IT IS a debate that we may only discover who won when it is too late.

This week, some of the country’s top actors and directors warned of a crisis facing the arts because of Government cuts.

Stars including Dame Helen Mirren, David Tennant and Miranda Hart lined up to warn that arts and culture face their biggest threat in decades.

Well, they would say that wouldn’t they because it is their industry, it is what they do. Easy to think that and brush over a heartfelt concern.

But who better to defend the arts against the huge cutbacks many fear are still to come than those who are most skilled – and most high profile – in their chosen profession.

In an open letter to a national newspaper, 46 of our biggest theatre, stage and film names agreed on a script.

They listed the attacks on spending already delivered and pointed out that Creative Industries plc is under threat from the sort of swingeing cuts already causing public alarm in many other areas.

Public investment, say the stars, is crucial for the UK’s creative industries which produce a “staggering” return from the investment.

They are quick to point out too that the film and arts industry contribute over £7 billion to the economy each year.

“If we are serious about rebuilding our economy, culture cannot and should not be an easy target for cuts,” they say.

But the broader, more worrying argument to be had is surely not just about what the arts contribute to the country’s economy, but what they do in helping to express the very essence of the nation, who and what we are.

Yes, culture has a huge economic impact on this country.

It brings in visitors whether it’s to see West End shows, our great theatre companies, award-winning British films, an explosion of stand-up comedy talent or some of the world’s best orchestras and opera singers.

And there is economic traffic in other ways as the skills of our performers, writers, technicians, crew, designers and directors are sought around the world.

Where many are worrying is in the regions and not just as the letter says because that’s where most of our major talent begins its journey to the top.

More concerning still is in the withdrawal of funding from those projects at the grassroots.

The ones where people, particularly children, get to sing, learn to play a musical instrument, make things or are encouraged to express themselves through art, writing or a dozen other creative art forms.

Cut funding at that level and we are in danger of depriving whole generations of ways of communicating, of enriching themselves and society.

The arts are so often a key to getting people to open up, to develop their personalities and skills and to find a way into a world that may previously have been difficult for them.

Many of these activities which nourish and build communities for the future start here at local level.

It is why we should all be aware of what the arts can do, not just in terms of expressing ourselves and entertaining others, but in the way in which they can be used therapeutically.

The currency of any country lies in the skills of its people and art is one of the areas which is too often overlooked, seen as a luxury and not a necessity.

But if arts funding is seen as a soft option in difficult times then we should all beware.

Talent, in whatever arena, should be nurtured and encouraged. Those who cannot express themselves through the conventional routes may find an outlet through the arts.

Keep those avenues open and we encourage a less frustrated, more engaged population who have a focus in their lives and can develop a means with which to communicate the views that they are entitled to express.

Let’s as ever, leave the last word to a politician.

According to Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt, national funding for the arts had fared better than many other areas of public spending.

“We are doing everything we can and that is precisely because we understand the economic importance and what the arts do for our national way of life,” he said.

Now do they really?