Whichever, it is a "regressive step" that sends out a very negative signal, according to Vikki Heywood, of the Royal Shakespeare Company.Sir Nicholas Serota, of the Tate, said the danger was that the uncertainty created could potentially lead to a damaging loss of ambition and verve. And English Heritage also received a 4.6 per cent cut.The Labour Government was presiding over "a betrayal of their very own electorate", Gormley said. Philip Pullman, the writer, predicted: "Some theatres and arts projects will die while others will be forced to become more commercial. It sends a message to the country that the Government is not interested."What leaders in the arts are puzzled by is whether this is short-term realpolitik, driven by the need to bolster health and education funding before the election, or a backtracking on what had seemed a genuine commitment.

The Arts Council said that represented a £30m cut.Regional museums received an increase of more than 100 per cent on their previous funding but it was still insufficient to roll out the Renaissance in the Regions programme which was designed to tackle the parlous condition of many institutions. The Department for Culture announced that the Arts Council grant would be frozen at its 2005 level of £411m for each of the next three years plus cash from efficiency savings. A £10m injection of cash for orchestras was deemed a similar success. Free admission to the national museums and galleries saw attendances soar.Better programming and improved buildings encouraged audiences to flock to venues such as Tate Modern and the National Theatre, with increasing numbers of people saying they wanted public funding of the arts.Which is why there has been such bafflement at the Government's spending round announcement in December. In the words of Antony Gormley, the Turner Prize-winning artist, there was a "huge sea-change; there is a more widespread engagement with the arts in all their variety than ever before in this country".Sir Christopher Frayling, of the Arts Council, described it last week as "a golden age".A dedicated £25m towards regional theatre staved off bankruptcy in some and revitalised nearly 200 venues.

As government advisers caustically point out, actors, artists and musicians have a disproportionate ability to promote their own cause compared with the plight of single mothers or the disabled. "It costs money but, without an expert's view, you cannot be sure that you'll fill [the document] in properly."However, as with any other financial product, it will be worth shopping around among different solicitors to check consultation prices, she adds.Alternatively, if your estate is relatively straightforward but you don't want to do a DIY will, a will-writing service can provide help and advice for no more, usually, than £50.Consumer group Which? says professional legal advice is advisable with any complicated estate, particularly if you have remarried and have children from a previous marriage.. Of course, the legal industry has a financial incentive not to do so, but the society warns of the dangers of a poorly drawn will.It advises that members of the public talk to a solicitor instead, says spokeswoman Catherine O'Leary. "It will be right for you if you have a house, some savings and a couple of heirlooms," says Russell Roworth of Lawpack.However, those with a large or complicated estate should think twice.Opting for the DIY route could mean you miss out on a solicitor's expertise with, for example, trusts, charitable gifts, tax and business assets.The Law Society, the professional body for solicitors, doesn't back DIY wills.