Open Letter from the BCACG to Minister Rich Coleman

Rich Coleman, Minister for Housing and Social Development (responsible for Gaming)

This damning Open Letter from the British Columbia Association For Charitable Gaming to Minister Rich Coleman concerns the legality of Coleman’s sweeping cuts to charities and non-profits across BC. These organizations include arts and culture organizations. Coleman recently claimed there was no legal agreement with charities, only an “understanding.” This is patently untrue.

Please read the letter. For further information on the legality question and the history of gaming and charities in BC, read the fascinating associated brief. (If you are a serious legal geek, see this on the government’s site.)

What can you do?

1. Post the item to your Facebook profile, and pleas “Like” the BCACG’s Page.
2. If you are a Vancouver resident, *please* sign the petition to Vancouver City Hall!
3. Write to Rich Coleman. Tell him what you think of his cavalier attitude to Gaming funds. The people of British Columbia did not intend Gaming revenues to become a slush fund entirely at his discretion. Remind the Minister, politely of course, that he works for us, not the other way around.

October 15, 2010

Open Letter to Minister Rich Coleman

Dear Minister Coleman,

We write on behalf of the nearly 7000 B.C. charities affected by gaming grants. These groups include the Heart and Stroke Foundation, the Deaf Children’s Society, Surrey Hospice Society, North Shore Rescue Team, Horsefly Volunteer Fire Department, Pacific Post Partum Support Society, Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention Centre, Charlie Lake PAC, Campbell River Minor Hockey, Cerebral Palsy Sport Association, and thousands more worthwhile community causes across B.C.

Our members, tens of thousands of them, are at work 7 days a week, 365 days a year, helping the poor, the weak and vulnerable, the elderly, disabled, the bullied child, sports teams, the arts, refugees and immigrants, and our environment. They man crisis lines, deliver Meals on Wheels, and search for the lost in our mountains and forests. We could not ever afford to buy what our charities and non-profits give us for free. We cannot live without them, and they never stop giving of themselves, no matter how hard it gets.

On Friday, October 15, you were asked to comment on our request to Vancouver City Council to postpone hearing any application to expand the gambling licenses relating to the planned Edgewater Casino redevelopment and expansion, pending the provincial government agreeing to honour its agreement to allocate 33.3% of net gaming revenues to B.C. charities.

You said that there was no agreement, only a letter of understanding, and that you have other bills to pay.

Minister Coleman, you are mistaken.

BC Liberals try to mask the disgrace of BC’s $6.50 per capita spending

BC Liberals MLA Don McRae – deceptive language

It has come to our attention that the BC Liberals are attempting to paper over the embarrassing fact of BC’s last-place position when compared with per capita arts funding in every other province. And they’re doing it with a dishonest abuse of statistics. Most of you know by now that the national provincial arts funding average is $26 per capita. BC is a distant last in Canada at approx. $6.54 per capita. Now, there are other ways of tallying arts funding in each province, and some take into account ALL levels of funding including federal and municipal, as you will see below. The BC Liberals are here doing a very clumsy, blatant version of apples vs. oranges, in an attempt to hide the fact that their provincial funding is glaringly low. And even by their model, adding in all other federal and municipal funding sources, BC is still last. How could it be otherwise, considering the nearly nonexistent provincial funding level? This is a deliberately deceptive communication tactic to say the least.

Here is BC Liberal MLA Don McRae, member of the Standing Committee for Finance that is currently touring BC collecting public submissions for next year’s budget.

Via Hansard:

D. McRae: Well, I just want to preface. I’m a big supporter of the arts and culture, and I’d like to see more dollars go in. But one of the things that we see at this committee oftentimes is the fact that we are spending $6.54 per capita as compared to Alberta. You know, it is lower per capita in that way.

The Arts Research Monitor says that in British Columbia, when you look at all levels of government, we actually spend $194 per person in British Columbia on arts and culture. Now, maybe that’s still not enough, but the reality is that how we delegate our dollars provincially, federally and municipally might be a little bit different if we just look at it on that level.

I don’t know how the municipalities contribute to arts in other jurisdictions. For that reason, I’m a little curious as to how that would level the playing field or not. So if you could provide some information — not today, necessarily — about…. When you take all three levels of government into arts funding, does B.C. really stand far below the rest?

Response from Keith Higgins, President of the Pacific Association of Artist-Run Centres:

“If some members of the finance committee would like to argue that a larger investment by a handful of municipalities somehow absolves the province of responsibility for investment in culture throughout the province, it shows a real lack of responsibility.

The question that comes to mind in response is: Even if the “mix” [federal plus municipal added to provincial] provides adequate investment (and it doesn’t; I’ll come back to that) how exactly is government going to address the Metro/non-Metro disparity in access to culture? If the finance committee would like to find a way to encourage municipalities who are not providing adequate (or any) investment — and there are many — to do so, it would of course be welcomed. If they have some other way to increase federal and private investment, let’s see that strategy.

By the way, the issue of Hill’s Arts Research Monitor that is being referred to is 8:6, November 2009. The complete passage is:

“On a per-capita basis, spending on culture by all levels of government was $266 per Canadian in 2006-07. From highest to lowest, per-capita spending by all levels of government was as follows in each province:

Quebec ($335 per capita);
Prince Edward Island ($272 per capita);
Saskatchewan ($257 per capita);
Ontario ($245 per capita);
Nova Scotia ($234 per capita);
Manitoba ($231 per capita);
Newfoundland and Labrador ($224 per capita);
Alberta ($219 per capita);
New Brunswick ($210 per capita); and
British Columbia ($194 per capita).”

See http://www.hillstrategies.com/docs/ARM_vol8_no6.pdf

Look who is last! So, the quoted statistic is an extremely cynical tactic. I will address this in a written submission to the Finance Committee. Any presenters still scheduled to appear before the committee should be alerted to this.

We should thank MLA Don McRae for raising the Hill Arts Monitor as a reference, since it confirms many arguments that arts presenters have been making, especially that the province’s historically low investment has prevented BC from getting a fair share of investment from federal sources. Read the entire issue at the link above; it’s quite illuminating.

David Diamond’s submission to the BC Finance Committee

David Diamond is the Artistic/Managing Director of BC’s Headlines Theatre. This is his submission to the Standing Committee on Finance, spoken in person to the committee today in the course of its public Vancouver hearing:

To the Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services:

September 16, 2010

Hello, my name is David Diamond and I am the Artistic Director of Headlines Theatre. The best way, I believe, to talk about arts and culture is to make it personal.

One of the reasons I am here because sometime in the last 30 years, Headlines will have done a project in every single one of your constituencies; projects on addiction, family violence, racism, intergenerational conflict, homelessness, gang violence, suicide prevention and many others.

I want to acknowledge off the top that I am very happy that a portion of the money that was cut from Arts and Culture has come back to the BC Arts Council. Let us not think, however, this has solved the problem.

Mr. Les – you came to the opening of Meth, in Sto:Lo Territory – Meth toured into 27 communities across BC and then toured western Canada. I remember you came to me after the show, literally vibrating and said you had never experienced anything like this powerful theatre project on addiction;

Mr. Ralston – you might recall “Here and Now”, on gang violence. It was so deeply embraced by the Indo-Canadian community it was created and first performed inside the Ross Street Temple in Vancouver and then moved to the Surrey Arts Centre;

Mr. Donaldson – I carry a Gitxsan name because of the theatre work over many, many years throughout the Hazelton area – in Kispiox and Gitanmaax in particular.

Mr. Rustad – Street Spirits in PG who do work with at-risk youth, who I am sure you must know, were born directly from a Headlines’ workshop over 10 years ago.

I could go on through all of your constituencies.

(Cont’d….)

Inappropriate outburst by Minister Krueger on CFAX Radio

“I was threatened in a meeting with them in a way that didn’t seem that much different to me than a junkie waving a needle if I was confronted by somebody on skid row who was high. It was just blatant. It was an outright threat. “You give us more money or else.”

Right on the heels of the first positive arts-funding development in a year—yesterday’s announcement of a partial restoration of funds to the BC Arts Council—Kevin Krueger, BC Minister for Tourism Culture and the Arts, has ruined the moment by making his second defamatory, unfounded accusation in a week. Both of Krueger’s statements concern a single, remarkably civil meeting he attended with the Alliance for Arts and Culture late last fall. You can read about that meeting here and decide for yourself, but in short what happened is what would happen with any sector in crisis; the Alliance told the Minister that if funds weren’t restored soon, in order to represent their members they would have to go into the communities to gather support for their cause and prove that voters care about the arts. This was not a threat. It was democracy. And it was delivered cordially and politely. What was a threat was the manner in which Minister Krueger opened the meeting. As the Alliance notes, “Minister Krueger opened that meeting last November by telling us that we should “stand down” our advocacy efforts, and that if we didn’t we could be doing “more harm” to ourselves and our cause. The implications of that comment seemed clear, but we never considered accusing the minister of threatening us.”

As is well known in the arts sector, the Alliance for Arts and Culture, BC’s largest association of arts organizations, has been faultlessly polite and professional with Mr. Krueger. It has conducted itself this way ever since the beginning of this unprecedented arts sector demolition. It’s a fact: the Alliance’s professionalism and even-handedness is a matter of record. This is why Mr. Krueger’s increasingly unstable public outbursts on the subject of his dealings with the Alliance are all the more ludicrous and inexplicable. Rather than being threatening, the Alliance has in fact often come under fire from its own members and the community at large for its remarkably soft approach during a year of emergency. Does Minister Krueger think he is saving face with British Columbians who know nothing of the issue, painting himself as the victim, when in fact what’s he doing is blaming the victim? This is not just dishonest and unethical; it’s getting downright weird. The unfortunate thing is that ever since yesterday’s partial restoration of funds, the arts community and its vocal arts audiences have made a huge effort to applaud the government for a positive first step.  In light of this, to be confronted today with the Minister’s destructive, defamatory and simply bizarre behaviour is particularly galling. Were it not becoming obvious that British Columbians are giving this government’s statements an increasingly skeptical reception, we would be more worried about his remarks. However, it does seem important that we issue a reaction to this kind of unstable, dishonest behaviour from the government. We are trying our level best to take the high road but this Minister seems determined to run us off the road in his own hellbent slide into the ditch. We will not go with him. We have been honest and straight in our dealings with an extremely opaque, uncooperative and high-handed  government, one that has saved no money buy cutting our tiny industrial subsidy, far smaller than other sectors receive, and that has done irreparable damage to . But enough is enough. We’re grateful for yesterday’s small partial restoration, but it must be said that the win did not just come out of the generosity of the government’s heart. It came as a result of many things: Federal Heritage Minister James Moore’s frank criticism of BC arts policy; Jane Danzo’s protest resignation from the BC Arts Council over political interference and cuts; and increasing outrage from regions all over the province on the verge of losing their arts intrastructure as well as the heart of their communities, as well as all our advocacy. If Minister Krueger thinks he can safely defame arts organizations—organizations dealing with him with the utmost professionalism—without losing his job, we think he will find he is mistaken. Full transcript of Minister Krueger’s CFAX interview is below. The arts section of the interview is immediately after the section on the HST:

See also the Georgia Straight article.

CFAX Straight Talk 01-Sep-2010 16:10 Adam Stirling: We are joined by BC’s Minister of Tourism and the Arts, Kevin Krueger. First, Minister Krueger, thanks so much for coming on the show today.

CBC Interview: Kevin Krueger

“Spin” does not begin to describe Minister Krueger’s misrepresentation of facts in this CBC interview. It’s hard to know where to start with the transcript, but let’s begin with the Minister’s representation of his meeting with the Alliance. Present were Minister Krueger, the Alliance for Arts and Culture’s ED Amir Ali Alibhai and an Alliance board member (not their “legal counsel” as Krueger calls her), and twelve or so executive directors of major BC arts organizations. The purpose of the meeting was to try to communicate to the minister the severe infrastructural damage his cuts would soon cause to BC arts and culture. During the meeting the Alliance board member stated that if the disproportionate cuts to arts were not reversed, the Alliance, in support of its members, would be forced to appeal to their huge audience for help, as well as to organize in ridings across the province. Minister Krueger chose to hear a threat and in this interview calls here calls this “extortion.” Clearly this is not extortion, and it’s actually defamatory to say so. What it is, in fact, is the normal course of democracy. Minister Krueger’s attempt to actually criminalize even mild disagreement is anti-democratic. The irony of course is that the Alliance has treated Minister Krueger remarkably politely throughout this whole devastating year. In fact, the Alliance has been so uniformly cordial with the minister that a proportion of the province’s arts organizations, shrinking or dying due to cuts, began asking the Alliance to be much more aggressive with him. Calling the Alliance “vicious” would be comic were it not such a disturbing untruth. What really happened that day? Minister Krueger, whose government had handed down draconian cuts and programs without any adequate consultation with the arts sector or with the BC Arts Council, was patronizing and seemed impervious to the arts sector’s concerns throughout. His communications during what was a multicultural meeting amounted to paternalistic admonishments couched occasionally in quotes from Christian scripture. Yet somehow the assembled arts sector remained civil throughout. That Krueger now claims he was a victim of viciousness indicates that he can dish out draconian cuts but not take dissent; it indicates that he is simply incapable of stewarding this sector. The arrogance of a government that does not consult with sectors before mangling them, and then clamps down on dissent with intimidation and spin, is of course not unique to the arts sector. The HST was rammed through with the same arrogance. It’s interesting that the tourism sector, also under Krueger’s stewardship, was hit with the HST disaster after zero consultation and substandard communication from the same minister.

Secondly, there’s the issue of Minister Krueger’s glaring self-contradiction when he claims ‘we don’t have money for arts’ and then says ‘here’s $30 “new” million over 3 years, if you stop what you’re doing and instead start a February festival in celebratory memory of the Olympics.’ This contradiction has been fully exposed and criticized in the media, yet Krueger dares to keep trotting it out. Of course there is also the related point that this “Spirit Festival” idea amounts to blatant political interference in BC arts and culture. CBC’s Kathryn Gretsinger tries to address this issue in the interview, but Minister Krueger repeatedly skirts it.

Lastly Jane Danzo has made clear to the arts community and the public that she resigned because as Chair of the BC Arts Council she could no longer work under this government’s unbearable political interference. She did not resign—as Minister Krueger unbelievably claims here—because she was finding it hard to be pressured by artists. When she returns from a month’s holiday she will confirm this.

To sum up, Minister Krueger contradicts himself through the interview and plays a dishonest, anti-democratic game, as well as an inept one. Its only virtue is that it so blatantly reveals his hand. Read for yourself. To hear the interview, listen to the CBC podcast.

CBC Early Edition
26-Aug-2010 07:13

Kathryn Gretsinger: The separation of art and state is a debate that we’ve been chewing over for the last week or so. It all began with Jane Danzo. She resigned her position as head of the BC Arts Council last week.

Jane Danzo: It was made very clear, in fact, the board of council has no independent voice from the government, and therefore I believed very firmly that in order to serve actually both government and the arts sector better that I should step down.

Gretsinger: That’s Jane Danzo, the former head of the BC Arts Council.

Today we have the opportunity to hear the government’s side on this story. Kevin Krueger is the provincial minister in charge of tourism, culture and the arts, and he joins me on the line.

Good morning.

Kevin Krueger: Good morning, Kathryn. A warm good morning and hello to all your listeners.

Gretsinger: Thank you very much for taking our call. We do appreciate it. What role, Mr. Minister, do you think the province should play in making decisions about prioritizing arts funding?

Krueger: I think that the relationship with the arts community, arts and culture community around British Columbia, the government and the arts community has been greatly facilitated by the BC Arts Council, and the arrangement is working very well. I have read the transcripts of your interviews with the past and present chair, and I think that they both said that well.

There have been some false allegations that government has stepped in and steered funding to organizations over one another. They both made it very clear. Jane didn’t say that when she resigned. That’s never been true, and she’s been categorical about that, and I appreciate it.

So this is a process that works so well. There are only one or two, generally an average of one complaint per year that go through the full complaint process because it’s a peer review system by juries that are selected from the community in the various disciplines as I know the chairs have outlined to you works well.

Gretsinger: I guess what I want to just make sure of is that there’s a few issues on the table here. One of them has to do with funding and the way that it’s distributed. Another one is to do with the fact that there’s been dramatic cuts to funding. So let’s take them apart individually, if we can. Jane Danzo says that she does not think that the BC Arts Council has enough independence to make decisions outside of the government realm. How do you respond to that criticism?

Krueger: I think that Jane was expressing a profound frustration that she feels in a worldwide recession. That frustration is shared by billions of people around the world, and I’m one of them. It can’t be helped that Canada and British Columbia close to last of all got dragged into this whirlpool of a recession. I think we’ll be out of it faster than anybody else, but in the meantime Jane and I and Mr. Hamilton and all of us in government and in the organizations that work for government, including health authorities, have experienced this barrage of concern, that, “Please don’t cut in our areas because we just can’t stand the cut,” and that’s very legitimate.

Gretsinger: That’s the funding question, though, Mr. Krueger. That’s the funding question. But I’m asking you, first of all, about independence. She does not feel that as the head of the BC Arts Council she had enough independence to speak her mind about what the government was doing with regard to arts funding. Is there a problem with not having people be able to speak freely when they sit on the council?

Krueger: Well, I think that the acting chair, Mr. Stan Hamilton, answered you very clearly on that. If a person wants to be completely free to criticize anything you want, we all have that right. But if you are an organization that is helping to make crucial decisions in a very tough time about where funding goes and you’re heading that organization, then you are trying to do your best, and Jane Danzo is a very competent individual and I think very highly of her, trying to do your best to make sure that you’re doing the best you can for all sides.

Now, if you come out swinging against one of the sides, then you’re not remaining in the role that you were. So she wouldn t do that. She was too ethical to do that. I know that there are some people in the arts and culture community that are actually quite vicious, and they have been grinding on her really hard and on me and on the government and on their MLAs. Jane came to a meeting that I had because I’ve had a lot of round table meetings around the province. We had one in Vancouver where I was actually threatened. It was like an extortion process by the time they got down to their legal representative, summing up what they planned to do if we didn’t come up with more money. She was horrified, and it is hard for a classy, principled, gentle person like her, earnestly trying to do the best for the arts, to put up with that. That group was way over the line.

Gretsinger: Well….

Krueger: Just let me finish. That’s the situation she was in, and she finally reached the point where she is saying if what the arts community really expects from me is full-on advocacy, she’d never attack people like that group did, but she had had enough of that, so she stepped aside to say what she said.

Now, let’s get back to the other half of your question, which is the Olympic legacy funds.

Gretsinger: Yes.

Krueger: This is a marvellous thing.

Gretsinger: And this is something that is causing a lot of concern not just in British Columbia but the Canadian Conference of the Arts is speaking out about this too. If you not only peel back a budget but also provide a smaller budget and then say that it needs to be spent on a certain thing, are you not trying to control the way decisions are made?

Krueger: No, and it…different budget. And I need to…. You’ve given me something else I have to address in asking the question that way. When you say that we have peeled back a budget, that just isn’t true. There’s an appropriation each year to the BC Arts Council to be distributed to artists and arts organizations throughout the province, and they have a lot of clients and that’s what they do. And as I said, they do it very well.

In 2008 we reached our high-water mark so far. I think we’ll get back to doing even better than that, but we were heading for what looked like a $3b surplus, and the government gave a lot of money to the arts and cultural sector, including a $150m permanent legacy fund for the BC 150 celebration. Nobody complained about that, and if they didn’t they have no right to complain about an Olympic legacy fund either, because that is new money.

The fact is we have had to take really tough decisions. The same people who complained bitterly that they aren’t getting as large a grant as they did last year would be furious if they or any of their loved ones, any of their friends couldn’t get the same wonderful health care that everybody else is getting in BC. We have to deal with these urgent needs, health care, education, social services. We have to also try and maintain all of these other relationships and important things we’re doing, and our government has demonstrated very faithfully that arts and culture are very high priority to us. We know they’re integral to who British Columbians are, all of us. They help us deliver health care and education and social services. They’re great economic generators, growth with the multiplier effect and tax revenues.

Gretsinger: How do you ensure, though, that when there are reduced dollars that you make sure that the arts community has independence to decide how that money should be spent?

Krueger: Well, nobody’s thought of a better way than the way it’s being done right now through the BC Arts Council. And again, I know that both Jane Danzo and Stan Hamilton have explained that to you. The fact is we don’t have as much money as we did, but we will, I expect, get back to providing more.

We’re actually providing more than quadruple the amount of annual funding to the arts and culture community than the government we replaced did. People lose sight of that, although not always, because the same round tables will say to me we would never want them back. It was an average of less than $13m a year that the NDP provided.

Gretsinger: All right.

Krueger: We are close to $60m a year.

So I want to answer your question if you’ll let me.

Gretsinger: We’re going to run out of time, though, for this morning, and if you can keep it very short that would be great.

Krueger: You bet. So we had a Cultural Olympiad, never been done before, a three-year Cultural Olympiad leading up to the Olympics, fabulous success. Well, 2.5 million people in total came out to watch the performances and participate, in pay performances and in free performances. We want to keep that spirit alive. We want to grow these arts organizations through their memberships who provide money to them, also through their audiences. The Olympic legacy fund is geared to do that…

Gretsinger: Okay.

Krueger: …and BC’s festivals are just one part of it. There’s a whole lot more. So we should talk again.

Gretsinger: That would be great. Thank you so much for taking our call this morning, and I appreciate your point of view on it.

Krueger: Thank you very much.

Gretsinger: Goodbye for now.

British Columbians deserve better government than this.

Letter to BC MLA Ron Cantelon systematically refutes government’s claims about arts cuts

Letter to MLA Ron Cantelon written by Sandy Garossino, Chair of the Alliance for Arts and Culture Advocacy Committe. Garossino’s letter is in response to Ron’s remarks in the Times-Colonist, Saturday Aug 21, 2010, remarks that indicate he does not have an informed understanding of the way in which BC culture functions. Upon being told that BC arts infrastructure, which has been built up over many decades of volunteer labour, audience support and toil, is being devastated by entirely unnecessary cuts, Cantelon replied “”They [B.C. arts groups] will come back in other incarnations.” Upon which a writer from Summerland on Twitter replied “yes, they will, Ron: as voters.” But to be serious, Cantelon does not grasp what communities all over BC already know: the arts may be key to our identity as a province, but they’re also a business sector like any other and must be treated like one.

Garossino’s response to Ron’s remarks:

Dear Ron,

I have just read your comments about arts cuts in the Victoria Times Colonist.

Normal business practice–which is my background–would strive to achieve proportionality between savings and sacrificed services. Ideally the prudent budget process would seek minimal impact for maximum savings–or the closest thing to it.

In the case of arts cuts, the savings have been negligible–less than one-thousandth of the provincial budget. Yet the inherent structure of the non-profit arts model will result in severe damage across all BC communities. This is a complete inversion of rational governance.

It’s plain that the government believes that the impact will be small, contained, and limited to the arts sector only, rather than the public at large. This belies a failure to grasp what is at stake. Organizations that fail will not reappear. Communities across the province will lose longstanding beloved emblems of their local character.

Chart offers clarity on B.C. Liberal arts cuts

Reprinted from The Georgia Straight, (virtually the only local media outlet consistently covering the near-elimination of all arts funding in BC):

By Charlie Smith
February 11, 2010

Since the last provincial budget was announced on September 1, none of the B.C. Liberal cabinet ministers responsible for arts funding has returned calls from the Georgia Straight to discuss this issue.

Finance Minister Colin Hansen, Tourism, Culture and the Arts Minister Kevin Krueger, and Housing and Social Development Minister Rich Coleman have all gone into hiding.

Fortunately, the NDP Opposition has created a chart that paints a pretty good picture of arts funding in B.C.

The critic for the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and the Arts, Vancouver-West End NDP MLA Spencer Herbert, e-mailed it to the Straight today.

The next provincial budget is scheduled to be unveiled on March 2.

Peter Ladner, publisher of Business in Vancouver, speaks out against the cuts

Here is the full text of Peter Ladner’s article, from its original source at Business in Vancouver:

Liberal-arts cuts are bad for B.C.’s economy
Friday, 11 December 2009

It’s hard to understand what the BC Liberals were thinking when they chose arts and culture to take such a huge hit in the struggle to keep the province on track financially.

Artists talking to businesspeople feel compelled to make the economic case for what they do. Although they’re a sideshow to the real contribution of the arts, those numbers are impressive: a payback of $1.05 to $1.36 for every dollar invested; $12 in economic spinoffs for every dollar spent on the arts. My experience is that the small amount of money contributed by the province leverages not just matching funding but thousands of volunteer and unpaid hours from people who care passionately about what they do, building the social capital that is vital to any place that purports to be “the best place on Earth.”

There is a bigger financial picture, too.

The arts are the infrastructure for a creative economy. Why would we be lowering taxes to attract new businesses and mobile employees, especially in the burgeoning new- media industries, while we undermine the performing artists and organizations that feed those industries and pull creative people into this province?

“By reinventing our province as a cultural centre in the world … we … effectively distinguish our cultural identity in the global economy in ways that would ensure B.C.’s continued prosperity,” said PUSH Festival director Norman Armour. “To the province’s young professionals – emerging artists, administrators and technicians – who are now considering, as I did 20 years ago, the difficult, life-determining decision of whether they should lay down roots here, stick it out or simply pack up and leave – what can I say?”

After touring the province, one of the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services’ 49 recommendations was to “make funding of the arts a high priority in the 2010-11 budget by returning to overall actual funding levels of 2008-09.”

That would bring it up to 1/20th of 1% of the total budget.

The government argues that it gave the B.C. Arts Council $150 million last year in a big-burst endowment intended to provide stable funding for the future. The problem is that the proceeds, expected to be $7.5 million a year, are at half that amount because of low returns. The same problem is afflicting foundations that support the arts, with at least one liquidating its capital to keep money flowing to arts organizations that would otherwise disappear.

Provincial funding to the arts is down 50% this year. Approximately 85% to 90% of the cuts are scheduled for 2010-11 – from $47 million to $3 million – and that’s from a starting point of contributing only 7% of operating budgets of performing-arts organizations, the lowest in Canada, where the average is almost twice that.

The 2010 Olympic Games rings a hollow bell with its rich cultural festivities and promises to lure tourists, framed as they are by the gutting of performing-arts support.

Housing and Social Development Minister Rich Coleman said his priority for gambling revenue is support for low-income, disabled and at-risk people.

“So often we talk about children at risk and the vulnerable in our society,” said Yulanda Faris, arts philanthropist, chair of the Vancouver Opera Foundation, honorary chair of Judith Marcuse Dance Projects, at a recent rally. “The arts have the force and the dynamism to help everyone across the board: rich, poor, sick, whomever. We have the tools and we are part of the solution.”

Bob D’Eith, executive director of the Music BC Industry Association, tells the story of Winston Churchill’s finance minister asking to cut arts funding to support the Second World War effort.

“Then what are we fighting for?” was Churchill’s response.

Peter Ladner ( pladner@biv.com) is a founder of Business in Vancouver and a former Vancouver city councillor.

Note:

Peter Ladner’s article provides a great set of briefing notes for anyone willing to call or write their MLAs. Have you ever called your MLA? It’s surprisingly easy to do, and probably more effective than even writing a personal letter. Now that the BC legislature is out of session until late January, the MLAs are back in their constituency offices in their home ridings. You can call and talk to them, or go in and visit. If they’re not in, you can leave a message. They’re your MLAs – they must respond to you. Please make it clear to them in rational terms what these cuts are going to mean for your community, both economically and socially. Thank you!

Transcript of Radio Interview with Minister Krueger, Tuesday, Dec 1

“It’s not that we cut. It just isn’t there.”

This quote is from  the transcript below of the radio interview Arts Minister Krueger gave very recently in Kamloops. Krueger makes the point, among other very questionable points, that the BC Liberals have not cut the arts. We’ll examine some of the inaccuracies and misleading statements in a later post, but here’s the full transcript now, for the record:

Kevin Krueger, Minister of Tourism, Culture and the Arts, joins Claude Richmond – CHNL Kamloops – The Jim Harrison Show – 9:35 AM, Tuesday, December 1, 2009

Claude Richmond: We’re privileged to have Kamloops–South Thompson MLA and Minister of Tourism, Culture and the Arts, the Hon. Kevin Krueger. Kevin, welcome to the program.

Kevin Krueger: Thank you, Claude, and a warm good morning to all of your listeners.

Richmond: Thanks. Let’s remind all of our listeners that if you wish to talk to Kevin on any topic, now’s your chance to put him on the hot seat.

Kevin, you’ve been through quite a few legislative sessions. What did you think of this one? I just want to get your take on just a few highlights and/or lowlights of this past session.

Krueger: Well, I think it’s really great that British Columbia — although the whole world is in the grip of the worst recession we’ve experienced in my lifetime — is doing better than everyone else and is about to host the largest celebration of 2010, the Olympics. My ministry is fully engaged in preparing for the economic benefits that will flow from the Olympics.

“Arts Cuts Memo” contest submission is a striking data visualization

This entry in the Arts Cuts Memo contest – a competition to see who can make the most creative memo to the government out of yellow sticky notes – was designed by Sharon Kahanoff. She submitted this explanation: “Just so you know, my yellow sticky has been accurately rendered to reflect 1/20th of 1% of the budgetary whole that is the paper, and of course this figure is before the cuts. It took me longer to do the math than to make the drawing, and I think I’m prouder of the math than the drawing.” When the little arts funding sticky note says “after the cuts I will be too small to see,” it’s not kidding. To read more about why these cuts make no social or economic sense, click here.