Sue, my mind is not closed, but having worked in venues for many years (in partnership with one famous orchestra for a couple of years) I have seen the audiences for these subsidised artforms - largely upper-middle class - and feel that we are subsidising what is not only a minority artform, but one largely enjoyed by people who are already quite privileged. Why should they enjoy these benefits, particularly as they are largely paid for by working class people buying lottery tickets? Other artforms have made much more successful inroads into wider accessibility to people from all sorts of backgrounds - I haven't observed this with opera, ballet or classical music.

While it's true that orchestras are expensive to keep on the road, my experience is that it can cost substantially more to bring in equivalent numbers of classical musicians compared to those from other genres, because the pay scale is significantly higher. Why should this be, when the artform is already receiving subsidy?

I am not dissing classical music at all. I just don't think it deserves a higher status than folk music, which is the national music of this country.