Phil, I am familiar with the concept of ESG. It should be a tool to help organisations improve their services and recognise their wider role in society. It should not be the tail wagging the dog.

Of course we know folk music is of no interest to the majority of the population, to whom the EFDSS under any name will be entirely irrelevant. The Board should be more concerned that it is of little interest or relevance even to those who are involved with folk. The individual membership at 31 March 2020 stood at only 2202, which is simply pathetic.

I've been involved in folk music for 50 years, as a singer, a morris dancer, a ceilidh band musician, and an events organiser. In all that time the EFDSS has been entirely irrelevant to me, and if it were to disappear tomorrow it would not make the slightest difference to any of my musical activities. A straw poll of my friends showed that many feel the same, and those who are members often only do it to support the Library. Despite that, I am glad that there is an organisation which tries to encourage what I love, I just wish it did it better and that it did more to support grass-roots folk beyond Camden.

I agree that the current name may be a bit old-fashioned, although I'm not sure that's a bad thing. I don't think "Folk Arts England" conveys folk music (although some of the alternatives they considered are worse) and suggests a direction even further away from the folk music I am involved with.

I'm not campaigning one way or the other. People look out for the consultation when it goes public and make their views known.