|
CHAPTER TWO: CREATORS
We need creators. We need them because it is the creators - more than
anyone - who shape our cultural identity and give us our sense of who we
are and where we belong.
By virtue of their inspirational and intuitive nature, creators frequently
challenge the status quo and are often at the cutting edge of social change.
Indeed, our creative and performing artists are the very foundation of
our cultural enterprises and the source of Canadian cultural content. Without
their commitment to their talent and their craft our cultural industries
and institutions would be dominated by foreign voices and perspectives.
Pierre-Marc Johnson, the former Québec Premier, now Président,
Regroupement des événements majeurs internationaux, underlined
this notion for the Committee at a round table discussion in Montreal in
February 1999:
Cultural creation and production are, first and foremost, done by individuals.
I am deeply convinced that there is no creation of cultural productions
without people, whether [they be] authors, composers, dancers, painters
or performers. The force behind creation is the people. That is why the
community and the state have developed a series of means to defend creation.1
The Canadian Conference of the Arts reminded the Committee that in consideration
of their important contributions to our cultural life, Canadian artists
deserve support:
One of the key objectives of a federal cultural policy must be to sustain
a strong domestic base of creators, artists and entrepreneurs engaged in
the development and promotion of Canadian cultural expression.2
In Support of Canadian Creativity
The on-going story of creative expression and artistic achievement in
Canada is a rich one and it is filled with people with a unique vision
and remarkable talent, such as the innovative pianist Glenn Gould, who
helped change the relationship between musicians and audiences through
his approach to the recording process. Michel Tremblay demonstrated that
popular and award-winning playwrights can also be popular and award-winning
novelists.
No matter what the art form, artists apply creativity to the familiar
and to the unknown. What they produce is viewed in the light of past traditions
and current tastes, but frequently their work reflects neither. Cultural
policy is most effective when there is the flexibility to respond to changing
circumstances. Indeed, as Iain Phillips, a Mohawk elder, suggested to the
Committee, even in areas of traditional expression, "[i]t is inevitable
that new forms of cultural expression will be developed."3
Over the 40 years of its existence, the Canada Council for the Arts
has become so much a part of our cultural landscape that few Canadians
realize just how different the Canadian scene was in 1950. Cultural historian
Rosemary Sullivan paints a picture of how difficult it was to make a living
in the arts in Canada in the early 1950s.
In the 1950s if you . . . wanted to write, the best solution was to
get the heck out of Canada. Many did: Mavis Gallant and Mordecai Richler
went into self-imposed exile in France and England, Sinclair Ross went
to Spain. Margaret Laurence lived outside of Canada for ten years. Why?
Because there was no cultural fabric to support writers; there was only.
. . indifference on the part of a public. . .taught to believe there was
no culture. . .[in Canada]. Writing was something done by Americans and
Europeans, preferably dead Americans and Europeans.4
Carol Shields, one of Canada's distinguished novelists, spoke about
a time in the recent past when getting a work published in Canada was exceptional.
There's a statistic I'd like to quote to show how this flowering came
soon after the founding of the Canada Council. In the year 1960 there were
five novels [in English] published in Canada. That was considered a bumper
crop. A year ago, there were five Canadian novels published in London in
one week. This is the distance we've gone. Our writers are now recognized
internationally.5
Against this backdrop the federal government entered the fine and performing
arts scene in Canada through the creation of an arms-length agency - the
Canada Council for the Arts. The work done by the Massey-Levésque
Commission in investigating the Canadian arts and cultural scene prepared
the way. However, the recommendation to establish the Council on the scale
imagined by the Commission required a great deal of start-up money. The
account of how the money was found combines creative problem-solving and
happy co-incidence.
One morning in Ottawa in 1956, J. W. Pickersgill, one of the most prominent
federal public officials at the time, who had been trying to make the Council
a reality, was walking to work when he met John Deutsch, secretary to the
Treasury Board. Deutsch began talking about what to do about the government's
sudden windfall of succession duties amounting to $100 million from the
estates of two prominent millionaires who had died the year before. Izaak
Walton Killam and Sir James Hamet Dunn had been highly successful industrialists
and investors. Pickersgill suggested that the government provide $50 million
to meet some of the capital needs of Canada's universities and another
$50 million to provide an endowment for the Canada Council for the Arts.6
Deutsch passed on the idea and soon the Council received the money.
This imaginative approach to policy development appears as a recurring
theme in the history of the federal government's support of the arts and
culture. It speaks to real needs, it is responsive to community interests,
and it avoids any hint of direct involvement by the federal government
in cultural expression.
Today, the same elements - government leadership, creative problem-solving
and a blend of commercial sponsorships, donations and direct government
funding - are part of the mix used to support culture in Canada. What is
different today, however, is the scale and vibrancy of the cultural sector.
It would be overstating the case to suggest that Canadian artistic achievement
flourished only after, or simply because of the influence of the Massey-Lévesque
Commission and the establishment of the Canada Council for the Arts. Such
a suggestion would be a disservice to the many pioneering Canadians who,
through their inventiveness and dedication, managed to carve out careers
for themselves without government support of any kind. However, the fact
remains that since 1957 the federal government's contribution to the arts
has been enormous.
Since its inception, the Canada Council for the Arts has sponsored the
work of thousands of Canadian writers and artists, many of whom are now
world-famous. Each year more names are added to that list of celebrated
Canadian artists who are honoured internationally, as well as by Canadians
across the country. Today, Canada's artistic community is truly national
in character with writers, composers, musicians, film-makers, artists and
performers working in all parts of the land. Their achievements and success
attest to the high quality of their work in Canada and abroad. The Committee
considers it essential to maintain the existing vitality of Canadian creators.
With this objective in mind, the Committee set about its task of considering
the appropriate role for the federal government in support of the arts
and Canadian culture in the years to come.
During its deliberations, the Committee heard from individual creators,
representatives of the major federal arts agencies and arts service organizations.7
These witnesses painted a picture of a vigorous, healthy and decidedly
mature cultural sector. Indeed, if there is a single image of the Canadian
cultural community, it is one of maturity.
Ottawa based researcher Terry Cheney cited some interesting statistics
relating to the contemporary cultural workforce:
What are some of the distinctive features of the culture labour force?
As you may have heard, it is in fact surprisingly large. Even if you define
it fairly narrowly it's about 1.5% of the labour force, which is probably
still bigger than the famous fishing, mining, and forestry activities.8
It is difficult to compare cultural statistics because the criteria
for reporting information over the years have not been consistent. Different
definitions have been used and often include activities such as sports
and recreation. Nonetheless, using a narrow definition of "artist,"
Statistics Canada data show that, in 1994 (the most recent year for which
complete comparative data are available), the sector represented close
to 700,000 jobs and contributed almost $22 billion to the Canadian economy.
The cultural sector also represented 5.2% of the Canadian labour force
(see Table 2.1).
Table 2.1
Canadian Labour Force by Selected Industries (1994)9
The Committee agrees with the witnesses who pointed to the maturity of
Canada's cultural sector. While the sector may be mature, the income levels
of individual creators working in the sector do not always reflect this
maturity. For example, a 1993 labour force survey conducted by Statistics
Canada shows that some Canadian creative artists (e.g., painters and writers)
have earned incomes that are substantially less (between 25% to 50%) than
other jobs within the cultural sector.10
Grants to Individual Creators
Most creators underwrite the creation of their own poetry, paintings,
sculpture, screen plays and other works of art, and do so over extended
periods of time. Heather Redfern of Edmonton's Catalyst Theatre outlined
the case:
The largest subsidizers of the arts in this country are artists and
art workers (themselves) because of the low wages they receive for the
work they do [and] because of the huge amount of volunteer work they have
to do just to keep their companies afloat.11
Some works take years to produce. The Committee is aware of the limited
amounts of short-term funding available through the Canada Council for
the Arts that can be used to support an artist's income. From the Committee's
standpoint, investing in the arts is no less important than investing in
the social sciences, humanities, the pure sciences or medicine. The Committee
is also aware of the long-term commitments made to researchers and scholars
by other federal government agencies and looks for a similar level of commitment
to Canadian artists.
While some attention has been paid over time to support the income of
creators, the existing measures can at best be described as modest. The
Canada Council for the Arts provides modest grants to individual artists
usually on a one-time basis.12
Support for writers is provided through short-term grants, with the maximum
value being $20,000. These grants are intended "to offset subsistence
costs" and are available for a maximum period of one year.13
This is in sharp contrast to some academic research grants offered by Canada's
research councils, which provide substantive support over a number of years.
A researcher who is awarded a Killam Research Fellowship, for example,
can receive more than $50,000 per year for more than one year. "The
Council expects the Research Fellow to continue receiving full salary during
tenure of the fellowship."14
The Committee feels that support to individual creators should be increased.
If Canada's leading Research Councils - notably the Social Sciences and
Humanities Research Council, the Medical Research Council and the Natural
Sciences and Engineering Research Council - see the need to provide substantial
assistance to researchers, there is ample justification to support Canada's
creative communities in much the same way. As was acknowledged earlier,
the Canada Council for the Arts already administers a program to support
deserving individuals. However, it does not approach the scale of scholarship
funding and the other support programs administered by the Research Councils.
The Committee supports the policies exercised by the various Research Councils
and recognizes the need to provide university researchers with substantial
financial support paid over extended periods of time. However, the Committee
also contends that individual Canadian creators are just as deserving and
their financial need is just as great. Therefore, individual creators deserve
levels of financial support comparable to those now available to academic
researchers.
The Committee recognizes the need to support university researchers
for extended periods, but many creators who came to talk with the Committee
expressed unease about the lack of support for individual creators, even
as they expressed thanks for the modest sums available.
The Committee recognizes that providing substantial financial support
to individual artists and creators is complicated and that many aspects
of existing policies were decided upon many years ago. However, this is
of such importance that the Committee makes the following recommendations.
Recommendation 1
The Committee recommends that:
1.1 The Canada Council for the Arts, as the main source of federal
government support for creators, continue to provide grants to creators
that enable them to devote themselves full-time to a creative project.
The Government of Canada should encourage long-term and sustainable support
to creators.
1.2 The additional resources required by the Canada Council for the
Arts to implement Recommendation 1.1 should be provided.
1.3 The Department of Canadian Heritage, in partnership with the
Canada Council for the Arts, develop a plan to secure the funding proposed
in Recommendation 1.2 and report back to this Committee within one year
of the tabling of this report.
Along with the direct support recommended above, it is necessary to
recognize that an important source of support to creators comes through
the work of Canada's cultural agencies, such as the National Film Board
of Canada and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. The Committee learned
from senior officials of the Canada Council for the Arts that a number
of new initiatives are being pursued.15
The Committee was apprised of the Council's new funding priorities and
supports the federal government's provision of a $25 million annual increase
to the Canada Council for the Arts over a period of five years beginning
in 1997-98. This will allow the Council to strengthen its basic programs
in support of creators as well as to establish new programs in support
of important areas of activity - Aboriginal cultural development, cultural
diversity, international initiatives and festivals. However, the Committee
believes that more must be done in the realm of self-employment.
Self-Employment
Many creators, including writers, designers, craftspeople and musicians
are self-employed. They are not unique in this respect. Using 1994 data
provided by Statistics Canada, it can be seen that more than 18% of the
Canadian labour force, compared to 12% in the United States, is self-employed.
Indeed, self-employment is the only category of employment that has shown
steady growth over the past ten years. During the 1990s fully 80% of the
growth in the Canadian labour force was in self-employment. In the United
States during this same period, less than 10% of the growth in employment
could be attributed to self-employment.16
These dramatic changes in employment patterns can be attributed largely
to shifting demographic trends and structural changes in the Canadian economy.
The growth in the numbers of self-employed persons across Canada poses
major challenges for the country's social safety net, and raises important
legal, health, insurance and taxation questions. The Canadian system of
health insurance, unemployment insurance, labour law and pension programs
is based largely on the assumption that most of the work force is made
up of employees rather than self-employed persons. Although many of these
issues have been raised by those concerned with the status of the artist,
the issues themselves touch the lives of a large proportion of Canada's
labour force.
While the Committee's particular concern is for Canada's cultural life,
it also recognizes that all Canadians must deal with these major shifts
in Canadian employment patterns. The Committee therefore considers the
clarification of the rights and obligations of the self-employed to be
of central importance.
Self-employment is a complex issue involving the federal and provincial
governments. The Committee is aware that important work is currently being
done by the Canadian Policy Research Network that relates to the topic
of changing employment relationships in Canada. That being said, the Committee
believes there should be additional initiatives.
Recommendation 2
The Committee recommends that:
2.1 The Department of Canadian Heritage ensure ongoing federal initiatives
examining issues of self-employment include the interests of self-employed
artists and creators.
2.2 The Minister of Canadian Heritage appoint a task force to review
self-employment issues in the cultural sector. The task force should include
representatives from the Department of Revenue, the Department of Finance,
and the Department of Human Resources Development Canada, and should report
its recommendations within one year.
Today, Canadian creators can take some comfort in the knowledge that
a solid framework exists to encourage and support their artistic and cultural
endeavours. It is not by any means a perfect framework, but it has proved
to be effective in supporting the efforts of thousands of creators. The
Committee is dedicated to the principle of strengthening and building further
on that framework. Of course, the environment in which creators work can
also be improved. The Committee is aware that the income levels of Canadian
creators - especially writers and visual artists - are often lower than
others who work in the cultural sector.17
It is not the government's function to determine which creative endeavor
is more valuable than another, but in the Committee's view, the
striking discrepancies between income levels across the various cultural
disciplines warrants study and appropriate action. Another area requiring
action is the opportunities for creators presented by new technologies.
New Technologies - New Challenges
The convergence of new technologies - including computer and digital
technologies, the Internet, cable and satellite communications systems,
compressed digital broadcasting and fiber-optics - has the potential to
reshape traditional relationships between creators and their audiences.
It is difficult to keep up with these changes. In the past, there has been
an impulse to devise regulatory regimes to control the use of such technologies.
Governments face a challenge in this respect because they are not organized
to accommodate rapid change. Delays are often costly. For example, it took
the federal government nearly ten years to get from Phase I to Phase II
in amending Canada's copyright legislation.
The Committee received interesting but conflicting testimony with respect
to the role of new technologies on creative activity. One witness testified
that technology has no impact at all - at least in his area. "New
technology was part of us when we quit banging bones together." 18
Another witness testified that new technologies have a powerful impact
on the creative process. "Our role has changed with the arrival of
new technology. We no longer just store paper; we store information, no
matter what medium it is on."19
Still another witness suggested that new technologies are vehicles of opportunity:
Where technology has really changed our industry is in the technology
to make books. That means the ability to typeset and to scan certain things
so you can make books cheaper than we used to do by comparison. We can
make books in two weeks or two days actually, if we really need to. So
the technology has worked . . . to upgrade the ability of the publishing
industry to bring forward the books.20
Canadians have always been exposed to, and have had to deal with, new
technological developments. The present generation is not the first. When
Sir Wilfrid Laurier was Prime Minister, the "new" technologies
of the day were telephony, cinema and sound recording on wax cylinders.
Similarly, during Sir Robert Borden's term, the dominant new technology
was radio.
It is essential that the Government of Canada have the capability to
respond in a timely fashion. This requires planning to ensure that the
people who are needed are in place, that there is an adequate information
base to deal with developments promptly, and that all of the relevant policy
options have been considered.
Robert Lepage
Robert Lepage is a remarkable example of an innovative Canadian creator
who has become one of the most sought after theatre artists on the international
scene. Lepage specialized in collective creation, a way of devising and
presenting plays with an ensemble of theatre artists. His productions cross
the traditional boundaries of theatre, dance and performance arts. Lepage
works closely with actors, designers, choreographers and musicians. Together,
they create works of art grounded in the rich cultural traditions of theatre,
dance and cinema
In addition to ground-breaking productions such as The Dragon's Trilogy,
Tectonic Plates, and The Seven Streams of the River Ota, Lepage has also
directed opera for the Canadian Opera Company, and is responsible for some
innovative feature films such as Le Confessional, Le Polygraphe, and Nô.
Lepage and his artistic collaborators continue to create new forms
of public presentation which embrace new technologies. During a 1997 workshop
for theatre artists in Toronto, Lepage said:
We're dealing with an audience today that has a very sophisticated
narrative vocabulary. I'm not saying that we have to become more cinematic
or more "televisual," but we have to find a way to invite that
audience into the theatre. Film was supposed to have killed theatre, but
it liberated it. Every time there is a technological revolution, it gives
an artist reason to hope.21
Protecting Creators in the Information Society
When Canadians think of cultural objects, they often think in terms
of specific items such as books, films, sheet music, sound recordings and
paintings. By applying digital technology to such media, traditional cultural
objects now have an electronic dimension. This means that they can now
be easily copied and sent anywhere in the world. This makes it very difficult
for artists and other creators of cultural products to protect their works.
As one of the discussion papers sent to the Committee observed:
[T]he technological changes that are now taking place are even more
profound than those we have faced in the past. One key change has been
the global adoption of what amounts to a common, universal computer language,
which allows for the seamless transmission of "bits" to and from
anywhere in the world.22
Some believe one of the keys to the economic wealth of nations in this
new era will be the ability to exercise the legal rights provided under
the Copyright Act.23
The Committee agrees. At a round table discussion Eddie Bayens, a musician,
expressed his view of legislation designed to protect performers:
The performer's slice of that revenue. . . needs to be protected in
the performer's rights, in neighbouring rights, in copyright and also in
digital retrieval rights. 24
As important as it is to protect performers, it is equally important
to provide all creators with the rights to control the digital exploitation
of their materials. When the writer John Gray appeared before the Committee
he noted that: ``what is really necessary is a combination of national
action and international agreements.''25
While support from the Department of Canadian Heritage is available
to publishers for the production of printed and bound books, comparatively
speaking, little is available for the development of electronic cultural
products. Similarly, as will be seen in Chapter Five, museums, archives
and libraries need resources to digitize their collections. With these
considerations in mind, the Committee makes the following recommendations:26
Recommendation 3
The Committee recommends that:
3.1 Existing federal programs should also support the creation of
traditional cultural materials (books, music, films, and images) in electronic
formats. In addition, the Department of Canadian Heritage, in consultation
with the Department of Industry and the Department of Finance, should encourage
investment in enterprises that market and sell access to these products;
and
3.2 The Minister of Canadian Heritage, in consultation with the Ministers
of Industry and Finance, develop a strategy that implements Recommendation
3.1.
Intellectual Property and Copyright Law Reform
Intellectual property protection is provided by five federal statutes:
the Copyright Act, the Patent Act, the Trade-Marks Act,
the Industrial Design Act, and the Integrated Circuit
Topography Act. One of the most important of these statutes for creators
is the Copyright Act. Technological innovations have, in part, prompted
on-going amendments to the Copyright Act. One element of this process
is implementing the obligations in the World Intellectual Property Organization's
(WIPO) two new treaties: the Copyright Treaty and the Performers and Phonograms
Treaty.
These treaties were negotiated as an international response to the challenges
of digital technologies, particularly the Internet. They represent a new
set of international rules for the use and protection of digital materials
and are drafted to create, in those countries joining them, a legal framework
which fosters the orderly development of the international exchange of
digital materials.
In December 1997, Canada signed the two treaties. Under Canadian law,
the fact that a treaty has been "signed" does not make the treaty
law in Canada. National laws must be enacted, or amended, to reflect the
obligations undertaken in the treaty.27
Recommendation 4
Legislation implementing the two World Intellectual Property Organization
(WIPO) Treaties should be introduced by the government and enacted by Parliament
as soon as possible.
Recommendation 5
The Government of Canada should take appropriate measures to ensure
that amendments to the Copyright Act keep pace with technological
change.
Status of the Artist
Copyright is one federal law designed to provide creators with legal
rights entitling them to compensation for the use of their creations and
to protect against unauthorized use and exploitation of their work. Another
federal law that recognizes the contribution of creators is the Status
of the Artist Act. The Committee endorses the principles set out in
sections 2 and 3, reprinted below, of this legislation:
2. The Government of Canada hereby recognizes:
(a) the importance of the contribution of artists to the cultural, social,
economic and political enrichment of Canada;
(b) the importance to Canadian society of conferring on artists a status
that reflects their primary role in developing and enhancing Canada's artistic
and cultural life, and in sustaining Canada's quality of life;
(c) the role of the artist, in particular to express the diverse nature
of the Canadian way of life and the individual and collective aspirations
of Canadians;
(d) that artistic creativity is the engine for the growth and prosperity
of dynamic cultural industries in Canada; and
(e) the importance to artists that they be compensated for the use of
their works including the public lending of them.
Policy Statement
3. Canada's policy on the professional status of the artist, as implemented
by the Minister of Communications is based on the following rights:
(a) the right of artists and producers to freedom of association and
expression;
(b) the right of associations representing artists to be recognized
in law and to promote the professional and socio-economic interests of
their members; and
(c) the right of artists to have access to advisory forums in which
they may express their views on their status and on any other questions
concerning them.28
In its presentation to the Committee, the Canadian Conference of the
Arts made the following observation:
Since passage of the federal legislation, no other status of the artist
initiatives have come to fruition at either the federal or provincial level.
As a result, the conflicts between government policies and programs over
such fundamental issues as taxation, training, and professional development,
and access to programs such as Employment Insurance, have become more challenging
and unresponsive to self-employed artists and cultural workers.29
The Committee is convinced that it will be difficult to make improvements
to the status of Canadian artists without the cooperation and participation
of provincial governments. Existing federal status of the artist legislation
will fulfil its purposes only if it is accompanied by complementary provincial
legislation. Therefore:
Recommendation 6
The Committee recommends that the Department of Canadian Heritage
invite its counterparts in provincial governments to put in place complementary
legislation relating to the status of the artist.
This chapter began by saying that "we need creators." The
Government of Canada needs to support, recognize and value them.
1 Pierre-Marc
Johnson, Président, Regroupement des événements majeurs
internationaux, Montreal Round Table, February 25, 1999.
2 Canadian
Conference of the Arts, Working Group on Cultural Policy for the 21st
Century, presented to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage (hereinafter,
"The Committee"), p. 16.
3 Iain
Phillips, Witness presentation to the Committee, April 22, 1999.
4 Rosemary
Sullivan, Perspectives on Canadian Cultural Policies, lecture, Ottawa,
March 20, 1997.
5 Carol
Shields, Author, Ottawa Round Table on the Arts, March 10, 1998.
6 Paul
Litt, The Muses, the Masses and the Massey Commission, University
of Toronto Press, Toronto, 1992, p. 241-242.
7 See
Appendix 3 for the complete list.
8 Terry
Cheney, Witness presentation to the Committee, February 10, 1998.
9 Statistics
Canada. The Health and Vitality of the Culture Sector in British Columbia.
Education, Culture and Tourism Division. 1997: 166.
10
See Appendix 2, Table A-2.
11
Heather Redfern, Catalyst Theatre, Edmonton Round Table, February 24, 1999.
12
The 41st Annual Report of the Canada Council for the Arts, reports that
in 1997-1998 the Canada Council for the Arts made 4,593 grants to artists
and arts organizations. A total of $17,349,000 was paid in grants to professional
artists and $76,273,000 to arts organizations.
13
Program information from Canada Council for the Arts Internet site, <http://www.canadacouncil.ca/>.
14
Program information from Canada Council for the Arts Internet site, <http://www.canadacouncil.ca/prizes/
killam/broch-e.htm>. In 1998, nine new Killam Research Fellows were
announced.
15
Canada Council for the Arts, Brief to the Committee.
16
D. Sunter, "Canada-US Labour Market Comparison," Canadian
Economic Observer, Statistics Canada, December 1998.
17
See Appendix 2, Tables A-2, A-3, and A-4.
18
Eddie Bayens, Musician, Ottawa Round Table on the Arts, March 10, 1998.
19
Diane Charland, President, Canadian Council of Archives, Ottawa Round Table
on the Heritage, March 10, 1998.
20
Jack Stoddart, Publisher, Ottawa Round Table on Publishing, March 10, 1998.
21
Robert Lepage quoted by Richard Ouzounian in "Theatre: Canada's most
renowned stage talent refuses to be a prisoner of convention," The
Globe and Mail, August 12, 1997.
22
Stentor, Discussion Paper submitted to the Committee, April 1998, p. 39.
23
Charles C. Mann, "Who will own your next good idea?," Atlantic
Monthly, September 1998.
24
Eddie Bayens, Musician, Ottawa Round Table on the Arts, March 10, 1998.
25
John Gray, Author, expert witness, February 12, 1998.
26
Related issues of preservation are dealt with in recommendations in Chapter
Five.
27
Publishers, private and public broadcasters, writers and the Canadian Conference
of the Arts addressed copyright issues before the Committee.
28
Status of the Artist Act, R.S.C. 1995, c.19.6, sections 2 and 3.
29
Canadian Conference of the Arts, Working Group on Cultural Policy for
the 21st Century, presented to the Standing Committee, p. 19.