Ottawa Provides Long Term Arts Funding

[Keepitsimple]

As promised, the government is plowing money back into the Arts Sector - and committing to longer term funding.

Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore unveiled major funding renewals Friday, securing $504-million in arts funding for the next five years and garnering widespread praise from a relieved cultural community.

Mr. Moore announced that the Canadian Arts and Heritage Sustainability Program, Cultural Spaces Canada and Arts Presentation Canada will all continue to be funded at the same level through 2014-2015, though re-branded with new names.

“Consistently, people have said, yes it's true that the Conservatives have increased money for the arts … but give us some reassurance that this is a policy understanding and not just short-term cash in a minority Parliament,” Mr. Moore said at an event in Vancouver. “This is us demonstrating that we really understand the value of the arts.”

Arts leaders across the country praised the move, with Canadian Museums Association executive director John McAvity calling it “pure music to the cultural community's ears.”

“This is great news and will be welcomed by everyone in the arts sector,” said John Brotman, executive director of the Ontario Arts Council. “Predictable and sustained public funding is the core of a healthy arts field.”

Link: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nation...article1199260/

Edited June 27, 2009 by Keepitsimple

[jdobbin]

As promised, the government is plowing money back into the Arts Sector - and committing to longer term funding.

I expect we will see spending announcements all summer. Like we do every summer since the Tories got into power.

[fellowtraveller]

Doesn't all this spending stimulate the economy?

I'm sure we are all foursquare behind that....

[Argus]

I expect we will see spending announcements all summer. Like we do every summer since the Tories got into power.

This is why the Tories can't get ahead in the polls. They don't seem to understand how politics works.

Of the people and groups who were clamouring for this sort of thing, 99% would rather slit their own throats than ever vote Tory. And not this announcement, nor a hundred more like it will change their minds in the slightest.

It will do nothing to attract new voters, and will displease their base, much of which is already less than enthusiastic about them.

[Oleg Bach]

Great resentment is generated in those that are cutting edge artists -who actually have important statments to make through their work. Arts grants and the support of the supposed arts - are establishment granting to estabishment - the art world is corporate these days - if you are not accredited by a degree from some art school - you are out of the loop. So all that happens is that the same stuff is re-cycled over and over again - like the making and re-remaking of motion pictures - that have all the same formulas....Those that get grants are those that love to look at the work of orignal creators..they pick though and steal ideas - and off they go to drink wine and eat cheese being pretentious...I know a well established artist and gallery owner - who thinks that a showing of a jail birds art is cool - and they lobby for his release - so he can generate more mayhem ----and they will look at crimminality as performance art ---these jerks get grants - they debase society - they do not elevate it - why they are funded is beyond me.

[Oleg Bach]

Art is supposed to be original and not mainstream. We tend to fund what is tried and true -- we don't take chances _ if a piece of art debases and weakens society - we fund it - If it supports the status quo, we fund it...If it empowers we do not fund it - If it brings about change we do not fund it --- Rich people will fund stuff that makes them look good - seeing money can not buy class..they buy art that is specifically formulated for them..art that does not challenge or offend them - but reinforces their status as they percieve it.

The last person a rich person wants to patronize with cash is an artist that is more intelligent than they are - Heaven forbid that some smart ass actually has money and full power.. Take opera for instance - I know of this very nice young black opera singer - she sings for the rich - she wants to do pop but she needs the money...she reminds me of a canary being strangled by the rich - who delight in the sounds of a tormented bird that sings in the most artifical way imaginable....So the rich take pride and are brought "to tears" with the beauty of her voice...Yet - she dispises them for controling her for their own benefit.

The reason a lot of artist become famous after their deaths is because the rich don't want a living person with abilty to have power - I have seen art rejected that is created by the living - the second the genius dies - they are all over it.. Funding or the dispersal of funds should not be done by a committee that respresent the establishment-- because art by it's very nature if it is good is always anti-establishment - we will dump money into the arts...and in the end no great culture will be created - just a lot of creepy cheese eating phoneys living like parasites and patting each other on the back between sips of wine at some pretentious gallery owned by an arts professor - who knows how to apply for money and knows the game.

[normanchateau]

As promised, the government is plowing money back into the Arts Sector - and committing to longer term funding.

Yes, they always keep their promise.

[jdobbin]

Doesn't all this spending stimulate the economy?

I'm sure we are all foursquare behind that....

Except that someone has to pay for the party at some point. The Tories make believe that a growing economy will make it possible not to raise taxes or cut services. That is a very optimistic viewpoint.

[jdobbin]

It will do nothing to attract new voters, and will displease their base, much of which is already less than enthusiastic about them.

The arts funding probably won't draw votes from the people who are in arts. They do however appeal to some people who do vote Tory and support the arts.

The only problem is that the spending announcements come all the time and alienate many other Tories who want fiscal responsibility.

Harper still hasn't found that balance and then there is the issue of trust. A lot of people don't believe he really means it and that as soon as he gets his majority, he will turn on those parts of the economy that he funded earlier.

No one even has to make a claim of a hidden agenda when his own party insiders admit what their intentions are. For example, they are going to say nothing on party financing but will do it again despite how it was regarded the first time they did it.

http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/06/27/harper%...t-big-chance/4/

Whenever the election does come, Harper has one plan in mind for afterward: the elimination of public funding to political parties. A punishing blow to his opponents. Sure, the idea caused a showdown last autumn, the adviser said. “But in retrospect, we should have stuck to our guns. It was strategically smart. It’s still strategically smart. We’re going to run again on it. And we’re going to do it, if we win the next election. It’s coming.”

[Oleg Bach]

No art should be funded - if there are committed artists in all different mediums including performance - let them mass together and gather up their own funding...artists are supposed to be superiour thinkers - correct? I am sure if their art is so great that the whole nation will toss money at them without it having to go through the government...But - people want art ----for nothing.....they want class and don't want to pay for said class. Keep artists poor - that inspires them to greatness - make them suffer - make them starve ----and make them die ----then you can get the art for free..sounds like a plan to me..