I have received a pleasant email from Kate Davies, which points out that she is married to a different Nick Johnson than the oily creep from the CRE (not her description). Kate deserves marks for sense of humour, and for the possibility that her taste in men could be better than I thought (I haven’t seen her Mr Johnson yet). She also points out that her bit of Sussex Gardens does have prostitutes.
So unreserved apologies for incorrect marital attribution. However, whether her quango job really deserves a salary on the same scale as Ambassador to Washington or Permanent Under Secretary at the Treasury, is something on which I am afraid I remain sceptical. So apologies Kate swam into our sights by mistake, but fair game nonetheless.
Another of our excellent contibutors has sent me this:
It's an issue that has caused a lot of anger
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/05/340078.htm…. And the last chair wasGerard Lemos who is among other things a trustee of the British Council and a director of the Akram Khan Dance company (which does very well out of the British Council). He was instrumental in the appointment of Kinnock to the chair of the BC. He also appointed the Finance Director of the BC – Margaret
Mayne – to the board of the Akram Khan Dance Company. She was previously finance director of Hyde Housing. I guess Kate Davies is in the same club.
I don't know quite what point you're making – I take it one of the concerns you have is with the British Council. However, I feel obliged to point out that, whatever the source of his company's funding, Akram Khan is rightly seen as a major figure in contemporary dance (as dancer and choreographer). I imagine, like many engaged in all kinds of arts, he has to take funding where he can find it. His concern to combine Kathak and contemporary styles is important in persuading people in the arts establishment to take classical Indian dance more seriously. It's perhaps worth pointing out that even Mark Thomas has performed to a group of lobbyists for the arms industry while some might criticise the Battlefield Band for touring in repressive Uzbekistan!
Akram Khan may well be wonderful. I think the allegation is that the links between this dance company and the funding body are too close leading to conflict of interest. There are very many other truly excellent artistic groups which struggle to access British Council funds.
IThe other point is the interchangeable job links between housing associations and other quangos and government institutions, enabling the NuLab nomenklatura to make large amounts of money personally.
fair point – I was just a bit worried that Akram Khan's name was used. I happened to meet him once and, though I could be wrong, gained the impression that he views the world through dance and wouldn't necessarily be aware of the implications of funding groups. His isn't the only group to be taken up by the British Council. No-one raises an eyebrow at the many ballet companies that gain support. There are presumably many other examples that could have been cited.