My perspective is more anecdotal, being in the trenches with the artists. But I would say that investment hasn't kept up with the fact that eggs, milk, and butter cost more than they did 5 or 10 years ago. Subsidy is key. We had quality professional dancers prior to 1957, but we did not have professional dancers who were paid. We went from paid to unpaid to paid again. We went to vaudeville where people were paid. Then from the end of vaudeville, basically 1930 until 1957, people worked other jobs and danced on weekends and evenings and so on. Then with the Canada Council people started to have jobs again.
The reality is that subsidy is very important to having an artistic country, and education is also key. I know that is not a federal jurisdiction. It's up to the provinces, but I would say there is still not enough art exposure in the classroom, for dance, in particular. I have two little boys who are not that interested in sports. They don't like competition very much. One draws and the other one dances. That's just how they came out. Yet they don't get a lot of exposure to that in their classrooms in our little town of Whitby.