Official Languages Committee on April 1st, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you for the explanation.

As a supplementary, what is the reason why this program is for magazines that are sold and not for those that are distributed free of charge?

[Scott Shortliffe]

That was actually one of the major questions during our policy review. Our old programs were set up that way. They were only for paid circulation magazines and community newspapers.

During our consultations several groups asked, what if we expanded it to free circulation papers? The problem with free circulation papers is you're not sure who is reading them. Are you distributing 30,000 copies because 30,000 people want to read it, because you can print 30,000 copies and leave it on 30,000 doorsteps where it goes into the cat litter box the next morning?

We decided that for our program we would take the attitude that we are supporting the reading choices of Canadians. The funding we apportion is based on the money that Canadians have decided to invest themselves in buying a magazine, either on a newsstand or through a subscription. So we're offsetting the creative choices of citizens in that way. And because of that, if a magazine spends our funds unwisely or a community newspaper spends it unwisely and loses readers, they'll get less funding from us. They have an incentive to connect in the best possible way with their readers.

The other practical reality is that currently we're looking at funding roughly 900 to 1,000 titles. According to Statistics Canada, there are 2,700 magazines in Canada and 1,300 newspapers. If we expanded to fund all the free circulation titles as well, I would need a 300% budget increase. I don't think this is the best time to ask for that, since I think I know what the answer would be.

So given the reality of--

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Through the back door.

[Scott Shortliffe]

Well, that's true. I could look at a back door option.

But given the reality of limited budgets, we decided that the best way to spend our funds is to invest in the choices Canadians make for their reading material as shown by the money they spend.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you for that answer.

We will now turn to the Parliamentary Secretary for Official Languages, Ms. Glover.

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

Merci, monsieur le président.

Mr. Shortliffe, I want to continue in the vein you have followed. With regard to the 50% exemption, is there a minimum?

[Scott Shortliffe]

In terms of the sales?

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

In terms of the sales, is there a minimum? What is that minimum?

[Scott Shortliffe]

The minimum for most titles is that you must sell 5,000 copies a year.

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

No, that's not what I mean. For OLM publications, they're exempt from the normal eligibility requirements of at least 50% paid circulation. But you said you will look at some, even if they're at less than 50%. Is there a minimum?

[Scott Shortliffe]

Thank you. I understand the question. My apologies for misunderstanding.

There's not a minimum set currently for it. As a practical reality, most titles coming in will be at 10% to 20% circulation, but even then, and this is where it does tie in to what was said earlier, they must sell at least 2,500 copies a year. Whatever funding they will get will only be based on that.

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

That's pretty flexible.

[Scott Shortliffe]

It's a recognition that with these communities, official language minority communities, aboriginal and ethnocultural, you have much more restricted advertising, you have more restricted populations. It's a side example, but when I look at aboriginal communities, there are some newspapers that serve communities with 90% unemployment. They're not going to get 50% paid circulation. It's absolutely impossible for them. So we've said that for these communities, because of their special importance to Canada, we will allow them to come in with practically no...it could be 90%, 95% free circulation, as long as they're selling more than 2,500 copies a year.

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

I think that's very wise.

Mr. Bernier, are you also responsible for newspaper advertising? No?

[Jean-François Bernier]

That would be up to Public Works and Government Services Canada, to handle that. I must have a colleague there who handles it.

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

A lot has been said about that this morning and I'm a little concerned. I just wanted to know whether you had anything to do with that.

[Jean-François Bernier]

No.

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

There has also been talk about newspapers in minority communities outside Quebec and anglophone newspapers in Quebec. It was suggested that francophone newspapers outside Quebec receive 10 times more funding than anglophone newspapers in Quebec.

Do you have anything to share with us on that point? Frankly, I don't think it is very high, but I need the officials to tell us what the actual figures are.

[Scott Shortliffe]

I was very interested in Mr. Bakoyannis' presentation on that. I could say that's certainly not true for our programs. I have no knowledge of whether it's true for the advertising program run by Public Works and Government Services Canada. For our programs, they receive exactly equivalent support. As a matter of our eligibility criteria, there are more francophone titles outside of Quebec that are eligible for our programs right now, so they do receive a higher dollar amount than the English language papers in Quebec, but on average, per title, they receive roughly the same amount. We give them absolutely equivalent treatment.

As to whether there is unequal treatment, in terms of governed advertising, that's something I have no knowledge of, but I would certainly be very interested in Mr. Bakoyannis' comments in that regard.

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

As am I, and I would suggest perhaps the committee may want to look at that, the Public Works side of this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

We're taking notes, Ms. Glover. Thank you.

We'll start our second and last round with Madame Zarac.

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, gentlemen. Thank you for being here today.

In your presentation, on page 7, you say that the publications have already been informed that if they were eligible for the old program, they could expect to receive between 90% and 150% of the combined amount they received. That seems very interesting, but it would also be interesting to know whether a majority of the publications will be receiving 90% of the combined amount or in fact 150% of that amount. What criteria will determine that some will get less funding?

[Jean-François Bernier]

Less than they received in the past?

[Lise Zarac, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Yes.

[Scott Shortliffe]

We think the vast majority will receive more than 100% of their previous funding because of the funding we have freed up by putting the cap on large publications. The only reason why they might fall below that is the way a formula works, you check the eligibility for everybody. Once they're in, you mathematically divide the funds. We do have 130 titles we haven't funded in the past who have applied to us this year. If all of them were eligible, and all of them were large titles, then the same amount of money might be divided in a way that individual titles would receive less than they had in previous years.

I have to say, we're not finished with our analysis yet. I don't expect that is going to be the result. I expect that most titles that are under the $1.5 million cap--