In the case of feature films, no; in the case of new media, we've not experienced that yet; on the ground in the Canadian television funds at the grassroots level, obviously there's concern.
It's not the first time. There's the anticipation of its renewal every year, and I'm sure members around this table and others in the House of Commons are vigorously lobbied many times in terms of its renewal--but yes, people are looking for stability and assurances that the projects they're going to undertake six months from now, or whenever, can be financed.
One of the issues we're concerned about--and it's partially financial, but I don't want to put a stress on it--is that traditionally this was a world of silos that we've dealt with. It was only cinema; then it was cinema and television; now it's cinema, television, and new media. These funds are constructed in a silo.
That is being completely wiped out by the new technologies. When you think of a film or a television program now, you have to think of its use as a website, you have to think of its use on the Internet, and you have to think of it on cell phones. You have to imagine, creatively construct, pitch, and finance for all of those platforms. So it's not a question of one fund being in jeopardy; it's a question that any time there's financial instability across those platforms, there's uncertainty.
Charles referred to flexibility, and that's another area. We want to be able to address the new multi-platform universe, and sometimes the guidelines, the programs, or the statutes that defined this corporation 40 years ago--next year will be our 40th anniversary--are out of date; they're antiquated. They need to be addressed.