6 Weeks On: Will the Hodge Report Spark Real Change for Theatre?
It's been six weeks since Baroness Margaret Hodge's review of Arts Council England landed in December 2025, calling for a "radical overhaul of the organisation." Theatre companies up and down the country perked up—could this finally fix a broken system? But as responses trickle in and promises mount, the question lingers: will anything actually change, or is it more hot air?
Theatre's Big Gripe: Stifled by "Let's Create"
Hodge nailed what many in our theatre circles have been saying for years: ACE's Let's Create strategy feels like a straitjacket. Despite its equality principles enjoying overwhelming support, its overly bureaucratic, instrumental implementation has stifled creativity and artistic innovation. Our friend , Director Simon Harvey summed it up brilliantly in a Facebook post last year:
"Let’s Create? Chance would be a fine thing."
I’ll wager very few artists get into theatre just to tick boxes for economic growth or social outcomes—you get into theatre to stir souls. Same for audiences: nobody’s buying a ticket thinking "this supports place-based regeneration." You go to be moved, to have an experience. Yet funding hoops frequently sideline, or worse, ignore this fundamental truth.
Business, business, business…numbers
Unikitty in a still from The Lego Movie
Mark Robinson (2020) from Live Theatre argues that success in fundraising now hinges on "a combination of extremely high artistic quality and business acumen." I speak for many artists when I say: business acumen is a very different skill set from artistry. It’s rare to excel at both. Smaller organisations and individuals suffer most from these demands—outsourcing admin to a growing industry of funding experts, meaning grant money increasingly funds ACE processes, not art itself. I’ve heard the same about Cornwall’s Shared Prosperity Fund: artists call the reporting "a nightmare," and complain of having to hire extra admin staff to handle it.
The Problem with Speaking the Funder’s Language
For years, artists have twisted projects to fit funding criteria. Industry advice on UK Producers forums and "how to get funding" workshops is full of it: "speak the funders' language." But does this exacerbate the problem? By adopting instrumentalist principles to bag cash, are we eroding our worth? As Sheff and Kotler pointed out in 1996: "Instead of holding to the belief that art is everything, [arts organisations] are conceding that, in today's funding maze, art is not enough."
What’s the result of this behaviour? If we erode art’s importance in our own minds, won’t it affect audiences and funders too? By admitting "you’re right, the art isn’t that important," we weaken our case to exist.
Reframing Value
To see the results of my study on reframing the value of theatre, skip to 22:43 in the vid
In my MA dissertation last year at Falmouth University, I dug into why people really go to the theatre. Surprise: no one said "to help the economy" or "solve social problems"—government favourites. Instead, they described deep human needs from Maslow's pyramid: belonging, esteem, and self-actualisation. Laughter that heals, tears that connect, stories that make sense of chaos -the unique powers of live theatre.
Yet in funding policy, these qualities often get sidelined or ignored entirely. Why? Measurement. Ticket sales or demographic shifts are easy to capture; emotions aren’t. Art’s impact unfolds over time—how do you quantify a quiet epiphany months or years later? Or processing grief (Dan recalls a lady saying Near-ta’s Christmas show let her reconnect with happy memories of her late husband)? We chase the measurable, missing the magic.
Regional Risks and the Heritage Trap
One of Hodge’s solutions (to improve efficiency and fairness) is pushing power to regional boards. But in Cornwall (where we’re based), the council’s creative manifesto is heavily heritage-led. ‘Owdyado’s modern, philosophical themes don’t fit this — we like to explore universal human experiences (albeit through a dark-comedy "twisted" lens). Cornwall audiences need space for that as much as plays about mining; it’s patronising to assume otherwise.
Time for Trust
The Hodge Report could be a turning point which leads to less red tape and more faith. Funders: trust us to make bold work. Industry: let’s start standing up for our intrinsic worth. Theatre’s power is complex — mind-bending and soul-touching — not just a KPI line on a spreadsheet. Think of the plays, literature, and music you love that have stayed with you or changed your life: most sprang from an artist’s brain, not prescribed criteria. Aren’t we all richer for it? Let’s measure success by changed lives, not numbers. If you just let artists be artists, some will pursue social aims, others heritage, others just their muse. That’s not wrong—it’s art. Here’s hoping that one day ACE and DCMS see it that way.
ARTICLES REFERENCED
HODGE, M. (2025). Arts Council England - an independent review by Baroness Margaret Hodge. [online] GOV.UK. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/arts-council-england-an-independent-review-by-baroness-margaret-hodge/arts-council-england-an-independent-review-by-baroness-margaret-hodge#summary-of-recommendations.
ROBINSON, M (2020) Live Theatre Business Model Case Study - CultureHive. [online] Available at: https://www.culturehive.co.uk/resources/live-theatre-business-model-case-study
SCHEFF, J. and Kotler, P. (1996 Crisis in the arts: The marketing response. California Management Review, [online] Available at: https://www.proquest.com/docview/216127604/abstract/46C12321B044418EPQ/1.