Evidence of meeting #36 for Canadian Heritage in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was programming.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
Tina Keeper Liberal Churchill, MB
If I understand correctly, the CRTC regulatory framework allows you to do your business, has allowed you to be as successful as you are, and there is a contribution under that framework that you are to make.
Essentially, the problem seems to be, from what I'm hearing, that you do not have enough control in determining what productions are being made through that and where they're being utilized.
9:35 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Shaw Communications Inc.
Our concern is not paying the money. Our concern is that we are not taking advantage of anything and it hasn't produced nearly enough. That's all we're saying. We think it's flawed and it's broken, and either it has to be fixed or it will not go anywhere.
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
Tina Keeper Liberal Churchill, MB
So what you're seeking is a process in which to have your voice heard and to address this situation.
9:35 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Shaw Communications Inc.
Yes, all we're asking is to address the situation that's in front of us. I think Canada has lots of smart people. We just can't give our money away and not have anything to show for it at the end.
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
Tina Keeper Liberal Churchill, MB
But you're also aware that we have a very fragile television production industry, and that the steps you took have put that industry at risk.
9:35 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Shaw Communications Inc.
I don't agree with that. I think the steps we took will make the industry stronger.
You know what? As we said to the commission, you can license a lot of channels and not all of them will make it, not all will survive, but the good ones and the ones that Canadians want will.
We were talking last night that CBC takes one show and puts it on at 10 o'clock against Hockey Night in Canada, and so does Global. People are using the system to their advantage, taking the money, and producing no Canadian—
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
Tina Keeper Liberal Churchill, MB
Well, I think there'd be many people who would disagree with that statement. In fact, we have found that the Canadian television content has been quite successful in terms of its Canadian audience.
I'd like to go back to another statement you made in your news release. You said that you're being taxed to pay for the activities of the Canadian Television Fund. This is understood as a contribution, not a tax. Could you explain the wording of that, please?
9:35 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Shaw Communications Inc.
We say that this is a tax on Canadians.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Can you honestly say that the CTF funded programs all miss the mark?
9:35 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Shaw Communications Inc.
I'll get Ken to go over the numbers. We have them here. When I look at the numbers that are delivered and the number of Canadians who watch, it is pretty low versus the dollars we spend. So we're just asking to take it to a higher level, and maybe that means not all producers might not make it, but many, many will. Let them adapt.
Why would we give 20% of the fund away just because you organize how to get in the fund? I think that's crazy. Can't we make it efficient? Where are the leaders in programming in Canada to drive the fund further? That's all we're asking.
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
9:35 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Shaw Communications Inc.
I can't comment on Quebec, but Ken will give the numbers on English Canada.
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
If I understand correctly, your criticism is directed at English programming.
9:35 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Shaw Communications Inc.
Yes, you will have to ask someone else to comment on the French programming, because I have to have the translator.
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
What criteria do you use to gauge the success of a CTF funded-program? What are you aiming for?
9:40 a.m.
Senior Vice-President, Corporate and Regulatory Affairs, Shaw Communications Inc.
In terms of the two markets, let me first deal with the English language market, because you do have that information in front of you from the CBC. The CBC showed a chart, which is quite interesting. It shows a number of shows they've produced through CTF funding, and they had one from CTV shown on Saturday night at 10 o'clock, I think, and one on Global at 10 o'clock. Both of those shows have very low audiences.
We have a list of the top 200 programs in English language programming, and these programs rank 140 and 163 out of 200. Most of the top-rated programs are American programs and Hockey Night in Canada.
We're not making any judgments on the programming, but we just think that if we have spent $2.3 billion, two things should have happened. One is we should have a strong production industry. With that investment and those kinds of payments by Canadians there should be a strong industry. The second thing is there should be an accountability in terms of viewership.
The CTF has only produced one viewer report that we can find over the past five years. They presented some of that to this committee. There is no evidence that the funding they have put into the system has resulted in shows that have been successful with Canadian viewers, and we think that's a problem. That's what we're trying to say.
9:40 a.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
If I understand correctly, gentlemen—and I would like you to give me a straight answer—Canadian programs aren't as good or as interesting as American ones. Is that it?
9:40 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Shaw Communications Inc.
Let's take a small commercial example. Alliance Atlantis was able to come and partner with CBS, and they created a show that is now worth over a billion dollars, out of probably $100 million in investment. Yet we've been able to go the other way, take $2.3 billion and work it down basically to very little. Why is that? This tells us that the system is flawed.
9:40 a.m.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
Earlier, I asked you a question about your demands and the Canadian Television Fund. You spoke of performance, accountability and fairness.
Can you give us concrete proof that the Canadian Television Fund has not satisfied the performance and accountability criteria? You are saying this here today, but what evidence do you have to back up your claims? I want proof.
9:40 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Shaw Communications Inc.
Okay. We have the proof, and we'll file it with the committee.
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
Mr. Warkentin, you have two minutes left for one very short question.
February 20th, 2007 / 9:40 a.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
I'll try to keep it short.
Thank you very much for coming. We do appreciate your testimony. We appreciate the fact that you've taken the time and that you've made the announcement that you're going to renew the funding.
It may not be short, but certainly we want to get into this discussion at some point about the existence of this fragile production industry in Canada. We want to move it to become a strong production industry, there's no question.
This is something you have identified as being an important thing as we move forward, especially when we consider the new technologies that will compete for market share. This is very important, if as Canadians we want any type of strong production industry.
What are the top number of things that moving forward would ensure that we have a strong production industry in Canada—even outside the CTF?