Tate Visitors Could Donate 1p Each to Make Gallery BP Free

R2uAVsWy_400x400
on

Art lovers visiting Tate would have to donate less than 1p to allow the galleries to drop oil company BP as a sponsor, according to figures released today following a Freedom of Information request. 

Sponsorship figures released today show that BP donations increased from just ยฃ150,000 in 1991 to only ยฃ330,000 in 2006 โ€“ less than 0.5 percent of Tateโ€™s overall operational budget during that time.

The donations, which continue today, mean BP has its flower petal logo hanging around the gallery and, according to campaigners at Platform, provides them with a โ€˜social licence to operateโ€™ by making them appear socially conscious and respectable.

The sponsorship figures were released after the Information Tribunal ruled in December that Tate galleries must disclose the controversial sum of money BP paid as a sponsor between 1990 and 2006.

The landmark ruling was the result of a three-year long Freedom of Information appeals process by London-based campaign group Platform, information charity Request Initiative and law firms Leigh Day and Monckton chambers.

Embarrassingly Small

Brendan Montague, Request Initiative co-founder and DeSmog UK editor, said: โ€œTate Britain and Tate Modern had a combined visitor-ship of more than 2.6m people during 2013. We estimate that if every 20th visitor donated just ยฃ0.01, enough money would be raised to make Tate BP-free.โ€

Anna Galkina from Platform said: โ€œThe BP sponsorship figures are even lower than we had estimated. For nearly a decade, Tate provided a veneer of respectability to one of the worldโ€™s most controversial companies for just ยฃ150,000 a year.

โ€œThe figures are embarrassingly small for Tate to go on justifying its BP relationship. BP desperately needs the โ€˜social licenceโ€™ provided by cultural sponsorship in order to continue trashing our climate. But Tate can clearly do without BP.โ€

Tate renewed BPโ€™s sponsorship contract for five years in 2011, a year after BPโ€™s Deepwater Horizon spill. As Director Nicholas Serota commented at the time: โ€œYou donโ€™t abandon your friends because they have what we consider to be a temporary difficulty.โ€

Reputational Risk

However, the newly revealed minutes of Tateโ€™s Ethics Committee โ€“ released with the sponsorship figures โ€“ show some scrutiny of the legal cases against BP as a result of the spill as well as BPโ€™s Canadian tar sands projects.

The minutes state: โ€œTate has taken a public stance on sustainability and is arguably the cultural institution most in the public eye in the UK. In light of this the reputational risk to Tate of retaining BP as a partner is significant.โ€

It added that the โ€œoil and gas industry is appearing as the recipient of public scrutiny, disapproval and negativity, in the same way as the tobacco industry was in the 1990sโ€.

Yet the Ethics Committee concluded that โ€œtaking a moral stance on the ethics of the Oil and Gas sector โ€ฆ is outside of Tateโ€™s charitable objectivesโ€ and that the benefits of BPโ€™s support for Tate โ€œfar outweigh any quantifiable risk to our reputationโ€.

โ€œTate has fought and no doubt spent a large amount of money trying to keep this information secret,โ€ said Rosa Curling, solicitor of Leigh Day who has been working on the case.

โ€œIf public bodies are accepting sponsorship money from corporations such as BP, they must be open about how much they are receiving. Tateโ€™s actions have prevented proper public debate over the acceptability of the sponsorship, based on actual figured, for over three years.โ€

She added: โ€œWe hope that Tate will now change its approach and act in a more open and transparent manner about corporate sponsorship from now on.โ€

@kylamandel

Photo: Magnus Manske via Creative Commons

R2uAVsWy_400x400
Kyla is a freelance writer and editor with work appearing in the New York Times, National Geographic, HuffPost, Mother Jones, and Outside. She is also a member of the Society for Environmental Journalists.

Related Posts

on

A new report shows how a strategic worldwide campaign to delay building electrification policies risks public health and climate goals.

A new report shows how a strategic worldwide campaign to delay building electrification policies risks public health and climate goals.
on

Hill & Knowlton played a key role in exporting Big Oil's PR tactics to the Southern Hemisphere.

Hill & Knowlton played a key role in exporting Big Oil's PR tactics to the Southern Hemisphere.
Analysis
on

A smarter investment? Put that money towards a massive build-out of the nationโ€™s electrical grid to reach projected energy demand instead.

A smarter investment? Put that money towards a massive build-out of the nationโ€™s electrical grid to reach projected energy demand instead.
Analysis
on

Delay and denial have clouded debate on green issues, with potentially devastating impacts for Europe's energy transition.

Delay and denial have clouded debate on green issues, with potentially devastating impacts for Europe's energy transition.