ARCHIVED - Transcript
This page has been archived on the Web
Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.
Providing Content in Canada's Official Languages
Please note that the Official Languages Act requires that government publications be available in both official languages.
In order to meet some of the requirements under this Act, the Commission's transcripts will therefore be bilingual as to their covers, the listing of CRTC members and staff attending the hearings, and the table of contents.
However, the aforementioned publication is the recorded verbatim transcript and, as such, is transcribed in either of the official languages, depending on the language spoken by the participant at the hearing.
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
FOR THE CANADIAN RADIO-TELEVISION AND
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
TRANSCRIPTION DES AUDIENCES DU
CONSEIL DE LA RADIODIFFUSION
ET DES TÉLÉCOMMUNICATIONS CANADIENNES
SUBJECT / SUJET:
CANADIAN TELEVISION POLICY REVIEW /
EXAMEN DES POLITIQUES DU CONSEIL
RELATIVES À LA TÉLÉVISION CANADIENNE
HELD AT: TENUE À:
Conference Centre Centre des conférences
Outaouais Room Salle Outaouais
Place du Portage Place du Portage
Phase IV Phase IV
Hull, Quebec Hull (Québec)
October 8, 1998 8 octobre 1998
Volume 12
tel: 613-521-0703 StenoTran fax: 613-521-7668
Transcripts
Transcription
Afin de rencontrer les exigences de la Loi sur les langues
officielles, les procès-verbaux pour le Conseil seront
bilingues en ce qui a trait à la page couverture, la liste des
membres et du personnel du CRTC participant à l'audience
publique ainsi que la table des matières.
Toutefois, la publication susmentionnée est un compte rendu
textuel des délibérations et, en tant que tel, est enregistrée
et transcrite dans l'une ou l'autre des deux langues
officielles, compte tenu de la langue utilisée par le
participant à l'audience publique.
StenoTran
Canadian Radio-television and
Telecommunications Commission
Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des
télécommunications canadiennes
Transcript / Transcription
Public Hearing / Audience publique
Canadian Television Policy Review /
Examen des politiques du Conseil
relatives à la télévision canadienne
BEFORE / DEVANT:
Andrée Wylie Chairperson / Présidente
Vice-Chairperson, Radio-
television / Vice-
présidente, Radiodiffusion
Joan Pennefather Commissioner / Conseillère
Andrew Cardozo Commissioner / Conseiller
Martha Wilson Commissioner / Conseillère
David McKendry Commissioner / Conseiller
ALSO PRESENT / AUSSI PRÉSENTS:
Jean-Pierre Blais Commission Counsel /
Avocat du Conseil
Margot Patterson Articling Student /
Stagiaire
Carole Bénard / Secretaries/Secrétaires
Diane Santerre
Nick Ketchum Hearing Manager / Gérant de
l'audience
HELD AT: TENUE À:
Conference Centre Centre des conférences
Outaouais Room Salle Outaouais
Place du Portage Place du Portage
Phase IV Phase IV
Hull, Quebec Hull (Québec)
October 8, 1998 8 octobre 1998
Volume 12
StenoTran
TABLE OF CONTENTS / TABLE DES MATIÈRES
PAGE
Presentation by / Présentation par:
Union des artistes 3528
Impératif français 3559
Horizon Interfaith Council 3589
Canada Family Action Coalition 3612
Canadian Diversity Network 3636
CHRC, Cultural Human Resources Council /
CRHSC, Conseil des ressources humaines
du secteur culturel 3685
The War Amputations of Canada / Les amputés
de guerre du Canada 3724
StenoTran
3527
1 Hull, Quebec / Hull (Québec)
2 --- Upon resuming on Thursday, October 8, 1998
3 at 0905 / L'audience reprend le jeudi
4 8 octobre 1998 à 0905
5 16665 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good morning.
6 16666 Madam Secretary, would you invite the
7 next participant, please.
8 16667 Mme SANTERRE: Madame la Présidente,
9 est-ce que vous me donnez quelques minutes? Je viens
10 de me rendre compte que je n'ai pas d'interprètes dans
11 la cabine.
12 16668 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Ça va. Nous
13 attendons.
14 --- Courte pause / Short pause
15 16669 Mme SANTERRE: Je m'excuse du
16 contretemps.
17 16670 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Allez-y, Madame la
18 Secrétaire, s'il vous plaît.
19 16671 Mme SANTERRE: Merci, Madame la
20 Présidente.
21 16672 Alors ce matin je voudrais inviter
22 l'Union des artistes à faire la présentation de leurs
23 commentaires pour l'audience.
24 16673 Allez-y, Monsieur Curzi.
25 PRÉSENTATION / PRESENTATION
StenoTran
3528
1 16674 M. CURZI: Bonjour, Madame la
2 Présidente, Mesdames et Messieurs les Commissaires.
3 Merci de nous recevoir de si bon matin pour entendre
4 notre mémoire et la réponse à votre avis des politiques
5 du Conseil relatives à la télévision canadienne.
6 16675 Je ne doute pas que vous avez lu et
7 pris connaissance de notre mémoire. Je vais essayer de
8 résumer assez brièvement le contenu de ce mémoire-là en
9 tenant compte du fait que votre avis posait à la fois
10 des questions extrêmement larges et des questions
11 extrêmement pointues. C'est dans le même esprit que
12 nous avons essayé de répondre à cet avis, à ces
13 demandes, en essayant de dégager quelle était notre
14 opinion plus large et aussi en apportant certaines
15 réponses pointues dans les cas qui nous touchaient plus
16 directement ou au sujet desquels nous étions le mieux
17 informés.
18 16676 Pour l'essentiel, l'opinion de
19 l'Union des artistes au sujet de la télévision...
20 évidemment, cette télévision-là, celle qui nous touche,
21 est surtout d'expression francophone puisque notre
22 juridiction s'applique aux produits et à la télévision
23 francophone.
24 16677 Notre impression, c'est que nous
25 vivons actuellement dans un équilibre extrêmement
StenoTran
3529
1 fragile, extrêmement précaire, et que cet équilibre est
2 basé sur deux principes: sur la nécessité pour
3 l'ensemble du public francophone d'avoir accès à une
4 télévision publique de qualité qui lui assure un
5 contenu culturel, un contenu de divertissement et un
6 contenu d'information de qualité... en ce sens, une de
7 nos recommandations, ou un de nos souhaits les plus
8 fondamentaux, c'est que la télévision publique soit et
9 demeure forte, qu'elle soit bien financée et qu'elle
10 assure à tous les Canadiens une présence de qualité.
11 16678 On ne peut pas contrer ce qui se
12 passe à l'intérieur du monde des communications. Il y
13 a eu, et il y a encore, l'existence, la naissance et la
14 multiplication de nombreux canaux spécialisés. Nous
15 croyons que le CRTC doit être extrêmement prudent dans
16 le fait d'accorder de nouvelles licences à des canaux
17 spécialisés; non pas que nous soyons opposés à
18 l'existence de tels canaux, mais nous pensons que le
19 principe que le CRTC doit respecter, c'est celui de cet
20 équilibre général et plus largement aussi celui de
21 pouvoir offrir des canaux qui répondent ou qui contrent
22 l'offre qui peut arriver du côté de d'autres canaux
23 spécialisés anglophones.
24 16679 J'essaie d'être le plus clair
25 possible: Nous ne croyons pas qu'on puisse aller aussi
StenoTran
3530
1 loin que d'autres pays où les spectateurs sont beaucoup
2 plus nombreux et où on peut spécialiser à l'extrême
3 l'offre de canaux spécialisés. Nous croyons que dans
4 notre marché il faut absolument maintenir un équilibre,
5 fragile je le répète, qui permette à tout le monde à la
6 fois de conserver l'audience, donc d'offrir
7 suffisamment pour que tout le monde trouve matière à
8 manger, à consommer, mais en même temps ne pas sur-
9 spécialiser tellement que l'on fractionne l'auditoire,
10 que l'on fractionne les revenus, que l'on fractionne
11 les moyens de production. Ça, ça nous apparaît
12 extraordinairement important pour que l'ensemble de ce
13 marché télévisuel francophone continue à respirer.
14 16680 Je me fais le porte-parole d'une
15 inquiétude profonde que nous ressentons, nous, quant au
16 danger que pourrait apporter ce fractionnement-là quant
17 aux moyens de production. On sait très bien que la
18 masse des gens n'est pas infinie, surtout du côté
19 francophone. Nous savons que nous sommes dans une
20 relation de compétition avec un marché anglophone
21 extrêmement puissant. Donc nous sommes limités dans
22 nos moyens, dans nos ressources, et pour nous assurer
23 qu'il y ait les moyens suffisants pour faire un produit
24 canadien de qualité, nous devons faire attention.
25 16681 En ce sens, l'autre menace qui nous
StenoTran
3531
1 semble être extrêmement importante... et là, ça devient
2 une fonction vitale, je pense, du CRTC. Nous demandons
3 que le CRTC soit très vigilant quant à l'utilisation de
4 la publicité sur les ondes en général.
5 16682 Il apparaît actuellement des formes
6 de messages publicitaires où l'on tente de lier la
7 publicité au contenu des émissions par des sortes de
8 publicités subliminales, par des formes de publicité
9 qui envahissent littéralement l'écran. En ce sens-là,
10 nous avons une profonde inquiétude.
11 16683 S'il fallait qu'une telle tendance se
12 poursuive, nous croyons qu'il y a là un danger de
13 maladie extraordinaire, une espèce de cancer du contenu
14 même des émissions canadiennes. Ça, c'est une menace
15 énorme.
16 16684 Il y a des recommandations plus
17 spécifiques, mais je pense que vous avez déjà des
18 questions assez précises. J'ajouterais que, pour le
19 moment, nous nous réservons à la fois deux occasions,
20 celle de pouvoir apporter des recommandations peut-être
21 plus précises à la fin de ces audiences-ci, mais
22 surtout celle de pouvoir intervenir dans des cas précis
23 de renouvellement des licences, dans les cas précis où
24 les audiences du CRTC nous permettront d'être plus
25 directement pointus sur les questions posées.
StenoTran
3532
1 16685 Voilà, je serai aussi bref que ça,
2 vous ayant fait part de mes principales préoccupations.
3 16686 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Je vous remercie.
4 16687 La conseillère Pennefather, s'il vous
5 plaît.
6 16688 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Bonjour.
7 16689 M. CURZI: Bonjour.
8 16690 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: En effet,
9 j'ai quelques questions de clarification, et peut-être
10 qu'un peu plus de discussion nous aidera à comprendre
11 vos préoccupations.
12 16691 M. CURZI: Oui.
13 16692 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: En premier
14 lieu, vous proposez au début de votre mémoire que le
15 cadre de réglementation de la télévision canadienne
16 doit demeurer.
17 16693 M. CURZI: Oui.
18 16694 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: En même
19 temps vous parlez, comme beaucoup d'intervenants, de la
20 distinction du marché francophone.
21 16695 Est-ce que dans votre mémoire, en
22 disant que le cadre de la réglementation de la
23 télévision canadienne doit demeurer, vous parlez de la
24 totalité de la télévision canadienne, anglaise et
25 française, ou seulement du marché francophone?
StenoTran
3533
1 16696 M. CURZI: Nous croyons que le cadre
2 devrait demeurer pour l'ensemble de la télévision.
3 16697 Ce à quoi nous faisions référence,
4 c'est évidemment, par exemple, que du côté de la
5 télévision francophone le respect du contenu canadien
6 ne pose à peu près pas de problèmes, sauf peut-être en
7 dans ce qui a trait aux canaux spécialisés, où le
8 contenu canadien a des exigences beaucoup moindres. En
9 ce sens, s'il y avait une recommandation ou un souhait
10 que nous ferions, ce serait de graduellement augmenter
11 le pourcentage de contenu canadien qui sera demandé et
12 exigé des canaux spécialisés.
13 16698 Mais comme c'est une préoccupation,
14 le contenu canadien, qui n'est pas la nôtre -- je pense
15 que la Société Radio-Canada se vante cette année
16 d'avoir une diffusion 100 pour cent canadienne -- le
17 seul objet précis de notre préoccupation dans ce cadre-
18 là, ce serait une recommandation précise que les heures
19 de grande écoute passent de 17 h 00 (sic) à 18 h 00, et
20 donc que la période couverte soit de 6 h 00 à 11 h 00
21 le soir, de 18 h 00 à 23 h 00.
22 16699 Pour le reste, l'ensemble des
23 réglementations du CRTC nous convient... que ça passe
24 de 18 h 00 à 23 h 00 et non 19 h 00 à 23 h 00, qu'on
25 augmente d'une heure.
StenoTran
3534
1 16700 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Qu'on
2 augmente d'une heure.
3 16701 M. CURZI: Oui, qu'on augmente d'une
4 heure.
5 16702 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Vous savez
6 qu'il y a des intervenants qui parlaient du marché
7 francophone qui en effet ont proposé des nouvelles
8 approches. À titre d'exemple,l'APFTQ a parlé d'une
9 allocation de crédits supplémentaires pour les
10 catégories sous-représentées pour les productions du
11 secteur indépendant seulement; ça veut dire un
12 pourcentage de 150 pour cent pour les dramatiques
13 lourdes, documentaires, émissions pour enfants et
14 coproductions majoritaires, et 125 pour cent pour les
15 téléromans.
16 16703 Qu'est-ce que vous pensez de cette
17 approche, qui est un effort de vraiment travailler
18 d'une façon plus réglementée dans le marché francophone
19 qu'aujourd'hui?
20 16704 M. CURZI: Je vais demander à
21 Mme Beauchemin de vous répondre.
22 16705 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: Bonjour, madame.
23 16706 Si je peux me permettre de juste
24 revenir un peu en arrière, le message fondamental de
25 l'Union des artistes, c'est que les deux marchés,
StenoTran
3535
1 francophone et anglophone, ayant leurs spécificités, il
2 est nécessaire que la réglementation reflète ces
3 spécificités-là. Notamment, les habitudes d'écoute ne
4 sont pas nécessairement les mêmes dans les deux
5 marchés, les habitudes d'écoute des francophones étant
6 telles que l'écoute de grande écoute commence plus tôt.
7 Donc il serait nécessaire qu'on tienne compte de cette
8 réalité-là.
9 16707 Pour revenir à votre question plus
10 spécifique de la recommandation de l'APFTQ, il va sans
11 dire que nous sommes d'accord pour qu'il y ait une
12 attention additionnelle apportée aux secteurs qui sont
13 sous-représentés et que l'APFTQ a mentionnés dans son
14 mémoire. Les modalités que retiendrait le CRTC pour
15 arriver à cette fin-là, nous ne nous prononçons pas là-
16 dessus. Nous laissons la liberté au CRTC, qui a toute
17 l'information nécessaire, d'arriver à définir les
18 modalités.
19 16708 Ce qui nous semble important, par
20 ailleurs -- et là, je me réfère au mémoire de
21 l'ADISQ -- c'est qu'il est important qu'en parlant de
22 catégories sous-représentées on fasse bien attention de
23 bien définir les termes, de bien reconnaître la
24 situation particulière par exemple de la chanson, qui
25 est à la fois sous-financée et sous-représentée...
StenoTran
3536
1 sous-financée pour ce qui est de la production
2 d'émissions et sous-représentée par la même occasion au
3 niveau de la diffusion. Pour nous, ça, c'est très
4 important.
5 16709 Mais les modalités précises que vous
6 propose l'APFTQ, nous ne sommes ni pour, ni contre;
7 nous vous laissons la liberté de les évaluer à leur
8 mérite.
9 16710 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Mais, en
10 principe, vous voyez la possibilité d'aller un peu plus
11 loin pour supporter la production du secteur
12 indépendant du côté francophone.
13 16711 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: Très certainement,
14 oui.
15 16712 M. CURZI: Ah, oui.
16 16713 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Dans ce
17 sens-là aussi on a des propos pour et contre le fait
18 que les télédiffuseurs aient accès au Fonds de
19 production de Téléfilm en plus de ce qu'ils ont déjà.
20 Qu'est-ce que vous pensez de cette proposition, étant
21 donné le besoin de plus en plus de ressources pour la
22 production?
23 16714 M. CURZI: À tout le moins on
24 considère que l'accès à ces fonds-là ne devrait pas
25 être comptabilisé comme étant une partie de leurs
StenoTran
3537
1 dépenses de programmation.
2 16715 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Oui, j'ai
3 vu ça.
4 16716 M. CURZI: Ça, ça me semble être
5 une...
6 16717 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Alors vous
7 n'êtes pas d'accord qu'ils aient accès à ce fonds,
8 qu'il devrait rester seulement disponible au secteur
9 indépendant de production?
10 16718 M. CURZI: Pas forcément. J'avoue
11 que, là encore, jusqu'à un certain point, le
12 financement des émissions... la seule chose qu'on peut
13 dire là-dessus, c'est qu'il nous semble qu'il serait
14 préférable que l'accès à ces fonds-là, s'il y en a un,
15 ne soit pas comptabilisé et ne serve pas jusqu'à un
16 certain point à augmenter une image de profit et
17 diminue les investissements, donc l'injection d'argent
18 frais dans la production de la part des télédiffuseurs.
19 Ça, ça nous semble être le minimum qu'on peut demander.
20 16719 Quant à la structure de financement
21 elle-même, à l'extrême, nous préférons être prudents
22 pourvu qu'on soit certains qu'elle augmente.
23 Généralement, c'est notre seul souhait étant donné que,
24 dans l'intérêt de nos membres, qu'elle soit répartie
25 d'une façon ou d'une autre, pour nous, elle a
StenoTran
3538
1 sensiblement les mêmes effets si l'on excepte le fait
2 que la télévision généraliste nous semble encore être
3 le moyen de dégager des consensus sociaux et que, tant
4 qu'on n'aura pas fait la preuve qu'on puisse avoir et
5 obtenir à l'intérieur d'une diffusion... de diffuseurs
6 des consensus aussi larges que nous assure la
7 télévision généraliste, ce serait extrêmement dommage
8 de prendre la proie pour l'ombre.
9 16720 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Oui. En
10 effet, vous avez mentionné deux choses qu'il est
11 important pour nous de comprendre. J'aimerais que vous
12 élaboriez davantage sur la participation des
13 radiodiffuseurs francophones privés. Votre position
14 sur la SRC est claire, mais du côté privé, quelles sont
15 les priorités pour vous?
16 16721 M. CURZI: Du côté de la télévision
17 privée c'est bien clair qu'actuellement il y a, je
18 dirais, une domination du télédiffuseur privé, qui est
19 TVA dans ce cas-là, qui est assez importante au niveau
20 du marché. L'argumentation de la Société Radio-Canada
21 veut que la Société elle-même soit le concurrent et
22 qu'elle empêche une sorte de situation de monopole de
23 la télévision privée.
24 16722 C'est le raisonnement, et j'ai
25 quelque malaise à épouser ce raisonnement-là dans la
StenoTran
3539
1 mesure où ce serait une manière de se départir de ce
2 qui est lourd et coûteux pour une télévision telle que
3 la Société Radio-Canada. Que les producteurs privés
4 cherchent à se multiplier et à augmenter leur marge de
5 profit, à être compétitifs dans un marché qui l'est,
6 c'est difficile de s'opposer à ça; ça me semble être
7 une force économique qu'on ne peut pas contrer. La
8 seule chose qu'on puisse exiger, c'est qu'ils aient des
9 pratiques cohérentes et qu'il n'y ait pas d'esquive de
10 la part du télédiffuseur qui se décharge de ses
11 responsabilités de producteur.
12 16723 En ce sens-là, la seule chose que je
13 pourrais dire, c'est de l'ordre de la vertu ou de
14 l'ordre des principes: Il me semble que le fait
15 d'accorder des licences à des privés, des licences
16 d'exploitation des zones publiques, implique un certain
17 nombre de responsabilités et de devoirs dans certaines
18 pratiques commerciales actuelles. Je ne voudrais pas
19 me mêler de ce qui ne me regarde pas, mais dans
20 certaines pratiques il me semble qu'il y a un risque de
21 glissement des télédiffuseurs privés vers un dégagement
22 de leurs responsabilités au sujet du contenu et de la
23 qualité du contenu.
24 16724 C'est tout, je pense, ce que je puis
25 dire maintenant.
StenoTran
3540
1 16725 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Je pense
2 que TVA a fait le point qu'ils ont un pourcentage de
3 contenu canadien assez haut.
4 16726 M. CURZI: Incontestablement. En ce
5 sens-là, nous sommes d'accord; nous revenons à ce qu'il
6 y a de spécifique avec la télévision francophone, et
7 c'est que les contenus canadiens sont largement
8 assurés. L'audience est très fidèle, l'audience
9 consomme d'une manière privilégiée des produits qui
10 originent de chez nous. Donc, s'il y a des efforts à
11 faire, c'est au niveau de maintenir la qualité et le
12 niveau de production des émissions canadiennes chez
13 nous.
14 16727 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: En effet,
15 vous avez parlé, à la page 4 de votre mémoire, de la
16 dégradation de la qualité. Qu'est-ce que vous voulez
17 dire par ça?
18 16728 M. CURZI: Ce que je veux dire -- et
19 nous en sommes particulièrement affectés
20 quotidiennement -- c'est que le développement de la
21 télévision canadienne s'est fait de telle sorte que
22 nous avons encouragé le développement d'une structure
23 industrielle et nous en étions tous conscients.
24 L'actuelle prolifération de producteurs, l'actuelle
25 prolifération de canaux spécialisés, le morcellement,
StenoTran
3541
1 la multiplication des structures industrielles sont une
2 menace puisque chacun doit gérer maintenant une somme
3 qui, semble-t-il, n'a pas augmenté énormément.
4 Autrement dit, c'est comme si on avait le même gâteau
5 mais que le nombre d'intervenants se partageait de plus
6 en plus.
7 16729 En ce sens-là, les budgets de
8 production ont tendance à plafonner et ça, c'est
9 extrêmement inquiétant parce que, quand il y a un
10 plafonnement au niveau des budgets de production, c'est
11 évident que ce sont les travailleurs et ceux de
12 première ligne qui voient leurs conditions de travail
13 se dégrader. Cette menace-là, elle est permanente,
14 constante, et c'est notre combat quotidien pour essayer
15 de maintenir des conditions de travail. Que ce soit
16 dans le temps, dans la durée, dans les conditions
17 physiques de travail, dans les cachets qui sont versés
18 aux artistes-interprètes, on doit dire que depuis
19 quelques années on n'assiste pas du tout à une
20 augmentation ou à une bonification de nos conditions de
21 production, c'est plutôt le contraire.
22 16730 Donc, en ce sens-là, il faut qu'il y
23 ait une sorte de corset, et le CRTC doit absolument
24 maintenir une sorte de réglementation qui établisse
25 clairement les règles du jeu.
StenoTran
3542
1 16731 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: Si je peux me
2 permettre d'ajouter, ce que M. Curzi décrit a des
3 conséquences directes sur la programmation puisque, les
4 cadences augmentant, il y a de plus en plus une
5 tendance dans les productions à dire que, là où il y
6 avait peut-être une période de répétitions plus longue,
7 on écourte; là où il y avait possibilité de faire
8 plusieurs prises, il n'y en a plus qu'une, et ainsi de
9 suite.
10 16732 Ceci fait que, pour les artistes-
11 interprètes eux-mêmes, au niveau de la qualité de leur
12 travail et de leur professionnalisme, ils se retrouvent
13 souvent dans des situations extrêmement difficiles où
14 ils savent qu'ils n'ont pas pu donner le meilleur
15 d'eux-mêmes et que le public n'obtiendra pas le
16 meilleur produit qu'il pourrait obtenir à cause des
17 circonstances qui font que les cadences sont
18 augmentées, les budgets sont plafonnés et qu'il y a une
19 prolifération de maisons de production, chacune
20 travaillant évidemment en concurrence avec sa voisine
21 et chacune essayant de livrer le produit, mais dans le
22 sens le moins noble du terme, le plus rapidement
23 possible pour remplir un espace et que ça s'appelle une
24 émission.
25 16733 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Je
StenoTran
3543
1 comprends. Vous cherchez un équilibre dans tout ce
2 secteur-là...
3 16734 M. CURZI: Oui.
4 16735 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: ... et je
5 comprends que vous parlez de certaines conditions de
6 travail. Mais en même temps il faut aller chercher les
7 moyens pour supporter de plus en plus de productions
8 francophones, non pas pour survivre en termes des
9 francophones au Canada mais aussi dans un monde de plus
10 en plus envahi par les productions qui viennent de
11 partout. Alors c'est une balance importante à trouver.
12 16736 M. CURZI: Excusez-moi, on pense
13 qu'une des manières en tout cas d'assurer qu'il y ait
14 un équilibre, c'est que les groupes de créateurs soient
15 présents dans l'ensemble des organismes, à l'intérieur
16 des organismes qui gèrent des fonds publics. On pense
17 que c'est encore un des moyens très forts pour les
18 créateurs de s'assurer d'une qualité du contenu, d'une
19 qualité du travail.
20 16737 Si on peut être toujours les
21 gardiens -- les gardiens, oui -- de ce que l'ensemble
22 du peuple consacre à sa représentation culturelle, je
23 pense que ça devient la seule façon qu'on a pour nous
24 de ne pas nécessairement adopter un modèle mondial...
25 je pense qu'il y a cette aberration que nous sommes de
StenoTran
3544
1 plus en plus confrontés, obligés d'adopter un modèle
2 qui ne nous convient pas nécessairement. Si l'État, si
3 les organismes publics, si les fonds publics ne servent
4 pas à préserver un modèle de société qui n'est pas
5 nécessairement le même que celui qui nous entoure,
6 alors, vraiment, là, on est dans la panade.
7 16738 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: On parle
8 souvent dans nos audiences de la diversité en effet de
9 la programmation, et ce mot peut vraiment souligner
10 beaucoup de questions qui sont importantes.
11 16739 Avant qu'on revienne à ce point-là,
12 une question peut-être un peu plus spécifique. Au
13 paragraphe 18 vous parlez des canaux spécialisés, des
14 services spécialisés; vous l'avez mentionné aujourd'hui
15 aussi.
16 16740 Est-ce que vous avez quelque chose à
17 nous recommander qui est plus spécifique vis-à-vis les
18 recommandations pour un accroissement graduel du
19 pourcentage de contenu canadien à leur antenne? Est-ce
20 que vous avez une recommandation spécifique vis-à-vis
21 le pourcentage et cet accroissement graduel?
22 16741 M. CURZI: Un des moyens pour obtenir
23 l'accroissement du contenu canadien dans le cas des
24 canaux spécialisés nous apparaît être peut-être la
25 possibilité de fractionner le contenu canadien en
StenoTran
3545
1 émissions produites et en émissions de langue étrangère
2 produites ailleurs et diffusées sur les ondes, et
3 doublées ici, évidemment.
4 16742 Si on augmentait ou si on avait les
5 mêmes exigences de contenu canadien face aux émissions
6 doublées, et que ce soit graduel, sur un certain nombre
7 d'années, ce serait exiger des canaux spécialisés, qui
8 consomment beaucoup de productions en langue étrangère
9 doublées un peu partout... ce serait leur demander à
10 eux de faire un effort supplémentaire pour que les
11 émissions qu'ils achètent qui sont en langue étrangère
12 soient doublées chez nous et soient donc accessibles au
13 contenu canadien, qui est défini, je pense, à 50 pour
14 cent d'une émission produite. Ce serait une manière
15 douce et pas trop coûteuse d'augmenter les demandes
16 pour que le contenu canadien soit respecté dans le cas
17 des canaux spécialisés.
18 16743 Il y a, plus largement, à l'intérieur
19 de ces canaux-là, évidemment la production d'émissions
20 dont le contenu est canadien. Encore là, dans le cas
21 du marché francophone, on pourrait je pense avoir des
22 exigences raisonnables face aux canaux spécialisés
23 puisque là encore la loi de la consommation de ses
24 propres produits devrait jouer en faveur de ce contenu
25 canadien.
StenoTran
3546
1 16744 Ça pourrait être une des manières, en
2 tout cas, qui apporterait aussi du travail, un travail
3 important dans un secteur très pointu du marché
4 francophone, qui est le secteur du doublage, où on mène
5 des combats féroces pour développer cette industrie et
6 la rendre autant que possible concurrentielle et
7 éventuellement exportable, parce qu'on croit qu'il y a
8 là un créneau où nous sommes très bien situés, entre
9 l'Amérique et l'Europe, qui nous permettrait de
10 développer une expertise qui soit exportable.
11 16745 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: Si je peux me
12 permettre, je m'excuse, d'ajouter...
13 16746 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Pas du
14 tout. On prend le temps nécessaire.
15 16747 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: D'accord.
16 16748 C'est simplement pour vous dire qu'il
17 y a deux aspects qui, pour nous, travaillent ensemble.
18 D'une part, lorsqu'on dit: "S'il vous plaît, soyez
19 extrêmement vigilants quand il s'agit d'accorder de
20 nouvelles licences pour des canaux spécialisés", on
21 n'est pas en train de dire qu'il ne doit pas y en avoir
22 d'autres mais qu'il faut effectivement faire bien
23 attention parce que la capacité de produire de la
24 programmation n'est pas illimitée et qu'il y a un
25 problème à un moment donné à ce qu'il y ait une
StenoTran
3547
1 saturation, une répétition trop grande des mêmes
2 émissions, ce qui fait que les gens se désintéressent
3 de toute façon.
4 16749 Alors, d'un côté, on dit: Si on peut
5 être vigilants au niveau du nombre de canaux
6 spécialisés qui sont présents, on peut ensuite regarder
7 au niveau de la programmation elle-même de quelle façon
8 peut-on travailler pour en arriver à un contenu
9 canadien plus élevé. Et c'est là, comme l'explique
10 M. Curzi, qu'il y a deux voies; il y a effectivement la
11 voie du contenu pour ce qui est de la production au
12 Canada, et d'ouvrir la possibilité d'accorder des
13 crédits pour le doublage au Canada d'émission produites
14 ailleurs, ce qui aiderait à accroître ce pourcentage de
15 contenu canadien.
16 16750 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Merci,
17 madame.
18 16751 M. CURZI: C'est plus clair quand
19 vous le dites.
20 16752 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Maintenant,
21 un autre point très important dans votre mémoire est
22 l'autonomie des stations régionales.
23 16753 M. CURZI: Oui.
24 16754 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Vous
25 proposez que le Conseil "établisse des quotas
StenoTran
3548
1 d'émissions locales pour assurer une plus grande
2 diversité de la production et un meilleur reflet des
3 réalités régionales." Je cite.
4 16755 Pourriez-vous définir la production
5 locale et régionale et ensuite nous dire quels sont ces
6 quotas que vous recommandez? Qu'est-ce que vous voulez
7 dire?
8 16756 M. CURZI: Ce qu'on veut dire, c'est
9 que le problème que nous avons, c'est évidemment que,
10 de plus en plus, les stations mères constituent
11 l'ensemble de la programmation. Il y a un besoin
12 patent pour que les productions régionales aient accès
13 au réseau national. Pour qu'elles aient accès au
14 réseau national, les télédiffuseurs, à même une part de
15 leur budget qui est consacrée aux productions
16 indépendantes, doivent en dépenser une partie dans des
17 productions régionales de telle sorte que l'on
18 maintienne en vie et que l'on bonifie ces productions-
19 là pour qu'elles aient une chance d'accès au réseau
20 national.
21 16757 Est-ce que je suis clair?
22 16758 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Pas tout à
23 fait.
24 16759 M. CURZI: Pas tout à fait.
25 16760 Je pense qu'à l'intérieur des
StenoTran
3549
1 licences qui sont accordées par le CRTC il y a une part
2 du budget qui doit être consacrée aux productions
3 indépendantes. Ce qu'on recommande, ce qu'on souhaite,
4 c'est qu'une partie de ce budget consacré aux
5 productions indépendantes soit réservée...
6 16761 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Qui est
7 géré par le Fonds de production, pas le CRTC.
8 16762 Vous parlez du Fonds de production de
9 télévision canadienne, le fonds de Téléfilm?
10 16763 M. CURZI: Oui.
11 16764 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Vous parlez
12 de ce fonds-là?
13 16765 M. CURZI: C'est de ce fonds-là dont
14 on parle.
15 16766 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Il y a déjà
16 une portion pour la production régionale.
17 16767 M. CURZI: Il y a déjà une portion?
18 16768 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Oui.
19 16769 Est-ce que vous recommandez qu'on
20 l'accroisse?
21 16770 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: En fait, prenons un
22 exemple concret: la région de Québec.
23 16771 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Oui. C'est
24 ça que je voulais.
25 16772 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: Alors arrivons-y
StenoTran
3550
1 immédiatement.
2 16773 Dans la situation actuelle -- et nous
3 pourrons y revenir plus en détail au moment des
4 renouvellements de licences pour cette région-là --
5 essentiellement, ce qu'on veut dire, c'est qu'en ce
6 moment, la façon dont les choses fonctionnent, c'est
7 que pour rencontrer leurs obligations de licence, la
8 plupart du temps le contenu régional se limite à un
9 bulletin de nouvelles ou à quelque chose de cet ordre-
10 là, et qu'une fois que cet élément-là a été ajouté à la
11 programmation ou remplace le bulletin de nouvelles
12 venant de Montréal; les gens ont un peu l'impression
13 que, bon, ça y est, notre mandat a été réalisé et tout
14 est beau.
15 16774 Nous, nous constatons, d'une part,
16 qu'il y a au niveau de la ville de Québec un bassin
17 important de comédiens, de réalisateurs. Il y a une
18 vie culturelle très intense, il y a une vie théâtrale
19 intense, il y a là un bassin de gens qui peuvent
20 travailler à des émissions d'une autre nature que le
21 simple bulletin de nouvelles régional pour offrir une
22 programmation plus proche des intérêts de cette région-
23 là, produire un produit de qualité, et que ce produit
24 de qualité là, s'il y a un intérêt plus large, puisse
25 évidemment être repris par la station, par la chaîne
StenoTran
3551
1 nationale, mais qu'il y ait un plus fort pourcentage de
2 programmation de la région elle-même.
3 16775 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Dans un
4 marché restreint, par contre, le marché francophone, si
5 on met plus d'emphase sur la production régionale du
6 type que vous avez décrit, quel sera l'impact sur les
7 autres types d'émissions?
8 16776 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: Madame, prenons un
9 exemple d'un autre secteur, qui est la radio.
10 Évidemment, on n'est pas ici pour discuter de la radio,
11 mais prenons cet exemple-là.
12 16777 Il y a quelques années, alors qu'il
13 n'y avait pas le phénomène de concentration au niveau
14 des grandes chaînes, on pouvait se retrouver dans une
15 situation où un talent dans une région pouvait se faire
16 entendre sur la radio de sa région, et éventuellement
17 ça venait à l'oreille d'un public plus large, et ainsi
18 de suite. Ceci n'est plus le cas, mais ça, c'est une
19 autre histoire.
20 16778 On a un peu le même problème du côté
21 des bassins de talents au niveau des régions, où il n'y
22 a qu'une solution qui s'offre aux gens; c'est de s'en
23 aller à Montréal pour essayer de faire carrière là
24 parce qu'il n'y a pas de débouchés autres que le
25 théâtre, qui, comme tout le monde sait, ne nourrit pas
StenoTran
3552
1 son homme.
2 16779 Il y a là, il nous semble, une
3 possibilité pour la télévision régionale, dans sa
4 mission justement, d'avoir aussi ce mandat-là, qui est
5 d'offrir une fenêtre aux talents de cette région-là.
6 16780 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Maintenant,
7 madame, messieurs, est-ce qu'on peut se tourner vers la
8 menace de la publicité...
9 16781 M. CURZI: Ah, oui.
10 16782 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: ... et le
11 cancer de contenu que vous avez décrit ce matin. En
12 effet, vous en parlez dans votre mémoire, et je voulais
13 avoir une clarification là-dessus.
14 16783 Au paragraphe 25 vous parlez de ces
15 nouvelles formes de publicité...
16 16784 M. CURZI: Oui.
17 16785 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: ... ce
18 qu'on appelle en anglais "infomercials". C'est un peu
19 ça ou si c'est d'autres types...
20 16786 M. CURZI: Non, ce n'est pas
21 tellement celles-là.
22 16787 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: C'est plus
23 subtil que ça?
24 16788 M. CURZI: Ce dont on parle
25 nommément -- et je peux vous donner des exemples; il y
StenoTran
3553
1 a des exemples assez patents -- c'est du lien qui est
2 en train de se faire entre la publicité et le contenu
3 même des émissions. Ça, ça nous apparaît épouvantable.
4 Je vous donne un exemple.
5 16789 Il y a une série d'émissions qui
6 s'appelle "Watatatow", je crois, où l'Agence spatiale
7 canadienne est commanditaire, mais elle l'est à
8 l'origine, et le résultat de ce financement-là, c'est
9 qu'à l'intérieur même de l'émission un des personnages
10 veut devenir astronaute. C'est un but louable en soi,
11 mais le fait d'intervenir au moment de la conception
12 même d'une émission et que ce soit donc une publicité
13 subliminale nous apparaît être à abolir et à éliminer
14 complètement. C'est une forme.
15 16790 D'autres formes. Par exemple, nous
16 sommes dans une série dramatique lourde, importante,
17 une scène entre deux personnages; je vous donne un
18 exemple qui n'est pas tout à fait fictif mais que je ne
19 veux pas nommer. Tout à coup vous voyez une petite
20 vache qui se met à se promener autour de votre écran.
21 Il y a un problème, là. Il y a un problème parce que
22 nous avons un placement de produit qui est plutôt indu.
23 Ou alors nous sommes dans une série où le personnage
24 central est alcoolique et, dans une scène, il se
25 convertit et il devient un buveur de lait. C'est, en
StenoTran
3554
1 soi, excellent, nous préférons que tous les alcooliques
2 se mettent au lait, mais est-ce que c'est bien le cas
3 et le moyen pour intervenir?
4 16791 Ce type de publicité là est, pour
5 nous, à proscrire.
6 16792 En plus, je pense que le nombre de
7 minutes consacrées à la publicité à l'intérieur d'une
8 heure de diffusion doit rester ce qu'il est et il ne
9 doit pas augmenter. Ce type de publicité là, je ne
10 suis pas convaincu qu'elle soit comptabilisée ou
11 comptabilisable, et il me semble que là, on verse dans
12 un trop plein de publicité dont les effets sont très
13 clairs: il va y avoir une désaffection du public, une
14 saturation des gens, ce qui a tendance à multiplier le
15 désir des canaux spécialisés, mais c'est en soi une
16 pratique incorrecte, je pense, de la place nécessaire
17 de la publicité et de la commandite à l'intérieur de la
18 structure de production.
19 16793 Il y a donc des formes vicieuses de
20 publicité qui sont en train de s'instaurer.
21 16794 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Je pense
22 que je comprends et je peux saisir votre point de vue
23 vis-à-vis l'effet de ça sur le travail des artistes-
24 interprètes, mais une autre question peut être mise sur
25 la table, et c'est: Dans une ère où on cherche de plus
StenoTran
3555
1 en plus de ressources pour la production, pour la
2 programmation en soi, pour que les auditoires
3 francophones aient accès à une programmation
4 diversifiée, vous trouvez toujours... parce que vous
5 nous laissez avec une question ici. Il faut voir à
6 cette question-là mais, si vous pouvez nous guider un
7 peu, entre avoir plus de ressources pour la protection
8 de la programmation et restreindre cette implication
9 disons des commanditaires dans la production, vous vous
10 trouvez où?
11 16795 M. CURZI: Il ne s'agit pas
12 d'empêcher, au contraire. Nous ne sommes nullement
13 opposés aux commandites, aux commanditaires et à la
14 publicité; ce n'est pas là le but. Il y a certaines
15 formes, celle qui lie la publicité au contenu même des
16 émissions, ça, ça nous semble à proscrire. Pour le
17 reste, nous sommes ouverts à toute forme de publicité
18 et de commandite.
19 16796 C'est sûr qu'il y a des fonds
20 importants qui sont là. Ce qu'on dit, cependant, c'est
21 qu'il faudra que les gens de cet univers-là s'assoient
22 et qu'il n'y ait pas aussi des effets pervers sur le
23 marché publicitaire lui-même, c'est-à-dire que si la
24 publicité emprunte le canal des télédiffuseurs et saute
25 par-dessus le marché, le lieu de production de la
StenoTran
3556
1 publicité, alors là, on met en péril un univers qui
2 fonctionne très bien et qui est, pour mes membres en
3 tout cas, une source de revenus importante.
4 16797 Donc, tout ce qu'on souhaite, c'est
5 que certaines choses ne soient pas faites, qu'il n'y
6 ait pas trop d'abus. En quelque sorte, ce qu'on
7 demande, c'est que le CRTC s'assure que, dans ses
8 réglementations, il n'y ait pas de portes ouvertes à
9 trop de laxisme. Pour le reste, c'est un travail
10 auquel nous nous attablons actuellement, qui est
11 d'avoir des conversations avec l'ensemble du milieu sur
12 comment gérer les différentes formes de publicité à
13 l'intérieur des émissions pour qu'elles respectent le
14 marché publicitaire et ceux qui le supportent, c'est-à-
15 dire les créateurs, qui en sont les véhicules.
16 16798 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: C'est ça,
17 parce que j'essayais de faire le lien entre vos
18 commentaires et ceux de l'ACTRA... et je fais une
19 traduction: "Vous devriez prendre des actions pour
20 encourager la production de la publicité canadienne et
21 l'achat d'air time pour cette publicité dans les
22 entertainment programs scheduled in peak time."
23 16799 Est-ce que vous êtes d'accord avec
24 cette position d'ACTRA?
25 16800 M. CURZI: Mon Dieu, je la découvre
StenoTran
3557
1 ce matin, cette position-là. Je ne peux pas répondre à
2 ça, je ne sais pas.
3 16801 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: C'est juste
4 pour essayer de comprendre. Les milieux sont
5 différents, mais c'est un point important.
6 16802 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: Je pense que, au
7 risque de me répéter et de paraître très lourde et
8 didactique, l'essentiel du message de l'Union des
9 artistes, c'est qu'effectivement nous ne sommes
10 aucunement opposés à la publicité, nous reconnaissons
11 la publicité comme faisant partie de notre société; ça,
12 la question ne se pose pas.
13 16803 On ne peut certainement pas être en
14 désaccord avec nos camarades de l'ACTRA lorsqu'ils
15 souhaitent qu'il y ait davantage de publicité produite
16 au Canada; ça, c'est évident qu'on ne s'y oppose
17 d'aucune manière.
18 16804 Il y a deux messages. L'un est celui
19 que M. Curzi vient de vous expliquer de façon très
20 éloquente; l'autre, qui est la question que vous posez,
21 est la question de fond: Où se trouve l'argent pour
22 une production de qualité.
23 16805 Là-dessus, je reviens encore sur
24 cette notion que M. Curzi a développé à plusieurs
25 reprises: Nous savons que les fonds sont limités.
StenoTran
3558
1 Dans une situation où les fonds sont limités, est-il
2 raisonnable de multiplier les canaux et les diffuseurs
3 sans égard, justement, à cette limitation des
4 ressources? N'est-il pas préférable, justement, de
5 s'assurer que ce qui existe a les moyens de fournir une
6 programmation de qualité?
7 16806 C'est un peu ça, notre inquiétude.
8 C'est qu'on a l'impression qu'on essaie de faire tout
9 en même temps. On essaie de développer une
10 programmation de qualité -- et ça, nous en sommes -- et
11 en même temps il semble y avoir une tendance à se dire:
12 Mais, parce qu'il y a multiplication de canaux
13 ailleurs, il faut absolument suivre le même modèle.
14 16807 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Merci.
15 Merci beaucoup.
16 16808 C'est la fin de mes questions, Madame
17 la Présidente.
18 16809 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Merci beaucoup,
19 Monsieur Curzi, Madame Beauchemin et... c'est
20 Monsieur Choquette, je crois?
21 16810 M. CHOQUETTE: Oui.
22 16811 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Nous vous remercions
23 de votre participation.
24 16812 M. CURZI: Merci, madame, pour la
25 qualité de vos questions.
StenoTran
3559
1 16813 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Nous vous souhaitons
2 un bon voyage de retour. Vous rentrez à Montréal, je
3 suppose?
4 16814 M. CURZI: Oui.
5 16815 LA PRÉSIDENTE: À la pluie.
6 16816 Madame la Secrétaire, voulez-vous
7 inviter le prochain participant, s'il vous plaît.
8 16817 Mme SANTERRE: Merci, Madame la
9 Présidente.
10 16818 La prochaine présentation sera faite
11 par Impératif français.
12 16819 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Bonjour, messieurs
13 dames. Allez-y quand vous êtes prêts.
14 PRÉSENTATION / PRESENTATION
15 16820 M. PERREAULT: Dans un premier temps,
16 nous tenons à vous remercier pour bien avoir accepté de
17 nous recevoir aujourd'hui et nous profiterons de
18 l'occasion pour vous faire part de recommandations, de
19 suggestions ou de commentaires, nous le souhaitons,
20 susceptibles d'améliorer la qualité de la télévision
21 canadienne. Mais, avant de débuter la présentation,
22 j'aimerais vous présenter les membres de la table:
23 tout d'abord ici, en arrière, M. Léo Labrie, membre
24 d'Impératif français; Mme Lucie Carrière, adjointe
25 administrative; M. Raynald Charest, conseiller aux
StenoTran
3560
1 questions ontariennes; et Mme Nathalie Mathieu, vice-
2 présidente d'Impératif français.
3 16821 Nous avons avec nous un document que
4 nous avons prélevé du site Internet du CRTC. Il a pour
5 titre: "Ici le CRTC". Je vais vous lire quelques
6 extraits de ce document-là.
7 16822 En premier il est dit ici:
8 "Partout où se trouve une radio,
9 un téléviseur ou un téléphone,
10 nous veillons au maintien des
11 caractéristiques qui font la
12 spécificité des Canadiens et du
13 Canada. Nous veillons également
14 à assurer aux Canadiens l'accès
15 aux meilleurs services
16 possibles." (Tel que lu)
17 16823 Il est dit plus loin:
18 "Le CRTC a pour rôle d'assurer
19 une programmation diverse et de
20 qualité, satisfaisant les
21 intérêts les plus variés, de
22 favoriser la production et la
23 diffusion d'émissions
24 canadiennes et de veiller à ce
25 que la programmation respecte
StenoTran
3561
1 les normes canadiennes." (Tel
2 que lu)
3 16824 Également, un peu plus loin, il est
4 également dit:
5 "Le Canada d'abord.
6 Tout en permettant aux abonnés
7 du câble d'avoir accès aux
8 services étrangers les plus
9 populaires, le CRTC veille à ce
10 que la majorité des canaux
11 soient réservés aux services
12 canadiens. Cela a pour but de
13 promouvoir l'essor et la variété
14 des services canadiens de
15 programmation." (Tel que lu)
16 16825 À cet égard, nous formulerons
17 aujourd'hui certaines recommandations et nous demandons
18 au CRTC:
19 16826 - De modifier ou d'adopter des
20 règlements et les politiques nécessaires pour que les
21 Canadiens aient accès à un plus grand nombre de
22 stations publiques et privées de télévision canadienne.
23 Vous n'êtes pas sans savoir, comme nous le savons,
24 qu'un grand nombre de câblodistributeurs vont favoriser
25 la diffusion de stations américaines avant les stations
StenoTran
3562
1 canadiennes lorsque la réglementation canadienne ne
2 l'exige pas.
3 16827 - D'adopter ou de modifier les
4 règlements et les politiques nécessaires pour que les
5 Canadiens du Canada hors Québec aient accès à un plus
6 grand nombre de stations publiques et privées de
7 télévision canadienne de langue française. Compte tenu
8 de leur fort contenu canadien, les stations de langue
9 française devraient, à notre avis, bénéficier d'une
10 priorité plus élevée en câblodistribution.
11 16828 À notre avis également le CRTC
12 devrait envisager:
13 16829 - D'imposer la présence de sept ou
14 huit stations de langue française partout au Canada.
15 16830 - D'adopter des règlements, ou de
16 les modifier, pour que dans la capitale canadienne,
17 Ottawa, la capitale des deux langues officielles, les
18 citoyens canadiens aient accès en priorité aux signaux
19 des stations de télévision canadienne. Encore là, nous
20 ne sommes pas sans savoir que des stations canadiennes
21 à fort contenu canadien se voient refuser par le
22 câblodistributeur d'Ottawa la diffusion auprès de la
23 population de la région. Tout de même, lorsque nous
24 regardons la grille de ce câblodistributeur, nous
25 constatons que nous y trouvons dans bien des cas des
StenoTran
3563
1 stations américaines. À notre avis, cela est
2 doublement étonnant, puisqu'il s'agit de la capitale du
3 Canada.
4 16831 - D'adopter les mesures nécessaires
5 pour que la politique et les règlements du CRTC
6 relatifs à l'attribution de licences aux réémetteurs
7 n'ait pas pour effet de priver les Canadiens de
8 stations de télévision à plus fort contenu canadien.
9 En effet, le câblodistributeur est tenu d'offrir les
10 réémetteurs en commençant par la bande de base du
11 service de base, privant ainsi, certaines fois, ses
12 abonnés et la région de la réception de signaux de
13 stations de télévision canadiennes à plus fort contenu
14 canadien. Dans cette région-ci, il y a cinq stations
15 réémettrices.
16 16832 Dans bien des cas le
17 câblodistributeur invoquera la raison de cette
18 obligation de diffuser ces signaux en provenance des
19 réémetteurs pour justifier le fait qu'il ne peut pas,
20 il n'a plus d'espace de libre dans sa grille pour
21 diffuser des stations canadiennes à plus fort contenu
22 canadien, et également pour justifier qu'une station
23 éducative aussi importante que Télé-Québec soit
24 déplacée au signal 70, que certains câblosélecteurs ne
25 peuvent capter.
StenoTran
3564
1 16833 Il faut également savoir que ces
2 réémetteurs ont une production locale ou régionale
3 minime ou inexistante. En grande partie, la
4 programmation est celle de la station mère
5 indépendante, et le plus souvent à fort pourcentage
6 d'émissions américaines. Il faut également savoir que
7 ces stations réémettrices ont accès à l'assiette
8 publicitaire bien qu'il soit spécifié dans certains cas
9 qu'elles ne peuvent avoir accès à l'assiette
10 publicitaire locale et régionale; néanmoins, elles ont
11 accès à l'assiette publicitaire nationale, ce qui
12 occasionne sûrement des pertes de revenus aux stations
13 régionales et locales qui, elles, le plus souvent, ont
14 une programmation locale et régionale et également à
15 fort contenu canadien.
16 16834 Le CRTC devrait exiger une teneur
17 canadienne plus élevée de la part des demandeurs de
18 licences pour réémetteurs ou refuser carrément
19 l'émission de nouvelles licences si cela a comme
20 conséquence d'empêcher la diffusion de stations
21 canadiennes à plus fort contenu canadien.
22 16835 Nous demandons également au CRTC de
23 modifier ou d'adopter des règlements pour que les
24 câblodistributeurs canadiens réservent les meilleurs
25 signaux aux stations de télévision canadiennes ayant le
StenoTran
3565
1 plus fort contenu canadien dans l'ensemble de leur
2 programmation et aux heures de grande écoute. Il est
3 troublant de constater que, dans bien des cas, les
4 câblodistributeurs offrent dans leur service de base
5 l'accès à des stations américaines alors que nous
6 savons pertinemment bien que dans certains cas des
7 stations canadiennes à fort contenu canadien se voient
8 refuser l'accès au service de base et même aux signaux
9 de l'ensemble de la grille de certains
10 câblodistributeurs.
11 16836 Nous demandons également au CRTC:
12 16837 - D'adopter des règlements ou de les
13 modifier pour que les Canadiens aient accès à un plus
14 grand nombre d'émissions canadiennes produites et
15 diffusées par les stations de télévision canadiennes.
16 Nous savons, et vous le savez, qu'il y a des stations
17 canadiennes de langue anglaise qui ne respectent pas
18 les quotas minimums imposés par le CRTC de 60 pour cent
19 pour l'ensemble de la programmation et de 50 pour cent
20 pour les heures de grande écoute. Ce phénomène n'est
21 pas sans avoir d'effet sur l'érosion culturelle, dit
22 différemment l'américanisation culturelle des ondes, et
23 par conséquent le nivellement culturel de l'ensemble de
24 la société canadienne.
25 16838 - D'adopter ou de modifier des
StenoTran
3566
1 règlements pour que le gouvernement canadien,
2 l'industrie de la télévision et l'industrie de la
3 câblodistribution consacrent plus de ressources à la
4 production et à la diffusion d'émissions canadiennes en
5 s'assurant qu'un financement adéquat est par conséquent
6 disponible.
7 16839 Il y a des stations de télévision,
8 des chaînes, qui font un excellent travail en termes de
9 contenu canadien, et les programmes d'accès devraient,
10 à notre avis, favoriser les stations qui font bien ou
11 qui font mieux. Il devrait y avoir une possibilité pour
12 elles d'avoir un accès élargi à l'ensemble des
13 ressources sans néanmoins se soustraire à l'obligation
14 faite à d'autres stations de bien vouloir respecter les
15 quotas minimums imposés. Il devrait y avoir un
16 incitatif à la canadianisation des ondes.
17 16840 - D'adopter ou de modifier des
18 règlements pour que les téléspectateurs bénéficient
19 d'une plus grande production locale, régionale et
20 communautaire.
21 16841 Encore une fois, j'aimerais vous lire
22 un extrait du document qui a été retiré du site
23 Internet du CRTC, "Le Canada au premier plan".
24 "Conformément au mandat que nous
25 a confié le Parlement, nous
StenoTran
3567
1 insistons pour que les
2 radiodiffuseurs accordent une
3 place dominante à la dimension
4 canadienne, en particulier à la
5 programmation qui porte sur les
6 activités et les dossiers
7 d'intérêt local ou
8 communautaire." (Tel que lu)
9 16842 Alors nous demandons au CRTC de
10 modifier ou d'adopter des règlements de telle sorte que
11 le citoyen canadien ait accès à une plus grande
12 production locale, régionale et communautaire en
13 s'assurant que les stations locales et régionales
14 consacrent plus de temps dans leur programmation aux
15 productions locales et régionales. Et là, ça soulève
16 encore une fois toute la question des réémetteurs, qui
17 n'ont aucune obligation de programmation locale ou
18 régionale et qui ont quand même priorité d'accès sur
19 les signaux auprès des câblodistributeurs et qui ne
20 sont pas sans avoir d'effet également sur l'effritement
21 ou la fragmentation, si vous voulez, de l'assiette
22 publicitaire et la fragmentation et l'effritement des
23 auditoires en région.
24 16843 Il serait peut-être également
25 souhaitable de rétablir l'obligation aux
StenoTran
3568
1 câblodistributeurs de fournir une programmation
2 communautaire à la région qu'ils desservent, ayant été
3 informés que cette obligation-là avait disparu des
4 règlements du CRTC.
5 16844 Nous sommes disponibles pour répondre
6 à diverses questions si toutefois il y en avait.
7 16845 Merci.
8 16846 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Oui, Monsieur
9 Perreault. Bonjour.
10 16847 M. PERREAULT: Bonjour.
11 16848 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Votre présentation,
12 votre soumission écrite et le nom de votre groupe, qui
13 est Impératif français, semblent viser surtout les
14 problèmes d'accès à la programmation en français, mais
15 je crois ce matin que vous allez plus loin que ça; vous
16 parlez de l'américanisation de certains marchés et là,
17 vous vous adressez aussi aux effets pour le marché
18 anglophone de cette américanisation-là. Je comprends
19 bien?
20 16849 M. PERREAULT: Oui. Bien, vous
21 savez, l'ensemble du monde télévisuel, c'est quand même
22 un ensemble, et les parties ont des effets entre elles.
23 Si le câblodistributeur choisit de donner priorité à
24 une station de télévision canadienne à faible contenu
25 canadien, ou si vous voulez à fort contenu américain,
StenoTran
3569
1 au détriment de la diffusion d'un signal d'une station
2 de télévision canadienne à fort contenu canadien,
3 notamment les stations de langue française, vous
4 comprendrez avec nous que nous devrons à ce moment-là
5 parler carrément, d'un côté, d'américanisation des
6 ondes et, de l'autre, pour les francophones,
7 d'américanisation des ondes et d'anglicisation des
8 ondes.
9 16850 Finalement, le consommateur de
10 télévision ayant accès à l'ensemble de ces signaux-
11 là... et encore une fois, et vu dans une perspective
12 encore plus globale et en regardant en particulier la
13 situation des Canadiens français, des francophones hors
14 Québec, dans certains cas ils n'ont accès qu'à une
15 station de langue française, et nous savons que les
16 câblodistributeurs vont diffuser une quantité inouïe de
17 signaux de stations américaines, privant donc les
18 Canadiens de ces régions-là de l'accès à des stations
19 canadiennes à fort contenu d'émissions canadiennes.
20 16851 Nous demandons au CRTC, de par son
21 mandat, de réfléchir aux règlements existants pour que
22 des situations comme celles-ci n'existent pas dans la
23 capitale canadienne, Ottawa.
24 16852 C'est troublant d'apprendre que les
25 Canadiens de la capitale canadienne vont avoir accès à
StenoTran
3570
1 des stations américaines en toute priorité alors qu'on
2 leur refuse l'accès à des stations canadiennes à fort
3 contenu canadien. Je sais qu'hier on annonçait que le
4 câblodistributeur de la région d'Ottawa-Carleton
5 inclurait dorénavant, à la prochaine révision de sa
6 grille, la diffusion du Canal D en français, mais vous
7 conviendrez avec nous que c'est très peu et très
8 insuffisant et qu'à notre avis la capital canadienne,
9 la capitale des deux langues officielles, devrait être
10 l'exemple sur lequel le CRTC et l'ensemble de la
11 population pourraient s'appuyer pour y retrouver un
12 modèle pour l'ensemble canadien.
13 16853 Je ne comprends pas, et nous ne
14 comprenons pas, qu'il y a certaines régions du Canada
15 où des Canadiens qui devraient être des Canadiens à
16 part entière n'ont pas accès à la télévision canadienne
17 dans leur langue et des régions où ils n'ont accès qu'à
18 une ou deux stations de langue française. Je pense que
19 le CRTC pourrait exiger des câblodistributeurs
20 l'obligation de diffuser un certain nombre de stations
21 canadiennes de langue française partout au Canada, et
22 je pense que ça va de soi selon le mandat du CRTC.
23 16854 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Je comprends très
24 bien le chevauchement des deux inquiétudes, le contenu
25 canadien et aussi le contenu francophone, mais c'est
StenoTran
3571
1 surtout une préoccupation dans certaines régions, comme
2 celle de la capitale nationale, où il y a beaucoup de
3 francophones qui voudraient une panoplie plus large de
4 services et où justement il y a plusieurs réémetteurs,
5 plusieurs stations accessibles sur les ondes et qui
6 exigent l'accès à un canal. Donc les canaux deviennent
7 assez limités.
8 16855 Maintenant, si je comprends bien,
9 vous voudriez une comptabilisation qui mettrait les
10 services qui ont un plus grand contenu canadien en
11 priorité et vous inséreriez dans cette comptabilisation
12 les services francophones dans tous les marchés ou
13 seulement dans les marchés où il y a une forte
14 proportion de francophones? Évidemment, les Canadiens
15 en général dans tous les marchés où il y a une forte
16 proportion d'anglophones s'attendent aux mêmes services
17 qu'on reçoit dans les autres régions; alors là, il y a
18 un problème.
19 16856 Moi, je crois vous entendre dire que
20 le Conseil devrait comptabiliser le contenu canadien et
21 donner priorité, mais à ce moment-là vous voulez aussi
22 insérer dans la comptabilisation les services
23 francophones. Comment est-ce que vous marieriez les
24 deux dans les endroits où la population est en grande
25 majorité anglophone et qui, eux, évidemment, auraient
StenoTran
3572
1 moins de services anglophones, incluant des services
2 populaires américains qui sont reçus dans d'autres
3 secteurs?
4 16857 M. PERREAULT: Là-dessus, je dois
5 vous dire qu'une bonne partie de notre raisonnement
6 repose sur le contenu canadien des stations de
7 télévision canadiennes au Canada indistinctement, pour
8 cette partie-ci du propos pour le moins, de la langue.
9 À notre avis, le CRTC devrait adopter les mesures
10 nécessaires de telle sorte que les Canadiens d'un océan
11 à l'autre aient accès en priorité, en toute priorité, à
12 l'ensemble des signaux, avec priorité accordée dans le
13 choix des meilleurs signaux offerts par les
14 câblodistributeurs aux stations à plus fort contenu
15 canadien, ce qui serait à mon avis un incitatif
16 important de la part des stations à canadianiser
17 davantage leur programmation, leur contenu émissions.
18 16858 Quant à la situation de la capitale
19 canadienne, Ottawa, je vais laisser à mon collègue,
20 M. Charest, le soin de commenter.
21 16859 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Monsieur Charest.
22 16860 M. CHAREST: Oui. Je suis un
23 résident de la région d'Ottawa et, dans ma région, le
24 câblodistributeur a décidé en 1997... il y avait quatre
25 nouveaux canaux canadiens de langue française dont le
StenoTran
3573
1 contenu canadien est assez fort, et le
2 câblodistributeur a décidé de ne pas nous les offrir.
3 Je vois, par exemple, des Space Channels ou du golf ou
4 des choses comme de la course automobile, de la course
5 nautique, offerts comme services. Je vois aussi des
6 choses comme... il y a trois canaux américains de
7 nouvelles continues qui me sont offerts alors qu'on ne
8 m'offre pas Le Canal Nouvelles de TVA, qui est un canal
9 canadien.
10 16861 Alors il y a des canaux spécialisés,
11 des chaînes spécialisées canadiennes de langue
12 française qui, à mon avis, dans la capitale du Canada,
13 auraient dû avoir une priorité plus élevée que des
14 chaînes américaines ou même des chaînes qui ont un
15 contenu élevé américain. C'est ça qui est, à mon avis,
16 le problème dans le région de la capitale nationale.
17 16862 Il y a quand même une population
18 francophone assez forte, et j'arrive mal à expliquer
19 qu'on ait oublié le fait qu'on est dans la capitale
20 nationale, qu'il y a une population francophone assez
21 forte.
22 16863 On peut même penser aussi à Cornwall
23 ou au nord de l'Ontario, et on se retrouve avec des
24 problèmes semblables. Des chaînes américaines vont
25 passer avant des chaînes canadiennes de langue
StenoTran
3574
1 française spécialisées.
2 16864 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Vous visez donc une
3 réorganisation de la réglementation, parce qu'en ce
4 moment, comme vous savez, il faut qu'il y ait une
5 prépondérance de signaux canadiens, si on parle au
6 départ de signaux canadiens... et j'habite à Ottawa
7 aussi et je comprends la frustration au niveau de
8 l'accès aux services francophones. Alors à ce moment-
9 là vous voudriez qu'on change, que ce ne soit plus une
10 prépondérance seulement de canaux canadiens et ensuite,
11 dans les étages, la capacité d'offrir un à un, un
12 service étranger et un service canadien, au lieu de ça
13 vous voudriez, je crois que je vous ai entendu dire,
14 Monsieur Perreault, sept ou huit services francophones
15 partout et ensuite des services américains s'il y a des
16 canaux disponibles. Alors ce serait tous les services.
17 16865 Et à Ottawa, je suis d'accord avec
18 vous, il y a des réémettrices de services qui
19 proviennent de Toronto, il y en a qui sont accessibles
20 à Hamilton, et il y a aussi le service multilingue.
21 16866 Vous avez dit cinq. Quels sont les
22 deux autres? Il y a CFMT multilingue...
23 16867 M. CHAREST: Attendez... Global.
24 16868 LA PRÉSIDENTE: ... Hamilton, Citytv.
25 16869 M. CHAREST: Global est pratiquement
StenoTran
3575
1 un réémetteur.
2 16870 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Oui, mais Global...
3 16871 M. CHAREST: J'ai appelé Global...
4 16872 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Non. Global, c'est
5 un service ontarien.
6 16873 M. CHAREST: C'est un service
7 ontarien...
8 16874 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Quel serait le
9 cinquième?
10 16875 M. PERREAULT: Ici, on a CHRO
11 Pembroke, CFMT, Citytv, CHCH Hamilton...
12 16876 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Hamilton, oui.
13 16877 M. PERREAULT: ... et nous avons
14 inclus Global parce qu'il a très peu de production; on
15 a dit "inexistante ou minime". Alors c'est vraiment un
16 réémetteur.
17 16878 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Il faudrait vraiment
18 revoir à votre avis la réglementation parce que, comme
19 c'est là, quand on est sur les ondes, que ce soit Radio
20 Nord... il y a beaucoup de services sur les ondes à
21 Ottawa, alors à ce moment-là ils ont priorité. Pour
22 offrir tous les canaux canadiens, il faudrait éliminer
23 évidemment des canaux américains qui sont accessibles
24 ailleurs.
25 16879 M. PERREAULT: Il y a de fait,
StenoTran
3576
1 madame, même sur la bande du service de base des
2 câblodistributeurs, des stations américaines alors
3 qu'on refuse... on dira peut-être que le signal est
4 impur, mais néanmoins...
5 16880 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Oui. Ce sont souvent
6 des canaux... il y en a un service en particulier qui
7 est un canal limité mais le service américain a accepté
8 d'être sur un canal limité. Je suppose que si les
9 services canadiens étaient prêts à faire la même chose,
10 ce serait une possibilité.
11 16881 Maintenant, comment définissez-vous
12 une région bilingue? Et est-ce qu'à votre avis une
13 région bilingue -- vous parlez de région bilingue dans
14 votre soumission écrite -- devrait être traitée
15 différemment des autres régions du Canada? C'est pour
16 ça que j'essayais d'avoir vos positions sur comment le
17 Conseil devrait exiger plus de services francophones.
18 Maintenant, passons de canadien à canadien de langue
19 française au Canada.
20 16882 Comme vous savez, nous nous sommes
21 penchés assez récemment sur cette question avec la
22 demande de TVA, dont nous ne pouvons pas parler puisque
23 la décision n'est pas émise, mais il y a eu beaucoup de
24 discussion sur est-ce qu'on l'exige partout, est-ce
25 qu'on le fait là où il y a une proportion quelconque de
StenoTran
3577
1 francophones selon Statistiques Canada, est-ce qu'on
2 définit des régions bilingues et on les traite
3 différemment, ou est-ce que vous suggérez que partout
4 au Canada, quelle que soit la population, on exige je
5 crois que vous avez dit sept ou huit services de langue
6 française, autres que Radio-Canada évidemment, quelle
7 que soit la composition de la population?
8 16883 M. PERREAULT: Il faut tout de suite
9 faire une distinction, je pense, entre les régions où
10 la minorité a déjà accès à plus de services dans sa
11 langue que le groupe majoritaire. Je pense que, dans
12 des régions comme Montréal et dans des régions comme
13 l'Outaouais, le nombre de stations de télévision de
14 langue anglaise, canadiennes et américaines,
15 accessibles par les abonnés est supérieur à ce à quoi
16 les francophones peuvent avoir accès, ce qui m'amène au
17 point de départ.
18 16884 À notre avis, et quitte à ce que nous
19 ayons à le répéter et à le répéter... à notre avis,
20 partout au Canada les câblodistributeurs devraient être
21 tenus, dans l'allocation ou la distribution des
22 signaux, d'accorder priorité aux stations canadiennes
23 ayant le plus fort contenu canadien; et ça va bien avec
24 le mandat du CRTC. Sur la base de cet argument-là,
25 nous savons pertinemment bien que nous retrouverons,
StenoTran
3578
1 d'un océan à l'autre, une très grande quantité de
2 stations de télévision canadiennes de langue française
3 dans la bande de base et le service de base des
4 câblodistributeurs.
5 16885 Ça, à notre avis, nous y tenons,
6 parce que le produit est également canadien et, étant
7 un produit canadien, en toute équité, et selon le
8 mandat du CRTC en plus, on devrait le retrouver dans la
9 bande de base des services de base des
10 câblodistributeurs, à moins qu'il y ait deux poids,
11 deux mesures, et j'ose espérer qu'il n'est pas question
12 de ça ici ou ailleurs pour le moins.
13 16886 Quant aux régions à l'extérieur du
14 Québec... parce qu'à l'intérieur du Québec, comme je
15 vous le disais, dans bien des cas l'accès aux stations
16 en langue anglaise est souvent plus large que celui de
17 l'accès aux stations de langue française; on parle des
18 grands bassins comme l'Outaouais et le bassin de
19 Montréal. Dans le cas des régions du Canada hors
20 Québec, à notre avis, si on parle de sept ou huit
21 stations pour l'ensemble canadien, la réglementation
22 pourrait permettre, pour le moins en tous les cas pour
23 la région de la capitale fédérale, de la capitale
24 canadienne, un accès encore plus large à un plus grand
25 nombre de stations de langue française.
StenoTran
3579
1 16887 Je reviens au cas de la capitale
2 canadienne. C'est troublant, comme Canadien, comme
3 francophone, comme anglophone, de constater que dans la
4 capitale canadienne des stations canadiennes se font
5 refuser l'accès aux signaux du câblodistributeur pour
6 privilégier des stations canadiennes à plus faible
7 contenu canadien, donc à plus fort contenu américain,
8 et de retrouver chez le même câblodistributeur des
9 stations de télévision américaines. Là, on dit: Un
10 instant. Quel est le profil de la capitale canadienne?
11 Quel profil veut-on donner, ou présente la capitale
12 canadienne? Quel profil présente le Canada lorsqu'il
13 n'exige pas des câblodistributeurs, dans leur service
14 de base, en priorité la diffusion des stations
15 canadiennes, ce qui est carrément dans le mandat du
16 CRTC?
17 16888 Les réémetteurs, c'est un problème
18 également. Je pense que le CRTC aura à réfléchir à
19 toute la question. Réémetteurs dans les régions mal
20 desservies, soit; réémetteurs dans le cas des
21 télévisions éducatives, soit; dans le cas des
22 télévisions d'État, soit, ça va. Mais si le réémetteur
23 a comme effet, dans des régions bien desservies, de
24 priver les Canadiens de stations canadiennes à plus
25 fort contenu canadien, nous disons là-dessus: Un
StenoTran
3580
1 instant. Il faudrait peut-être regarder les politiques
2 et les règlements pour éviter que des situations comme
3 celle-là se produisent. Et ce qui est doublement
4 gênant et embêtant, c'est que ça se produit dans la
5 capitale canadienne.
6 16889 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Quand vous proposez
7 qu'il y ait sept ou huit stations, sept ou huit
8 services de langue française qui soient accessibles
9 partout au Canada, comment est-ce que vous établiriez
10 la priorité des services francophones qui devraient
11 être offerts, par exemple, à Calgary, à Winnipeg, à
12 Vancouver? Parce que dans ces cas-là, si on y allait
13 selon le contenu canadien, c'est évident que la plupart
14 des services et des signaux francophones seraient
15 accessibles si la technologie le permet et si les coûts
16 le permettaient dans des villes comme Calgary, Winnipeg
17 ou... mais disons à Calgary, si on essayait de
18 s'assurer qu'il y ait sept ou huit services de langue
19 française, comment établiriez-vous les priorités des
20 services qui devraient y être accessibles, des services
21 de langue française? Est-ce que ce serait un service
22 généraliste, un service spécialisé... sans parler de
23 TVA, puisque la situation est devant nous.
24 16890 Est-ce que ce serait la société
25 d'État, par exemple, RDI? Qu'est-ce que vous
StenoTran
3581
1 entrevoyez comme étant une réglementation raisonnable
2 lorsqu'il s'agirait d'imposer aux câblodistributeurs,
3 dans les régions où il y a peu de francophones, sept ou
4 huit services de langue française?
5 16891 M. PERREAULT: Il faut tout de suite
6 savoir qu'il y a peut-être des gens qui peuvent réagir
7 fortement à la demande de sept ou huit signaux de
8 langue française distribués au minimum par l'ensemble
9 des câblodistributeurs canadiens, sauf qu'il faut
10 savoir qu'il restera quand même approximativement au-
11 delà de 70 signaux en langue anglaise dans les régions
12 majoritairement anglophones. Donc ça n'enlève rien à
13 la quantité de services en langue anglaise que d'exiger
14 des câblodistributeurs de favoriser des stations
15 canadiennes à fort contenu canadien.
16 16892 Maintenant, quant à savoir lesquels
17 devraient faire partie des sept ou des huit, écoutez,
18 sans trop vouloir nous aventurer dans cette voie-là,
19 vous laissant davantage le soin de réfléchir à ce qui
20 devrait faire partie des services de base des
21 câblodistributeurs dans l'optique de cette obligation
22 de diffuser sept ou huit signaux de stations publiques
23 et privées de langue française, je pense qu'évidemment
24 les services de télévision d'État, la télévision d'État
25 devrait avoir priorité, et après -- et après -- celles
StenoTran
3582
1 à plus fort contenu canadien.
2 16893 Je pense que c'est le but du CRTC et
3 je pense que c'est le choix de la société canadienne de
4 vouloir canadianiser son mode de vie entre autres par
5 l'intermédiaire de la radio et de la télévision, en
6 contrôlant l'offre de produits et en ne laissant pas la
7 demande entièrement diriger le marché. Ce choix a été
8 fait par le gouvernement canadien, par le Parlement, et
9 par conséquent par la population.
10 16894 Mais quant à vous dire précisément...
11 vous comprendrez avec nous que nous n'osons pas rentrer
12 là-dedans, vous laissant le soin de penser davantage à
13 ce qui devrait faire partie des sept ou des huit, mais
14 nous sommes heureux d'entendre que tout de même,
15 puisque vous posez la question sur les sept ou les
16 huit, ça laisse entendre que l'idée est reçue.
17 16895 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Quand vous dites, si
18 le Conseil établissait une règle d'ajouter sept ou huit
19 canaux, que la population anglophone ne perdrait pas de
20 services, de fait, ils en perdraient parce que, jusqu'à
21 l'implantation de la numérisation, c'est évident qu'il
22 n'y a pas beaucoup de canaux analogues en ce moment
23 dans plusieurs marchés d'accessibles. Mais là,
24 M. Charest me dirait: "Enlevez le golf, enlevez le
25 Speed Vision et mettez-y des"... alors c'est une
StenoTran
3583
1 question de philosophie. Mais il y aurait des marchés
2 où il y aurait des services qui sont maintenant
3 accessibles qui ne le seraient plus.
4 16896 Si vous vous indignez des décisions
5 que le Conseil a prises par le passé, ça, c'est autre
6 chose. Ce sont des situations qui ont été permises et
7 que vous critiquez aujourd'hui, mais il y aurait un
8 réajustement nécessaire jusqu'à ce qu'on ait un
9 déploiement de la numérisation qui permette que plus de
10 canaux soient accessible. En ce moment, ce que nous
11 avons, c'est une réglementation dont tous les
12 câblodistributeurs peuvent bénéficier; donc ils peuvent
13 ajouter des canaux américains pour chaque canal
14 spécialisé canadien.
15 16897 Je comprends vos propos, mais comment
16 les mettre en oeuvre, évidemment, il y a toujours des
17 problèmes selon les attitudes des gens. Vous savez
18 comme nous que nous avons entendu TVA dernièrement qui
19 voulait la distribution partout, et ce ne sont pas tous
20 les Canadiens qui sont d'accord avec cette approche-là.
21 C'est une question d'essayer de trouver un équilibre.
22 16898 Vous voulez dire autre chose,
23 Monsieur Perreault?
24 16899 M. PERREAULT: Oui. D'abord, je
25 pense également qu'hier nous écoutions la télévision de
StenoTran
3584
1 Radio-Canada, et RDI, dans la région d'Alfred... c'est
2 bizarre que dans une région comme ici nous apprenions
3 hier que la population canadienne de la région d'Alfred
4 n'a pas accès au Réseau de l'information de l'État
5 canadien. J'ai trouvé ça troublant de voir qu'une
6 réalité comme celle-là pouvait exister.
7 16900 Je veux revenir sur la notion de
8 perte. Vous dites que les anglophones perdraient s'il
9 y avait un plus grand nombre de stations de langue
10 française. Là-dessus, j'aimerais faire le commentaire
11 suivant.
12 16901 C'est toujours dérangeant d'entendre
13 que des Canadiens perdraient parce que le contenu
14 serait davantage canadien.
15 16902 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Monsieur Perreault,
16 je ne pense pas que...
17 16903 M. PERREAULT: Je veux juste vous
18 mentionner autre chose. Je veux juste vous mentionner
19 également que si c'est perdre que d'avoir la diffusion
20 de sept ou huit canaux de langue française, imaginez-
21 vous, sur la base strictement linguistique, ça fait
22 combien de temps est-ce qu'il y a des Canadiens qui
23 perdent parce qu'ils n'ont pas accès à une quantité
24 jugée minimale de stations canadiennes de langue
25 française.
StenoTran
3585
1 16904 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Monsieur Perreault,
2 vos propos ne sont pas tout à fait justes. Je n'ai pas
3 dit qu'ils perdraient sans ajouter le qualificatif
4 qu'ils perdraient des services anglophones. Ce n'est
5 pas juste de dire que j'ai dit qu'ils perdraient; ils
6 perdraient quelque chose, qui est autre chose. Vous
7 êtes d'accord avec moi?
8 16905 M. PERREAULT: Je pense que nous nous
9 comprenons.
10 16906 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Oui, d'accord.
11 16907 Maintenant, vous parlez du problème
12 de la programmation locale, je crois, la disparition
13 dans plusieurs cas au Canada... je crois que vous vous
14 êtes adressé à ce problème...
15 16908 M. PERREAULT: Oui.
16 16909 LA PRÉSIDENTE: ... qui est
17 évidemment un problème, je suppose, au Canada français
18 aussi bien qu'au Canada anglais, à votre avis, où il y
19 a une certaine diminution de l'aspect local de la
20 programmation.
21 16910 Nous avons eu à travers le Canada
22 anglais, et au Canada français aussi... je suis allée,
23 par exemple, à Chicoutimi en juin; nous avons eu des
24 réunions avec le public qui font partie du procès-
25 verbal de cette audience et nous avons eu plusieurs
StenoTran
3586
1 représentations de la part du public à ce effet-là.
2 16911 Est-ce que vous êtes d'avis que c'est
3 un problème au Canada français aussi?
4 16912 M. CHAREST: Là-dessus, ce qu'on a
5 soumis cette semaine ne porte pas sur la production
6 régionale comme telle au Canada français. On n'a pas
7 une opinion très, très forte là-dessus.
8 16913 Tout ce qu'on peut dire, c'est que
9 c'est vrai qu'on constate que la production régionale a
10 diminué, mais le contenu canadien est quand même assez
11 fort dans la télévision francophone canadienne; il est
12 demeuré fort. Même si on produit moins d'émissions à
13 Québec localement ou à Chicoutimi ou à Rimouski, il est
14 quand même fort. Le contenu canadien demeure fort.
15 16914 LA PRÉSIDENTE: C'est une
16 revendication des producteurs des régions, qui trouvent
17 qu'ils n'ont pas autant de possibilités de produire de
18 la programmation localement ou régionalement, que la
19 programmation est produite surtout à Montréal et est
20 une programmation genre réseau.
21 16915 Monsieur Perreault...?
22 16916 M. PERREAULT: Il faut quand même
23 comprendre que, dans la situation économique actuelle,
24 l'assiette publicitaire dans laquelle pigent la plupart
25 des stations de télévision est réduite, pour ne pas
StenoTran
3587
1 dire faible. Alors si, d'une certaine façon, on a
2 probablement un courant de centralisation pour réduire
3 les coûts, aidé par le fait qu'il y a des réémetteurs
4 qui bénéficient des mêmes avantages sans aucune
5 obligation de production locale ou régionale, quel est
6 l'incitatif pour les stations de télévision locales ou
7 régionales quand ils pourraient importer de leur
8 station mère toute leur programmation comme les
9 réémetteurs le font?
10 16917 Alors il y a une concurrence; on
11 demande donc aux stations locales et régionales de
12 supporter des coûts d'exploitation additionnels que les
13 réémetteurs n'ont pas.
14 16918 Dans la révision, dans ce que nous
15 vous demandons lors du réexamen, si toutefois il y en
16 avait un, du comportement du CRTC dans l'émission des
17 licences pour réémetteurs, s'il n'y a pas obligation de
18 production locale et régionale, pour le moins il
19 faudrait peut-être imposer à la station mère
20 indépendante un plus fort contenu canadien pour
21 compenser le fait que, lorsqu'elles arrivent dans les
22 régions, elles viennent livrer une concurrence
23 d'auditoires et de marchés de publicité aux stations
24 locales et régionales.
25 16919 La prolifération du nombre de canaux,
StenoTran
3588
1 du nombre de stations, l'assiette publicitaire qui
2 n'est probablement pas grandement... qui en tout cas
3 n'est sûrement pas proportionnellement croissante ne
4 sont sûrement pas sans avoir d'effet sur le contrôle
5 des coûts, la rationalisation de la programmation, et
6 fort probablement une perte de production locale ou
7 régionale. C'est peut-être celle-là que pourraient
8 être souvent tentées de faire disparaître en premier
9 les stations.
10 16920 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Vous souvenez-vous,
11 Monsieur Perreault, si vous vous êtes présenté devant
12 le Conseil, ou Monsieur Charest, lors de l'audience qui
13 a justement permis à CHCH et à City d'installer un
14 réémetteur à Ottawa?
15 16921 M. CHAREST: Je ne suis pas venu,
16 non, et je l'ai appris par les nouvelles; je pense que
17 c'était dans les journaux. C'est comme ça que je l'ai
18 appris. Je l'ai appris, je pense, dans le Globe and
19 Mail, qu'il y avait les réémetteurs ici, à Ottawa.
20 16922 LA PRÉSIDENTE: CFMT, c'est quelque
21 chose de différent, je suppose, parce que c'est une
22 station multilingue.
23 16923 Évidemment, la philosophie est un peu
24 l'espoir que ça localiserait les stations vraiment
25 locales en les incitant à garder leur programmation
StenoTran
3589
1 locale pour être plus près de leur marché et aussi
2 parce qu'ils ont accès à la publicité locale. Mais il
3 semblerait, selon les plaintes que nous avons, les
4 représentations qu'on nous faites, que ça ne semble pas
5 nécessairement le cas.
6 16924 Alors je vous remercie,
7 Monsieur Perreault, Monsieur Charest, mesdames,
8 monsieur, et continuez à venir nous voir aussi souvent
9 que possible.
10 16925 M. PERREAULT: Nous vous remercions
11 infiniment.
12 16926 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Au revoir.
13 16927 Nous allons maintenant prendre une
14 pause de 15 minutes. We will take a 15-minute break
15 and be back at a quarter to eleven.
16 --- Short recess at / Courte suspension à 1028
17 --- Upon resuming at / Reprise à 1050
18 16928 Mme SANTERRE: Messieurs, mesdames,
19 Madame la Présidente, the next group will be Horizon
20 Interfaith Council. You may start now.
21 PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
22 16929 MR. GILLANI: Good morning, Madam
23 Chair and the Commissioners.
24 16930 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good morning.
25 16931 MR. GILLANI: I believe we meet the
StenoTran
3590
1 second time. Were you in Vancouver sitting as well?
2 16932 THE CHAIRPERSON: I have been to many
3 places.
4 16933 MR. GILLANI: So many places. My
5 name is Amir Gillani and I am from the American
6 Institute of Islamic Studies. I currently am the
7 President with the Horizon Interfaith Council. I take
8 pleasure in introducing my colleagues here.
9 16934 On my right is John Sullivan from the
10 United Church of Canada. On my left is Earl Smith from
11 the Church of Scientology. On my further left is Gil
12 Gillespie from the Unitarian Church of Ontario.
13 16935 The Horizon Interfaith Council was
14 formed 20 years ago to help faith groups make
15 television programming for Toronto community channels.
16 We organize resources for them and allocate broadcast
17 time.
18 16936 The arrangement has worked very well,
19 both for our members. We have 28 groups current in our
20 council and have assisted 70 faith groups that have
21 passed through our council.
22 16937 Our group has functioned with a great
23 spirit of harmony and communication for a very long
24 time.
25 16938 We want to talk to you today about a
StenoTran
3591
1 reflection of local communities in the television
2 system. Like many others that have appeared to you, we
3 are concerned that our cities and our neighbourhoods
4 are disappearing from our television screens and we
5 think this a real loss to Canadians and that something
6 must be done about it.
7 16939 At the end of our presentation, we
8 would like to suggest a new approach, one that relies
9 on a group that up to now has taken a very minor role
10 in the television system. This is the voluntary
11 sector.
12 16940 Many people have in this hearing
13 expressed the concern that the local broadcasters were
14 reducing the hours they devote to local affairs.
15 16941 Horizon's, OUR, principal concern, of
16 course, is with the cable community channel.
17 16942 As we said in our written brief, Shaw
18 Cable seems to be turning their community channel into
19 a local news operation. This may fit the definition of
20 a community channel in the regulations, but it
21 certainly reduces community access to the channel.
22 Rogers have reduced resources to the point where
23 community access is disappearing. Horizon is the last
24 group that we know of which has access to Rogers'
25 studios in Toronto, and the staff there has been
StenoTran
3592
1 sharply reduced.
2 16943 MR. SULLIVAN: Some people may tell
3 you that this is an inevitable result of the logic of
4 marketing. If reflection of the local community is
5 less profitable than other uses of broadcast time, then
6 it will disappear. But before that happens, we believe
7 that we should think hard about it, and think about how
8 television affects communities -- both for good and for
9 evil.
10 16944 If there were no television - if the
11 average person did not spend 22 hours every week
12 watching television, then our communities would be
13 quite different places. We would probably do many of
14 the things that our grandparents did. We would meet
15 our neighbours. We would play our own music. We would
16 go to community meetings. We would attend churches in
17 greater numbers. In short, we would spend a great deal
18 more of our time in actual contact with other people.
19 16945 As it stands, though, much of our
20 contact with society is through the media, not face to
21 face. In many ways, that has its benefits. We
22 probably know more about the rest of the world than our
23 grandparents did, and it is possible we know more about
24 our own nation. But we certainly know less, and care
25 less, about our neighbourhoods and our towns than we
StenoTran
3593
1 did, because we do not simply see them on our
2 television screens. We may think less about God as
3 well, because God - unless represented by a television
4 evangelist - also gets little attention in the world of
5 TV.
6 16946 This problem is even greater in a
7 city like Toronto, where the changing cultural and
8 religious character of the city has made it imperative
9 that we take the time to get to know each other if we
10 are to live successfully in harmony.
11 16947 In short, every hour we spend
12 watching rich young people on the beach in California,
13 or watching the police deal with criminals in New York,
14 is an hour we do not spend forming the real bonds that
15 tie us together as families, neighbourhoods,
16 congregations and cities. The natural ties of social
17 human beings - the ties that give us joy in good times
18 and sustain us in crisis - these ties have been eroded
19 by the dominating presence of 22 hours of television a
20 week in our lives.
21 16948 Well, we cannot turn the clock back
22 but what can we do, in our real situation, to restore
23 the ties of community and the ties of spiritual life?
24 16949 MR. SMITH: Our response at Horizon,
25 like many other groups across the country, has been to
StenoTran
3594
1 try to redress the balance within the world of
2 television. We use television to show our neighbours
3 who we are - in our case we make programs that explain
4 and explore faith. We help each faith group that comes
5 to us to tell its story to whoever is watching in the
6 metro area and we hope that the people watching will
7 learn something that may contribute to their own faith.
8 Frankly, we hope that some of our programs will get
9 them to turn their TV off and join a congregation, or
10 at least take whatever part they can in the life of
11 their chosen faith.
12 16950 The kind of programming that we do
13 will never be a big part of the system - we know that.
14 No one will ever make any money from it, and no one
15 will ever want to put much money into it. It is run by
16 volunteers - people who do it because they are willing.
17 16951 In fact, we believe that community
18 programming, programming that is about and for the
19 community, should always be made primarily by
20 volunteers. That way we know it will have only one
21 purpose, to communicate, to create community, not to
22 sell products or fulfil a corporate agenda. Of course,
23 the volunteers need help, because television is
24 complicated, and professional advice is really useful.
25 We are very grateful for all the technical assistance
StenoTran
3595
1 that Rogers has freely given to members over the years.
2 But the content should be in the hands of volunteers,
3 and their access to a channel should be guaranteed.
4 16952 In short, we believe that the
5 television system is not just public and private. As
6 the Broadcasting Act says, it comprises "public,
7 private and community elements." We believe that it is
8 time that the community elements took a larger place in
9 order to perform a role that public and private are
10 increasingly abandoning.
11 16953 MR. GILLESPIE: But how do we make
12 this happen? How do we ensure that there is
13 programming that reflects the community? How do we
14 ensure that it has the resources it needs to be
15 successful?
16 16954 We think that there is a good model
17 for television in the community radio movement. Why
18 not license voluntary, non-profit groups that represent
19 a broad range of interests in a community to run a
20 channel themselves?
21 16955 We don't mean to show disrespect for
22 those cable companies who are still providing a good
23 access channel for their communities. If the old
24 arrangements work and people want them to continue, we
25 would not interfere with them. But in those places
StenoTran
3596
1 where the old arrangements are breaking down, we think
2 that a community-owned model is a better alternative.
3 16956 Of course, the first question will
4 be, how can the operation survive financially? Will it
5 be re-imposed as a burden on the cable companies? Or
6 must the community group seek donations?
7 16957 We don't think that either of these
8 options is fair or workable. To seek donations would
9 not be practical and not a stable source of income.
10 16958 To put the burden back on the cable
11 companies when they have been the only support for
12 community access for a long time also seems to be
13 unfair.
14 16959 Our view is that all of those in the
15 system who benefit financially from serving a community
16 should share in the responsibility to make community
17 access television possible. If the resources needed -
18 which are not large to begin with - are spread among
19 many players, then the burden will be very small on
20 each of them. If local broadcasters, cable companies
21 and the new competitive distributors all share in the
22 support of the community-owned access channel, we
23 believe that it would not interfere with their ability
24 to discharge their obligations or with their
25 profitability, particularly in a television market as
StenoTran
3597
1 rich as Toronto.
2 16960 After all, though we are not
3 professional broadcasters, many of us run our own
4 businesses, and we understand how difficult it can be.
5 16961 In addition, it may be possible for
6 some local players to provide resources in different
7 kind. Or they may find it easier and more convenient
8 to provide money so the community group can purchase
9 its own resources.
10 16962 MR. SULLIVAN: At this point, our
11 idea is no more than that - an idea. We know it is not
12 possible for the Commission to fully evaluate it in the
13 middle of such a complex hearing as this, with so many
14 issues of national reflection to evaluate.
15 16963 We would suggest that the Commission
16 consider a separate proceeding to look a local
17 programming and local reflection. We are not the only
18 ones to raise the local issue, and community access
19 programming is not the only kind of local programming
20 that needs attention.
21 16964 So we suggest that the Commission
22 issue a new call for comments on local programming
23 policy. We would like to see such a call address the
24 issues of, first, a local access channel. Secondly,
25 the idea of licensing community groups to run such a
StenoTran
3598
1 channel. And, finally, the best way to financially
2 support such a channel.
3 1100
4 16965 In addition, since the Commission has
5 initiated a new practice of making research available
6 to the parties in a proceeding, we would like to see
7 research done that would tell us how much money is now
8 being derived from broadcasting activities in each
9 major community across the country and how much of it
10 goes back into local reflection.
11 16966 MR. GILLANI: Our interest in this
12 study should be very clear. We want to know how big a
13 burden our idea would present to the broadcasting
14 operations in each community and we would like to work
15 from a common set of figures so we can discuss the
16 principles, rather than argue on figures and numbers.
17 16967 The Broadcasting Act says that, I
18 quote, "programming provided by the Canadian
19 broadcasting system should ... include education and
20 community programs." We think that the community
21 programs are at a risk in the system we see unfolding.
22 We also think these programs are very important to the
23 life of communities and to the life of the spirit
24 within those communities, even though they won't many
25 anyone a millionaire.
StenoTran
3599
1 16968 We hope you share our concern and we
2 thank you very much for your kind willingness to hear
3 our proposal. We would be happy to answer questions.
4 16969 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr.
5 Gillani and gentlemen.
6 16970 Commissioner Cardozo?
7 16971 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Thank you,
8 Madam Chair.
9 16972 Thank you for that presentation and
10 all the thought you have put into this because I think
11 it's nice to see people who, after a number of years at
12 working at what you have been doing, have put together
13 a rather creative proposal. I also want to
14 particularly thank Mr. Sullivan for noting that we
15 can't evaluate this proposal in the throes of this
16 complicated hearing, but it's certainly a time to start
17 thinking about it.
18 16973 The one thing, as you probably know,
19 the broadcast distribution regulations which came into
20 effect about a year ago will be up for re-evaluation
21 the end of next year or early the year after that and
22 that would be a time when we would be looking at local
23 -- not to say I am rejecting out of hand what you are
24 suggesting here, but just to let you know that that's
25 our plan at this point as to where we will be looking
StenoTran
3600
1 at how local programming has been going over this
2 period of two years since the regulations were changed.
3 We change the regulations, but what happens very often
4 when we change regulations, we keep an eye on what
5 happens and decide where to go and evaluate the
6 situation. So, there is a plan to do that.
7 16974 Because of that, I won't get into a
8 detailed discussion about local programming, but I
9 would like some of your feedback and your thoughts on
10 it. What are your feelings about what is missing about
11 the kinds of things that are missing in local
12 programming currently? I am thinking both of what you
13 see on the community channel, as well as on the regular
14 stations that broadcast channels. What is the essence
15 of what you are missing currently?
16 16975 MR. SMITH: I think that one of the
17 things that has happened over the years is the lack of
18 resources that has been devoted to community
19 programming. For instance, in the metro Toronto area
20 we can go back even the 20 years that most of us have
21 been there. You have seen the resource gradually erode
22 from something like 50, 60 community programmers down
23 to right now only three. That's just within the Rogers
24 system. When we started, of course, many, many years
25 ago, there were six or seven different cable companies.
StenoTran
3601
1 We are down to two, I think, now.
2 16976 Aside from that, also the lack of
3 time that has been allocated, in our case in
4 particular, has dropped from four hours when we first
5 started 20 years ago to now two hours. Even the time
6 that we have been given; we were once on prime time
7 through the week, Monday to Friday, except on
8 Wednesdays, and now we are back in sort of a
9 morning/early afternoon slot on Sundays from 11:00 to
10 1:00.
11 16977 But I think in the last two years in
12 particular also was, of course, the sharpest cut with
13 the lack of -- there the community programs and
14 resources have dropped from about 50 or so community
15 programs down to three. So, there has been a very,
16 very sharp reduction and we are really not allowed much
17 other than a talking format, with very little or almost
18 no editing allowed at all. So, our ability to create
19 programs has been hampered.
20 16978 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: When you say
21 "not allowed to do editing", that is because there
22 aren't the personnel to help you with that?
23 16979 MR. SMITH: Exactly. There is no
24 resource for people for us to have that sort of
25 resource.
StenoTran
3602
1 16980 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: And what are
2 the genres of programming that you are missing? Is it
3 talking heads programming? I don't mean to put that in
4 a negative way, but is it people talking about issues,
5 is it entertainment, is it news?
6 16981 MR. SMITH: Mostly it's, I would
7 suppose, people talking about issues. Sometimes some
8 of the groups provide entertainment or spiritual songs
9 and that sort of thing, but that has been sharply
10 curtailed because there are not the studios to do that
11 in, they don't have the resources to set that up. It
12 has to be very limited now to -- currently, it's
13 talking heads.
14 16982 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: And there
15 isn't much or was there room for coverage of community
16 events in the past?
17 16983 MR. SMITH: There was a minor amount.
18 It's non-existent at this point. There was on
19 occasion --
20 16984 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Do you want to
21 add something, Mr. Gillani?
22 16985 MR. GILLANI: There were two special
23 distinct formats that we were on the air over the past
24 20 years. We had the faith group talking to their
25 congregation on the air and then we had specials where
StenoTran
3603
1 a few groups would come by to deal with issues that
2 were in the community, alcohol, drugs, abuse. Now it
3 happens that with the meagre resources that are cut
4 down, as Earl has mentioned, we have lesser and lesser
5 availability of the studio time for production and it
6 turns back to even airing times have been reduced.
7 16986 At this time I must emphasize that we
8 are deeply grateful to Rogers Cable with the meagre
9 resources that we have. They have been very nice to us
10 to stretch as much as they can, but it doesn't justify,
11 it does not give us a feeling of satisfaction.
12 16987 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: How about the
13 other faith programming that there is? I am thinking
14 of Vision TV and now the licensing of "Crossroads".
15 16988 MR. SULLIVAN: I think this has to do
16 with the community because Vision is very much national
17 coast to coast. So, the kind of thing we have been
18 doing relates very much just to the local community,
19 even though that's a huge one, metro Toronto. So, it's
20 that aspect that Vision will never really meet the
21 needs of and we feel there are needs there.
22 16989 Your last question raised an answer
23 in my mind, which may not have been what you are
24 thinking, but it seems to me that not just the talking
25 heads, but there is an increasing -- how shall I say it
StenoTran
3604
1 -- realization that within our communities are people
2 the world should meet sort of thing. I am thinking of
3 a lady 89 years old. Nobody knew that she was a
4 talented artist. She chose to keep that to herself and
5 through a media process we were able to acquaint a
6 whole community with what she was able to do.
7 16990 It occurs to us that there are many
8 of these people that it is very good for the community
9 to know of them. We would like to share that and, of
10 course, there has been no way in which that can be done
11 at the present time.
12 16991 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Let me come to
13 the centre of your brief, the culmination of your whole
14 exposé this morning, which was your idea for a
15 community channel. In your written brief you talked
16 about a community channel that would air on all
17 systems, so it would be on cable, as well as the
18 satellite systems. I would like you to give me some
19 sense of how it would be set up and how it would be
20 run. I note you say today:
21 "If the resources are needed --"
22 16992 I don't think there is an "if" there,
23 they are needed:
24 "-- which are not large to begin
25 with -- are spread among many
StenoTran
3605
1 players then the burden will be
2 very small on each of them. If
3 local broadcasters, cable
4 companies and the new
5 competitive distributors share
6 [in the programming]..."
7 16993 Is that how you see the thing being
8 financed?
9 16994 MR. SULLIVAN: I think we have to add
10 my line -- I think I was the one who read it -- it's an
11 idea, only an idea. But in partial answer to your
12 questions -- and I know the others have thoughts here,
13 too -- we would see a sharing amongst community groups
14 which would reach beyond faith groups. We have reason
15 to believe that that's not an impossible thing to hope
16 for. I recall the Vision people at the outset saying,
17 "Can we get people to work together", and, of course,
18 they have been able to do that.
19 16995 In the project that we have we think
20 20 years of up to a total of 70 groups working together
21 shows that that working together can come. I think we
22 see as a real challenge the business of getting various
23 groups working together and we think that that can be
24 done. Details on the ideas, no, not yet.
25 1110
StenoTran
3606
1 16996 MR. GILLANI: I would like to inject
2 one more very definite issue, there, that we are
3 looking towards the Commission to create a situation
4 where a study can be taken to look at the three
5 different facets of the whole question that you have
6 got. The resources, and we mentioned in our brief
7 getting those resources from the cable and the local
8 broadcasters, we do not have a definite solution or a
9 definite formula. We feel that if the Commission gave
10 an opportunity where a study was be put to place, there
11 would be some substantial information that we could
12 get.
13 16997 And number three, I am just re-
14 emphasizing John's issue, there, where we would be able
15 to go to local issues that are now disappearing from
16 the television screens.
17 16998 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Okay, don't
18 count on us to do a study that would make your
19 application, because we can't do that. We might
20 industry- or city- or region-wide study, and indeed, a
21 lot of figures are available from which you can glean
22 the information that you need. And I see that is how I
23 think you formulated it in your --
24 16999 MR. SULLIVAN: I think our thought
25 may have been to -- would the Commission be able in
StenoTran
3607
1 some way to create a foundation, a framework within
2 which a study could be initiated maybe by others. But
3 that foundational support would be what we were
4 wondering about.
5 17000 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: What are your
6 thoughts about who else would be part of this? The
7 Horizon Interface Council, the material you sent in had
8 a long list of faith organisations, churches, temples,
9 et cetera.
10 17001 What are your thoughts about who else
11 would be part of it? Because we have heard from
12 various people. We had round tables across the country
13 in the month of June, and we heard from people from
14 Vancouver to Chicoutimi about people from various types
15 of community groups who felt they weren't being heard
16 on the community channel.
17 17002 So my question is, what are your
18 thoughts on who else would be part of it? Would you
19 have sports groups and, say, parents' groups and anti-
20 violence groups and so forth who could be part of this,
21 or are you looking at primarily an inter-faith channel?
22 17003 MR. SULLIVAN: I would like to
23 respond to that beginning with a short quote, and this
24 is from John P. Roache, professor of political science
25 at Harvard University, who said some years ago that:
StenoTran
3608
1 "In a healthy democracy the
2 majority and the non-conformist
3 depend upon each other, and each
4 supplies a vital component to
5 the whole. Stability is
6 provided by the majority, while
7 vitality flows from the non-
8 conformist. Consequently, the
9 democrat protects the rights of
10 the non-conformist, not merely
11 as an act of decency, but more
12 significantly as an imperative
13 for him or herself and the whole
14 society."
15 17004 And so currently, for example, in the
16 greater metro area, we are getting substantial coverage
17 of amateur sports or sports that are not covered by the
18 major broadcasters. That doesn't seem to be a problem.
19 But the kind of voices that are suggested here might be
20 shut down, or have been shut down. The smaller voices
21 who have this vitality, who have something to say.
22 17005 And we talked already of a special
23 that we would do, for example, where the co-ministers
24 from my particular congregation have just returned from
25 six months' sabbatical which took them through Nepal,
StenoTran
3609
1 India, and Greece, Turkey, Romania, up into Germany,
2 Switzerland, so forth, where they were into the museums
3 along the way and studying the culture. And doing a
4 comparison as well with the other experience that we
5 are having now in helping -- and this would be
6 interfaith -- people build schools down in Guatemala,
7 and their discovery of the lack of that kind of
8 cooperation, sometimes, in the jurisdictions in which
9 they were travelling in. And so here is that kind of
10 small voice but important voice that we can express
11 through community television.
12 17006 So it ranges all across political
13 jurisdictions, or political voices, if you will, and
14 the various ethnic groups who have an important
15 message, sometimes, that informs us as to their
16 identity and their activities within the community, and
17 their ambitions for becoming more participatory in the
18 Canadian scene.
19 17007 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Okay. Just to
20 be a bit more specific, then, you are going beyond a --
21 I am not saying it should be one way or the other, I am
22 just trying to understand. You are going beyond a
23 religious faith-oriented station to one that would deal
24 with other things, like, for example, the Canadian
25 Labour congress was here a few days ago, and we talked
StenoTran
3610
1 about the lack of labour programming, sports, and stuff
2 like that. Would you see all those being accommodated?
3 17008 MR. GILLANI: In our presentation, we
4 have mentioned that we would be willing to combine with
5 other community groups and prepare a project where
6 everybody is involved, although our prime concern at
7 this time is our own faith group.
8 17009 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Okay. One of
9 the questions, short of the community programming, what
10 are your thoughts about what you see in the broadcast
11 channels, for those of you from Toronto, whether it is
12 Citytv or the local CBC, CTV affiliate, CFTO -- what
13 are your thoughts about what you are seeing there in
14 terms of the local community being reflected both in
15 news and entertainment?
16 17010 MR. GILLANI: We have emphasized in
17 our verbal presentation today that more and more
18 community, local diversity, everything is disappearing.
19 17011 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Do you want us
20 to do something about that part?
21 17012 MR. GILLANI: Definitely --
22 17013 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Or do you
23 think the solution lies only in the community
24 programming?
25 17014 MR. GILLANI: The point is, the whole
StenoTran
3611
1 submission is that -- the prime reason for the
2 submission is just that those issues are now
3 disappearing from the screen. We were a very vital
4 part of that ongoing activity, and we would like them
5 to be put in place the way the Broadcasting Act says.
6 17015 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Okay. Well,
7 thanks very much. It is an interesting proposal that
8 you are working on. I appreciate your recognising that
9 we can't license ideas, that our system requires stuff
10 to be more thorough, and indeed, you are not there yet.
11 You want to be more thorough, so we appreciate that.
12 17016 I am particularly taken by your note
13 -- I was just looking for the quote, I couldn't find it
14 -- but you talked about the number of people who did
15 belong to religious affiliations, and that in a city
16 like Toronto it is useful, important, essential to find
17 means through television to be able to share those
18 values and create understanding. So thanks very much
19 for that presentation.
20 17017 That covers my questions, Madam
21 Chair.
22 17018 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr.
23 Gillani and your colleagues.
24 17019 MR. GILLANI: Thank you very much.
25 17020 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you for your
StenoTran
3612
1 presentation.
2 17021 THE CHAIRPERSON: Madam Secretary.
3 17022 MS SANTERRE: Thank you, Madam Chair.
4 The next presentation will be done by Canada Family
5 Action Coalition, with Peter Stock.
6 PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
7 17023 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good morning, Mr.
8 Stock.
9 17024 MR. STOCK: Thank you. Good morning,
10 Commission. We would first of all like to thank you
11 for the opportunity to appear here this morning, and I
12 look forward to a good discussion. We appreciate the
13 opportunity, too, the CRTC has presented to Canadians
14 to discuss the quality of television broadcasting in
15 this country, and where we might go in the future.
16 17025 So for us, a pop tune from the 70s
17 sums it up quite well when it says, "57 channels and
18 there is nothing on." Indeed, Canadians are becoming
19 increasingly disturbed by the violence and pornography
20 they are seeing on many, many more channels nowadays,
21 and many of them have decided just to switch off.
22 17026 Recent surveys have shown, on the
23 other hand, that a smaller and infrequent television
24 viewership has led to book sales increasing, magazine
25 sales increasing. People are reading more. Maybe that
StenoTran
3613
1 is not such a bad thing.
2 1120
3 17027 That sort of activity, reading,
4 socializing, other forms of entertainment, are probably
5 more beneficial for society as a whole than plain
6 television watching. Certainly, Robertson Davies is
7 infinitely more important to Canadians than Jerry
8 Springer. However, it's also clear that television
9 does have the potential to serve the common good, and
10 we have seen that.
11 17028 For example, I would point to the
12 recent licensing of the History Channel as an excellent
13 example of the direction the Commission has taken
14 television and a very positive one. That channel in
15 particular served as a powerful tool in reminding
16 Canadians of their origin, culture and identity. So,
17 it's exactly this point that we would like to
18 emphasize, that Canadian television can be encouraging,
19 a unifying force and positive in serving the common
20 good.
21 17029 We have a few simple suggestions to
22 make on how to improve the situation over the longer
23 term. First, we would ask the Commission to reconsider
24 the licensing of the Playboy Channel. Anti-women
25 programming such as Playboy is not particularly
StenoTran
3614
1 Canadian and there is nothing Canadian, of course,
2 about displaying women as furry, naked creatures who
3 exist simply for the pleasure of men. So, I would
4 recommend that you re-address that question. That's
5 the type of antiquated bigotry that belongs alongside
6 holocaust deniers and the Klu Klux Klan. It's part of
7 the past, it's not part of our future as a country. I
8 believe the CRTC can do better in this regard.
9 17030 Next, let's consider developing a
10 standard for decency that no programming may fall
11 below. We may not all agree on where the line should
12 be drawn, but it's clear that an effort should be made
13 to deal with the worst obscenity and graphic violence
14 that is increasingly filling the TV Guide today. No
15 standard at all means anything goes and lately this has
16 meant even the real-time acting out of an incest scene
17 between mother and son, full nudity, on a major
18 Canadian network. We have also had -- and I am sure
19 you are aware of this -- many complaints about the
20 Showcase channel in recent days and months. Citytv is
21 moving in this direction, too. We are extremely
22 concerned about this.
23 17031 It is relatively easy, though, to
24 just say, "Ban the bad stuff." That's a cry we have
25 heard in the past. We believe it's important to offer
StenoTran
3615
1 constructive alternatives as well. Perhaps the most
2 important change to be made towards improving the
3 quality of programming would be to encourage more faith
4 or principles-based Canadian programming. It's our
5 belief that if Canadians are given a real alternative
6 to the murder-a-minute cop shows and lewd, adolescent
7 sitcoms, the quality programming will start to raise
8 the overall standard of the programming menu.
9 17032 This proposal doesn't have to cost
10 taxpayers a cent. Many private groups are ready to
11 finance and produce quality faith and principles-based
12 programming and the job created and the export earnings
13 potential will be of net benefit to the Canadian
14 economy. The only barrier holding these entrepreneurs
15 back so far has been licensure by the CRTC. The 1991
16 Census indicated that 87 per cent of Canadians self-
17 identify with a particular world religion. It
18 logically follows that some portion of our population
19 has an interest in television that reflects their
20 mostly deeply held convictions.
21 17033 Faith broadcasting has mostly been
22 denied to Canadians for the past 65 years. Take, for
23 example, last summer the recent refusal by the CRTC to
24 license EWTN, the world's largest religious or
25 Catholic, I should say, TV channel. Forty-six per cent
StenoTran
3616
1 of Canadians consider themselves Catholic, according to
2 that 1991 Census.
3 17034 Now here is something you may not
4 know. EWTN is broadcasting legally in every single
5 country in the western hemisphere, with the exception
6 of communist Cuba and Canada. Now, the difference
7 between Cuba and Canada is that Cuba doesn't license
8 the Playboy Channel, either. So, it's time for our
9 broadcasting policy in this regard to catch up with the
10 rest of the world.
11 17035 However, to the Commission's credit,
12 this year a licence has been granted in Hamilton,
13 Ontario to a station that is now carrying a majority of
14 single-faith programming. That's in fact a historical
15 precedent. It's the first major market licence that
16 has been granted in this area. So, congratulations.
17 However, serious problems still remain, in our opinion.
18 17036 Two things that we point out with
19 regard to that licence and those that may come along
20 like it are arbitrary requirements that require that
21 station and others like it to broadcast incompatible
22 viewpoints of other faiths on their channel, the
23 balance requirement, and also the imposition of a
24 speech code. I call these arbitrary because they don't
25 apply to all broadcasters. If we applied the same
StenoTran
3617
1 standards to MuchMusic and others, then we would have
2 something to talk about, that minimum standard again.
3 17037 Then, of course, there is the
4 question of where the Catholic channel is now. We have
5 a protestant channel, that's great. Where is the
6 Catholic channel? Perhaps that's down the road and I
7 would ask the Commission to consider that. I don't
8 think I will get into that right now.
9 17038 Parliament is starting to take some
10 notice of where the Commission has been going in recent
11 years. I think there is a great deal of satisfaction
12 with some of the recent moves, the licensing of
13 "Crossroads" and so on, but parliamentarians are
14 increasingly concerned about where television is going
15 to. We have heard from them about this and they are
16 expressing this in the House in increasing numbers. In
17 fact 10 per cent of parliamentarians now have presented
18 a petition. Ten per cent of parliamentarians
19 representing 10 per cent of the ridings or 10 per cent
20 of the population coast to coast presented a petition
21 decrying the licensure of Playboy and the denial of
22 religious broadcasting licences.
23 17039 So, I will leave my presentation at
24 that point and perhaps answer any questions you might
25 have.
StenoTran
3618
1 17040 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr.
2 Stock.
3 17041 Commissioner McKendry?
4 17042 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you,
5 Madam Chair.
6 17043 Good morning, Mr. Stock.
7 17044 MR. STOCK: Good morning.
8 17045 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I must admit
9 I have never seen the Playboy Channel, but your
10 submission is attracting my interest when you described
11 the women on the channel as furry. It conjures up in
12 my mind sort of a "Planet of the Apes" channel with
13 women. Am I missing something here? Why are the women
14 on this channel furry?
15 17046 MR. STOCK: I haven't seen the
16 channel except in passing on satellite TV at one point
17 in time several years ago, but the fact is it has been
18 licensed and I think people are aware of the image that
19 the Hugh Hefner crew placed on women, the
20 objectification of women, dressing them up in bunny
21 suits. This is nothing new.
22 17047 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: This is a
23 subscription channel, so I take it that one wouldn't
24 watch it unless one made a decision that that's what
25 one wanted to see and was prepared to pay for it.
StenoTran
3619
1 17048 MR. STOCK: That's correct, but that
2 doesn't justify licensing it. The CRTC has discretion
3 to say yes or no to these channels and it's a question
4 of community standards. The Canadian community that we
5 talk to says that this falls below that standard.
6 17049 So, once again I would refer back to
7 my earlier point that what we need to perhaps develop
8 and the Commission should consider developing is a
9 minimum standard for decency, a minimum standard when
10 it comes to a speech code that applies equally to all
11 broadcasters. If the Commission wants to say, "Yes,
12 the Playboy Channel is fine", then why wouldn't we say,
13 yes, it's fine to have a Catholic channel, too? What's
14 so offensive about EWTN and Mother Angelica?
15 17050 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: In any event,
16 I think you would agree with me a member of the general
17 community who doesn't want to watch the Playboy Channel
18 doesn't have to watch it?
19 17051 MR. STOCK: I could say the same
20 thing about any of the other channels that are on TV
21 and, as I stated at the beginning of my presentation,
22 increasingly Canadians are turning off, but I don't
23 think that's the solution. I think the solution is to
24 look to the future and say: What kind of TV do we want
25 to have? It's not all going to be the same, but
StenoTran
3620
1 certainly we can meet a minimum standard, certainly we
2 can strive towards better quality programming, and
3 certainly the licensing of Playboy goes in the opposite
4 direction.
5 17052 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: This is a
6 technical point, but the Playboy Channel in fact isn't
7 licensed by us, it's authorized for distribution in
8 Canada. I suspect that point does detract from the
9 point you want to make with us that it's available.
10 17053 MR. STOCK: Yes.
11 17054 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thanks.
12 17055 Let me ask you about what I detect
13 are two options that flow out of what you have
14 presented to us. If I have those options wrong, please
15 let me know. The first option, I take it, is the one
16 that's set out about halfway down the first page of
17 your written submission where you suggest or ask us to,
18 and I quote, "develop a standard for decency that no
19 programming may fall below." That would be one option.
20 We would have a standard and programming that was
21 unacceptable for the reasons you set out here just
22 wouldn't be on the screen.
23 17056 MR. STOCK: That's right.
24 17057 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: The other
25 option, I take it, is more diversity. You would like
StenoTran
3621
1 to see more programming that's consistent with the
2 values and so on that you set out here. Have I got
3 that right, that you see two options in front of us?
4 17058 MR. STOCK: I see those working
5 concurrently. Certainly if somebody wants to pursue
6 the golf channel or pursue the sailing channel or
7 pursue faith-based programming, they should be free to
8 do that. However, all those channels should meet a
9 minimum standard.
10 17059 I would refer to the speech code that
11 the CRTC imposes on faith-based programmers. No
12 intolerance, basically, is the motive there. Perhaps
13 that's a very reasonable statement to make, but that's
14 not applied to other channels like MuchMusic. Some
15 might argue that the Playboy Channel, as it objectifies
16 women, is intolerant towards women. So, certainly
17 there needs to be a debate about what is and what isn't
18 acceptable.
19 17060 What we are saying is apply the same
20 standard across the board. Don't have special rules
21 for this area of broadcasting and that area of -- or
22 this type of programming and that type of programming.
23 If somebody wants to do a faith-based channel, they
24 have to meet the same standard that somebody doing
25 MuchMusic or a sports channel does.
StenoTran
3622
1 17061 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Your ultimate
2 goal is a standard and anything that falls below the
3 standard wouldn't be on our screens. That is the
4 standard for decency.
5 17062 MR. STOCK: That is correct.
6 17063 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Just to
7 understand where the standard or the line should be
8 drawn, let me ask you about another statement that you
9 make later on in the first page. You refer to lewd and
10 adolescent sitcoms. Can you just give me a couple of
11 examples of what you consider to be lewd and adolescent
12 sitcoms that are available today?
13 17064 MR. STOCK: I think most of them are
14 nowadays, but "South Park" would be a good example.
15 1130
16 17065 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Do you have
17 any others?
18 17066 MR. STOCK: "Seinfeld" has been from
19 time to time quite adolescent, quite lewd.
20 17067 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: So once we
21 set the standard that you are suggesting we should,
22 "Seinfeld" wouldn't be on our screens and "South Park"
23 wouldn't be on our screens?
24 17068 MR. STOCK: That might a possibility
25 in some cases, yes. Depending where we set that
StenoTran
3623
1 standard, it is quite possible that many "South Park"
2 episodes would not be acceptable to the Commission and
3 to the Canadian public. I think you would find that is
4 the case already, based on the number of complaints
5 that you may have received about some of those
6 episodes.
7 17069 "Seinfeld," it might only be the
8 occasional episode where either a word is deleted in
9 the course of conversation, which does happen, quite
10 frankly, already in the States, or, it might be that
11 entire episode is considered unacceptable.
12 17070 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Who would the
13 individual be that would decide that an episode of
14 "Seinfeld" isn't acceptable?
15 17071 MR. STOCK: Well, there are a number
16 of ways to go about regulation. There is self
17 regulation that once a standard is set, it depends what
18 the censure is going to be if one violates that. If a
19 station believes that they are going to go beyond the
20 limits the Commission has set, then maybe they won't
21 want to risk their licence. So we don't necessarily
22 need a strict censor board. We may need just a
23 standard set that the Commission sets and licences are
24 either granted or denied or renewed on the basis of
25 whether or not they have been adhered to. Or a licence
StenoTran
3624
1 could be pulled, if it has been grossly violated.
2 17072 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Just so I
3 understand again where the line should be drawn, what
4 about "Frasier," would there be some episodes of
5 "Frasier," which I think is going into the schedule at
6 the same time. "Seinfeld" used to be in the schedule.
7 Are there some episodes of "Frasier" that would fall
8 below the line?
9 17073 MR. STOCK: I can't say that I have
10 watched that show quite as much but I suspect that from
11 time to time there may be comments made that are
12 considered abusive, intolerant, obscene and, as a
13 result, might be deleted or entire episodes may not be
14 shown. That is a decision that, as I say, once we draw
15 that line, we will have a better sense of how to deal
16 with it.
17 17074 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Down at the
18 bottom of page one, you point out that 87 per cent of
19 Canadians self identify with a particular world
20 religion, and I think you use the statistic to
21 reinforce your submission to us. Now I would
22 anticipate or expect that many of those 87 per cent
23 Canadians watch "Frasier" or "Seinfeld," do you see any
24 conflict there with your position that we should take
25 into account the fact that 87 per cent of Canadians
StenoTran
3625
1 self identify with a particular world religion, we
2 should draw a line that certain episodes of "Seinfeld,"
3 "Frasier," "South Park" wouldn't show up on our
4 screens, yet many of these people are watching these
5 episodes.
6 17075 MR. STOCK: It is quite possible that
7 many people are watching them. It is also a fact that
8 many people are writing complaints to the CRTC on the
9 basis of some of the activities or comments that are
10 made in episodes of shows like "Frasier." I am not
11 aware if you have complaints about "Frasier" itself but
12 I am certain you have them about shows like "South
13 Park" and others.
14 17076 Now the point there about 87 per cent
15 of Canadians self identifying as being religious, this
16 comes from StatsCan's '91 census. This is how people
17 have identified themselves to the Government of Canada.
18 Our point here isn't that 87 per cent of Canadians want
19 to watch faith-based programming or faith-based
20 programming exclusively. What we are suggesting is
21 that many of them want and that many of them might
22 enjoy that alternative and would have an interest in
23 television that reflects their most deeply held views.
24 They might also at the same time choose to watch
25 "Frasier" but we think they should be granted that
StenoTran
3626
1 choice. They don't currently have that, in our
2 opinion.
3 17077 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: In your
4 written submission, you noted at the end of the
5 submission that you would or your organization would be
6 consulting with Canadians over the summer on this issue
7 and would be presenting us with some findings as a
8 result of this consultation at the hearing. Did you
9 have an opportunity to carry out those consultations?
10 17078 MR. STOCK: Indeed, we did. I guess
11 I would say two things that is really to re-emphasize a
12 number of the things that we have outlined in here,
13 three points perhaps.
14 17079 First of all, they are happy to see
15 stations like Crossroads get licences. Obviously, it
16 has only been a few days that particular station has
17 been on the air but people are excited by that. We
18 have heard a great deal of feedback saying, yes, we are
19 glad to finally see this on TV. Where has it been all
20 these years? That is the statement. So,
21 congratulations to the Commission on that point.
22 17080 The second point would be that of the
23 worsening of some channels on TV in terms of their
24 obscenity. "Showcase" is one that I have heard
25 numerous complaints about. Why is that filth on my
StenoTran
3627
1 television set? People are looking for a movie to
2 watch late at night and they had never heard of this
3 movie and it turns to be literally hard core
4 pornography. They are upset by that.
5 17081 Citytv as well has been moving down
6 this road. I believe it is a week away we are supposed
7 to see "Sex in the City" is the name of the show, full
8 hard core pornography on Citytv, again. So there have
9 been, in our estimation, a rise in complaints, a rise
10 in the number of concerned people who are worried about
11 what is, in fact, being shown on television.
12 17082 Then the third point is the one I
13 mentioned. The question that is asked of us is why
14 isn't there a standard? How can they be allowed to get
15 away with this? Where is the standard? So we ask that
16 question of the Commission. Where is the standard?
17 How low will we go?
18 17083 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Let me just
19 come back now to the beginning of your presentation
20 where you note that television viewership may be
21 declining and the book sales are rising and so on.
22 When I was having a chat in the cab recently with the
23 cab driver who had asked me what I did for a living and
24 I told him what we were doing right now and he had an
25 interesting comment because he said, well, that seems
StenoTran
3628
1 like a pretty big proceeding you are having and so on.
2 He said it is just television. I guess I take it that
3 is your point, too.
4 17084 There are other alternatives
5 available to people. Television is only, first of all,
6 one dimension in their lives. They have a family life.
7 They have their spiritual life. They have their
8 community life. And they have many options available
9 to them with respect to entertainment and information,
10 such as books.
11 17085 So I take it that is the point you
12 want to make to us is that people have options. To the
13 extent they move away from television to exercise those
14 options, the television industry may adjust the nature
15 of its programming on its own initiative.
16 17086 MR. STOCK: Yes, there is certainly
17 some truth to that. Of course, because of regulation
18 in this country and because of the failure up to this
19 point up until very recently, in fact, to license, for
20 instance, faith-based programming on the public
21 airwaves in this country, people have sought other
22 alternatives. Yes, it might be books.
23 17087 It might also be satellite TV. The
24 pizza dish has made the reception of foreign signals or
25 signals from satellites much cheaper, as you are well
StenoTran
3629
1 aware, and has put it in the range of affordability for
2 most middle class families. So if a Catholic person in
3 this country wishes to receive Mother Angelica on EWTN,
4 they might buy a pizza dish for 500 bucks.
5 17088 What that means to me is that cable
6 companies and Canadian television production suffer as
7 a result because those dollars are flowing out of the
8 country and in a very literal sense. I think that is
9 something that the CRTC needs to be concerned about.
10 If we are losing market share, whatever market it is -
11 distribution, production, to foreigners because of a
12 failure to provide the services here at home, then I
13 think that is a serious problem that we need to
14 consider. I mean the job is going south of the border,
15 literally.
16 17089 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you
17 very much, Mr. Stock. Those are the questions I have
18 for you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
19 17090 THE CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner
20 Cardozo.
21 17091 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Thanks, Madam
22 Chair. Thanks, Mr. Stock. It is nice to see you
23 again. The last time we met, it was at the hearing
24 that eventually licensed Crossroads and I am hoping
25 that your opinion of us has changed since then or
StenoTran
3630
1 improved since then, as you have mentioned, and I
2 appreciate the feedback you brought us on Crossroads.
3 17092 In terms of the programming that you
4 find objectionable, I am wondering if you have ever
5 looked at the issue of community evaluation. And I ask
6 this in light of the position we find ourselves in
7 quite frequently when people object to this or that
8 type of programming. We consequently get thrown the
9 argument of freedom of expression, freedom of speech.
10 Our role is not to censor, et cetera, et cetera.
11 17093 I think at various times the
12 programming, and perhaps we have seen this more in the
13 States, where community groups have gotten together and
14 either evaluated a number of shows or particular shows
15 and tried to exert consumer viewer pressure on stations
16 and stuff like that. Have you approached it from that
17 perspective?
18 17094 MR. STOCK: Well, I think the problem
19 that we face in this country is with respect to
20 censorship versus a freedom of expression is probably
21 best summed up in the Butler decision of the Supreme
22 Court back in '92 when they addressed the issue of hard
23 core pornography being sold out of a video store in
24 Manitoba and it worked its way through the courts over
25 several years and the justices decided that they would
StenoTran
3631
1 apply something called "community standard of tolerance
2 test." And that did not mean what you or I would
3 tolerate in our own home or being sold to our front
4 door but rather what we would tolerate our neighbour
5 watching, listening to, reading, et cetera.
6 17095 The Supreme Court, in fact, gave a
7 minimum standard for what was obscene. They said if it
8 involves criminal activity of some sort in connection
9 with the portrayal of sexuality or nudity, that that
10 activity would be considered criminal. It does not
11 mean that it would necessarily, if it is not criminal,
12 it isn't also obscene or pornographic. And so I would
13 suggest that the problem we face is one of where has
14 the court drawn the line on a number of these issues.
15 17096 The Playboy Channel may be legal in
16 the sense of whether or not it meets the community
17 standard of tolerance test. But that doesn't
18 necessarily mean that it is moral and it does not
19 necessarily mean that the community accepts it or wants
20 to see it on TV. In fact, Commissioner McKendry was
21 quite correct, the average Canadian isn't going to see
22 it on TV unless they pay for it.
23 17097 But the fact of the matter is that
24 Canadians may not tolerate, and it is quite clear from
25 the complaints we have had and that Parliament has had,
StenoTran
3632
1 and I believe the Commission has had, that the Canadian
2 public isn't interested in tolerating that for their
3 neighbours either, and so perhaps that type of
4 programming does not meet the community standard of
5 tolerance test.
6 17098 As to who should make the final
7 decision, well, I would submit that many times these
8 decisions have to end up in a place like the CRTC or in
9 the courts and work their way up to the Supreme Court
10 level and be decided, hopefully not on a case-by-case
11 basis, because you can imagine that would clog the
12 courts pretty badly. But certainly the Commission has
13 the power through licensure to say yes or no to a
14 certain standard.
15 17099 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: You are aware
16 of the CBSC, the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council
17 and have you used it?
18 17100 MR. STOCK: Yes, I guess we find that
19 it doesn't do the job, and I will give you an example
20 why. A complaint just last year where a housewife
21 complained to the CBSC about a show called "Fashion
22 File," CBC-TV, Newsworld, and the fact that full
23 frontal nudity was displayed at the dinnertime hour and
24 that her child saw this and she was extremely offended.
25 The Broadcast Standards Council said, well, that's
StenoTran
3633
1 fine, you know, we don't have a problem with that. I
2 don't know what their exact wording was. I don't have
3 it in front of me but that --
4 17101 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: I am not
5 familiar with that particular decision. Just for your
6 information, that is one of the things that is up for
7 review, perhaps early next year. So keep in touch with
8 us on that.
9 17102 MR. STOCK: Okay, we appreciate that.
10 17103 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: On local
11 programming, what were your thoughts? Were you here
12 during the previous presentation by Horizon?
13 17104 MR. STOCK: Yes, I was.
14 17105 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: What are your
15 thoughts on that? I mean what these folks were asking
16 for was a community-based interfaith channel that also
17 dealt with other local community level stuff. What are
18 your thoughts about that type of programming?
19 17106 MR. STOCK: Yes, I think that is
20 excellent. It shows, as they described, volunteers
21 taking initiative, wanting to support the community,
22 their own personal communities, and I think that's a
23 very Canadian thing. We should give serious
24 consideration to that proposal. It sounds, from what
25 they were presenting, that they weren't looking for a
StenoTran
3634
1 handout from the government. They were looking to
2 produce this very low budgets and at a volunteer level
3 and I think that is the kind of thing that benefits the
4 community as a whole. I don't see how we could
5 possibly oppose that type of initiative.
6 17107 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: But does it go
7 some way to serving the kind of needs you say aren't
8 being met?
9 17108 MR. STOCK: I believe that certainly
10 does, yes.
11 17109 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Lastly, Mr.
12 Thiessen from Trinity was here last week. You are
13 familiar with Trinity?
14 17110 MR. STOCK: Yes.
15 17111 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: One of the
16 points he was making in relation to Canadian content,
17 which is one of the core issues of this hearing, was
18 that he wanted protections to continue in terms of the
19 amount of Canadian programming because it also helped
20 religious programming, a lot of Canadian-based and
21 Canadian-made religious programming. Is that a view
22 you share?
23 17112 MR. STOCK: Not necessarily because
24 we don't view religious programming as Canadian,
25 American, whatever. It is international in its scope
StenoTran
3635
1 because religions are international in their scope. If
2 there is any type of programming that shouldn't have
3 those types of restrictions attached to it, it is
4 probably religious programming, for those very reasons.
5 17113 Yes, people are catholic in a
6 particular country, for example, but you cannot draw a
7 line between Canadian catholics and American catholics
8 and say their culture is different in terms of their
9 religion because it certainly isn't. They attend the
10 same services. They pray the same prayers and they
11 speak the same words. If they are going to broadcast
12 that, they are going to communicate that. They are not
13 communicating a Canadian or American perspective. They
14 are communicating a religious perspective, which
15 transcends international boundaries.
16 17114 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Interesting.
17 Thanks very much. Those are my questions, Madam Chair.
18 17115 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr.
19 Stock.
20 17116 MR. STOCK: Thank you, Madam Chair.
21 17117 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you for
22 appearing.
23 17118 Madam Secretary, would you call the
24 next participant?
25 17119 MS SANTERRE: The next presentation
StenoTran
3636
1 will be done by the Canadian Diversity Network.
2 1150
3 PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
4 17120 MS CLARKE: Thank you. Good morning
5 and again, thank you very much for giving us the
6 opportunity to appear before the Commission today.
7 17121 By way of introductions, my name is
8 Anne Clarke, I am executive director of the Pearson-
9 Shoyama Institute. I am also a community development
10 worker within the immigrant and visible minority
11 community, and former president of the first black
12 women's network focused on black women.
13 17122 Some of the network members with us
14 today are Professor Lionel Lumb, who has got a
15 background in journalism and mass communications, and
16 he has been a television producer.
17 17123 We have Dr. Karim, on my far right,
18 who is also with the school of journalism at Carleton
19 University.
20 17124 Amos and Alfons Adetuyi in the back,
21 who are both with Inner City Films and producers.
22 17125 Jennifer David of Television Northern
23 Canada, and Rubin Friedman with the National Capital
24 Alliance on Race Relations, and one other coalition
25 group member who is not with us today.
StenoTran
3637
1 17126 A little bit of background about the
2 group. The network was formed as a result of a round
3 table in June dealing with diversity in broadcast
4 media, hosted by the Pearson-Shoyama Institute in our
5 role as a national public policy think tank.
6 17127 Our institute is geared towards
7 ensuring that a wider cross-section of Canadians have a
8 say in the development of private and public sector
9 policy. Participants at the round table felt that the
10 network was necessary in order to continue the dialogue
11 and have direct input into Canada's communications
12 policy, which in many ways projects Canada's eyes on
13 the world, not just through language, but also imagery.
14 17128 The network is a loosely-knit group
15 and organisations. Their main purpose is to deal with
16 issues of culture, race, religion, and linguistic
17 diversity that affects the Canadian communication
18 system.
19 17129 This will be done through exchanges
20 of information with other individuals and organisations
21 across Canada, through research. And certainly the
22 network would like to work very closely with your
23 Commission, industry, labour, and other people to
24 ensure that communications policy reflects the
25 multiracial and multicultural mosaic of Canada.
StenoTran
3638
1 17130 And I will pass you on to Professor
2 Lumb, who will do a presentation for us.
3 17131 MR. LUMB: Good morning, and Madam
4 Chairperson, Commissioners, we are obviously very glad
5 to have this chance.
6 17132 We would like to present some
7 thoughts, concerns, and possible solutions on Canadian
8 broadcasting and diversity. And by diversity, of
9 course, we do not mean variety of programming. Our
10 concern is to achieve a more faithful reflection of the
11 wonderful diversity of Canadians' experiences,
12 aspirations, and cultural history.
13 17133 We are not seeking something
14 extraordinary. We only ask that which is already
15 required of television networks and channels in the
16 Broadcasting Act of 1991, to reflect "the multicultural
17 and multiracial nature of Canadian society," and to
18 reflect Aboriginal cultures to the rest of the country.
19 17134 We know it is within your power to
20 make this happen, and we urge you to take action on
21 five points: the first of these, to ensure that
22 broadcasters develop a pool of writers, producers,
23 performers and managers drawn from right across the
24 Canadian cultural spectrum so that viewers find a fresh
25 and balanced array of programs.
StenoTran
3639
1 17135 Two, to develop a research framework
2 that monitors the reflection of Canadian minorities in
3 broadcasting.
4 17136 Three, to develop a framework to
5 monitor, measure and evaluate the progress of
6 broadcasters in this regard.
7 17137 Four, to ensure that broadcasters
8 understand that their performance and their progress in
9 meeting this section of Broadcasting Act will face
10 review at the time of licence renewal.
11 17138 And five, to ensure that broadcasters
12 will be required as part of the license process to
13 conduct an assessment of the diversity needs of their
14 market at the time of licence application, licence
15 renewal, or change of ownership -- and that, I think,
16 is becoming a more important part of the game -- and to
17 couple this with a promise of performance that will be
18 measured and evaluated as a licence condition during
19 subsequent reviews.
20 17139 So why do we think these measures are
21 necessary? And the answer lies in Canadian
22 television's response, or apparent lack of it, in many
23 cases, to section 3 of the Act.
24 17140 Since you began this policy review,
25 many broadcasters and producers appearing here before
StenoTran
3640
1 your have voiced variations on a nice-sounding theme,
2 and that is, we reflect, or want to reflect, Canadians
3 to Canadians.
4 17141 The simple fact is that some
5 Canadians are being reflected a lot, but others hardly
6 at all. Millions of adults and children will go to bed
7 most nights without seeing their lives, their hopes,
8 and their experiences properly reflected.
9 17142 Now we are not here to complain and
10 whine about this, we are here to say, what a waste.
11 What a terrible waste of a glorious opportunity. The
12 richness and the promise of Canada's diversity is
13 surely not something to ignore, but to celebrate. Our
14 industries know how to mine the wonderful resources of
15 the land, but broadcasters barely scrape at the richest
16 resource of all: the diversity of its people. It is
17 not just wrong, but also sad that many great Canadian
18 stories go untold.
19 17143 When visible minority groups make up
20 30 per cent or more of the population of Canada's major
21 cities, how can public and private broadcasters get
22 away with this?
23 17144 Certainly, the situation has improved
24 from previous decades, when visible minorities were
25 invisible on television screens, and a diversity of
StenoTran
3641
1 accents was absent on the airwaves. But Canadians can
2 still watch in vain most night a week for a drama in
3 which a Canadian Aboriginal or a South Asian or a
4 Chinese Canadian plays a major role. When minority
5 actors do appear, they are usually in marginal roles.
6 17145 Greater gains have been made in news
7 programming, in which it is no longer remarkable to
8 find reporters and anchors of various backgrounds. It
9 is time the entertainment industry caught up, which
10 leads us to point number one, the diversity talent
11 pool.
12 17146 Borrowing on a line from a famous
13 baseball story -- "if you build it, they will come" --
14 we suggest Canada's broadcasters should apply this to
15 programs -- "if you make them, they will watch." Large
16 numbers of Canadians have watched "Anne of Green
17 Gables."
18 17147 More recently, "Due South" and
19 "Traders" have their loyal audiences, despite terrific
20 competition from American programming. In music,
21 literature, and film Canadians are soaring to new
22 heights. Why not Canadian television? Sure the talent
23 must exist there too, but it needs nurturing.
24 17148 It may take a while, but if good
25 Canadian programming is out there, audiences will grow.
StenoTran
3642
1 And perhaps the fastest increase would come from
2 reaching out to the 30 per cent of Canadians for whom
3 there is now little or no programming -- a reaching out
4 not only to viewers, but also to writers and performers
5 to ensure that they enter the mainstream.
6 17149 In Britain, the BBC created a special
7 diversity programming unit based in Birmingham, centre
8 of many cultural and many minority communities, to fill
9 gaps in its drama and comedy production.
10 17150 Gaps, we say? Well, it is safe to
11 say that Canadians who watch British dramas and
12 comedies on TV or on PBS are likely to see more Asian
13 and black actors in major roles than they ever will by
14 watching the CBC or Canada's private networks.
15 17151 And that is another missed
16 opportunity. If Canadian broadcasters tapped into our
17 rich vein of diversity, they too could increase their
18 export markets to countries with similar populations.
19 A talent pool that builds on the work done by ACTRA to
20 promote minority writers and performers will boost both
21 our domestic and our export markets.
22 17152 Point number two: Diversity and a
23 research framework. To expand on what we mean by
24 "research," let us look at the news business. There is
25 industry research in this area.
StenoTran
3643
1 17153 In 1995, a report prepared by
2 Goldfarb Consultants for the Canadian Daily Newspaper
3 Association, as it was then called, found that 57 per
4 cent of participants in focus groups said daily
5 newspapers helped to reinforce the feeling that visible
6 minorities are not part of mainstream Canada. Yet,
7 Goldfarb also found visible minorities are avid
8 readers, and form a growing potential market at a time
9 when daily newspaper readership is declining.
10 17154 The strong message -- grasp this
11 opportunity, serve all of your potential readership,
12 increase your market, and, of course, earn more
13 advertising dollars. It is a prescription for better
14 and more balanced reporting, and that becomes a
15 prescription for success.
16 17155 An example of a newspaper that heeded
17 the word and reaches out far better than before to its
18 potential readership is the Montreal "Gazette," which
19 worked very hard at introducing and sustaining greater
20 coverage of diversity.
21 17156 Among television stations, the
22 outstanding example is Citytv, possibly unmatched in
23 its range of on-air personalities drawn from many of
24 Toronto's cultural minorities. One of its
25 personalities, the music video presenter Monika Deol,
StenoTran
3644
1 can say with fire and conviction, Wake up -- I am the
2 mainstream. Citytv's viewers can see many role models
3 to emulate any day of the week.
4 17157 This kind of forward thinking earlier
5 caused the advertising industry to improve its
6 reflection of diversity driven by market surveys.
7 Diversity is good business.
8 17158 But the research data that exists in
9 the area of diversity and broadcasting is incomplete
10 and out of date. We would ask that the CRTC develop a
11 research and evaluation framework that monitors the
12 reflection of Canadian society in Canadian
13 broadcasting.
14 17159 Point number three: monitoring
15 diversity. Also worrisome is that no framework exists
16 to monitor, measure, and evaluate the progress of
17 Canadian broadcasters in implementing the Broadcasting
18 Act's expectations on diversity. We urge the CRTC to
19 develop such a framework.
20 17160 Point number four: diversity and
21 licence renewal. With little or no progress on
22 diversity in broadcasting since the Act came into power
23 seven years ago, we urge the CRTC to exercise its
24 authority in this regard. Broadcasters must be made to
25 realise that licence renewal will depend on how they
StenoTran
3645
1 have met the requirements of the Act.
2 17161 And finally point five: diversity
3 needs of markets. Not all markets are the same. One
4 shakes one's head in disbelief when drama and
5 entertainment programs fail to reflect the rich
6 diversity of a market such as Vancouver's. And do
7 producers ever venture out onto the streets, visit
8 schools, shopping malls, restaurants?
9 17162 That is why we urge the CRTC at the
10 time of licence application, licence renewal, or change
11 of ownership, to do two things. First, conduct an
12 assessment of the diversity needs of their market; and
13 two, couple this with a promise of performance that
14 will be measured and evaluated as a licence condition
15 during subsequent reviews.
16 17163 We conclude with this oral
17 presentation by asking you, Madam Chairperson and
18 commissioners, to support the obligations enshrined in
19 the Broadcasting Act. Armed with research and
20 information about the progress of diversity in both
21 programming and the hiring of talent, we urge the CRTC
22 to take the next and logical step. Every broadcaster
23 who comes before you at the time of licence renewal,
24 change of ownership, or with an application for a new
25 licence must know that the Commission has before it
StenoTran
3646
1 data on that organisation's progress in the field of
2 diversity. Every broadcaster must know that the
3 commitment to reflect aboriginal cultures to the rest
4 of Canada and to reflect the multicultural and
5 multiracial nature of Canadian society has indeed been
6 monitored, measured and evaluated.
7 17164 The Canadian reality embraces a
8 gloriously simple message: there are unheard voices
9 well worth hearing, and there are untold stories well
10 worth telling. Thank you.
11 17165 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms
12 Clarke, Mr. Lumb. Commissioner Pennefather.
13 17166 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Good
14 morning.
15 17167 MR. LUMB: Good morning.
16 17168 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you
17 for that very informative presentation. You have
18 actually taken a number of ideas from the written
19 submission forward quite a bit, and I have a number of
20 questions which you may have already answered, but I
21 would like to go back over them.
22 17169 But my first question is, you have
23 changed your name to Communications and Diversity
24 Network, correct? Why? What is the name change about?
25 17170 MS CLARKE: It is clearer, and as I
StenoTran
3647
1 said earlier, it is a new network and it is continually
2 evolving and growing. As you see, we have Inner City
3 Films from Toronto who are interested in the work of
4 the network and would like to get involved and are here
5 with us today. And it was the decision of the group of
6 people that communications, which is what we are doing,
7 makes it certainly more relevant and clearer.
8 17171 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Well, I
9 wondering because before I saw that I had written down
10 a quote from page two of your written submission:
11 "The network agrees with the
12 Commission that the Canadian
13 broadcasting system is currently
14 reaching a very strategic point
15 in our history because of
16 globalization and unprecedented
17 technological progress."
18 And perhaps what the name change is about as well, is
19 what this means for the diversity in Canadian
20 programming, a diversity which you have said is not
21 variety of programming. But you do say later viewers
22 find a fresh and balanced array of programs as a result
23 of diversity.
24 17172 So I know what you mean, but one does
25 not exclude the other. In fact, the variety of
StenoTran
3648
1 programming in your thesis is only going to happen with
2 fresh views.
3 17173 But if we could just start with this
4 broader picture, what does globalization and
5 technological progress mean for diversity in Canadian
6 television?
7 17174 DR. KARIM: If I may answer the
8 question, or at least try to discuss it in a broader
9 way. One of the earlier presentations alluded to the
10 fact that religious programming of all sorts can now
11 come into Canada via digital broadcasting systems.
12 This also has opened up a broad variety of programming
13 for ethno-cultural minorities in Canada.
14 17175 Of course, we have our own digital
15 broadcasting programming as well, Asian television
16 network, Telelatino and French on television.
17 17176 The transglobalization, deregulation,
18 liberalisation are going to make this more intense.
19 17177 Already, south of the border,
20 minority broadcasters have been increasing their
21 programming on digital broadcasting satellites. I
22 don't know how possible it is for Canadians to receive
23 that kind of programming, but I am sure that they will
24 try because their needs are not being met at the moment
25 in Canada.
StenoTran
3649
1 17178 The challenge for us, I guess, is to
2 look at the market as Mr. Lumb pointed out, assess what
3 the needs are, and see how the Canadian broadcasting
4 system can meet this need. Otherwise, you will have
5 more and more pizza dishes cropping up on top of roofs
6 or on the sides of walls, with Canadians basically
7 looking at more and more American programming or even
8 programming coming out from other parts of the world
9 via satellite.
10 17179 Just to give you an example of what
11 is happening overseas, at one point the French
12 government tried to discourage Arabic language
13 broadcasting in France, despite its large minorities
14 who are Arabic-speaking. Again, they did not provide
15 for much local Arabic programming, either. The answer
16 of the Arab communities there was to put up pizza
17 dishes, and point them southwards towards northern
18 Africa, towards their countries of origin, from which
19 they began to receive programming almost 24 hours a
20 day.
21 17180 So this is a choice that faces us.
22 Yes, globalization is going to make borders less
23 significant, as far as broadcasting goes. We do have a
24 fairly large talent pool, as Professor Lumb pointed
25 out, in Canada, a very diverse talent pool. But they
StenoTran
3650
1 have very few opportunity to perform in front of a
2 camera. It is this kind of absence on the broadcasting
3 network that may create a situation in which more and
4 more people may turn southwards.
5 17181 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you.
6 I just wanted to table that there is a broad
7 discussion, here, which was are not ignoring as we look
8 at more specific points that you raise, and I would
9 like to turn to a few of those now, although I am sure,
10 we will have to take a little more time to look at the
11 proposed framework that you have sketched out here for
12 us.
13 17182 But in terms of this talent pool,
14 could you summarise for us what you recommend in terms
15 of taking to the airwaves the existing talent pool,
16 which is an important point, and to continue the
17 development of the talent pool. What are the steps
18 that you recommend we take to do that?
19 17183 DR. KARIM: I will start off and then
20 hopefully some of my colleagues who are producers of
21 programming may want to add in as well.
22 17184 First of all, there are resources
23 available to producers who seriously want to reflect
24 all Canadians to all Canadians. ACTRA comes out with a
25 regular publication called "Into the Mainstream." It
StenoTran
3651
1 is a book that contains the pictures as well as lists
2 the kind of experience of a range of minority
3 performers. So this resources already exists for
4 producers.
5 17185 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I believe
6 that the rationale behind such a resource is to avoid
7 the common comments that, I am sorry, no such talent is
8 available.
9 17186 DR. KARIM: Exactly, yes. And you
10 often hear that. Secondly, there is almost a knee-jerk
11 response to diversity. Producers generally have become
12 aware of the lobbying by minorities for greater
13 inclusion over the last ten to 15 years.
14 17187 But the response tends to be knee-
15 jerk in the sense that there is an anecdote about a
16 director on a set producing -- creating a commercial.
17 And then realises that none of the performers in the ad
18 are non-white. So the first thing that comes out of
19 his mouth is, quick, get me someone black or oriental
20 so we can basically have a token kind of a portrayal of
21 visible minorities.
22 17188 This is a very creative business, and
23 yet you have such a lack of creativity when it comes to
24 portraying diversity. Not only are people of non-white
25 backgrounds, Aboriginal people, put in minor roles in
StenoTran
3652
1 most dramatic programming, but there is no attempt to
2 think creatively as to how their stories, how their
3 aspirations can be integrated into mainstream
4 programming or their stories told. There is a wealth
5 of stories that remain to be told, but you rarely see
6 these during one of the screens or in the media.
7 17189 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Well, we
8 had Linda Schuyler here last week or the week before, I
9 believe, and certainly she commented that there is no
10 question in her mind that in producing a program like
11 "Riverdale," she would have a great diversity of
12 actors.
13 17190 And so, as you say in your notes in
14 your papers, there certainly is some progress because
15 people are realising what will work with an audience
16 has to have some reflection.
17 17191 Well, if that is the truth, why are
18 we still here talking about the need to move forward?
19 What is the blockage constantly coming back to us?
20 17192 I am talking about a framework. And
21 without reading, I am assuming your framework includes
22 the development of talent, research, and action.
23 17193 Let us get to the action part. When
24 you talk to producers about this issue, when you talk
25 to ACTRA -- who in their recommendations yes, talk
StenoTran
3653
1 about a talent pool through ACTRA Works -- but is that
2 talent pool really accepting and helping actors and
3 directors of diversity? Why isn't it mentioned here?
4 1215
5 17194 So, are you dealing in a very
6 concrete and productive way with producer groups, with
7 the actor groups, with others, to say, "Let's find some
8 solutions."
9 17195 DR. KARIM: I think I will defer to
10 my colleagues who have actually worked in this field.
11 17196 MR. ALFONS ADETUYI: I will attempt
12 to answer that. My name is Alfons Adetuyi. I am a
13 producer with Inner City Films. Maybe I should just
14 move over so I can see you.
15 17197 I think what we tried to do -- I have
16 been in the business for about 15 years. We started
17 out producing industrials and in 1992 we produced a
18 one-hour drama. That was the first drama that was
19 produced, written and directed by people of colour,
20 broadcast in prime time, at least the NFB tell me so as
21 they were doing a study on this. In 1996/97 we
22 produced 13 one-hour dramas for CBC on prime time. The
23 series was called "Ekhaya: A Family Chronicle". It
24 was the first Canada-South Africa international co-
25 production.
StenoTran
3654
1 17198 When I first came into the business
2 in the early 1980s, we went to a lot of seminars and
3 studies and a lot of discussions that sounded similar
4 to this, about where to move and how we would get
5 minorities on the screen. I remember at one of those
6 particular discussions -- Lincoln Alexander was the
7 Governor-General at the time in Ontario and he said,
8 "What we need now is just leadership and movement", and
9 I think it's a lot of what you are saying. So, I think
10 certainly at Inner City Films what we took that to mean
11 is we just have to do it.
12 17199 One of the things that we did when we
13 made this drama, the first one hour that we did, is I
14 hired a production manager and said, "I would like
15 maybe 50 per cent of the crew to be minorities." The
16 look was, "Does that exist, 50 per cent of a crew?
17 Where are you going to get that?" At least because of
18 the nature of the show, it had about 17, 18 actors, and
19 16 or 17 actors were people of colour. That was a lot
20 of people to come together and to be on a prime time
21 one-hour drama at once, but the idea was to find these
22 crew members.
23 17200 When I realized what he needed was a
24 prod, "You must get 50 per cent", what he started to do
25 was look at where are these people, look at Ryerson,
StenoTran
3655
1 maybe we will have a trainee, but what we discovered
2 was we not only had people that were possible trainees,
3 we had people that were available to do the job.
4 Because of the nature of our business, which is I
5 wouldn't say incestuous, but it's who you know and it's
6 a small business and a small group and usually you hire
7 your friends or people that you have worked with and
8 vice versa, I think it's a natural way for businesses
9 to grow. It just grows among people who are working
10 together.
11 17201 Within that, there were not people of
12 colour within that circle, so you have to pull them
13 into that circle and you have to make an effort.
14 Someone had to lay down the rule. I was a producer at
15 the time and I said, "We must have 50 per cent." So,
16 there was a mandate set and we did end up with that.
17 It was great because it was very empowering for those
18 people and they were good people and we made an award-
19 winning program. It won a few awards across Canada,
20 including The Golden Sheaf Award.
21 17202 I guess why I am saying that is in
22 order to bring these people into the production does
23 not mean you are giving up anything. It enhanced this
24 production and it went on to win awards because of
25 these people and their involvement. We did the same
StenoTran
3656
1 thing with our drama series. We had the same mandate.
2 It was bigger, of course, with 13 one-hour prime time
3 dramas, but it was still the same mandate. I think
4 what we need are more companies that will take that
5 responsibility, having that desire to reach out and
6 involve the wider spectrum of our society in producing
7 these images.
8 17203 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I think
9 you have also put it in your paper that diversity is
10 good business and I gathered one of the themes you are
11 developing is it makes perfect sense and logical
12 business sense to reach to an audience which will
13 respond to a product as opposed to just an approach
14 that says a certain quota system or certain regulations
15 are important.
16 17204 MR. ALFONS ADETUYI: Definitely.
17 What is amazing -- I did a documentary, I guess maybe
18 it was 1994 or 1995 called "Visible Minorities in the
19 Media". "Where is the Colour? Racial Minorities in
20 the Media" was its full title. A lot of the studies
21 that have been done since the 1980s were quoted here
22 that indicated that, yes, the U.S. was moving on and
23 realizing the economic benefit of reaching the minority
24 market. But in Canada for some reason we weren't doing
25 this and I kept trying to understand: All these facts
StenoTran
3657
1 are here, it makes economic sense for these advertisers
2 to reach these people and to reach us, so what is the
3 problem?
4 17205 Off the record I was asking one of
5 the people, one of the advertising executives, "It's a
6 puzzle. I am going around in circles in these
7 documentaries. You have to tell me the answer as to
8 why you are not catering to something that is
9 economically viable for your clients and yourselves."
10 His simple answer was, "Old habits die hard."
11 17206 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I'm sorry,
12 I missed that.
13 17207 MR. ALFONS ADETUYI: He said, "Old
14 habits die hard." These are money-losing habits that
15 we have. Yes, these people are losing money. They are
16 losing all kinds of things, but it's just an old habit.
17 That's the hardest thing to fight.
18 17208 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Yes, it
19 sounds like familiar territory, but it doesn't mean
20 that we haven't made progress. I appreciate the story
21 that you are telling. It helps us understand what in
22 the day to day is being done in terms of efforts to
23 educate, to position people in those positions where
24 there is a door open, where the choices and decisions
25 are being made, which is part and parcel of an
StenoTran
3658
1 employment equity, which I have read through your
2 papers here.
3 17209 But I want to get to the component of
4 your framework, which is regulation. I believe, Dr.
5 Karim, you mentioned an era in which deregulation is
6 constantly coming forward. In the environment of this
7 review, we have also had various players coming to tell
8 us to let market drive the system and yet you say to us
9 that it's important that we, in the end -- and tell me
10 if I am wrong -- regulate the system so that a licence
11 condition at the time of licence renewal be applied in
12 terms of a promise of performance regarding the
13 assessment of diversity needs.
14 17210 Could you be a little more specific
15 about what you mean by a licence condition,
16 particularly in the environment that we find ourselves
17 in now? How will that be received and how will that be
18 managed?
19 17211 DR. KARIM: I will start off and I
20 imagine Professor Lumb might want to say something
21 about this as well.
22 17212 I would like to put this within the
23 framework of public service broadcasting. There are
24 certain values that the Canadian broadcasting system
25 has held as being fundamental to our approach to
StenoTran
3659
1 broadcasting. Whether they be Canadian content or
2 developing the Canadian talent pool, et cetera, et
3 cetera, there has to be a certain strength, certain
4 pillars that give the system strength that it continues
5 to exist.
6 17213 With the changing population of the
7 country and the lack of reflection of this population,
8 the terrain has shifted, but what we are asking,
9 basically, is that these changes be incorporated into
10 the strengths of Canadian broadcasting, of Canadian
11 public service broadcasting, as well as the private
12 sector broadcasting. We have certain criteria in terms
13 of Canadian content, French language content rules, et
14 cetera, et cetera, and we see the whole issue of
15 diversity as having been resolved at the time when the
16 Broadcasting Act was revised in the late 1980s and when
17 it was established in 1991.
18 17214 However, we don't seem to have moved
19 on since then. Section 3 states that the Canadian
20 broadcasting system should reflect the multicultural
21 and multiracial diversity of Canada. However, there is
22 no monitoring of that evaluation, nothing that the
23 broadcasters seem to be bound to show that this is
24 something that should be a facet of Canadian
25 broadcasting as the law of Canada sees it.
StenoTran
3660
1 17215 Now, if we would ask for or the CRTC
2 would ask for some kind of evidence that broadcasters
3 are attempting to adhere to the stipulation, I don't
4 think that it's a particularly onerous kind of
5 regulation. It fits very much within the basic
6 regulatory framework of the Canadian broadcasting
7 system. In fact, as I said before, it's one of the
8 strengths of our system.
9 17216 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Would this
10 be over and above, however, the Employment Equity Act
11 of Canada, which is, of course, for large broadcasters
12 over 60,000, not employees not in our purview at the
13 moment? Are you talking about a system which would be
14 over and above that in terms of what we directly
15 regulate?
16 17217 DR. KARIM: I see them as parallel
17 aspects. Yes, there is the requirement to show
18 employment equity. On the other hand, our approach to
19 this is also to look at the kind of portrayal that
20 takes place. A broadcaster may be hiring all kinds of
21 people in front of the camera or behind the camera or
22 in very menial positions, as office cleaners, whatever,
23 and be able to show that they are hiring people of all
24 backgrounds.
25 17218 The issue here also is: Are these
StenoTran
3661
1 people, first of all, being portrayed at all?
2 Secondly, how are they being portrayed? So, this would
3 be parallel to the employment equity regulations.
4 17219 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: On the
5 portrayal -- and I think in your written submission you
6 propose a task force and other intervenors have also
7 come forward to propose a task force on visible
8 minorities, not only representation in the industry,
9 but portrayal. What is your comment on the self-
10 regulation process, which is now in place in terms of
11 compliance to stereotyping, et cetera?
12 17220 DR. KARIM: I was at a conference
13 yesterday, which is part of the OECD hearings on the e-
14 commerce, and the whole issue of self-regulation in
15 that industry came up to do with new media. There were
16 people basically from community organizations. NGOs
17 were present at that conference.
18 17221 The consensus largely was that self-
19 regulation largely allows, whether it's the
20 broadcasting industry or the new media industry, to do
21 the minimum possible, if that. When there isn't an
22 outside body monitoring what is happening with the
23 self-regulation, if the industry is actually carrying
24 out what it is supposed to and if there are no, for
25 lack of a better term, penalties, then there is very
StenoTran
3662
1 little compliance or progress in that area.
2 17222 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Does your
3 framework include the other side of the picture;
4 namely, incentives? You are aware of a number of the
5 proposals that have come forward at this hearing
6 regarding Canadian content, increasing amounts of
7 Canadian content, expenditures on Canadian content, in
8 addition credits for Canadian content in prime time.
9 Do any of these approaches figure into your framework
10 for increased cultural diversity?
11 17223 DR. KARIM: I would like to pass this
12 on to Professor Lumb.
13 17224 MR. LUMB: What we have seen in the
14 past, but particularly in the news side of
15 broadcasting, is because of regulations, because of
16 perceived needs and because of market surveys and
17 research, we have seen that people have reacted
18 properly and we have seen a change. As a former CBC
19 executive producer, it was part of my task to bring in
20 people from various ethnic backgrounds, and I did that.
21 I brought them in because they were good. They are
22 successful. Many have passed on to higher ranking
23 jobs, not the top jobs but higher ranking.
24 17225 I think we can agree that this works.
25 What I think we don't have, going back to the framework
StenoTran
3663
1 idea, what we do not have as yet in the entertainment
2 side of the television business, we do not yet have a
3 willingness to appreciate the fact that a sufficient
4 number of programs simply are not being made. These
5 programs are simply not being made. Certainly
6 "Riverdale" is new, but it's replacing perhaps
7 "Degrassi". In that sense, it's just an exchange.
8 17226 You can't point to a whole wide
9 variety of programs coming onstream. If you look at
10 the British experience -- and I know you have mentioned
11 that you are looking at that quite intensively -- there
12 is a maturity there. Because they have built up over
13 the years, over two or three decades, a large variety
14 of programming, they can actually do programs in which
15 they can do in-your-face stereotype programming. They
16 can actually make fun -- communities can actually now
17 make fun of themselves. They can make comedies, they
18 can make satires.
19 17227 They can take it because they have
20 entered the mainstream and this is what we are trying
21 to say has to happen. We have about 30 per cent of
22 Canadians, 35 per cent of Canadians who simply do not
23 get reflected. The image of them usually belongs on
24 the dark side of the news instead of under the bright
25 lights of drama and comedy and entertainment and music.
StenoTran
3664
1 This is where we think that there has to be kind of a
2 quantum leap. It will only be brought about by
3 regulation, we think.
4 17228 MR. FRIEDMAN: Could I just add --
5 17229 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Only by
6 regulation?
7 17230 MR. FRIEDMAN: Could I just add
8 something to that in terms of depiction and
9 stereotyping? The problem from the point of view of
10 entertainment is partially absence, people not being
11 depicted at all. The problem in terms of news coverage
12 and public information programming is stereotyping.
13 People use quick shots, they use shorthand to
14 communicate a message. When they do that, they tend to
15 appeal to the lowest common denominator understanding
16 of someone's picture of a group.
17 17231 I was watching "CTV News" today and
18 they were talking about -- they had a shot of Lucienne
19 Robillard talking about immigration to Canada and how
20 it was going to be lower this year. Immediately they
21 went to a street scene. We don't know what city this
22 was. It could have been Hong Kong. You saw a lot of
23 oriental people walking, crossing streets. We don't
24 know what city this was in. It could have been
25 Vancouver, but we have no idea where it was.
StenoTran
3665
1 17232 If it was Vancouver, how many of the
2 people on the screen were actually born in Canada?
3 Many of them were probably Canadians and yet they were
4 presented as immigrants. That's our image of the
5 immigrant, that somebody who looks oriental is an
6 immigrant. That's the kind of thing that we do all the
7 time.
8 17233 It's very hard in terms of setting up
9 an individual complaints mechanism for every such
10 incident you are going to say. I think really
11 egregious incidents can be handled by a complaints
12 mechanism, but with things like that, it's too onerous
13 to go through a whole complaint just to make this kind
14 of a point. You can write a letter to the network and
15 then you will get a nice polite response, but we need
16 something more.
17 17234 We need some kind of overall
18 assessment over a period of time to understand what's
19 going on here and we need to give that feedback to the
20 networks themselves. That has to be done through some
21 kind of formal process. Regulation is one of the ways
22 to do it.
23 17235 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: One of the
24 ways, because many of you, if not all of you at the
25 table there who have been or still are in production
StenoTran
3666
1 itself, in the business of creativity and, as my
2 colleague Commissioner Cardozo said in earlier
3 discussion, what inevitably will come up is freedom of
4 expression, as we realistically do something as regards
5 the points you have raised. The process of changing
6 systemic opinion, if I can put it that way, or systemic
7 systems is a long one and part and parcel of it has to
8 do with dealing with the creative community.
9 17236 So, I raise the issue of incentives
10 in that regard, that in the creative community and in a
11 creative fashion how do you change those opinions? How
12 do you open up, as we used to say in terms of women's
13 production, the other eye of perspective?
14 17237 MR. FRIEDMAN: B'Nai Brith Canada
15 operates the Media Human Rights Awards giving
16 recognition to people in broadcasting and hard media
17 for their achievements in the covering of human rights
18 and diversity issues. So, people get awards. Is there
19 something that the CRTC can do in terms of giving extra
20 points to people and isn't that some kind of
21 regulation? It's not a punitive regulation, but it's
22 still a regulation.
23 1225
24 17238 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: No, I take
25 your presentation in that regard. We do have to look
StenoTran
3667
1 at specifically what we are doing, but I appreciate a
2 discussion which assures that that is done in an
3 overall context that is appropriate to other steps that
4 are being taken. Because, as I said earlier, it is of
5 concern that these issues still come forward. I think
6 you have made that very clear. Others have as well.
7 17239 I believe that Joan Grant-Cummings
8 from NAC took us into a discussion of the culture of
9 equality when my colleague, Mr. McKendry, raised the
10 word "culture" as a component of the objectives of the
11 Broadcast Act. And that discussion of equality really
12 was about point of view about different experiences and
13 it is, I hope, part of your framework that when it
14 comes down to it that creativity itself will advance
15 the issue. The creators themselves will have a chance
16 to change things.
17 17240 That completes my questions, Madam
18 Chair.
19 17241 THE CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner
20 Cardozo.
21 17242 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Thanks, Madam
22 Chair.
23 17243 I was watching TV last night, the new
24 show called "Da Vinci's Inquest," which is on CBC, and
25 I watched it closely to look for diversity of people
StenoTran
3668
1 there and there was a reference to an Aboriginal
2 person, you will be interested to know. The fact that
3 the Aboriginal person referred to was a prostitute on
4 drugs, and I am not kidding, I think goes to what you
5 are talking about. So that is some of our new
6 programming, which some people are very proud about.
7 17244 I was struck by one of the comments
8 you made in your opening comments, Professor Lumb,
9 where you said:
10 "It is safe to say that
11 Canadians who watch British
12 dramas and comedies on TVO and
13 PBS are likely to see Asian and
14 Black actors in major roles than
15 they ever will by watching the
16 CBC or Canada's private
17 networks."
18 17245 I guess I hear the comment that Mr.
19 Adetuyi made with regards to old habits die hard and
20 also a comment about BBC having a diversity programming
21 unit. But I am wondering if you have any other
22 thoughts or whether that sums it up as to why there is
23 this reluctance, seemingly, to reflect diversity, both
24 the cultural and racial diversity, and the Aboriginal
25 diversity in Canadian programming.
StenoTran
3669
1 17246 MR. LUMB: Perhaps I can begin and
2 then I turn it over to Alfons.
3 17247 I think, Commissioner Pennefather,
4 you put your fingers on it, creativity. People have
5 it. People want to exercise it. They yearn to
6 exercise it. And then they don't get an opportunity to
7 do so. Not because their proposal, their project,
8 their stage play, their television production is not a
9 good idea, necessarily, but because it simply doesn't
10 fit somebody's idea of what the Canadian public,
11 whoever that is, wants to see.
12 17248 I am a little bit more comfortable in
13 the news area because I know it well and we have had
14 lots of examples of that. The story selection process
15 is something that frustrates a lot of younger
16 journalists, for instance, because they go into
17 newsrooms run by managers -- gatekeepers, we call them
18 in the news business -- with very set viewpoints and it
19 is very difficult to get those ideas to change.
20 17249 It takes a rare and courageous
21 journalist to challenge the system, to continue to
22 produce ideas that are so very good that they cannot be
23 turned down and rejected. So, inch by inch, little
24 progress is made.
25 17250 I know the same thing happens in the
StenoTran
3670
1 documentary world. I am sure the same thing must be
2 occurring in the entertainment business. And what I
3 see as the only possibility for change, and it runs
4 parallel to the news business where news media have,
5 for instance -- this is the result of a workshop which
6 the news media themselves got together with a few
7 helpers from the academic side or former journalists
8 like myself, and they have come up with a checklist
9 which approaches the whole question of diversity from
10 three viewpoints.
11 17251 One is for beat and general
12 reporters. One is for producers and desk and
13 assignment editors, the gatekeepers. And the other one
14 is for senior management. Because, actually, the
15 process has to stop there. The process has to stop
16 with senior management. You have to start with the
17 will to get this underway. Once you have got that,
18 once people have the message at the middle management
19 level that the guys upstairs, and I say "the guys
20 upstairs," because it usually is the guys upstairs,
21 once the guys upstairs have decided that this is good
22 and this is what we should try, or go for this year,
23 even if it is only the flavour of the year, then that
24 trickles down to middle management. Middle management
25 suddenly gives a larger licence, if you like, to those
StenoTran
3671
1 reporters who want to do something different and it
2 happens to work.
3 17252 Of course, sustaining it is very
4 tough. This is a framework that exists for the news
5 business drawn up by news media people themselves which
6 has these areas, including a system for how to sustain
7 it. I will make these, of course, available to the
8 Commission.
9 17253 It occurs to me that why can't the
10 entertainment industry do something similar. If a
11 decision is taken either with or with help, a nudge and
12 a prod and a tiny bit of legislation, possibly, or some
13 licence concerns imposed by the CRTC.
14 17254 I well remember what happened a few
15 years ago when the CTV licence came up for renewal
16 about Canadian content and when they realized that the
17 licence renewal was a little on the shaky side,
18 overnight there was a great plan. Overnight there was
19 a great plan to have a whole lot of new Canadian drama
20 introduced. This happened. It's well documented.
21 17255 So regulation and a CRTC spur can
22 actually work. And I am suggesting that in the
23 entertainment industry today, if there is sufficient
24 awareness on the part of senior management where it all
25 starts, that this is good business.
StenoTran
3672
1 17256 Let's unlock a whole new range of
2 creative minds in this area. Let's see what else we
3 can do other than the predicted, the tried or the true
4 and if we just put it on the air, if we give it half a
5 chance, maybe it will stick. Maybe it is like a
6 vaccination. It will actually pop and bulge out and be
7 there and it will work. It will take, in other words.
8 And I am hoping that that is the kind of thing. Are
9 you able to deliver that kind of inoculation or
10 vaccination to the industry? That is what we are
11 asking for.
12 17257 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: We only do
13 painless things.
14 17258 MR. LUMB: It doesn't have to hurt.
15 It is just a scratch.
16 17259 MS. CLARKE: Actually, I can just add
17 to that. There was an article recently in MacLean's,
18 20th of September, that said that even though Canadian
19 television is changing, the content is still very
20 narrowly based demographically and that is all white
21 and female.
22 17260 Certainly there is nothing wrong with
23 the fact that there are more females participating in
24 the acting profession, and that is good from a feminist
25 point of view, but within a multicultural, multiracial
StenoTran
3673
1 society, according to the article, it is not a good
2 thing. And this was by Josh Chidli (ph.), the tube's
3 cult of youth.
4 17261 And my daughter spends a lot of time
5 watching television. She is 15. She will be in the
6 arts and she doesn't see herself reflected at all in
7 the shows that she watches.
8 17262 DR. KARIM: We have attempted to
9 address the issue of freedom of expression and
10 creativity within the proposed framework to monitor and
11 measure and evaluate the cultural diversity clause of
12 the Broadcasting Act.
13 17263 Basically, we would like to bring
14 attention to the fact that most of the producers and
15 the decision-makers are in their 50s, 40s, 30s and grew
16 up in an environment largely where broadcasting
17 textbooks tended to edit out minorities, even
18 Aboriginal people.
19 17264 Perhaps the socialization that takes
20 place at that time -- Well, we know that childhood
21 socialization is important. Perhaps these people just
22 don't see the changes in society, the need to reflect
23 everyone.
24 17265 And this kind of self-censoring,
25 perhaps if you can call it that, is a greater barrier
StenoTran
3674
1 to the freedom, personal freedom of expression and
2 creativity than a mild sort of approach, whether it is
3 regulatory or whatever, that encourages these same
4 producers to be inclusive of all people.
5 17266 This is perhaps something to keep in
6 mind as to how we ourselves have what Walter Lippman
7 50, 60 years ago called "the pictures in our minds"
8 which don't allow us to see our society as it really
9 is.
10 17267 ALFONS ADETUYI: I just wanted to add
11 to that. Your question of why we are not there.
12 17268 On a practical side, we formed an
13 organization called the Black Front Video Network, by
14 the way. For your information, it has about 250
15 members of racial minorities that are working in the
16 film and television business.
17 17269 I remember leaving one of the
18 meetings and going to CanPro, where the Association of
19 Canadian Broadcasters get together and when I got
20 there, there was a room of, I don't know, a few hundred
21 people. There were no minorities represented there,
22 except for one person, one other producer that I saw
23 way down at the end of the hall that I made a good
24 friend with for a number of years who was Southeast
25 Asian.
StenoTran
3675
1 17270 I remember going there being fired up
2 from this meeting of the fact that we can make an
3 impact and the minorities and trying to talk to
4 broadcasters about programming possibilities.
5 17271 What I realized is that we are not
6 even an issue. I thought there would be some interest.
7 We are not an issue at all. It was very sobering to
8 realize the running of the Canadian -- You know, it's a
9 multi-billion dollar production business that was
10 rolling along there and that's a good place to actually
11 witness and see the decision-makers that are involved
12 in the running of the Canadian television and to
13 realize, yes, of course, they don't represent at all
14 any of the minorities in this group.
15 17272 How do I expect them to be sensitive
16 to these issues? So I think that was one thing. To
17 realize that to a large extent we are a non-issue.
18 Maybe we will become an issue.
19 17273 The only time we will actually become
20 an issue, I believe, is if some of these regulations
21 and if some of these recommendations follow through.
22 Then we become an issue quickly. But I don't believe
23 we will become an issue.
24 1245
25 17274 The other thing I wanted to mention
StenoTran
3676
1 is another reason I think that we are not there is
2 because of misinformation. I mean, the broadcasters,
3 the producers, the showmakers want public opinion, they
4 want to reach an audience, and they research. But a
5 lot of the research, methods of gathering research, the
6 structure of research, has not really involved an
7 understanding of racial minorities. And in order to do
8 that in a lot of these research and test markets, one
9 has to piggyback a study like this, as to how do we
10 reach minorities, or what is the impact of this group.
11 And that costs money.
12 17275 And during certainly the last few
13 years, and certainly during the recession years there
14 was no room for that extra expenditure to try to
15 understand that market.
16 17276 And now there is still fiscal
17 restraint going on in many corporations and downsizing
18 or companies coming together to truly survive in this,
19 you know, multichannel market. And to ask them to
20 voluntarily, you know, add something else onto their
21 marketing and study research -- where is that money
22 coming from? Where is that effort coming from? They
23 are not going to pay for this, you know. And I think
24 if they don't have to do it they won't do it.
25 17277 I will just cut it there. I think
StenoTran
3677
1 there are ways it could move ahead, but just to answer
2 your question two ways, I think that we weren't there,
3 you know, I think those are two ways, definitely.
4 17278 What I am getting at is, when we
5 produce 13 one-hour dramas on prime time on CBC -- so
6 when they ask, well, how did you get there? How did we
7 get 13 dramas produced, written, and directed by
8 African-Canadians pretty well -- one of them lives in
9 South Africa now. He is a Canadian and is a graduate
10 of Ryerson, the writer of all 13 of our dramas.
11 17279 So I will let you know how we did it
12 with CBC, because this is the first time in the history
13 of broadcasting it has been done, the first time that a
14 black actor was nominated as a best leading actor in a
15 dramatic series -- not a supporting actor, but best
16 leading actor. Maybe we got that because the Mountie
17 wasn't there that year, it was his last year. So we
18 took his place with our best leading actor.
19 17280 And how we got there, is went to CBC
20 with 13 scripts written, that they did not put any
21 development money into. And those of you that are
22 familiar with production and how that is done. We
23 realised that the chances were slim of this kind of
24 development going on, so we developed it ourselves.
25 17281 And then it was still just
StenoTran
3678
1 overwhelming to think of giving us Thursday night at 8
2 o'clock to these new producers, 13 one-hour dramas. I
3 think it was too hard to swallow, so there was still
4 talk of this development approach.
5 17282 So we went to South Africa, and we
6 got 60 per cent of the money to do this show, which is
7 a Canadian show as far as, you know, an international
8 co-production.
9 17283 So in essence what had happened is
10 South Africa paid 60 per cent of the money for CBC's
11 first minority-produced prime time drama series. And
12 it is kind of sad in one way. Sixty per cent of the
13 money for that came from South Africa.
14 17284 Mind you, it was money well-spent in
15 South Africa, because it was the top-rated series in
16 their country. They have a population very similar to
17 ours, almost 40 million. It is a little more. And it
18 became number one, receiving about 3 million viewers,
19 and it was watched all over that country.
20 17285 I mean, we did okay here, as far as
21 critical acclaim, and we have, for what they paid for,
22 a pretty good audience for CBC. But I am just making
23 that point from, you know, being in the trenches, that
24 is how you get those things on the screen.
25 17286 I guess I benefitted from the
StenoTran
3679
1 leverage that all Canadian productions have because of
2 the rules that are placed now to have Canadian content.
3 What I am saying is I still had to bring 60 per cent of
4 the money from outside this country to get something
5 on, and I think, I don't know, there are other Canadian
6 shows that didn't have to do that that got onto our
7 market.
8 17287 So I think that we have to look at a
9 way of encouraging this kind of programming to get done
10 without going to that extent of bringing in 60 per cent
11 from another country.
12 17288 MS. CLARKE: I suppose the question
13 for us is how can we sell our products as we expand our
14 global market -- and that is Canada's plan -- and are
15 we showing the true culture of the society? And that
16 is something that everyone has to think about very
17 seriously. It certainly has to be the political will
18 to do that.
19 17289 And one slight anecdote, last year I
20 had an opportunity to attend a pre-screening of "L.A.
21 Confidential," I went to this fabulous reception. As I
22 was entering the door they wondered what I was doing
23 there. I did get in -- we had an invitation -- and I
24 took my sister-in-law. And we were the only people --
25 visible minorities in the reception.
StenoTran
3680
1 17290 One of the other things, of course,
2 was the minorities that were there were those that were
3 serving, the caterers. They may not necessarily have
4 been the chefs, but certainly they were part of that
5 team.
6 17291 And that's a sad reminder that Canada
7 has all sorts of different talents from all different
8 backgrounds going back in our history of Aboriginal
9 people.
10 17292 MR. AMOS ADETUYI: To go to Mr.
11 Cardozo's question about why the reluctance. We are on
12 the front lines as producers, and so we are in the
13 boardrooms of the different broadcasters and the
14 different production companies and distribution
15 companies.
16 17293 And to go back to the series "Ekhaya"
17 that we did, that wasn't just presented to CBC, it was
18 presented to CTV as well, to the head programmer at the
19 time.
20 17294 And I can recall the letter that came
21 back quite vividly. He said it was a wonderful
22 project, wonderful proposal, "I think it is a great
23 program, but I don't think it is for our audience."
24 That is the way he worded it. And so that is something
25 that has always stuck with me, because I don't
StenoTran
3681
1 understand what he figured his audience was then, if a
2 show portrayed people from a visible minority wasn't
3 part of it. He loved the drama, he loved the script,
4 so.
5 17295 I think it is -- when we go to these
6 boardrooms, we are the only people of colour in there.
7 Obviously, that happens all the time. And to reinforce
8 what Anne is saying, sure, the receptionist will be a
9 person of colour, a lot of the security guards people
10 of colour, and on and on. But not the decision-makers.
11 And that is where the key problem lies.
12 17296 How do you change that without
13 putting any teeth into the Broadcasting Act and
14 enforcing it? I don't know how that happens. I think
15 it just carries forward and the status quo sits the way
16 it sits.
17 17297 It was funny reading the CBC's
18 licence agreement with the CRTC -- their old one. Of
19 course, the new one is coming up, which should be
20 interesting.
21 17298 But the old one talks about them
22 fulfilling this part of the Broadcast Act's mandate and
23 their mandate, and in fact they feel that they exceeded
24 portraying visible minorities -- and it was something,
25 seven or eight per cent. At the time there was only
StenoTran
3682
1 about six per cent minorities.
2 17299 And the CRTC, in fact, in response to
3 that said, that is great. They responded as saying the
4 CBC is doing very well in that area. But you turn on
5 the television, and it is obvious that's not the fact,
6 unless they are considering the people in the
7 background as the camera pans through that have been
8 placed there as secondary actors.
9 17300 So there is a reluctance there,
10 because there just are no decision-makers in those
11 positions, or that surround them and raise the
12 questions when decision are being made, when the
13 pictures and the creator is coming down that, well, let
14 us have this storyline in this particular series, or,
15 let us look at this series that has storylines with
16 different cultural kind of points of view, world views.
17 If nobody is saying, yes, I think that is interesting.
18 If those people aren't in those decision-making places,
19 it is not going to come up unless the CRTC says that it
20 should come up. And if it doesn't come up, well then,
21 there will be some ramifications to that. Yes, I guess
22 that is my point.
23 17301 THE CHAIRPERSON: Does anyone have
24 any other comments to make?
25 17302 MS DAVID: I just wanted to point out
StenoTran
3683
1 that TVNC we know for a fact from the Aboriginal
2 programming that we put on, especially for young
3 people, Aboriginal programming aimed at youth and young
4 people where they see themselves reflected increases
5 the amount of people that you are going to end up
6 seeing in the industry. Because children who see
7 themselves on television, who see their culture
8 reflected back to them, they say, well, maybe
9 television is for me. I could be an actor, I could be
10 a producer.
11 17303 But watching mainstream television
12 now, as a child, as a youth, really as anyone, if you
13 don't see yourself reflected, you don't think that is a
14 viable option for you. I don't see myself there. I
15 don't see why I should pursue that as an option. So it
16 kind of goes in a circle. If we get visible minorities
17 and Aboriginal people reflected in mainstream
18 television, then we will get more talent, we will get
19 more people interested in the industry.
20 17304 THE CHAIRPERSON: Counsel.
21 17305 MS. PATTERSON: Thank you, Madam
22 Chair. I had a question about your methodology for
23 your framework to monitor diversity. The scoring
24 system appears to be focused on dramatic programming.
25 My question is, is it your intention to focus on drama
StenoTran
3684
1 alone, or would it be appropriate to extend your
2 framework to other genres of programming?
3 17306 MR. LUMB: I will answer that. This
4 was just given as examples, these various points. We
5 would hope that the scoring system would be extended to
6 news, to drama, to documentaries, et cetera, the whole
7 range of programming. Not just entertainment.
8 17307 MS PATTERSON: Okay, thank you.
9 Thank you, Madam Chair.
10 17308 MR LUMB: If I may -- sorry, if I may
11 just add, if by drama you also mean comedy, music
12 programs, entertainment programs, children's
13 programming, all of those, okay?
14 17309 MS PATTERSON: Okay, yes, that
15 answers my question, thank you.
16 17310 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr.
17 Lumb, ladies and gentlemen.
18 17311 We will resume at 2:30. Nous
19 reprendrons à 2 h 30.
20 --- Short recess at / Courte pause à 1257
21 --- Upon resuming at / Reprise à 1432
22 17312 THE CHAIRPERSON: Madam Secretary.
23 17313 MS SANTERRE: Thank you, Madam Chair.
24 The presentation will be done by the Cultural Human
25 Resources Council/Conseil des ressources humaines du
StenoTran
3685
1 secteur culturel.
2 PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
3 17314 MR. TABET: Hello. Thank you for
4 having us today. My name is Jean-Philippe Tabet. I am
5 the Executive Director of the Cultural Human Resources
6 Council and here with me is Sandy Crawley. Sandy
7 Crawley is the Chair of the Audio-Visual Committee of
8 the Cultural Human Resources Council and also the
9 Executive Director of the Canadian Screen Training
10 Centre.
11 17315 Thank you for providing us with the
12 opportunity to present our comments regarding the
13 Canadian Television Policy Review. We would like to
14 start briefly with a presentation on where we are at
15 and what is the cultural sector definition, if you
16 want, and then go into what kind of recommendation we
17 could provide you with, this issue that is at stake
18 today. So, I am going to go over there to make the
19 presentation.
20 17316 Bonjour, et merci de nous recevoir
21 aujourd'hui. When we are talking about the cultural
22 sector in Canada, we are talking about 670,000
23 Canadians working in our cultural sector. This sector
24 contributes $30 billion to the gross domestic product,
25 but the most striking thing is the fact that this
StenoTran
3686
1 sector has grown much faster and much bigger than any
2 other sector in Canada. In fact the latest statistics
3 show that between 1993 and 1996 the cultural sector
4 workforce has grown by 12 per cent.
5 17317 Fifty thousand Canadians work in the
6 television and production industry and each Canadian
7 spends nearly 25 hours per week viewing television
8 programming. This is something that we need to remind
9 ourselves of before we are sort of looking at the
10 global picture about television programming and
11 Canadian content.
12 17318 CHRC, the Cultural Human Resources
13 Council, is a not for profit organization, non-
14 governmental. We were created by the cultural sector
15 and Human Resources Development Canada to sort of
16 promote, initiate and develop strategy direction for
17 human resources development in the cultural sector.
18 Hence, the content of our brief was about the idea of
19 how to strengthen the human resources development in
20 the area of television, especially in the context of
21 digitalization. We represent employers and employees,
22 self-employed, educators and training providers and our
23 membership is 220 organizations, associations and
24 individuals across Canada.
25 17319 I will now just mention to you the
StenoTran
3687
1 core of our presentation is the needs and priorities
2 because of the arrival of digital television and the HR
3 issues in that regard. For producers and cultural
4 workers there will be a need for new techniques in
5 lighting, set design, construction, make-up/costumes;
6 digital television will be wide-screen, meaning that
7 the coordination and complexities of composition and
8 staging must be re-learned; and digital television will
9 use multi-channel stereo sound, which will require new
10 skills. So, that will have a direct impact and has
11 already a direct impact within our industry. What do
12 we do about it?
13 17320 Producers and cultural workers will
14 not only be affected, broadcasters will also be
15 affected. There was a presentation in that regard made
16 by the different associations. Digital television
17 permits additional data to be transmitted, which will
18 require additional technical, as well as sales and
19 management skills; digital television allows more than
20 one program to be transmitted by a single broadcaster
21 at a single time, which requires new coordination and
22 presentation skills; and digital television requires
23 different editing and other skills in order to prepare
24 programs for broadcast. So, as you can see, there is a
25 need to think about all of this when we prepare some
StenoTran
3688
1 kind of strategy for meeting that challenge.
2 17321 So, for distributors there will be
3 some issues. Digital television will provide many more
4 optional extra charge services, for example, requiring
5 different marketing and technical management skills of
6 the distribution network and also again different
7 control and management techniques to ensure quality
8 control and viewer satisfaction. So, there is going to
9 be something we call a "digital pipeline to the home"
10 and the convergence will have impact on all those three
11 major contributors to television programming.
12 17322 There will be a cost to all of that
13 and it has been sort of assessed around $500 million.
14 There is already a Canadian digital television
15 organization that has been formed to research, test and
16 liaise with all interested parties in that regard.
17 Increasing Canadian viewership for us means to develop
18 a better skilled workforce to meet emerging needs of
19 programming and invest through partnership between
20 broadcasters, producers and workers in skills
21 development activities.
22 17323 So, it leads to some kind of
23 recommendation that our Council has put together that
24 all federal cultural policies, programs and substantive
25 projects require human resources impact statements
StenoTran
3689
1 identifying contributions to strengthening the cultural
2 workforce. I hope in the deliberations that you are
3 going to take that will be a criteria that you may want
4 to assess.
5 17324 Secondly, we hope that you will be
6 able to support some kind of a cultural human resources
7 development fund which could include youth internship
8 programs, for example, or another option would be as a
9 condition of licence some kind of revenue may be put
10 into upgrading human resources in that area. Another
11 option will be trying to develop some kind of a
12 registered training plan policy to help the self-
13 employed in our industry.
14 17325 I thank you for this quick
15 presentation and I will be open to respond to your
16 questions. I am sure you have read our brief. I will
17 pass on the microphone to my colleague, Sandy Crawley.
18 17326 MR. CRAWLEY: Thank you, Jean-
19 Philippe.
20 17327 I wanted to open up by just
21 suggesting or reminding you that you already have some
22 considerable expertise at the Commission in human
23 resource issues. I have noticed over the years when I
24 have come here wearing various hats that I have
25 sometimes raised subjects that people have said -- or
StenoTran
3690
1 the Commission seemed to feel, "That's not our job",
2 but that seems to be changing with the next panel
3 that's coming up on new media.
4 17328 I just wanted to suggest that the
5 work, I think the very valuable work, the Commission
6 has done over the years in cultural diversity and
7 gender equity issues, which are obviously because of
8 the public nature of the work that your licensees do,
9 the sector that you are regulating, are key and I
10 believe that in human resources development in terms of
11 information, training and professional development that
12 you can also play a similar salutary role as you
13 develop the expertise of the Commission and take into
14 consideration some of the questions Jean-Philippe has
15 raised.
16 17329 Just a few points to share with you
17 so that when you are thinking about human resource
18 development in the broadcasting sector and in
19 television you keep these in mind as landmarks. One of
20 the features, of course -- and we have had some
21 difficulty convincing some of the social scientists
22 that we have worked with in terms of labour market
23 issues -- is that in the creative fields in television
24 broadcasting an over-supply of labour is natural and in
25 fact to be desired. It's only by an over-supply of
StenoTran
3691
1 labour of creative people that you create the real
2 excellence that eventually gives you a strong industry.
3 17330 Innovation is extremely important,
4 but it requires risk. The producers and artists are
5 more likely to take risks than broadcasters, even
6 though they do operate on tighter margins, particularly
7 artists but producers as well. So, therefore, we
8 support the position that suggests that it's not
9 appropriate to open up the various production funds or
10 the big fund to the broadcasters at this time because
11 we don't believe that they will in fact take the risks
12 that are required to build a strong sector.
13 17331 The other kind of historical context
14 that we have been playing with at our Council is that
15 we recognize -- it's generally recognized by our
16 particular constituency -- that in the earlier
17 development of broadcasting in Canada there was a
18 perhaps appropriate emphasis on building out the
19 distribution system to the detriment perhaps of the
20 production sector. We realize now that the Commission
21 -- and we have all grown up enough to recognize that
22 production is very key and very important and a lot of
23 emphasis has been put on the necessity of getting
24 resources directed into production and we like to see
25 that happening. It's a very good thing.
StenoTran
3692
1 17332 We are afraid that in a sense human
2 resources development and training are under that
3 somewhere and that we are left for table scraps when
4 the great new wonderful initiatives that are started
5 sometimes get started. So, we are just here to urge
6 you to consider that the grand dreams of some of your
7 licensees and future licensees are based on the
8 creative talents being made available to them and that
9 a certain investment has to be made in developing that
10 talent.
11 17333 The point that I would like to bring
12 -- I always learn something when I come to the
13 Commission and this morning I was here to hear Union
14 des artistes and they jogged my memory that the issue
15 of regional development is extremely key and I hope
16 it's key in your deliberations over this process. I
17 think the point that Union des artistes was making this
18 morning was that regional production plays an
19 indispensable role in building viewership for Canadian
20 content.
21 17334 It also has always played a
22 tremendously indispensable role in developing talent
23 and that all our sort of national talents and household
24 names and so on one way or another started in the
25 region somewhere and we shouldn't forget that. We
StenoTran
3693
1 should try to encourage the growth of production
2 facilities and training facilities in the regions.
3 17335 I think that's about it. We know
4 that we have wandered into perhaps some areas that
5 aren't directly in your purview, but again we find that
6 sometimes if we drop a stone at the Commission some
7 ripples will go through. We know that there are very
8 committed and talented public servants at Patrimoine
9 Canada at Human Resources Development Canada and
10 Industry Canada and sometimes we have the perception
11 that the political leadership have all too narrow a
12 view of how we might build this industry. So, I just
13 wanted to put that on the public record.
14 17336 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr.
15 Crawley, Mr. Tabet.
16 17337 Commissioner Cardozo?
17 17338 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Thank you, Mr.
18 Tabet, Mr. Crawley.
19 17339 Mr. Crawley, I note you said that
20 whenever you come to the Commission you learn something
21 and then followed it up by the example was that you
22 learned from somebody other than the Commission. I
23 just observe that.
24 17340 Can I just ask a little bit about the
25 Council? Especially on the first page of your slides
StenoTran
3694
1 today where you talked about the cultural sector, who
2 would you include in that? What are the industries
3 that employ the 670,000 you are talking about?
4 17341 MR. TABET: The definition of
5 "cultural sector" was a key element that led to the
6 creation of the Cultural Human Resources Council.
7 Basically, we consider that we have six sub-sectors, if
8 you want. One is writing and publishing, the other one
9 is visual arts and crafts, the third one -- and it's
10 not by order of priority -- audio-visual and live
11 performing arts, heritage, new media and music and
12 sound recording.
13 17342 What we tried to do when we sort of
14 looked at the cultural sector in Canada was to find a
15 way by which we could easily comprehend what is a
16 cultural sector in Canada and you have basically one
17 way of doing it. There are many ways of doing it, but
18 one way was to look at the occupational classification
19 of occupations, especially group 51 and 52 which talks
20 about mainly the workers involved in the production of
21 works of art. That can be done very easily.
22 17343 In fact we are, with Stats Canada and
23 Industry Canada and HRDC and the Department of Canadian
24 Heritage and we hope with the CRTC, trying to develop
25 some kind of ideas around those numbers as well because
StenoTran
3695
1 the Census is now more available and because we are
2 trying to sort of use the work that has been done over
3 the last five years to define the cultural sector in
4 order to represent it clearly in the statistics. The
5 problem we have is we do not yet a clear Stats Canada
6 definition of the cultural sector and we are trying to
7 work on it with them.
8 17344 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: And this 51
9 and 52 are Stats Can numbers?
10 1450
11 17345 MR. TABET: Yes, they are the
12 classification of occupation. But, unfortunately,
13 those numbers are not enough to define the cultural
14 sector.
15 17346 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: I am just glad
16 that they are not our numbers because 7, 8 and 9 is as
17 far as we go in numbers. I thought maybe there was
18 something I didn't know about it.
19 17347 Now you talked about your fund. How
20 does that differ from ACTRA works? Because ACTRA made
21 a presentation a few days ago and they suggested a
22 similar kind of contribution suggestion towards ACTRA
23 Works?
24 17348 MR. CRAWLEY: ACTRA Works actually
25 was seeded by a program that was begun by the Cultural
StenoTran
3696
1 Human Resources Council and that is how it got going
2 and the Cultural Human Resources Council is not a self
3 sustaining mechanism in the sense that if someone else
4 can do the job better than the council, more power to
5 them. We are trying to stimulate and be catalytic in
6 that way.
7 17349 I think ACTRA is the first of the
8 talent guilds in our industry, in the broadcasting and
9 film industry that has actually put a component in its
10 collective agreement, its scale agreement whereby the
11 producer and the artist who is being engaged make a
12 small contribution towards a fund which sustains
13 training activity. So it is a model that we think can
14 work and, quite clearly, they are arguing in favour of
15 the same model.
16 17350 There are many different ways that
17 you can go at this and, obviously, the different talent
18 guilds will do it in different ways, but I think it is
19 certainly something you should be aware of as an
20 approach so that the industry itself takes on the
21 responsibility. We have not always got our hands out
22 to the public purse.
23 17351 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: So the
24 impression I get from your material is that the CHRC
25 fund, development fund hasn't begun as yet and that it
StenoTran
3697
1 is at the proposal stage?
2 17352 MR. CRAWLEY: That is correct. The
3 political context, of course, is that there was a
4 decision made to devolve labour market training to the
5 provinces. That decision is far from implemented and we
6 have been doing some work in the cultural sector,
7 including this one, which showed remarkable results.
8 But, unfortunately, those programs have come to a close
9 because, supposedly, it is provincial responsibility
10 but the provincial governments don't have the ears to
11 hear yet. So we are in a rather difficult period of
12 transition in that regard.
13 17353 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: And your both
14 talent development and technical development, is it
15 fair to say that ACTRA is probably more talent
16 development based?
17 17354 MR. CRAWLEY: In terms of the
18 individual guilds, like ACTRA, the Writer's Guild, the
19 Director's Guild, et cetera, obviously they concentrate
20 on the skills that are required for their specific
21 craft.
22 17355 What CHRC has been taking a
23 leadership role has been in trying to develop some
24 curricula and so on that are appropriate across the
25 sector in things like career management because the
StenoTran
3698
1 level of self employment in our particular sector, in
2 fact, in film and television, I think it's even higher
3 than in some of the other cultural sectors, sub-
4 sectors.
5 17356 It is over 50 per cent of the people
6 are essentially freelancers and some of those people
7 need guidelines and some thinking about how to manage
8 their business affairs, their tax business, the various
9 aspects that go into building a career without any
10 organization to support you. So that is one of the
11 areas that we are trying to make some progress in.
12 17357 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: So, currently,
13 do you have programs running that are dealing with
14 training? Are you developing them?
15 17358 MR. TABET: Well, the answer is, yes,
16 we do have some programs that are actually operating,
17 one in particular which is a youth internship program
18 in science and technology. And that science and
19 technology youth internship program is based on a
20 partnership with the industry. The employer invests
21 and the young person gets a first work opportunity.
22 17359 Prior to that, we had an experimental
23 program called the training initiatives program which
24 was of a much wider scope and that is a program that
25 was the initiator for the ACTRA Works program, but that
StenoTran
3699
1 program has been discontinued since the devolution of
2 training to the provinces has been enacted in effect in
3 many provinces in Canada. Except Ontario where there
4 is no agreement between the federal government and the
5 provincial government at the moment. Therefore, there
6 is a sort of void that has been created which presents
7 a number of dangers for our industry because many
8 cultural workers and cultural training was happening in
9 Ontario and is happening in Ontario.
10 17360 So we do have a sort of an urgency
11 here in trying to promote a cultural human resources
12 development fund.
13 17361 But going back to your question in
14 how it relates to what is the issue today, which is the
15 review on the Canadian television policy, what we feel
16 is that there must be an emphasis on human resources
17 development in any decision that you are going to make,
18 because if we want to have in Canada a competitive edge
19 in programming, we need to have people who are able to
20 really be on the cutting edge of creating that cutting
21 edge programming, and we feel that we need to put an
22 emphasis on this issue.
23 17362 MR. CRAWLEY: Can I try to answer
24 your question, too, Mr. Cardozo?
25 17363 In the area of film and television,
StenoTran
3700
1 there is a recognition of this. I mean this is not an
2 original idea. And there is a certain amount of
3 expenditure on human resource development and training.
4 There are some programs that provide some funds.
5 17364 They are a little disparate right now
6 and they are spread around. We have in one province we
7 have the Film Commission itself offering training. We
8 have four federally funded institutions of which the
9 one that I am just the new head of is one, The Canadian
10 Screening Training Centre, the Canadian Film Centre,
11 l'INICE (ph.) in Montreal, National Screening Institute
12 on the Prairies.
13 17365 There is some good work that has been
14 happening, but there is not a coordinated strategy and
15 we are going to work towards that. But I think it is
16 important for the Commission to know that, at least
17 from my point of view. And if someone comes forward to
18 contradict me, then I would be happy to find out there
19 is a coordinated strategy.
20 17366 But in the same way that
21 commissioners played such a key role in taking the
22 various people who were willing to contribute to
23 funding production at an arm's length by setting up the
24 various funds that have happened, I believe something
25 similar could happen in the training area so there
StenoTran
3701
1 would be some rationale. We wouldn't be competing with
2 each other in markets that are overcrowded, speaking of
3 markets for training, and ignoring certain markets that
4 are crying out for training.
5 17367 So I think there is a policy
6 development exercise to go through there. I certainly
7 intend to participate in one through the telephone
8 mechanism but I think you should know about it as well.
9 17368 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: I am just
10 trying to clarify in my mind the role of the council.
11 You are not necessarily concerned with giving the
12 courses, but you are interested in seeing the courses
13 happen and some sort of coordination across the board.
14 17369 MR. TABET: We are very much
15 interested in providing a career and framework for
16 better human resources development strategy in the
17 cultural sector. This is really what it is all about
18 and we test some case, pilot testing in certain areas,
19 yes.
20 17370 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: In your three
21 recommendations in the last slide, I believe it is,
22 could you just explain that first one a little more?
23 You are saying all federal cultural policies, programs,
24 et cetera should require human resource impact
25 statements identifying contributions, strengthening the
StenoTran
3702
1 cultural work force. What are you looking for in an
2 impact statement?
3 17371 MR. TABET: It is an analysis about
4 the needs in human resources development in that area.
5 This is quite important because I think there have been
6 a number of decisions that have been taken from a
7 government perspective and they do not really take into
8 account what are the emerging needs and contribution to
9 human resources development in that area.
10 17372 As I said, in the television
11 industry, for example, we need to assess what would be
12 the sort of cutting edge element in human resources
13 need. For example, we took the issue of digital
14 television and for us there is repercussion and impact
15 in the way we are going to do television in this
16 country, but have we assessed the impact in terms of
17 strengthening our work force? And that has, according
18 to me, not yet been done.
19 17373 It is beginning. We have done at the
20 Banff Centre in June a one-day workshop on that
21 particular issue, but there is not yet a sort of
22 coherent strategy for the Canadian film, television
23 industry in that regard.
24 17374 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: In terms of
25 digital training, okay. With regards to local
StenoTran
3703
1 programming, Mr. Crawley, you mentioned the Union des
2 artistes recommendation today. What you would like to
3 see there is local training programs?
4 17375 MR. CRAWLEY: It was a general point
5 that it is rather a broad brush stroke that I used
6 before in supporting the position that broadcasters
7 should never have access to production funds. So I was
8 trying to temper that a little bit with the suggestion
9 and I would put specialties potentially, specialty
10 licensees in the same category. That there is a very
11 specific role that they can play in human resource
12 development as well as developing their businesses,
13 which they obviously have to do.
14 17376 And there is all kinds of ways that
15 people can kind of mask things to look like they are
16 regional and they are really just padding their bottom
17 line. So it is a tricky area, but the Commission is
18 well versed with tricky areas.
19 17377 I would suggest that perhaps if
20 someone imaginatively came forward with a plan that
21 would put more resources in the hands of local
22 production for local distribution, then I personally,
23 and I am just speaking for myself, I haven't consulted
24 with the Council on this, but my perception would be
25 that people might be open to that idea because it would
StenoTran
3704
1 stimulate that grass roots talent development, as it
2 has done in the music industry.
3 17378 As UDA was pointing out with the
4 certain pressures that were put on the radio
5 broadcasting industry by the Commission, we have
6 developed a tremendous musical talent in this country.
7 I think we can do the same thing in television, but we
8 do have to recognize that it is not all going to happen
9 in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver.
10 1500
11 17379 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: What is your
12 sense of the role that community programming plays in
13 training? Because there is a lot of volunteers --
14 17380 MR. CRAWLEY: Yes, it is quite
15 considerable, and to a certain extent, I think that the
16 cable companies have been fairly responsible.
17 Recently, in fact, the Canadian Screen Training Centre
18 did a course of training for one of the major cable
19 casters in the country. And there are obviously many,
20 many people who come into the industry as a result of
21 their initial experience working in television at the
22 community cable channels. I think it is quite a useful
23 contribution.
24 17381 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: You mentioned,
25 I think, what amounted to sensitivity training around
StenoTran
3705
1 issues of gender equity and cultural diversity. Any
2 thoughts about what that would involve and who would
3 hire --
4 17382 MR. CRAWLEY: You know, it is
5 interesting. I mean, I have been working with the
6 talent guilds for a lot of my life and so on, and some
7 of the unions and so on. And I think that many of them
8 are really sensitized to these issues. I think some of
9 the work that the Commission did really was with the
10 major employers in terms of broadcasters both what was
11 showing up on the screen, and what was happening inside
12 their shops.
13 17383 And I really was just alluding to
14 that as a way of reinforcing that human resources
15 issues are not foreign to the Commission, and that you
16 have every right to look into them, and we would
17 encourage you to do so.
18 17384 I wasn't suggesting that we had a
19 particular role to play in gender and cultural
20 diversity equity. I think most of the organisations
21 that I am thinking of that are constituents are well
22 ahead in that regard, in fact.
23 17385 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Now, in terms
24 of digital, can you tell us a little bit about the
25 workshop you mentioned in Banff and the kinds of ideas
StenoTran
3706
1 you obtained as the kinds of things that have to
2 happen? We have been hearing quite a bit about the
3 costs of digital, generally a sense that the
4 broadcasting sector has to move there sometime in the
5 next few years. What is the portion of the human
6 resources development part that has to take place
7 there?
8 17386 MR. CRAWLEY: I think we have been
9 quite brilliant in this country, actually, the
10 formation of this consortium. If you compare it to
11 what is happening south of the border where they are,
12 you know, trying for outright competition with each
13 other, and everybody wants to sell their own model and
14 beat everyone else to the punch. The sort of pre-
15 competitive investments that the consortium are
16 prepared to make, I think, is a very good stroke of
17 good thinking on our part.
18 17387 What we did in Banff was an initial
19 discussion with some of the major players from the US,
20 and some of the major players here, and people who had
21 some experience and training for digital -- was to try
22 and figure out where there was a potential problem and
23 where there wasn't. And in fact, I don't think it is
24 going to be that difficult to adjust to digital
25 television.
StenoTran
3707
1 17388 I think, though, that this consortium
2 can play a key role in perhaps providing some hardware
3 to help train people on these new techniques, and so
4 on. In terms of the lighting design and aspect ratio
5 and all that stuff, it is essentially copying film,
6 rather wisely.
7 17389 So I think people who have film
8 training are going to adapt very easily. People who
9 are trained only in television will have a harder time
10 adjusting to digital television.
11 17390 But I understand that the consortium
12 has formed a relationship with the Centre of Excellence
13 in the country here, and I think that is going to be
14 very good for their primary sort of high-end training.
15 I think, though, again, in the regions there is work to
16 be done, and from what I understand, and we have been
17 hearing for decades about the low-cost and wonderful
18 efficiency of these new technologies, that it seems to
19 me that some of the technology providers who have a
20 vested interest should be providing some of that for us
21 to disseminate for them and help to train people on
22 their use. It is obviously going to help their
23 business, anyway.
24 17391 So I think it is a question of
25 coordinating, identifying those business opportunities
StenoTran
3708
1 to people that can also serve human resource
2 development.
3 17392 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: In the high-
4 tech sector, places like Nortel and Newbridge, they are
5 always talking about a real lack of potential
6 employees. And you often hear them saying, If I could
7 find 100 trained people, I would hire them tomorrow.
8 Do you see the same thing happening with digital
9 television?
10 17393 MR. CRAWLEY: To a certain extent, I
11 think because it is conceived, and it is really going
12 to go this time, it looks like. It really is conceived
13 as an upgrade of conventional broadcasting. So I don't
14 think it is going to be quite as daunting a human
15 resource challenge as some of these, you know, magical,
16 new properties that Newbridge is playing with and so
17 on. I think it is a kind of technical skill.
18 17394 I don't think the technical
19 readjustment for digital television is going to be as
20 great, depending on how many licensees there are. They
21 probably need some pretty clever engineers. But I
22 think they are going to be able to find them. I don't
23 know, because a needs assessment hasn't been done, as
24 Jean-Philippe has said, and I think that is something
25 we have to get on with. I am sure the consortium will
StenoTran
3709
1 want to do that, and I think the Cultural Human
2 Resources Council will try to help with that as we can.
3 17395 Well, maybe we should save this -- I
4 don't know if you are on the new media panel that is
5 coming up, but I think that we are really going to get
6 into these issues in the new media area, and it will be
7 quite interesting.
8 17396 Digital TV will, in fact -- you might
9 argue that it is new media if they really use the full
10 capacity of the technology to get interactive and mix
11 different forms of media in the actual creation of
12 programming and advertising and so on, so there is a
13 new media aspect to it.
14 17397 But I conceive of it as really an
15 upgrade of conventional broadcasting, as opposed to
16 some of the --
17 17398 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: So you see it
18 more a matter of training the current workforce in the
19 broadcasting industry, as opposed to training people
20 coming out of school or moving from other areas?
21 17399 MR. CRAWLEY: No, I wouldn't say
22 that. I think it would be brilliant of us to train
23 people in advance of their requirements, for a change,
24 instead of always playing catch-up. This is why it
25 seems to me an appropriate thing to encourage would be
StenoTran
3710
1 to get some of the vested interest in technology to
2 provide some of those technologies so that we can start
3 to train people for their use before their hit the job
4 market.
5 17400 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Okay. One of
6 the issues we have been talking about, as you know, one
7 of the central issues is Canadian content, and this
8 discussion about what is Canadian content.
9 17401 Is it identifiably Canadian in terms
10 of scenes and locales, or is Canadian content about who
11 does it and the people involved.
12 17402 If I would venture a guess, you don't
13 really care what the themes and locales are, you are
14 concerned about the people.
15 17403 MR. CRAWLEY: I think that would be
16 fair, from the Council's point of view, with this
17 particular hat on. I think trying to legislate
18 aesthetics is pretty dangerous.
19 17404 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Trying to?
20 17405 MR. CRAWLEY: Legislate aesthetics is
21 pretty dangerous. I heard of recent case, just by
22 example, a friend of mine has an extraordinary
23 opportunity to produce a documentary in South Africa
24 with a leading political figure there, with whom he has
25 long-term relationship personally. And he has been
StenoTran
3711
1 offered an opportunity to explore all the family
2 records, all the old film. They have everything from
3 this particular very high-profile politician in South
4 Africa.
5 17406 And he is having trouble getting
6 access to the production fund, because, of course, he
7 has to be working with an executive producer with a
8 track record, which he doesn't have, particularly in
9 that genre. And his executive producer is coming back
10 to him, saying, well, you know, I can't find a
11 broadcaster. Maybe if we could put you on the camera
12 and you could be talking to the person so that it would
13 be Canadian and, you know, you are the Canadian. That
14 seems silly to me.
15 17407 If a Canadian has an opportunity like
16 that, it is something, obviously, that is going to be
17 of interest to Canadians as well as South Africans or
18 elsewhere. That seems like silly criteria. Now, that
19 is just anecdotal. But if that is the kind of thinking
20 that we have set up, then I think it is a bit
21 dangerous.
22 17408 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: What are your
23 thoughts about counting commercials, advertising, and
24 infomercials as Canadian content?
25 17409 MR. CRAWLEY: Well, I think that if
StenoTran
3712
1 we could guarantee that they are produced here, I am in
2 favour of exploring that idea, personally.
3 17410 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Exploring it,
4 but --
5 17411 MR. CRAWLEY: Well --
6 17412 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: This isn't the
7 time for exploring --
8 17413 MR. CRAWLEY: -- we are wearing other
9 hats, here. I have suggested for a long time that we
10 should have Canadian content regulations for
11 commercials because they are great training ground, to
12 keep it in this context, but they also, you know, make
13 it possible for people to have a life and to make a
14 little bit of money. And so they are very important
15 that way.
16 17414 I am not pushing any particular model
17 when I said "exploring," because I didn't come here
18 prepared to argue for a particular model. But I am
19 glad you are talking about it.
20 17415 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Lastly, let me
21 come back to your last slide, and just talk about what
22 you are recommending we should do. In terms of the
23 second bullet you have got, with regards to the
24 Cultural Human Resources Development Fund -- this has
25 yet to be set up, okay?
StenoTran
3713
1 17416 MR. CRAWLEY: Yes.
2 17417 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: So the third
3 recommendation is that: "the CRTC as a condition of
4 licence require that a contribution of a percentage of
5 the gross revenues be made to the Canadian Human
6 Resources Development Fund." That would happen once
7 such a fund was set up, and I suppose you would expect
8 us to in some way bless it, or endorse it, or have some
9 input as to what it would be doing, and that kind of
10 stuff.
11 17418 And the last point on there, "a
12 registered training plan policy be developed to help
13 the self-employed." That would come under the Fund?
14 17419 MR. TABET: It could very well be
15 coming under the fund, yes.
16 17420 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Okay. Now,
17 how about if we went a different route, which was to
18 say that a percentage of gross revenues be put towards
19 human resources development, where we would not specify
20 the fund, so that it would open it to ACTRA Works,
21 this, or any other fund?
22 17421 MR. TABET: That is obviously a very
23 important proposal. The question for us, and it goes
24 back to what we said, we need a coherent policy here.
25 The idea of a fund is that it is based on a coherent
StenoTran
3714
1 policy.
2 17422 The type of people of initiative that
3 we are envisaging are any Canadian initiatives,
4 basically, that will allow a better cultural workforce
5 to be developed.
6 17423 But the idea that there is a coherent
7 policy that forms the basis of the fund is essential.
8 It is not just an issue of putting money towards
9 something. It is really trying to build a coherency
10 around all of this.
11 17424 For example, we know very well that
12 the government of Canada is supporting some training
13 school through Telefilm. But that support has been
14 fought for for a year and half, and it was through that
15 fight that we believe that there is still a need for
16 coherency policy for human resources development. And
17 the more we are able to attract CRTC to voice that
18 concern, I think the more it will be helpful for our
19 sector to grow.
20 17425 Going back to digital, it is again an
21 issue. Digitalization has changed the way the many
22 visual artists are working.
23 17426 You talked about the new media. We
24 all feel that because there are already some of these
25 techniques that are already operational in the
StenoTran
3715
1 audiovisual field, that we believe that the transition
2 will be minimal. And I agree with that.
3 17427 However, we may have some surprises.
4 Nobody can predict the future. And what we are trying
5 to see is to increase the way that Canadians are
6 relating to television and to their own television.
7 And maybe there are forward-thinking strategies that
8 need to be brought to that aspect.
9 17428 MR. CRAWLEY: Can I just add
10 something? On the fund, I think the reason we are
11 recommending the creation of a fund alludes to my
12 earlier remark about the political pressures of
13 devolving labour market training to the provinces.
14 17429 I think it is generally accepted,
15 even by people who are kind of regional boosters, that
16 you can't build an industry like television, for one,
17 or film in one province in a silo, even if it is
18 Ontario and thinks that the rest of Canada really
19 should follow.
20 17430 You really have to have mobility. We
21 are too small a market. You have got to be able to do
22 something coherently, strategically, for a market of 30
23 million people. You have got to be able to move people
24 around, move the information around, the knowledge.
25 17431 So the concept of the cultural
StenoTran
3716
1 development fund is really to try to get the federal
2 spending power back in our court so that we could do
3 something that is useful. Because unfortunately, I
4 think the ball has been dropped a little bit there.
5 17432 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: That paints a
6 complicated field for us, but nevertheless clarifies
7 the issues. Thanks very much, that covers my
8 questions.
9 17433 THE CHAIRPERSON: How do you explain
10 the growth of the cultural labour force twice as much
11 from '81 to '93 as the general labour force, if that is
12 how I am to read your slide and the schematics that you
13 have attached at three?
14 17434 And secondly, doesn't that work
15 against your desire to have special funds and special
16 efforts for training the cultural labour force? If it
17 is growing already twice as fast as the ordinary labour
18 force, that is what I would like you to tell me, why
19 this is occurring.
20 17435 Is it because other things are being
21 done that is making it happen, and that perhaps this
22 slide makes you wonder why this particular area needs
23 more attention at the level of labour and training.
24 17436 MR. TABET: Growth -- I think it
25 could be easily explained by demographics, and the fact
StenoTran
3717
1 that a lot of people are requiring more entertainment
2 value for their time.
3 17437 Also, the fact that the older
4 generation, which has grown old over the years, is
5 probably more attuned to be more at ease with cultural
6 products.
7 17438 And thirdly, the value of our
8 cultural product in Canada is probably of a very high
9 quality.
10 17439 Now, that is the first question.
11 17440 The second question is, Why do we
12 need some kind of attention to human resources in an
13 area where there is a growth? Well, I think -- and I
14 will go back to that again -- it is a fact that there
15 are emerging and strategic needs that needs to be
16 addressed. It is not enough to just see a growth, but
17 trying to assess where this is going to go in the next
18 century.
19 17441 And we have seen, for example, that
20 new technology has changed the condition of work of 70
21 per cent of cultural workers in Canada, but only 30 per
22 cent of them have been able to really get the training
23 they need.
24 17442 So why is that? It is because very
25 often they are self-employed. Their condition of work
StenoTran
3718
1 does not allow them to upgrade their skills on an easy
2 basis. When you are an employee, you have the
3 opportunity to have either your employer to pay for
4 your skills upgrading, or to have the Employment
5 Insurance Act to be able to give you some training and
6 skills upgrading opportunities.
7 17443 But when you are not an employee,
8 when you are self-employed, therefore it becomes very
9 difficult for you to access those types of upgradings.
10 17444 So we are seeing that more works and
11 works is created and needed.
12 17445 And in the film industry it is very
13 true, for example, in Nova Scotia, the growth of the
14 film industry has been obvious, and at the same time it
15 has been obvious that the technical skills as well as
16 creative skills needed to be upgraded. As a matter of
17 fact, ACTRA Works deliver workshops in Nova Scotia.
18 17446 So always we have to take into
19 consideration that growth, but we need to help to shape
20 that growth in order to respond to the emerging need.
21 And this is what is showing more and more.
22 1520
23 17447 MR. CRAWLEY: I would just like to
24 give sort of a personal response to that very good
25 question. I think part of that growth is that through
StenoTran
3719
1 that period that is measured in the slide, it became
2 barely possible to actually make a living as an artist
3 in this country, so more people were attracted to do
4 it.
5 17448 As someone who has worked that way
6 all my life until just recently, it really is a
7 question of -- if you look at the economics of it,
8 artists in this country have always subsidized the
9 industries in which they work. They work for very
10 little money. So, it's just enough to live. It's a
11 delightful way to live, to live a creative life, if you
12 can take the risks. So, I think you saw the growth
13 because we reached a certain point.
14 17449 Analog might be the television
15 production industry in this country, which is doing
16 quite well, thank you very much, but then people who
17 are interested in public policy or just taxpayers say,
18 "Why do we need to help them any more?" I think you
19 know quite well the fragility that exists there. You
20 build a structure out, but it's dependent on certain
21 ongoing factors and if you don't have them, you know,
22 the whole thing can collapse. So, it is great to see
23 the growth, but it doesn't mean that we don't need to
24 do some wise spending to see the growth continue.
25 17450 THE CHAIRPERSON: In constructing
StenoTran
3720
1 your graph at page 3 of your slides, what did you put
2 in the artistic, literary and recreation or when you
3 talk about a 32 per cent growth between 1981 and 1993
4 in the cultural labour force -- just very briefly,
5 would you put in there the engineers that look at
6 developing greater capacity? Whether it be HDTV or
7 digital radio, would you put the engineers in there or
8 just those who create content, so to speak, rather than
9 the means of distributing the content?
10 17451 M. TABET: Je serais très content de
11 vous donner le détail de ces études... et on est en
12 train de les mettre à jour, mais votre question me fait
13 revenir à ce que je disais au début: Ce sont les
14 groupes occupationnels 51 et 52 de la classification
15 des occupations dans leur ancienne version, car ça a
16 été changé en 1990. Alors ça n'incluait pas les
17 ingénieurs...
18 17452 LA PRÉSIDENTE: C'était Statistiques
19 Canada?
20 17453 M. TABET: Oui, de Développement des
21 ressources humaines Canada, d'Emploi et Immigration.
22 Ça n'incluait pas les ingénieurs mais ça incluait les
23 producteurs, les techniciens dans le domaine du film,
24 et je pense aussi dans le domaine des
25 télécommunications, je crois. Il faudrait que je
StenoTran
3721
1 vérifie et je serais content de vous donner le détail.
2 Mais ça n'incluait pas les ingénieurs, non.
3 17454 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Mais si ça incluait
4 les gens dans les télécommunications, ça incluait des
5 gens qui n'avaient rien à faire avec la création de
6 contenu mais qui étaient surtout occupés à la
7 distribution?
8 17455 M. TABET: Je pense que ça impliquait
9 les producteurs.
10 17456 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Ah, oui. Alors au
11 moins on essayait de regrouper le domaine vraiment
12 culturel...
13 17457 M. TABET: C'est ça.
14 17458 LA PRÉSIDENTE: ... et de ne pas
15 inclure ceux qui... mais évidemment ça inclut des gens
16 qui sont à la périphérie du contenu mais qui sont quand
17 même...
18 17459 M. TABET: À ma connaissance.
19 17460 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Oui, les techniciens
20 sont quand même impliqués de très près dans la... ça va
21 être une question assez importante, je suppose, quand
22 on regardera les nouveaux médias parce qu'à ce moment-
23 là il y a une grande proportion qui est plutôt des
24 communications personnalisées plutôt que qui visent à
25 véhiculer un produit culturel.
StenoTran
3722
1 17461 M. TABET: Ce que je puis dire, c'est
2 que, d'après les études qu'on a faites sur les besoins
3 dans les nouveaux médias, l'industrie des nouveaux
4 médias nous dit qu'elle a besoin de talents créatifs,
5 et c'est quelque chose qui est extrêmement important
6 pour la croissance de cette industrie et pour notre
7 pays aussi.
8 17462 Dans la mesure où le Canada va se
9 numériser et l'industrie de la télévision va se
10 numériser, quelle va être la part de ces créateurs dans
11 cet environnement? Et c'est une des questions que nous
12 posons dans notre mémoire et c'est une des raisons
13 aussi pour laquelle on insiste pour que la notion de
14 développement des ressources humaines, d'accroissement
15 des compétences, pas seulement, M. Cardozo, pour ceux
16 qui sont dans l'industrie déjà présentement mais aussi
17 pour des jeunes, qui constituent une grosse portion de
18 ceux qui travaillent dans les nouveaux médias, puissent
19 être intégrés aussi au secteur de la télévision.
20 17463 Ça, c'est quelque chose qu'on devrait
21 vérifier, qu'on devrait tester, et c'est pour ça qu'on
22 pense qu'il devrait y avoir une stratégie cohérente où
23 producteurs, câblodistributeurs, travailleurs
24 pourraient participer.
25 17464 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Ce serait tous ces
StenoTran
3723
1 jeunes qui vont créer des produits pour nous, les
2 vieillards, qui consommons beaucoup de produits
3 culturels.
4 17465 M. TABET: Je crois qu'ils en
5 consomment aussi beaucoup pour eux, et ça, c'est
6 quelque chose dont on n'a pas assez parlé pour le
7 développement de la télévision canadienne.
8 17466 Les jeunes regardent de moins en
9 moins la télévision et de moins en moins la télévision
10 canadienne. Je pense que si on essayait de se pencher
11 sur la manière dont on peut intéresser le fabricant de
12 contenu et l'intégrer dans la programmation, ça devient
13 quelque chose qui permet peut-être de redonner une
14 chance à la télévision canadienne de rejoindre un
15 public qu'elle a un petit peu aliéné, on pourrait dire.
16 17467 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Merci.
17 17468 Conseiller juridique.
18 17469 MS PATTERSON: Thank you, Madam
19 Chair, but my questions have been answered.
20 17470 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very
21 much; merci beaucoup.
22 17471 Nous allons prendre une pause de cinq
23 minutes en changeant de panel.
24 --- Short recess at / Courte pause à 1526
25 --- Upon resuming at / Reprise à 1530
StenoTran
3724
1 17472 THE CHAIRPERSON: We are back.
2 17473 Madam Secretary, please.
3 17474 MS SANTERRE: Thank you, Madam Chair.
4 17475 I would like now to invite the next
5 participant, the War Amputations of Canada/Les amputés
6 de guerre du Canada. You may commence now.
7 PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
8 17476 MR. CHADDERTON: Madam Chair, ladies
9 and gentlemen, as everyone says, it is a great
10 privilege. This is my third appearance before the CRTC
11 and I always find them just fascinating.
12 17477 My name is Cliff Chadderton, the
13 Chief Executive Officer of the War Amputations of
14 Canada. I would ask my associates to introduce
15 themselves and explain a little about what they do.
16 17478 Raquel?
17 17479 MS CHISHOLM: Good afternoon. My
18 name is Raquel Chisholm. My title is Director of
19 Electronic Media Relations with the War Amputations of
20 Canada, and the key word is "Relations". It's my job
21 and my staff's job to build relationships with the
22 broadcast industry throughout Canada and, in doing so,
23 we have met personally with probably 100 community
24 programmers, the program directors of community
25 channels.
StenoTran
3725
1 17480 We meet with the promotions people in
2 television stations to discuss our public service
3 announcements, we meet with specialty channels and try
4 to learn as much as we can about them and how we can
5 promote our video material to them. We have also
6 discussed our video promotions with educational
7 networks and so on. So, we deal with basically the
8 broadcast industry right across the country.
9 17481 MR. CHADDERTON: Isabelle?
10 17482 Mme DUGRÉ: Bonjour, mon nom est
11 Isabelle Dugré. Je suis directrice de la Division des
12 relations avec les médias électroniques pour le Québec;
13 donc j'ai sensiblement la même position que Raquel
14 mais, moi, pour le Québec. Ma tâche aussi consiste à
15 rencontrer personnellement les responsables de la
16 programmation des télévisions communautaires et aussi
17 des stations de télévision en vue, évidemment, de
18 promouvoir les vidéos que nous produisons.
19 17483 Moi, ça fait cinq ans que je suis
20 pour l'Association et donc, moi aussi, j'ai visité
21 plusieurs stations à travers le Québec, comme Raquel.
22 17484 MR. CHADDERTON: Thank you. I think,
23 as you can see, although I do some of the work, I have
24 brought with me the people who are really in the
25 trenches. I think that the work they had done in
StenoTran
3726
1 recent years in developing relations with community
2 channels would be of interest to the CRTC.
3 17485 I did prepare a brief and I will make
4 some comments from it, but, firstly, I think it would
5 be easier if I just, off the cuff, spoke a bit about
6 what the War Amps do and just how important community
7 channels and television generally is to the work that
8 we do. I think in a sense we are probably unique in
9 looking at the people and organizations which have
10 appeared before you. We certainly are producers and we
11 certainly represent some constituencies I would like to
12 talk about.
13 17486 We have, in the past 15 to 20 years,
14 been able to develop within our own organization what I
15 consider to be quite a respectable production house.
16 That gives us an opportunity to produce videos which,
17 in turn, are really the basic ingredients of some of
18 the programs which the War Amputations of Canada
19 handles, one of them, for example, being our Champ
20 Program for child amputees and tied in with that is the
21 Playsafe Program, a safety program. Another program is
22 Never Again, which really translated means no more war,
23 and with that, of course, we develop videos which deal
24 with our military heritage.
25 17487 I would mention that we have had
StenoTran
3727
1 experts come into our edit suites. We have two avid
2 edit suites now. We have two first-class editors and I
3 think the material we are able to produce is certainly
4 of broadcast standard, if not perhaps a little better.
5 17488 On the area of financing, we require
6 no financing whatsoever from any source. We have had
7 it offered to us, we don't take it. All of the
8 productions that we handle are all financed by
9 corporate donors and I want to speak a little bit about
10 that later because I realize that many of the people
11 appearing here are speaking about financial assistance
12 from government or financial assistance from the
13 industry or from other sources.
14 17489 We have found that if you have the
15 right idea and you can go to the corporate sector, it
16 is really not too difficult to get them to put up the
17 kind of money that we need. I must say also that
18 because we are a registered charity, we cannot spend
19 and do not spend funds that are donated to our
20 organization through our key tag service and that type
21 of thing. So, I think that's rather interesting to
22 bring that out.
23 17490 With regard to the communities,
24 basically we deal with community channels, although we
25 do deal with some regular television channels, but we
StenoTran
3728
1 have had no difficulty in speaking with the community
2 channels and having them accept two of our
3 constituencies as being part of the community. I know
4 the general feeling is a community channel talks about,
5 for example, the Ottawa Lynx baseball coverage or the
6 Ottawa City Council or metro council, that type of
7 thing, but if you look at, for example, our military
8 heritage, in my mind it would be very difficult for a
9 programmer working with a community channel to develop
10 a very accurate, if you like, portrayal of our military
11 heritage. It's a very tricky area and I will explain a
12 little bit about that later.
13 17491 The second constituency we have is
14 the disabled, particularly one group of disabled --
15 that is amputees, child amputees in particular -- and
16 here again it takes a certain amount of expertise.
17 Therefore, we have in production right now, for
18 example, a film called "In Flanders Fields". It will
19 be based on the 80th anniversary of the end of World
20 War I. I would really defy anybody to write the script
21 and do the narrative for one hour of what really
22 happened in World War I unless they have a lot of
23 knowledge on that subject.
24 17492 That's why I think the community
25 channels have said yes, "If it comes down the pike from
StenoTran
3729
1 the War Amps, we know that the integrity of the film is
2 there." Exactly the same thing happens, ladies and
3 gentlemen, with regard to the portrayal of the
4 disabled. It's a field that is fraught with danger.
5 For example, how do you ask a young girl -- and I might
6 mention that both of these young ladies with me today
7 are both graduates from our Champ Program. They are
8 both amputees.
9 17493 I wouldn't even dare to suggest how a
10 programmer, without some knowledge, would get into
11 asking intricate questions of either of these young
12 ladies about how their lives are lived without having
13 some basic knowledge. That's why I believe that the
14 productions, which the War Amputations of Canada,
15 particularly through our Champ Program, have been able
16 to do, have been acceptable to this disabled community.
17 Then, of course, we have tied it in, as I said earlier,
18 to our Playsafe Program.
19 17494 I will mention very quickly something
20 about PSAs in a minute, but if you see a public service
21 announcement on television -- and we have just finished
22 one now, which will be on Grey Cup day, of a young lad
23 tossing around a football with the Regina Roughriders.
24 If you see that, I think you have to understand that in
25 order to produce that, there were discussions with the
StenoTran
3730
1 youngster, discussions with the youngster's
2 counsellors, discussions with the family, and it all
3 ties together. Then you get to the Regina Roughriders
4 and you say, "This is how we are going to present
5 this."
6 17495 I think you fully understand that
7 there are so many potholes that you can step in in
8 doing just one 30 second commercial, but we have been
9 able to do it and I think with sort of some success.
10 1540
11 17496 I might also add that the War
12 Amputations of Canada, we do produce in-house our 30-
13 second spots, and we have them on television but we do
14 not produce spots which are asking for money, never.
15 17497 Those spots are all part of our
16 program. It talks about Play Safe or it talks about
17 Never Again or it talks about the 80th Anniversary of
18 the end of World War I, that type of thing.
19 17498 Those are our programs, and I think
20 we have been very successful in producing the kind of
21 television PSAs and spots which do in fact get on the
22 air and you get considerable exposure, if you like.
23 17499 On the question of how do you judge
24 whether the productions that we produce are any good.
25 Well, firstly, we get a lot of feedback. We have four
StenoTran
3731
1 1-800 lines and if people don't like them, they soon
2 tell you.
3 17500 We get feedback from the industry.
4 17501 Another way is we have distributed
5 these and I will just quickly mention them. One of
6 them is the list of awards from various international
7 film festivals going back probably no more than --
8 Let's see, we started with John McDermott. That would
9 be in about a year. And those are the awards that we
10 have won in the English festivals. And we have also
11 been rather successful, all international awards, world
12 fests, Charleston. QUESTA awards, New York. These are
13 productions done in the French language.
14 17502 And we are also very proud of the
15 fact that everything we do, as much as we can, is done
16 in both official languages.
17 17503 What we are expressing to the CRTC
18 today might be said as a fear. We are just a little
19 bit afraid that regulations are not tight enough and/or
20 more regulations could come down the pike which would
21 free, for example, community channels from having to
22 put too much on the air by way of public service,
23 whether it is public service announcements, but I am
24 talking more about the kind of films we can do.
25 17504 So we will be asking you to take a
StenoTran
3732
1 look at whether by regulation you could produce a
2 guideline which would really give some protection to
3 organizations such as ours.
4 17505 Now we all know about multiple
5 channels. I, for example, subscribed when I was in the
6 States last winter to Direct TV and I just shook my
7 head.
8 17506 But then I found that of the 262
9 channels, or whatever I could get on Direct TV, there
10 weren't very many of them that would ever show War Amps
11 films. They are very selective about television
12 movies, women's programs, golf or what have you. I
13 didn't see anything in there that would be particularly
14 adaptable to the kind of message, if you like, that we
15 feel that we have to get across in regard to our
16 constituencies. And I will just repeat them again -
17 military heritage and, of course, the disabled.
18 17507 With regard to the films that we do
19 produce, the blue guide, and you have a copy of that,
20 that lists the productions over the years. And I must
21 say I was surprised. We keep putting this together and
22 we keep updating it, but I was surprised that we have
23 done almost 50 productions in perhaps the last 15 or 20
24 years.
25 17508 And we have covered areas that
StenoTran
3733
1 Canadians would never say anything about it. For
2 example, Korea. Who knows anything about the war in
3 Korea? But we did a film about it. We did a film
4 about the Battle of the Shell (ph.). These kinds of
5 little known things but we are just doing one right now
6 about the war in Italy.
7 17509 The red brochure, that is the French
8 version of the films that we do. And this brochure,
9 this lists 21 films that we have done on military
10 heritage.
11 17510 Perhaps it is time to tell you a bit
12 of a story which I think would interest you. When
13 Steven Spielberg's film came out on "Saving Private
14 Ryan," we had to put extra people answering our 1-800
15 telephones to answer complaints from veterans and from
16 children of veterans saying, "My God, 'Saving Private
17 Ryan,' it tells a story of what the US forces did.
18 Where were the Canadians?"
19 17511 And because we have the footage and
20 because we have the capability, there were two films
21 not listed here. One of them is called "D-Day, The
22 Canadian Assault Forces," and the other one is called
23 "Operation Charmwood," which was about the capture of
24 Cannes. How successful were they?
25 17512 Raquel's organization, in her office,
StenoTran
3734
1 she puts out an information sheet to community
2 channels. She says this is the film. This is what it
3 is about. If you would like a copy to put on the air,
4 let us know.
5 17513 I think at last count there were more
6 than, I think 105 or 106 community channels had asked
7 for and presumably had shown on the air the first film,
8 which was a kind of a response or a rebuttal to this
9 "Saving Private Ryan."
10 17514 Then the phones didn't stop because
11 there is a -- I don't know if you have seen "Private
12 Ryan," but there is a crack in there that bothers all
13 Canadian veterans. Tom Hanks is talking to Ted Danson
14 and it comes out this way. "Well, where is
15 Montgomery?" And the answer is, "Well, he is dragging
16 his heels." Well, of course, any military historian,
17 let alone any veteran who was there, like I was, that
18 gets the dander up.
19 17515 So we did another film saying this is
20 what Montgomery was doing. While they were saving
21 Private Ryan, we were trying to take Cannes. And we
22 did a one-hour film on that and, again, we have had
23 something like 65 or 70 community channels have asked
24 for that.
25 17516 So I think that, Madam Chair and
StenoTran
3735
1 Commissioners, I think that there is a need out there
2 for the kind of thing that we can do.
3 17517 Just referring very quickly to one or
4 two of the points in my written brief, I think I have
5 covered most of them. I think our main, if you like,
6 submission or what is behind what we are trying to say
7 is that there is no point in getting corporations to
8 put up the money and spending time and energy to do
9 these films unless we can get some access.
10 17518 We have been, I thought, very
11 successful, I still think, very successful in getting
12 access, mostly through, well, Alberta government --
13 What do they call the system again?
14 17519 MS. CHISHOLM: Access.
15 17520 MR. CHADDERTON: Access in Alberta
16 have been very good, but it's mostly access through
17 community channels, but we are beginning to see,
18 particularly through Shaw, an idea that, no, they don't
19 have to do this any more. They can go use the time that
20 they were using to put our films on, and films like
21 ours, they can use that as a marketing tool.
22 17521 And I am wondering if on a regulatory
23 basis there isn't something that the CRTC could do
24 about that.
25 17522 What I call the gap between the so-
StenoTran
3736
1 called free broadcasters and those that are supported
2 by advertisers seems to be closing in.
3 17523 There was a time when we could pretty
4 well guarantee that if we did a pretty decent film,
5 whether it was, say, on Play Safe, a Play Safe film,
6 pretty well guarantee that it was going to get used.
7 Right now, we are not too sure.
8 17524 So far as the regular channels are
9 concerned, I must get something off my chest. They
10 love to take our footage when they are doing a news
11 broadcast and they will use it.
12 1550
13 17525 They won't give us any credit -- we
14 don't care about that. But to go to the regular TV
15 channels and say, Look, this is the story which
16 involves the Regina Rifles on D-Day, and go to a
17 television station in Regina -- forget about it. I
18 mean, they are not interested. They don't have the
19 time.
20 17526 If you take it to, let us say -- and
21 I have had this experience, so I can talk about it --
22 take it to CTV, and they say, well, we would have to
23 sell the advertising first, Cliff. And so we sit there
24 and we say, well, I mean, we want to get this filmed,
25 but what do we mean to sell the advertising? Well, you
StenoTran
3737
1 and I know what we mean. It is a commercial venture,
2 and I guess our films are really not suitable. They
3 don't think they can sell the advertising on them.
4 17527 So there is this gap that is closing
5 in. But we really have to depend on what we call the
6 free broadcasters.
7 17528 I think finally we are looking for --
8 and I did hear the presentation from Rogers -- we are
9 looking for a definition of community. And I heard
10 some of the commissioners asking for that same
11 definition. And it runs all the way from, yes, we
12 cover the municipal council. We know that is
13 community.
14 17529 But there is this wider community of
15 veterans, or community of the disabled, and in what way
16 can they possibly be served?
17 17530 I think they can be served by
18 organisations such as ours which are prepared, free of
19 charge, Canadian content, broadcast quality or better
20 -- we are prepared to do those and get them out there.
21 17531 But if the answer is, well, we don't
22 have time to put those on, then I think there must be
23 something wrong. And the reason I would say that is
24 that we read a lot about the kind of -- I will call it
25 junk, and some people might not like it, but the kind
StenoTran
3738
1 of programming that is there.
2 17532 Then we take a look at the kind of
3 programming we do. And if we hadn't won a lot of
4 awards, if we hadn't gone to the length of hiring first
5 class editors and that type of thing, then I would say
6 we have no place before this hearing. But we do that.
7 We have produced very good material.
8 17533 And you just have to look at the
9 public interest today, for example -- and I don't want
10 to be pegged as a dinosaur -- take the public today in
11 connection with the merchant seamen. I don't know if
12 you read last night's paper. I don't know if you read
13 the "Sun" this morning, but that is a big public issue.
14 And we have already done a program indicating what
15 benefits were available to the merchant seamen. And I
16 would say to Madam Chair and to you commissioners, who
17 else can do that? Who else can do a story of the
18 veterans' charter showing what the veterans got from
19 World War II and what the merchant seamen didn't get?
20 And that is in the public domain today. That is a big
21 issue.
22 17534 I wrote a letter to the prime
23 minister yesterday. He may or may not read it, but
24 some people in his office will. And these issues, such
25 as Hong Kong veterans, they are public issues. And who
StenoTran
3739
1 else can produce the information on them, except those
2 of us who work in this field?
3 17535 So I think that the type of thing we
4 are doing is very much in the public interest, and I
5 think we have to have a way to get that out.
6 17536 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Chadderton, it
7 has been indicated to me that you have gone over your
8 presentation limit --
9 17537 MR. CHADDERTON: I am sorry.
10 17538 THE CHAIRPERSON: -- but you may have
11 a conclusion you want to --
12 17539 MR. CHADDERTON: Oh, thank you very
13 much.
14 17540 THE CHAIRPERSON: -- get on the
15 record before we pass to questions.
16 17541 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes, thank you, yes.
17 I was just getting to the question of just generally
18 saying, Madam Chair, that you might wonder why we are
19 here. It is a question of without some guideline, we
20 are just afraid that more community channels -- and I
21 am not going to gild the lily here -- that more
22 community channels are going to go the way we see Shaw
23 going. And if that happens, then the public of Canada
24 are going to have a source drying up. It will no longer
25 be available to them, that they can see programs such
StenoTran
3740
1 as the type that we can produce for the community we
2 serve. Thank you.
3 17542 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr.
4 Chadderton. Commissioner Wilson.
5 17543 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Good afternoon,
6 Mr. Chadderton and good afternoon to your colleagues.
7 I would like to ask you just a few very quick questions
8 of clarification about your written submission, and
9 then maybe we can deal in a little more detail with the
10 main thrust of your presentation, which really is
11 access to Canadian airwaves for the videos that you
12 produce.
13 17544 On page one of your submission, you
14 state that you have been producing videos and
15 documentaries for the past 20 years on an in-house
16 basis, and I notice, actually, in your news release you
17 do the same thing. The phrase "in-house" is in
18 quotation marks, and I am just wondering why is it in
19 quotation marks? Is it in-house, or is it not?
20 17545 MR. CHADDERTON: No, thank you very
21 much for the question. It is very definitely in-house.
22 Our audiovisual department -- the director of the
23 audiovisual department was a producer with CBC for a
24 number of years. She runs the shop. She has two or
25 three different assistants, researchers, that type of
StenoTran
3741
1 thing. We do everything within the organization except
2 camera work. We hire outside camera people, but other
3 than that, when it comes back in we do the off-line
4 edit, and then we go from there. We do all the
5 research, and we do all the final edit. The only thing
6 we do not do, of course, is the dubs.
7 17546 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Right.
8 17547 MR. CHADDERTON: And once we have
9 finished it, it is over to the dubbing house.
10 17548 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Yes.
11 17549 MR. CHADDERTON: And it is available,
12 yes.
13 17550 COMMISSIONER WILSON: What would be
14 the average cost of one of your productions, just out
15 of curiosity?
16 17551 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes, we did -- the
17 most expensive one that we have done in the last few
18 years was called "From Juno Beach to Cannes," which was
19 a two-hour production, and that came in at about
20 $65,000.
21 17552 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Okay. In the
22 second paragraph of your submission, and I may know the
23 answer to this, just from the comments that you have
24 made today, because you have expanded a bit on your
25 written submission by being here today.
StenoTran
3742
1 17553 You refrain from going into detail on
2 your 20 years of experience, but you use the phrase
3 "your current standing with the television industry."
4 And I am just wondering if this refers to the fact that
5 your videos are not typically broadcast on commercial
6 television stations? Is that what you are sort of
7 referring to --
8 17554 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes, it does in
9 part. I don't know how you establish a standing within
10 the industry. Certainly, I think, we have done very
11 well --
12 17555 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Oh, so you are
13 using "standing" the same way that you said you wanted
14 to request standing before the hearing.
15 17556 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes, correct, yes.
16 17557 COMMISSIONER WILSON: That is kind of
17 a military term, isn't it?
18 17558 MR. CHADDERTON: Well, okay, let me
19 put it another way.
20 17559 COMMISSIONER WILSON: We are not a
21 military tribunal.
22 17560 MR. CHADDERTON: How do they -- I was
23 -- but that was 50 years ago.
24 17561 COMMISSIONER WILSON: My dad too.
25 17562 MR. CHADDERTON: No, how are we
StenoTran
3743
1 regarded in the industry? This is the way I am looking
2 at it.
3 17563 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Your
4 reputation.
5 17564 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes. Certainly, you
6 can go to, and you can win, and do well in film
7 festivals. That is one way.
8 17565 Secondly, with regard to community
9 channels, they have no problem in telling my
10 associates, here, that our productions are of broadcast
11 quality or higher.
12 17566 With regard to regular television, I
13 don't think that our productions are being turned down
14 for airing because of the quality. They are being
15 turned down simply because there isn't room. It
16 doesn't come within their television programming
17 schedule.
18 17567 COMMISSIONER WILSON: You said that
19 you have had a fairly good relationship with community
20 channels over the years.
21 17568 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes.
22 17569 COMMISSIONER WILSON: And you have
23 been able to get many of your videos aired on the
24 community channels, but that has been decreasing.
25 17570 MR. CHADDERTON: Uh-huh. I wonder if
StenoTran
3744
1 I could ask Raquel Chisholm to answer that, because, as
2 I said earlier, she is in the trenches. She talks to
3 these people every day.
4 17571 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Yes.
5 17572 MS CHISHOLM: About five and a half
6 years ago I was hired on at the War Amps as a summer
7 position.
8 17573 Cliff and his staff were making
9 videos and sending them out to community channels,
10 crossing their fingers and hoping that they would get
11 aired. And I was brought on, just as a summer job, to
12 kind of check out how the community channels operated
13 and see if we could improve our relations.
14 17574 Well, five and a half years later,
15 here I am with two assistants.
16 17575 And our relationship with them is
17 phenomenal. And I will give you an example of how,
18 though, a bit of it has deteriorated, is that my
19 assistant was in Alberta this past summer, and we visit
20 them, as I say, go right into their stations and visit
21 them personally. And she met with someone at Shaw in
22 Edmonton who said they played our stuff all the time;
23 they loved our materials. There are times, actually,
24 when stations will call us and say, I just put
25 something on the machine and something is not working
StenoTran
3745
1 because -- and they hadn't even looked at our material,
2 because they would just assume it is okay. They know
3 it comes from us, and immediately put it on the air.
4 17576 And this woman in Edmonton said, you
5 know, but I am so sorry, in a couple of months our
6 whole community channel is changing, That has come
7 down from the top. We have no say. We would love to
8 play your films -- we can't after such and such a time.
9 17577 So in Alberta, for example, we have
10 lost the community channel, and in Calgary we have lost
11 the community channel, and in Edmonton. We are going
12 to be losing it in a few other places. We have lost it
13 in certain places in Ontario as well.
14 17578 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Are some of the
15 smaller ones still running your material, though?
16 17579 MS CHISHOLM: Many of the smaller
17 ones are, and for example, Rogers, right across the
18 country, is still playing our materials, even in the
19 bigger centres, Vancouver, and Toronto and so on. So
20 it is just some of the stations.
21 17580 But our relationships are -- like, we
22 get phone calls, and they know our name personally. We
23 know, you know, 180 or so community channels. We know
24 what they want, what they don't want. We can remember
25 how messy their desks were when we walked in the
StenoTran
3746
1 office. I mean, we know these people. And a lot of
2 the times if they can't play our stuff, a lot of the
3 times it is not their choice.
4 17581 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Okay.
5 17582 MR. CHADDERTON: May I ask Isabelle
6 Dugré to tell you of the situation in the French
7 language stations with whom she deals too, because --
8 well, go ahead.
9 17583 Mme DUGRÉ: Oui. Moi aussi, ça fait
10 cinq ans que je fais un petit peu le tour des
11 télévisions communautaires à travers le Québec. Les
12 premières années, ça allait vraiment bien au niveau de
13 la distribution de nos films, au niveau de la qualité.
14 17584 Évidemment, il faut dire qu'on fait
15 ces visites-là pour établir un contact personnel,
16 évidemment, avec les responsables de la programmation,
17 parce qu'on se dit que peut-être qu'en ayant ce
18 contact-là on va avoir plus de diffusion, et aussi
19 évidemment pour connaître le genre de productions
20 qu'ils désirent, si nos standards sont vraiment ce
21 qu'ils recherchent, et caetera. Ça, c'est une première
22 chose.
23 1600
24 17585 Donc nos visites nous ont permis de
25 savoir que nos productions correspondent vraiment à
StenoTran
3747
1 leurs besoins, à ce qu'ils recherchent.
2 17586 Donc, pour les promouvoir, les
3 relations sont vraiment excellentes, ça, on n'a pas de
4 problèmes, sauf que ces derniers temps, évidemment,
5 vous savez que les réglementations concernant les
6 câblodistributeurs... ils ne sont plus tenus d'avoir
7 les canaux communautaires. Ça, évidemment, ça nous
8 affecte indirectement dans le sens que, en tout cas
9 moi, de mes stations que j'avais déjà dans ma liste, il
10 y en a déjà qui ont fermé. Donc ça, ce sont des
11 régions dont d'autres stations vont s'occuper, mais
12 quand même, ce sont des téléspectateurs qu'on ne
13 rejoindra plus directement.
14 17587 Aussi, compte tenu que les
15 télévisions communautaires -- certaines d'entre elles;
16 je ne dis pas majoritairement -- reçoivent moins
17 d'argent du câblodistributeur, il doivent couper dans
18 les heures de leur programmation parce qu'ils n'ont
19 plus autant d'effectifs qu'ils avaient. Donc, au lieu
20 de, par exemple, mettre un film d'une heure, vu qu'ils
21 vont avoir moins de place dans leur programmation, ils
22 vont peut-être préférer mettre, par exemple, une demi-
23 heure de quelque chose qu'eux ont tourné.
24 17588 Donc ça, on commence à voir ça
25 tranquillement, pas vite. Ça a commencé surtout cette
StenoTran
3748
1 année parce que ça a été mis en branle... c'est une
2 nouvelle réglementation cette année.
3 17589 Nous, l'Association, nous sommes
4 membres associés de l'APTQ, l'Association des
5 programmateurs de la télédistribution du Québec, et
6 moi, j'ai la chance justement d'assister à leur
7 congrès. Ce que je peux voir qui peut-être s'en vient,
8 c'est qu'on peut peut-être s'attendre à voir d'autres
9 fermetures et à voir que d'autres télévisions
10 communautaires vont peut-être être restreintes dans les
11 heures de programmation et on va voir nos moments de
12 diffusion tout simplement éliminés.
13 17590 COMMISSIONER WILSON: I actually
14 would have thought that the fact that you are providing
15 a completed video to the channels is an advantage in
16 terms of keeping your product on the air because it
17 means that you are just delivering a tape to them and
18 all they have to do is play it. So, I am interested to
19 hear you say that the cutbacks have negatively affected
20 you as well.
21 17591 Mme DUGRÉ: Oui. De ce point de vue
22 là, oui, vous avez raison que c'était un avantage parce
23 que dans les visites que moi, j'ai faites au Québec --
24 je ne sais pas pour Raquel ce qu'il en est -- les
25 directeurs et directrices étaient très surpris qu'un
StenoTran
3749
1 organisme tel que le nôtre puisse se déplacer et aller
2 les rencontrer personnellement, établir des contacts,
3 qu'on puisse leur laisser des copies.
4 17592 Généralement, si on prend d'autres
5 organismes qui mettent à la disposition des télévisions
6 communautaires leur production, ils doivent par exemple
7 laisser une copie, la station en fait une copie, puis
8 après ça la cassette se passe dans toutes les stations.
9 Nous, on a l'avantage, comme M. Chadderton le disait,
10 grâce aux dons corporatifs, que nous pouvons laisser
11 une cassette du format requis à la station.
12 17593 Donc, oui, dans ce sens-là, c'est un
13 avantage dans le sens que, s'ils veulent mettre...
14 admettons qu'il y a un 30 minutes d'une émission qu'ils
15 n'ont pas, ils prennent notre cassette et ils peuvent
16 la mettre.
17 17594 L'avantage, c'est que, oui, ils ont
18 une copie de notre cassette et ils ont une copie de
19 qualité, ce n'est pas une copie d'une copie. Ce qu'ils
20 ont, c'est une copie, si je peux dire, du master; donc,
21 au point de vue qualité, oui, sauf que même si parfois
22 ils ont nos cassettes en stock -- ça, il n'y a pas de
23 problème -- comme je disais, à cause des limites, des
24 restrictions budgétaires et du temps peut-être de la
25 programmation, les heures de programmation qui sont
StenoTran
3750
1 peut-être un peu plus limitées -- et je pense peut-être
2 que ça va aller en diminuant -- même s'il sont la
3 cassette en stock, ils ne pourront peut-être pas mettre
4 autant que, par exemple, quand ils avaient peut-être
5 des plus gros budgets ou quand les stations étaient
6 ouvertes.
7 17595 Donc, oui, il y a un avantage là-
8 dessus par rapport aux autres -- ça, je me le suis fait
9 dire -- mais avec ce qui arrive, à cause de la nouvelle
10 réglementation, ça affecte même s'ils les ont en stock.
11 17596 COMMISSIONER WILSON: No, absolutely.
12 If they are reducing the hours on air, then I can see
13 how that would have an effect.
14 17597 MS CHISHOLM: If I could actually add
15 to that, sometimes it's not just budget cuts. For
16 example, Rogers continues to have high quality
17 community channels and so on and have made a strong
18 commitment to them from what I gather sort of just
19 walking around their studios, but the culture has
20 changed within community channels.
21 17598 So, for example, it used to be we
22 were told that, "We love having your programming
23 because it's half an hour and if city council goes
24 short, we will throw one of your tapes in and it fills
25 that time up until our bingo game starts", or whatever.
StenoTran
3751
1 So, we were used a lot as fill material and they found
2 that very, very useful.
3 17599 A lot of the culture has changed,
4 however. Now it has become very regimented. Community
5 channels have very strict half-hour, hour long shows.
6 It's not the sort of happy-go-lucky kind of thing as it
7 used to be, which in certain cases I am sure is fine,
8 but that's where we have been cut out slightly, to the
9 extent that we had to go into our editing suites and
10 edit all of our productions for Rogers in order to make
11 them their standards, 27 minute/30 second or 57
12 minute/30 second films.
13 17600 COMMISSIONER WILSON: I think what
14 they said when they appeared on Saturday was that they
15 feel with the proliferation of channels out there they
16 have to sort of carve out a niche audience for
17 themselves and people are accustomed to watching
18 programming in half-hour or one-hour blocks.
19 17601 MS CHISHOLM: But that cultural
20 change has again affected us, which doesn't necessarily
21 have anything to do with CRTC regulations or anything,
22 other than an involvement, and the whole Shaw cable
23 channel, of course, has changed. I mean that's the
24 biggest cultural change of all.
25 17602 COMMISSIONER WILSON: I was actually
StenoTran
3752
1 interested in the submission when you suggested that
2 you might want to widen the definition of "community"
3 as it applies to community channels, because some
4 people would argue that the community channels have
5 taken it upon themselves to widen their definition
6 themselves by creating or turning into quasi-local news
7 channels. So, I am glad you made the distinction today
8 when you made your oral presentation that you are not
9 referring to that, you are referring to the notion of
10 just being more encompassing of all the different
11 groups within your community.
12 17603 MR. CHADDERTON: If I could just add
13 a little further to that, we haven't pushed the panic
14 button yet. I could honestly say to you, because we
15 have people who report back to us all the time, that
16 our video productions continue to be used, but what we
17 see down the pike is probably a narrowing of maybe the
18 definition of "community" or a narrowing of access.
19 17604 We don't know, but it may be well be
20 within the purview of the CRTC to take a look at this
21 and say, "Now, just a minute, if there are
22 organizations which are representing national
23 communities or constituencies, yes, we believe that
24 community channels should save some time for that kind
25 of programming." I think that's our main pitch.
StenoTran
3753
1 17605 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Let me address
2 that just a little bit later.
3 17606 On page 3 you make a distinction
4 between commercial broadcasters and so called free
5 distribution channels, the educational and community
6 channels. So, we have talked a bit about the community
7 channels. Have your videos been broadcast on any of
8 the educational networks across the country, TVO or
9 Access or Télé-Québec?
10 17607 MR. CHADDERTON: I think probably my
11 two associates would answer that.
12 17608 MS CHISHOLM: Yes, in the past we
13 have been on educational networks and in fact for
14 whatever reason the relationship between us and the
15 various educational networks has sort of lapsed in the
16 last few years sometimes having to do with the fact
17 that there has been changes, for example, with Access.
18 In Alberta they have gone through a lot of change. So,
19 that has recently been brought back into one of our
20 priorities.
21 17609 In this past year I have met
22 personally with the people at the Knowledge Network in
23 B.C., with the person at Access. We have actually had
24 a really good relationship the last couple of years
25 with SCN in Saskatchewan and I have just started
StenoTran
3754
1 talking again with the people at TVO. Unfortunately,
2 the whole country doesn't have -- every province
3 doesn't have an educational network, but where they do
4 exist, we are trying to and are providing them with
5 videos.
6 17610 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Have you ever
7 had any of your videos broadcast on commercial
8 television?
9 17611 MR. CHADDERTON: Oh, yes. In the
10 earlier days --
11 17612 COMMISSIONER WILSON: How early are
12 we talking about?
13 17613 MR. CHADDERTON: We are talking now
14 -- when did I make my presentation to the CRTC -- 10
15 years. Ten years ago when there were stations, for
16 example, in Windsor and whatnot, quite often what they
17 -- I think the term they used was local managers
18 programming options. Yes, they used our films very,
19 very much. As a matter of fact, I think we were a bit
20 prophetic in saying that once they closed those
21 channels down, we were going to suffer, but certainly
22 the community channels picked up the slack.
23 17614 COMMISSIONER WILSON: How long has it
24 been, do you think, since the commercial broadcasters
25 have been showing your videos?
StenoTran
3755
1 17615 MR. CHADDERTON: Well, ATV uses our
2 materials quite often.
3 17616 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Still?
4 17617 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes. Yes, quite
5 often. Global uses them.
6 17618 COMMISSIONER WILSON: How would
7 Global use them? At what time of day would they play
8 them?
9 17619 MS CHISHOLM: For example, the films
10 that Mr. Chadderton was talking about earlier, the D-
11 day film and "Operation Charmwood", the response to
12 "Saving Private Ryan", they were promoted to television
13 stations across the country, the regular broadcasters,
14 and they were picked up by five of those broadcasters
15 across the country. The way it works is they order our
16 video and they say, "Thank you very much", and then we
17 don't know when they air them. Sometimes they will
18 write a little note in a fax that they send us, "We are
19 going to be saving this for Remembrance Day", or what
20 have you. Often Remembrance Day is a big time for our
21 longer productions to be shown.
22 17620 Another thing that we have done
23 recently through my and Isabelle's relationship with
24 the television people is they have told us, for
25 example, they need sort of two-minute things, that they
StenoTran
3756
1 have played the Heritage Moment so many times now that
2 they want something new or whatever. So, we have
3 started making shorter productions, filler productions
4 that are shown on regular broadcasters, but our longer
5 documentaries, our Playsafe films and so on, really
6 don't get shown that often. I think the "Saving
7 Private Ryan" thing was especially pertinent to people
8 and so on, so five out of -- how many -- 40 regular
9 broadcasters ordered them.
10 17621 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Aside from the
11 commercial considerations that you mentioned earlier
12 today, where they say that they are not sure they can
13 sell ad spots in your programming, why do you think
14 they are reluctant to play those videos? Could it have
15 anything to do with the fact that maybe they don't
16 really see you as an independent producer?
17 17622 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes, I believe
18 that's true. I know that people have -- I have met
19 regular, if you could call it that, producers at film
20 festivals and they say, "What are you doing here?" I
21 say, "We came down for a gold." They say, "How do you
22 do that?" So, I just explain that the judges thought
23 it was good.
24 17623 There is a certain amount of
25 jealousy. I am not going again to guild the lily.
StenoTran
3757
1 There is a certain amount of jealousy and I think it's
2 understandable. The regular broadcasters have their
3 staff and whatnot and they produce some of their own.
4 Then, of course, there are a myriad of private
5 producers out there who go in, sell an idea to a
6 network and then they produce a very good program. In
7 this sense, we are in competition with them because
8 there is only so much television time.
9 17624 I think the prime example would be a
10 program or a film I did last year with John McDermott,
11 the well known singer. We took a lot of our archival
12 film footage and put it to his songs. We took it to
13 the CBC, we spoke to -- I had a meeting with a Mr.
14 George Anthony who some of you may know, a respectable
15 gentleman. We went all through the thing. They got it
16 to the very point where they were going to put it on
17 and then they called me and they said, "We have some
18 internal problems." They would not tell me what it
19 was, but I have to say that Pamela Wallin came to our
20 rescue and she said, "We will put it on." She had some
21 control.
22 17625 I can only say from my experience
23 that it's understandable. The War Amps is a charity,
24 they deal with young kids, they deal with our military
25 heritage, et cetera, et cetera, but what right do they
StenoTran
3758
1 have --
2 17626 COMMISSIONER WILSON: So, they might
3 see you as a special interest group?
4 17627 MR. CHADDERTON: A special interest
5 group, yes, but I think it's more that they don't
6 recognize the quality of the work, and that may be fair
7 ball. I don't know how we judge quality, but, as I
8 say, we do well in the film festivals and we certainly
9 get a lot of comment from the public with regard to the
10 productions that we do. Most of that comment is good,
11 some of it isn't, but I guess most of it -- almost all
12 of it is good.
13 17628 COMMISSIONER WILSON: One of the
14 solutions that you suggested for dealing with your
15 issue is that you said it may be entirely possible to
16 establish rules which would provide more so called free
17 channels. You and I both know that nothing is really
18 free.
19 17629 MR. CHADDERTON: No, that's true.
20 17630 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Of course, you
21 recognize that by calling them the so called free
22 channels.
23 17631 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes.
24 17632 COMMISSIONER WILSON: So, who would
25 pay for these free channels?
StenoTran
3759
1 17633 MR. CHADDERTON: Well, what I am
2 thinking about is in licensing. If, for example, the
3 CRTC licensed the History Channel, maybe you look at
4 Canadian content. I watch the History Channel very
5 closely and I am absolutely certain that some of the
6 productions that we have done on our military heritage
7 are good enough to be on that channel, but they don't
8 get there. I don't know whether the CRTC has the power
9 to say to the specialty --
10 17634 COMMISSIONER WILSON: "Play that
11 video."
12 17635 MR. CHADDERTON: Pardon?
13 17636 COMMISSIONER WILSON: "Play that
14 video."
15 17637 MR. CHADDERTON: No, I wouldn't say
16 that. I wouldn't want to be that specific. I would
17 say that --
18 17638 COMMISSIONER WILSON: I am sure that
19 we wouldn't, either.
20 17639 MR. CHADDERTON: No. I would rather
21 think, though, that a broad guideline might be that
22 there is programming out there which is not done by the
23 regular channels, which is not done by independent
24 producers who get their funds from Telefilm or what
25 have you, but they are interesting. What they might
StenoTran
3760
1 lose in quality, they make up in integrity because they
2 are done by people who know what they are talking about
3 and that's sort of a suggestion there.
4 17640 But I think I probably misled you
5 when I am talking about the free channels. I am really
6 talking about my fear that the avenue that has been
7 most effective in carrying these messages --
8 17641 COMMISSIONER WILSON: The community
9 channels.
10 17642 MR. CHADDERTON: -- has been the
11 community channels. I am told that they really don't
12 have a guideline.
13 17643 You are in the trenches.
14 1615
15 17644 MS. CHISHOLM: I have met with, I
16 would say, about a hundred community programmers across
17 the country and I have a questionnaire that I ask
18 everybody the same thing and the first question is:
19 How do you define community programming and where do we
20 fit in?
21 17645 And I have had about a hundred
22 different answers. Nobody says the same thing. And
23 whenever I tell them that, they just kind of chuckle
24 and say, oh, of course. But no one has ever -- and
25 Isabelle probably gets the same thing.
StenoTran
3761
1 17646 Everyone has a slightly different
2 look on community programming. Sometimes they will
3 say, well, you fit a certain community within our
4 community, so we can play your programming.
5 17647 Or they will say, well, no, we can't
6 play your stuff because it wasn't made by the community
7 but we like it anyway, so we will put it on there. I
8 mean like we have never gotten a single solitary answer
9 about what is community programming.
10 17648 COMMISSIONER WILSON: In reference to
11 the comment that you just made, Mr. Chadderton, about
12 sort of advising the channels about productions being
13 available from different sources, the Commission has
14 never required broadcasters to acquire programming from
15 a particular producer.
16 17649 We have made regulations about the
17 quantity of Canadian content that they carry or how
18 much money they should be spending on that. But we
19 have never required them to acquire programming from a
20 particular source.
21 17650 Why do you think it would be
22 appropriate for us to change this policy in order to
23 satisfy your desire to have your -- and I guess I am
24 asking this because I guess as I am sitting here
25 listening to you and I am very familiar with your
StenoTran
3762
1 organization, and I am familiar with the videos that
2 you make.
3 17651 But I am wondering, too, as we are
4 looking for a solution to this issue that I am
5 wondering if part of the solution isn't also up to you
6 in terms of maybe making a choice to do co-productions
7 with independent producers as a way of trying to
8 increase the outlets for your videos. I don't know.
9 17652 MR. CHADDERTON: I wouldn't think
10 that that would be a solution. If the channels were
11 faulting our productions because of quality, that may
12 be true. But I don't think that's what it is.
13 17653 I think what the access situation is,
14 and let's just keep to community channels, the access
15 situation is that the community channels like what we
16 do. They like the integrity of it. When you talk about
17 special interests, I don't think they consider us as a
18 special interest.
19 17654 COMMISSIONER WILSON: No, in fact,
20 that comment really didn't have to do with the
21 community channels because I think we are dealing with
22 two very different things. If you are talking about
23 the community channels, that is one approach. But if
24 you are talking about trying to get commercial
25 broadcasters to air your programming. Is that a part
StenoTran
3763
1 of your strategy?
2 17655 MR. CHADDERTON: Well, yes, we made
3 an award-winning film with a producer by the name of
4 John Zareski on the thalidomide children of Canada and,
5 boy, the response we got back from the CBC on that
6 program was just terrific. And we have gone that route
7 in co-productions occasionally.
8 17656 But I really feel that's not our
9 forté. That independent producers get ideas and they
10 want to produce them and whatnot. Let them go ahead.
11 We have our own niche, as we call it.
12 17657 I hope I haven't totally misled you
13 but I am really talking about the fact that my fear is
14 that there is a definition out there of community
15 channels which seems nobody has pinned it down, and it
16 seems to me that if we could, by regulation or
17 something, or a guideline, something could be said to
18 community channels that their community is wider than
19 city hall, then I think that would sort of satisfy us.
20 I think that's it.
21 17658 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Okay. I am
22 glad you were so direct because I think I was going off
23 on a slightly different track.
24 17659 MR. CHADDERTON: If I can just add,
25 there is no way that I was suggesting that CRTC should
StenoTran
3764
1 tell the History Channel to put our programs on.
2 17660 COMMISSIONER WILSON: I was going to
3 say that would be quite a bold suggestion.
4 17661 MR. CHADDERTON: No, I was just
5 giving you that as an example of the problems that we
6 have in trying to get them on regular channels and,
7 therefore, that leaves open just the community
8 channels, except for a few educational channels.
9 17662 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Let me just ask
10 you one final question and this is really just out of
11 curiosity for myself. Do you make your videos
12 available through libraries or video stores as well?
13 17663 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes, not video
14 stores.
15 17664 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Not video
16 stores.
17 17665 MR. CHADDERTON: Libraries, yes, free
18 of charge. School boards. We distributed last year
19 around November the 11th, I think something in the
20 neighbourhood of 1400 free videos dealing with our
21 military heritage to school boards right across Canada.
22 17666 COMMISSIONER WILSON: How many
23 libraries would you be in?
24 17667 MR. CHADDERTON: The success rate of
25 putting them in the libraries hasn't been too great.
StenoTran
3765
1 We put them in any library. We write out to them and
2 say would you like to have this. Maybe 10 per cent of
3 them write back and say yes.
4 17668 Then we follow it up and we say,
5 well, you know, you must have records. How many times
6 have they been logged out? And it hasn't been too
7 successful but it does help. It is part of getting the
8 message out there.
9 17669 But I guess to be almost crude about
10 it, if you don't get it on the "boob tube," it is not
11 going to register.
12 17670 COMMISSIONER WILSON: I can't believe
13 you said that. And you said it right on, too.
14 17671 MR. CHADDERTON: That is what my
15 friends and some of them are, you know, well spoken;
16 that is what they call it. I think what I am really
17 talking about is that if you can't get it on television
18 through community channels or something like that, it
19 really isn't worth production funds that you would put
20 if you were depending on distribution through
21 libraries.
22 17672 Now free distribution through
23 schools, that is different. But then there is a limit.
24 I mean when you put out 1400 dubs, that is a lot of
25 money.
StenoTran
3766
1 17673 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Yes, that is.
2 17674 MR. CHADDERTON: So we run out of it,
3 yes.
4 17675 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Considering
5 there are 16,000 schools across the country.
6 17676 MR. CHADDERTON: That is true, yes.
7 17677 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Thank you very
8 much. Those are all my questions.
9 17678 MR. CHADDERTON: Thank you.
10 17679 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms
11 Dugré, Ms Chisholm, Mr. Chadderton. Thank you for your
12 presentation.
13 17680 This will end today's work and we
14 will resume at 9:00 o'clock on Tuesday morning.
15 17681 Nous reprendrons à 9 h 00 mardi
16 matin, et bon weekend à tout le monde.
17 --- L'audience est ajournée à 1625, pour reprendre
18 le mardi 13 octobre 1998, à 0900 / Whereupon the
19 hearing adjourned at 1625, to resume on Tuesday,
20 October 13, 1998, at 0900
21
22
23
24
25
StenoTran
- Date modified: