I guess one of the complaints that people have with the federal department is the level of scrutiny, when there is scrutiny. Sometimes in arts programs it seems to take more than a year to get money out the door. Yet we have the Canada Council, which is at arm's length, as you say, and allows you to look very good and never take a partisan hit.
The question I would have is why not look at alternative models for getting this funding out? For example, there's the Ontario Arts Council. The Ontario Arts Council does its touring grants for all kinds of promotion. It's an arm's-length peer jury. I used to sit on those juries. It's an excellent process. The money gets out in a timely fashion.
Given just how easy it would be for people to turn something like a festivals fund into a pork-barrel fund, I wonder whether or not you would consider having an arm's-length peer jury for funding like this. That way, the big festivals are going to get their funding, the small festivals are going to get their funding, and the dubious ones are going to be weeded out. We won't have a taint of the pork barrel. Would you consider a move like that in terms of getting this money out in an accountable fashion?