Some are calling for looser definitions, more maneuverability on the Cancon front; others want more Cancon measures.

The cab is calling for a national industrial strategy for tv programming that focuses on the world market, stating that ‘an industry aimed at Canada alone would ultimately fail to provide a significant volume of Canadian programming and our presence on our own screens would sink beneath foreign waves.’ On the other side of cab president Michael McCabe’s ‘Production is simply too costly and our market too small to make most programs for Canada alone’ argument is Heritage Minister Sheila Copps’ cftpa address contention that a strong crtc and a closer look at Canadian content is in order: ‘We should be open to examine ideas that could make more Canadian content available to more Canadians.’

Sounds like a request for less Canada-centric specifics, and an offer of more, perhaps down to the minutiae of how much to spend on u.s. programming.

Meanwhile, back in the production trenches, the point may well be moot in Alberta, where the closure of the ampdc last year has, as expected, turned off the flow of indigenous production. Alberta stories are now becoming Saskatchewan stories, heading off to Quebec or joining the production queue in New Brunswick. The companies staying put are developing stories for the international market, and call the situation ‘a cultural tragedy.’ This says a lot about the essential nature of the local support infrastructure on the ability to tell (read finance) local stories.

The argument that Canadian tales would thrive with relaxed content supervision does not seem to be supported, while the contention that there are currently enough incentives (exchange, tax credits) in the system to encourage generic-setting or world market productions is.

No wonder the Writers Guild of Canada felt the removal of the clause requiring ‘identifiably Canadian’ stories from the ctcpf’s movies-of-the-week guidelines was an ominous sign in the Canadian versus generic orientation, and felt it was worth lobbying for a reversal.

The move to produce ‘generic’ with the aid of Canadian incentives may well backfire creatively with a glut of imitative product. Currently even entrenched u.s. producers are finding their own market exceedingly difficult in certain areas, and are themselves increasingly relying on international sales.

The tenuous nature of the industry evident in the rapid decline of Alberta’s 1997 production slate would seem to confirm Copps’ original statement when announcing the new fund: ‘The marketplace on its own, will not produce television that reflects Canadian life and Canadian values.’

And supports the theory that there is no room for ‘a crack in the door’ allowing more American access to the market, or for relaxed Cancon restrictions, a fear which producers voiced to Industry Canada.

It’s too late to crazy-glue the door shut, so the remaining option is to brace Canada’s windows to itself. Whether it’s made in the u.s.a. or here, without the specific, and regional supports to indigenous production, more anytown (u.s.a.) is what you’re going to get.