RE-BUDGET SUBMISSION TO THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE

September 2002

CREATIVITY IS THE DRIVING FORCE OF ECONOMIC GROWTH

The Canadian Conference of the Arts is grateful to the Standing Committee on Finance for an opportunity to submit a brief on behalf of our members.  Founded in 1945, the CCA has developed over the intervening decades into a strong and coherent voice for the Canadian cultural community, representing approximately 250,000 artists and cultural workers across the country.

This year, 2002, the federal government is carrying out a major review of the Status of the Artist legislation which received Royal Assent in June 1992.  Under Status of the Artist, the Government of Canada recognizes:

. the importance of the contribution of artists to the cultural, social, economic and political enrichment of Canada;
. the importance to Canadian society of conferring on artists a status that reflects their primary role in developing and enriching Canada's artistic and cultural life, and in sustaining Canada's quality of life;
. the role of the artist, in particular to express the diverse nature of the Canadian way of life and the individual and collective aspirations of Canadians;
. that artistic creativity is the engine for the growth and prosperity of dynamic cultural industries in Canada; and
. the importance to artists that they be compensated for the use of their works, including the public lending of them.

This legislation was a long time coming.  As early as 1951, the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters, and Sciences (the Massey-Lévesque Commission report) stated that "One measure of the degree of civilization attained by a nation might fairly be the extent to which the nation's creative artists are supported, encouraged and esteemed by a nation as a whole".  In 1980, Canada signed the UNESCO recommendation on the status of the artist (the Belgrade Recommendation), urging signatory states to adopt a broad range of policy development, including funding, training, professional status for artists and access to social programs.  The Applebaum-Hébert Report of the Federal Cultural Policy Review Committee concluded, in 1982, that in 30 years, despite their overwhelming contribution to Canadian life, artists' living conditions remain virtually unchanged: "The income of many, if not most, of these artists classifies them as highly-specialized, working poor".

It is a sad commentary that, a further two decades along, life for many of Canada's artists remains difficult despite proposals for constructive changes from ourselves and many other organizations and individuals.  There is still much to do before the broader objectives set out in the Status of the Artist legislation come close to achieving equity under the law for Canadian artists.  In this brief, the CCA , speaking on behalf of Canada 's arts community also wishes to address the crucial role of federal government in supporting the overall sustainability of the cultural sector.

HOW CAN CANADA BEST ASSURE GREATER LEVELS OF ECONOMIC PROSPERITY WIDELY SHARED BY ALL CANADIANS?

There is nothing more basic, more intrinsic to human life, than the culture of a people.  Art has been used as a primary means of communication since the time people first walked the earth and, consequently, is the primary legacy we bestow on future generations.

What we most remember are the glories of each era's art.  A few tiny ivory artefacts depicting birds, fish, and animals remain as mute testimony to an extinct people who inhabited the Arctic region of Canada thousands of years ago.  Prior to the written word, Canada 's aboriginal peoples used storytelling and visual arts and cr af ts as a means of passing on their rich cultural heritage and traditions, myths and legends. 

In the same way, the awesome cave paintings of Lascaux, the treasures of Tutankamun, the frescoes of Santorini, and the ancient structures at Angkor Wat or Machu Picchu all form part of our collective heritage, and we are the richer for them.  Today Canadians celebrate internationally renowned artists of the calibre of Karen Kain, Paul Gross, Colm Feore, Frank Gehry, Jane Urquhart, Janet Cardiff, Luc Plamondon, Atom Egoyan, Menaka Thakkar, John Kimura Parker,  Zacharias Kunuk, Denis Arcand, and Alexina Louie - the list goes on and on.  As a nation, we are delighted to acknowledge and celebrate these people once they have "made it", to claim them as Canadian, but we seem reluctant to do much to recognize and support them while they are emerging and developing as artists.

Culture and the arts are a basic, over-exploited but under-funded resource.  To quote from an impassioned speech made by Nova Scotian playwright and actor, Carol Sinclair as the provincial government moved to close down its arms-length arts council:

"[Culture] is cleaner than coal, less prone to obsolescence than steel plants, less expensive to extract than offshore oil and gas, and less of a gamble than hydroelectric power.  And it is a renewable resource....  Talent is the only resource that enhances the value of other resources."

Income Averaging
Canada 's professional artists, as primary creators, are at the very heart of all our cultural and artistic activity.  These immensely gifted and talented people work tirelessly to perfect their cr af t - be they musicians, dancers, visual artists, actors, writers, singers or professionals in any other arts discipline.  The table below tells a sad story regarding the meagre incomes they realise from their creative work, which usually have to be supplemented by other, non-cultural work.  

Average Employment Income of Artists and other Occupations

*It should be noted that The Writers' Union of Canada's 1998 survey of writers reported an average net professional income as only $11,480 (total income minus deductible expenses).
** The Mills report went on to say that these salaries could be expected to double over the next four years, ie: by 2002.

Most Canadians feel ashamed, when confronted with these statistics, to learn that our country serves its arts workforce so poorly.  It should be noted, moreover, that very few artists work full-year, full-time in their chosen professions as projected in the census figures shown.  (In addition, many artists practising non-Western art forms are frequently not captured in government statistics at all.)  Most professional artists and creators are primarily self-employed, with incomes that are unpredictable and which usually fluctuate dramatically from year to year.

[We would point out here that such low incomes are not restricted to artists and creators in the cultural community.  A study currently underway at the CCA indicates that cultural managers also suffer from low salaries, poor - if any - benefits, and overwork.  Attracting a new generation of managers into the cultural community is becoming a serious problem.  As most are not self-employed, their plight is not one which is addressed directly in this brief but it is a situation endemic to the cultural community and one which we are anxious to resolve.  The CCA and its partners are undertaking a study of the compensation levels of arts managers, which will form part of our pre-Budget submission in the next budget round. ]

Self-employment is not confined to the cultural sector; it also "accounted for half of all the new jobs created in Canada since 1989".  Contrary to public belief, self-employment does not confer automatic perks on those individuals who practise it.  Yes, various reasonable expenses can be claimed against income earned, but the long hours, low pay, lack of job security, benefits, or pensions, make it an act of courage to join the arts workforce and there are few opportunities for professional development.

Obviously, a request for a considerable increase to the budget of the Canada Council for the Arts could partially resolve this issue (see Recommendation 5).  However, subsidy is only one of the essential tools of cultural policy: tax regulation is another.  Given the large and ever-increasing numbers of self-employed in Canadian society, the CCA would like to suggest a regulatory solution: a return to income back averaging for all self-employed individuals in this country .  To quote from Price Waterhouse Coopers' Canadian Tax News: "In any progressive system of income taxation, fairness would seem to dictate that there should be some form of income averaging.... There are many other sources of income that may be received sporadically (authors or artists come to mind) and it seems unfair that a large income in one year (that may have been many years in the making) should fall prey to high marginal rates without some relief.  Various forms of income averaging have been tried over the years and then discarded, presumably because of administrative difficulties.  But the answer is not to say that income-averaging is too hard to administer.  Rather, the challenge is to develop a system that is administratively feasible."

Long-serving members of the Standing Committee on Finance will recognize this theme of income averaging as one which the CCA has been developing for the past several years.  And we are not the only ones.  Since 1981, when income averaging was repealed, cogent arguments have emerged from several sectors of the economy urging the reintroduction of this mechanism.  Many reports deal specifically with the situation of artists, like the 1987 guide to proposed changes in the tax treatment of artists compiled by the Canada Council.  It listed five separate government task forces and special committee reports.  On the issue of income averaging for artists, they appear to have been unanimous:

"We recommend that the Income Tax Act be amended to allow an artist whose chief source of income involves artistic endeavours to elect to average income in five-year blocks."
(The Canadian Artist and the Income Tax Act, February 1984, 5.0)

"That the government develop an averaging system for taxpayers with fluctuating incomes that will be available for those whose marginal rate of tax is below the maximum.  This system should not involve an initial increase in cash payable."
Report of the Sub-Committee on the Taxation of Visual
and Performing Artists (Fisher), June 1984, 26.

"Artists should be allowed to average their incomes on a five-year basis for income tax purposes."
Funding of the Arts in Canada to the year 2000: The report of the Task Force on the
Funding of the Arts (Bovey), June 1986, 58a).

"We recommend that the Income Tax Act be amended to permit the artist to average that part of his or her income which is derived from artistic work over a period of five (5) years, as is now provided for specific occupational categories within the Act."
The Status of the Artist - Report of the Task Force
(Siren/Gélinas), August 1986, 5.

"That the Income Tax Act be amended to extend to professional artists the right to use block averaging and the modified accrual basis of accounting as is currently given to farmers and fishermen."
Taxation of Artists and the Arts (Standing Committee on
Communications and Culture), January 1987, 4.

A report prepared by consultant E Jane Condon in June 1993, stated that there were seven principal recommendations which appear repeatedly in reports on fiscal issues and the arts from 1986 on, one of which is "That some form of income stabilization or averaging for artists be established".

In June 1997, in Paris , a conference held by UNESCO reported that "... Income averaging for artists over several years is practised in several countries ( Germany , Denmark , the Netherlands , Greece , France , the United Kingdom , and Luxembourg )...".

In December 1997, a report prepared for the Department of Canadian Heritage by Price Waterhouse stated: "The Department of Canadian Heritage was aware that income averaging had been eliminated and recognized that some individuals were still exposed to the tax inequity related to fluctuating income.  Canadian Heritage therefore suggested to the Department of Finance that income averaging be considered as an option for tax reform.  Finance's response indicated that more analysis may be required, and that they were looking at certain averaging provisions...."  As this report points out, "it is not just self-employed artists, but all self-employed individuals, who are exposed to greater income volatility as compared to individuals who are employed.  In addition ... the self-employed do not have the same access to the social s af ety net, such as Employment Insurance.  This additional economic vulnerability further supports some measure to improve the fairness of the tax system for the self-employed".  

The Standing Committee on Finance itself has recommended income averaging; in its 1999 report it stated: "The Committee therefore continues [ CCA emphasis] to recommend that the government consider the introduction of income averaging for those forms of income that fluctuate substantially from year to year".

The CCA wonders how much more analysis the Department of Finance requires; it is hoped that with a new minister at the helm, the Department will look more favourably on the issue.  Direct requests to the Department of Finance have been met with the repeated answer that fewer tax brackets and lower marginal tax rates make income averaging virtually unnecessary.  Departmental officials have stated that if only artists would stock up their RRSPs in fat years, they would manage to get through the lean ones with ease.  This indicates a profound misunderstanding of the issues, namely:
. The low incomes experienced by most artists severely limit their ability to contribute to RRSPs at all. 
. Artists who spend years in the creation process, and finally enjoy some financial rewards at the end, "cannot make a substantial RRSP contribution in the high income year because maximum allowable RRSP contributions are based on the previous year's earned income".
. In that third year, the artist would be required to pay tax at a considerably higher rate, "leaving less disposable income to be invested in an RRSP in the subsequent, lower income, year when the maximum allowable contribution will be higher".

A lose/lose situation all around.

The CCA respectfully submits the following recommendation for the Standing Committee's consideration:

Employer/employee vs. contractor relationships
This year the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA) is examining what constitutes an employer-employee relationship between performing arts companies and the artists they engage.  However, the four tests set out by CCRA are poorly suited to the peculiarities of self-employment in the cultural sector.  For example, orchestral musicians might have to pay in the tens of thousands of dollars for their "tools" in order to make a very modest living; orchestras do not, with few exceptions (percussion), pay for musicians' instruments.  There are few other employment relationships that require the employee to make such an investment in order to belong to the organization.  Artists are required to spend much unpaid and unsupervised time keeping up their cr af t (ie: hours of daily practising or rehearsing for musicians, exercise and stretching for dancers, voice and body exercises for actors) in order to be always ready to secure work in the arts.  They act as contractors partly because most need to secure work from numerous engagers to make ends meet.

At the present time, several national arts service organizations (including the Canadian Conference of the Arts) are involved in discussions with CCRA regarding self-employment status as it applies to artists, particularly those who contract their services to performing arts companies.  All are attempting to resolve the ambiguities which exist without negative impact on the community (companies being deemed to be employers and thus being required to contribute significant back contributions for EIC and CPP, or artists losing their right to collective bargaining).  The danger here is that a change of status from self-employed to employer/employee could seriously jeopardize both artists and arts organizations in the performing arts sector - a sector that is already impoverished and facing severe financial and human resources problems.  While we are aware that the government of Canada does not intend to bankrupt its performing arts sector, the financial burden imposed by the contemplated change could be disastrous for some arts organizations.  Discussions with CCRA are ongoing and we are hopeful that a mutually acceptable settlement can be reached.  This is, however, an indication of how government policy as it relates to self-employment issues may be equal but not necessarily equitable.

We remain hopeful that the various government departments can work together to resolve the current ambiguities inherent in the legislation without undue negative impact to those in the cultural community.

A further concern is the lack of any sort of social s af ety net for self-employed individuals. 
Subsequent to a presentation made in March 2001 before another parliamentary Standing Committee, this one on Human Resources Development, two recommendations based on the CCA 's arguments were included in the final report:
"Recommendation 8:
In view of the growing incidence of self-employment in the Canadian labour market, the Committee recommends that the government consider developing a framework for extending EI coverage, both in terms of regular and special benefits, to self-employed workers."

 "Recommendation 9:
The Committee recommends that the government consider extending better EI coverage to workers employed in both paid and self-employment.  In the event that the government does not extend coverage to self-employed workers, a premium refund should be provided to those who work in insurable employment but are unable to establish a claim because they are also self-employed."

The government's response to these recommendations was:
"EI coverage for the self-employed through regular benefits has always presented a policy challenge....  No less challenging is the diversity among the self-employed....  The Government would welcome further study by the Standing Committee on support to the self-employed."

In other words, the Department of Human Resources Development hit the ball back into the Standing Committee's court.  Yet another parliamentary Committee, that on Canadian Heritage, has also commented on this issue in the recent past.  In its report entitled A Sense of Place - A Sense of Being , it stated:
"The Canadian system of health insurance, unemployment insurance, labour law and pension programs is based largely on the assumption that most of the work force is made up of employees rather than self-employed persons ....  The Committee therefore considers the clarification of the rights and obligations of the self-employed to be of central importance."

While we realize the pre-Budget hearings of the Standing Committee on Finance are not necessarily the best place to bring up such an issue, CCA is hopeful that some pressure from another quarter might break the logjam and provide a strong indication that the issue of self-employment and how best to address it in a fair and equitable manner, is one which needs serious and immediate examination.

Tax Exemption on Artistic Income
A further measure which would provide some tax relief for Canada's beleaguered artists would be an annual income tax exemption on artistic income.  Without our artists and creators, where would Canada be?  Most Canadians are more aware of the cultural industries which have built up over the past years: music and sound recording, book and periodical publishing, broadcasting, films and videos.  But surprisingly few remember that all these mega industries, with their multi-million dollar budgets, turn on the creative talents of individual artists: the writers, composers, painters and sculptors, choreographers and performers.  The ability of our cultural industries "to create an enduring place in our lives is dependent on the creativity and talent of Canada's artists, creators and producers...".   By the very nature of their work, "... the largest subsidy to the cultural life of Canada comes not from governments, corporations or other patrons, but from the artists themselves, through their unpaid or underpaid labour" .

As a first step, the CCA would recommend the introduction of an annual income tax exemption on copyright income only, as currently exists in the province of Quebec.  This was initially proposed in a Private Members' Bill a couple of years ago.  In Quebec, artists and creators were originally entitled to an annual income tax exemption on copyright income on a sliding scale up to $30,000; the upper limit has now been raised to $60,000.

HOW CAN THE GOV ERN MENT ENSURE THE HIGHEST
QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL?

Canada's cultural community is a major contributor to and participant in ensuring our quality of life remains at a high standard.  As mentioned at the outset of this brief, this is clearly stated in the Status of the Artist legislation.

Our lives would be bleak indeed without the constant joy and intellectual stimulation we derive from cultural products and activities.  And the arts af fect us and our communities in other ways as well: use of arts-infused learning techniques in the education system stimulates learning; hospitals use the arts to comfort the ill and engage the elderly and young; the preservation of our cultural built heritage revitalizes declining neighbourhoods; participation in arts centred projects helps youth at risk; university business programmes teach improvisational theatre techniques to help students think more creatively; Canada's arts and culture are proven drawing cards for millions of foreign tourists, as well as for our own population - the list of examples of the arts working within our communities is endless.

Another important example is that businesses looking to locate in a new area take several factors into account  A Maclean's article called Saving Our Cities (June 3, 2002) wrote: "International firms are seeking clean, s af e locales with skilled workers, efficient transportation and cultural and recreational amenities."   And the skilled workers these firms seek are those with creativity, innovation, the ability to solve problems, communication skills. These are all attributes which apply to artists, cultural workers and to those fortunate adults who have had the benefit of arts infused education in their early years.

Emergence of a New Class
CCA 's 2001 submission was entitled "On the Edge of a Revolution" - a quote from Ken Robinson, Chair of the National Advisory Committee (UK) on Creative and Cultural Education.  The revolution he was describing was from the impact and change new technologies are having on all our economies.  Revolutions result in the emergence of a new class of people - and Richard Florida's new book describes the rise of a new social group he calls the "Creative Class".  As he says "Because creativity is the driving force of economic growth, in terms of influence the Creative Class has become the dominant class in society." 

One index Florida came up with to measure the density of artists, writers and performers in any given area (his Bohemian Index) led him to conclude that "... rather than being driven exclusively by companies, economic growth was occurring in places that were tolerant, diverse and open to creativity - because these were places where creative people of all types wanted to live".

So who makes up this new Creative Class?  And what exactly do they do?  According to Florida, they encompass "all colours, genders and personal preferences" , and they are "primarily paid to create".   It would seem logical, therefore, for governments at all levels - federal, provincial and municipal - to encourage and nurture the creative spark in everyone.  To bring this argument full circle, the Canadian Conference of the Arts sees government investment in Canada's artists and creators, and in the arts and cultural sector, as providing both improved economic prosperity and increased quality of life to all Canadians. 

More Needs to be Done
With its increased funding to the cultural sector announced in May 2001 under the rubric Tomorrow Starts Today , the federal government recognized the centrality of the arts and culture by investing some $560 million over 3 years, a sum which went a long way towards restoring funds which had been withdrawn during previous cutbacks.  This level of funding must be sustained and more needs to be done.  In addition to the recommendations already outlined in this submission, we believe there are several important steps which need to be taken to fully provide Canadian artists, creators and cultural workers, and the cultural industries which depend on them, with the moral and financial support necessary to ensure a vibrant, cultural and economically sustaining way of life:
. a coherent, all-encompassing federal cultural policy
. increased funding to the Canada Council for the Arts
. adequate, stable, multi-year funding to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and other federal cultural agencies and institutions
. amendments to the Copyright Act that reward creativity, and advance and protect the economic and moral rights of creators and copyright owners
. amendments to the Status of the Artist legislation to guarantee the economic livelihood of Canada's artists through improved access to social benefits
. development of programs and funding levels to respond to the needs of Canada's aboriginal artists and artists of colour, as well as emerging artists and organizations, and those artists practising non-Western art forms
. development of programs and strategies to attract and retain the next generation of cultural managers, particularly in the non-profit sector.  

Update Designation of Charities
As members of the Standing Committee on Finance are no doubt aware, the current legislation which governs charities in Canada is based on 400 year old laws from Great Britain - hardly keeping up with the times! 

Charitable status is extremely important to not-for-profit arts organizations.  It provides them with greater latitude when applying for funding (access to foundations), bestows respectability in the eyes of the public, is a useful tool for fund-raising, etc.  However, inconsistencies abound in the criteria of what a charity can and cannot do: for example there is a very fine line between "education" and "advocacy"; contributions to political parties trigger greater tax benefits than those to other charitable groups; businesses are encouraged to lobby but charitable organizations are penalized for doing so; and so on. 

In her speech at the launch of the Voluntary Sector Initiative, Lucienne Robillard, President of the Treasury Board and Chair of the Reference Group, stated "We need to do more - as a government and as society as a whole to support these individuals and the organizations they serve, because they contribute, without hesitation, to maintaining our social, economic and cultural fabric."    Now, in the last year of this important government-sector initiative, it is time to act on the recommendations which are coming forward to improve the capacity and effectiveness of the voluntary sector's work.

Increasingly, over the past few years, governments have downloaded various social services onto the backs of charities and not-for-profit organizations.  Given the proper financing and support, these organizations might have been able to pick up the slack without too much trouble.  But, as a new report remarks: "In the face of rising public demands for services and declining revenues, governments began to cast about for alternative means of providing services more efficiently.....  off-loading services to voluntary organizations provided an attractive alternative....  However, expanded responsibilities were not always balanced with new resources."

The CCA supports the stand set out by the Canadian Centre of Philanthropy in this regard in its submission to the Standing Committee on Finance, and would urge that the federal government "recognize that all of the non-partisan public policy work, public education and awareness initiatives, and policy advocacy that is undertaken by charities in furtherance of their recognized charitable objects (or purposes) is not 'political activity', but is 'charitable activity' that enriches our society and our democracy....  Any serious effort to strengthen Canada's democratic system must allow charities to speak out on matters related to the charitable purposes for which they are registered, provided that their advocacy is non-partisan and remains 'incidental' (ie: does not become a purpose in itself)."

There is much Canada could learn from other countries - alternative models exist in the United States, Great Britain, Australia and a host of other countries - and in this regard we would draw the Standing Committee's attention to the research carried out by the Institute for Media, Policy, and Civil Society (IMPACS), based in Vancouver. 

NASO Designation
CCA is a registered national arts service organization (NASO), a deemed charity under the Income Tax Act, and as such it believes passionately that a healthy not-for-profit sector is invaluable to our communities.   In its 1995 study on arts service organizations, CCA defined them as "organizations ... founded and directed by their members, who are professional creators, interpreters, producers, distributors/disseminators and/or conservers in the arts and cultural sector, to serve the collective interests of the membership, the constituency and the public."   The criteria for designation as a NASO (upon the recommendation of the Department of Canadian Heritage to CCRA) is currently extremely restrictive and the number of organizations which have been granted NASO status to date remains very small.  Some groups which would on the surface appear eligible for NASO status have been refused on the grounds that their work is primarily advocacy - a reiteration of the conundrum referred to earlier.  This is a particular "Catch 22" for arts organizations, as illustrated in this quote from the CCA 's "Portrait of Canadian Arts Service Organizations in 1999": "[Revenue Canada] particularly did not like the fact that we advise governments on policy and openly indicate we do advocacy.  This is particularly frustrating when facing federal MPs who tell me we (the arts) have to lobby more (this happened most recently at the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage roundtables)."

At the November 2001 Chalmers Conference, an annual forum of arts service organizations convened by the CCA , the issue of charities and charitable status was discussed in some detail.  As a result of these discussions, the participants cr af ted a resolution, with the full support of those present.  CCA is making this resolution its eighth recommendation of this submission:

CCA would add to this recommendation that consideration be given to reviewing the legislation governing NASO designation to make it more inclusive.

In a recent meeting with Elinor Caplan, the Minister responsible for the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, she promised voluntary sector representatives that the CCRA would produce new dr af t guidelines on "political activities" by September 2002.  The hope is that these may narrow the definition of "political activities" sufficiently that much of what charitable organizations want to do (in advocacy and public policy development) will no longer be classified as "political activity" and therefore registered organizations, including NASOs, will not risk losing their charitable status by doing important advocacy work such as appearing before committees like this one. We urge committee members to monitor this issue and to assist us in our efforts to lift the limits on the amount of advocacy that charitable organizations, arts and others, may do.

Change Back to Core Funding
In addition to decreasing public sector support to the cultural sector over the past decade, the type of support provided has changed in small but very significant ways.  To quote again from "The Nonprofit Sector and Government in a New Century":

"With the explicit objective of exercising greater influence over the delivery of services by nonprofit agents, governments are shifting explicitly to a policy of project funding, simultaneously moving away from the core funding that has been the lifeblood of many organizations in the past....  Their dependence on external funding forces them to adapt to the changing funding environment in ways that can change (often for the worse) the very nature of their organizations....  Greater reliance on contract and project funding may result in a loss of control by boards as government contract officers and project sponsors become the main target of accountability....  The management of projects and contracts, as opposed to core funding, can lead many nonprofit organizations to devote a disproportionate amount of time and resources to meeting more extensive monitoring, reporting, and evaluation requirements."

In the wake of various "scandals" within government (HRDC project monies, sponsorships delivered through Public Works), many small cultural organizations have been hit very hard.  The sheer volume of accountability measures currently required is out of all proportion to the (usually quite small) amounts of money involved.  In addition, there are now so many people examining each contract and contribution agreement in an effort to ensure due diligence on the government side, that the delay in receiving any funding has jeopardized the sustainability of many arts organizations, large and small.  Cultural organizations are having to look increasingly to lines of credit and loans to tide them over, something not all financial institutions are willing to extend.  Better and more efficient ways of providing public sector funding to the cultural sector (and others) while still ensuring proper accountability and reporting practices must be developed immediately.

We would like to close with an account from a very small, under-funded community organization in India .  Apparently, in that country, even small voluntary organizations include a theatre company.  An individual from one organization was explaining to a group of visiting Canadian students that the presence of artists helps deliver the messages while reminding people of the value of the arts.  This is how it was expressed: "How else do you show people that if they manage to get out of poverty, there's something worth living for?"