Canadian Heritage Committee on Oct. 22nd, 2009

[Alain Pineau]

We seem to be talking at cross-purposes. Nobody disputes that the investment of the government, as was confirmed through the five-year renewal of the Canadian Music Fund, is needed. On better days, I would even argue that it's not enough.

The issue here is that we're talking about something completely different, which is being suppressed for a good cause. It's like cutting off your right limb in order to be able to scratch your back. It's like supporting the auto industry today to save jobs, while failing to invest in alternative forms of transportation. That's what we're talking about here.

You can tell me that the government has made important investments in other areas that are just as important as this one. I will agree 100%. I'm saying that this one is just as important and it's a small amount of money. Can we revisit?

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

Ms. Zarac please.

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon. I am not a regular member of this committee, but since I have been here, I have understood that the industry is very happy with the extension of funding over a five-year period. I also heard that the government may have met more than 500 associations or artists to establish the new mode of funding.

Mr. D'Eith, you said that you wanted to send out a very clear message saying that the reductions were made by Canadian Heritage and did not reflect the opinion of your association or of the industry.

You belong to this group of 500 associations or artists who did not know that this was a poll aimed at establishing a new way of funding the program. I felt that you were somewhat defensive when you said that.

[Bob D'Eith]

Sorry. I didn't mean to be on the defensive. It just seems the music industry or the commercial industry is somehow being pitted against the non-commercial in this.

We were consulted on what would help the music industry. We were not consulted on cuts to the Canada Council. If we had been told that our funds would be at the expense of something, we may have had a completely different approach. We may have said maybe we need to balance things, or maybe we have to rethink that.

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

You think that you belong to the 500 organizations that were consulted, but you were not really aware of it. Am I right?

[Bob D'Eith]

I'm not sure if I'm on that list. I can only tell you that I did speak to the minister and we did speak about these issues. Was it a public forum? No. But I feel we were consulted because what I said was implemented and it was echoed by many of the organizations I'm affiliated with, so we were very happy with the fact that we were listened to and that our consultation had some impact, which was great.

What we just didn't know was that it was going to be at the expense of something.

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Pineau, you said that something would be closing down in April 2010 and that it would impact on research, innovation and exploitation.

[Alain Pineau]

It had to do with distribution.

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Could you tell us more about the impact that this will have?

[Alain Pineau]

Distribution is one part of the $1.3 million. The Distribution Service has existed for many years and it is managed by the Canadian Music Centre on behalf of the Canada Council. This service created an international network for distributing small catalogues by consolidating the catalogues of 200 publishers. This could have to do with individual artists who have published their works or, for instance with the St. Lawrence Quartet, that released five or six recordings and that enjoys an international reputation, but it will never make any money from this.

By combining all the small catalogues, the Canadian Music Centre succeeded in negotiating with Naxos, or with the online service, international distribution over Internet; that is the future. Besides, this is what we quoted in the July announcement. We recognize this and we entirely agree with Mr. Del Mastro: This sector must look toward the future. However, it is a mistake to think that the program we are talking about is part of the past. It is very much a part of the future, in our opinion, and this distribution system includes, among other things, the recordings—and I did not know this—and the catalogue of music that was recorded by Radio-Canada, and perhaps they are making fewer recordings than they used to make. This is quality music that shows that the Canadian artists, orchestras and classical music ensembles, and even experimental music groups, when Radio-Canada was still involved with that, have a role on the international stage that we can be proud of.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

I'll move on now to Monsieur Pomerleau.

[Roger Pomerleau, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

All the people—mainly artists—who came before us during the past two meetings explained how vital this program was for them in many ways. It is a basic need of theirs because they are creators more than people who work in the commercial field. They told us that this program is, in a way, research and development for the arts and that it would nurture future production. Some even told us that it was crucial for Canada's image. These people have often won international prizes, for example Juno awards, and they are known abroad, even though they are less well known in Canada. They are known as bringers of Canadian culture. This is important.

We realize that this program costs very little, namely $1.3 million. It will be cut, but we see that it has little overlap with other programs. Others told us that this was a program that cost very little to administer and that the sums that are being cut will be redistributed. Therefore there is no advantage for the government in cutting these sums because they will be redistributed elsewhere. There is no clear justification for this nor any reasons having to do with accounting, administration or the budget.

Mr. Pineau and Mr. D'Eith, what is the basic reason behind the government's cutting this program?

[Alain Pineau]

I am not going to speculate about the reasons why the government would make this kind of transfer. The most generous explanation that I can provide is that it was done inadvertently.

You will have the opportunity next week to ask officials from Canadian Heritage if they recommended this. Normally, if these people recommend something, there should be reasons for it. These reasons would refute our statements. Either there was an issue with duplication—this is not the information we obtained—or someone felt the money was wasted, or it was a greater priority to head in this direction and just too bad for research and development!

Next week, the officials should be able to tell you whether or not they recommended this to the minister. If it is not the case, other reasons will have to be found. I will not fabricate any reasons for the purpose of this exercise.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. D'Eith.

[Bob D'Eith]

It's interesting. I agree that a number of these artists receive money from FACTOR, MUSICACTION, and what not. A good example is Jesse Zubot, who came in last week. He's a good friend of mine. He's a prolific artist in Canada. He has won multiple awards. He is an interesting fellow and he has an interesting music career. There are some commercial products that he and his partners do. But there's also a side of Jesse Zubot, and artists like him, that leans toward experimentation. I'm not sure what he said, because I wasn't here, but I would imagine he would say that although he might receive some money through FACTOR and other organizations, he would always want the ability to create in an unfettered way.

[Roger Pomerleau, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

That's what he said.

[Bob D'Eith]

Did he? I honestly didn't know. But that is the distinction. It's really easy to see on a spreadsheet that artists received FACTOR, Canada Council, or this or that, and then to say that they're double-dipping. But the reality is that these are the same people who are also experimenting, who are pushing the envelope. If anybody is going to push the envelope, it's Jesse Zubot. He's right out there. He's brilliant. And we should support artists like him. If you dig deeper into the program, you'll realize that there really is a value to that.

[Roger Pomerleau, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

May I put another question, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Okay, but keep it very short.

[Roger Pomerleau, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Pineau, you mentioned UNESCO. You are among the very few that mentioned it.

What are the obligations of Canada with regard to the UNESCO treaty?

[Alain Pineau]

I cannot quote the entire text, but the commitment has to do with preserving and promoting cultural diversity all over the world, on the international scene, and with recognizing that cultural products—if I can use this expression that some find offensive—and cultural expressions are not commercial products like the others. This must be taken into account in international trade treaties.

Especially in a country like Canada, where cultural diversity is real and growing—in Quebec as well as in the country as a whole— we say that charity begins at home. If we make a commitment to support cultural diversity on the international scene, we must make a commitment to forge a Canadian cultural identity with the resources we have here. This is where the argument of cultural diversity comes into play. The Canadian government has made such a commitment. Its commitment must be valid both at home and abroad.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

Ms. Grewal.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, gentlemen, for your time and your presentations.

My question is for Mr. D'Eith. He is from my home province of British Columbia. About 60% of those funded by the Canadian musical diversity fund also receive funding from other kinds of music funds or a Canada Council music program. Mr. D'Eith, are you familiar with other sources of federal funding for Canadian musicians? Can you tell us something about continuing the funding for this program? Is it true that the government also supports popular artists and major labels?

Talking about Jesse Zubot, I would like to say that he didn't receive any funding under this program.

[Bob D'Eith]

I'm not sure what Jesse may or may not have received. It's hard for me to speak on this, because we are the affiliated office for FACTOR, but we are not FACTOR. So I can tell you what I know, but I can't speak on FACTOR's behalf.

What I can say is that FACTOR does fund all genres. I know for a fact that of approximately 1,500 applications, over 450 of those were of the non-commercial variety—about $4 million last year—but as I did say, there is a distinction to be made between funding classical jazz roots and.... It's a fan: at some point along that continuum, it is something that FACTOR would never support, and that is where this program kicks in.

It picks up the slack where FACTOR would just not get involved because there's not a clear commercial viability to it. So it filled a gap that MUSICACTION and FACTOR and other programs didn't cover, to my knowledge.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Mr. Chair, I will pass the rest of my time to Mr. Gourde.