Reintroducing an old support measure would provide a new incentive for creatives.

The Cabinet is allocating an extra three hundred million euros to cushion the damage of the corona crisis in the cultural and creative sector. This is an important step in the right direction and will actually help a number of institutions get over the bridge. By doing so, the cabinet is also sending a signal: that culture matters. Moreover, with this, Rutte and his colleagues recognise the importance of a labour market that must remain intact. After all: a large share in the gross national product, high-quality employment for a few hundred thousand people, many export opportunities, a contribution to Dutch profile abroad, of value for national cohesion and debate and a relatively very low demand on raw materials and the environment.

That minister Van Engelshoven could now bring out the additional measure will have relieved her. From day one, the minister who, when she took office, was able to repair part of previous cuts, has been committed to a solid cultural and creative labour market (art, culture, creative industry, media). Yet - while she was fiddling something behind the scenes - she was in danger of getting an image of the wait-and-see spectator.

Risky investments

What the sector can now fall back on apart from this extra investment are: the previous support measures by the Minister of OCW in favour of nationally funded institutions, the cabinet's generic scheme around short-time work for employers, the ZZP (assistance) scheme and the one-off contribution for small entrepreneurs. That is a lot, but unfortunately not yet enough for a sector where mainly non-subsidised cultural entrepreneurs make risky investments. And it still offers just too little customisation for the labour market with the largest percentage of self-employed and flexible employment contracts.

An additional step is needed here. And then I immediately think of the SER's advice ("Passion Valued", 2017). The SER and the Council for Culture recommended taking another look at the scheme for artists, which was axed in 2012 and had functioned to many people's satisfaction. The scheme helped self-employed artists overcome a dip at difficult moments in their careers and encouraged an eventual return to self-employment. A measure with a win-win effect. A lower welfare payment, thus cheaper for the government, with wider additional earning opportunities, thus more appropriate for the profession.

Basic Income

At a time when the fray in our economic system has become more visible -value and price or value and reward are not always so clearly related to each other- and when the notion of a basic income is coming up again more often, a new pilot with a basic scheme for artists and creative entrepreneurs is appropriate: a temporary guarantee of a subsistence contribution and, where necessary, help with fixed entrepreneurial expenses.

If ministers Koolmees and Wiebes get to work on this quickly, in the short term it will provide the additional building block still missing in the package of coronary measures. And for the longer term, a good example of innovative social and economic policy for the benefit of all self-employed people for whom content and financial valuation are sometimes just too different.