Potholes

Bear with me here. I’m about to start rambling.

The federal government has given 33 billion over 7 years to cities in Canada for infrastructure. Fine, but what does it mean?

I think most people would say that you get to qualify as a city if there are more than 100,000 people in the immediate area. If that’s the definition we’re using, there are 48 cities in Canada.

But I don’t think that that’s the federal government’s definition of a city, so I’ll go with the 16 major cities.

33 billion divided by 7 years equals 4.7 billion a year. 4.7 billion a year divided by 16 cities equals 2.9 million per year per city.

Now here’s the definition of infrastructure:
The basic facilities, services, and installations needed for the functioning of a community or society, such as transportation and communications systems, water and power lines, and public institutions including schools, post offices, and prisons.

Jim Flaherty says the federal government “isn’t in the pothole business.” That’s a good thing because, since it probably costs more than 2.9 million to fix all the potholes in a city in a year, they’d be doing a crappy job. I guess the communications systems, water and power lines, and public institutions including schools, post offices, and prisons are going to have to suck it up for now.

Now, of course, whenever I read about government funding I naturally think about the arts. Ever the whiner, I wonder why the arts aren’t being considered. In this context, I suppose it’s because it doesn’t make sense. This is about infrastructure; the arts has its own funding programs which we get to whine about all the time. I actually think that governments are trying to support the arts, but they don’t seem to take the following information into account and provide a leadership role by making sure that the creative/knowledge sector of the economy is properly supported.

John Mahon of the Edmonton Arts Council has outlined economic impact of arts and culture, which includes expenditures of $82.5 million on the Greater Edmonton Region and $116.6 million on the province of Alberta (numbers based on 101 arts and festival organizations that applied for operating grants from the City of Edmonton in 2000 and representing only a portion of the possible economic impact). Every city can tell this same story.

According to Mahon, “Communities have integrated the arts into their economic development arsenal to achieve a wide range of direct an indirect economic goals:
They leverage human capital and cultural resources to generate economic vitality in under-performing regions through tourism, crafts, and cultural attractions;
They restore and revitalize communities by serving as a centerpiece for downtown redevelopment and cultural renewal;
They improve quality of life, expand the business and tax revenue, and create a positive community image; and
They make communities more attractive to highly desirable, knowledge-based employees thus stimulating new forms of knowledge-intensive production to flourish.”
“contribute to the economy, generating billions of dollars on investment and expenditure on facilities, equipment, hotels, restaurants, tickets, clothing, transportation, tourism and attract business, industry and a skilled labour force.
Apart from the economic benefits, the arts contribute to livable cities in a number of ways:
“They create social cohesion by engaging large numbers of people in the process of art as participants and artists. The arts contribute to the beautification and attractiveness of cities through festivals, arts centres, environmental and architectural arts, and landscaping…This enhances the uniqueness and personality of cities.” (Meric Gertler. Canadian Policy Research Networks)

What do I mean by properly supported? I mean more than the horse racing industry here in Alberta (there are different numbers thrown around here: 47 million dollar grant for the horses earlier in the decade; 57 million this year. In contrast, the Alberta Foundation for the Arts is getting 27 million this year)

I think that it’s pretty obvious that arts and culture provide a more sustainable economic strategy than horse racing. What contributes more to creating a great city? Art and culture or gambling on horses?

There’s being short-sighted and then there’s being stupid. Which quality do you think is most noticeable in this particular scenario? I think it’s pretty clear that they’re both there, but which one really jumps out at you?

More money, please.