|Location:||V22 Louise House|
Dear Sir Nicholas Serota,
In 2013, V22 London Ltd. acquired a 125-year lease on former public building, Louise House, from Lewisham Council. In 2016, V22 London Ltd. sub-let this property to V22 Foundation for 123 years at an inflated rent. It appears Arts Council England funding underwrote and paid for this commercial, profit-driven transaction. Supporting V22’s Directors’ simultaneous interests in London property markets.
Arts Council England agreed funding of £315,000 on 19th February 2015. The offer was made to Kathleen Cranswick, as Director of V22 Foundation. On 30th September 2015, an invoice was submitted to Arts Council England. For direct payment of £123,697.37 from this grant. Of this, £100,000 is itemised as “Premium payable to V22 London Ltd.” alongside sums of £5,400 and £7,095.60 invoiced by V22 London Ltd. This document is signed by Kathleen Tara Cranswick – as Director of V22 London Ltd.
V22’s structure risks its CEO to personally profiting from public funding in 4 ways:
This account of V22’s activities is from V22’s report to Investors:
The success of our property strategy is also reflected in the increase in net asset value. Our subsidiary V22 London Ltd. was delighted to enter into a 125-year lease on Louise House in Forest Hill, London, in May this year. . . V22 London sold a long lease on the rear of the building of this property to V22 Foundation. V22 Foundation raised significant grant funding from the Mayor of London and Arts Council England.
This account of V22’s activities is from the Financial Times:
Year on year V22 Plc has grown net income from a loss of 40.38k to a gain of 893.44k primarily through revenue growth (822.31k to 1.24m). For while (sic) the costs associated with cost of goods, selling, general and administrative and debt all increased as a percentage of sales, the 51.36% growth in revenues contributed enough to still see net income improve.
This account of V22’s activities is from their Director’s Dealings announcement:
Kathleen Cranswick, Executive Director of the Company. . . now holds 3,349,444 Ordinary Shares representing 10.70% of the issued ordinary share capital of the Company. In connection with the share purchase, Ms Cranswick also received 3,000,000 deferred A shares and 3,000,000 deferred B shares in the Company (the “Deferred Shares”). . . Ms Cranswick is now interested in 27.30% of the voting capital of the Company.
Clearly, V22 is not the V22 Foundation. And the V22 Foundation does not exist independently. V22’s CEO defines V22 as “3 complimentary companies”. And V22 as, “the alternative name… (if any) for the V22 Foundation”. In 2009, 2011, 2012 and 2016, V22’s CEO authorised payment for herself in company shares. Some in off-market transactions. V22’s CEO personally loaned V22 £15,000, repayable at 7% interest. Arts Council England granted V22’s London Ltd. subsidiary £5,000. And V22’s Foundation subsidiary £405,000 from between 2011 - 2015. So suggestions ACE funding was ‘ring fenced’ from V22’s ‘core running costs’ appear questionable.
Does Arts Council England, “supporting organisations to be more resilient by having the right buildings and equipment to deliver their work” now include paying / sponsoring private investors to Privatize Library services / properties across London? Is Arts Council England able to recognise a breach of any funding agreement, or a funding agreement framework that isn’t fit for purpose? Is Arts Council England responsible for any misappropriation of public money that this case may represent?
 Companies House lists also lists V22 Director Tara Cranswick as Director of V220 Ltd (‘Management of real estate on a fee or contract basis’), In Ladywell Ltd. (‘letting and operating of own or leased real estate’) and African Agronomix (‘Mining and Quarrying’). V22 Director Bruce McRobie is listed as Director of V220 Ltd (‘management of real estate on a fee or contract basis’), Mornington Road (block H) Management Company Ltd. (‘property management’) and Shakey Isle Ltd (buying and selling of own real estate’)
 Company number 115477C – incorporated and Registered in the Isle of Man
|File size:||available soon|
|Location:||Lewisham Art House|
|Lyrics:||If your role when you have no power is to make souvenirs of your culture for commercial use, then you are doing what the Government says artists do. People like that. Artists like that too because we are so alienated that it feels like we need this proof. So maybe I'm painting jazz paintings because it makes me feel artistic to paint paintings about jazz. Not because I have an urge in my blood to paint paintings about jazz. Not because it's part of my cultural community to paint jazz paintings. Maybe it makes me feel artistic to paint jazz paintings at a time when the entire set-up is saying you are not real, you are not the artist that [insert your own context mascot's name here] is. If you make art that is 'contextual' to be scene commercially, I think that you are necessarily destroying your place or community because you are destroying the identity as though it was the identity and doing it and selling it. Every time someone buys into it, it is re-enforced that is the identity. Whatever.|
|Lyrics:||Not Not Fireworks is a Land Art initiative about exceeding ironic economies of attention. Substantiating single entendre principles. Risking the disapproval of collectivised yuppsters (or those that want to be like collectivised yuppsters). And art persons afraid of gaze or ridicule. It has been inspired by the oppressive nature of the too successful artist. By this I mean the conferred ability to critique a question whilst tacitly avoiding its content. Like using the same groovy technique to expose the enemy as insulate yourself. Colonial criticality. The tyranny of 'cool'. Visual aids for gentrifiers. Irony institutionalised. And other simultaneous things.|
|Location:||Astrup Fearnley Museum|
|Lyrics:||British artist Richard Parry is invited by Jamie Stevens to represent London's alternative art scene. Parry's works often seems like nuanced satires of the bureaucratic self-promoting practices that are part of today's artistic lifestyle. Several of his works ironically comment on the art-interested public's journies to far-flung places to see biennales and large exhibitions. He believes that this practice smack of neo-colonialism. For an exhibition at the Institute for Social Hypocrisy that was held in Paris in 2011, Parry filled the entire gallery with thousands of yellow air mattresses - the type normally associated with tourism to tropical destinations. The installation could be read as an ironic comment on the artist's international position and the art-world thirst for whatever is exotic and new. In Europe Europe we see works that perpetuate this neo colonial theme. Parry presents part of a project called Art Zimbabwe which was originally shown at the National Museum in Harare in 2011. In Art Zimbabwe there was among other things a catalogue of works from a fictive art fair; paintings that were based on photos from tourist brochures and traditional handicrafts to which false designer labels were attached. Here in Europe Europe we see four silkscreen prints of Zimbabwean paper money that represent dizzying amounts like one-hundred trillion dollars. The motifs are printed on mirrors such that when we see our own reflection we become part of the artwork. These silkscreen prints are actually based on real Zimbabwe dollars that were used from 1980-2009 (sic), a period of astronomical inflation. These sums can also allude to the art market inflated prices as they are always being pushed higher and higher.|