Mr. Chairman, members of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, as has just been said, my name is Alain Pineau and I am the National Director of the Canadian Conference of the Arts, or the CCA. I would like to thank you for giving the CCA this opportunity to intervene as part of your study on the recent cuts to the musical diversity support programs.
The CCA is the largest and oldest cultural organization in the country. Established in 1945, it represents a broad range of members covering all cultural disciplines, all lifestyles and all regions of the country. The CCA defines itself as the national forum for the arts, culture and heritage sector. It provides information, analyses, research and, from time to time, opinions on all of the political issues which, at the federal level, have an impact on the Canadian cultural sector.
Given the breadth of its mandate and the large perspectives it is called upon to adopt, the CCA rarely intervenes with respect to specific issues like the one currently in front of you. But it will intervene when, as we deem to be the case here, some fundamental principles are at play with respect to the health of the Canadian cultural sector and the welfare of the hundreds of thousands of artists, creators, and arts professionals who work in it.
The CCA has publicly rejoiced in the fact that the government has committed to a five-year renewal of the Canada Music Fund. We welcome the fact that the Minister of Canadian Heritage has recognized the need to increase the money available for digital and international market development. Those two sectors of activity will certainly benefit from the increased money they will receive through FACTOR and MUSICACTION.
It is, however, most unfortunate that this needed injection was done at the expense of what we deem to be an important strategic investment in Canadian cultural diversity. These programs that have been abolished foster the development of new forms of music that are not necessarily commercially viable immediately, or ever for that matter, but could eventually become so.
Why does the CCA invite the government to seek new funding to maintain those programs? First, because investing in what is deemed to be at the fringe today may well shape our culture tomorrow. Second, because it is important for the federal government to help develop the incredible, inexhaustible natural resource we have; namely, the diverse cultural communities that weave the new fabric of Canadian society.
We do believe that one of the responsibilities of the federal government is to invest in experimentation, which will lead to the development of new forms of music by Canadian artists. This is like risk capital or investing in fundamental research in other sectors of our economy.
Moreover, we believe that it is through modest programs such as the ones that were terminated that Canada is meeting within its borders the commitment regarding cultural diversity that our successive governments made when they ratified and then supported internationally UNESCO's 2005 Convention. Cultural diversity begins right here, by supporting our own creativity, which is rooted in the rich diversity of our population.
As for the economic argument, we have presented several examples of musical genres or of musicians that successively went on from the programs managed by the Canada Council to the programs of FACTOR and of MUSICACTION when their reputation led them to some kind of commercial viability. Canadian Celtic music is an example, as well as the artists of various cultural origins in genres such as gospel, jazz, experimental music, without mentioning small classical music ensembles that only have a modest catalogue of recorded works. Besides, the argument of administrative streamlining does not seem to be valid in this case. In fact, if we go by the information included in the summary evaluation that was made in 2007 on behalf of Canadian Heritage, there is very little duplication between the programs that were terminated and the programs of FACTOR and MUSICACTION.
Last Tuesday and also earlier, you had the opportunity to hear about this from the artists who came to testify: the relatively modest sum of $1.3 million that was invested in recording and distributing so-called specialized music made a world of difference for artists, creators and small ensembles, some of which are very well known, although they are not commercially viable, in the way that MUSICACTION uses this term.
The communiqué announcing the renewal of the Canada Music Fund and the disappearance of the program supporting musical diversity stated that:
Music industry business models are changing. Businesses that were once largely concerned with sales of physical formats need to diversify their revenue streams (for instance, through live music and merchandising) and use digital models (including on-line stores, subscriptions, over-the-air mobile downloads, and streaming) to promote and sell their content.
We fully agree with this statement, and it is the reason why, this week, we suggested to the Minister of Canadian Heritage that he should find at least $1.3 million, the sum that is needed in order to restore the terminated programs, which is a priority that we consider to be just as important as the priority of increasing the budgets of the FACTOR and MUSICACTION programs for their market development.
Many artists are already recording, performing, touring, promoting, and distributing through the support of the Internet, but they cannot move their work to the next level of economic viability without support programs like the ones that were terminated.
A recording for specialized creators and ensembles is a business card. It's the promotion of a tour. It may be the gateway to successful distribution through the Internet. The latter is something those artists and ensembles are now most unlikely to achieve. A case in point is the demise of the non-profit distribution services of recordings administered by the Canadian Music Centre, thanks to the financial support from the Department of Heritage. At a cost of $150,000—I repeat, $150,000—the CMC distribution services make it possible for over 1,300 titles produced by some 200 small independent Canadian labels to achieve international distribution. By grouping together catalogues too small to be considered individually by distributors, the CMC has been able to negotiate on their behalf with the likes of Nexus or the Independent Online Distribution Alliance, giving those Canadian artists access to 300 online distribution services and to more than 2,000 public library re-subscription services. The program supports the development of markets for those Canadian niche formats that would not otherwise be able to reach their audiences.
The CMC will have no choice but to close the distribution services of these recordings if the money is not available on April 1, 2010, and that's five months away.
We submit to you that $1.3 million a year is a very reasonable public investment to make so that emerging and experimental forms of Canadian cultural expression may take advantage of the famous long-tail effect in the new Internet economy.
Some might argue that if this is such a high priority, the Canada Council, whose budget was increased by $30 million per year last year, should find some way of getting the money that is needed for maintaining the terminated programs. The problem with this easy solution is that it ignores the fact that the $30 million that was added to the annual Canada Council budget is insufficient to meet many identified needs, which is why the CCA spoke out in other forums and asked that the base budget of the Canada Council be increased to $300 million by the year 2014.
Asking the Canada Council to compensate for the termination of the program from the Department of Canadian Heritage would in fact amount to some kind of cut, at the very moment when the Canada Council is liable to lose $9 million of its budget due to the strategic program review required by the government, without mentioning the loss of revenue from its foundation which, like all other foundations, has been hit by the economic crisis.
That's not to mention that the $30 million increase has been partly offset by the $20 million and more that has been cut in the past three years--my colleagues here alluded to that--from programs such as PromArt and Trade Routes, which has put additional pressure on the Canada Council to try to pick up the slack.
Hence, for all these reasons, on behalf of the CCA, I now invite your committee to recommend to the minister that he do whatever he can to find what is basically a very modest sum for restoring programs that support research and innovation in Canadian music along with the development of the cultural diversity that is characteristic of our population.
Thank you for your attention to this presentation. I am ready to answer your questions.
