Latest news with #GageHaubrich
CBC
31-07-2025
- Entertainment
- CBC
'Art creates connection': Sask. artists push back against call to cut provincial grant funding
Social Sharing The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) is calling on the Saskatchewan government to eliminate what it describes as "wasteful spending" on public arts funding, but artists say the federation is ignoring what art provides for the province and its people. A CTF news release said the province allocates about $7 million in grants to be administered for SK Arts annually. Gage Haubrich, prairie director for the CTF, said taxpayers should not be subsidizing what he calls "artist passion projects" during a time of growing provincial debt. "Most Saskatchewanians will work on their hobbies on the weekend," Haubrich said. "They don't go to the government to beg for a cheque to take some time off so they can work on their hobbies. The government doesn't have extra money lying around to fund these types of projects, so they should cut it completely." Haubrich cited several examples in his case for defunding SK Arts entirely, including a $5,000 grant that supported a musician's leave from work and a $1,000 grant that funded a music video by Regina artist Amy Swallow. The video, titled Baby Back Bitch, was posted on YouTube and had around 200 views at the time of publication. "Just because art is something that people like, it doesn't justify wasting taxpayers' money on projects that nobody really watches," said Haubrich. "It shouldn't be subsidized." The artists behind the projects say the CTF is missing the point entirely. Amy Swallow, who wrote and performed the song, said art helped her during difficult times. "Engaging with music and the arts gave me a renewed sense of purpose during a time when I was deeply struggling," Swallow wrote in a public statement. "It connected me with a supportive community that helped me get back on my feet. That creative lifeline played a real role in helping me become healthy enough to work, live, and contribute the way I do today." She added that her work appears across multiple platforms, and that reducing its value to YouTube views alone is short-sighted. "It overlooks how art lives, circulates, and resonates in today's world." The video's director, Marz Gebhardt, also pushed back on the CTF's framing. Gebhardt said the grant provided meaningful creative and professional opportunity for both her and Swallow, noting that the project built on their earlier work, and opened the door to festival recognition and further collaborations. "Not all meaningful art goes viral overnight," Gebhardt said in her statement. "That doesn't mean it isn't seen, shared, or significant. These grants don't just fund one project — they empower learning, connection, and long-term growth." Cupid's Heart, a Saskatchewan-based band also named in the CTF release, issued a collective statement defending the value of public arts funding, especially in a province where many artists lack access to commercial platforms or financial stability. "Art creates connection. It creates community. It allows for expression and exploration. It provides healing. It tells our stories and bridges gaps," the group wrote in a statement. "Creating home-grown independent art that comes from Saskatchewan is important, and it speaks in a way only we can." They also highlighted the economic ripple effect that even small projects can create. "As artists, we receive many types of support. When people come to a show, purchase from the artist, share our work, provide space for shows to happen, or provide grant support for a project — they're not just supporting an individual artist, they are supporting a bigger message, a broader movement, and the role art plays in our communities to bring us together." 'You're cutting the soil of a society' Joel Zola, executive director and founder of Street Voices, a Toronto-based arts media nonprofit that provides free media workshops, said his work is possible because of arts grants. Zola said an arts program helped turn his life around when he was young and warned that cutting these funds would limit options for vulnerable youth. "There's people out here who have a passion for art," Zola said. "If you're cutting out that outlet, you're cutting out the soil of a society." He said the arts could be a last lifeline for people with difficult circumstances. "Once you cut out all options, the only option is the streets," he said. "So I think the more options we can create to distract youth and give them opportunities aside from being in the streets, it's a better solution for all of us." Zola said people calling for cuts to art are underestimating its impact on an economy. "If you're looking at this stuff from a budget perspective, yeah, you might ask what value does it bring," Zola said. "But if you're there in person, interacting with the people who participate in these activities, I think it might expand your perspective." SK Arts CEO Lisa Bird-Wilson initially agreed to an interview with CBC to discuss the growing public attention on its programs, but backed out. As of publication time, no statement has been provided by the organization.
Toronto Sun
29-05-2025
- Politics
- Toronto Sun
Most Canadians want feds to focus on gun crime, not confiscation: Poll
'Planning to spend potentially billions of dollars on a program that Canadians don't think is effective is a waste of money," said the Canadian Taxpayers Federation's Gage Haubrich An in-house Privy Council study says middle-class Canadians are feeling overtaxed and underappreciated, according to Blacklock's Reporter. Photo by iStock / GETTY IMAGES OTTAWA — As Canada continues to battle high crime rates, most Canadians want the federal government to focus on criminals rather than law-abiding firearms owners, according to a survey. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account In a Leger survey commissioned by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, 55% of those polled say Canadian gun policy should focus on introducing tougher measures to stop illegal firearms from being smuggled into Canada from the United States. Just 26% want the government to instead ban the sale and ownership of certain models of firearms, and to compel owners to turn over their property via the Liberals' 'buyback' program. 'The poll shows that Canadians know the real problem is illegal gun smuggling, not firearms owned by licenced Canadian gun owners,' said Gage Haubrich, the federation's prairie director. 'Planning to spend potentially billions of dollars on a program that Canadians don't think is effective is a waste of money.' Your noon-hour look at what's happening in Toronto and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Introduced by the Trudeau Liberals, Canada's gun policy has largely focused on disarming licenced Canadian gun owners over closing Canada's porus borders to smugglers illegally importing weapons from the United States. Read More Attempts to strengthen Canada's gun laws was a long, messy road for the Trudeau Liberals. Experts, observers and even Canada's police chiefs have long stated that most crime guns seen on Canadian streets are prohibited firearms that were never legal for sale in this country. The Liberals have been trying to enact their firearm confiscation program since 2020 with little success. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. As of last September, $67 million has so far been spent on the program without confiscating a single gun. As well, a key plan in Prime Minister Mark Carney's gun platform during the recent federal election — revoking gun licences for those convicted of domestic violence — is already Canadian law. A 1985 amendment to the Criminal Code — Section 109 — states those convicted of violent crimes against a person are subject to mandatory firearms bans. As well, specific regulations separating intimate partner violence as a separate aspect to the offence, was introduced by the Justin Trudeau Liberals in 2019 as part of Bill C-75. Licenced gun owners in Canada are already subject to automatic and daily criminal record checks. The poll was conducted among 1,537 adult Canadians via Leger's online panel between May 16 and May 18, 2025. As margins of error cannot be applied to online panels, an equivalent probability sample would yield a margin of error of ±2.5%, 19 times out of 20.f ±2.5%, 19 times out of 20. bpassifiume@ X: @bryanpassifiume Toronto & GTA Columnists Toronto & GTA Ontario Sunshine Girls
Winnipeg Free Press
07-05-2025
- Business
- Winnipeg Free Press
Opinion: Letters, May 7
Opinion Cost of scrapping tax Re: End the industrial carbon tax (Think Tank, May 6) With regards to opinion piece by Gage Haubrich, Prairie director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation: I've done online research on the implementation of carbon taxes by countries worldwide. This research shows that European countries are environmentally advanced compared to North America. It also shows that they will not buy as many goods from countries who do not implement some form of carbon taxes to protect the environment. Mr. Haubrich suggests Prime Minister Mark Carney needs to remove the industrial carbon tax. My impression is that although removing this tax may lower costs for businesses, and also somewhat for consumers, doing so may affect Canadian trade with the European countries that implement these taxes. Removing carbon taxes will also negatively affect environmental protection (increasing pollution, flooding, wildfires and other events). Do we want this? Donna Eastoe Winnipeg Mr. Haubrich omits any mention whatsoever of the European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, which provides for tariffs on goods from countries that fail to apply a carbon pricing mechanism. So, his advice to pressure Manitoba to 'demand an end to the industrial carbon tax' has the effect of making Canada more dependent on the U.S. market. Norman Rosenbaum Winnipeg World needs more food Re: 'Homes and food production' ( Letters , May 6) Mr. Hammond states 'Perhaps higher buildings may be better for real estate in cities. Leave the land for food production' and 'Citizens need to plan for a longer range.' I agree with most of this, except I would change to 'Leave the land for rewilding.' The global population is projected to be 10 billion people by 2050. In order for everyone to be properly nourished, the current food production system is unsustainable. We need to think more radically and unconventionally and embrace innovation, technology and science. We need to produce much more of our food in the lab, for example, using precision fermentation, which is used today to produce insulin. Europe accepts organic, but has banned genetically modified crops and precision fermentation. We need to lift bans on solutions based on evidence and science and instead move forward with them. Todd De Ryck Winnipeg Problems with separation Re: Not the time for brinkmanship (Editorial, May 5) Maybe the question to separate should be the story of two Albertas. One without oil revenue and the other with. As it stands Alberta has roughly 140 years' worth of oil reserves. So for the sake of the question of an Alberta without oil revenues, let's pretend cold fusion energy was achieved tomorrow. That would give Alberta maybe 20 years for the economics of scale of cold fusion can reach a level to impact on their economy. That's not to say there won't still be a need for oil. Petroleum products are vast. If it's plastic, it's come out of the ground at least in part. However, the heavy crude used in the production of transportation fuel is not ideal for plastics. Crude oil is better suited for those purposes. But regardless, oil has to be, in today's dollars, at least $100 a barrel to make it worth the cost of pulling it out of the oil sands and processing and shipping. If the need for oil drops, so will the price. If there is cheap clean energy, the price of processing it should drop as well but it still has to be worth the cost of getting it to market. In any scenario the corporations that actually own the oil sands, not Alberta, will most likely cut back or idle production because it just isn't worth it, and Alberta's economy will move in lockstep with those production cuts. So back to an Alberta with oil revenue. Would Alberta still want to stand alone? Because if so then Alberta has to use that oil revenue to pay for everything the federal government currently does. Meaning their own rural policing because there wouldn't be an RCMP. Managing their own social safety nets like EI when their primary industry is boom or bust. Full freight on any natural disasters like wildfires or floods or blizzards which are all forecast to intensify in the years to come. And the list goes on all while asking do the dollars Alberta generates for transfer payments exceed the costs they will now be responsible for? Mind you, the way they do math on 'what they are owed' for their cut of CPP I wouldn't trust any numbers they come up with to sell separation to the masses. However the questions are worded on a ballot to stay or go, it better be an honest question about the very real outcomes of the decision people are making. You don't get to take your ball and go home. You get to keep what is really yours and the rest leaves your control. This includes the lands that were recognized, before Alberta was even a province (formed in 1905), for the peoples that were there long before the oil pumps were. Brian Spencler Winnipeg Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and all Albertans who support her separation threat tactics should think through long and hard at what they are proposing. Do they think they can form an island nation cutting off British Columbia from the rest of Canada with regimented border crossing patrols? Why do they think that they should have special concessions simply because they are an oil-rich province? Yes they provide Canada (my country) with huge fiscal benefits for the country as a whole, but other provinces also provide Canada with many other assets, albeit on a somewhat smaller scale. The world is changing and there will come a day (I hope) when polluting fossil fuels will become a thing of the past. What will they do then? No one is an island and we are and should be working together to create a better world, not squabbling about who is more deserving of a bigger slice of the pie. There is enough of that just south of the border. Alice French Winnipeg A more varied curriculum Re: The Holocaust 80 years later — teaching its history (Think Tank, May 5) I agree with Allan Levine's call to fill gaps in our public education curricula on the horrors of the Holocaust. The public myopia, denial, and antisemitism following the Second World War to the present do need to be confronted and corrected. At the same time, I wish Levine could have broadened the call to address education about genocides in general, along with the extreme nationalisms that give rise to them. The Armenian, Rwandan, and Rohingyan genocides come to mind; and increasingly, human rights groups are including the destruction of Gaza in the list. Each is unique in scale and circumstance, of course, but to isolate the Holocaust to the exclusion of other more recent genocides not only obscures the others, it also suggests a myopic kind of exceptionalism which is problematic in itself. The mantra of 'never again' should apply to any destruction of innocent people groups. Byron Rempel-Burkholder Winnipeg
