Internships

Through last week's Voluntary Arts England's enewsletter, I was directed to an article on The Stage website. It states that this summer, a new government scheme is launched to pay graduate interns wanting to enter the arts. £600,000 will provide at least 40 people a year with the opportunity to have a £15,000 bursary. There are not many details, except that it is still in its pilot stages.

At one level, this is to be applauded.

But there are a couple of things which continues the frustration.
It is for those from 'deprived backgrounds'. What is 'deprivation?' I am of the opinion that many of us not socially disadvantaged, now are. It seems that being in a recognised form of disadvantage actually serves. And it still leaves out those who fall out of those parameters to become the really disadvantaged.

I have heard part of this definition will be those who have been signing on for 6 months - what of those who have already signed on in the past, who have tried to manage without benefits, on odd jobs and erratic income? My experience of unemployment benefit was that the jobcentre didn't understand arts graduates and after 6 months I was being hounded to take any job - let alone after a year, when I got ad hoc work in desperation to avoid that weekly gruelling. We have the dual message of don't scrounge, work; and the fraud team are after you - and yet benefit claiming has advantages beyond the award itself. It means you are exempt from or eligible for a host of other things. It seems the system, crazed by statistics and penalties wants to push people off the ladder before they get to the point where their career gets serious help.

The other aspect is that it is for those within a year of graduation. This also precludes many. What of those who graduated longer ago who have been struggling, who for financial reasons have not been able to take up internships, or have been passed by on opportunities? And I am sure they feel, as with above - if only this came in sooner, I could have benefitted. Now the much fought for places will go to others by definition, whilst my struggle continues.

I see too much funding as being too specific: the right age; postcode; ethnicity. Funding sources do not spread these so that something should potentially cover all; they tend to focus on similar criteria so that some are always left out.

I particularly resent that if over 30 but not yet in your niche, there appears less help to do so. You are probably less inclined or able to work for nothing, you've already had a taste of work and do not wish to go back to the bottom. Many schemes are open to the very young, forgetting that retirement age is 65; so at 30, you have longer of your working life potentially ahead than behind. At 40, you are only halfway; and at 50, you have as long to go as new graduates have been in education. Plus we could live another 30 years after retirement, and want to do had a satisfying working life as well as one that provides for that final third age. People do not chose one career at 22 and stick with it. This is now seen as normal. It is a ridiculous pressure that young people should know themselves and what they want to do by the time they graduate, or sooner, when we all know how we develop and wish the liberty to choose again later, and the means to do so.

It means that for those not helped early on in our lives and careers, there is a bigger period of wrangling ahead; and after several years of trying to enter the arts (or any other career), one can feel very despondent.

Whereas £15,000 is a generous bursary (I presume per annum), only 40 people benefitting each year is a small number of those wishing to enter the arts.

It is a positive step but as it is, stands to frustrate and disappoint far more than it will help.

I call for such schemes to be more widely available and for the provisos to be scrapped.

NB the POUND sign seems not to print when this is published