Canadian Heritage Committee on June 5th, 2008

[Richard Flohil]

Absolutely not. Its members are largely employed in other orchestras as well. So there's not a great mass of unemployment, although there would be a loss of income. I think we have many orchestras in this country, some—Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver included—certainly of a standard equal to that of the CBC Radio Orchestra. So I think there is no excuse for keeping that orchestra going at that cost.

If I may make one point about transparency, I'm told that the weekly audience for CBC's show, Two New Hours, which specialized in electronic or experimental music, was less than 2,000 listeners in a country of 33 million. That's a show that had two hosts, a budget to commission works, a budget to pay performers to play those works, and nobody listening out there. Sorry.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Anyone else?

[Richard A. Hornsby]

The orchestra is made up of some of the top people in the Vancouver area. Almost every orchestral musician in this country does more than one job. So that doesn't really—

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Is it a national institution?

[John Hornsby]

It is a national institution, because it is the only radio orchestra we have left. As I mentioned earlier, I believe it should actually be looked at and strengthened.

[Howard Knopf]

I agree with what Mr. Hornsby just said. We have a supposedly national orchestra here in town. Unfortunately, the current conductor doesn't care for music that was written much beyond Mendelssohn and certainly doesn't care for any new Canadian music, but he's a good fiddler. We have to live with that. Maybe one day things will change here and we can have a second national orchestra.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

I do have one more question, and I know the chair is going to cut me off.

[Howard Knopf]

If I can just quickly get in a shot at Mr. Flohil, the Two New Hours show, I understand, had very high ratings by CBC standards, which is not to say—

[Ian Menzies]

My guess would be—and this is totally a guess—that the local philharmonic is probably just as meaningful to most classical music fans as the supposedly national radio orchestra. There's no data on that, but that would be my guess.

For me, as a rather casual classical fan, I'm paying more attention to the Calgary Philharmonic, the Edmonton Philharmonic, and what's going on near me with classical music. I'm not really invested in the radio orchestra at all.

[Joan Pierre]

I have to agree it's a national treasure.

[Ingrid Whyte]

I think it's a national institution, but with respect, I would suggest that that's not really the point. I think the money that goes into supporting that orchestra in this day and age is huge. We have many wonderful orchestras right across the country that are struggling for audiences. They deserve to be heard on our national broadcaster.

[Geoff Kulawick]

I agree wholeheartedly. I think other orchestras are just as viable and play just as great music and are made up of a lot of the same musicians that are in the Vancouver and the CBC Radio Orchestra.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

My point in getting that out is that if it is a national institution, then I think that is why we should collectively rush to save it. If it is an orchestra like other orchestras, then there are other orchestras.

We're going to put a report together when we're done. I do think this has been a platform. I'm sensitive to things like what Mr. Flohil said. We shouldn't be telling the CBC what to do. What we've done is created a platform for people to come forward and speak. I think we need to determine if it's not a national institution. Outside of Vancouver there are varying views on that. In Vancouver there's one view: it's a national institution.

Mr. Flohil, CBC Radio 2 has a 3% radio listenership. I agree with something Mr. Knopf said, that we shouldn't just be evaluating it as that, although I do think if we put some roller coasters in some parks there might be more people there, and I might be one of them. I'm kidding.

What do we do to get more than 3%? An educational tool with a 3% radio listenership, to me, has a challenge. Why are we maintaining this national institution, Radio 2, if we can't get over 3% of radio listenership?

[Richard Flohil]

My answer is you widen.... Radio One has become an information talk channel, in the main, and as you've remarked, an excellent job is being done. If you widen the musical scope of Radio 2, you have a very serious chance of increasing its market share within three to five years up to at least 6% to 8%, which I think would be viable.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Does anyone else want to comment?

[Ian Menzies]

I'm going to repeat that you need hosts who.... Look at Radio One. Look at Stuart McLean; look at Shelagh Rogers. I think this is what CBC means to a lot of people.

Shelagh Rogers can do anything on her show. She can whistle in the wind. She can do anything on that show and more or less maintain her listenership. She does do a very wide number of things, and Stuart McLean.... Somebody else like her needs to come along; people don't last forever.

I'm sure she deserves to retire, and I hope she enjoys it, but the answer for Radio 2, in my opinion, is host-driven.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Go ahead, Mr. Hornsby.

[Richard A. Hornsby]

I take a slightly different viewpoint on the eclectic programming idea for creating larger audiences.

People I talk to...they're typical. When you go out to supper, you don't want to see a menu that says, have the fajitas and then the French rack of lamb and then.... You go to an Italian restaurant or something. A lot of people listening--

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

I suppose, but could I just propose one thing to you? To pull it from an artist who was mentioned here tonight, if a tree falls in the forest, does anybody hear? I think it's important that we give platforms to these artists, but if nobody's listening, isn't that a problem?

[Richard A. Hornsby]

I suppose that would go for everybody around the table, though, because we're not representing popular music anyway. Jazz listening is no bigger than classical listening, and some of the other niche areas are in the same predicament.

I would still go back to what I said earlier: do we believe those are part of our cultural landscape, and should they be supported alongside popular music, which doesn't necessarily need the support?

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

I'm not making an argument; it's only that if we can get the listenership up a bit, then we're exposing more people and bringing more people into the camp.

[Richard A. Hornsby]

Just to finish, again I don't believe the eclectic nature is actually what we're looking for. I think you actually may see the audiences go down as a result of that, because you're fragmenting your audience in ways. People who are interested in listening to classical music don't want to hear Buck 65 as the next cut.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Okay.

If anyone else would like to comment, please make it short, because we do have to go in camera. I have to give my staff some direction.

Go ahead, Mr. Kulawick.

[Geoff Kulawick]

I'm convinced that the numbers for CBC Radio 2 are going to go way up. They will appeal to a much broader constituency and to more demographics from broad backgrounds. I think you're going to see the numbers double or triple.

I also think that's why the people who are managing CBC want to do this move: it's because they see it growing their audience and growing their relevancy, and we should let them do it.

That's my brief comment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Okay.

Go ahead, Ms. Whyte.