Canadian Heritage Committee on Nov. 23rd, 2020

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Prégent, Ms. St-Onge, Mr. Song, and Ms. Rubin, you are an example of the great diversity of Quebec culture. It is a great pleasure to have you with us today.

I have taken careful note of the comments of the Union des artistes on the CRB, and I will come back to them.

Mr. Song, I know that my colleague Ms. Bessette will have questions for you.

I am going to go to questions for Lisa Rubin, since the Segal Centre is in my riding, in Mont-Royal. It's been an incredible pleasure to work with this incredible organization that often has two or three things going on at once, between plays and concerts and all kinds of incredible activities for our community.

I want to congratulate you, and I do want to encourage the Quebec government to move quickly on your application to revise the infrastructure projects for the renovation of the Segal Centre.

But coming back to the issue at hand, the recovery, Lisa, you talked a lot about timelines. I think timelines are important because we all think that when the Quebec government gives the go-ahead for theatres to reopen, theatres will just be able to reopen, but they won't, because you need to plan sometimes a year in advance to buy the rights to a show to put it together. Can you talk to us about...? Let's say, if Quebec said theatres could reopen on January 11, when would you be able to actually get running to the point that your revenues would be equal to what they were before the pandemic?

[Lisa Rubin]

Thank you for your question and for your support always. It gives us so much confidence when we have an MP who cares about the arts, so I just wanted to share that and thank you.

A great example was in Quebec. We got the go-ahead earlier this summer, so theatres scrambled, scrambled, scrambled to get work going for the fall. In this case, everyone was doing a one-person or a two-person show because of the financial risk and the timeline. In order to do a musical, for example, we usually cast the musical a full year ahead.

In order to get back to where we were before, you usually work on a project one to two years out. If you're a distributor or just a presenter, then you can kind of grasp for these things that can come in and just get up in a few days, but when you're really creating, when you're really part of the ecosystem of development, it really takes a year.

I'd like to piggyback for a second on what Madame Prégent was saying in that we understand that, with our unions—we work predominantly with the Canadian Actors Equity Association and sometimes with UDA—when we are making an offer, that contract needs to be signed in equity 10 days from the offer, so it's very, very scary for an institution to say that we're going to do a big show, because everybody will need to be paid if we're going to cancel. This is what's happening with Underneath the Lintel.

Zebrina. Une pièce à conviction, at the Théâtre du Nouveau Monde.

It's a one-man show with a full team. We hired everybody under UDA for 16 performances. We're not doing any, and they're all being paid. It's a tremendous loss for us, although CALQ has given wonderful support to try to recoup some of the ticket losses so we're all very grateful for that. Bit it's the mounting of these productions and knowing that you're just going.... We want the money to get into the hands of the artists, but living under this back-and-forth, are we or aren't we, makes it impossible to do anything that we could do before. There's going to need to be a vaccine before we can have 10 people on stage who can dance and sing.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Lisa, coming back to what you are suggesting, for you the wage subsidy, CERB, has worked well. Then the Canada recovery benefit has worked pretty well for the people you've had to lay off. I want to ask the Union des Artistes about the people who are not getting it.

You need something afterwards. You in theatres and festivals across Canada are going to need a bridge period of subsidization, a special program for the theatres, the artists and all the production teams who work there to support you, between the time the pandemic ends for everybody else and your being able to get off the ground.

I'm going to ask both you and Pascale, what do you suggest?

[Lisa Rubin]

I'll just jump back in and then I'll leave it to Pascale.

Our contract, in a way, with audiences and artists has completely shifted. You describe it really well, with that bridge period.

Also, we need to acknowledge that right now, because of the support, we may be okay in the office, but it's very hard to hire people. The people we can hire are super busy—I was going to have a concert, but he's too busy and he can't do it—and the rest have moved on; they've left our industry.

We need to find a way to support the artists and the technicians, to help them not leave us so that when we do come back, we can come back strong. It's a problem right now in terms of hiring people, even if we have our jobs in the building or outside of the building.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you.

Can the representatives from the Union des artistes comment briefly?

[Pascale St-Onge]

I will start, and Ms. Prégent can complete my answer.

Clearly, we are not against helping institutions. We are well aware that there must be theatres, producers and so on. What we want is measures designed in such a way that they reach the artists.

Ms. Rubin said that artists, technicians and people in the field are leaving because it's too difficult right now. It's going to be a real problem and it's going to take a robust, comprehensive action plan.

One aspect that has not been raised so far is the distress of people in the arts. There should be help with mental health, training, labour market reclassification, and so on.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

I'm sorry. I have to interrupt.

We really have to push forward.

Mr. Champoux, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I too would like to thank the witnesses for being here today.

Ms. St-Onge, you were on a roll. You were saying that the reaction on the ground is not positive and that a much more robust and comprehensive approach will be needed to support the sector. Could you tell us more about that?

[Pascale St-Onge]

Yes, of course. Ms. Prégent will also be able to give you details on the assistance provided by the Fondation des artistes and explain why this assistance is not sufficient to meet the needs.

We receive many cries for help from people on the ground. The criteria for accessing the CRB are more complicated than those for the Canada emergency response benefit (CERB). The closures are extended for a long time again, until January, and we don't know when we will be able to reopen. It's becoming very overwhelming for people on the ground.

There has been a lot of government investment in infrastructure and some sectors of the economy, but culture is particularly affected and more help is needed. I really like Ms. Rubin's proposal for production insurance.

I will let Ms. Prégent talk about the Fondation des artistes in particular.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I will come back to Ms. Prégent in a few minutes on this very subject.

I would like to continue this discussion with you on the fact that the assistance does not go to the artists and that we are still a little uncertain as to when the venues will be able to reopen.

Could the fact that artists are still living in constant uncertainty have a long-term effect? Might some artists and artisans simply change careers? Are we in danger of losing these people?

What's the message from the community?

[Pascale St-Onge]

The Guilde des musiciens et des musiciennes du Québec sent a survey to its members. According to the responses, many are thinking about their future and others are in the process of leaving the profession. We can draw the same conclusions for all sectors related to the performing arts.

[Sophie Prégent]

Let me clarify.

We are in the process of surveying our members about that sad reality. The Union des artists has 8,500 active members. In any given year, about 2,000 members do not earn a penny; their income is zero dollars. That leaves about 6,500 members. In our business, there's clearly not enough room for all those people. Imagine the impact that that reality can have.

Although there is no room for 6,500 members, 6,500 members still want to work in our profession. At the moment, there is no work. This will have a direct impact on the membership of the Union des artistes. I expect lots of memberships to lapse and a number of members to leave the union. We have a foundation and, mercifully, it is doing well. You have probably heard that Netflix has provided funding and that the Ministère de la Culture et des Communications injected $2 million for the performing arts, and so on.

Since April 1,the Fondation des artistes has distributed a total of more than $1 million, mainly from the Fonds Jean-Duceppe. This is mostly money from the foundation, not from Netflix or the government. In general we distribute around $115,000 per year.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Ms. Prégent, our time is limited, but I would still like us to talk about assistance programs.

You talked about the issue with the CRB, in that artists do not always meet the criteria. You also talked about the fact that they are living on last year's income and you emphasized that artists' income fluctuates greatly.

Would you have a model you could propose? I am thinking of the REMU criteria, for example, that exist to manage insurance coverage for the Union des artistes. Could that model be used to determine the artists' eligibility, for example?

[Sophie Prégent]

Yes, it might be possible. It would certainly not be perfect, but it could be studied.

We could also consider income averaging, as it already exists with income tax. That kind of measure more or less matches the reality of self-employed workers' incomes.

Currently, using the preceding year as a basis penalizes some people. The “REMU year” criterion actually averages income over the last five years. Yes, that approach could well be promising.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Let's talk about Telefilm Canada and the grants available for feature-length films. Just now, you raised a point that I find very interesting, when you were talking about the budget you needed to make a feature film. The grants offered in that program, from $150,000 to $250,000, seem laughable to me.

How much does it really cost to make a feature film if you tighten the budget as much as you can?

[Sophie Prégent]

At the Union des artists, we sign variances on account of the Talents in View program, and that is why I raise the point today.

It is actually possible to make a feature-length film with a budget of $150,000. People manage to do it but no one is paid. Basically, what you have is nothing more than the artists and the crews subsidizing art and culture.

No one is paid, actually; not the technicians, not the writers, not the directors. That is my conclusion as to the Telefilm Canada grants. They give between $150,000 and $250,000 to people who have to do what they can to get the most out of that money. Clearly, they then turn to the associations to ask whether that amount is adequate for a first feature. We must be aware of the impact of that kind of program.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Ms. Prégent.

Thank you, Mr. Champoux.

I'm not the only one back today. Ms. McPherson is back as well.

We're going to miss that beautiful snowy background that you had on Zoom.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I know.

Mr. Chair, I can tell you that I brought the snow here. That was nice of me; it was kind of me to have brought it with us.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

You have six minutes.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you.

Thank you also to all of our witnesses who have joined us today. This has been very interesting to me.

I'll put my first question to Ms. Prégent. You talk about the trickle-down money, about making sure that we get money to artists, making sure that the CRB meets the needs of artists and whatnot. What do you think would be useful? Would you be supportive of a guaranteed livable basic income? This is something our party has put forward. I'm wondering whether or not it would be helpful for the artistic community, in your opinion.

[Sophie Prégent]

Yes, that is also an avenue that could be explored and that could easily be studied. It's somewhat like the system we thought about at the outset.

I will also say that we must not throw the baby out with the bath water. Some things in the CRB program, which was somewhat modelled on the employment insurance system, are commendable and very helpful. However, employment insurance works on the basis of income that is regular and consistent. That's what it does best.

With the CRB, they should try to tailor it a little better to the varying incomes of self-employed workers. If they were able to do that, we would end up with something good. We are not here to tell you that there's nothing good in the program. On the contrary, it has something in it that we have never seen before, and you have our sincere thanks for that.

I am just pointing out an imbalance in the CRB program. For example, if I earned $17,000 or $27,000 in 2019, I would be penalized, whereas, in theory, an income of $38,000 would let me get more money. The balance has to be reestablished. The guaranteed income that you are talking about does that.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

One thing we see with the guaranteed basic living is that it's a sliding scale, depending upon how much you're able to make within your community. It will be a top-up piece, and I think that's very useful.

I am running out of time, but I have a question for Ms. Rubin about venue support.

You talked about the challenges that venues are experiencing. You certainly were very clear with the five asks and a wish. Thank you for those. Could you talk a little about your worries concerning the audience's ability to come back? Even once there is a vaccine, even once the Quebec government or whichever government across the country says theatres can reopen does so, when I speak to the theatre community in Edmonton Strathcona, they talk about a fear that the audiences won't have the confidence to come back. Can you speak to that a little bit?

[Lisa Rubin]

Sure. Thanks for the question.

I think it's just a matter of time and we're in it for the long haul. Just as, when this first started, people would say “I'm not wearing a mask to the theatre”, now we're all saying “It's fantastic to wear a mask to the theatre.” It will take time for the fear to subside, particularly among the baby boomer-plus generation, who, as many know, with their disposable income form the majority of the theatre-going audience.

We are doing a lot of work for students, for the under-30s, all of which comes with a different pricing structure, but yes, there is going to be a slow, gradual return to a full house.

We believe it's there, but it may come in 2024. When we say we're in it for the long haul, then, we're definitely in it for the long haul when it comes to reduced seating and trust and confidence, and the way we understand that everybody is vaccinated or the fears subside.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

How would you see us providing that long-term support to you, until 2024?

[Lisa Rubin]

I think so much has to do with the messaging. So much has to do with.... Being told that museums, libraries and theatres have to close, when Costco can.... Well, it's food; we get that, but.... So much has to do with encouraging culture, encouraging live arts in your life. Our institutions have done everything possible. Let's have a health check. Come to our venues and check that we're doing it right so that you can say, “The Segal Centre is stamped with health and safety.” That is something you can do.

Again, we're looking for long-term support and no penalties. The same way we're talking about protecting the artists themselves, we should be protecting the institutions, understanding that it's going to be a slow return in terms of sales, production capacity and just getting back on our feet. Whatever those programs are to encourage development, such as the earlier parts of that production chain, I would say they are going to be helpful and they are going to be better for the mental health of the artists, so they know they're working toward something without the pressure of a performance date that's just going to be cancelled.