CHPC Committee Meeting

    Good morning, everyone.

     Welcome, everyone. Thank you for coming. This is the 102nd meeting of the standing committee.

    I would like to welcome our witnesses.

    To begin, we must consider certain matters, including the project budget request, which the clerk has distributed to everyone.

    This is the budget for cultural hubs and cultural districts in Canada, which is our next study. Does anyone have any comments about this budget?

    I see no need to travel. I think all of this could be done adequately with the witnesses coming here or as we are doing it today.

    I don't believe there's anything in this budget that would have us travelling.

    Is that for them to travel to visit us? Okay. That's fine.

    Are you okay with the budget as it is?

    I shall make no further comment.

    All right.

    Mr. Nantel, have you had time to look at the project budget request?

    I have no further questions.

    Would you move for the approval of the budget, Mr. Hogg?

     (Motion agreed to)

    The Chair: Excellent.

    Our morning is off to a good start.

    We will now start with our witnesses, who are from three organizations.

    This is for the study of the state of Canadian museums. We have with us Ms. Heidi Reitmaier from the Museum of Contemporary Art Toronto Canada. We also have with us, from the Hockey Hall of Fame and museum, Jeff Denomme and Phil Pritchard. We also have, by video conference, Ms. Elaine Hruby, from the Bellevue Underground Mine.

    Each of you will have 10 minutes to make a presentation.

     Why don't we start with video conference? We have you there, and you never know how technicalities will work. Why don't we start with the Bellevue Underground Mine, please, for 10 minutes?

     Thank you, Madam Chairman and committee members. I feel honoured for this opportunity to present evidence to the standing committee on the state of museums.

    The Bellevue Underground Mine, of which I am Past-President, is an Alberta provincial historic resource and a recognized museum by the Alberta Museums Association. I am the Past-President, Past Executive Director, for the Bellevue Underground Mine in Crowsnest Pass, Alberta. I'm currently completing a diploma in cultural resource management. I was the first director at the mine with any prior knowledge or experience of museums.

    The Bellevue Underground Mine is the only historically authentic underground mine that is accessible to the public in western Canada. It is open from May to early September for walk-in tours, and the rest of the year it takes pre-booked tours. Staff interpret the history of coal mining in the Crowsnest Pass in relationship to immigration, community building, economic growth in the area, and the CPR. The Bellevue Underground Mine receives 22,000 visitors a year. This is a significant achievement, considering that the sight is 200 kilometres away from the nearest urban centre and is in a community with only 5,589 people.

    As indicated in the evidence by previous witnesses, museums, historic sites, and cultural institutions benefit Canada's health, well-being, economy, and the environment. The mine supports spin-off revenue in a town that is small and has a dwindling commercial tax base.

    The mine's situation is comparable to the circumstances faced by other rural museums and historic sites. However, it has the additional burden of maintaining 1,000 feet, 300 metres, of authentic haulage tunnel, and concrete entry portals. The prime concern of the Bellevue Underground Mine is retaining its authenticity while securing the site's longevity and sustainability. Some of the challenges we face are that, in addition to maintaining the tunnel, the organization must also raise funds for the rehabilitation of concrete mine portals. Both are expensive projects. However, the volunteer work of skilled coal miners reduces the cost of labour and materials in the tunnel.

     These aging volunteer miners spend thousands of hours retimbering and sourcing materials and equipment. During the last 10 years, they have kept the cost of maintaining the tunnel to under $30,000 a year. Should their expertise be lost, the alternative would be engaging consultants, engineers, and contractors, which could conceivably run into millions of dollars.

     Cost is one of the reasons that the tunnel and the portal have not had the benefit of an engineering study in recent years. It's disconcerting to see these men—many of whom are over the age of 60—striving to keep the site running with little outside support. The miners would also maintain the portals in addition to the tunnel, but this is a separate rehabilitation project requiring geotechnical studies, engineers, architects, and historical conservationists. A significant injection of funding is essential to the rehabilitation of the portals and the mine tunnel. It's unrealistic to believe that eight people—and that's pretty much it—can raise the capital to secure and rehabilitate this site.

    While the Bellevue Underground Mine's visitorship and popularity continue to increase, with national and international visitors, there is a complacency about its future. It is inconceivable that this small group will ever be able to have the capacity to meet the overwhelming financial needs of the Bellevue Underground Mine. Without a significant infusion of capital, Alberta will lose this historic site.

     There's a large discrepancy between our funding and resources and those of government-operated national museums and not-for-profit sites. For example, the Frank Slide Interpretive Centre, a provincial site two kilometres from the mine, receives the same school tours and visitors as the Bellevue Underground Mine. As a government-run centre, Frank Slide employs greeters, janitors, and programmers. They also have spacious facilities that can accommodate large tours.

     In contrast, the mine's orientation building is a series of two-garage packages. It barely holds 30 people, or one average-sized school tour. When there are back-to-back tours, the second group must wait outside regardless of the weather. The two washrooms are substandard and inadequate for average-sized school and bus tours. The executive director does everything from administration to cleaning washrooms. The Frank Slide Interpretive Centre pays their interpreters $18 an hour, while the mine stretches to pay theirs $15. The mine's executive director receives $3 more per hour than an interpreter at the Frank Slide. The gap in pay rates and working conditions between the two sites makes it challenging to entice professional museum staff and to retain trained interpreters.

    Even though the Bellevue Mine does not have the benefit of a programmer or professional exhibits, it gets consistently high ratings and return visits. It's disheartening for the staff and volunteers to know that despite their diligence and the popularity of the site, they have been unable to offer new programs or services after 30 years of operation. The inadequate infrastructure and insufficient number of staff cannot continue to cope with yearly increases in visitors. This is a popular site.

    However, this is secondary to the problem of raising funds to keep the tunnel and the portal safe. At one time, local mining companies gave the Bellevue Underground Mine large corporate donations and sponsorship. Currently, their focus is on health and wellness, which is admirable but doesn't help the mine with long-term sustainability. Conversations with a B.C. mining company revealed that before they could commit large donations they would need to confirm that there's a substantial commitment from the government.

    We have a few recommendations, mostly for all museums.

     First, we need grants that are flexible and fit the needs of Canadian museums of all sizes. On page 3 of the Canadian Museums Association's brief to the standing committee is a sample of museum sizes and operational budgets across Canada. The sample shows that 62% of museums operate on budgets of less than $500,000. Given the number of small museums existing on subsistent funding, it would be welcome news to see a fairer disbursement of funds between government-run and not-for-profit museums. New grants allocated to meet the specific needs of rural museums would be a bonus.

    Grants that support each stage of growth in museums or historic sites are also needed. They should support an organization's development toward becoming a recognized museum. The library model could be incorporated to raise additional funds for museums and historic sites. Endowment funds, like those set up for visual and performing arts, could give tired museums and historic sites a boost.

    The above recommendations are general, and would be helpful to museums in the long term. However, time is running our for the Bellevue Underground Mine, which is a shame when it has such a compelling history and the number of visitors to justify investing in its future. It will never reach its full potential if it doesn't get timely and substantial funding from the provincial or federal government.

    Thank you once again for initiating this important study and for your time this morning.

    Thank you for that.

    We will now go to Ms. Reitmaier of the Museum of Contemporary Art Toronto, please.

     Many thanks for your invitation to speak today. I feel honoured to be here and share my thoughts.

    I thought it would be useful to provide some biographical information. I was born in Toronto and completed an undergraduate degree in fine arts. I moved to the U.K. in the 1990s to complete a graduate degree in art history at the University of Leeds, and subsequently held management and leadership positions in Vancouver, at Tate Gallery in London for eight years, and most recently at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Chicago, before returning to Canada to take on the role of executive director and CEO of the Museum of Contemporary Art Toronto Canada.

    As many of you may know, MOCA will soon open a new five-storey space to the public in an industrial heritage building with over 55,000 square feet of exhibition, public programs, learning, and office space. The museum will boast a full-time permanent staff of 20 and an annual operating budget of $8 million.

    My career migration and breadth of experience within different institutions across different disciplines, with international colleagues and in various countries, has shaped my sensibilities and I think made me an unusual hybrid in the museum world. Though my outlook may be viewed as progressive or even groundbreaking, I know that museum professionals around the world are attempting to understand a new world context for the 21st-century museum. There is a lot to think about.

    I believe the experience of art, the inspiration, and the instigation that art provokes can serve as a way for people to understand themselves and the world. I think contemporary art and artists ask hard questions and provoke audiences to think and imagine in new and different ways, with more curiosity and, we hope, with more civility.

    Museums are the vestibules where an exchange between art, artists, and visitors happen. Our job as professionals really is to create relevant spaces that ensure that museums reflect the world we're in and the diversity and plurality.

    At the moment, I'd suggest that museums are in trouble, because they aren't nimble enough to reimagine themselves. They hold too much currency in their expertise and thus purport to be authorities on cultural relevancy. I believe they either haven't considered how the world has changed around them or they don't know how to evolve with these changes. It's worth highlighting that many small and mid-sized museums are slow to change.

    For me, the question of relevancy has been top of mind for decades, and it's fairly exciting. The need for museums to consider this has been formative in many best practices in the world. I think it's worth considering, and asking the question in our own context, how museums can become more relevant in the 21st century for Canadians.

    I'd like to suggest first that we have to consider the audience, the public. Most large-scale and mid-sized museums are struggling to retain audiences and attract a younger visitor base. The visitor demographic of most museums is predominantly white and mature, at least in the visual arts, not to mention the demographics of the staff, the board, and the individual donor base. In all of these cases, numbers and support are dwindling. If we don't fulfill a cultural contract that demands we serve audiences beyond traditional patrons, our continued relevance into this century will be seriously at risk because it's not reflective of the plural and diverse cultural practices or of the diverse communities we serve.

    According to the 2017 “Culture Track” study, an initiative of the U.S.-based consultancy company LaPlaca Cohen—which I know you've heard about—audiences no longer distinguish between high and low culture. For the cultural consumer, going to a street fair is of equal value to attending an opera. The visitor measures a successful experience by way of learning, doing something new, finding enjoyment and fun, and being socially engaged. Museums that uphold an idea that their sole responsibility is to be the singular and notable custodians of objects and those that believe that theirs is a special and unique position are potentially out of step with the contemporary public.

    I believe the challenge for museums is figuring out how to differentiate an experience from other opportunities, to do this with integrity, and to figure out how best to connect art and ideas with interests and ambitions of relevant communities in the world. At MOCA we aim to be a listening museum, a welcoming place in which we will seek a reciprocal relationship with our community, public, and the world, and we are committed to ongoing dialogue through everything we do. Museums need to listen.

    Twenty years ago, the Harvard Business Review ran an article entitled “How the Arts Can Prosper Through Strategic Collaborations”. The piece declared,

    This looked specifically at the U.S., yet the sentiment could be relevant today in Canada. Arts and cultural organizations around the world have to up their game when it comes to forging collaborations with business, industry, and tech companies. They need to seek engaging and relevant visitor experience and generate much-needed revenue.

     As our industry seeks to create relevancy and connect with audiences, it would benefit us immeasurably to have the government play a role in facilitating collaborations between culture and the private sector with a mind to sharing best practices. These practices could include technological advances, expertise in customer experience strategy, research intelligence, consumer psychology, and so forth.

    A dynamic example of such collaboration is one that the Cooper Hewitt design museum launched in 2014 in New York. It was an interactive pen that allowed visitors to design new projects in response to the permanent collection and to contribute this work to an ongoing archive. It was created in partnership with Hewlett Packard, Local Projects, and Sistelnetworks, a company leading in wireless technology. The federal government could nurture such partnerships by building cross-disciplinary networks in leading the charge to collect data on new and best practice, best-in-class research.

    I'm interested in how the government might lead a national conversation about culture and economic growth. A very well-documented example is the U.K.'s New Labour party launch of the “Cool Britannia” brand in the nineties. This was an interesting model of a campaign that celebrated a modern public face for Britain with a new kind of industry and workforce. Living in London at the time, I think it was seen as a chance to redefine what the economic future would be about. It was an attempt to reimagine England, not just as a place of factories and Fleet Street bankers but creative entrepreneurs from across society.

    “Cool Britannia” fuelled the creative industries and increased prosperity. It turned once ordinary industrial cities like Manchester into cultural destinations, interconnected the arts and businesses, revitalized urban areas, and attracted skilled workers. Cultural Capital: The Rise and Fall of Creative Britain by Robert Hewison, published by Verso in 2014, is a great read and worth citing here.

    Museums like MOCA are committed to generating and supporting Canadian content. Our role, as we nurture young artists and cultural producers, would be assisted by an ambassadorial international spotlight that advocates and underlines the unique qualities, benefits, ingenuity, talent, and plurality of Canadian culture on a global scale.

    Finally, leadership and mentorship is a common theme across the many presentations you've heard to date, and is something that I feel would be beneficial to Canadians as well as to MOCA. To that end, there are two stellar leadership programs to be considered or looked at, and one has opportunities for Canadians. The U.K. Clore Leadership Programme aids the professional growth of museum professionals, and in the U.S., the Getty Leadership Institute, which I have completed, assists experienced top-level museum and cultural executives from around the world in becoming better leaders, with the aim of strengthening their own institutional capabilities as well as advancing the international museum field.

    I also think there's an opportunity, as so much talent has migrated to Canada in recent years, for the government to initiate a formal mentorship program whereby directors from large to mid-sized museums, especially those who have gained experience elsewhere, are encouraged to partner with mentor colleagues from smaller institutions. Mentoring is a key element of programs like the Center for Curatorial Leadership in New York, and extends learning outside the classroom.

    Towards the same notion is the subject of capacity building and philanthropy in Canada. Although they're a different history and system, we know that $373 billion is handed out by individuals, foundations, and businesses in the United States, and rates of giving are two to 20 times higher in the U.S.

    From my years at MCA in Chicago, I developed an appreciation of the history of philanthropy in America, and the social and political traditions behind it. I think it would be advantageous for Canada to learn from this best practice, and I think professionals in mid-size museums could gain, and need to gain, more proficiency skills in donor cultivation.

    Lastly, on the question of access, equity, and inclusion, it's a challenge, as we know, of deepening the talent and leadership pool within the Canadian museum sector. There's a small pipeline in this country. The challenge is also great, in that the museum profession does not represent the socio-economic and racial demographics of the country. As someone building a leading international contemporary art museum in Canada that hopes to lead with best practice, it's challenging to find the skills and industry expertise within the country. It's also challenging to build the team that reflects the diversity and plural voices of this country. An initiative that allows for the growth of mentorship and leadership, as well as helping to diversify the museum field in Canada to reflect the complexity and brilliance of this country, would be welcome.

    I want to thank you for the invitation and this opportunity to share my thoughts.

    Thank you very much.

    We will now go to the Hockey Hall of Fame and Museum, Mr. Denomme and Mr. Pritchard, please.

     Madam Chair and members of the committee, thank you for inviting us.

    Given the Hockey Hall of Fame's position as a very well-funded not-for-profit corporation and registered charity that honours and preserves the history of our great national winter sport, when first asked to appear before the committee it wasn't clear to me what meaningful value we could bring to this discussion. Both Phil and I are sports management graduates. Phil is our Vice-President and Curator. He's been with the Hockey Hall of Fame for 30 years. I'm in my 32nd year, and for 20 of them I've been President and CEO of the corporation.

    As I mentioned, we are in a unique position in our country, not only in the country but in the museum field as one of the “big four” major single sport halls of fame in North America. Our counterparts in basketball, football, and baseball are all based in the United States. The foundation of our success is certainly built on strategic partnerships, not only within the hockey world but within the corporate world, and certainly in our strong relationship with the City of Toronto that dates back to the first museum, which was opened on the Canadian National Exhibition grounds in 1961.

    We have already circulated a background summary, so I won't spend a lot of time on it this morning. It certainly answers a lot of questions and gives background that we thought was relevant information. We compiled for the committee the public benefits; the government support, which has been minimal certainly at the federal and provincial levels; and the support we get from the City of Toronto through tax exemptions and the development agreement that established the Hockey Hall of Fame, which are certainly valuable to our existence.

    As a self-sufficient operation, success and sustainability stretch far beyond the gate admissions. Being self-sufficient and well funded does not come from a lack of effort. We have a retail merchandising business, corporate events and hospitality, sponsorships, and the licensing of our intellectual property rights. Leveraging those rights is certainly something we enjoy that perhaps other museums do not have privilege to, because of our position in the national game and certainly the professional game.

     Outreach is a key to our success, with travelling programs and education. We have a curriculum with Seneca College called “Hockey Hall of Fame Presents”. We provide field services. We're the official photographer of the International Ice Hockey Federation, responsible for all photographic assignments at their major five world and Olympic championships. Another example is our new relationship and long-term partnership with the Edmonton Oilers. They built their new arena facility two years ago. We were involved in designing, in part, some of their exhibition facilities, and we have an ongoing curatorial relationship.

    Having said all that, we do face similar challenges to those in the museum industry, particularly in the cataloguing and preservation of our vast archival and museum collections. In 2009 we established the D.K. (Doc) Seaman Hockey Resource Centre. Doc Seaman was the former owner of the Calgary Flames and a great philanthropist. Through the Calgary Foundation and the Doc Seaman Canadian hockey fund, we were able to receive funding to build a new remote archival facility to house our collections. In fact, with the Canadian cultural spaces program, through specialized equipment, we were able to receive some funding for that particular project. Still, as our collections grow, financial resources are limited and reinvestments in the public museum attractions generally take priority. It really is a challenge to keep up with the cataloguing and preservation of our collections.

    With that, this is a special year for the Hockey Hall of Fame. It's our “75/25” anniversary, 75 years since the inception of the Hockey Hall of Fame and 25 years at its present location in downtown Toronto. It's been a great success at the corner of Yonge and Front streets. This is a major year for us. We recently established a new endowment fund, called the Hockey Hall of Fame development and preservation fund. This anniversary year we will fund our inaugural fundraising campaign. We've been successful in getting seed contributions from the National Hockey League. We have a major gala fundraiser this June. Our first named endowment program, from the Tanenbaum family, will create the legends of hockey scholars fund in support of indigenous youth educational initiatives. We're quite proud of that program.

     In talking about what matters to the Hockey Hall of Fame in this discussion, it is really relationships with donors and enhancing the benefits to donors, both from an endowment and a sustainability perspective, but also particularly with respect to gift-in-kind collections. This is Phil's domain as our curator. He can speak to that and certainly answer any questions.

    When I look at key recommendations, certainly on the endowment side, expanding the mandate of the Canada culture investment fund, which is generally, I believe, directed towards arts organizations, is certainly something the museum sector could benefit from. It's quite relevant to what we're doing in this early stage of developing this endowment fund.

    On the gift-in-kind donation side, for our marketplace it's highly competitive in terms of sports memorabilia. I believe that some of the benefits that accrue to cultural property that's certified under the Cultural Property Export and Import Act ought to be considered as general to museums because of the competitiveness and certainly the tax benefits such as the elimination of capital gains tax and the extended deduction limits. Those sorts of things would matter a lot to the Hockey Hall of Fame because I think we're losing a lot of great material from our collections to private collectors. Not only that, but the Canadian Museum of History recently purchased a collection for $3 million from a Toronto-based collector, and I would think that a lot of that collection should be with the Hockey Hall of Fame.

    We really appreciate the opportunity to be here today. Hopefully there is some value we can add, certainly from a philosophical point of view, museology. We do have people on staff who are engaged in that particular area.

     I commend the eloquence of the other two speakers. In terms of museums generally across the country and their challenges, we can appreciate that certainly from a collections standpoint. We are well funded and well supported, not only, as I said, in the hockey world but outside. Our government funding is very limited. Really, that's not why we're here today. We're here more to talk about donor relations and enhancing those benefits.

    Thank you to the committee for inviting us.

     I'm going to speak on behalf of our archives. First of all, thank you very much for having us here. We are thrilled to be here. I think halls of fame and museums in Canada play a special place in our society.

    Speaking from the Hockey Hall of Fame side, hockey has grown up with Canada. There is a special bond with Canada. It's Canada's sport. It's played in over 80 countries around the world now. People who move to Canada love the sport, and they become part of it because of what it means to Canadians.

    We've seen in the last week across Canada how Canada and society have grown together, but as Jeff mentioned, we do a lot with archives and outreach. We have a course at Seneca College that teaches about the history of the game. That course is fully multicultural. We talk about diversity. We talk about the history of the game and how the game has grown within Canada and around the world.

    We've been fortunate in the past couple of years to be contacted by the Chinese government, the Czech Republic's government, and the Kazakhstan government, and next week we're going to Hungary to do a display on what hockey means to Canadians and how it can influence their country. They're hoping it can influence their countries as well.

    On behalf of the archives, we are a member of the Canadian Association for Sport Heritage and a member of the international sports halls of fame and museums. We speak as a whole on preserving sport. It's an important part of our society. Hockey is obviously close to us, but every sport plays a different role within Canada, and preserving that history and preserving the archives is one of our main goals.

    As Jeff mentioned, the collectors' world plays a huge role in artifacts these days, and the mighty dollar is always at stake. We have to somehow compete with that, and as Jeff mentioned, with work from the government and Canadian Heritage, I think we could all work together on preserving not only our national sport but every museum and hall of fame across Canada, and show Canadians what it really means to be a Canadian.

    Thank you very much for your time. We look forward to talking with you and answering questions.

    That's a great lead-in to what we're doing next, which is questions and answers. It's a seven-minute round right now, and we're beginning with Ms. Dzerowicz for seven minutes, please.

     Thank you so much.

    Those were three excellent presentations, three very different presentations, so I want to say thank you very much.

    I only have seven minutes, which sounds long, but it isn't, so I'll probably direct most of my questions to Ms. Reitmaier.

    You make a lot of recommendations. You said them quite quickly, so I want to delve into them a little, just to have you flesh them out a little. I'd be really appreciative if you could submit your notes formally to the committee so that we could look at them in more detail.

    One of the first things that you mentioned is that the world is changing very quickly, and I think some museums can be slow to change, but they're always trying to find ways to stay relevant. You also mentioned that there's an aging population for most museums. We're looking at the state of museums in Canada, but we're also looking at how the federal government can be helpful.

    When you have an aging audience, I think you're always trying to build an audience 30 years from now, 50 years from now, and there's probably some data that you need to do that. It would be important, as well, to know the state of play of what's happening in the world.

    What type of data can the federal government help gather that might be beneficial to the museum sector, and particularly for museums like MOCA?

    When I speak, I speak predominantly from a visual arts, contemporary arts museum perspective, so I have to keep qualifying that. I come from a learning and public programs education background.

    There has been a lot of work with youth programming and youth development, and integration within the schools. A great piece of work has been done by the Whitney Museum, ICA Boston, and LACMA in L.A. It's called “Room to Rise”, and it looks at the impact of youth and how to cultivate a youth audience, and also the application of 21st-century skills.

    I think what's interesting about contemporary art is that it allows the possibility of increasing curiosity, increasing leadership skills, and certainly in my previous work I've seen how that impact can lead to kids becoming better scientists or better artists.

    I need to focus your answers. Can we gather some data at the national level that would be helpful, in attracting new audiences?

     I think the impact is looking at teen programs across the country and understanding the impact those teens have had in changing audiences inside museums, but also where those teens have gone and what skills they've learned inside museums, and how that's impacted their higher education.

    That's helpful.

    You also talked a little about government helping facilitate collaborations across different sectors, and that government can gather data on best practices.

    Can you elaborate on that very quickly?

    One of the struggles museums have, because we're always limited in resources and we're also limited in our skill sets, is to understand what best practices are happening.

    We're fascinated by Disney, Google, and Starbucks loyalty programs. Those programs are transferable into the work we're doing in museums.

    If the federal government could help us, through creating a network where we can understand what practices are going on across the country, and then also by setting up systems where we can exchange and collaborate with industry, that would be incredibly helpful. If we're doing something on, let's say, visitor experience and visitor satisfaction, having a connection with Starbucks Canada would be incredibly useful. They're usually ahead of the field for us, because they have the resources to invest in developing new ideas and best practice.

    That's excellent.

    One of the things I think MOCA does fairly well is that you have a nice mix between private and public funding, and then going out to your membership. In general, because we're looking at the state of museums across Canada, is there anything else the federal government can do to help leverage the private sector, to get them more engaged within the cultural and artistic industry in Canada?

    I'm going to qualify this by saying I've only been back in the country four months and I came from a place like Chicago, which obviously has a completely different history of philanthropy, so I might not know what you can do. But donors should understand that when they invest, they're not investing in single institutions and to think more broadly about how they're investing in ecosystems.

    In our case in Toronto, giving money to the AGO doesn't prevent you from giving money to MOCA. There might be different numbers, but donors must understand that it's important. It's our job to figure out what we can provide for them and give back, but I think donors must know it's important to give, and that in giving, they're investing in a larger ecosystem.

     Okay. Thank you.

    Lastly, you're right. We have heard quite a bit about the lack of pipeline in terms of developing talent within the sector. You've mentioned a number of amazing programs in the United States as well as a mentorship program. I wonder if you could elaborate maybe on some key aspects that you think the federal government should be focused on and supporting.

    I think mentorship is of huge benefit to young leaders growing up in this country. The opportunity to use the resources and talent of people who have either gone abroad and come back as I have or have actually migrated here is of huge benefit to this country. The federal government could look very closely at a mentoring system through which leaders can bring younger leaders in and develop skills and talents with them, but to actually exploit the skill set that's coming from elsewhere into the country would be really advantageous.

    Okay. I think those are all my questions for you.

    To the Hockey Hall of Fame, you had mentioned that you're well funded, well supported, but a key area seems to be your collections and actually maintaining those. Is there something at the national level beyond just providing additional funding that we can do to be supportive?

     I would just give the caveat that we're down to about less than half a minute, so it will have to be a quick answer. Thanks.

    Certainly, if at Canadian Heritage there are grant programs in support of collections management initiatives, particularly for the labour side of it, I think that's the key. Digitizing collections and making them accessible is important to all museums.

    One of the major projects we accomplished with the International Ice Hockey Federation was digitizing their entire video archives of over 9,000 hours of footage. That was a commercial exchange and that worked out very well for us. That's the sort of thing we need to do, branching out to keep the Hockey Hall of Fame self-sufficient. As I've said, we're subject to economic factors and current events, and the peaks and valleys of any cyclical business. I think that area is one in which we need to look at additional support. With the endowment program, we look at the key objectives and the permitted purposes and use of those funds. That will be important, but if there are programs through which matching grants can be brought into this, we have a massive collection, we continue to accumulate, and we are under-resourced in that area.

    I'll have to cut you off there. We've gone over by just a bit.

    We are going to Mr. Van Loan now, and maybe he can continue as well on those issues.

    Thank you.

    I want to focus on long-term sustainability. I'll start with Bellevue Underground Mine.

    I think you're an extraordinary museum. You have a great museum in and of itself as an interpretation centre. It's an experience to go there. It's high quality, and it has that passion of volunteers. Even your so-called paid people are really to a large extent volunteers and have that passion among them. Also, as you mentioned, a lot of the volunteer side is on the mining side, maintaining the physical structure, and those folks are getting old. Have you contemplated or has there ever been talk of some kind of administrative consolidation or merger with the Frank Slide site to create one museum of the area that's provincially funded, or is there a concern that you might lose that volunteer passion that makes a visit to Bellevue of such high quality?

    Frank Slide Interpretive Centre actually managed the Bellevue Mine for a couple of years and returned it back to a volunteer board after. I'd say a lot of our problems do stem from volunteer boards not being aware of the larger implications of museums, museum standards, and so on. Educating the boards is a challenge in itself. I don't mean to say that they're not knowledgeable people, but maybe just not about museums. I really like Heidi's ideal of mentoring. We have used the Galt Museum before for internships, but it really is hard to attract people who can make a big difference to the mine. We're not afraid of losing volunteers and so on. Frank Slide Interpretive Centre is an excellent centre, but their focus is on geology. I guess we would be secondary to them, for sure.

     That's certainly one of the things that has been discussed. Mergers are a way of dealing with some of these challenges, but it sounds like that's been tried before and didn't quite work.

    I think the role of the AMA, the Alberta Museums Association, could be expanded. There is a real need for museum professionals rurally. Sometimes it's hard to get to conferences and workshops and things. If there could be a more regional centring of those types of services, maybe with professionals who go from small museum to small museum to help with strategic planning and board development, it would be helpful. There are a lot of small museums out there that could use that.

    To the Hockey Hall of Fame, you now benefit from being a pilgrimage for every Canadian on their first visit to Toronto, and that gets you a good gate. It hasn't always been that way. The old hall of fame site, when it was at the CNE, was, I think, challenged. I think that's a fair way of putting it. We've had the CFL Hall of Fame, which had a similar relationship with Hamilton, which had the space there, and it has gone under, which tells us that these things aren't good forever.

     I want you to talk about two things, if you could. First, you have a great marketing guy, Peter Jagla, and you do some good counterintuitive marketing. How is it that you are successful in developing that gate? Secondly, in terms of the long-term sustainability—so you don't go the way of the CFL Hall of Fame—and in view of the different cultural approaches to philanthropy between the States and here, how important is that notion of expanding to the museum sector the matching grants for endowments that we now have for arts, theatre, symphonies, and so on?

    Fifty per cent of our gate comes from Ontario, about 15% from the rest of Canada, about 22% from the U.S., and then the is rest from overseas. There was a day when the U.S. number was much higher, but 9/11 and all the border issues, etc., brought that down.

     Because the Hockey Hall of Fame has not only national relevance but international and global relevance, marketing it is a challenge in terms of the use of our limited marketing dollars. That's where leveraged partnerships come in for us. We have strong corporate partners such as TSN, Imperial Oil, and others. Always activating partnerships and getting the Hockey Hall of Fame out beyond, without having to draw on our own financial resources, has been the key to driving the gate.

    In terms of sustainability, we're at an interesting point after 25 years. Particularly in the past 10 years, we've had an intense growth period as far as development goes. We are uniquely situated in a class A office development in downtown Toronto, whereas the other major halls are in smaller communities. In particular, there is Cooperstown, a community of only a couple of thousand people in upstate New York, Canton, Ohio, for football, and Springfield, Massachusetts, for basketball.

     Our challenges will include growing or expanding the facility in a class A office development in downtown Toronto, where rents are quite significant and space is at a premium, with very little space available. Then there's the question of how much growth is too much growth, because there's always a requirement to reinvest. That was the founding principle of the Hockey Hall of Fame: to continually reinvest and change and make sure we're relevant. It's not only about the past but about the present. In our research, we find that fans want to see as much of hockey today as they want to see the history, so that's been important to us.

    From some of our initial market studies, we saw that when we first opened at the current location people thought the Hockey Hall of Fame was just the historical building at the corner of Yonge and Front. It connoted “museum”. For hockey fans, that wasn't a positive, so we came out very strong on emphasizing the hands-on interactive elements of the Hockey Hall of Fame. Most of our advertising campaigns draw on that, and that I think is why we have great success.

    There was an article a few years ago in The Wall Street Journal about the Internet generation snubbing Cooperstown—

    Jeff, I'm just going to give you the warning that you've gone over seven minutes, so if you can, wrap it up quickly.

     I'm sorry.

    From a sustainability standpoint, this new endowment program is for us, particularly the focus on preserving the collections.... Our goal is to raise $10 million in the next five years, so we're going to need it from various sources.

    Thank you very much.

    Mr. Nantel, you have the floor.

    Ms. Hruby, I don't know if you can hear the interpretation, but I'm guessing not. So I'll simplify things and switch to English.

     You are the best example of why we are doing this study. Mr. Van Loan's question was advocating for the fact that you're more of an interpretation centre and a historical site.

    How much support do you get from provincial governments and from Ottawa? I can't recall exactly, but I would ask you in your answer to come back to the first recommendation you made, which seemed quite accurate to me.

     We do get some money from matching grants from the Alberta Historical Resources Foundation. We have to match those grants. We don't have a lot of unrestricted funds. We're a popular site, but staffing takes quite a chunk of money. We are eligible for MAP grants because we are open all year long. We do have a professional museum person. The big thing is matching grants. For the portal, you have a geological study that could cost $30,000, and we just don't have those types of funds.

    I know that this looks like a plea for long-term government support. That's not it. It's about trying to split the small amount of funds that we get every year for large infrastructure that's really important. It goes beyond a new building for a museum, or whatever. If that is not sustained or rehabilitated, the whole site goes down.

    Do you think it's possible to reach out to the mining community or mining workers across Canada, or companies that do enjoy good wealth on many occasions?

    Absolutely. One professional staff member can't deal with marketing, travelling, and getting out and networking as much as they should. The mines in B.C. have been approached, and they've said that they would like to see a commitment from either the provincial or federal government, which I think is fair. It's not like we're looking for big sums of money, ongoing. It's just—

    It's money you need. This is why some witnesses have come up with the endowment funds programming from Ottawa, so that we provide money and we actually have a program to incite companies or individuals to contribute. Matching funds come up—

    Absolutely. What I'm seeing in grants, from the mining industry as well, is that their focus is on health and wellness, which is a part of sustainability and is totally admirable, but it doesn't help our long-term planning.

    I really want to emphasize the mentorship and a more supportive role—more people out there—for small rural museums that might not have the skills.

    Like Ms. Dzerowicz said, it's a very interesting panel, as you come from three very different angles. Toronto is a community, and contemporary art is something to bring to everyone, especially to kids, to open their minds. We have various approaches to the museum world this morning.

    The Hockey Hall of Fame has a very niche market that's internationally attractive, but there's a small community that just went through the worst horrible nightmare.

    I'm thinking about what happened in Humboldt. The wife of our colleague Kevin Waugh is from Humboldt. According to my colleague Erin Weir, from Regina—Lewvan, Humboldt's hockey community has fostered the emergence of many Canadian talents.

    The Humboldt community contributed a lot of hockey talent to the NHL. Would you consider placing a spotlight on this community, with it being suddenly super local, as an international hall of fame? I think this for the same reason that the hockey community allowed the hall of fame to be in Canada.

    It has been a tough week for not only hockey but Canada and worldwide. My daughter goes to school at the University of New South Wales and she read about it in the Sydney newspaper, so it has impacted the world hugely.

    From our point of view with Humboldt, we went to Humboldt on Friday. We took the Stanley Cup there on behalf of the hall of fame and the National Hockey League. It was a request from one of the doctors to try to cheer them up a bit. It was under the radar that we went in there. They were thrilled. It offered a few smiles for a while, but still the major impact is there and will be there for a long time.

    We have a display outside the hall, where you don't have to come in, that pays tribute to the Humboldt Broncos right now, but next month, in May, which is the 100th anniversary of the junior A hockey tournament that was dedicated to the veterans in World War I, the Memorial Cup tournament is in Saskatchewan. We are taking a big display out there. Timing, obviously, is a big part of that, but there will be a big display not only on hockey across Canada but, obviously, Humboldt and the Memorial Cup as well.

    When things like that happen we try to preserve it in a way that is elegant but respectful. It touches so many people. I think the way hockey comes across to Canadians, not only Canadians who were born here but new Canadians, is touching in a way that only hockey can be.

    Thank you. I'm going to have to cut it there.

    Mr. Virani, please.

    Do I have seven minutes, Madam Chair?

    If you can do a little less, that would be great.

    I will try.

    Just as preparatory comments, I want to say it has been a hard week for Canada. I want to say to the Hockey Hall of Fame folks, thank you for participating in that national healing process. It's very important and your contributions are appreciated.

    I'm going to direct most of my comments to Ms. Reitmaier. I represent the riding of Parkdale—High Park, which is literally 100 metres from where you're located. It includes the area of the junction, so having you in the junction triangle is a welcome and terrific addition to the neighbourhood. Welcome.

    I want to ask you about three different things.

    First of all, there are a lot of creators in my riding. The creators in my riding are very excited about the imminent opening of MOCA. Some of my constituents are already employed by you. I know you have only been there for three months, and maybe you don't know them all yet, but they are working there and I'm sure there are more to come. There are also people who are excited in my riding because they both take in art and they create art.

    Can you tell me a little about what it means to have a museum of contemporary art in Toronto for artists who are in the downtown area, in the west end, in terms of giving them a vehicle or opportunity to showcase their visual arts talents?

    One thing that MOCA has done is a model that I think is unique. It was also cited at the Melbourne museum of the moving image, where they have a similar model. At MOCA, on one of our floors we're housing 22 artists in low-rent studio spaces, and those are individuals from the community. We're working in partnership with Akin, whose mandate is to do that, to provide studio spaces.

    They will be leading a lot of professional development and professional conversations. MOCA sees itself both as a house for those individuals but also, I think, as a mentor in professional development. It's how we share knowledge of the local, the hyperlocal, but we also think about the international.

    One of our roles is really thinking about how to help the engine of contemporary art and how we can bring international global expertise here and work with individuals on the ground in the local. It's creating that kind of network.

     Excellent.

    I want to segue from that to something you raised a couple of times in your opening comments, which is about diversifying your holdings and what you present, ensuring that it's inclusive and reflects the city and the country you are in. You put your finger on it when you said that thus far the art spaces and creative industries have not done this as well as they could. Specifically you talked about things like racial diversity, and I would add indigenous reconciliation to that mix.

    Could you tell me about what you are doing, particularly in a city like Toronto, to ensure that both your holdings and the artists you will be showcasing reflect the wider community, as a means of attracting those new audiences but also as a means of empowering artists from the various communities that have thus far been under-represented?

    One of the responsibilities is nurturing that young talent. Toronto is full of diverse practitioners. We're doing a lot of work in our first opening show, for example, with Nep Sidhu, who's a young, rising artist based in Toronto. He's bringing in artists from New York, the Middle East, and across the world to bring and build networks. I see our job as creating those relationships and providing those platforms. The community is already diverse. The work is already happening. Our job is really to provide platforms and create spaces of experimentation and growth for those people.

    I know MOCA has existed since 1993. You previously were on Queen Street. Obviously, I know you spent some time abroad in those intervening years, but you outgrew that space and now you're moving to the junction triangle. That move was facilitated by a $5.1-million grant from the Canada cultural spaces fund, which is a fund we've actually increased by $300 million over the next 10 years. That kind of investment is leading the G7. We believe in that as a government in terms of the moral imperative of allowing Canadians to tell and showcase their stories, but also as an economic imperative, because there's tremendous economic growth in the cultural sector.

    Can you tell us what an investment of that kind means to an institution like MOCA, when you're able to access infrastructure funds from something like Canada cultural spaces?

    It basically creates the institution. You cannot do it without that seed money, that growth money. That is going to happen. You can look at other institutions and other sites. You can look at the meatpacking district in New York. You can look at Shoreditch in the U.K.—in the borough where the Tate is, on the south bank in London—and how those cultural engines and those institutions create a kind of epicentre for each city.

    MOCA is a similar model. That initial investment effectively means we can now go out and create an operating model, continue to exist, and think about endowments—which would have been unthinkable a year ago—and sustainability. Those initial funds are imperative to make institutions exist and grow, and to enable them to think about the future.

    Thank you, Madam Chair.

    If you don't mind, I think that's a good place for us to end.

    I want to thank the witnesses for your presentations. That was very helpful, and actually brings to an end our witness hearings for the museum study. Thank you very much for all your presentations.

    We will suspend for just two minutes, if everyone can stay close. We're just going to change our panels over. Thank you.

     If everyone can please come back to the table, we're going to start again, right now. There's a little bit more arranging happening.

    We are now starting with our hour studying cultural hubs and cultural districts in Canada. Today we have Mr. Jones from Artscape in Toronto and Ms. Lunde from GamePlay Space.

    We also have with us Christine Gosselin and Suzanne Laverdière from the City of Montreal.

    Thank you to everyone for being here today.

    We'll start with Mr. Jones from Artscape Toronto.

    Thank you very much for inviting me to speak to you today.

    My name is Tim Jones, and I'm the CEO of Artscape in Toronto.

    I'm going to sort of make five recommendations to you today with respect to community cultural hubs, and I want to first start by thanking the government and the Department of Canadian Heritage for the recent changes to the Canada cultural spaces fund changes to the criteria that recognize community hubs. It's a very good and important step.

    Today, I'd like to talk to you about the things the Government of Canada can do to strengthen the enabling environment for those of us who are developing community hubs in Canada. It starts with building capacity for those who are hub developers, doing a little bit of research on impact, making changes to the CRA regulations on how charities can invest in properties, and increasing the investment that the government makes in community hubs as well as exploring the re-use of government facilities for these purposes.

    I'm going to give you a little bit of background on Artscape. We're a 32-year-old, not-for-profit urban development organization, and our mission is to make space for creativity and to transform communities. In Toronto, we've developed a portfolio of real estate projects that, on the one hand, provide affordable space to the creative community, but have also been a major catalyst for the revitalization of the communities and neighbourhoods that they're a part of.

    We've been a pioneer in Canada in the development of this new form of facility called a community cultural hub. Sometimes it involves repurposing former schools, public buildings, or transit facilities, and sometimes building new places, as we've done in Regent Park.

    Currently, we have four new projects under construction. Two of them kind of fall into the category of community hubs. One is something called Artscape Daniels Launchpad, part of the larger City of the Arts development opening later this year. It's a centre for art and design entrepreneurship, which we're very excited about, and one that we think will have a big impact on artists and designers across southern Ontario.

    We're also in the business of trying to proliferate the development of community cultural hubs outside of the core, in Toronto. This is the first iteration of that exercise in the village of Weston. We hope to build a network of these facilities in the coming years.

    In total, we have 11 different projects in operation and four under construction, about 2,800 creative people who are working and, in some cases, also living in our facilities, and about 140 different organizations and 42 public venues in our portfolio—just to give you a sense of the scale and reach of the work that we're doing.

    One of the things that's really important to understand about community hubs is the impact they have on the community. We design them and build them from the ground up in the community through a community design process, and that's key to the kind of positive social, cultural, economic, and environmental impacts that they can have in all of those areas. The importance of understanding that work and taking advantage of that in the development of these places is really important.

    About a dozen years ago, we coined the phrase “creative placemaking” to describe our work. We define that as leveraging the power of art and culture to be a catalyst for change, growth, and transformation of place. There's a real growing field of international practice in this area, and probably nothing could better illustrate it than the role that we've played in the revitalization of Regent Park and the creation of Daniels Spectrum.

     Regent Park, as you may know, is Canada's oldest and largest public housing development. It was built in the 1940s by the federal government. Over a number of decades, many things proved to be wrong with the design and development of Regent Park. The warehousing of poor people in one area, the lack of services and amenities, and the design of the space itself made it a place where all the vestiges of poverty were very present. It's well known by reputation, across the country.

    About 12 years ago, a bold decision was made to tear it all down and start over. We're now well along in that process, a process that involves temporarily relocating people and then reintroducing them into a new community. As part of the plan, which is, I think, very important, the social development plan was given equal importance to the master plan for the community, and that has had a huge impact on the way that this community has grown and evolved.

     A lot of social infrastructure has been developed as part of this revitalization strategy, and our particular role was to look at the importance of culture and, when a community is going through this kind of transformation, how culture helps bring people together. How does it actually build social cohesion and how can it provide a platform for cultural exchange and expression? There are 46 different countries of origin represented in Regent Park, speaking 67 different languages, so there is a big opportunity to leverage culture for change and write a new narrative around this in what had become a very stigmatized community.

    Through a community steering committee, we grew this idea of creating a place that was rooted in Regent Park but open to the world. It's been open now going on six years, and I'm happy to say that it's had a very profound impact on the community and neighbourhood around it. The young people like Mustafa the Poet, who you saw a minute ago, have helped to rewrite an important, more positive narrative around the community and not just sugar-coat the kinds of challenges with revitalization, of which there are many.

    But I would say that largely this community is succeeding in its revitalization, and the community cultural hub has provided a platform for people to come together to help, as the Toronto Community Housing Corporation was looking to do, to build social cohesion. It gives local artists a platform for exchange and expression. For people who are community activists, it's a place to come and hang out, which I think is really important, but it's also been a key part of building a multi-billion dollar market for residential development in a place where people thought, 10 years ago, that you couldn't sell a single condominium.

    That, I think, speaks to the power, on multiple levels, that community cultural hubs can have. I'm really happy this committee is looking at this issue, because I think it has this kind of catalytic impact, and these projects have the potential to do that right across the country.

    I want to come back to the five things that I'm encouraging you as a committee to consider. The first is to think about how we can build capacity with hub developers across the country. There is lots of innovation happening in this field around the practice of creative placemaking, around the practice of community design, around governance and community stewardship, and around public-private partnerships. When we're building these projects, we have to think and work differently. It's important that we actually help hub developers build their talent in this area.

    I mentioned the kind of multi-dimensional impact, the quadruple bottom line that some of these projects can have. There is a real need for better research that actually illustrates the cultural, the economic, the social, and the environmental impacts and outcomes of these projects.

    One of our biggest challenges right now is to figure out how to fund these projects, not just through government but also through charitable donations. One of the things I forgot to mention about our model is that our projects are all self-sustaining once the front-end capital is invested. We look to government, to the private sector, to lenders, and to donors to help make that happen. We can't do it unless we can raise money, and the charitable portion of these projects is really essential.

    Currently CRA regulations really restrict a charity's ability to invest in facilities, particularly these facilities that cobble together non-profits and charities and other uses in the same place, so we need a renewal of the regulation with respect to investment by charities in capital projects.

    Those first three ideas are fairly easy to do. They don't cost a lot of money. The others, I think, are equally important but do require more investment, and I'm heartened by the new investment through the government's Canada cultural spaces program. That's really important, but projects like Daniels Spectrum would never have happened through Canada cultural spaces alone. We were very fortunate to get $24 million through the infrastructure stimulus funding program when that happened. Projects of this scale, which are going to have a profound impact on the community, need that larger type of investment.

    Opening up the building Canada fund, or whatever the new iteration of that is called, is really important to non-profits so that we can actually advance projects like this.

    Finally, there is a lot of interesting innovation happening around the disposal of surplus government property. I've seen in Toronto that government can sell an asset and get the market value for it but also, in the process, procure a community cultural hub like this. I think this is an area that really needs to be looked into at the federal level, how we can use old post office buildings and old government buildings to deliver social benefit and financial return at the same time.

    Thank you very much.

    Thank you very much.

    We will now go to Ms. Liv Lunde from GamePlay Space.

     Thank you.

    Good morning and thank you for the opportunity to speak about the importance and the impact of cultural hubs. I will be speaking specifically in relation to independent video game development and digital creatives. My name is Liv Lunde and I'm the Executive Director of GamePlay Space. Prior to working in video games, I built my career in the Canadian music industry, and I grew up surrounded by immense amounts of cultural opportunities because I had two parents who were arts administrators. My role here today is as personal as it is professional.

    GamePlay Space is a not-for-profit organization that operates a 10,000-square foot co-working space in downtown Montreal specifically for independent game development. Three years ago, we opened our doors, thanks to a small investment from public and private enterprise. We're currently home to 100 creators across 20 different studios, and we more broadly support our local gaming community of over 2,000 independent game creators across over 100 studios, the majority of which, I might add, are Quebec-owned small businesses creating Canadian intellectual property.

    Today I want to highlight the value of and the need for funding and support for cultural hubs such as ours and the critical role we play to foster innovation, collaboration, and economic development. I need to begin by establishing that video games are a cultural economy. They are art and they are culture. The strength of GamePlay Space as a cultural hub is that we focus our efforts solely on the independent game community in play spaces, not just walls and desks. It's a platform for success.

    Independent game creators work in precarious conditions. In contrast to the large foreign-owned studios, their situation is much more unstable due to lack of funding, a competitive market, long development cycles, and a lack of business and marketing skills. A hub like ours allows for resource sharing to a critical mass of developers working side by side. This is true not only for the studios that work in our space every day but also for the community organizations that use our space for meet ups, workshops, showcases, etc. By honing their art in our community space, they inspire and mentor each other every day.

    I want to highlight two of our most notable success stories. One is a studio that came out of our space, and another is an organization that uses our space regularly.

    Outerminds was one of the original studios at GamePlay Space. They literally helped us build tables and chairs. The team started as four co-founders and, within two years, grew to a staff of 25 people. They've had two number one games on the app store, the second of which was so popular that it crashed all their servers on day one and quickly saw over 25 million downloads.

    While their company flourished, the guys kept their eyes on the community that surrounded them on their hardest days. The intangible value of the community within GamePlay Space has kept the team in our space long after they could afford to move out. They didn't stay because they had to; they stayed because they wanted to. Their success has become the success of us all as they continue the cycle of support through mentorship and financial aid to smaller studios, organizations, and community events.

    One of those organizations is Pixelles, which is another success story out of our space. They are dedicated to empowering women to make and change games. We've allowed them use of the space as often as they need for the last three years. They operate monthly workshops and have a writing program and a game design cohort for women who have little to no experience in video games. Almost all of their graduates from their narrative program have found jobs in the industry after their training. Many of the women who graduate through Pixelles end up returning to volunteer and mentor the next round of women coming up through the industry. Having a stable and safe physical space for their programs has been a key to their success. We have more examples, but we're limited on time, so I'll leave them out.

    If we're seeing all this success, then where's the problem?

    Not all of our studios achieve financial and critical success. You can aim to achieve Outerminds' victories but, in what the industry has coined the “indiepocalypse”, most studios will fall short. Most artists are inherently bad business people, and they need support. The Canada cultural spaces grant is all about collaboration between entrepreneurs and creative types. What are video games, if not that?

    When producing a ballet, there are composers, musicians, costume and set designers, choreographers, and dancers all working together to produce a final product. When producing video games, there are musicians, visual artists, designers, historians, animators, writers, and choreographers. It's the same thing. These people are artists. They are highly trained and highly skilled at their artistic craft in exactly the same way that dancers and actors are great at theirs. We need to stop ignoring that and taking it for granted. We need to stop seeing the final product as the only part of the equation that matters.

     Having a singular focus in our hub is our strength: a critical mass of talent and business that can prop each other up, learn from peers, and attract industry gatekeepers and influencers. Yet it's our weakness when applying for funding. We don't tick all the boxes. It seems like a counterproductive requirement to force already established, singular-focused hubs to change their mandates in order to be eligible for funding.

    We respect and value the support that has gone into the arts. However, the definitions need to be broadened as to what constitutes culture in Canada and how this funding will truly be helpful to the communities that it claims to serve. The Canada media fund experimental stream is still the single funding body in Canada that we can apply to for financial support, and by “we” I mean our studios because I am ineligible as a cultural hub.

    Currently there's no place to apply for financial help for cultural operating costs. There are no funding options for the cultural intermediaries, the administrative staff that holds up these organizations every day. We are the invisible scaffolding of creative industries and we, too, need support.

    I'm here today asking this committee to reassess how cultural spending is distributed. When our cultural hubs receive proper support, we will surely see our industries flourish. We can't support cultural industries if the cultural intermediaries that provide everything from community to training to literal shelter disappear themselves due to lack of funding.

    Thank you for the opportunity, and thank you for your time.

    Thank you.

    We will now hear from Mrs. Gosselin and Mrs. Laverdière from the City of Montreal.

    Good morning.

    Thank you, Madam Chair.

    Vice-Chairs and members of the committee, I am a municipal counsellor in the Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie borough. I'm responsible for Culture, Heritage and Design for the City of Montreal. With me today is Mrs. Laverdière, who is the Director of the City of Montreal's Department of Culture.

    First of all, I would like to thank you for inviting us to take part in this study.

    My speech will be divided into four parts. The first will address cultural districts, the second will be devoted to our new cultural development policy, the third will focus on the economic benefits of cultural districts and cultural hubs and, finally, I will discuss the role we play in revitalizing cultural heritage.

    The question of cultural districts has been part of our vision since 2005, as evidenced by the City of Montreal's first cultural development policy, which was implemented with various partners, including the Canadian government.

    Our brand new 2017-2022 cultural development policy is in keeping with the process of creating and developing cultural districts throughout Montreal. In this process, Montreal is moving from the concept of cultural hub to that of cultural districts.

    Without overlooking the already consolidated hubs, today Montreal is adopting the vision of cultural districts in order to offer Montrealers a quality local cultural offering. We wish to encourage the participation of citizens in the development and improvement of their living environment.

    As a result, culture is becoming an integral part of the daily life of these districts through the presence of artists or cultural institutions, as much on the commercial arteries as in the parks, the public squares and near the modes of public transport.

    We are convinced that it is the boroughs that are the prime movers of the consolidation and development of cultural districts. However, the city accompanies them, in particular in developing their own cultural plan and mapping strengths that contribute to development of cultural districts, as well as in the implementation of various pilot projects.

    The city's new cultural development policy considers the presence of artists' studios in central districts as a priority for the development of cultural neighbourhoods, in a perspective of sustainable development.

    The previous policy recognized the difficulty artists have in finding housing and finding creative spaces at affordable prices in the most sought-after districts.

    The City of Montreal has therefore take an initial step by funding the Le Chat des artistes project for the installation of 43 artist's studios in a disused textile factory on Parthenais Street a dozen years ago. We then developed a response framework with a special assistance fund of $13 million. This fund has made it possible to perpetuate artists' access to creative spaces totalling 28,000 square metres.

    Let's talk about the Cultural Development Policy entitled “Combining creativity and the citizen cultural experience in the age of digital technology and diversity”. Our field of action is currently guided by this innovative policy. We have brought you copies of this policy.

    The vision that inspires our cultural policy is driven by a desire to put culture as a stakeholder in our key interventions in economic development, heritage, social development and smart cities.

    We rely in particular on values of inclusion and equity. These values involve an approach of living together that favours the contribution and representativeness of all citizens and all cultural influences so that everyone recognizes themselves and develops their full potential.

    The cultural districts will then allow the various local artistic expressions to manifest and interact in a coherent way with the face of the diversity so characteristic of Montreal districts.

    In addition, the quality and cultural vitality of living environments require an increased presence and commitment of artists, creators and organizations, especially in cultural districts.

    I invite you to consult this map, which presents the locations of our cultural facilities. The cultural districts are defined around these flagship places of local culture.

    The development of cultural districts must result in the adoption of an integrated approach to enhancing heritage attractions as well as establishing municipal, governmental and private cultural facilities.

    I would now like to discuss the impact of the city's cultural districts and cultural hubs.

    Take the example of the Quartier des spectacles. It has the highest concentration and diversity of cultural venues in North America in the same area of just one square kilometre.

    There are more than 28,000 seats in thirty or so venues. There are also some forty exhibition venues, cinemas and eight public places, where more than 40 festivals are held throughout the year.

    I will backtrack a bit now.

    At the Rendez-vous de Montréal, a cultural metropolis in 2007, the various levels of government pledged to financially support the Quartier des spectacles.

    An important urban redevelopment operation was proposed as part of the special planning program for the Place des Arts sector. This operation, which involved the creation of a network of public squares around this key sector, aimed to ensure the continuity of major festivals and cultural events. It aimed to make Place des Arts a truly urban, friendly, year-round destination, lively and enjoyable for both Montrealers and visitors alike.

    The federal government contributed $40 million to the project, one-third of eligible costs under the Building Canada Fund. Several studies have been conducted to evaluate the impact of the Quartier des spectacles, including one very recently. Here is some evidence: since 2007, $1.5 billion has been invested in 60 identified real estate projects; real estate investments have raised GST and QST revenues of approximately $228 million since 2007; the total economic impact associated with the completion of these projects is $2.2 billion; lastly, the annual land and school tax revenues have more than tripled over the last 10 years.

    To illustrate other concrete economic benefits in a cultural district, I will give just one example, that of Cinéma Beaubien, which is located in the area I represent.

    A recently published study has shown that, since its reopening in 2001, this sole neighbourhood cinema has truly revitalized the neighbourhood. Not only did the Cinéma Beaubien contribute to the transformation of Beaubien Street, its commercial artery, but it also fostered the renewal of the built environment and the commercial offering.

    The City of Montreal is very committed to the development and creation of new cultural facilities and equipment. Several large-scale projects are under way or under consideration, and financial support from the various levels of government is fundamental to making them a reality.

    Montreal has already been able to count on the federal government's support for certain cultural infrastructure projects such as the Pointe-à-Callière museum and, more recently, the Musée d'art contemporain de Montréal, but it is important not to stop there. Other structuring cultural projects for the city are in progress.

    Expansion of the Pointe-à-Callière museum is ongoing, and we invite the federal government to contribute to the completion of phase 3 by investing in the project relating to the Parliament of United Canada. This project aims to highlight the vestiges of Canada's first permanent parliament, dating back to 1844.

    We also hope that the federal government will invest again in the Old Port of Montreal to make it a real meeting place accessible to citizens and visitors.

    To this end, there is a unique opportunity to participate in the project of a cultural and tourism centre for the First Nations of Quebec and Labrador in the Old Port, the DestiNATIONS project.

    This centre will become a hub of dissemination, production and cultural creation of international calibre dedicated to the discovery of indigenous cultures. This project is in keeping with the vision of the Canada Lands Company regarding the development of the Old Port.

    In closing, I want to emphasize the importance of this committee's work. It will help to better understand the key issues related to the creation of cultural districts and cultural hubs across Canada. In addition, it will highlight the crucial importance of federal support in the development and consolidation of cultural districts, notably by supporting facilities, cultural spaces, and major festivals and events.

    Thank you so much for your attention.

    Thank you.

    We will now begin the period for questions and answers.

    Mr. Hébert, you have the floor for seven minutes.

    Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

    First of all, I want to emphasize the quality of the witnesses' presentations.

    Ms. Lunde, I was very surprised to learn that so many artists were contributing to the creation of a video game. Sometimes, we're not aware of this kind of thing.

    Mr. Jones, during your presentation, you showed us how the extraordinary transformation of a place by culture influences the quality of life of the people who live there. Bravo! What you have presented to us is extraordinary.

    I have three questions, and they are for Mrs. Gosselin and Mrs. Laverdière from the City of Montreal.

    The City of Montreal aims to become a cultural metropolis and funds many projects throughout the city.

    In what way, if any, does support for cultural hubs and cultural districts contribute to this objective?

    What funds are specifically earmarked for the development of cultural hubs and cultural districts?

    To date, what benefits have existing cultural hubs and cultural districts brought to Montreal?

    I will turn things over to Mrs. Laverdière, but I will some add details if necessary.

    Could you please repeat the third question?

    To date, what benefits have the existing cultural hubs and cultural districts brought to Montreal?

    In our opinion, cultural centres have two meanings. First, there are the cultural houses, that is, spaces programmed by the various boroughs, in collaboration with the Service de la culture, with a view to offering local culture. We believe that the hubs also carry the sense of neighbourhood, in other words, everything that develops around it.

    In terms of cultural houses, as you've seen on the map, we've identified a number of things, starting with all the existing venues that are funded by the city. There are 24 cultural houses already in existence, and another 50 are in development. We also included libraries. There are currently 45 libraries, and another 10 are being renovated or are under construction. In addition, we have listed all private broadcast locations, theatres, movie theatres, and so on.

    The money we invest in these projects is for infrastructure. It involves funds that we dedicate to constructing cultural houses and libraries, in partnership with the boroughs. Every year, we invest tens of millions of dollars in infrastructure that belongs to the city. At the same time, we are still investing tens of thousands of dollars in activities that take place in cultural hubs, in other words all their programming, as well as in all the activities offered by libraries. That was the part about the funds.

    Mrs. Gosselin, do you want to touch on other issues?

    I will talk about the benefits of cultural districts in Montreal.

    We all know that Montreal has gone through a very difficult time. It has become a post-industrial city and has suffered the consequences of political changes. Then it reinvented itself as a cultural city. It really bet on culture very early on to build a new signature and a new sense of pride. It has organized all sectors of its economy by relying on culture and cultural events, elements that have become key figures and truly structuring elements. Today, there are economic as well as social benefits. Like all major cities, Montreal faces a challenge related to integrating new populations. Once again, culture is used to ensure social cohesion and to offer activities where everyone can come together.

    The map I presented illustrates the extent of the cultural infrastructure. We now want to go beyond what is done in the city centre and the initial infrastructure to develop neighbourhoods. It even has an effect on tourism, since cultural tourism occurs in places that are outside the city centre. Indeed, cultural tourism happens in neighbourhoods where there is an authenticity and fabulous restaurants that only local residents know about. This is a new trend in tourism, and Montreal is well positioned to take advantage of it.

    Of course, the first places visited by tourists returning to Montreal are located near metro stations, which provide easy access. We are already seeing it on the metro's orange line. We want to begin a new phase of development that will truly integrate the principle of discovering Montreal and all its beautiful, old heritage neighbourhoods with a focus on cultural attractions. Many of these attractions are freely accessible in the public square. Visitors, just like Montrealers, can blend in by walking around these places over the days.

    We are really convinced that this is one of the main advantages for Montreal. Investments in culture have already been made, and we hope this will continue.

    That's perfect.

    At one point, the Saint-Roch neighbourhood in Quebec City was somewhat rundown and then revitalized. Now, the cost of housing is rising, so long-term residents can no longer live there. Aren't you afraid that the same thing is happening in Montreal?

    Absolutely. We are well aware of this problem, and we are really trying to incorporate new ways of taxing and limiting certain consequences of this economic vitality. It's an exciting problem, but it's still a problem. Now that we have brought about an economic vitality, how can we manage it so that Montreal can remain authentic and accessible?

    A whole series of compensatory and complementary measures can be considered, but that remains a constant concern, of course. A variety of means will need to be used to stabilize the development so that the original occupants of these neighbourhoods aren't pushed out.

    Thank you for your answer.

     Thank you.

    Now we'll go to Mr. Eglinski.

    I'd like to thank the four witnesses for coming today.

     I'm very interested in the cultural hub philosophy. I come from a rural part of Canada, and many of our rural parts have cultural centres within their smaller communities. I'm talking about communities of maybe 3,000 to 5,000, or 10,000, 15,000. You folks are working on much larger demographics, larger populations, and it's much more evident what you're doing within your community. You see a bigger picture, and I believe you have the opportunities to raise a lot of funding through different grants, such as the Canada cultural spaces fund and stuff like that.

    The gentleman from Artscape talked about working outside of your community within the province to help other organizations, other cultural centres from, I'm going to say, the rural communities. I am wondering if you could each elaborate a little on what you do outside of your cities to help cultural centres within the rural parts of your provinces.

    Thank you.

    I would start with Mr. Jones.

     We've made an organizational commitment to growing the practice of creative placemaking globally. Our ambition is to mainstream this practice over the next five years, working both within Canada and internationally.

    Within Canada, we teach a university course through the University of British Columbia on creative placemaking. We have a mentorship and coaching program that helps communities interested in these activities advance cultural hub developments.

     Currently we're working with the folks in Halifax around repurposing the old convention centre into a community cultural hub. A few years ago, we created a sister organization in Vancouver called B.C. Artscape, which is using the same kinds of principles in that community. In about a month, in early June, we're playing host to a conference in association with the World Cities Culture Forum. It's a study tour in Toronto that will bring together 50 leaders from cities around the world and across Canada to look at the innovations in making space for culture and leveraging culture for change in urban development.

    I would say that in a rural context the principles of our work are equally applicable. The idea of clustering creative people together can have an impact in a rural context equal to the impact in an urban one. Look at the great success of what's happened in Prince Edward County, with putting together the winemakers, the beer makers, the cheese makers, and the artisans. They are there in a place that used to not have much of an identity. That's an example of how this principle of clustering, bringing people together in a rural context, can have a profound impact on both the local economy and the identity of the place.

    Ms. Lunde.

    Contrary to what people believe, we don't have access to a lot of funding. I spend most of my time trying to figure out where we can get more money and how we can convince people that we are a cultural hub and that we do work in the arts. We also work in technology, but I think there's a whole portion of what we do that just gets ignored.

     No offence to the City of Montreal, who are sitting right beside me, but they don't define us as culture so we can't turn to them for help. We can't turn to our provincial government for help either, because they don't define us as cultural. We struggle for funding as much as rural communities do.

    I grew up in a small town in Alberta. I know how hard it is. My parents worked as arts administrators and ran one of the local theatres in that town. I saw my entire life that this was a difficult thing to do. I empathize with the smaller communities and their lack of resources and access to funding. While my mission is to help specifically the community within my walls and the ones that come to our events, I haven't hesitated to reach out to these hubs that sit in the smaller communities throughout Quebec and to develop relationships with them to see how we can help them.

    I'm lucky. Video games are inherently a digital art form, so we can work with people and mentor them through the Internet. We can access their work and share our work digitally. We don't need to physically be in a space with them.

    The other thing we've done is that we've kept all of our costs low. We've had only two events in the last three years that people have had to pay for. Other than that, they're free and open to the public, which lowers the barrier to entry for anyone who doesn't have money. For students who are looking to enter the industry, for anyone who just wants access, it's there. I think these things have helped to attract people to our space and to our online space as well. If I could do more outside, in the smaller communities, I would.

    I would like to get a response from the City of Montreal.

    Your question is very pertinent. On our map, as you can see, there are pink dots that are quite far from the centre. These are 45- or 50-minute drives from downtown Montreal when there is no traffic. In these outlying centres, which are still boroughs of the city of Montreal, we have to develop a model that very much resembles the one you would have in a small town. If fact, some of these are old agricultural villages, with their church and their community centre.

    We create hubs with municipal equipment as a starter for, sometimes, devastated main streets that have been drained by the construction of commercial centres. We wish to restart the commercial vitality of these districts via this large equipment, which will draw people from the surrounding area the way commercial centres do.

     Do you think there's a need for more federal funding for these smaller communities and for the larger communities to help them?

     There's always a need for more federal funding. We really do wonders with the money that you send us, and we always match it with provincial funds and our own funds. It really goes a long way. Also, we—

    I'm going to have to cut you there, but I appreciate that.

    Mr. Nantel, go ahead.

    Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

    Mr. Jones, I have a very quick question for you. Can Artscape be considered a little like a technical resources group for housing co-op projects? Do you see your organization as being a technical facilitator?

    Do you see yourself as a resource? I know that in Quebec we have a group, the GRT, groupes de ressources techniques. Groups come to them and say, “We want to build a housing co-operative”, and the GRT comes in and says, “Okay, how do you want to see it, and we'll materialize your hopes in the plan.”

    Do you see yourselves like this?

    Yes, we're kind of a unique organization in the world. We act as a developer. We develop both affordable housing for artist-led families as well as these community cultural hubs. We also act as a bit of an intermediary, working to build a shared vision and value between urban developers, philanthropists, people advancing public policy—

    Do you have a parallel in Quebec? Would you say the McConnell Foundation is working with you?

    McConnell has supported some of our work, but there's not a direct parallel. There are other artist studio providers, like Cité des Artistes in Montreal, that are—

    For a specific project.

    —for specific projects, or are specifically focused on artists' studios.

    This is work that is trying to find the sweet spot between developers and the activists, policy, and philanthropy.

    Thank you.

     This is why I was asking.

    It's a bit like the example of a municipality, a village, a city, a district that has a vision. To realize it, an organization like this can be consulted.

    In any case, before asking a specific question to each of you, I would like to tell you that this morning's testimony—especially that of the representatives for the City of Montreal—demonstrates just how vast the scope of the study is and how difficult it is to define. You gave four distinct presentations on various aspects, including the pixellation of the cultural offering in Montreal, district by district to the DestiNATIONS project which I think is the archetype of what is kind of the dream of ultimately making the program for cultural hubs a reality. You also talked about the concept of cultural districts and mentioned the Quartier des spectacles.

    You have gone all out to demonstrate how important Montreal is to culture. As a Montreal homeowner, I am very proud of that, but I think we'll have to clarify certain things.

    Ms. Lunde, you understand the quest for the musical dimension of the cultural milieu, since you were part of the management team at Ariane Moffatt at one time, I believe.

    I used to work in a recording studio where we charged $200 an hour to rent it. Eventually, almost all the studios, except the one where I worked, were dismantled. A group of artists then gathered in a large room at Studios Piccolo. Everyone made a small contribution to pay the rent.

    You did the same thing with the concept of shared workspace. I had the chance to meet people from Garage & co, an organization in Longueuil that has adopted this mode of collaboration. We'll remember the presentation of 312 Main in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. Here, the dimensions of culture, social mission and shared workspace were grouped together. It's virtue, it's wonderful.

    I also met people from the Montréal Cowork organization, and what I see is that every creator, not just art creators, but anyone who has a creative approach to their work—who thinks outside the box—wants to share their experience. This is what companies aren't doing anymore. They got rid of their employees, arguing that the payroll taxes were too steep. It sounds cynical to say that in terms of business, but it's still the reality. Finally, they fired employees in order to pay less in taxes, and we end up with the deficit that we know today.

    We are seeing more and more freelance workers, and they end up feeling the need to group together. The enthusiasm of these people is quite wonderful.

    It is true that Montreal is like a flagship for the concept of shared workspaces in general. The question I want to ask you three or all four of you, including Mr. Jones, is this: what do you recommend? What do you think the dangers are? What approaches should we adopt? What we are doing here is obviously clearing the way for Canadian Heritage.

    Can we pinpoint the gaps and come up with some recommendations so that the Government of Canada can support initiatives like yours without interfering with local expertise?

     I echo the sentiments of a whole bunch of arts organizations across Canada. The funds are project-based, so I need to continually come up with a new project. That means that I need to spend my resources and time on that project, and not on what we do day to day.

    I recently applied for funding for a project that we're doing with the Ministère de l'Économie, de la Science et de l'Innovation.

    I will be working directly on that project along with staff that I hired, but I'm not allowed to put a portion of my salary in that budget. Even though 20% of my time is going into it, it's the only line item they removed from our budget.

    Our day-to-day costs, or the value of my time, as executive director of this organization, was removed entirely from that project, yet I'm expected to support that project. I'm expected to make sure that we do all the paperwork, that we abide by all the contracts with the government, that we do our finances, and that I do an audit every year. Who's time is that? It's my time as the administrator, yet there is a value of zero dollars put on my time.

    How do we reach out to industry so that it sees the economic value and the jobs within this context, and not only the heritage thing?

    Yes, and to put, in these grants, money for the people who are doing the day-to-day work in order for these organizations to thrive, in order for us to support the industries that are making money and that are contributing back into the economy. Our space alone, the studios in our first year of operations, generated $10 million. In the second year it was $25 million. That's from our support. I didn't generate that money. I'm a not-for-profit. I'm not in that. That's the kind of contribution we're giving to society, yet our time is devalued to zero dollars.

    I'll have to cut it off there. If anybody has other answers, you can submit them in writing as well.

    Ms. Dhillon, you have the floor.

    Thank you very much.

    Since we only have five minutes, I will share my time with Mr. Hogg.

    My question is for Mrs. Gosselin or Mrs. Laverdière.

    The City of Montreal aims to be a cultural metropolis and funds many projects throughout the city.

    In your opinion, in what way does support for cultural hubs and cultural districts contribute to this objective?

    The philosophy underlying the city's new cultural policy is to foster local culture and encounters between citizens and culture. This includes awareness of cultural recreation programs as well as the city's orientation to the “living together” that is being talked about in Montreal. It takes shape through the culture, inclusion and fairness that exists between creators and Montrealers. In this sense, any development of cultural districts and infrastructures will consolidate this approach.

    In addition, there is much talk of the need to invest in places, since these are the basis of projects. That said, it will be necessary to be vigilant. Almost all cultural organizations and businesses are aware of the problems faced by the company of the lady who made a presentation earlier. We invest a lot in infrastructure, but we forget that it takes money to keep it up and running, to do the necessary work and to keep things running.

    As for the investments that the city wishes to make in the future—and we hope that the Canadian government will do the same—it will be important to establish the types of mutualisation, to create shared workplaces, to put in place risk-sharing structures, where new business models will be applied in ways that allow businesses and organizations to carry much less of a financial burden and do what they are really intended to do, that is, create. They spend most of their time looking for funds to survive.

    As for us, the orientation we give to our cultural policy, which is related to cultural districts and organizations, includes new business models, models of social economy, risk sharing, mutualisation and development of cultural entrepreneurship.

    Perfect.

    Thank you very much.

     It's been referenced many times, the CRA, references to our different models, and interfacing with business. In England they've developed community interest corporations. Our primary models with a non-profit are foundation and business models. In British Columbia we developed a community contribution company, basically a non-profit. You're not allowed to make a profit, buy a franchise, pay your boards of directors, or sell shares. We tried to develop a model that blended the non-profit with a business and make something in the middle so that you can have the benefit of doing that.

    I'm interested in, and it occurred to me during some of your discussions and some of the previous discussions we've heard, whether or not a foundational change in your delivery model, in your incorporation, allowed you to have more flexibility. My primary source of interest in this is that I worked in social programming so we developed social impact bonds. We now have about 45 community contribution companies in British Columbia that look at blending these two models.

    I'm wondering if there is a foundational change. Would that be of any benefit? This may be a tough question off the top without my having much background on it, but when you mentioned people making reference to the CRA....

    I think we have about half a minute, so you might want to think about that and provide an answer in writing. I would very much encourage you to do so. If someone thinks they can say something in 25 seconds....

    I think I can. I would like to.

    We've all highlighted, each in our different ways, that culture does a lot with very little. We have to get out of this mindset where we see culture as decorative and that it's a secondary thing that you add after you finish doing everything else. What we've shown in Montreal is that the way that the new economy is setting itself up very much on a social economy model, everybody at every level of government, municipal, provincial, federal, needs to bring home to their colleagues the importance of investment in culture for economic development.

     That was a wonderful presentation.

    Thank you, everyone.

     That brings the meeting to an end.

    The meeting is adjourned.