The Canadian Association of Broadcasters, along with a gaggle of other industry lobby groups, is calling on the Heritage Ministry to reinvent the structure that governs the Canadian Television Fund. The cab wants to eliminate the ‘Telefilm Canada-style’ approach to funding not only television production, but also feature films and new media.

The private broadcasters’ lobby group has strongly hinted at this position in the past but makes this recommendation, along with numerous other suggestions, in a Sept. 15 position paper on the future of the ctf, submitted to the Culture Ministry. The cab’s paper says that following a transition period of ‘a year or more,’ the government should create ‘a new institution with the responsibility of providing funding support in television, feature film and in new media.’

Because the ctf – with its private sector/public sector board of directors – has been so successful in supporting productions, McCabe says ‘we found a better model. Public accountability, I don’t think, is a problem.’ McCabe argues that as long as government representatives are on the ctf board, and so long as the ctf respects the requirements set out in the government’s contribution agreements – the guidelines under which it allows bodies like the ctf to access public money – Telefilm isn’t needed to protect the public interest.

The ctf says last year it ‘supported 380 television programs and feature films, which helped bring 2,065 hours of new television programming to air.’

The cab proposes a ‘true melding of two institutions – the ctf and Telefilm,’ but makes clear the board of this new institution should mimic the existing ctf board ‘representing all of the key private and public sector interests.’ This would effectively strip Telefilm of its mandate to ensure that public dollars intended for production are spent with Canadian cultural policy in mind. Telefilm currently administers the fund’s $100-million Equity Investment Program.

‘We’ve got better television programming out of the ctf in the last three or four years than we ever got from Telefilm,’ counters McCabe.

Heritage called for industry comment on the ctf’s future as part of a regular process of reviewing government funding, and as a way to re-evaluate the fund’s governance structure. Meanwhile, the industry is lobbying cabinet to renew the fund, due to expire March 31.

CFTPA’s position

English Canadian producers, through the cftpa, offer the government more flexible advice on how to change the ctf.

Like the cab, the cftpa suggests a single organization should administer funding for television, feature film and new media. This organization, says association president Elizabeth McDonald, ‘would be responsible for multiple funding streams, tailoring the funding mechanism – whether it be equity, licence fee top-up or other mechanisms – to the financing needs of the production.’

Unlike the cab, however, the cftpa does not advocate the removal of Telefilm, or of a public institution of that type, from the process. The cftpa submission to Heritage says the ctf’s governance structure could be improved in two ways: ‘either by the creation of a new not-for-profit company, or by re-structuring an existing public agency like Telefilm Canada.’ She says a public structure is needed ‘based on the accountability requirements for the administration of public funds.’

McDonald also advocates a continuing role for representatives of the private sector – broadcasters, cablecos, other bdus – on the ctf. She emphasizes the two review reports done on the ctf, as currently construed, both gave the fund strong commendations on its work to date.

CBC proposal

cbc has proposed the federal government create a new fund, with 50% of total ctf financing to be administered directly by the cbc, and to be spent exclusively on Canadian independent production.

The cbc’s proposal says the ctf should be given responsibility for both the Licence Fee Program and the eip, with the remaining 50% of financing to be distributed among all other broadcasters, with no access for cbc/src.

The cbc says its newly proposed model could be expanded to include all public broadcasters within a ‘Public Sector Fund.’

cbc’s proposition addresses the ‘political’ problem of the Corp.’s chronic underfunding.

‘CBC Television, particularly English Television, is in a critical phase,’ says the cbc.

Changes to ctf rules have had an adverse effect on cbc’s ability to finance its primetime schedule. In ’99/00, cbc/src received $47.1 million from eip, or 51% of all eip funds. This year, the combined eip contribution, as of Aug. 25, is $34.7 million.

In ’99/00, cbc/src received $42 million in lfp funds, or 41% of all lfp funding. This year, as of Sept. 8, the lfp dollar contribution had dropped to $32 million.

Says cbc: ‘The loss of the guarantee [reserved cbc/src enevelope] has affected both French and English Television but English Television has been particularly affected. Because of its financial situation, CBC English Television is no longer able to invest in drama at the same level as in the past.’

cbc says it had $10 million less to trigger ctf-supported drama this year than last, with indie-produced drama receiving $33.3 million from the ctf last year but only $17.3 million this year, $5.8 million less than the amount requested.

‘The size of the total decrease of Fund support for English Television projects is stunning….This leaves CBC English Television in a difficult position since, with increased competition, fewer resources available to trigger the Fund, and no guarantee, the share of ctf-financed programs destined for the cbc is bound to continue to decline – unless a major restructuring occurs.’

In the short term, cbc says it wants one more member on the ctf board. It also wants the ‘existing inequities’ in the lfp, including the reserved lfp envelope for broadcaster-affiliated production companies, to be removed.

In ’99/00, cbc invested $38.7 million in ctf-funded programs and src invested $21.7 million, for a combined total of $60.5 million.

APFTQ’s position

In its ctf review submission to Heritage, the apftq, Quebec’s producers association, is proposing two entirely separate funds, and the establishment of a new consultative body.

bdu contributions would be managed by a private-sector body such as the ctf, controlled by broadcasters and subject to crtc supervision.

Government contributions would go to a separate fund managed by a public agency such as Telefilm. A national television council would be a think-tank resource for the development of the tv sector, fostering better synergy between the two funds.

The apftq says Telefilm should receive all public funds, approximately $135 million, for investment in programs made by independent producers not affiliated with a broadcaster. Funding would come from Telefilm’s resources, $50 million, and Heritage, $85 million.

In this proposal, the $15 million allocated for feature film financing is transferred from the ctf to ‘the future and much-awaited Feature Film Fund,’ or if a new feature film fund is not introduced, the transfer would go to Telefilm.

The apftq says with the additional $35 million, Telefilm could contribute to financing productions ‘with licence fees in excess of the threshold requirement or a significant percentage of dollars at risk, or to financing more commercial productions to encourage corporate development among producers. Such contributions could be granted automatically, without content analysis but according to precise criteria established so as to limit demand.’

The private fund would stand at about $80 million.

Claire Samson, apftq president and director-general, says the private-sector funds should be managed by the broadcasters – who already control the ctf.

‘What we propose is like an air miles plan. The more the broadcaster will invest, the more they will get from the private fund.’

In the apftq scheme, broadcasters would receive a lump-sum, year-end payment based on their average share of the total of [all] top-up investments from broadcasters. ‘As they would be managing the fund, they could adapt it according to their industry. And it also has the quality of recognizing the contribution of speciality tv,’ says Samson.

Since producers would no longer directly benefit from the private fund, broadcasters would be required to pay a 10% premium over and above the licence fee threshold, with the ‘incentive’ calculated as the total amount over and above the threshold.

‘So it’s an incentive for them to invest more in Canadian programming, give out better licences, and make independent production less dependant on public money so public money can support more programs, genres and hours,’ says Samson.

With the apftq proposal, ‘only broadcasters at the end of the year would know how they performed [in relation] to the other networks.’

The apftq says its proposals would create a level playing field for both public and private funds. *