Okay.
Evidence of meeting #36 for Canadian Heritage in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was films.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #36 for Canadian Heritage in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was films.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
5:10 p.m.
President, Entertainment One Films Canada and Les Films Seville, Entertainment One
Just at eOne in Canada, there are 800 employees.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
I see.
Secondly, I think you all agree that there are some good things about Canadian government policy. The Telefilm support, I think you all said, is something really good, and on the tax credit system, I think one or two of you referred to it and said that's been instrumental in helping the Canadian film industry grow. So far, so good.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
Okay. Then there's this 1988 distribution policy. Pardon me if I didn't understand completely what you said. I was trying to follow as closely as I could, but there are several points that you have to pull together to really get this.
I think what you said is that there's a grandfather clause that allows foreign distributors to enter the Canadian market. Is that right, Richard?
5:10 p.m.
Canadian Association of Film Distributors and Exporters
On foreign companies, new foreign operations are not allowed to set up distribution in Canada. That's protected by the Investment Canada Act, but the entire policy is said to not apply to the major American studios.
At the time, they tried to introduce the policy as the film importations bill, but the Motion Picture Association lobbied so hard they were not able to pass it. It never became law because the studios fought very hard to say that they had invested in those films, they owned those films, those were films that they distributed worldwide, they financed them, and they needed to be able to distribute them in Canada. It didn't pass.
It was said that the policy did not apply to them, but what's happening now is that they are distributing in Canada films that are not their proprietary films.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
5:10 p.m.
Canadian Association of Film Distributors and Exporters
As for what we've heard back, as you know, we've made submissions to Heritage before and we've said that they're distributing non-proprietary films and shouldn't be allowed to do that. What came back was an answer, just as a blanket statement, that this policy doesn't apply to the studios, period, whether it's non-proprietary films or proprietary films. What we're saying is that this really flies against the intent of what the policy was introduced to accomplish.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
Who would enforce such a policy? Assuming your interpretation is accepted, where is the responsibility for enforcement?
5:10 p.m.
Canadian Association of Film Distributors and Exporters
There were fines. There were penalties that were in the film importations bill. As a policy, it doesn't have an enforcement mechanism, so we would welcome thoughts about how the policy could actually be enforced.
To say that you couldn't have a provincial film distribution licence to distribute that film, because it's not a proprietary film, would be a great place to start. To say that you couldn't get.... For example, in Quebec, where they require stickers from the Régie in order to distribute video products in the province, it would be great if they said that if it's not your proprietary film, they're not going to issue those stickers.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
You lauded Flora MacDonald for bringing in the policy, but what I'm hearing is that it has never been enforced.
5:10 p.m.
Canadian Association of Film Distributors and Exporters
Well, it is enforced, and it's enforced on a policy level without much teeth to it, so it seems to be something that is understood. Again, it's supported by the Investment Canada Act, which doesn't allow new foreign entrants into the marketplace, so that is protected, and—
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
But Patrick, you said that 92% of films came from major U.S. producers. Is that right?
5:10 p.m.
President, Entertainment One Films Canada and Les Films Seville, Entertainment One
Yes.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
So really, enforcing against the small new ones isn't going to do a lot to help us, if I'm following the argument closely.
5:10 p.m.
Canadian Association of Film Distributors and Exporters
No, but what would help is if we did not allow the studios to use their grandfathered status to pull these independent films, which are the bread and butter of our businesses that allow us to invest in Canadian films. By pulling those away from us—these ones that are the really choice films—it erodes our entire business model.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
You're asking for a new regime. In other words, somebody in the government needs to stand up and enforce a policy that's been there but has never been enforced previously.
5:10 p.m.
Canadian Association of Film Distributors and Exporters
Well, no, because from what I understand, Canadian Heritage is saying that the policy is in place and will be enforced, but it won't be enforced at all against the studios.
It's proprietary versus non-proprietary. If we had our choice, we would want the non-proprietary requirement to apply to the studios, so that it would say yes, it doesn't apply to studios, you're still allowed to be in Canada, but you can only distribute your own proprietary films.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
But you're not sure who ought to enforce that.
5:10 p.m.
Canadian Association of Film Distributors and Exporters
Well, look, we would love to have legislation introduced to mirror what the films importation bill had tried to accomplish. We recognize that is an uphill climb. That's not an easy task for government. In the absence of that, we would want a more robust application and for the government to say that the intent of this policy was to allow the studios to distribute their proprietary films in Canada. This erosion of starting to partner with American independents and starting to distribute their films in Canada, films that ought to go to Canadian distribution companies, should be stemmed.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
Do you have any other comment on that, Patrick or Naveen?
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
Richard, you were saying there were three policy issues. One is the enforcement of the 1980 policy, and we just covered that. Then there's the reflection on such policy given ancillary distribution, and that—
5:15 p.m.
Canadian Association of Film Distributors and Exporters
I cut short a bit of my remarks on that because I was going long. What we're talking about there is the fact that the policy governs the actual distribution and physical video.