It is a cruel April Fool’s joke for The Arts House staff today.

In the midst of their 10th anniversary celebrations, The Arts House's company, known as The Old Parliament House Limited (TOPH), will be no more. They will also bid farewell to both their current Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer (CEO).

On 1 April 2014, TOPH will merge with the Arts Festival Limited (AFL).

The new entity will be named Arts House Limited and led by Lee Chor Lin, 50, CEO of Arts Festival Limited.

Here's the curious part: Why would The Arts House merge with a new entity without its top management?

Anyway, Mothership.sg doesn’t want anybody to get hurt, but here are a few questions to ask the authorities and the experts in the arts scene.

(From left to right: outgoing CEO Colin Goh, Acting Minister Lawrence Wong, and ex Chairperson Jennie Chua)

1. Why did Chairperson Jennie Chua and CEO Colin Goh both depart at the same time? 

Chua has been the Chairman of TOPH for seven years, and Goh was its CEO for a decade. Neither will have a role at the new company to provide leadership and counsel to this new venture.

When Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth, Lawrence Wong, spoke at the 10-year anniversary celebrations last week, he paid tribute to Chua, Goh, the board members and staff of TOPH, "who have worked hard behind the scenes to bring The Arts House to where it is today".

Read the online tributes to Goh on Acting Minister Wong's FB page.

Source: Lawrence Wong Facebook

Even if there is a mismatch in skill sets and abilities needed for the new venture, one wonders why Goh was not offered a role as an adviser. In most mergers, the senior management would at least stay on temporarily to provide continuity in leadership. After all, Acting Minister Wong said that Goh "has provided solid and steady leadership in building up the organisation".

2. Why didn't the mainstream media highlight these issues during its coverage?

We are not experts in the Singapore's arts scene. But the arts correspondents from The Straits Times and TODAY are long time observers of the arts scene and would have been able to make connections and draw conclusions about the implications of this merger.

Hence, we are disappointed with the media's coverage of the merger and its lack of analysis.

What got reported was basically a copy of the press release by the National Arts Council, with quotes from incoming CEO and coverage of the recent public spat between her and Sifa festival director Ong Keng Sen.

Source: Asiaone

Interestingly, the Arts House did not feature NAC's press release of the merger on its website. Instead, it carried a press release of Goh's departure and a book launch.

Again, this was something that should have caught the attention of the reporters.

3. Did anyone know that there was a book launch highlighting the Arts House' first ten years?

The Creative Art of Survival, written by NUS Adjunct Law Professor Kevin Tan, provided some hard-hitting comments about the change in arts leadership in Singapore and its impact on the Arts House.

Again, no one knew such a book was being published, save for The Arts House' press release.

Interestingly, in the book's acknowledgement, Professor Tan noted that he was given only six weeks to write and publish the book in time for the Arts House's 10th anniversary celebrations.

Below are some unwelcome home truths from Professor Tan:

a) On the Arts House's shift in focus in 2009, following the appointment of Lui Tuck Yew and Benson Puah as MICA Minister and NAC CEO respectively.

"Unlike all its previous Strategic Plans, this document had a distinctly despondent air about it. While it looks internally coherent, it was externally inconsistent. The Plan fails to explain why it departed so dramatically from its previous trajectory..." (pg. 109)

b) On the New Vision for the Arts House

"Under the 2010 Strategic Plan, a new vision was proposed for the Arts House: to build a world that engages art, culture and creativity as catalysts for community transformation, sustainability, prosperity and liveability by unlocking the creative potential of people and places to build vibrant, resilient and inclusive communities. This sounded like a mission statement written by a marketing and communications neophyte encountering The Arts House for the first time, and trying to appease everyone up the line by including every single buzzword in the arts and culture lexicon". (pg. 109)

c) On the potential conflict of interests in Benson Puah's role as both the NAC chief and the CEO of the Esplanade.

"Puah, who was then CEO of Esplanade, continued in his post at the theatre complex, prompting questions about the wisdom of him holding both posts concurrently. Puah maintained that his appointment at NAC was not tainted by a conflict of interest since Esplanade was funded directly by MICA and not by NAC.." (pg. 106)

d) On the retirement of the entire TOPH board (except Ms Chua and Mr Goh) in 2011 and the appointment of three new directors on the board

"This change was a clear signal from NAC that TOPH had to focus on its new role...For such a role, there was no need for a large, varied and entrepreneurial Board" (pg 113).

e) On the Arts House's successful 10-year run

"Sitting in the caboose, the management team at The Arts House could look back at a mountain of accomplishments. By that time, it had transformed The Arts House into a vibrant, exciting arts venue, figured out how to incorporate arts with business, and developed the Spotlight Singapore brand. Most important of all, it had survived ... It had grown up quickly and adapted itself to the market and its audience.

What is achieved is remarkable by any standard and could only have been done because of those who ran the House - the amazing management team built up by Colin Goh and the far-sighted, supportive Board of Directors. Ultimately, it was about people - those who ran the House and those who used it; those who worked for the House, and those who worked with it." (pg. 127)

One wonders if the Arts House merger with Arts Festival Ltd was decided by a vote in the board. This is because the new board members would have a majority even if the Chairman and CEO disagreed with them.

Source: The Arts House

4. The arts community was surprisingly reticent about the merger. Is that a reason for this?

For a vocal community like the arts community, it is strange that no one shared their concerns regarding the merger online.

All is not lost.

In 1998, a young administrative assistant at the NAC prepared the first concept paper for The Old Parliament House. She called for the place to be "converted into a multi-disciplinary arts centre enlivened by music, theatre and dance performances, visual art exhibitions, art films, poetry recitals and seminars".

She is Janice Koh, now the voice of the arts community in Parliament.

In fact, Koh has been an effective voice for the arts community, highlighting the importance and relevance of the arts community in Singapore in her term as NMP.

As her NMP term concludes in April, she is the ideal person, given that she is probably the "spiritual mother" of the Arts House, to ask the authorities why the Arts House's mission has, in Prof Tan's words, "departed so dramatically from its previous trajectory" from an arts pacesetter to an arts place-maker.

Top photo from here. 

Find Mothership.SG on Facebook and Twitter.