I agree that cultural investments are important. This is something we could discuss at length. I do not want to debate the issue or create any confusion. However, my impression is that the government is so used to cutting cultural spending that, when it maintains funding levels, it is as if it is making new investments. In a sense, that is the impression that one has.
Obviously, I am interested in new investments. The amounts are there for all to see, but we hope there will be no budget cutbacks. You have confirmed that for the next two years.
Judging by all the new measures, this is indeed a spending budget. The government has decided—and rightly so—to invest in economic stimulus. There have been job losses and business closures. Our priorities must receive funding. Your government has tabled a $34 billion action plan for the next two years—I have even heard of as much as $40 billion. But there is something that doesn't seem quite right. A decision was made to invest massively; it is said that this is a spending budget and that culture is a priority. However, less than 1% is invested in culture, which accounts for 7% of the GDP. This to me is contradictory. You cannot claim that culture is important and then invest less than 1%.
Do you follow me?