'Give municipalities their own culture budget'. Interest groups put pressure on new election manifestos (and sort for BBB)

The creative sector is pushing for a radical change in the arts subsidy system. This is evident from the lobbying documents (position papers and suggestions) sent to political parties' election programme writers. The largest and most important of these, the theatre managements (VSCD) and Arts 92, want central government to give municipalities a clear and specific culture budget ('earmarked') from now on. By doing so, they want to prevent local governments from using their state contribution from the municipal fund not for art, but for extra parking spaces, for example, out of political arbitrariness. 

It seems a detail, but that is only for the superficial reader. Indeed, the non-earmarking of money for arts and culture is the reason why cultural policy in the Netherlands has not changed significantly since 1986, despite all the revolutions of successive plans.

Toothless revolution

The latest example of such a toothless revolution was the introduction of the Basic Cultural Infrastructure in 2009. Under that system, the central government distributes money to regions for "functions" such as "presentation institution", "medium-sized city company" and "regional orchestra". It was not only killed by the legendary Putinsdatjadweller Halbe Zijlstra, who took 200 million out of the budget, but by successive Houses of Parliament and ministers who wanted Zijlstra's balderdash repair by more and more institutions to 'reward' with a place in the BIS. So that became another premier league of the arts, and that was precisely not the intention of that BIS.

People who have followed Culture Press a little, in recent years, know that there has always been a passionate plea here for an arts subsidy system in which not determined in The Hague which (Amsterdam-made) art can be seen where. This endeavour was always considered interesting by various stakeholders, but conversations about it stranded in woolly statements about existing structures and - above all - a lack of trust.

Toe-curling wish lists

After all, no one in the cultural sector dares to trust that a city like Cuyck or Zwolle would handle well a cultural task heavier than keeping a theatre or museum open. Practice also shows that this is quite often gone wrong. After all, city councils are only used to saying something about real estate for culture, and never talk about what should happen in it. When they do, it usually leads to tiresome wish lists from people who don't know anything about art, because they never had to.

By curbing this distrust of municipalities by earmarking cultural funds, it would become possible to get substantive local cultural policy off the ground. So it might just be possible for local Kunstraden to set up their own high and low art system, rooted in their own community.

BBB and the arts

The question now is which parties might have ears for it. This lobby seems most promising with newcomer BBB, which so far has not shown itself very hostile to the arts. A party like the VVD might also be interested, but they are deeply distrustful and still prefer to get rid of any kind of subsidy. They do not like earmarked money either, because it gives too much responsibility, and liberals do not like that.

Whether the new centre-left bloc under Frans Timmermans has ears for it? It just might, just like the chances that they are most likely to end up in formation talks with BBB after November. The interest groups' choice seems partly motivated by that chance. Whether that is a smart move? Kunsten92 also calls for 'trust' in its suggestions.