Welcome to the Rivers Museums. Matters of Policy podcast, this is a podcast in which we explore the museum's collections development policy,
speaking with guests from across the globe to delve into the language used and consider what really matters in this policy.
Hi everyone, it's Megan. Today I am with Bessey interviewing Liam Wiseman and I'd like to do a land acknowledgement as I am on indigenous land today.
So I am a white settler of Celtic and British descent living on Treaty one territory in Winnipeg, Manitoba,
the traditional lands of the Anishinaabe in a new Ojibwe, in the new Cree ogy, Cree DNA and Dakota peoples, as well as the birthplace of the nation.
I acknowledge that our past history of colonialism and genocide continue to deeply harm indigenous communities in the land now called Canada.
I am committed to listening to indigenous people through my work in cultural
institutions and learning as much as I can in order to move forward with truth,
reconciliation and restitution. Ian is senior music and relationship manager at the Arts Council England.
He focuses on supporting museums to challenge their existing practises through funding and self-reflection.
So maybe I think a good place to start is if you could just tell us a little bit more about your role as a
museum relationship manager and how you kind of engage with decolonisation principles within your role.
Sure. So Museum Relationship Manager is a kind of Arts Council's main way of interacting with the with the museum sector.
We have relationship managers for all different sectors that we work with, including theatre and dance and of other art forms as well.
Museum relationship managers specifically oversee what could museums, and we work with them to support their activity and organisational development,
both in terms of what ambitions they might have, but also in terms of their programming activities they deliver.
And obviously a large part of that is through funding as well.
So we provide the funding for our national portfolio, which is our regularly funded organisations that we fund for four years at a time.
But we also support a variety of independent and small museums with some other funding streams, including National Lottery Project Grants.
And I suppose the way that we tend to interact with the conversation around
decolonisation is that we're a body that's also the development of arts and
culture in the U.K. So we have a role not just to kind of support the financial development stability of organisations in terms of their finances,
but also in terms of their understanding of the way that they work,
helping them to develop new business models and react to, you know, public consciousness.
The conversations are happening socially with people.
So I think that we obviously have a role to play in helping the conversations around decolonisation develop.
I suppose the way that I've tended to do is if a museum really wants to engage with the discussions,
they've realised that they have collections that are kind of related to this particular
topic or they're just interested in understanding the conversation about decolonisation.
I basically work with them to support their understanding, try and talk to them through their ideas,
their opportunities, the challenges they might face as well.
Because I think obviously one of the big fears for museums in the sector is they know they need to change.
But what happens if they get it wrong or if they risk further upsetting people?
Or you know what potential backlash there might be from engaging this particular topic?
What would that do is support museums to be braver, I guess, because it's a necessary step.
Museums are going to have to take in order to change and develop.
Just going back to that, talking about museums that wanting to change and assisting with that.
Does it ever go the other way around? You ever feel that as in your role, your kind of is anything that you do that to encourage that or to kind of.
I don't want to say like, give a kick up the arse like, no, no, no, that's that's fine.
I mean, I do like I said, there are some museums are really ready for these discussions and are happy to have them.
And that's brilliant because then obviously going into a discussion about this sort of thing where a museum is already
kind of ready to begin that process or feels like they're wanting to engage with that process makes it a lot easier.
But there are times where some museums or some people in some museums don't want to or don't feel ready or
don't feel like they're equipped with the knowledge or understanding to begin that kind of conversation.
And that could be a bit more challenging.
But you know, again, as Arts Council, we have a role to play in improving the diversity of the arts sector in general.
Obviously, we do that through what we have done it through a process called to create a case for diversity.
It's part of the funding agreement with the national portfolio organisations that they work to
try and improve the representation of different types of diversity within their organisation.
So obviously, including from the representation of race within their collections, exhibitions, activity,
staff, workforce or disability, or improving the representation of women within the organisation.
So I think there's a lot that we do with that anyway. But.
Decolonisation is something that's still quite new, I guess, for Arts Council and for museums as well.
So there's plenty that we're always learning as well.
So, you know, there are some museums or they could have embarked on these discussions or conversations about decolonisation,
and we were able to learn a lot from them as well because they already have some experiences.
They've learnt what to do, maybe what not to do, which is that kind of, you know, support and encourage them as they develop.
When Bessie spoke about difficult museums, we've been speaking with some of the professionals at the rivers,
and it's a lot of their views that national standards can sometimes make it a little bit difficult to decolonise,
especially in terms of funding like, some of them might be worried that if they do make significant changes, they'll no longer be eligible.
So do you think that the standards for funding of the Arts Council prevent change from being made?
Or has that really not been your experience? No.
I think the Arts Council is the thing that's that's trying to drive the change or one of the things that's trying to drive the change.
I think, you know, standing in the way of that at all.
And what I've noticed, certainly and that might be obviously, I'm speaking from the funding perspective,
it could be very different from people in the sector that are applying for money.
But from what I've seen as a general reticence to even to even consider getting funded for this sort of thing,
because I think that some people fear that it won't be taken seriously or they don't
think it's important or it's not something that would get funded when in actuality,
it's completely the opposite. This is the type of thing we're looking to fund.
Not not to say the Arts Council wouldn't fund kind of a more traditional museum work because we absolutely do, and we still do.
But I think we want to see improved representation within museums.
We want to see museums being critical of themselves on Britain's history and its imperial legacies in
order to have a nuanced conversation about history because it's something that just hasn't happened yet.
So at least not in the kind of national way. So absolutely, museums should feel comfortable coming to us to have these conversations.
And even if they just kind of testing the waters or just trying to dip the water,
they can always come and talk to a relationship manager before they consider putting in a funding bill or anything.
And just see if the idea is, is this something that's likely to get funded?
Is it something that you'd be interested in and more for the not yet? Absolutely.
Because we took a huge mob museum applications compared to everything else.
We see far more, you know, for example, theatre applications that we do museum. But also the Typekit Museum applications, we do see a pretty safe.
Generally, there's very few that we get that would consider something like decolonising or pushing the boundaries,
I guess, you know, in terms of representation within museums, and that's the type of thing we're really interested in.
That's great to hear your perspective on that because sort of the impression that I've been
getting is that a lot of professionals are sort of not only hesitant to just do the wrong thing,
but hesitant that if it upsets the status quo, maybe it will upset the funding that comes from the status quo.
So it's fantastic to hear a little bit more about the other side about how that's actually the opposite of what's really going on.
Yeah, absolutely. I think that, you know, whilst Arts Council admittedly is the status quo in terms of where the majority
of funding kind of traditionally comes from for cultural organisations, we recognise the need for change.
You know, just as much and probably more so than a lot of organisations because we're taking a broad view
of the cultural sector and in terms of things like decolonisation and racism within the sector,
because that's what decolonisation is all about. It's really about challenging racism and racist stereotypes.
The sex is not good. It's not good at that. It's not it's not actively doing that.
It's not actively seeking to do that. It doesn't really give the impression that it particularly cares about that process.
I know Arts Council certainly needs to do more to make that clear that we're looking
to fund this sort of thing and we really want to be a part of that process.
But museums shouldn't feel worried or uncomfortable about coming for us, for it,
because you're not going to you're going to lose out on funding by saying,
you know, you want to decolonise or you want to challenge perceptions of history or whatever it is, you want to do it.
That's what we want to see. Yeah, I definitely agree with Meghan. It's really reassuring to to hear that that is the side of things.
This hesitancy to enact change and the idea that you can build the ground and trying to do
things and be met with so many different barriers from funding or from within the organisation.
And actually the fact that you know, there is room to flex its muscles and try to enact some of this change.
I think one of the things that's kind of come up in our conversations with other
guests in previous podcasts is this idea about budgeting for some of these practises,
for example, working with communities whose objects are in the museum and whether there is funding or specific grants set aside to
facilitate trips or projects where people are engaging with the objects that they might not be able to take back with them,
but they could engage with within the museum space, other grants or funding set aside for museums who would like to do things like that.
It's both a blessing and a curse with the Arts Council because I think we tend to be really,
really open and flexible about how people use our funding, which is a good thing in terms of.
If someone came in to apply for a project grant, you could do almost anything with that grant.
So if you did want to do you know, community engagement projects or you did want to do, you know, put an exhibition on in partnership with,
you know, people from the Diaspora community or someone that's affected by those objects, you absolutely could.
I think that sometimes it could be a bit of a problem, though, because sometimes people don't realise,
I guess, our guidelines for what you kind of can't do with it.
On as explicit as they might well be, it potentially makes people think, Oh, maybe I can't use it for that.
All that is for we'll just be overwhelmed by the amount of things you could do with it.
So, yeah, we don't have a specific kind of decolonisation fund as such,
but you could absolutely use our project grant funding to decolonise or to to kind of initiate some of this work,
and that would be absolutely fine and encouraged. But like I said,
I think one of the issues we have with museums is that museums also came into the Arts Council portfolio much later than a lot of organisations,
and I think there is a legacy to that.
You know, historically, the organisation has worked much more with theatre dance organisations and the performing and visual arts as opposed to,
you know, museums and libraries, which came in about 10 years ago. You know,
those organisations are understanding how the Arts Council works and what the
Arts Council can bring to them and what they could do to benefit from it. But it's taken time to build those relationships,
and it's still going to take time until the museum sector is probably fairly comfortable with what we can offer.
But I think what I would suggest is if you're a museum or a museum employee that's considering doing any of this work,
put in an application or talk to one of our relationship managers about an application before you do,
because chances are it will be something we can fund and something that we're really interested in.
Yeah, that's that's awesome to hear, really. We hadn't gotten the impression that the Arts Council was so encouraging of this stuff.
Just from talking to museum professionals, it sort of seemed as if the external barriers were far more difficult to get over than the internal ones,
whereas it's fantastic to hear from a perspective that it's really sort of the internal and maybe
even mental barriers which sort of block any possibility of enacting change and a lot of places.
But given that, of course,
are there really good examples that you think other museums should follow of museums which have done the good work to decolonise?
Like what are some of the best decolonial practises in museums that you personally have seen?
The big one is obviously, I don't know.
I feel like this isn't even a practise as more of a mindset, but not being afraid to be criticised or received backlash.
I think bravery and ambition in this sector is something that is often really lacking and that can manifest itself in different ways.
I think in terms of decolonisation,
there seems to be a lack of museums even feeling like they could get funded for this sort of thing or that little that that option is there.
And so it kind of stops the process before it's even really have a chance to still get going.
So I think that is that's a skill or a mindset I think museum professionals could do with adopting, you know, you know,
to make sure that there is at least at that stage the work isn't blocked, you know, and it can,
you know, has it has a chance to start, I suppose, in terms of the best of the best?
Peer colonisation, what I've seen, I think from kind of my my area, which I covered, which is the east of England,
let's say Colchester Ipswich Museum service is a really good example of that because they work very closely with their community partners,
which includes obviously representatives from a variety of different, diverse backgrounds in the area.
So they have different groups they work with,
and they bring their ideas and thoughts and feelings and responses to the collections and exhibitions into everything that they put on.
And so I think that level of community engagement is really, really important.
And obviously that is is tricky when you know, it says it's tricky when you're doing that with people that might be like,
you know, halfway across the world or something if you're talking about specific items from specific countries.
But I think it's something that museums need to embrace because again, it's like you see him talking about the objects.
They're about people that the objects represent.
They're about the histories of they've gone past and the people that they're here now in the future and everything is about.
You know, that human link, and I think that sometimes we get so hung up on the objects that they don't really engage with people.
And again, in terms of decolonisation. Which is about kind of challenging racism and bigotry.
And I, you know, tried to bring equity to the museum sector and to the two communities.
You can't do that without talking to people, and you can't do that without having these conversations.
You can't do it. You can't do it without understanding.
Why certain things might be problematic or why they might be offensive to some people, or how the displays that you've put on historically.
I'm not representative of that particular group. You know, I think you're absolutely you can't just.
Put up a barrier and say it's going to carry on doing things the way we've always done it because it's been fine so far, you know?
Yeah, I think that's definitely the case that, you know, is that resistance to a lot of things when actually this.
Maybe a new reason for the resistance, I know that some of my favourite passages, you know, sounds quite sad.
My favourite passages from the from the policy is just that it's unnecessary inclusion of things that
are kind of outdated or that aren't really affecting the actual method message of the policy itself.
I think also that as you were saying about the emotional side, the.
The museums being around people and that know about the objects, and I think.
Well, we've definitely found looking at the policy is just that lack of emotive language surrounding some of the passages,
for example, like the disposal of human remains.
So obviously that that's language that needs to be in the policy because referring to.
Certain legal barriers in the University of Oxford had its own procedure for dealing with that.
But. It's still talking about a human body and that somebody is family and that's, you know, it's a person,
and it's that difficulty of making it sound like a policy, but also acknowledging, like you said, that it is.
It's a space that is about human engagement. And I think.
One of the questions maybe leading on that is just the view of the public that the policy itself does say a lot about,
especially the mission statement about this idea of who the public, how what the museum is for, what public it's facing.
And do you think that maybe the public attitude to.
Declan, your practise is maybe one of the reasons why museums might feel hesitant to and back out some of this change.
Yeah, I mean, obviously it's something that. Is a real issue, you know,
with these kind of culture war like situation we seem to be in at the moment
and there have been some obviously really nasty cases of very public backlash.
You know, the media about trying to change history or what they well, they would say is,
you know, erasing history or it's not erasing history, it's bringing context and.
Realising that not all of our, you know, all the people who have statues in this country,
not all the people who are who are kind of viewed as heroes in history were actually good people,
you know, plenty of them were flawed or racist or, you know, just vile people.
And that's. And that's not a bad thing to say, like that's that's that should be able to say,
you know, this person was committed horrific crimes if they committed horrific crimes.
You know, it's about criminal. But because someone was legally allowed to do something, it's like, Oh, we can't say that.
But just because someone was, you know, legally allowed to be a slave trader in the 1800s doesn't mean they would be today.
That's a very different thing. I think again, you know, it's interesting you talked about language,
and it just made me think of another really good example of of some kind of decolonisation I saw,
which I mean, it was, you know, it was just it was a sin Orbit's museum.
And I'm going to be I got to be I can't remember the life of me what the exhibition was called or the person it was about,
but it was about kind of the history of science. And, you know, it touched on eugenics and then race science.
And I, you know, I don't remember the exhibition that well, but I do remember is there was a big panel with this old white guy's face on it.
You know, classic kind of scientist person you'd expect. And it had a section that just said, you know, this person was a eugenicist and a racist.
And I think.
That's probably, you know, that was in 2019, just before the full Kogut, and I feel like that was the first time I've ever seen that in a museum.
You know, just someone actually being outright saying. This person was a racist, they were not a good person.
They were vile, they were, you know, reprehensible and.
That's great. You know? You know, because I was like, God, I've been, you know, walking for museums so long in my life and just seeing.
The way that some of these people are talked about, we're always talked about, you know,
what's discussed, there's always the positives that they brought to the world.
You know, no doubt there were positives that this person brought to the world as well, but they never criticised them.
They never critique them and they never say, OK, this person might have done this, but they were all.
There was a really problematic and a lot of ways. And being able to name it, just put a name on it like this person was racist.
It that's a term that we use now. And we know what it means, and it's relevant because racism exists.
And he brought it to to talk about it in history. And that's what we should be because it makes it.
It makes people understand. I think, you know, if you don't. Say what this is.
In reality, if you don't say that you eugenicist is racism and it was genocide.
Then it removes again, it's a step away from realising the reality of it.
And like a lot of people walk around, you see, obviously like this person was a eugenicist and not make the connexion of exactly what that means.
In reality, if you actually, you know, say, this person was a racist and they believed these horrible, outdated racist views.
That makes a difference. You know, people, people understand that.
Yeah, I think like you just call a spade a spade and you know, you've got objects on display and you discuss the objects you discuss there,
you know how it was produced in the environment it came from,
as well as saying what the object is and if you can apply the same to two people and just transparency, I think is.
Yeah. And I completely understand the fear of.
If maybe people would perceive as going too far with that or, you know,
saying the wrong thing or upsetting the wrong people in fear and getting backlash in that as a legitimate fear because it's.
It is horrific, some of the things that, you know, people have to go through it now just for telling the truth.
But. If we don't have people telling the truth.
And we're telling his lies. You know, it's and that's not history, and that's not what.
That's not what museums should be as a museum should not be a house of lies, but many of them are in reality so.
Or they, you know, just carefully edit bits of history to to just beat the positives and.
That's not what I think a museum is for. I don't think that's another thing that helps anyone to open up benefits anyone.
I don't think that is a positive use of.
You know, of lottery money, which is what we, you know, use public money.
And so I think the museum, certainly the museums that we fund. I have to change if they're if they're not being honest or being truthful.
Well, they won't get funding anymore, essentially, that's what we've said.
So, yes, and this wasn't in the questions that we sent to you, so I apologise in advance,
but I would really love it if you would comment on this idea that you touched on before of a culture war because I'm not in the UK at the moment,
but I think that Canada, where I am, is going through its own version of this,
especially when it comes to reckoning with the past that isn't palatable for people who
want to put forward the myth of Canada as this super tolerant and accepting place.
And maybe it's not quite the same in Britain,
but do you think that museums in particular have a role to play in this in coming forward and saying this
is what the correct history actually is and we'd like to change the public's perception of history?
Do you think that it would be difficult for museums to do this or do you think that it's something they're very uniquely suited for?
I mean, yeah, I think that museums are realists.
I mean, like it when you think about how people tend to engage with history, that most people study some level, some history at school,
or they might go into a museum and experience some history there, or they might see on TV from a documentary or something.
But I think in terms of. You know, the best way to change people's minds is probably free museums,
because it can give a lot of context because you actually have the objects in front of you,
you have the evidence right there, you can't ignore it or if you know when you're seeing it right there in front of you.
We do find it difficult with this, because obviously, the Arts Council is an arm's length government body, which means it's obviously.
Separate from the government, but very much as to follow government policy.
So when it comes to things like my most hated phrase contested heritage the government are using to describe,
you know, statues and public art and things like that, which which could have, you know.
Negative history is associated with them.
We we can't challenge that, you know, we have to actually toe the line on the kind of retain and explain angle which they have, but.
I think with. With the organisations that we fund, we can absolutely say, well, look, in reality.
This is not going to help you. You know, just going along and going along with this because I mean the people that.
A kind of belief these misconceptions about history.
Firmly not that interested in museums, anyway, because, you know, I think that there's potential for, you know,
there is potential if a museum decides to to to kind of be more open and honest and challenge assumptions than.
They're going to disagree with that, and I'm going to want to see that anyway, all they really.
So there is there is a challenge for trying to engage those people, and I don't think it's it's isn't as easy to change people's minds around that.
So when you when you are in a culture war like this, it can be incredibly difficult.
But what we can do is make sure that information is being put out there for the people that are engaging with it or want to engage with it.
They can see it and understand, and perhaps they'll bring people that wouldn't want to engage with it.
Usually end up like, actually, you know, come and see this, you know, we might learn something.
And obviously, museums have the role of learning and outreach teams have a lot of which is kind of,
you know, have adult learning programmes and things like that that's potential for. Having these discussions in those spaces as well.
But it is really difficult. I don't have the answer to the kind of how you deal with a culture war because it's.
It's not new. You know, people think that this is new, people think that this is the first time we've had arguments in England about British history.
But it's not, you know, you go back to the 1980s, people were having these conversations back then,
you know, in the early 90s again, it was the same thing.
And I've seen it several times within my museum career, going to museum conferences and they always talk about the same things.
And one of them is, you know, decolonisation and racism within museums.
And it's it's a thing that's recognised, but it's there's nothing that's challenged generally, and it's not something that's really.
Had any clear action on that yet, so I think that's that's what the issue is,
just when you keep having these conversations and nothing changes, it gets incredibly frustrating. You know, I can imagine.
I think, you know, we're both at the beginning of our careers and already frustrated.
And say it must be a lot.
I was just wondering, again, this is not a if not maybe going off topic slightly, but just what you were saying about the people who.
Maybe wouldn't be in the museum spaces wondering if, like maybe statues as being such a central aspect of this debate.
I'm actually doing my dissertation on the whole statue of debate, and I'm just wondering if it was like because they're in the public realm.
So they're kind of not. You don't purposely go to view it, so you don't have an option to be confronted by it, though, and by.
Both kind of groups like a range of different people, kind of from different viewpoints.
Addressing that, sorry, I don't know what that was, the question was just think what is interesting is interesting and it's an important reflection.
That's something I feel about because, you know, I've been thinking a lot about the Colston statue, obviously, which was the big one,
the the court of media attention, because I used to live in Bristol and I walk past that statue all the time.
And, you know, it was a horrible reminder of Bristol's past and.
It's interesting because there's an argument to be made for, OK, if you leave that statue up,
eventually, time will weather it and it would be destroyed naturally, you know, if he did nothing.
And the weird thing is now that is it a museum, it's going to be preserved. So it's kind of like.
It's a weird thing where you like, I get it because we we need to preserve this in order to talk about it and in order to have that conversation,
understand how things all the way they are right now.
But at the same time, I would just love to have left that statue rotting in the harbour, you know, because that would have actually destroyed it.
Eventually, you know, it would have nature would have reclaimed it.
But then obviously, you risk, you know, potentially forgetting about those folks, obviously,
it's important to make sure that those conversations are still in the public, in the public eye, but.
It sits kind of uncomfortably with me knowing that that statue is probably at a better position where it is now in a museum.
Then it's just been left in hall, I don't know. Yeah,
I think this idea around preservation is something that we've looked so much when looking at the policy and so much
and all of our conversations that we've had is this idea around preservation and how objects require different.
Means of preservation, you know, on one hand, you might have an object that is intended to stand outside and be bothered.
And by putting it in the museum space, you will. Diverting its use in its path, and on the other hand,
you have an object that maybe would be better to be left outside and shipping in the museum's faces,
diverting it in an equally negative way, but in very different ways and.
I think we've kind of veered off topic a little bit and the fear factor there, the policy slightly as much as I'd like to go down this rabbit hole.
And so I think one of the.
Other questions that had been raised that we'd be interested to talk about is.
The question around a restitution repatriation and the council's kind of attitude to that, and especially when it comes to.
The funding for those projects, whether the funding is even going to be part of the conversation when the decision is made,
or if the funding and the budget to actually return, something can come afterwards, how that influences the decision.
So yeah, just looking at the policy and if you think that there's room and do you think
that there is room in the policy to expand on what's allowed to be done?
Yeah, I think I mean, this is. Such an it's such an interesting mine minefield, because it's like.
You know, I would absolutely love for everything just to be returned.
You know, like the British, you know, the British Museum should just be British stuff.
Shouldn't that like it? You know, it shouldn't be Britain's imperial conquests or like things we've nicked from other countries or.
Because, you know, I don't know, I I'm all for restitution and repatriation, I'd rather everything went back,
but then obviously there is a financial aspect to that, which is something that needs to be considered.
And obviously, Arts Council is working on a kind of updated version of restitution or repatriation guidance at the moment,
which is supposed to be released this summer. Um.
I don't think that really. Considers the funding aspect, particularly in terms of like, the expense, obviously,
it's a it's a best practise document, essentially, you know, which you know, talking about how you.
How you should be making Connexions with communities that might have a claim on items that you hold in your museum
collections and how to go about kind of engaging them in that process or what to do if they engage in that process?
But. I think that, you know, what's more challenging for museums than actually engaging people about these
conversations is actually finding the money to do so or to to ship things back,
you know, especially if they have to do quite a lot of returns or if they're having to go over to another
country to actually visit people in person or fly people over to this country and vice versa.
So that's a real challenge. You know, I would hope that the Arts Council would be behind that.
I don't think it's something that's been tested yet in terms of the realities of.
How Arts Council would support.
You know, museums financially in that sense, obviously, we we generally support museums when they're engaged in these discussions about,
again, about the best practise of what you should do and how you should respond. But.
I think it will be interesting to know because our new strategy on detainee strategy, which we've got now.
You know, it does include the words decolonisation includes words, restitution, repatriation, you know, it's there.
It's clear that that's something the Arts Council wants to see happen. But whether Arts Council will foot the bill?
I don't know. That's another thing entirely. So I guess we'll just have to.
Almost wait and see until a big test case like, you know, something that comes up.
But I think, you know, it's such a weird thing because the focus on restitution is it tends to always fall on like the big museums, right?
The Nationals like the British Museum and the Parthenon marbles and things like that.
And I think one issue with the museum sector is.
Whilst there is a wealth of best practise guidance out there, a lot of museums tend to look to the Nationals for advice and guidance,
and if they see the nationals not doing things which the British Museum is not.
Then. A lot of them, not all of them, but a lot of them just don't tend to think they have to do anything at all.
You know, well, I could just ignore it or just be like, Well. We don't have to do this legally, you know?
You know, so I think there is an issue about. About where museums are going to for guidance and advice and.
You know, the pressure they feel to actually make change. I don't think it's quite there yet.
And I think that was something that we're encouraging on a lot of other organisations are encouraging.
It's not. It's not required legally, and that's an issue, because, you know, in France, obviously,
they made it they made it legal that if you know you have a claim against you,
yeah, it's great because you know they're forced to do it, they're forced to return things.
We don't have that same kind of pressure here. So even when we put out guidance documents like we're going to be this summer,
there's there's only so there's only so much to an extent it will work for.
You know, I think that's the interesting thing about the looking to the nationalists.
Actually, you've got more scope as a no national museum and maybe not having to adhere to some of the same stipulations.
A question that has come up is this idea around the legality of it.
And obviously we talk about and think it's 15.
The Holocaust Situation Act and.
The potential for there to be a mirroring legal aspect that, you know, that would be part of having to be in these policies, do you think the.
Having something like a colonial exploitation act would be beneficial.
To include, as is a legal barrier. Yeah, um, yeah, I mean, obviously anything that could kind of really, you know,
legally back up people's claims and back up and enforce the kind of needs to make this change would certainly,
well, certainly keep people at the bottom to give them, you know, to get into gear, wouldn't that, you know, actually deliver?
Um, but again, I think the one thing to just consider this financial aspect is, you know, museums and museums generally don't make money.
Museums generally are kind of lost, leaving organisations that, you know, never really.
Very few of them really ever actually make a profit. So there is the issue of, okay, well, how do you support a sector?
That's that the exists bye bye, you know, not making money, you know, and then if you add extra costs like that, well, you know what happens there?
And I think the issue is then obviously the government would need to step up to fill a gap.
And I don't think this government's going to do that. So I would love to see it.
I would love it because again, like I said, I want,
I want items to go back to their countries of origin or to whoever feels like they have the rightful claim to those items.
But. I think the reality of it is quite different because, like I said,
we're we're in a culture war where we've got a government that is not interested in culture generally.
You know, they've they've been trying to cut provision to arts and culture, to, you know, education and things like that.
So I can't imagine they would step up and do something like that.
But you live in hope. Yeah, maybe need to start buying some more postcards from the gift shop.
Yeah. So interesting what you said as well about it, and I think we'll have to make this our last question because you've been so generous
with your time today and we really don't want to take up too much more of it.
But one of the things that we've been talking a lot to professionals at the PR about is sort of this idea
of being a leader in the field when there aren't any rules to sort of guide people in the right direction.
And so the reverse has changed a lot of its policies or sorry, a lot of its practises in recent years did better or follow a decolonial mindset.
And yet their policy like this policy is still sort of out there, and it's quite outdated in some spots.
The mission statement that's on it isn't even their true mission statement anymore, but it's still open access.
So this is sort of if other museums are sort of looking to follow with what the reverse does, this is what they see.
This is sort of the guidance that they have, but it doesn't reflect their true practises.
So having read the policy yourself, do you think that there is or briefly, I guess, because I know it's a super long document.
Do you think that you could suggest any specific sort of changes or a shift in mindset
that would really help the rivers to sort of decolonise this policy so that other people,
when looking at it can sort of follow in their lead? Yeah. That is really interesting, I mean, I think that the idea of being a leader way,
way also trying to work out the answers to the questions the sector is asking has a really interesting and difficult position to find yourself at.
But. I mean, ultimately, I think that these kind of guidance documents, obviously Arts Council putting out a general one for for the sector,
but I think internally when museums are developing their own guidance documents,
they should fit the museum and they're not going to be the same for every museum like it works in a museum.
It's not going to work in a world culture's collection museum. It's not going to work enough for Policy Museum.
It's, you know, they're all very different. So.
I guess I don't know if that's like a thing that I would suggest that they do, but I think again, going back to what I was saying,
like it was a star is being brave enough to say that things aren't right and to say, do you want to make that change is that's the mindset.
And they stay in that. That's brilliant.
You know, the rest of it will be, you know, from having discussions with a variety of people and getting feedback and doing consultation,
they should understand where they need to be going.
But just having the mindset of realising that we need to change is something that's quite rare in the museum sector and it's something that you know.
What's even rarer is to see them act on it, you know, because that might be quite a few members of staff in the museum sector that realise,
OK, art museums shouldn't be the way that they are, they do need to change.
But actually, either having the will or the ability or the position of power in your organisation to make a difference or to make that change is rare.
So I think that, you know, just stepping up and saying, well, look. The secretary isn't really working at the moment.
We need to make it work and we need to do better. It's a good thing.
Awesome, and thank you so much for all of this extremely poignant material that we got today,
and we really appreciate you sharing your time with us, we really value the especially the words that you've spoken to.
It's we've both learnt a lot. I think I certainly came into this conversation with some misconceptions that have now been corrected.
I think Betsy might feel the same. So it's been absolutely fantastic to speak with you and thank you so much for coming.
No problem this and I told you, Ted. That was the Rivers Museum's Matters of Policy podcast produced by Betsy Woodhouse.
Yet Boom, Mega Man, Alexis Barriere and Bhogle sounds music by Jack Forcett voiceover Baiju who let a special thank you to Muranga,
Thomas, some Modlin and the knowledge exchange.