The financial problems of HET Symphony Orchestra have not gone unnoticed. Regional newspaper Tubantia brought out last Monday that PvdA MP Jacques Monasch had minister Jet Bussemaker (also PvdA) summoned to the House of Representatives.
In that message, Monasch passes with seven-mile boots advice, applications and decisions that have already been made or are yet to come, and immediately reports that a symphony orchestra must remain in Enschede beyond 2017. He spoke about this with orchestra director Harm Mannak and conductor Jan Willem de Vriend and is convinced: "I am impressed by their approach. The orchestra has shown great enterprise. That it is now in trouble despite all its efforts I find extremely regrettable and very worrying."
Nu.nl and the Geen Stijl-affiliated Das Kapital immediately took over the post, but what Turns out? The message is wrong. Not only was there no need to call the minister to the House of Representatives during Question Time, she had to be there anyway to answer other questions, but above all: Monasch's questions had not yet been tabled.
Those questions came on Tuesday afternoon, just after Question Time. In written form. These are the questions that make our parliamentary democracy so expensive, answered not in the House of Representatives by the minister, but by civil servants, rarely followed by a debate. Therefore, a brief treatment below. Saves the ministry's civil servants some work.
Obligate introductory questions
After the obligatory "have you taken note of" and an open door about whether cancelling concerts is evidence of a dire financial situation, the first interesting question.
"Do you agree that HET Symphony Orchestra in particular has shown great entrepreneurial spirit in recent years and has done everything possible to operate in a financially sound manner?"
Monasch asks two questions at the same time and actually asks the current minister here whether she thinks HET Symfonieorkest has done exactly what her predecessor Halbe Zijlstra demanded, but links this to something completely different. Because it is precisely from all the problems that are becoming visible here and there that 'great enterprise' leads to excessive risk-taking and precisely not financially sound operations. See Groningen, see Amersfoort, see THE Orchestra.
Next question.
Receptacle
"Are you getting signals from more cultural institutions that acquiring their own income through sponsorship, cooperation with schools and ticket sales remains very difficult due to the ongoing crisis and limited resources from third parties? How many institutions are tapping into their reserves in the hope of better economic times?"
Yes, of course Bussemaker has received signals that institutions are struggling, but it is beginning to look very much like Monasch is presenting HET Symfonieorkest's press release to the minister in questioning form, similarly linking sponsorship, cooperation with schools and ticket sales, and linking all that to the crisis. To that repository of problems, Bussemaker can only reply approvingly, just as she obviously cannot give an exact number of other institutions that are in trouble.
Strategy
Monasch's strategy is exactly the same as HET Symphony Orchestra's: it is all the fault of Rutte I and the crisis. The following questions therefore build on that. We give the answers in advance. Yes, more institutions are struggling; yes, there are cutbacks; yes, there is a tight pool of sponsorship money, if that pool exists at all; and yes, so the financial position of institutions is deteriorating. Get to the point.
And Monasch does just that, with a rather stilted question:
"What are you doing to support successful and innovative institutions that are struggling?"
Positive framing
By linking all previous questions to coverage of HET Symfonieorkest, Monasch suggests that this orchestra is innovative and above all successful. After which Monasch goes further by asking an equally suggestive question:
"In what way do you intend to make room in the new grant allocation for the ambitions of successful and enterprising cultural institutions, which are currently struggling?"
All in all, it is a fine example of positive framing, ahead of the culture debate, in which HET Symfonieorkest is portrayed both as a victim of Rutte I and the crisis and as successful and innovative.
But it can also be substantive
Monasch is not alone: State member Martha van Abbema (ChristenUnie) has also submitted written questions submitted, obviously to the province. She responds to the same notice, but with dossier knowledge.
"In 2011, Provincial Council enabled HET Symphony Orchestra financially as a cultural entrepreneur to implement the innovative business plan drawn up at the time. The goal was to be able to stand on its own feet by 2018. Is this goal still achievable today?"
A similar introductory firing, to which the answer cannot but be no. But then Abbema takes a completely different tack from Monasch, noting that the money was meant to be
"[...] to enable the orchestra to raise more money 'from the market'. The orchestra's press release states that it is because of the crisis that this has not succeeded. But in 2011, it was also known that it was a crisis. So what happened to the 5 million in recent years? The Christian Union wants to know what became of 'the innovative business plan' and its results."
And Abbema, like Monasch, has also read the press release from HET Symfonieorkest, but does not copy it blindly:
"In 2011, attendance was limited but there was growth. Is this growth still there and why are concerts in Deventer and Zwolle still loss-making? If cost savings can still be realised on traditional performances, why was this not done earlier, as early as 2012? Now the Province and the State and other subsidy departing organisations are faced with a financial problem. The Christian Union wonders to what extent the hole in the budget could not have been avoided by better planning and cost savings."
Finger on the wound
She then touched on a sensitive point for the Gelderland Orchestra as well:
"Will further collaboration with the Gelderland Orchestra yield more cost savings?"
Indeed, both Gelderland and Overijssel came up with millions across the bridge, and all that extra money has been used up. But not for its intended purposes, we read in today's advice of the Council for Culture. Because there we read unequivocally that cooperation between regional orchestras should be stimulated harder than hitherto. And especially that money for cooperation was not earmarked enough so that it went into the regular exploitation. Exactly what happened with HET Symfonieorkest, with all its consequences. The Council concludes:
"Continue funding for cooperation in the orchestra system, but decouple it from the regular operating subsidy. Use this budget to encourage collaboration plans aimed at innovation, profiling and strengthening the region's offerings."
Bottom line
So the problems of HET Symfonieorkest and other orchestras are bigger than press reports and the parliamentary questions based on them suggest. Especially if you reread the clause that the Province of Overijssel included when providing the million-dollar grant:
"Conceivable is a partial recovery of the amount granted if the agreed performance is not (no longer) achieved. In case of an unforeseeable bankruptcy, the one-off provincial contribution will most likely be gone."
It will hopefully not come to the latter. But just as the sector does not benefit from negative framing, as Halbe Zijlstra cannot even now that he is no longer in charge of culture omit, does the sector gain anything by positively framing chamber members who no doubt do the same out of genuine love for the arts.
The cultural debate in our country should not be based on party politics or self-interest, but is best served by facts and real vision.
English (UK) 
Nederlands 
Français 
