Francisco Undurraga: "What matters here is whether the world of culture wants to keep deceiving itself or wants to act with the truth"

It has been intense days for the Ministry of Cultures, Arts and Heritage. "Every day here is like this," admits the head of the ministry, Francisco Undurraga, seated in his office at the Palacio Pereira in downtown Santiago, before beginning the conversation with Culto. Concretely, since the beginning of the month, the area he leads has found itself at the center of numerous analyses, debates and criticisms regarding the adjustments contained in the 2027 Budget Law project: Culture faces a 10.1% reduction in resources, dropping from $489,899 million to $440,518 million (equivalent to an adjustment of $49,381 million). The fact impacts various funds and programs; for example, it affects the Cultural Pass (50.8%), the National Book and Reading Promotion Fund (17.6%, although it received new amounts for Chile's participation as guest of honor at the 2027 Frankfurt Book Fair), the Sites of Memory program (25.3%) and heritage investment (16.2%), among others. The reductions have provoked widespread disapproval from the cultural world and, at least publicly, a sense of short circuit between both sides. In contrast, the ministry has not concealed its pride and satisfaction over the recent visit of national representatives to precisely the last edition of the Frankfurt Book Fair, where a delegation of writers, publishers, literary agents and government representatives began paving Chile's way to the 2027 edition of the fair, the most relevant in the world in the publishing industry. There, they gave presentations and held panel discussions. In fact, Undurraga admits that the upcoming trip to Germany ranks among the most important objectives of his administration. "This puts and repositions Chile on a plane greatly desired by the state, which unfortunately was not materialized during the previous government for reasons I am unaware of," he says regarding the controversy that surrounded the initial invitation in 2023, when the country was invited as guest of honor of the fair for 2025, but the government of President Gabriel Boric — through the then Minister of Cultures, Jaime de Aguirre — backed out of the trip, arguing that it was preferable to allocate that investment to other matters. Undurraga continues: "For us, being in Frankfurt as a special guest elevates not just the management of one government, but a state policy, a cultural policy that comes and that is born even in the absence of state cultural policies with great creators in the literary world. And our presence has to do with a continuum. We inherited an executive director (Nicolás Leyton), whom we ratified; a proposal that was on the table, which we also ratified, because we believe it is the right thing, and all that remains is for us to relaunch it, generate all the financing mechanisms so it will be a success. The publishing world is of great interest to us." —What amount will be allocated to Chile's participation in Frankfurt 2027? We are talking about the fact that next year we should be investing around 4.6 billion pesos. Those 4.6 billion pesos include a line item from the Ministry of almost 2.2 billion pesos, and the additional amount is contributions that go to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In order to fulfill all of this with the objectives we have set, which is to have a very good presence, to have a very good stand, of 2,000 square meters. "The stand has a design made by the people from 31 Minutos. Then, we have to bring people, bring writers, be able to promote. We have a communications line item, where a communications agency in Germany is being hired." —You are talking about a figure of more than $4 billion allocated to Frankfurt. When De Aguirre was minister, his estimate was that Chile should allocate double, $8 billion, to this event. Was this line item also reduced? No, I have to be super transparent about this. This is work we inherited, where the budgets were already allocated. We reviewed them. We have not questioned them, because they are the budgets. And the figure that was requested of us as a Ministry and as a State by the Executive Committee is the figure we are allocating. It is not a figure we imposed on the Executive Committee so it can carry out its work. It is a figure that obviously has upward adjustments; airplane tickets today do not cost what they cost in March of last year, and many other inputs have become more expensive. Now, our issue here is how we develop an industry in a better way. The State has to invest, because we do not see this as an expense; on the contrary, we believe it is an investment. 22/10/2026 - FRANCISCO UNDURRAGA. Photo: Mario Tellez MARIO TELLEZ —What narrative would you like Chile to show at the Frankfurt Fair 2027? What perspective would you like the invited writers to present? Well, the perspective of Chilean narrative is broad, it is diverse, and we believe we have to give it space through a curatorial committee that will be formed during January, so that the presence is as representative as possible. This government is not a censoring government, nor is it a government that imposes a line. The State has to be a facilitator so that things happen. In fact, this ministry, in its construction, from its beginning, is a ministry that has many councils. The Book Council, the Music Council, the Audiovisual Council, which similarly are the ones that determine who accesses the funding lines we have. From that point of view, I as minister wish for plurality to exist in a representation where we all fit, not just one sector. —Why have you said "this is not a censoring government"? Can you assure that the ideological plurality of the invited writers will be guaranteed? Here, among our "stars" (in the motto Stars of the Earth that Chile presented) is Nicanor Parra, there is Pablo Neruda, who was a communist, and there is Gabriela Mistral. Sure, maybe I would also have liked Vicente Huidobro or Pablo de Rokha to be there. But if these stars were chosen, we are extremely proud of them. That Isabel Allende received the prize she received, and hopefully she can join us in Frankfurt. Even though, so to speak, she already has her editorial situation sorted out with this well-deserved prize and tribute. —During Chile's recent visit to Frankfurt, there were writers very critical of the budget cuts in Culture. Did that make you uncomfortable? Democracy is democracy. Freedom... even though there are some actors in the cultural world who claim we are living under a dictatorship. We are not living under a dictatorship. This ministry and the president of the Republic are democratic. We came to power through democratic means. That is how the citizenry chose it. And the country is built on diversity, just like culture. I do not like to talk about cuts. I prefer to talk about adjustments. "The Ministry of Culture, the cultural world, is immersed in a society, in a country, in a nation that has certain priorities and that also has realities that have unfortunately led us to have to adjust our budget. Now, we have fulfilled our commitments throughout this entire year, and no one who was granted a fund had it taken away. Here, the adjustments were made by maximizing situations that had not been awarded in the first place. Then, they did not affect anyone from the cultural world. Perhaps, (they affected) the expectations of some who might perhaps have been going to win a fund or a funding line." "But no one here can tell me that through the adjustments we limited those we committed to as a State. Besides, the competitions were awarded during the previous year. And this year we have administered them." 22/10/2026 - FRANCISCO UNDURRAGA. Photo: Mario Tellez MARIO TELLEZ —Returning to Frankfurt, the writer Carmen García Palma said that while Chilean literature was being promoted at that fair, the literary ecosystem in the country was being weakened with the significant reduction in the Book and Reading Fund. She pointed to a contradiction in the government's cultural policy. That is a voluntarism with a rather biased perspective. —On her part? On the part of the publishing world that has raised that complaint. Because I inform you that more than 1.6 billion pesos have come out of the Book Fund this year so that precisely they, and just in time, could represent us in Frankfurt and raise legitimate criticisms, which, by the way, they can raise not only in Frankfurt abroad, but also here at home. If we are in a State of Law and in a democracy. "But if you add the line item we are allocating to Frankfurt plus the line item of the Book Fund, it comes to exactly the same money we had in 2026. We have not suffered adjustments or cuts on this matter. We have an amount to strengthen something that is extremely obvious for the Book Fund, which is to strengthen its environment, its macrosystem. Or do you want me to take money away from music to go finance the book?" "If you add the 10-thousand-and-some million pesos that the Book Fund has today plus the two-thousand-and-some (that will go to Frankfurt), it comes to exactly the twelve-thousand-and-fraction that the Book Fund has. I think there needs to be intellectual honesty as well when making criticisms, which I accept and which in this case I do not share, because in addition to this we are putting in greater amounts of money through other channels to make Frankfurt happen. Frankfurt benefits the book world, it does not benefit the audiovisual world." "Now, if it is a cause for scandal, well, with the Book Fund budget they legitimately went there and we proudly, without any misgivings, that action was financed by the State of Chile through this ministry, and that is what corresponds." —So the criticisms in Frankfurt did not sit well with you. No, it is not that the criticisms did not sit well with me; I think the criticisms are unfair. But they are not appropriate, because appropriate would be for us to leave it at 10 billion and not go to Frankfurt; but we are going to Frankfurt with the conviction that it is worth going to Frankfurt. We are not taking money away from another fund — that would be where raising those criticisms would be legitimate. —It is understood that Frankfurt is the priority. The complaint from the book world is that the 17.6% drop could also affect other initiatives. Well, that is the interpretation you give to the question, but I believe there is an atmosphere here of seeking something that, in this particular case, everyone agrees on: the most convenient thing for the ecosystem is to be in Frankfurt. And when we were not in Frankfurt, the heavenly choirs came down in criticism of Jaime de Aguirre and the government of President Boric. If we had kept the Book Fund amounts, but had rejected Frankfurt, what would the criticism be? —Do you fear that Chile's participation in Frankfurt could be tainted by criticism of the government? Well, that is the environment I move in as minister. There are people who think I do it terribly and there are people who think I do it well. There are people who think the president of the Republic is reductive in these matters and, yet, this year we are going to have invested in culture, in executed spending, as never before in the history of this ministry. Adjustments and priorities —But 10.1% is a significant adjustment. If there has been more investment than ever in history as you say, why is there constant criticism of your management and no trust on this matter? Mutual trust does not exist because we have not given ourselves the opportunity to have a real understanding of the actions we are taking, and a group — which I hope is a minority — takes refuge in the slogan, because they are not under the control of the government, not even under the control of the ministry. —What do you mean by that? What group? Here there are parliamentarians, here there are cultural actors who have identified with the left, who have been spokespeople not only for presidential candidates but spokespeople for constituent processes, who clearly have an ideological definition and have settled for the caricature of a pseudo-government that does not care about culture. "So then, when the (historical) average of the ministry is 305 billion pesos, which is quite a respectable amount of money even for other ministries, up to 2025, when 466 billion pesos were executed, we are going to execute 489 billion pesos. We are presenting the third highest budget, at 440 billion pesos. In 2024 it was 338 billion pesos executed." "The discussion can take place and we can sit down and dialogue calmly, and the numbers are explainable. The interpretations can be multiple, but clearly there is something here, and Deputy (Ignacio) Achurra recognized it to me, besides. He said: actually, (you) are not coming to deconstruct the world of culture." —You have said several times that there is a "caricature" of you in this discussion. But do you make any mea culpa about it? About not having known how to communicate these issues? Caricatures are born from something too. Now it turns out I am the one to blame. … (The caricatures) are born from an effort by the political opposition to claim that we are not fit to administer culture. —And, according to you, that is a view without foundation. Of course, because if we want to deceive ourselves or deceive the population, let's talk, then, about budget. In 2023 and 2024, the budget remained flat at 330 billion pesos. The last year there were 57 billion in transfers; it jumped from 5 billion to 57 billion. In other words, 50 billion pesos that did not correspond to this ministry were added for this year. And they know that, because they administered until March 10 of this year. "So then, when we talk about a negative reaction regarding the execution and the money going to the world of culture from a right-wing government, well, here are the figures; I call for them to be audited, I have no problem with that." "The cultural world itself told the previous government that it had not done a good job in culture. It seems it is not obvious, because theoretically the one who has done a bad job in culture is the government of President Kast, through Minister Undurraga. So I think there is a lack of intellectual honesty in this conversation, this discussion. And there is political opportunism in the sense that I am not willing to present to the nation a budget that I then will not be able to execute. Budgets were presented here that were not executable. During the previous government." 22/10/2026 - FRANCISCO UNDURRAGA. Photo: Mario Tellez MARIO TELLEZ —Does that seem irresponsible to you? I think that, more than an irresponsibility, it is a way of doing politics that I do not share. I believe one has to look at the citizenry and, evidently, invite it to a dream, but not build this dream of unrealities. And the people who were affected during the previous administration, which is the cultural world, were very critical of the cultural management carried out by the government of President Boric. I think the criticisms (of us) have been unfair, they have been empty slogans that honestly do not contribute to building culture for the nation." —Now, the criticisms have not come only from the opposition. Senator Luciano Cruz-Coke, from your own sector, spoke of an "excessive and unnecessary" reduction. Columnists like Cristián Warnken were also very critical. Well, because we are used to the dialectic of talking versus budget. But when one goes to look at the money that is actually given to the world of culture to develop it, one can have the right to multiple interpretations. I also do not ask that the cultural world align itself ideologically. Please, culture is built among diverse perspectives. There is no official view of what culture has to be like. —Evidently for the government today the priorities are employment, the economy and security. Culture clearly does not appear among the essentials. Does it frighten you that you are increasingly seen as a government that leaves culture on a marginal plane? Let's see, things do not frighten me. I can be reflective on the matter, but I do not live with fears. The second thing is to have a governing perspective too, because let us once again be transparent. If you yourselves, through the multiple polls you conduct or publish in your outlet, ask people where their priorities lie. Culture is never among the top 15 priorities. I say it with pain, I am not saying it with pride. "Now, in a society where we still live with so much precarity, such as insecurity, lack of housing, lack of work, education, health, unfortunately people's priorities are not in this ministry. Unfortunately. Now, when you go to the provinces, when you leave the most privileged environment, you see crafts, you see love for traditions, you see a longing to consume culture in a better way, culture that reaches them more. Because people require, want and long for more access to culture." —But for many people, culture is a priority because it is their source of employment. But evidently it is important, and it also deserves access to the world of work, and we generate many actions that relate to and speak to that. We have not stopped investing, for example, in infrastructure; infrastructure also creates jobs. 22/10/2026 - FRANCISCO UNDURRAGA. Photo: Mario Tellez MARIO TELLEZ —Why was the design of the Cultural Pass changed? Because a minority portion of people adapts it in a different way and it is used in an unintended way, and I am sure that those who designed it did not envision it the way it ended up being used by that portion of people. Fortunately that was corrected; today they cannot go buy liquor or misuse the pass, but we want to give it an emphasis on families; we want to reward the effort, given that, besides, people are not having an easy time, so that they can and are able to enjoy and approach culture in a transversal sense, that is, as families. —Returning to the 10.1% adjustment, did that figure surprise you? Did you talk with Finance so it would not be so much? I prefer to stay with what happens internally, but believe me — and probably many people will not believe me — I do politics not for the press. I am obviously not in opposition to my own government. What matters here is whether the cultural world wants to keep deceiving itself or wants to act with the truth, which is what we have been discussing. What is important? The execution or the dream that ultimately does not come true? That is the call I make to the cultural world. In politics nothing is insurmountable and our will is deeply one of democratic dialogue. I am not going to close the door on anyone and I hope no one closes theirs on me. Some have closed theirs on me, of course. —Besides closing doors, when you have attended events you have received insults and shouts. These demonstrations have become recurrent with officials of Culture like you. They are not pleasant, but rather than the shouting, I believe dialogue is what leads the way. I come from the political world; I was in a process as harsh and as relevant to the history of this country as the one after October 18, where people from different sectors shouted at me, some even pushed me, threw bags of water at me, so one more or less knows how this goes. What I do not like is to presume bad intent simply because of representing a particular political sector and government. If I did not feel capable of doing politics, I would not be a Cabinet Minister, much less in this ministry. Dialogue will always be important, it is always relevant to political action, and the question is whether we want to score points or generate agreements. —With regard to those differences, Marcelo Acevedo, president of the Estadio Nacional Memoria Nacional Corporation, said in this newspaper that the budget reduction for the Sites of Memory had an ideological aspect. What did you think? Memory is part of culture; I do not deny it, quite the opposite. I think everything in the line item is very important; to begin with, the Estado Nacional Site of Memory has exactly the same money it had last year, it is unaffected, and neither is the Museum of Memory. Everything in the line item, of which we are guaranteeing continuity and giving them the opportunity, with the reduction that did indeed occur there, to participate in infrastructure funds for the improvement of their sites through competitions and projects — it is a different thing to assume that today with the money we are giving them, the State, through the budget, we are demonstrating that with the Sites of Memory there is no ideological issue, because if that were the case, it would not be in the line item, and you can check it, it is there. —Finally, one of the criticisms that attracted the most attention recently was that of filmmaker Pablo Larraín, who spoke of "negligence" and "ignorance" on the part of the government in dealing with the death of Patricio Guzmán, because a national mourning had not been declared. We issued a statement, which was what corresponded. Personally, it mattered to me and I recognize the work Patricio Guzmán did as a film director. He was a very important man and he is a very important man in his creation, which will endure over time, but I am not going to polemicize with Pablo Larraín.