Agenda item

To consider the Briefing Paper of the Cabinet Member for Culture and Leisure. The paper proposes a plan for the Guildhall which, whilst not comprehensive due to the scope of challenges faced, outlines a vision to improve Guildhall through working collaboratively with the Council‘s partners.

19.1    The Corporate Director presented the Briefing Paper. He explained that the contents of the Paper should be viewed as a direction of travel and vision for Guildhall. Guildhall, he explained, is uniquely placed as a site which could potentially play an important role in the city ‘s cultural fabric by becoming Gloucester ‘s focal performance venue. As such, the proposed plans for Guildhall would be threefold, focusing on ‘Building Skills’, ‘Building Purpose’ and ‘Building a Place’. Therefore, the plans would go beyond just renovating the building, but also developing skills and creating an environment to foster and grow creative talent in the City. These developments would help Gloucester to bid for City of Culture.

19.2    Finally, he informed Members that due to stretched public finances, funding the development through the Council ‘s budget would be difficult, and so the plan would be to acquire funding from other organisations. It was noted that there were opportunities for grant funding.

19.3    Councillor Stephens opened the discussion. He reminded the Committee that the proposals should not be considered a development plan, as much a vision statement as set out by the Corporate Director. He proceeded to say that although some of the proposals were welcomed, detailed work was still needed. He stressed the importance of setting realistic targets and budgets. He questioned, for example, whether the proposed cinema would be profitable, and how the food provision would work.

19.4    In response, the Corporate Director commented that he did not disagree with Councillor Stephens’ comments. Indeed, the Government ‘s funding scheme was not guaranteed, and therefore it was about utilising available funding opportunities. Additionally, the plans could be as big as funding allowed, and similarly they could also be scaled down if necessary. He added that as an example, the Future High Streets Fund if acquired, could provide an opportunity for expansion. In answer to the query about food provision, he suggested that for this to be successful, it would be about matching the food offers to the events taking place at the time. Moreover, he confirmed that a decision had not yet been made as to whether this would be stand-alone.

 19.5   Pointing to the fact that Officers had mentioned the possibility of having interns as part of the Guildhall Development Plans, Councillor Ryall asked how this would be regulated. She noted that Apprentices, for example, tend to be more regulated. Interns, on the other hand, could be more open to exploitation, such as underpayment.

19.6    Responding to this, the Corporate Director stated that there were no detailed or concrete plans regarding taking on interns yet. However, it was a conversation to be had. Any decisions made would uphold the rights of interns. The overall aim would be to create a positive experience for them. He suggested for example that the University of Gloucestershire could be approached to partner with students from the Performing Arts. However, he emphasised that this was still in the thinking stages.

19.7   Councillor Pullen submitted that the aim should be not to compete with larger cities such as Birmingham and Bristol, which could be unrealistic, but rather local theatres such as the Roses Theatre in Tewkesbury and the Wyvern Theatre in Swindon. Thus, any plans for Guildhall would aim to make it a place which people want to visit from within Gloucestershire and surrounding counties.

 19.8   Councillor Lewis commented that whilst the proposals were laudable, there was perhaps a risk that there were trying to do too much, and thus needed to be narrowed and focused. 

19.9   The Cabinet Member for Culture and Leisure suggested that there was     an appetite for cultural regeneration in the City.  The Guildhall plans if realised, would play a key role in this. Notably, the plans would help young people in the City to develop both artistically, and in other ways.

19.20  Councillor Lewis suggested that it was a chicken and egg situation, in that the onus would be on the Council to show that Guildhall would be worth investing in.

19.21 Councillor Hilton felt that the Council needed to clarify what it wanted to achieve in cultural terms. In his view, the potential for Guildhall to succeed as a professional theatre could be hindered by the fact that more people could choose to visit the Everyman Theatre in Cheltenham, an already established professional theatre. Moreover, attracting performers to Guildhall could prove challenging. Additionally, he questioned whether a cinema would do well.

19.22   He drew Members’ attention to the fact that Guildhall had been operating as an Arts Centre for over 30 years. In his opinion, it had not been very successful in this time. He asked the Officers whether they should be looking outside the box, and looking at larger venues, such as the (Regal) Wetherspoon in Gloucester City Centre which would provide more space than Guildhall. Furthermore, he felt that this venue would have the added benefit of being in closer proximity of the railway station, car parks and bus stations.

19.23  The Corporate Director advised that, economically, Gloucester would not be able to sustain a bigger venue at the moment, although it could be possible in the future.  Likewise, Councillor Stephens stated that there were already places in the City which could hold large audiences, including Kingsholm Stadium and the Cathedral.

19.24  Councillor Lugg commented that Cheltenham had cornered a lot of the market for the Arts within the local area, and this could be limit the potential for a redeveloped Guildhall to succeed. Equally, she suggested that the Guildhall ‘s website needed to be improved, and that in its current state, the Guildhall was perhaps struggling to attract younger audiences.

19.25  Councillor Toleman queried whether the Olympus Theatre which was currently undergoing construction would help or hinder Guildhall. The Corporate Director responded saying that he did not feel that this would hinder the plans for Guildhall.

19.26 Councillor Walford asked Members to make a decision about what to do with Guildhall.

19.27 Councillor Morgan stated that overall, he could not agree with what had been presented in the Briefing Paper.

19.28 Bringing the discussion to an end, concluding that the discussion had been useful, and that the Committee had nothing to oppose in principle.

RESOLVED that: The Overview and Scrutiny Committee NOTE the report.