Shadow enlightenment cabinet member Jeremy Hunt: "It is going to be tough" Culture The Guardian

Calling all philanthropists ... Jeremy Hunt at Portcullis House Photograph: Teri Pengilley

The alternative day, I was chatting to the executive of a vital inhabitant humanities ­organisation. "What do you think of Jeremy Hunt?" this chairman asked. "Because I think he"s wonderful. Absolutely brilliant." It was similar to slipping in to a together universe: Hunt is the shade enlightenment secretary, a Tory, for integrity sake. And it is one of Britain"s articles of conviction that artists, a handful of eccentrics ­notwithstanding, are on the left. So what is going on?

For the past dual and a half years, Hunt, elderly 43, has been diligently desirable the British humanities universe with all the respectful conscientiousness one would design from a former head child of Charterhouse with a initial from Oxford (where he was trainer of the Conservative association). ­Considerably aided by enlightenment cupboard part of Ben ­Bradshaw"s underwhelming performance, Hunt has been surprisingly successful. ­Despite his absolved credentials – his father was a naval military officer and he grew up in Godalming, square of what is right afar his Surrey subdivision – he lacks the Bullingdon bar appearance of a little of his Tory colleagues. One of his tricks is to fool around ground himself at the front of a entertainment and residence his audiences but notes. Theatre directors confess he is utterly theperformer.

This appeal descent reaches the consummate currently – with the announcement of the Conservatives" humanities manifesto. It has been, he tells me when we encounter in a Portcullis House discussion room, all about severe the ­"assumption that Labour"s good for the arts, and the Conservatives are good for ­business". A new talk he gave to an ­in-house Conservative website put it some-more bluntly: "Part of my pursuit is [...] to detoxify the Conservative brand." So that"s what it"s all about: the humanities ­provide a forum in that to promote the thought that the Tories are no longer the nasty party.

So what of the essence of the Tory humanities manifesto? In reality, the settled humanities policies of all 3 vital ­parties are strikingly close. It was former ­culture cupboard part of James Purnell who commissioned, in 2007, the McMaster report, the majority critical Labour matter on enlightenment in new years. That shifted Labour process afar from valuing the humanities in conditions of how they competence assistance ­fulfil amicable process goals; instead, the humanities were to be distinguished for their unique qualities, and speedy to essay for "excellence". That ­approach has been adopted by the Tories. ­"Excellence in all the humanities does" is one of the Tories" settled (if ­syntactically dubious) "core principles".

Hunt affirms his joining to the principle, if not the level, of ­public ­funding. "People have had sure ­assumptions in the past about ­Conservative governments, partly given of a little of the things that happened in the 1980s, and partly given of the tinge of a little of the discuss in the 1980s that appeared to contend open spending on the humanities was something you competence wish to gradually ­reduce. That isn"t where the complicated Conservative celebration stands."

He adds: "I think it"s treasonable of Ben Bradshaw to contend that humanities appropriation is safer underneath Labour; the honest ­position to take is to contend that it is ­going to be difficult in each department." His guarantee is that the humanities "won"t be ­singled out", but he declines to go further. "We have no approach of meaningful what the state of the nation"s books competence be, and to theory a commission cut would be ­dishonest." But, surprisingly, he does say: "I am ­confident that over the subsequent parliament, we can enlarge the volume of income going in to the arts."

There are dual main strands to this claim. First, he says, the ­Conservatives will remodel the Lottery so as to ­benefit the strange good causes. With ­efficiencies and taxation rejigs, he thinks it should produce an additional £40m per year for the humanities – and, after the Olympics, "much bigger increases than that". This won"t, however, be instead of unchanging funding: "The sum point of Lottery appropriation is additionality."

Second, Hunt has big plans for ­philanthropy. Organisations that take stairs to set up up an capacity (a large sum of income from that they can pull down seductiveness as income) will be rewarded with longer-term appropriation agreements than the stream three-year deals. As square of a gold of reforms directed to assistance ­museums, the ­acceptance-in-lieu intrigue (which allows people to suggest functions of art instead of profitable estate tax) would be extended. Gift aid, that gives taxation service on free ­donations, would be simplified. More than this, Hunt aims to provoke a informative shift. "We wish to convince people that ­giving is not usually a duty, but one of life"s pleasures. It chimes with David ­Cameron"s ideas on amicable ­responsibility: if you have been successful, you should give something back."

There are problems here, not slightest in that it takes some-more than a supervision of a sold colour to shift a nation"s giving habits. In the US, endowments, an critical income source for the arts, are in big trouble: unwell to produce income in the stream climate, they have left majority organisations in crisis. "I so reject that argument," counters Hunt. ­"Saying that endowments don"t work in the misfortune retrogression given 1931 is not a ­rep­resentation of what endowments can do for the humanities over the subsequent thirty years."

He adds. "I am underneath no apparition that this is a 20-year project. There will be no domestic dividends from this – at slightest until I am a grandpa." Iask him to blueprint out what square he sees endowments personification in an ­organisation"s finances. Say the National ­Theatre"s income is £20m, he says, subsequent similarly from the government, sheet sales and in isolation donations: "Wouldn"t it be good if they could get an additional £5m from endowments, so that the sum income is £25m?"

Also cryptic is the actuality that sure humanities organisations capture hospitality some-more than others. In the US, high-profile outfits similar to the Metropolitan Opera action as magnets to the wealthy. A chair on the residence of a glamorous notable relic or show residence is majority some-more ­attractive to the abounding than ­involvement in less glitzy establishments. My guess is that Tory process favours – consciously or not – "posh arts". Tory spirit is prone less towards, say, the fashionable opening ­artist in a border venue. "That"s just since hospitality should never reinstate grant-in-aid," ­argues Hunt. "But if the Met can daub in to all that wealth, afterwards isn"t it improved that it should?"

In line with Tory tongue on alternative departments, Hunt is penetrating to see Arts Council England (ACE) and the ­Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) frame executive costs "to the bone". He reckons ACE is "top-heavy" or "admin-heavy". He additionally believes that the DCMS ought to be in the humanities process "driving seat". "I wish to see people with capability ­working for the DCMS and not ­thinking that the usually place to go is ACE." Some ­Conservatives have, in private, ­expressed reservations about ACE chair Liz Forgan (who additionally chairs the Scott Trust, that owns this paper), given of her viewed ties to ­Labour. Hunt answers carefully: "We don"t have an bulletin to reinstate each trainer of each quango who competence be viewed to have Labour ­leanings. We will work happily with ­anyone peaceful to work with us."

It is normal to enquire of MPs with enlightenment jobs what movie they last saw. In Hunt"s case, there"s no need: he not long ago wrote an admiring square on his blog about An Education, that he and his mother Lucia, who is awaiting their initial child, went to see on Valentine"s night. He has additionally attempted his palm at art ­criticism, on the Van Gogh show at the Royal Academy in London.

What has he seen and hated? "Part of an differently glorious opening by Candoco dance association in that they deteriorated the inhabitant anthem in to Hitler salutes. I thought it was uninspired and unnecessary." He is referring to the square Still, by the reputable choreo­grapher Nigel Charnock, a first ­member of dance association DV8.

As for his entertainment likes, he ­namechecks Gethsemane, David Hare"s ­critique of New Labour; the National"s strike War Horse; Jez ­Butterworth"s ­Parlour Song (he says Parlour Games, but I know what he means) and ­Jerusalem. He enjoyed what he calls Doris ­Salcedo"s "crack" (her ­Turbine Hall designation in Tate Modern), but a Dalí muster there valid "more ­challenging and I"m still not utterly there with a little complicated epitome art". As for exemplary music, he says: "I am still early Schoenberg rather than late."

He says he likes poetry: "Osip ­Mendelstam and ... [he clicks his ­fingers] who"s that lady Isaiah Berlin fell in love with?" At the finish of the interview, he remembers: Anna Akhmatova. He favourite Chaucer at school. "Whan that Aprille with his shoures soote," he quotes, and I follow: "The droghte of Marche hath perced to the roote." It"s not each day you recite Middle English with a part of of the shade cabinet.

A diversion of pool with Tricky

At the finish of the interview, Hunt brings me to his rather plain office, and I poke for some-more clues. There"s a CD of bass-baritone Gerald Finley on the desk, a imitation of geishas by Koryusai (Hunt lived in Japan after university), and an 1808 ­Rowlandson and Pugin imitation of the House of ­Commons. "Only Tories have prints similar to that," he says of the latter.

Tony Blair once betrothed to write the humanities in to Labour"s "core script". How critical are the humanities – certainly a ­marginal electoral issue – to the Tories? And are there not, for each ­modernising Cameron, legions of rightwingers who would leave the humanities to the vagaries of the market? "They are essentially important," says Hunt. "George Osborne gave a debate [last December] at the Tate about the significance of art for art"s sake. We haven"t listened Alistair Darling give such a speech. David Cameron has reiterated his joining to the arts, and in truth Samantha Cameron"s ­commitment, that shouldn"t be underestimated as an change on David." Samantha Cameron, a scion of the gentle landed gentry, complicated art at Camberwell and Bristol Polytechnic, where she used to fool around pool with Tricky (which someway seems a really ­modern Tory multiple of loftiness and bohemianism).

As we finish talking, I ask Hunt if he thinks his efforts to win turn the humanities universe have succeeded. Trust in ­politicians is so low at the moment, he says, that it will all bring to boil down to what we essentially do. It will indeed. At the moment, the blazing subject is: "Is this man for real?"

What the alternative parties offer

Labour

Since 2007, the supervision has had 4 enlightenment secretaries: Tessa Jowell, James Purnell, Andy Burnham and Ben Bradshaw. Though no pre-election ­document on humanities process has been published, the majority wide-ranging matter on Labour humanities process came when Purnell supposed the recommendations of the 2007 McMaster report. This shifted the concentration afar from "the feat of uncomplicated targets" (on, say, amicable or racial makeup of audiences) towards "a concentration on the peculiarity of inventive ­experience". The slogan became "excellence".

In 2008, Burnham affianced schoolchildren five hours of enlightenment a week, and voiced a million free entertainment ­tickets for under-26s by 2011; ­according to Arts Council England figures, 121,345 have been taken up. In 2009, he ­announced a new intrigue for British cities to be dubbed collateral of ­culture for a year. Bradshaw not long ago argued that humanities appropriation will be safer underneath Labour than the Tories.

Liberal Democrats

This month, the Lib Dems set out their meditative in a request called The Power of Creativity. Unlike the alternative parties, they oath to keep stream levels of funding. They target to have firm the arts" purpose as a apparatus of "soft diplomacy" (with performances for on vacation unfamiliar ­dignitaries) and enlarge culture"s ­visibility at No 10. National humanities organisations, they say, contingency get out of ­London some-more (this was additionally a thesis of Burnham"s reign at DCMS). Like the Tories, they wish present assist reformed and acceptance-in-lieu to be lengthened to lifetime ­giving. Local ­government is to be helped to have use of enlightenment as a regenerative force.

Mark Lawson on how the last Tory supervision dealt with the arts

Thatcherites objected to the humanities from assorted angles: political, class, dignified and financial. These gradually overlapped. The critique was that income from taxpayers (through humanities legislature grants and the BBC looseness fee) was used to broach element that was possibly dirty or leftwing or both. Why, asked the Tories, should we account things that offends the values and attacks the principles?

So the plan was to revoke the upsurge of state cash. Thatcher would have forked visits to Glyndebourne, that saved the operas privately, whilst grants to the big institutions were often solidified or filleted.

The rejecting of the "arm"s-length principle" in that the state pays the bills but doesn"t ­question the content, resulted in a array of attacks, possibly without delay or by proxies such as Mary Whitehouse: Howard Brenton"s The Romans in Britain at the National was pounded and there were hurdles to a little stream ­affairs shows, such as ITV"s Death on the Rock, that criticised the ­government over the sharpened of IRA suspects in Gibraltar.

This punitive perspective (Thames TV lost the authorization mostly given of that film) was gradual by the Major administration. But a little aspects of Thatcherite process – enlivening open companies to find sponsorship and in isolation cash, for e.g. – sojourn prevalent thirty years later, in any case of the celebration in charge.