Skip navigation

Where the arts money will flow

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail

Cash infusion for arts and culture expected in federal budget will be placed squarely on infrastructure, festivals and training ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Broad Vacant from St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada writes: Gosh, this article's been posted for 7 hours now, and not a single cranky "don't-give-anything-to-the-lazy-queer-left-wing-elitist-artists-anything" crowd.
  2. Brad Smithee from Canada writes: I know, refreshing!

    I gotta say though, the PromArt and other travel funding should really be reinstituted. I don't want to start a flame war by saying this, but hey - why cut something that amounts to something like a $40 million dollar fund that triggers international money in the film sector alone, which brings back more than double that, at least, to Canada in work?

    The tories just don't get the cultural industries. That's "industries", tories!

    anyway I hope Iggy gets in there sooner than later.
  3. barb johnston from Calgary, Canada writes: Why would the RCM qualify for the Cultural Spaces Canada program? Their new facility is almost finished, is it not? It does not seem right to get a grant for a project that is so close to completion.
  4. Chris Halford from Ottawa, Canada writes: Interesting! There's got to be something hidden in this budget that will not be warm and fuzzy at all, I guess I'll have to wait until this evening to see what the catch is.
  5. Bubbles McBubbles from Trawna, Canada writes: Chris, it's a bald-faced ploy to buy votes at the riding level. Tory MPs get to look arts-friendly as they swan about at the ribbon cutting ceremonies for all these construction programs and pierogi festivals. No one is actually funding the art that goes into it, of course. That would cost too much money. So these new art barns will remain empty. Luminato is the biggest funding hole of all - but for different reasons.
  6. Bjorn Tubiywyld from Toronto, Canada writes:
    OK. I'll bite.

    I can't believe the posts today. I guess there's just no way to please some artists.

    If you can't make a living selling your wares, you're not good enough. Find another career, perhaps art should be simply a hobby for you.

    The government has no business handing money out to subsidize inferior works. Doubly so during a severe recession.

    .
  7. philippa lloyd chambers from London, United Kingdom writes: If these guestimates on spending are true, it points yet again to traditional conservative trickle down economic theory. Give money to the big dogs and their activities will generate economic benefits to artists that work in the less glorified areas of the arts. Trickle down economic policy does not work. Infrastructure and grass roots funding is what is needed..artists and arts centric organizations such as theatres , dance companies, musicians, art galleries etc need to get adequate and stable funding (investment) in order to make their product better and more accessible.
  8. Broad Vacant from St. Catharines, ON, Canada writes: Nice try Bjorn, but you were merely stating an alternative opinion. We can deal with that; we can even have a conversation. You weren't cranky, needlessly offensive, belittling (well, a little there, but not much), and appeared to calm (most appear to be screaming when they rant here).
  9. Sue W from Canada writes: Broad Vacant from St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada writes: Gosh, this article's been posted for 7 hours now, and not a single cranky "don't-give-anything-to-the-lazy-queer-left-wing-elitist-artists-anything" crowd. .....

    You must mean like the $9,000 funding for the Lactation Station Breast Milk Bar held in Toronto a few years back.
  10. Peasinour Thyme from Edmonton, Canada writes: The infrastructure money should be under the infrastructure part of the budget. The training should be under the training budget. Take those away and we are back at square one, which is no meaningful support for artistic creation and expression.

    Harper is merely pretending to even give a royal poop about arts. Everyone knows he hates artists and thinks they are elitists and somehow abnormal. Arts will never see a nickel under Harper.

    Harper's only nod to the arts are his own magically disappearing surplus and the deft legerdemain of his bait and switch.
  11. Paul Pedersen from Ottawa, Canada writes: Mrs Harper is a patron and supporter in the local Ottawa art scene. Mr Harper must have been served hot tongue and cold shoulder by Mrs Harber for dinner after he made nasty comments about artists and their elitist gala digs just prior to the election.

    r
  12. Raging Squirrel from Toronto, Canada writes: Ordinary Canadians DO SUPPORT the Arts, Mr. Harper. You are dead wrong...has lots of lively debate on this issue.

    http://www.new.facebook.com/group.php?gid=41692823152
  13. Nicole Hamm from Saskatoon, Canada writes: "Bjorn Tubiywyld from Toronto, Canada writes:
    OK. I'll bite.

    I can't believe the posts today. I guess there's just no way to please some artists.

    If you can't make a living selling your wares, you're not good enough. Find another career, perhaps art should be simply a hobby for you.

    The government has no business handing money out to subsidize inferior works. Doubly so during a severe recession."

    Thanks for that enlightening commentary. So according to your logic, we shouldn't be handing out money to the auto industry or any failing industry. GM and Chrysler clearly are, to use your words, "not good enough" because they can't turn a profit selling cars. And we can't have the government subsidizing "inferior works. Doubly so during a severe recession."

    Yet today's budget is giving $2.7 billion to the auto industry. Gotta love hypocrisy.
  14. Sarah Bee from Canada writes: The problem isn't the amount of money being spent, it is who is benefiting. Big organizations in large urban centers only. Anything of smaller scale and local and is left out. An elitist approach to art funding. I suspect Harper's only understanding of art is shaped largely by his wife who only ever attends those galas he thinks keep artists so busy.
  15. Shawn in Montreal from Quebec, Canada writes: I still don't see a cent for digitization. Countries like the UK are spending tens of millions digitizing their national audiovisual archives. The Harper gov't even shut down the tiny AV Preservation Trust (a mere $300 k a year).
  16. That OTHER Guy from Good ol' Toronto, Canada writes: Why not some money for film and video distribution? For the price of even a so-so festival there could be a database of all Canadian films and videos, a great website, and money for digitizing film too.
  17. Welwyn Yarrow from London, Canada writes: Hey, Bjorn, your offensive comment "If you can't make a living selling your wares, you're not good enough" just nauseates me. Artists (for example, writers, painters, sculptors, actors, dancers) need to learn their art, and they need to practise it. That means if they are writers, painters, and sculptors they must learn how best to do what they do, and keep on learning while they create their works of art (my particular art takes up to three years to create one piece), and all that time they don't get paid. Yes, sir, we don't get paid until we've finished and been judged good enough to see the public eye. Even then we get only a very small amount of money -- you'd probably turn your arrogant nose up at cheques the size of the ones we get. I, for instance, have been nominated for and/or won dozens of major awards for my particular art in this country and abroad, I get hundreds of fan-letters a year (and have done for 30 years), you can find my work pretty much in any library in this country, and *I can't make a living*. If I can't make a living, you can be sure that it is *not* because I'm not good enough. I can't make a living because I am not allowed to, in this country. If the PM really cared about the arts he would fund artists first. People like you, who obviously know nothing about the arts, should not be allowed to comment on them in so offensive a way.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top