Evidence of meeting #32 for Canadian Heritage in the 39th Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was programming.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Thank you, Chair.
There's lots of good information here. I have a question for Mr. Sunter, and perhaps Professor Kurth could comment as well.
Mr. Sunter, I think in your presentation you asked somewhat rhetorically what would become of all these musicians. I wonder if these folks could reflect on that. If the CBC Radio Orchestra is disbanded, what will happen to the musicians who are part of it now?
As an Individual
Well, they will lose income. This is a very expensive town in which to live, and that loss of income could actually see some of those musicians moving out of town.
Professor and Director, School of Music, University of British Columbia
I agree with that. The orchestra represents the future for younger musicians. They need to know there is an investment in our country in this kind of music and that they have a future. When they see their teachers moving out of town and losing positions, they are disheartened, of course, to say the least.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
I don't know if Mr. Ramsbottom wanted to comment on that, given his experience.
As an Individual
My involvement with the radio orchestra goes back 35 years, but I do so many other things. I teach at UBC. I'm on 32 recordings of the CBC. You have to remember that the CBC Radio Orchestra has 232 commercial recordings out there; it's the most recorded orchestra in North America.
However, personally, I take my income from the CBC and distribute it through my concert series called Out for Lunch. If I no longer had this income from the CBC, my concert series at the art gallery would lose its major funding source—that's me. I would lose my stature as a professional musician in the country. I would probably have to resign from the university where I teach, because I would no longer be considered a prime community musician, and so on.
As Alain Trudel said on March 27 to the French media, I think it was, the economic infrastructure of Vancouver's music scene is extremely fragile, and the few dollars we get here and there to augment our income will have a huge impact on us. The CBC Radio Orchestra is one of the pillars of the community, in terms of the infrastructure of the arts. We all know the studies on the economic impact of the arts in a community. The multiplier effect is one to be considered there.
Also, as for the members of the VSO who happen to be in the radio orchestra, particularly the string players and the brass, you can speculate that when their income drops significantly, they will have to make up the income some other way, maybe by going back to their primary employer and saying, “We need a raise; we just lost $10,000. Can you compensate for that?” To that the VSO would rightly say, “Look, we're not the bank of last resort here. I'm sorry you've had the cutback, but that's not our problem.” That would put those families in the position of saying, “Then we will have to move elsewhere”—because, as Dr. Kurth said, this is an expensive town to live in.
It's also very demoralizing to say to your students, “Why on earth do you want to go into music? There's no future, especially when the government is giving the clear signal that there is no support for the arts here.”
I'm very puzzled why the Canada Council hasn't come out and had an absolutely vociferous pitbull approach in protesting these changes.
Music Director, Vancouver Symphony Orchestra
I would like to disagree with Gene, if I may. I think the government has actually stood by that Canada Council and been very supportive of the arts in this community. The program that was announced last week for youth training in dance and music and other disciplines I think is excellent.
So I think it is a difficult situation for the Vancouver Symphony Orchestra, as about 20 of our musicians are in the CBC Radio Orchestra.
When your committee heard from Mr. Stursberg, I've heard that he described it as a “different” bunch of musicians, I believe, who come together to play music when we pay them, the accent being on the word “different”. Some of these different musicians, one in particular, has played in the orchestra for 50 years; another one, a horn player, has played for 34 years. The trombone section of the orchestra has been together for 32 years. So there's a longevity of membership there, which I think Mr. Stursberg perhaps wasn't aware of, or I'm sure he wasn't seeking to mislead your committee in any way whatsoever. But perhaps it might be drawn to his attention.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
I have one quick question.
I wonder if any of the folks on the panel have any sense of the different models of audience feedback. I know that when we heard from the BBC when we were looking at the mandate review, we heard about their audience councils and how board members were actually responsible for meeting with different sections of the BBC audience.
Do you know more about that, or do you know of other models where public broadcasters get feedback from their audiences?
As an Individual
Certainly, National Public Radio does that. But I think the problem here is that CBC doesn't think it's accountable to anybody, not even the listeners and viewers.
Chair, Executive Committee, Stand on Guard for CBC
The German example is useful, I think. They have a number of radio orchestras, I think 11, if my memory serves me correctly, and those radio orchestras are advised directly and indirectly by local musicians.
There is a close connection between university and conservatory music staffs, particularly conservatories, and the ministry of culture, and those public broadcasters. So there's a circuit of opinion and information that flows all the time amongst those four players, and that's worth thinking about, it seems to me.
Professor and Director, School of Music, University of British Columbia
A related point is that it's been noted many times that the CBC Radio Orchestra is the last in North America. I think the reason why there isn't one in the United States is that they have a very decentralized system of public radio and public broadcasting there, and because it's decentralized, it can't support a national institution the way we can and should.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
Thank you.
Now we move to the last round of questions and Ms. Murray, please.
Liberal
Joyce Murray Liberal Vancouver Quadra, BC
Thank you.
From hearing this whole discussion, I'm picking up a couple of key principles that in a way answer the question I put in the beginning, which was, what are the principles this committee could put forward to government that would not be direct programming decisions—which, clearly, you're not advocating either.
Two that have risen to the surface are that the CBC needs to be accountable to the public, and that because of its important function, the CBC needs to have a clear commitment to excellence. So with those principles in mind, my question to the group around the table here, which represents quite a diversity, and also some dissenting opinion about the role of classical music and Radio 2, is whether you would be able to suggest a simple and compelling accountability mechanism to the committee so that this is not so wide open. Otherwise the committee would be putting forward a recommendation for the principle of accountability to the public, to which the CBC could answer, of course, we are already accountable now.
Would you be able to recommend an illustrative mechanism for that accountability?
As an Individual
I believe we don't have to go down this new road.
Mr. Abbott mentioned or listed off in the Tuesday meeting the three areas of accountability in the Broadcasting Act, and then he put the checkmate in with subsection 46(5). But the Minister of Canadian Heritage already has the accountability mechanism in place, and, in turn, the minister can seek advice from the standing committee on various issues. I refer specifically to the CBC being obligated under the Broadcasting Act to present the next season's plans, and so on, through the Minister of Canadian Heritage. The minister has to approve those. Is the Minister of Canadian Heritage merely a rubber-stamp mechanism to say, yes, here's your funding, go back and spend it, because we can't talk about programming? Alternatively, can the minister say, if you want this programming, I have to consult with my very learned standing committee and get their opinions on this?
I think the mechanism is in place already; it just takes courage to implement what's going on there.
Chair, Executive Committee, Stand on Guard for CBC
On accountability, it seems to me that you might want to consider being more explicit about the criteria that guide the government when it makes appointments to the board. If you added criteria like knowing something about the arts and the history of this country in a substantial way; being committed to classical music, amongst other kinds of music, and knowing something about it; and understanding the industry, as it's sometimes called, quite well, you could make the board answerable without interfering with programming.
We have no clear idea what criteria are being used to make appointments to the board. That seems to me a crucial thing. We have some idea about the criteria being used to decide who will be the high civil servants in the CBC—that we do have some idea about. But there is a lot of obscurity in the way the board is chosen, and that makes it hard for us to get accountability, because we can't refer to specific criteria to say that a board member or the board as a whole is acting competently and in the interests of arts and culture in this country.
So if you could give us that means of doing so, we'd be very grateful.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
Okay. Thank you for that.
For the last question, we go to Mr. Fast, please.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
If I might, I'd just like to summarize what we've heard from you in terms of options. Ms. Murray has already touched on a couple of those.
What I heard you say, first of all, is that it might not be a bad idea to actually withdraw the CBC mandate review that we've issued and perhaps revise it somewhat to address specifically the issue of CBC Radio.
Second, there was a suggestion that we fire the board; that's pretty simple.
Third, there was a suggestion that a separate entity be established with respect to the CBC Radio Orchestra.
Fourth, there is the suggestion that CBC be asked to explain why its blogs are being censored.
Fifth, there is the whole issue of public consultation, that somehow, whether statutorily or through regulation or otherwise, there be a mechanism put in place to ensure broad public consultation on these kinds of issues.
And sixth is improving transparency, especially with respect to CBC decisions.
Does that accurately characterize what you've been telling us, and have I missed anything?
By the way, Bramwell, thank you for those comp tickets you provide us from time to time. They're very much appreciated.
Music Director, Vancouver Symphony Orchestra
What with dinners and comp tickets, I'm going to get examined by some kind of parliamentary watchdog.
By the way, anyone else on the committee is invited for dinner or tickets any time they're passing through.
Speaking on behalf of the Vancouver Symphony Orchestra and speaking for classical music, I think most of those things would cover the topics very well indeed.
On the question of transparency, this is the word we keep coming back to, and accountability is terribly important. The fact that there is a vice-president for radio and television seems to me to be quite ludicrous. It's rather like inviting a person to be music director of the opera, the choirs in the city, and the orchestra. It's inappropriate for the milieu. CBC should have a head of Radio 2 who is answerable to the heritage committee, who at least must turn up and answer your questions. At the present time it's totally obfuscated. We have no idea who is making the primary decisions--except anecdotally through evidence from members of the CBC board.
So transparency is the name of the game, I think.
I thank you, Mr. Fast, for your list of actions.
As an Individual
You could add to that that the senior officers of the corporation should be culturally informed. We now have people in the senior levels of CBC who know nothing about the arts, nothing about music, and I wonder how they reach their decisions.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
Thank you very much.
I must say that you were a great bunch of witnesses here today. You were very candid, and we appreciate that.
And thank you to our committee for the great questions.
Again, thank you for your presentations and for your answers. I wish you all the best.
The meeting is adjourned.