Richard Stursberg’s call for a single, non-government body to dance the production finance tango – cutting in on Telefilm Canada and the current Canadian Television Fund – is causing dips and missteps in many parts of Canada.

Defining his Banff Television Festival speech as ‘personal’ rather than an opinion of the ctf board he chairs, Stursberg said the new fund should be ‘structured and operated as a private, not-for-profit venture.’ He added that private-sector involvement in managing the ctf ‘rescued’ it from the lineup snafus of 1998. ‘The private sector proved it was an equally able – if not better – steward of taxpayers’ money than the public sector.’

The only public-sector involvement in the fund, post restructuring, would be through the general guidelines or ‘contribution agreements’ the federal government lays out when handing over its monies.

In a letter to Stursberg responding to the Banff speech, Telefilm executive director Francois Macerola ‘categorically’ disagrees that ‘the private sector is a ‘better steward of tax dollar’ money than the public sector. I want to draw your attention to the fact that the funds, that are returned to Telefilm through investments made in programming, largely cover the Corporation’s administration expenses and generally benefit the system by providing more resources for increasing hours of Canadian programming. The interests of the private sector are very different than the public sector, the former being to increase the bottom line, and not necessarily to implement public policy priorities.’

Macerola goes on to say: ‘Telefilm Canada has almost a 20-year record in assisting creators, producers and broadcasters make high-quality and distinctively Canadian programs. Distinctively Canadian programming did not suddenly emerge on the Canadian broadcasting system with the creation of the ctf in 1996. The present health of the television industry is due, in large part, to sound and imaginative public support initiatives, and to the creation of Telefilm Canada, which represents the public interest and achieves public policy goals.’

Serge Losique, president and ceo of the Montreal World Film Festival, characterizes the idea of public money managed by ‘private’ interests as almost undemocratic. ‘If Telefilm Canada’s participation in the ctf’s administration is terminated, it’ll be a first for a western nation.’ Losique (see also Comment and Opinion, p. 6), also notes ‘the conflict of interest inherent in the composition of the ctf’s board is something to worry about. Of the 16 current members, only two do not receive fund subsidies, Telefilm and Canadian Heritage.’

Stursberg says his not-for-profit funding body should have ‘a ctf-type board with both public and private members,’ adding private-sector members can ‘ensure that the [funding] programs fit the rapidly evolving television marketplace and work effectively with their existing financial arrangements.’

Regina-based producer Kevin DeWalt says he’s spent years working to build a vibrant industry beyond Canada’s big cities. If Telefilm is not involved in funding decisions, he wonders, ‘what does that mean to a national approach to building an industry?’

‘The ctf has shown it can work,’ DeWalt adds, especially this spring, efficiently co-ordinating responses from both the eip and lfp. ‘So I’m not sure it’s a good idea to crunch that all together in one board.’ Right now, says DeWalt, ‘decisions for 98% of the business in this country are done out of Toronto. This business is relationship based. For those of us who are established, one board system would work. But a lot of young people [who don’t have those relationships] would have trouble with one board….Telefilm has a mandate to foster new faces and new voices.’

Veteran Montreal producer Arnie Gelbart is ok with a private-public mix on the board, but wants fair representation for all sectors. ‘On the ctf, producers are very much in the minority, it’s broadcaster driven. Is that the only voice needed?’

Meantime, Ontario Film Development Corporation ceo Adam Ostry agrees the fund needs a single-board structure. But he says because Ontario is the only province which does not provide its own equity financing – since the ofdc has only tax credits – Ontario would be affected most by a change in ctf governance in which private-sector representatives dominated decision-making.

Ostry argues since all eip and half lfp money comes from government – and since the crtc required the cablecos to start up the cable fund in the first place – ‘it would be myopic to abdicate the public vision’ in favor of private control.

Virtually everyone involved in the debate to date has, however, agreed that tv, feature film and multimedia financing decisions should all rest with one organization.