Montreal: On those competitive issues central to the interests of the industry, safeguarding of our distinctive rights market and special status for coproduction ties with Europe, the battle continues. But recently appointed chairman of Astral Communications and former crtc chair Andre Bureau says the Canadian broadcasting and production system is healthy right now and headed in the right direction.

Bureau entered the industry at the top as chairman of the crtc from November 1983 to February 1989. Begrudingly or otherwise, he earned the respect of the industry’s highest rollers and has been a consistent voice in support of the Canadian model, a model characterized by a growing order of benefits to this country’s talented creative production community.

‘What we see on the horizon is more and more programming being offered, and secondly, the means of offering it are being multiplied and are of a higher quality,’ he says. ‘With that in mind, our broadcasting system is doing well. It is not broken.’

And even if the introduction of dth and dvc on cable has been delayed, Bureau says they will arrive and bring major benefits to rights holders, producers, distributors and the public, which will see improved digital imaging and expanded choice.

Bureau says there is an order of business to ensure the system as a whole keeps moving in the right direction.

Some parameters for VOD

Minutia issues on Bureau’s plate this month include the video on demand hearings beginning March 17. Viewers Choice is one of the applicants seeking a licence.

vod is a new category of licence, says Bureau, though not necessarily a new industry or sector, ‘because it will use programming which already exists.’

‘It’s not pay-per-view, it’s not near vod, it’s something different. In video-on-demand the subscriber can have immediate access to the movie they want to watch. If you say `We’ll wait to see how many people want to see it at the same time and then we’ll download it,’ it is not vod. This is what separates some of the applicants who are before the commission at the present time.’

‘Secondly, it’s easy to use those kinds of numbers (edd’s application states it will invest $121 million over the term in Canadian programming), it’s just a question of buy rates (penetration levels for vod operators). It’s not even a commitment. They say they `expect’ to contribute a certain amount of money to the broadcasting system. The difference is that we have a little bit of expertise, they don’t.’

Programming is likely to include blockbuster films in the ppv window, the most popular offering to date in limited tests, films that are finished their tv cycle (pay, syndication and conventional), and other films, as determined by rights holders, that have completed their theatrical cycle and are entering the home video phase, says Bureau.

‘The success of the broadcasting system is the result of a delicately balanced mix of policies, regulations and incentives to the industry and the artists, and this type of mix and approach should be maintained.’ And because of the size of the Canadian market, Bureau says things can’t only be left to commercial or economic forces.

Something of interest

‘The second thing is to ensure the distinctiveness of our Canadian (rights) market,’ he says. ‘If we let the Americans buy what they are now calling `universal rights’ on programming, and they are the rights holders of so much product, they will simply put us out of business.

‘You may say `Who cares if so and so is out of business?’ but if you put the Canadian broadcasting system out of business you do not provide the means of creating a fantastic future for our artists, producers, scriptwriters and technicians who can use their talents to do something of interest for themselves and for Canada.

‘The third issue is the importance of Canadian content. I hear people say `Maybe we don’t need quotas anymore,’ [but] I think it has proven to be a very good tool. It’s never 100% quality, but the Americans do not produce 100% quality either. They produce hundreds of movies every year that no one wants to watch. So we don’t have to be ashamed if some of our products aren’t 100%. We should aim for it.

‘Over the years we’ve proven that we have talent, the expertise and peopleand we should pursue this. And the only way to do this is to have a form of quotas – modified, qualified – but fundamentally you need quotas. This is what is happening in the rest of the world. The rest of the world is looking to Canada as a model,’ says Bureau, adding:

‘We also have to make sure we have the right ownership rules in place because in this type of industrythe production of sensitive cultural material, audiovisual programs, we need to have control of the ownership of our programming licensees.

‘Distribution – like the telecoms, for example – is a separate type of animal, but when you deal with content, with the essence, you need ownership.

‘Plus you know very well if you allow the Americans to have control of our programming businessesthey will push their own programming because it’s really a dumping ground here. They amortize the cost of their programming in the u.s. and then they throw it here at very little or no cost and reap all the benefits.’

And while export is vital to the Canadian industry, Bureau recommends a dose of reserve so we don’t con ourselves about our real weight in international program sales.

‘I want to raise one point. When people say export is the key to our survival or success, it is true. But we have to recognize that it requires a domestic market to start with.

‘When we brag about the fact that we export a lot of our programming we should at the same time recognize that we import from one country, from the u.s., $1.2 billion in programming annually. Pure export sales of Canadian film and television production according to StatsCan was $150 million in 1993/94. So (we’re) importing $1.2 billion, that’s a pretty big discrepancy.’

Citing data from the latest available NGL Report and Statistics Canada data, Bureau says all film and tv production activity in Canada was worth $2.7 billion in 1995, an increase – despite public funding cuts – of $200 million over 1994. Overall licence fees paid to acquire Canadian programming by pay-tv and specialty services exceeded those paid by conventional broadcasters in 1995/96, $103 million compared to $70.7 million.

‘What is important,’ says Bureau, ‘is that producers are getting $800 million of the $2.7 billion creating 72,000 jobs. When I say things are working well, this is the reference.

‘Now if you look at the complete Canadian broadcasting system, which includes broadcasting plus the film and tv production industry, the overall business represents $7 billion of the country’s annual gdp.’

In a detailed rationale to be published in the spring mip-tv edition of Playback International, Bureau says the Canadian industry is ready for a powerful international ambassador, a real movie czar a la Jack Valenti and the powerful Hollywood studio lobby he heads, the Motion Picture Association of America. Too much responsibility is placed on the shoulders of the Telefilm Canada office in Paris, he says, and the ad hoc emergency rescue mission routine is not the best guarantee.

Bureau’s corporate responsibilities extend to president and ceo of the Astral Broadcasting Group, owner and partner in 12 network licences, chairman of Les Reseaux Premier Choix, ceo of TMN Networks, a director of Viewer’s Choice Canada, Canal Indigo, and Family Channel. He is an Officer of the Order of Canada, holds directorships with several Canadian corporations, and is a counsel with one the country’s leading and fastest growing legal firms, Heenan Blaikie.