Spending £500,000 – and considerable energy – on Nowhereisland to drag six tonnes of Arctic rock to the UK for the Olympics is wrong



It's not that often that you will find me squaring up in support behind the likes of the Daily Mail, the TaxPayers' Alliance and the more reactionary elements of the Conservative party. But on this particular issue, they have called it correct.

Just what was the Arts Council thinking when it agreed back in 2009 to hand over £500,000 to the artist Alex Hartley in order for him and 18 volunteers to create Nowhereisland?

The creative idea itself is actually rather captivating: find an Arctic island that has recently been exposed by melting ice and then break off some rocks to form a new "island nation" which can then be transported to the waters off the UK in time for the 2012 Olympics.

During its conception, Hartley billed it as a "travelling embassy" intended to highlight issues such as climate change and land ownership. Here's how his website explains it:

In 2004, artist Alex Hartley discovered an island in the High Arctic archipelago of Svalbard, whilst on the Cape Farewell expedition. The island revealed itself from within the melting ice of a retreating glacier and Alex was the first human to ever stand on it and with the help of the Norwegian Polar Institute, the island, named Nyskjaeret, is now officially recognised and included on all maps and charts subsequent to its discovery. In September 2011, Alex returns to the Arctic to retrieve the island territory. Once in international waters, Alex will declare Nowhereisland a new nation.

I "get" its artistic merit. It's just the cost and contradictions associated with the project that I have a problem with.

Nowhereisland is one of 12 "Artist Taking the Lead" projects commissioned for the Culture Olympiad next year. The Treasury provided £6m, with a further £950,000 coming from National Lottery coffers.

There's a hearty debate to be had about whether those sorts of sums are justified in these austere times. We are constantly being told that every penny of public money counts, so £7m is not to be sniffed at. We could all probably think of more urgent ways to spend that sort of money. Wouldn't a corporate sponsor be more applicable when it comes to funding this sort of large-scale arts project? If we are going to spend £500,000 of public money on regional art – Nowhereisland will represent the South-West during the Cultural Olympiad – wouldn't it be wiser to spread it across the dozens of arts projects in desperate need of funding, rather than hand it to one lucky recipient?

Phil Gibby, head of Arts Council England in the South West, has responded to critics, telling the BBC:

It is absolutely vital to invest in vibrant arts projects in Devon, but we could not have spent this money on them. It is a remarkable visual sculpture and we reckon more than a quarter of a million people will engage with it. So for everyone getting engaged with it, it is about £2 or less.

But my bigger gripe is that there appears to be a contradictory vein running through the rocks that now form Nowhereisland. For a project that claims to be driven by environmental concerns, where is the logic in digging up six tonnes of rock from a pristine environment and then towing it by barge hundreds of miles away for display?

And wasn't it entirely obvious to the Arts Council that the core message behind the project would be drowned out by the completely predictable outcry over its huge cost and environmentally unsympathetic construction? If the aim of the project was to raise awareness about the urgency of climate change then, sadly, it seems to have already failed.