Canadian Heritage Committee on Feb. 22nd, 2021

[Jesse Wente, Executive Director, Indigenous Screen Office]

Thank you so much.

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on behalf of the Indigenous Screen Office and the first nations, Métis and Inuit storytellers we serve.

As I'm sure you all know, the Indigenous Screen Office was announced by this government in 2017, after years of advocacy for such an agency to exist. We serve first nations, Inuit and Métis storytellers within the Canadian screen sector, and seek greater opportunity and greater measures of self-determination for our communities within the screen storytelling industry.

As a long-sought and only newly created organization, for us the opening of the broadcasting and telecommunications act presents our first opportunity to advocate for legislative change that could affect our communities and our storytellers. We are pleased to see that our comments are represented within Bill C-10. The changes in language and elimination of qualifiers around the need for first nations, Métis and Inuit programming and broadcasting to be represented within the Canadian broadcast sector are welcome and long overdue. We believe the stories of first nations, Métis and Inuit are as central to the Canadian story as those of French and English, and as such should be treated the same way within this legislation.

As this bill ensures the creation of Canadian broadcasting and the dissemination of Canadian content, it should also ensure support for first nations, Métis and Inuit content and broadcast initiatives. We ask that the language within the law be specific. “Indigenous” is a catch-all term. While it is one that we use to describe the totality of our communities, we feel that this law should specifically define indigenous to mean first nations, Inuit and Métis.

We also want to ensure that the bill provides the space not just for first nations, Métis and Inuit content but also for broadcast undertakings. This bill should, as much as possible, protect itself from future technological advancements and allow for the possibility of new broadcasting technologies to emerge, and for these to be potentially utilized by indigenous storytellers and broadcasters.

In addition to these key points, I would really like to ask today that you consider the true nature of this legislation. Having listened today, I am confident that you have heard much about the need to modernize this law to better reflect the broadcasting and telecommunications environment of today.

I'm confident that you have heard much about the evolution of broadcasting and transmission technologies, and how this legislation must capture that modern state of broadcasting, inclusive of technologies that have emerged since the last time this legislation was amended. I'm confident that you've heard about the importance of onboarding massive foreign media networks into this legislation to better reflect the modes of consumption and creation that Canadian audiences and storytellers are currently engaged in. I'm confident that you've heard the need to have these networks meaningfully contribute to our sector here. I'm confident that you've heard about the need for better data collection and aggregation so that our sector may more easily and rapidly adapt to the evolving broadcasting and telecommunications environment.

These are all important things, and I know that you will be considering all of them. The ISO supports the way this bill approaches the definition of broadcasting and its meaning today.

What I would like to leave you with is this. As much as this legislation is about all of those things, its central purpose has always been, and remains, storytelling. As much as this bill addresses the changes in storytelling—its creation and transmission and consumption—the true revolution in storytelling is not about technology or broadcast systems or Internet-based streaming services. The revolution in storytelling is not about new forms of storytelling or new platforms for storytelling. The revolution in storytelling that this bill must ultimately address is not about the what or the where or the when of the storytelling. It is the who. Who is telling the stories we will watch, no matter where or how or when we will watch them?

It is the who. For too long, the who of Canadian storytelling has been too limited. As a result, the Canadian story and the stories Canadians tell each other have been incomplete. They have been incomplete to our shared detriment. These gaps in storytelling have contributed to gaps in policy, gaps in equality, gaps in understanding and indeed gaps in humanity.

The bill must ensure the stories that are broadcast, the stories that it is meant to ensure, don't just take place in a modern broadcasting and telecommunications regulatory framework, but that these stories come from what has always been the modern Canada—a multinational place with a deep history still largely unexplored and a rich and diverse future that will be created through right relations between communities and a sharing of our stories.

I ask that you pass this bill so that our stories may flourish and so that they may dance together.

Meegwetch for this opportunity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Meegwetch, Mr. Wente.

I want to remind our colleagues, again, to please direct your questions, or at least say the name of the person you're directing your question to, in order to try to make this as smooth as possible.

We're going to start our question round. We're starting with Ms. Ien, for six minutes, please.

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.`

Thank you to our witnesses for appearing today.

Mr. Wente, I want to start with you.

You said so much to us and gave us a lot to think about, but where do you see the biggest—?

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Chair, it seems to me that—

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

I'm sorry.

Yes, Monsieur Rayes.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

It seems to me that the round of questions should start with the Conservative Party, unless the speaking order has changed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Yes, you are right. I read it the wrong way. Actually, I wrote it down the wrong way.

Ms. Ien, I sincerely apologize. I used to be a chair in another committee and we had different rules.

Don't mind me. Just carry on.

Monsieur Rayes, you have six minutes, please.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Ien, I'm sorry for interrupting you. I didn't mean to be rude.

First, my thanks to all the witnesses for joining us today.

My questions are mainly for the representatives from the Association des réalisateurs et réalisatrices du Québec. I will let my colleagues from all parties ask all the other witnesses questions, and I'm sure they will.

Mr. Pelletier and Ms. Cyr, I had the opportunity to speak with you before this meeting. You shared with me many of your concerns about Bill C-10. I think everyone agrees that we need a bill, and we all want it to be the best possible, but there are a number of shortcomings. You pointed out two in particular, and we talked about them at our meeting.

You presented some extremely worrisome data on Canadian creative resources, both francophone—I assume they are also from Quebec—and anglophone. They show a decline year after year. I would like to hear your comments on that.

I would also like you to address the whole issue of the French language. Just last Friday, the Minister of Official Languages announced, in the reform document she tabled, that she wanted the broadcasting sector to take into account the concern about the decline of the French language. However, the bill seems to make no mention of the need to protect French-language content. It seems that the two departments have not spoken to each other, and here we are discussing Bill C-10.

Have I understood your concerns properly? Is my analysis of the situation correct? If so, what would you recommend?

[Gabriel Pelletier]

Actually, the bill does not specifically mention it, but there is already a linguistic concern in the current version of the act. We want to have the rightful place of the French language recognized and promoted. Of course we welcome Ms. Joly's concern. We want to see the same concern about the rightful place of the French language in broadcasting. We can send the committee proposals for amendments to the bill that address this problem.

Today, we brought up the fact that the business plans of foreign platforms do not show a great deal of concern for French. We are not asking that quotas be added to the act. Instead, we want the CRTC to be given the power to make decisions based on clear objectives that will guide its choices and how it regulates broadcasters, whether digital or traditional.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Thank you. That fully answers my question. I am pleased, because the analysts will be able to hear that concern.

There should at least be some guidelines, although not quotas. I think we all agree on that. You also mentioned that, in the absence of quotas, it is important that the new investments reflect the linguistic uniqueness of our country, which has two official languages.

In terms of funding, you told me that the National Film Board (NFB) is one of the few organizations whose funding had not increased. The envelope has even decreased by 40%, which affects you in a concrete way.

Can you briefly tell us about that?

[Gabriel Pelletier]

The NFB's budgets are not annualized, and its mandate has expanded over the years. It has a very expensive digital platform that it has to maintain. This raises concerns, because the only cuts it has been able to make are in production. The fixed costs are increasing from one year to the next. The only variable the NFB has been able to control is production.

Clearly, we are concerned about this, just as we are concerned today about the place of independent production in the new context of foreign platforms, which are extremely present on the market and have no concern for Canada's two official languages.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Pelletier, let me ask you for some clarifications about that. It will be interesting for the analysts. You were saying that, in the past, the CRTC played a role in the negotiations between the broadcasters and the independent producers. In the new bill, you feel that that has been excluded. So it would harm independent producers who are small players in comparison to the big ones. Have I interpreted your concern correctly?

If so, can you explain it for us?

[Gabriel Pelletier]

Yes, you have interpreted it correctly. I have also heard the CMPA make a request about the process, that the CRTC be able to set rules for the negotiations between broadcasters and producers. As we have seen, the major platforms want to have all the intellectual property and to make use of it as they wish. That property is therefore no longer Canadian. It is important for the CRTC to have the power to set the rules for the terms of the negotiations.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Great.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Mr. Rayes, Your time is up.

Thank you.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

My thanks also to the witnesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you.

Mr. Rayes, accept my apologies for the confusion at the beginning.

Speaking of which, Ms. Ien, it's your turn. This time, I've consulted and I'm correct.

It is your turn right now, so thank you.

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.

It's no problem at all, Mr. Rayes.

Mr. Wente, I have a question for you, and I thank you for being here—and all our witnesses for being here.

I want to know specifically what you see as the biggest gap in the bill with regard to indigenous people.

[Jesse Wente]

I think the bill is certainly an improvement over the last iteration of this particular piece of legislation, dropping some of the qualifiers. Of course, we'd love it to be stronger, to set measurements. We look to the directive to the CRTC to do those things. Of course, we would also have loved to see indigenous languages entrenched in the bill in the same exact manner that French and English are. However, we also recognize the limitations around the current designations around official languages.

I think there are areas that we see. The biggest thing that this bill needs to do is to compel the supports for first nations, Métis and Inuit content production that it does for French and English. That is really what has been lacking. The previous iteration recognized a need for that content. It just did not provide any supports for that actual production to exist. Now is the time for this sector to actually invest in our storytellers to meet a largely unmet demand internationally for this type of storytelling. That's really what we're looking for the bill to do—compel supports for the production of that content.

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Mr. Wente, can you explain the delineation that you're talking about between indigenous peoples and why that's important?

[Jesse Wente]

We were somewhat surprised to see the word “indigenous” actually used in the bill because, as far as I know, it doesn't actually appear in any other law in Canada. While it is a relatively new term that we use as a catch-all, it does lack a specificity that I think is important if you're going to embed it in legislation. When we're talking about indigenous content in Canada, that very specifically means first nations, Métis and Inuit. All of those communities, who are a multitude, have a very different variety and approach to storytelling, different protocols around storytelling. We think it's important for this law to be very specific around those communities and not leave itself opened to a broader interpretation that may lead to unintended consequences.

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Mr. Wente, thank you so very much.

I have a question now for Ms. Creighton, from the Canada Media Fund.

Ms. Creighton, you talked about language a lot—about clear language and the mindset of expansion, not contraction. Are there specific things that concern you along those lines within this bill?

[Valerie Creighton]

The issue of expansion versus contraction is about money, really. We know right now, as we see and support the sector at the CMF, that the BDU revenue is declining for the cable issues and the reduction of cable. That source of revenue to us was stabilized by the federal government in 2017, and eventually the decline in BDU revenue will outstrip that stabilization.

There's tremendous pressure on the Canadian broadcasting system, as you have heard I'm sure, from loss of revenue. This could translate into fewer Canadian stories, lower licence fees or decreased budgets, and that will make our country's content much less competitive.

The industry continues to grow. Demand for content is already a minimum of 50% oversubscribed in this country than the resources that are available. There are imperatives to support indigenous voices. We have an $8.7-million fund for indigenous language and content at the CMF, but the demand for that program far outstrips the resources that are there.

At the same time, the dilemma here is that world audiences are clamouring for content. We have certainly provided some examples of success in terms of stories that have originated in Canada and travelled the world. As a country, if we want to be present in this world market of storytelling and support our sector in remaining competitive, it's going to take some resources. The bill describes the imperative for racialized content and communities that are under-represented.

We were very fortunate through COVID. We were able to support that sector to the tune of about $16 million and provide additional resources to the ISO. It created a wellspring of enthusiasm and we were able to achieve a great deal with that money, but that's temporary and it's only the beginning. The real question now is how we translate all of that into long-term change that ensures our media sector represents the fullness of Canada and, more importantly, that those incredible stories are available to audiences around the world.

I already forgot the first part of your question, but I focused in on the money. I'm so sorry about that. I hope it answered what you were asking.

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

It absolutely did. Thank you so much.

Mr. Chair, that's it for me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Champoux, you have the floor for six minutes.