This thread might be unpopular or difficult.
The tweets from this minister strike me as being increasingly illustrative of a simple truth - he is in the corner of the room (or even next door) waving at a cabinet table who don't give a fig https://twitter.com/oliverdowden/status/1278457745474191361

2 There are two obvious issues
a) how to underwrite the period of closure
b) opening up and how to support or underwrite empty seats
Neither have yet to have a 'figure' put on them as far as I can see.
How much does your org need to keep going until opening, let's say to Dec

3 This government has allowed airlines to begin flying, which compacts people into smaller spaces. This is a business decision - airlines are far more vital in their minds. Those airlines have also had money - 100s millions - yet still lay off 1000s. The government can see this.

4 It is not a government that holds culture dear. We have spectacular amounts of evidence for this. And I can assure you that the thinking in cabinet is 'we will be throwing good money after bad' because when theatre opens again, the number of punters is going to be low

5 And those numbers will be low not only because of SD but also by choice of the audience - the data is clear about reluctance and the government will have noted it for sure. So I think the industry is probably right to focus on one bailout - money now to stay in the game.

6 But the government are going to quote the hundreds of millions we may already have had as an industry for the furlough scheme. We might also note that the BJ miracle recovery plan amounted to just 5bn (when the French put 7bn into arts alone)

7 So I think we are largely pissing into the wind right now. The crucial thing for all of us to do is address what happens when we get theatre (and opera in our case) open again - particularly during that transition period of low houses for whatever reason.

8 Do you know already how you are going to manage that should you still be in the game? I think we should exclude all possibility of subsidy for empty seats. But if by a miracle there is some dosh for sustenance, will you be able to say how much you req given other measures?

9 All this really adds up to is a need to put a real number on how much is required to keep cultural orgs alive. I still haven't seen one. Be assured of one thing; the 'names' will be the first to be saved, those who already get most of the public money.

10 I heard the RSC CEO say yesterday that it costs £1m to mount a show at the RSC. Are they going to maintain that level of expenditure? Or argue that they should do so? Probably, and the government might help THEM do that. The rest of us don't have that luxury.

11 This issue of expenditure is particularly relevant to opera of course. In the end, this gov doesn't care enough. It will do 'something' but I am afraid I also sense a link to planning changes and all that theatre property out there. Yes, it's that dark in the Cummings cabinet

12 And don't think those big guns making the noise and who have the Minister's zoom ear give a flying one about smaller, regional orgs. They might say they do but their job is to look after themselves and they are painting an extremely expensive picture of what is reqd.

13 So in conclusion, put some numbers on the demand for survival money and then change how we do what we do (and how much we pay ourselves) from then on so that you become much more resilient. There really is no other option that is likely to materialise.

14 The kind of radical remodelling of the arts industry and the funding system that is needed is unlikely to happen. The devil will take the hindmost. Small and medium sized orgs will need to get incredibly feirce about costs going forwards.

15 If you can demonstrate this, then you stand a chance of getting some of the money. But get on with it now and show how you'll do it because any money that appears will have those strings attached - for you, not the big boys.
Do not assume solidarity in any of this. At all.

16 Shit innit?