On the road and on the radar

Despite the demands of travelling, taking a show on tour remains one of the most effective ways to connect the performing arts with audiences. In recent years increases in site responsive work, interactivity and digital platforms have been among the influences reshaping how performance is experienced, so touring companies and venues have to be sensitive to audiences’ changing expectations and attitudes.

What is evident from conversations with companies and venues of all shapes and sizes is that there are numerous success stories: the recently refurbished Newcastle Theatre Royal; collaborations between the commercial and the subsidised sector such as The Children’s Theatre Partnership; the regular presence across the country of vibrant touring ensembles such as New Adventures, Propeller and Kneehigh; and the expansion of rural touring circuits and outdoor festivals.

But touring is not without its challenges. On the one hand, bookings that make sense financially and geographically (to minimise carbon footprints) can be difficult to secure, and it is pretty shocking to hear some smaller companies report they are only able to secure fees that are the same or even lower now than they were 15 years ago. On the other hand, venues and promoters complain that a regular supply of quality work is elusive and that some larger managements are seeking unrealistic terms. Yet a healthy touring ecology is important for so many. Companies depend on touring to provide the all-important means of both developing their craft and surviving financially. And promoters, from number one houses to village halls, still want to be able to present the best live experience. Without touring, people in large parts of the country would have a limited cultural diet, in particular where dance and opera is concerned.

Many factors beyond the current economic climate have had an impact on touring circuits and structures. Amongst them are the emergence of Ambassador Theatre Group as a dominant presenter and producer of large-scale work; the ambition of presenting venues of all scales to influence their own programmes and support the creative process through co-producing and commissioning; and increased competition for audiences’ time and money. Some companies that had previously toured on the middle-scale are now working in more diverse venues. This circuit has been both enriched and complicated by producing theatres importing productions by touring companies to diversify their programmes. As a consequence mixed programme venues with limited funding may be at a disadvantage when it comes to competing for exciting work. On the small scale there has been considerable fragmentation of the circuit and disinvestment in venues prepared to take a risk with new theatre and dance. The implications of this could be considerable – the DV8s, Cheek by Jowls and Improbables of this world all started out in small venues.

Prior to the Lottery, Arts Council England (ACE) supported touring projects from its core grant-in-aid, but in recent years Grants for the Arts has been the principal port of call. While this has meant significantly more money being available, there are conditions attached that have not always been to the benefit of touring activity. Additionally the ramifications of the decentralisation and subsequent demise of ACE’s influential Touring Department are still being felt: so the announcement of its new Strategic Touring Programme is to be heartily welcomed – £45m could facilitate a huge raft of exciting new initiatives. Clearly a lot of thought has gone into the new programme, which covers all artforms, not just the performing arts, so it has to be applicable to a broad range of activity.

However, potential applicants will have to invest considerable time addressing what looks like a complex application process. It may be that those organisations best equipped to tackle this will be those already in receipt of regular funding. I am concerned that, at one end of the market, small companies, already struggling to keep afloat, and at the other, commercial producers, which have the potential to become key providers of quality drama, may not be able or willing to engage with the process. Of course, I hope I am wrong and ACE will be bombarded with dozens of exciting projects which visit considerably more than the two locations stated as a minimum to qualify as a tour.

Maximising investment in touring requires an overview, some degree of co-ordination and proactive brokering at a national level, taking into account knowledge of the touring infrastructure as a whole, including work that is unfunded. This may be challenging for the Arts Council, with its current structure, to achieve. In recent years it has supported many positive developments in the touring arena. These include the emergence of energetic consortia of venues delivering high quality drama and dance, collaborations between producing theatres, collaborations between producing theatres and innovative peripatetic companies, partnerships between the funded and the commercial sector, the development of rural networks and touring of international work. Let’s hope that the new fund builds on these and opens a new chapter for touring, stimulating companies to take to the road and venues to open their doors to a wide range of work benefiting artists, promoters and audiences.