A new approach to culture, media and sport

The initial question is to ask whether there should even be a Department of Culture, Media and Sport. Are these areas in which government should be involved at all? Would culture, media and sport be better off without government involvement? As Elon Musk is poised to turn the fire hoses on US bureaucracy, should we perhaps turn a few of them on our own? 

A government seeking to reduce the cost of bureaucracy might look at the savings to be achieved by closing the department. This would enable it to reallocate funds to areas of greater need such as defence, healthcare and infrastructure projects.

If any of the department’s responsibilities were felt to be needed, they could be reallocated to other departments, or down to the local level, streamlining their operation and making them more efficient.

Closing the department could decrease red tape, making it easier for businesses and organizations in the culture, media, and sports sectors to operate independently. Many of its activities would do better if performed by private sector associations and partnerships, who would almost certainly pursue its objectives with greater efficiency and readiness to innovate.

Cultural and sporting concerns would be better devolved down to local level, where community needs and preferences could be taken on board. Local knowledge would determine the priorities in a bottom-up replacement of top-down and centralized decision making.

 On balance, the arguments come down in favour of closing the department altogether. Involvement in each of its three areas is simply not something that government should be doing. It should focus more on its core priorities such as national security, economic growth, public safety and healthcare. 

There is a case for saying that government is currently doing too much, and that this is one area it should not be doing at all.