TORONTO - When federal Finance Minister Ralph Goodale delivered his budget address Tuesday, he was careful to emphasize the billions of dollars that Paul Martin's government will be devoting to health care and education.

One of the things Goodale avoided mentioning altogether is spending on culture and the arts, which some observers believe was a calculated strategy.

"That's exactly what I'd expect," said Douglas Long, a professor who teaches political theory at the University of Western Ontario in London, Ont. "The very word 'culture' lights the wrong kind of fuse on a whole sector of the electorate."

In Long's view, the governing Liberals are purposely shying away from highlighting any budget items that could be viewed as unnecessary by voters in the wake of the sponsorship scandal.

"This is an unusual kind of pre-election budget, but it's still a pre-election budget. And I think that perception is everything in a pre-election budget," Long said. "Largesse to the cultural sector would not have looked the way the Liberals want to look right now. The emphasis on prudence is so great."

What this means is that the budget Goodale brought down is largely silent on the government's cultural priorities. For the most part, the details - if they have been worked out - have yet to be announced.

"This is just an intentionally, aggressively obscure document," said Jim Abbott. Abbott is the Conservative Party MP who serves as the opposition critic for the Heritage Ministry, which is in charge of arts and culture policy.

According to Abbott, the lack of detail may be an indication that the government is standing pat when it comes to culture.

"It appears on the surface to be a status-quo budget, but it could be anything," he said. "Certainly, there were no specific pronouncements about any significant increases or decreases with respect to culture or heritage."

Officials in the office of Hélène Scherrer, the minister of Canadian Heritage, did not return phone calls from CBC News Online.

One specific item that was mentioned is the Canadian Television Fund (CTF). As Martin promised last year, funding for the program was restored after being cut by former finance minister John Manley. The fund, used to help Canadian television producers, stood at $67.5 million. It has been topped up to $100 million, with an additional $100 million promised for 2005-2006.

"We had to look really carefully to find the page where the renewal of funding for the Television Fund was announced," Megan Davis-Williams said.

Davis-Williams is the national director of the Canadian Conference of the Arts, a group that lobbies on behalf of artists and cultural workers. She was puzzled why Ottawa was ignoring what could be a "good-news story."

"It's so short-sighted," she said. "Maybe they fear that people think the arts is a waste of money, but that's such a retrograde attitude. I just can't fathom why they wouldn't be more forthcoming about their support for the arts."

Stephen Waddell is the national executive director of ACTRA, the organization that represents Canadian actors. He said he was pleased that Martin kept his promise, but would have liked to see other cultural issues addressed.

"The only mention of culture in the budget is [the CTF]," he said, adding that the budget ignored the possibility of increasing tax credits for Canadian producers.

Davis-Williams pointed out that some of the income-tax changes announced Tuesday will be good for those working in the cultural sector. "It's not acknowledging the arts specifically, but it will benefit arts organizations," she said.

Long believes that Canadians can expect to see Martin focus more on culture if he wins the next election, which may be called in the next few months. The Prime Minister will likely defend arts spending not based on the fact that it contributes to the richness of the country's culture, Long says, but on the basis that it's a wise investment.

"I don't think culture is off his radar."