Fair Practice Code is beta version. (Why it will remain unsettled in the arts for a long time to come)

Art subsidy cuts have been passed on to the weakest shoulders. Minister Jet Bussemaker made no bones about it in one of her latest public appearances. 'I have often praised the resilience of the sector, and we should celebrate that,' she declared yesterday at the presentation of the Code of fair practice, 'but I also saw subsidised institutions skimping on their staff. I was very shocked by employers who did not take paying artists for granted.'

The minister, who is now the longest-serving culture minister in years, stated, "Passion should never be a reason to underpay people" and "Money added now would be fine, because there is plenty of money. Some of those present would have liked to have heard such statements from Bussemaker about five years ago. Unfortunately, she was then, she said, still too shocked by the state of the cultural sector. And she was of course bound hand and foot by a shuttered coalition agreement with top austerity advocate Halbe Zijlstra, whose name she hopes not to hear again any time soon.

Gruesomely complicated

At the Amsterdam art centre Veem, which itself is only open 100 days a year due to budget cuts, the first two days of this week had been about European art and 'fair practices'. During the closing debate, it became clear that the representatives of unions and art institutions had not really come to an agreement. Some reactions expressed frustration, but it also became clear that the issue is just horribly complicated.

'Introducing fair practices is only possible if you turn the entire system of art subsidies upside down to do so,' declared a Brussels union leader. The rest of those present actually agreed with him. This made it all the more surprising that Kunsten 92 had succeeded in launching a debate so soon after the first distress signals coming up with a code.

Polder model

Now that's pretty special too. Although, on closer inspection, the text presented yesterday is less clear and powerful than you might wish. A lot of people spent a long time discussing this. That is also inherent in everything Kunsten 92 produces. The cause is the unique nature of this interest group. Kunsten 92 is actually one of the last remnants of the once famous polder model: employers and employees solving problems together. That employers from the performing arts and museum sector were not present at yesterday's presentation should be seen as a coincidence, the spokesperson explained.

'This is a version 1.0,' said theatre maker Anouk Nuyens, who had co-written the compromise text. Because the booklet itself still calls it a 'draft declaration of intent', the designation 0.5 would be better. It is actually a public beta version. The makers cannot yet guarantee flawless operation.

As much as possible

This was evident during the discussions after the presentation. At present, the code is still very bureaucratic and verbose, with many ways out and detours still possible. For example, people argue that 'collective agreements and fee guidelines should be as far as possible be adhered to'. That 'as much as possible' already builds in a nuance that really does not belong in a code. Of course, the fact that it is so loose is also because the grantmaker itself is underpaying artists has encouraged.

Felix Rottenberg, never shy of making strong statements, wants to work with the code anyway, even if it is a beta version. As chairman of the Amsterdam Fund for the Arts, he will make the code the guiding principle when granting subsidies to A-bis institutions, i.e. Amsterdam's top clubs such as Holland Festival and National Opera & Ballet.

The question is how well such a thing can be enforced. A collective agreement is of course binding, but what about all the Those freshly self-employed in the arts? Those would rather compete each other to death than be forced by fair practice to demand fair rates. Or they enter a so-called opera design competition, where they even have to pay to supply a set design. Something that normally carries an honorarium of thousands of euros.

Slave-free art

It is great that work is under way on the code of fair practice. This will not make the arts "slave-free" at a stroke, but it is a start. It also became clear that there are still many hurdles to be taken. If only the cartel legislation, which prohibits entrepreneurs from making price agreements. For now, it is only a matter of the art sector itself, in which a change in mentality is needed. If management, cleaners and administrative staff are paid as a matter of course, the same should apply to the artists whose work is your core business.

Without extra money, many arts institutions will go under if they have to enforce the code. 'There are more expensively paid directors of drama schools than there are permanently employed actors,' a retired manager whispered during the drinks afterwards.

In any case, the supply will have to come down considerably at the same budget. Minister Bussemaker looked relieved, at her speech. 'The code sets a standard for my successor,' she said. Indeed it does. It will remain unsettled for a long time, in the arts.

The Code.