Canadian Heritage Committee on April 10th, 2014

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Patti, the Chair keeps reminding us to make sure we ask questions of the people who are coming to us via video, so I'm going to start with you.

I don't mean for this to take up a ton of time, but I'm really interested. I know that when we were young people growing up, one thing that was impressed upon us was to find out when we purchased an album, an LP or a CD, how much revenue actually went to the artist who created the piece of music.

Some folks do complain once in a while about the additional fees that Ticketmaster puts on when they purchase a ticket for a concert. That got me thinking a little about this whole shift to live music and the way artists are going to be able to make a living both now and in the future, through the promotion and the sustainability of live music.

I wonder if you could give us a bit of a breakdown. I meant to ask you this on Saturday when we did the round table at the Junos, but could you give us a breakdown of how the revenue is disbursed through Ticketmaster and what it looks like for the artist at the end of the day?

[Patti-Anne Tarlton]

I think what we want to make clear is that a ticket, or a ticket price, is driven by the artist. We are all servicing the artist and trying to build their economic impact for their own career, and then in turn we can see the ripple effects of that throughout the industry.

When we talk about ticket pricing, we often debate about high ticket prices, but if you compared days gone by to today, the production elements, for example, that come with these shows are so much superior to what they were before. With regard to the specific question about a service charge on the ticket, it's really one component of the entire opportunity. Over time what you'll see is that we're collaborating to generate revenue on behalf of that artist. Whether it's shared inside the ticket price or as a service charge, or if it's in the catering bill, etc., these are all expenses that go against generating income for the artist.

For any given event, the artist will take the lion's share. Let's say north of 90% of what's generated on a show is going towards the artist.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you.

One of the other pieces that you spoke about was music education. It's become a general theme throughout all of our presenters that music education is something that we need to pursue in a lot stronger fashion. The difficulty, of course, is that the delivery of that service, at least on an education side, is considered to be that of the provincial governments.

What is the role of the federal government here in terms of education? Perhaps we can very quickly move this around the panel.

[Patti-Anne Tarlton]

It's to build consistency. You'll see a common thread in our conversations. We are doing a lot of this already. It's really just the ongoing encouragement. The charity MusiCounts through the Junos that we spoke of earlier is already a program that's in place because the actual formal programs in schools have been diminished over time. This is not necessarily even asking the government to fund a national music program, but to encourage it, not discourage it, as part of the curriculum. I was really interested by the concept of ParticipAction. I think if we did some ideation around that, we could show something consistent across Canada, and then we could promote that internationally, too, that here in Canada we have this as our cornerstone.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

I'm almost out of time and I have another question, but I want to have your quick input into this.

[Mike Tanner]

I just want to jump in on that for a second, as well.

I think I agree with what Patti is saying. Sometimes it's not down to actual dollars flowing from government X to institution Y, but perhaps in terms of creating a cultural shift and a national identity built around music and music education. We see the same thing happening in sports. We consider ourselves a hockey country. That's promoted and promulgated at all different levels of government all across the country, and so you don't have a shortage of kids, boys and girls, signing up for hockey no matter where you look. Partly that's because of who we think of ourselves as. We can do the same thing with music.

[Riley O'Connor]

I want to add to that.

To echo everybody's sentiment here, and also just in terms of the last witnesses from the previous session, education, in terms of music, also brings respect. With that respect would come less downloading music for free, because if you're part of an integrated process, just like your math courses.... One of the first things that seems to be going away from schools is a music program, but you wouldn't think of ever dropping math. It's about respect. It's about learning the process at every stage of the game. I think that just will come as a natural thing.

I know it's a provincial issue, but maybe there can be some direction from the federal government in terms of trying to get a better consensus across the provinces.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you.

Excellent. I appreciate that.

I'll try to get this question in quickly and get all of you again to respond.

Mike, in particular, you talked about the promotion of music tourism in Canada, and how we do that. I guess the question is how do we do that to the rest of the world? How would the federal government engage itself in that process?

As an example, a lot of you and I have heard lots about Austin, Texas, and the success there, and what has just transpired in this huge event that generates millions of dollars for both Austin and the State of Texas itself. I wondered if you could talk a little bit about that in terms of the message to the rest of the world, and how the federal government could play a role in this process.

[Mike Tanner]

Sure. That's a good question, and it's not an easy and quick answer.

I think the process starts with—

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Perhaps the chair will give you some more time.

[Mike Tanner]

The process starts with exactly what we're doing here.

In Toronto, and Ontario, we have been able to move the needle a little bit through initiating dialogue with elected representatives and bureaucrats at the city level, and it's the same thing at the provincial level, particularly with the tourism ministry. The whole process has begun in both situations with exactly what we are doing here. We have an information exchange, a gathering of data, a sharing of perspectives, and an expression of a willingness to work together to shape priorities, to shape messaging, and to create programs and initiatives that make sense to the industry and to the constituents who all of you represent.

I am not really suggesting that the federal government go out and spend millions and millions of dollars necessarily on advertising campaigns that would play in Europe, in Asia, and across the world, in promoting the country as a live music destination. But if we have that in our minds collectively, which is something that can be promoted by the federal government because of the ubiquity of the influence you have, I believe that those things will come out naturally in a lot of the things that private enterprise does. What a government can do sometimes is just create a pathway, a railway or a pipeline, for private industry stakeholders to then populate and animate.

Let me give you a quick example. In Toronto we just signed a music city alliance with Austin. A lot of people are asking what this means. It's just two mayors putting their signatures on a piece of paper. I see it as a pipeline. Now that those official things have been established, the relationship and the alliance have been established between city hall and city hall, it's up to private business to take advantage of that, to share best practices, to ferry artists back and forth, and to have the industry talking to each other. All of that is more possible.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gord Brown]

Mr. Tanner, I'm sorry, but we're going to have to move to Mr. Stewart, but maybe he'll want to hear more.

Mr. Stewart, you have the floor.

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Thanks to all the witnesses for coming today.

Gee, this has taken me back 20 years. Mike and I were just speaking about how we had a bandmate in common back in the 1990s. We were both very active in the Vancouver music scene. I remember that one of the first shows I played at the Commodore was with Barney Bentall. When I saw Ticketmaster on the stub, I thought, “I've made it.”

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Boy, why did I become a politician? I don't know. I should have stayed in music. And I think maybe my colleagues on the other side are saying that they agree.

[A voice]

You can always go back.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

It's a great pleasure to be here today. It does take me back to how we used to think of making money back in the 1990s. As a young band, you were lucky to get a CD. It was very expensive. We had some FACTOR grants, which were very helpful.

It does seem that the model is very much changed, because last year my brother played South by Southwest and now is touring in Europe. His way of making money is so much different from how we conceived it. My brother tells me—pointing to what you're doing—that it's mostly the live music venue. They've kind of given up on trying to capture money off recordings. Now the industry is looking for more help, and I'm glad you're here today to talk about this.

I'd like to know more about festivals and tours and this whole idea of perhaps changing how we see ourselves. I was struck by what was said by a witness we had here last week or earlier this week, who was talking about moving everything down to Nashville, because Nashville is seen to be the place to go. Perhaps you can elaborate a bit more on how we can make Canada more of a music mecca in terms of live music, and how that translates into emerging artists perhaps being able to support themselves.

I would ask you to be specific. We have to write stuff on paper here and pass it in Parliament, you know, so if you have some specific ideas on how we might do that, it would be very helpful.

[Mike Tanner]

At North by Northeast, speaking specifically, we have about 1,000 artists playing each year over the course of about a week. Some of those will be the international headliners that you see on our poster, but most of them will be emerging artists. Emerging artists are at a more incipient stage in their career. They're looking for the exposure. They're looking for the networking. There's an attendant conference that happens. Because we're a large event, and because Sled Island and Osheaga and some of the other festivals that I mentioned are large events, there's a lot of media around it as well.

You're right in that the paradigm has changed tremendously. It used to be that the tour was a loss leader to support the product that you're selling, the record or the CD. Now it's all flipped around. Nobody's moving lots of units of recorded music anymore. You can't be Steely Dan anymore and stay in the studio and just sell records.

The emerging artists who play our festival benefit from a payout directly, from exposure to the industry and the media, and from getting on a bill with larger and better known artists. You probably remember from your days that it was a good thing to get a support slot, perhaps be taken on tour as well, and get all the attention and the buzz that comes from animating more festivals, events, promoters and iconic venues.

You talk about Nashville, but consider Massey Hall in Toronto. There's no reason that shouldn't be as well known internationally as the Ryman Auditorium. It has every bit as long a history and a story to pass.

We create a culture where the world will come to us looking for live music and looking for that kind of animation, energy, and unforgettable experiences.

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Thanks.

Do any of the other witnesses have comments on what we could do to actually build Canada as an international music mecca?

[Riley O'Connor]

Well, we're already a mecca. I mean, Toronto is number three in the North American concert market. Canada is one of the largest touring countries for its size of a 35 million population. I think what some of the focus, though, in terms of even going back to the tourism question is that I think we can change the focus.

I'm also a board member of Tourism Toronto. It's over the last three years that we've introduced music as part of the platform when we go out on international trade exhibits to encourage conventions that come to Toronto to know that there is more activity going on in that city than just walking around and going to a restaurant. I think that you can change the focus on how you show yourself internationally as well.

On touring, I think it's time that we started thinking about multi-use facilities. I mean, our hockey arenas aren't just hockey arenas. They are also the centre of communities, the centre of concert activity and conventions. Every city in this country has seen an economic growth every time they build a new facility. In London you have the John Labatt Centre, and in Kelowna you have Prospera Place. These have now become the centre of those communities because they are multicultural in terms of their activities besides just sports.

[Patti-Anne Tarlton]

I'll add to that. We're very comfortable saying we're a hockey country, but every time we say we are hockey we could also say that we have a vibrant music industry. It could be part of every trade mission that Riley talked about, to bring an attraction with us, an artist with us. That's where the success is that we've seen in the other examples in America and in Europe. They really are bringing the musician or the industry into the fold.

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Okay, thanks.

How do we do this besides just perhaps changing the content of our ads? Are there things like tax credits or new grants or things that would help? I know one of the biggest problems is keeping venues alive. When I was playing they were all over the place, and now there are just a few small ones. I'm sure that's essential to any festival, to have venues. Do you have any thoughts about how that might be encouraged, or do we just let the market take its course there?

[Mike Tanner]

Well, as Riley said, the market is generally pretty good at taking its course. We're not talking here about completely reinventing the wheel, but of shifting the focus, as we've all said.

There used to be some programs administered by the federal government that are no longer available. There was the fleeting shooting star of MTEP, the marquee tourism events program.It had a two-year horizon and then it ended. There was something called trade routes program administered by Canadian Heritage. PromArt I think was a DFAIT program, and there was Culture.ca. All of those things have gone away. FACTOR still exists, and a lot of our artists avail themselves of FACTOR through the new talent demo awards and videoFACT as well.

We believe that those programs that disappeared for one reason or another didn't animate the industry as I'm speaking about here, which is really to put the funding and support in the hands of the promoters, the venues, or the industry that can provide the stages for the artist to perform upon. I think that is the easiest and the most streamlined way for the federal government to be involved at that level to reinstate some of this dialogue that might lead to creation of appropriate programs and the flowing of support into the right quarters.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gord Brown]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Dion, go ahead for seven minutes.