Search

Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2025-201

PDF version

Gatineau, 8 August 2025

Various Certified Independent Production Funds
Various locations across Canada

Applications filed by Certified Independent Production Funds seeking eligibility to receive contributions from audio-visual online undertakings

Summary

As part of its broader regulatory plan to implement the modernized Broadcasting Act, the Commission issued its decision on base contributions by certain online streaming services in Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2024-121. In that decision, it announced that new funding would be directed to areas of immediate need in the Canadian broadcasting system, including producers from official language minority communities (OLMCs) and producers from diverse communities. It further specified that Certified Independent Production Funds (CIPFs) seeking to receive these contributions and support content produced by these communities must submit applications.

The Commission approves applications by the Bell Fund, the Independent Production Fund, and the TELUS Fund, to be eligible to receive contributions from audio-visual online undertakings to support producers from OLMCs and diverse communities.

The Commission approves, subject to the fulfilment of specific conditions, applications by the Quebecor Fund, Telefilm Canada’s Talent Fund, and the Shaw Rocket Fund to be eligible to receive contributions from audio-visual online undertakings to support producers from OLMCs and diverse communities.

These applications will provide additional financial support for those CIPFs committed to dedicating funds in support of programming by OLMCs and diverse communities.

A dissenting opinion by Commissioner Ellen Desmond is attached to this decision.

Applications

  1. As a result of Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2024-121 and Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2024-121-1 (collectively “the Policy”) and Broadcasting Order 2024-194, the Commission issued orders requiring that certain audio-visual online undertakings contribute 5% of their Canadian revenues as a base contribution to support the Canadian broadcasting system. Part of this base contribution can be allocated to Certified Independent Production Funds (CIPFs) supporting content produced by official language minority communities (OLMCs) and diverse communities. CIPFs seeking to receive these contributions must submit an application to the Commission demonstrating that they meet the criteria set out in the Policy.
  2. The Commission received applications from the Bell Fund, the Independent Production Fund, the TELUS Fund, the Quebecor Fund, Telefilm Canada’s Talent Fund (Talent Fund), and the Shaw Rocket Fund seeking eligibility to receive the above-mentioned contributions. More information on the applicants can be found on the Commission’s Certified Independent Production Funds webpage.

Legal framework

  1. Following amendments to the Broadcasting Act (the Act), the Commission established in the Policy that certain online broadcasting undertakings must allocate 5% of their Canadian revenues to support the Canadian broadcasting system, with a focus on promoting Canadian and Indigenous content. The decision specified that 0.5% of the contributions from certain audio-visual online undertakings would be directed to CIPFs that committed to supporting producers from OLMCs and other diverse communities.
  2. The Commission also determined that, to be eligible to receive contributions, CIPFs must submit an application to the Commission demonstrating that they meet the requirements outlined in the Policy. These requirements include the following criteria:
    • allocate at least 10% of the total budget (consisting of contributions from audio-visual online undertakings to CIPFs supporting producers from OLMCs and diverse communities) to an envelope, of which 50% is dedicated to OLMC producers (in either language) and 50% to producers from diverse communities;
    • maintain the envelope permanently and continue to respect the criteria, clarification, and reporting requirements set out in Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2016-343 (the CIPF framework);
    • file an annual report with the Commission demonstrating that the minimum spending requirements for the envelope (10% of the total budget) were met by indicating the total amount of funding received from licensed undertakings and audio-visual online undertakings and the amount and percentage of total funding allocated to projects supporting OLMC producers (by language) and producers from diverse communities; and
    • provide information in its annual reports to the Commission on the number of OLMC projects evaluated and approved in each minority language, as well as the number of projects supporting producers from diverse communities.
  3. Applications must also be accompanied by written confirmation of compliance with the above-noted criteria which was approved and signed by the board of directors.

Issues

  1. After examining the record for these applications in light of applicable regulations and policies, the Commission considers that it must address the following issues:
    • the Shaw Rocket Fund’s alternative proposal and definition of the permanent envelope;
    • Quebecor Fund and the Talent Fund’s reporting; and
    • the launch date for establishing the permanent envelope.

The Shaw Rocket Fund’s alternative proposal and definition of the permanent envelope

  1. In its application, the Shaw Rocket Fund expressed concerns about committing to a permanent envelope for OLMC producers (in either official language) and producers from diverse communities. It indicated that its concerns stem from uncertainties regarding varying contribution levels from online undertakings, the total duration of these contributions, and competition from other CIPFs.
  2. The Shaw Rocket Fund argues that it cannot reasonably determine its annual budget or commit 10% of its total budget to a specific envelope until eligibility is confirmed and contributions are received. Specifically, the Shaw Rocket Fund raised the following concerns:
    • the term “envelope” is ambiguous, and flexibility in allocation methods is crucial;
    • tying the 10% requirement to a CIPF’s total budget is problematic given future funding uncertainties, particularly with Rogers’ intention to discontinue its contributions to the Shaw Rocket Fund in 2025, and the unknown timing of contributions from online undertakings; and
    • if required to allocate 10% of its total budget, a scenario with zero contributions from Rogers and online undertakings in 2026 could find the Shaw Rocket Fund legally required to fund projects without the means to do so.
  3. To address the above-mentioned concerns, the Shaw Rocket Fund proposed that the 10% commitment be calculated based on annual program funding, rather than the total annual budget. It also proposed that the term “envelope” be clarified to refer specifically to funds earmarked for OLMCs and diverse communities.
  4. The Commission considers that the Shaw Rocket Fund’s alternative proposal to allocate 10% of its total program funding, rather than of its total budget (or revenue from audio-visual online undertakings),Footnote 1 constitutes a departure from the requirements established in the Policy. If the Commission were to accept such a proposal, it would diminish support for equity-deserving groups, as non-programming budgetary expenditures (such as fund administration) would be excluded from the calculation of the 10% envelope. The Policy ensures that CIPFs dedicate a meaningful portion of their overall resources to supporting OLMCs and diverse communities.
  5. CIPFs must calculate the envelope as a proportion of money received by the fund from broadcasting distribution undertakings (BDUs) and audio-visual online undertakings, rather than a proportion of money disbursed for program funding as proposed by the Shaw Rocket Fund. The Commission considers that adopting the Shaw Rocket Fund’s proposed calculation method would limit support for OLMC producers and producers from diverse communities.
  6. In light of the above, the Commission requires, as a condition of approval, that the Shaw Rocket Fund file a letter signed by its board of directors confirming its commitment to establishing a dedicated permanent envelope for OLMCs and diverse communities, as well as ensuring that the permanent envelope is funded by a 10% commitment of overall fund revenues. Once the Commission has received this letter, the Shaw Rocket Fund will be added to the list of CIPFs eligible to receive contributions from audio-visual online undertakings for the purpose of fulfilling their base contribution funding obligations.

The Quebecor Fund and the Talent Fund’s reporting

  1. The Commission considers that recent reports from both the Quebecor Fund and the Talent Fund were not consistent with a number of reporting requirements set out in the CIPF framework. In particular, the Quebecor Fund filed its 2023 annual report late and did not include its required audited financial statements. The missing annual report and financial statements were filed following correspondence from Commission staff. Regarding the Talent Fund, while it has generally published its annual reports on its website, the reports have not always been filed with the Commission.
  2. The Commission does not consider these errors sufficient to render the Quebecor Fund or the Talent Fund ineligible to receive contributions from online undertakings for the purpose of fulfilling those online undertakings’ base contribution funding obligations. However, it notes that CIPFs eligible for such contributions must comply with the reporting requirements outlined in the CIPF framework, as well as the additional reporting requirements set out in the Policy. These requirements are essential for the Commission and the Canadian production sector to assess how the new CIPF envelopes support OLMC producers and producers from diverse communities.
  3. In light of the above, the Commission requires, as a condition of approval, that the Quebecor Fund and the Talent Fund file a letter signed by their respective board of directors confirming their commitment to file reports in accordance with the requirements set out in Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2016-343, Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2024-121, and Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2024-121-1 no later than 8 September 2025. Once the Commission has received these letters, the Quebecor Fund and the Talent Fund will be added to the list of CIPFs eligible to receive contributions from audio-visual online undertakings for the purpose of fulfilling their base contribution funding obligations upon the Commission’s receipt of these letters.

Launch date for establishing the permanent envelope

  1. Eligible CIPFs have proposed various launch dates for the implementation of the new envelope to support OLMCs and diverse communities. Some have indicated that all the requirements from the Policy have already been implemented, while others have committed to an implementation date. However, other funds tied the implementation date of the permanent envelope to the reception of contributions from online undertakings.
  2. The Commission notes that eligible CIPFs are not guaranteed to receive contributions from online undertakings, which will have the flexibility to decide to which specific eligible CIPFs they wish to contribute for the purpose of meeting their base contribution funding obligations. If the Commission were to accept that the creation of the envelope be triggered when contributions are received, it could result in some eligible CIPFs not creating the required permanent envelope.
  3. Further, the Commission notes that the Policy does not specify the start date. However, the Commission also notes that the Policy’s intent is to incentivize change within CIPFs, and the creation of the permanent envelope is a prerequisite for eligibility to receive funding.
  4. In light of the above, the Commission directs all eligible Funds to establish their permanent envelope no later than 7 October 2025, regardless of whether they receive contributions from online undertakings. Additionally, the Commission directs each Fund to notify the Commission once its permanent envelope has been established. Documents can be filed electronically using the secured service My CRTC Account.

Conclusion

  1. In light of all of the above, the Commission approves, by majority decision, the applications from the Bell Fund, the Independent Production Fund, and the TELUS Fund to be eligible to receive base contributions from audio-visual online undertakings to support producers from OLMCs and diverse communities in accordance with the criteria set out in Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2024-121.
  2. The Commission approves, by majority decision, subject to the conditions set out in paragraphs 12 and 15 of this decision, the applications by the Shaw Rocket Fund, the Quebecor Fund, and the Talent Fund respectively to be eligible to receive contributions from audio-visual online undertakings to support producers from OLMCs and diverse communities.
  3. The Commission directs all eligible Funds to establish their permanent envelope no later than 7 October 2025. Additionally, the Commission directs each Fund to notify the Commission once its permanent envelope has been established.
  4. The Commission reminds eligible Funds that they must, in order to remain eligible to receive contributions from audio-visual online undertakings to support producers from OLMCs and diverse communities, respect the criteria set out in Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2016-343, Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2024-121, and Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2024-121-1.

Secretary General

Related documents

Dissenting opinion of Commissioner Ellen C. Desmond, K.C.

Existing policy

  1. As my colleagues have stated, Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2024-121 and Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2024-121-1 (collectively “the Policy”) together with Broadcasting Order 2024-194, require that a portion of the base contributions made by certain audio-visual online undertakings (online undertakings) be allocated to eligible Certified Independent Production Funds (CIPFs).
  2. Directing these funds to eligible CIPFs is intended to ensure that programming produced by official language minority communities (OLMCs) and diverse communities will receive additional financial support.
  3. As set out in the Policy, any CIPF interested in being eligible to receive these contributions must file an application with the Commission and satisfy the following criteria:


    (i) allocate at least 10% of its total budget (consisting of contributions from audio-visual online undertakings to CIPFs supporting producers from OLMCs and diverse communities) to an envelope, of which 50% is dedicated to OLMC producers (in either language) and 50% to producers from diverse communities;

    (ii) maintain the envelope permanently and continue to respect the criteria, clarification, and reporting requirements set out in Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2016-343 (the CIPF framework);

    (iii) file an annual report with the Commission demonstrating that the minimum spending requirements for the envelope (10% of the total budget) were met by indicating the total amount of funding received from licensed undertakings and audio-visual online undertakings and the amount and percentage of total funding allocated to projects supporting OLMC producers (by language) and producers from diverse communities; and

    (iv) provide information in its annual reports to the Commission on the number of OLMC projects evaluated and approved in each minority language, as well as the number of projects supporting producers from diverse communities.

  4. Applications were to be filed within 120 days from the date of the Policy being published and had to be accompanied by written confirmation of compliance with the above-noted criteria, approved and signed by the board of directors.
  5. The application of these criteria is not an issue. The Policy was published in 2024 and provides the necessary guidance to interested CIPFs. At the same time, it is important to note that the Policy does not establish a launch date for the funding envelope, leaving this issue to be decided by the Commission.

Applications seeking approval

  1. Several CIPFs have now applied to the Commission for approval to be eligible to receive these contributions from the online undertakings.
  2. My colleagues have approved the applications from the Bell Fund, the Independent Production Fund, and the TELUS Fund, and I take no issue with these particular CIPFs being considered eligible to receive contributions. I further take no issue with the Quebecor Fund or Telefilm Canada’s Talent Fund being approved for eligibility, upon satisfaction of the condition that has been specified by the majority.
  3. I do, however, take issue with the launch date for the permanent envelope and the deadline that my colleagues have set, particularly as it impacts the Shaw Rocket Fund. My reasoning is below.

The Shaw Rocket Fund (the Rocket Fund)

  1. The Rocket Fund is the only dedicated fund for Canadian and Indigenous children’s and youth audio-visual and digital media content. As noted in their submission, the Rocket Fund is an essential partner of the Canadian children’s media sector – a sector that has faced a number of challenges in recent years. The Rocket Fund fully endorses the Commission’s goals to support the needs and interests of OLMCs and Canadians from diverse communities. Moreover, the Rocket Fund has a demonstrable record of successfully prioritizing such programming for many years, without a dedicated envelope. In effect, they have, by all accounts, been accomplishing what this Policy sets out to achieve.
  2. The Rocket Fund, however, also finds itself in a position of transition. The funding on which it has traditionally relied (funding provided by Rogers, arising from existing broadcasting license terms) is expected to expire in August of 2025. The Rocket Fund is therefore facing a unique situation where future funding is uncertain.
  3. In particular, the Rocket Fund raised the following concern:


    If required to allocate 10% of its total budget, a scenario with zero contributions from Rogers and online undertakings in 2026 could find the Shaw Rocket Fund legally required to fund projects without the means to do so.

  4. In essence, insisting that the Rocket Fund launch a funding envelope immediately could result in a situation that would be untenable and contrary to good governance practices.

Launch Date – the deadline to establish a permanent envelope

  1. My colleagues have determined that all eligible funds must establish their permanent funding envelope no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this decision. The majority decision notes that while eligible CIPFs are not guaranteed to receive contributions from online undertakings, the creation of the permanent envelope is still required. The intent is to incentivize change within the CIPFs.
  2. For most funds, this deadline and launch date is unlikely to create any significant difficulties.
  3. In contrast, given the financial uncertainty that the Rocket Fund has outlined in its submission, the necessity of launching a permanent envelope at this time creates an obstacle instead of an incentive. The unfortunate result is that a CIPF that has both a:


    (a) demonstrable record of supporting programming for diverse Canadians; and

    (b) willingness to continue satisfying this objective;

    will not be considered eligible to receive contributions from the online undertakings in the immediate future.

  4. With the greatest respect to my colleagues, this launch date, which was not set out in the Policy, creates an unnecessary barrier to the Rocket Fund, a fund which has been making valuable contributions to Canadian and Indigenous youth programming.
  5. While the Policy does require a permanent funding envelope to be put in place, the Commission has the discretion to provide some accommodation to address these unusual circumstances. In my view, the Rocket Fund could be listed as an eligible fund with the condition they launch their funding envelope once their financial situation has become more certain, something that could be monitored by the Commission in the coming months. Doing so would provide the necessary flexibility to a fund that has already made efforts to achieve what the Commission is now striving to accomplish.
  6. In conclusion:


    (i) The criteria provided in the Policy were established in 2024 and continue to guide interested CIPFs. That said, the launch date for the funding envelope was not set out in the Policy, thereby giving the Commission the opportunity to exercise its discretion.

    (ii) Setting a 60-day deadline for the establishment of a permanent envelope creates a barrier for some CIPFs, such as the Rocket Fund, as opposed to an incentive for change.

    (iii) Extending this deadline for the Rocket Fund (or other CIPFs demonstrating financial transition or uncertainty) to establish a permanent envelope provides an opportunity for such funds to benefit from eligibility, should online contributions become available in the immediate future. This provides the necessary flexibility without compromising the objectives of the Policy.

Date modified: