CAB calls for Canadian TV strategy; ACTRA wants more broadcaster requirements

The Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) says policy conflicts between various government bodies are hampering the industry’s ability to supply Canadian television programming. Appearing before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance on October 8, association president and CEO Glenn O’Farrell said approved large numbers of new broadcasting licences, other departments have reduced the flow of funds to the industry that would see enough quality programming for those channels. In the face of contradictory government decisions, O’Farrell called on Ottawa to make sure the various government bodies involved act in concert. O’Farrell noted in his presentation to the committee that private broadcasters were originally able to cross-subsidize their Canadian programming through revenues earned from the simulcast of high audience-generating U.S. programming. But as the number of channels ballooned from 38 in 1996 to 118, audiences have become fragmented, and "the original commercial underpinnings of the regulatory contract became seriously strained," he said. The way to rebalance the supply of Canadian content – how much the broadcasters can afford to produce – with the demand – what is demanded by the CRTC – is to pump more taxpayers’ money into the production of Canadian programming and for the CRTC to further relax its Canadian content requirements, O’Farrell argued. "End the disconnect between demand and supply. Moderate demand by the CRTC, so that it is in tune with the level of available supply of investment funding," O’Farrell told the committee as part of its pre-budget consultations. "What is absent is a sense of cohesion between the various players – (Canadian) Heritage, (the Department of) Finance, the CRTC and the Canadian broadcasting industry – to meet the stated government cultural objective," he added. But the CAB’s desire for a more collaborative approach involving various government departments and institutions as well as the broadcast industry could be derailed by dissent within the larger sector. Already, opposition to what the CAB considers essential to any long-term strategy is coming from the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA). ACTRA is calling for the private broadcasters to be forced to spend more on Canadian programming and to commit to more Canadian drama during prime time. It made these suggestions at an October 7 media conference, in meetings with CRTC staff, and before the Finance committee. The CRTC’s 1999 TV policy, which was implemented in 2000, has already given private broadcasters more flexibility than they previously had by eliminating spending requirements for the large networks and expanding the definition of priority programming, ACTRA noted. As a result, many broadcasters turned away from the more expensive drama programming and commissioned low-budget documentaries and reality TV shows to fulfill Canadian content requirements, the performers’ union stated. Therefore, ACTRA wants the government and regulator to move in the reverse direction of that advocated by the CAB. ACTRA wants the 1999 TV policy eliminated, and stricter broadcaster requirements implemented. "We need a new set of broadcast regulations and we need them in time for next season’s production cycle. They must clearly spell out that there is more, much more, to a Canadian broadcast licence than a free pass to rebroadcast American shows," actor Paul Gross, a member of the ACTRA contingent, said during the October 7 media conference. Both the CAB and ACTRA see value in increased and stable funding for the Canadian Television Fund. For the CAB, a stable CTF will help private broadcasters boost the supply side of production. In his presentation, O’Farrell pointed out to the committee that some genres of Canadian programming are self-sustaining, such as news and sports, but that Canadian drama isn’t. The impact of government cuts to the CTF is greatest on dramatic programming, he said. "The Canadian government has long recognized the need to support the production of Canadian programming content that is not market-sustainable – through financial mechanisms such as the Canadian Television Fund and tax credits," he said. "Unfortunately, these financial mechanisms have not kept pace with the increase in CRTC awarded licences for new programming services." Referring to the CTF as a cornerstone of the long-term programming action plan, the CAB called for the government to restore its contributions to the fund to the previous $100-million level in 2004, and to commit to multi-year funding. ACTRA also asked the Finance committee to restore government contributions to the CTF to the pre-2003 budget level and to add 20% annually on an ongoing basis (CCR Update, Oct. 8/03). ACTRA national president Thor Bishopric told the committee that increased funding for the CTF is necessary "given the pressures our industry endures principally from the practice of American dumping of American programming into our country. …If we’re going to have any cultural content on our television screens we need to ensure that we can put together programming with adequate budgets so that the viewers and the market will develop a market for it." Testimony before the Finance committee made it evident that it will be a long road to the establishment of a multi-year Canadian programming strategy that receives the support of the multiple stakeholders, as called for by the CAB. The one area on which the CAB and ACTRA agreed – replenished and long-term funding for the CTF – did not receive the support of everyone on the Finance committee. For example, Liberal committee member Bryon Wilfert commented, "I think it is important to have a long-term capacity to produce Canadian programming in this country. …We have a slight difference of opinion it would seem with the department of Canadian Heritage. It is my understanding that since 1996 that the $200 million (in the CTF) comes $100 million from Heritage, $50 million from Telefilm and the rest was supposed to come from the private sector…The federal government’s contribution was supposed to provide stability in the early years and then be reduced as contributions from the private sector rose. I think that’s where there seems to be a problem because it was from Finance’s view that the…($100 million from Heritage) would decline as the private sector went up." He further noted that the CTF was supposed to end a few years ago in March, but that the government had already extended it for two years. While stating that the long-term goal is to develop a market that can sustain Canadian TV drama, actor Rick Mercer, who appeared before the Finance committee with ACTRA, stated, "If the Finance department wants to say, ‘Oh by the way, this is a one shot deal,’ I guess that’s their prerogative. But at the same time, that’s not acceptable. We don’t accept that’s an acceptable position. This has to be an industry that has to be supported and invested in. If we are going to compete on any level with the United States and with foreign broadcasters, there is going to have to be some subsidy there…What we need is a commitment for ongoing funding, and that’s year after year after year." To rectify what the CAB sees as problems between the supply and demand of Canadian content, O’Farrell urged the Finance committee to work with other sections of the government to develop "a multi-year, accountable and transparent" Canadian programming strategy. Despite all the disagreement, O’Farrell defended the CAB’s call for a more synchronized, multi-year strategy for Canadian TV content. "Other industries have long-term plans, and we should too," he told Canadian Communications Reports. He said that the request is a realistic one, and pointed out that a recent roundtable, albeit in another context and headed by another department, bodes well for the development of a collaborative TV strategy. A few weeks before the Finance committee hearings, Canadian Heritage deputy minister Judith Larocque chaired a roundtable to allow industry players to discuss the CTF in the context of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage’s broadcasting report released last June (CCR, June 20/03). "Not only do I think it’s feasible (a collaborative TV programming strategy), it’s already commenced," he said. "We have recommended to deputy minister Larocque that she continue on this course, irrespective of the response from the government to the (Heritage committee) report. I thought a lot of good came out of the roundtable. I thought there was a broad consensus on the fact that the people around the table – representatives from Finance, the CRTC and other stakeholders – understood that there was a disconnect between supply and demand." O’Farrell doesn’t oppose the current Canadian drama proceeding undertaken by the CRTC (CCR, Oct. 3/03, Sept. 18/03), even though it won’t be all-encompassing as the regulator doesn’t control such things as tax credits. "The (CRTC) drama proceeding can co-exist with another simultaneous process that essentially defines some financial mechanisms (for funding drama). I think it is important to know where the revenue and the funding is going to come from no matter what we say about what we want in terms of more Canadian choices and programming," he said. "So I see no conflict between the two processes that could unfold simultaneously. In fact, if anything, it will only intensify the participation and the consensus that will come out of it. People understand that we need to improve our Canadian content and our audience levels. We have to be tangible about it; we need to be very practical."

CAB calls for Canadian TV strategy; ACTRA wants more broadcaster requirements

News | 10/16/2003 4:00 am EDT

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us