Evidence of meeting #46 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 television.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Director of Policy, National Office, Directors Guild of Canada
Yes, fortunately, it is a pilot project.
NDP
Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Forget.
Ms. Grady, I would like to tell you how happy I am that you have joined us today. I think everyone here would like to hear more about special effects and post-production. Thanks to you, we are touching on that.
I will turn things over to my colleague Kennedy Stewart, who would like to ask you a few questions.
NDP
Kennedy Stewart NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Thanks very much.
It's good to see another west coaster here.
I was wondering about the British Columbia film industry just from your perspective. Why is your company located there? What's keeping you there, and what can we do to bring more companies there?
Head of Film, Moving Picture Company
We came here when Technicolor, which existed in Canada already in Quebec, B.C., and Ontario, looked at moving into the realm of feature films. They purchased a U.K.-based company because that's where there was significant talent. The motivation for MPC was to be able to move internationally and come out of only being in London.
Vancouver was the first and obvious choice. It was the first choice, but it wasn't obvious at the time. The tax credits for digital animation or visual effects had been in place for a few years, but hadn't really been tested.
The studios were interested in testing it, so they approached MPC, which was one of the studios, and said, “If you open up in Vancouver for a project for us, we will give you a significant award”. That was for a feature film that we did in 2008 called Watchmen. It was such a successful endeavour for us that every other major was picking up the phone to call at that time.
NDP
Kennedy Stewart NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
How do you see the industry growing there?
We're looking back 10 years, but if you can look forward 10 years, how would you make it more successful and how would you bring more companies in do you think?
Head of Film, Moving Picture Company
The talent is our single most significant challenge. We're growing faster than we can create Canadian talent. We're creating new Canadian talent at an incredible pace, but we have to keep having open borders so visual effects talent can move, and they can come to MPC to work on Batman v Superman.
We are contract based and we don't offer much full-time employment. They'll come work for me on Batman v Superman, and as soon as they're done, they'll jump to another company in Canada to work on another great film. They might jump out to New Zealand to work on The Hobbit, and we need to be able to allow them to come back in because having access to that pool of talent is critical.
An immigration policy that allows us to move quickly and openly is one of the key things that we can do.
It is a discussion point among our clients, the worry that we're tapping out of talent. That's a potential risk.
Conservative
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to thank Ms. Grady, Mr. Savoie, Mr. Southam and Mr. Forget.
Mr. Savoie, could you please give us a summary of your main recommendations?
Administrator, Alliance des producteurs francophones du Canada
Our main recommendations are to create a fund to help producers in the regions working in minority situations. The fund could be managed by the Official Languages Secretariat or by Telefilm Canada, which would be required to give these funds to francophone producers to develop the francophone industry in minority communities.
Liberal
Administrator, Alliance des producteurs francophones du Canada
We're talking about $700,000 a year. That would be enough to make one or two feature-length films. Telefilm Canada has what we call the micro-budget program, which makes it possible to make feature-length films at a cost of up to $2.5 million. So one or two could be made a year.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Is this a new request you are making to the committee or have you discussed it with the government previously?
Administrator, Alliance des producteurs francophones du Canada
It is a new request that I am making to the committee.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Thank you very much.
I am going to look at the briefs I have in front of me. Thank you very much for your presentation, Mr. Southam.
You have a paragraph where you speak about the 2006 report of the committee. You quote different aspects. I would like to understand, are you saying that very little has been done regarding these points since 2006, or are you satisfied with what has been done and now you want to go to a new step?
Director of Policy, National Office, Directors Guild of Canada
I'll start, perhaps.
A few minutes ago we mentioned the programs of national interest which is an obligation on the part of broadcasters to invest in certain types of high-risk programming. I'm making the link. There was a mandate given by this committee at the time, in general terms, to do more—
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Do you think the mandate has been fulfilled or not?
Director of Policy, National Office, Directors Guild of Canada
We don't. We don't think they've been successful.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Okay, you don't. Now I understand the paragraph; I wasn't sure.
I'm not very sure about the percentage. In the first paragraph, point one says, “a minimum 1% of their Canadian revenues specifically to support the creation....”
Is it 1% of 30%, or within the 1%, you take 30%?
Director of Policy, National Office, Directors Guild of Canada
Just to clarify, the obligation generally is 5%, which is a subset of the 30% overall obligation broadcasters have. The 5% is the subset which is directed to these programs. We're saying the 5% has not been effective. Even though feature film is included within the 5%, money is not being spent.
We're suggesting that the obligation be increased by at least 1%, still within the universe of 30%.
Director of Policy, National Office, Directors Guild of Canada
Well, six would be five plus one, so yes, of the 30%.
Director of Policy, National Office, Directors Guild of Canada
Yes, that is precisely the point. We're not suggesting that the overall obligation to broadcasters be increased.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Okay.
Do you want 1% of this 6%, or will it be a pot of 6% and you hope you will have your share?
Director of Policy, National Office, Directors Guild of Canada
We haven't gone as far as to say what the overall pot should be. We're saying a minimum of 1% targeted to feature film would actually get money into the hands of feature filmmakers. It would remedy one of the gaps in the current policy to ensure that at least 1% is used for feature film. What we're finding now is, notwithstanding that feature film is included, money is not actually being spent on feature film. It's being spent on other available options like dramatic series within that.
