Pitching the world on cultural diversity

Ottawa’s initiative in forging a new international trade agreement for culture is finding allies in Europe, and enemies in the United States. As Richard Stursberg, the former head of Cancom and the Canadian Cable Television Association, noted in a recent presentation, U.S. officials have branded Canada’s initiative a "virus". Below is an edited excerpt from his Nov. 25 keynote address to the Canadian Institute of International Affairs, at its cultural conference in Montreal. The full text of his speech can be found on our web site. Over the last little while there has been considerable discussion about how to move forward in the area of trade and culture. The most interesting suggestion has come from the Special Advisory Group on International Trade in Cultural Products – the Culture SAGIT – of which I am a member. Last year we proposed that the government should seek to replace the cultural exemption with a new international instrument that would be designed to safeguard cultural diversity. Instead of leaving the evolution of cultural policy to the anarchy of the exemption, the instrument would establish rules for determining how governments may or may not behave. In this way, governments and businesses could make policy and invest with confidence knowing they would not be subject to arbitrary retaliation by aggrieved parties in other countries. As we know, the greatest impediment to any form of investment isn’t bad rules but the uncertainty that comes when there are no rules. In October 1999, the Canadian government indicated that it would pursue the development of a new international instrument on cultural diversity. Since then, a host of meetings and discussions have occurred all over the world spearheaded by the minister of Canadian Heritage. Many countries have started to indicate their support for the Instrument and their enthusiasm to see it embedded in trade law. However, uncertainty remains as to what the Instrument is and how precisely it should be formulated. It seems to me there are five key areas that need to be addressed. First and above all else, the Instrument needs to make clear that it promotes cultural diversity and freedom of speech. It is not – and cannot be used – to inhibit the importation of foreign cultural goods. Second, it must cover all cultural products but define them in a way that is technologically neutral. Broadly speaking, this means that if a product involves pictures, sound or text – whose purpose is to entertain, enlighten or inform – it is ipso facto a cultural product regardless of how it is delivered. Third, three kinds of measures should be recognized as legitimate: Subsidies by way of contributions, whether tax credits or cash, to supply side development will remain essential to overcoming thin market problems. The reinforcing of borders: i.e. ownership rules (even the U.S. has ownership rules for conventional over-the-air broadcasters). Licence conditions or shelf space rules: By requiring a minimum number of hours of Canadian content on TV, movie hours in cinemas, pages of content in magazines, etc. we ensure Canadians will have some guaranteed access to their own stories and ideas. Forth, there should be no obligation on the part of any country to implement these rules. A country could decline to provide subsidies, license or establish shelf space tests. They might do so for reasons of policy (the U.S. is an example), or because they feel they are technologically or administratively impractical. Finally, it needs to be made clear that so long as a government’s measures conform with the standards described, they are not subject to countervails or other forms of retaliation. Whether these are the right basic components of the Instrument or not, we need to move forward quickly to begin defining them. Efforts are currently under way to start another round of negotiations and it will be crucially important for Canada to arrive at them with a clearly thought through position that enjoys broad support from important countries. Canada’s initiative with respect to the Instrument is a crucial undertaking. If we succeed, it will be a significant contribution to the international agenda.

Pitching the world on cultural diversity

Broadcast | December 7, 2000

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us