IN PERSPECTIVE #10: Tea, biscuits and a working title: Cultural Netherlands

Coffee, tea and refreshments I had prepared. I had also asked my son the designer to sketch a sample of a future logo for 'Cultural Netherlands'1. While the Federation of Culture (FC)'s Heath Day took place at the chairman's house and not on the moors, it was meant to be a Heath Day. That is, an informal discussion about the Federation's direction with the firm intention of really moving forward. Would it work: a broad industry organisation, like, say, Bouwend Nederland or Horeca Nederland? And did the working title 'Cultureel Nederland', introduced by Berend Schans (director of the pop culture branch organisation), fit in with that?

The Federation of Culture had evolved from a CAO-focused consultative body for employers to a more structured and broader-focused umbrella of industry organisations. A lobbying club too, growing in its relations with OCW and Lower House. But all watches did not run the same. Views on the FC's ambitions diverged. The familiar question at play in any federation: how far can the club go and where does it displace the position of its members? But also: how far should the federation go on the road from pure employer interests to a broader lobby for the cultural sector? The role of Kunsten '92 was also around the corner here, at times perceived as strengthening, at other times as competing.

Discussing broader ambitions, the FC did not neglect employer issues. The Rutte I government's austerity measures led to many job losses. The FC set up a separate career path for the cultural sector at the request of the performing arts umbrella organisation NAPK and together with UWV, OCW and trade unions.2 The minister of SoZaWe decided to subsidise sectoral labour market plans. Together with Cultuur+Ondernemen, the FC took responsibility for a Culture Sector Plan.

No time yet for Erica

With seven members, the Federation of Culture umbrella organisations covers some 1,200 cultural institutions, including libraries, museums, venues, centres for the arts, companies and ensembles. In terms of employers alone, there is much to do and much to cooperate with for the relatively small institutions and their relatively small sector associations. The SER report on the labour market of the cultural and creative sector3 Rightly pointed out the lack of a central consultative body for employers and employees.

But that the industry associations need each other on other fronts is beyond dispute. The interests run parallel more often than they compete. The need to strengthen and combine lobbying was and is great. There have been calls for years for an 'Erica Terpstra for culture'. My thought has always been - and was also endorsed by others - that if there is to be an Erica Terpstra at all, it only makes sense once the sector has organised itself more firmly. First the ship, then the flag.

Several coordinates are important for the ship's course. I would like to highlight two of them here. Although the policy focus is most often on national institutions and national offerings, the centre of gravity of the cultural sector lies locally: with local libraries, venues, museums, centres for the arts. Secondly, clustering, in the form of cultural houses or merged cultural institutions, is increasingly common. From De Cacaofabriek in Helmond to Kunstwerk! in Zevenaar, from the Limburg Domain to the theatre cluster in Rotterdam.

Cultural Netherlands in two phases

The way I looked at it at the time (this is only seven years ago, but it already seems a completely different time), I saw 'Cultural Netherlands' developing in two phases. From the FC's point of view, it was now first about a solid Federatie Cultuur as a single interest organisation for the joint industry associations. It should no longer be a point of discussion that not only employer issues, but also joint lobbying and business development were on the agenda. Plus joint culture promotion, a hitherto neglected topic. The second step would be to then shape cooperation with the other parties more vigorously. The 'Madeleine consultation' (the constructive but informal and non-committal catch-up sessions we had started with the Culture Council, the funds, Kunsten '92 and the unions) was useful, but not sufficient.

From the FC's perspective, it was especially important to find the optimal relationship with Kunsten 92 in the future model. Whereas the FC could not take important positions without consulting its members (who sometimes had to consult their own members) and was therefore representative but slow, the strength of Kunsten ' 92 lies precisely in its speed of action. The small bureau does a lot of work. You can only generate so much attention if you can act flexibly, with a supportive rather than controlling board behind you. Taking for granted that specific constituencies can sometimes grumble because they do not agree with statements or do not feel involved.

For the longer term, I thought of a model with a representative 'Cultureel Nederland' as a broad, representative branch organisation and Kunsten '92 as a flexible, agenda-setting club that permanently assails politics without a permanent need for a mandate. The Kunstenbond and other unions needed to be able to be closely affiliated to Cultureel Nederland, perhaps even be part of it. In addition, the position of the Creative Industry Federation (FCI) required attention. This sister organisation of the FC combines eight branch and professional organisations in the world of design and creative industry. As with Kunsten'92, a very small organisation here also manages to achieve a remarkable amount of output. A marriage between the two federations has not come to pass so far. A lot of flirting from within the FC did not result in a courtship; on the contrary: there were bruises.4

On the move

The panels have now shifted. A lot has happened in the past five years. Kunsten '92 gained position, authority and trust. With that, this active 'gideon gang' moved towards a kind of 'Cultural Netherlands'. Two mandates from the government reinforced this: the labour market agenda and the Taskforce corona.

Kunsten '92 became the penpal of the Labour Market Agenda and managed a constructive collaboration between lots of parties from the sector, including the creative industries. The subsequent establishment of the Cultural and Creative Future Labour Market Platform (Platform ACCT) initially caused friction and uncertainty, but landed in an approach that all parties seem to embrace. It is a platform, not a lobbying organisation. Whoever wants to come and collaborate with it is welcome.

The corona pandemic was a phenomenon with nasty effects, but a perfect example of a crisis not wasted. The cultural and creative sector suddenly turned out to be very good at working together, and also at acting quickly. Kunsten '92 also became the spokesperson for the Taskforce corona5. Once again, the small agency showed agility and energy. The board grabbed a role that was necessary and for which it was rightly appreciated. Corona is not really gone yet and was joined by the energy crisis. For the time being, therefore, the Task Force seems to have a longer life.

Cards on the table

And so there are cards on the table that have been reshuffled:

• Kunsten'92 with a strengthened position (provided the forthcoming departure of the general secretary is properly handled) and a pivotal role to the Taskforce.
• The Taskforce, grown from improvisation to become the focal point for the entire sector.
• The Federation of Culture, made less visible than a few years ago and with member organisations facing internal problems in relay.
• The Creative Industries Federation, which has entered into a surprisingly strong partnership with Kunsten'92 as a lobbying association.
• Platform ACCT as a strong platform for the labour market, with the modest intention of being primarily service and support.
• The Kunstenbond, which like most unions does not have an easy time of it, but is putting a lot of effort into the Creative Coalition (umbrella of freelancers), and co-managing Kunsten '92, the Taskforce and Platform ACCT

The changing positions are going to produce a new picture for the design of 'Cultural Netherlands'. (In that picture also fits a more prominent place for the organisations for amateur art and cultural education and their national/ provincial umbrella organisations. Plus an active observer role for the supporting institutions)

Organic organising

At the Federation of Culture's mooring day, at my home, the coffee, tea and refreshments were probably fine. But the step towards Cultural Netherlands was not taken. A minority felt nothing for enhanced cooperation. In a federation, you need all the votes for important decisions, as we see from the European Union. Cultural Netherlands - in the variant of the first phase: an enhanced FC - did not materialise. Under my successor, the FC continued to make itself heard firmly in VNONCW for a while. So after that it became quieter. The question is how the branch organisations culture will relate to the sector organisation as a whole.

But more important, of course, is what the picture of the sector organisation will look like. I have pretty much lost my faith in blueprints and organisation charts by now. Of course you can try to draw out how the Taskforce and Kunsten'92 should relate to each other and how the other organisations and umbrella organisations fit into the galaxy. But it will ultimately be organic processes, at times fostered then hindered by idiosyncratic personalities and by unexpected events. The sector is slowly and organically growing towards even greater unity and professionalism, I am sure. Watch what strengths surface in various places. As long as the people in the lead are people with authority, ideas, perseverance and connecting talent. Not egos, but collaborators. Coming up with structures is good, trust is better.