Thank you for the question.
I totally agree with what Richard Hornsby said. There is no doubt that we would get more people attending the National Gallery if we were to turn it over to Disney Corporation and fill it full of Mickey Mouse exhibits, but that's not the point. Our taxpayers want to have a national gallery, even though it's full of quality. We don't relegate all European art to the back room between 10 and 3 and fill it full of Disney during the day. We could get more people attending our national parks if we turned the management over to Canada's Wonderland and had McDonald's concessions, but we don't want that.
I think there will always be a relatively small—I hate to use the word—elite taste for the finer things in the arts and culture. I think it's the CBC's job to deal with that, because that's why they get $1.5 billion a year from the taxpayers. If they're not going to deal with it, then they don't need a subsidy; let them compete with Moses Znaimer and Garth Drabinsky and Canada's Wonderland, and all the other people who do the commercial stuff very well.
So yes, there is a core, there is a niche, and I don't think we should worry too much about whether it's 3% or 4% or 2.9%. It just has to be done, as long as we're going to have a CBC.