THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON OFFICIAL LANGUAGES
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Monday, December 1, 2025
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 5:00 p.m. [ET] to examine and report on the strengthening of federal institutions’ arts, culture and heritage responsibilities in official language minority communities and in Canada; in camera, to examine and report on such issues as may arise from time to time relating to official languages generally; and, in camera, to consider a draft agenda (future business).
Senator Allister W. Surette (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Before we begin, I would like to ask all senators to consult the cards on the table for guidelines to prevent audio feedback incidents. Please make sure to keep your earpiece away from all microphones at all times. Do not touch the microphone. Activation and deactivation will be managed by the console operator.
I am Allister Surette, senator from Nova Scotia and chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages.
Now, I would like to ask my colleagues to introduce themselves.
Senator Gerba: Amina Gerba from Quebec.
Senator Moncion: Lucie Moncion from Ontario.
Senator Cormier: René Cormier from New Brunswick.
Senator Patterson: Rebecca Patterson, senator from Ontario.
The Chair: Colleagues, I would also like to welcome everyone with us today, as well as those listening to us online on sencanada.ca.
Today, pursuant to the order of reference received from the Senate on October 29, we are continuing our study on the strengthening of federal institutions’ arts, culture and heritage responsibilities in official language minority communities and in Canada.
We are pleased to welcome this evening, from the Regroupement des éditeurs franco‑canadiens, Stéphane Cormier, President, and Piedad Sáenz, General Director. Welcome.
We also welcome, from the Association des groupes en arts visuels francophones, Lou-Anne Bourdeau, Chair, and Elise Anne LaPlante, Executive Codirector. Welcome.
You received instructions that you have five minutes for your opening remarks, which will be followed by a question period. We will begin with the Regroupement des éditeurs franco‑canadiens followed by the Association des groupes en arts visuels francophones.
Mr. Cormier, you have the floor.
Stéphane Cormier, President, Regroupement des éditeurs franco-canadiens: Thank you very much. I am Stéphane Cormier, president of the Regroupement des éditeurs franco‑canadiens, or REFC, and executive codirector of Les Éditions Prise de parole in Sudbury. With me today is Piedad Sáenz, general director of the REFC.
I’ll say a few words about the REFC. The REFC works to grow the literary ecosystem and expand the outreach of French Canadian literature. Its team supports 15 publishers and a literary journal in five Canadian provinces — in the West, in Ontario and in Acadia — through representation, promotion, dissemination and market development.
As you know, the recent modernization of the Official Languages Act recognizes the cultural sector’s critical role in maintaining the vitality of francophone minority communities and also reinforces the responsibilities of federal institutions when it comes to positive measures.
Given the decline of French in this country and issues related to cultural sovereignty, now more than ever, achieving the substantive equality of official languages and securing access to literature must be government action priorities.
Piedad Sáenz, General Director, Regroupement des éditeurs franco-canadiens: I will tell you a bit about the background and evolution of French-Canadian books.
The group was founded in 1989, when minority francophone publishing was in a fragile state. At the time, few structures existed to sustainably support the production, distribution and recognition of French-language books outside Quebec.
Our publishers started out in environments marked by geographic isolation, scarcity of bookstores and limited access to broadcast networks, as well as strong pressure toward linguistic and cultural assimilation. Today, our members still operate in structurally unfair conditions that currently add significant challenges.
Despite that, for 35 years, the group and its members have been getting strong, diverse and essential francophone voices heard through literature. In minority communities, books play a key role in passing down the language and asserting a sense of belonging. For example, if an Acadian author is published, readers can identify with the characters, recognize the language and cultural references and, as a result, strengthen their connection to the community.
The main issue remains underfunding. Our members have to do more with less, since small markets are often far away, while incurring costs comparable to, if not greater than, those in majority settings. Although Canadian Heritage and the Canada Council for the Arts recognize our specific needs, grants remain insufficient to fully support our publishers’ artistic, cultural and community mandates. Unfortunately, it should also be noted that nearly half of our members are not currently supported by the Canada Council for the Arts, despite significant contributions to literary life.
Mr. Cormier: We will continue discussing the issues and talk about solutions a little later.
In addition to the challenges my colleague just mentioned, there are also issues with the circulation and visibility of literary works. In many regions, there are few, if any, francophone bookstores, and there is an overriding lack of books in French. There is also a concentration of key players in bookstores, broadcasting, distribution and printing in Quebec. That also worsens the imbalances to a certain degree.
The scarcity of cultural media as well as digital use transformation are making discoverability efforts rather complicated. The visibility of our works depends increasingly on globalized platforms whose commercial mentality and algorithms don’t really take into account our minority language realities.
The industry is also concerned about the growing use of generative AI, which is all the rage and uses works without authorization to train its models and competes directly with humans in the creative field.
Finally, the general increase in production and transportation costs, combined with the scarcity of literary expertise in our communities, is putting constant pressure on the viability of publishing companies.
All these findings paint a picture of a challenging environment where the cultural mission of minority francophone publishing is facing rather serious structural constraints. Fortunately, the REFC remains an essential lever for supporting publishing companies through initiatives that we can discuss a little later.
Ms. Sáenz: In conclusion, I would like to remind you that your committee is fundamental to us, because without your structuring, sustainable and adapted support of our communities’ realities, it will be hard to achieve substantive equality of the official languages.
Publishing is a strategic link in the cultural ecosystem. It nurtures identity, fuels education, supports literary creators and ensures that a language is passed on. We want to work with you to strengthen federal institutions, ensure programs are appropriate and support discoverability, training, market access and the cultural sovereignty of francophone minority communities.
Thank you for your attention, and we look forward to answering your questions and exploring constructive avenues to address these many challenges.
The Chair: Thank you. I now give the floor to Ms. LaPlante from the Association des groupes en arts visuels francophones.
Elise Anne LaPlante, Executive Codirector, Association des groupes en arts visuels francophones: Mr. Chair, members of the committee, I am Elise Anne LaPlante, an Acadian from Moncton and executive codirector of the Association des groupes en arts visuels francophones, also known as AGAVF. With me is Lou-Anne Bourdeau, chair of the AGAVF board of directors and director of the Maison des artistes francophones in Saint-Boniface, Manitoba. Thank you for the invitation to appear here today and for choosing a topic of study that is directly related to our work.
AGAVF is the only national arts service organization representing the visual arts in francophone minority communities. The association has been working since 2003 to professionalize, network and enhance the vitality of artistic communities across Canada and represents 18 organizations, artist centres, galleries and artists’ collectives.
To highlight some of the issues facing our sector, we draw on the Étude sur l’état des arts visuels dans les communautés francophones en situation minoritaire study, published by AGAVF in 2023.
As the study shows, the realities of the visual arts in official language minority communities are in line with the needs of majority communities, particularly when it comes to the precarious situation of artists and cultural workers. In fact, the 2025 federal budget identified visual artists as among the lowest-income people in Canada, despite the importance of their contribution.
Canadian French-language visual arts, however, face challenges that are unique to them because of major training shortcomings and structural, historical funding gaps due in part to a lack of recognition of the language aspect of the visual arts.
Lou-Anne Bourdeau, Chair, Association des groupes en arts visuels francophones: Thank you.
In terms of training, only the Université de Moncton and the University of Ottawa offer an undergraduate program in visual arts in French, and the only graduate program offered outside Quebec is the bilingual program at the University of Ottawa. There is no comprehensive undergraduate or graduate art history program offered in French outside Quebec.
The professional development activities provided by AGAVF seek to fill some of these gaps.
While the modernization of the Official Languages Act of 2023 includes a new recognition of the essential nature of the cultural sector, AGAVF continues to defend the idea that the visual arts cannot do without language. Language is essential for the professionalization of artists and the distribution of their work in the sense that various forms of oral and written communications are always involved in the creation and presentation of a work of art. Without them, there can be no professional recognition leading to the distribution, circulation and collection of works that make them accessible to the public.
In recent decades, our communities have fought to get language recognized as crucial in visual arts practice. We need to keep taking action on this issue. The impacts of the misinterpretation of the way our discipline works are still being felt to this day, particularly with regard to the delays in granting core funding to organizations.
There are inequities both in relation to other disciplines and within our discipline between provinces. For example, visual arts organizations in New Brunswick do not have access to core funding under the Official Languages Support Programs, or OLSP, at Canadian Heritage, whereas in the western provinces, it is their main source of operation funding.
Ms. LaPlante: While the cultural sector is relieved to hear about the 2025 federal budget, and although AGAVF recognizes the importance of implementing the artist’s resale right for visual artists, we find the increase in funding to the Canada Council for the Arts to be deplorably small, $6 million rather than the $140 million recommended by the sector.
Since many of our members depend on the Canada Council for their operations, and since funding avenues for the visual arts are limited in the absence of a disciplinary fund, we are deeply concerned, given that we cannot foresee any improvements to an already challenging situation.
We reiterate that core funding for organizations is a very important lever. Despite our vitality, the funding currently available does not allow us to fully carry out our mandates and put together the teams needed to do our work.
We are pleased to be able to rely on the mechanisms of the cooperation agreement, through which we can maintain dialogue with federal institutions. AGAVF has many opportunities to meet with Canadian Heritage and the Canada Council for the Arts.
However, it seems to us that there is still a lot of work to be done to achieve substantive equality for official languages in the cultural sector, and even more so to enable the visual arts field in particular to play its full cultural and social role.
Thank you for listening. We will now be happy to answer your questions.
The Chair: Thank you. We will now move on to the question period. I would suggest five minutes for questions and answers, if possible. We can get in a second round if time permits, and I imagine it will.
Senator Gerba: Thank you and welcome to the committee.
All the comments and testimony we’ve heard so far lead us to understand that funding is really the basic problem at all levels.
In the previous session, we also heard about the importance of training programs. You just talked about training adapted to minority realities. Publishing and visual arts also require technical and digital skills that are hard to develop without structured support, particularly with the rise of artificial intelligence.
In light of all this, I wonder why there is underfunding, especially since you just mentioned that Western Canadian publishers are better funded than you are. Why is that, and what could the federal government do? You’re already in contact with Canadian Heritage, but it doesn’t seem to resolve the issue.
Ms. LaPlante: Thank you for the question.
Why is there underfunding? We in the arts sector certainly feel that there is still some fragility, as we mentioned, because the language aspect has not always been properly recognized.
For example, although AGAVF has been funded under the Official Languages Support Programs, or OLSP, since 2005, our position in the OLSP was called into question in 2013. We had to do a lot of work to justify our position, whereas we feel that language needs are indispensable in the visual arts sector. Sometimes words don’t come into play in works and creations and sometimes they do, but the fact remains that the entire ecosystem to support professional development and the visual arts depends on language. This has resulted in the underfunding of our sector.
What could institutions do? As has already been mentioned, they could certainly increase core funding, but if it is increased, they could also consider equitable rather than equal distribution. I’ll give the example from the action plan: The improvements that have been granted in recent years were welcome and were certainly appreciated, but that doesn’t mean that they weren’t granted based on the percentage of funds that had already been received.
The smaller players received smaller amounts, so there is less impact. There’s a gap that keeps growing. For example, for AGAVF, 12.5% meant $15,000. Our objective was to put in place a third position. We are a co-directorship, equivalent to one and a half positions, and we would have liked to be able to hire a third person. We also have a part-time contract worker, but she depends on project funding. Obviously, $15,000 isn’t enough to hire someone in the current economy.
Another possibility is giving us access to project-based funding, multi-year funding that would enable us to consider structuring projects with greater, lasting impacts, and also reviewing certain funding program criteria. We notice that in the visual arts, there are issues in this area, and we’ll certainly have a chance to talk about them again.
I’ll leave it at that to allow you to answer as well, and we’ll have a chance to expand on that. Thank you.
Mr. Cormier: Funding is the foundation. On the publishing side, I’ll start by acknowledging that when the Liberals came to power, they said they would double the budget of the Canada Council for the Arts, and they did.
That’s a good thing. The publishing sector has benefited. Since then, the funding hasn’t changed. In our business, our core subsidies will remain the same until 2028. With the inflation that has landed on our heads, that means we are getting poorer every year.
Why isn’t there more funding? I can’t answer that question. I imagine these are political decisions. Funders and our partners, whether at the Canada Council for the Arts or elsewhere, are also taking steps to try to increase their budgets. Their requests are not always heard.
One of the issues in the book industry is that the OLSP may have a little trouble recognizing the community side of literary activities. Unless I’m mistaken, I think that Prise de parole is the only or one of the few publishing houses subsidized by the community component of the OLSP. My fellow publishers elsewhere don’t have access to those funds. We think that the literary work we do in our communities is both artistic and community-based, because in a place where there are few institutions, we have an institutional role to play. I get the feeling that this is not always understood at the OLSP.
Going back to my personal example, we’ve had a few increases recently, because the envelope for the OLSP has been topped up, but we’re at the same basic level and we’re trying to prove our community impact. It doesn’t necessarily translate into money. With the OLSP, the Regroupement des éditeurs franco‑canadiens works on a project-by-project basis. We’re not on the operational side. Year after year, we have to apply or reapply to the OLSP. A switch to operational funding would be very much appreciated.
It’s the same issue with the Canada Bood Fund. Even though the Regroupement des éditeurs franco‑canadiens gets its operating budget from the Canada Bood Fund, we’re still working on one project at a time. We were lucky this year to get two projects. That’s new. We used to have one project per year, now we got two. However, that raises some issues, because, each year, we have to start over, and our funding isn’t necessarily guaranteed.
I’d like to say one last thing quickly. The reporting process for the Regroupement des éditeurs franco‑canadiens is onerous. Heritage Canada is asking us to produce a cash flow statement every quarter. For a small three-person team like ours that manages numerous projects and activities for 15 or 16 publishing houses, that’s a big ask. During the Canada Book Fund audit, we tried to argue that the data from grant applications and reports, and our budget presentations should be enough, but the department still asks for quarterly cash flow statements. That puts a lot of pressure on a small team, because a third party does our accounting. We understand that the reporting process needs to be beyond reproach, but we think the data from applications, reports and budgets should be enough. Do we really need to go so far as to review our cash flow? We wonder.
Senator Cormier: If you’ll allow me, given that this is World AIDS Week, I’d like to take this opportunity to recognize that a lot of people in our artistic and cultural communities have suffered losses. I just wanted to point it out.
Thank you for joining us today. I have too many questions, I’ll have to limit myself.
I’d like to start by making sure I understand correctly. Both of your organizations are membership-based. As federative organizations, you have your own challenges, but so do your members, the visual artists and authors.
My first question is on the partnership agreement we talked about, which includes Heritage Canada, the National Arts Centre, the Canada Council of the Arts, the CBC, the National Film Board, and Telefilm Canada. Do you think all the players are there, or are some missing? Given your needs, who else should be at that table, whether it’s to support creation, production, broadcasting and distribution, or market development? There’s the national market, but there’s also the international market. My first question is quite short, and I would ask for a short answer, so that I can move to my next question. Who would like to answer?
Ms. Bourdeau: Obviously, the Canada Council for the Arts is an important voice from the visual arts perspective. That said, from the Association des groupes en arts visuels francophones’ perspective, we think the National Gallery of Canada would be a possible voice, as much for distributing and acquiring works, as for assembling collections. They could be one of the missing actors from that agreement.
Mr. Cormier: On the literary side, a partnership agreement has just been renewed. That transfers to working groups, where things sort of take shape. It’s been a while since we’ve had working groups. We’ve had the pandemic, followed by the partnership agreement review, but we’re looking forward to having working groups again.
We’re dealing with the same representative partners as before, which are the OLSP, the Canada Book Fund and the National Arts Centre. The Regroupement des éditeurs franco‑canadiens is asked to be the voice for the whole sector, but it’s a big sector. It includes publishing houses, but also literary festivals, bookstores, authors and distributors. For a small team, it’s quite a heavy burden. That’s why we’d like for other representatives from the literary community to help us. We’re part of an ecosystem, so it’s difficult to speak for everyone.
Senator Cormier: We’ve heard that the new Official Languages Act includes a mandate for Global Affairs Canada, which would be to promote French abroad. Do you see the department as a possible partner? Would you want the department as a partner given the type of production you do?
Ms. LaPlante: There could certainly be some valuable opportunities. We’d have to think about it. My understanding is that the department’s role would be more in establishing international partnerships. Our needs at the national level are so great that it’s difficult to see beyond those needs. That’s not to say we wouldn’t aspire to reach that level, but given our current reality, it’s hard to see that far ahead. That’s why we singled out the National Gallery of Canada as a potential partner for our sector. However, it could be a good idea to consider other partners.
Senator Cormier: You talked about the National Gallery of Canada. There are many challenges, including funding for creators. Regarding broadcasting and distribution, you talked about bookstores, literary festivals and art galleries. What would be the main obstacles to making your members’ works available and having them displayed? One of the objectives is to figure out how national institutions can assume their responsibilities when it comes to official languages. That means they have to ensure visibility and inclusion in their institutions. What are your thoughts on that?
Ms. Bourdeau: Visual artists don’t necessarily fit in a commercial setting, like bookstores. There’s no equivalent for visual arts, not even festivals. The idea would be a travelling exhibition. If artists can’t fit in a commercial setting, it’s really hard for them to make their mark outside their region. If the National Gallery of Arts could facilitate the distribution of works within Canada, that would be a very big step forward for our regional artists. It goes to what Elise Anne was saying that there’s still a lot of work to do at the national level for artists to really be able to communicate with each other, and to distribute the works from one province to the next.
Ms. LaPlante: I would like to expand on the importance of professional development for artists, but also for all the other actors of the ecosystem. We not only need competent art gallery mangers, we also need curators, archivers, art critics and specialists in media coverage.
All these actors play a very important role in bringing together works of arts and publics. They also ensure a certain outreach, a recognition, and an historicizing of practices for works to be included in national collections. We need to document things, leave a paper trail, and get recognition. Without these actors’ support—AGAVF works hard to further their development, but it’s still a challenge for francophone minority communities.
Ms. Sáenz: It’s really one of the major issues for the book industry. As we said, francophone bookstores are few and far between, and because key sectors are centralized in certain areas in Quebec, both our distributors are in Quebec City. Moreover, based on our discussions with them, transportation costs are a major hurdle to being able to serve populations or schools where they are.
Sometimes, shipping a box of books is less expensive than the books it contains, and that’s a major issue. Transportation costs to participate in small book fairs in Toronto or Vancouver are very high, but we want to serve the francophone communities there. Quebec distributors don’t go to those fairs, so we have to figure out our own transportation, and do what we can to participate in those fairs. We realized that without our organization’s participation, those fairs wouldn’t exist. It’s the only opportunity for schools and librarians to find French books.
We also notice when we go to education congresses that the education department of every province prefers the least expensive option. Most of the time, that’s ordering from Amazon. Small bookstores can’t compete with Amazon. Public schools and libraries are not subject to any policy when it comes to purchasing books. That’s the reality we have to deal with. We’re competing with Amazon and other large distributors.
Senator Moncion: I’d like to come back to what you were saying about Amazon. That was going to be my question. You say distributing works is an issue, and that Amazon is a large distributor, is that correct? I don’t buy from Amazon. It goes against my values. I buy my books in francophone bookstores.
Mr. Cormier: In regions where there are bookstores, Amazon doesn’t do as well. But if people don’t have access to a bookstore, ordering from Amazon becomes a simple solution. The impact on our sectors is even bigger, because very often, there’s no francophone bookstore in the area. In rare cases anglophone bookstores will have a French book section. That’s why Amazon sells a lot of books in francophone minority communities.
Senator Moncion: You said it’s been a few years since the last working groups. If there were working groups, you’d need one for artificial intelligence, human creation versus mechanical creation, copyright, and many others, right? That’s one of the missing elements. What would be the others?
Mr. Cormier: When the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française signed a partnership agreement, a dozen different axes were identified, including AI. I think all those axes cover a lot of ground, and constitute an excellent starting point that can be applied to many art forms. From an editing standpoint, it was great. We’re in constant communication with our partners. We met with representatives of the Canada Book Fund, or the CBF, at the Salon du livre de Montréal, an informal setting comparted to a working group. We do talk regularly.
It’s been a while since we’ve had working groups, because of the pandemic and the partnership agreement review. That said, I think they’re to start again in 2026. Part of that is our fault, because we told the CBF that one of the issues is the lack of evidence in the editing sector. We got funds from the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française, and the Fédération representative we were talking to said she could get us more funds elsewhere. Once this study is over, we’ll be able to make our own presentation with better information.
Senator Moncion: We often hear about recurring issues, a lack of strong data and a lack of basic funding for federated organizations. Then we have the artists. I imagine that the artists are paid per project?
Ms. LaPlante: In our working group, the priority would be to discuss access to funding. The funding set aside for OLMCs includes a number of funds within the sector. However, a number of organizations or artists don’t identify with the criteria.
The Canada Council for the Arts has strategic funds to promote market access. However, our sector isn’t structured like an industry. Even if our sector is eligible for this funding program, the artists or organizations don’t pursue these funds. They don’t identify with the program or their applications are unsuccessful. We need to find ways to ensure that institutions can help us access funding to fulfill our mandates.
The same applies to the circulation programs. It seems that circulation is designed more with performing arts, music tours or theatre tours in mind. These needs are understood. When artists or visual arts organizations try to find their place, differences arise. Reality clashes, in a way, with the criteria proposed. We would discuss this issue around the table as part of a working group.
I would also like to make a recommendation. We would like to see a free-flowing conversation within the scope of the agreement, particularly with the working groups. We feel that the discussions are relevant. However, we would like to see some form of reporting or updates from the institutions. Ideally, this would happen on an annual basis. Our last working group met in 2021 and the next one will meet in 2026. Ideally, we would meet every year. That way, we could share our issues and challenges, brainstorm together and find solutions. The institutions would then update us on the steps taken to address a given issue and on plans for the future, so that we can move beyond the conversation stage. It’s good to be able to discuss and brainstorm, but we would also like to see concrete results on both sides.
Senator Moncion: Thank you.
Mr. Cormier: I would like to make a brief comment on this matter. This issue came up during the consultations that took place when they were assessing the cooperation agreement. I think that this is more or less what everyone wants to do when we start up the working groups again. I thought that this was understood. The goal is to have working groups that help us identify priorities and work on them more regularly. That’s our hope, yes.
The Chair: Before we move on to the second round, I have a question.
You both talked about the need for professional development and training, and the challenge of having only two universities that provide much of the training. Funding can help, but I’m trying to find solutions. When I look at the solutions, I think that more funding will help, of course.
What are your recommendations? Even with more funding, only two places in Canada would provide training in traditional institutions. I would like to hear your suggestions on how training and professional development could be provided.
Ms. LaPlante: In addition to increasing multi-year core funding and access, it should also be possible to submit a project more than once within the same program. At AGAVF, we developed training programs in areas such as exhibition curating and writing for the visual arts. Last year, we ran a training course that was very well received. The project was a great success and it had real benefits.
However, it takes more than a year for everyone to learn to write and to succeed in getting published. We would like to continue providing this training. Since we’ve already received funding, we can’t submit the same project more than once. We can’t continue the initiative even though the needs remain. For starters, we would welcome the prospect of multi-year funding or the possibility of continuing projects already under way.
At AGAVF, with more core funding, one of our goals for the past several strategic planning sessions has been to develop stronger ties with the University of Ottawa and the Université de Moncton in order to build bridges with the next generation. Students could learn about the AGAVF network and they would have access to all the members. However, a lack of resources also means a lack of time, money and energy to do this.
Ms. Sáenz: In our case, I think that one of our requests was to offer multi-year internships, two or three per year. At the moment, we can hire students for only one year. Sometimes, we must also let them go. One year isn’t enough to show the needs and the difference that one more person makes in a team. This would also be a positive step.
The Chair: Thank you.
[English]
Senator Patterson: Thank you. I’ll ask my question in English, but please respond in French.
I’d like to go back to the publishing and distribution. I can imagine that this is a massively difficult challenge. I had two children in full French throughout their education years living in the west of the country, and it was almost impossible to find educational books that suited their needs.
You also referred to Amazon and the challenges there. What is making it so challenging for you to get into that market? Is it the lack of funds to try and actually do the marketing in order to get there? Yes, you cannot find francophone books on Amazon because my children tried.
[Translation]
Mr. Cormier: There are a number of compelling examples. First off, the largest book market is in Quebec given the size of its population, the number of bookstores and the concentration of the industry.
When I talk about Quebec, I joke that Quebec really is our number one export market and that we should almost be considered exporters when we sell to Quebec. This would help us do a number of things.
If we look at our own communities, I think that we have about ten French-language bookstores across Canada. Let me give you a recent example. I’m a trained bookseller. When Sudbury’s Place des Arts was built in 2022, a space was set aside for the bookstore. Four organizations in Sudbury worked to develop this bookstore project. It took me a year to find someone who could run the bookstore given the lack of resources.
We hired the best person possible. She had never worked in a bookstore before. We paid for her internships so that she could work in a bookstore in Quebec. She moved to Sudbury and we asked her to open the bookstore. I know that it takes three, four or five years to learn the bookselling trade, and even longer to become a bookstore manager.
Skilled labour is in short supply. We talk a great deal about funding, but I believe that training is almost as important. The two go hand in hand, of course. However, finding someone with expertise in bookselling is quite difficult. This expertise takes many years to develop.
Unfortunately, after two years of operation, we had to close the Sudbury bookstore. This was mainly because of provincial realities, since school boards don’t really support local bookstores.
It’s expensive to distribute books across the country. My colleague spoke about the prohibitive costs of transportation. We often joke that the transporters are the only ones in the book ecosystem who make money. The joke is true, but it’s a bit sad. To bridge this gap, publishers are trying to do what they can. Our group participates in book fairs and festivals. However, book fairs are also underfunded, along with public and school libraries.
These aren’t fertile environments for bookstores to grow. Few provincial policies encourage the purchase of books in bookstores. Another telling example — admittedly outside the federal sphere — concerns an Ontario MPP who tried to introduce a bill to advocate for Franco-Ontarian bookstores. She was an opposition MPP, and the bill didn’t pass in Queen’s Park.
So, no bookstore can survive without making at least half its sales to schools and libraries. This is impossible, so policies are needed. I don’t know whether this is a provincial issue. However, this is one reason for the lack of bookstores in Canada’s French-speaking communities.
[English]
Senator Patterson: If I understand correctly, that is also a very good example of why just-in-project funding will never work. I’m going to go back. That is a fabulous example of the baseline funding that you require in order to get this supply chain to actually get the books to where the people are. I think that’s what I’m hearing from you.
[Translation]
Mr. Cormier: Exactly. That’s why I would like to recommend that Canadian Heritage consider minority community publishers as interprovincial exporters. It would also be necessary to take into account the costs associated with this responsibility. We’re practically the only ones doing this if we compare ourselves to our colleagues in majority communities.
Senator Gerba: Mr. Cormier, do you have any specific recommendations for accessing Quebec markets?
Mr. Cormier: My idea is that we should be considered export companies. This could come with a larger budget for touring in order to help us with transportation and distribution. This falls within the scope of the activities for which we receive funding. Let’s be clear about this. The Canada Council for the Arts gives us funding for this, and so does the Canada Book Fund.
Perhaps it’s a matter of degree. We’re already recognized as groups that deserve fair treatment in relation to all these partners. However, I’m not sure that our remoteness, community work and role as exporters are given enough consideration. So perhaps all these factors should be given a bit more weight in the calculations and in the assessment of current grant applications. Programs that support exports to Quebec could also be created for Franco-Canadian publishers.
Senator Gerba: Ms. LaPlante, after listening to the previous witnesses, we understand that coordination is an issue among the various federal institutions, including Canadian Heritage, the Canada Council for the Arts, Telefilm Canada, the NFB and Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec. How could federal institutions work with you to strengthen your capacity for creation and distribution?
Ms. LaPlante: I believe that better communication among institutions would definitely be beneficial. We’ve already seen cases among our members or within our own organization where we want funding for an initiative, but Canadian Heritage refers us to the Canada Council for the Arts, and the Canada Council for the Arts refers us back to Canadian Heritage. We feel that better communication might also lead to some form of agreement to ensure that the visual arts also receive their fair share, to make up for the gap referred to earlier.
Who would be responsible? We could discuss this together. Also, in terms of data, having standardized data collection and sharing among institutions would make it much easier to take action and talk about this. Lou-Anne, did you want to add something?
Ms. Bourdeau: I would add that, for the visual arts, the Canada Council for the Arts provides access to Canadian Arts Data, or CADAC. For example, Canadian Heritage could have access to this data, or at least access to some data sharing, rather than renewing the request each time, particularly for reports, cash flows and things of this nature.
I would also add that, in the case of Canadian Heritage in particular, programs should be standardized. The fact that organizations in some provinces don’t have access to them, while in other provinces these programs are becoming the main source of funding, creates inequalities within our network. Yet these are the same budgets and the same organization. So how can these differences across regions be explained?
Senator Cormier: To address your transportation challenge, perhaps a book pipeline is needed.
This was actually the introduction to my question. I’ll be a bit provocative. It isn’t the right term, but do we have good models? Today, in 2025, given access to artificial intelligence, the web and the distribution of all these widely used models, when I search for a visual artist’s work on the web, sometimes I find it, sometimes I don’t. As an art enthusiast, I feel a certain amount of frustration at not having access to it.
It’s the same thing with books. I went to Quebec to look for an Acadian book, and it was listed as a “foreign book.” I concluded that we’re always foreigners to someone. Shouldn’t this prompt some reflection on reinventing the model? If so, how could federal institutions help you work on this?
Do you understand what I mean? How can we break out of the box that we’re all in, and try to imagine a different way to bring the book to the public?
Ms. Sáenz: We’ve given this challenge a great deal of thought. We’ve already taken the first steps by creating a catalogue of Franco-Canadian books from all the publishers. We partnered with the Coopérative des Librairies indépendantes du Québec, which manages the leslibraires.ca website.
On our end, we approached the Canadian Independent Booksellers Association to try to pitch the offer to anglophone booksellers. They’re actually quite open to having French-language sections. However, this has been really difficult. We need to negotiate the commercial terms with the distributors. They say that they can’t take on the risks of these funders.
As a result of grants received from the cooperative, the Canada Council for the Arts and a number of other funders that liked the idea, we managed to create this catalogue in both official languages. We also offered better shipping conditions so that anglophone bookstores wishing to place orders would have conditions similar to the ones available for the anglophone market. These are two completely different worlds.
I used to work in a bookstore. I know that, in the past, books were acquired quickly in both markets. We’ve already developed certain initiatives and made compromises. Ultimately, the cost of transportation is the issue that keeps coming up. Perhaps we need to take positive measures. For example, in areas with only English-language bookstores, we could open a French-language section so that these bookstores could also carry French-language books.
Senator Cormier: Before my time is up, I will give the AGAVF a chance to respond.
Ms. Bourdeau: I think transportation issues remain very important for visual arts. As soon as you move beyond small-scale works and shipping crates, you need specialized shippers to transport works from one place to another, and those are very important issues. What’s more, visual arts cannot do without a physical presence.
Senator Cormier: It’s about discoverability. The thing is, I feel like I don’t know enough about visual arts because I don’t have access to them. Might there be some innovative way to make them more accessible, since you were talking more about local markets?
Ms. Bourdeau: Quite so. Indeed, I think works of art can’t travel on the internet. However, written works can. Having online platforms that allow for the dissemination of texts about visual arts and the artists who make up the ecosystem could be a possibility, in cases where the works themselves cannot necessarily travel. I think we should really focus on mediation and understanding of the works, beyond the work itself.
Once again, this brings us back to the same issue of training and the possibility of having these stakeholders in our communities; that remains a very important issue.
Senator Moncion: For visual artists, you essentially face the same problem as publishers do in terms of distributing paintings and what is prepared. How do artists survive?
Ms. LaPlante: It’s certainly a challenge. It’s often once you get a certain amount of recognition, when things are written about you, when there are exhibition curators who are familiar with artists’ work and can include them in exhibitions, that a snowball effect occurs. There are awards, for example. However, those opportunities are quite limited, and only a handful of artists can access them.
On the other hand, there is an exhibition circuit, and all the challenges Lou-Anne mentioned are very real. However, being able to provide more funding for artist circulation would also help a lot. In other words, yes, there are exhibitions, but there are also creative and research residencies that are important and often lead to encounters with the public. Whether through conversations or events, our organizations have expertise in carrying out such activities — but funding is needed to enable people to circulate.
In addition to what Lou-Anne mentioned regarding discoverability, in Quebec, for example, there are several specialized visual arts magazines that feature plenty of articles on practices. That’s one way for people to discover practices in the visual arts. For us, the closing of the Liaison magazine, which was interdisciplinary, left a void that the AGAVF is trying to fill.
We published one piece during the pandemic and another is on the way. We will dedicate and create a web space, but the ability to invite authors to write will depend on project funding. The platform will be there, but funding will be needed on a project-by-project basis to keep it going.
Senator Moncion: Thank you very much.
[English]
Senator Patterson: There is no doubt that there is extreme talent in the community, and it is an absolute travesty that it is not getting out there.
It would be nice to end on a blue sky thinking into the future. Because I directed my last question here, I would like to go to visual arts recognition. Sometimes externally does way better for Canadians than even in-house. While we need to get our house in order in Canada, you talked earlier about Global Affairs and trying to project minority language visual arts, in this case, out of country.
If you could recommend one thing to Global Affairs, what would that be?
[Translation]
Ms. LaPlante: I think that, to be realistic and to take the first step, we need to fund artists’ circulation. Before considering sending exhibitions abroad, which would involve very high transportation costs, if artists could at least participate in international visual arts events and residencies, that would certainly be a significant first step.
Ms. Bourdeau: Again, I think this idea of an ecosystem is very important. Artists go out there and meet other artists, curators, different specialists in various fields; a network is developed that allows the works to be shown elsewhere afterwards. That networking is quite important internationally, but also with Quebec. In Quebec, we very rarely hear about francophone artists from the rest of Canada. There is definitely work to be done to promote awareness and let people know that they are there. There are no better ambassadors than the artists themselves.
The Chair: Thank you. That concludes this exchange. On behalf of the committee, thank you for joining us tonight. Thank you for your statements and for answering our questions.
We will now briefly suspend the meeting before moving on to the second panel of witnesses.
[English]
Welcome to the second panel. We have in front of us Miranda Castravelli from the English Language Arts Network. I saw you were here so you know how we operate. You’ll have five minutes for opening remarks and then we’ll go to questions and answers. The floor is yours.
Miranda Castravelli, Executive Director, English Language Arts Network: Before I get started, I did prepare a statement — and my apologies to the translation team — but I do feel like I need to give you a little bit of additional context because everything my francophone colleagues said was 100% correct and is equally applicable in Quebec as anywhere else. Because I’m here speaking for the English language minority, there are other particular preoccupations that in some cases take supremacy, and that’s what I’m hoping to speak to you about tonight.
After the fact, if you want to talk about specific practical applications or plans, I am happy to do that.
[Translation]
Please feel free to use both languages; that’s fine with me. Whatever is comfortable for you is also comfortable for me.
[English]
Thank you very much to the Senate committee for your invitation and today and for allowing me to speak on behalf of the English language arts community residing in Quebec.
As you may know, the English Language Arts Network, or ELAN, represents English-speaking artists and organizations, whatever their ancestral origin, reflecting an evolving Quebec identity and celebrating the province’s cultural, artistic and social diversity. We believe in the right to exist, thrive and make a living in Quebec. Many of our initiatives are also widely pertinent to the over 1.7 million English speakers in the province, whether they are artists or not.
We are, therefore, well placed to speak about why OLMC support is so important to us. In short, because existence is not the same as thriving, and where there is no ability to thrive, eventually things cease to exist. If the tapestry of difference disappears in Canada, every individual is poorer for it.
When we think about why the existence of official languages has been specifically named in our constitutional rights, it is because we have, as a society, recognized that people do not always behave fairly and that language is more than just a convenience of choice. It is integral to being heard, getting what we need, and it is also an inalienable part of who we are.
Historic record shows that French speakers were, for a long time and at a fundamental level, not given the same opportunities as English speakers. Therefore, as we became a more fair and just society, we recognized the need for redress. As we all know, even in meaning well, biases can be unconscious but still leave lingering impacts and trauma.
But we are not in history; we are right now, and right now the imbalance has gone in the other direction. This reality is less obvious, but it is no less true. Anglophones are often omitted by assumption or lumped into the greater English-speaking majority of Canada. Unfortunately, this is another bias and it has serious repercussions on everyday individuals who live in Quebec.
Because we speak English, it is presumed somehow that we are taken care of by the greater anglosphere. Programs are cut and resources are not provided to those who need them, but an actual person does not exist in the cultural abstract.
We are seeing this in hospitals, schools and most recently in the proposed Bill 1, also called the Constitution Act of Quebec 2025, which specifically puts the good of the majority above everything else. This perspective is having a detrimental and direct effect on the ability to make a living for all anglophones throughout the province, and we have the research to prove it.
If you are asking why I am talking about hospitals and other sectors, it is because, as my French colleagues would say, everything relates to everything else. So there is no one sector that is not affected by all the other sectors, and culture in particular is the voice of sectors, culture isn’t everything.
I submitted, along with this brief, a study that ELAN had commissioned in 2023. Without getting into too much detail, because it is quite extensive, you will see that the revenue discrepancies between anglophone and francophone artists are significant, in the range of 17% to 21% across all sectors. Whether you are talking about the median or mean, it comes out to approximately the same thing.
Other research done by other organizations also shows that anglophones have a higher incidence of poverty and unemployment across all sectors in Quebec. This is despite similar or higher education levels, and the fact that the estimated economic impact of the English-language cultural community on Quebec’s GDP was $7.73 billion in 2021, and just under $1 billion on the GDP of other provinces.
I have included at the end of the brief additional reading from those other organizations should the committee be interested, but in summary, though people — and artists in particular — are struggling across the province and across the country, by any metric anglophones have even worse outcomes than their francophone counterparts in Quebec.
There are in ways in which government support could change everything. In reference to the particular topics this committee is covering today, please let me address them specifically. Across the country, the culture sector is suffering. Cultural work is more than artists, though; it is administrators, coordinators, gaffers, caterers and more. Simply put, we are losing the scaffolding that makes culture possible.
People desperately need to know what tools are out there, what they can do, how they can maintain a career and how they can protect themselves against AI and other threats. Greater support for real structured programs is needed.
With the sector often at a disadvantage, people tend to gravitate towards free solutions. In this way — and in this way only — the anglophone community does have a greater number of resources online than the francophone community, but just because things are plentiful doesn’t make them good and it also doesn’t make more time. A team of two still remains a team of two.
Lack of performance and rehearsal space infrastructure is negatively impacting the culture sectors. English-language theatre, as an example, has precisely two venues remaining in Montreal, which necessarily limits the profusion of culture to availability. Will I be able to get a stage? Will there be space for me? Maybe, maybe not.
While it is true that in-person attendance has dropped, it is not universally true, but the public gravitates towards the experiences that can only be maintained by the most well-funded organizations. I do have some specifics on that if you want those later.
Digital tools are often looked at as a replacement for in-person events, however, these require extra care. With the profile of Canada raising at home and internationally, a digital platform is actually a good idea to showcase our diverse talents. However, the content should be for the good of all, not one select group or any one majority. We must be guided by the question of what cultural sovereignty really means, but it certainly is not exclusion.
Quebec is currently specifically rejecting multiculturalism and saying that we should follow the integration model instead. If we proposed this for other OLMCs, the outcry would be swift and justifiable reasons would be evident. Anglophones, however, are brushed away for the reasons I already mentioned.
This cannot be the answer. There is a very real difference from the anglophone minority in Quebec to the majority in the rest of Canada. Influences and immersion from childhood make for very different realities and perspectives.
Aside from the content regulations of a digital platform, there also needs to be stronger language and protections in law. English is one of the groups that needs protecting in our context.
Good structure must be ensured, for whatever we build, as well as general education campaigns for appropriate use. There is the potential for tremendous benefit, but also tremendous harm. These things must be studied and well planned and not rushed into. And let’s do it the Canadian way, by ensuring that everyone has a seat at the table.
As much as our provincial government might sometimes find us inconvenient, we are here. We do exist. And our rights cannot be trampled.
I am a Quebecer. I am from Montreal. I am proud to be a Quebecer, but my Quebec is a multicultural, diverse Quebec. It is Montreal-style bagels, it’s “bonjour/hi,” it’s bises, it’s cinq à sept. But it is also a place where hijabs and hellos are equally welcome. It’s in the small things and unexpected combinations that we find the most beauty and richness.
We may not all be the same, but we are all equal and deserving of respect and a chance to add our piece to both Quebec and the Canadian cultural mosaic. That is true cultural sovereignty, and we need your help to ensure that this vision of inclusiveness and welcome is the one that prevails. Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much. While I’m waiting for my first questioner, you mentioned revenue discrepancy between anglophones and francophones. I’m curious to see what are the major factors in that? Maybe government funding is part of it, I’m assuming markets are part of it; you mentioned stage availability, which probably is one of the factors. Could you briefly describe that?
Ms. Castravelli: I can tell you that I think that some more extensive studies need to be done to really determine what it is and I think it is a series of concatenating factors like you mentioned. But I do think that there is a certain amount of cultural “This is going to be too hard.” So I’d rather give the job to somebody who speaks good French first, or adequate French second and, if your French is so-so, maybe I won’t bother and I’ll go with someone else; will the Quebec government give me a hard time? Will I provide services to my people? Will I be getting complaints? There is sort of an overall attitude from the everyday person of it’s too difficult to fight that battle.
That’s part of it, but that is supposition. We obviously haven’t done a particular study. We are working on what people are telling us. I think that more research is required for culture-specific things. There are a lot of general statistics; all I can tell you is that it is the truth, but can’t tell you specifically why at this moment.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: Welcome, Ms. Castravelli.
Ms. Castravelli: Thank you, senator.
Senator Gerba: As a senator for Quebec, I understand you. I fully understand what is happening right now, especially for Quebecers, proud Quebecers from diverse backgrounds. So I understand you very well. We understand each other.
In addition to the support you receive from Canadian Heritage and the Canada Council for the Arts, ELAN receives support from the Quebec Government’s Secrétariat aux relations avec les Québécois d’expression anglaise.
To what extent does this support from Quebec complement that of the federal government, and how do you view the collaboration between the provincial and federal governments in that area? How could it be improved?
Ms. Castravelli: Thank you. What I mean is that when it comes to the secretariat — for example and in particular — we have a very good relationship with them and there is no doubt that their support is indispensable. On the other hand, it is a secretariat within a government that is often changing. Do they support us well? Yes, they do their best, but they too are fighting a battle with what is happening at the moment.
From a practical standpoint, my organization is well positioned. We are fortunate to have good support from all sides. Could we do more? Always. I am not paying my employees enough. I’d like to have more help with management.
I see a gap right now in educating the next generation. People are starting to retire and there aren’t enough administrative funds for education. Every time we say we want to promote education, we run up against the province, which says, “No, education is our domain, don’t touch it.” There is nothing in English, there is nothing in French, and there is nothing comprehensive in the sector that we can see. There is no way to break down this barrier by saying that education and training the next generation would be a great support that would certainly help the future of the arts. More support from the province and less obstruction would be really helpful.
Senator Gerba: Thank you very much. What about the proposed 2023–2028 Action Plan for Official Languages? What is your view of this action plan? Does it truly meet your requests and needs?
Ms. Castravelli: I think it was well-intentioned, but it’s a bit vague. There is certainly no mention of Quebec’s anglophones, apart from a brief “we’ll ask for their opinion at some point,” but nothing specific. The intention was really to expand into the regions, but without any particular plan to pursue that goal. I feel like the action plan could have benefited from consulting with the public, who could have been asked how exactly to go about all these things. In other words, as a concept, it was well intentioned at the outset, but it lacks oomph, as we’d say in English.
Senator Gerba: Thank you. On the market access strategy, we saw that Quebec is a model and also a target for exports outside Quebec, which is a good thing. What markets are you able to reach as a Quebec organization?
[English]
Ms. Castravelli: You have to begin by acknowledging that English is, in fact, a part of Quebec culture. That would be the starting point because at the moment, there is no actual place. I’m sure everybody is aware that they put together a plan for a digital platform to try and export Quebec culture, mostly audio-visual, to places like France or Belgium. Great, cool. I actually think Canada, right now as a whole, would be kind of interested in Quebec stories because I think there is a lot of history, a lot of art and so on. I think there is actually a market for that right now. Quebec is hot right now, and Canada is hot, in general.
So for the English-speaking artists, I think it would be really beneficial if we could have a part of that. They started to make some inroads with some of the Indigenous groups, but they’re only just scratching the surface, which is cool. It is really great. I would like for the anglophones also to be considered part of that culture and I do think the market could digitize and modernize.
[Translation]
Some young people might be very interested. There are some really good stories. Quebec culture is a beautiful culture, but the way it is shared needs a little work.
[English]
Senator Cormier: I will use some clichés, but I want to understand better. A former senator once told me that the problem for the English community in Quebec is not language, it is building strong communities because you want assimilation, and assimilation is not possible because you have a broader, huge market throughout Canada and the States.
I don’t want to speak about the Quebec province, so I don’t want to go there. I want to look at the federal and the federal that need to help you, they have obligations with official languages.
In what field is it more crucial to help you, to help the artistic communities? I’m saying this because you have access to a fantastic market that francophones don’t have access to.
Is it more for creators? Is it more for producers? Is it more for distribution? I’m trying to understand because the reality is still different between the French minorities and the English-speaking minority in Quebec. I’m trying to understand where the need is and how national institutions can help make sure that your culture — especially the artists —are well known in Quebec but also outside of Quebec.
Ms. Castravelli: It is a complicated question and I will try and keep the answer as brief as possible. There is an idea that we have all of this market. That might potentially be true, it is a truth in potential, but it is not a truth in actuality because there is still the same struggle for an everyday artist to make a living, get their stuff out there. The visual arts spoke before and it’s the same thing; you can’t transport your giant six-foot sculpture somewhere, it is hard. You can’t really go on tour with your art. That sort of distribution would be extremely expensive and complicated. In my dream world, the federal support for this would look like some sort of a nationalization of the stories behind the art project.
Actually, my colleagues were alluding to something like that. They were saying that you can’t transport the artworks that easily, but you can certainly transport the stories of the artists, the people who are doing these things.
If there could be a federal program to understand what an artist is, what they do, what their motive was. On a personal level, these are the things that actually sell these things. These would sell not just here but everywhere. People want to see themselves reflected in their stories, so how would we work on a campaign which says this is the motivation, this is the beauty, this is the inspiration that this person came from, like 19th‑century churches across the Quebec countryside. There are, in fact, some artists who do that.
It is a question of how you bring those things out and how the federal government could do it. First, there are rules; that’s true. The latest statistics are showing that, even though there are rules, the organizations that are supposed to be following those rules haven’t always been following them, and they are not meeting their percentage. So enforcement would help, and some consequences if they don’t.
Some additional programming that could be opened toward getting more money to more people. One of the things Alain in particular — thanks to Canadian Heritage — has been successfully able to do was a micro-grant program that we call Trellis, which has given money directly to those artists. Part of what they are doing is being able to expose and build bridges. So more of that would be helpful. More money toward micro-grants means that we can give it out faster, getting it into the pockets of the artists.
Some national incentive campaign put together by the federal government that would say, here is what Canadian culture is and here’s what it looks like. Some version of a lobby, like the sports people did in the 1990s — ParticipACTION. I don’t know if any of you remember that particular thing, but there’s no argument as to why a sports stadium is important, so why is there an argument as to why a theatre is important? It’s because we don’t understand what it does. That’s why. People don’t understand what it means. There are many ideas.
Senator Cormier: You say that you are different from the anglophone majority. I can understand that because you feel like you are a minority within Quebec. You spoke about problems with having venues to present, but there are thousands of places where you can present.
I hear great English music in Quebec, and I hear it at different places. I’m trying to pinpoint what the biggest issue is, besides what you said about Quebec as a province, about the provincial government. If we think federally, what can the federal government do better to make sure that you are not only well represented but you are well served by the federal government?
Ms. Castravelli: It’s an issue of trying to understand it. Let me explain what we perceive as the difference between the anglophones in Quebec and the anglophones outside of Quebec.
When an artist produces a work, they are doing it based on their lived experience, everything that they have been subjected to and everything that they have been exposed to. My favourite example is “Passe Partout.” There is nobody in Ontario who is an anglophone who has grown up on “Passe Partout” like we have. There is nobody who understands its characters that are very niche, actually, but inform who those artists are, and, therefore, inform the stories that they tell. While there may be universal truths to everything all artists say, the influences and the type of art comes out separately.
From the outside, the perception that we have infinite venues is not actually true. The fact is that technically the buildings exist, but MainLine Theatre — I don’t know if you have heard about them — who were one of the major fringe festival producers, have lost their building. I can’t speak to Quebec City because I don’t know it as well, but in general, in Quebec City the venues are up for debate. There is limited space, and they are limited to those who can afford to pay for them.
Since the artists are struggling even more, you still have to pay for those venues. Those venues are not free, so technically the buildings are there, but we don’t have access to them. One needs to have funding and also enforcement of the funding regulations that already exist.
If I were to ask the Senate committee to make a recommendation, I would say, please study what the issue is. How many people actually have access to it? Could we please make some suggestions to whichever office it is — is it Heritage Canada? I don’t know — that regulates what money goes to these places and make sure that a certain percentage is allocated to those of diverse cultural expressions, whatever that means. Does that answer the question?
Senator Cormier: Yes, thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Moncion: You mentioned in your remarks that those who succeed are well funded. You said so earlier.
[English]
You spoke about lack of performances, lack of venues. The ones who succeed are well funded.
[Translation]
Ms. Castravelli: Place des Arts is one example. Place des Arts has no trouble filling its seats.
Senator Moncion: No, but you were talking about anglophones, and that’s what I’d like to understand. In your earlier remarks, you said that those who are successful among anglophones are well funded.
Ms. Castravelli: That’s not what I meant. I apologize if that’s the impression I gave you.
What I meant was that certain groups in Quebec are doing very well, but they are always the ones with the most funding. The nuance may be a bit different. To attract public attention, you have to run a promotional campaign. For example, the Centaur Theatre works quite well because you book in advance; they have a very sophisticated system that allows you to do that. It’s comfortable, there’s parking across the street, there’s a whole vibe to it, the place is beautiful, you walk in and you feel at ease. It’s one of the success stories, but it took a fairly recent investment of $6 million to $8 million to get to that point.
Not everyone receives that kind of funding. That’s what I was trying to say. The public is interested if you give them opportunities.
[English]
If I’m going to go out, I need to make it worth it for me. It needs to be interesting, I need to get something out of it, and it needs to be not too much of a hassle. Does that make sense? Those kinds of things are available mainly to the people who have money, like Place des Arts, Centaur Theatre and others of that nature.
Senator Moncion: I understand. The other thing that I am always surprised about is how English performers do well in Quebec. For example, at Festival d’été, they had Paul McCartney. I understand that it’s not the same thing, but my concern is always that Quebecers are very English-oriented when they listen to music. However, locally, they won’t finance local English-speaking artists, and that’s what I understand from what you were saying.
Ms. Castravelli: Yes.
Senator Moncion: There’s a big population that will go to large concerts in Montreal because the venue is there and you have large groups.
I’m a francophone from Ontario, but I was completely raised in French, so I was never exposed to the Paul McCartneys of this world or Queen until I was 60 years old. I’m thinking, “Oh, my goodness! There was something I missed along the way.” I knew the songs, but I didn’t know it was Queen, so just put it that way.
Going back to Montrealers and English, in Ontario we have the Stratford Festival for theatre. Are artists from Montreal able to participate in the Stratford Festival and vice versa?
Ms. Castravelli: Yes, but at a very small level. They are competing with everybody else from across Canada because Stratford is Stratford.
Senator Moncion: It is the place.
Ms. Castravelli: It is the place for anybody in theatre. Once in a while, the National Theatre School does have some events, but we’re talking about 10 actors a summer out of 13,800 artists who are English-speaking in Quebec. The percentage is very small. They are in competition with everyone else, and it’s not in any regular way.
Why do we not support our homegrown artists? Actually, our francophone counterparts will probably understand this too. It’s like it’s always better when it’s from somewhere else. That is what I mean when I say it would be nice if the federal government put together some version of “this is what our culture is, this is why it’s important, this is the impact, this is how cool it is and, by the way, why don’t you look over here first?”
I get Paul McCartney and Britney Spears are exciting. They have fantastic attendance, but those people are not the creators of our culture. We need to support our own culture. They don’t need our help. Our everyday artists need our help here to maintain the voice that is ours.
Senator Moncion: I want to go back to the lack of financing that you were talking about.
[Translation]
A discussion paper we consulted indicated that francophone minority communities have had a formal collaboration agreement with six federal arts and culture institutions for 25 years. Your agreement has been in place since 2024. Have I correctly understood that you have access to the same institutions — albeit for a shorter period of time — such as the Canada Council for the Arts and the National Arts Centre?
Ms. Castravelli: Do you mean we at the English Language Arts Network, or artists in general?
Senator Moncion: Because you represent artists, or rather organizations.
Ms. Castravelli: The English Language Arts Network is a type of network. Our members are other organizations. Some have access to these funds, but others do not. Some are individual artists, some are not. So I apologize, but I don’t know exactly who would have access to what, nor for how long they’ve had it.
As for the English Language Arts Network in particular, I’ve been there for a year and a half, but I believe the founder has been involved in these initiatives for about 20 years. We receive support from the Conseil des arts de Montréal, the Canada Council for the Arts, Canadian Heritage, and the Conseil des arts et des lettres du Québec.
Senator Moncion: You therefore have the same problems accessing funds as any other organization with only core funding, which is not enough, and so on.
Ms. Castravelli: We are fortunate that our core funding is good.
[English]
It’s okay. We manage. We’re all right comparatively to others. Having said that, am I paying everybody on my staff a living wage?
[Translation]
No. I would like to do more.
[English]
We have no support network.
[Translation]
We have no guarantees. It’s very limited. For me personally, that’s not really a problem. We have help for now, but it’s our members we’re worried about.
[English]
This is a problem more universally than my particular issue currently.
Senator Moncion: Understanding the situation in Quebec, it could be as difficult as it is for francophones outside of Quebec.
Ms. Castravelli: That is certainly true. There is a struggle, and I will say that there is a problem.
CALQ is doing a wonderful job. They have been handed a heck of a mandate to distribute an enormous amount of funds in a short amount of time. I have nothing to say about their internal workings — they have a good plan — but it’s tough for an anglophone to penetrate that particular very opaque application process.
Living project to project is very hard. It is extremely hard, and they may be doing a lot of work and still not getting anywhere. They are basically denied because the language of their application doesn’t quite match what a francophone jury panel expects to see, and that’s a tough one. Even when we personally offer to help them with translation and application, it still doesn’t guarantee that they are even going to get past that first hurdle of whether this is an acceptable project.
Yes, it’s tough, which is why I say microgrants might be a good suggestion. In terms of increasing the microgrants programs, if that is a thing that the federal government would be interested in continuing, that would 100% be my recommendation. Trellis had 300 and some applications; we only have 11 grants to give out. Somebody on the staff was telling me the other day that getting accepted to one of those things is a higher standard than Harvard. There’s clearly a lot of need to be able to fast-track and get these people out there.
Some of the projects that have come out of it have been amazing and very popular, by the way.
Senator Moncion: It’s a good starting point.
Senator Patterson: It never pays to go last because most of your questions have been answered.
I would put an observation forward as another anglophone in the room. When we talk about your market outside of Quebec, it’s analogous to us going and working in the United States. It’s not going to be about us. There’s always going to be something that shapes the product that you’re putting forward.
If the aim under the Official Languages Act is to see your face so it’s familiar to your people and project even within your local community, that’s where I see the parallels with minority francophone communities outside of Quebec. Ryan Reynolds popped into my head right there because when he uses American words or expressions, we know he’s Canadian, but . . .
If it’s about looking for people, and I believe it’s what happens, again, when you’re pushed somewhere else.
You talked about the funding trial. That was quite important to me and how it went. I hadn’t even thought about the application process, and I would suggest it works both ways outside of Quebec.
Ms. Castravelli: Fair enough.
Senator Patterson: Truly, you answered all of my questions, so that was just a comment. You’re certainly welcome to add on there. I’m not saying that’s what it’s like. It’s not my lived experience, but I can imagine.
Ms. Castravelli: Earlier, somebody else was alluding to the idea of marketing yourself as an artist, and it’s a bit of a challenge because, I get it; money is tight. Every sector needs money. The challenges of the world, where we are right now, you’re thinking, is this the most important thing? But the thing is, it is the most important thing, because if we don’t have culture, we lose ourselves and our perspective.
It’s hard to justify when you say doctors’ salaries are being cut; how do I fund an artist? If you don’t fund the artist, who gets to speak for all of these things that are happening? Who gets to speak these truths that are maybe uncomfortable? You need the blue-sky stuff to be able to have the marketable stuff too.
It’s not that there’s no room for everything. There’s room for beautiful, decorative things that don’t have much meaning, but there are also beautiful things that do have meaning that are maybe not particularly publicly attractive at the moment but are also important to say, and culture is a complex network of all of these things.
The job, as the government, is for the public good, if I may say so. You guys would know better than me, but I think it’s for the public good, and the public good is not always at the bottom dollar. It’s in the interest for the long term, the voices of our people. That would sort of be my closing sentiment on that.
Is it a bottom dollars and cents thing? Would we have to modify some things for dollars and cents? Yes. Should we? Maybe not, or maybe not always.
The Chair: On funding, I’m looking at the briefing note we had here. It explains how you’re funded. It also says that ELAN has implemented a project to assist arts and culture organizations to access funding opportunities offered by the provincial government. It also helps organizations navigate through the available federal programs.
To me, that says a lot. I don’t know if you can validate or not. It says a lot that it’s not easy to navigate through provincial and federal systems for funding.
Ms. Castravelli: Yes, 100%. It’s really opaque for most artists. They are lost. Trellis has been fantastic, but it’s very recent. What we call the Québec Relations project, which is the one you’re referring to, is the most popular program that has certainly been in the long term, and there is more demand than we can meet. I guess if I was going to ask personally for ELAN, that’s where I would begin.
Our mandate does come from the provincial government, so we do tend to focus mostly on provincial grants. However, the Canada Council for the Arts has approached us recently to ask if they could start, and that is somewhere I would ask for additional funding. Could we start supporting artists to apply to those things? Because it is extremely complex.
We have two people on staff right now who are experts just in applying for these things and to explain to people not just how the application process works but what it means. What does this question mean? What do you need to do to make yourself look good? What are the digital things you need to attach to be able to even get past the first hurdle?
Yes, it’s exceedingly complex, and the barrier for an artist who, honestly, just wants to create is very hard indeed.
Senator Cormier: Under the modernized Official Languages Act, CBC/Radio-Canada has obligations. We hear a lot of francophones outside of Quebec speaking about the importance of Radio-Canada. I would like to hear what your thoughts are around the role that CBC plays in Quebec for the English-speaking community, and what are your expectations in the future for Radio-Canada, but CBC particularly?
Ms. Castravelli: CBC has done wonderfully in Montreal and Quebec City, but outside in the regions of Quebec, they have had some struggles. We are tied in with community media, and we have been speaking to them recently about what we could do better.
What we could do better is honestly finding some way of building a bridge between the community media that is also a sector that is struggling and is very intimately tied to the arts, to publicize those good things that are happening in those regions and pockets as sort of a feeder. If any of you have an educational background, feeder schools that go into high schools, it is the same idea. Feeder news that would go into the bigger news. That is sort of the thing we’ve been kind of dancing around, but it always comes down to how would you judge that, who would get to choose, how do you do this in a way that’s fair and inclusive, and how exactly would you manage this and how often? It’s still in the nascent stages.
A committee on that specific issue, how would you get the word out, would really be actually pretty helpful, because there is quite a lot of material there and a lot of desire, but it’s complex, and so honestly the role could be very interesting.
They could be the spokesperson and the nationalizer for all of these things that give legitimacy to those artists, and at a national level. Somebody might see something in Alberta on CBC Montreal and say, “Hey, I’d like to go to Sherbrooke this weekend and see whoever is playing.”
Senator Cormier: Some say there are enough English-speaking televisions that we don’t need CBC anymore.
Ms. Castravelli: I think that’s a bit of a fallacy. We can see what partisan, privately owned broadcasters do south of the border. Anational, impartial, government-run broadcaster where it isn’t about necessarily making a buck has a great benefit of being impartial and actually being able to show voices in an equal way rather than whoever is paying the bill.
I think it is an integral part of Canada, of the Canadian fabric and the Canadian identity. It is indispensable to have things that are national and effectively not run with the bottom dollar in mind, because that means they are run with the public good in mind. To me, that is indispensable to Canadian identity.
Senator Cormier: Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Moncion: You mentioned in your remarks that Quebec has business offices in some European countries, including France and Belgium, but also in other countries, such as Germany and Poland. Those are business offices. I have a question, and you may have the answer. Not all European countries speak French. Do you have some access or any assistance with bringing anglophone artists from Quebec to European countries?
Ms. Castravelli: Within our organization, not at all. Could the Conseil des arts et des lettres du Québec, or CALQ, help us? It’s possible. It’s the francophone group that is most similar to us, whose functions are similar to ours — but for francophones in Quebec. All I can tell you is that the minister of culture is focusing on exports to those countries, not on programs that might be available. We are not producers, so perhaps people who tour have other means of access of which I am unaware. It’s possible. That would go through the CALQ; you would have to ask them.
Senator Moncion: That’s another organization. Thank you.
The Chair: Is there anything else?
[English]
This brings our second panel to a close. Thank you for your opening remarks and thank you for the answers to the questions.
[Translation]
I’d like to thank the first panel, whose members are still here. Thank you very much. Your contributions and comments will certainly be taken into consideration by the senators.
[English]
We will pause for a few minutes to go from the public meeting to an in camera meeting.
(The committee continued in camera.)