Canadian Heritage Committee on May 1st, 2007

[Ted East]

I don't think it prevents them from doing it. I think it's perhaps a handy excuse to not do it, particularly when they're mandating themselves to have a particular audience. They could say, well, a feature film starring these people isn't gong to reach an audience. But I think they have a role in developing the industry, in building a star system, in building audiences for Canadian drama and for Canadian feature films. You can't get there any other way. You have to have a commitment.

[Maka Kotto, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Have you made representations to this effect to the powers-that-be at CBC?

[Ted East]

We have. Our individual members plead it all the time.

[Maka Kotto, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

And how they do respond?

[Ted East]

What are we told? You'd have to speak to the individual members.

We have been frustrated by their lack of consistent commitment to feature films, I will say that. It is quite clear they are not living up to their promise of 2000, which is why we would like to see it as a condition of licence when the renewal comes.

[Maka Kotto, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Fast.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

And thank you, Mr. East, for attending today.

I had a chance to review a brief that was submitted by your organization to Canadian Heritage some five years ago, in 2002. Are you familiar with that brief, which addressed Canadian content requirements for the feature film industry?

[Ted East]

That was before I was running CAFDE. I may have read it.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Let me refresh your memory. The report focused very much on the Canadian content requirements for feature films to get funding from some of our government sources. However, at that point you focused very much on the essential role of the feature film industry, which is the primary market, theatrical releases.

Your submission today is much broader. In those intervening five years we've had a dramatic escalation in the number of new media platforms that are available. More and more people are watching movies at home--videos, DVDs, etc. And there are additional platforms--the Internet, pay-per-view.

Back then the brief referred to the fact that of films watched in Canada, only 0.2% were Canadian--that's in the theatres. Is that still the case?

[Ted East]

No.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

What is that percentage today?

[Ted East]

It's over 5% across the board. I think it was 16% or 17% in French-speaking Canada, and over 2% in English-speaking Canada.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

All right. And I think they were referring to English Canada at the time, but even then, that's quite a significant increase from 0.2% to 2%, at the time.

In total, of all the platforms on which your movies are released, what percentage of films watched would be Canadian? Is it the 5% you've just referred to?

[Ted East]

At least, yes.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

At least 5%.

[Ted East]

Yes, it would be higher. The statistics aren't available, and we've certainly lobbied Heritage Canada as a regular thing to research Canadian viewing habits for Canadian films and films generally, because we believe huge changes are in store for us. And regardless of whether the box office goes up or down for Canadian films, we think Canadians seeing Canadian films is really what matters most.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Right.

Now, there has been a suggestion from other witnesses before this committee that perhaps the private broadcasters should not receive any government funding and that funding should be refocused on improving the robustness of CBC. In other words, you take the money from the private broadcasters and make sure CBC, which is the public broadcaster, can do its job well. Your comments?

[Ted East]

When you say “public funding”, would you mean the Canadian Television Fund?

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Yes, the CTF, for example.

[Ted East]

Private broadcasters don't receive any public funding. Private broadcasters contract with independent producers.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

That's correct. Indirectly, private broadcasters do benefit because it's the independent production industry that gets to access the Canadian Television Fund.

The submission from a number of witnesses was that we should remove any subsidies that would directly or indirectly go to private broadcasters and focus those moneys on strengthening the CBC. Your comments? I know it's a tough question. It's controversial.

[Ted East]

It's a political hot potato. When you say “public funding”, are these people referring to the money that Heritage Canada contributes to the CTF exclusively, or what the BDUs contribute? Because there is a sense in some quarters that the money the BDUs contribute is public money, whereas the BDUs would think otherwise.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

I think the BDUs would not consider the money they contribute to be public money. No, I'm referring to the money the Government of Canada actually puts into the independent production industry.

[Ted East]

Well, strangely--I don't have the exact statistics in front of me--I think we're pretty much there, anyway. I think the amount Heritage Canada contributes to the CTF is roughly the amount that CBC gets from the CTF. I believe that's the case.