It has been just over a year since Glenn O’Farrell took over as president and CEO of the Canadian Association of Broadcasters and, as such, he has rarely been far from the front lines of the many issues and debates in the radio and TV industries.

Under O’Farrell, the CAB has launched a very vocal campaign against signal theft and, recently, a massive multi-year study of ethnic diversity while continuing to lobby policymakers in Ottawa for greater funding and fewer restrictions.

The group has also weighed in, albeit quietly, on foreign ownership regulations, supporting ‘majority and effective Canadian control’ of the country’s media outlets.

In between the AGM of the Ontario Association of Broadcasters and the Canadian Radio Music Awards, O’Farrell sat down with Playback, in the lobby of Toronto’s Royal York Hotel, to talk about his inaugural year and the work that lies ahead for CAB.

PB: What is on your ‘to do’ list this year?

GO: We advocated recently to [Finance] Minister Manley that a working group be created between Finance and Canadian Heritage – so that once the cultural objectives of the government are articulated they can be married with its financial capacity and funding… It would be about six people [from] the industry groups, broadcast and production, and also people from Finance and Heritage. We haven’t identified anyone specific yet.

PB: How soon could that take shape?

GO: The [House Standing] Committee on Heritage is going to publish a report in the next four to six weeks which we’re hoping will include the recommendation that this group be formed.

PB: What then?

GO: Then we’ll get very active meeting with both Finance and Heritage, saying ‘Here’s the recommendation… It specifically suggests this group and we highly support the idea of you endorsing it and creating a government will to act on it.’

PB: How has the recent federal budget changed CAB’s plans?

GO: It’s a big problem, there’s no doubt about it. We were thoroughly disappointed. But we’re going to work very hard to see [CTF] funding levels restored to their former levels… We’re really and truly holding great hope for the Heritage Committee report that will, hopefully, recognize that the continued funding of Canadian programming is an important objective. The report is a catalyst to additional activity and to hopefully bring that funding level back up.

PB: If it goes in your favor, what then?

GO: We sit down again with the ministers and officials at Heritage and Finance, and again say, ‘Here’s a group that did an intensive study of the sector. Here’s what they feel is important. Let’s re-evaluate this year’s decision.’

PB: And if it doesn’t?

GO: We will continue to push [Heritage and Finance] to see funding levels restored.

PB: Is it feasible to restore the full $25-million cut from CTF this year?

GO: We hope it is.

PB: CAB is calling for the lifting of the ban on pharmaceutical ads. If successful, will CAB finish what it started and help work out sticky issues about drug ads?

GO: That’s one of the key reasons I think we need to have a ‘Made in Canada’ solution. This kind of advertising is all over Canadian consumers through American publications and TV. And if you see one of those ads, it is not prescreened.

[We propose] a modest regulatory model – where there’d be prescreening of the ads and where, for instance, if a new product came on the market maybe you don’t have the right to advertise it right away. Give the medical community a chance to learn and educate about the pros and cons. Maybe there’s a lag period of, 12 or 18 months. But we think there’s a smarter way of doing it.

PB: CAB has been very vocal against Part Two fees, supplementary fees charged to broadcasters by the CRTC. What progress have you made to have them revoked?

GO: We’re encouraged because we think we received the explicit support of [Heritage] Minister Copps and [Industry] Minister Rock. Both concluded that our presentation led them to the position that Part Two fees are not being collected to cover the costs of supervising and regulating the broadcast industry.

The CRTC has the authority to recover its costs, but does not have the authority to apply taxes. [Part Two fees] go directly into the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the government. They do not serve to pay CRTC costs or spectrum costs. It’s an indirect illegal tax.

PB: So what’s the next step?

GO: We have a request to review the appropriateness of these regulations before the [Joint] Committee [on the Scrutiny of Regulations] that the fees be abolished. If they recommend that, then we have a much stronger case to go to the government.

PB: Kevin Shea, ex of Bell Globemedia, wants CRTC approval to sell U.S. specialty signals to Canadian cable and satellite operators. What do you make of this controversial plan?

GO: Shea’s idea is an old idea… and it has not gotten better with age. The proposal says that it will introduce significant amounts of new advertising inventory into a market that has shown no demand. It will drive down ad rates for all media [and] funnel more money out of the system and into the hands of non-Canadian services… It is not surprising that the advertising industry supports this proposal, as it will mean discounted rates.

PB: And the $30-million boost to content production?

GO: Any suggestion that it will contribute to the production sector is incorrect and doesn’t add up. Overall, the system will lose significant revenue and only a fraction will be put back in, an amount that will not make up for the loss.

PB: CAB recently launched an ambitious study of cultural diversity on TV. Why such a big project, and why now?

GO: The study was called for by the CRTC, and I would imagine they were following a broader government dictate to be more sensitive to multicultural issues and changing demographics in the country. Private broadcasters have added tremendous cultural diversity to their programming for many years – there are five specialty services, two pay, eight Category Two digital services and then the conventional services in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. There’s a lot of private initiatives [that] the commission wanted to [examine].

PB: Doesn’t that imply that broadcasters are somehow out of touch with the ethnic scene?

GO: It’s more a matter of the minister of heritage saying that the makeup of Canada has evolved significantly, and that as a country we have to be more prepared to reflect that. The government said ‘We have a question about portrayal.’ We’re happy to respond.

-www.cab-acr.ca