My time's up already? Fine.
Evidence of meeting #119 for Canadian Heritage in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was music.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #119 for Canadian Heritage in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was music.
A video is available from Parliament.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Julie Dabrusin
Mr. Bussières, I'll let you finish what you wanted to explain. You have 30 seconds. Go ahead.
11:55 a.m.
Founder and Spokesperson, Regroupement des artisans de la musique
I just wanted to wrap by saying that these figures are not only laughable, but that they are also the result of a favourable contractual situation and a favourable copyright situation because we self-produce, we write all of our songs, and we have a favourable contract with our label.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC
Good morning, and welcome to our witnesses.
I will share two minutes of my time with Mr. Boissonnault.
I'll start with some questions for Ms. Mulholland, but if you have anything to add, Mr. Déziel and Mr. Bussières, take the time to do so.
Ms. Mulholland, in many interviews you've done, I've noticed that you talk about the Copyright Act as not protecting creators and artists. What concrete changes would like to see to the Copyright Act so that we can have more fairness and money can be distributed from the distributors to the creators?
11:55 a.m.
Artist entrepreneur, As an Individual
I'd love to go over the four points I mentioned, because that's exactly what they do.
Right now, I and all my creator colleagues are subsidizing billionaires, and the subsidies have to stop. That would be under the radio royalty exemption. I know there's a lot of talk about all the broadcasters and the ISPs, and them contributing because they're dumb pipes, but it was supposed to be temporary. It needs to be removed. That is one.
Regarding the definition of sound recording, again, we just want to get a functioning marketplace. This would contribute. This would enable some mailbox money for me so I don't need to be on the road all the time. At this moment, in order for me to make any money, or any kind of reasonable money, I have to either be on stage or in a studio, and that is not sustainable. There has to be some way to free up some of this money that used to be available and is no longer available because of the digital revolution.
The private copying fund is something else that would cover these contingencies, and then, term extension to make my catalogue more valuable.
Those are the four things that I suggested would change my life drastically and immediately.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC
Okay.
You've mentioned that you signed up at the beginning and got only $280.
Mr. Adams was here about two days ago, and he testified that 40 years ago he signed a contract for a dollar. Has much changed since that time, or is it just the same?
11:55 a.m.
Artist entrepreneur, As an Individual
It's night and day. From when he began his career and when I began my career, there has been a seismic shift.
I received the $280 to do one recording session for Republic of Doyle. I do one recording session. I go in there and I play my fiddle for three hours, doing a whole bunch of different “stings”, as they're called, that are used over a series of episodes. Say I did five seasons of the same show, I'd have five sessions for $280 each session.
I don't know how much studio work Bryan did for Canadian television shows, but one of the things he said two days ago that really caught my ear was that he made two albums that didn't do well before he had a hit. We are in a climate now where artists are making records, and if they don't have a hit on their first record or first single, they're gone because we have been subsidizing billionaires and we need to stop that.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC
If you calculated, how much money would you say you've lost with that $280 per session?
11:55 a.m.
Artist entrepreneur, As an Individual
I'm not an economist, so I don't know how much I would get. However, if we look at the jingle I did, “Good things grow in Ontario”—which is not actually an easy little musical phrase—because it's not the same, because it's a jingle, an ad, and not under the same rules, I do get residuals for that. Having a cheque for, whatever, $300 here and there, show up in my mailbox does actually make a significant deal to me. That's groceries for a month. These things actually matter.
If that could be applied to the film and television work I do, such as the film Maudie, which went around the world, was presented at big film festivals and is now streamed on Netflix, that could make a significant contribution to my day-to-day income.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
11:55 a.m.
Randy Boissonnault Edmonton Centre, Lib.
I would like to thank my very dear colleague.
I would like to thank the witnesses for their very interesting presentations.
Mr. Déziel, I have a question for you, and I will let you answer after I question Ms. Mulholland.
The question is very simple: as a group, if you had to choose three measures from the list of 29 measures proposed to improve the lives of artists, what would they be?
Miranda, I've heard you fiddling. I've seen you with Jim.
To all of the artists here today, you have to keep pushing. You have to use your voices. There's a natural tension in Parliament between the rights of the consumer and the rights of the artist to earn a living. Those are fundamental rights. Keep pushing. It's our job to be in your corner and to push.
You've given the four things. If you ranked them, how would you rank them?
Then I will come back to the gentlemen joining us by videoconference.
Noon
Artist entrepreneur, As an Individual
I would say they're all very important and as a package could make a huge difference.
The radio royalty exemption that was supposed to be temporary, that needs to go. The definition of “sound recording”, for me, I would like that to go because that would change my life dramatically right away. Obviously, the private copying fund, again, that would help me. I haven't written “Summer of '69”, unfortunately, so term extension would be my lesser ask but it's still extremely—
Noon
Artist entrepreneur, As an Individual
—important to me. Those four as a package are very important.
Noon
Edmonton Centre, Lib.
Did you like Mr. Adams' suggestion of 25 years after assignation of the licence as opposed to after death?
Noon
Artist entrepreneur, As an Individual
I think what Bryan Adams being here signalled to creators was that it's great that he's listening and speaking up for us. That was really wonderful.
I think without a functioning marketplace, it doesn't matter how long we have any kinds of rights for.
Noon
Edmonton Centre, Lib.
Okay.
Mr. Bussières, I did the math based on your data. In Alberta, the minimum wage is $15 an hour. To get $2,400 a month, you would need 16,800,000 listenings of your song on Spotify and 9,500,000 a month on YouTube. It doesn't make sense, it's not fair. Things have to change.
What are your three priorities?
Noon
Some hon. members
Hear, hear!
Noon
Founder and Spokesperson, Regroupement des artisans de la musique
That's very good. Thank you.
You're absolutely right.
As Mr. Nantel said, there are 29 points in the RAM platform. The three points I will address here today, and the most important, I think, are points 7, 8 and 9 in my brief.
Point 9 talks about extending the private copying regime. I think it may be the one that would be the easiest to implement in the short term.
Next, point 7 requests a modification of paragraph 2.4(1)(b), which provides that:
a person whose only act in respect of the communication of a work or other subject-matter to the public consists of providing the means of telecommunication necessary for another person to so communicate the work or other subject-matter does not communicate that work or other subject-matter to the public;
This removes the responsibility of Internet service providers and ensures that they are not recognized as making a public communication and are therefore not subject to artists' remuneration laws.
Point 8 concerns Internet service providers who help to ensure the visibility of our culture on platforms for the Canadian public, so that more streaming content is generated, and our works receive more listens to generate more money and keep our creators alive.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Julie Dabrusin
Thank you.
I would like to please just jump in for one quick question, because this is something that's just caught my attention.
M. Déziel has proposed a system where there would be a graded way of providing funds to artists based on how much they would allow it to be shared. With two artists here, I'm impinging a bit beyond our time here, but maybe in a couple of minutes, Ms. Mulholland and Monsieur Bussières, can you tell me what you think of this proposal?
Noon
Artist entrepreneur, As an Individual
I think one of the most disappointing things about the digital revolution, to me as an artist who started just as it began, was that we were promised a levelling of the playing field. We were promised artist to listener with no middlemen, or middlewomen, to be politically correct. But what has happened is that there has been a proliferation of middlemen in the past 20 years.
Grants are wonderful, and I feel so honoured to live in a country where there are grants. My problem with grants, though, is, then, who are the gatekeepers for these grants? What are the merits that we then look at to judge? We're just creating a whole other entity. So far we have the Ontario Arts Council, the Canada Council for the Arts, the Toronto Arts Council, one in each region. The granting body is trying to come up with a matrix and a rubric that will then give merit to some over others. What does that mean? That to me is a bit problematic.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Julie Dabrusin
I'm sorry. I have to cut it because I'm impinging over time, but I just was curious to get your insight.
Mr. Bussières, do you have anything quick to add in 30 seconds?
12:05 p.m.
Founder and Spokesperson, Regroupement des artisans de la musique
Yes.
Mr. Déziel proposed that citizens could deliberately add $1 to their Internet access package so that the money goes directly to the artist. The political challenge is to ensure that Internet service providers contribute to improving the remuneration of artists, but that the bill is not passed on to consumers. Mr. Déziel's idea is very good.
I have a suggestion. Why doesn't the CRTC step in to set the maximum, the ceiling price, for monthly Internet access service to ensure that providers do not pass the bill on to consumers? For example, it could be a maximum of $70 per month. It seems to me that the CRTC could have the power to intervene in contracts so that the bill is not passed on to consumers.