Tag: Deborah Bull

  • Deborah Bull – 2022 Tribute to HM Queen Elizabeth II (Baroness Bull)

    Deborah Bull – 2022 Tribute to HM Queen Elizabeth II (Baroness Bull)

    The tribute made by Deborah Bull, Baroness Bull, in the House of Lords on 10 September 2022.

    My Lords, it is a privilege to speak today and to add to the tributes we have heard so far the gratitude and respect of the many arts and cultural organisations across the country that benefited from the support and patronage of Her late Majesty the Queen over the 70 years of her reign. As the noble Earl just reminded us, it is easier to picture the Queen and Prince Philip at the races than at the theatre. It is hard to deny that they would likely have felt much more at home in a hippodrome intended for horses than one designed for performance. To my great surprise, I once found myself discussing choreography with the Duke of Edinburgh, but it was in the context of his having agreed to create a dressage display for a charity event. In characteristically colourful language, he shared his frustration at the complexities of combining movement with music, and I secretly enjoyed his grudging realisation that there might be more to this whole dancing business than he had previously imagined.

    And yet, her Majesty’s interest in the arts was real and it stretched back across her life. An Arts Council report from 1946 includes a photograph of the Queen attending a concert in Kings Lynn with her mother and paternal grandmother, suggesting, perhaps, that it was they who helped instil her interest in the arts. As Sovereign, she opened and reopened countless galleries, museums and theatres, cutting ribbons and unveiling plaques. She attended no fewer than 35 Royal Variety Performances. The first, in 1953, included the Tiller Girls and Vera Lynn at the Palladium; the last, in 2012, was at the Royal Albert Hall. She was a patron, over many decades, of arts organisations around the country, including orchestras, brass bands and choirs as well as major institutions such as the National, the Royal Shakespeare Company and the Royal Opera House, where I had the great privilege to meet her.

    Many of those visits were, of course, formal occasions—occasions on which she was obliged to perform her own role and to dress in costumes and jewellery that rivalled those we wore on the stage. She would come backstage to meet the performers after curtain down and, before the days of mobile phones, we would fervently hope that the official photographers would catch the moment of regal handshake and preserve it for posterity. Perhaps she enjoyed those ceremonial visits—she was far too discreet to let on if not—but they were also part of the life of duty about which we have heard so much over recent days. Yet we also know that, away from the formal schedules, she would occasionally attend performances for sheer pleasure, making unofficial visits to “Billy Elliot” to celebrate her 80th birthday in 2006, and to “War Horse” in 2009. I recall one such private visit to the Royal Ballet, when Her Royal Highness Princess Margaret, the company’s long-standing president, decided she liked one ballet so much that she would come back to see it again, and this time, she would bring her sister too.

    So, while her love of the arts may have been lower profile than her passion for horses, her support was steadfast and enduring, and the fact that it was passed on through the generations of her family is another of her many legacies. His Majesty the King is an extraordinary supporter of the arts, across music, dance, visual arts and theatre, and has been patron of some 400 organisations. He is particularly committed to opening up opportunities for young people, encouraging them to fulfil their individual creative potential through participating in art.

    Over history, monarchs have always inspired artistic creations, and our late Queen was no exception. Her Coronation included a new composition from William Walton, “Orb and Sceptre”, played alongside a march he had composed for her father’s Coronation. It inspired Benjamin Britten’s opera, “Gloriana”, and a new ballet from Sir Frederick Ashton, “Homage to the Queen”, a ballet I had the opportunity to dance some 40 years later. Surely, no sovereign before her inspired such a diverse range of fictional representations in theatre, on stage, on screen and in literature. Perhaps this is as good a measure as any of the changing times over which she reigned. When she ascended the Throne, the Lord Chamberlain still had the power to refuse a licence to a play that might offend, a power that would remain in place until 1968. While one sometimes has occasion to wonder what the 1950s censor might have made of all this, the creative and sometimes whimsical imaginations of writers from Sue Townsend to Peter Morgan and Alan Bennett have given us a different kind of legacy for an exceptional life exceptionally lived. And as other noble Lords have recalled, Her Majesty had her own sense of performance, deployed to memorable effect at the London 2012 Olympics and, more recently, in that unforgettable and heart-warming two-hander with a virtual bear.

    Over the coming days, some theatres and arts venues may close their doors, observe moments of silence or dim their lights. They will do so as a mark of gratitude and respect not just for someone whose patronage was so valued, but whose dedication to duty was the living embodiment of that well-known theatrical adage, “the show must go on”. To some, that may sound too trite for such a solemn occasion, but it is a phrase that came to my mind this week as we witnessed Her Majesty summon the strength, even in the fading moments of her life, to carry out her last constitutional duty: a defining moment of both continuity and change that was echoed today as the Council of Accession met and the proclamation of the new King rang out. The curtain falls; the curtain rises. Thank you, Ma’am, and to King Charles III, we wish every success.

  • Deborah Bull (Baroness Bull) – 2020 Speech on the Queen’s Speech

    Below is the text of the speech made by Baroness Bull in the House of Lords on 9 January 2020.

    My Lords, in the days following Her Majesty’s gracious Speech, noble Lords may have missed the announcement of 0.3% as UK statistic of the decade. It represents UK productivity’s average annual growth, down over 10 years from 2%. According to the Royal Statistical Society’s Hetan Shah, it is

    “the most important boring statistic that you have never heard of.”

    Productivity did not feature much in election campaigns, but it should have. High productivity growth leads to higher wage growth and more money for public services. Shah is not alone in linking low productivity with social discord. The University of Sheffield’s Richard Jones suggests that it is not

    “far-fetched to ascribe our current dysfunctional and bitter political environment … to a decade of stagnation in productivity growth.”

    I therefore welcome the commitment to boost productivity through new investment and R&D tax incentives. As the notes on the Speech explain:

    “R&D is vital to a productive economy—firms that invest in R&D have around 13 per cent higher productivity than those firms that do not”.

    The Government intend to

    “prioritise investment in industries of the future where the UK can take a commanding lead”—

    life sciences, clean energy, space, design, computing, robotics and AI. But in focusing on the cutting edge, they need to take care not to ignore everyday and foundational areas where poor productivity is a drain on the economy: low-wage, low-skill industries such as catering and retail; the public sector, which makes up one-fifth of the economy; or health and social care, where advances in biomedical science need to be balanced with research that improves productivity in the system.

    Too narrow a focus on becoming a “global science superpower” also risks excluding areas of existing dominance. This includes the creative industries, which generate 5.5% of the economy and contribute across every region of the UK. Yet they are absent from the Queen’s Speech—as they were from the last—and are seemingly excluded from any additional support for research and development. Creative businesses undertake almost as much R&D as manufacturing, but as much of it relies on arts, humanities and social science research, ​it does not qualify for targeted R&D tax relief. This is because in applying R&D definitions that draw on the Frascati Manual, HMRC requires that R&D relates to scientific or technological delivery, despite the manual’s wider scope. Arts, humanities and social sciences are specifically excluded, and are deemed

    “not science for the purpose of these Guidelines.”

    This narrow definition excludes advances in knowledge that lead to production of experiences or to enhanced understanding of human behaviour.

    The benefits of a unified R&D definition across all knowledge domains go beyond the support of legitimate innovation in the creative sectors, and I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Duncan, for agreeing to meet on this. A unified definition would ensure that technological solutions are informed by insights into human behaviour, making adoption more likely; it would also encourage knowledge exchange across disciplines where innovation often occurs.

    The correlation between creativity and scientific discovery is well understood, including, I know, by the noble Baroness, Lady Blackwood. Galileo was a poet; Newton was a painter; and Leonardo was both, and more. A 2008 study of 40 Nobel laureates in science found them three times more likely to have arts and crafts avocations than other scientists. Several observed that

    “purely academic skills are not sufficient to train a person for creative scientific work.”

    This makes obvious sense: it takes creative thinking to come up with new hypotheses and to imagine the experiments that will prove them.

    Given this, the Government’s decision to opt out of the PISA 2021 test for creative thinking is surely a mistake. This is a unique opportunity to collect internationally comparable data and increase understanding of how education best develops creative thinking—vital for the workforce of the future and vital in solving global challenges. It is an opportunity that the Government should not turn down.

    The Conservative manifesto promised to promote creativity in schools, but measures to do so are noticeably absent from the Queen’s Speech. Reversing the decision to opt out of the PISA 2021 test for creative thinking would be a first step in addressing this. I am sure noble Lords will agree that it would be unfortunate if, in our efforts for the UK to become the global science superpower, we were to lose our position as a global superstar in creativity.