Oh Canada!

At the risk of demonstrating a howling lack of imagination, I’m going to continue my relentless march through Ann’s proposed topic list. Fortunately, it’s a good one today: “the relationships between and among the AFM, Orchestras Canada, and the Canada Council” (and just for good measure, I’ll include in the Organization of Canadian Symphony Musicians).

First of all, let’s cover the governance angle. Unlike the American Symphony Orchestra League, Orchestras Canada’s bylaws have long stipulated the active, voting participation of representatives from the AF of M, the Organization of Canadian Symphony Musicians and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation on our board of directors. At present, the representatives include:

· Someone from the Canadian office of the American Federation of Musicians, nominally V.P. from Canada, Bobby Herriot (though Bobby is usually represented by Symphonic Services head Mark Tetreault);

· Someone from the Organization of Canadian Symphony Musicians. OCSM has declined the right to vote on motions at OC board meetings since 1999. However, they regularly send a delegate to observe and report at OC board meetings;

· Someone from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, presently Mark Steinmetz, who is responsible for the Radio 2 redevelopment project.

Our governance structure is rooted in the belief that Orchestras Canada has obligations to the entire Canadian orchestral community, and not just one group of stakeholders within that community. Well and good: but does it actually work?

Here’s the thing: I’m not sure it does work as well as it could. At the same time, I’m uncertain about the prospective effectiveness of the alternatives.

At one level, the specific willingness of AFM and OCSM to be part of the discussion at the OC board table (collaborative, critical, rancorous, constructive…) demonstrates a fundamental and shared recognition that, at the end of the day, all we have is one another (so we’d better make it work somehow). This is a gift. At another level, I wonder if the representational nature of ex-officio appointments enables – or impairs – authentic human exchange about the stuff that’s really not working in our worlds. Like so:

· do I tell you what I really think,
· do I tell you what I think my people want you to hear, or
· do I disengage?

I don’t think there’s a single, easy answer to this, and I hope that we’ll continue to work with the ambiguity, the diversity of perspectives, and the strength that our structure brings us. I think it’s also important that we work together to identify specific projects we can work on together, as was the case during the Soundings initiative, referenced in Mark Tetreault’s article elsewhere on this site.

And what about Canada Council? It’s a many-layered relationship.

Canada Council is an arms-length agency of the federal government, with a specific mandate to “foster the development of the arts in Canada through grants, services and awards to professional Canadian artists and arts organizations.” “Arms-length” means that there is no political interference in Council’s granting processes. Also noteworthy: Council’s funding decisions are made on the basis of recommendations from expert peer assessors.

· Orchestras Canada is funded in part by the Canada Council. Approximately 25% of our annual budget comes in the form of an operating grant from Canada Council, which we access through an annual, competitively-assessed grant application.

· At the same time, we advocate to Council on behalf of our member orchestras, with particular focus on funding criteria and policies that will be of greatest benefit to orchestras.

· As well, we advocate to the government for increased federal funding to the arts through the Canada Council. We are part of a group called the Canadian Arts Coalition, which for the last 18 months has been working very hard to make this case. We presently have two key goals: to get the one-time $30 million increase to Council announced in last May’s federal budget made permanent; AND to secure a further $100 million increase to Council’s budget. These two initiatives, if successful, would take Council’s budget from $153 million to $283 million – and would surely transform the arts community as we know it.

Again, it’s an interesting balance. To work most effectively on behalf of our members, we’ve periodically needed to gum, gently, on the hand that also feeds us. But the relationship is generally strong enough to withstand the ambiguities.