Money: everywhere, all the time, over the last two weeks. The feds are in for $100 million in production funds, the four new English-language specialties another $17 million, and even PolyGram hovers, cryptically waving the potential for Canadian films with a $70 million (!) budget if we relax protectionist policy. Ironically all this coincides with the announcement of how the cbc ­ the stronghold of ‘for Canada’ production ­ will deal with its massive budget hurt.

But with the consolation of new services and a bigger kitty to tap, producers are making plans for the new lucre and the broadcasters are equally giddy with eyes on Telefilm funds. Everyone is reading something for them into the scenario. But whether this cumulative pot of gold is going to up the volume of quality ‘Canadian’ production is a big question mark.

In the short term, more money with the same number of windows likely means higher budget productions, meaning the risk factor is up. Broadcasters having more at stake foreshadows a plot twist whereby production companies proven capable of running high-budget shows become busier. Where do the mid-sized and smaller producers fit in? Perhaps the two solitudes get farther apart.

And how d’es Copps’ ‘Canadian culture’ agenda fit into this new reality. Since profitability on a Canadian production means international sales, how truly Canadian can a story be when it’s market reality dictates sales to Germany, or the u.s.?

What clearly Canadian product d’es PolyGram really want to finance and distribute? The distributor was fairly explicit as to the distinction, likening culturally significant product to ballet, as opposed to the ‘Hollywood’ fare they are interested in.

The industry asked for this: less regulation, more money, and the means to play in the global marketplace. What’s Canadian about what’s on the other side is t.b.d., but the imbroglio the new specialty channel licensees will maneuver through over the next few months is part and parcel of alleviating the ‘nanny state.’

The ‘what consumers want’ argument has been beaten to death by all concerned, but on the other side of this decision, the chance to mandate that analog space being used to test near-video-on-demand (ppv isn’t enough?) be freed up for Canadian programming services is past. Welcome to the free market agenda and all its inherent politics.

Stifling the ‘careful what you wish for’ maxim, maybe ctv exec Gary Maavara is right: this is no time for pessimism.

Maybe cable will work out a constructive plan to get everybody up and running and effectively block out the infiltration of more u.s. services that contribute zilch to the Canadian system (consumer demand, Canadian style). Maybe letting the consumer choose will work (although it’s a nasty chicken-and-egg when you need a base of subscribers choosing you to get up). And maybe all this new money won’t wind up funneled into making more u.s. syndication market fodder and actually create a volume of unique indigenous programs legitimizing the ‘Canadian’ broadcasting system.

Or maybe the consumer will circumvent the lot, and (illegally) choose Comedy Central, and the nanny state will start to look good.