A Dangerous Precedent

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7811408.stm

The basic gist of this story is that a Scottish MP (Ian Davidson) is criticising the Scottish Government for pledging (or appearing to pledge, as the facts are being "checked") £17.5m to help secure a painting for a gallery.

I was waiting for these sorts of stories to rear their head. During times when money is tight, the Arts are often squeezed. They are an "invisible" (in terms of political benefits, anyway, since all the Arts are obviously visible), seemingly "useless" area of a Government's responsibility. And so, when people see massive amounts of money being spent on the Arts, they react badly.

Now, it would be hard to argue with Ian Davidson, if the following had happened:

A local authority is receiving £17.5 million to repair a local community facility for children in a deprived area. The Scottish Government takes the £17.5 million from that project, and uses it to buy a painting. Now that is wrong. But I don't think that is what has happened.

The Arts have their own budget, just like every other Government area. Now, whilst we can criticise ways in which the money is spent (and it can be argued that the £17.5m for a painting is a lot), it is important that we don't accidentally set a dangerous precedent.

If every ounce of money spent on the Arts can be analysed and criticised as a waste, just because it is for art and not for (so-called) important areas of Government responsibility, then we're into scary waters. The Arts are famously hard to define, hard to pinpoint as having intrinsic value in and of themselves. The budget for the Arts is often cut in times of economic crisis, because it isn't seen as being as important.

Now, if it is a simple choice between someone starving or a gallery getting a new painting, I'd choose getting food to someone. But nothing in Government is ever that simple. The Arts support our culture, the Arts preserve and refresh what we hold dear, the Arts make us laugh and cry, and have a value that is in many ways immeasurable yet is still vital.

I hope if (when?) things get worse, we don't automatically turn to our cultural strengths and sacrifice them to save money. I think it'd be totally the wrong thing to do.

Post by Ol - opinions not neccessarily those of the student society