1Secretary of State Gunay Uslu wrote on Monday that 170 million euros will be added for culture. Cause for celebration?
No and yes. The coalition agreement already stated that this government would structurally spend 170 million more on culture. That was reason for cautious celebratory news headlines last December because it was the first time that the culture budget went up substantially after the enormous cutbacks of 200 million euros under Rutte I (2010-2012). The national government now spends about 1 billion euros every year on culture, less than 0.3 percent of the national budget. Provinces and municipalities together invest 2.3 billion euros.
2What was the letter from the Secretary of State about?
The letter that Uslu sent to the chamber on Monday was about spending the extra money from the coalition agreement, it was not a new promise of more money. For this year it is about 135 million euros. Of this, 122 million will be allocated to the recovery plan that Uslu announced yesterday. Thirteen million will go to other plans from the coalition agreement.
Previously, there was hope that extra reparation money would be paid, on top of the structural increase in cultural expenditure. Especially because a lot of European money was available for recovery after the corona pandemic. When the Dutch Recovery and Resilience Plan was submitted to the House at the end of March, it appeared that there was no separate recovery fund for culture.
3 What’s in the recovery plan?
Without culture, life becomes meager, dull and pale, writes Uslu. She notes that the future of the sector has been under great pressure and that it is “still a challenging time to say the least”. Cultural life is here and there slower than hoped. The State Secretary wants five things: promote the restart (29 million), strengthen the labor market (10 million), support (young) makers (42.5 million), promote culture for and by young people (22 million) and help innovation further ( 18.6 million).
4 What does the sector think of the recovery plan?
The response is generally positive. Jeroen Bartelse, director of TivoliVredenburg and member of the Taskforce Cultural and Creative Sector, which has discussed the corona crisis with the Ministry in recent years, thinks it is a good and balanced package of measures. “The sector has been listened carefully and there is support across the board.” He praises the attention for young people: there will be support for the offer for young people as well as for opportunities to participate.
Bartelse does have reservations about feasibility. “It is important that the money starts rolling now, we are in a period of recovery and we need it now. But there are often weeks, sometimes months, between drafting a letter of intentions and implementation.” He mentions the money for new productions and drama as an example. “It will take a while before it is worked out who gets that, and under what conditions.” And Bartelse had also hoped for some sort of matching scheme for municipalities and provinces, which eventually pay the largest part of the culture money. “The municipalities are now making their coalition agreements, and if they make a recovery plan for culture, the government could have rewarded that.”
5 Uslu says it mainly wants to support makers. Will that work with this plan?
The plan mainly provides indirect support for makers, by simplifying investment in culture, and by making money available to free stage producers and independent film producers. In this way, Uslu wants to help ‘start the order flow’. Only starting makers who have stood still due to the corona deadlock receive money directly, almost 10 million euros. The national culture funds will distribute this, in collaboration with the art schools.
Peter van den Bunder of the Kunstenbond would have preferred to see conditions attached to the money for good rates and other agreements for makers. “Money that goes to producers does not automatically settle with makers, it has been shown. If you give an impulse, that is the moment that you can also introduce a steering mechanism.”
6 Why is there relatively little money in the recovery plan for tackling the labor market, while it has turned out that it is precisely this that does not function properly?
The State Secretary says that she will come up with a detailed plan for the labor market later, on Budget Day. In this she wants to work together with the Minister of Social Affairs. The problem in the cultural sector – the vulnerable position of the self-employed – is relevant for many more sectors. Van den Bunder praises the collaboration with Social Affairs. That should be obvious, he says, but it is exceptional. “The pilots that she is announcing are in line with the plans that are being made for the entire labor market. It is actually strange that a culture budget is used to solve general labor market problems.”