Report comment

The BFI sounds very satisfied with itself from the tone of this article, which may not be its intent as in reality it has a lot to be concerned about.

As a former BFI veteran, I remember well the pre-UK Film Council days when the BFI reported directly to the DCMS and they were very definitely not halcyon days. Collaboration was difficult with uncomprehending Govt depts and ministers who understood little about film and even less about the BFI, and the constant turnover of junior ministers meant they were always having to re-start from scratch.

There was a feeling of loss of status and marginalisation when the UK Film Council was created thus getting back to a direct report might be something that many at the BFI want, but real tangible benefits are dubious. The BFI may only be a more visible target for a budget snip or two if the DCMS decides it wants to move money somewhere else, something that was all too common in the old days.

The BFI might not have always had an easy relationship in the past 10 years with the UKFC, but may have a lot to lose if it were to close. It may find itself pressurised without extra funding, into various left-over tasks the DCMS can’t find a home for. The BFI is a cultural and educational institution who's film industry role has been accidental at best and there isn't much overlap in its staff skillsets with the UKFC's.