Canadian Heritage Committee on Jan. 31st, 2008

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Sure.

[Michel Roy]

Yesterday, I signed four letters to those who made the films Away From Her and Eastern Promises, which have been nominated for Oscars in Hollywood.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you for that.

Now we move to Mr. Malo, please.

[Luc Malo, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Welcome, Mr. Roy.

This, of course, won't be the last time we welcome you here. I imagine the next time you appear before us, you'll be accompanied by a number of people from Telefilm Canada who can support you in your answers. Today, they've let you face committee members alone. I promise we'll be relatively well behaved for this first appearance.

My colleague Mr. Bélanger talked to you about funding. As you know, since a new act was passed in 2005 amending Telefilm's mandate, the whole multimedia component has been added to its responsibilities. You mentioned that in your preliminary remarks. I was wondering whether you intended to ask the government for an increase in your multimedia budget precisely so you can achieve the objects of the act.

[Michel Roy]

Thank you, Mr. Malo.

First, your introduction very much reassures me because, if you mention that you're going to meet with me again, that means you won't have any objection to my term continuing.

As to your more specific question on new media, we do say “new media”. This is something that is new for us all and that is developing exponentially on a daily basis. We currently have $14 million in funding to support these initiatives. I feel that the program currently in place—and this is me speaking personally now, not Telefilm Canada—is an experimental program. We're experimenting in a new sector consisting mostly of very small businesses and of entrepreneurs who can invent things in their basements, come up with brilliant ideas, but who then don't have the necessary resources to develop and market their products. And it's often at that stage that they're bought out by others, by foreigners who ultimately benefits from their bright minds.

We're somewhat in the situation Quebec was in a few years ago, when our natural resources were being exploited by others. That's somewhat what's happening. I believe that, at some point, there will be a change in the way we address the new media program. I think we'll have to ask ourselves this question: what do we do with new media? Should we continue to support them in a lukewarm and timid fashion, or should we take the leadership role in developing new media?

If we assume leadership in new media development, that will take much more considerable funding than what we currently have. When you look at the feature film industry, which is a major industry in Canada, you see that box office receipts are $850 to $860 million, perhaps $900 million in good years. New media revenues in Canada are about $5 billion. This is a much bigger industry. If we want to assume leadership of that industry, we will obviously have to...

Furthermore, I also wonder, given the size of this business—and once again this is a personal thought—whether, if we develop a new media fund, we'll be able to afford to act as a bank. I'm thinking of a bank that would make high-risk loans, for example, but that would manage to get a return on its loans, on its investment, which would enable it to constitute a fund that would then be enough to enable us to assume leadership in new media development.

[Luc Malo, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Thank you very much.

You are not unaware that, on November 27, 2006, the House of Commons recognized the Quebec nation. Now that that nation is recognized, do you think Telefilm Canada should recognize the existence of a Quebec film industry that goes beyond the Francophone market that includes all Francophone and Acadian communities?

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

I have to step in for a minute just to clarify, Mr. Malo. I think we recognize that the Québécois are a nation within a united Canada. Let's make sure we keep that straight. We've corrected that a couple of times here in this committee. We recognize--

[Luc Malo, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

That said, Mr. Chairman, can we allow Mr. Roy to answer my question?

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

--the Québécois as a nation within a united Canada.

Go ahead, sir.

[Michel Roy]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I don't have any intention of getting involved in your political discussions, but I will simply tell you that Telefilm Canada acknowledged, before the House of Commons, that there was indeed a Quebec film industry, since through our Montreal office, which we call the Quebec regional office or the Quebec office, it acts in two ways. First, it is responsible for all films produced in Quebec, whether the are French-language, English-language, other-language or Aboriginal films. It is also responsible for all French-language films produced not only in Quebec, but also outside Quebec.

I think that the Telefilm Canada organization is already taking the matter you raised into consideration.

[Luc Malo, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Don't you believe we should go further and reserve funding for a Quebec film industry? You say that you do take into account the fact that there is a French-language film industry, as there are others, but there isn't any funding dedicated to that or clear objectives for that production or market segment which is the Quebec film industry. There is an office in Montreal, but—

[Michel Roy]

There are already rules that we apply and that I think will continue to apply. I think they're sufficient in the circumstances.

For example, if we talk about the feature film industry, we have an obligation to grant the French-language film industry at least one-third of the funding available to us. It isn't Telefilm that decided that. We are bound by decisions made at the government level, at the departmental level, and we will continue to comply with them.

You mentioned the recognition of the Quebec nation. Very well, but the Quebec nation existed even before it was recognized, and I think that Telefilm Canada, by its structure, has taken that fact into consideration. I don't believe I have to or can add anything whatever to that answer, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you for that.

We now move to Mr. Batters, please.

[Dave Batters, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Monsieur Roy, for appearing before our committee today. It's greatly appreciated.

Sir, I understand from the chair that because we don't have an NDP member here today we're going to get seven minutes for this exchange. I plan to speak for about four minutes, leaving time for your response. When I finish, I'll ask a few questions that will be directly related to your ability and skill to chair the board of Telefilm.

On the bottom of page 3 in your opening remarks you said that you had some apprehension before you accepted your position as chair of this board, because of the harsh criticism of Telefilm in the past. I will be asking you to comment on that past.

My comments obviously in no way will be a criticism of you, Monsieur Roy, as you're a recent appointment, but I want to touch on some of that harsh criticism and then allow you to enlighten us as to how you may lead the board forward.

First of all, in terms of the board, it's responsible for providing strategic guidance to management, ensuring good value for the funding provided by taxpayers, and holding management accountable for its performance.

The mandate of Telefilm Canada I read verbatim:

As a cultural investor in cinema, television, multimedia and music, Telefilm Canada is primarily concerned with the funding of original, diverse and high-quality productions that reflect Canada's linguistic duality and cultural diversity. Telefilm Canada accordingly supports productions with a high level of Canadian content.

It goes on from there.

Telefilm is an arm's-length entity to the government. Telefilm uses established criteria to distribute taxpayers' dollars. But the established criteria include discretion and value judgments.

In my mind, sir, and in the minds of many of my colleagues and many, many Canadians who will be watching today, the purpose of Telefilm is to help facilitate the making of films for mainstream Canadian society, films that Canadians can sit down and watch with their families in living rooms across this great country.

Historically, though, some of the judgments of Telefilm have raised controversy, the most recent example being a film.... I'm very hesitant to use this title, Mr. Chair, but it's part of the harsh criticism that we're going to levy at Telefilm Canada. The film is titled Young People Fucking, and that was shown this summer at the Toronto International Film Festival.

I haven't seen this film, but it's my understanding that the film contains a lot of soft-porn images. It's supposedly somewhat witty, but with very blue dialogue. It is certainly not discussion that most Canadians would share in their homes or offices.

There are, of course, other examples.

Let me just back up a minute. I'll read a description of the film I just alluded to. The description is that is “a scathingly honest and hilarious portrayal of four couples, one threesome and a crazy night of sex”.

There was, of course, a lot of controversy previously about a film called Bubbles Galore, in which an adult entertainer obtained a grant from the hard-working taxpayers of Canada to make what was a soft-porn film.

You can continue on and look on the Internet, and there's a film entitled Rub & Tug.

A colleague of mine approached me today, a very esteemed colleague, an assistant deputy speaker, Mr. Scheer, and said, “I want you to bring up at committee today a film called Control Alt Delete”. I just want to read for you, sir, a brief description:

It’s 1999 and lovable computer geek Lewis is dumped by his long-time girlfriend Sarah. So he does what any young techie would: beat off to Internet porn. But as Y2K hysteria takes hold, Lewis discovers that the website images no longer turn him on... and so begins his strange sexual relationship with the machine itself. It isn’t long before his desire for newer, sexier models has Lewis copulating with co-workers’ CPUs.

I could go on, but I'm not going to.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Can you get to the question, please.

[Dave Batters, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

I'm going to finish my questions, and then the speaker will have ample time to respond.

I'd like to remind my colleagues opposite that I was quiet, listened, and said nothing during their entire presentations. There has been a lot of heckling at this meeting today, and I've never heckled once at a heritage committee. I'd like to ask for a little bit of respect opposite.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

You'll get it, sir.

[Dave Batters, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

Thank you.

I'm going to get straight to the questions, and they're all related. Can you tell me approximately how many taxpayers' dollars each one of these films would have received? I think the hard-working middle-class families of Canada would like to know how much money has been taken out of their pockets to pay for these types of films.

Clearly, these films are not able to recover their costs by moviegoers actually buying tickets. So maybe you can tell the hard-working men and women in my riding of Moose Jaw and Regina, and indeed all Canadians, why they should have to pay for these movies with their tax dollars. If there is a niche market for these films--and we're not talking about censorship today--why can't these types of productions raise private capital and have people who wish to see these films pay the $11 to see them?

I have two more quick questions. Then I'll turn it over to you, Mr. Roy.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Batters--

[Dave Batters, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

I'll be really quick.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

We're almost at seven minutes.

[Dave Batters, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

The decision by Telefilm to fund this production is history, but as such it is instructive. Do you envision Telefilm continuing to fund productions such as this? On page 5 of your comments you talk about the highest standards of integrity, and that was encouraging to me. In your opinion, what is the responsibility to reflect societal values when Telefilm makes these funding decisions?

All these questions are related. I'm interested to hear your response, and I thank you for your indulgence.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

I wonder whether we can have the full response in the time remaining. If we can't get that response, could there be a written response to the people around this table?

I'll take a short response, because we're at seven and a half minutes.

[Michel Roy]

The member asked a number of questions. I believe the one he attaches the greatest importance to concerns certain films whose titles he mentioned. In his view, they do not meet the criteria that Telefilm Canada should apply. I'll be very brief on that subject. I'm not in a position to judge those matters. If those films were approved by Telefilm Canada, that means that the team responsible for judging whether they are admissible determined that they were.

Now to answer your question more fully, sir, I'd like to go beyond those films and tell you that, at Telefilm Canada, all contracts signed with film producers contain a clause setting out conditions. Those producers have to meet a certain level of morality, to avoid, for example, producing pornographic films or matters that might offend population groups. All that is set out in the contracts that Telefilm Canada signs with producers.

The fact that we agree on—because I think your concern is entirely legitimate—is that works financed out of public funds should never contain subjects contrary to public morality or public decency. Those works should never encourage hate propaganda or remarks that might be offensive to population groups.

I am very sensitive to the question you've raised. I'm going to suggest to board members, at an upcoming meeting, that we make the wording of the clause appearing in the contract between Telefilm Canada and producers more specific.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

Ms. Bennett.