Transcript, Hearing 27 November 2023

Attendees and Location

Held at:

Conference Centre
Portage IV
140 Promenade du Portage
Gatineau, Quebec

Attendees:

• Chairperson: Vicky Eatrides
• Members: Alicia Barin, Vice Chairperson, Broadcasting
  Adam Scott, Vice Chairperson, Telecommunications
  Nirmala Naidoo, Commissioner, Alberta and the Northwest Territories
  Joanne T. Levy, Commissioner, Manitoba and Saskatchewan
• Legal Counsel: Valérie Dionne
  Bianka Lauzon
• Secretary: Jade Roy
• Hearing Managers: Courtney Fitzpatrick
  Marie Lyse Lavallée

Table of Contents

Presentations

4127 Reelworld Screen Institute

4223 Wolastoq Language and Culture Center

4321 Indigenous Music Alliance and National Indigenous Music Office

4406 Makusham Musique Inc.

4483 ADVANCE, Canada’s Black Music Business Collective

4549 The Canadian Ethnocultural Media Coalition

4648 Disability Screen Office

4741 U Multicultural Inc.

4822 The International Alliance of the Theatrical Stage Employees, Moving Picture Technicians, Artists and Allied Crafts of the United States, its Territories and Canada (“IATSE”)

4903 Canadian Film Centre, the National Screen Institute, and L’institut national de l’image et du son

Transcript

Gatineau, Quebec
27 November 2023
Opening of Hearing at 8:59 a.m.

Gatineau, Québec

‑‑‑ Upon commencing on Monday, November 27, 2023 at 8:59 a.m.

4124 THE SECRETARY: Good morning, everyone. Welcome back to week two. Thank you for being here.

4125 We will start with the presentation of Reelworld Screen Institute.

4126 Please introduce yourself and you may begin.

Presentation

4127 MS. WILLIAMS: Good morning, Madam Chair, Vice‑Chairs and Commissioners. It is truly a pleasure to be here and to have this opportunity to speak with you.

4128 My name is Tonya Williams and I am the founder and executive director of Reelworld Screen Institute, Reelworld Film Festival and Reelworld Foundation.

4129 Reelworld is a national organization dedicated to fostering access, inclusion and equity for Canadians who are Black, Indigenous, Asian, South Asian and people of colour in the Canadian Screen Industries, and we’ve been doing this for the past 23 years. Our membership and alumni number over 18,000 who stretch from British Columbia to Prince Edward Island.

4130 I myself have been working in the Canadian and the U.S. screen industry for the past 48 years. I started when I was 17, working as an actress, a director, a producer, a writer, and most importantly an advocate through Reelworld.

4131 For my work in diversity and inclusion, I have earned several awards, including an ACTRA Award of Excellence, a WIFT Toronto Crystal Award and most recently a Legacy Visionary Award. I was actually the 2021 Playback's Changemaker of the Year and I'm also one of the cofounders of the Black Screen Office.

4132 I don't say this to boast. I really say this so that you understand my life's work has been around equity and inclusion. It is the driving force of who I am and what I do.

4133 Reelworld has been a catalyst for change, supported by key stakeholders like Heritage Canada, Telefilm, CMF, and others. In the wake of what we now call the racial reckoning ignited by the George Floyd murder, Reelworld became a crucial hub for guidance and solutions for government agencies, production companies and broadcasters. Our involvement in Telefilm, Heritage and CMF committees and advisory groups around data collection and improvements in funding and programs, with our collaboration with over 30 like‑minded organizations, which we call ourselves the Canadian Racial Screen Leaders' Collective, across Canada reflect our commitment to systemic change.

4134 Reelworld serves as a vital platform for underrepresented creators, offering a film festival, year‑round training programs, and a hiring database, Access Reelworld, connecting diverse talent with opportunities in our industry. Our mission is to break down barriers that prevent diverse creators from accessing funding, to help diverse workers get jobs in our industry, to connect our Canadian talent with international racialized producers and talent, and to address the historic underfunding of organizations like ours that champion that Canadian talent.

4135 In 2000, we started the Reelworld Film Festival to address the lack of Canadian films from Indigenous and racialized creators' ability to screen in Canadian film festivals. Today, we still notice that film festivals programming a small percentage of Canadian films receive more government funding, more financial support, and we advocate for funding incentives for festivals programming Canadian content, particularly by Black, Indigenous, Asian, South Asian, and people of colour creators.

4136 Film festivals play a crucial role in a creator’s journey to success. They continue to be one of the only ways filmmakers can get their work seen by buyers. For many creators to access funding, they are often asked which festivals they have screened at or what awards they have won. These questions become a barrier to accessing these funds.

4137 Film festivals are still the best platform for industry creatives to meet each other, network, pitch and build their future production teams. Now in its 23rd year, Reelworld Film Festival continues to be a significant platform and the only film festival in Canada dedicated solely to Canadian filmmakers who are Black, Indigenous, Asian, South Asian and people of colour, providing over $45,000 in cash prizes to our awardees. This year we launched our inaugural Reelworld Summit, a two‑day event specifically for Indigenous and racialized Canadians in our screen industries.

4138 Reelworld has a number of programs and here are just a few.

4139 Our E20 Program was specifically designed ‑‑ it's called the Emerging 20 Program ‑‑ for Canadian screenwriters who are Black, Indigenous, Asian, South Asian and people of colour. We pair them with story editors who are also Indigenous and racialized, and at the end of the program we connect them with broadcast executives and executive producers that they pitch to at our Face2Face program. We’ve had great success over these past two decades, with many of those pitches resulting in shows that have aired on our screens.

4140 However, our focus isn’t solely on creators and content. We need to remember that our Canadian productions hire hundreds of people, good paying jobs: catering, crews, electricians, carpenters, drivers, editors, lighting technicians, hair/makeup/wardrobe. We must address the lack of diversity in all these areas.

4141 Additionally, we don’t seem to speak about how little diversity there is within our casting directors, agents and managers. There are very few production companies owned or run by Indigenous or racialized people. There are very few of those diverse people sitting on a board of directors or executives in the broadcast sector, very few heads of departments of production crews. These are key gatekeeper roles that have been barriers to our content creators finding support and success.

4142 With a $1.4 million investment from FedDev, Reelworld pioneered a three‑year year‑long program for training Black casting directors, agents, managers and film producers. Our first two years of cohorts, consisting of 30 people, have already set up their businesses and are successfully representing talent and working for productions. Our funding only covers one more year and we are hoping that with these new funds you can help continue necessary programs like this.

4143 We also run a year‑long program for producers. There are very few Canadian producers from the Indigenous, Black and racialized communities. Currently, we have found no government funds to support our Producers Program as a majority of these funds are geared to creatives. Producers are an integral part of content, not only for it getting made but the life of that content for years to come.

4144 Reelworld proposes a Wage Subsidy Program, overseen by us, to give top production companies the opportunity to hire future producers from diverse backgrounds. This program, lasting at least a year, would enable apprentices to not only find employment but also to equip them with the knowledge to start their own companies. In the long run, this benefits the entire industry.

4145 Through the Feminist Response and Recovery Fund from WAGE, we have spent the past 20 months researching the depiction of Black, Indigenous, Asian, South Asian and women of colour on our Canadian screens. The negative stereotypes of these depictions have had real‑life consequences for Indigenous and racialized women everywhere. We are turning this research into a Protocol Guideline for broadcasters and producers to use as they consider the content they are supporting.

4146 I would also like to take this time to give my hearty support of the new Heritage Canada directives that are so in line with our industry needs.

4147 In conclusion, I mention the programs above because it’s time to consider these as crucial areas of our industry that we should carve out funding for with our new funds. We should also remember that with Canada having such a diverse population, of which many racialized creators hail from, it would be useful to expand our co‑production treaties to include more African, Caribbean, Asian and South Asian countries. Think of the rich diverse Canadian stories that we could be showing our audience internationally. We must remember to make sure that we create new funds specifically for the survival and support of film festivals and AV media organizations who are the lifeline of the diverse content we all wish to have more of.

4148 Please consider, if you don't want to consider core funding, multiyear funding. It's impossible for our organizations to make future plans when we are plying year by year from scratch.

4149 I look forward to future consultations, especially around definitions. Words like “underserved communities” and “equity‑seeking communities” have become catchall phrases that diminish the large population that falls under it. I thank you for this time and am happy to answer any questions.

4150 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much. We are very happy to be kicking off week two with Reelworld. Thank you for your presentation. Thank you for sharing how you've been breaking down barriers.

4151 I will turn things over to Commissioner Levy to start with some of the questions. Thank you.

4152 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Good morning.

4153 MS. WILLIAMS: Good morning.

4154 COMMISSIONER LEVY: I am just going to go through some questions that probably will take really quick answers, I hope, because we just want to make sure that we get some things on the record. Then I have some additional questions where we can interchange a little bit more.

4155 To start off, what proportion do you think of the initial base contributions should go to funds like the Canadian Independent Screen Fund and the Black Screen Office?

4156 MS. WILLIAMS: I know they have been asking for the 5 percent off the top and I absolutely support that. It might even be more and I'm somebody who is always going to say more, but I think definitely the 5 percent that they are requesting is... We won't know, will we? The need is so great that until we actually have the funds and we can start spending them, and the reports come back and the data is collected will we know is this sufficient or do we need more, but it's certainly a good start.

4157 COMMISSIONER LEVY: The Commission has been presented with some evidence that funding to the production system is likely to see declines in the coming years as revenues of the large broadcasters which fund Canadian productions decline. Should the Commission place an emphasis first on funding established production funds and then ensuring productions of other initiatives such as training?

4158 MS. WILLIAMS: Oh, well, horse, cat, dog, the cart before the... Egg, chicken. I wish it didn't have to be one or the other. I wish, as one person said last week, we could chew gum and talk at the same time. The need is for both and I would hate to see one be focused on, while the other is waiting. Both sides are in dire need.

4159 I know that the broadcasters are in a critical condition right now and streamers have taken a big portion of the audience that used to watch there, but I also know that the new funds that we're talking about, we've been waiting decades for and it's like the light at the end of a very long tunnel. I think if you were to say we would have to wait longer, it would just be depressing at this point. So it would be great if both could be.

4160 COMMISSIONER LEVY: In your opinion, would committing to training and development opportunities be a viable alternative to contributing directly to production funds or are we cutting up the pie too closely?

4161 MS. WILLIAMS: Well, the training is important, the programs are important, but I find what ‑‑ because we apply for the grants for this training and programs. I think I'm always discouraged when I see such a small amount given to the organizations putting them on. I have a staff of 14 full‑time people. It is a challenge every year for us to do the amazing programs we do, knowing that the lion's share goes to the programs and that I'm not able to pay my staff a living wage or to give them the benefits that they so deserve because that is not also included in the funding that is there currently.

4162 So I speak more ‑‑ I mean the broadcasters will be out here pushing for what their needs are, but we cannot have ‑‑ they cannot hire, they cannot create more content if you don't have that diverse talent trained properly, with the opportunities that our organizations give them.

4163 COMMISSIONER LEVY: How could the existing funds like the Canada Media Fund and the Canadian Independent Screen Fund be improved to better serve your equity‑seeking creators?

4164 MS. WILLIAMS: Well, certainly, giving $20 million to the Independent Screen Fund would be a start, because they are not able to execute right now with no funds.

4165 CMF has been fantastic. They have been incredibly supportive. Valerie Creighton and her team have been incredibly supportive about diversity, about racial diversity, about Black diversity and how we can forward, but they feel their hands are tied. They don't have enough funding for what our needs are. In fact, a lot of times the program that they open, the funding they open, it's already oversubscribed the minute they open it. There's a lot of complaints from our members and from across Canada diverse communities going, “How do they expect to give us such a small slice of the funding pie that can made an impact? It can't make an impact.”

4166 You have to remember, that's why I talked about these terms we use, “underserved communities”. “Underserved communities” is everyone except white cis men. It's everyone else. So how can they get 10‑20 percent of the funding? I know Barbara Lee said 50 percent of the funding. I say 75 percent of the funding.

4167 So until we can seriously look at data, and that's where it needs to come from, data can't also be something that you can choose to answer or not. We're going to need to create incentives that make people answer the data, because we can't answer those questions until we know what is that population, what is the need, you know, what are we actually trying to do at the end of the day, and I'm hoping that we can fund more.

4168 CMF wants to do more. CMF doesn't actually have the funding right now to fund organizations like Reelworld. So we need to create more funding around that.

4169 COMMISSIONER LEVY: So you would like to see established funds include training as part of their remit in a more fulsome way?

4170 MS. WILLIAMS: Absolutely. But I would also like a caveat in that training is not something that stands alone. People have to be hired to train them. Organizations must exist to create the programs for the training. So I think that's all part of that.

4171 In the Wage Subsidy Program I talk about, I would consider that under training. But how much is that going to be to fund an individual for a full year to be at a production company? When you think of how many individuals would you like that to be, it's hard to say right now what would the funds be. Would you like it to be 100 people or 5 people, 1,000 people or 20 people?

4172 COMMISSIONER LEVY: I would like to ‑‑ I think we've covered off the questions that we have that were very specific to what we need for our record.

4173 I would like to talk a little bit about the experience with the online streamers, because your presentation seems to be very locked into broadcaster production funds, you know, the existing system. But the online streamers have been operating in this country for some time and I haven't heard anything about the impact that they've had on your client group, if you like. For instance, Netflix says that for more than five years it's been steadfastly supporting the development and advancement of the next generation of Canadian creators, with a focus on screenwriters, directors and producers from underrepresented groups.

4174 So, in your view, is that happening?

4175 MS. WILLIAMS: I believe Netflix is doing that. I know Amazon Prime is supporting a program that we're doing. But is it just any kind of support? I mean the support is really wonderful. What is the amount of money to that support? Is it one program, is it four or five, or is it the thousands they could be doing? So I think in my presentation I used the word “series” often, meaning streaming as well, because I see series and film as being on broadcast or on streaming networks as well.

4176 So, absolutely. I mean, why we're here is this new injection of funds that is going to come from the streamers. I don't feel we yet have the transparency from the streamers, the data to know how much money that could be. It could be more than $250 million. We don't know what that is. So we might start with that, but I'm hoping that part of what the directives will have is more transparency as to exactly who is watching and how much is being brought in so that we can know what numbers we're actually talking with.

4177 But the answer to your question is yes, they should do more training. It is helpful for the programs they're creating. But within that, how much money is that? Are they now telling you it's X amount of dollars and how much is that?

4178 COMMISSIONER LEVY: My last question is: How are your clients and your training approaching the new opportunities in the online world? For instance, are they getting anything out of YouTube, Vimeo, any of those sort of platforms?

4179 MS. WILLIAMS: They are certainly using it to try and build their own personal audiences ‑‑ you know, Tyler Perry did something very similar when he built his own audience ‑‑ in the hopes that when they go to a streamer or when they go to a broadcaster, when they go to anyone, they get to say, “I have these one million people watching me.” So I don't know if they're making money.

4180 At the end of the day I think it's great to talk about content in terms of culture and getting their stories out there, but we will not create a stronger industry if people can't make a living from what they're doing. So I don't feel they're actually making a living streaming on these things that you're just talking about, but I think it's great for young people and emerging people to just get their work out and see what does the audience like or not like.

4181 On the larger scale of what we're talking about when it's the streamers, we need to ‑‑ the bigger streamers, we need to also look at what are they getting paid, what are those creators getting paid for the work that they are putting on that those streamers are making money from, is it fair? Have you had the transparency to see that yet?

4182 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you.

4183 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.

4184 We will go to our Vice‑Chair of Broadcasting. Thank you.

4185 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you very much and welcome, Ms. Williams.

4186 MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you.

4187 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: So in the questioning by Commissioner Levy, you talked about the 5 percent being a good starting point and then I heard you say, “We don't really know what the exact need is, we need data.” So what exactly do you need in terms of data? Like what kind of data would support the metrics that you would need in order to be more precise in identifying what the production and training goals are?

4188 MS. WILLIAMS: So when I say the 5 percent is good for now, it's because we know we have the obvious need. We have ‑‑ organizations like myself and the training programs that we're doing, we have the obvious needs. When I say more data, I mean what do Canadian audiences want to watch, what do they like. This is information our creators need. We don't have that currently. How much money is being made off of the shows that are on there? Like those are more intricate.

4189 If the money is so much larger than we think, then shouldn't our creators get a piece of that? But I'm saying for now it's hard to just say, yes, let's make this piece this. We don't know what it is, so we have to start somewhere. So I wouldn't want us to wait to fund while we wait to get all the data. I'm saying let's start with what we know is the very minimal and then let's build on that. Let's not make that the cap, let's make that the beginning.

4190 Does that help?

4191 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Yes. I mean, you are speaking about trying to match the funding to the demand or the audience appeal ‑‑

4192 MS. WILLIAMS: Well, that is part of it.

4193 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN:  ‑‑ because you say we're not ‑‑

4194 MS. WILLIAMS: Yeah. So that's not the 100 percent of it, but that's a part of it. I mean, at the end of the day we're in the entertainment industry, we're in the entertainment business, it is a business, and we are making content for audiences to watch as well. So yes, I might talk about the effect of that content and how it affects, for instance, the real‑life impact of women in colour and the depictions. That's one part of it as well, but we also need to know that.

4195 What I would love to know in the transparency is who are the top people making that content; are we still only using diverse people at the very lower end for some crew parts, for some of the extras, you know, that are going ‑‑ or are the top two leads in a show; is it the keys who are head of makeup, head of like...

4196 I don't think we have that data and that information, and yet, productions do have it. But I think currently we're saying to them, “We would like you to provide this information if you would like to, but we're not making it mandatory.” And I guess I'm more, how can we know what true data is if we don't make it mandatory in some way, so that we can look at it later and go, Okay, they upped their diversity in these areas, but we see we still need more executives, you know, more people working in the streaming who are executives, people in the streamers who are green‑lighting. We don't have that information right now.

4197 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Understood. Thank you for that answer.

4198 Back to the Chair.

4199 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Vice‑Chair.

4200 We will go over to Commissioner Naidoo for the last question. Thank you.

4201 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you so much for being here.

4202 I want to stick a little bit with the data. Are you familiar with the Canada Media Fund's PERSONA‑ID program?

4203 MS. WILLIAMS: Absolutely. I am signed up on it. I answered all the questions.

4204 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: And do you believe that the way that it proposes to collect data will provide us with what's needed?

4205 MS. WILLIAMS: I certainly helped work on what that would be. It's almost like you need data to know what more data you need. And so I never want to be, yes, this is the absolute. Right now, that PERSONA‑ID is fantastic.

4206 But here's what makes me a little frustrated: how they're collecting it at CMF is not how they're collecting it at Telefilm is not how they're collecting it in other agencies is not how they're collecting it across the board. So how do we gather all that data together? It won't fit. So you'll have here's the CMF data. Here's the Telefilm data. Here's the ...

4207 At some point, we're going to need to come up with some sort of structure that's across all the funding agencies or it'll be pointless, I think, to just collect pieces of data from different places that don't actually fit. So that's what I'd like to see. How are we going to streamline it that everyone is using it, and then it's all collected in one place and you go, Here are true numbers.

4208 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: So I am going to follow up on that. Are you asking for a standardized way of collecting data across the board and/or, I guess, are you asking for a place to deposit all of that data so that you can access it?

4209 MS. WILLIAMS: Well, I know people are uncomfortable about people like me just accessing data. But I think a standardized where at least you all should be able to see it or people who are at Heritage Canada, the top people. Even if it doesn't come to me personally, sometimes I ask questions at a higher level, and they're like, Well, we have these numbers for this, we have these numbers for this.

4210 Our unions, for instance, are collecting data, but it's not standardized, and that could be included in ‑‑ I know CMPC has sent me some data. WGC has sent me some data. But I spend a lot of time going, I guess this could fit with, you know, this, but it doesn't really.

4211 Like I just happen to feel like this is the kind of thing that has to be standardized in some way so that you and I, we won't get it in the first year, but 10 years from now we can go, you know what? we looked right across the board and here are the gaps and here are the problems and here are the issues. I think we need that.

4212 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you.

4213 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Naidoo.

4214 So we would like to give you the opportunity to offer any concluding remarks.

4215 MS. WILLIAMS: Oh, my god, where would I start? So much! But I think I will focus on ‑‑ I'm not sure you are aware of this ‑‑ there are a lot of organizations that are not run by Black, Indigenous, Asian, South Asian, and people of colour that are applying for the funding. And when I say not just racialized, I'm going to say LGBTQS2, I'm going to say all disabilities, they are not from those communities at all. They are applying for this funding, and they are receiving this funding because they say they are creating programs for those communities. And what I'm hearing from those communities is those same organizations will go to those communities and want to not pay anything to those communities to say, Here, we're setting up a program; we'd like you to run it.

4216 So my hope is that we create stricter guidelines around who can receive this money, and it should go to the people who are serving those communities. Let it ‑‑ you know, people were repeating it all last week, you know, “For us by us.” Let us have that power. Don't give it to others to dole out. We're not children. We need to feel that we are empowered in the decisions that we're making and how we can pay for those.

4217 So I think those would be one of the last things I'll say.

4218 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much for sharing that, and thank you again to Reelworld for participating in the hearing.

4219 MS. WILLIAMS: Thank you.

4220 THE SECRETARY: Thank you. We will now connect to our next participants, Wolastoq Language and Culture Center. Can you hear me, Chad?

4221 MR. INGRAHAM: Yes.

4222 THE SECRETARY: Perfect. Maybe turn on your camera if you can. Here you go.

Presentation

4223 MR. INGRAHAM: There we are.

4224 Well, good morning, Madam Chair and Commissioners. My name is Chad Ingraham, and I am appearing before you representing the Wolastoq Language and Culture Center. I am joined by one of our founding elders, Dr. Imelda Opolahsomuwehs Perley.

4225 Our organization, located in Neqotkuk First Nation in New Brunswick, works to revitalize and preserve the language, culture, and ancestral teachings of the Wolastoqey people. Thank you for the opportunity to speak here today.

4226 The Wolastoqey language is at risk of extinction, with less than 200 speakers left in a population of approximately 8,000. In light of this situation, we have worked to develop language‑learning apps, written curriculum, and aid in the establishment of language classes in the Wolastoqey communities in New Brunswick. We are working to develop audio programs in the language and to document and record as much as possible from the remaining language carriers in the communities.

4227 While the journey to save a language might make a good subject for a film which could trigger funding, a show on how to speak the language would not. As APTN pointed out in their presentation, such a program would be considered a how‑to program, an educational or instructional program, and they don't qualify. It's also hard to make a business case for development of projects in the Wolastoqey language with such a small audience.

4228 In the Act, it states that the programming provided by the Canadian broadcasting system should

4229 “reflect the importance of Indigenous language revitalization by supporting the production and broadcasting of Indigenous language programming.”

4230 But the type of programming that urgently needs funding, the how‑to educational programming, does not qualify under the current funding models. The Act calls for the broadcasting system to include educational and community programs, yet, in our search for funds to accomplish just this, we have found no sources for which the production of a language learning show would qualify.

4231 What we hope comes about from this consultation is the recognition that if the objectives of the Broadcasting Act, specifically the importance of language revitalization and the inclusion of educational and community programs, are to be carried out, the type of programming that receives funding may have to be redefined.

4232 We would like to request that funding for Indigenous community broadcasting infrastructure be put in place, so that community not‑for‑profit organizations like ours can own, operate, and run broadcasting undertakings that could be based in community. These undertakings could take the form of radio stations, community television stations, or multimedia centres that would become hubs for Indigenous creators. This infrastructure funding we believe is the key to preserving the language and should be placed at a higher priority than other funding.

4233 By creating community‑based media centres, Indigenous stories can be told and shared with the people who resonate most deeply with the cultural content. The establishment of such centres would be relatively inexpensive when measured against the value of the content they would produce. We are not talking about setting up multi‑million‑dollar studios, just community spaces where video, audio, and multimedia content can be created by community members. Such centres would not only provide valuable cultural content but would be a training ground for Indigenous storytellers to hone their skills, in the long term creating a more vibrant and equitable media landscape.

4234 We would also like to see the Commission request flexibility from the production funds when it comes to providing funding for language and culturally specific instructional programming.

4235 The Wolastoq Language and Culture Center supports the broadcasting modernization process and the requirements for online undertakings to make mandatory initial base contributions to the production of Canadian and Indigenous content.

4236 We have heard your requests to other intervenors throughout this process to give specific percentages or dollar amounts for this contribution, but I do not have the expertise to do so. However, we support the excellent work APTN and the Indigenous Screen Organization continue to do.

4237 We also support the work that CACTUS has implemented in the distribution of the Local Journalism Initiative, and we believe that their vision of community television stations throughout the country is aligned with our goals to have development spaces for community media.

4238 We agree with APTN's statement:

4239 “When you lose your language, you lose part of your identity and you cannot regain it.”

4240 We hope the Commission understands that this a crucial time for the Wolastoqey language, and we urgently require support for the development, production, and broadcasting of culturally based content.

4241 And I'll turn it over to Dr. Perley for any additional comments.

4242 DR. I. PERLEY: (Indigenous language spoken / langue autochtone parlée) I welcome you from the unceded, unsurrendered territory of the People of the Beautiful and Bountiful River.

4243 And I just wanted to, I guess like Chad said, I'm a speaker, grew up a speaker, and but right now, I'm trying to hard to find all avenues. And when Chad mentioned, Oh, what about a radio station or a media station? And I got so excited that yes.

4244 I know we're developing apps. I know we're doing websites. I know we're trying so many things to attract new speakers.

4245 And I did work in a radio station in New Brunswick before, and I do remember how excited the communities were ‑‑ not just one community, all the Wolastoqey communities ‑‑ when I was doing 10 hours of content per week. And I divvied it up throughout the day so that morning commuters could hear ceremony, mid‑day commuters could learn something in the language, and all the way through. So it was a very inter‑generational multi‑faceted way of learning and hearing the language.

4246 So I'm just here to also ‑‑ what can be done? We're just seeking help. And I see ‑‑ because right now, I do work with all the First Nation communities as a cultural coordinator. And I see I've collected stories, and so I have lots of content. I just don't know where to put it. So that I think would be something maybe we could work together with, and maybe somebody out there has ideas for us to be able to make sure the language survives.

4247 Thank you for listening.

4248 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much for your participation and for sharing your personal experiences with us. Thank you as well for following the proceeding. It's quite clear that you've been very engaged, listening to other participants as well.

4249 I will turn things over to Commissioner Naidoo to start with some questions for the Commission. Thank you.

4250 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you both for being here. We really appreciate it.

4251 In your intervention, you propose funding for Indigenous groups with special consideration given to endangered languages. If a portion of an existing fund was set aside for Indigenous groups who wish to establish their own community television and radio stations, would this meet your objectives for funding and for considering endangered languages? And which organization do you think could fulfill that mandate?

4252 MR. INGRAHAM: These are, yeah, difficult questions for me to answer, but thank you for the opportunity.

4253 We've been looking for funding for this kind of programming and haven't been able to find any current funders who can push that forward. The infrastructure funding, the closest that we've seen is the Northern Broadcast Initiative from Heritage Canada that actually provides infrastructure funding. There's lots of funding for large‑scale production as well, if we wanted to make a film or anything like that. But when it comes to just, you know, the community television type of model, we haven't been able to find any funding for things like, you know, a few cameras, a little switcher, some audio mixers, these kind of small‑scale community‑television‑style infrastructure available.

4254 So I'm not sure if it would be better to give it to the Indigenous Screen Organization, and the way that they funded the new studio up north, that seems like a very good avenue because it is infrastructure funding. But I probably have to defer to the knowledge of the Commission and maybe some other funders with their expertise.

4255 DR. I. PERLEY: And I have contributed to APTN, so I've done a lot of work already to ‑‑ there's we developed Wolastoqey cartoons last year that APTN shows on occasion. We use them in the schools, actually, as a language lesson, you know, our cartoons that I translated for APTN, which has our local language.

4256 And but I really see that ‑‑ because I knew when we had that radio station, we had other communities across the, you know, State of Maine that were coming to Canada to listen to the broadcast and wanted a radio station even there, because we have Maliseet or Wolastoqey community in Maine as well. And so what we're trying to do is support each other so that we can survive as a nation and not necessarily as one community against another community, as the first speaker this morning was saying.

4257 You know, there needs to be equity in how much of our language ‑‑ it's such a threat, because French and English are legislated to survive but our Indigenous languages aren't. And so that's why we're reaching out to as many places as we can to revive and have it heard. Our children need to hear, you know, the language. Our elders need to hear it. I need to hear it.

4258 And so that's why we're looking at, oh yes, maybe a radio station would work. Then people ‑‑ because not everybody goes on the website, you know. I know that and stuff, you know, because that's been our setback is even though we have developed apps, not everybody has a computer, not everybody has an iPhone or, you know. And so we thought, well, it worked when we had a radio station, and you know, like I said, we do have content. It's where do we put it, yeah.

4259 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you for that.

4260 Mr. Ingraham, we talked a little bit about distribution of existing funds, but what about if a specific fund were created in line with what you proposed? And how do you recommend that that fund should be administered and by whom? And I know you kind of said that you weren't really an expert on whom, but you might have some thoughts about it. I think anything that you can offer is of value. Thank you.

4261 MR. INGRAHAM: I always think that elders in the community and the grandmothers in the community are the ones who really know where those kind of community resources should be placed. So I would say probably in a nation‑to‑nation relationship, just consulting the nation and the grandmothers, the elders, and seeing where these resources should be placed to continue the cultural work.

4262 The funding thing, the access to the funds and establishment of the funds is one thing that we are concerned about as time moves on, because the BDUs won't be able to provide the funding as, you know, inevitably revenue continues to decline.

4263 So similar to the concerns that APTN had, I think we do need places where that funding can come from, whether it's direct from Parliament or similar to CBC funding or something along the lines of what we're here discussing today where those contributions should come from.

4264 But I think the establishment of a new fund would be excellent. Infrastructure funding is what's needed. We're not looking at large amounts of money, relatively, to establish things like radio stations or small community television stations.

4265 But it's also the equity of access that you get from a radio station that we haven't been able to find something equal to for TV or video content. Even if we put our things on YouTube, you're still expected ‑‑ you know, a household needs to have a broadband connection. They need to be paying the broadband fees or the large cellphone bill fees to be accessing that content.

4266 So we looked at UHF transmission as something that is kind of an antiquated technology but fits our objectives because we're trying to just release this content in a very accessible way that doesn't ask people to incur so many expenses to be able to consume it. That's why community centres where we could have these, you know, screens running or working with libraries would be useful. And as ATSC 3.0 rolls out, even more of that technology is going to place what we're trying to do farther away from the consumer.

4267 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you.

4268 You had recommended that the type of programing that receives funding may have to be redefined in order for the objectives of the Broadcasting Act to be carried out. I'm wondering if you can expand a little bit on that idea.

4269 MR. INGRAHAM: Yeah. I will try my best. So with the goal of our centre to revitalize language, we're looking at the type of programming where, you know, you can follow a speaker and they introduce you to a topic and they tell you about it, or they take you through the woods and point out medicines and talk about traditional names, or even just a group sitting together and explaining how cards are played in the language or how games are played in the language, these kind of programs that are extremely useful for people who are learning a language to immerse themselves in, day‑to‑day situations where the language is used. There is not funding for that kind of programming.

4270 So it is the how‑to, the educational programming that APTN mentioned as well that doesn't receive funding because it's not a drama series, it's not really a documentary series, it's not, you know, children's programming. So we're looking for any ways that the Commission could recommend. I know we're here to make recommendations as well, but just to get as many people together, including other presenters, to try and figure out how we can accomplish the goals that we have of just revitalizing language.

4271 DR. I. PERLEY: If I can just ‑‑

4272 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: All right ‑‑ oh, sorry, go ahead, please. Please do.

4273 DR. I. PERLEY: Yeah, I just wanted to add to that. So for example, here in the community that I'm at this morning, I'm doing ‑‑ we do livestreaming for the parents because I work with maternal child health. And I have this goal of every child should hear their language from the womb to beyond. So I do prenatal classes where I sing and tell stories to the babies in the womb. How I'm expanding it throughout our large community is the health centre comes and livestreams me on a little phone. Then parents that have access to it will be able to tune in in the evening as a storytelling thing in the language. Those who don't have access to technology, we have copies of it in the language and then so I have a team that actually goes and tells those stories to the children or to the families.

4274 So we're developing more and more of these materials, especially with Christmas coming up. I didn't want it to be a Western style Christmas. I want it to be a traditional Christmas where, you know, it wasn't so commercial. And so I'm developing programming for our communities as we speak.

4275 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: That is so interesting. I am so glad that you shared that. Thank you for that.

4276 My last question before I pass it back to my fellow Commissioners, because I know that they've got some questions too, I just want you to paint a bit of a very vivid picture for me. What kind of funding do not‑for‑profit Indigenous groups such as yours need on an ongoing basis? And I'm trying to get a sense of like what your annual budget is now and where you would like it to be or where should it be, and do you have access to the funds that you need.

4277 MR. INGRAHAM: The more funding we receive, the more things we can do. Each initiative that we undertake can be different, but with the core of what we’re dealing with now, it is language and revitalization and cultural preservation.

4278 We could look at things like establishing archives and museums as one of the goals that we would like to accomplish. We could look at things like distribution through BDUs as something we would like to accomplish, you know, have that common carriage type of access to whatever platform. For us, it’s about getting it out there and making it easy for people to have access to.

4279 The people who record these things are staff members of other organizations or volunteers or, you know, family, friends, just anybody around who has enough expertise to try and record something and document something and share something.

4280 So if we had funding for staffing, if we had funding for, you know, more of an organizational structure around this, we could accomplish these goals much easier, but I’ll also get Opolahsomuwehs to explain some more of the funding that we’re currently working with.

4281 DR. I. PERLEY: Yes. So currently, we do have funding to develop a healing with language program, so that’s working with all the health directors in our seven First Nations. And so what I’m doing is all the ceremonies that I conduct, I’m putting them into the language but also documenting with Chad’s help as my media person, so he’s been following me around doing placental burials, doing naming ceremonies, doing ‑‑ I actually have a home birth as one of my stories because we’re reclaiming our birthing rights as Indigenous women, so we have a doula.

4282 I teach a doula ‑‑ traditional doula training and right now we’re establishing Indigenous midwifery, so there’s lots of these things that we’re doing ceremonially that are being documented now. And so that’s what I’m working on now with the funding that I do have from Heritage Canada now so that each of the health directors will have access.

4283 And right now we’re just going to be putting it on a website for them.

4284 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you so much, both of you. I’m going to pass it back to the Chair.

4285 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Thank you, Commissioner Naidoo.

4286 We’ll go over to Vice‑Chair Scott.

4287 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you very much. It’s been really interesting and I think really important for us to hear you talk about language preservation and the important cultural initiatives that you’re pursuing.

4288 I also found it really interesting to hear that you’ve already tried apps, that you’re already live streaming, the proposal for the creation of digital media centres in the communities. And then there’s ‑‑ to me, it almost lands with a bit of a clunk, this notion that radio is going to be the technology that ensures the success of this.

4289 Can you speak a little bit to the irony ‑‑ I think you’ve mentioned, you know, BDUs are dying, so can you speak to the irony of, you know, the importance of the objective, the forays you’ve already made into kind of the modern technology that’s, in fact, eating away at BDUs and yet the proposal to lean into radio in particular?

4290 Thank you.

4291 MR. INGRAHAM: We love the idea of hearing stories around a fire. So it doesn't cost you money to go to those things. You don’t have to pay a fee or a subscriber fee to go to that storytelling session. So how do we carry that through into a space like this?

4292 So you know, some people ‑‑ that’s why radio, to us, seems like ‑‑ it encompasses that idea. It is a fireplace. It is, you know ‑‑ it’s, compared to the other avenues, an inexpensive technology. It’s something that, as a community, we could purchase 500, 1,000 radios and distribute them, but then ‑‑ and provide content so that people can listen and just, you know, have a station where it’s just vocabulary words running 24/7 so you could tune into it any time and hear that.

4293 And then you think, “Well, why not just make an app and have a stream going where I could choose the word and hear the words and it’d be like flash cards or something?”. And it’s like yes, okay, that sounds great.

4294 Technologically much more advanced. But now I need a $1,000 phone, now I need a data plan with that phone. Now I need on a back end hosting infrastructure. I have to get app development and all this kind of stuff that is another barrier to learning that language and preserving that language.

4295 So we’re looking for any kind of way to distribute this knowledge, to save this knowledge, to make it accessible so that people don’t have barriers when they're trying to learn, when they’re trying to preserve their culture, that it is there, it is available, it’s ‑‑ it feels like you’re going next door and chatting with your grandmother. So how do we make that app and not compete with social media apps? Because if you pull up this $1,000 phone, are you going to go to the language app or are you going to go to, you know, the one that’s programmed to keep you on longer and engage you and give you that ADD mindset?

4296 So what are the things that we could have in waiting rooms, in ‑‑ just playing in the house that kind of run in the background? That’s why we went with that.

4297 And the same with the UHF transmitters for television. It’s like most people have a television set, an antenna to attach to that television set, roughly $30, so it’s very accessible to say this isn’t a $30 a month streaming service which requires all this back end development and everything. This is here’s an antenna, attach it to your TV, go from HDMI to antenna and you can see what we’re putting out.

4298 And then, of course, there’s, you know, ways that we can have multiple channels if the transmitters that we purchase are able to do that, so you could have the language learning channel, you could have the cultural channel, the story channel.

4299 But it is using old technology to make it equitable, and I think that’s the thing that we’re missing a little bit in broadcasting, is broadcasting used to be very, very accessible technologically. It wasn’t expensive. It wasn’t prohibitively expensive. And now it’s becoming normal to have the $100 a month fee for broadband or a $25 fee for your streaming platform, if not multiple streaming platforms.

4300 And the more that we encourage production for those venues and on those technologies, the less inclusive we become when we’re looking at sharing knowledge and stories and culture. So that’s why we like that idea.

4301 We know there’s ways to cooperate with BDUs and with new technologies that emerge, but that space isn’t being made for us on networks that exist in the province, the Rogers network, the Bell network.

4302 They continue to close down community television stations where this kind of production would have once been accessible, but they’re still in population centres that are always outside of community, so they’re not in locations that make it easy for us to go to and film a quick language lesson or do a live broadcast about something or target specifically the Wolastoq communities.

4303 So that’s why we look at those kind of technologies and knowing that they are phasing out, they still are the thing that accomplishes our purposes in the most equitable and accessible way.

4304 DR. I. PERLEY: And to that, when I did do the 10 hours a week, I timed it so that on the weekends we would raise money by doing radio bingo in the language. And then in between, every third game, I would tell a story that my Elders would recognize, so even though they weren’t bingo players, they ended up starting to listen to the radio just so they could hear the old stories that I grew up with.

4305 And it became really flourishing and families would get together on that Sunday afternoon just to hear the stories. And I just remember the joy of walking down the street and being that, you know, storyteller.

4306 And I have ‑‑ I still have some storytellers left. You know, as in every Indigenous community, we’re losing our speakers, and so I’m still lucky enough to connect with the Passamaquoddys in the States, so we do Zoom sessions just so we can hear each other speak.

4307 And so I’m hoping that ‑‑ and how courses are taught online, you have to pay a tuition to take those courses. I want to offer you don’t have to pay. You just have to want it and we’ll provide it as long as we have speakers.

4308 MR. INGRAHAM: I just want to quickly add ‑‑ I’m sorry to jump in a second time.

4309 We’ve looked at TELILE TV in Arichat and CHCO TV down in St. Andrews as kind of this community television model that is something we could emulate. And then when it comes to the technology side of things, we would love to see the Commission encourage more open source development of platforms that would allow us, if we were to host ‑‑ go the technological route and host our own servers in community that we would have access to technologies that we could just drop into a server and then establish the network or use the network that's already in communities to deliver our own version of a streaming platform, but free of charge just saying, you know, give us access to the wires that are already up and transmit data that’s already in the stream that is here.

4310 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you both very much for those answers.

4311 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.

4312 So perhaps now we could just turn it back over to you for a minute to add anything that maybe we haven’t covered this morning or any other key takeaway that you would like to leave us with.

4313 Thank you.

4314 DR. I. PERLEY: I just want to support everybody that’s working towards that equity and, you know, in viewing in the language because there was this book that was written by Jerry Manders way back in the probably nineties, and it was called “Absence of the Sacred”.

4315 And “Absence of the Sacred” alluded to how media has also replaced Indigenous anything. That’s why we were happy when APTN started their station that, oh, we have something that we could listen to that’s in First Nation languages, and so we had our own members from here by the name of Jeff Bayer who worked out in Vancouver and told those stories of water around the world.

4316 And so I’d like to see more of that ‑‑ you know, that content. And so I really wish everybody well that’s asking for the funding to ‑‑ so that we could have ongoing communication so better understanding for each other and with each other.

4317 MR. INGRAHAM: I think I’ll just leave it there, the accessibility. The affordability, too, is something that we need to talk about. We have lots of people who want to create the biggest, best, most exciting TV show or film and we’re looking to just create and share knowledge and cultural practices. It’s small scale. It’s around the campfire kind of thinking, very community oriented, and that’s the model that we’re hoping receives much more funding and regulation ‑‑ regulatory support to allow the things, not to consistently rely on federal support, but to somehow, you know, continue to thrive on their own.

4318 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much. Thank you for being with us this morning. We really appreciate you sharing your perspectives with us. Thank you.

4319 THE SECRETARY: Thank you.

4320 We’ll now connect to the next participants, Indigenous Music Alliance and National Indigenous Music Office, appearing remotely.

Presentation

4321 MS. KISH: Aaniin boozhoo, mino gizheb, good morning, Madam Chair, Vice‑Chair and Commission Members.

4322 (Indigenous language spoken / langue autochtone parlée)

4323 My name is ShoShona Kish. I am Eagle Clan, and my family is Anishinaabe from Batchewana First Nation. I am joining you today from the traditional territory of the Objibwe Odawa Potawatomi Three Fires Midewiwin. I am honoured to be here today with you all.

4324 I am an artist, the Co‑Founder of Ishk?dé Records and the Artistic Director of the Indigenous Music Alliance, a national Indigenous women and artist‑led not‑for‑profit organization that produces the International Indigenous Music Summit. The Indigenous Music Alliance is currently serving as the fiscal agent for the Indigenous Music Office, which has a mandate to support the growth of a thriving and sustainable Indigenous‑owned music industry.

4325 MR. GREYEYES: And hi. My name is Alan Greyeyes. I am a member of the Peguis First Nation. I’ve been working full‑time in the music industry, and I’m really excited to be here today. I’d like to thank the Commission for including us in this process.

4326 I also want to take this time to acknowledge FACTOR for their support of the Indigenous Music Office’s startup process. I also want to acknowledge the Government of Canada for supporting the Indigenous Screen Office in such a meaningful way for the past three years.

4327 And lastly, I want to thank the Commission for making it clear that Indigenous people and Indigenous languages are one of the main pillars of the Canadian broadcasting system.

4328 With that in mind, I want to note that the Two Row Wampum belt provides a great reference for what’s currently being discussed. Now, I’m not Haudenosaunee and I’m going to oversimplify the significance of the teachings, but essentially the first row or boat on the belt represents Indigenous people and the second represents Canadians. Both boats have their own equity‑deserving groups and Indigenous people are not one of the equity‑deserving groups in the Canadian boat.

4329 The Indigenous Music Office is currently in the second year of a three year start‑up grant from FACTOR and that funding ends in 2025. This support is greatly appreciated, but it’s also on par with equity‑deserving groups in the Canadian boat, so we definitely need the CRTC mandated funding that recognizes the Indigenous boat.

4330 The Indigenous Music Office supports the broadcasting modernization process and the requirement for online undertakings to make contributions to the production of Canadian and Indigenous content, but we understand that these businesses are different from traditional broadcasters and a one‑size‑fits‑all approach won’t work. We also believe that Indigenous people working in the music industry will benefit from direct contributions from online undertakings because the majority of Indigenous artists have a hard time competing in the current funding system. The Indigenous‑owned music industry doesn’t have a nationwide network of non‑profit organizations that can access the funding programs that currently support emerging artists. And we feel that Indigenous artists working in both traditional and contemporary genres, along with Indigenous languages, already have great relationships with streaming services operating in Canada.

4331 I want to take this time to acknowledge SiriusXM for Channel 165. Giving Indigenous artists a home on their platform has made an incredible difference for dozens, if not hundreds, of Indigenous artists and their families.

4332 And before I hand it back to my colleague, I want to make a couple notes about Indigenous radio stations.

4333 They are an integral part of the Indigenous‑owned music industry and we can’t reach Indigenous audiences without them. They play a vital role in language revitalization. They provide an Indigenous perspective on the news that we don’t see from other broadcasters. They can’t rely on volunteers to fill programming roles because volunteering is a luxury that most Indigenous families can’t afford yet. And lastly, racism and financial insecurity make it really hard for Indigenous radio stations to compete with commercial radio for advertising accounts.

4334 And back to ShoShona.

4335 MS. KISH: Miigwetch.

4336 It’s important to recognize that Indigenous people have a special constitutional relationship with Canada. Indigenous peoples are not equity‑deserving groups, we are sovereignty‑affirming groups, and, as such, are entitled to targeted supports and policies within this framework.

4337 When we refer to narrative and music sovereignty, we are talking about the critical importance of maintaining ownership and control of our stories and artistic projects. Our stories have largely been told for us, and the stories we are telling ourselves are largely being curated by mainstream, non‑Indigenous people.

4338 Indigenous people need to be centred within the curatorial and decision‑making spaces. We need to have the autonomy to tell our own stories from our own perspectives, to be the decisionmakers in what stories get heard and who is telling those stories. Narrative and music sovereignty is not based on concepts of “inclusion” or “diversity”, but on self‑determination, which is an Inherent Right of Indigenous peoples that finds expression in Section 35 of the Constitution.

4339 APTN’s 2019 National Indigenous Music Impact Study highlighted that the majority of all interview respondents experienced challenges and barriers within their careers specifically related to their identity, including prejudice, ignorance, tokenism, stereotyping, colonialism and inter‑generational trauma.

4340 Indigenous owned and led organizations struggle with systemic barriers that limit access to funding and resources that threaten their sustainability and growth and, by extension, that of the whole music industry ecology.

4341 We want to ensure that there is an equitable playing field while also addressing historical injustice. This will require acknowledgment of the distinct, special relationship we have with Canada and the Crown as sovereign nations, and will require recognition and understanding of the systemic inequities that are embedded within the mandates of centralized funding bodies.

4342 We need to ensure that Indigenous artists and the Indigenous‑owned music industry receive immediate and long‑term benefits from CCD contributions.

4343 Similar to the role played by the Indigenous Screen Office, we believe that the Indigenous Music Office will play a key role in advocating for Indigenous music, artists and the Indigenous‑owned music industry. When properly funded, the IMO will be appropriately positioned to use CCD contributions to make critical investments into supporting, building and growing the Indigenous music community.

4344 We also believe that all commercial broadcasters should be mandated to spend a portion of their contributions directly on Indigenous events, presentations and artists.

4345 Chi miigwetch, thank you, merci for the opportunity to participate in these consultations.

4346 Over the past week, we have heard so many of our creative industry partners and colleagues acknowledging the systemic issues and inequities within our sector. Despite the historical lack of mainstream institutional cultural competencies and accountabilities to Indigenous communities, we have heard their commitment to continue to advocate and work alongside us.

4347 I would like to acknowledge our allies and partners who have stepped up to this challenging work, with special recognition and respect for the leadership from our colleagues at ADVANCE and the Black music community.

4348 Let us not look to the status quo to guide how we move forward together as a greater Community. It is long past time to support and create an Indigenous music ecosystem that nurtures the well‑being of our artists, our families and communities while enriching the world with the brilliance and wisdom of Indigenous stories.

4349 Let us harness this incredible opportunity to make decisions that are aligned with our true values, address inequities and injustices, invest in potential and make real change, change that cannot be undone, change that will shape the world for our grandchildren and future generations.

4350 Miigwetch.

4351 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much for joining us and thank you for your presentation. I know that Panel Members are really looking forward to having a discussion together, so we will jump right in.

4352 I will turn things over to Vice‑Chair Scott. Thank you.

4353 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Great. I’d like to thank you as well. You certainly packed a lot of powerful messages into your presentation this morning.

4354 I’d like to start with a question ‑‑ so I thought you were incredibly gracious in sharing your thanks for those that you described as allies or supporters, but I also heard you loud and clear on the issue of sovereignty and that being kind of the fundamental nature of the relationship.

4355 So with those two elements as context, what is the right mix of Indigenous‑run initiatives versus mandates on non‑Indigenous organizations to support Indigenous music? Is there a blend that would be appropriate or is it really just a step towards full Indigenous sovereignty over funding for Indigenous creation, promotion, et cetera?

4356 MS. KISH: I will jump in real quick. I think in all things, we are looking for balance. I think that we’re not looking to swing really hard in one direction or another. What we’re looking for is better ways to work together and more meaningful partnerships, longer‑term partnerships that need to be established between Indigenous‑owned music spaces, organizations, and artists ‑‑ and the mainstream spaces. I think there is a lot to be learned from each other, and a lot to be gained by working together.

4357 And at the same time, I think that that cannot replace the importance of our own autonomy and self‑determination in running our own programs, administering our own funding, and amplifying artists in the ways that we know are appropriate, and in deep relationship with protocol ‑‑ and deep relationship with our own communities and Elders and in a way that I know that the mainstream cannot do now and may never be able to do.

4358 MR. GREYEYES: And I have just got to say that I am a product of 18 years of working in the nonprofit sector, and so, the duplication of administration for me means that we’re going to have more full time jobs for Indigenous people working in the music industry, and we need that. We need them to learn the ins and outs. It takes a lot of time to understand what’s happening in the music industry ‑‑ even longer to understand what’s happen here, in the broadcasting system ‑‑ and without the opportunity to work full time, we’re simply not going to see a lot of development in the Indigenous music community.

4359 And one last thing ‑‑ I also run a nonprofit music festival. We need multiple sources of funding to make the ends meet, and so, I am looking for ‑‑ like ShoShona said, balance, and the opportunity to have our own Indigenous‑specific funds, along with opportunities to work with the existing funding organizations, commercial broadcasters, and online undertakings. Because it really takes a village to raise us up. Maybe that’s not the right analogy, but like I said, my point is that we need multiple options, and introducing supports directed towards Indigenous people and Indigenous languages is going to be integral.

4360 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you. My next question is a two‑parter because I know I won’t get too many questions, so I’m going to combine some.

4361 In the online world that we’re in now, when we talk about funding and supports, what are the types of initiatives that ‘get the best bang for the buck’? So, in other words, what are the types of activities that the funding should support?

4362 And then the second part is, what is your vision for the IMO, and do you see that as ‑‑ is the IMO going to be the organization that undertakes those initiatives? Or is it more of a flow‑through, a kind of a hub through which funding flows to support a variety of initiatives?

4363 MR. GREYEYES: So, I think, for me personally, a lot of the Indigenous artists in Canada are payable considered emerging. And so, I’m looking for opportunities to do more artistic development ‑‑ more songwriting. I was just a part of a partnership with the SOCAN foundation Amazon Music, in which we brought in I think 16 Indigenous artists to Toronto, and they spent the week just writing songs. I think songwriting is the entry‑point to developing a peer support network ‑‑ a nationwide peer support network that artists can rely on to develop not only their artistic skills, but their business skills.

4364 And for the IMO, I think we want to have a hybrid approach and that we deliver some residency similar to the songwriting camps and the artist development camps, but also having funds to support the creation of Indigenous content, mostly for Indigenous artists because we recognize that Indigenous radio needs a lot more money. And Indigenous ‑‑ like the Wolastoqey organization, they definitely need more funds than we currently have in mind, and so, again, a hybrid approach is what I envision.

4365 ShoShona, do you want to add anything?

4366 MS. KISH: No ‑‑ only that I think that part of the role of the IMO will be to support emerging organizations that will also provide programming. And we’re looking at both the artistic side and the administrative side, as Alan referred to, because I think there is all of this untapped potential in our communities, and when we start investing in that, I think we aren’t even aware of what’s possible.

4367 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you both.

4368 My last question. You’re one of numerous voices that we’ve heard raise the issue of gatekeepers and barriers to entry. Are there any specific practices you can shine a light on that are being used to keep you on the other side of the gate?

4369 MR. GREYEYES: I think right now, we have seen in multiple presentations that oftentimes our counterparts and relatives in funding and broadcasting, and also on the nonprofit side, lump Indigenous people in with equity‑deserving groups on the Canadian boat to row, and so, what we really need again is for them to recognize that Indigenous people have their own boat and we have our own equity‑deserving groups that we are trying to share or trying to service, and specifically, I think, like, what the existing funding structures rely on is a nationwide ‑‑ and this is for emerging artists ‑‑ to develop emerging artists, they are relying on a nationwide network of nonprofits with their own funding that can match contributions from the national funders. And so, for us in the Indigenous music community, we really don’t have that nationwide network yet. And so, that’s what we’re looking for support in developing.

4370 Also, on the artistic side, I think it’s really hard for a lot of Indigenous families to afford to make investments in careers. And so, again, just to start a process of matching contributions that are currently available, it makes it really hard for us to enter the system and to participate.

4371 MS. KISH: I also will add that I think that the lack of cultural competencies within the organizations that are currently delivering funding and programming is a real barrier. And I think that, as our relationships deepen and we continue to, you know, travel this path of doing this good work, we will get to know each other better and we will get to understand how to better meet in the centre. And I think this is why organizations like the Indigenous Screen Office and the Indigenous Music Office are so important, because it creates that constant touchpoint for those relationships to be developed.

4372 Right now, as I mentioned, our stories are almost exclusively being curated by non‑Indigenous people. And what happens, for example, when that happens, we don’t get to hear a whole world of music because it’s being curated from a very particular aesthetic that is from without our communities. As soon as that comes into our communities at festivals like Alan’s, for instance, I think we get to hear all of these sounds and we get to hear all of these stories that otherwise are being silenced. And so, bringing that curatorial autonomy into our community and having mainstream festivals and organizations work with the intelligence in our community, bringing Indigenous people into those organizations to make curatorial decisions and work alongside of them, I think will be of great benefit both to our artists who are emerging into this space, but also to Canadians who, you know, need the magic of our stories.

4373 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you very much.

4374 Those are my questions, Madam Chair.

4375 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much.

4376 We’ll go right to Commissioner Levy.

4377 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Good morning and welcome. I would like to know a little bit more about the barriers that you face and I would like to combine it with a question that has arisen many times. Organizations like FACTOR and Musicaction have been suggested that could leverage their programs to better assist Indigenous artists. Do you see an Indigenous Music Office being separate and apart, or working with, or being part of in some way those organizations? And what has been your own experience trying to raise funding that might shed light on those relationships?

4378 MR. GREYEYES: I think we envision a complementary role to FACTOR and Musicaction, having an Indigenous fund that could provide the matching dollars that are currently available in the system. Again, I want to reiterate the fact that we are looking for an opportunity to build our own table, and I love the idea of developing admin talent through the nonprofit sector. I believe that the 12 positions that we currently have envisioned for the Indigenous Music Office, if it is to manage a fund, would again give us the opportunity to develop admin talent, which is going to strengthen the Canadian music industry and broadcasting system, I think. Like, more Indigenous representation on Boards, more Indigenous representation in executive roles across the country will, again, make Canada and the broadcasting system stronger.

4379 MS. KISH: I will share a brief story. I started an adventure of running a record label with my dear friend and colleague Amanda Rheaume, and it is an Indigenous‑focused record label called Ishk?dé Records, and we’ve been working with a beautiful and very important new artist by the name of Aysanabee. And his first record was nominated for a Juno and shortlisted for a Polaris, and he has since perhaps had the busiest touring schedule that I’ve ever seen. But when we went to the system to support his upcoming recording project, we were unsuccessful ‑‑ and this is coming from a place of a reasonable amount of experience, and at the table and preparing those things professionally and appropriately, and I believe that he is going to be one of the most important artists in the Canadian landscape as he continues to grow. But I think that it ‑‑ just as an example of the power of his work, which I encourage you to listen to ‑‑ his work ‑‑ was not successfully able to navigate the current funding systems for the support required.

4380 And I think that I bring this up only as, like, an anecdotal but important example of the system not working for us. And I believe that it’s working for many people, but it is not currently working for Indigenous people. So, we are really interested in building our own tables and looking at how we can address these issues within the current bodies, but also establishing space that is guided by Indigenous community, guided by Indigenous leadership, and guided by Indigenous intelligence. And I think that we will see incredible shifts in this space when that happens.

4381 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you.

4382 MR. GREYEYES: I also want to add one more thing. I work with a powwow drum group called Northern Cree. They are a nine‑time Grammy‑nominated drum group. The existing system doesn’t really fit their reality. I mean, there’s anywhere between 12 to 18 singers that are in recording ‑‑ need to be participating in the recording process. They also live across Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba, and so, accommodations and mileage alone puts us outside of the current supports that are available at FACTOR. And so, I think FACTOR definitely wants to support powwow recordings, round dance recordings, Inuit throat singing recordings ‑‑ but the cost of getting those done currently exceeds the limits of contributions that FACTOR is able to make.

4383 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you. That is exactly the kind of colour that I think we wanted to add to the discussion. Thank you.

4384 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thak you so much. Let’s go to Vice‑Chair Barin.

4385 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you, and welcome Ms. Kish and Mr. Greyeyes.

4386 I am going to focus less on the funding now, and move to the actual online platforms that we are talking about in this proceeding.

4387 So, you indicated that Indigenous artists have relationships with online platforms. And these platforms would like the Commission to consider their current investments in support of Canadian content when establishing a new contribution framework. Could you speak to some of the current initiatives or investments that online platforms have currently, that support Indigenous music?

4388 MR. GREYEYES: Yeah, I could just jump in here really quickly. Spotify for ‑‑ I think it’s been ‑‑ I can't remember how long it’s been, but they have an Indigenous playlist and they invite artists from across the country to curate that playlist, which again, with my work with Northern Cree, they were able to curate a powwow playlist and take powwow music to larger audiences. Already, though, powwow on Spotify and Apple and Amazon have a sizeable audience, which is why we definitely targeted more because powwow and round dance don’t have a place at commercial radio ‑‑ or in the existing broadcasting system, but again, Spotify and Apple and Amazon give us an opportunity to reach our audiences.

4389 I also referenced a songwriting camp that Amazon Music has been involved in, and so they were one of the partners. They made, I think, financial contributions to the project, and also brought in two music producers from Los Angeles that helped the songwriters and producers that were participating realize what the next stages in their careers could look like. They also presented a synchronization briefing and mentioned the fact that their sync budgets, just for music alone for advertising, is quite significant.

4390 And so, again, that was an example ‑‑ one example of one of the streaming services giving us access ‑‑ or giving us the ability to deliver programming, but also helping our artists to identify what the next stages in their careers could look like.

4391 Actually, one more thing I will note is Apple Music also offered Northern Cree an opportunity to get their music mixed for Dolby Surround Sound. So again, it would have been an incredible opportunity but we were unable to get it done in time; we were just really overwhelmed with the amount of work we were doing around the project.

4392 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Okay, thank you. Thank you very much for that answer.

4393 Back to the Chair.

4394 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Vice‑Chair.

4395 And kudos on the example involving Manitoba and Saskatchewan in response to a question from Commissioner Levy, because that’s her region, so I think she probably very much appreciated that.

4396 We would like to turn things back over to you, to share with us any concluding thoughts, or if there is anything that we haven’t spoken about in our discussion. If there is anything you would like to add, now would be a good time to do that. Thank you so much.

4397 MR. GREYEYES: I guess my only comment that I would like to get on the record is, for me, reconciliation is the process of strengthening Indigenous families. And so, that’s what we are trying to do with all of our projects and our services at the Indigenous Music Office.

4398 MS. KISH: I just want to say, as we go through all of these discussions, one of the things that is really foremost in my mind is that, you know, our stories ‑‑ the stories that we are telling together ‑‑ they are magic, because they tell us our history. They tell us where we have been. They tell us who we are right now. And they tell us where we can go together and who we might be together. So, I’m just ‑‑ I’m excited to be in this discussion that helps us look more closely and practically at how we can ensure that all of those stories get heard, because when they are all heard, we can imagine ourselves in a much more wholesome, much like in our truest potential.

4399 And so, that’s really why I am here today, and I think that that is why we’re all here today, and I just wanted to say thank you for this good work, and I look forward to the ongoing conversations.

4400 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much. And that is a beautiful and uplifting note to end on. We have “our stories are magic” on the public record now, so that is great. Thank you again. Really appreciate you joining us today.

4401 MS. KISH: Miigwetch.

4402 THE SECRETARY: Thank you. We will now take a 10‑minute break and be back at 10:41. Thank you.

‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 10:30 a.m.

‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 10:41 a.m.

4403 LA SECRÉTAIRE : Bienvenue. Bon retour.

4404 Nous entendrons maintenant la présentation de Makusham Musique Inc.

4405 S'il vous plaît vous présenter et votre collègue, et vous pouvez débuter.

Presentation

4406 MME JOURDAIN : Kuei utshimashkueut Kuei utshimaut, Tshe pushukatitinau kassinu etashiek. Ne mishta minueniten kie nitashinen ute taiat minekuiat tshetshi peshtinamat nitaimunan.

4407 Bonjour, Madame la Présidente, Madame la Vice‑présidente, Monsieur le Vice‑président, Mesdames les Conseillères.

4408 Je suis Nelly Jourdain. Je suis Innue, membre de la communauté de Uashat mak Mani‑utenam, et présidente, directrice générale de Makusham Musique.

4409 Je suis accompagnée aujourd’hui de M. Mathieu McKenzie, Innu de la communauté de Uashat mak Mani‑utenam, cofondateur de la maison de disque Makusham Musique et membre du groupe de musique Maten, et de Mme Michelle Corbu, avocate pour le conseil Innu Takuaikan Uashat mak Mani‑utenam.

4410 Makusham Musique est une maison de disque indépendante située dans la communauté de Mani‑utenam, sur la Côte Nord au Québec. Elle est détenue par Florent Vollant, Nelly Jourdain, Mathieu McKenzie et Kim Fontaine, tous Innus de Uashat mak Mani‑utenam. Nous offrons des services d’accompagnement aux artistes, et nos activités entourent la production d’albums musicaux, la production de spectacles, la gérance d’artistes et la gestion d’événements autochtones.

4411 Nous intervenons devant vous en tant que professionnels de l’industrie de la musique et aussi comme artistes autochtones au Québec et membres d’une Première Nation souveraine qui possède un droit inhérent à l’autodétermination.

4412 Nous tenons à vous mentionner que nos remarques aujourd’hui n’engagent que Makusham Musique. Nous n’avons pas la prétention de parler au nom de tous les artistes autochtones du Québec et du Canada.

4413 Les statistiques démontrent que la part de musique autochtone sur les ondes des radios commerciales se situerait à moins de 1 pour cent. Le fait que la musique autochtone est quasi‑inexistante sur les ondes des radios commerciales, que la réglementation actuelle ne permet pas d’assurer la présence de la musique autochtone à la radio, et le fait que le financement accordé pour la création de contenu autochtone soit très difficile à recevoir sont autant de facteurs qui démontrent que les artistes autochtones ne bénéficient actuellement ni de la même reconnaissance, ni de la même légitimité que celles accordées aux artistes francophones et anglophones du pays.

4414 Nous sommes dans la Décennie internationale des langues autochtones 2022‑2032. Les langues et les cultures autochtones sont millénaires et elles sont au cœur de l’identité de nos peuples. Elles constituent une richesse qu’il faut préserver. Les langues autochtones sont en déclin et en danger de disparition.

4415 La musique constitue un atout précieux pour préserver et redonner vie à nos langues. Il est impératif de créer des outils et des initiatives à long terme afin de revitaliser, maintenir et renforcer les langues autochtones.

4416 Nous saluons le travail qui a été fait par le CRTC de distinguer le contenu autochtone comme une catégorie à part entière. Il est vital de maintenir cette distinction.

4417 Actuellement, les artistes et les entreprises autochtones en musique ont accès aux fonds existants tels que FACTOR, Musicaction et le Conseil des arts et lettres du Canada, mais ils demeurent confrontés à de nombreux défis. En effet, ils doivent compétitionner avec l’entièreté du bassin francophone et anglophone, et le pourcentage des projets acceptés est très minime. Pour que les artistes autochtones aient les mêmes opportunités que les artistes francophones et anglophones, il est nécessaire de repenser le système actuel en matière de contributions.

4418 Makusham Musique suggère donc la création d’un nouveau fonds indépendant, un Fonds de musique autochtone. Ce fonds serait entièrement consacré aux artistes et aux entreprises de musique autochtone. Il aurait pour objectif de créer et de développer le contenu autochtone, d’accompagner les artistes dans leurs projets, de faire émerger de nouveaux talents et de rencontrer les standards de l’industrie. Ceci constituerait une assurance pour nous d’avoir un fonds culturellement sécuritaire et des programmes adaptés à nos réalités.

4419 Conformément au principe d’autodétermination, ce fonds serait dirigé par et pour des Autochtones issus du domaine de l’industrie de la musique et qui connaissent les réalités du milieu. Il sera très important que ce fonds soit représentatif de tous les peuples autochtones au Canada et tienne compte de la particularité des Premières Nations au Québec qui parlent français. Ce fonds permettrait aussi de remplir adéquatement les objectifs de la politique canadienne de radiodiffusion.

4420 Le Fonds de musique autochtone devra recevoir des contributions de base initiales autant de la part des entreprises en ligne que des radiodiffuseurs traditionnels. Leurs contributions respectives devront être équitables et significatives afin de permettre l’essor de nos artistes et la diffusion de notre culture.

4421 Des fonds dédiés sont nécessaires et inévitables, mais le CRTC doit également imposer un quota minimal de 5 pour cent de musique autochtone aux radiodiffuseurs, comme c’est le cas pour les quotas de musique francophone et anglophone. L’un ne va pas sans l’autre. Sans les fonds, il n’y a pas de création de contenu, et sans quota imposé, il n’y a pas de diffusion.

4422 Les artistes autochtones sont des ambassadeurs de notre culture et de nos langues. Ils contribuent à rallumer la fierté pour nos peuples qui ont besoin de se voir représenter à la télévision, au cinéma et à la radio. Nous sommes optimistes d’entrer dans une nouvelle ère, celle d’une réconciliation qui passe, entre autres, à travers la musique et la représentativité des voix autochtones. Nous espérons qu’à travers la modernisation de son cadre réglementaire, le CRTC pose des gestes concrets et contribue à une réelle réconciliation.

4423 Nous vous remercions pour votre écoute et sommes prêts à répondre à vos questions en français.

4424 (Langue autochtone parlée / Indigenous language spoken)

4425 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Bon matin. Merci beaucoup pour votre présentation ce matin et aussi pour votre participation dans notre instance et notre audience. Alors, merci.

4426 On va commencer avec la vice‑présidente de la Radiodiffusion. Madame Barin. Merci.

4427 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Merci beaucoup, Madame la Présidente.

4428 Alors, bienvenue, Madame Jourdain, Monsieur McKenzie, Madame Corbu. Je tiens à vous remercier d'avoir participé et d'être ici aujourd'hui avec nous. J'ai quelques questions qui ont lien avec les propositions que vous avez faites ce matin et aussi dans vos interventions écrites.

4429 La première a lien avec ce que vous proposez à court terme, qui est la création d'un volet musique autochtone, au sein de Musicaction et FACTOR, qui serait administré par un département spécifique géré par les peuples autochtones.

4430 Alors, selon vous, quel serait un montant équitable et significatif pour mettre en œuvre un volet spécifique pour la musique autochtone au sein de Musicaction et FACTOR?

4431 Me CORBU : Merci pour la question. On souhaiterait revenir aussi sur cette proposition‑là qu'on a faite dans le mémoire.

4432 Quand on a écrit le mémoire, on réfléchissait à toutes les avenues qui étaient possibles pour accorder le plus de fonds possible au contenu autochtone, puis il y avait une des questions justement qui parlait des fonds existants et comment ces fonds existants pouvaient être améliorés. Donc, c'était une des avenues qu'on avait considérées, qu'une partie de ces fonds‑là soit mise de côté pour le contenu autochtone, puis que ce fonds soit dirigé par et pour des Autochtones.

4433 Mais je souhaiterais réitérer le fait que ce n'est pas la solution idéale. Nous, ce qu'on souhaiterait, c'est la mise en place d'un fonds indépendant, un fonds de musique autochtone qui, conformément au principe d'autodétermination, soit géré par et pour les Autochtones, un fonds qui serait donc distinct de Musicaction et de FACTOR. Ces entreprises‑là ont bénéficié depuis des décennies de la représentativité pour leurs groupes, c'est‑à‑dire les francophones et les anglophones. Ils ont des droits linguistiques qui sont protégés par la Constitution.

4434 Mais les peuples autochtones ont aussi des droits constitutionnels protégés par l'article 35, et puis, parmi ces droits‑là, il y a le droit inhérent à l'autodétermination. Donc, pour nous, ce serait vraiment la solution envisageable.

4435 Et puisqu'on est dans une ère de réconciliation, pour nous, le CRTC fait déjà un premier pas, avec cette consultation‑là, à mettre le contenu autochtone à part entière. Donc, on veut vraiment se diriger vers cette voie‑là.

4436 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Merci beaucoup, Madame Corbu.

4437 Alors, je vais transposer ma question à votre proposition d'établir un nouveau fonds. Est‑ce que vous êtes en mesure de faire une recommandation quant au montant qui serait adéquat pour fonder un tel fonds?

4438 Me CORBU : Oui. Donc, c'est sûr que c'est difficile de se prononcer quand on n'a pas tous les chiffres encore qui vont être disponibles, mais on a entendu au courant de la dernière semaine, ce matin encore, la possibilité d'un 5 pour cent. Je sais que certains l'ont proposé par rapport au 5 pour cent de la population autochtone au Canada. Il y en a d'autres qui ont aussi mis les groupes en quête d'équité aussi dans ce 5 pour cent là.

4439 Comme je l'ai dit, c'est vraiment distinct, et on pense que 5 pour cent ce n'est pas assez. Il y a un rattrapage à faire avec Musicaction/FACTOR, puis il faut compter sur ce rattrapage‑là, qui demande plus de fonds. Donc, on estime un minimum de 10 pour cent, mais ça pourrait aller jusqu'à 20 pour cent, et c'est sûr que le plus de fonds, le mieux pour nous. Donc, ça se situerait à ce niveau‑là.

4440 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : O.K. Alors, ce niveau, un 5 pour cent c'est un bon départ, mais vous diriez jusqu'à 20 pour cent?

4441 Me CORBU : Non. C'est un 10 pour cent est un bon départ.

4442 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Parfait. Merci pour la clarification.

4443 Alors, dans votre réplique écrite, vous mentionnez qu'un fonds de musique autochtone devrait être développé à la suite d'une consultation efficace et rapide. Et je sais que vous avez quand même soumis les recommandations d'une consultation que vous avez faites autour de ce processus.

4444 Alors, pourriez‑vous, s'il vous plaît, élaborer sur la façon dont, concrètement, vous entrevoyez une telle consultation?

4445 Me CORBU : Donc, pour nous, puis Nelly l'a dit dans sa présentation, c'est vraiment important que tous les peuples autochtones soient représentés dans cette consultation‑là. On a entendu les personnes avant nous, qui est l'Office national de musique autochtone, qui, je pense, se prête volontaire à être ce fonds‑là, mais on veut vraiment que les Premières Nations au Québec qui parlent français soient représentées.

4446 Donc, ça prendrait une consultation à court terme, parce qu'on ne veut pas quelque chose qui s'éternise dans le temps puis que le CRTC prenne cette excuse‑là pour donner les fonds à FACTOR ou Musicaction, parce qu'on comprend que ça serait peut‑être la voie de la facilité. Mais on estime que d'ici la fin de l'année prochaine, si on pouvait... si le CRTC peut nous soutenir à rassembler tous les peuples autochtones au Canada, les artistes autochtones, les créateurs de contenu, puis toutes les organisations autochtones dans le domaine de la musique, on serait capable de se parler et puis de venir avec une solution, décider quel fonds finalement devrait être institué.

4447 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Alors, ça serait avec la participation ou collaboration du CRTC que vous voyez que ça serait...

4448 Me CORBU : Oui.

4449 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : O.K. Merci.

4450 Alors, dans votre mémoire, vous avez clairement élaboré une vision pour la mise en place d'un quota de diffusion de 5 pour cent de musique autochtone. Alors, je voulais juste vous remercier de ce mémoire qui était très complet.

4451 Mais aussi dans votre intervention, sur le cadre de contributions, vous recommandez que des actions concrètes soient prises afin de soutenir la sauvegarde des cultures et des langues autochtones.

4452 Au‑delà du financement et d'un quota de diffusion, avez‑vous d'autres recommandations pour le Conseil sur ce point, sur la sauvegarde des cultures et des langues autochtones?

4453 M. McKENZIE : Ce qu'on remarque au Canada, au Québec, partout en fait, ce qui est important dans cette démarche‑là, de cette sauvegarde des langues qui sont en perte de vitalité, c'est de voir la représentativité autochtone dans les organisations. L'organisation qui a parlé avant nous l'a spécifié, puis moi encore, c'est quelque chose, je pense, qui est important. Si vous voulez... Si le CRTC, le gouvernement fédéral, les provinces veulent être en appui dans cette démarche, je pense que c'est important d'avoir des Autochtones à cette table ici. Dans toutes les tables de travail, dans les comités, on n'est pas assez représentés. On n'a pas d'oreilles, des yeux, des bouches dans ces organisations‑là pour exprimer la façon dont nous, on voudrait que ça se fasse.

4454 Trop souvent, c'est d'autre monde qui décide, des non‑Autochtones qui décident notre avenir. Puis ce qui est important maintenant, je pense, si on veut aller vraiment dans une réelle réconciliation dans le futur, c'est d'impliquer les Autochtones dans ces organisations‑là. Puis après ça, eux vont vous aider, ils vont vous dire les réalités qu'on vit dans les communautés, puis comment qu'on peut aider à la sauvegarde de la langue. On en a des idées. Ce n'est pas ça qui manque. Il manque une place où est‑ce qu'on pourrait siéger, où est‑ce que les décisions se prennent, puis il manque des fonds. Il manque de l'argent pour ça.

4455 C'est la façon dont moi, je vois dans le future comment qu'on pourrait avancer dans cette démarche‑là pour essayer de ramener ça à une équité un petit peu plus 2023, je dirais, dans les années futures, là.

4456 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Bien entendu. Merci beaucoup, M. McKenzie.

4457 Alors, j'ai une dernière question pour vous. Vu qu'on parle des plateformes en ligne, j'aimerais connaître votre expérience avec les plateformes en ligne, et surtout en appui à la musique autochtone.

4458 M. McKENZIE : Quelque chose, un gros manquement de ces plateformes en ligne, là, qui sont en ce moment offertes dans l'industrie... Moi, je suis artiste, je fais partie du groupe Maten. Quand je rentre ma musique dans ces plateformes‑là, je ne peux pas cocher ma langue. Il n'y a pas de coche qui dit c'est des langues autochtones.

4459 Ce n'est pas normal en 2023 que tu ne peux pas cocher tes origines. Ça n'a pas de sens. Je mets ma musique Maten; il faut que je coche que je chante en français, puis ce n'est pas du français, c'est de l'innu‑aimun. Ça, je ne comprends pas ça, comment ça que je ne peux pas cocher mes origines. Comment qu'on peut...

4460 Juste ça en partant, c'est un gros manquement de ces plateformes‑là. Maten, il faut que je coche français, puis je ne chante pas en français, je chante en innu‑aimun, dans ma langue, une langue millénaire. On peut‑tu leur dire à ces plateformes‑là de donner ces options‑là, au moins écrire « langues autochtones » s'ils ne sont pas capables d'écrire toutes les langues qui existent au Canada? Au moins là, le monde, ils m'écoutent, ils entendent l'innu‑aimun, puis j'ai coché français. Dans les algorithmes, ça marque ça. Là, tu voyages là‑dedans, puis ce n'est même pas ma propre langue, ma propre culture.

4461 Ça c'est une chose, puis il y a encore beaucoup à faire, mais on peux‑tu commencer pour être capables de cocher les vraies choses que nous sommes?

4462 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Merci. C'est quand même un exemple très parlant et très concret.

4463 M. McKENZIE : Je te donne un exemple. Oui. Oui.

4464 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Je vais re‑passer maintenant la parole à la présidente. Merci beaucoup pour vos réponses à mes questions.

4465 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Merci beaucoup.

4466 Puis on va continuer avec la conseillère Levy. Merci.

4467 CONSEILLÈRE LEVY : Bonjour. Vous affirmez qu'il est difficile pour les artistes autochtones de bénéficier de financement de FACTOR et Musicaction. Pouvez‑vous, s'il vous plaît, élaborer sur ce point?

4468 MME JOURDAIN : Oui. D'abord, nous, on vient d'ouvrir Makusham Musique, ça fait deux ans, puis on a déposé à Musicaction pour la première fois. Et puis on a... Premièrement, avec le groupe Maten, on a fait un dépôt, puis la première chose qu'on a eue c'est un refus, un refus qu'on ne comprenait pas vraiment, puis on se disait... On est allé vérifier pourquoi on avait été refusés, puis le refus c'était un peu... ce n'était pas vraiment au niveau du produit, parce que la musique, on avait des commentaires sur la musique. Ce n'était pas là qu'on avait perdu des points. Mais les points qu'on avait perdus, c'est au niveau administratif, sur le fait qu'on n'avait pas assez élaboré dans certaines questions, on n'avait pas assez développé. Puis moi, je ne comprenais pas ça.

4469 Moi, le français, ce n'est pas ma première langue, premièrement. Je m'exprime bien en français, mais j'ai un mode de raisonnement dans ma tête en innu. Ça fait que mon mode de raisonnement, quand je parle, je vais droit au but. Je ne fais pas de flafla autour pour parler de c'est quoi que je veux. Ça fait que pour moi, c'était comme je ne comprenais pas. Il a fallu qu'on aille en appel puis tout ça.

4470 Mais on a eu d'autres projets qu'on a eu le financement. Mais c'est juste pour dire que sur tout le financement que Musicaction a, le pourcentage de projets acceptés autochtones est très, très minime, t'sais. Puis des fois... C'est juste pour dire que des fois c'est dur d'être en compétition avec tous les artistes francophones du Québec et au Canada aussi. C'est la même chose pour FACTOR, t'sais.

4471 Ça fait que nous, c'est pour ça qu'on réclame qu'on ait un fonds distinct, que nous, on pourra, avec nos réalités, plus adapter à notre culture, puis, en même temps, avoir un bassin de créateurs, de producteurs autochtones, puis qu'on se compétitionnent entre nous. Parce que sinon, c'est comme... c'est trop large, là.

4472 CONSEILLÈRE LEVY : Merci.

4473 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Merci beaucoup. Merci aussi d'avoir partagé un exemple avec nous, parce que c'est plus clair avec l'exemple. Alors, merci.

4474 Alors, on vous laisse le dernier mot si vous voulez ajouter quelque chose ou nous laisser avec un message clé. Merci.

4475 M. McKENZIE : Message clé. Je pense que les organisations actuellement, elles font ce qu'elles peuvent. Musicaction, FACTOR, toutes ces organisations‑là, l'ADISQ, elles font dans leur capacité. Mais encore une fois, je pense qu'un fonds dédié que nous, on gérerait par nous‑mêmes, consulter toutes les provinces, avoir des représentants dans cette organisation‑là, je pense que c'est une solution qui serait envisageable puis vivrait longtemps dans la démarche.

4476 Ce qu'il ne faut pas oublier, ce qu'il faut que vous compreniez, quand vous diffusez des artistes autochtones par la chanson, par la télévision, par le cinéma, peu importe, c'est pour nous aider à guérir des blessures. Je ne ferai pas l'histoire ce matin, mais vous la connaissez.

4477 On est blessés. Notre identité a voulu être éteinte dans l'histoire du Canada. Quand tu diffuses une musique des artistes à la télévision, tu nous donnes un peuple qui écoute, tu rallumes la flamme de nos enfants, de nos parents, de nos grands‑mères, de toutes nos familles à rallumer la fierté autochtone.

4478 J'ose espérer qu'on va avoir cette place‑là qu'on mérite dans l'industrie, parce que vous ne pouvez pas savoir comment vous nous aidez à chaque fois que vous diffusez une chanson autochtone à la radio, un artiste à la télévision, un acteur au cinéma. Tu ne peux pas savoir comment tu nous aides dans notre guérison, parce que les gens, ça rallume la fierté autochtone. C'est ce qui est important à savoir, ce message de réelle réconciliation qu'on veut, parce qu'on mérite cette place‑là.

4479 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Merci beaucoup. Merci pour votre passion. On a bien écouté, et vous êtes bien entendus. Merci.

4480 LA SECRÉTAIRE : Merci beaucoup.

4481 We will now hear the next presenter, ADVANCE, Canada's Black Music Business Collective.

‑‑‑ Pause

4482 THE SECRETARY: When you are ready, please introduce yourself and you may begin.

Presentation

4483 MS. MYERS: Good morning, Chair and Commission Panel. My name is Keziah Myers and I am the Executive Director of ADVANCE, Canada’s Black Music Business Collective.

4484 ADVANCE represents the interests of Black Canadians working in all sectors of the Canadian music industry and those professionally involved in the Canadian music ecosystem. We focus on dismantling Anti‑Black Racism and eliminating systemic barriers within the music industries.

4485 First, let me thank the Commission today for inviting us to take part in the proceedings and the regulatory process of the Online Streaming Act. We believe that there can be no real diversity in Canada’s broadcasting system without diverse representation at every level, and that certainly does include taking our seat at the table today for a once‑in‑a‑lifetime regulatory process in the Canadian cultural landscape.

4486 ADVANCE, in collaboration with the CRTC, has an opportunity to bring about a transformation that will improve and propel not only Black Canadian creatives and professionals in Canada but the Canadian music industry as a whole.

4487 Many of the themes you will hear us discuss today are echoed by other historically excluded groups, including the Indigenous Music Office, the Black Screen Office, BIPOC Film and TV, and the Racial Equity Media Collective. These themes support the need for contributions to go to a fund that focuses on the training and upskilling of Black professionals and creatives in the sector and the interest in seeing contributions go towards initiatives that support sustainable core funding.

4488 The Online Streaming Act is a historical piece of legislation for our community. It in fact marks the first time “Black” is uniquely identified in Canadian federal legislative history. This is a special relationship and Canada's Black community has a special relationship with production, especially in music. The regulatory results must follow the path laid out in the legislation, especially when it comes to music funding distribution, priority and engagement. Let’s attempt to do this right, together, by reviewing best practices and focusing on what will be successful moving forward.

4489 Historically, there has been a gap between the music funded by the Canadian cultural funding system and Black music artists. Funders have not found success in reaching the community. ADVANCE’s research shows that 98.4 percent of Black music creators and industry professionals have never applied for funding from public or private granting organizations. Of those that have applied, 82.7 percent were unsuccessful.

4490 Despite the existence of other funds, there remains an overwhelming lack of trust due to years of neglect and systemic disparities. Trust is essential for fostering a collaborative and supportive environment. Furthermore, the lack of Black representation in the workforces of many organizations hinders their ability to comprehend and address the distinct requirements for upskilling, business development and retooling within the Black music professional community.

4491 Contributions towards sector development are essential to the important work that CRTC wants to do. Therefore, we support the sentiments that have called for initial base contributions.

4492 A big part of why I got into the music industry at all was because I wanted to see people closest to me succeed. Growing up being closely connected to names like Maestro Fresh Wes, Deborah Cox, Sharon Riley of the Faith Chorale gave me a unique perspective of who was supported and who wasn't. Why was their music so successful abroad? Why didn't Canada treat them the same? How come their revenue didn't match their level of success?

4493 I was saddened by what I saw in terms of their resources and success trajectories. Seeing this so young and being privy to some of the hard realities directed me into a space that required me to figure out a way to build my own skills to support their music development. This sector support, therefore, would create more executives like me, someone currently considered an anomaly.

4494 Currently, the Canadian music industry has one Black person in a top role for a major international company. There is one Black programmer in country music in North America. There are zero Black people in top leadership roles at the MIAs, zero Black suppliers in live music for production, crew, live tech, or e‑trades. There are zero Black‑led national service organizations, zero Black‑owned radio stations, and zero Black‑led booking agencies.

4495 With sustainable core funding, we would be able to research and properly address these realities. We see the need for dedicated initiatives that support music development both in creative and administrative spaces with an interest to develop more.

4496 Such a fund is not only a step towards rectifying historical disparities, but it is also instrumental in promoting a more inclusive and equitable music ecosystem.

4497 The value of Black music in the Canadian music industry is not only culturally significant, but it is also economically substantial. In 2022, streaming subscription revenues in Canada reached over $520 million. With Black music constituting approximately 65 per cent of streaming revenue, it is estimated that this alone could account for nearly $340 million. This substantial contribution underscores the undeniable influence and popularity of Black music across various genres, and recognizing the impact of Black music is crucial for fostering a fair and equitable music industry. By doing so, not only can we support and elevate Canadian Black artists, but we can also contribute to the overall vibrancy and diversity of the Canadian music landscape.

4498 ADVANCE has already been successful in identifying industry diversity issues, earning trust, and building relationships with the Canadian music industry and reaching Black communities across the country. In partnership with municipalities and provinces, we have reached over a hundred Black music companies and distributed envelopes of over $200,000. You see, the cultural funding system should be designed to reflect and serve the diversity in the Canadian music industry. ADVANCE is ready to work with the CRTC to find better ways to support and celebrate Black Canadian music industry professionals and artists.

4499 Thank you for your time, and I welcome any questions you may have.

4500 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much and thank you to ADVANCE for participating in the proceedings. Thank you as well for sharing your personal story with us and what brought you here today.

4501 I will turn things over to Commissioner Naidoo. Thank you.

4502 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Hi. Thank you so much for being here today.

4503 I wanted to ask you what percentage of the initial base contributions you feel should be allocated to the Radio Starmaker fund and also the Broadcasting Participation Fund, and what percentage should be given to each of those in your view?

4504 MS. MYERS: So we have heard a bit before from those that have gone before me that five per cent off the top is a number, but not necessarily the number. It is a good start, as, you know, my two fellow music organizations mentioned before. And maybe I shouldn't even say a good start: it is a start.

4505 We're talking about equity here. And when we're talking about equity, we have seen visual descriptions of someone who can see and somebody who can't see. And so if we're looking at that, we do have to review year over year based on data that we have to understand can that person see now. Can that person see yet. And so I would say, you know, five per cent is at minimum a start. But to review all of the opportunities we have to understand the true realities and nuances is really important.

4506 You talk about the BPF, which is Broadcast Participation Fund. And I am here in spite of that. It was talked about last week that the Broadcast Participation Fund does have some unintended barriers such as spending the money prior to being reimbursed. So when we're looking holistically at percentages, we also should take a look at the systems and the processes in which money flows through and if that truly is serving the community that you are looking to partner with.

4507 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: All right, so you mentioned the Broadcasting Participation Fund and what you think are some of the issues with it. Are there other ways to support participation in the public proceedings aside from that particular fund?

4508 MS. MYERS: I think continued conversations and engagement with organizations like ADVANCE and the CRTC. There is a scenario that I can bring to the forefront and it is the inclusion of Black in legislation. I was participating in the cultural summit that happened not too long ago. I mean, I guess it was long now. And while there, I was talking to the Racial Equity Media Collective. And at the time, the person who was leading that organization said that they were putting in Bill C‑10 ‑‑ which became Bill C‑11, which is where we are now ‑‑ notes that they wanted to have racialized peoples in the legislation clearly identified. And on that couch, I said it is important for it to say “Black and other racialized.” And the reason for that is because there is a unique experience of those of us that are Black, some of us that did not choose to come to this country. And so at the time, there was just the two of us. And what I did further beyond that was I corralled almost everybody that you saw present to you on Friday and said, We need to stand behind this.

4509 In doing that, I have realized that ADVANCE has a unique opportunity to bring people together. And yes, on one hand, there is the percentage of funds that will support people getting to this table. But on the other hand, it's the knowledge alone that proceedings are happening and what that means for them. And so I implore you to utilize ADVANCE and continue to engage with us so that we can do ‑‑ continue to have those effects of explaining to our colleagues who have been excluded many times from these processes about the importance of this and how they too can participate.

4510 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: As you know, the current tangible benefits formula for radio ownership transactions involves 60 per cent of contributions going towards English funds and 40 per cent of contributions going towards French funds. So I'm wondering what your thoughts are on that particular formula and whether it could be replicated in your view for ‑‑ in the contribution requirements for online audio undertakings.

4511 MS. MYERS: I think that we are at a time, a once in a lifetime regulatory process, and that could require us to look at everything from the beginning. I don't want to specify what will and will not work if it has or has not worked for various communities. And so at this time, I would say what I would like to say is that online streaming services should be looked at based on the ones that are similar to each other. But outside of that, in terms of a current split, right now we absolutely support the OMLCs and we recognize that there is importance in other languages that are not necessarily official minority languages.

4512 But what we do have an opportunity to do now is to look at everything and start almost with a clear slate. And that clear slate will then allow us to hear the voices that we need to hear to ensure that what we are doing is in fact helping the Canadian music landscape.

4513 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: You have expressed in your intervention support for funds like the BPF and the Radio Starmaker Fund, specifically mentioning the Orion program. You also indicate that a new fund specific to Black producers and creatives is necessary. What specific needs, in your view, are not being met by the current funds and programs like Radio Starmaker's Orion program and why a new fund is necessary to meet those needs as opposed to just expanding the current envelope of the current fund?

4514 MS. MYERS: Right, so thank you for the question.

4515 With the Radio Starmaker Orion fund, as we saw, unfortunately when there were no funds available, the Orion fund was one to be depleted. And so with a new fund that does focus on, in our perspective, the foundation of the music industry, the music industry professionals within the music industry, we know that our focus and dedication is to the Black music professionals. And we don't run the risk of being in a precarious situation as an organization, but we know that we can service those that need to be serviced.

4516 When we see funds that are created, sometimes they are ad hoc, sometimes they are one time and it doesn't continue, needing to ensuring that there is directives and mandates that ensure the continuity is critical. Because unfortunately, we did see Orion depleted in its funding. The BPF, we can talk about that too in this example of, you know, currently there's no money filling those coffers.

4517 I do believe and ADVANCE believes that the funders, although capable and necessary, are unable to reach the Black community because they are servicing the entire music industry.

4518 ADVANCE has the tools and resources to ensure that money is truly building a foundation, creating resources and access along with directed contributions to Black‑led spaces just makes more sense on the dollar. And if we're talking about efficiency and we're talking about urgency and we're talking about getting to the right people, then utilizing us as a partner really will benefit that process.

4519 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you for that.

4520 Obviously, we have talked a lot about a need for funding, more funding. I wanted to get a sense from you as to how willing you think the industry is to pay new talent to do projects. If there is funding, are they more inclined to invest in mid‑range or professional, more professional, seasoned talent? And do you think that that ‑‑ if it is an issue ‑‑ do you think that funding will solve that issue?

4521 MS. MYERS: We see a number of people in the industry focusing on emerging, mid‑tier, and experienced. Where we are lacking is the representation in the industry itself. And so the funds may go to someone emerging, but what ends up deterring them from doing it again sometimes is the trajectory that that person has or the success that that person has. And I think the bigger issue there is that there are not Black music industry professionals within the ecosystem that actually can help that emerging kickstart to get from stage to stage to stage to stage.

4522 As I mentioned earlier, I am closely connected to Maestro Fresh Wes. I am also closely connected to Kardinal Offishall, and others, others that I have seen develop and have developed in spite of the representation and understanding of their unique nuances and their unique situation.

4523 And so funds going towards, I do think funds do go towards emerging, but then again there's that deterrent of, well, we don't actually know how to support the emerging in a space. Like ADVANCE does train. We are doing a leadership program right now that is focused on making sure that Black women are in decision‑making positions. We need to see Black people on boards and represented at the top levels so that they have the autonomy to actually take the emerging and make them our successful success stories.

4524 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you so much. That's all I have. Madam Chair?

4525 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. And thank you, Commissioner Naidoo.

4526 Let's go over to Vice‑Chair Scott.

4527 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thanks very much. I'd like to pull together a couple of the themes that came out in your presentation as well as your answers. So in your opening remarks, you spoke extensively about some of the lack of representation in decision‑making positions. And again, in your last couple answers, you highlighted the value that could be extracted there.

4528 Could you speak a little bit more about kind of the return on a dollar invested in Black artists versus the return on a dollar invested in Black decision‑makers, executives, people of influence. And then a follow‑up: What's the mechanism for making that latter category of investment?

4529 MS. MYERS: Right. So when we look at creating an opportunity to build a foundation, your return on investment is maximized because you've invested in the training of someone who like myself, the anomaly that you're sitting in front of right now, there's more of me. And if there's more of me, then we can further support the artists that come through the door. So the return on investment on training itself is very substantial. It is one that continues time and time again, year over year. If you're looking at someone's career over a 25‑year career, and they've been able to be the conduit that puts other Black artists into the space, it's cyclical, right? In order for us to maximize the success, we have to develop the training. And the training, therefore, goes into putting people in upward mobility is at the centre of that. And it puts them in positions where they go from entry‑level into executive. And seeing that over their years they've been able to amplify the voices of other Black music artists.

4530 A mechanism has to be pulled together through conversation and engagement. And so I do want to talk about us continuing to engage with each other to understand what that mechanism would look like. ADVANCE stands here before you supporting the music industry professionals. And we recognize that that foundation helps to catapult the artists, but there is an opportunity now to look at what that mechanism is. We, being a vehicle, but not necessarily the only participant in that mechanism.

4531 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you very much.

4532 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. We will go over to Commissioner Levy.

4533 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Good morning.

4534 MS. MYERS: Good morning.

4535 COMMISSIONER LEVY: You have talked about the critical need for funding, obviously. But we've also heard that having flexibility is really important. And I wonder if you could talk about that, the importance of flexibility and perhaps give some concrete examples about how you might need to use it with any available funding, any, you know, personal experiences you have that can put some meat on the bones of the issue.

4536 MS. MYERS: Absolutely. Flexibility is critical when you are doing something for the first time. Unique circumstances require unique conversations and continued conversations. I would call for the equity oversight to answer the first question about the flexibility. Equity oversight and those that represent Black professionals within the CRTC will help with ensuring that there is flexibility.

4537 And the reason there is a need for flexibility is an example I can pull when we were pulling our research together. Our research study that has not yet been published but will be published early in 2024 is the analysis and value of Black music and Black music professionals. While pulling together this research with the Diversity Institute, the funding of Ontario Creates, and the funding of Creative B.C., a number of times we've actually had to ask for extensions because it has been quite difficult to reach ‑‑ to gather the data that we need.

4538 So from the outset, first it was developing the questions for the survey. We had 1,500 people participate in the survey, but developing the survey, because nothing like this had been done before, was ‑‑ it was important for us to get it right. And so with the time constraints with some of the funders, it ‑‑ you're looking at fiscal years. They're looking at their own deadlines. And the need for flexibility was highlighted when we got to a point because we wanted to make sure that we were having ‑‑ that we had as many people at the table to look at things.

4539 Just as an example, something that was brought up earlier this morning, the PERSONA‑Identification. What does that look like? Is it standardized anywhere? And at the time when we started this research study, it wasn't as far as it is now and still to date it is not yet standardized. So that's an example of something that took a little bit more time.

4540 Now, as we continued, we had the survey. The survey was complete. And now we need secondary sources. When you're looking for secondary sources, the flexibility of time to gather those, the data, is critical because if people in the industry, in organizations and companies in the industry haven't been collecting the data that specifically speaks to Black professionals, then they have to find it. They have to distill it from somewhere, which takes additional time. And so we were the beneficiaries of this said flexibility.

4541 And I do think that it is quite important to recognize that that's going to be a reality ongoing from a number of years, which is: How do we do this? How do we do this right? Do we do this with such urgency that we find out in a couple years that people are left behind? How do we maintain? And so that flexibility and essentially the collaboration is what flexibility is, is to be able to say, Hey, this is the situation. This is the nuance. This is something we may not have thought about before or a wall that we've hit. Let's work together and be flexible.

4542 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you very much.

4543 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. So we will turn things back over to you to maybe tell us what you hope this Panel has taken away from our discussion this morning, and if you'd like to add anything else, please do.

4544 MS. MYERS: Absolutely. Well, thank you, Chair, Vice‑Chairs, and Commissioner Panel. It has been a pleasure to speak in front of you today. It is something that I take quite seriously, and I am humbled by the opportunity to do so. It is to highlight to you that I am one Black‑led Black‑focused music industry organization that sits before you in all of these proceedings. And I think that speaks to why contributions in a fund is really important. I think that's why we speak to continued engagement with the CRTC and why we need to work better together to look at an opportunity to have a clear slate and build something that does bring more than just me here.

4545 We would like to ensure that there's a great intersection of Black professionals at every level. We recognize that this bolsters the industry, encourages artists to stay in Canada, because we've seen them leave, and that helps all parts of the industry. Today, we see an efficient way forward that includes contributions for training and upscaling and operations for Black‑led organizations.

4546 We thank you so much for listening. I am excited to work further with you. And thank you for all that you continue to do.

4547 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, again.

4548 THE SECRETARY: Thank you. I will now ask the Canadian Ethnocultural Media Coalition to come to the presentation table.

Presentation

4549 MS. ZINIAK: Good morning. Good morning, Madam Chair, Vice‑Chairs, Commissioners, and Commission Staff. Thank you very much for providing this opportunity to appear before you today at this important proceeding. My name is Madeline Ziniak, and I am chair of the Canadian Ethnic Media Association. Beside me is Aldo Di Felice, president and managing partner of TLN Media Group. And next to Aldo is Kevin Goldstein, our regulatory advisor.

4550 We will now begin our presentation. Aldo and I are co‑founders of the Canadian Ethnocultural Media Coalition. The CEMC is an ad hoc organization that includes the most active independent ethnic media content producers and publishers, including broadcasters, from across the country.

4551 The CEMC was formed in 2021 specifically to advocate for better inclusion of diverse communities and ethnic programming in our Broadcasting Act and industry support programs. We believe that all members of our officially multicultural Canadian society should fully participate in our broadcasting system, and that includes all of the diverse ethnic minority communities of Canada, including, but not limited to, black and racialized communities.

4552 Until now, creators of multicultural content and Canadian ethnic‑owned multicultural broadcast media have been systematically marginalized and under‑supported, even though our nation has never been more ethnoculturally and linguistically diverse.

4553 The amended Act has introduced new provisions that specifically address these issues in setting the priorities for the system. For the first time, the Act now states that Canadians from diverse ethnocultural backgrounds, including black and racialized persons, should be the ones producing relevant ethnic programs and operating the services which broadcast them. This is a win not only for producers and broadcasters, but for all Canadians that consume ethnocultural media.

4554 Multicultural Canada’s appetite for information, opinion and entertainment of all kinds cannot be satisfied only by multilingual content delivered on foreign channels. Foreign channels and content are not focused on Canada and, when they are, they invariably serve their own cultural, political and economic interests in diasporas living in this country.

4555 It is a matter of national interest that Canadian information, opportunities, values and our ethnoculturally and linguistically diverse stories are made readily available in our broadcasting system.

4556 MR. DI FELICE: So while the language contained in the new clauses in the Act promises real possibilities for improvement of Canadian ethnic content creation and distribution, that promise will need to be fulfilled. And we are pleased to see that the Policy Direction issued by the Federal Government two weeks ago notes that the Commission must ensure support for the creation, availability and discoverability of programming made by and broadcasting undertakings carried on by members of equity‑seeking and ethnocultural groups.

4557 In the context of this proceeding, which is examining initial base contributions for online undertakings, the CEMC submits that it is critical that any contribution regime and disbursement mechanisms direct a certain percentage of such contributions to the production of content for all such diverse ethnocultural Canadians. How much? It’s important to keep in mind that, in the next 10 years, it is expected that some 30 per cent of the Canadian population will be comprised of people not born in this country. Today, one in three Canadians report themselves to be ethnic Canadians and one in four Canadians speak at least one language besides English or French.

4558 We also support centralizing the disbursement of such content creation programs in an agency such as the Canada Media Fund instead of a newly established fund. However, the CMF rules must address longstanding inequities when it comes to the way it recognizes diversity in the administration of its funds and how it treats ethnic owned and oriented broadcasters.

4559 For instance, the CMF's Persona ID compulsory self‑identification system purports to classify dozens of distinct ethnoculturally diverse backgrounds simply as “white or European descent”. Albanian, Croatian, Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Maltese, Portuguese, Polish, Romanian, Spanish, Serbian, Slovenian, Macedonian and dozens of other ethnoculturally distinct communities are considered indistinguishable from each other or from Canada’s two Anglo‑Franco founding cultures and, because of such classification, they are all disentitled from the benefits and advantages accorded to other diverse communities.

4560 It must be noted that neither the Act nor the Direction purport to rank diverse communities against each other in terms of the degree to which they are deserving of the benefits and advantages meted out by the CMF.

4561 In addition, when it comes to diverse languages in our significantly multilingual country, the CMF currently devotes only one per cent of its budget to its Diverse Languages Program. This is inappropriately low in a country where over one in five people speak a language other than English or French at home. And the revised Act now specifically mandates that the system should “support the production and broadcasting of programs in a diversity of languages”.

4562 So while we agree with the idea that monies be consolidated and administered by existing funds, we do believe that, given the Commission’s stated intention of establishing a flexible regulatory framework that is outcomes‑based, there must be clear instructions at the outset prescribing where certain funds should go and how they should be spent. This is essential for the CMF, which is not specifically regulated by the CRTC, like a CIPF.

4563 Notwithstanding these facts, we are excited about the future. These proceedings have the potential to finally welcome Canadian multicultural content creation and broadcasting from the fringes and into the mainstream of Canadian society.

4564 Thank you, and we welcome your questions.

4565 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much. We are also excited for the future.

4566 We have a lot of questions, actually, so I think we’ll just very quickly jump right in. I’ll turn things over to Vice‑Chair Scott.

4567 Thank you.

4568 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Message received, Madam Chair.

4569 So I’ll start with what I think is my hardest question, then.

4570 So you spoke about the vast range of diversity. You mentioned even just within, you know, white Canadians representing dozens and dozens of various groups, so the diversity is huge. Even an expanded funding pool, if that were the case, would be finite.

4571 How do you divide finite funds across such a degree of vastness and ensure fairness, equity, but also meaningful enough portions of funding so that we’re not failing at everything? How do you address the finite and the infinite need?

4572 MS. ZINIAK: If I can just jump in there, the Canadian Ethnic Media Association two years ago just created an ethnic media directory which has identified 1,200 media entities across Canada. Some of these are long‑term entities who have ‑‑ despite everything, have struggled and continue to maintain.

4573 It's been a tough journey for them, but they continue to maintain.

4574 And I think certainly one can establish a variety of values. Certainly it’s not only the population and who you’re serving because sometimes there’s only one media entity that is serving one specific ethnocultural community and there’s nothing else in the country that’s serving that community, for example, the Napolis community. You know, they have one radio station in the Toronto southern Ontario and that is the important conduit for information and community relevancy, for example.

4575 So I should also add that when you take a look at the variety of values that one could actually place towards identifying, you know, who is deserving and who is not, certainly it is a challenge. Certainly a variety of organizations like the Canadian Ethnic Media Association could be helpful in that regard, but it is, I think, important to be reflective and also to remember it’s not only the density or the amount of population, but it’s also that conduit that serves that one community.

4576 For example, on Saturday, and I’ll just jump in here, the Canadian Ethnic Media Association just celebrated its 45th year of juried awards of journalistic excellence. 45 years we’ve been doing this, and ethnic media in Canada has been here since the 1800s.

4577 So it’s here, it’s here to stay, and I think it’s important to be able to invest and support a vehicle that is very positive for evolving Canadian citizenry.

4578 I’m going to stop because I just get too excited.

4579 MR. DI FELICE: I can add something.

4580 I appreciate your question. I think it suggests that why open up the doors to funding ethnic content generally when people will consider it not enough, there won’t be enough resources.

4581 I don’t think I’ve ever heard in my career anybody saying there is enough funding, so I think that is a general idea among recipients of support and funding.

4582 What we’re suggesting is that there be some proportionality. The number of ethnic Canadians, the number of Canadians who speak another language, ethnoculturally diverse Canadians, regardless of pigmentation, Canadians who have, in the past, been considered, for one reason or another, outside of the establishment are now being recognized by the Act.

4583 I don’t think it’s appropriate to suggest that we shouldn’t make them eligible, we shouldn’t consider them deserving when the Act says they are deserving of some of the supports and promotion that is being called for simply because of a lack of resources.

4584 We know that it’s either disproportional or non‑existent for many ethnic media producers. The Canadian Media Awards that ‑‑ ceremony that we just attended included that recipients who thought that on this most important occasion when they were receiving an award, they made a plea for support from the government which had been non‑existent for one of the award winners for years and years.

4585 So proportionality would simply mean that something more than what is less than nominal now become something that’s material. That doesn’t need to come at the expense of recipients of existing funds. The whole promise of this proceeding is that there will be an influx of new funding that will be available.

4586 So nobody’s suggesting that others should have less, simply that those that are deserving, those that have been recognized as deserving should have more than any material amount of support.

4587 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you for that.

4588 I certainly didn't mean to suggest that because the challenge is difficult we shouldn’t pursue it. But maybe I was a bit surprised, given your focus on diversity, that your solution seems to be such a centralized approach and having a large centralized fund to address the issue of ethnocultural diversity.

4589 Do you see a role for more distributed funding and, if so, how granular should we be in allocating funds, or is the role of the CRTC simply to set aside ‑‑ identify a pot of funding for ethnocultural diversity and then we back away or is more granular management more helpful?

4590 MR. DI FELICE: Well, I think what we’re saying is that we support the CMF’s administration because it is the largest investor in content production in Canada and simply that the opposite approach of splintering available funding might not get the results that everybody’s intending.

4591 MR. GOLDSTEIN: If I could just add, I think one of the appeals of the CMF approach, and I think you’ve heard this from other intervenors in this process, is it’s there, it’s set up, it has the administration capacities through Telefilm to distribute those funds. And so I think there’s ‑‑ and per the Chair asking numerous parties, you know, what’s the urgency and everyone’s pretty much said it’s urgent, we need it now, and so I think that, you know, just in terms of implementation, there’s a benefit associated with that.

4592 And I think as ‑‑ you know, although Madeline alluded to it in our opening presentation, there’s already a program. It’s woefully underfunded, but there’s already a program.

4593 And Vice‑Chair Scott, in terms of the second element of your question saying what should the CRTC do, we touched on that a little bit in our opening statement. I think that’s important that the CRTC sets out broad parameters of where it expects money to go or the ‑‑ you know, what is expected to be supported.

4594 And I think one of the points we were highlighting was the concept of diversity needs to be properly framed and then the money can go to the organization for them to implement the program. But it’s simply there’s a bunch of groups that need ‑‑ you know, generally need to be supported and here’s a whack of money, go forth and multiply, I’m not sure we get necessarily the results that the kind of vision for this new regulatory framework was structured around, you know.

4595 And as we highlighted, the CMF kind of falls into kind of an interesting space in that it’s a public/private partnership. It has an MOU with the Department of Canadian Heritage, but it’s not a CIPF, so it’s not certified by the CRTC and the CRTC doesn’t do an every three to five years, let’s review the CMF and see how it’s doing. It’s a key vehicle in implementing CRTC policy but exists outside of the CRTC’s purview.

4596 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you.

4597 So my last question, you alluded to it, but I think you stopped just short of saying that the need is for 30 percent of the funding to be allocated. Is that the ballpark that you’re looking at?

4598 MR. DI FELICE: I don't think so. No, not at all.

4599 I think, just based on some of the numbers that have been talked about, the idea that there may be at a level of five percent up to $250 million in additional funds that are injected into the system. Five percent of that five percent would amount to $12.5 million. Twelve and a half million dollars would already be a significant increase in the size of the diverse languages program, for example, which is now $4 million.

4600 So I’m not sure that I talked about 30 percent, but I think maybe what you’re referring to, and I think I understand, is that because a fifth of the population, say one in five, 20 percent of the population has identified, according to certain sources, a language other than English or French as their language of comfort at home, that the funding should be somewhere between one percent and 20 percent.

4601 But just looking at what’s available, we’re not suggesting 30 percent of all new funding be allocated to these communities. In fact, five percent of five percent would only be $12.5 million with a CMF that’s already close to $400 million.

4602 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you for that clarification.

4603 Madam Chair.

4604 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much.

4605 Let's go over to Commissioner Naidoo.

4606 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you for being here today.

4607 You mentioned some deficiencies with the CMF’s Persona ID self‑identification system, as did the previous intervenor this morning. Can you expand on how you think it could be improved and also whether you think that a self‑identification system should be standardized in some way?

4608 MR. DI FELICE: Yeah, it's been evolving as the previous speaker had talked about. It has changed every year based, presumably, on input from stakeholders.

4609 I think it ‑‑ the very first thing that should happen is that it should be aligned with what now the Broadcasting Act says. The Broadcasting Act specifically refers for the first time that the broadcasting system should support the production and broadcasting of programs in a diversity of languages that reflect black and other racialized communities and the diversity of the ethnocultural composition of Canadian society, including through broadcasting undertakings that are carried on by black ‑‑ from black or other racialized communities and diverse ethnocultural backgrounds.

4610 Right now, diversity under the CMF’s identification system is defined as separating deserving communities from not deserving communities, and all of the various communities that I talked about, diverse ethnocultural communities, are lumped into the undeserving class. That’s what needs to change. I think that would align it with what now Parliament has said in the Broadcasting Act and what the Directive itself has picked up on two weeks ago.

4611 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you for that.

4612 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

4613 We will go over to Commissioner Levy.

4614 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Good morning. You’ve talked in terms of your support for the program within the Canadian Media Fund to get things going and our Policy Directive asks us to look at tools like incentives and outcomes.

4615 So I wonder if you’d turn your mind to how we might use incentives and outcomes to get to the place? Like what would be the outcomes that you would like to see in terms of the differences that Canadians would see on their screens or on their radios or on their online platforms? What are the outcomes that you think are appropriate and what are the incentives to get us there?

4616 Thank you.

4617 MR. DI FELICE: Based on the recognition of ethnic communities as content producers and as owners of broadcast undertakings that broadcast ethnic content and keeping in mind that ethnic content has always been defined as content in any language, whether it’s English, French or a third language that is primarily directed at a distinct ethnocultural community, the outcomes would be that there is more diversity in the system. There are more players in the system, more producers and more broadcasters, especially more ethnic‑owned broadcasters, not necessarily just all establishment‑owned broadcasters. More content, more broadcasters, more visibility, more accessibility and more sustainability.

4618 Many of the members of the Canadian Ethnic Media Association, which has over 200 members, some of our coalition partners, which include four top ethnic broadcasters, EC Television, Fairchild Television, TLN Media Group and Ethnic Channels Group, are struggling in the same way and more than the establishment companies that are coming to talking about the crisis for media.

4619 None of the broadcasters I’m talking about have other lines of business that can ever replace their broadcasting business and the idea that they should be sustainable in the future, and in Canada that’s becoming increasingly diverse, would be the minimum outcome. The fact that there may be new entrants should really be what we aspire to, not just the preservation of legacy ethnic broadcasters, broadcasters like ours and Fairchild, which were both licensed almost 40 years ago in 1984, but that new entrants would enter the field in an increasingly diverse country and an increasingly multilingual country.

4620 I think those are the outcomes that we should be striving for.

4621 MR. GOLDSTEIN: If I could add, too, I think the first part of your question was about incentives.

4622 I think for this group specifically and their focus in terms of, you know, ethnic broadcasting, ethnic programming and content, I think funding is critical. You know, they don’t need an incentive to want to be in this space or populate their channels and stations with the best ethnic content for their communities. They need the financial support to be able to do it.

4623 And so I think that’s ‑‑ I think in terms of referring back to the direction in terms of incentives, I think there are players in the system who may need incentives to want to feature within their program offering programming that is produced from various equity‑deserving groups as well as, you know, ethnocultural ‑‑ you know, diverse ethnocultural groups. But for this group, just like previous intervenors who’ve talked about, you know, purpose specific funds for their communities, this is what they do.

4624 MS. ZINIAK: And if I may add also, I think what we hear from our membership, from the independent ethnic producer base, is that, you know, we just ‑‑ we want to be seen, we want to be heard, we want an equitable playing field. And I think that’s ‑‑ if we want to have a takeaway message from today, I think that’s, you know, what we’re looking forward to as a very positive evolution and development for the ethnic producer base.

4625 And I think sustainability is something that is very important. Maintaining quality. I think that’s been a battle, always, for ethnic media, is that it’s being stigmatized and marginalized as, you know, it’s the camera in the basement and ‑‑ you know, and we’re just ‑‑ we’re trying to continue to evolve and it has evolved. The quality ‑‑ the meaningfulness is always there, the source of information, the community reflection, community relevance.

4626 So I think what we’re asking for is an equitable playing field, at the end of the day.

4627 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you very much.

4628 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, and thank you for answering all of our questions.

4629 You’ve started touching on this. I will turn things back over to you for a key takeaway and any sort of closing remarks.

4630 You talked about how your members want to be seen and heard. You talked about sustainability. Are there other things that you would like for this Panel to take away.

4631 MS. ZINIAK: I think it’s important to recognize the importance of multilingual media in Canada, how it is a real conduit. It’s a trust factor. It’s a contribution to self‑esteem of a community. And I think that’s very important to keep in mind and also to note that sometimes there’s just one program that serves one community and there’s no other information base.

4632 I think COVID ‑‑ that everything that communities have gone through was an important example of who to trust, and this is where you come in with foreign signals where there was another message coming into Canada and the communities, the vast ethnocultural base, wanted a trust factor, wanted to hear from Canadian government, Canada and to try not to have that misinformation, disinformation.

4633 So I think it’s a trust factor in home‑grown, local ethnocultural reflection in media and I think that’s an important takeaway.

4634 I don’t know if others would like to add.

4635 MR. DI FELICE: I think the takeaway to add to what Madeline is saying is that multilingual programming, ethnic content and diverse ethnocultural background Canadians have now, for the first time, been recognized in the Broadcasting Act and we need to operationalize that priority and that support and include them in our initiatives.

4636 That’s what I think the purpose of our coming together as a coalition was initially and operationalizing the legislation now is critical. They need to be brought in to the mainstream of society.

4637 Diversity is more than just about gender, sexual orientation and pigmentation. Diverse ethnocultural backgrounds have been recognized. There are many, many communities represented by our coalition that are excluded from programs that are meant to promote diversity, equity and inclusion and they, unfortunately, exclude a number of communities that should properly be involved because multilingual content, ethnic content is not solely based on race. It's based off ethnicity and it’s based on ethnocultural traditions.

4638 There are many communities that previously were referred to as “olive skinned” that are being lumped together, the Mediterranean communities of Europe are being lumped together as white Europeans as a result of our effort to address systemic racism, but systemic racism did and does apply to them as well.

4639 So I think we don’t have to argue that any more because we’ve achieved the result that we were looking for, which is to expand the definition so that it’s more appropriately inclusive of all Canadians of diverse ethnocultural backgrounds. So ultimately, we’d like to operationalize that in all of our programs.

4640 And I wanted to underline again the fact that neither the legislation nor the Directive talk about ranking these communities against each other. They are equally entitled to the benefits of the support that the Broadcasting Act is calling for. That’s my submission.

4641 MS. ZINIAK: I think also the independent community base of producers are really looking at this as a shining light, a fresh opportunity to be listened to, to be heard. And I think this is why it’s ‑‑ everyone’s quite excited about being able to contribute to this new evolution for the multilingual community base in Canada.

4642 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much for being here with us this morning into this afternoon. We really appreciate the discussion and you answering all of our questions, and thank you for your participation in the proceeding.

4643 MS. ZINIAK: Thank you.

4644 THE SECRETARY: We will now take a 45‑minute break and be back at 12:50.

‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 12:06 p.m.

‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 12:51 p.m.

4645 THE SECRETARY: Bienvenue.

4646 We will now hear the presentation of Disability Screen Office.

4647 Please introduce yourself and your colleague, and you may begin.

Presentation

4648 MS. LUK: Good afternoon. My name is Winnie Luk. My pronouns are she/her. My visual description is I am a Chinese woman with short black hair, wearing a black suit jacket. I am the inaugural Executive Director of the Disability Screen Office or DSO, a national, bilingual, not‑for‑profit organization that works with the Canadian screen industry to improve accessibility and disability representation, eliminating barriers across the sector. We are the only organization within the Canadian broadcast system with this specific mandate. As a disability‑led organization, 88 percent of our leadership team ‑‑ seven of eight members, including myself and six of our seven‑person board of directors ‑‑ self‑identify as disabled. Our goals include advocating for people with disability by influencing policies and removing barriers; educating industry players by providing tools, research, data and programming; and creating awareness by fostering authentic representation of people with disabilities in the media.

4649 MME LAROCHE : Bonjour. Je m'appelle Yazmine Laroche. Je suis une femme à la peau claire, aux cheveux courts et bouclés, et je porte de grosses lunettes rouges. Je suis très fière d’être la première présidente de l’Office de représentation des personnes handicapées à l’écran, ou l’ORPHÉ.

4650 Lorsque l’on m’a offert de rejoindre le conseil d’administration de ce tout nouvel organisme à l’automne dernier, je n’ai pas pu résister à l’occasion de combiner deux choses qui me tiennent profondément à cœur : la vitalité de la culture canadienne et la garantie que les personnes en situation de handicap y occupent une place significative. Et quand je parle de handicap, je ne pense pas seulement aux handicaps moteurs comme la mienne, ou visuelles ou auditives, je fais également référence à la diversité de tous les handicaps, soit visibles ou invisibles.

4651 The DSO was launched in early 2022 with the strong support of Accessible Media Inc. and Telefilm Canada after extensive consultations with Canadian industry employees and freelancers with disabilities.

4652 It was the first time that Canadian creatives with disabilities were invited to share their experiences working in the industry. Their feedback was loud and clear: lack of accessibility disables their career progression and as a result, it also disables the industry's capacity for innovation and an ability to reach new audiences. The most prominent themes were: the barriers to employment for persons with disabilities; the barriers for audiences to access content in an equitable way; the myth that people with disabilities cost more to work with and are less capable than their non‑disabled counterparts; and, finally, the glaring lack of meaningful and authentic representation both in front and behind the camera, which creates narratives that are harmful to disabled people ‑‑ because if you can’t see yourself, then you get the message that you’re not welcome.

4653 So, these themes form the foundation of the DSO’s mission, and it focuses on two distinct pillars: representation and accessibility. And the distinction between these categories is very important. Representation of disabled people is a matter of awareness, like we are doing here today, training, and opportunity. Accessibility is a human right. It’s the law. And it’s a right that is recognized in federal and provincial legislation, regulations and policies.

4654 Once upon a time, I was the Deputy Minister for Public Service Accessibility in Canada, and my mandate was to move the public service of Canada, the nation’s largest employer and service provider, to become a leader in accessibility and inclusion of people with disabilities. Not an easy task in an organization that stretches from coast to coast to coast, with over 300,000 employees. But we recognized the need to reflect the diversity of our country, and more importantly, that by not being accessible and inclusive, we were actually missing out on the amazing talent and creativity of people with disabilities ‑‑ a grossly under‑utilized segment of Canada’s labour force.

4655 As I am sure you all know, the ACA, the Accessible Canada Act, was put in place by the Government of Canada in 2019. This legislation requires federally regulated sectors, including the broadcasting industry, to identify, remove, and prevent barriers to accessibility. The Act requires broadcasting undertakings to publish accessibility plans relating to how they will remove barriers to accessibility, and of course it provides the CRTC with the authority to set regulations in this regard. That is why funding and production planning have to reflect a commitment to accessibility and the inclusion of people with disabilities. For there to be inclusion and meaningful representation of disabled people, the broadcast ecosystem as a whole has to be accessible.

4656 MS. LUK: As Yazmine mentioned, disability comes in a diversity of forms and different perspectives. That is why it is imperative to engage a diverse group of people with different lived experiences to develop appropriate funding frameworks. In other words, the industry barriers faced by writers with muscular dystrophy can be quite different from the barriers faced by writers who are dyslexic, from both an accessibility and representation perspective.

4657 The Disability Screen Office unequivocally calls for a content production funding framework that builds accessibility into every aspect, from the very beginning of the creative process to distribution and exhibition. Accessibility should not be an ad hoc line item, rather an integrated part of the production design and planning process from development, production to post‑production, and marketing. Accessibility and inclusion of people with disabilities in the broadcast system is the responsibility of everyone, and we need to be proactive in this work.

4658 The industry, from broadcasters and streamers to funders to independent producers are simply not prioritizing accessibility. That gap was loud and clear to the DSO after our original submission to the CRTC in July. Many of the existing CIPFs contacted us in complete astonishment. One wrote to us: “We are shocked. We were not made aware by the CRTC that we have to meet accessibility obligations under. Please give us some guidance.” And there were many other appeals to learn how to make their programs more accessible to both creators and audiences.

4659 We believe that CIPF criteria need to be amended to set specific and rigorous standards of accessibility so CIPFs can align with the Accessible Canada Act and the Commission’s own Broadcast Regulatory Policy of 2016.

4660 In addition to strengthening the criteria for existing CIPFs, the DSO supports the creation of new, independent funds to address gaps in disability representation, participation and accessibility in the broadcast market. This needs to be addressed urgently, effectively, and sustainably. There is no CIPF doing that right now. We advocate for the Commission to prioritize funding that empowers disabled creatives, and suggests the creation of a specialized Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accessibility, or IDEA, fund or stream within initial base contributions. The presence of systemic barriers has resulted in a limited talent pool of disabled creators. It is therefore important to support disabled individuals to enable their meaningful contributions in this sector.

4661 And I have to emphasize, any new Fund designed to support accessibility and disability inclusion must be truly representative of people with disabilities ‑‑ not, as is too often the case, an organization doing things “for” or “to” people with disabilities. In the absence of a dedicated CIPF for and by people with disabilities, we would be pleased to partner with existing funds to establish programs that meet the needs of disabled creators in terms of both accessibility and representation. Representation is key and we believe the Commission should prioritize funding that will encourage the development of a talent pipeline for disabled creatives.

4662 We further recommend that the Commission direct a portion of initial and final base contributions to the Broadcasting Participation Fund or other funds with similar objectives. Equity‑seeking groups and the full spectrum of organizations supporting underrepresented voices will not be able to participate in proceedings like this without the support of the BPF. This type of support is the only kind currently available under the Commission’s purview that facilitates barrier‑free access to full and equal participation in these proceedings for people with disabilities, which is one of the primary principles of the ACA.

4663 MME LAROCHE : Je vais parler en français un petit peu maintenant ‑‑ in case anybody wants to use the translation.

4664 L’ORPHÉ est là pour travailler avec la Commission et là pour travailler avec les parties prenantes du secteur afin de soutenir les objectifs de la Loi sur la radiodiffusion et les objectifs fixés pour le nouveau cadre de contributions, en particulier ceux qui concernent la diversité, l’inclusion et l’accessibilité, et l’industrie souhaite que nous fassions ce travail.

4665 Depuis notre lancement, nous avons reçu un soutien massif de la part de fonds de production, de diffuseurs, de syndicats, de corporations et de producteurs indépendants, tous désireux d’améliorer l’accessibilité et la représentation de personnes en situation de handicap, et qui nous ont sollicité nos conseils et de la formation.

4666 Despite being a small organization with very limited resources, we are already playing a crucial role in transforming this industry. And while this was not specifically part of phase one of these hearings, we think it is important to bring something up: We are a startup. We have one employee and some very, very dedicated board members who are volunteering hundreds of hours of their time. We would love to take on more, but we have a genuine capacity issue. We can’t fulfill every request. So, we urge the commission to consider mandating contributions to the core operations of equity‑seeking organizations like the Disability Screen Office.

4667 MS. LUK: The creation of the Disability Screen Office in Canada represents a vital step toward a more inclusive and equitable media landscape. The DSO's existence is a direct response to the longstanding barriers to employment opportunities and equitable access to media content. We are working to integrate accessibility into every aspect of production, aligning with the Accessible Canada Act’s goals, and pushing the industry to make accessibility a fundamental consideration.

4668 The Disability Screen Office’s vision, coupled with industry support and regulatory cooperation, has the potential to transform the Canadian screen industry into a more inclusive, accessible, and representative landscape. By addressing barriers, nurturing talent, and providing necessary resources, the DSO can make accessibility a standard part of the industry's operations. This effort benefits people with disabilities and enriches the industry’s creativity, innovation, and its ability to authentically portray the diversity of the Canadian society.

4669 We see this as just the initial step, and we are eager to collaborate with the CRTC to advance this crucial work. We appreciate your time and thoughtful consideration. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at this moment. Thank you very much.

4670 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much for your presentation. Congratulations on the creation of the Disability Screen Office. It sounds like you’re coming up on a two‑year anniversary in the not‑too‑distant future. It’s also an adjustment to not call you Deputy Minister ‑‑

‑‑‑ Laughter

4671 THE CHAIRPERSON:  ‑‑ but very lovely to see you. I will turn things over to Commissioner Levy.

4672 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Good afternoon. My name is Joanne Levy. My pronouns are she/her. I am ‑‑ let’s see ‑‑ a mature woman, à la peau claire ‑‑ I like that phrase better ‑‑ and I am wearing a black cardigan.

4673 You said that you propose that a portion of base contributions be directed to the Broadcasting Participation Fund and the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund. Can you detail whether these two funds are aligned to help support your public participation? Do they work ‑‑ do they play well together?

4674 MS. LUK: Absolutely. We need the BPF to be able to access and participate in proceedings like this. Unfortunately, we weren’t able to access it currently, and so for future meaningful, thoughtful participation, the BPF is absolutely necessary.

4675 COMMISSIONER LEVY: So, should the two funds be kept separate or could the funds' resources be optimized by having a single fund for public participation?

4676 MS. LUK: Well, the BAF and the BPF are separate in their mission and mandate. The BAF ‑‑ the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund ‑‑ is about making content in broadcasting content accessible. So, I would say separate. The more funding opportunities, the better.

4677 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Are there other ways to help fund public participation that you know of?

4678 MS. LUK: Are there other funds? Not that I know of. If there were, we would have accessed them.

‑‑‑ Laughter

4679 COMMISSIONER LEVY: I am sure you would find them. You expressed that a portion of the base contribution should be directed to funds dedicated to diversity, inclusion, and accessibility, including but not limited to the Canadian Independent Screen Fund. Can you comment on whether these contributions should be mandated, and how they should be mandated ‑‑ by fund or by need? And perhaps an extra: Are there ways to incentivize support, or does it need to be a mandate?

4680 MS. LUK: So, in regards to the DEI stream, I would like to actually introduce an ‘IDEA’ stream which actually includes the word ‘accessibility’ ‑‑ so, I.D.E.A. ‑‑ because right now, unfortunately, DEI conversations and work ignore accessibility and disability work. It’s odd, but it does. And so, I would even ‑‑ or rather ‑‑ propose an ‘IDEA’ stream with ‘accessibility’ ‑‑ naming it, label it, saying it out loud ‑‑ and how important that is.

4681 And absolutely, we do believe that there should be a portion of initial base contributions dedicated to the IDEA stream. That is how equity works. Equity is not easy, and there are lots of amazing organizations right now that need that support to change the structure and the framework of the current Canadian screen sector.

4682 And so, this IDEA stream would be fundamental in making that change, and I think it’s an incredible moment in time to make that change. And so, I’m not sure if you’ll be asking this, but we do have a prepared statement in regards to how much we would like for the initial base contributions. So, 25 percent of the initial base, and then, for that, 25 percent. We do propose 20 percent going to people with disability but, if we were to be so bold, we would even ask for 50 percent of that, because we know that disability intersects with every single identity. And so, we would not be only working with the disability community, but we would be working with everyone across the sector, and everyone and every equity organization.

4683 MS. LAROCHE: If I can add to that, I think from our perspective, we know that the Commission is going to be looking at these questions over time. You’re taking sort of an “étapiste” approach to doing it, but we feel strongly that you’ve got this wonderful opportunity before you right now with the initial contributions to really set the stage for the change that needs to happen. And so, we urge the Commission to think about how you can actually innovate with this opportunity that you have in front of you. This is a golden opportunity to actually send a message and a signal that, ‘We’re going to do things differently now, because the old ways don’t work’ ‑‑ haven’t worked. They’ve left people out. They’ve left people behind.

4684 And so, these new funds give you the opportunity to actually say, ‘We are now going to try and start to deal with some of those systemic issues that are pervasive in this sector.’ So, we are super excited, and we think you’ve got a great opportunity here, but we are encouraging the Commission to be bold. Be ambitious. And it could set the stage for the discussions that you are going to be having further on about revisiting how we currently support content creation in this country.

4685 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you. And I guess we will all be looking forward to the report that you are currently working on with CMF. So, thank you very much.

4686 MS. LAROCHE: Wonderful.

4687 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.

4688 Let’s go over to Vice‑Chair of Broadcasting.

4689 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you.

4690 And thank you for being here, Ms. Luk and Ms. Laroche. I am going to touch on systematic issues that you mentioned.

4691 So, you have indicated that it’s important for the Commission to implement a content production funding framework that builds accessibility into all of its components, including at the very beginning of the creative process. And when we talk about allocating a specific amount for productions, for equity‑deserving groups, and for accessibility, we can measure the funds that are targeted. In your view, how else would you measure success? What other metrics would you use to ensure that the framework that is ultimately put in place results in systemic change?

4692 MS. LUK: Thank you for that question. It is important, and I wouldn't even say in content and starting at the beginning of the creative process. Essentially, we have to start from the very top. We're talking about Canadian Heritage, CRTC, broadcasters, all the funding bodies and agencies, all the associations, unions, and guilds to the producers, to the festivals and exhibiters, to the market. So we're talking about change throughout the whole sector, not even just in production and content.

4693 And in regards to metrics, we have to start with regulations and a framework and a mechanism that has requirements ‑‑ so no longer suggestions and incentives ‑‑ and that we have to set targetable goals to measure. And then reporting as well. So it is a three‑prong approach. And across the whole sector, I would like ‑‑ I would rather say across rather than top‑down, but because we're working all together moving this progress. But essentially, it should be regulated; it should be mandated; and we do need to start now because we are very behind.

4694 MS. LAROCHE: If I could add to Winnie's comments, metrics and measurement are critical. If you don't measure, you're never going to know. This is an area ‑‑ I'm speaking specifically about disability representation, which is the reason we're undertaking this huge study ‑‑ we just don't have good data.

4695 And I know this from my experience in the public sector. We needed to understand how we were doing every year. Like we needed to understand how many people are coming into our organizations. How many people are leaving? Why are they leaving? So you need good data.

4696 And one of the best data sets you can have is representation. How many people of these various groups are in every aspect, are represented in every area of this industry? You know, are they in C‑suites? Are they in front of the camera? Are they crew? Are they writers? Writers Guild of Canada has done some interesting preliminary work in this space. But we don't have a really good database. And so that's one of the things that we're trying to rectify.

4697 MS. LUK: I want to thank Commissioner Levy for bringing up our report. One of our first initiatives is about collecting data, doing that research. Because there has ‑‑ there's nothing right now in the Canadian media landscape. And so the very first thing we need to do is consult and survey the industry, consult and survey our community to figure out what is needed, who is being counted, who is not. Because, as Yazmine mentioned, a lot of us are not being counted and that has a lot to do with language, feeling safe, feeling secure to divulge.

4698 Twenty‑two per cent of our population identify with a disability, but I know that that number is incredibly low because most people do not divulge their disability and do not feel comfortable. And also, there's awareness and a knowledge behind a diagnosis.

4699 Right now, I'm seeing a trend where there is a generation who wants to know, who are being diagnosed, who are asking questions. They want to be able to adapt and work within society. And then there's a whole other generation of parents seeing that their children ‑‑ they're saying, Wait, I have these same characteristics and personality traits. I am going to go and get diagnosed and talk about it.

4700 It is about the talking, bringing it up, creating these safe spaces. You know, when I meet people, I feel like we're not only just starting from ground zero; we're actually below zero, because we have to identify members of our own community. And I align it sometimes with essentially coming out.

4701 And so it is important that we start this work. And again, I do thank you for recognizing that we are starting this work.

4702 A second initiative that we will be starting is a resource hub because right now it's also connecting with each other and people finding the resources. There has been a little bit of work started in Canada, but people do not know where to even find them. So part of our responsibility is making sure people are connecting to not only our amazing, talented creatives, disabled creatives and talent, but also linking to the resources that are out there. And part of our work and a priority of ours is also making sure we partner and collaborate and credit and spotlight amazing people who have been trying to progress this work. And I do see that as one of our main responsibilities.

4703 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Very helpful. Thank you. I will pass it back to the Chair.

4704 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. We will go over to Commissioner Naidoo.

4705 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Hi, thanks for being here today.

4706 The Commission has been presented with evidence over the years that funding to the production system is likely to see declines in the coming years as revenues of the large broadcasters declines. And they obviously fund Canadian productions. So my question to you is should the Commission place an emphasis first on funding established production funds and then secondly ensuring funding of other initiatives such as funding for some organizations? And I guess explain why as well.

4707 MS. LUK: It has to be both. We cannot do one without the other. Because right now within the system there are not enough people from our community. We're not even talking about ‑‑ I'm advocating for hiring within, not just about consulting and feedback. Those days are behind us. We need to start hiring these equitable or equity communities within so there is the knowledge base, there is the experience, the first‑hand, again, knowledge and education within it.

4708 And who knows best? We have a belief: Nothing about us without us. And that should apply to every single program, every single policy, every single guideline. Because again, who knows best? The people who have to go through the system on a daily basis. And the folks who want to get into the industry and who have been ignored and/or have left the industry because it isn't good for them, it hasn't been welcoming to them. So we want to welcome them back.

4709 It's also about ‑‑ it's not so much of a “if you build it, they will come,” as well. Because it is also about building this trust in relationships again. I've been travelling across Canada recently, going to the festivals. And unfortunately, when I'm in these regions meeting with disabled creatives and talents, they themselves are not attending these festivals because they know it's not working for them. They can't access it.

4710 So at the very fundamental getting into the room, getting through the door. If that door isn't automated, it's not working for them ‑‑ if there's no ESL interpretation, if there's no captioning. And all of these tools are good for everyone. Example for captioning, it's good for newcomers where French or English is not their first language, where oral is not the easiest for them to absorb information.

4711 And so when you're asking about whether to fund this first or not: in tandem ‑‑ this whole work has to be in tandem across the sector through and through. I cannot ‑‑ I know it's only me right now and it's very ambitious ‑‑ but I can't pick and choose which area of the industry to work with. It's essentially a restructuring of the whole framework from side to side, top to bottom in progressing this work.

4712 Because I cannot work with one ‑‑ let's say if I just work with producers in trying to make their productions accessible. They're going to be looking for funding, and right now, I'm already hearing they're feeling pressure of maybe absorbing all the, you know, the budget lines themselves.

4713 But what I'm doing is also working with the funding bodies and agencies to make sure that they open up new envelopes to support this work. The Canadian Heritage, CRTC, all of the funding bodies, they do have to change what they've been doing year after year, decades after decades, because it's not working for our community. And we heard that loud and clear through our phase one of consultations.

4714 And as I'm meeting folks, whether it's from the industry or not, whether they're disabled or allies, and even ‑‑ this is an interesting anecdote in the sense of people who I'm meeting who think they're allies as I sit down to the table with, as they're telling their stories and experiences, I'm hearing, That's actually a disability. So again, being counted, being included ‑‑ the information and the knowledge is not out there right now.

4715 And so our work is to hold people accountable. Because people are saying to me, We want to start this work. We just don't know how. Show us the way. And I say, Absolutely, I want to partner with you.

4716 But I am going to hold folks accountable because right now so many productions, and whether there are children and youth actually, so many animation projects right now coming up that are centring the narratives about disability, people wanting to connect to talent and creatives who are disabled. And one of the projects ‑‑ probably be a phase two of our second initiative of the Resource Hub ‑‑ is eventually creating a database of disabled talent and creatives. I can't keep up with right now with the inquiries regarding that. And so as I say, it has to be in tandem.

4717 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much.

4718 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. I am just going to squeeze in one very quick question that's just very specific. You talked about the Resource Hub and the importance of partnerships. Can you share with us a little bit about who you would be partnering with for the Resource Hub?

4719 MS. LUK: Uh‑huh. Can I say this out loud right now? I've already signed the agreement. But I'm very happy to say we're going to be launching and announcing our lead funder, which is CMF. So both our research project and data collection and ‑‑ which will culminate into a best practices guide in working with a disability as well as our Resource Hub, our leading funder will be CMF. Is the embargo over right now? I think it is. Ontario Creates has also signed on for both of the initiatives. And I'm working with other ones right now that I don't think I can announce yet. But please sign on to our e‑newsletter and I'll be announcing all our incredible partnerships soon.

4720 But Writers Guild, we had mentioned that they've done incredible work, and they are the very first labour organization and union to sign on with the Disability Screen Office, which is huge.

4721 I'm working with other labour organizations as well, because our third initiative that we do want to introduce ‑‑ we're fleshing this out a bit more ‑‑ right now it exists in the United States as a production accessibility coordinator. We're kind of rethinking this role to elevate it to be a little bit more influential and have decision‑making power and for it to be inserted at the very beginning of the ecosystem lifecycle of a production, so they do have influence and decision‑making power in budgeting, in locations, in scheduling.

4722 I do want to add in the sense of this industry and that the fact that only 14 hours and above counts as over time is doing harm to the industry, these long days. So not only are we supporting the fact that people with disabilities who enter into the industry, or also want to start preventing injuries and because this industry is actually causing disability. Throughout my five months ‑‑ I've only been here for five months ‑‑ I'm hearing stories over and over of accidents on set, crushed, you know, fingers, herniated discs, car accidents ‑‑ I just heard a story when I was in Montreal about a colleague who died because of a fatal accident, car accident after working ridiculously long hours. So when I'm talking about restructuring the industry, it is not just about the programs and the funding. It is really essentially about how we work.

4723 My previous life was working in human rights where I was working in life‑and‑death situations on a daily basis. When I re‑entered into this industry ‑‑ this is entertainment. It's supposed to be celebratory, joyful, representative of our lives, our livelihoods. And for the fact that this industry is causing disability at the same time, we owe the people who work in this industry, who dedicate their lives, we owe them better.

4724 And so when I say restructuring, I'm talking about a real restructuring and shifting the culture and the lens of how we work on a day‑to‑day basis and that we shouldn't be accepting 14‑, 18‑, 20‑hour‑long days, because again this is causing harm to the folks who are working here.

4725 So I derailed a little bit about partnerships, but in the sense of partnerships, other equity groups which I haven't mentioned, my amazing colleagues who presented earlier today and on Friday, I am in active conversations with them as well in doing this work because, as I mentioned before, disability intersects with every single identity. And so the opportunities before us are huge. We have so many people that we can partner with and the industry is also very large. Our population is also very large. And it does, it intersects with everyone. So no shortage of partnerships.

4726 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you for that. We want to ensure you have the final word.

4727 MS. LUK: Oh, thank you.

4728 MME LAROCHE : Je pense que moi, je commence. Merci infiniment. Merci beaucoup de cette occasion aujourd'hui.

4729 Notre organisation, l'ORPHÉ, a été créée afin de remédier aux inégalités dans les secteurs de la radiodiffusion et du cinéma au Canada. Il faut éliminer les obstacles à la participation, mais plus encore, le Canada mérite d'entendre, de voir et d'expérimenter l'incroyable créativité et talent des Canadiennes et Canadiens en situation de handicap. C'est pourquoi nous sommes ici aujourd'hui. Nous espérons que la Commission et l'industrie saisiront cette belle occasion qui se présente.

4730 MS. LUK: I am proud and honoured to be the inaugural executive director of the Disability Screen Office. But to be honest, I was shocked that this work didn't start 10, 20 or 30 years ago. Accessibility should have been prioritized and integrated into the ecosystem a long time ago. So now we are playing catch‑up. We are behind the US, the UK, and Australia in this work. They have more data, more research, more programs, and more funding dedicated to accessibility and disability representation.

4731 We need a full cultural shift in how we see and work with the disability community. We have a unique barrier with data collection within the community. Some people are not comfortable with divulging their disabilities because of fear of discrimination and stigmatization. I want to share an example of this. When people were interviewing for my role, the executive director of the Disability Screen Office, a leadership role in a disability‑led organization, they still did not feel comfortable in divulging their disability within their interviews. That's how deep the shame and fear can go for some.

4732 And this is the very reason why we need the support, the language, the safe place, safe spaces, and role models for people to essentially come out. Collectively, we can break down these barriers and encourage people to speak up and be counted. This is the moment, the moment to make real, tangible change. And I know the sector is hungry for it. My very full inbox and schedule is a testament to that.

4733 People have questions about how to work with the disability community. They want to find and be connected with the disabled creatives and talent. There are so many productions wanting to centre disabled characters and narratives at the moment. But they need the knowledge, resources, and funding to make the productions accessible. I have been attending festivals across the nation and I know that these organizations also want to start this change, be accessible, and be truly inclusive for the industry and their audiences.

4734 We are here, happy, and eager to support and partner with you and everyone across the sector to do this work. We need to transform the whole Canadian screen industry and its current structure, from top to bottom, side to side, to do this work properly and methodically.

4735 This is not going to change over night. But the most important thing is that we start the change today. And if we prioritize this across the sector, it's not too late for Canada to become leaders in this. I am truly optimistic. And with all the meetings I've been having with funding bodies, broadcasters, streamers, labour organizations, associations, producers, festivals, and other equity organizations, we are positioned to tackle this head‑on.

4736 Disability intersects with every identity and everyone will have a disability at one point in their lives. Let that sink in. Accessibility is for everyone.

4737 Equity work is not easy, but Canada is very lucky to have so many amazing groups working towards a better, more equitable, and accessible Canadian screen sector. I attended the hearings on Friday because I wanted to cheer on my incredible colleagues doing this work every day. Let's use this historic moment in time as an opportunity to make real change and ensure a Canadian screen sector that is truly inclusive, representative, and accessible. Thank you.

4738 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Merci encore pour votre participation. Thank you for being here with us this afternoon.

4739 THE SECRETARY: Thank you. We will take a two‑ to three‑minute break and hear the next participant.

‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 1:29 p.m.

‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 1:31 p.m.

4740 THE SECRETARY: Welcome. We will now hear the presentation of U Multicultural Inc. And I will give you the PowerPoint clicker. You may introduce yourself, and you may begin.

Presentation

4741 MS. RTICHSHEVA: Good afternoon Chairperson, Vice‑Chair, Commissioners, and Commission staff. My name is Taya Rtichsheva, and I serve as the founder and executive director of U Multicultural, a Canadian ethnocultural community multimedia platform. U Multicultural operates as a television and radio broadcaster as well as a media training centre, with headquarters located in Winnipeg, Manitoba. Additionally, we have established branches in four Canadian provinces ‑‑ Alberta, Saskatchewan, B.C., and Ontario.

4742 Joining me on my right is Paulo Bergantim, the chair of U Multicultural's board of directors.

4743 Established in 2019, U Multicultural serves as a vital platform for ethnocultural, diverse, and Indigenous communities in Canada, offering TV, radio, and web media services. With an Indigenous board of directors, we amplify the narratives of over 30 groups, producing content in various ethnic languages, including Cree, Ojibwe, and Inuktitut.

4744 First, U Multicultural advocates for critical support for community TV and radio stations. Unlike commercial counterparts, these stations allocate revenue to organizational development, outreach, training, programming. To sustain, U Multicultural calls for an independent operational fund accessible to all non‑profit community TV and radio stations in Canada. Recognizing the historically undervalued role of community stations, there is a growing demand for their services in Canada, particularly among ethnocultural and Indigenous groups seeking media access to amplify their voices.

4745 The framework implemented by the Australian government for the community media sector could be a good example of a sustainable community media landscape. Through the Community Broadcasting Foundation, the Australian government allocates funds to support operations, training, broadcasting, production, and many more.

4746 It is deemed inequitable when large Canadian commercial broadcasting corporations and cables, earning billions annually, exploit community media initiatives to comply with the CRTC obligations. Moreover, community access stations under commercial corporations’ umbrella cannot be considered as owned and operated by community members and volunteers. The true community station is nonprofit, owned and governed by the community members.

4747 Existing funds pose challenges for community broadcasters due to their inapplicability. A simplified and, the most important, transparent process for obtaining operational funds tailored for community TV and radio stations should be established. This approach aims to ensure fair access, eliminating potential conflict of interest, discrimination, or exclusion.

4748 I think we can switch to the next slide.

‑‑‑ Discussion off record

4749 MS. RTICHSHEVA: So this is the information about organization and some members of the diverse community we serve. I'm sorry, I just have to get back to the presentation, okay.

4750 Second, U Multicultural advocates for an exemption of community‑based nonprofit TV and radio broadcasters from financial contribution to the Canadian broadcasting system. Their lower revenue compared to commercial counterparts is directed towards operations, community engagement, and programming rather than commercialization.

4751 Third, diversity in media production is essential, however, in order to provide the orientation and training to journalists, additional support is needed. The Commission should consider the funding allocation for media training initiatives aimed at youth, individuals from underrepresented groups, ethnic and Indigenous communities. This funding should include provisions for potential work placement within the industry.

4752 Fourth, U Multicultural works with many Indigenous communities and partnering with Indigenous organizations. To support community broadcasters in providing media training and establishing work placements for Indigenous producers and media professionals, the additional resources should be allocated. This initiative should encompass funding not only for payroll and expenses for Indigenous candidates but also for essential infrastructure, including equipment and studios, as well as supporting roles such as trainers, supervisors, and editors.

4753 To sustain, the community TV and Radio stations generate multiple revenue streams. U Multicultural asserts that for any content carried or aired by commercial broadcasters or cable providers, a fair compensation system should be established. It is perceived as unjust when commercial cables include community TV stations in packages sold to customers without providing any form of compensation. U Multicultural advocates for a system where community stations receive a certain percentage of revenue from commercial cables when their content or channel is carried.

4754 In conclusion, U Multicultural proposes a comprehensive set of initiatives and funds aimed at protecting and preserving diverse languages, engaging ethnocultural and indigenous communities in democratic media processes, providing accessible media training, supporting media production and local content, offering employment opportunities in media and broadcast, and amplifying diverse voices.

4755 The proposed initiatives include again: establishing an annual or multi‑year operational fund for nonprofit community TV and radio stations; ensuring a transparent and fair application process for fund access; exempting community‑based nonprofit TV and radio broadcasters from financial contributions to the Canadian broadcasting system; creating a fund focused on community media training; implementing a special initiative to support community broadcasters in providing media training and work placements for indigenous producers; mandating commercial cables carrying community stations and broadcasters airing content produced by community stations to pay a certain percentage of revenue to community broadcasters.

4756 Thank you for listening, and thanks for your time.

4757 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Thank you for the presentation. Thank you for the slideshow with the lovely photos of the community members.

4758 I will turn things over to Commissioner Naidoo to start the questions for the Commission. Thank you.

4759 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you so much for your presentation. I’d like to start off today talking about contributions.

4760 In your view, what would be the appropriate portion of initial contributions that could be allocated to audio funds? And I invite you to feel free to comment on the current CCD contribution framework and whether contributions from online services should be similar to that.

4761 MR. BERGANTIM: In terms of where the funds should be allocated, I think it’s a little bit of a loaded question because a lot of times when you’re trying to allocate funds, you’re trying to allocate funds based on the resources that you have or resources that you may need to continue on with the projects or grow with the projects that you want to be able to fund up and coming.

4762 So when it comes to that, it’s ‑‑ percentage‑wise, I wouldn’t know what the percentage would be per se. It’s kind of, like I said, a loaded question. But definitely funds will be needed to be able to advocate for further projects, advocate to grow those projects, advocate to cover the resources that are needed to provide those to the communities that we at least represent, which are the ethno communities, under‑represented communities that we represent.

4763 So in terms of percentage‑wise, that’s kind of a hard question to answer only because we’ll take everything that we can get. I mean, I can say 10 percent off the top, I could say five percent. I can say give us 100 percent. I think every organization can use pretty much everything that they can get. No matter how small or how large, I think everything would be used appropriately for their particular needs.

4764 MS. RTICHSHEVA: I can add something.

4765 So I had a chance to watch the presentation from our colleagues from Canada Radio Fund. As I remember, they proposed like $90,000 a year for operations to each community and campus radio stations. I think it is fair, so I can just give you some numbers.

4766 If we talk about U Multicultural, we probably spend $300,000 for operations for television studios in Winnipeg, so ‑‑ and as we are growing, we are now currently covering five Canadian provinces and we are planning to apply on licensing in those provinces as well, so it probably would be more than that.

4767 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you.

4768 In your view, then, I just want to dive down a little bit more, should diverse communities be served by numerous funds with diffuse funding or by a smaller number of funds with more concentrated funding such as the Indigenous Screen Office and the Black Screen Office? And then, further to that, what is the optimal balance, in your view, between diversity of funding organizations and efficiency in supporting diverse communities?

4769 MR. BERGANTIM: I think when it comes to how those funds should be utilized, whether it’s a bunch of small little specific funds or not, I think it’s more of a question of what the rules and regulations are to get those funds.

4770 I think it’s more so having lots of funds might get a little bit more complicated to regulate, whereas if you’ve got one fund but you change the rules on accessing those funds, you change the rules on the application of those funds, you change the rules on how to get all of those funds, and under those rules and regulations, I can apply ‑‑ or pretty much one umbrella sort of fund for everybody, but the amount you would get would be based on do I tick off this box, I tick off this box, I could provide this, we can provide that. That would be based on, of course, whatever formula that the CRTC would come up with.

4771 But I think too many funds get more complicated. It gets muddy in the water. It’s not as clear as it needs to be, whereas if we are looking at more and more major fund or a couple of different funds, then that would make it easier (a) for application purposes, accessibility purposes and, of course, for division purposes.

4772 MS. RTICHSHEVA: Yes. I just wanted to add, in my presentation I mentioned Australian experience on community broadcasters support, so I think it’s a perfect example. So they have a foundation with the multiple streams, so where you can get funding for (a) training, (b) engagement of Indigenous communities and group First Nations, (c) operations. They even have emergency funds, so if the organization cannot sustain for the next six months and something happened, then Australian government would ‑‑ community broadcast foundation want to make sure that the community TV or radio stations still can operate and serve community groups, so.

4773 I think it could be optimized fund for community TV and radio stations, so ‑‑ but again, there’s always option to continue this discussion with our colleagues from Canadian Radio Fund or CACTUS (phonetic).

4774 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much.

4775 I think we all know that the goal of the initial base contributions is to get money flowing quickly to better support specific programming types that might require additional funding. For example, you’ve heard that concerns have been raised about insufficient support for local news programming and equity‑deserving groups.

4776 So in your view, what improvements do you suggest about the current funding system to achieve the objectives of the Broadcasting Act?

4777 MS. RTICHSHEVA: Currently at U Multicultural we employ two journalists which produce exclusively news and civic content. Those journalists supported through LGI, and we really appreciate this initiative and the opportunity to be a part of this program.

4778 And the ‑‑ I just wanted to mention, so as an example, we have Arabic journalist who speaks Arabic, so he opens the door to Muslim community.

4779 So before we had Arabic journalist at U Multicultural, that wasn’t ‑‑ that was an issue for us to get into the community because the community itself is pretty closed.

4780 So I think that if we would get more support for this initiatives like hiring more reporters, diverse reporters who speak different foreign diverse languages, that would provide us ‑‑ give better opportunity to produce local news content or hire more diverse journalists who could focus on that, for sure.

4781 And there is a demand for diverse languages news in Winnipeg, Manitoba and across Canada. I can tell you that U Multicultural is very exclusive and unique organization because we don’t have any similar model across Canada which would serve different diverse groups, including Indigenous groups. It’s like one stop shop, so ‑‑ and we call ourself multimedia.

4782 So sometimes the term multimedia concerns funders, so ‑‑ and they ‑‑ like for some programs like LGI would have a written component, written journalism posted on our website, so the organization which administer funds for this component does not consider us eligible because they see TV, they see radio. They do not really understand the term multimedia, so.

4783 Thank you.

4784 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you so much for those answers.

4785 And that’s all I have. Thank you.

4786 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Naidoo.

4787 Let's go over to Commissioner Levy.

4788 COMMISSIONER LEVY: I just want to quickly get a clarification because you’ve talked about a fund dedicated to professional development and training for community media professionals, correct, that aligns with two other proposed funds, one operational and one for production.

4789 So are you suggesting creation of a distinct third fund specifically for professional development and training initiatives or is it all rolled into one, and who would administer and be responsibility for the funds that you proposed?

4790 MS. RTICHSHEVA: Thank you for your question.

4791 So the fund for training and professional development could be a separate stream under umbrella of the general operational fund. So I think it would simplify the whole application process because the eligibility criteria, the organization, the officers and we’re going to be familiar with them already, right, so when we start working on the application.

4792 So I apply on like lots of grants every week, so I know how hard it is to reach out different venues, so ‑‑ and if it’s going to be just one umbrella organization which would have different streams, that would be perfect for U Multicultural.

4793 In terms of training, so we train lots of community members, lots of people from under‑represented groups. With this example, with Arabic journalist, he engaged Arabic and Muslim seniors to the media, which is pillar. So it is important to engage them so because they produce amazing content. They really would like to be a part of the media landscape, so ‑‑ and he run trainings with them every week.

4794 So yeah, this is just amazing opportunity to engage communities into the media processes, so yes.

4795 MR. BERGANTIM: If I could add on to that really quick.

4796 Regarding the funding itself, as I said earlier, having lots of little pockets isn’t necessarily the way to go. I think the way to go here is to have a general fund but different rules underneath that fund because you’ve got everyone in place, you’ve already done this for years. The system is there, the people are there as opposed to creating something brand new. You’ve got to start all over from the bottom up, you’ve got to train those people. They’ve got to go around the block two, three, four, five times before they really get to know what they’re doing.

4797 So the extra funding that I think a lot of organizations are asking for all pretty much the same thing, it’s more clarity on what we can apply for, more clarity on what’s available but still have it under that one umbrella so it’s easily accessible and everybody that’s in place already knows the system and it's just that much easier to apply.

4798 MS. RTICHSHEVA: I also wanted to mention that we would like to see the transparent system, the transparent access to funds. We would like to have the opportunity to communicate with officers because from our past experience, it’s not related to CRTC, but it is related to journalism and broadcasting when we’ve applied on QCGO status. And we don’t know why, but the Commission decided that we’re not eligible and we’re not ‑‑ you know, they cannot consider us QCGO, so unfortunately, although we produce a regional, local media and use content every single day and sometimes the amount of content is bigger than produced by commercial broadcasters.

4799 So ‑‑ and that’s why we would like ‑‑ and we didn’t have a chance to talk to the officers. There is no phone number or email address posted on the website. There is no way to communicate with them.

4800 So unfortunately, it is what it is, but we would like to have a clear, transparent, easy to understand process of the application.

4801 Yes. We don’t really have any priorities about organization which would administer funds. It could be an independent body. But we would like to see the transparency.

4802 We would like, as recipients or candidates because this is taxpayers’ money ‑‑ we would like to see who those people who made those decision. What’s the background?

4803 Again, let’s back to QCGO. The staff there, they don’t have any media background or journalism background, unfortunately. How can they make a decision on our case or suggest to the advisory committee?

4804 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Transparency, yes, is a very important aspect to all of this. Thank you very much for your clarification.

4805 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you and thank you for sharing your experiences with us.

4806 We will now turn it back over to you to give any concluding remarks.

4807 MR. BERGANTIM: I just want to thank the Commission for having these hearings and having us here because, as U Multicultural, we try to provide a voice for ethno communities that don’t have a voice or would like a voice. No matter how small or how big, they’re all equally important. And right now, we represent a little over 30 different communities.

4808 So to provide them with that voice means so much to them, and I just want to thank the Commission for giving all of us who are here for all these hearings a voice, our voice to be able to give to you. So thank you very much for that.

4809 MS. RTICHSHEVA: U Multicultural, as I mentioned previously, work with many Indigenous groups and we produce content in Indigenous languages as well.

4810 So we are the only station ‑‑ I’m not talking about APTN ‑‑ the community‑based station which have this connection with Indigenous communities and First Nations. And we’re privileged, we really appreciate for this connection.

4811 So ‑‑ and I just wanted to mention that the role of community media in Indigenous production is huge because currently we’re working with Inuit Broadcasting Corporation as our partner. We work with the First Peoples Radio in Ottawa which broadcasts in Ottawa and Toronto. So we work with another station which actually reached out us from U.S., so it is a native station which is looking for content in Indigenous languages.

4812 So ‑‑ and we ‑‑ unfortunately, we don’t have like specific training ‑‑ specific fund focused on training of Indigenous journalists, but we have access to Canadian Heritage Fund just to support Indigenous languages initiatives, which again, gives us the opportunity to produce this content under the leadership of Indigenous communities and Indigenous producers.

4813 And we really would like to make sure that ‑‑ because Paul, he has a Portuguese background. I also have a mixed background. And we really would like to make sure that there is no barrier between APTN or any other Indigenous broadcasters and non‑Indigenous organizations because we’ve been created as a volunteer‑based non‑Indigenous organization. Now we have more than 51 percent of more Indigenous.

4814 So just ‑‑ you know, just to make sure there is no barrier for us to share this content as many as we can. I’m talking about Indigenous languages.

4815 So ‑‑ and also, I would like to thank CRTC for the opportunity to participate in the hearing. I’m optimistic about the positive impact that your decisions and policies will have on the future of community broadcasting.

4816 The cultural richness and democratic values that community broadcasters bring to our communities are invaluable and your support is crucial in preserving and enhancing those contributions.

4817 I’ll look forward to witnessing the positive outcomes of your efforts and the continued success of local media in Canada. Thank you for your time.

4818 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much. Thank you for your participation and for being here this afternoon.

4819 THE SECRETARY: Thank you.

4820 We will take a 10‑minute break and be back at 2:05.

‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 1:54 p.m.

‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 2:04 p.m.

4821 THE SECRETARY: Welcome back. We will now hear the presentation of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, Moving Picture Technicians, Artists and Allied Crafts of the United States, its Territories and Canada. Please introduce yourself and your colleague, and the Powerpoint will be shown, and you may begin.

Presentation

4822 MR. LEWIS: So, I think we win an award for having the longest name of an organization, but I hope that doesn’t count against our time.

4823 My name is John Lewis. I am an International Vice President and Director of Canadian Affairs for the IATSE.

4824 MS. LECOMPTE: I am Isabelle Lecompte, working with John Lewis at IAT Canada.

4825 MR. LEWIS: So, thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today. IATSE is one of North America’s largest entertainment industry labour unions. It represents over 170,000 creatives who work behind the scenes in film, television, and live theatre. In Canada, we represent over 35,000 English‑speaking and French‑speaking members. The IA membership spans a number of key creative production roles, including cinematographers, visual effects workers, prop masters, set decorators, costume designers, and hair and makeup artists. In these roles, IA members make independent creative contributions to domestic and foreign productions that are vital to a production’s overall identity and creative achievement.

4826 And just one example ‑‑ IA Local 212 crews in Calgary, and they alone, have achieved at least 48 Academy Award nominations and 14 wins, as well as at least 92 Emmy Award nominations and 22 wins, and each across a wide range of creative categories. And while IA Canadian members contribute creatively to many Canadian‑owned productions, they also make vital contributions to foreign‑owned productions that are filmed and produced in Canada. On average, 97 percent of the creatives contributing to a foreign‑owned production are Canadian. Those creatives ensure that those productions have strong Canadian identities and creative contributions. These are creatives who live and work in Canada.

4827 The IA is therefore uniquely placed to present an “on the ground” perspective of the practical implications that the CRTC’s proposed regulatory framework may have on the Canadian workers that make up the lifeblood of Canada’s domestic and foreign production industry.

4828 The IA supports the CRTC’s efforts to introduce a new contribution framework that imposes overall spending requirements on undertakings in a way that favours flexibility and adaptability. A flexible and adaptable framework should follow the guiding principle of “do no harm”. As global content expenditures decrease and international competition for productions rises, the new framework should not inadvertently harm some Canadians in the pursuit of supporting others.

4829 A thriving Canadian industry is one where all Canadians have meaningful opportunities to contribute to domestic and foreign productions in Canada. To achieve that, both domestic and foreign undertakings should be encouraged to hire and collaborate with Canadian talent. They should also make meaningful contributions to support the Canadian broadcasting industry as a whole, including in less traditional ways.

4830 That requires developing a framework that promotes equitable access to opportunities across Canada and among different groups of Canadians, including regionally and across different language markets and equity‑seeking groups.

4831 It also requires establishing an inclusive definition of what makes a production “Canadian” that can guide the development of the framework, not follow it. A flexible and adaptable framework should not inadvertently pit domestic undertakings against foreign undertakings. Domestic and foreign productions in Canada have been growing simultaneously. However, that growth will only continue if the framework is flexible enough to recognize the diverse range of contributions that both types of undertakings make to uplift Canadian creatives both above the line and below the line.

4832 MME LECOMPTE : L’exigence d’une contribution de base initiale obligatoire, sous la forme d’un paiement direct à un ou à quelques fonds traditionnels, nous apparaît incompatible avec l'engagement du CRTC en faveur de la flexibilité et de l'adaptabilité. Cette rigidité risquerait de dissuader les entreprises étrangères de réaliser des productions audiovisuelles au Canada. Cette situation serait extrêmement pénalisante pour les créateurs et créatrices canadiens qui dépendent fortement des productions étrangères pour obtenir des emplois stables.

4833 Nous disons cela pour deux raisons.

4834 Premièrement, l’exigence d'une contribution de base initiale présume que les entreprises étrangères ne contribuent pas déjà de manière significative à l’industrie de la production audiovisuelle au Canada. Cette supposition ignore les contributions vitales que les entreprises étrangères apportent déjà à l'industrie canadienne en créant des possibilités d'emploi importantes pour les membres canadiens de l'AIEST. En d’autres termes, le succès des membres canadiens de l'AIEST dépend en grande partie des productions étrangères qui tournent au Canada et qui utilisent presque exclusivement des équipes canadiennes.

4835 Deuxièmement, les risques associés à l’imposition d'une contribution de base rigide aux entreprises étrangères pourraient aggraver les tendances récentes de l’industrie mondiale. En effet, l’industrie audiovisuelle canadienne est confrontée à des défis contradictoires difficiles. Certaines régions renforcent leurs mesures d'incitation à la production étrangère, même si les dépenses en matière de contenu mondial diminuent. Ainsi, le Canada doit faire face à une compétition plus intense pour attirer des productions étrangères de moins en moins nombreuses. L’imposition d’une contribution de base initiale aux entreprises étrangères pourrait être la goutte qui fait déborder le vase. Cela pourrait les inciter à quitter le Canada, en emportant avec elles les emplois et leurs souhaitables contributions.

4836 L’impact dévastateur que cela pourrait avoir sur des membres canadiens de l’AIEST et sur d’autres travailleurs de l’industrie canadienne n’est pas seulement une préoccupation théorique. Les récentes grèves de la WGA et de la SAG‑AFTRA fournissent des exemples concrets de la manière dont les membres de l'AIEST sont impactés par le ralentissement de l'activité de productions étrangères. Ils ont subis des baisses de salaire désastreuses et une augmentation significative de chômage.

4837 Les créateurs et créatrices canadiens ne peuvent pas se permettre de perdre les occasions de travail indispensables qu'offrent les entreprises étrangères. Le cadre de contribution devrait donc garantir que les entreprises étrangères qui apportent ces contributions continuent de valoriser le Canada en tant que destination de production. Pour ce faire, le cadre de contribution devrait reconnaître la valeur des contributions inhérentes que les entreprises étrangères apportent déjà à l'écosystème canadien. En d'autres termes, le cadre ne devrait pas mettre en péril des emplois.

4838 Une exigence rigide de contribution financière de base risquerait également de réorienter les contributions existantes non traditionnelles, et cela au détriment des secteurs mal desservis. L'industrie canadienne de la production bénéficie actuellement de nombreux types de contributions différentes destinées à une gamme variée de contributeurs de l'industrie. Un nouveau cadre de contribution ne devrait pas nuire à certains membres de l'industrie au nom du soutien à d'autres.

4839 Par exemple, les programmes de formation sont essentiels pour les membres de l'AIEST. Ces formations complètent l'expérience acquise sur le plateau et sont très utiles pour obtenir et maintenir un emploi valorisant. De nombreuses entreprises, tant nationales qu’étrangères, consacrent déjà des ressources directement au soutien de la formation, soit de leur propre initiative, soit dans le cadre de programmes tels que l'obligation de contribution à la formation en vigueur au Québec. Ce serait une perte pour les membres de l'AIEST si ces entreprises devaient réduire le financement de ces initiatives parce qu'elles sont obligées de le réaffecter à une contribution de base initiale obligatoire aux fonds traditionnels.

4840 Il existe de nombreux moyens efficaces de soutenir l’industrie canadienne de la radiodiffusion sans faire fuir les possibilités d’emplois créatifs à l'étranger. Le nouveau cadre devrait reconnaître que la meilleure façon de maximiser l'efficacité du soutien à l’industrie canadienne de la radiodiffusion serait d'établir une exigence de contribution holistique et flexible que chaque entreprise pourrait satisfaire par un éventail de modèles de contribution acceptable. Cette approche favoriserait une plus grande diversité en matière de styles de membres de l’industrie et d’initiatives soutenues.

4841 MR. LEWIS: Traditional industry funds like the CMF bring value to certain aspects of the Canadian broadcasting and production industries, but a modernized framework presents an opportunity to service all aspects of the industry.

4842 For example, CMF’s production support is heavily concentrated in Toronto and Montreal, whereas massive Canadian production centres in British Columbia receive only a small fraction of CMF’s production support. A modernized contribution framework should aim to correct these regional disparities, not to perpetuate them. But the currently proposed initial base contribution requirement would force undertakings to shift funding out of B.C. and into the CMF’s hands, presumably for distribution back to Ontario and Quebec.

4843 Of course, it is unrealistic to expect the CMF to almost single‑handedly address and equitably fund every aspect of the Canadian domestic industry. The CMF’s stated mandate and its funding focuses almost exclusively on direct production of Canadian content. While certainly important, that excludes many valuable supports for the Canadian industry that are not directly tied to production, like training, like employment support and advocacy.

4844 It is also unrealistic to expect the CMF ‑‑ or any one fund ‑‑ to single‑handedly support both the English‑language and French‑language sectors. Canada’s broadcasting policy in the amended Broadcasting Act recognizes that the English‑ and French‑language broadcasting markets operate under different conditions. With that in mind, Canada’s broadcasting policy would be better achieved by encouraging undertakings to contribute to a wider range of funds, including some that are tailored to the unique aspects of the French‑language market and also to equity‑seeking groups. Overall, introducing greater flexibility in the types of funds that qualify for the contribution requirement would allow traditional funds like the CMF to continue to focus on what they do best, without creating or perpetuating gaps in terms of the people and projects that are supported.

4845 To conclude, we remind the Commission of the guiding principle we proposed at the outset: Do no harm. The modernized contribution framework should enhance all aspects of the Canadian production industry, not just a subset of the industry to the detriment of the whole. A rigid and inflexible framework risks inadvertently disincentivizing foreign production in Canada and undermining the livelihoods of tens of thousands of Canadian below‑the‑line creatives. If that happens, the goal of Canada’s broadcasting policy, which inherently depends on the contributions of those creatives, will not be achieved.

4846 The IATSE therefore urges the CRTC to refrain from establishing an initial base contribution requirement in the form of a direct financial payment to one or a small number of traditional industry funds. Instead, the contribution framework should prioritize flexibility and adaptability in the forms of contribution options and the recipients of those contributions.

4847 Thank you, and we are available to answer any questions you may have.

4848 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much for your presentation. Again, I know we have a lot of questions from panel members, so I will quickly turn things over to Vice‑Chair Scott.

4849 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you, Chair. Thank you very much.

4850 One of our earlier intervenors characterized broadcasting as having dual objectives ‑‑ so, it’s both cultural and also economic or industrial, and I think your presentation highlighted that today as well. We are telling Canadian stories, but we are also paying salaries and putting food on tables. Can you speak to the relationship between those two objectives? You certainly hinted at it in your presentation, but how can we as a Commission support cultural objectives without doing harm, as you said, on the economic side? I would be interested in hearing some more.

4851 MR. LEWIS: So, at a later stage I think that the key issue of what is a Canadian production I think is going to be addressed by this Commission. I think that’s going to be a great opportunity to have those discussions, but it’s not one versus the other; it’s the context, right, of our discussions. In a lot of ways, you know, I feel sort of like we should rewrite our ‑‑ because we’re not asking for any money; I think we may be the only group that’s coming here that’s not asking for any money or any funding. I say that sort of facetiously because even though the context is culture, there is an underlying economic analysis and consequence to everything we do; right? So, we are creating product that we can be proud of ‑‑ cultural products ‑‑ but it’s also putting bread on the table. It’s housing people.

4852 This is a big, thriving industry, and as we said, the whole industry globally is facing headwinds right now. You know, this unparalleled, unprecedented growth that we’ve seen in the last dozen years or so is coming to an end. You know, what we kind of colloquially referred to as ‘the streaming wars’ are coming to an end. You know, the business model of such an extreme number of productions at such high budgets I think is coming to an end, at least for the temporary period of time. And Canada has to be in a position where we can still be a viable location for those productions. And so, yes, you can’t divorce the cultural aspect of what you’re doing, but you have to consider the economics of what you’re doing.

4853 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you. Is there a non‑zero number that we could set for contribution without imposing harm? Isn’t there a way to set a contribution percentage and establish an exemption threshold that doesn’t drive out the investment you’re talking about?

4854 MR. LEWIS: So, we ‑‑ we’re a union, and we look after people that work in the industry, and in some ways I feel somewhat cautious in opining on policy and some of it is policy. And so, I say good luck to you in terms of doing that ‑‑ but all facetiously. And I hear the issue of, you know, is it one fund or multiple funds? Well, what about new funds that may exist, or new organizations that may exist? And I get concerned when I hear, like, it can’t be the traditional groups that are already there because that sort of, you know, precludes anyone new from coming to the table. And isn’t that what we’re trying to achieve with diversity ‑‑ is about opening up, you know, different groups from being a little more involved in the industry?

4855 As the largest trade union dealing with this, we’re dealing with those issues in terms of opening up our membership, and it’s about training. You know, we spend millions of dollars in training. We receive next to nothing from public support for training. That is because every collective agreement, we have contributions from our employers go to training; in Québec, you have the one percent training tax, but really that’s still a contribution made by employers. You have to have a two‑million‑dollar annual salary, so guess which employers are putting that money up? And it’s the foreign employers.

4856 But when we talk about diversity, it’s ‑‑ you know, recruitment is one issue. Retention is really what it’s about. We can recruit. We work with organizations; particularly in Toronto, Vancouver we’re recruiting different groups, but if we don’t have the money available for training, it’s the retention that we fall down on. It’s a tough industry. I heard, you know, the previous panel on disability. It’s a tough industry. It’s a freelance industry. You know, we were the gig economy before there was a thing called ‘the gig economy’. We’ve been around since 1893, in Canada since 1898. It’s freelance. You’re hired day‑to‑day. And there’s not a lot of opportunity for training, and the unions fill that void.

4857 And so, we’ve got to look at it, and if an employer wants to put money in for training, I think that is crucially important. And the unions have had generations of experience using that money for training, to make sure that we can reach out and train groups that have not been part of the industry before.

4858 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you for that.

4859 Following up on the theme of flexibility versus rigidity, so the new Act expands the objectives, and it was already a ‑‑ let’s call it a relatively broad set of objectives in the first place. If we allow maximum flexibility, is there a risk that the breadth of the objectives doesn’t get covered? And is there therefore a role for the CRTC in taking a more prescriptive role in directing where the funds ultimately end up and which objectives they support? And is flexibility contrary to that, or is that part of the solution?

4860 MR. LEWIS: I think it’s part of the solution. It can’t just be ‑‑ it can’t be just ‘Trust us; we’ll put the money where we say we’re going to put it.’ I think there has to be some type of reporting mechanism. There has to be some way that the CRTC and the industry as a whole can evaluate if the money is going where it’s supposed to be going. I think that has to be part of any kind of solution.

4861 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Okay, thank you.

4862 And my last question. Both today and in your written submission, you drew a strong distinction or a need for a differentiation between domestic and foreign players. Can you speak more about why the same rules can’t apply to both? What are the distinguishing features, and what’s the objective that we’re pursuing in distinguishing the two?

4863 MR. LEWIS: Their business models just completely do not marry each other. You have global streamers that really ‑‑ by the name, they’re global, and they have a global marketplace and they have a global business. And that isn’t so much the case in terms of domestic broadcasters. There’s a whole statutory regulatory regime for more traditional broadcasters, good and bad, that doesn’t exist for the streamers as well. So, I think it’s about bringing in parallel, equitable rules that apply equally to both.

4864 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you very much.

4865 Madam Chair, those are my questions.

4866 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Thank you so much.

4867 Let’s go over to Vice‑Chair Barin.

4868 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you. I have a couple of follow‑up questions.

4869 So, in your presentation, you highlight the issue of having an initial base contribution as it may harm the diverse foreign funding that’s already present in the industry. So I just want to be clear, do you support the online platforms who are asking that the Commission consider the current investments that they are already doing in support of Canadian content when we establish a contribution framework?

4870 MR. LEWIS: Yes. So what we are saying is ‑‑ you know, and I really applaud the documentation that the CRTC comes out, because I think it really speaks more broadly to the industry. And there is too much about, you know, free riders and all this stuff. I didn't come from the CRTC, but it came from pockets in the industry. And we're an industry that needs both. We need a strong domestic industry, and we need a foreign service industry. They work well together. They dovetail well together. You look at Quebec as a perfect example of that.

4871 But to ignore or to say it doesn't matter what they're spending right now, particularly if we go down the road at the next stage and define what Canadian production is, and you know, and then try to, you know, fit it within that definition, I think it has to be a factor.

4872 Doesn't mean that a broadcaster cannot make contributions. That could be one of the ‑‑ in the envelope of where they deliver the monies, that could be one of the areas that they deliver money. But I think so can be training, because that is crucial. It doesn't get talked about enough. It doesn't get talked about enough by us, the groups that actually do the training. And shame on us for doing that.

4873 But this is an evolving industry. The technology is just blowing up, not just in terms of the technical aspects of the job, video walls ‑‑ you have these AV video walls now; they're revolutionary ‑‑ but also just the platforms. You know, we're going to set up a set of rules today that it might be outdated in five years. You know, the different platforms, you have FAS, you know, free ad‑supported television. You have ad‑based video on demand that is sort of overtaking, you know, subscription video on demand. Who knows where it's going to be in five years?

4874 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Okay, thank you.

4875 I am going to go back now to your “do no harm” theme. So it applies to foreign undertakings, but it also would apply to domestic undertakings. So I heard you say that you support regional equity and representation and funding for Indigenous groups and equity‑seeking groups. So this would imply that we have new monies in the system. And if it didn't, and I'm just trying to clarify what your position is, because if it didn't, it would mean we would have to reallocate resources which would affect the existing stakeholders in the system. So can you sort of address or maybe flesh out what your position is with regards to new monies in the system?

4876 MR. LEWIS: Yeah, I see in whatever model that is created there will be new money coming in. I guess we can argue as to the extent, the scope, the amount of the new money. I think some of it is a bit of reallocation, and I don't think some of that is in the CRTC purview in terms of how the CMF operates, in terms of how it distributes its money.

4877 Because put it this way, the largest foreign sector location in Canada is British Columbia by far. And they receive less than 10 per cent of the CMF funding. And so any model that potentially takes money away from direct financial contribution for productions in B.C. to transfer it into the CMF, knowing that that money is not going to end up in Vancouver, I just don't see how that's equitable.

4878 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: The concrete example is helpful. Thank you very much. Back to the Chair.

4879 MR. LEWIS: By the way, our largest local is in Vancouver, so that also may explain some of my reasons for answering that way.

4880 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thank you for that. Thank you, Vice‑Chair. Let's go over to Commissioner Levy.

4881 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Good afternoon. Certainly very familiar with IATSE. My region includes Saskatchewan and Manitoba. And I'm certainly very familiar with the impact that the foreign online streamers have had on the production industry in Manitoba.

4882 However, Canada I think ranks about third or fourth in terms of the jurisdiction that is the location for the most online streaming production. Despite that, we hear a lot about the threat of productions leaving. But are you aware of anywhere in the world where streaming companies have left countries solely due to contribution regimes and contribution requirements?

4883 MR. LEWIS: No. And I will draw a comparison between C‑11 and C‑18. And I think, you know, the US foreign service production companies that we deal with play a lot differently than the other organizations that are covered by CAT. And they tend to work with local governments in countries and try to facilitate a worthwhile process sort of thing.

4884 But having said that, Canada has fallen behind. We don't do largely big tentpole feature film productions anymore. That's a tax credit issue. The UK, Australia, some other countries are leaps and bounds way more economic than we are. We've had issues with temporary foreign worker program, issues about getting people across the border. It becomes just a headache of doing work in Canada. And just when all things being equal, I'm not saying that anyone will pinpoint and say, That CRTC policy is the reason, but we're just trying to avoid when it's so easy to go anywhere globally to do the work, we're just trying to be aware and cognizant that there are risks associated with the policies that the CRTC is going to bring down.

4885 COMMISSIONER LEVY: We are going to be talking again to some of the online streamers. And I wonder, do you think that this is the room where it's going to happen? Or do you think there's some other level of negotiation that has to occur before we settle on where we're going to end up with the regime?

4886 MR. LEWIS: I am not sure if I am allowed to answer that question. I'm not sure what is appropriate in terms of negotiation or not. I am somewhat relieved ‑‑ again, this is an industry that always works together, both domestically and foreign service. And there was a lot of vitriol going, coming into these hearings. I was here the first day. I heard two of the larger organizations. They weren't that far apart, quite frankly. I don't think they were that far apart.

4887 And you know, I hope there's going to be informal discussions that take place that hopefully that could help inform this Commission in terms of going forward what might be acceptable, a good Canadian solution, right, a nice compromise solution that everyone can live under. I think that would make a lot of sense here.

4888 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Just to be clear, we are transparent. So ‑‑

4889 MR. LEWIS: Okay.

4890 COMMISSIONER LEVER:  ‑‑ what ‑‑

4891 MR. LEWIS: I might not be, but that's okay.

4892 COMMISSIONER LEVY: This is, for us, this is the room where it happens. So thank you very much.

4893 THE CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner Levy is going to get us in trouble. I'm teasing. I'm teasing.

4894 Thank you very much for that. We would like to turn it back over to you to have the last word.

4895 MR. LEWIS: Thank you. So with over 35,000 Canadian members, the IA represents a significant portion of film and television creatives in Canada. These members are a critical part of Canada's creative sector in offering our creative contributions. We're proud of the creative contributions we've made on domestic Canadian productions like When Calls the Heart, Heartland, and Trailer Park Boys. And we're equally as proud to work on Star Trek: Discovery, Supernatural, and Jusqu'au déclin.

4896 After years of investment in Canadian below‑the‑line talent, foreign productions no longer need to bring in costume designers, gaffers, or cinematographers from other countries when they shoot big productions in Canada. Those jobs are now almost exclusively performed by Canadians.

4897 The contribution framework that prioritizes flexibility and adaptability must recognize the significant contributions that foreign undertakings already make in Canada. A single foreign service production can employ up to 1,000 Canadian below‑the‑line creatives. An example: HBO's critically acclaimed The Last of Us employed over 900 IA members in Alberta over the course of 17 months. These are highly skilled jobs that allow Canadians to make meaningful creative contributions to world‑class productions.

4898 A flexible and adaptable contribution framework also cannot ignore the qualitative forms of contribution that many foreign undertakings make including in training programs. These qualitative contributions uplift a diverse range of Canadian creatives and talent and help us deliver stronger results in the future.

4899 With all the work that's been put into building up the Canadian creatives and talent, it would be devastating if the modernized framework pushed away foreign production in an already competitive landscape with lower global production expenditures. And from IA's perspective, this is what we would like to leave you with: Whatever decisions the CRTC makes as it builds a new contribution framework, we urge it to please do no harm. Thank you.

4900 THE CHAIRPERSON: Message received. Thank you.

4901 THE SECRETARY: Thank you very much. I will now ask the Canadian Film Centre, the National Screen, and l'institut national de l'image et du son de venir à la table, s’il vous plaît.

4902 When you are ready, please introduce yourself, and you may begin.

Presentation

4903 MS. BAILEY: Thank you and bonjour, Madam Chair, Vice‑Chairs, Commissioners, and staff. My name is Maxine Bailey, and I'm the executive director of the Canadian Film Centre based in Toronto. I'm joined here by the co‑authors of our submission, Joy Loewen, CEO of the National Screen Institute in Winnipeg, and Jean Hamel, the director general of L'inis based in Montreal.

4904 We are honoured to be part of this historic hearing that is so critical to the sustainability and continued success of our screen industry. And I know that all of you are passionate about it. So thank you for inviting us this afternoon.

4905 We are grateful for the support of international streaming services that provide project funding for us and organizations like ours. And as you have heard over the past few days, there is still a pressing financial need for all players in our industry, including our three organizations, looking for more.

4906 The CFC, NSI, and L'inis all believe in the power of storytelling and the beauty and necessity that the imaginations of Canadian creators have to share their stories with all of us. While some of you may not know who our organizations are, I have no doubt that everyone in this room and those watching online have viewed something created by one of our collective network of over 4,000 Canadian alumni.

4907 Now, here lies the crux of the situation: it is our belief that there simply cannot be a growth in support of the production of Canadian content without the growth in support of the Canadian talent and those who train them, who bring these stories to life.

4908 Our purpose today is to ensure that our three organizations continue to focus on the talent behind the stories, to bring content, jobs, and cultural relevance to the country we all call home. There would arguably be no Sarah Polley and her 2022 Oscar win without her journey, years prior, through training at the CFC. There would be no Jennifer Podemski, whose latest series Little Bird is taking the nation by storm, without their time at the CFC and the NSI. And without time spent at L'inis, there would be no Ariane Louise‑Seize and her Humanist Vampire that reached a new generation of film buffs as well.

4909 A fun fact, if I may: last week, you heard from Tracey Deer, director and vice‑president of the DGC; Damon D'Oliveira, producer and chair of the CMPA; Joan Jenkinson, producer and executive director of the Black Screen Office. Again, these are all examples of the calibre of talent that is pushing our industry forward, who also happen to be proud CFC and NSI alumni.

4910 Together, we are Canada's largest not‑for‑profit institutions dedicated to the sole purpose of discoverability, training, and upskilling talent in the audiovisual sector, representing both official languages. We provide unparalleled training for producers, writers, actors, directors, editors, and music composers and more for screens of any size. And we like to ensure jobs to keep our industry thriving and to create more content that everyone here in these hearings so desperately seeks.

4911 Collectively, we represent more than a century of experience and economic and global impact. Our alumni base brand Canada like no other institution can. Collectively, our alumni have won accolades from film festivals, fan favourites, Canadian Screen Awards, IRIS awards, Gémeaux, Academy Awards, all the way up to the Order of Canada.

4912 Despite our successes, to be clear, our three organizations are outliers. We are the forgotten beginnings of and the gateway to the industry's diverse talent pipeline. If content is king ‑‑ or better yet, queen ‑‑ where are we in the discussion?

4913 This hearing is indeed an important first step, and we thank you for that. We also thank you for seeing that our three organizations are an essential part of the funding equation, and we ask to be considered as you on the Commission drive the modernization of the funding structure forward for us all.

4914 I will now turn it over to my colleague Jean.

4915 M. HAMEL : Bonjour à vous.

4916 Il a été beaucoup question de formation, en particulier aujourd'hui, mais depuis le début des audiences. Alors, on peut se poser la question : Pourquoi est‑il important de soutenir la formation professionnelle dans le secteur de l’audiovisuel? Les raisons sont multiples, mais on va se limiter à en exposer cinq en priorité.

4917 La première raison, c'est que la formation est le premier maillon de la chaîne de la production audiovisuelle. Rares sont les industries dont les travailleurs et travailleuses ne sont pas au préalable formés pour pratiquer leur métier. On n’imagine pas un plombier ou un électricien travailler sur un chantier sans qu’au préalable on se soit assuré de ses compétences. C’est la même chose pour la production audiovisuelle. Des investissements dans la formation professionnelle contribuent à former une main‑d'œuvre qualifiée, ce qui favorise le développement et la croissance de l’industrie. Cela garantit que les professionnels formés sont rapidement opérationnels et prêts à contribuer à l'économie du secteur dès leur entrée sur le marché du travail.

4918 La deuxième raison, c'est l’expertise en matière pédagogique de nos organisations. À chacun son métier, comme le dit le proverbe. Le CFC, le NSI et L’inis sont des centres de formation professionnelle dont la mission première est d’offrir des programmes adaptés aux besoins et aux tendances de l’industrie audiovisuelle. Ça veut dire avoir une approche pédagogique qui identifie pour qui, pour quoi et comment développer les compétences nécessaires à la bonne marche du secteur.

4919 La troisième raison, c'est soutenir l’adoption de nouvelles pratiques : des pratiques en termes de compétences comportementales, par exemple, en termes de prévention du harcèlement qui peut exister sur les plateaux de tournage, les compétences en termes de leadership. Ça peut vouloir dire aussi des compétences qui tiennent compte des nouvelles réalités : les tournages écoresponsables, par exemple; des compétences sur l’utilisation de nouvelles technologies : les studios virtuels, l'intelligence artificielle); des compétences en termes de techniques innovantes : des productions immersives ou de réalité augmentée. Investir dans la formation permet aux professionnels d'acquérir des compétences de pointe qui encouragent l'innovation dans l'industrie et l’adoption de meilleurs comportements.

4920 Quatrième raison : Favoriser la promotion de la diversité et de l'inclusion. En soutenant des programmes de formation accessibles à tous, on contribue à la représentation équitable de diverses communautés et de groupes sous‑représentés au sein de l'industrie.

4921 Cinquième raison : L’impact positif sur l’identité culturelle canadienne. Les productions audiovisuelles jouent un rôle essentiel dans la création d'une identité culturelle forte. En finançant la formation, on contribue directement au bien‑être culturel en favorisant la création d'œuvres qui reflètent et célèbrent la diversité culturelle du Canada.

4922 Je cède maintenant la parole à ma collègue Joy.

4923 MS. LOEWEN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Jean and Maxine, my two counterparts, have demonstrated the collective impact of our institutions on the sector. Our goal is to illustrate how the CRTC can further advance our commitment to nurturing and shaping new generations of diverse storytellers and creators in every region of the country.

4924 We propose that the Commission create the new Canada audiovisual and immersive training fund. Administered by CFC, NSI, and L'inis, this fund would support our training programs, fostering creativity, break‑through ideas, growth, and employment opportunities within our creative economy. Contributions from Canadian and foreign broadcasters required to register under the Act would help sustain the Fund, as mandated by the CRTC.

4925 We believe that the creation of such a fund squarely aligns with the federal government's directives to the CRTC, and that is to champion an inclusive future, addressing the challenges faced by equity‑seeking, ethnocultural, and underrepresented groups, including Indigenous, Black, official language minorities, and other racialized communities, and promote the creation, vitality, and discoverability of their programming.

4926 The proposed fund would help fulfill the CRTC's mandate under Section 11.1(b) of the Online Streaming Act and address the industry's calls for at least 20 per cent of initial base contributions to be directed to certified independent production funds, CIPFs. Our call for a new training fund echoes the request from key stakeholders like CMPA and DGC for enhanced productions and training opportunities for underrepresented creators in Canada.

4927 So, why us? Well, the CFC, National Screen Institute, and L'inis are the bedrock of the industry. We believe that a fund dedicated to training creators and storytellers in Canada is crucial to meet the overarching policy objectives as stated in the Online Streaming Act. We are working together as thought leaders in an ever‑changing industry. We complement each other's strengths and offerings to identify and further Canadian creative talent.

4928 Our training programs provide Black, Indigenous, francophone, and racialized and regional creators with the opportunities they deserve to succeed in an industry that must reflect the richness of our diverse nation. Our programs contribute to the creative economy and take significant steps towards truth and reconciliation, addressing historical inequities in Canada's cultural sector.

4929 The skills we cultivate in our audiovisual training programs go far beyond storytelling, preparing creators for a world where creativity and innovation are economic drivers. The effects of our training ripple beyond the audiovisual sector, enhancing growth in interconnected fields like augmented reality, gaming, multimedia content creation, and the visual arts.

4930 The achievements of our alumni speak volumes: 82 per cent of the National Screen Institute alumni continue to shape the industry, developing over a thousand projects. CFC and L'inis alumni boast the production of over 195 feature films and 800 projects respectively. Our collective success is a testament to our transformative impact. Without our training programs, Canadian programming would scarcely mirror our nation's rich diversity and inclusivity.

4931 The National Screen Institute, along with our esteemed counterparts, urges the CRTC to consider the creation of a new fund dedicated to supporting our training programs. Together, all of us, we will continue to be catalysts for creativity, innovation, and inclusivity, propelling the Canadian audiovisual industry toward a future of unprecedented growth and representation.

4932 Together, we will move the needle to ensure the voices of the mosaic of creators and their stories are heard, seen, and celebrated here in Canada and all across the globe.

4933 We thank you for your consideration and now invite conversation with you for further discussion.

4934 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Merci beaucoup. You have covered a lot of ground. I will turn things over to Commissioner Levy to kick things off.

4935 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Good afternoon. You've proposed that your three organizations received funding from the special fund to support work that you already do. How would you allocate the contributions between your three institutions?

4936 MS. LOEWEN: Good question. So initially, we have discussed areas of new growth, appreciating that there is a current demand that must be met in terms of upscaling talent based on current technology. There's also opportunity as relates to new technology and areas as relates to AI. And then broadening, right now the demand for our programs is such that we can't compete. So the disbursement of the funds between the three of us would be through further collaboration. This is something that we have over the last year and a half been speaking about, playing with the idea of how we can identify gaps as well as identify areas of overlap and work together to eliminate the gaps and address the overlaps.

4937 I turn it to Jean and Maxine to speak further.

4938 M. HAMEL : Peut‑être que je peux ajouter à cela le fait que chacune de nos institutions a des expertises particulières aussi, le fait de pouvoir travailler ensemble, que ce fonds nous permet de collaborer ensemble, parce que de travailler ensemble, ça implique de pouvoir permettre à nos équipes de se rencontrer et de discuter sur nos programmes respectifs de formation, de pouvoir échanger sur nos pratiques, les bonnes, les enjeux que nous partageons chacun de notre côté, mais de mettre en commun les meilleures pratiques pour pouvoir offrir les meilleures programmes de formation.

4939 Le NSI a une expertise particulière au niveau de soutien à la communauté autochtone. On pourrait en bénéficier, ce qu'on a besoin effectivement de faire au Québec auprès des clientèles autochtones francophones. Avec le NSI, ils ont une expertise particulière au niveau de formation de long métrage qu'on peut aller chercher chez eux aussi.

4940 De plus, de pouvoir, dans le cas de L'inis, qui offre des formations en français, de pouvoir rayonner davantage en s'appuyant sur des structures qui sont existantes à la fois en Ontario et à Winnipeg.

4941 COMMISSIONER LEVY: We have heard ‑‑ in fact, the intervenor just before you, IATSE, talked about the prediction that funding for production is going to decline under the current regulatory system or not. So in a world of perhaps declining resources, how should the Commission prioritize contributions? Should it be primarily to production? Or you know, where does training fit into that scenario? Because there's not going to be enough money to be effective at everything.

4942 MS. LOEWEN: So we would present that the monies for training, there needs to be enhanced production and training. There does need to be both. You know, I mean, as Maxine cited in her remarks, many of the decision‑makers and the speakers that you heard earlier received training years ago for the roles that they have now. And we are legacy builders. We do need to identify, we do need to support the talent that is in the system now so that there can be increased production opportunities later on down the road.

4943 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Could training be perhaps a longer‑term goal under a broader contribution framework as opposed to coming straight out of the initial base contributions?

4944 MS. LOEWEN: We see an urgent demand. So the time is now. The fact is, is that we have not received funding to support our programs for over ‑‑ federal funding received to deliver our programs for 15 years. And the impacts of that is that we have done more with less, but there is an ongoing demand, especially as it relates to underrepresented creators to service the demand at this time now. So it's both.

4945 M. HAMEL : J'ajouterais quelque chose par rapport à cela. Effectivement, l'absence de financement du gouvernement fédéral depuis 2008‑2009 a joué... a eu un impact critiques sur nos organisations. Dans le cas de L'inis, on aurait pu disparaître du jour au lendemain avec le retrait qui a été fait du financement du fédéral. Dans le cas de L'inis, on a joui du soutien du gouvernement provincial du Québec, qui a comblé la différence, qui nous a permis de maintenir nos opérations et de développer de nouvelles opérations. Mais là, on est rendus à une étape où toute expansion doit être soutenue par des fonds supplémentaires. On travaille de plus en plus avec les professionnels directement. On est en contact avec les syndicats, les associations qui regroupent différentes entreprises de production. La demande de formation est là. Plusieurs organisations ont leur propre programme de formation, puis probablement que ça va continuer, mais quelque part, on a besoin d'une expertise commune pour partager des réalités qui sont identiques, quel que soit le métier ou le secteur d'activité. C'est ce qu'on propose de faire. C'est de pouvoir regrouper une expertise pour nous et pour les autres aussi qui ont des activités de formation. Je donnerais pour exemple : Quand est arrivée la pandémie, on a pu développer, avec la collaboration des associations au Québec, une formation sur comment gérer les problèmes liés à la transmission de la pandémie sur les plateaux de tournage. On travaille aussi avec le Bureau du cinéma et de la télévision du Québec sur les tournages écoresponsables. Ce sont là des compétences qui sont transversales, mais pour ça, il faut avoir des organisations qui sont capables de s'asseoir et de réfléchir sur les besoins de formation, sur la façon de livrer les formations, sur évaluer les formations, et de tenir compte de ces évaluations‑là pour les améliorer.

4946 MS. BAILEY: I was just going to add, both of my colleagues have covered it quite well, but I was just going to say that, as I said in my remarks, we are outliers. We have not been considered for federal funding. But the demand for training and content has grown exponentially and we're actually feeling that. The number of applicants that we get for each one of our programs has grown and grown and grown. So do you prioritize training or production? I think the Commission has a very, very hard job, and I sympathize. But truly, you need to do both.

4947 COMMISSIONER LEVY: And finally, we've had a number of organizations come forward saying they want their own funding streams. They feel very strongly that, you know, it's all about that “Nothing about us without us.” So how do you respond to the needs and interests of Indigenous creators and disabled creators and all of the other groups who feel very strongly that they're the ones who should be rowing the boat for training in particular?

4948 MS. LOEWEN: At this point in the discussion, I'm going to say, especially when we're considering the modernization and the growth and inclusion, I'm going to say there has to be room in the boat for all of us, to use your words, Joanne, or Commissioner Levy.

4949 And I present that by way of this is a stage in time right now where we have an opportunity to hear all of the voices. And in this case, I don't feel ‑‑ and that of my colleagues ‑‑ we don't feel that it is an us or them, a this or that, that there is opportunity for all of us to present our needs, stating who the audience is, the stakeholders, the creators we're seeking to support and appreciate that this is now happening at a time when the industry is wanting the content. This is the growth of the industry.

4950 So you know, I mean, I would purport ‑‑ and this is based on experience, we work together to reach those underrepresented ‑‑ to reach the underrepresented communities of creators, and that appreciating that some of what we do is distinct.

4951 So in the case of the ISO and the BSO and the BIPOC TV Film CISF, we support ‑‑ Reelworld you heard this morning ‑‑ we support their work and in many cases we work alongside of them. And what we would say is that we would want to encourage more of this, appreciating that as we sit here, the three of us together, we represent the entire nation. So between the Canadian Film Centre, L'inis, National Screen Institute, you have an institution that is an umbrella and distinct in that we have the history of working together to support our ask today.

4952 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you very much.

4953 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much.

4954 Let's go to Vice‑Chair Scott for the last question. Thank you.

4955 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Good afternoon. How would you characterize the current level of support from online undertakings for the development, training, and support of Canadian creators, and do you see a risk that imposing new requirements could have negative repercussions on existing supports?

‑‑‑ Laughter

4956 MS. LOEWEN: That was a go ahead. You know who the mouthpiece is here.

4957 So appreciate the question. And what we would say, I mean, as is stated by my colleague Maxine in the opening, we are grateful for the support that has been received from streamers and the online broadcasters. We would position that our position is that more of this is needed. More support is needed to support the demand for content and grow audiences based on the stories that are produced.

4958 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Okay, maybe to ask it another way, if the Commission were to push too hard, might we end up displacing supports that already exist? Or do we come out even? Could we come out behind? It's similar to the “do not harm” message that we heard from our last presenters.

4959 MS. BAILEY: I kind of like that last message. We have really good relationship with our streaming partners and broadcasters. They stood up and they've supported us and they actually filled a void for us when our federal funding fell through. So we're very, very grateful and appreciative for all the work and support they've given us. And so again, you have a very hard decision, and “do no harm” should be a good way for you to look at it.

4960 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Okay. Thank you very much.

4961 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much. So we would like to turn things back over to you for any concluding remarks.

4962 MS. BAILEY: As stated, the Commission has a very, very hard job. But we know that these hearings are here to support the future of funding of our industry and the growth of our industry. And I ask the Panel to consider what would happen if organizations like ourselves and others that you've heard from in the last couple weeks did not exist.

4963 So we're not eligible for current federal funding, operational funding, and this needs to be addressed, as there's huge demand and growth, and we need to continue. And I believe it's just, the last thing we could leave you with, it's imperative that if Canada wants to be competitive in this field, then an investment at the beginning of the pipeline will support all that you've heard over the last couple of weeks. And we thank you for your care and your thoughtful questions.

4964 M. HAMEL : Merci.

4965 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Merci beaucoup.

4966 MS. LOEWEN: Thank you.

4967 LA SECRÉTAIRE : Merci. Ceci conclut l'audience pour aujourd'hui.

4968 We will be back tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. Thank you.

‑‑‑ Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3:01 p.m. to resume on Tuesday, November 28, 2023, at 9:00 a.m.

Reporters
Deana Johansson
Monique Mahoney
Lynda Johansson
Tania Mahoney
Brian Denton