Federal budget approach to arts funding contrasts provincial plan

Two governments faced with hard times. Two very different approaches to arts funding during a recession.

Though not ready to break out the balloons and party hats, groups like the Canadian Arts Coalition and the Professional Association of Canadian Theatres (PACT) are expressing relief that the federal government's budget, announced March 3, has sustained its investment in arts and culture, and particularly in the Canada Council for the Arts. Just a day earlier, B.C.'s Liberal government announced a budget that the Alliance for Arts and Culture estimates will cause a 32.5-percent cut to arts funding from its 2008-09 level--when it ranked ninth among provinces for per-capita arts spending.

And now comes word B.C. is poised to axe gaming funds from "adult" arts groups

The stark difference in approach has not escaped Amir Alibhai, executive director for the Alliance of Arts and Culture. "Given some difficult decisions at both levels, it's at the federal level that they decided not to make the cuts because they value the investment in the arts. They're really focused on job creation," Alibhai told the Straight, adding the country has 600,000 people employed in the cultural sector now. That's one in 30 people.

The province, he observed, seems to see arts not as an investment in the economy but as "discretionary" spending.

So we see two strategies: arts funding as part of a stimulus package and arts cuts as part of belt-tightening. The question is, will they just cancel each other out?

Comments

arts veteran
To answer your question, Janet: No. The result will be a net loss for BC artists and audiences. To further complicate matters, the cuts to BC arts groups means that they are less likely to be able to leverage other federal funding for our province, since lower budgets overall mean less funds that can be allocated to 'matching funds' programs. This holds true for private fundraising such as foundations and corporations. So it's important to remember that cutting funding means a loss of potential revenue as well, and a loss of potential growth in programs and job creation. It's clear that the provincial government's actions do not make any economic sense, and that it is intent on ignoring its own policy as well as budget committee recommendation. The only motivation is spite.
 
joker
Maybe I should become an "artist" so I could get some of that free government money. If art can't stand on it's own, why should the government give away free money? I'd rather see my money spent on something that brings a good positive return instead of just supporting people who think they "deserve" funding just because they have a vision. Charles Manson had a vision. Bring on the hatred.
 
jansumi
Obviously joker, you really have no idea where that money actually goes....
 
 
[Comments Disclaimer]
Post a comment
· Use your real name to have your comment considered for publication in print.
· URLs and email addresses will be automatically turned into links.