We are not out of the woods yet. The arguments are solid, on both sides.
To respond to Ms. Boucher's question, as Mr. Simms was saying, film and television do indeed constitute two different worlds with different cultures. Those who work in these worlds do not speak the same language, nor do they have the same problems. Montreal, as we know, is an important hub in terms of feature film production, but it is an under-exploited platform because it does not always have the necessary financing.
But when we are far removed from those worlds, we cannot appreciate what their needs are, hence the necessity to get closer, to immerse ourselves in them, and to be in close contact with these worlds that are fighting the big Hollywood machine, Silicon Valley or New York. If we are far removed from it all, we cannot understand.
In time, what we will see is American hegemony, American cultural products. The Americans export 7 billion dollars' worth of cultural products; the British export some 8 billion dollars' worth. If we are not close to these people, to their problems and their crises, how can we understand them? How can we make any decisions on their behalf? How can we make decisions to move towards a new film or cultural policy?
If we stay away because of our fear of the public perception of the use of public funds... We toured the entire country within the framework of our study dealing with feature film policy. No one ever challenged that, because the work was justified. However, I understand that we have just been elected and that the idea of travelling right away poses a problem for you. On the other hand, we have responsibilities, as Mr. Angus was saying. And these responsibilities go beyond the boundaries of our ridings.