Calling their decision to cut centre's funding 'flawed and illegal'

After seeking legal advice, Watermans yesterday sent the Arts Council a ‘letter before action’ challenging its decision to cut Watermans’ funding as flawed and illegal. The Arts Council has until 28 March 2008 to respond. If the Arts Council fails to remedy the flaws in its decision making and reverse its decision, Watermans shall consider immediately commencing judicial review proceedings.

The essence of Watermans’ case is that the Arts Council’s decision making has been seriously flawed on the following points:

• Established and agreed decision making procedures were not followed
• The recommendation to withdraw funding was based on unsubstantiated and inaccurate evidence
• Evidence to the contrary that was presented in the appeal, was ignored

As a consequence Watermans has asked the Arts Council to set aside its decision and reinstate Watermans annual funding for the next three years.

Watermans has been advised that it has a strong legal case.

The Arts Council has by its own admission concluded that its decision making process was seriously flawed, so much so, that it has asked Baroness Genista McIntosh to conduct an internal investigation into how the decisions were taken.

In its most recent published comment about Watermans, http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/01/09/hounslow_watermans_feature.shtml
an Arts Council statement reiterated that the primary reason for withdrawing funding was a failure by Hounslow Council to match their own level of financial commitment over many years, although there is absolutely no evidence to support this contention and this was pointed out to the Arts Council.

The Arts Council’s London board are believed to have been severely divided over Watermans’ case and many felt that the facts had not been objectively considered.

March 25, 2008