Canary Pete
The Netherlands is a modern, Western democracy, which means, among other things, that adults are allowed to participate in electing political representatives, that we distribute our wealth a bit, that there is a right to (and duty to) education, that we have freedom of speech, and that we stand up for and care for individuals in society who are in any way less fortunate than average or in an exceptional position. Such as children, the disabled, the unemployed, refugees, the elderly and adults who earn poorly. The latter group includes artists.
Artists, and their work, illustrate - along with journalists and scientists - the aforementioned freedom of expression. They are, in many cases, the alarm bells of society. Just as the little canary bears relation to the old mines (if he fell off his stick, there was trouble in the mine), so does the artist and his role relate to democracy. If art (ánd journalism, ánd science) is fiddled with, it is time to keep a sharp eye on democracy and its workings.
How gratifying it is, in that light, that last December the Directive on Artists' Fees, which was created with joint efforts, was presented. (But how disturbing that it is an initiative from the field and not one from the government - but that aside). The Directive shows that the role of artists in our society is taken seriously or at least should be taken seriously.
The Directive is endorsed by many parties and marks the beginning of true objective appreciation of the work of visual artists. Surely it can no longer be the case that every professional involved in an exhibition - from attendant to director, from curator to bar staff - is reasonably to extremely well paid, while the artist is hardly, or not at all, and often depends on what is still available in the budget or what the artist himself can rake up in funds. The Directive is the beginning of a reversal in the appreciation of (the work of) artists, or a reappraisal. And if we want to be optimistic and extend the canary's reasoning, the Directive can even be seen as the beginning of a revival of democratic values.
In February, the covenant will be signed by several parties. Unfortunately, not all possible parties. Many large museums and the Museum Association do not. It is said that this is because they like to make their own agreements and do not want to be hindered by a directive. What that means I don't know exactly.
Anyway. The first step has been taken and the next lies with the government. As former director of Platform BK Rune Peitersen wrote: "Given that the ultimate responsibility for publicly funded institutions actually lies with the government - the same government that has been mouthing off about 'entrepreneurship' - it does not seem too much to ask Platform BK to hold the government accountable for its responsibility as principal there as well. This guideline is a first step." An important question here for the future is whether the Directive will result in a reallocation of existing resources, or whether budget will be added to the culture budget.
English 
Dutch