While Canada has scored resounding successes in television, at home and now abroad, in the feature film area our presence in theaters and on video shelves is almost non-existent.

The country’s distributors, through their trade association, say the state of affairs is the result of an entrenched commercial practice that frames Canada as part of the u.s. domestic film distribution market. They say this policy has served to marginalize the feature film industry in Canada.

The fallout has various manifestations.

On one hand, Canadian government promises of distribution legislation have not materialized, and secondly, major American communication companies continue to push for new startups in Canada or takeover of existing operations.

Dan Johnson, executive director of the Canadian Association of Film Distributors and Exporters, says there’s no inherent reason for the marginalization of Canadian feature films.

‘The difference between film and television in Canada is not talent, because production is largely done by the same people,’ he says. ‘It is not technical infrastructure, and it’s not the tax system, nor is it the availability of public money, because Telefilm Canada and the provinces invest in features.

‘The single biggest difference between television (production and distribution) and feature film is the Broadcasting Act and the crtc requirement that broadcasters devote screen time and money to Canadian content, specifically drama.’

Johnson says cafde’s lobbying efforts are directed at Industry Canada in opposition to new u.s. startups in Canada, including current applications from Polygram Filmed Entertainment and Turner Broadcasting.

According to Johnson, takeovers such as Viacom’s recent acquisition of Paramount Canada ‘perpetuate an affront to Canadian sovereignty.’

‘The Investment Canada policy issue is urgent, and we continue to urge the federal government to act in a meaningful way,’ he says.

The distributors are also lobbying to have ‘Canadian’ service productions excluded from public funding programs.

They also want features to be made eligible for the Cable Production Fund, and are working for the dismantling of interprovincial trade barriers.

While it’s anticipated a Canadian distributor will hold the rights to all media for certified productions qualifying for the new federal investment tax credit, cafde wants those productions where all the economic benefit outside of Canada go to a non-Canadian company to be denied access to public funds.

Johnson says the foreign ownership rights to such production should be divided up, effectively prohibiting control of both the u.s. and worldwide rights.

‘What we are saying is that Canadian service work should not be subsidized by Canadian taxpayers. This will have no effect on service work which is based on favorable exchange rates, locations and available expertise,’ he says.

Johnson says if public funds are used to support production in Canada, there has to be ‘a margin of value’ for Canada beyond the direct production benefits of service work. To use public money in any other way ‘would be selling to the lowest bidder,’ he says.

cafde is actively lobbying against interprovincial trade restrictions.

The association is ‘strongly opposed’ to restrictions in Quebec’s Bill 109, legislation that prohibits distributors not based in Quebec from operating in the province. Bill 109 exempts Motion Picture Association of America members, the Hollywood studios.

And while the Ontario Film Development Corporation has recently given Ontario-based distributors access to the Ontario Film Investment Program, cafde says it wants to see ofip opened to all bonafide Canadian-owned and operated distributors.

‘There is still another step for Ontario, and a big step for Quebec in terms of Bill 109,’ says Johnson.

Johnson says cafde supports the crtc’s decisive role in defending Canadian content in broadcasting and tv production, but continues to be frustrated by the commission’s ‘myopic’ view of Canadian feature film production.

‘The commission has been responsive to carriers and broadcasters and the television production community to the detriment of feature films.’

However, Johnson says the practice is misguided because Canadian feature films are seen across a wide distribution spectrum, including theaters, pay-per-view, pay-tv and free tv, ‘whereas tv movies are frequently only seen on free tv.’

‘We have not yet been successful in penetrating the commission’s consciousness on these fairly basic points,’ he adds.

Feature films have been excluded from the Cable Production Fund despite a much wider range of options available for television.

Financing from the new fund is tied to a program’s broadcast licence, typically only provided to made-for-tv programming, and does not include investments made by Canadian film distributors in the form of advances.

‘The industry is constantly being urged to take an international perspective, but as globalization takes hold, the marketplace becomes more American,’ says Johnson. ‘Our association is no less apologetic in advocating the interests of its members than (mpaa chairman) Jack Valenti is in advocating the interests of his members.’