Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Ottawa axes second arts subsidy in two weeks

MICHAEL POSNER

From Monday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 7:05 AM EST 11/08/08

Trade Routes, a $9-million program funding Hot Docs and other initiatives, ends in what critic calls a 'stupid' and 'provocative' choice ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Greg Stevens from SIDNEY, Canada writes: When are the arts going to recognize that private patrons and their customers are their support, and not the taxpayers, many of whom are seniors, others are losing their jobs, or worried about their homes and escalating costs of living?
    Arts, look elsewhere for a while. Congratulations government. Reduce more wasteful spending and eliminate many other arts and other unnecessary programs and concentrate on health wait lists, education, and the economy.
    Every time the arts plead for a one time capital grant or a one time operating subsidy, mediocrity returns and the taxpayers bail the arts out.
    Now, watch the rebuttals!
  2. Charles Smith from United Kingdom writes: Greg Stevens - no argument here. I love the arts, but if it is not self sustaining, it is probably not art, but rather a subsidised government program.

    Ironically, the lack of art or a desire in the community to freely support art probably is just one more symptom of the family breakdown.

    Parents just do not have time to put the icing on the cake in raising their kids!
  3. Vern McPherson from writes:
    When the oracle achieves his complete dictatorship he can issue a decree banning the liberal press, publically burn all books he doesn't agree with ,tax galleries with nudes displayed and ensure kids are educated in strict accordance with what business tells him they need.

    Of course singing the CPC song will be manda -tory in all schools.

    Isn't he a wonderful leader .................

    North Koreans is so grateful for their dear leader.

    Why can't Candians be like them ?
  4. janfromthe bruce from Canada writes: Neocons showing their nasty mean-spirited ways- divide! Reminds of Harris years in Ontario. No wonder we won't ever vote this crew in!

    Again shows their cultural lack of sensibilities.
  5. Roop Misir from Toronto, Canada writes: Does a truly 'cultural' activity really need government support?
  6. robert quinn from Japan writes: More, please.
  7. john doe from toronto, Canada writes: Roop Misir writes: 'Does a truly 'cultural' activity really need government support?'

    Yes.

    Even under Bush, the US has a countless number of such funds, administrated by their givernment. Ditto France, China, the UK, Germany, Italy, and Japan. Canada will be the odd man out.

    Harper is a petty idiot out to ruin his own country's economy and reputation on the international stage.
  8. R Magnuson from Montreal, Canada writes: This is a great conservative move and demonstrates Mr. Harper's solid conservative credentials. Frankly, there's lot's more that can be cut. About half the stuff that makes it on to the CBC nowadays is just plane frightning. Fund its core services and then it's on its own from then on.
  9. William J Gillies from Canada writes: R Magnuson from Montreal, Canada writes: 'About half the stuff that makes it on to the CBC nowadays is just plane frightning.'

    So arts cutbacks are going to boost Air Canada profits?
  10. wayne ouellette from Canada writes: Good work Mr. Harper. For years I have watched my tax dollars frittered away by the liberal give away machine. I have nothing against productive, well managed programs where expenditures are monitored and people held accountable, but the liberal record speaks for itself. Lots more rot out there. Keep up the good work.
  11. Roop Misir from Toronto, Canada writes: Vern McPherson from writes:

    Roop Misir from Toronto, Canada writes: Does a truly 'cultural' activity really need government support?

    Posted 11/08/08 at 4:58 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Roop that's a dumb question and one I would not expect from you...... pardon my directness ..........

    Hi Vernon:

    Your comment wasn't unexpected!
  12. Dr. Winston O'Boogie from Waterloo, Canada writes:
    “He estimated that programs like Trade Routes deliver a 10-to-1 return on investment.” If this correct, or if the ROI is positive, then wtf is the problem?
  13. Int Cord from Waterloo, Canada writes: Is it too much to hope that we finally have a government in this country who recognized absolute waste when they see it and are willing to end the payouts? Lord I can only hope it continues. If the 'art' is truly 'art', then it will be self-sustaining. Otherwise, the artist simply becomes another 'entitles' citizen or group. Way to go Mr. Harper!! Thank you.
  14. Stude Ham from Outremont, Canada writes:
    the arts fundings are the easiest spending cuts to make especially at a time when the military misadventurism runaway costs and the vote buying schemes of the government are sucking the federal coffers to the point of bleeding deficits.

    skip the arts arguments...

    DUMP HARPER!
  15. Paul Byer from Canada writes: And it isn't hard to spot the thinking rational Canadians is it?
  16. Bobby the K from Durham, ON, Canada writes: It seems odd that a party that doesn't care about the environment wants to spend so much time in the wilderness.
  17. Nicolas Perrot from Ottawa, Canada writes: Totally agree with you Dr. Winston. If 10-to-1 return is rot, like Wayne Ouellette likes to proclaim, then all form of government in canada would need to fold. If such a profitable program is not enough, then perhaps we need to rethink subsidies to the wheat and cattle industries.

    In any case this just confirms english-canadian culture is an american sample sent by mail. People like greg stevens, int cord, ouellette and other clones probably think Sex in the City is a masterpiece. Hope they enjoy their Milwaukees... Now, watch the rebuttals!, and other similar moronic phrases.
  18. D W from Halifax, Canada writes: Nicolas Perrot from Ottawa, methinks you miss the point. If the return on this investment were actually 10-1 then there would be no shortage of private sources of funding for these ventures. The reality is that ridiculous number was argued by a partisan special interest individual who is merely showing his ignorance on the economics of the situation.

    I daresay that a significant minority (likely the majority) of 'Arts' funding is nothing more than welfare to support a very select few. Where I can certainly understand why those on this welfare would complain at its slight curtailment, the select few must surely understand why the vast majority would rail at this wasteful spending of our money.
  19. r h from Toronto, Canada writes: These buggers screwed us all. They said they would never tax Income Trusts. THEY DID. Enough said, that screwed most pentioners and investors of billions...

    These Minions are only interested in pleasing their American Masters...

    Fight in Afghanistan to help help infrastructure 'Pipeline for US Oil' (er, Iraq Oil) Give them our water, take our rights,.. we will show our glowing support in the upcoming election.
  20. Vern McPherson from writes:
    D W from Halifax, Canada writes:
    I daresay that a significant minority (likely the majority) of 'Arts' funding is nothing more than welfare to support a very select few. Where I can certainly understand why those on this welfare would complain at its slight curtailment, the select few must surely understand why the vast majority would rail at this wasteful spending of our money.
    Posted 11/08/08 at 6:22 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment

    =====================================

    ' wasteful spending of our money' ??

    Save ....... what is it .......... 9 million bucks ??

    Lets see that's 26 cents a piece ?

    How much are those COns pics of dogs playing cardz ??

    Here's a quarter D doubya.

    Go get yerself a GST reduced half a popcicle.
  21. Dr. Winston O'Boogie from Waterloo, Canada writes:
    Defining Characteristics of Fascism: #11 Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts.
  22. N. American from New York, United States writes: Why should the government give a tiny minority of oh so sensitive intelligent wing nuts money to make films that only an oh so sensitive intelligent win-nut can enjoy? The vast majority of Canadians like to watch things go 'boom' and have a beer during HNIC.

    The whole cultural industry supports nothing but silly empty circular conversation at your last dinner party.

    You stink of the last moldy old book you read.
  23. Green Dragon from Ottawa, Canada writes: Public funding for the arts is a luxury that we can ill afford. On the list of things that government should spend money on this has got to rank at the bottom. So long as there is pothole that needs to be filled, a Taliban that needs to be drilled, or a kid who needs to learn how to read, we should spend no public money on the arts.
  24. Chris R from Toronto, Canada writes: Who ever said that art has to be self-sustaining?

    Shakespeare's productions were not self-sustaining? He was gifted money from the court.

    The only art that I see that's self-sustaining in this country is Canadian Idol. If that's your idea of art - than welcome to Canada!

    All of our great Canadian artists - whether it's the Group of 7, Margaret Attwood, Michael Ondaajte - all received gov't funding at some time. Without - they'd never be who they are we wouldn't have their art.

    Cutting 9 million to showcase our art to the world is petty.

    And the PM's spokesperson claims the work is ideological??? It's art - it's supposed to ideological. What he should have said is that it's contrary to the Party's ideology.
  25. Pete H from Canada writes: Paul Byer from Canada: Thanks for the link, this particular paragraph should be of interest to many posters, including the partisan hacks. Where is the G&M in putting some perspective on this issue? 'Many of the recipients weren't even Canadian and had very little connection to Canada. A group called Peru 2021, for instance, received nearly $30,000 from Canadian taxpayers 'to organize a one-day conference on corporate social responsibility,' while nearly $44,000 was doled out to the Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development And Transparency to 'host a two-day conference on Pakistan's national Elections in 2007 and possible political scenarios for the region.'
  26. Paul Byer from Canada writes: r h from Toronto, Canada writes: These buggers screwed us all. They said they would never tax Income Trusts. THEY DID. Enough said, that screwed most pentioners and investors of billions...
    .......................................................................................

    With the unanimous approval of all provincial finance ministers including the Ontario Liberal government. Every last province could see the harm it was doing to the country and the government had the guts to listen. How refreshing. My kind of government. Listens to the people. All of them serving their American masters I suppose. I got hurt as well. Instead of a 22% return on my income trusts that I enjoyed for just over a year, I now only get a reasonable return on my investments once again. However, my family, friends and neighbours aren't paying the difference. Somebody had to. It wasn't taken from a magical money tree. I can live with that. Only a select minority of pensioners were able to take advantage of the trust funds, only those with money. It saved the majority of pensioners and others that could least afford it the burden of paying those billions to the ones that could. Makes sense to me. A humane and sensible sacrifice.
  27. Ryan Ginger from Canada writes: This was a truly small-minded move. We are talking about chump-change, really, 9 million bucks.

    Canadian embassies did so much with this money to promote Canadian talent abroad. It is a sad day. Get rid of Harper's theocon clan.
  28. della baird from vancouver, Canada writes: dee vancouver: i would still miss many of the great doc's from cbc. am proud that beryl fox 's tributes were something to remember. cbc is still an icon in this country as far as good and insightful programming ought to be. although i hate how it is changing. but,please, don't stop the doc's.
  29. Gardiner Westbound from Canada writes:
    If Trade Routes really has a luscious 10-to-1 return on investment savvy private investors will eagerly replace the taxpayer funding.

  30. Paul Byer from Canada writes: Ryan Ginger from Canada writes: This was a truly small-minded move. We are talking about chump-change, really, 9 million bucks.

    ....................................................................
    Probably think the another 40 million missing is also chump change. However a few million here supporting a study of Pakistans election and Peruvian corporate responsibility
    (art?) and another 40 million there (supporting we don't know who or what) is something that adds up to billions in the over all picture and does nothing to help those who are truly deserving. Support art yes. Support non Canadian politics or corruption? No!!!!
  31. Roop Misir from Toronto, Canada writes: D W from Halifax, Canada writes:

    'If the return on this investment were actually 10-1 then there would be no shortage of private sources of funding for these ventures. The reality is that ridiculous number was argued by a partisan special interest individual who is merely showing his ignorance on the economics of the situation.

    'I daresay that a significant minority (likely the majority) of 'Arts' funding is nothing more than welfare to support a very select few. Where I can certainly understand why those on this welfare would complain at its slight curtailment, the select few must surely understand why the vast majority would rail at this wasteful spending of our money.'

    I did not make the above points.
  32. Scott Elliott from Toronto, Canada writes: ' He estimated that programs like Trade Routes deliver a 10-to-1 return on investment. 'Who would we not love to get that from our stock portfolios?'

    So put your own money in pal, apparently you'll make a killing!!
  33. Christopher Coady from St. Thomas, Canada writes: I would much rather see my tax dollars go somewhere useful. Art is in the absolute last place on my list of smart ways to spend tax money. How about putting a little more money in scientific research to help cure disease. Or investing some more money into some of our hospitals with out of date equipment. I enjoy the arts but they have no place on the government spending list. You can toss the arts in the same trash can as welfare and athletics.
  34. earl pearl from Canada writes: Great, now build me a hospital in Vaughan.

    For all the whining and accusations against our government, I haven't read one sentence even trying to convince me that these programs accomplished anything , served anyone, or were necessary in any way. I am waiting.

    Might be a connection to why the government cut them.

    Getting bent out of shape simply because the CPC government occasional cuts a program is typical left wing slothful thinking.

    Prove to me that these programs need to be saved and I'll help the uprising, otherwise...
  35. A.J. Maynard from Canada writes: Of course dump any art/cultural programs. What is this country coming to. Everyone knows any good 'artist' would be living in an attic, eating stale bread and drinking bad wine. The day this country takes away the rights of artists to live poor lives and cut off their ears is the day I say I will not longer want to be an Harporcrit.
  36. Rusty Waters from Canada writes: If artists make good art people will buy it. If one sings for ones supper one has to sing good enough to get paid. Why do musicans and artists want welfare. If they can't make a living at their art and music they should get another job to support themselves and their family. Just because someone can arrange a bit of paint on a piece of canvas or play three chords on a guitar, they can't expect the taxpayers to pay for it. Almost every household in Canad has at least one family member who can sing, paint, write or fart in the key of g, but they look at it as a hobby. If you travel to Europe there are artists everywhere in the streets selling and creating art. They work for their money. Why should taxpayers pay for artists's work here in Canada. Every other working man and woman in society has to work to produce something whether it be a cardboard box or parts for space program and if they, don't they don't get paid. The government should have only one responsibilty for art and music and that is to finance those programs in high schools. Let the individual and private enterpize take care of it from there.
  37. Russell Barth from Nepean, Canada writes: more chilling that arts cuts is where the Tories are spending the money instead: cops, courts, cages, armies.

    Martial Law is just around the corner. All we need is some sort of trumped up (sigh) 'emergency' to completely stomp all of our civil rights and liberties. Anyone who speaks out will be quickly dispatched.
  38. Christopher Coady from St. Thomas, Canada writes: Russell Barth..... This is Canada not Burma! You fears are so very misguided.
  39. garry heaps from toronto-home of urban voters, Canada writes: relax they just needed a 'nasty' fix. who can we screw today?
    besides we need every cent to finance our holy war, i mean our military exercise in the middle east.
  40. John Percy from Halifax, Canada writes: Green Dragon from Ottawa, Canada writes: Public funding for the arts is a luxury that we can ill afford. On the list of things that government should spend money on this has got to rank at the bottom. So long as there is pothole that needs to be filled, a Taliban that needs to be drilled, or a kid who needs to learn how to read, we should spend no public money on the arts.

    GD, it might interest you to know that less than 12% of arts funding goes to film or record production. The majority (60%) goes to libraries and heritage sites (yes they are considered part of the arts), so that money is actually going to help kids learn to read and appreciate their history.

    But by all means let's throw the baby out with the bathwater.
  41. Major Pain from Canada writes: Unsurprising from the Conservatives, who tend to treat artists like a pack of welfare bums, not recognizing the billions of dollars (yes, I said billions) that the arts pump into the national economy. With government subsidization for pretty well every other area of the national economy (industry in Ontario, oil in Alberta, tourism everywhere, etc, etc.), somehow, our conservative friends from across the country still rail at the idea of artists receiving similar (albeit proportionally far, far less) funds to promote themselves and develop their industry (yes, it's a money making industry) internationally. I guess they don't like the idea of artists being able to advance their businesses (yes, they are businesses), and would rather actively try to put them on the welfare rolls. Then they can bellyache about how they are leeches on that far more expensive and far less productive government program.
  42. Christopher Coady from St. Thomas, Canada writes: Garry Heaps..... You feel that the government is screwing artists by making these cuts. I feel that the government has been screwing me all these years they have been wasting my tax dollars.
  43. FedUp InToronto from Canada writes: What a bunch of crybabies. Its about time the gravy train was stopped.

    And it appears Mr. Lewis has been part of the problem.

    As for the nonsensical whine about starving artists, you can do one of two things... Get some talent or get a job.
  44. Old Sam Dark and Dirty from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: As soon as I read these words this person lost all credibility 'Al-Jazeera network'

    These so called 'cultural' groups have been using these grants and subsidies to funnel money to other countries for years. This was the Liberal way of retaining the 'cultural' vote.

    I am glad we are closing these loop holes that these 'cultural' groups are using to steal our tax dollars.
  45. A.J. Maynard from Canada writes: Mr. Waters I see you are a true renaissance man.

    Businesses can apply for grants or low interest loans to give them a start. Since artists/art groups pay taxes like anyone else why should they not be able to apply for grants the same as anyone else?

    An artist I know who is just starting out works approximately 80 hours a week. Part of that work you will be happy to know is in a coffee shop, part is teaching E.S.L. and the other part is working far into the night struggling to 'arrange paint on a piece of canvas'. T

    If art/culture is such a worthless endeavour why do we flock to the movies, plays and gallery openings etc.
  46. NWT Knifer from Yellowknife, Canada writes: Nothnign wrong here. I hate when my tax dollars are wasted.

    hey let me hang some rotting meat and the Arts council of Canada will buy it for 500,000!!!

    let these artist find private funding!!!
  47. Green Gene from Federal Bluesville, Canada writes: This is just sweet! The Harperites have found a way to appease their Christian-repressed right-wing nut backers, and citizens justly opposed to government largesse. Mind you, I don't need the government to tell me what should be art, and when government funding is going into art (government = our $) I don't want some sexually-repressed right-wing idealogue deciding what deserves our support. Put up and shut up!! To those fiscally responsible posters who support this sort of posture: when all you see is American (or European, Asian) produced cultural programming and wonder where all the performers are gone will you be happy with your fiscal fastidiousness? I mean these jokers in Ottawa aren't about balancing the books (they have a dismal record at that so far), they just want to turn government into a pale shadow of that pale shadow of a government they have south of the border: corrupt, bankrupt and in the hands of its corporate controllers.
  48. San Tomas from Kelowna, Canada writes: Now if we just cut out ALL the other useless programs, we could wind up eliminating the income tax. It seems that our politicians feel they are entitled to play Santa Claus with the public purse. And the waste cut includes the Afghanistan mission, foreign aid, etc.
  49. John Percy from Halifax, Canada writes: Rusty Waters from Canada writes: If you travel to Europe there are artists everywhere in the streets selling and creating art. They work for their money.

    RW, it might interest you to know that the arts in Europe are heavily funded publicly, and in recent years (since 2001) funding has actually increased.
  50. Jim Brennan from Canada writes: The arts need Canadian funding. Art is important to culture, particularly in this time of mass media. I recommend Canadians that truly care stop going to American movies, stop watching American made television, stop attending American stage productions and stop listening to American musicians. We should spend the money presently dropped into that cultural abyss on Canadian art rather than art funding. (Has there ever been a government that could do a better job than people acting on their own values?) If we want a strong culture Canadians need to get more personally involved and drive it with passion rather than government. Culture is too important to be left in the hands of the government.
  51. Mike Quinlan from Gatineau QC, Canada writes: Where is the balance in this article. Tells us nothing about the history of the fund and whether or not it was effectively fulfilling its purpose.
    As for the level insult... well in my world when you start calling people troglodytes and idiots dont expect charity from them.
  52. earl pearl from Canada writes: Still waiting for someone to tell me what these programs accomplished.

    All I've seen so far is poorly medicated Libbies spouting 'Harperites have found a way to appease their Christian-repressed right-wing nut backers'.

    Not one person has told me what these programs do yet I'm to believe that it's a right wing conspiracy that they are now gone.

    Hmmph. thought so.
  53. Gogh Forit from Canada writes: Now these 'liberally' supported 'artists' will have to get real jobs like everybody else. Boo hoo the gravy train ride is over.
  54. Dave T from Toronto, Canada writes: The argument that funding the arts is a waste of taxpayers' money can be reduced to absurdity. You could use the same argument to say that governments should not spend any money on parks, recreation centres, bicycle trails, urban beautification plans, or indeed anything that improves Canadians' quality of life but doesn't provide an immediate financial return on investment.

    It is virtually impossible to be a self-supporting artist of any kind in Canada (or anywhere else) - the numbers don't hold up. There are lots of people in Canada with plenty of talent who can't make a living in the arts.

    (For the record, I prefer to see government funding for venues and teaching facilities, not individual artists. But that's a different discussion.)
  55. Wild Bill from Canada writes: Rather than using the money to help Canadians it's more likely needed to help our friends in Afghanistan build schools, dams,etc. As good Canadians, we've got to help others before we help ourselves.
  56. Hugh Albert from Canada writes: What's the beef? It is the policy of this Government to eliminate all small group funding over time. Let the strong survive & step on the weak. The innovativeness of government to clean bones is outstanding. Where else can tax reductions be given & deficits be reduced?
  57. North of 49 from Ladysmith, Canada writes: Wow!!! $9 million for Trade Routes, $4.7 million for Promart plus other programs including Cultural Spaces Canada, a capital renovation fund, and Arts Presentation Canada, an operational subsidy...Talk about being entitled to their entitlements. Anything 'cultural' in this country the public does not pay for?
  58. Steve D from St. John's, Canada writes: Dr. Winston O'Boogie from Waterloo, Canada writes:
    ' “He estimated that programs like Trade Routes deliver a 10-to-1 return on investment.&8221; If this correct, or if the ROI is positive, then wtf is the problem?'

    I don't trust his estimates. Also, we pay people to create 'cultural works' then pay them to promote it. Most of the culture thus created is unrecognizable to ordinary people and I can't help but wonder if it is Canadian culture at all. As for Hot Docs, isn't CBC sucking enough cultural funding out of us to put this on?
  59. John Percy from Halifax, Canada writes: 'Kory Teneycke, the Prime Minister's press secretary, noted that Ottawa 'spends $3.5-billion on arts funding ... and is spending more on arts than did the previous [Liberal] government. '

    Actually not true at all. StatsCan figures for 2004 show a federal arts budget of $3.5 billion. Adjust that for inflation and...well..you know...

    But we should never let the facts get in the way of a good quote.
  60. boz dobbs from toronto, Canada writes: Does this mean I can,t get any funding for the saving the Arctic tail weasel conference next April in Paris,I happen to paint wildlife portraits of the little critters.
  61. Bluer than You from Canada writes: Excellent news, now let's hope PMSH follows up on his talk at Calgary and starts to fund some Christian programs!
  62. Old Sam Dark and Dirty from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: John Percy from Halifax, Canada writes: 'Kory Teneycke, the Prime Minister's press secretary, noted that Ottawa 'spends $3.5-billion on arts funding ... and is spending more on arts than did the previous [Liberal] government. '

    Actually not true at all. StatsCan figures for 2004 show a federal arts budget of $3.5 billion. Adjust that for inflation and...well..you know...

    ---------------

    Percy was that amount for one year or was it spread out over the Liberals favorite term....5 years?

    Seems the Liberals always spread their speding out over 5 years then in the next budget change the funding amounts. Classic vote buying.....they announced funding then never deliver on it.
  63. G S from Canada writes: Since the cons are so worried about putting Canada into deficit, cut government funding to the Vancouver Olympics. Same thing, but it'll 'save' a lot more.
  64. The Real PS from Canada writes: Just once, I'd really like these discussion boards to be something other than partisan cr*p. My best guess, 99% of the people crying horror over these cuts don't give a toss about the arts or understand where and how this money was spent (and neither do I by the way) but boy, hand them a good line to slag Harper (or the libbies) and away they go.

    Why not have a reasonable discussion on the funding, those who understand how this money is spent can perhaps point the rest of us to some real information and then perhaps a non-derogatory conversation can follow, unlikely I know but good Lord it would be a nice change.
  65. North Star from Canada writes: Harper needs money for his war machine!
  66. Dave Miller from Montreal, Canada writes: @ Greg Stevens and others...

    If what you say is valid, why do we seem to be the only country in the developed world that is decreasing our arts spending instead of increasing or sustaining it?

    And as far as I can gather, in Canada there are no artists 'pleading' for grants and subsidies, simply praying that the ones that already exist are not lost.
  67. Always Right from Canada writes:

    The Conservatives axe a couple of 'p' in the bucket programs and the whining left proclaims an all out ban on 'the arts' is underway. Oh the drama!!

    If these programs reall do provide a 10 to 1 ROI then no doubt they will have no problem replacing the government money with private investment. Problem is, to Liberals, all ROI is measured in intangibles.

    What a laughable lot you lefty whiners are. No wonder no one takes you seriously.
  68. John Connor from Canada writes: r h from Toronto, Canada writes: These buggers screwed us all. They said they would never tax Income Trusts. THEY DID. Enough said, that screwed most pentioners and investors of billions

    And exactly WHAT does this have to do with funding of the Arts?
    Suck it up buttercup, if you sold out on the down side, I have no sympathy for you
  69. R Hopkins from Edmonton, Canada writes: Good. The Art world is full of corruption and charletans.
    Real artists will survive.
    The best thing for art is to take the money out of it. Then it will be pure. Art will survive, art will always survive.
    Neo cons got this one right.
  70. peter E from Montreal, Canada writes: Typical of modern day conservatives- thugish, petty and churlish. Welcome to Harper's Canada, where you're either with us or against us. Vote the bums out before they cause more damage and we look like Bush's America
  71. G S from Canada writes: And then there's that huge obscene government 'investment' in carbon sequestration -- like the oil companies can't afford to pay for their own technology... Cut it.
  72. Bluer than You from Canada writes: It's about time! I urge all readers to save yourselves and follow the real Conservative values, learn what you must do and thank S.Harper.

    I urge you to view our site which has the support of many CPC politicians including S.Harper. Hopefully he will begin funding our efforts as promised by the CPC.

    http://www.familyaction.org/index.htm
  73. Uncle Fester from Canada writes:

    3.5 billion for arts funding? And the government should apologize for making spending cuts?

    They should be apologizing for flushing billions down the toilet.

    The reason Canadians are such apologists in the first place is because we are subsidized to the point that we are a facimile of a nation.
  74. Jim Q from Halifax, Canada writes: Just a thought: Cultural exports in this country are a major economic force in Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and Halfiax.

    In Toronto, film, theatre, arts and other cultural economies are much larger than manufacturing.

    In total, this sector is worth billions of dollars to these centres, muchof it from smaller, more vulnerable producers.

    Note, all of these cities are Liberal/NDP strongholds. Could be they're just being punished for voting the wrong way by a party that doesn't understand Canada's economy. (You need to advertise to make money, especially in exports.)

    Between this, Bill C-10 and whatever other goofy antics Bev Oda has up her sleeve, our city economies better be prepared to take some hits.

    At least this will leave more money to subsidize the oil sands and 905 auto manufactures.
  75. Mister Fartleberry from Toronto, Canada writes: Tomorrow Starts Today? Good riddance. Absolute government trash for corporate art organizations. Garbage in - garbage out. The faster they get rid of all the other multi million dollar artcorp welfare the better. Too bad art students aren't clued in to the federal corporate art culture which favours only well connected insiders and the politically correct hyphenated flavour of the week. Maybe they could learn something reading this article. BTW most of the money goes to government mandated accountants anyway.
  76. A.J. Maynard from Canada writes: Steve D: What the arts dream of are often the reality of the future. That is why it may not be recognizable at first because it is NEW, INNOVATIVE and maybe just a little topical.

    Do you think da vinci's drawings were understood in his lifetime? As a note, da vinci was highly subsidized.
  77. Alpha Sigma from Canada writes: Is that a floating banana over Texas in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?
  78. Bluer than You from Canada writes:
    Jim Q from Halifax, Canada writes: Just a thought:
    Between this, Bill C-10 and whatever other goofy antics Bev Oda has up her sleeve, our city economies better be prepared to take some hits.

    Bill C-10 is very important and a key part of the moral ascent of Canada, Stephen Harper follows through on his promises, he will reshape Canada, I trust him from listening to him years ago espousing true Christian values and his plan for Canada.
  79. A.J. Maynard from Canada writes: Green Konstantin: Your remarks are truly offensive, I would hate to believe that every conservative is as rude and ill mannered as yourself.
  80. JP M from Canada writes: 'we think the [funding] choices made were inappropriate ... inappropriate because they were ideological in some cases, with highly ideological individuals exposing their agendas or [money going to] wealthy celebrities or fringe arts groups that in many cases would be at best, unrepresentative, and at worst, offensive.'

    What a laugh... Conservatives critical of ideologues! Hmmm... are that presented and ideology or agenda.... maybe the Con's should read a little history and find some art that DID NOT do this....

    Bumbling, incompetent bumpkins...
  81. Bluer than You from Canada writes: We are embarking upon a new age....

    A new crusade led by great men like George Bush and Stephen Harper. They share the same values and ideas with the majority of Canadians.

    Some in Canada only need to be shown the way, we will persevere!
  82. Bill Bill from Trenton, Canada writes: Oh Happy Day. The arts community exists somewhere out in la-la land! But as they would say 'we are entitled to our entitlements', as their welfare cheques, subsidies and grants keep rolling in, and they likely never even have to get out of bed.

    Keep it up, Mr. Harper. I smell a majority coming, and it smells delicious.
  83. Unabashed Opinion from Toronto, Canada writes: I am amazed at how many people who post here do not understand the role of art in a society. To all those who say that artists have to make it on their own in the commercial market, you are sadly mistaken. The role of art is to provide an early warning system to the society for its folly and foibles, to probe the human dynamics that begin to render us less than human, to enable us to question that which we take for granted.

    It's clear why Harper cuts arts funding: it is through the sharp lens and bright light of the arts that the disastrous effects of his social policies can be revealed for the dangers they pose to the fabric of our society.

    The act of cutting itself, in a way, reveals the selfishness and 'I'm okay, Jack' attitudes of many Canadians represented by some who post here. 'Get a job, and get off my lawn,' is not the way to build a strong, cohesive society.

    'Get a heart, and get off my neighbour!'
  84. A.J. Maynard from Canada writes: Green Konstantin: A good debate allows for all manner of civil discourse. Perhaps you should attend a remedial class in comportment.
  85. Green Konstantin from Canada writes: A.J. Maynard from Canada writes: Green Konstantin: A good debate allows for all manner of civil discourse. Perhaps you should attend a remedial class in comportment.

    ___________
    Go pay for your own art. It's not the governments job.
  86. Tranquil in the US from Canada writes: You (Bluer than You, from Canada) wrote:
    We are embarking upon a new age....

    A new crusade led by great men like George Bush and Stephen Harper. They share the same values and ideas with the majority of Canadians.

    Some in Canada only need to be shown the way, we will persevere!

    Posted 11/08/08 at 8:47 AM EDT

    ---

    Is the Conservative party up there like the Republicans down here?

    Reading through some of these comments (like above) sounds pretty disturbing. Fanatical ideologues with religious undertones who disregard science, facts and common sense put our country on the edge of destruction.
  87. Imperial K from Toronto, Canada writes: A.J. it's not that, it's usually...well let's put it this way...guys eating 'Lonely Choice' TV Dinners and upset over how things went in their lives. Mind you it could be women to I suppose.
  88. Harvey Mushman from cambridge, Canada writes: No matter what there can never be enough government money flowing into the arts community to keep them happy. Never. If you doubt it...just ask them.
  89. Darren X3 from Toronto, Canada writes: '3.5 billion for arts funding? And the government should apologize for making spending cuts?
    They should be apologizing for flushing billions down the toilet.'

    Exactly correct. There is no justification for government subsidy of the arts. We hear all about the 'economic stimulus' effect of arts subsidies... what about the economic stimulus of simply leaving 3.5bn in taxpayers pockets?

    I'm not some raving libertarian, there are many good areas were government involvement in the economy is totally appropriate due to market failure... art is not one of them.
  90. Stan L from Canada writes: This is a flatfooted and shortsighted moved designed to satisfy an uneducated mass of supporters rather than educate them as to the benefits of programs such as these. There is not a developed nation on the planet including the US that does not offer programs such as these. Many posters talk about the need for the arts to be self-sustaining and yet there is not an industry in Canada that doesn't benefit from some sort of subsidy or tax benefit. Arts programs do a great deal of fundraising particularily in the corporate sector, but the sad truth is that we have a lot of corporations here that are US owned and more inclined to support US programs and charities and do only the token amount required in Canada that allows them to claim whatever tax benefits they get from it. With a country of this size supporting a population so small....it baffles me why the simple math of this escapes everyone. Bil c-10, Bev Oda's version of Adscam (which has escaped press scrutiny for the most part) and other such ventures make me doubt very much that this government has a grip on this portfolio...in fact this portfolio has been badly managed and administered for the past 30 years....the difference is that I think this government is using dollars from this department to fund shortcomings they have incurred in other areas....just speculation though.
  91. A.J. Maynard from Canada writes: Green Konstantin: Ah one step up on the civility train, good work! Is that your final answer lol
  92. Frank Rizzo from Brossard, Quebec, Canada writes: I don't think that Canada can afford a *cut* to arts funding. Hotdocs in particular is a very important program. Anyone who is familiar with that festival knows that it attracts a wide variety of independent Canadian film. This is not just a venue for abstract art house material. What is really upsetting here is that this is (another) significant blow to independent expression in Canada. Harper seems to have waged open war on expression since he has been in office. Art cannot and should not be subjected to the marketplace, and I believe that art must be supported by the government as is done in Europe. Why is this so easy to see in other areas? What if Harper was to make a similar cut to the funding that supports Olympic athletics? Of course the big multinationals are always there to give out endorsements to the winners, but who will support the cultivation of younger (i.e. not yet commercially exploitable) athletes? I don't hear people screaming about private sector support in that case. Should we not support a single athlete unless all potholes and international dictators/despots are eliminated? People jump up and cheer these althletes but does that really make them more eligible for government funding? Where is there 'economic benefit' of having athletes that carry Canada's name? Why do we impose economic sufficiency standards on the arts? We might as well impose 'culinary standards' or some other irrelevant standard since that is how irrelevant economic self-sufficiency is in the world of art.
  93. liquid sherwood from kelowna, Canada writes: I have had the opportunity to watch artists, musicians and performers from Canada who were funded through the programs offered by DFAIT (Foreign Affairs). To witness the communication of culture in action in such places as China (10 years ago), Vietnam and Russia. Most of your reactions are predictable for what ever political team you have decided to side with, however, the communication and celebration of our culture is essential to both the individual and the country. Have any of you actually seen the product of these two programs or are you making vast statements about 'art' and automatically going to the extremes of body fluids and Christian images..stop going for the easy ones, why don't you actually investigate the things you criticize.

  94. Paul who is from Vancouver, Canada writes: .
    Promart?

    Hot Docs?

    Canadian Independent Record Production Association?

    Tomorrow Starts Today programs?

    Money going to wealthy celbrities or fringe arts groups?

    Naionalpost says that among the biggest beneficiaries of Promart is the Toronto International Film Festival, which last year was given nearly $150,000 to bring out-of-country film buyers to T. O. and wine and dine them while they were there.

    What the hell?
  95. Old Sam Dark and Dirty from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: Unabashed Opinion from Toronto, Canada writes: I am amazed at how many people who post here do not understand the role of art in a society. To all those who say that artists have to make it on their own in the commercial market, you are sadly mistaken. The role of art is to provide an early warning system to the society for its folly and foibles, to probe the human dynamics that begin to render us less than human, to enable us to question that which we take for granted. It's clear why Harper cuts arts funding: it is through the sharp lens and bright light of the arts that the disastrous effects of his social policies can be revealed for the dangers they pose to the fabric of our society. The act of cutting itself, in a way, reveals the selfishness and 'I'm okay, Jack' attitudes of many Canadians represented by some who post here. 'Get a job, and get off my lawn,' is not the way to build a strong, cohesive society. 'Get a heart, and get off my neighbour!' ------- Please get off your high horse. These were a couple of small Liberal programs that were put in place to reward a few Liberal supporters. We still fund the arts in a very big way and I don't think the Arts community will be decimated by these program cuts.
  96. new beginning from Toronto, Canada writes: To Greg Stevens and other such troglodytes, a pox on your houses. You forgot to include the prescription that education not be wasted on the poor as they will never amount to much anyway. Teach them only to count to 500.

    To the 2nd writer in this comment list, you are referring to show BUSINESS, not art. Patrons come from private and public areas. If some governments did not mandate a percentage of building funds to public art, we would be living in a soviet vision of heaven, the gulag, devoid of stimulus to the senses.

    Of course, our 'new government' is truly interested in only providing the best quality art for public consumption: their ideas, not the artists'.

    I shudder at the prospect.
  97. scott reid from Canada writes: the horror...the horror...
    • Posted 11/08/08 at 9:02 AM EST |