Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee. It's wonderful to have the opportunity to speak to you alongside my esteemed colleagues.
My name is Jonathan Bunce. I am the co-founder and artistic and executive director of Wavelength Music, a non-profit organization in Toronto that has supported emerging Canadian artists for more than 25 years through concerts and festivals, and now a conference. I'm also a co-author of two recent research studies on the wider independent live music sector: “Reimagining Music Venues” and a forthcoming report titled “New Sounds, New Spaces”.
Across Canada, there are hundreds of creative and performance spaces that are largely invisible at a policy level. These are grassroots music venues, as well as rehearsal spaces, artist hubs and DIY community cultural spaces. These spaces are where artists develop their craft, build audiences and launch their careers, yet most survive with little to no public support and operate primarily as commercial businesses.
The central finding of our research is simple: Creative and performance spaces are cultural infrastructure, but Canada largely treats them as commercial real estate. This creates what I would call a “value-capture” problem.
The Canadian live music sector generates more than $10 billion annually and supports over 100,000 jobs, yet many of the artists, venues and community organizations that generate this cultural activity are the least financially secure participants in this whole system. Too much of the economic value flows elsewhere—to landlords, ticketing companies, multinational promoters and surrounding real estate—while the cultural infrastructure at the foundation of the ecosystem remains chronically undercapitalized.
Our research points to three key challenges.
First, Canada is losing the lower and middle rungs of the cultural ladder. Emerging artists depend on affordable small and mid-sized spaces to perform, rehearse, experiment and build audiences. Despite their high demand, these spaces face rising rents, insurance costs and operating expenses. If we care about the next generation of Canadian artists, then we must care about the spaces in which they get started.
Second, the market alone is not solving the problem. Artists feel that they're underpaid; audiences feel that tickets are too expensive, and venue operators face increasing costs. The issue is not a lack of demand for culture; it's that the economics of providing cultural space no longer work on their own.
We invest in libraries, recreation centres and museums because they produce public benefit. Grassroots performance spaces also produce public benefit, yet they are expected to survive on limited commercial revenue alone. Primarily, that means sales of refreshments.
Accessibility is another consequence of this market failure. In high-cost cities, such as Toronto, cultural organizations are often forced into the oldest and least expensive buildings they can find. Such spaces are rarely fully accessible, forcing operators to choose between affordability and accessibility, when both should be a top priority.
When we look internationally, particularly to countries in Europe, we see a different approach. Local governments frequently provide underutilized buildings to cultural organizations at low cost and support them with ongoing operational funding. These spaces are then able to focus on culture rather than mere survival.
Third, cultural spaces require ongoing stewardship, not just capital funding. The recent insolvency of Artscape in Toronto offers an important lesson. The challenge is not simply building cultural spaces; it's ensuring that they remain affordable and mission-driven 20 years later. Capital funding alone is not enough; long-term operating support matters too.
I'd like to leave the committee with four recommendations.
First, recognize grassroots creative spaces as essential cultural infrastructure.
Second, create dedicated capital and operating support streams for community-based creative and performance spaces. We welcome the ongoing support of the Canada arts presentation fund and the Canada cultural spaces fund, and we would love to see these programs not just renewed but have their budgets increased to match not only inflation but also the economic realities we live in now in the 2020s.
Third, support a national network approach to cultural infrastructure—music hubs, rehearsal facilities, artist workspaces and performance venues distributed across communities rather than concentrated in a handful of major institutions.
Fourth, develop a national cultural space strategy that supports community ownership, long-term affordable tenancy and operational sustainability. International examples such as the U.K.'s Music Venue Trust or the Trans Europe Halles network demonstrate how community ownership can protect cultural spaces from displacement and rising rents. Canadian examples, such as Hugh's Room Live and It's OK* Studios, both in Toronto, show that similar approaches can work here as well, though they're still in their infancy.
Twenty-five years ago, Ontario's cultural renaissance invested heavily in major institutions, such as the Art Gallery of Ontario and the Four Seasons Centre. A national approach should complement those investments with support for the smaller grassroots spaces in which future generations of Canadian artists will be developed. It's time for a cultural renaissance 2.0.
In closing, Canada is known globally for our successful work to support artistic creation and presentation. We've been less successful at supporting the essential physical spaces in which culture grows. Europe doesn't simply subsidize art; it also subsidizes the spaces in which art happens. If we fail to invest in those spaces, we risk losing the infrastructure that makes Canadian culture possible in the first place.
Thank you.
