Canadian culture (whatever that means) has been making the front pages of most newspapers and the top story on many newscasts over the past few weeks.

Whether it is the President of the CBC testifying before the CRTC or Sheila Copps almost bringing us to the brink of a nasty trade war with the U.S. over split run magazine legislation, we seem to be obsessed with defining, then promoting, then protecting, then preserving and don't forget funding, "Canadian culture."

And the culture vultures around the country take great pride in their passion - or more appropriately, their xenophobic zeal - in utilizing the tools and resources of the state to further their crusade.

But along the way, they have forgotten to reflect and question their mission. So, in the service of taxpayers, we offer a few questions that loyal culture vultures from coast to coast should take a few moments to ponder.

In a 500-channel universe with a proliferation of new media spin-offs to boot, why do we need to continue to fund a public broadcaster to the tune of $900 million per year Wouldn't this money be better used for other program priorities, debt reduction or tax cuts

If there is a compelling public policy reason (which is highly debatable) to continue with a state-funded broadcaster, should it not at least discontinue its practice of eroding the profit margins of private broadcasters by offering discount advertising rates What better uses could we find for the $900 million that we spend each year on the CBC

Further still, why should we believe CBC President Perrin Beatty and his claim that the "People's Network's" plans to add six specialty channels and two new radio stations would be self-financing Given the empirical record of financial management at the CBC, skepticism is warranted.

And why is the government a player (the CBC) and regulator (the CRTC) in the marketplace Isn't this a blatant conflict of interest

Speaking of the CRTC, why do they regulate television and radio, but not newspapers Why are Canadians free to choose their print and on-line media sources but subject to the whims of government appointees who decide what gets to air and what doesn't"

Moving to films, why does the Canadian Film Development Corporation exist And why do we tolerate its losses to the tune of 150 million taxpayer dollars each year

Can someone explain to me the public policy purpose of funding lesbian pornography (can you say Bubbles Galore ) or books of dumb-blonde jokes with taxpayer dollars

Finally, what the heck is going on with this new split-run magazine deal Not happy with blowing millions of dollars at the Canada Information Office (not to mention, threatening the private flag distribution industry) or turning a blind eye to critical Auditor General reports concerning her department's multicultural funding practices, Canadian Heritage Minister Sheila Copps now wants to subsidize the Canadian magazine industry with a $100 million fund.

U.S. magazine publishers will be allowed to create split-run editions with up to 18% Canadian advertising content. Canadian magazine publishers who are "affected" by these split-run editions will have access to a subsidy fund (read: Corporate Welfare) to compensate for their losses.

I've always thought culture is the sum of our existence. But the culture vultures believe that it must be protected with tax dollars. One last question: Why do we continue to tolerate this abuse of our money