Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to thank our four witnesses for being with us today to present their views regarding funding cuts to be made by the government in a number of different areas that will affect them.
Ms. House, you used the expression “new creative economy” a number of times. I really think that is exactly what we are talking about. The arts economy does not result in any costs in terms of human time, it doesn't damage the environment—at least, not as far as I know—it doesn't require the use of natural resources or anything else. As you so aptly explained, it is profitable in a number of different ways, not only financially. It also has an impact on the image we project, both here and abroad. It is an economy that harms no one.
The traditional economy, as it currently operates, is on a downward trend. Or, as they say in English:
If you do more of the same, you're going to get more of the same.
If we persist in doing things that way, we will continue to see the economy deteriorate. That's why we have to spend more money on the creative economy of both the arts and education, in particular, which do not rely on the traditional economy.
Do you not think that cutting this funding is exactly the opposite of what we should be doing, not only in terms of the arts, but economically as well?