News
Taideneuvosto

Central Arts Council submits opinion on draft legislation on administrative reform

The Central Arts Council has submitted its opinion on the government proposal regarding the Education and Culture Administration 2030 reform project, which plans to merge government agencies. According to the draft legislation, the Arts Promotion Centre Finland (Taike) and the National Audiovisual Institute (KAVI) would merge to form the Culture Agency of Finland (Kulttuurivirasto) at the beginning of 2026. At the same time, the structure of the arts councils would change.
Published

The Central Arts Council acts legally as an expert body of the Ministry of Education and Culture on arts policy issues. The Central Arts Council’s opinion can be read on the lausuntopalvelu.fi website (in Finnish). The consultation round on the draft legislation is open until 31 January 2025.

According to the draft legislation, the current national and regional arts councils would cease to exist. In the future, the preparation of decisions based on peer reviews would be carried out by expert panels assembled from a pool of experts. The Culture Agency of Finland would have a Central Arts and Culture Council, which would make decisions on grants and prizes based on the preparations of the expert panels. The Ministry of Education and Culture would appoint the members of the Central Arts and Culture Council, which in turn would appoint the members of the pool of experts.

Central Arts Council’s key remarks on the draft legislation

The Central Arts Council states in its opinion that the current Central Arts Council is a body similar in composition and tasks to the planned Central Arts and Culture Council, so it has special, experience-based expertise in the matter. The Central Arts Council's statutory status as an expert body of the Ministry of Education and Culture has not been sufficiently taken into account given the significance of the reform.

The opinion submitted by the Central Arts Council draws particular attention to the following points:

  • The Arts Promotion Centre Finland and the National Audiovisual Institute have significantly different mission statements, and there are no operational grounds for merging them.
  • The Central Arts Council is concerned about the funding of the future agency and the resources for promoting the arts and culture.
  • The government proposal lacks any mention of the autonomy of the arts. The freedom or autonomy of the arts must be guaranteed by law in a democratic, civilised state.
  • It is essential that the peer review and arm’s length principle be preserved in the law. In these respects, the government proposal’s entries on the new Central Arts and Culture Council and the Council’s relationship with expert panels are too open and require clarification.
  • A particular concern of the Central Arts Council is related to the power of one centralised institution and its limits. It appears that the Central Arts and Culture Council is being given both too much power and a task that it cannot perform within the time and resources available to it.
  • Regarding terms of office, the Central Arts Council supports the current practice: terms would be three years and there could be a maximum of two.
  • In general, the Central Arts Council is concerned about the rush in which the new legislation is being drafted. Unfortunately, there are signs in the air that the autonomy of science, the arts and non-governmental organisations is under threat.

The government proposal on legislation on the reform of the administrative branch of the Ministry of Education and Culture is intended to be submitted to Parliament for decision in the spring session of 2025. The Education and Culture Administration 2030 reform is part in the Government Programme.