Despite some solid recommendations that in essence support the future of government subsidies for Canadian film and tv, members of Canada’s film and television industries are worried that Pierre Juneau’s paper baby, the 300-page mandate review committee report, will be thrown out with the bath water.

A proposal for a new tax to fund a nearly commercial-free cbc/Radio-Canada has caused such a public outcry that it may render the efforts of Juneau and his colleagues, Peter Herrndorf and Catherine Murray, obsolete. The report came in at a cost of $2.8 million.

In spite of what she calls ‘a lot of public policy speak,’ Canadian Film and Television Production Association president Elizabeth McDonald detects some real value in the mrc report and does not want to see it overshadowed by one recommendation. ‘My greatest concern is that the cbc financing models are going to take over the whole thing.’

The proposed communications distribution tax, to be placed on cable, dth and telephone companies, would be implemented in the Broadcasting Act and operate on a seven-year cycle.

If made into policy, a new tax could interfere with the Cable Production Fund, says Atlantis Communications ceo Michael MacMillan. ‘There already are some taxes on cable and the cpf is a great model. The report referred to the information highway committee as a source of suggesting the tax, but that committee also recommended all distribution outlets contribute to something akin to the cpf, so I would be worried if this tax would in any way supplant the very successful cpf and its parallel funds such as dbs when it’s up and running.’

A spokesman for the Quebec producers association, the apftq, says the recommendation for a dedicated tax on cable and telephone should be submitted to the federal cabinet. ‘We hope the cabinet would take into consideration the negative effects certain options could have on the private funds (cpf, dth programming, etc.) financed from the revenues of different distributors.’

Canadian Association of Film Distributors and Exporters head Dan Johnson and his members are primarily interested in the report’s recommendations on Telefilm, which include upholding the continued parliamentary allocation of $110 million annually and building a renewed emphasis on supporting feature film distribution in Canada.

However, Johnson says since most of the debate has centered on the proposed tax for the cbc, he is worried he won’t get to consult with government representatives on the Telefilm issues as he had hoped.

‘My concern is that the cbc financing ideas have so preoccupied the public debate that the report may live or die based on whether or not the cable industry is able to successfully challenge these models,’ says Johnson. ‘If (the report) was tossed in the garbage because of the cbc financing proposal, that would be a great waste of time and public money.’

Tax issues aside, industry response is extremely favorable to some recommendations and cold to others.

Regarding the proposal for a nearly commercial-free cbc and Radio-Canada, the apftq says in a prepared statement removing much of the advertising on Radio-Canada is problematic. The network could be reduced to carrying ‘elitist programming’ while the likely fusion of Television Quatre Saisons and Tele-Metropole would ‘place a single owner in a monopoly situation’ with the consequences for ad rates.

cbc English tv vp Jim Byrd calls the report ‘healthy’ and says it is timely. He fully supports the recommendations to Canadianize cbc tv programming and supports the advice that regional production should be revitalized, commenting on the cbc’s decision against closing all or some of its regional stations ‘even though it was one of the quickest ways of finding the funding shortfall we have.’

Throughout the chapters on Telefilm and the cbc, the mrc report refers to ‘identifiably Canadian’ programming and material that is ‘made for Canadian audiences.’

When Playback asked whether Alliance Communications’ Due South (aired on ctv and cbs) would qualify, Juneau said no. North of 60 (for cbc), another Alliance series, received Juneau’s nod of approval.

‘Due South is not really Canadian. It is in terms of jobs and profits, but I think when they make programs of that kind they are very pleased with their success in the u.s. market,’ says Juneau.

McDonald takes offence to Juneau’s theory. ‘I think the only way we can make identifiably Canadian programs is to find a market for them, and I mean Due South and programming like that. It creates a critical mass that allows us to make North of 60, which may not have much or any afterlife in foreign markets.’

Telefilm executive director Francois Macerola says the agency is pleased with the cultural approach adopted by the review committee. He says Telefilm’s cultural mandate is spelled out in the last Action Plan and the agency is readying a detailed response for later this week.

Macerola says the agency currently invests more than 99% of its funds in programs with eight or more points. (About 85% of Commercial Fund projects meet the eight-point classification.) ‘I personally don’t believe in films or television projects designed to reach the international market. To reach the international market there is a price to pay and that price is to be deeply and profoundly Canadian,’ he says.

Macerola says the review committee wanted to send ‘a reminder to Telefilm’ not to become too commercial.

The lean towards public subsidy of ‘uniquely’ Canadian programming in the report fits in with an overall view that taxpayers should not be responsible for the bigger production companies and for programming made for export.

McDonald argues that this approach is unrealistic and punitive. ‘There seems to be a lot of castigating people for being successful outside the country. Now that we have companies that can produce well beyond our borders doesn’t mean they can’t produce well within the borders. It doesn’t seem to be a realistic approach to say if you are a business you somehow have the wrong objective and you are not as Canadian as others might be.’

Excludes industrial role

Further, she is concerned the report emphasizes the cultural mandate of Telefilm to the exclusion of an industrial role, and she takes to task the recommended eight out of 10 cavco model for Canadian programming which ‘builds further on the criteria for the Cable Production Fund and ignores the important role that coproductions play.’

‘While we’re happy to see the cultural mandate of Telefilm supported, we wouldn’t want to throw out its industrial mandate altogether, if only because the industry has supported the growth of culture,’ she says.

‘Don’t exist’

Malofilm chairman Rene Malo says the mrc report makes no reference to Canada’s cultural industries. ‘For Juneau, cultural industries don’t exist,’ he says. Malo says the report effectively dismisses 20 years of industry-building efforts.

Malo says the public agencies were so fearful of losing most of their funding, they might be open to many of what he views as its wrong-headed recommendations.

Juneau’s argument is: ‘If you are making shoes or furniture, to make a profit you’ve got to export. But there is something special about culture, any kind of cultural product.’

In the pursuit of more Canadian programming, 50% of Telefilm funds would support a new drive at the cbc to produce and coproduce more aggressively, says Juneau.

Macerola says at the moment, 43% to 44% of Telefilm tv funding goes to cbc/Radio-Canada. ‘So it means that 6% extra will have to go to (cbc/r-c) and that will penalize the private broadcasters.’

The report also proposes Telefilm actively encourage ‘small and medium size companies,’ which, if interpreted to mean Telefilm should not subsidize the top companies, is ‘absolutely absurd,’ says MacMillan.

Another point of contention for MacMillan is the recommendation that 75% of equity in Canadian production companies should be held by Canadians. It is inconsistent with the recently proposed rules that will stabilize ownership rules in the Broadcast and Telecommunications Acts at 40%. ‘I think to qualify as a Canadian producer it ought to be the same ownership requirements that are going to be imposed in the future on Canadian broadcasters,’ he says.

Macerola says the 75% equity ownership recommendation for production companies ‘is a problem (because) it will eliminate a number of important Canadian companies.’

‘I don’t see why it’s a recommendation, there has been no abuse from these companies. Frankly speaking, it’s a strange position because it is not in line with the Broadcasting Act. I really don’t see what they had in mind.’

Distribution and particularly, feature films, were targeted in the report as areas that have been underserved by Telefilm in recent years. Macerola says funds for feature films have been used elsewhere, ‘but with the full consent of the professional associations.’

He says the agency is pushing to increase the number of films produced annually in Canada, and it seems likely there will be more funding for features in the near future.

According to the mrc document, the Feature Film Fund’s $31 million in 1998/89 has been whittled down to $16 million in 1994/95, largely due to ‘other activities’ and cuts. The report recommends the implementation of a new marketing and distribution fund that would amalgamate the Feature Film Fund, the Distribution Fund and ‘the programs of the Festivals Bureau.’

Johnson objects: ‘We want to make sure any combination of funds would both protect the important role of the Distribution Fund and the market-oriented principle of the lines of credit which have resulted in a regime whereby distributors are punished if their performance is below industry average.’

On distribution, Macerola endorses the report’s recommendation for imposing crtc quotas for Canadian features on tv, saying he made the same case years ago. However, the initial reaction to the idea of scrapping the Feature Film Distribution Fund is basically negative. ‘I want to sit with the distributors,’ he says. ‘There’s some room for improvement, for surebut we won’t make any drastic changes.’

To nfb head Sandra Macdonald, the report’s advice is sound and the research solid, with a few exceptions. The figure for nfb administrative costs cited in the report – 47% – is ‘misleading,’ she says, ‘What they’ve done is only included in production costs the craft aspects of production not technical services nor administration costs that go with production. I don’t think that’s quite fair.’

While Macdonald agrees with the recommendation that the nfb improve its distribution system – and she is overseeing a cost recovery program that will be implemented within 18 months – she says there is a misunderstanding of how the issue has been approached. ‘The point at the board has been for people to get the (films) and revenue generation has been a low priority; it’s worthy in a social sense but we have to rethink the situation.’

The proposal that the nfb reduce its permanent filmmaking staff is welcome, says Macdonald, and she has been working at adjusting the staffing situation since she started at the board in 1995. Of the 61 permanent staff filmmakers reported in the mrc document, Macdonald says 37 are permanent and the others are there on a contract basis.

The suggestion the nfb dismantle and lease its Montreal headquarters, including tech services, and move to a smaller location in the city is extreme, says Macdonald. ‘It’s far more radical than anything I had contemplated or examined and I remain to be convinced that degree of change is a good idea.’

The Canadian Independent Film Caucus is especially opposed to the report recommendation that the nfb’s English-Program Branch should be moved to Toronto. The filmmakers contend ‘a move to Toronto can limit the exchange’ between language and cultural groups. The cifc also wants the nfb to hold on to the unique aspects of its technical service division, including pafps.

The mrc document recommends the nfb and cbc – long-standing rivals in the making of documentaries – intensify their supplier/deliverer relationship. Macdonald says of the historically strained relations, ‘I welcome the recommendation and I’m certainly prepared to answer a broadcaster’s needs. If we want a deal like this we have to be a bit more flexible and it might be good for the cbc if they were to be a little bit more adventurous.’

The filmmakers say the mrc report doesn’t effectively deal ‘with the contradictions inherent in cbc’s management style, which can hamper (documentary) innovation.’ They say their vital independent documentaries are not subject to cbc’s journalistic standards. To this effect, the cifc’s Barbara Doran says the cbc should contract its commissioning editors from the independent film community.

Overall, Macdonald says of the mrc report: ‘The recommendations of the Juneau committee in all the chapters have been much discussed within agencies so none of these are brand new topics that burst like bombshells on the horizon. We all have agencies that were created some time ago now, there is a challenge for all of us to be modern.’