CHER Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON CANADIAN HERITAGE

COMITÉ PERMANENT DU PATRIMOINE CANADIEN

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Monday, February 22, 1999

• 1305

[English]

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte (Parkdale—High Park, Lib.)): Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I would like to call this meeting of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage to order.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the standing committee is conducting a series of round tables on the government's evolving role in the support of Canadian culture in a context of a rapidly changing national and international environments.

[Translation]

I would like to welcome our guests and offer our sincere thanks to them. It's an honour for us to be among you today.

[English]

Our usual practice is to listen to the presentations of our witnesses, but this time we have decided to have a round table, with members and invited speakers sitting together in order to encourage a more fruitful exchange.

As you know, our committee is undertaking a study of the challenges facing culture on the eve of the next century, with the globalization of trade, the economy, emerging technologies, the Internet, and others, and their impact on culture and our cultural instruments, along with the demographic changes that will transform present-day Canada into a completely different country in the 21st century. Our predecessor committee began this study before the last election, and fortunately this committee decided we should continue the same work.

We wish to examine first the supports that are already in place by the federal government and how these supports, such as the rule of governing ownership in cultural content, federal grants to federal institutions, or tax incentives, will enable us to face the challenges of the next millennium. Those are the issues we are dealing with.

[Translation]

As I said, the three main challenges facing us, at least for the purposes of our study, are the advent of new technologies, the development of the global economy and global trade, and the changing demographics in our country.

At the outset, as committee members, we sought to inform ourselves thoroughly. One year ago, we held a parliamentary forum on cultural policy and international trade and technology in the new millennium. At this forum, we organized round tables on various sectors: the arts, heritage, the publishing industry, film and video, broadcasting and sound recording.

This forum was very successful in identifying key themes which, I hope, we will have a chance to discuss with you today.

[English]

We have heard from representatives of the various federal cultural institutions and from officials of the various departments. We've had briefings from experts on the evolution of technology, on international trade, and on demographics. In this last phase we want, through these round tables, to cover certain sectors specifically and get input from you, as the people who practise culture on the front lines, in order that we can find out how to manage to survive in the cultural milieu and how you will face the challenges of the next century.

Obviously in a format such as this, in a short time, it is impossible for people to cover a lot of ground, but we want to cover as much ground as possible. At the back of your programs, we have given you the five questions we would like to see addressed today. Not all of you may want to tackle all of them. You may want to tackle only one of them. We are interested in your views.

Hopefully, at the end of the week we will have some answers to questions such as this. Which role should the federal government perform in the future to support the cultural sector industries? For example, should the federal government exercise the following roles or others in this field, and how should it do so? As a legislator, regulator, owner, operator of national institutions, a funding patron, a supporter of the arts, a business developer, or a promoter?

[Translation]

Naturally, both official languages are welcome here, so you may speak in either French or English, as you choose. We hope we won't get speeches, only brief remarks, so that there's an exchange of opinions all around the table.

• 1310

[English]

To start our work, I would like to ask the participants to introduce themselves—very briefly, not a total biography. Just give your name, what you do at present, and your involvement in the cultural community. Once we have completed the introductions, I will invite comments from the table in a specified order. I would ask you, because of the translation, to make yourself known to me, and we will hear one person at a time.

I also note that there are mikes at the back, and we would like to encourage the audience's participation.

I'd like to begin counter-clockwise with Mr. Bélanger.

[Translation]

Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.): My name is Mauril Bélanger. I am the MP for Ottawa-Vanier and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage. I have been taking part in these discussions for nearly two years.

[English]

Mr. Robert Douthwright (Comptroller, Magnus Theatre Company Northwest Incorporated): Good afternoon. My name is Rob Douthwright. I'm the comptroller with Magnus Theatre.

I'm just going to preface my statements with the fact that I'm new to this area. I came on as the comptroller for Magnus in October 1997. My previous field of employment was with a local accounting firm in town. I'm an active member of various local arts and heritage groups in the city, including Arts and Heritage Thunder Bay and the Arts and Heritage Alliance.

Ms. Diane Imrie (Executive Director, Northwestern Ontario Sports Hall of Fame and Museum): My name is Diane Imrie. I'm the executive director of the Northwestern Ontario Sports Hall of Fame and Museum.

Like Rob, I am involved with a variety of organizations in town, including the Arts and Heritage Alliance. I'm also involved with the Thunder Bay Children's Festival, which is a celebration of our local arts and heritage for the youth of our community. I'm also a past president of the Canadian Association for Sports Heritage, which is looking at the national picture in terms of heritage preservation for sports.

Ms. Sharon Godwin (Executive Director, Thunder Bay Art Gallery): I'm Sharon Godwin. I'm the director of the Thunder Bay Art Gallery. I'm involved in most of the same things as the previous two people. In this community, I think the people you see around the table are the ones who are involved in these sorts of organizations.

Mr. Clint Kuschak (General Manager, Thunder Bay Community Auditorium; President, Arts and Heritage Alliance of Thunder Bay): Good afternoon. My name is Clint Kuschak. I'm the general manager of the Thunder Bay Community Auditorium, a 1,500-seat performing arts centre and home of the Thunder Bay Symphony Orchestra.

Today I'm also representing the Arts and Heritage Alliance, which is a professional network of managers and executive directors of Thunder Bay-based arts and heritage organizations. As much as an organization like that can have a president, I'm it. Many of our colleagues are here today speaking for their various organizations, so when we come to issues of common interests, perhaps I will speak on behalf of the Arts and Heritage Alliance. Otherwise my primary role is to represent the auditorium.

Mr. Michael Comuzzi (President of the Board, Thunder Bay Symphony Orchestra): Good afternoon. My name is Michael Comuzzi and I'm the president of the Thunder Bay Symphony Orchestra.

Ms. Dorette Carter (Executive Director, Thunder Bay Museum): My name is Dorette Carter. I've made my living in the cultural field, particularly with the museum field, and here in Thunder Bay with the Thunder Bay Museum, for about 25 years. I hadn't realized that until I was just adding that up in my head.

Like the previous speakers, I'm involved in a variety of activities here in Thunder Bay, and culturally associated, but I've also been involved over the last 25 years with both provincial and national museum associations and heritage organizations.

Mr. Stan Dromisky (Thunder Bay—Atikokan, Lib.): Stan Dromisky, member of Parliament for Thunder Bay—Atikokan. I have been heavily involved in the arts ever since I was a kid.

I'd like to extend a warm welcome to all those who are participating. I can see, Madam Chairperson, that we do have a power structure here. We have all the dynamic leaders of every facet of our cultural community here. Thank you very much, everyone, for coming.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): And we'd like to thank you very much as well, Mr. Dromisky, on behalf of your regular colleagues on the heritage committee, for coming to your own riding and being with us here today.

Ms. Lise Vaugeois (Member, Thunder Bay Symphony Orchestra): My name is Lise Vaugeois, and I've been a member of the Thunder Bay Symphony Orchestra since 1992. I'm also co-director of the Thunder Bay Creative Music Project, which is an organization that does a lot of creative work in the schools.

I was a member of a touring brass quintet for many years and toured across the country at that time. Although I'm a member of the Thunder Bay Symphony Orchestra, I'm actually here to speak as a practising musician.

[Translation]

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Mr. Sauvageau.

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau (Repentigny, BQ): My name is Benoît Sauvageau. I am a member of the House of Commons, a member of the Bloc Québécois and its critic for international trade. In our study, what is particularly important for me, is how the whole cultural aspect—that is, the promotion and protection of culture—relates to trade liberalization. Thank you.

• 1315

[English]

Ms. Maureen Brophy (Community Recreation Division, Victoriaville Civic Centre): I'm Maureen Brophy, supervisor of community recreation with the City of Thunder Bay. My area of responsibility is arts and heritage, and I work with about ninety different arts and heritage groups in the community, including the Arts and Heritage Alliance, Arts and Heritage Thunder Bay, and the community of presidents.

Ms. Dusty Miller (Chair, Arts and Heritage Thunder Bay): Hello, and welcome to Thunder Bay. My name is Dusty Miller, and I chair the city's arts and heritage committee. That is the committee that makes recommendations to council about grants to the arts and heritage groups in the community.

Although I was a member of city council as mayor and councillor for the most part of twenty years, I also had this other secret vice called theatre. I worked professionally in the theatre for a number of years. I started the theatre program at Lakehead University, and I have also taught at Confederation College. Now, because of my job as chair, I cannot be a member of any of the boards of any of the local groups because of possible conflicts of interest. However, I have been associated with most of them at one time or another, so I am quite familiar with them.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Welcome.

Ms. Heather Esdon (Individual Presentation): My name is Heather Esdon. I've been working professionally in theatre for the last eighteen years as an actor. I have also done some writing for the stage and for television, and I have taught acting and arts administration courses for Confederation College. I have been with the board of the Thunder Bay Regional Arts Council for the last five years. I am the recently appointed festival coordinator for the Thunder Bay Fringe Festival that will be starting up this summer, but I am speaking here as an individual artist.

Ms. Catherine Kozyra (Board of Directors, Definitely Superior Art Gallery): My name is Catherine Kozyra. I was born and grew up in a small community about 200 miles east of here, so this area has quite affected the artwork I do. I've worked for the past twenty years in display and advertising, and I also work as an installation artist. I've been involved with Definitely Superior, an artist-run centre and gallery, since 1990 as a member of the board. For the past two years, I've been president of the gallery, although I'm now past president at this point.

With my involvement with the gallery, I have been able to attend meetings with CANPAC, a national artist-run network for artist-run centres. I have also been able to attend meetings with ARCO, which means Artist-Run Centres Ontario. That involvement has really broadened my views about what is happening across the country with artist-run centres.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you.

Mr. Lowther.

Mr. Eric Lowther (Calgary Centre, Ref.): I'm Eric Lowther, a Reform Party MP from Calgary Centre. I must say that my experience with the arts has usually been on the audience side of it as opposed to the production side. However, I do have a couple of twin daughters who are getting increasingly involved in various expressions of art, including music and art school, etc. I'm going to be here to listen and learn more than anything else. I'm going to enjoy it, I'm sure.

I was just wondering if Mike Comuzzi and Joe Comuzzi were related.

Mr. Michael Comuzzi: Don't you see the resemblance?

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Mr. Joe Comuzzi (Thunder Bay—Superior North, Lib.): He's my younger brother.

Mr. David Frood (Assistant to Joe Comuzzi, MP): I'm David Frood, assistant to MP Joe Comuzzi.

• 1320

Mr. Joe Comuzzi: I'm Joe Comuzzi, member of Parliament for Thunder Bay—Superior North.

Madam Chair, I know you took a lot of heat in choosing to come to Thunder Bay instead of some of the other northern points, and I appreciate that very much. I'm sure the representations you're going to hear this afternoon will also express appreciation not only to you, but also to the members of your committee, for taking the decision on short notice—I think it was made last Wednesday or Thursday—to come to Thunder Bay to hear what I'd like to term the care and concerns of the smaller communities in Canada. As you all know, sometimes I feel they are not represented in an adequate way in the Ottawa milieu, whereas the huge centres of Toronto, Montreal, Halifax, Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver seem to get the lion's share of the attention and perhaps some of the resources.

I particularly want to thank our clerk for putting together a very interesting agenda this afternoon. We all know it takes a lot of difficulty to get the proper people involved.

I also thank very much those people at the table with me who, in a short period of time, decided to come in to make a presentation. It is very important that they do so.

And to the other folks—our research staff, and particularly our translators—who had to take a day out of their weekend in order to travel here yesterday to set up for this hearing today and to provide the translation, I thank you and I applaud you, because you usually don't get a lot of credit.

Some hon. members: Hear, hear!

Mr. Joe Comuzzi: As usual, I've said too much. Thank you very much.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Mr. Comuzzi, on behalf of the committee, we're absolutely delighted to be here in Thunder Bay and to have both you and Mr. Dromisky here. Thank you very much.

All right, ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to open it up to you. As Mr. Lowther said, we're here to listen to and learn from you. If you could address the five questions in some way, or one question on whatever is most important to you, we would again ask that we do it in roundtable style.

Who would like to start? If I don't see a hand, I'm going to pick someone.

Ms. Miller, please.

Ms. Dusty Miller: Well, thank you. In a way, I feel inadequate to start, since I'm surrounded at the present time by a number of professionals and arts administrators. However, I am going to start and I'll be very brief in what I say. Perhaps because of that, I'll not be quite as diplomatic as I might be; however, I hope you'll understand that I think everybody needs to be able to say what they want to say, so I know we have to go quickly.

Is it question one that we're tackling?

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): You can tackle whatever question you wish to tackle, or all of them.

Ms. Dusty Miller: Well, I'll go with question one at this point in time. I imagine you're going to hear a lot of us say very similar things, too.

The first question led me to wonder what exactly the programs are that we get through the Department of Canadian Heritage. That question proved to be not as easy to solve as I thought it would be initially. However, since somebody was capable of getting a whole lot of information for us off the Internet and faxing it around, that was a very useful way of finding out.

I think that is a bit of a problem. One does not get to hear very much about what the programs are, except through accounts in the newspaper or other media, usually after something has happened. We are very aware of the ones that are no longer functioning, in particular the capital initiatives program that was very important to communities all across this country in terms of the development of facilities.

• 1325

In the city of Thunder Bay, we are very fortunate to have a Canada Games complex that was funded through a three-part program, with the federal government, the provincial government, and the city contributing the same amount. Of course there was also fundraising. And we also have the community auditorium, although I'm not going to steal Clint's thunder, because he's far more knowledgeable in talking about that. However, the thing is that it was also funded by this three-part program. Neither of those extremely valuable facilities would be in this community if we had not had that program, so it's incredibly important to us.

We have now embarked upon trying to build a small theatre. Actually, that's partly a heritage project, because what we're trying to do is preserve the oldest school in the city of Thunder Bay and enhance it. It's in a park, it's beautiful, and it's one of the earliest parks in the whole of Canada. We want to build the theatre there, adding it on at the back of the school. It's a magnificent project.

• 1330

Again, I have to say that the province has been excellent, the city has been good, and the people in Thunder Bay and northwestern Ontario are being very good in terms of fundraising. But the federal government support has been minimal, and that's very disappointing to us. I guess I see it, having been a municipal politician—not a party politician, but a municipal politician. My own experience is that there does seem to be discretionary funding. It goes to certain other places, and I don't know how we can tap into it. We don't seem to be very successful in tapping into that in terms of the federal government.

It leaves questions in my mind about consistency. How can some places get the funding and other places not get the funding, and how can we find out what we have to do and what we have to build or whatever we have to do to achieve it? That's a major question for me. I think it is for many of us, apart from the fact that also right across this country, because there's been no facility funding for such a long time now, we have a lot of theatres and so on that are falling apart that badly need help.

You know what the state of the arts is—I don't have to tell you—and the difficulty in raising funds. We're all into fundraising all the time, constantly, to survive.

It is the same thing with the symphony, with Mr. Comuzzi and Ms. Vaugeois. We have this terrible problem with the federal Department of Revenue. Why can't we get help? Other people can get it. If the Montreal symphony can get money to help raise salaries when there's a strike, why can't we get it to help us when, through no fault of our own...? Practically every symphony orchestra in the whole country is in exactly the same situation we were in. We're suddenly in trouble with the tax department.

These comments are raised for discussion, and others will add to them, I'm sure,

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Mr. Kuschak, would you like to follow up on that?

Mr. Clint Kuschak: Yes, I will, and I'll speak first about the Arts and Heritage Alliance, which, as I said earlier, is a network, so you're going to hear a lot of the same statements or echoes around the room.

The Arts and Heritage Alliance isn't that old, maybe five, six years, and its only really close-call experience with federal initiative funding would be through the 1995 Nordic World Ski Championships, which were held in Thunder Bay. It was a stage for the world, so we in the community, having formed the Arts and Heritage Alliance, felt it was very important that the cultural festival or component be part of this sporting event, and it would be the first time ever for this event. We were successful. We worked very closely with the Department of Communications at the time and secured funding through the initiative of the Arts and Heritage Alliance and the Nordic board, and we were able to present a cultural festival.

The other thing I would like to say about the alliance is that as of the advent of the alliance, we are encountering more and more opportunities in terms of federal, provincial, and municipal initiatives because we are a network now. Prior to that time, it would, as Dusty said, have been very difficult to find out about programs, and often deadlines were in our face after we learned about them. So we would miss many opportunities. Now with the Arts and Heritage Alliance and Arts and Heritage Thunder Bay, we are all learning about initiatives faster, and we are obviously learning how to be better partners in terms of using every advantage.

The last thing I could say is that we are in need of representation from the Canada Council and the Ontario Arts Council. We have made overtures on both councils for representation in this area. We think it's very important that there be that kind of representation through major funding and innovative councils such as those.

I'm going to defer on the community auditorium comments until others can speak.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Mr. Kuschak, just to follow up on what you mean by representation, do you mean to have a person from your local community on the Canada Council?

• 1335

Mr. Clint Kuschak: Ideally it would be preferable to have a council board member for both the Ontario Arts Council—we have submitted nominations. The government is considering our nominations. Likewise, federally, if the Canada Council could have a representatives from time to time, either in Thunder Bay or in a community nearby.... Beyond that, of course, it would be wonderful to have a staff person assigned to an area close by, Sault Ste. Marie or Thunder Bay, because we all know in the business, as professionals, that staff sometimes make the difference. We have certainly experienced that with the Ontario Arts Council, as it was able to afford a position. It has now denuded this position to the point where it's really no longer there. We're now going to have to scramble, through the Internet and other forums, to learn about the OAC's programs and policies.

I realize this is a money issue, and perhaps the councils can't afford this all the time, but given the geography and the scope from virtually Winnipeg to Toronto, there might be room for some kind of staff support, even if it were seasonal or part time.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Ms. Esdon, I see you nodding your head.

Ms. Heather Esdon: I can attest to that. I'm a member of the Canadian Actors' Equity Association, which is the Canadian union that represents performers on stage. I'm covered by the eastern Ontario office. I'm not sure why, except I used to live in Ottawa, and did for many years, and that's where I began my career. Geographically, it makes no sense at all that they represent my interests. I don't live in Manitoba, although that's the closest office to serve my needs, and Toronto has a membership in the tens of thousands, so I don't really want to be represented by the Toronto office.

The needs for artists living here in Thunder Bay, particularly individual artists who are seeking to make their careers in a country this vast, are immensely difficult. Even the costs for training, to audition, in my case, are absolutely prohibitive. It doesn't take long to get out of that loop at all. You can say we have access now to the Internet, and there may be other technical media that can serve certain artistic disciplines, but I am passionate about an actor's presence on stage. I refuse to have myself reduced to a virtual reality that goes out over the Internet. But I cannot afford the hundreds and hundreds of dollars it would take to try to make auditions at other major theatres across the country.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Ms. Kozyra, I saw you nodding your head.

Ms. Catherine Kozyra: I'd like to comment on some of the points Heather brought up.

It's very much the same for those of us who are involved in the visual arts. Contact with especially our federal representative, who would be Michel Gaboury, has been very distant in time since he's made a visit here. It was 1992. Now, luckily, we've been able to keep in contact mainly through the ARCO meetings, which happen once a year. But again, as Heather said, the cost of sending representatives is very expensive and prohibitive here.

I think one of the real disadvantages and problems, even in developing a stronger arts community or a more informed arts community, is that more individuals don't have the opportunity to rub shoulders with people and hear information firsthand. I believe too that the Internet, while it's very valuable, does have a distancing factor, and I don't think everything can be reduced to a virtual reality. We need the actual live artwork, music, and theatre here in the community, but we also need to be able to rub shoulders for realistic development and confidence, even within ourselves and our community. We are aware of all the possibilities that are happening out there, plus the subtle nuances, which you don't get by not being able to have personal contact and build personal relationships with people. I think that's really important.

• 1340

Michel is apparently trying to come. It was an important visit when he did come, because at that point I think our gallery was threatened. It was in part because the people who were involved were so isolated and were not picking up on the subtleties of what the Canada Council was requiring from us. That's been worked on over the years, but I think a broader dissemination or a feel for the criteria can happen more if people can actually get together.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Ms. Brophy.

Ms. Maureen Brophy: I have comments relating to question number one. We're fortunate in Thunder Bay to have a local CBC station, CBQ. I consider it one of our cultural treasures in this region. In terms of one of the federal cultural measures in place, I hope it's one that continues to be in place.

The geographical isolation we face in this part of the country, as well as the vast distances that I'm sure you have heard referred to quite often, really make that CBC station almost a necessity for us in terms of hearing about what's going on, not only within the community but throughout the region in terms of culture and other things as well. It really does help to form a cultural identity, and the emphasis on Canadian content seems to be much higher than private radio stations. Locally the CBC station has been a community partner in a number of events within the community, such as the Summer in the Park concert series. For us in Thunder Bay that's something that I think we would really like to see maintained.

The Canada Council for the Arts has another program provided by the Department of Canadian Heritage that we would like to see maintained. It's probably the one agency that most of the cultural groups in this city would make the most use of.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Mr. Dromisky.

Mr. Stan Dromisky: If I can, I'd like to intervene just for a second. I'll be very brief. I want to speak because I don't want to lose the concept that Clint introduced, and that is membership on the national arts council. I'm not too sure whether you were referring to part-time or occasional representation.

I would like this committee to recommend permanent representation from this part of the country on the national arts council. It doesn't mean the same person will be on forever, but there should be someone from this part of the world. I'm saying this because when you take a look at the national arts council and the Ontario Arts Council, for instance, you find that people come from basically certain centres. Because of that, they have a completely different perspective and a different attitude relating to the rest of the country. It's very easy, for instance, for the Ontario Arts Council to make all kinds of cuts, because they say let the people go out there and hustle and get their money. That's okay for people in Toronto, where the vast majority of the corporate offices are, but there are hundreds of communities in this country that don't have corporate offices and they don't have access to all these generous funds.

So it's very important that we have people there with different attitudes. I'll give you one example and then I'll shut up. The Ontario Ballet Company is the only company that for the past few years has been travelling to all the small communities and giving performances in high schools, in elementary schools, union halls, and so forth. It's been to Kapuskasing; it's the only one that's been to all the communities in Ontario, even Atikokan and Ear Falls, and all those places. However, we cut funding off for them at the federal level and we cut funding off completely and totally at the provincial level. That destroyed a company with over 20 professional dancers. Why? Because the people there were thinking in terms of, hey, there are too many dance companies in Toronto. That's the main reason—a completely perverted perspective about a tremendous service that one company was providing to all these isolated communities in northwestern and northern Ontario.

• 1345

Thank you.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you.

Ms. Godwin and then Ms. Vaugeois.

Ms. Sharon Godwin: I wonder if I can be a bit more specific about some of the grant programs that the art gallery has benefited from. You wanted comments on what works well and what doesn't.

I would greatly support the Canada Council. The Canada Council has been very important to our gallery. We've taken advantage of almost every granting program. We find that the guidelines are very clear. We know their expectations. They know what we need. They notify us in a very timely manner when our grants are coming through, and they do come through. We have the feeling that their allocation is very arm's-length. When we're told we're getting the money, the money comes. We report to them, and we have a very good relationship. I think the Canada Council has really affected the growth of our gallery very positively.

We've used many other federal programs. We would greatly support the continuation of the Canadian Heritage Information Network. The Canadian Conservation Institute, the Moveable Cultural Properties Division—obviously we need all of these things and they're very important and work very well.

The Canadian Museums Association has funds from the federal government for student employment, which I think is crucial to training our managers and people working in the arts. It's probably the best program in the country for that because it is very specific to our needs and to the students' needs. So we value that very greatly. Of course, the museum assistance program is where much of our funding comes from.

We began as a national exhibition centre, and you're probably familiar with that program. Twenty-six galleries were built across the country in the 1970s, and we're one of those. We've grown beyond that. That program doesn't really exist, and the funding for it is now part of the access and service. We must apply. That's been very good for our gallery. We were able to access more funding because there was the realization that we had grown beyond a national exhibition centre.

The criteria for the museum assistance program are flexible. I think it's effective because we all have the same goal. We are here to protect and promote and educate people about our culture and our heritage and the arts in this country. That's what that program is about. I think it also guarantees access to the public, and we really desperately need that. We need to be able to feel some stability so that we can continue and have people come and see what we do.

However, there are some concerns I have with that program, and I hope this is the proper forum, because there are some frustrations. I know as well as anyone how difficult it is to run programs and make changes and satisfy everyone. I think they are simple matters that can be solved.

One is that the notification for grants is very frustrating. I remember one year we were seeking funding from that program and we were notified on December 15. That's when we got our cheque. The year had ended. So we are running programs, presenting programs, with the hope that the money does come through. That was 15 days before year-end. Luckily it did come, but it was a little scary. It may seem a small matter, but to us it's a real cashflow difficulty. We're gambling on whether or not the money is really coming.

• 1350

We also don't have the same feeling that the money will come, and we do have a feeling that there is some discretion. The ministerial priorities perhaps take precedence over some of the money. There was a year when the money was reduced part of the way through the fiscal year, but we did understand that it went to other priorities. It was very difficult, though, because we were counting on the money. Other galleries and museums across the country were too, not just in Thunder Bay. It makes it very difficult for us to operate, if you will.

We are also a bit concerned because we do know there was a February 1 deadline for the MAP. It's long gone, and we have no application form. We understand it's coming and we understand how difficult it is to redo a program, but we're very concerned that we will again be probably eight or nine months into our fiscal year before we receive any notification that the money is coming. I have to say that we appreciate all of the funds and can't do what we do without them, but it's very difficult to operate this way.

We also understand there are new priorities for the program. We've received nothing in writing. In fact, as far as I know, nobody across the country has received anything in writing about the new program. We understand the priorities are somewhat based on travelling exhibitions. This is what we've heard. Again, I have been able to talk to one of the officers, who has been very helpful. I would never criticize the staff because they are wonderful and have been so helpful to all of us, but it's very difficult to know when we have to apply and what these new priorities are.

We're concerned that the mid-sized galleries in the country may not really be able to meet some of the new criteria and these new priorities if things do involve starting to travel with exhibitions more than we have. You can understand how that would be difficult. To suddenly change your program and start to tour shows around Canada is an expensive proposition. We're not sure who made that decision, and whether or not there was any consultation involved in that decision. It's a bit of a great unknown in terms of the museum assistance program.

The last thing I would say is that, just in terms of capital, within the museum assistance program there's also a collection support category. It has been helpful to our gallery, and it seems to be the one place where we can go to get money for upgrading. There are a number of galleries that were built in the 1970s and that are our size across the country, and many require retrofitting and upgrading. I know this because we've received money from MAP—and we're very appreciative of it—in order to upgrade our environmental conditions. We know there are lots of other galleries that need to do this, though, and it's a very serious thing. You have to have the right environment, but there aren't a lot of other funds available.

I haven't heard that the program is changing, but the fear of the unknown is what I'm trying to emphasize. We need a program like that because our facilities were built largely by the federal government and really, probably wouldn't be here to the extent that they are without that support. We need to know that the government can still support them and keep them going.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you.

Ms. Vaugeois.

Ms. Lise Vaugeois: Yes, I'd like to expand a little bit on some comments that have already been made, mostly looking at inequities across the country, inequitable access to resources.

Dusty was speaking about CBQ and how valuable CBQ is to this community, and I would agree with those comments. I lived and worked in Toronto for fifteen years as a musician. There are some very specific differences in my life in terms of what I am able to do as an artist now and the kind of profile that I have now. When I lived in Toronto, I was a part of groups that were frequently broadcast by CBC radio nationally and regionally, and I was also paid for those services. Here, we have CBC radio, but it has so few funds available that it cannot even pick up the Thunder Bay Symphony in our own auditorium.

• 1355

The possibility of having chamber music concerts picked up is non-existent, so musicians in Thunder Bay have no access to CBC funding as performers. We also have no access to the publicity that those broadcasts would bring to us as individuals and to our organization, the symphony. Whereas we might have the ability to enhance our reputation as an organization in this country, we can't do that because nobody knows about us. We're never broadcast. Most regional orchestras are broadcast in the country—certainly the ones in southern Ontario are. Therefore, we are seen as having a much lower status artistically.

I'm the same musician I was when I lived in Toronto and people in Vancouver could hear my performances. Our CBC never had enough money to do this, but I have a problem with the fact that it has even less money than it had before. I would say that I believe very strongly that the role of the CBC in Canada is vital for the whole cultural sector. CBC money in general needs to be restored, and it certainly needs to be increased in the outlying regions.

I would also like to comment a bit on the taxation situation and the situation with the Montreal Symphony, whose musicians went on strike in order to receive pay equal to the highest-paid orchestras in our country. I don't have a problem with their position on that, but I do have a problem with the fact that there has been no response give to the people from Thunder Bay who approached the Department of Canadian Heritage.

For our full-time positions, musicians in Thunder Bay earn between $14,000 and $18,000 a year. We all have extensive educations, university educations. Most of us have studied abroad, sometimes with council support, sometimes at our own expense. We're all constantly putting money out to maintain our skills and maintain the tools of our trade. Our organization has been put in severe jeopardy because of the tax situation, and also because of the whole funding situation. You have a group of people here who are contributing a great deal to the community we live in. I think that was quite evident when we made an appeal and did very well in getting community support. Why is it possible, then, to support the musicians of the Montreal Symphony but not support the musicians of the Thunder Bay Symphony? They quite possibly have an even more important role in a community of this size than do those arts organizations in larger centres.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you.

Mr. Bélanger.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I just wanted to touch very briefly on what Madame Godwin was saying in terms of the MAP.

My understanding is that there will be an increase in the funding of MAP from $7 million to $9 million, as of April 1. Plus, we have pending in front of the House the proposed legislation in Bill C-64, if I recall, which would provide for travelling exhibits, whether they come from abroad or within Canada, not to have to cover insurance any more. It would be an exoneration, a program by which the Canadian government would cover insurance as long as certain conditions were met. I don't know if you're aware of that or not.

Ms. Sharon Godwin: I wasn't, so thank you.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Okay.

That bill is still on the books. As for whether or not the House will have sufficient time to deal with it, we hope it will be dealt with before we adjourn in June. I know we have talked to Mr. Mark, the Reform critic for the department, and he has indicated that his party is not going to oppose. I don't have a sense from all the other parties. On the face of it, though, it seems to have been very well received, so it's likely to be put into effect relatively soon. I just wanted to put that out as information.

• 1400

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you, Mr. Bélanger.

Colleagues, I would encourage you to please participate. This is a round table, so don't be afraid to ask questions.

I'll go to Ms. Carter first, and then Mr. Sauvageau and Mr. Comuzzi.

Ms. Dorette Carter: I'd like to preface what I'm going to say by indicating that I am a very passionate Canadian, so please take what I'm about to say in the right vein. I'll be general to begin with, and then specific. Having been this long around, I guess age has a few privileges.

The Government of Canada and its Department of Canadian Heritage should strive for a role as a travel agent to Canada's past and its cultural present. The role of travel agent is one that would facilitate access to Canada's vast and rich culture, while promoting unapologetically a heritage that takes a back seat to no one, particularly our neighbours to the south.

I'm not here to start bashing the United States, but the role of legislator, regulator, and funder is very important as far as setting standards and goals is concerned. Until our federal government is proud of who we are, how can we expect Canadians to be proud of who we are? We are constantly showing our lack of pride by eroding all sorts of support, either through our national broadcast system, our live theatre, our symphonies, our visual arts, or our material culture.

As I said, I have managed to make my way, and I'm still fighting the same fight I started in the late 1970s, after I graduated from university. What has kept me in this business is the fact that I am very passionate about my country, its past, and what I see as an absolutely extraordinary future. I get very tired of listening to people identify us by who we aren't. I really believe that unless the federal government—particularly its suitably named Department of Canadian Heritage—loves what it does and who we are, and makes no bones about it to anybody and everybody, we're never going to move comfortably into the 21st century. We're going to be scrambling.

More specifically, I'll talk about museums. The Thunder Bay Museum itself is now in its 91st year. It has weathered some interesting times—and I haven't been around for all 90, although some days I feel like I have been. It has had a fairly comfortable place in recording the history of this particular community and the Lakehead, and draws upon it in terms of looking at some perspectives.

On the question about programs that are successful as far as the museum field is concerned, I would echo Dusty in terms of the cultural niche of the program and its capital assistance. We are all in a position of facing rapidly aging facilities. It's not just the art galleries—although I am fully behind Sharon on that—but it is particularly the case with museums because we still suffer from the centennial syndrome. So many museums were built in 1967, but they're falling apart. Unless we can have a world-class product, no one, including the people who live in the communities these facilities are in, are going to be proud of them. We're scrambling. We're running around with buckets.... I could catalogue a list of complaints in terms of the condition of our buildings.

One of the programs the cultural initiatives had at one time was the management assistance program. It was axed simply because not many people knew about it or didn't know how to access it. It was the kind of program that was designed for what we keep being told that we need to do: act like businesses, look at business plans, look at improving management skills. That program died in the late 1980s, around 1986 or 1987, and it's very unfortunate that particular program under that larger umbrella was dropped, because this community has suffered in the last two years from needing all sorts of different kinds of assistance, as have many communities across Canada.

More specifically, I would support Sharon's concerns about the MAP. I am therefore very pleased about the proposed reinstatement of the insurance for travelling exhibitions. I think that's just terrific. But under the museums assistance program, the access to conservation funds is now very hobbled and it's a very peculiar route. Instead of calling conservation conservation, we wind up having to find different names for it. And it gets very uncomfortable, because we'd like to say specifically what we want, rather than dancing around to find the way that will get the money.

• 1405

Conservation is very important, not just from a treatment point of view but also from a preventive point of view. That leads into the Canadian Conservation Institute, which is one of the most incredible success stories this government has ever funded as far as the museum and art gallery community is concerned. They have led the field internationally in terms of research. We tend to focus on the impacts of technology with our obsession with computers. They have developed treatments about which they are consulted around the world.

I have travelled to many countries—usually on busman's holidays—and visited different institutions and museums. Canada still has the reputation of training the best conservators in the world. There are not many, but they are hired so readily and so quickly. It's not just a brain drain to the United States in terms of the university level, as we're losing very good technicians. It's a concern that should be reviewed by the federal government in terms of the institutes, programs, and its regional services. They have been the most creative in terms of trying to find help for us, but their funds are limited. They have always been there on the other end of the phone. They have given their time. And we know a lot of it is on a volunteer basis. In terms of emergency planning, regional workshops, and all those things, they have had to find different ways of trying to deliver those particular services.

The one thing I would disagree with as far as Sharon is concerned is CHIN, the Canadian Heritage Information Network. It was begun 25 years ago and is in desperate need of review. It has fallen behind in terms of keeping up with technology. Its original purpose, to have a national database, is laudable and commendable, but we now are in contact with our own regional and provincial museums far more readily than we are with Ottawa. It's something that really needs to be looked at and shaken up, because within the museum field, they really do have the reputation of geeks. And it does not bode well. I'm sorry, it just doesn't. We're telling them how to do collections management and retrieve information.

While I have the floor, I will go through my other little list.

I might also encourage either the improvement or the bolstering through External Affairs, but it was always done in conjunction with DOCH, of international arts promotion, that it be beefed up. It was a terrific program. It had a great deal of impact on performing arts, visual arts, and heritage, because it meant we could travel. We could take things across to our consulate in Minneapolis without much difficulty. It made it much simpler and beneficial for exposure for us.

I might also take three seconds to talk about the technology. It has a huge impact on all of us. That is well and good and we are accommodating in terms of our exhibitions and collections management. What is a bigger concern is trying to keep ahead, or at least keep up with, the changes in technology. It's financially a burden that most institutions are finding very difficult. Just when we invest in the computer technology to access information, to upgrade our collections, or any of those kinds of things, we find that we can no longer find replacement cartridges for a printer we bought six months ago that was top of the line. We can no longer upgrade the actual computer hardware because the computer industry has discovered what the old appliance industry discovered many years ago: built-in obsolescence. It's the only way to make money. And we've been slapped about three times in the last six months in terms of trying to get things up to speed.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much.

Mr. Sauvageau.

• 1410

[Translation]

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: First, I must tell you that I found it very interesting to hear how strongly you support, though sheer determination, various cultural activities in a municipality which is not, strictly speaking, one of the big cities in Ontario.

There are a number of cities like yours, in Quebec and throughout Canada, where people have been working for many years, often as volunteers, to ensure that a highly important artistic activity is preserved and maintained. The manner in which you defend your field of activity really does you credit.

It was also interesting to learn that some government programs are working well, and others could be beefed up so as to give you more assistance in your efforts, within the community, to ensure certain key activities survive and prosper.

I perhaps did not understand clearly, but I would like to ask two short questions. Here's the first. Yes, the federal government can and must help you. This it does, sometimes well, sometimes not so well, but it continues to do it anyway. Believe me, my question is not intended to be partisan, but I would like to know whether, in cultural matters, there are not certain problems with some programs between what the provincial government can offer and what the federal government can offer. Does it work smoothly, do the two complement each other? That's my first question.

Here's my second. Perhaps it's somewhat easy to say that the federal government could beef up its grants and its funding of various programs. Are there not other sources of funding? Often, it's the smaller communities that come up with big ideas. Are there not other sources of funding? In the documentation, endowments and tax measures were mentioned. You say that you are tired of fund- raising campaigns. As a group, have you thought about other types of financial assistance that could be offered by the federal or provincial governments, either in terms of income tax, or support for setting up endowment funds, or other similar methods?

I was wondering if you yourself had thought of other forms of financing where we could help.

Thank you.

[English]

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Do you have a direct reply, Ms. Esdon? I saw your hand up.

Ms. Heather Esdon: Yes, I'd just like to address the first point here.

Yes, of course there are going to be differences between the federal and provincial governments' roles in how they address certain cultural issues. Something that is very dear to my heart is the level of arts and culture education that happens in the schools. Obviously the federal government cannot take a leadership role in how arts education is approached in each province or each community. But what is of concern to me is that does not excuse the federal government's involvement as being an equal and vocal partner in the valuing of arts training and cultural appreciation in a very meaningful and sustained way.

More and more we see provincial initiatives—not initiatives, that's an oxymoron there—to reduce funding for the arts in our schools. We had a recent community consultation with the Ontario Arts Council within the last month where this was perhaps one of the most heated issues that was addressed.

I'm not talking here as an artist who expects to receive my training in a public school system, but I am talking as a mother of a seven-year-old who I want to graduate with an appreciation, at least, of what the various arts are, and an understanding that the arts, lest we all forget, do come at the expense of some individual artist's effort, passion, and creativity—whether they're a writer or a dancer, or involved in music or theatre. Arts administration, that dissemination of information, and the gathering places for us to meet and share culture together are very important things.

But we cannot expect this will just happen from the sky, and it is incredibly important that the federal government not pass the buck to the provincial government, that the provincial government not pass the buck to the regional arts councils, and that the large institutions do not pass the buck to the local citizenry. This is everybody's responsibility.

• 1415

I think the federal government has to be involved as a vocal partner in encouraging arts and culture—the specifics and the appreciation. It's time to bring back the days of multiculturalism and individual diversity that are a couple of decades old, particularly when we're faced with the information superhighway. The technology does not replace the people. It does not replace the artists.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): I have some speakers on my list: Ms. Miller, Miss Imrie, and Ms. Kozyra. Ms. Miller, please.

Ms. Dusty Miller: Thank you.

I very much appreciate Monsieur Sauvageau's question. I wish I could respond to you in French. I'm afraid I can not.

We have tried just about everything. Let me assure you that in Thunder Bay it's.... I'm talking about northwestern Ontario only. We are a sparsely populated part of the country, but northwestern Ontario “only” is the size of France. I don't think a lot of people have any idea of that. We're as big as France.

Communication and transportation in this community is incredibly difficult, and the questions of the technology.... I can remember ten years ago, most of the organizations—apart from the auditorium—had not even got computers yet because they couldn't afford them. And let me tell you, when they bought them, they did not buy the most expensive ones that could do miraculous things. We're still in a difficult problem with that.

Certainly the auditorium is setting up an endowment fund. We have to think in those directions and we are. But I can tell you this, and it's very important: at one point, of the three granting bodies—the provincial, the federal, and the municipal—the municipal gave the least amount of money. Now in many respects we give the most, which I think shows you that we are very fortunate in having a city council that has strong support for arts and heritage, and our citizens believe in it. But I have to say to you, it's not because the city's grants have increased so much; it's because the Ontario Arts Council, the Canada Council grants, and the federal-provincial programs have gone down so badly. And that really hurts.

I said to you we have a sparse population. We are going to probably be—because we live in an absolutely beautiful part of the world, with many amenities—the big resource for Canada in the next thousand years. I'm not kidding, we have so much to offer here.

I just want to say, we've tried everything. We always try everything. We have the Arts and Heritage Alliance, which is known as AHA. Let me tell you, I think a lot of communities would be very happy if they had something similar, because this means our art galleries are talking to our theatres, who are talking to our museums, who are talking to our symphonies or our theatre companies, whatever. They're communicating. They're telling each other about the opportunities. They're doing everything they can to go into partnerships.

Maureen mentioned partnerships with the CBC, but there are many partnerships that have emerged through this kind of organization. The City of Thunder Bay has passed its own arts and heritage policy. It's one of the few municipalities in the whole country that has one.

I used to be a representative of the City of Thunder Bay in an organization that was quite prominent in the early part of the nineties. It was called Arts in the Cities. We used to meet in cities all across the country, quite often in Ottawa or Quebec City. It was a wonderful organization, because—and this is the same thing Cathy Kozyra was talking about—it meant we could share our problems, our issues, and what people were doing about them. Unfortunately, it no longer exists, so we can't do that.

• 1420

I think there is a real problem, in that programs are not getting out—as a number of people have mentioned—from the Department of Canadian Heritage. Somehow or other access to these programs is not made known to us soon enough and clearly enough so we know what is available to us.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you, Ms. Miller.

I have Ms. Imrie and Ms. Kozyra on this particular topic, and then I have Mr. Comuzzi. Ms. Imrie.

Ms. Diane Imrie: In response to your two questions, I would concur with Ms. Esdon. The federal government has to take the lead in many ways in showing the provinces and municipalities that heritage and culture are important. I just received a fax from the Canadian Museums Association, which was in the lock-up for the budget, and in the 500-page document, the word “heritage” never appeared, and “culture” appeared once. Although it was the spending budget, when you start to review it, it wasn't there. And yes, the $2 million was being given, but apparently that wasn't even mentioned in the overall budget. That's a concern.

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: [Inaudible—Editor]...the federal government, if you cut all the budget?

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): One at a time. I can't....

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I'd like to get back on the list.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): You're already on the list.

Ms. Diane Imrie: It is crucial the federal government play the lead in making Canadians aware of the fact that our culture and heritage are key to who we are. It has so many positive impacts. And it doesn't necessarily have to cost millions and millions of dollars. But if the importance is on the minds of people, the politicians have an easier way of getting that message across, and it will help out all of us.

The other thing I think would be marvellous—I don't know if we'll ever see it again—is the 100% tax-deductible donation. Give us the tools to be able to go and raise the money. That was a key one. We've all been involved in fundraising, and if you can say you'll get 100% tax back on your donation.... It was great. When we lost that, it hurt us a great deal in trying to raise money. There are so many people out there trying to raise money. That charitable tax allowance was a great leg up for us, and it would be wonderful to see it put back.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Mr. Comuzzi had a question.

Mr. Joe Comuzzi: Thank you.

Lise, you were talking about the Montreal orchestra, the problems they experienced, and that they were remedied through Heritage Canada in an expeditious way. None of us is aware of how that was remedied. Do you want to elaborate on that please?

Ms. Lise Vaugeois: I can't tell you details, but I can tell you my source comes from watching a CBC documentary that was done about the Thunder Bay Symphony Orchestra, and the Montreal Symphony situation was used as an example. There was a cut of Sheila Copps celebrating with members of the Montreal Symphony, and a comment made that she had directly provided funding to the orchestra to try to end their strike.

Mr. Joe Comuzzi: You don't have an amount?

Ms. Lise Vaugeois: No.

Mr. Joe Comuzzi: Thank you.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): We can undertake to provide that information for you, if Mr. Bélanger doesn't have it.

Ms. Kozyra, Mr. Sauvageau, and then Mr. Kuschak.

Ms. Catherine Kozyra: I would like to make a number of comments.

Going back to Dorette Carter's comments about being a passionate Canadian, I feel that I am, and I feel I'm also a passionate northerner. But as both Canadians and particularly as northerners, I think we're made to feel that life and culture are elsewhere, that what we do doesn't really count in the scheme of things. Some of the comments Lise Vaugeois made about getting our voices out there are very important. I feel the visual arts in particular have a very difficult problem—for one thing, the stability of funding.

• 1425

Both federal and provincial funding for our gallery has been reduced since the 1991-92 season by approximately half from each of those funding sources. We are operating on such a thin thread that I don't know how we can continue to do what we would like to do.

One of the problems is even getting what we do out into our own community. We're charged with the responsibility, in our minds, as artists, of connecting with other artists from across Canada and bringing what we, as artists, feel is important to our communities, for the community to view and to interact with other artists, but also, as regional artists, of getting our work out to other parts of the country.

Our resources are getting so thin, and we do not have the critical mass of people to accomplish what some of the larger or audience-based organizations can do. That makes it even more difficult, because the volunteer component that we rely on gets to be very stressed. With funding being cut more and more, we cannot hire the people to do the actual physical work. It does rely more and more on a few volunteers.

The other issue is the creation of jobs. The resources have become so thin that venues become threatened, like maintaining an actual venue. Rents and things are an awful lot higher than might be expected in a community like ours. Also, we don't have the opportunity for artists within the community to make a living outside of what they do. There are very limited opportunities to develop work.

Within the cultural community, there's an awful lot happening, but again, it's all volunteer—or a good part of it is—and that really wears thin, especially when a lot of people do have a lot of training and expertise that is being invested into the community but it's not coming back in any kind of paid support for the people who are doing the work.

In larger centres, artists at least have other alternatives. I'm sure they're struggling all over the place, but there is a very narrow margin within which people can operate in this community.

We try to share our programs and resources with groups like the Thunder Bay Art Gallery and with the programs available to people through Lakehead University. As a gallery, basically creators, we try to link up with the programs that are happening at Lakehead University, but artists who are graduating from those programs have no place to expand and use their talents within the community, and it really contributes to the brain and cultural drain from this whole area.

Further to the education aspect of things, I agree that there should be money invested in touring companies or things that are developed from here, to go to other regional areas, because there are very few opportunities for people to connect with the live things that are happening.

• 1430

On what Mr. Dromisky said about ballet companies being able to come through and present works in some of these outlying communities, I believe there were probably more of these opportunities back in the mid-sixties when I was growing up and you would have the National Ballet performing on the Manitouwadge stage. Dancers would disappear behind the curtains because the stage was so small, but at least people had the opportunity to connect with what's out there.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much.

I still have quite a few people on my list. Mr. Kuschak has been very patient. He'll be next. Then we'll have a member of our audience, Ms. Wheeler, and then Mr. Lowther, Mr. Bélanger, Mr. Comuzzi, Ms. Brophy, and Ms. Vaugeois. I would ask each of you to cut it a little bit shorter so we can get through more people.

We will start with Mr. Kuschak.

Mr. Clint Kuschak: I would ask that Mr. Comuzzi go first. I think he was waiting for an earlier spot and he was missed. I'll follow him, if that's okay.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Okay, Mr. Comuzzi, please.

Mr. Michael Comuzzi: Thanks.

I see a great deal of selfishness by the federal government. My comments are limited strictly to the north. We are loved when it comes time for an election, providing two federal MPs, both Liberal. To see the lack of support for us is, in my mind, absolutely disturbing.

Having gone through this situation with the Thunder Bay Symphony Orchestra and Revenue Canada three years ago, starting with that board and within six or seven months of my start date, getting challenged by Revenue Canada over the employment status of our musicians, after 37 years, what is going on? Where is the common sense?

I'm a small-business man in northern Ontario. I spent two years of my volunteer time with the musicians and my board fighting this issue and losing. Thank God, Revenue Canada wasn't malicious, and I applaud them for at least negotiating terms with us. We lost fair and square under the way the law is written—and they're doing their job. But to end up in this situation...I wish I weren't here today. I wish I could have thumbed my nose at this and said the Thunder Bay Symphony Orchestra doesn't need the federal government.

Two years ago we had a partnership with the community auditorium. We were moving in the right direction and starting to see some daylight, and then we had our shins kicked out from underneath us. I got so far as to request a loan—don't give us something for nothing. Well, we don't do loans. Okay, what do you do?

With the amount of money and time that people have spent, 38 years for the Thunder Bay Symphony Orchestra, am I to just let it crumble, playing ping-pong between—and I agree with you—the federal and provincial governments, not knowing who to talk to...do this, don't say that? It's really absurd, and you're seeing a deterioration that is irreparable.

I have two young children. We all went through school having the ability to attend music classes, go to theatre, and do all these things. Are we building little zombies now so they can become good North Americans?

Diane talked about business deductions. If you don't want to do anything for the north, can you pick and choose? That seems to be what's going on. We're picking sectors that are more deserving than others, I guess, or that have more tax base, or more voters, or whatever it may be.

Get a policy. Talk to people who are going to make a good policy that has common sense and that can be followed, distributed fairly, and for God's sake, support those who support you.

Those are my comments.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much.

• 1435

Mr. Comuzzi, perhaps you could provide the committee with a synopsis of your problems with Revenue Canada, including what was the final outcome, since we're unable to get into it right now. That will form part of our report, and we can bring all our committee members up to speed about that.

Mr. Michael Comuzzi: Sure.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you. You can give it to the clerk.

Our next participant from the audience is Tanya Wheeler.

Ms. Tanya Wheeler (Group Sales and Sponsorship Coordinator, Old Fort William, Tourism Development, Ministry of Economic Development, Trade and Tourism, Government of Ontario): My name is Tanya Wheeler, and I work for Old Fort William in Thunder Bay, which is an historical site that's owned and operated by the Ministry of Economic Development, Trade and Tourism. I'm here in lieu of my boss, who sent me here because she knew I would enjoy it.

Just to give you a quick background, I'm a wildlife biologist and an educator. I've been doing consulting work in the tourism business for several years. I work with the Northern Ontario Native Tourism Association. In this position, as well as in my current position with the Old Fort William historical site, my partners and I promote cultural tourism, aboriginal cultural tourism, and environmental tourism in Thunder Bay and northern Ontario.

I'm a northerner, and I like to hear the word “passionate”, which I've heard from a couple of individuals in this room. I'm also a passionate educator.

I want to address a couple of issues. The first question refers to the range of federal cultural support measures currently in place. I'm not familiar with them, because I'm not in arts administration. I'm actually a marketer. But one thing I can say is that I'm into promoting a regional destination. One thing I do see about arts administration is that perhaps it doesn't work closely enough with tourism.

To get things to work, I think culturally we have to first get things in schools, and I haven't heard the word “children” yet. I think children are a critical element in terms of changing demographics. I think getting cultural programs in schools to generate interest among our youth is critical. Secondly, we need to get this into communities in order to create jobs. Getting youth interested in something is going to be useless unless they have somewhere to work in the future. That's the practical side. Thirdly, I think having touring groups or touring companies is something that has been very successful, and this is something we would like to see more of.

Finally, I am involved in the production of a CD-ROM on the history of fur trade in Canada, which has been developed with Old Fort William through the private sector community as well as with government funding. I have a fairly good historical background as well, because I have an undergraduate degree in history. I would like to see the government continue to develop programs to encourage the development of multimedia technologies. I know Sheila Copps has released some funding under Heritage Canada. These are the ways we are going to reach kids in the future. Without getting really sentimental about that, I think it's critical that the arts community stays on top of the cutting edge of technologies, and hopefully the government can develop initiatives for that.

I think that's about it. Thank you.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much.

Going back to my list, Mr. Lowther has been waiting very patiently.

Mr. Eric Lowther: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm really being educated here today. I'm kind of stuck on question five, which talks about what should be the role of the federal government. There have been a number of suggestions made. I've been trying to answer that question, as I've listened to the people around the table. You've kind of answered it since I put my hand up to ask a question, but I may have missed some things that somebody may want to add.

What I've heard people mention is better access to programs, frustration about notification of grants, and that the federal government must take the lead. Somebody said heritage and culture should be on the minds of Canadians. We should be proud of who we are. I like the idea of 100% tax deductible, because then the people are deciding what culture they want to support, and I think it's an expression of people, rather than somebody else deciding what should be the culture. Funding for CBC radio was mentioned, and I like that.

We're starting the western leg of our trip here, and Thunder Bay is not Toronto, Montreal, or Vancouver, which the people in Thunder Bay are probably thankful for. I'm wondering if we're going to hear different things here on what the role of the federal government should be compared with what we'll hear in those cities. I'm probably going to ask this same kind of question in other cities.

• 1440

Mr. Comuzzi, if I kind of boil down your idea, you're saying that we should make the policy clear and straightforward, because there's a lot of confusion over the way it is right now.

I rambled on there a bit, but question five asks what role the government should play in the future to support the cultural sector industries. What is the role? I'm hearing money, but it's more than money, I think. What would this group of people like to see the federal government's role be?

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Because the list is still quite long, perhaps everybody could take just a second to address that. Mr. Kuschak has been very patient, and then we'll hear from Mr. Bélanger.

Mr. Clint Kuschak: Thank you very much. I'll just say one more thing on question one, and then I'll offer my responses to question five. I'm trying to stay in order.

Ours is a facility or venue with a presenting responsibility. Some of you may understand what I mean by that. We're not there simply to rent. We actually buy and present various types of programming. Our problems will be expressed later on in the hearings when you receive a submission from the Canadian Arts Presenters Association in Montreal on behalf of many facilities, presenters, agents, and managements. But using Canadian content as a description so that you'll understand our problem, we need to see more product available that is produced in Canada by Canadian artists and producers.

A facility of ours is presenting musical theatre, because our market likes it and wants it. We're a little tired of presenting Oklahoma. Why isn't there a Saskatchewan? Why isn't there a musical version of The Beachcombers or The Plouffe Family? I grew up with that. It's part of my heritage. There are no productions happening. Either the producers don't know how or don't have the wherewithal. We are the network. We're ready to receive.

Years ago we purchased a Canadian production called A Gift to Last. It was very Canadian. The Gryphon Theatre lost the western tour. We lost a very heavy profit-making production that was on the verge of being sold out because the producers, the planners, planned poorly. Either they didn't put together the right funding package or they simply didn't know how to do the job. Why is it that our counterparts in the U.S. can do the job and we can't?

I'll pass on the other ones and go to the suggestions. What we would like to suggest for your consideration is that there should be more opportunities and expanded resources for artists to produce in Canada, whether it's through the Canada Council or other agencies. I think the artists need to know better what the opportunities are, and if necessary be better trained to access them so that we can see Canadian product produced here.

The decline of cultural training in education is a concern on a national level now. I realize it's probably a provincial mandate. Perhaps a federal-provincial forum is required to discuss what Canadian cultural curriculum should be for the future. This should happen soon, before it's too late. Then let the provinces and the school boards work within some kind of framework.

There isn't a clear message through provincial and federal agencies on policies with regard to venues. There are so many venues across Canada. Somebody referred to the centennial syndrome. We're building facilities, but we're not properly supporting them. We're leaving it up to the municipalities, primarily, and I think that's unfair. As time goes on there should be some avenues for a federal-provincial partnership. I do recommend the reinstatement or recreation of cultural initiatives programs at some point in the near future. It's unfair for Magnus Theatre to have to be relegated to quasi-political solutions for something that should fit within a program.

The auditorium is a good example of a facility that received federal-provincial funding. The federal government instituted a cultural initiatives program in response to their being fed up with having to solve these questions politically. They wanted a program. We were one of the first facilities to receive funding under that program.

What we have in the area of specific recommendations are things such as a Canadian cultural trust fund and allowing individuals and corporations to invest in things such as the National Arts Centre and the Canadian Opera Company. It goes back to individual tax reform. But I think there's a bigger issue about other countries enabling individuals and companies to invest in their culture. We don't have either a motive or a means to do that.

• 1445

I would also like to suggest the exploration of regional heritage funds. There are obviously some in place now. I think you want to be creating some avenue for local communities working together to decide their own priorities from time to time. The national perspective is one thing, but we have so many regions within the country. I think the creation and the exploration of regional heritage funds is very timely as we enter another millennium.

Obviously the Canada Council needs to be reinforced and as an agency its use should be expanded. Partnerships should be developed between Heritage Canada and provincial governments to use the Canada Council as a means to an end. I will explain this further in notes that I will send after, rather than taking up much more time here.

We've all talked, I think, at one level or another about individual tax reform, the use of tax reform to support things such as endowment funds, endowment programs for individual organizations venues, or to establish capital reserves so their facilities can be planned for their eventual replacement, as opposed to having to worry about their future when there is no future to be planned for.

I think the last thing I'll talk about is the infrastructure-type program the federal government and provincial governments worked on in the past. I think there is a real opportunity, entering a new millennium, for the federal and provincial governments to work in partnerships on cultural infrastructure, perhaps on a one-time catch-up basis until this discussion or this review of national cultural policy is concluded. With all of what is required across the country, perhaps some form of specific cultural infrastructure program is warranted.

I'll reserve my other comments for a follow-up brief.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much, Mr. Kuschak.

Mr. Bélanger.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I'm prepared to skip and come back at the end, if you wish.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Okay.

Ms. Brophy and then Ms. Vaugeois.

Ms. Maureen Brophy: Thank you.

We were asked about what other sources of funding are available with which the federal government could assist. I think the arts community across the country had a very nice source of funding in tobacco sponsorships, which the federal government nicely assisted in eliminating. As Dusty has said, we've tried and are trying other things, but it makes it difficult when you have things like that curtailed.

In response to the other question, about what things we could be doing, something that would cost a lot of money but is very important is data collection for the purposes of planning, marketing, and advocacy. That can be a problem for small organizations, because they don't have the resources and the staff to get that information. So we rely on information being provided by other agencies, like Stats Canada, the Canada Council, and the Ontario Arts Council, because we can't afford to pay for that research and development.

There is a need for the government to continue to provide timely, quality research and information and have it communicated effectively. For example, Stats Canada puts out a quarterly cultural statistics information bulletin, which is very useful.

As a further comment, I would say that the strength of any national program or policy begins at the local level. We have to provide adequately at this level in order to succeed provincially, nationally, and internationally. I would equate that to hockey, a national Canadian heritage. In hockey you have house leagues, and the house league is your very broad base. You build on that, and from that you start going up and up and up until you get to your elite NHL. I would ask that the federal government continue to support at the local level, because that's where the basis for culture comes from in this country.

Thank you.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you.

Ms. Vaugeois.

• 1450

Ms. Lise Vaugeois: First of all, I would like to say that the situation of arts education in the younger grades is dire. We now have equality in Ontario. Whereas there used to be some boards that had some quite good programs, we now have no boards with good programs. The specialists are all losing their jobs.

In Thunder Bay the specialists lost their jobs around 1992. So we now have a situation where students in grade six have never had music with somebody qualified to teach music, or any other arts subject. That's critical. In fact, the Ontario curriculum now has arts as a core subject, but each Thunder Bay school has about $600 a year to spend on the arts, so there are no teachers. It's meaningless to have it in the curriculum. I'm thrilled that it's there, but there is no one to teach those subjects, so it is not happening.

One of the places where I would like to see leadership from the federal government is in reiterating the concept of publicly shared resources, such as health, education. I believe the arts are also one of our shared public resources that need public funding. That concept has been eroded a great deal over the last few years. We're constantly talking about privatization and that the private sector can do a good job, which also says that we no longer believe in public education, for example, because we're willing to let education become something that only people with privilege can access. And that is also true of the arts. They go hand in hand.

Until people are actually willing to stand up and say that out loud in a political forum, we're not going anywhere. We're losing what people have been building up in this country over the last 30 years. We've seen a tremendous erosion of people's work.

In this country there has been a commitment at different times of having equal access to resources across the country. We know that the tax base benefits from the size of the country, from the resources that are in different parts of the country. The people who live in those remote parts do not have equal access to the benefits of being part of this country.

I also believe that democracy is very important, and democracy means that people have the ability to participate at all levels of decision-making. Without an educated population and a population that has some kind of shared education and shared experience, other than watching American television, we don't have a population that is able to function democratically, and that is essential. Again, that is addressed through our public education system and the concept that we believe in a shared culture.

I agree with many of the concrete suggestions that have been made. I also believe the federal government could take an advocacy role and perhaps some kind of public relations campaign in the style of Participaction, which I remember very well from my time as an elementary student, where it was made clear to the population that physical health would benefit everyone. I believe spiritual and cultural health and cultural literacy are things that every person in this country should have, deserves to have, and needs to recognize as valuable to them as individuals and as communities.

I also think—and I've said this in my written notes—that there are many ways in which the federal government could financially directly support programs that already exist and also be looking at educational initiatives that could be supported.

As one last comment, artists are often used to showcase our country in other parts of the world or when we have international visitors here. Artists are living hand to mouth across this country in every single discipline. I think it's time the hypocrisy of that situation was recognized and addressed.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much.

Mr. Douthwright, please. You have been very patient, so since this is your first intervention, we'll give you a little more time.

Mr. Robert Douthwright: Thank you.

This will be a treat for the group here. They don't normally hear my voice in a forum like this.

• 1455

As previously mentioned, I represent the organization that is undertaking the big capital project. One of the terms I heard earlier was education: where can I go and find a source of funds from the federal government to support our project? Our two representatives, Mr. Dromisky and Mr. Comuzzi, have been great in guiding us to date.

I guess the second part is the proactive stance that has to be taken, not just in theatre, but as Clint was mentioning, all venues, all facilities. We're coming to that point where they are starting to run down. I know our project is one that just happens to be here right now. If something happens, our project will be looked at as the one that got some money, which could possibly open the door for other people making inquiries, other organizations across the country. So I guess that's where the proactive stance has to be taken. Are we going to be opening the floodgates on this if this happens?

I'm going to turn now to what we do. We provide theatre to northwestern Ontario. The Canada Council has been very supportive of our efforts. The new money received recently has gone to programs that give us hope in providing better programming. We have a touring aspect of our operations, which we would like to expand. The moneys available for those programs were great to see.

Another one was the international initiatives that have come out through the Canada Council. We've recently had initial conversations with a Finnish group to start working on these kinds of initiatives with them. So the introduction of this program fit immediately with what we wanted to do.

There's one aspect of the Canada Council programming I'm not exactly sure of. One of our core activities deals with youth in theatre, and I'm not sure if the Canada Council has specific youth programs. If so, where were they with the new money, if youth initiatives were thought of in those talks?

My final point is I hope the new initiatives continue. It would be nice to see that after five years these programs are still around.

Thank you.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much.

Now we'll go to one of our audience participants, please, Denyse Culligan.

[Translation]

Ms. Denyse Culligan (Association des francophones du nord- ouest de l'Ontario): Good afternoon. My name is Denyse Culligan. I am here on behalf of the Association des francophones du nord-ouest de l'Ontario, which represents 20 member groups that, in turn, represent approximately 10,000 francophones living in northwestern Ontario. We have social clubs. We look after the elderly and young people. We're involved with almost everybody in our community because there aren't very many of us. All our groups are involved in activities which help to perpetuate our art, our music, our culture and our French-Canadian traditions through the use of the French language in northwestern Ontario. Believe me, this is not always easy.

In fact, I might admit that I'm a little concerned, even a bit surprised, that we were not invited to participate in this round table as representatives of all these francophones. Under the law, I think there still are two official languages in Canada. We have the right not only to interpretation, but also to representation. May I remind you that we should have an official voice at events such as this one.

I am here today to remind you that French-Canadian culture is alive and well in northwestern Ontario. We receive funding from Heritage Canada, which is an enormous help. I believe there is also work underway on Canada-communities agreements, which will provide us with more support, which is a good thing.

• 1500

However, people tend to forget us and even deny our existence, especially in Thunder Bay, in the northwest in general and probably throughout the country. I'd like to remind you that this does not prevent us from being very active and from working to further our culture and our French-Canadian heritage. We are an integral and involved part of the communities we live in, in our province and in our country.

Next year is the Année de la Francophonie, and we're working on activities focussed on technology, amongst other things.

We would like to specifically address four of the five questions. However, I did not have time to prepare a presentation since I did not know I was going to be here. If you don't mind, I will submit a short brief. I hope you will accept it, read it and include it in your documentation.

I would also like to add that we contribute to the richness of our region by adding to its culture as francophones. There are very few francophones in the northwest, and they keep the francophone factor alive without receiving much support by speaking and living in French, by raising their children in French and by developing francophone culture in our country.

That is what I wanted to say today.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much for your contribution.

[English]

We look forward to receiving your brief with great pleasure. Thank you.

Our next speaker is Ms. Esdon.

Ms. Heather Esdon: I'm going to talk about dollar signs as they translate to the individual artist.

First off, a couple of millennia ago Aristotle talked about the dangers of replacing spectacle with art. I think that's something that needs to be addressed by the major powerbrokers within this country, and I would include the federal government in that.

The definition of theatre does not.... Garth Drabinsky doesn't write it. It's not only taking place in the major urban centres. As a matter of fact, our folks have had the most exciting and worthy cultural contributions in this country, coming from places that you can designate as marginal, perhaps, because of their geographic proximity, or because of the attitudes of those involved in creating that art. What I would love to see is a valuing of culture that is proactive and informs our definition of its value, not one that responds to the dollar sign in regard to whether or not it is worthy art, or worthy of cultural consideration.

The other point I wanted to make was on the flip side of that. Lise began to address this issue. For individual artists who are living hand to mouth, please, Revenue Canada, don't forget us either. As I attest to being a working actor, I don't get employment insurance when I'm between engagements. I don't get any of those other things. So please, remember people like me, whose gross income may be less than $15,000, and please don't question us when the cost of doing business, as we reflect it in our statements of income, seems rather disproportionately high. It is. That's our cost of trying to do business, and we don't get to say whether we work or not.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much.

Ms. Godwin.

Ms. Sharon Godwin: Thank you. I was going to respond to question five, and actually Lise did that. I'll just expand on it a bit more.

All the roles you've outlined here in question five are important in varying degrees. But I think the last one, the promoter, is really the one that is most important perhaps to our culture. Just as Lise said, if we can have strong, vibrant arts organizations that people are coming to, looking at and listening to the art that is produced, then we will have support across the country from the citizens. I think we do have the support, but it isn't measured in their visitation.

• 1505

I get this all the time at the gallery, where people say we love you, we love your organization, we were just there. And when I question them about what show they saw, it's a show that was here three years ago. But in their own minds, they have been visiting and they do support us. So if we can have a Participaction type of thing, or have the government look at that, it would be very few dollars for the net effect at the end. More people would be coming and would be supporting.

I know we didn't address the question about globalization. I don't personally understand it, but I think I know it's a threat, or there could be a threat there. And that would be another reason we need our organizations to be very strong, to withstand any kind of threat. We don't need protectionist measures. We need, as Dorette said, not to apologize any more, but to support what we have.

As a final comment, Lise, regarding what you said about using artists to portray us, it's interesting that in the school systems, when you see pictures in school reports, they're always of kids playing an instrument or making a painting, not sitting there with their math books. That's another interesting commentary on that system, as well.

Thank you.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much.

Ms. Godwin, you brought up the topic of globalization. I'd like to draw your attention to the fact that last week, on February 17, there was a report released by the cultural industries SAGIT, one of the sectoral advisory groups for international trade, which actually looked at the role of culture in light of international trade and agreements. We hope we'll be able to take this report, and between Minister Marchi and Minister Copps, we will decide which committee will analyse it—it may be our subcommittee on international trade. I have a web site number. It took two years in the making. There were people from the private sector and the not-for-profit sector on the advisory council. It's an interesting document. You may want to look at it.

Ms. Miller, as you started by saying you're the last to know in Thunder Bay, I'd like you to be the first to know about this report, and to get your brief into this report. It's for discussion purposes, and I urge you to read it. Perhaps afterwards, if you're interested, we can give you the web site number on that.

Ms. Imrie.

Ms. Diane Imrie: I wanted to make a couple of closing remarks. Also, as Ms. Esdon pointed out when she quoted Aristotle, the reason we have knowledge of that is because of good oral historians, archivists, and librarians who have made sure those stories have been kept. I say that jokingly, but in all honesty. We are the conservators of our history. We have to make sure we're preserving that history, and it is our role, in this generation, to do that. To me, that is priceless.

I know dollars are few, but I can't stress passionately enough that I also am a Canadian. If we don't retain those stories and that history, they're going to be lost. We have to make sure our youth are very much aware of our history. We can sit and argue about the division of power, that education is a provincial responsibility and not a federal responsibility. What happens in many cases is that we're losing valuable time.

In the case of education, for example, I happen to run a sports museum. And with globalization, the web, and everything else, kids come into my museum—and we represent sports in this part of the world—and they want to see Michael Jordan and Mark McGwire. It takes a lot for me to explain to them they're not from northwestern Ontario, and they're not Canadian.

I would suggest to you that 30 years ago they were walking in and asking about Rocket Richard and the great Canadian heroes. I have a great concern that we are going to lose our cultural identity because of mass technology and things like that. So again, I caution the federal government that we not lose the opportunity to be proud of who we are. I know everyone around the table is, but sometimes it costs dollars to be proud of who we are. I would encourage you to put those dollars across.

• 1510

For example, regarding the National Museums Corporation, as a minimum the federal government should be responsible for maintaining the National Library, the National Archives. Often during budget times they get slashed, and it's impossible for them to function in many ways. But please continue that.

Please continue the CBC's funding. As you've heard today, it's crucial to isolated communities. I grew up in Toronto, where you can push the button and you have 400 radio stations. You can't do that in northwestern Ontario. It's crucial that information be available to the people all across this region.

Again, in terms of one of the roles of the Canadian government being a regulator, sometimes that's a bad word to people. I know there's too much regulation in our lives. I equate it to the medicine our moms give us: sometimes we don't like it, but it's good for us in the long run. So I again encourage you to make sure for our youth and our future that they're aware of our history, and make sure we maintain that.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much, Ms. Imrie.

We're almost out of time. We're going to have to wrap it up, but I still have five more people on the list. Perhaps you could make your comments succinct.

We have Ms. Kozyra, Ms. Miller, and Ms. Carter.

Ms. Catherine Kozyra: On the idea that art happens in marginalized areas, I think it needs to be allowed to happen. It can't be all spectacle. But whenever any of this information comes through and they speak about culture, it's always referring to the large showcases, the national dance companies, the operas. If you don't have the grassroots development, things won't evolve except in the major centres.

On the other issue, about preserving our heritage and documenting what is happening, enough money needs to happen so that the documentation can happen locally for the works that are being created locally, and with the cutbacks, these kinds of things can't continue to happen.

The art bank was discontinued. That was another way of collecting and preserving our national heritage across the country. It was not just coming from the major centres.

I feel that artist-run centres definitely need to be supported, because that's where the experimentation and the research and development happen before things can happen in the national galleries or the national-provincial galleries. So I believe the support has to be from the grassroots up.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much.

Ms. Miller.

Ms. Dusty Miller: Thank you. I will try to be quick.

I really want to say something about the person who gets no particular kudos or money, even an insignificant amount of money, and yet without them, the arts organizations and institutions across the country would not exist. I'm talking here about the volunteer. Whether it be the Musée des beaux arts in Montreal, or the Stratford Festival, or the Thunder Bay Art Gallery, we could not survive without the volunteers. They do an enormous amount of work to keep them going, and many of them have been doing it for years and years.

I'm simply saying that I would hope the federal government would recognize that and recognize it in a way to bring in established programs and policies that encourage the volunteers. This is fundamental to all of us.

Secondly, my heart goes out to the symphony board, which is particularly the one that Mr. Comuzzi came on, a totally new fresh face willing to give some time and energy to this. And of course this board fell afoul of what I consider to be a federal regulation, which is really in the grey area. As a result of that, he and his board are financially liable for.... We all hope this is not going to come to that. But I'll tell you something. There are not too many people lined up with great eagerness to get on the board of the Thunder Bay Symphony right now. These are matters that are very important.

• 1515

As Maureen Brophy suggested, in a way, sometimes it all starts from the local scene. I know our federal government is supposed to think of the whole totality of Canada, but the local volunteers, right up to the ones who are the volunteers in the elite organizations, are to be treasured. They should be acknowledged. I hope this will be part of the work of the Department of Canadian Heritage.

I'm really glad the committee is here. It has been very cathartic. I hope it's going to be more than cathartic, but it has been great to have a chance to express our feelings and our ideas.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you.

Ms. Carter.

Ms. Dorette Carter: We should never lose sight of the power of the real thing. We keep talking about children, and we keep talking about the value of all of these things. I find it fascinating to watch children, who we assume are—and they are—incredibly comfortable with all of the rapid changes in technology and all the virtual this, that, and the other thing. But they value what is real. They value live performance, because they actually see a real person blowing into an instrument or doing something, an artist who can create something out of a block of wood that they would not really believe actually can happen unless they see it with their own eyes.

From personal experience—and this was triggered by Diane's comment—having taken two boys of 10 and 12 years of age, who are rabid hockey fans, to the then brand-new Hockey Hall of Fame a few years ago, my thinking naively was that they would be seduced by the simulation of being in a hockey net. They went right by all of this very high-priced equipment, and they were absolutely determined, in very loud voices, to see the real Stanley Cup. And there was nothing that we had paid at the door that would ever have enticed them in.

Having watched those two kids up this close, I know the elder one was skating around in his mind with that thing over his head at centre ice. It reminded me what I know professionally, but very bluntly: that the virtual Stanley Cup would not have cut it. We sometimes think maybe we'll get along with less than the real thing. Trust me, they're going to be more demanding than we are as constituents in another ten years.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much, Ms. Carter.

Mr. Bélanger.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I'm very happy that I was one of those who insisted that the committee travel. We've been in Ottawa listening to what I've termed “the cultural aristocracy”, and I thought it was important for us to hear, in larger and smaller centres, people involved in the day-to-day, the grind, what they thought and felt.

I have a few questions and comments. I won't be that long.

One, I hope we have addresses. There are a couple of people to whom I want to send some documents.

[Translation]

Madam Clerk, do we have the addresses of these people? Thank you.

[English]

I want to know about this 1992 visit, which was the last time Michel somebody came to Thunder Bay. If that's in that person's territory, I'd like to know which agency that person represents and why they haven't come back.

Ms. Catherine Kozyra: It was a very positive visit, and we have maintained contact.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: It has been seven years ago, though.

Ms. Catherine Kozyra: That's because he is so pressured with the—

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Okay, with the Canada Council.

Ms. Catherine Kozyra: Yes.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: You're not going to get him in trouble.

Ms. Catherine Kozyra: We have a very good relationship with him, and it's very positive, but because of cutbacks, too, these people only get to go to the major centres.

• 1520

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Fair enough.

Well, cutbacks are often very handy for people who may or may not want to do something.

Ms. Catherine Kozyra: Oh—

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I understand there have been government cuts, but too often that's the excuse not to do anything, in my view.

Ms. Catherine Kozyra: But—

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I have the floor here, if I may.

Ms. Catherine Kozyra: I'm sorry.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Obviously, I'm glad we're going to get information on the Revenue Canada situation with the symphony, because that one is new to me. I'll wait until we get that.

[Translation]

This is for the representative of the francophones from northwestern Ontario. Regarding the appearance of groups before the committee, I've been told that the media were all invited, and the Alliance culturelle de l'Ontario was specifically invited. So we did not forget anybody and we did not try to ignore anyone. Perhaps the organization should review its internal communications systems. When this type of committee travels, we also make sure that news releases are sent to all national and local media outlets, so we don't miss anyone who might be interested in the subject. People are also partly responsible for staying on top of things and keeping an eye out for what is headed their way.

As for the Canada-communities agreements, which you mentioned a little earlier, I am pleased to confirm that last week's Budget increased Heritage Canada's official languages programs budget by $70 million. So we can expect a certain increase in these envelopes.

As for you, Mr. Sauvageau, you tried to play politics, but I won't hold it against you. Don't forget, however, that we have made changes in the last while, despite getting our financial house in order. I'm not saying that things are perfect—they're not. However, don't forget that the Canada Arts Council recently received an annual increase of $25 million for their budget. That's a lot of money. Now the budget is at the same level it was before program review. So, despite all the cuts imposed on government departments since the 1993 elections, the Canada Council budget was not affected. In fact, it received $25 million more.

As well, don't forget, the review of the Copyright Act had a major impact on Canada's artistic and cultural communities. Just ask our artistic community how it feels about neighbouring rights in particular and about the issue of collectives. So, we have made some progress, despite the fact that distributors of cultural products often tried to work against us. But we prevailed. The same holds true for the media, which, incidentally, we mentioned here.

We also made progress in the area of taxation—Ms. Bulte is more familiar with this than I am—in terms of donations, major donations. There have also been changes in the field of music, TV productions—that was quite a victory—and so on.

I can't say it's all bad—however it's not all good either.

[English]

What I've picked up here and there is that there are some significant weaknesses on the educational side. Perhaps it's a little delicate and touchy, since education is primarily a provincial responsibility, but that doesn't mean we have to shy away from it. Perhaps we can learn from this summer employment program, which has been positively mentioned, and apply it a little more widely. So we'll retain that.

The other one is on fiscal tax and the whole endowment area. I would have wished to hear more on that, so I look forward to Monsieur Kuschak's paper.

Finally, on the international scene, I want to know if I'm mistaken—and please tell me if I am, yes or no—by taking it, from what you've said, that, yes, there is a will or a desire that our cultural sector be carved out from international agreements, as we have in the past, and that it be promoted and in some cases protected, because we have protected it, although sometimes measures that may be deemed protectionist are not necessarily so.

• 1525

For instance, the Canadian content on radio has generated a wonderful music industry in Canada. It's doing very well. Arguments have been advanced, and I think rightfully so, that if it weren't for that we wouldn't have the music industry we now have. So is that a protectionist measure, or is that a promotional measure?

A lot of people often put Canadian content into a protectionist bag and then just spit on it. We have to be careful about that. There are some who would abandon that, such as we have confronting us now on magazines.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm taking it that there is a will around this table, mostly, perhaps not everywhere, that the Canadian government continue to act in the international field for the protection and promotion of our cultural industries.

Thank you.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much, Mr. Bélanger.

You may address that in your written submission.

Mr. Comuzzi.

Mr. Joe Comuzzi: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be shorter than my colleague, who was going to be short to begin with.

In northwestern Ontario, since Minister Dupuy was the Minister of Heritage and handled the Nordics, and now we have Minister Copps, I think it's fair to say—and Stan would attest to it—that the treatment we've received from the Minister of Heritage for northwestern Ontario has not been very fair. It certainly has not been equitable when you consider the funding that has been provided for other centres in this country. I've been involved in several of those projects, and had to bring the words back for a refusal.

The symphony orchestra, if it weren't for the intervention of Stan and me—and I'm not happy with this—with the Minister of Revenue to ask for a special consideration in the repay of the outstanding obligation.... It is only a piecemeal solution to the fundamental problem.

The other part of the equation is now the Minister of Heritage and the committee and the department providing the proper funding for the Lakehead Symphony Orchestra in order to meet its current obligations—and part of those current obligations are the undertakings they've given to Revenue Canada—were taking much too long to even come to a decision. It's just too long to come to a decision, Madam Chair. This has been ongoing now for almost a year. I'm going to ask you and the chairman of the committee, on your return to Ottawa, to undertake to try to speed up that process, please.

The other project, which may be the most exciting heritage cultural project we've ever had developed, developed by the volunteers of our community, is Magnus in the Park. It's the most exciting project I have ever seen trying to be developed. We have had the submissions in front of Heritage Canada—I don't know, I think it was two and a half, three years ago—and further submissions and further submissions, and we have not had a great deal of success.

I would like your undertaking that you would call for those submissions that Magnus in the Park have made to the heritage ministry. Would you review them again in your committee and look at the importance of this to northwestern Ontario? And remember that Canada is made up of small parts, of which northwestern Ontario is a small part.

Thank you. That's all I have to say.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Thank you very much, Mr. Comuzzi.

I think that brings us to a close. I'm sorry we ran a little bit over time.

Mr. Stan Dromisky: I have one question, and I'm not going to speak.

Please put your hand up if you or your organization is taking part in the millennium fund that the federal government has introduced. Have you applied?

All hands are up. Very good. I just wanted to seek some indication.

The Acting Chair (Ms. Sarmite Bulte): Okay.

On behalf of the committee, I'd like to thank each and every one of you for coming today and sharing your concerns, discussing what issues are important. We've had some wonderful ideas. It's nice to be away from Ottawa—as Monsieur Bélanger said, away from the cultural aristocracy. We always see the same people over and over again, dealing with the same issues.

• 1530

I also want to say a special thanks to Ms. Wheeler and also Madame Culligan for coming and participating from the audience. Your ideas, suggestions, and concerns will form a part of our report, as well.

I encourage you all, if you have not done so, to please provide us with written submissions before the end of March so they can be incorporated into our report.

Thank you again for coming here and taking the time from your very busy schedules. I know a lot of you are volunteers and have taken a lot of time from what you do for a living to be here.

Thank you very much to our co-hosts, Mr. Dromisky and Mr. Comuzzi, for being here with you in the riding.

We look forward to this being the beginning of future consultations. Thank you very much.

The meeting is adjourned.