[unimaginative2]

Tories slashing $44.8-million in arts spending

Canadian Heritage programs hit hardest
JAMES BRADSHAW

August 20, 2008

The Tories are committed to cutting $44.8-million in spending on arts and culture by April of 2010, The Globe and Mail has learned.

As criticism of recent cuts continues, most recently from the mayors of Montreal and Toronto in a joint letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, details of several new cutbacks are emerging.

The Conservatives have earmarked 10 programs and parts of another to be eliminated and will reduce spending on two others, after a "strategic review" process that audited all Canadian Heritage programs for efficiency and effectiveness.

All but one cut falls under the Heritage purview, the lone exception being the previously reported $4.7-million PromArt, a grant program for foreign travel administered by Foreign Affairs and International Trade.

The most expensive of five new cuts approved in February was the $11.7-million Canadian Memory Fund, which gives federal agencies money to digitize collections and mount them online. Also chopped were the $3.8-million Culture.ca Web portal; the $560,000 Canadian Cultural Observatory; the $5.64-million research and development component of Canadian Culture Online; and the $2.1-million Northern Distribution Program, which distributes the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network signal to 96 Northern communities.

Funding to the Book Publishing Industry Development Program and the Canada Magazine Fund will also drop by $1-million and $500,000 respectively.

July brought another round of cuts, a Heritage Department spokesman said, which included the previously reported $300,000 Audio-Visual Trust, the $1.5-million Canadian Independent Film and Video Fund, the $2.5-million National Training Program for the Film and Video Sector and the $7.13-million Trade Routes, in addition to cuts and reductions totalling $3.4-million to the Stabilization Project and Capacity Building elements of the Canadian Arts and Heritage Sustainability Program.

The departments says a rarely advertised $500,000 annual fund - part of the Sustainability program designed to rescue arts organizations on the brink of extinction - has also been axed, after helping rescue four groups on the brink of disaster in the past six years: the Winnipeg Symphony, Calgary Philharmonic and Théâtre du Rideau Vert received $250,000; and the Orchestre Métropolitain du Grand Montréal received $100,000.

Montreal Mayor Gérald Tremblay and Toronto Mayor David Miller's joint letter to Mr. Harper, which decried a perceived reversal in a generous Conservative approach to the arts, only added to the exasperation of the Prime Minister's communications director, Kory Teneycke.

"To listen to some in the arts community and the opposition, you would think that there's blood in the streets," he said.

"When we find examples of programs that are clearly not meeting their objectives, without apologies we will cancel them. That is the entire purpose of Strategic Review. We owe that to taxpayers," Mr. Teneycke added, calling PromArt "a boondoggle."

 

[Brandon716]

Great job, conservatives! Its always wise to defund your cultural and artistic communities. Every advanced society finds funds for such programs.

 

[299 bloor call control.]

From the culture.ca website:

An important notice to Culture.ca users

Culture.ca would like to thank its visitors for using this cultural portal since 2003.

We wish to inform you that Culture.ca has been discontinued since April 1st, 2008.

This is a result of a Strategic Review of Government of Canada programs and activities announced in the 2008 Budget. The original program objectives of Culture.ca have been fulfilled and the decision to discontinue the Web portal reflects the changing conditions in the digital and online environment. The digital space has evolved tremendously since Culture.ca was created in 2003.

Please note, no new content will be developed. The site will be maintained for the next several months until it is taken offline and archived. During this time, every effort will be made to make content and digital collections related to the Department of Canadian Heritage's mandate available to Canadians as the Department integrates its online services.

..right. So taking down a website is a reflection of how the digital age is evolving? What next? Chopping down cell phone towers and rebuilding telephone booths and reinstating the rotary dial?

 

[Admiral Beez]

I see nothing wrong here, and see no reason why taxpayers must fund the arts, or sports for that matter. Taxpayers should never had footed the bill for Skydome, for example.

 

[Mot]

The Tories continue their efforts towards Canadian Dystopia.

 

[junctionist]

Our artists promote the country, build our national identity and inspire further creativity. The cuts are needless and taxpayers should be supporting the arts. I also think that taxpayers can respect the benefits of the arts, and therefore it is wrong to slash funding.

 

[kEiThZ]

Sadly, it is very difficult in Canada to explain the need for arts funding in Canada to the average joe. I would argue that the museums have some fault in this. I am always impressed that museums in London (British museum) and Washington (The Smithsonian) with some impressive collections are free to visitors. As a result, the public is far more supportive and generous with these institutions, resulting in a culture that appreciates the arts. I know those museums have significant grants, but I still think that museums in Canada could do more to encourage public visits and build a support base for the arts. A Thursday night for free is rather stingy.

And without this base of support, the more avant-garde stuff will never pass muster. How many youth (25 and under) have seen an opera or a ballet or an actual art exhibition? And how many students take any arts/music/drama classes beyond the one mandatory high school credit. Yet, somehow we expect there to be an uproar when funding is cut? When culture in our country is largely about tv shows, some ethnic parties, and occasional flag waving holidays, it will be very hard to build up a constituency that supports the arts. Without first understanding our own history (both personal and national) and the roots of Canadian and Western culture, etc. we will not be able to change this trend....

 

[kEiThZ]

I see nothing wrong here, and see no reason why taxpayers must fund the arts, or sports for that matter. Taxpayers should never had footed the bill for Skydome, for example.

Beyond the simple reason of supporting the arts for the sake of perpetuating our cultural values, and promoting them to the world, culture can be viewed as a strategic asset. The New York Philharmonic playing in North Korea for example..... Given Canada's relative unimportance in the world, Canada's cultural assets might well have been some of our best diplomats.

And some of the cuts are particularly egregious in that they are directed at institutions that work to protect and promote our national history, something I am sure anyone would agree that Canadians have very limited knowledge about.....

As for the Skydome....oh I mean Roger's centre...I didn't the government funding its construction, but it was bonehead not to demand a repayment of the its portion when the place was sold to Rogers.

 

[lordmandeep]

Great job, conservatives! Its always wise to defund your cultural and artistic communities. Every advanced society finds funds for such programs.

The problem in Canada is that our governments are very fiscally conservative, and mostly it has kept Canada stable since 1993 and will for some time, but it will start to fall behind a lot of countries who are spending like there is no future.

 

[Hydrogen]

Sadly, it is very difficult in Canada to explain the need for arts funding in Canada to the average joe. I would argue that the museums have some fault in this. I am always impressed that museums in London (British museum) and Washington (The Smithsonian) with some impressive collections are free to visitors. As a result, the public is far more supportive and generous with these institutions, resulting in a culture that appreciates the arts. I know those museums have significant grants, but I still think that museums in Canada could do more to encourage public visits and build a support base for the arts. A Thursday night for free is rather stingy.

Let's see. For years, the National Gallery was housed in an office building. The War Museum was housed in a relatively tiny, leaky building and most of the collection warehoused. The Museum of Nature was housed in a structure that was slowly starting to sink and had seen no significant updating in decades. The Aviation Museum housed its collection in wooden hangers - or parked aircraft out doors for up to forty years. The Museum of Science and Technology is still housed in a converted bread factory.

Today, the National Gallery is out of room, the War Museum was expanded through a campaign of national embarrassment, the Museum of Nature is finally being refurbished (because the building faced potential structural failure), the Aviation Museum was expanded to fit its existing collection (and no more) in a storage hanger that has limited public access, and the Museum of Science and Technology is still housed in an old bread factory. The Agricultural museum hangs on because its popular with kids and it would be hard to explain why a country with such a significant agricultural history can't maintain even the smallest effort to recognize that fact in some form. Funding for operating budgets is always limited. Thank goodness that there is an Imax theatre at Civilization. It's the only one in Ottawa-Gatineau, so its a draw for the Museum of Civilization (as is the pretty building).

National museums are underfunded in this country. As Crown Corporations, they are expected to generate a portion of their operating budgets by charging for entry because long-term funding is always questionable (Aviation, War and Civilization rent their spaces - competing against the Congress Centre and hotels for events). It's hard to have free entry and to promote Canadian museums when Treasury Board is always looking at the bottom line.

Unlike the Brits or the Americans, we are never too sure in this country about the the intrinsic value of these organizations as cultural institutions. What we end up with is noble half-efforts that are hobbled, and pale in comparison to similar institutions in other countries. They could stand out, but they have no means to.

The most expensive of five new cuts approved in February was the $11.7-million Canadian Memory Fund, which gives federal agencies money to digitize collections and mount them online.

A stupid and pathetic cut. Truly backwards thinking here.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

and conservatives are worried about immigrants changing the culture of this country.

way to go steve-o.

 

[Urban Shocker]

I agree that our publicly-funded museums and galleries should have free admission all the times - with all levels of government subsidizing these cultural centres at a higher level in order to accomplish this. I find the parsimonious attitude of our Municipal government towards funding the arts that give our city international prestige particularly galling.

 

[fiendishlibrarian]

"The most expensive of five new cuts approved in February was the $11.7-million Canadian Memory Fund, which gives federal agencies money to digitize collections and mount them online."

Lots of pissed-off librarians and archivists over this one, with just cause, especially when you compare what you can find online from other countries, esp. the US.

 

[Northern Light]

Arts Funding

For the big institutions, (ie signature galleries and museums) there is no doubt under funding.

If nothing else, from a purely economic perspective, having these institutions lures tourists and polishes national and civic brand-image, which can be a factor in attracting and retaining corporate headquarters and the like as well.

As stated above, the unfortunate decision to raise admissions fees to a level where few youth, and no one who isn't at least middle income attends these institutions has greatly diminished their support base and thus had the ironic effect of reducing the gov't funding they might have otherwise received.

I had a look at what AGO and ROM brought in through admissions (their financials are posted on their websites).

The sum is fairly piddly relative to total revenues and expenses.

I'd imagine just saving money on admissions related staff, and money-handling would effectively replace up to 20% of what they take in!

********

One thing (and probably the only thing) I will give former Premier Harris is that he incented the Universities to build up their endowments.

One thing that might be useful is a program for the big institutions is to have a similar initiative.

ie. the government will match or double-match private donations to endow operating costs.

Then these institutions might need smaller increases in base funding but still be able to realize greater success.

********

The same idea by the way could be applied to CBC, if the government just bough the English TV division a sports-channel, I'd bet its books would improve drastically overnight.

 

[Urban Shocker]

All of the major cultural institutions have fundraising initiatives that encourage such things as setting up future endowments through estate planning. Anyone can do so at the time they make their will - I've done it myself. Depending on the level of giving, you can be very specific about where the bequest goes; though it is less glamorous than setting up a fund for new acquisitions, supporting the operating costs of these institutions in this way is something they particularly appreciate.