Taking the ‘art’ out of ‘partisan’

I am writing in response to Stephen McCreary’s article entitled “Who hates the arts?” I object to Mr. McCreary’s thinly veiled partisan whining, not just as someone McCreary would likely sneeringly label an “average left-wing know-it-all” but also on a factual basis. McCreary’s article is entirely factually amiss.

McCreary asserts that the Conservatives have actually increased arts spending, only cut what doesn’t matter and that Stephen Harper and his party do in fact love the arts. Therefore according to McCreary, the issue is an untrue fabrication of underhanded Liberal election politics.

However, McCreary is blind to the real issue. It is important to understand how the federal government defines cultural programs when using federal government statistics to support your claim that the Conservatives have increased arts spending. In fact, according to the CBC, cultural programs include: movies, museums, sports, the Olympic games, language training for immigrants, the Heritage Department, the Canadian Council for the Arts, the CBC, the National Filmboard and Telefilm. The CBC also cites that the Conservative government budget for arts and culture is $3.3 billion, and is just under $3.3 billion for next year, so it is in fact decreasing.

The more significant point is that it’s necessary to consider how the funding is being allocated. With such a broad definition of “culture,” it is easy for the government to claim that they support the arts. The reality is however that funding for traditional arts and culture has gone down, while areas such as sports have seen an increase in funding. Under the current Conservative government, traditional arts and culture (so, for example, the theatre so loved by Stephen Harper’s wife) is profoundly affected by a redistribution of arts funding. This change in emphasis is hidden on the surface by the government’s broad definition of culture.

The true fact of the matter is that local artists are suffering. Our very own Royal Winnipeg Ballet (RWB) was hit by significant cuts this year that will severely limit their touring plans. This is a ballet company that tours all over the country, continent and world. The RWB brings the arts to a wide cross-section of people and represents our city through world-renowned performances. This is a ballet company that performs free shows every summer to ensure that everyone has access to the arts. This is a ballet company that cares about ordinary people just as much as ordinary people care about it. Did the RWB deserve to have their funding cut, McCreary?

Stephen Harper seems to think that his cuts to traditional arts and culture are justified because these areas are something that ordinary working people don’t care about. Harper’s stance, as quoted in the Globe and Mail, is that “when ordinary working people come home, turn on the TV and see a gala of a bunch of people, you know, at a rich gala all subsidized by taxpayers claiming their subsidies are high enough when they know those subsidies have actually gone up, I’m not sure that’s something that resonates with ordinary people.” What Harper has found is that his stance has resonated in a strongly negative way with ordinary Canadians. What Harper has found is that he is out of touch with how ordinary Canadians feel. Conservatives are now dealing with this backlash by accusing the Liberals of fabricating an issue . This is what I suspect is at work in Stephen McCreary’s rantings. However, insulting Stéphane Dion and left-wingers does not hide the reality that ordinary Canadians are furious that their prime minister is re-allocating funds from the traditional arts. And all this in an entirely misguided attempt to reflect what ordinary Canadians supposedly care about.

It’s all well and good that Harper is such a gentle, arts-loving, piano playing soul, but he doesn’t depend on the arts to make a living, now does he? In fact, the support for the arts on the part of the PM and his wife really has no bearing on this matter. The support of both the Harpers would likely fall under the elitist category that Harper regards to be the only grouping that actually cares about the arts anyway. And I’m glad that McCreary can pat himself on the back for supporting and helping the arts community “more than the average left-wing know-it-all does,” but until he can back his argument up with real evidence and facts, I could care less. The individual and limited support of the Harpers and McCreary is no doubt appreciated by the arts community. But without the funding to back that up, the “relatively miniscule” cuts. McCreary refers to are having a critical impact on how the arts community in Canada is able to function.

Maybe McCreary doesn’t need the government’s help in supporting the arts he likes, but he should take the time to look beyond his partisan blinders and try to understand that perhaps the rest of the arts community does need that government support. Maybe McCreary doesn’t hate the arts, but he should try to avoid letting his hate of anyone that is not a Conservative guide his argument into unsubstantiated territory.

Dayna Steinfeld is a fourth-year honours history student who already has her tickets for the RWB’s upcoming production of Carmina Burana.