Canadian Heritage Committee on March 2nd, 2009

[Robin Jackson]

Yes, I believe it was.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

And how about you, Mr. Berdowski?

[Max Berdowski]

There was a study done called “A Summative Evaluation....” I don't remember the rest of it; it was a fairly lengthy title. There was an analysis done of the NTPFVS, the national training school called by that acronym.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Have you seen this study?

[Max Berdowski]

Yes, it was shared with all the schools. It did not recommend the cancellation of the program. It advised that any decisions about the program's future be informed, through clarification of the program's role. The report that was made acknowledges that there's a strong rationale for a federal government role in the sector. It did an analysis. It basically looked at the country as a whole and concluded that not all provinces and territories have the resources or even the will to do training. It concluded that there is a strong need for training. But it absolutely did not call for the termination of the program.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

When exactly was this analysis done?

[Max Berdowski]

It was sometime in 2008, I believe, and it was towards the summer.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

So you think the government decided to slash your grant program despite this positive, conclusive study?

[Max Berdowski]

It's was roughly in August, without any consultation.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

If the results of the program analysis were positive, why then was a decision made to go ahead with some cuts?

[Max Berdowski]

In fairness, it wasn't a glowing report about the state of training in the country. It points out that what was required and what it called for was that the Department of Canadian Heritage decide on a role for training in this country and be very focused in terms of what it might want the program to achieve. It refers to the fact that a number of benefits have come as a result of the work of the training schools and calls into question whether or not it's as a result of the training school program as a whole. It doesn't say it is and doesn't say it isn't, but it does say that there was a great level of satisfaction among the students.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Lambert, can you confirm for me the existence of a tacit agreement among all world producers whereby when a foreign company is hired, the party doing the hiring does not have to cover the performers' travel costs, that is their airfare? For example, if the Cirque Éloize goes to Paris to perform, the Canadian government covers the travel costs. The producer in Nice merely pays the performing fee, plus the cost of travel from Paris to Nice. Is that really the way it works?

[John Lambert]

In the way it functioned, PromArt had criteria that were fairly strict. The tour had to have at least ten performances; it had to go to three countries, and one of the countries had to be a priority country for the Canadian government, economically or politically, such as Britain, France, Italy, China, Japan; and it only paid out part of the travel and cargo shipment to the first destination. If you had a European tour, it would pay to get it to Paris and back from Paris, but all of the European touring inside the continent would be assumed by the local presenters. It was really to get you to market, and once there, then the local market would look after you. So it's basically to make Canadian industry competitive on the home terrain.

It's a common practice; it's what pretty well all the major developed countries do for their artists. Some are subsidized more than others. There are some projects that need a higher level of subsidy because it's important for the Canadian government that they be there, and so they pay more of the cost. Other times, you can get it so that the presenters actually pay quite a bit of the cargo and the travel, so that the investment of the Canadian government is less. It depends on negotiation. We try to get as much covered as possible.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you for that.

Ms. Chow, please.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Mr. Chair, the Jewish Film Festival is starting soon, and so is the Hot Docs, Reel Films, Planet in Focus, the Inside Out Film Festival. And then the International Film Festival is starting in the fall. It creates thousands and thousands of jobs, it creates GST, it contributes to the economy, it's good for our identity, it talks about who we are as Canadians. These cuts are completely contrary to everything that we, as a country, should stand for.

I look at the bigger picture. The entire heritage department has been cut by 12% year over year in terms of transfer of payment, from $1.1 billion to $960 million. And the stabilization projects, support for endangered arts organizations, those funds, as we need them most because of the economic downturn, seem to have been eliminated. And with Telefilm, there was the cut of $2.5 million. It went from $107 million to $104.6 million, which is probably one of the reasons the training program got hit, because Telefilm also got cut. The Canadian Television Fund, according to the estimates that came out on Thursday, went from--and this is dramatic--$119 million to $20.4 million. So you're looking at a $99.5 million cut--that's a huge cut--in the program book that I have in front of me.

Yes, Richard Florida talked about the creative class. I guess the Conservatives are not seen as the creative class. I don't know what class they're really representing--certainly not the middle class, because a lot of them go to see films and help train a lot of filmmakers and want to support that.

What do you think is the real reason behind these cuts? I don't quite understand the 12% cut in culture all across the board. I can list all the organizations, but you don't want me to go on for five minutes.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Point of order, Mr. Chair.

Just for the benefit of the witnesses, the document being referenced by the honourable member, as she well knows, is an estimate that did not reflect all of the spending in arts and culture this year. The numbers that she's reading are misleading to the witnesses. They should know that there will be further estimates come forward to authorize additional spending in the budget.

I'm sure the member wouldn't want to mislead the witnesses as to the total government spending in arts and culture.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

But I don't have the supplementary estimates in front of me. I have the main budget.

Who wants to tackle why there are cuts for Telefilm, for example?

[Max Berdowski]

Well, I can say this specifically about the Telefilm situation. In the case of the Telefilm cut that you were referring to, the $2.5 million, that is the total national training program for film and video. That entire program was cut. That was a $2.5 million cut. It was administered by Telefilm Canada. So they weren't discretionary cuts; that program was terminated. That's where that $2.5 million comes from.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

What I don't understand, though, is that in this budget that is in front of us for 2009, the Canadian feature film policy, the Canadian Independent Film and Video Fund, is still at $1.5 million. It's on the books, but you've heard that you've been cut off.

[Robin Jackson]

I can show you the letter.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

I know. I've seen it on the website. I've seen the letter. Why do you think that's the case? It's quite astounding that it's still there on the books.

[Robin Jackson]

I can't account for the books. We're a not-for-profit, two-person organization that's just running to get work done. I don't know. I can't answer those questions. I don't have the answers.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

I know that Bon Cop, Bad Cop did really well and it really helped cross the language divide. It's hilarious. Perhaps you could describe what kind of impact that film had, because of the training, which I heard you mention earlier in your submission.

[Max Berdowski]

The impact the film had?

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

What you've done and the impact on that film, for example.