Evidence of meeting #20 for Canadian Heritage in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was content.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON
What if instead of taxpayers' dollars funding local news it was a requirement for streamers to carry local news as well? Then it would generate revenue from subscription services.
12:45 p.m.
Vice-President, Regulatory Law, BCE Inc.
Let me take that one.
I think we want to get away from.... First of all, I don't think the answer is to turn to streamers such as the Netflixes of the world and look at them to be our local news providers, because they're going to be foreign-owned and they're not going to be focused on Canadian stories.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Aitchison Conservative Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON
No, sorry, I am actually thinking specifically about Canadian streamers. You have identified BCE as a streamer as well.
12:45 p.m.
Vice-President, Regulatory Law, BCE Inc.
Right. But rather than dictating and adding extra obligations on us, I would say that if you provide the funding.... Let me be clear: There is no proposal here to have taxpayer dollars. What we're talking about is that we would all have to contribute. There are obligations that we have to do. We think the existing money and new money coming into the system can be redirected partially to do that, by taking the OTT providers, the Netflixes of the world, and saying they should contribute into a system and some of that. I think it would be problematic if we turned around and said, “Oh, you want to be a Canadian streamer? You will have the following obligations, but the foreign streamer that you compete with doesn't have that.”
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I'm sorry, Mr. Aitchison. I have to leave it at that. Your time is up.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Thank you.
Perhaps I can begin with the artists formally known as ACTRA. At some point during the debate in the House of Commons, the idea was pointed out that there is a lot of employment in different regions in the film sector, and that this service industry has a value that seems over and above the Canadian content, or at least equal.
I'm wondering what you might want to say to that, because some of the response I heard was, “What's the issue? In my community, I have films that are being filmed right now, right here in my community, creating a lot of jobs, including for a certain number of Canadians.”
I'd like you to have an opportunity to respond to those comments.
12:45 p.m.
National President and Performer, Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists
We welcome the foreign service work that is coming to Canada right now. Frankly, it's been coming to Canada in this kind of volume for the last two or three years. It has become a financial boon for those streaming services that were super hungry for content. It has even been doubled through COVID, when it was recognized that they didn't have enough content for the people who were home for 20 hours a day and were able to watch it. They are eager to produce content. They're choosing Canada as a location, and it's bringing lots of job opportunities and money.
As I said before, when COVID is over, that will likely change to some degree. When they find that things are getting too expensive for one reason or another, they will likely ramp up, especially post-COVID, in South Africa and Australia and other places where they were doing work previous to COVID.
All of that is to say that it doesn't take away from our responsibility to support Canadian production and Canadian stories. We can do that through a number of means. Certainly, this bill goes far by saying that it's time for over-the-tops to contribute. It's time for them to follow the same rules we have for our domestic broadcasters to create actual Canadian content and to make it discoverable on their platform the same way they're doing in many countries around the world. Many other countries have not been shy about saying, “No, you're going to have to produce something in our language and something that supports our culture.” France, Australia and others have put in metrics for companies like Netflix, and Netflix has not had a problem with it.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Thank you.
Mr. Sparrow, perhaps you could comment on my next question as well.
Ms. St-Onge, I'd also like to hear your comments.
I know that your union, Mr. Sparrow, has worked a lot on diversity and inclusion and on how to make sure we have better representation of Black actors and indigenous actors in the field. What are the opportunities within Bill C-10 to better support that inclusion and those opportunities? Do you have any ideas in that respect?
Ms. St-Onge, I'd also like to know if you have any thoughts on this.
12:50 p.m.
National President and Performer, Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists
I'll be brief so that Madame St-Onge can speak to that as well.
Absolutely. For instance, we've been in conversations with the funding bodies themselves, such as the CMF and Telefilm, to actually put in rules that will allow for productions that can in essence prove that they are more diverse in the way they've come about, or in their production teams or casting, to receive funding. I know those conversations are ongoing.
I think the CRTC could well establish those types of rules as well to better support the wide diversity within Canada of peoples, including our indigenous communities, in ensuring that they, too, are able to tell Canadian stories.
12:50 p.m.
President, Fédération nationale des communications et de la culture
I'm going to continue in the same vein.
The current policy direction talks about incentives that the CRTC could put in place to encourage diversity. However, instead of incentives, it seems to me that it would be more appropriate and effective to talk about obligations. That would result in more constraints and clear guidelines as to the obligation to foster diversity in all its forms.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you, Ms. Dabrusin.
Folks, just looking at the time, it looks like this is going to have to be the last round as we get closer to one o'clock eastern time. I have one question left from the Bloc Québécois. I have one final question left from Ms. McPherson, but if I look at the lineup—and perhaps if you indulge me for just a few moments—I see that the only member with us right now who has not asked a question is Madame Bessette. Since we will fall short of one o'clock eastern after both the Bloc and the NDP, I thought it would be nice to give Madame Bessette a chance, and then we can say that everybody has had a chance to ask a question.
Ms. McPherson, go ahead, please.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
The only thing I would ask is whether it would be also possible to include Mr. Manly, because he has also not had an opportunity to ask a question.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I was thinking about that as well, but Mr. Manly has left, I believe. I got a note from him earlier. He had to leave.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you for intervening. It's very generous of you.
Now let's go to.... Is it Monsieur Champoux or Madame Desbiens?
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
12:50 p.m.
Bloc
Caroline Desbiens Bloc Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île dOrléans—Charlevoix, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I thank Mr. Champoux for giving me his time. I also thank our witnesses.
Ms. St-Onge, we know that French is in serious decline, that our artists and crews are in an even more precarious situation, as you mentioned at the beginning of your statement, and that artists are the raw material of everything we are discussing right now.
I'd like you to further elaborate on the discoverability of French-language content in Bill C-10.
12:50 p.m.
President, Fédération nationale des communications et de la culture
It's a big problem, because the bill does not include specific instructions for improving content discoverability.
Currently, the system puts the burden of discoverability on the productions. People often say that content will be discovered if it's good. However, we know that things don't work that way on the platforms, since content is displayed based on algorithms that are not transparent and over which we have no control.
So, to improve content discoverability, the policy direction or the act itself would need to specify obligations on content discoverability and accountability, and currently there are none. It's a big problem indeed.
I will give you a very concrete example. A Télé-Québec production, M'entends-tu?, is on Netflix, but we only see the English title, Can You Hear Me?, even though it's a Quebec production. For francophone viewers in Quebec, it's very hard to spot that.
This is the kind of thing that will change Canadians' ability to discover homegrown content.
