Quebec-based producers, and certainly members of the apftq, whether they’re in features, tv or documentaries, have been rather consistent in expressing their dismay with the all-encompassing ‘visibly Canadian’ requirement of the Canadian Television Fund. There’s clearly no evidence obtaining ctf or Telefilm Canada funding is more difficult for Quebec producers than anyone else, but this particular gripe seems most pronounced in this market, and on both sides of the language divide.

Arnie Gelbart, president of Montreal’s Galafilm, says he understands the need for the government-imposed requirement, but thinks things have now gone too far. ‘With the best of intentions (the rules) become driven by very subjective things like ‘Is this Canadian enough?’ to be measured by degrees of Canadianness and it just starts to echo things that are not so pleasant.’

And if the focus is all on subject matter, and not treatment, how does that bode for a renewal of Canada’s once-proud international tradition in docs? And, while we’re on the subject, it seems clear the demonstrably Canadian rule is undermining some of our best export potential – animation and children’s projects set in imaginary worlds, not in Canada.

‘And even if (the funding system) has to be discretionary, it has to stop the pretense that it’s an objective system, because it isn’t,’ says Gelbart. ‘The people in charge will say, ‘Okay, you design a better system,’ and that’s hard, too. It’s understandable, we don’t want a lot of American programs to be made with (ctf) money; on the other hand, it really limits what a Canadian producer doing Canadian-content is able to do.’

And because CTF is so oversubscribed, and the rules are so stringent, Gelbart says producers won’t stop applying – they’ll simply keep pandering to the system, cleverly creating shows which fit the model.

Seems like many Quebec producers want CTF out of the content analysis business. That means, once CTF is satisfied an otherwise qualified project meets the ‘key creative posts’ requirement, or is produced under an official coproduction treaty, there would be no penalty for choice of subject or shooting location.

apftq chair Denise Robert, president of Cinemaginaire, wonders how is it a movie adapted from a Canadian novel – good, bad or indifferent – outscores an original screenplay in the ctf system of thinking? She also says the decisive element in feature films, and drama in general, isn’t subject matter, it’s the treatment.

Denys Arcand’s new movie Stardom didn’t qualify under last year’s ctf rules because the storyline and locations are out of Canada. As it stands, Robert says our best filmmakers are denied the world’s literary heritage – whether it’s Shakespeare or Moliere – a numbing restriction imposed on creators nowhere else in the world except Canada.

‘I don’t think the creative process should be dictated by rules,’ says Robert.

‘We should encourage talent, and that is how we will keep talent here.’

The ‘visibly Canadian’ rule isn’t really about industrial phonies and covering up Ontario licence plates, at least not any more. But it does seem to be all about the huge oversubscription problem. ‘It’s not popular to say so,’ says Gelbart, ‘and (ctf) is a lot of money, but given the demand and given the licences the crtc is giving out with very stringent rules, there isn’t enough money.’