Tribunal Rules that Tate Must Reveal Price of BP Sponsorship

authordefault
on

Tate must disclose its sponsorship arrangements with oil giant BP in a landmark ruling by the UKโ€™s Information Tribunal after successful campaigning by environmental activists.

After a three-year long tribunal, the Tate is now forced to publish the sum of money BP paid as a sponsor between 1990 and 2006, along with details of internal decision-making on the controversial relationship.

The Tate argued that it โ€œwould not want BP to see its activities placed under explicit scrutiny, in case BP was thereby offended in some way that might prejudice the relationship,โ€ the Tribunalโ€™s decision stated. โ€œWe [the Tribunal]โ€ฆ consider this concern to be somewhat fanciful.โ€

โ€œWe have no doubt that BP is well aware of how its activities are reported in the public domain, and of the nature of the controversies arising around them,โ€ the Tribunal continued.

โ€œIt would be most surprising if BP expected Tate not to give careful consideration to whether any of the controversies arising from BPโ€™s activities should impact on the continuance of the sponsorship relationship.โ€

Lengthy battle

The decision is the culmination of a lengthy legal battle launched by information law charity Request Initiative. Requestโ€™s cofounder, and the editor of DeSmog UK, Brendan Montague, was supported by art activist group Platform. Together, they argued that BPโ€™s sponsorship of the Tate was controversial and not in the publicโ€™s interest.

The Tate opposed the request to reveal details about BPโ€™s sponsorship on the grounds that full disclosure would catalyse further public protest and upset sponsor relations with BP, both of which were dismissed by the Tribunal as โ€œsomewhat fancifulโ€.

In response to the ruling, Platformโ€™s Anna Galkina said: โ€œWe are delighted the sponsorship figures will be revealed.

โ€œTateโ€™s sponsorship deal provides BP with a veneer of respectability when in reality it is trashing the climate, and involved with a series of environmental and human rights controversies all around the world.

โ€œBP is desperate to maintain its โ€˜social licenceโ€™ through arts sponsorship. But Tate can do without BP, considering the deal is likely worth less than 0.5% of Tateโ€™s budget. Sponsorship secrecy makes BP seem more indispensable than it really is โ€“ and our culture must dispense with oil corporations.โ€

Industry relations

The campaign has attracted high public interest over the years and has sparked multiple protests and art events at different Tate galleries.

Protest has even come from within the Tateโ€™s own ranks, with last month seeing multiple members of the Tate Gallery openly challenge the art institutionโ€™s committed secrecy surrounding its partnership with BP during the Tateโ€™s annual members meeting, chaired by former BP Director Lorde Browne.

The Tate controversially renewed its sponsorship deal with BP in 2011 after BPโ€™s disastrous Deepwater Horizon oil spill when Browne was still Chairman. At the time, Tate Director Nicholas Serota stated: โ€œyou donโ€™t abandon your friends because they have what we consider to be a temporary difficulty.โ€

The ruling, made on 23 December 2014, gives 28 days for the Tate to appeal the Tribunalโ€™s decision and 35 days for it to reveal the sponsorship details.

A statement from the Tate said: โ€œTate is considering the decision of the first-tier tribunal in the BP sponsorship freedom of information case.

โ€œThe tribunal upheld many of Tateโ€™s redactions and also required the release of some elements of the FOI request, including the release of pre-2007 historic figures for BP funding.โ€

Campaigners hope the ruling will provide a staging area for increased opposition against oil sponsorship of public institutions and maintain the pressure on large oil companies that are allegedly involved in both human rights abuses and environmental destruction across the globe.

Photo: Magnus Manske via Creative Commons

authordefault

Richard Heasman joined DeSmog UK as a contributing journalist in October 2014. Originally from Stamford, he graduated with an undergraduate history degree (2:1) in 2013 from the University of Lincoln. His dissertation focused on the British mediaโ€™s role in shaping public opinion during the second Gulf War of 2003.

After graduating, Richard started his own online publication specialising in political-socio critiques, and now specialises in environmental topics including fracking and industry.

Richard has been published in the Ecologist as has reported for Blue and Green Tomorrow on a varied range of environmental issues.

Related Posts

Analysis
on

The former Canadian prime minister with close ties to current Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre was attending an energy panel in New Delhi, India.

The former Canadian prime minister with close ties to current Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre was attending an energy panel in New Delhi, India.
on

After donating heavily to Trumpโ€™s reelection, Big Oil is just catching on that the president's policies can hurt them too, anonymous survey of industry executives reveals.

After donating heavily to Trumpโ€™s reelection, Big Oil is just catching on that the president's policies can hurt them too, anonymous survey of industry executives reveals.
on

The UK media baron trebled his shareholding in Tesla, while his outlets pumped out pro-Musk content.

The UK media baron trebled his shareholding in Tesla, while his outlets pumped out pro-Musk content.
on

Importing fracked gas during a trade war undermines Canadaโ€™s energy security, environmentalists warn premier.

Importing fracked gas during a trade war undermines Canadaโ€™s energy security, environmentalists warn premier.