A massive 872-page two-year study of the Canadian broadcasting system calls on the government to create a single communications ministry bringing together the divided responsibilities now held by Industry Canada and Canadian Heritage.

The report by the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, ‘Our Cultural Sovereignty: The Second Century of Canadian Broadcasting,’ calls on the government to consider a single, unified Communications Act replacing the three existing acts – the Telecommunications Act and the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Act (governing the CRTC), both under the auspices of Industry Canada; and the Broadcasting Act, under the auspices of Heritage.

In an interview with Playback, Clifford Lincoln, MP and committee chair, said, ‘We are not touching the CRTC. We think it is a very important institution and we think it should stay.’

Lincoln says ‘the two-headed direction [Industry and Heritage] has created a tremendous amount of polarization and confusion… whether it’s copyright, broadcasting, broadcasting distribution.’

In large measure, the Heritage report supports many of the positions taken in industry submissions, particularly the production sector.

The report, based on over 200 submissions and interviews with 350 intervenors, makes 97 recommendations, including a recommendation the CRTC review its 1999 TV Policy on priority programming.

The report calls on government to create a ‘broadcast monitor’ to report annually to Parliament on the state of the broadcasting system; recommends the crisis in Canadian production and drama be redressed through a more stable and efficient Canadian Television Fund; and advocates ‘a replenishing and a refocusing of CBC’ through increased and stable multi-year funding.

Foreign investment issues

In terms of foreign ownership levels, the Heritage report stands in stark contrast to the recent report from Industry Canada. The Heritage report calls on government to hold the line at the current level of foreign ownership in broadcasting and broadcast distribution, direct and indirect positions combining at 47%.

The committee’s perspective on foreign ownership ‘is supported by a broad spectrum of opinion within the industry and that is you cannot separate the signal from the content. That is a myth,’ says Lincoln.

‘The one big argument that swayed us is that there have been very big mergers [involving] Quebecor and Videotron, CanWest Global, Bell and CTV and Shaw and every one of these mergers have taken place inside our capital [financing] structure. The investments were found within Canada and so we didn’t need all this foreign investment for these mergers. And so why do we have to lift the limits?’ says Lincoln.

The report also makes several recommendations important to private broadcasters, including the creation of a ‘local initiatives fund to promote community and local broadcasting.’

On the other hand, the report asks government to produce ‘a clear policy on cross-media ownership within a year.’ Until then, the report calls for ‘a moratorium on the awarding of new broadcast licenses in situations where a cross-media ownership situation exists.’

Glenn O’Farrell, CAB president and CEO, says the report is ‘very encouraging,’ and is very pleased with the recommendations against Part Two fees and limits on pharmaceutical advertising. He’s also pleased the report recognizes the importance of the CTF and the need for stable, predictable funding.

However, O’Farrell says the ban on new licences is ‘ill advised,’ and the concentration issues had already been dealt with thoroughly during the last round of licence renewals for the multi-station broadcasters.

Janet Yale, president and CEO of the Canadian Cable Television Association, says she is ‘disappointed’ with the report, which she thinks missed many opportunities to make ‘creative public policy.’ CCTA had hoped the report would give more attention to new technologies and changes in the economy, and that it would be more ‘flexible’ on consumer trends and foreign capital.

There are strong parallels between the Heritage report and the recent report on drama prepared by Trina McQueen for the CRTC, the latter calling for an ‘audience building fund’ of $30 million a year as an appropriate redirection of Part Two fees paid by broadcasters.

‘To me, these similar ideas, arrived by very different people in very different processes, are a hopeful sign that there may be an emerging consensus on what’s needed to support Canadian programs. That’s a giant step forward,’ says McQueen.

The disagreement, says McQueen, is on the CRTC’s ’99 TV Policy.

‘I don’t have the rationale, but the Heritage committee recommends a cabinet directive to review the policy. I just don’t get it. By the time there is a government response, a cabinet directive, a public process, a decision on a new policy, and even a minimal time for implementation, up to two years will have gone by. During those two years, the current policy will continue without change except that an already fragile system will be even further destabilized.’

Jay Switzer, CHUM president and CEO, says any review of the ’99 TV Policy should be delayed for at least 18 months. ‘You can’t expect industries to invest hundreds of millions of dollars and shift hundreds of people in and out of production, then completely rewrite the rules every 12 and 24 months.’

The government has 150 days to respond to the report’s recommendations.

Lincoln believes, despite the pending change in administration, and the possibility of new ministers in key departments, the government will be obliged to respond.

The Broadcasting Act has not been touched since 1991 and there is a consensus on the need to reform, he says.

The report’s appendix includes a dissenting opinion by the Canadian Alliance party and a complementary report by the Bloc Quebecois. Committee vice-chair Paul Bonwick has issued a supplementary opinion.

A press statement and summary of the report’s key recommendations is posted at www.parl.gc.ca.

With files from Sean Davidson and Peter Vamos.