The world of middle class arty farties is busy wringing hands just now. Why? Because the new Con-Dem government (remember them?) have decided to abolish the UK Film Council.
And while I've no doubt that in many ways the loss of the UKFC will have a substantial negative effect on the British film industry I can't help but...well, not really care all that much.
Let's be honest, the UKFC is a huge quango costing the taxpayer far too much money - as Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt, the man who made the decision to chuck the UKFC, explained when justifying the cut eight of the top executives employed by the council are paid more than £100,000 per annum. That's more than five times what I paid for my house. In a year.
Not only this but those who have had dealings with the UKFC, in particular those seeking funding for small, low budget film projects, have found themselves entangled in endless red tape, form filling and question answering only to be unceremoniously snubbed. Of course, there's no proof that these filmmakers weren't, for want of a better word, crap. Even so, the fact that so much time has been spent in clerical hell by those who were never funded suggests a vast waste of money.
And while it cannot be argued that the UKFC has been instrumental in ensuring that talents such as Shane Meadows and Gurinder Chada (actually, I thought Bend It Like Beckham was rubbish but most of Britain disagrees so let's leave it at that) see the light of day they've also wasted a phenomenal amount of money on some really poor movies too.
Remember Sex Lives of the Potato Men? If not, you're luckier than I. The UKFC spent £1m on that piece of utter toss.
The new St Trinians movie? Yup, they threw some money at that too. Real creativity there.
Not only that but the UKFC seem to willingly throw money at films which surely - surely - don't need it. See, for example the Harry Potter franchise or any of the (actually not as fantastic as everyone makes out) Richard Curtis films which have received a fair chunk of funding.
And I wonder whether, when desperately seeking cash, the makers of Gosford Park or The Constant Gardener considered asking the likes of Ralph Fiennes or Ryan Phillippe if they really needed such a hefty pay packet, what with being massively overpaid Hollywood actors.
What seems not to have been considered is that the abolition of the UKFC could actually breed creativity, encouraging filmmakers to broaden their horizons, sending the bigger budget movies to look for funding outside of the UK leaving room for emerging artists who have something new and different to offer cinema.
Do Richard Curtis and Danny Boyle really need help from a government fund? Can they not dig in to their own pockets and those of their producers to make films which will doubtless much, much more than double their outlay. I've no doubt that they can, and when they do perhaps there will be more opportunities out there for that new breed of moviemakers to find investment.
In times of recession the needs of people, real people, need to be considered. People in factories and shops, people with kids and people with disabilities. These people need to come before pretty films and creative freedom. And, lest we forget, recession breeds great creativity - just look at the Thatcher years, the years which bred such incredible art from the most unlikely of corners. Think Leigh Bowery, Vivienne Westwood and Judy Blame in fashion, street art flourishing and informing the art we now enjoy.
The end of the UK Film Council could herald a whole new era of new and exciting creativity in our film industry. A change is as good as a rest from cigar chewing fat cats.
