[nfitz]

Agreed. Besides, Caribana has had a history of trouble getting funding - I think people are past the point of calling it racism though.

If Caribana had previously received funding, had the personal responsible for providing the funding last year fired for funding a black festival, and the Prime-Minister was a known racist who had spoken out against churches being required to marry black people ... then yes, I would call it racism.

Sometimes a spade is a spade.

Stephen Harper is a bigot. The Conservative Party of Canada is bigoted. Any therefore anyone who supports the Conservative Party of Canada knowing this is a bigot. End of story.

 

[SunriseChampion]

Stephen Harper is a bigot. The Conservative Party of Canada is bigoted. Any therefore anyone who supports the Conservative Party of Canada knowing this is a bigot. End of story.

I have never and never will support the CPC but I must say your deduction here is absolute bullshit.
Just thought you should know.

 

[nfitz]

I have never and never will support the CPC but I must say your deduction here is absolute bullshit.
Just thought you should know.

The deduction makes perfect sense ... think about it for a minute ... if anyone supports a leader or party they know to be bigoted, then they are a bigot. How can this not be the case? The key is the knowing - not the universality ... think about it.

 

[syn]

If Caribana had previously received funding, had the personal responsible for providing the funding last year fired for funding a black festival, and the Prime-Minister was a known racist who had spoken out against churches being required to marry black people ... then yes, I would call it racism.

Sometimes a spade is a spade.

Stephen Harper is a bigot. The Conservative Party of Canada is bigoted. Any therefore anyone who supports the Conservative Party of Canada knowing this is a bigot. End of story.

It's a little more complicated than that. How is your labelling any different than what the Conservatives supposedly do (for the record, I'm not a Conservative supporter)?

 

[OttoSchloss]

Geez, first they force Pride to be moved a week back and then they deny funding to the exact festival they've just disrupted because they want to turn the city into a police state for a week.

The really just need to fuck off now. And take the lame opposition with them.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Perhaps the city should arrange for a convenient failure of public works during the G20 meeting. If Huntsville want it so badly, they should take it - afterall, they've gotten all this public money - what do they have to show for it?

AoD

 

[RapidTransit]

It makes sense not to fund the Gay parade, These people will never vote or support the conservative party, So why fund them. Giving funds to groups who support the CP makes more sense.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Make political sense, not ethical sense. Canada would be a terrible place to live in if funding for services and improvement to the livelihood is predicated upon which party individuals, groups or ridings voted for.

AoD

 

[Roy G Biv]

Alright, I'm going to play Devil's Advocate.

Why would corporately funded events need public funding? Does it not make sense that smaller events in maybe smaller cities deserve public funding? It's like scientific research, you fund the smaller "unsexy" research until the big companies pick it up.

I loathe this government more than anyone, and it's likely that this was any easy choice for them, but you can't just blow up when they justify the decision with sound reasoning.

This is not homophobia.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Roy G Biv:

That's like saying why arts insitution requires public funding even though they can raise a chunk (often significant chunk) of their capital, if not operating budget. Besides, if one operates on the basis they themselves have suggested, then why fund something like the Agricultural Winter Fair or Luminato - which also have corporate sponsors.

AoD

 

[Roy G Biv]

AoD: That's a fair point and I feel dirty for defending them. I tried, but when I read my post over....

However, I do believe that the LGBT community should not scream "HOMOPHOBIA" on this one. It's likely just a party investing public money where the ROI will be in votes. Every government has done this, as unethical as it may be. This is how the announcement should be viewed. We all already know they don't like gays.

Although, when I think about this in the context of the Ablonczy scandal last year, maybe I'm being naive, but I still think it's a government deciding to spend money where they may get votes. It's shrewd politiking.

 

[kEiThZ]

Sadly, it was an easy cut for them. Undoubtedly, even amongst the general population who don't vote Conservative, I am willing to bet that there are people who won't necessarily support funding for Pride. And it's tough to argue this one. Who says the Pride parade is more valuable than say Bluesfest in Ottawa? Sure Pride brings in tourism dollars. But is that the only determinant? Would any of us accept cuts to other Toronto events on the grounds that they don't bring in enough tourist dollars? Ultimately, we are seeing a rebalancing of programs and funding initiatives like this one, away from Eastern Canada and away from major urban centres to smaller cities. And I am willing to bet, you'll see it under the Liberals too. They just won't be as in your face and openly bigoted about it.

Next, the funding won't imperil the festival at all. It merely robs it of frills. The money was supposed to go enhancements this year. The parade itself is not dependent on federal dollars to happen. If Pride was entirely dependent on federal funding, it would have been a lot harder to cut it. But now, Pride will go ahead and the Conservatives will say, "Look. They didn't need the money after all."

I am not saying any of this is right. But there are some complexities to it. I think there's a lot more at play than the Conservative anti-gay reflex (though that was probably dominant in the decision).

 

[Roy G Biv]

It's a little more complicated than that. How is your labelling any different than what the Conservatives supposedly do (for the record, I'm not a Conservative supporter)?

I think it's pretty much a fact that if you support this government in a non-lesser-of-evils-way, you're an idiot or partisan hack.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

What I AM curious about is what is the selection criteria when the events are this spread out - like, how is it that Canada's Biggest Ribfest is more worthy of money than _____ (fill in the blanks). Somehow I don't think there can be much of a rational criteria on this basis.

Keithz:

By your rationale though, none of the big events funded (e.g. the Stampede) would fold because of the lack of federal funding - so it raises the question yet again, just what's the basis of selection x and not y? Oh and one should pay attention who gets the most money:

http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/dsib-tour.nsf/eng/qq00175.html

AoD

 

[kEiThZ]

AOD,

When I look at that list, I see a lot of places where the Conservatives won seats or want to win seats, not necessarily an ideological bend per se (though I agree it was probably there in the Pride decision).

Unfortunately, with this kind of funding it's always this way. Wasn't different under Martin or Chretien. Won't be dfferent under Iggy. These little slush funds (and in the grand scheme of things, they aren't huge) exist to help various administrations get votes. And arbitrary programs will always be this way, from infrastructure, to arts funding, to where the military places bases (for example DND has been repeatedly prevented by politicians of all stripes (including NDP'ers who'll complain about military spending elsewhere!!!) from consolidating bases to save money). It's not right. But it happens. C'est la vie.

I really don't know how you'd change the practice. And if you have absolutely nothing for the pols to play with, then what's the point of having them there? We can just do with public servant administrators. I'd rather they play with 20 million dollar for a cultural fund than start messing with the 20 billion dollar defence budget , with every MP demanding a base or station in their ward (I'm not exaggerating...MPs from Newfoundland now want to dictate how the CF conducts search and rescue operations and determines SAR posture and basing).

As for big events not getting funding. Personally, I don't think events that don't need the funding for viability should get it. Calgary Stampede can run without a federal grant. Pride can survive without a federal grant. Quebec's winter carnival can survive without a federal grant. Why shouldn't that money go to other arts and cultural events which needs funds to achieve sustainability? But that's just me.