I am sure a Dutch family struggling to pay their mortgages, loans, credit cards and other associated bills are not going to be devastated that their government want to save 260,000,000 Euros by scrapping a minority interest.
If, as gep has mentioned, the amount by which the Nertherlands deficit has been increasing of late is around that much every 2.5 days, might you not think that the Dutch family that you mention would be infinitely more aggrieved by that fact than by the saving that its government
thinks that it might achieve by scrapping MCO, especially since the not inconsiderable knock-on effect of such an action would blow a large whole in any such anticipated savings?
Not having a roof over your head or food to put on the table affects qualtiy of life, not having an orchestra pales into insignificance.
OK, so not having orchestras doesn't affect the quality of life? If that were true, why would so many Dutch people attend their performances and listen to their broadcasts?
But let's think about the consequences of such an action for a moment - and let's be pragmatic about it. Why only MCO? Why not also the Concertgebouw, the opera, etc.? Or might these follow later? However far-reaching these cuts might be, what will the fallout from them include?
To begin with, a lot of people will be put out of work, so they will either have to leave the country to find work and pay taxes elsewhere or they'll have to join the ranks of Dutch unemployed, both of which will cost the government money, thereby increasing rather than decreasing its deficit. Secondly, what signals will this send to universities, conservatoires and schools in the Netherlands about music tuition? Pretty obviously negative ones. So what will be the point in continuing with any music education, state subsidised or otherwise, in that country when the end result of its pursuit will be emigration, higher unemployment or both? What message will it send to the Holland Festival, which tens of thousands of people from all over the world attend annually, thereby generative revenue in the Netherlands?
Let this kind of thing spread throughout Netherlands society and you risk letting the country end up as a Western classical music-free zone - in other words, the exact opposite of the reputation that it has now - and, if the government gets away with it, what kind of message might this send to other countries in Europe and elsewhere who are also in the throes of financial deficit? Do you really want - or might you not mind - the demise of the BBC orchestras and singers, the Proms, Radio 3, music festivals up and down the land, classical record retail outlets, etc.? - because Britain has a vastly larger deficit than the Netherlands has.
I suspect that it's not the subject itself but the fact of government subsidy of it that bothers you. I have never been one to advocate disproportionately high government subsidy of the pursuit, study and practice of Western classical music, but that's only because it needs subsidy from every legal source from which it can procure it - governmental, corporate and private quite simply because it does not and cannot of itself make a direct profit, a fact which is plainly obvious when one recognises how small a proportion of required revenue can be generated by ticket sales even when events are sold out.
Lastly, what about these national financial deficits, then? They're certainly present and some are mighty - but were they caused by the continued pursuit of Western classical music? Was it those dastardly orchestral players who bled the country dry? Have the bankers and certain other financial services practitioners clean-handedly stood by and let these wretchedly irresponsible musicians bring about this economic mayhem? If your answer to any of that is in the affirmative, I suspect that the fruitfulness of any continued discussion will have ceased then and there.
Best,
Alistair
Topic: Netherlands woes