Tate must disclose its sponsorship arrangements with oil giant BP in a landmark ruling by the UKโs Information Tribunal after successful campaigning by environmentalย 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 controversialย relationship.
The Tate argued that it โwould 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 Tribunalโs decision stated. โWe [the Tribunal]โฆ consider this concern to be somewhatย fanciful.โ
โWe 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 Tribunalย continued.
โIt would be most surprising if BP expected Tate not to give careful consideration to whether any of the controversies arising from BPโs activities should impact on the continuance of the sponsorshipย relationship.โ
Lengthyย battle
The decision is the culmination of a lengthy legal battle launched by information law charity Request Initiative. Requestโs cofounder, and the editor of DeSmog UK, Brendan Montague, was supported by art activist group Platform. Together, they argued that BPโs sponsorship of the Tate was controversial and not in the publicโsย interest.
The Tate opposed the request to reveal details about BPโs 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 โsomewhat fancifulโ.
In response to the ruling, Platformโs Anna Galkina said: โWe are delighted the sponsorship figures will beย revealed.
โTateโs 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 theย world.
โBP is desperate to maintain its โsocial licenceโ through arts sponsorship. But Tate can do without BP, considering the deal is likely worth less than 0.5% of Tateโs budget. Sponsorship secrecy makes BP seem more indispensable than it really is โ and our culture must dispense with oilย corporations.โ
Industryย relations
The campaign has attracted high public interest over the years and has sparked multiple protests and art events at different Tateย galleries.
Protest has even come from within the Tateโs own ranks, with last month seeing multiple members of the Tate Gallery openly challenge the art institutionโs committed secrecy surrounding its partnership with BP during the Tateโs annual members meeting, chaired by former BP Director Lorde Browne.
The Tate controversially renewed its sponsorship deal with BP in 2011 after BPโs disastrous Deepwater Horizon oil spill when Browne was still Chairman. At the time, Tate Director Nicholas Serota stated: โyou donโt abandon your friends because they have what we consider to be a temporaryย difficulty.โ
The ruling, made on 23 December 2014, gives 28 days for the Tate to appeal the Tribunalโs decision and 35 days for it to reveal the sponsorshipย details.
A statement from the Tate said: โTate is considering the decision of the first-tier tribunal in the BP sponsorship freedom of informationย case.
โThe tribunal upheld many of Tateโs redactions and also required the release of some elements of the FOI request, including the release of pre-2007 historic figures for BPย 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 theย globe.
Photo: Magnus Manske via Creativeย Commons
Subscribe to our newsletter
Stay up to date with DeSmog news and alerts