Q&A: Carney flirted with the ‘end of Cancon’ by risking Online Streaming Act with U.S., says CMPA chair

In the world of Canadian cultural policy, the last few months have been a rollercoaster — and Kyle Irving has had a seat up front (though that doesn’t mean he’s enjoying the ride). As chair of the Canadian Media Producers Association (CMPA), Irving has helped lead the domestic film and television sector’s (at times uphill) battle to keep the Online Streaming Act and maintain ‘Cancon’ funding requirements for large U.S. streamers. In an exclusive interview with The Wire Report, Irving spoke about the importance of matching funding policy with discoverability regulations, and discussed how the stakes for independent producers cannot get any higher than they are for the next few months. We’ve seen lots of twists and turns in Canadian cultural policy throughout the year. What’s been your read as chair of the CMPA? It’s been a really wild ride this year, in particular around the Online Streaming Act. We started the year with the most well-attended and successful Prime Time conference in Ottawa that we’ve ever hosted, where Prime Minister Mark Carney attended and reinforced his support for our industry and the Online Streaming Act. We all felt very much that we were in good shape when it came to negotiations between Canada and the U.S., knowing full well that the Online Streaming Act was something they were going after in trade negotiations. Our confidence level at Prime Time was high. Then, we continued to reinforce the importance of that and did our work when it came to contributing to the CRTC process, as well as our ongoing efforts to lobby government and ensure we were top of mind and high on the priority list of things to protect in trade negotiations. Then, we were shocked when the prime minister and Canadian Identity Minister Marc Miller announced they were going to look at the Online Streaming Act and decisions of the CRTC, and potentially change those with a new policy direction. That was a big surprise to us. It seemingly had no impact on the negotiations, and U.S. Ambassador Jamieson Greer went out of his way to say they weren’t going to reward that behaviour. So, we became very concerned about the Online Streaming Act and the future of Canadian independent production and Canadian content. So, when the Canadian government walked away from the U.S.’s unreasonable demands, it was a great feeling of relief. Hearing the prime minister speak specifically about our industry, and how protecting Canadian culture was a red line for the government, was incredibly reaffirming. We’re glad the trade negotiators got it right and we’re proud of them for standing up to the American administration. Now, we look forward to this opportunity to reset things and get it right moving forward. The potential for the Online Streaming Act and what it can mean for independent production in Canada is somewhat limitless. It’s very exciting when you think about what’s possible because the potential is huge. But how do you interpret that red line? Ottawa was willing to cede territory on funding for Canadian content, but the government reportedly held firm on discoverability. What do you make of that? I think they’re reconsidering a lot of things when you walk away from that situation and look at where negotiations were. When it comes to Canadian culture, the government can’t be in it halfway. They can’t be partially supportive of Canadian culture. You either are or you’re not. Moving forward, there’s an opportunity for the government to correct its previous position and get it right. It’s very clear that Canadians do not want to see us compromising on cultural sovereignty, and giving anything on the Online Streaming Act would be compromising that sovereignty. I don’t think the government is interested in the fallout from that positioning. In addition to chairing the CMPA, you’re also an independent producer. From that standpoint, do you care more about discoverability or funding? Well, you can’t have anything to discover if it’s not made in the first place. And, if you’re going to make something, you certainly want it to be found. They’re both important, and you can’t have one without the other. As an independent Canadian producer, I was starting to wrap my head around contemplating shutting down our company and business because we are Canadian content producers. We tell stories from here. That’s our business model. We’re not service providers. We develop original content that we share with Canadian and global audiences and, had the Online Streaming Act been impacted that way it looked like it might have been, it could very well have been the end of Canadian content creation in the country. Is that still on the table? I know the government introduced $600 million, but we still don’t know what will happen with the CRTC policy direction. I don’t want to be a downer or think about doomsday, but it’s instinctive in producers to be somewhat paranoid. It’s an industry that needs certainty to plan long-term projects that can take years from development through production through delivery to the market. We plan everything years in advance, and uncertainty is poison. So, $600 million is nowhere close to covering the amount that an industry funding solution would have provided. That’s a structure that has worked for decades in this country, and there’s no reason we shouldn’t continue it and ask the Americans to contribute. The CRTC was asking them to make a contribution that was almost half of what Canadian broadcasters were being asked to make. It was already a terrific deal for them, so the industry funding solution is a long-term, permanent, and reliable solution that producers can rely on. The $600 million can be taken away with the stroke of a pen at any given annual budget from the government. This all sounds rather high stakes. It is. If they don’t get it right with the Online Streaming Act, then we need a serious conversation about how we make it up. But I can’t imagine the Canadian public is interested in a solution that doesn’t involve the American streaming giants contributing to a system they benefit from. You don’t buy the government’s rationale that any contribution requirements could be passed along to consumers through increased subscription fees? Did anyone buy that? I don’t think anyone bought what the government was selling on that. The streamers increase their costs to consumers regularly. That’s what they do, and they are regulated in several other markets around the world. Also, it’s not like they’re giving the money away to charity. They’re contributing it to content creation that they can then exploit or profit from. Going back to that CRTC policy direction, we still don’t know when it will come. But, if it were written by Kyle Irving, how would it read? It would say, ‘Dear CRTC, pardon the interruption. Get back to work. Apologies, the Government of Canada.’ Do you think the Liberals will borrow that language? They’re welcome to. I’ll release my rights to that language. Go ahead, please use it. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. dlegree@thewirereport.ca

Q&A: Carney flirted with the ‘end of Cancon’ by risking Online Streaming Act with U.S., says CMPA chair

Broadcast |
By Davis Legree
|August 28, 2026

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

Q&A: Carney flirted with the ‘end of Cancon’ by risking Online Streaming Act with U.S., says CMPA chair

Broadcast | By Davis Legree |August 28, 2026

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

CBC starts search for first Canadian Eurovision entrant

Job losses continue as Corus cuts television and radio positions

Should Ottawa treat streamers more like broadcasters? Experts, parliamentarians think so

Related Stories

OPINION: Canada’s broadcasting policy is solving yesterday’s problem — Part III: Funding Success

UPDATED: Streamers looking to clawback millions after Liberals pivot on Canadian content

OPINION: Canada’s broadcasting policy is solving yesterday’s problem — Part II: Defining Success

OPINION: Canada’s broadcasting policy is solving yesterday’s problem

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Broadcast |
By Davis Legree
|August 28, 2026