Does strategic review mean budget cuts?

The federal government insists that its strategic review process is just prudent, good management and that looking for the 5% least efficient programs doesn't necessarily mean loss of the money, just reallocation to other, higher priority areas. A piece in the Globe and Mail by Brian Laghi quotes the Prime Minister's press secretary, Kory Teneycke

“It's not automatic in Strategic Review when a department is looked at or a program is looked at that the department's overall budget will be reduced. It's a reprioritization within a department as a way of trying to find a more effective use for those dollars.”

Mr. Teneycke said it is healthy for government to go through a process to ascertain whether funds are being spent efficiently.

“I don't think there's any risk that government spending will be lower this year than it was the year before.”

This is probably of little comfort to the Canada Council which, with Telefilm Canada and the National Film Board, is a large granting institution. A 5% cut or reallocation of same (which can be to another department) will inevitably impact the money it has to give out; for instance to literary and cultural magazines.

Political scientist Heather MacIvor of the University of Windsor says this strategic review process can be dangerous for government and have an outsized effect.

“The precise effect of the Strategic Review is that any group that is going to be affected by it is going to be a small homogeneous group, like perhaps artists in Quebec who are depending on the travel-abroad culture fund to build links with other artists in the Francophonie."

The article notes that relatively small cuts under the program caused difficulties for the Conservatives in Quebec after it was announced that the government was slicing $44.8-million in arts and culture programs, which was reallocated to other areas.