Transcription, Audience du 24 novembre 2023

Les participants et l'endroit

Tenue à :

Centre de Conférence
Portage IV
140, Promenade du Portage
Gatineau (Québec)

Participants :

• Présidente :Vicky Eatrides
• Membres : Alicia Barin, Vice présidente, Radiodiffusion
  Adam Scott, Vice président, Télécommunications
  Nirmala Naidoo, Territories/Conseillère, Alberta et Territoires du Nord Ouest
  Joanne T. Levy, Conseillère, Manitoba et Saskatchewan
• Conseillères juridiques : Valérie Dionne
  Bianka Lauzon
• Secrétaire : Jade Roy
• Gérantes d'audience : Courtney Fitzpatrick
  Marie Lyse Lavallée

Table des matières

Présentations

3384 Aboriginal Peoples Television Network Incorporated

3545 Canadian Independent Screen Fund for Black and People of Colour Creators

3566 All Out Arts Management

3583 Playground Films Inc.

3607 In My Own Voice

3623 IN SYNC MEDIA

3693 Coalition M.É.D.I.A.

3770 Racial Equity Media Collective

3850 BIPOC TV & Film

3958 Black Screen Office

4022 Racial Equity Screen Office

Transcription

Gatineau (Québec)
24 novembre 2023
Ouverture de l'audience à 9 h 00

Gatineau (Québec)

‑‑‑ L'audience débute le vendredi 24 novembre 2023 à 9 h 00

3381 THE SECRETARY: Good morning, everyone.

3382 We will start this morning with the presentation of Aboriginal Peoples Television Network Incorporated.

3383 Please introduce yourself and your colleagues and you may begin.

Présentation

3384 MS. ILLE: Good Morning, Chairperson, Vice‑Chairs and Commissioners. Thank you for inviting us to appear here today.

3385 Kwaï! Nd’aliwizi Monika Ille. Alnaba sqwa nia odzi odanak m8wkaw8gan.

3386 I am the Chief Executive Officer of APTN. To my left is Cheryl McKenzie, Executive Director, News and Current Affairs; to my right is Mike Omelus, Executive Director of Content and Strategy; and to his right, Joel Fortune, our legal counsel.

3387 We will focus today on the key questions for this hearing.

3388 First, a little about APTN and our role in the broadcasting system.

3389 APTN launched in 1999 from a strong base established by Television Northern Canada and APTN's member societies, all of whom are Indigenous broadcasting organizations and producers.

3390 Avec son lancement, APTN est devenu le premier télédiffuseur autochtone national au monde. Nous en sommes fiers et nous pensons que toute la population canadienne devrait en être fière. Ça n’aurait pas été possible sans la vision des peuples autochtones et le leadership et le soutien du CRTC, ni sans l’appui de l’ensemble de l’industrie canadienne de radiodiffusion.

3391 Vingt‑quatre ans plus tard, APTN fait toujours partie intégrante du milieu de la radiodiffusion. Dans notre soumission écrite, nous avons souligné les nombreux partenariats, coproductions et autres relations que nous avons établis avec d’autres diffuseurs canadiens de l’industrie. En travaillant ensemble, nous avons tous eu un impact très important sur la participation et la représentation des peuples autochtones.

3392 I remember one comment from our 1999 licence application that there were more space aliens than Indigenous peoples on television. Science fiction is still very popular, but because of APTN, Indigenous peoples can now see themselves reflected on screen, consistently, in Canada.

3393 Importantly, they can see themselves in authentic roles created by Indigenous writers, played by Indigenous actors, directed by our own people and broadcast on our own network. Indigenous peoples also access news and information programming featuring stories that are important to them, that no one else covers, and from their own perspectives, and that is amazing.

3394 We think that APTN lies at the heart of this success story. This is because expression and the means of expression go together and, in our view, are inseparable.

3395 Amendments to the Broadcasting Act reflect this important understanding, as does the recent Direction to the CRTC.

3396 Of course, APTN is part of the entire broadcasting system and collaborates with many others to ensure that Indigenous storytelling is well supported.

3397 This includes the Indigenous Screen Office. APTN is a founding member of ISO and we have a shared mission to develop Indigenous creative talent and create authentic Indigenous content for Indigenous peoples and wider audiences. We support the designation of funding to assist ISO with its mandate.

3398 MR. OMELUS: APTN also supports the Commission's proposal that online undertakings make an initial base contribution to support the Canadian broadcasting system. The Broadcasting Act is now explicit that online undertakings, including foreign undertakings, are part of the broadcasting system. All undertakings should contribute in an appropriate manner to support broadcasting policy objectives.

3399 L’arrivée des services en ligne au Canada a eu des répercussions sur l’ensemble de l’industrie, et APTN n’en fait pas exception. En tant qu’organisme caritatif à but non lucratif qui ne dispose pas d’un financement gouvernemental de base, APTN dépend en grande partie des revenus constitués des tarifs de gros provenant des entreprises de distribution de radiodiffusion pour soutenir ses activités.

3400 Depuis 2018, date de notre dernier renouvellement de licence, ces revenus ont diminué de plus de 10 pour cent, et, compte tenu de l’inflation, il s’agit d’une baisse de 28 pour cent en termes de dollars réels.

3401 Au cours de la même période, les revenus attribués aux services en ligne au Canada ont atteint plus de 5 milliards de dollars par année. Nous savons tous qu’il y a eu un changement de ressources au sein de l’industrie de radiodiffusion, et cela signifie que la façon dont les entreprises de radiodiffusion soutiennent les objectifs politiques doit également changer.

3402 It is a matter of urgency for the Commission to begin to integrate online services into the Canadian broadcasting system. The “regulated” side of the Canadian system is under pressure and shrinking, and APTN is part of that system.

3403 APTN is active in the online system as well. We have launched lumi, our SVOD service, and we stream and create content for social media too. But all of these activities are supported by our broadcasting operations.

3404 Even while this is happening, APTN is as relevant, or more relevant than ever. The need for Reconciliation and mutual understanding between Indigenous peoples and Canadians is a pressing matter and APTN is an important part of that work.

3405 We think Canadians appreciate what we do. Over the last three years, APTN has experienced consistent growth in viewership, even while BDU distribution has declined. In fact, our year‑over‑year ratings are up 23 percent and we are continuing to make gains. We risk losing headway if we can't continue to offer the type of authentic and valued programming that we currently do. Shrinking resources are making this more and more difficult.

3406 Also, all Indigenous languages are under threat in Canada and many risk extinction. APTN has a direct role to play to revitalize languages and it is a key part of our mandate and our conditions of licence, but we need resources and support to keep making that happen.

3407 MS. McKENZIE: Online services should make a direct contribution to the broadcasting system. This should include support to production funds and also critically to broadcasting services such as APTN, that were established specifically to meet key broadcasting policy objectives.

3408 The role of production funds is relatively well known, but how APTN uses funding that comes to us directly from wholesale fees is less well known.

3409 One of the key areas where we use these dollars is in the production of news and current affairs programming, a central part of our mandate. Almost all of this money comes from subscription revenue.

3410 Currently, APTN News has a staff of 60 full‑time employees spread out from north to south and east to west. We produce news programs in English six days a week, a weekly French‑language newscast, three current affairs programs, and our award‑winning in‑depth news magazine program APTN Investigates. We have a dedicated digital media team bringing APTN news content to social media platforms and we have our own news website where viewers can watch our live‑streamed newscasts, www.aptnnews.ca.

3411 Before APTN, many Indigenous peoples expressed the view that the news either left them out completely or was intensely negative. We set out to solve that problem by covering important news stories from Indigenous perspectives and also by sharing facets of Indigenous cultures, language revitalization efforts, sports, entrepreneurs, and the many, many successes in our communities. These stories are an important part of the range of news content we provide across all of our platforms. None of this would be possible without direct support to APTN as a broadcaster.

3412 MS. ILLE: In addition to the money we spend on news and current affairs, up to one‑third of our other programming is not supported by production funds and APTN is the principal funder. Money to APTN effectively sustains a thriving Indigenous production ecosystem, which did not exist before APTN.

3413 Over the last decade, APTN has triggered production budgets in excess of half a billion dollars. This translates into more than 5,000 hours of content in a multitude of languages. Since we launched, APTN has produced content in 54 different Indigenous languages.

3414 And training. At APTN, training and skills development is a part of our culture.

3415 Now is the time to lay the foundation to support APTN and other important services in the broadcasting system that meet critical mandates and that are public service, not market‑oriented.

3416 The way forward for APTN is to supplement the wholesale fee structure through direct funding from the online part of the broadcasting system. We fully support, therefore, the creation of a Services of Exceptional Importance Fund in line with the Commission's power under section 11.1 of the Broadcasting Act and section 12 of the recent Cabinet Direction.

3417 All broadcasters have a role to play in commissioning or funding Indigenous programming. Funding to APTN is funding to Indigenous programming and it is also support for something more profound: Direct ownership and control of our own national network that Indigenous peoples ourselves operate, the means of our own expression.

3418 Wliwni. Thank you for the opportunity to be here today. We would be pleased to answer your questions.

3419 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much to APTN. We are so pleased that you are here with us this morning. We know that some of you have travelled a long way, so thank you for being here.

3420 I will turn things over to Commissioner Naidoo to kick off the questions of the Commission. Thank you.

3421 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Hi. Thank you so much for that presentation and for being here today.

3422 Please comment on the broadcasters' proposal to set the contribution level at 20 percent of annual broadcasting revenues for audiovisual programming services and at 5 percent for virtual BDUs, which are comparable to the requirements imposed on traditional broadcasters.

3423 MS. ILLE: Certainly. For that I will let Joel, our regular counsel, because we worked on this with the Independent Broadcast Group, so Joel will have the bigger picture, not only specific to APTN.

3424 MR. FORTUNE: Thanks, Monika.

3425 The proposal is based on the relative overall contributions, very roughly speaking, of different sectors of the industry, and obviously, the programming sector, the broadcasting sector makes a far more profound contribution than the 5 percent, give or take a percent or two, that is contributed directly by the BDU sector to production funds or local expression under the Commission's regulatory framework.

3426 And that includes, of course, things like the Canadian programming expenditure obligation, which can range from 30 percent or higher in the case of services of exceptional importance, to 20 percent for many services, in addition, of course, to extensive exhibition requirements, 35 percent as a standard rule and very much higher for services of exceptional importance. Obviously, as Monika has pointed out, a large proportion of a programming service's budget has to go to support that exhibition requirement.

3427 And of course Canadian broadcasters employ a vast number of Canadians and expend not only in the production and programming side of their business but in all parts of their operations expend a large proportion of their budgets on employment and economic activity in Canada for Canadians in the broadcasting system, as contemplated in the Broadcasting Act.

3428 So when you take all of those factors into account, the contribution of the Canadian broadcasting system by Canadian broadcasters is enormous. Twenty percent doesn't even begin to scratch the surface.

3429 And so, for that reason, I think the thinking is that certainly on the programming side it would be appropriate for that category of online service to make a larger contribution than merely 5 percent to achieve anything near equity to the Canadian broadcaster function.

3430 On the virtual BDU side, I think there is a measure for direct expenditures already and that is in the framework in the Broadcasting Regulations. So the 5 percent direct contribution from that sector as a starting point and moving into perhaps other regulatory aspects in that sector down the road. But as a starting point, that 5 percent seemed appropriate.

3431 So, to summarize, it's meant to provide an equitable framework in relation to the function of Canadian broadcasters in the system.

3432 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much for that answer.

3433 I would like to talk a bit about the services of exceptional importance. That has come up a couple of times in your opening remarks and you had just mentioned it as well.

3434 Can you tell us a little bit more about the creation of the specific fund to support services designated as being of exceptional importance? I'm looking for, like, what criteria should be established to determine which qualify as exceptional importance and thus are eligible to receive funding through this new fund.

3435 MS. ILLE: Thank you very much for that question.

3436 In the previous Broadcasting Act, APTN and other services are designated 9(1)(h), so mandatory carriage, and we received that designation because of our mandate and what we do, and knowing the nature of operations, that we needed some stable funding, so a wholesale fee for our operations.

3437 So I think all these services are considered exceptional in nature and we serve audiences that are not always well served. We play a big part in the Canadian industry. We diversify this industry at many levels and if it wasn't for these services, a lot of opinions, perspectives, point of views would just not be shared. And because of the 9(1)(h) designation we have, we are more accessible and discoverable, and that's important for us because, like I said earlier, we are not market‑driven, we are more a service provider.

3438 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you.

3439 Some parties like yourself and other broadcasters like Québecor propose that contributions should go to funds supporting services. We're talking about 9(1)(h) services.

3440 How would such an approach distinguish itself from funding producers from communities that require additional support and where would the central funding emphasis be placed, towards producers or broadcasters?

3441 MS. ILLE: I think there is a distinction to be made between Indigenous content and Indigenous broadcasting undertaking. As a broadcaster, we make sure that we give visibility to Indigenous content as a whole, not only on the original programming side but our news and current affairs side, and so we bring these voices at the forefront under one platform.

3442 So for me, we need to support both in different ways. So if there is a fund specific for APTN or for services of exceptional importance, it will give us the funds we need to continue operations, to sustain operations, to continue growing what APTN offers. And on the side, also have another fund specific for content as well, I think. And both work together. One cannot live without the other.

3443 If you just had a fund for Indigenous content but you don't have an Indigenous broadcaster to put them at the forefront, that would beat the purpose of it. Because I know other broadcasters do broadcast Indigenous content but not at the level that we do. And we are the one who broadcast the most and trigger the most Indigenous content here in Canada.

3444 I don't know if Mike or Cheryl you would like to add anything to this.

3445 MR. OMELUS: Just a quick comment. If we don't have the licence fees, we won't be triggering any program. The funding from those other funds won't matter.

3446 And also, there is one‑third of our programming dollars that we use to put programs forward, such as Vitality Gardening and Back to Roots on Indigenous medicines. They are considered “how to” programs. They are educational programs, instructional programs. They don't qualify for any funding, but we still think it's vitally important that we produce those kinds of shows.

3447 MS. McKENZIE: Both producers and the broadcasters are very important. This is Canada and APTN is the world's first national Indigenous broadcaster. We have such a large platform. We have 24/7 broadcasting of programs. We have news and current affairs programming. We have online digital streaming. We're on multiple platforms. We're always trying to reach out to our audience and be where they are, meet them where they are, what can we do more for our audience.

3448 And those producers ‑‑ in the early days, I remember being at APTN and, you know, Don Burnstick would make a joke about there being a lot of Inuktitut programming, because we came from the North and that vision to have a national Indigenous voice, APTN was born. And I know I can say Joanne, I think, can appreciate a lot of that. I know she knows the history of APTN.

3449 So I think it's very important that we keep APTN going so that we can bring more producers up with us. We always want to bring people up with us and not just, you know, bring other people up to another height, but we want to bring people along with us, too.

3450 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you for that.

3451 In your intervention you said that the CRTC should continue to acknowledge Indigenous ways of production, but you did mention that you would like to see us relax oversight to help foster Indigenous self‑determination as an effort towards Reconciliation.

3452 I'm wondering if you can offer some examples about how the Commission can support that.

3453 MS. ILLE: Like I said in my presentation, we are here because of the support of the CRTC. That helped us to grow and to expand and we need to continue to do so. When APTN started there were a handful of producers and most of what they were doing was documentary series, but now the production value has increased and we're having producers doing all genres of programming. And now we have gotten to a point that we don't have the funds needed to support them, to support their storytelling, especially drama series.

3454 You've seen the great success of drama series: Little Bird, Bones of Crows. We're the Indigenous broadcaster and we can't even be first window because we don't have the resources to do that, and that for me is sad and even shameful. We should be the lead broadcaster on our own storytelling.

3455 We love our partnership. Don't get me wrong. I think the future in the industry is collaboration, but we should take a leading role on those types of shows. So by increasing funding or helping us get access to those resources, we could take those leading roles and really support the Indigenous production community the way we should support and like we did at the beginning. Now, we can no longer do it that way.

3456 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: In your opening remarks you talked a little bit about diversity of languages, Indigenous languages. I wanted to just dive down into that a little bit more.

3457 How should funding be allocated to different regions and different needs?

3458 MS. ILLE: I have never thought of that. I'm not too sure what do you mean by region and needs. I guess it all depends. I'm going to bring it back it to APTN because I'm here for sure representing APTN.

3459 We strive every year to broadcast in at least 15 different Indigenous languages representing the different regions of Canada, so not just one language, really expanding that. And sometimes we even will support an Indigenous language that is spoken by a few hundred people in the community, because we know the importance of the language.

3460 When you lose your language, you lose a part of your identity and you cannot regain that. APTN as a national Indigenous broadcaster has a role to promote and preserve Indigenous languages. It is essential. It's part of who we are. Losing a language is hurtful and every day languages are getting lost across the world, and we can't afford it. It's crucial right now. Within Indigenous peoples, we're living in a time where people are reclaiming their culture, their language.

3461 My mother, at 50 years old, when she moved back to her community, she learned the language. She wrote a grammar. She wrote a vocabulary. She taught the language for 10 years. And now, you go on social media and you see the young generation texting and writing in the Abenaki language. It was my birthday and I got so many wishes in Abenaki. You know what? That feels good.

3462 And us as a broadcaster, we have a big role to play. By promoting and showing programming in Indigenous languages, it shows the importance of the languages.

3463 So I'm not sure if I answered your question, but what I mean is that, yes, there's maybe ‑‑ but APTN is a national broadcaster and we do program from all across Canada and all the regions. The vast majority of our shows come from different regions.

3464 I mean Mike could attest to that.

3465 MR. OMELUS: Yes. We track where our productions are originating from and try and make sure that they are distributed equitably to give opportunities to as many producers as we can.

3466 But to your question about the different needs, I think on the language front, since we're talking about languages, we need to do and our plan has been to do more versioning of languages and original programs in a language to let people hear the beauty of a language.

3467 We're encouraged that some streamers are running a lot more international content now and it's getting an audience, and our dream is to see the same thing happening for these beautiful Indigenous languages. Let people hear them, understand the content. Communication is primarily non‑verbal anyway. And with subtitles, they can really get into the content.

3468 We hope ‑‑ we are repeating an awful lot of shows too many times. And if you're trying to learn a language, you're trying to be inspired, see your culture, see your tradition reflected, it gets a little stale. And so we need to keep that refresh rate going and produce new content to keep inspiring people to reclaim and revitalize their language.

3469 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much.

3470 I want to pass it over to my colleagues, but I have just more one more quick, quick question because I think it's really important. I wanted to talk about news content. I know that your news team is an award‑winning news team that really covers often overlooked issues, right? How can Indigenous news content be supported by any type of fund?

3471 MS. McKENZIE: That's a really great question, and I am always advocating to Monika that she's more than welcome to double the news budget within APTN. That would be great, allow us to get out in the communities.

3472 Of course we want to maintain our journalistic integrity and our journalistic independence. That would be very important to us. Our reporters and correspondents, our video journalists out in the regions, we rely on them to tell us what is the most important stories of your region, what should we be telling ‑‑ what stories should we be telling on APTN news.

3473 So as far as like how the Commission could help, I would just advocate for definitely more resources. Because it's getting so much more expensive to get out to the regions where our communities are and where we need to be in these remote communities.

3474 We just had a trip to the high Arctic, where we sent two reporters to Grise Fiord and Resolute Bay. The stories are rolling out. You can see them on APTNnews.ca and on our newscast. Just to reach those people that we have never before, to send one reporter up there cost us $10,000. It's definitely not something that we can do even every month. Maybe once every like six months, maybe we can do that kind of thing.

3475 So it's just really I think critical just to have more funds. I don't know how much more I could say to that, if there's any other questions I could answer.

3476 MS. ILLE: Joel would like to respond as well.

3477 MR. FORTUNE: Commissioner, as you know, I mean, there is a plethora of proposals in front of the Commission for various funds, but one of the main ones is to provide direct funding for news programming from contribution from online services. I mean, I don't have to repeat what people have said about the state of the news industry in Canada.

3478 APTN, as you've heard, is part of the ecosystem of the news economy. In many ways, we don't have to go through that today, but APTN is also impacted by the general state of the news industry. And APTN is, you know, a national broadcaster. It's a foundational broadcaster for Indigenous peoples in Canada. It's comparable to CTV network or TVA or, you know, Global or CBC news, you know, across the country.

3479 So I guess you can see where I'm going. What I'm saying is if there were a fund for news programming, then it would seem appropriate to me that an entity like APTN and its news would also receive support through that fund, even though it's not an over‑the‑air broadcaster, but it is essentially a national network in the same way they are.

3480 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you. That's all I have. Thank you.

3481 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Commissioner Naidoo. And thank you to APTN.

3482 We're going to go over to Commissioner Levy.

3483 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Good morning. Wonderful to see you. I have a couple of questions.

3484 You know, it is unusual, we have not heard, other than Québecor, which suggested a fund to support 9(1)(h)‑oriented services, we haven't heard very much about direct support for broadcasters in quite the way that you're outlining it. Everyone seems to be predicting that broadcasting is going to be all Internet at some stage; however, you have special challenges because of your very decentralized approach. Despite our best efforts and the best efforts of many people, broadband services simply aren't up to carrying diverse programming in far‑flung parts of the country in quite the way that broadcasters still can.

3485 Can you talk a little bit about what the extra operational costs are for your service because of the need to support pure broadcast services in so many different places across the country?

3486 MS. ILLE: So, presently, we invest the majority of our revenues in linear broadcasting. That's our purpose. That's why we have the 9(1)(h). And it's people that are ‑‑ subscribe to cable, right. So they watch linear television. So we need to reinvest.

3487 We have some advertising dollars, and over the years, we've been investing those dollars in our online activities to make sure that we have a presence. So we launch our APTN lumi platform back in 2019, and that was to be sure that we had that space, knowing that, you know, viewership is migrating to online. We need to be there.

3488 It's an okay platform. We should invest more, but we don't have the means to. Linear is still strong. I mean, there's ‑‑ you know, the vast majority of Canadians are still, you know, subscribe to cable. The shift is happening. I expect it's going to move on more and more quickly, so we have to be prepared.

3489 But we're going to have to invest in technology to be able to do so and be available everywhere. So that's why we definitely need resources. We're trying to increase our revenue as much as we can, but we can't forget that APTN is a not‑for‑profit charitable organization, and any activities that we do need to be closely linked to that purpose. Otherwise, we jeopardize our status, charitable status, and we do not want that.

3490 So yes, it's a challenge for us. I think we are very mindful of it, but we're getting to a point that we need extra support to be able to do that.

3491 MR. OMELUS: If I may just add, Commissioner, in terms of the question about cost, it is an expensive business, for sure. We're a bricks‑and‑mortar operation. You know, we're not working out of basements. We have bureaus, as Cheryl can attest to, in more locations in the North than ‑‑ I think there's one other broadcaster that might be able to match us with that contribution.

3492 To distribute our signals, you know, in our four linear feeds ‑‑ west, north, east, and HD ‑‑ is a million dollars per channel, somewhere, you know, significant dollars to get the feed distributed.

3493 So there's the bricks‑and‑mortar cost, there's the, you know, distribution transmission costs. But in terms of the broadcast industry, definitely, it's under a lot of strain. It's under a lot of stress. But in my mind, and having watched it for a number of years, the Internet is still in its exploration stage. Social media, it's a wonderful experiment.

3494 But you're not going to be able to learn a language or find content on, you know, how to learn Cree by going to TikTok. And broadcast can still bring people together like no other platform. It will take months to ‑‑ you know, we still have prime time shows that are generating 1.3, 1.4, 1.5 million viewers in English Canada. And you know, in the francophone markets, those numbers can be even higher with traditional broadcasting.

3495 So it's a model that's under strain, but that's primarily because it hasn't received the support, you know, from the foreign undertakings that are taking so much advertising dollars out of the market. But we're optimistic that it's going to be around for a while yet, even though we have two feet in, you know, the online space and the linear space.

3496 COMMISSIONER LEVY: As do many.

3497 Ms. McKenzie?

3498 MS. McKENZIE: Yes, so just Mike, my colleague, said a lot of the comments that I would add to for as far as our news service goes, definitely the travel costs are infinitely more.

3499 Indigenous Peoples are definitely put at a disadvantage when they need to rely on just Internet services for the ‑‑ just to learn their everyday news, learn their national news, to hear their national news. The Dejero services that we use to feed back our programs from the North, they only work in certain locations. And as long as we're in cellphone range, you know, we can do that.

3500 Luckily, we do have the three bureaus. We maintain those physical presences in the North, in Whitehorse, Iqaluit, and Yellowknife. There's only, yes, two broadcasters up there who have that physical presence, and we are one of them, because that's where APTN came from.

3501 Also, it's really important to have a diversity of Indigenous staff. And recruiting Indigenous staff, recruiting the journalists and training the journalists and investing in the journalists so that we can better cover Indigenous communities in all of these regions is also vitally important to our coverage.

3502 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you.

3503 Just the last question then. As you consider the production markets in this country ‑‑ English, French, and Indigenous ‑‑ the question then becomes how to split up the pie. And I wonder if you have some guidance for us on that. Thank you.

3504 MS. ILLE: It would be nice to see who is contributing to that pie, what's the level of that pie, and who will be accessing that pie. There's many unknowns right now. There could be many formulas, and I could just pull a number out of my hat, but I think there will be more analysis that needs to be done.

3505 But I think what's important to keep in mind that Indigenous programming, Indigenous undertaking, Indigenous content need to be a priority. We've been ignored for decades, not having ‑‑ being fully respected in our storytelling. And now I think people are understanding and appreciating where we're coming from and coming to APTN for our stories.

3506 So I think now we need to be up front, right, not an afterthought, that Indigenous as a whole is part of the broadcasting industry, and that we should be respected for what we do and taken into consideration at the beginning of the process.

3507 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you very much.

3508 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Commissioner Levy.

3509 We'll go over to Vice‑Chair Scott.

3510 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Good morning. I would like to ask your thoughts on existing relationships between Indigenous creators and the online platforms. So both existing relationship and future opportunities. And my question is whether there are any traps or potential missteps that we could make as a regulator that might actually end up costing Indigenous creators opportunities.

3511 MS. ILLE: Can you repeat the question? I am not too sure we fully understand. You want to talk about the relationship of Indigenous creators and the online broadcasting industry?

3512 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Correct. So that's kind of the preamble is kind of who's ‑‑

3513 MS. ILLE: Okay.

3514 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: You know, who's got relationships? Who's looking at opportunities? You know, these are global platforms, which can be a really appealing opportunity for a lot of creators. And I'm concerned that as we look at making regulations, might we unintentionally do something that sours relationships or costs people opportunities on a global scale.

3515 MR. OMELUS: I think, if I may just, you know, it is very enticing to any creator to have an opportunity with Netflix. And we are partnering with them on a production from the Arctic, the untitled Arctic comedy, with CBC, APTN, and Netflix. And so that's an exciting project because it brings new resources in, and it's attractive.

3516 But in many ways, these are one‑offs. You know, the international undertakings, they're not committed to Indigenous broadcasting in Canada. Let's face it. It's APTN that does that. And we have, you know, developed the production ecosystem, given consistent opportunities to producers, worked to discover new emerging talent whose stories deserve to be heard.

3517 And I would argue, you know, producers are probably going to be looking for an opportunity to do a Netflix show. Who wouldn't want ‑‑ I'd love to do a Netflix show. Is that going to sustain a career? Is that going to grow the production sector? is that going to keep it sustainable? And that's the question I think needs to be seriously looked at.

3518 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Great. I think your question answers mine very nicely. Thank you.

3519 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Vice‑Chair Scott.

3520 So maybe one very quick final question, and then we will turn things back over to you.

3521 As you know, this is a very large proceeding. You know, we've said up front that the CRTC will put in place this modernized broadcasting framework in phases. We're here to talk about the initial base contribution, which we know you support. We've phased it the way we have because, you know, we think it's important to have this discussion about the initial base contribution early on.

3522 We've heard from others that, you know, take your time. You've got a couple of years. We heard that from the Motion Picture Association Canada on Monday. You've talked about the urgency. Can you talk to us a little bit more about the urgency?

3523 MS. ILLE: I am not going to lie: for APTN, we are struggling. Like I mentioned earlier, we're no longer in position to take lead in high‑production‑value content because we just don't have the resource to do so. And it's really a shame that we have non‑Indigenous broadcasters taking the lead on those projects, and it's really for us to take.

3524 And we see that the Indigenous production community is thriving. There's so much talent out there at every level, and we wish we could support way more programming.

3525 We need to refresh our schedule. We're getting to a point, as Mike mentioned, there's more repeats. That's not what we're supposed to do. We're there to support original programming, giving opportunities to Indigenous storytellers. We've done that in the past so well, and now we're getting at a point that we're kind of going back. Ah, that's terrible. You don't want to lose that momentum.

3526 And we've never, never been so relevant as we are today in this era of reconciliation. Canadians having an appetite for Indigenous stories: that's why we've seen an increase in our ratings. That's why we've seen also in our news, online news, people are coming. Our podcasts ‑‑ people are signing up for it. They want to know our stories, told with our voices, our perspectives. We cannot lose that momentum. So yes, for us, it is critical to have the means and the resources to sustain but also to continue to grow.

3527 MR. OMELUS: If I may add, our focus has been on producing programming, continuing to do that on the news side and with our independent production community. And that's where we have continued to deploy as many resources as we can.

3528 But the reason it's urgent is because we're making decisions now that impact the long term and might not be ‑‑ we might not be able to recover from. We're revisiting the national concert that APTN has produced every year since 2007 for National Indigenous Peoples Day, a wonderful celebration and a marvellous achievement. And we're not sure whether, you know, it continues to make sense to invest dollars in that kind of program. We've cut back on marketing budgets, and that makes it doubly difficult to discover content. And that's unfortunate, because even though our ratings are up 23 per cent, more people should be able to see and experience and understand the content that only APTN is producing.

3529 So it's a real situation. You've heard from other broadcasters. We all know what's going on in the industry. We're trying to do things efficiently behind the scenes, not impacting the content that viewers are seeing or that producers are producing. But it's real, and it's now.

3530 MS. McKENZIE: We definitely have to be a lot more strategic with our resources in the newsroom. We have to like hold on to our people. They are the life blood of our newsroom. We're already stretched like really thin, right across the country. Like we have like half‑hour newscasts, hour‑long investigative program, three current affairs shows, online content. But in reality, you know, we have like one video journalist in Halifax; we have one video journalist at Edmonton, in Saskatoon, Yellowknife, Iqaluit, Kitimat.

3531 We have to be very strategic in what pool feeds that we buy into because those national news events, we absolutely have to be a part of it, and we can't sent a counter person to everyone. But those pool feed costs are also really starting to add up.

3532 We have this era of reconciliation, we've seen some of our ‑‑ many of our journalists like move on to other opportunities, which is great, you know. This is a part of why APTN was created was to bring Indigenous people into the broadcasting system, bring Indigenous people into the newsroom, train them, give them opportunity, give them experience. And if they decide to move on, then that's great, because we have APTN alumni in newsrooms, national newsrooms and broadcasters right across Canada and even into the US, I would say.

3533 So just to keep our news and to keep people informed and to keep Indigenous voices into the national dialogue, we have to keep our newsroom going. And we can't be reduced to, you know, the journalist and lots of talking heads in the newsroom. We have to hear from our Indigenous people and communities all over this land.

3534 MR. OMELUS: If I may add just one more thing that popped into mind, Hockey Night in Canada in Cree ‑‑ it's a wonderful project. It's inspiring kids to learn their language, whether they're Cree or from any other nation. We've reduced the schedule for this season because of financial dollars, and we've postponed plans to do games in additional Indigenous languages. We just don't have the funding. But we're still doing hockey in Cree. It's a reduced schedule, January 27th, Toronto and Winnipeg.

3535 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you for those answers and for the specific examples and some of the numbers as well.

3536 We want to ensure that APTN has the final word, so we will leave that with you.

3537 MS. ILLE: Well, we cannot underestimate the importance of Indigenous media. We bring diversity. We shatter stereotypes. We support a thriving Indigenous production community. We play a critical role in promoting Indigenous languages. We're also vital in maintaining cultural identity and building community. All of this as we're fostering reconciliation.

3538 My mother once told me that telling our stories is part of our healing journey. Indigenous people, as you all know, have a traumatic experience. And by telling our stories the way we want to tell them and share them with our voice helps us move forward and get stronger. And APTN is vital to that. At APTN, we do this 24 hours a day, seven days a week. It's part of who we are. We are an expression of our identity. We don't reflect Indigenous perspective: we are Indigenous perspectives.

3539 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you for that. What a great message to end on. Thank you again. Thank you for being here and for travelling a long way as well.

3540 Madam Secretary?

3541 THE SECRETARY: Thank you very much.

3542 I would ask the next panel to come to the presentation table and to connect to Zoom: Canadian Independent Screen Fund for Black and people of colour creators, All Out Arts Management connecting via Zoom, Playground Films Inc., In My Own Voice appearing via Zoom, and In Sync Media.

3543 We will hear each presentation which will then be followed by questions by the Commissioners to all participants. We will begin with the presentation by Canadian Independent Screen Fund for Black and people of colour creators.

3544 Please introduce yourself and you may begin.

Présentation

3545 MS. LEE: Thank you.

3546 Good morning, Chairperson Eatrides, Vice‑Chairs, Commissioners, and Commission staff. My name is Sally Lee, and I am the executive director of the Canadian Independent Screen Fund for Black and people of colour creators, also known as CISF. Thank you for the invitation to appear at this important hearing.

3547 CISF is a national fund whose mandate is to support the development and production of screen‑based projects by BPOC creators. We were previously known as the Canadian Independent Film and Video Fund, or the CIFVF, which first began operating in the '90s. CIFVF was known for supporting independent productions without requiring that a broadcast license be in place, which made it an important fund for filmmakers who were shut out of other funding opportunities due to that barrier. Our current activities include administration of what has grown into a $900,000 script development fund in partnership with the Rogers Group of Funds and the Black Screen Office.

3548 According to the Racialized Funding Data study produced by the Racial Equity Media Collective, Nordicity and Inspirit Foundation, in 2020, funding earmarked for BIPOC‑led projects at existing funding bodies amounted to $20.8 million, or just 0.7 percent of total funding available for Canadian work. The report states that 88 percent of this already low amount was directed to Indigenous projects, leaving a mere $1.7 million going to Black and other racialized creators.

3549 I can tell you firsthand that the Rogers‑BSO fund we administer is significantly oversubscribed. Over the three years of the fund so far, the number of applications has increased steadily. In the current round, we had a total of 250 applications, but were able to support just 13 projects, or just one in 20.

3550 Clearly, our communities have no shortage of stories to be told. We are, of course, grateful to the Rogers Group of Funds for their support, but it is obvious that the entire system must do better.

3551 CISF is uniquely positioned to help the Commission meet some of its stated objectives around racial equity for the new contribution framework. We are also well positioned to respond to the Government’s direction that the Commission support the creation and availability of programming from Black and other racialized creators, as well as their participation in our broadcasting system.

3552 First, given our experience and expertise, we are ready and able to receive and distribute some of the funding that is the subject of this hearing. Building on decades of experience as the CIFVF and our more recent administration of the Rogers‑BSO Fund, we have developed the framework to establish a $20 million fund strategically designed to support BPOC creators in the key stages of production at all stages of their careers.

3553 The four major streams would include: $5 million for a calling card program for emerging creators; $6.5 million for a development fund; $5.5 million for a completion/top‑up fund, and $3 million to support project promotion and market discoverability.

3554 Second, we are the only “For Us By Us” Certified Independent Production Fund with a mandate to provide production support to both Black and people of colour creators, and we have a commitment to allocate 50 percent of our funds to Black creators. We are also BPOC governed, managed, and operated, and have broad community buy‑in baked right into our governance structure, with current and past Board and advisory members holding leadership positions at key BPOC‑led organizations, including many participating in these consultations and hearings.

3555 Third, we ensure that our funded content is reflective of and relevant to Black and other racialized communities. Having the ongoing support and advisory input of many of the organizations representing BPOC creators across the country ensures impactful stewardship of funding in ways that encourage authentic, nuanced and culturally specific depictions of the lived experience of Canadians who have often been under and misrepresented on screen.

3556 And finally, it must be noted that CISF has buy‑in across the industry, with over a dozen other organizations and individuals from across the sector submitting interventions and replies mentioning their support for CISF, including the CMPA, the Rogers Group of Funds, the Writers Guild of Canada, the Disability Screen Office and the Documentary Organization of Canada, among others, including my fellow panelists.

3557 It is therefore our position that a set amount of the base contributions that are the subject of this proceeding must be directed to Certified Independent Production Funds that represent Black and other racialized creators, including no less than $20 million per year to CISF, and that this contribution must be directed to come off the top prior to any downstream flow of funds to CMF or discretionary funding.

3558 We say this for obvious reasons. I can provide you with a myriad of statistics like the ones I noted earlier, but to sum up, the current system has not served us well and we need to change it. The only way to ensure that the system produces diverse content reflective of Canadian audiences is to require it to do so.

3559 We are, of course, aware that funding alone cannot undo ingrained structures and generations of discrimination; however, a base contribution must be made as soon as possible at a level that is significant enough to contribute to addressing decades of systemic exclusion and barriers to access experienced by Black and racialized creators in Canada’s broadcasting system.

3560 In following the hearings, we note that the Commission has been asking presenters to make suggestions around allocations, and it is our opinion that the $20 million figure we are recommending for CISF off the top of the initial base contribution requirements fits in well with the estimate of a total funding contribution of 250 million which had been cited by our colleagues at the CMPA.

3561 Having put a number to our ask, however, we also urge the Commission to keep in mind clear directions around engagement and flexibility. As the sector moves forward under a new regulatory regime, we note that any allocations to the CISF should always be proportional and reflect that the Commission recognizes the enormous value that greater equity, inclusiveness and representation contributes to the ongoing health, vitality and relevance of Canada’s broadcasting system.

3562 Please accept my sincere thanks for your consideration of CISF’s submission and for the invitation to appear today. I look forward to answering any questions.

3563 THE SECRETARY: Thank you.

3564 We’ll now hear the presentation of All Out Arts Management appearing remotely.

3565 Please introduce yourself, and you may begin.

Présentation

3566 MS. OUTHIT: Good morning, everyone. My name is Allison Outhit, and my company is All Out Arts Management.

3567 I’ve worked for 30 years in the cultural industries in content production, funding and business affairs in film, television and music. For seven years I was the Vice‑President of Operations at FACTOR, a mandatory recipient of radio contributions which it in turn distributes to artists and to the music industry, and so I sat precisely at the intersection of CRTC policy and funding distribution.

3568 I am certified by the Canadian Centre for Diversity and Inclusion as an Inclusion Practitioner and equity consultant. My presentation today is rooted in deep experience and knowledge about Canadian content development contributions, who benefits, who does not, and why.

3569 The lived experiences of creators and entrepreneurs from equity‑deserving communities, which you’ll hear about today, are supported by data showing that they’ve been gated out from millions and millions of dollars of public funding that arises from broadcast policy. This situation is historic, systemic and ongoing. Nearly all of the funding was historically absorbed by white‑owned businesses, white‑led organizations and white creators, allowed their businesses to professionalize and expand. And infrastructure also grew up to support their content and business models. The funding effectively widened the gap and, in that sense, content development funding has deepened systemic discrimination.

3570 So it’s past time for reparation and reparative action that breaks from the old ways of thinking and doing that we know preserve a discriminatory system.

3571 As intimated in the Minister’s final policy directions, the CRTC must lead this change. And toward equity leadership, my recommendation is that the Commission create an Equity Office and appoint a Senior Equity Officer. This office should be tasked to work in partnership with equity‑deserving groups to build out, deliver, monitor and regularly retool a long‑term strategy for equity change, beginning at home, as it were, by developing competence and championship within the Commission as part of a wider plan that radiates out into all of its works.

3572 This equity strategy must impact broadcast regulations and the licensing regime, setting the meeting of equity objectives as conditions of licence for existing and new licensees. These goals must be clear, measurable, data‑based and capable of being implemented and reported in a reliable, objective and transparent way.

3573 The equity plan should spell out in detail the priorities and specific goals for recipients of broadcaster contributions with processes to ensure that CCD‑receiving funders and their ultimate recipients meet those targets and, if they don’t, to sanction them.

3574 If existing or new contributions are directed to be set aside for the specific benefit of equity‑seeking communities, the principles of equity call for the CRTC to turn to new partners with competence in those communities to receive and distribute the funds. It’s time for organizations such as the Canadian Independent Screen Fund for Black and People of Colour Creators to be recognized as best placed to maximize the distribution of CCD benefits for Black and People of Colour creators in the screen sector. Likewise in the music sector, ADVANCE for Black creators and entrepreneurs and the Indigenous Music Office for Indigenous creators and entrepreneurs.

3575 And in the name of allyship, it’s time for organizations that have proven historically ineffective at equitable funding to cede that space. Indeed, all organizations that are now distributing benefits of any kind under CRTC policy should be audited with an equity lens.

3576 I’ll conclude by sharing the most important thing that I’ve learned in my own equity journey, and that is that the first organizing principle of any system is self‑preservation. Systems want to keep going, they want to keep self‑replicating. Systems find ways to resist transformation, whether it’s through overt resistance at the top or through subtler expressions like mistaking box‑ticking for meaningful compliance or blocking the participation of historically marginalized people by hiding opportunity behind a highly complex bureaucratic process.

3577 The fact is that we can’t make slight alterations from inside a deeply entrenched system and expect to achieve foundational change.

3578 My hope is that the CRTC, through a thoughtful and collaborative equity strategy, will undertake a more profound journey toward social justice in Canadian broadcasting.

3579 And I thank you for the opportunity to present today. Thank you.

3580 THE SECRETARY: Thank you.

3581 We’ll now hear the presentation of Playground Films Inc.

3582 Please introduce yourself, and you may begin.

Présentation

3583 MR. SEONGHO CHOI: Good morning, everyone. Thank you for this invitation. I recognize the privilege and the importance of this, and to be in front of all you lovely humans. Thank you.

3584 Just to introduce myself, my name is John Seongho Choi. I have a small company based in Toronto called Playground Films which I like to think is like a bespoke production company which I believe as a person of colour, I’m trying to create content that’s meaningful and that has an authentic approach.

3585 My parents came here in 1966 from Seoul, South Korea, and back in those days, I think that to be racialized was something that we didn’t want to be recognized as, you know. As I was going into the film industry, I didn’t want to be recognized as an Asian or a Korean filmmaker. I just wanted to be a filmmaker, but ‑‑ and then somewhere along the line, I made my first feature documentary film about the 2011 Tohoku Japanese earthquake and tsunami disaster. And for me, it took me 15 years of being in the industry before I felt the confidence to actually make my own project.

3586 The project had to do with unlikely friendships being forged from across the Pacific from Canadians and Americans in the Pacific northwest returning items from debris being floating across the Pacific. It was a beautiful human story of characters, and I felt like it was perfect as a Canadian to bridge the gap between the stories that I can tell.

3587 I find that as a Canadian, you know, I can pull from two countries, two cultures that define me, being Canadian and being from South Korea. How wonderful is that as a creator to have this incredible creative well that I can pull from.

3588 And I think that’s what it is to be Canadian. All of us, with the exception of being Indigenous, are from another place. That is what defines us as being Canadian.

3589 What also defines us as being Canadian is the huge amount of diversity that’s happening and the future of immigration that’s projected to happen in this country. We as a country should be thinking about representing all those people.

3590 I find it very interest ‑‑ like to me, I look to my children as an audience. We as audiences, we just want to see people that look like us, to have people telling those stories that come from places like us so that we can identify and empathize and learn and be entertained by those stories. To me, that is what is being a person of colour in this country and contributing as a creator.

3591 So the point I’m really trying to make is that things are moving at a lightning speed right now. You know, from 2020 ‑‑ from May of 2020 from the murder of George Floyd, the pandemic, the perpetuation of Asian hate, it has just been a blistering pace of how social and racial justice change needs to happen. And I feel that CRTC at the forefront of our country should be on those precipices of positive change.

3592 I was saying that there’s a lack of funding and support of Black and racialized filmmakers. We need regulatory imperatives to support the work of BIPOC creators. To achieve diversity, accessibility, the objectives of this contribution to participating funds, we assert that Black and racialized voices hold immense significance in shaping Canadian culture and representing our values both domestically and internationally.

3593 I was also very lucky and privileged to participate in Doc Institute instigated Creative Producers’ Think Tank, of which eight mid to senior level producers all came together for three days in a room to try to imagine ‑‑ reimagine what the landscape of this industry can be as people of colour, as black and people of colour.

3594 And so out of that, we were forced to face each other, discuss our experiences, discuss our projects, which is an incredible way to actually come up with solutions. It’s engage in the hard conversations.

3595 The CPTT, the Creative Producers Think Tank, report explicitly calls for support of CISF as a “For Us By Us” fund that understands and appreciates BIPOC stories.

3596 We believe that the Canadian Independent Screen Fund is an ideal funding platform to receive base and any other contributions towards supporting individual Black and People of Colour creators, as well as BPOC‑led companies and sectoral organizations. Embracing and amplifying Black and racialized voices will enrich our cultural fabric and reinforce Canada's position as a global leader in championing diversity and inclusivity.

3597 It is crucial that funds directed towards Black and racialized groups be governed and managed by an organization that is composed of Black and racialized groups, and the CISF is the only fund that has a Board and staff representing Black and racialized groups. And while mainstream funds may also be mandated to direct a percentage of their funds to repair years of systemic discrimination, it is equally important that the CRTC recognize and mandate funds to be directed to the CISF, which is run by us for us.

3598 CISF is the natural recipient of any funds earmarked for the production of Canadian content by black and racialized creators.

3599 I firmly believe that one of the pathways to change is to have the gatekeepers represent us by being also black or people of colour. I think it’s mandatory for the gatekeepers to have that greater understanding and empathy to understand where the funds are needed to make things happen for positive change.

3600 Thank you.

3601 THE SECRETARY: Thank you very much.

3602 We’ll now hear the presentation of In My Own Voice, appearing remotely.

3603 Please introduce yourself, and you may begin.

3604 MR. BENJAMIN: I’m just going to unmute my mic.

3605 Is that okay, the volume level?

3606 THE SECRETARY: It’s perfect, thank you.

Présentation

3607 MR. BENJAMIN: Excellent. Thank you so much for the opportunity to spend some time with you sharing what we do and how, as an organization, we feel connected to the CISF BIPOC organization for creators of ‑‑ black creators and people of colour.

3608 My name is Sobaz Benjamin. I am currently living in Halifax, Nova Scotia with my wife and two children, and I’m going to share a little bit about the organization that I founded and started back in 2007.

3609 So iMOVe, In My Own Voice ‑‑ so the acronym is iMOVe ‑‑ In My Own Voice arts association, we offered programming in 2007 to inmates at the Nova Scotia Youth Facility here in Waterville. And over the years, we’ve continued to work in federal and provincial prisons with incarcerated people and formerly incarcerated people to share their stories but also to do the work, I think, of reauthoring ‑‑ you know, if you’re familiar with narrative theory, as I’m sure many of you are, reauthoring is a great way to get at the trauma of ‑‑ that many of the people we work with carry.

3610 So over the past 17 years, you know, also working with government and community, we’ve evolved into a small production company and also a training production company. And in my opinion, we punch way above our weight.

3611 So iMOVe production crews, a little bit about the people who make up our crews, are made up of equity‑seeking and equity‑deserving people. Some have ‑‑ like I’ve mentioned, have been incarcerated, many racialized and marginalized by our economic, community, cultural, health, educational and justice systems. Many have experienced and, as I mentioned, many are experiencing their own individual and intergenerational trauma.

3612 So iMOVe crew move through a professionalizing and personal journey, from Program Participants to Apprentices and then to Industry Practitioners. After rigorous training and evaluation provided by seasoned film industry professionals, our crews emerge as competitive, compassionate and skilled crew members who are ready to produce at the highest levels of the creative industry.

3613 So ‑‑ and many of our practitioners also serve as peer mentors to you know, new generations of participants joining our company who, like those who have preceded them, are peer mentors, enliven and embody the work and therefore, I think, make it possible for people to imagine themselves in the same shoes of their peer mentors. And I think that’s a recurring theme I hear, the ideals that really, I think, make the impossible seem possible.

3614 So you know, we’ve had numerous successes at iMOVe. Many of our participants have gone on to create really interesting films.

3615 I’ll share a little bit about one of our participants ‑‑ or two of our participants.

3616 Jodell Stundon has been part of the Fabienne Colas Foundation’s “Black in Canada” series and was ‑‑ won an award through a short film festival, local film festival here for best documentary short.

3617 And so did Shiquawn, also won in 2023, won a best documentary short. And these are people who probably would have no connection to the industry but are now practitioners.

3618 And also, we’ve connected with a reputable film company in town here called Arcadia Films. It’s been around for like 20‑plus years and have worked with companies like History Channel and so on.

3619 So, I want to just ‑‑ because I know time is ticking away ‑‑ I wanted to just share why, you know, we’re a bit of an unusual organization ‑‑ iMOVe is. You know, I sort of described us as a bit of a mongrel that is at once a social purpose organization and a social enterprise and a film company. So, grant funding organizations like the Canada Arts Councils and others have a difficult time sort of understanding what we do, but I think CISF get us because of the fact that they come from us.

3620 I know my time is done, so I won’t share more, but I definitely endorse the CISF BPOC fund and I really hope that you will too.

3621 THE SECRETARY: Thank you very much.

3622 We will now listen to that last presentation before questions. We will hear In Sync Media. Please introduce yourself.

Présentation

3623 MR. BALLOU: Good morning, Madam Chair, Commissioners, and Commission staff. My name is Samir Ballou and I am here representing In Sync Media, a production company based in Toronto. Lalita Krishna, the founder of In Sync Media, is unable to attend and has asked me to speak on her behalf. We are grateful for the opportunity to present at this important hearing.

3624 In Sync Media first incorporated in 1996 and is one of the oldest BIPOC‑owned media production companies in Canada. For over 20 years, In Sync Media has made award‑winning documentaries and interactive projects which have screened and sold in Canada, the U.S., Europe, Asia, and won awards at international documentary festivals.

3625 Like many emerging filmmakers, our founder Lalita Krishna faced many challenges, some of which are common across all industries. However, she managed to cobble together funds to make her first documentary, which premiered at Hot Docs in 2001, and gradually built up In Sync Media one documentary at a time. Many of the challenges faced by Lalita Krishna are common to most newcomers, but as a racialized filmmaker she faced additional barriers to entry.

3626 The point being made by telling you about the genesis of In Sync Media is that not much has changed for Black and racialized filmmakers, who continue to face barriers today because our public funding system is dependent on a handful of gatekeepers who trigger the majority of funding.

3627 In Sync Media was delivering award‑winning documentaries to the networks, but each project was still almost a miracle to get off the ground. We managed to patch together funding for each project through a variety of small licenses and support from independent production funds. However, many of the independent funds and many of the broadcasters that existed in the last two decades, no longer exist. Black and racialized filmmakers lack the networks and contacts with decision‑makers and we are constantly expected to prove ourselves. We need corrective measures to level the playing field.

3628 Studies have shown that when you target funding towards a priority group, you see results. This is clear in Telefilm’s Gender Parity Action Plan or NFB’s Indigenous Action plan. Both have resulted in improved participation from women and Indigenous filmmakers.

3629 We therefore strongly urge the CRTC to mandate base contributions to the Canadian Independent Screen Fund for BPOC creators, which has a mandate to provide 50 percent of its funds to Black creators and 50 percent to creators from racialized backgrounds.

3630 The CISF for BPOC creators has a long track record of administration and oversight of funds as it emerged out of the Canadian Independent Film and Video Fund, which ran as an independent fund for 20 years before it was terminated in 2009. Lalita was on the board of the CIFVF and instrumental in updating the mission and mandate of the fund in 2020 to focus on supporting Black and racialized creators as CISF.

3631 Like its predecessor, CISF is a nimble fund that is born out of the need of filmmakers. The fund has been designed after consultations with stakeholders, which include filmmakers and advocacy groups. The fund has a board of directors who represent diverse Black and racialized communities and regions of Canada. The fund recognizes regional priorities as well as BPOC intersectionality with gender identity, religion and different abilities.

3632 Le fonds a été crée pour aider à combler les trous dans le financement des cinéastes noirs et des personnes de couleur et fournir un soutien à chaque étape de leur carrière. Plus que jamais nous avons besoin d'un fonds indépendant stable et fiable pour les créateurs noirs et racialisés. Nous sommes conscients que toutes les agences prennent des mesures pour corriger le biais systémique au sein de leurs institutions, mais il faudra des années pour réellement rééquilibrer la situation. Pendant ce temps, nous risquons de perdre des générations de conteurs qui ont des histoires importantes à raconter.

3633 Merci pour votre attention. Thank you for your attention.

3634 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much for your participation in this proceeding. We really appreciate you sharing your perspectives and also your personal stories.

3635 I will turn things over to Vice‑Chair Scott to kick off the questioning.

3636 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Good morning, everyone. It’s a challenge when you’ve got such a thoughtful, well‑spoken and well‑prepared panel, to come up with questions that haven’t already been answered. But I think we can take this time to flesh out the record on a number of important points that across the panel have come up.

3637 And I’d like to start with the scope of the need. So, I very much appreciate the detailed proposal for the 20 million dollars. I think that’s clear. If the broader goal is to achieve equity across a group of creators that have clearly not been treated equitably in the past, is 20 million dollars the full extent of what’s required, or are there other numbers we should be looking at, other considerations we should be taking as we look to define the scope of the challenge specific to Black and people of colour that are creators? Thank you.

3638 MS. LEE: Thank you. Well, as I said in my presentation, you know, we don’t know what the final numbers are going to look like. We’re in the middle of seeing what ‑‑ where the chips are going to fall. So, I guess the principle of appropriate and commensurate contributions would be something to think of.

3639 Certainly, 20 million is not going to be a fix‑it‑all. We very much were mindful in thinking about where the gaps are in the sector and trying to be strategic around where the most effective use of a circumscribed amount of money would best be put. So, you know, we’re trying to operate from I guess a realistic perspective. However, I’ve been very heartened, seeing how the proceedings have been going, at what I perceive to be an openness on the part of the Commission to really think about some substantial systems change. So, certainly, if there were, you know, more monies available, there is no shortage of BPOC creators out there who could use additional support.

3640 I am going to maybe refer back to in our reply submission to the Commission. We did note that, you know, just because we exist, it would not absolve existing funders from their obligations to support our communities. And, you know, we did put a number in there, and this was something that we’ve been discussing with our other colleagues at other organizations, and the number of 35 percent is out there in terms of expectations for other existing funds to have targeted programs within their structures. So, we do see ourselves very much as working concurrently and side‑by‑side with existing systems which are in the process of changing.

3641 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Great. Thanks very much.

3642 Yes, so, that prompts a next question, and maybe I will direct it to All Out Arts Management. So, on that 35 percent, is there a strong enough consensus around that number? Is it generally recognized that that would be considered equitable? And how different is it, maybe, from the allocations that we’re seeing today?

3643 MS. OUTHIT: Thanks for the question. I don’t know that I am the right person to answer that, because my focus really is on strategies that actually would get us to that number, would get us to identify whether that’s the right number or not, and I think that my view is that, for us to sit here and say, “Well, it’s exactly 35 percent,” to some degree, that puts the cart before the horse. And for me, the horse ‑‑ I don’t want to belabour that analogy, but for me, the most important thing is for there to be, you know, a really fulsome discussion among all the parties as to, you know, “If there is a number value attached to what the meaning of ‘equity’ is, it’s this amount.”

3644 I have some doubts around that. I think what’s really important to achieve in equity objective is ‑‑ and I am going to reinforce what Sally said a moment ago ‑‑ it’s that all of the existing funds currently need to have more direction and more targets and more measurables, and a much sort of clearer direction from the Commission around how to restructure their funds and everything that they do in order to create equitable outcomes.

3645 And some of that is monetary. And some of it is not. Some of it goes to their governance and their constitutions and their programs. And then, you know, with respect to funds that are specifically dedicated for, you know, targeting Indigenous, Black and people of colour creators, you know, that’s a matter for I think a, you know, broader debate.

3646 But for me, those funds should be set aside on a reparative basis, so it’s not an either/or thing. So, all of the funds need to have an equity objective which includes dedicating a certain percentage of their funding ‑‑ whatever that may be ‑‑ you know, to certain communities, and then also, we need to have these dedicated funds which should be managed, as Sally mentioned, on a ‑‑ the language she used is “the for us, by us” basis.

3647 Thanks.

3648 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Great. Thank you very much.

3649 Maybe just quickly, before I leave the topic of kind of funding and need, do we have other panelists who would like to either put a new number on the record, or draw particular attention to a key consideration when it comes to defining the scope of the need? I know it’s a high‑pressure question, but...

‑‑‑ Rires

3650 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Okay. If no one’s got anything pressing, I’m quite happy to keep moving, as well, because I do want to dig in further on the issue of governance and leadership, and then the notion of “for us, by us”.

3651 So, a question where I would be very interested in hearing from In My Own Voice, but also Playground and In Sync ‑‑ what is the difference between dealing with a funding body that has leadership and governance structure that is representative of the voices that you’re trying to capture, vis‑à‑vis dealing with somebody who doesn’t have such representation in decision‑making roles?

3652 MR. BALLOU: I think, at the forefront, empathy plays a major role. The folks who are making these decisions ‑‑ not only are they aware of the stories the filmmakers are bringing forward; they empathize with it, they have some relevance within their own histories, and they have all the capabilities of deciding which projects or which filmmakers are worthy of funding. But having that empathy goes a very, very long way. And then, seeing it on screen afterwards and seeing future generations watch that programming is very important. So, I would say empathy at the forefront is major.

3653 MR. BENJAMIN: Yes, I would agree with that about empathy, and I would add that, you know, for me, being seen ‑‑ it is the difference between being seen and being heard and being understood. You know, it’s not about dodging difficult decisions or lowering some bar or something. You know, it really is about being heard and understood. And that, I think, when people come from similar communities, have experienced similar challenges, have experienced, you know, similar barriers, I think it makes the world of difference in terms of problem‑solving. And so, I think there is so much that I think people who don’t have to think about that don’t realize, and I think it’s a privilege not to have to realize, you know, that you ‑‑ or I ‑‑ often experience, you know, being a stranger in my own home ‑‑ and I mean that in a general sense ‑‑ you know, my own community, in my schools, in my hospitals that I, having that experience of not being seen, heard or understood ‑‑ it has a health hazard. You know? So, that would be my addition to the piece on empathy.

3654 MR. SEONGHO CHOI: I will just quickly speak. I have a good example. Recently, I was asked to series produce a series of short films for Hot Docs Film Festival Productions. They rarely make films, but the question for me was, did they hire me because I am a producer, I’m experienced, I’m a good producer/filmmaker, or was it that there was a vision that I was there?

3655 So, it was in the second season. We ended up bringing on my co‑series producer, Lisa Rideout, who is also a POC, and we immediately looked at this wide cascade of applications coming in ‑‑ over 150 ‑‑ to fill the mandate of, ‘What is our civic duty as Canadians?’, and make a film about that ‑‑ civic duty being how to make one’s place better than it can be ‑‑ what can you do as a person, as a citizen, as a Canadian? Great, great sort of thesis there.

3656 So, what Lisa and I did was ‑‑ we immediately pride ourselves as being people of colour ‑‑ we put a call out to say, okay, I have the applications; what is innovative? What is going to read to the audience? Our audience is mainly youth‑oriented. I have two kids ‑‑ two teenagers. I look to my children as the audience, like I said before, and ‑‑ and they are the vast majority of the future. Right? And the vast majority of the future is actual Black, people of colour, 2SLGPTQ+, disabled ‑‑ communities that have never been represented.

3657 So, we made this great series ‑‑ it’s touring across Canada right now ‑‑ called Citizen Minutes, and those stories were creators that were all BIPOC or in the 2SLGPTQ+ communities. So, they were amazing short stories that talk about things of a different perspective of how we as people of colour, as immigrants came into this country, not understanding that we can lobby to our M.P., but still want to make a change.

3658 So, they’re a citizen ‑‑ there’s Sisterhood Softball, the first Muslim female‑activated softball league. There is a film about Janelle Niles, who is Black and queer and uses her platform of comedy to talk about the hardships of colonialism and discrimination and systematic racism. I think that’s a really good point of view that you have two people of colour as series producers that kind of shifted ‑‑ we weren’t asked to shift that content, but we created a sort of a place for new, young people of colour, Black creators to spin their story, and they are all amazing stories. And that’s new content, geared towards people that have the empathy, that have the understanding to say, “Oh, I understand that story,” and it’s different from the traditional stories that I’ve seen before.

3659 Thank you.

3660 MR. BENJAMIN: And if I could add just briefly, I think, you know, it’s not about sort of sameness. There’s much diversity within BPOC communities and people, but one thing that is guaranteed ‑‑ what they ‑‑ and why I want to underscore this briefly is just to say that in all of that diversity, what you can bank on and take to the bank is that you will be seen and understood and heard by people who come from the communities with the challenges and barriers. It doesn’t erase the difficulties and challenges or the differences, but I think it gives us an opportunity to be able to work through those things with tools that I think stand a really good chance of success ‑‑ successfully problem‑solving, whatever the issue may be. And I think that, when you don’t have those basic tools of identifying with the false bias kind of piece, you’re just set back immensely. So, I just wanted to underscore that.

3661 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Great. Thank you very much for that. I think both you and Mr. Choi set up my next question, which I’ll make my last, recognizing the time. And it does get to the point you made about the diversity within the equity‑deserving groups, and we’ve heard a number of times this week that this is not a checking‑boxes exercise.

3662 So, in a landscape where we had some dedicated funding for BPOC creators, and where there was a threshold for all funds ‑‑ or an envelope for all funds to be contributing to equity goals ‑‑ is there still a role for further ‑‑ I’ll use the term ‘micromanagement’? Should the CRTC ‑‑ how granular should the CRTC be in allocating funding to try to get equitable treatment across a huge diversity of groups? Or are those decisions that somebody else is better positioned to make? What degree of governance is necessary to ensure broad equity?

3663 MS. OUTHIT: May I speak to that, quickly? My view is that I think the CRTC does need to take a guiding role in that. I mean, I don't know that it needs to be ‑‑ certainly not micromanaging, but I think that the ‑‑ because what we’re trying to do here is give effect to public policy, so there is a degree of social engineering that’s brought into play; that’s what policy is about. And so, I think it’s really important for the CRTC to actually have in mind some objectives for what it wants to see with respect to achieving equity in the impact of the funding. So, I think that there is very much a role that needs to be played there.

3664 That said, I think that it needs to be kind of tooled as a new ‑‑ a new relationship between the architects of the policy and the people who are actually going to deliver the policy, and the funds, and the filmmakers. So, some partnership building there I think is going to be really important. I think that there is definitely a role that needs to be played.

3665 And most importantly, there needs to be a role played around compliance, because my experience is that there is not much there that requires existing funds to actually step up to a certain threshold or to do certain things or not do other things. There’s not much in the way of review around compliance, and I think that that’s a really, really important piece because, you know, if you don’t actually say, “Look, you’re here now; we expect you to get from here to here in five years,” if you don’t actually plot that out and attach to it some measurables and some obligations that can actually be objectively reviewed, it will fail. I mean, we say in the equity business right out of the gate, “What doesn’t get counted doesn’t get done.”

3666 MR. SEONGHO CHOI: I will quickly speak to that, too. I agree. I one hundred percent agree. Like, right now, data is coveted as the place to understand who we are and where we’re going. And with the passing of Bill C‑11, it is the point at which CRTC should be looking at calling all that data. It is the most important thing to see where your money is going to the landscape.

3667 It’s like government’s policies are really starting to be ‑‑ we should really be thinking of ourselves as tech companies now, as thinking about how ‑‑ we’re not building films; we’re building tech towards an audience ‑‑ and how we’re reaching that. Is it broadcast? Is it streaming? Is it social media? Well, it all comes down to data, and that is the most important thing, and it’s an opportunity for the CRTC to really take hold of that and to use it to our country’s value.

3668 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank ‑‑ oh, sorry, did we have one last comment?

3669 MS. LEE: Yes. To that, I would add that the regulatory role of the CRTC ‑‑ it is around providing leadership and guardrails and things like that, but I'm going to go back to invoke the directives around engagement and flexibility again, that that will be so important moving forward.

3670 Having said that, though, and this is connected to your earlier question around the qualitative difference around governance and the “For Us By Us” concept, there is a reason why established funders have these consultative bodies that they convene, whether it's standing or ad hoc, of BIPOC members of the BIPOC community or working groups. You know, we all want to participate and weigh in, but a lot of times, we don't have the capacity to have the expertise, industry expertise. We don't have it in house or we don't have the funds to hire experts to guide us around that kind of thing. So I do want to say that, yeah, there is this ongoing engagement piece that I think is going to be so important.

3671 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you very much.

3672 Those are my questions, Madam Chair.

3673 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Vice‑Chair, and thank you for ‑‑ I'll use your words ‑‑ those thoughtful responses.

3674 We'll go over to Commissioner Levy.

3675 COMMISSIONER LEVY: I have a question that you may decide that you want to take away and think about, so don't feel compelled to answer immediately because this is coming from a different angle. We've talked an awful lot about making sure that, quite frankly, our Canadian culture is taking the very fullest advantage of the diversity that just makes it more interesting all around. But at a certain point, you need green lights and we need to discuss gatekeepers. And that's where my question is: What do we do to expand the gatekeepers and the green lights to enable the programming that your groups can provide and can help to flourish? So as I say, if you've got something right off the top, go ahead. But if not, you can take it away with you as well. Thank you.

3676 MS. LEE: Can I do both? I do have some initial thoughts on that. I mean, this is why we're advocating for some off‑the‑top funding and in, you know, amounts that are not inconsequential. So that is one point of action.

3677 I don't know what kind of levers or regulatory authority that the CRTC has around mandating certain ‑‑ again, maybe this is the micro‑managing thing on the, you know, but ‑‑ existing funders to specifically have quotas around the makeup of people making the decisions as gatekeepers. Perhaps part of the solution around that would be to pay attention to those people who are in governance and leadership roles in those organizations as well.

3678 MR. SEONGHO CHOI: I will quickly say something as well. You know, the notion of gatekeepers is like what is a gatekeeper? I'm not sure I even knew what that was a few years ago, in a sense. But it's in the creative think tank summit that we had, it was very apparent that it would be much appreciated to, A, have people of colour, Black, Indigenous in at the higher realms in the Heritage, at the CRTC making decisions. It would be great to have filmmakers, producers at the gatekeeper level to know what it's like to go and have to fill out all these applications across many platforms that are not unified at all, but still under the same Government of Canada. There's sort of like things that just make sense because you've been making things, you're making content, you're thinking of stories, but you're on the business practice of it as well. And so the gatekeepers to be of people from our side, I think, can make a change for a positive change.

3679 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you very much.

3680 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much. So perhaps we could now ask you to maybe each take a minute, and if you could share with us a final or concluding thought, we would appreciate that. Thank you.

3681 MS. LEE: I can start. I guess maybe I can reiterate what many have already been saying in other sessions that you have been having about us all being in a historic moment of reckoning for the sector. We're at a place where it's finally being widely acknowledged that Black and racialized voices are, in fact, essential to Canadian culture. And we have an opportunity right now to do something about it at the systems level.

3682 You know, we know it's going to take time to change long‑entrenched ways of doing things. And we do hope that the Commission agrees with us about the importance of acting boldly and, as somebody invoked earlier, with a sense of urgency. As, you know, really Canadian culture really does stand to lose another generation of BPOC talent and voices.

3683 I like to say imagine a world where BPOC successes are no longer in spite of but because of. I urge the Commission to use the lever of mandated contributions to strengthen the voices of current and coming generations of BPOC storytellers, and then of course to recognize that CISF is poised to play a really important role in all of these efforts that you're putting forward to address racial equity in our sector. Thanks.

3684 MR. SEONGHO CHOI: I will quickly say something. I believe that, you know, in the world of entertainment, in the world of education, in audiovisuals, you know, a lot of this is based on revenue and where the audience is engaging, like, in big streamers like Netflix. You can see the landscape of those programmings change, skew heavily towards less White or more people of colour and Black stories. You know, at some point soon, if not happening now, the top revenue of films of programming coming out will be people of colour. You can just look at hip hop in the music industry dominating. You know, and I think that right now, CRTC can take that opportunity to recognize the torque of the people like us that are making things and to support that to make sure that the equity is sound. Thanks.

3685 MS. OUTHIT: I just wanted to add, like my final comment on this would be to encourage the Commission when you're thinking about all these things, in particular allocation of reparative funding, to ask yourselves the question of whether it's possible to eliminate a problem using the same instruments that created the problem in the first place.

3686 MR. BALLOU: I am just going to take a moment and speak from the heart. I know we've mentioned “For Us By Us” many times. And I just want to reiterate that people from our communities, I think we always have to over‑prove why our projects, why our stories will be successful. And with the CISF, we don't have to over‑prove that. We'll show you. And with future generations, we're going to see more films, successful films like In Flames, Scarborough, Riceboy Sleeps, films that use different languages like Urdu, that use different languages like Korean. And we don't have to over‑prove why that will be successful. And these are films for Canadians, for all of us to enjoy. And that's what I would like to see in the future but also at this current moment, especially working with a lot of emerging and mid‑career filmmakers. I know we have incredible, successful stories that all Canadians and everyone around the world would enjoy and find entertaining as well.

3687 MR. BENJAMIN: I'd just conclude, I guess, my final thought really would be that obviously I endorse what has been shared. And I just want to say that, you know, for us, it really is about I think making ‑‑ you know, helping Canada to become what it aspires to be. We're here. We've been here out of Halifax, Nova Scotia. Like people were here before Canada was Canada. And I think the point being that, you know, we are, as was said, we're part of this fabric. We're part of this mosaic, this ‑‑ and we want it to be the best that it can be. And that means incorporating ‑‑ it's holistic. It's incorporating all. And there's room enough for all. So I just want to say that, for me, this is really about helping Canada to become what it aspires to be, making it live a reality. It's multiculturalism; it's pluralism; it's openness; it's a celebration of those things. We're helping Canada to become that.

3688 THE CHAIRPERSON: I think that the celebratory thought is a nice one to end on. We really appreciate you being here with us, both virtually and in person. We've covered a lot together this morning. We've listened intently. So thank you very, very much.

3689 THE SECRETARY: We will now take a break and be back at 11 a.m. Thank you.

‑‑‑ Suspension à 10 h 47

‑‑‑ Reprise à 11 h 01

3690 LA SECRÉTAIRE : Bienvenue.

3691 Nous entendrons maintenant la présentation de Coalition M.É.D.I.A.

3692 S'il vous plaît vous présenter et présentez vos collègues, et vous pouvez débuter.

Présentation

3693 M. JECROIS : Bonjour, Madame la Présidente. Bonjour, Membres du personnel du Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des télécommunications canadiennes.

3694 Mon nom est Patrice Jecrois, directeur général de la Coalition M.É.D.I.A. Je suis accompagné de Daniela Mujica, productrice et membre du conseil d’administration, à ma droite, et Ziad Touma, producteur et membre du conseil d’administration, à ma gauche. Merci de nous accueillir aujourd’hui à cette audience.

3695 Nous sommes conscients que la modernisation du système de radiodiffusion représente un défi complexe mais primordial. Nous vivons dans une ère de transformation numérique rapide qui influence la manière dont nous consommons l'information, le divertissement et la culture. Cité comme une priorité dans plusieurs articles du décret donnant des instructions au CRTC, il est essentiel qu’un nouveau cadre réglementaire s'adapte pour refléter l'innovation, la diversité et l'inclusion, et les valeurs qui définissent notre société canadienne.

3696 La Coalition M.É.D.I.A., comme son acronyme l’indique, favorise l’équité, la diversité, l’inclusion et l’accessibilité des professionnels issus des communautés sous‑représentées francophones au Québec et au Canada dans l’industrie des écrans. Nous œuvrons pour accroître la présence de ces professionnels par le biais de :

3697 (i) représentations auprès des différents paliers gouvernementaux, des organismes de financement et des sociétés de diffusion;

3698 (ii) du recensement des différents professionnels issus des communautés sous‑représentées francophones œuvrant dans l’industrie; et

3699 (iii) du développement de leurs expertises, comme par exemple, à travers notre formation entrepreneuriale M.É.D.I.A., la base HEC Montréal, qui vise à professionnaliser vingt producteurs émergents francophones afin d'approfondir leurs connaissances en gestion d’entreprise et en coproduction internationale, en plus de les accompagner dans les marchés internationaux.

3700 La Coalition M.É.D.I.A. s'engage donc à agir comme un catalyseur du changement en sensibilisant l'industrie aux enjeux de diversité et en facilitant l'accès équitable aux opportunités professionnelles.

3701 Notre volonté est d’aider à construire une industrie des écrans francophones qui reflète la richesse et la pluralité de notre société.

3702 Plusieurs juridictions internationales ont déjà mis en place un cadre réglementaire modernisé visant les entreprises en ligne dont il est actuellement question. Nous constatons que depuis l’avènement de ces réglementations, plusieurs de ces juridictions ont connu un bel essor autant dans leur capacité à produire plus de contenus originaux nationaux que dans l’exportation de ce contenu. Le nouveau modèle français en est un bon exemple.

3703 Nous sommes convaincus que des contributions significatives par les entreprises en ligne visées auront comme impact de changer le visage de l’industrie audiovisuelle au Canada, notamment en permettant aux communautés sous‑représentées d’avoir les moyens de mettre de l’avant des projets inspirants, amenant une nouvelle perspective et un point de vue au contenu canadien.

3704 MME MUJICA : M.É.D.I.A. constate que le seuil de 10 millions de dollars de revenus annuels bruts totaux de radiodiffusion au Canada, tel que proposé par le CRTC, semble trop élevé. Un tel seuil devrait être plus bas sur la base que toute entreprise en ligne qui souhaite diffuser du contenu au Canada devrait contribuer au financement de contenus canadiens, et ce, sans égard aux revenus qu’elle génère au Canada, dans la mesure où cette contribution demeure proportionnelle à sa place sur le marché canadien. Ainsi, outre les revenus, d’autres facteurs tels que le nombre d’abonnés et d’utilisateurs sont pertinents à considérer.

3705 Nous suggérons une contribution d’au moins 5 pour cent des revenus annuels bruts de radiodiffusion dans le cadre de la mise en place intérimaire d’un système de contributions de base, et ce, avant même que le cadre réglementaire dont il est présentement question soit adopté.

3706 Nous appuyons la proposition de l’AQPM que, par souci d’équité par rapport aux entreprises de radiodiffusion sous licence, une contribution supplémentaire équivalente à une valeur minimale de 20 pour cent de leurs revenus devrait être imposée aux entreprises en ligne, tout comme la contribution des plateformes en ligne, comme on l'a vu, en France.

3707 Afin de remédier à l’historique de distributions inéquitables des fonds disponibles et de diversifier la clientèle dans l’industrie audiovisuelle canadienne, M.É.D.I.A. propose de réserver un pourcentage de la somme initiale des contributions de base à un ou plusieurs fonds spécifiques qui financeraient uniquement les projets de compagnies majoritairement détenues et contrôlées par des personnes autochtones, afrodescendantes et racisées.

3708 Nous saluons ainsi l’avis du CMPA cette semaine, qui demande de tailler ou de faire un « carve‑out » de 20 pour cent des fonds alloués aux communautés sous‑représentées, avant de redistribuer le reste des fonds. Nous recommandons que le 80 pour cent restant soit réparti entre le FMC à 70 pour cent, les FPIC à 20 pour cent, et à Téléfilm Canada pour le long métrage à 10 pour cent.

3709 À ce sujet, M.É.D.I.A. est d’avis, comme l’AQPM l’a avancé cette semaine aussi, qu’une partie du financement devrait être consacrée à la production cinématographique de fiction et de documentaires, car une grande partie du contenu consommé sur ces plateformes en ligne sont des longs métrages. À nos yeux, les frontières entre contenus télévisuels, contenus audiovisuels et contenus cinématographiques sont de plus en plus floues ou hybrides. Le CRTC doit donc prendre en considération la production cinématographique comme composante intégrante du contenu audiovisuel offert aux Canadiens et aux Canadiennes.

3710 M. TOUMA : Pour mieux soutenir la diversité, l’inclusion et l’accessibilité au Canada, le FMC et tous les fonds éligibles, les FPIC, devraient investir au moins un tiers de leur financement total dans des sociétés de production majoritairement détenues et contrôlées par des personnes autochtones, afrodescendantes ou racisées, soit à travers des programmes spécifiques ou en atteignant des cibles. Ainsi, le partage des fonds serait plus équitable et soutiendrait une plus grande diversité de points de vue authentiques de créatrices et de créateurs issus des communautés en mérite d’équité.

3711 Tous les FPIC, qu'ils soient nouveaux ou anciens, doivent se doter d’un plan clair concernant leur politique en matière d’EDI, avec des cibles spécifiques à atteindre afin de continuer à recevoir du financement.

3712 Comme mentionné par l’AQPM et d’autres organisations et télédiffuseurs francophones, nous sommes d’avis et solidaire avec la proposition d’une répartition du 60 pour cent pour le marché anglophone et 40 pour cent pour le marché francophone. Nous tenons à préciser que cette répartition est également importante dans l’allocation des fonds qui seront alloués aux communautés sous‑représentées.

3713 M.É.D.I.A. ne s’oppose pas à ce que des fonds déjà existants et reconnus comme étant des FPIC gèrent les fonds dédiés aux communautés en mérite d’équité pour autant que ces fonds soient détenus, contrôlés et dirigés par des personnes des communautés visées et que la distribution des fonds se fasse de façon équitable entre les différentes communautés.

3714 Si un nouveau fonds est dans l’impossibilité de gérer le volet francophone, il devra trouver un organisme ou un partenaire allié qui pourra le soutenir dans cette démarche. La Coalition M.É.D.I.A. propose d’accompagner les FPIC existants dans la sélection, la gestion ou l’élaboration d’un jury externe pouvant analyser les projets de communautés sous‑représentées francophones.

3715 Dans l’optique de promouvoir l’autodétermination et le respect de la souveraineté narrative des peuples autochtones, M.É.D.I.A. appuie les recommandations d’organismes entièrement détenus et contrôlés par des personnes autochtones œuvrant dans l’industrie audiovisuelle, comme par exemple le Bureau de l’Écran Autochtone.

3716 Pour réellement créer une industrie inclusive, M.É.D.I.A. propose qu’au moins le tiers des postes suivants au sein de chaque fonds financé et reconnu par le CRTC, qu’il soit public ou privé, soient comblés par des individus qui proviennent de communautés sous‑représentées : le conseil d’administration, les postes de direction et les jurys de sélection.

3717 M. JECROIS : Depuis notre création en 2020, un des mandats que nous nous sommes donnés est de cartographier et répertorier les communautés sous‑représentées francophones œuvrant dans l’industrie. Bien que plusieurs organismes ou entités semblent minimiser notre présence ou importance, nous sommes fiers de dire que nous existons et que nous sommes une communauté bien présente dans le secteur des écrans. Malheureusement, les barrières à l'entrée ont historiquement ralenti et empêché plusieurs de nos membres d’accéder facilement à des financements ou au système qui est, comme nous le savons, très hermétique.

3718 Les données et constats suivants sont des plus convaincantes pour rappeler que nous existons et que nous sommes là pour y rester :

3719 ‑ Dans l’étude conduite en 2020 par le FMC et Ipsos sur le profil des bénéficiaires du fonds de soutien d’urgence du FMC, 36 pour cent des répondants des communautés sous‑représentées canadiennes disent produire des contenus de langue française.

3720 ‑ Le programme pilote PPCR du FMC, qui vise les compagnies détenues majoritairement par des personnes afrodescendantes et racisées, chaque année connaît un succès, et les fonds demandés excèdent les fonds disponibles.

3721 ‑ Des récents succès de productions comme Après le déluge acclamé par la critique et le public, Le mythe de la femme noire ayant connu un des plus grands succès d’auditoire en 2023, Kanaval récoltant des prix au TIFF et à CINÉMANIA, Pour toi Flora primée au MIPCOM, Séries Mania et au C21, sont quelques exemples de projets à succès financés par le FMC et les télédiffuseurs du marché francophone, produits majoritaires par des producteurs afrodescendants, autochtones et racisés francophones. Ils sont tous des exemples de contenus canadiens qui s’exportent au‑delà de nos frontières. N’est‑ce pas une des priorités de notre industrie pour assurer une pérennité et une découvrabilité de nos contenus?

3722 ‑ Vingt producteurs francophones viennent tout juste de terminer la formation entrepreneuriale M.É.D.I.A., la base HEC, conçue et propulsée par M.É.D.I.A., tous des entrepreneurs afrodescendants, autochtones ou racisés détenant leur propre compagnie de production, avides de proposer des contenus canadiens originaux. À ceci s'ajoutent des producteurs récemment formés par Main Film, L'inis et ceux qui sont déjà établis dans le milieu depuis plusieurs années.

3723 ‑ Selon les projections démographiques récentes de Statistique Canada, les immigrants pourraient représenter de 29,1 pour cent à 34,0 pour cent de la population totale canadienne d'ici 2041. La part d'immigrants récents venant d'Europe a continué de diminuer, 10,1 pour cent en 2021, laissant croire qu’une grande majorité de ces immigrants sont des personnes qui s’identifient comme étant afrodescendants ou racisés. À ceci, nous devons aussi ajouter ceux et celles de deuxième ou troisième génération qui s'identifient comme faisant partie de communautés sous‑représentées.

3724 ‑ Lorsque toutes les institutions se sont mobilisées pour défendre la place des femmes dans l’industrie audiovisuelle, avec les objectifs de 50‑50 pour la parité, les femmes ont rapidement pris leur place derrière la caméra et ont réalisé des films extraordinaires. Il est grand temps de se mettre des cibles claires pour les personnes autochtones, afrodescendantes et racisées, et ces communautés en mérite d’équité sauront rapidement les atteindre.

3725 Pour conclure, nous constatons que la question de l’équité, la diversité et l’inclusion est souvent abordée dans l’optique de présenter des histoires qui représentent la réalité canadienne. Bien qu’il s’agisse d’un point important, il est primordial que la question soit aussi axée sur la participation de créateurs et de producteurs issus de communautés sous‑représentées dans l’écosystème audiovisuel canadien, ainsi que sur la propriété intellectuelle détenue par des entreprises majoritairement détenues et contrôlées par des personnes autochtones, afrodescendantes et racisées.

3726 Je tiens à vous remercier pour votre écoute, et nous serons heureux de répondre à vos questions.

3727 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Excellent. Merci beaucoup pour votre présentation ce matin et aussi pour votre participation dans notre instance.

3728 Alors, on va commencer avec la vice‑présidente pour la Radiodiffusion, la vice‑président Barin. Merci.

3729 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Merci beaucoup, Madame la Présidente.

3730 Bonjour, Monsieur Jecrois, Monsieur Touma, Madame Mujica. On apprécie beaucoup vos commentaires dans ce processus.

3731 Je note que vous avez apporté des précisions et des suggestions plus concrètes dans votre présentation de ce matin. Alors, je vais essayer de vous poser des questions dans ce que vous n'avez pas couvert, en fait, et des questions plus précises sur les propositions que vous avez soumises.

3732 Alors, d'abord, dans votre intervention, afin de déterminer quelles entreprises devraient verser des contributions, vous avez suggéré un seuil de 1 million, je pense, ainsi que vous avez suggéré que le Conseil prenne en considération les facteurs comme les abonnés et les utilisateurs.

3733 Alors, j'aimerais vous donner la chance un peu de nous donner la justification pour le seuil que vous proposez et aussi si vous avez des suggestions concrètes de comment le Conseil pourrait intégrer les critères comme les abonnés et les utilisateurs dans la détermination des entreprises qui devraient contribuer à la contribution de base.

3734 MME MUJICA : Merci. Merci pour la question.

3735 En fait, aujourd'hui, on s'est un peu moins prononcés sur le 1 million, parce que, en effet, on a vraiment besoin de plus de données. Je pense que les data sont primordiales vraiment pour faire une suggestion plus soutenue.

3736 Mais on avait l'impression que le 10 millions, en fait, on a peur que certaines compagnies puissent peut‑être fragmenter leurs sous‑compagnies ou leurs différentes plateformes, et peut‑être ça serait une façon d'éviter justement cette contribution. Donc, on se pose la question.

3737 On n'est pas les experts non plus dans l'analyse de toutes ces données, puis c'est difficile aussi à se prononcer quand on n'a pas accès à ces données. Mais on se demande justement s'il faut revoir ce seuil juste pour éviter qu'il y ait des compagnies, en fait, qui essaient d'éviter de participer à cette contribution.

3738 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Est‑ce que vous avez cette préoccupation même si le Conseil adoptait une approche de groupe? C'est‑à‑dire que vous parlez d'une compagnie qui peut se fragmenter, mais c'est quand même la même compagnie dans une approche de groupe.

3739 M. TOUMA : Nous sentons que toutes les compagnies qui s'adressent à des Canadiennes et des Canadiens font partie de l'écosystème médiatique qu'on a mis en place, et tout le monde se doit de contribuer à cet écosystème‑là. Donc, de mettre des seuils un peu aléatoires, il faut vraiment les étudier pour savoir qui doit vraiment contribuer et dans quelle mesure. Donc, on sent vraiment que quand on participe, il faut redonner à la communauté de la production audiovisuelle.

3740 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Merci.

3741 Alors, j'aimerais maintenant vous poser une question sur le ratio que vous proposez d'un tiers. Alors, on a eu des intervenants dans ce processus. Peut‑être que vous avez eu la chance d'entendre, par exemple, l'intervention de Bell, qui propose 3 pour cent pour les communautés racisées ainsi que les autochtones. J'aimerais avoir vos commentaires sur ce point‑là.

3742 M. TOUMA : Par où commencer?

3743 Écoutez, le CRTC joue un rôle vraiment primordial dans ce que les Canadiennes et les Canadiens vont voir dans les années, les générations à venir. Durant toutes nos carrières, les écrans canadiens ont été différents de la réalité sur le terrain dans laquelle nous vivons. Les écrans canadiens ne représentent pas les écoles dans lesquelles nous étudions ou la mixité des quartiers dans lesquels nous vivons, surtout en français. Si vous regardez la télévision en français au Canada, elle est très distincte et très homogène, contrairement à la télévision en anglais.

3744 Il y a énormément de rattrapage à faire. Nous avons oublié plusieurs points de vue importants. Nous racontons les histoires tout le temps des mêmes points de vue, et il est grand temps d'incorporer des scénaristes, des réalisatrices et des réalisateurs, des productrices et des producteurs, et surtout des compagnies détenues par des personnes des communautés autochtones, afrodescendantes et racisées dans l'écosystème canadien. Il faut se mettre des seuils, il faut se mettre des cibles, et on ne peut plus se déresponsabiliser.

3745 Comme on l'a dit dans notre allocution plus tôt, lorsqu'on a voulu intégrer les femmes, qui étaient minoritaires dans notre industrie, la parité à 50‑50, lorsque toutes les institutions ont accepté de la mettre en place, les femmes se sont pointées, étaient au rendez‑vous. Elles étaient invisibilisées pendant des années, mais elles font présentement des films 50‑50, et des films extraordinaires qui se démarquent pour les Canadiennes et les Canadiens et dans l'international.

3746 Il faut vraiment mettre des mesures en place, que ce soit des cibles ou des quotas, comme vous voulez les appeler, ou des programmes spécifiques pour que les communautés en mérite d'équité soient plus présentes et actives dans l'écosystème canadien.

3747 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Merci beaucoup.

3748 Alors, ma dernière question, et je ne sais pas si votre position a évolué, mais dans votre mémoire écrit, vous avez suggéré de fusionner toutes les contributions dans un même bassin pour faciliter la gestion de contributions. Est‑ce que c'est encore votre proposition, et, si oui, pouvez‑vous nous expliquer comment ceci pourrait être plus efficace et comment on pourrait le concrétiser?

3749 MME MUJICA : Je pense que vous faites référence peut‑être à... En fait, on a toujours parlé justement d'une séparation, différents fonds, les FPIC, le FMC. Je ne sais pas si vous faites référence à ce qu'on avait parlé plus tôt.

3750 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Bien, c'est ce que j'ai entendu ce matin...

3751 MME MUJICA : Oui.

3752 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : ...mais j'ai cru comprendre que tous les fonds de cette contribution initiale devraient se gérer, selon vous, dans un même bassin pour faciliter la gestion.

3753 M. TOUMA : Est‑ce que c'était peut‑être une de nos interventions par rapport à si les compagnies devraient créer de nouveaux fonds destinés à des communautés spécifiques ou si elles devraient toutes contribuer dans un même fonds comme ceux des FPIC et du FMC, par exemple?

3754 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : D'après ce que je comprends, ce n'est pas ce que j'avais cru comprendre, et j'ai bien pris note de vos commentaires ce matin. Alors, on va laisser tomber cette question, et je vais re‑passer la parole à la présidente. Merci.

3755 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Merci, Madame la Vice‑Présidente.

3756 On va continuer avec le vice‑président Scott. Merci.

3757 VICE‑PRÉSIDENT SCOTT : Merci.

3758 Vous nous avez présenté l'exemple de la France. Pouvez‑vous aussi nous parler des impacts de ce cadre, soit les impacts positifs ou également des répercussions négatives?

3759 MME MUJICA : Peut‑être d'un point de vue de productrice et non de conseil d'administration de M.É.D.I.A., je peux peut‑être parler de l'impact que moi, je vois quand je suis dans les marchés internationaux. Je travaille beaucoup sur des coproductions aussi avec la France, et depuis qu'il y a eu les mesures qui ont été mises en France justement de la contribution, d'ailleurs, avec justement les plateformes en ligne, on le sent et on le voit sur les marchés que ça l'a accéléré et ça l'a vraiment rendu disponibles énormément de fonds pour de la création originale française, qui est des fois, oui, propulsée ou engagée par des Netflix ou d'autres plateformes, mais ça l'a vraiment été un levier incroyable.

3760 Je représentais Unifrance ou un producteur français, mais l'écho que moi j'ai du point de vue plus dans le secteur de la coproduction internationale et des Français a été vraiment bénéfique, et le nombre de productions a vraiment augmenté tant à la télé qu'au cinéma.

3761 VICE‑PRÉSIDENT SCOTT : Merci. C'est tout.

3762 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Merci beaucoup.

3763 Alors, on vous remercie encore, puis peut‑être on peut demander si vous avez quelques commentaires, peut‑être un dernier mot à partager avec nous. Merci.

3764 MME MUJICA : Je pourrais peut‑être dire en résumé ‑‑ je pense que Ziad aussi en a parlé un peu, et les intervenants avant aussi en ont parlé ‑‑ c'est que ce qui nous inquiète beaucoup, en fait, c'est les publics. Donc, si on demande une équité et une représentation, puis de nous reconnaître, justement qu'on existe, et ce n'est pas une œuvre de charité, mais c'est vraiment on est très conscients qu'on fait partie d'une industrie. On aimerait tous que ça soit une industrie viable et pérenne, et pour ceci, on s'inquiète beaucoup des publics, des jeunes générations et celles à venir. Et étant mère ou entourée de producteurs aussi qui justement regardent beaucoup qu'est‑ce que les jeunes regardent, ils sont de plus en plus rivés vers les contenus du sud ou vers des contenus qui sont sur les plateformes, qui viennent de partout.

3765 Des fois, même la langue n'est même plus un obstacle. C'est vraiment... Ils vont regarder Squid Game, La Casa de Papel, des séries qui viennent de partout, et donc, c'est ça qui nous inquiète, parce que ce n'est pas juste... Donc, c'est vraiment d'avoir une représentation à l'écran, derrière l'écran, des points de vue avec des récits authentiques. Je pense qu'il va pouvoir rejoindre les jeunes et les générations à venir.

3766 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Excellent. Merci beaucoup à la Coalition M.É.D.I.A. On vous remercie.

3767 LA SECRÉTAIRE : Merci.

3768 I would now ask Racial Equity Media Collective to come to the presentation table.

‑‑‑ Pause

3769 THE SECRETARY: When you are ready, please introduce yourself and you may begin.

Présentation

3770 MR. CARRINGTON: Good morning, Madam Chair, Panel Members and Commission staff. My name is Julian Carrington and I am the Managing Director of the Racial Equity Media Collective, or REMC.

3771 Founded in 2019, REMC is a national not‑for‑profit organization committed to equity for racialized creators in Canada's screen media industries. Focused on data‑led advocacy, REMC has produced several research reports, including most recently a study on data collection and benchmarking for equity, which was co‑authored with Nordicity and published earlier this month.

3772 Along with our research activities, we are rooted in community engagement and work closely with fellow BIPOC advocacy organizations. REMC is a member of the Canadian Racial Screen Leadership Collective and a participant in the Diversity and Inclusion Working Groups convened by the CMF and Telefilm Canada. REMC also holds a seat on the board of the Canadian Independent Screen Fund for BPOC Creators.

3773 My comments today will focus on the third of the Commission’s specified issues for discussion concerning existing and potential funds to support Canadian content.

3774 The Commission has asked whether existing funds sufficiently support the objectives of the current Broadcasting Act and has raised the prospect of amending the CIPF certification criteria. Last week, as you know, the government issued policy directions mandating the Commission to ensure that expenditures from broadcasting undertakings support creators from racialized communities. In light of these directions, we submit that the CIPF criteria should indeed be amended.

3775 Specifically, we propose three amendments to foster the diversity aims of the Broadcasting Act:

3776 i) Firstly, we submit that all CIPFs should be required to collect data in order to measure progress towards equity, diversity and inclusion. In 2016, the Commission mandated CIPFs to introduce evaluative measures that gauge the success of funded projects. We submit that given the stated diversity goals of the current Broadcasting Act, “success” must now be taken to include the degree to which funded projects reflect the diversity of Canada. These evaluative measures should include the solicitation of self‑identification data for the copyright owners and key creatives of all funded projects.

3777 ii) Secondly, and again building on the Commission’s 2016 amendments, we urge that CIPFs be mandated to include equity data in their annual reports. In 2016, the Commission noted the value of annual reports in fostering transparency and accountability; it is time for CIPFs to commit to transparency and accountability in service of diversity and inclusion.

3778 iii) Thirdly, we call for equitable representation on CIPF selection committees, again taking inspiration from the 2016 amendments. In 2016, the Commission mandated that CIPF committees must feature at least one member to reflect the interests of official language minority communities. Today, we submit that CIPF committees should also feature at least one member to represent the interests of equity‑seeking communities more broadly. Such representation would be a natural evolution of the requirement imposed in 2016, reflecting the Commission’s cognizance of the importance of decision‑makers who are sensitive to the lived realities of, and potential barriers faced by, members of minoritized communities.

3779 The second issue we wish to address today concerns the Commission’s general inquiry as to how production funds can better support diversity and inclusion as they relate to representation in programming and creators.

3780 Most efficiently, these goals can be better supported by directing robust contributions to existing programs targeted at racialized communities. These programs include:

3781 ‑ the CMF’s Pilot Program for Racialized Communities;

3782 ‑ Telefilm’s Development Stream for Black and People of Colour; and

3783 ‑ the Canadian Independent Screen Fund for BPOC Creators.

3784 These funds are currently significantly oversubscribed. As online undertakings are brought into the contribution framework, these programs should be prioritized for additional support to promote sustainable and accountable access to funding for creators from equity‑seeking communities.

3785 We note that the CISF is currently the only content production fund among the CIPFs that is BPOC‑governed and operated. This makes it particularly well positioned to provide accountability to its target communities.

3786 As I conclude, I note that the Commission has sought comments on a number of ancillary points concerning funds, including the kinds of selection processes, eligibility criteria and reporting requirements that would foster diversity and inclusion. Given our limited time today, I do not propose to comment on those matters here.

3787 I do wish, however, to underscore that the government’s recent policy directions instruct the Commission to engage with equity‑seeking groups concerning the most appropriate tools and frameworks to support our communities. REMC is well qualified to contribute to such engagement and we would welcome a dedicated opportunity to provide input to the Commission on these matters, alongside our colleagues in the BIPOC advocacy community.

3788 Thank you for the opportunity to comment today.

3789 And before I gladly respond to your questions, I have been instructed by the Hearings Manager to direct a request to the Panel to enter our recent research report into the record. The report addresses the prospect of harmonizing equity‑related data collection practices across key public media agencies and assesses the potential benefits of tools like targets and quotas in addressing equity gaps. So with the Panel's permission, I would like to place that report on the record.

3790 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thank you. I will take note on behalf of the Panel of the request and we will take that under advisement. So thank you.

3791 I know you said you would gladly answer our questions, so maybe we can dive in, and thank you for joining us today.

3792 Commissioner Naidoo.

3793 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much.

3794 I wanted to ask you: In your view, what percentage of the initial base contributions from online undertakings should be directed to funds that support racialized communities?

3795 MR. CARRINGTON: Thank you for the question.

3796 Primarily, we have sought to base our submissions on our own research and experience and the CRTC's prior precedents, and so we didn't have a specific evidentiary basis to cite a particular percentage, but we have considered both the prior written submissions of the other participants in the hearing as well as listened attentively to the other contributions this week.

3797 So I would say, firstly, that we note and defer to the advocacy of the Indigenous Screen Office on matters relating to Indigenous creators and that we are supportive of their request for an off‑the‑top carve‑out for Indigenous content.

3798 We noted with interest the CMPA's suggestion of a 20 percent off‑the‑top contribution for Indigenous and racialized creators. That struck us as a potentially reasonable approach.

3799 Arguably, a figure higher than 20 percent would be appropriate to equitably reflect both current and future demographic distributions and to offset historical barriers.

3800 We are supportive of the forthcoming intervention by our colleagues at BIPOC TV and Film, which I believe is actually advocating for a higher figure than that.

3801 So I think it's safe to say that certainly we would not support or advocate a figure below 20 percent. I will put it that way.

3802 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you for that.

3803 In your opinion, should audio and audiovisual online services be subject to different contribution requirements?

3804 MR. CARRINGTON: No. I don't see a reason that ‑‑ well, I should say I don't see any basis for online undertakings to contribute at levels lower certainly than existingly apply to traditional broadcasting undertakings.

3805 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you.

3806 In your intervention, you went quite in depth to talk about joint productions. And I wanted to ask you why it's so important to do joint productions with BIPOC communities around the world, if you could just explain that.

3807 MR. CARRINGTON: Yeah, thank you for the question.

3808 As has been referenced earlier today, one of the strengths, frankly, of Canada's diversity is the degree to which so many of our communities have diasporic relationships with communities all over the world. And of course, that raises the practical challenges of how to tell stories that transcend borders within a framework that is regulated for many reasons.

3809 We note, of course, that Canada has a rich co‑production system, many treaties, but many of those are with Western European nations or certainly relatively few of them are with global south nations, and that therefore makes it again challenging for diasporic creators with connections to these communities who want to tell stories that explore that lineage, that reciprocity to take advantage of existing co‑productions.

3810 So I think that's why we were eager to ensure that co‑ventures, so international productions that fall outside of the official treaty co‑productions are nonetheless able to access opportunities. And we noted, of course, that the Commission added some flexibility around CIPFs previously to allow co‑ventures to be deemed eligible. But we, in our written intervention, were pushing to go further than merely allowing but actually mandating equivalent eligibility between those two treaty co‑productions and co‑ventures, just to ensure that CIPFs not only have the flexibility to do so, but are actually, you know, required to do so.

3811 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you for that.

3812 In your intervention, you mention the need to support BIPOC creators creating for an audience that exists for third language content production. So I'm wondering, how can the CIPF funds be changed to ensure that they support a broader range of production to ensure that future creators are supported?

3813 MR. CARRINGTON: Well, this does not address third language content specifically, but if we're talking generally about CIPFs and how they can be instrumentalized to support a broader diversity of storytelling, then certainly, there could be requirements imposed.

3814 I think the reason that the focus of my comments today was on data collection rather than requirements is because I recognize ‑‑ we, the REMC, recognize the benefit of flexibility with respect to CIPFs. And so mandating a specific, say, 30 per cent quota or target for projects by racialized communities might be challenging for funds that are situated in regions where perhaps there are different population distributions. It might be difficult to expect a uniform target across the country. But we are certainly not opposed to the introduction of such requirements.

3815 I think we focus more on data collection as a mechanism of accountability and transparency, and we hope that amid an increasing recognition of the value of diversity and the importance and necessity, that the transparency will invite accountability and will invite funds to, you know, now that they're having to kind of disclose how inclusive their funds are, even if there aren't mandates in place, there will be an expectation created that they will do their utmost to see to diversifying the participation in their funds.

3816 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Okay. I want to dive down just a little bit more into the whole fund issue. Why do you think that certain independent production funds have chosen not to include international co‑productions and ventures for eligible productions? And do you think that encouraging co‑ventures is the best approach for supporting BIPOC creators, or do you think that there are some other things that the Commission should be examining?

3817 MR. CARRINGTON: I couldn't tell you why certain funds do not. I don't know if it's just inertia, perhaps, you know, previously they weren't eligible, and now that they are, there hasn't been sort of a concerted effort to make that expansion.

3818 But co‑ventures are but one means of helping BIPOC and particularly diasporic filmmakers tell stories that, again transcend borders. But no, there are certainly other ways that funds can support BIPOC communities. Again, they could commit to setting targets, imposing targets on themselves, even if they're not required to do so by regulation. But I think we've also addressed earlier or heard addressed earlier the importance of having representation among their selection committees, among their staff and governance.

3819 And I think that that component of decision‑makers, gatekeepers being, again, equitably reflective of Canada's diversity is another crucial component. Because it's one thing to have targets and quotas or requirements in place, and it's another to have decision‑makers who are not only empathetic to stories being told, but also who are able to parse nuanced cultural sensitivities.

3820 You know, there's representation, and then there's authentic or nuanced and sensitive representation. And I think you need the discernment that comes from decision‑makers. Quotas and targets can get you so far, but to really get that granular authentic perspective, that's where the decision‑makers as well are important.

3821 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: All right. Well, that leads to another question about the whole co‑venture idea. How do co‑productions or co‑ventures affect the ownership and rights associated with a production? And are producers disadvantaged by those agreements from a content ownership perspective?

3822 MR. CARRINGTON: I don't know that I am best‑positioned to speak to the nuances of that as someone who's not myself a producer. So for the interest of not providing you information that isn't, you know, wholly accurate, I'll ‑‑

3823 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Yeah, that's fine. That's fine.

3824 My last question before I hand it back to the Chair, what barriers do you think exist in the funding system overall to support things that may help BIPOC communities? And when you think of those barriers, do you have any ideas about how the Commission can reduce those barriers?

3825 MR. CARRINGTON: Yeah, so the media industry, the entertainment industry, it's a very relationship‑driven industry. And many of the barriers that exist aren't necessarily codified. They exist because creators may not have networks that get them the attention of key decision‑makers that can help them advance their projects forward.

3826 Or it can be that in order to take a loan that might ‑‑ you know, you might be able to get some interim financing for a project, but unless you have security against that interim financing, that can be a barrier, and that can be a barrier particularly for racialized communities.

3827 So there are plenty of barriers beyond the ones that are sort of immediately evident. I think it can be a barrier again to even perceive that you are not the target of an opportunity. And that may simply be based on the kinds of projects that you see being funded to date, the kinds of decision‑makers that you see presiding over that opportunity.

3828 So those are some of the barriers. And there are others. And I think actually this is a good opportunity to return to my point about the engagement mandate in the policy directives and the desire for our communities to find ways to meaningfully engage in an ongoing way with the CRTC. Because there are plenty of barriers that I'm sure I'm not thinking of here in the moment sitting before you. But in an opportunity to engage with you in a collective way, you would hear plenty of them.

3829 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much, Mr. Carrington. That's all I have, and I'll hand it back to the Chair.

3830 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. We will go over to Commissioner Levy.

3831 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Hello, Mr. Carrington. You have suggested a fund to support distribution and promotion of BIPOC productions. I'd like to know how you see this working. Would it work through producers or BDUs? And how would you measure its success?

3832 MR. CARRINGTON: Yeah, thank you for the question. That was an element of our submission that obviously relates to questions that will come up in later phases in particular of the consultation. I think we proposed that initially in response to the questions that relate to those later phases. But we would actually like to hear more from creators in our community about the particular barriers around marketing and distribution that exist.

3833 In terms of what forms they could take, I know, for instance, Telefilm Canada does currently have funding opportunities, funding support to support filmmakers in attending international festivals, markets. There's funding available to support distributors through Telefilm. I think those existing structures would be informative in how such a fund might be created. And I don't know that I propose an entirely new entity be created. But perhaps within, again, an entity like Telefilm that already has support aimed at discoverability and distribution, again, maybe there are specific streams that BPOC creators or BIPOC creators could access.

3834 COMMISSIONER LEVY: And I don't know whether you got to the issue of measuring.

3835 MR. CARRINGTON: Ah, how could the success of the created projects be measured one they ‑‑ aha. Well, of course, there are ways to measure success artistically in terms of festival selections or awards consideration, critical reception. There are financial metrics, certainly, sales figures to broadcasters or distributors within Canada and internationally, audience metrics.

3836 Again, this is something that we would be in a position to speak to more thoroughly in the later phases of the consultation. But I think we proposed that fund on the basis of an initial scan of where there are gaps, where we see opportunities to be filled. As to exactly how those gaps can be filled, I think we can return to you with some answers.

3837 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you for that. I have just one more question. And I was interested in your talking about, you know, let's use the offices of Telefilm and some of these other organizations to reach some of our objectives, because it strikes me that our policy direction asks us to make sure that for the most part support gets seen on the screen. And I think creators want to create. We want to make sure that a maximum gets on the screen. So how should we walk that line between the very important social policy objectives that we're being tasked with and getting things on the screen?

3838 MR. CARRINGTON: I don't know that there is a significant tension between those things, because I think we have seen in recent years that when BPOC creators have had the chance to tell their stories, they are making it onto screens, they are winning Canadian screen awards in record numbers. You know, I'm sure the Black Screen Office will speak to films like Brother which have been tremendously successful. Other films have been mentioned ‑‑ Riceboy Sleeps, In Flames was at Cannes this year. So again, I think returning to one of my earlier comments, one of the strengths of creators from racialized communities in this country are the ways in which their projects can often resonate globally very organically. And so I don't know that there is a significant tension between channeling more resources towards creators from our communities and seeing those results on the screen.

3839 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Which is what we all want. Thank you very much.

3840 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. And thank you for raising the issue of engagement with the CRTC, because that is something that we would like to do more of, more broadly. We're working on it. It will be a life‑long journey, but just really appreciate you raising that.

3841 We'll turn it back over to you for any concluding remarks. Thank you.

3842 MR. CARRINGTON: Thank you. In closing, I'd like to again reiterate that the REMC is supportive of the submissions of the ISO. In particular, we defer to their advocacy regarding policy concerning Indigenous communities in particular. So we would just like to echo our support for their submissions and their recommendation of that off‑the‑top contribution.

3843 As regards non‑Indigenous equity‑seeking communities, again, I return to those policy directions regarding expenditure requirements to encourage the Commission to also prioritize directing contributions towards targeted funds for these communities and again to mandate CIPFs to measure and report on progress towards diversity inclusion.

3844 I would also like, on your note, to reiterate that the REMC along with several of the other organizations that you will hear from today are eager to engage with the Commission going forward regarding the tools and frameworks to support creators from equity‑seeking communities. I note that the Commission has previously convened a discussion group to foster support for official language minority communities, and a similar undertaking may be a beneficial way of pursuing engagement around that mandate from those policy directions. I'll just say that whatever the Commission's preferred engagement mechanism, we stand ready to contribute, so.

3845 Thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

3846 THE CHAIRPERSON: Excellent. We look forward to that engagement. So thank you very much.

3847 THE SECRETARY: Thank you. We will break for lunch and be back at 12:45. Thank you.

‑‑‑ Suspension à 11 h 52

‑‑‑ Reprise à 12 h 44

3848 THE SECRETARY: Welcome, everyone.

3849 We will now hear the presentation of BIPOC TV & Film. Please introduce yourself and your colleagues, and you may begin.

Présentation

3850 MR. JOSHI: Thank you.

3851 Good afternoon, Chair Eatrides, Vice‑Chair Barin, Vice‑Chair Scott, Commissioner Naidoo, Commissioner Levy, Commission staff and colleagues. My name is Shant Joshi. I am Co‑Chair of the BIPOC TV & Film Board of Directors. I am also an award‑winning producer and President of Fae Pictures, a production company on a mission to decolonize Hollywood.

3852 To my right is Lisa Valencia‑Svensson, an advisor to BIPOC TV & Film, and a colleague who was instrumental in introducing specific language around black and racialized communities in the Online Streaming Act, and to my left is our esteemed Executive Director, Kadon Douglas.

3853 MS. DOUGLAS: Hello, everyone. For over a decade, BIPOC TV & Film has worked tirelessly to build, fortify and empower a growing community of Black, Indigenous and Racialized screen media artists, creators, entrepreneurs and leaders. We are a trusted organization with deep roots in our communities and proudly serve over 13,000 community members.

3854 Through ongoing advocacy and in solidarity with other equity‑deserving communities and Indigenous organizations, we call for structural and systemic change to ensure the creative freedom and economic sustainability of Black and Racialized media professionals. In partnership with stakeholders such as Bell Media, Screen Nova Scotia, Paramount+, DGC Ontario and the CBC, and support from Telefilm Canada, the Canada Media Fund, the City of Toronto, and Ontario Creates, among others, we deliver high‑impact professional development programs and strategic initiatives that clear pathways to funding, training, and entrepreneurial and employment opportunities.

3855 Our intention has always been to create a community of support, mentorship and solidarity. We are a movement within movements.

3856 As settlers and immigrants, we recognize the value of reconciliation through the prioritization of Indigenous voices, and therefore wholeheartedly support the Indigenous Screen Office’s requirement that funding for Indigenous projects is proportionate and commensurate to their cultural and linguistic role in the broadcasting system. Indigenous projects should be funded through the Indigenous Screen Office off the top of funding for Canadian projects, including those by Black and racialized creators.

3857 Per the policy direction from Canadian Heritage, we understand the term “equity‑deserving communities” to encompass communities that are Black, racialized and ethnocultural, 2SLGBTQIA+, official language minority, and persons with disabilities.

3858 To promote greater social cohesion in Canada and enhance our industry’s economic standing through the stories we tell, a commitment to equity, accessibility and anti‑racism must be at the foundation of the CRTC’s regulatory framework. Equity, accessibility, and anti‑racism cannot be an afterthought. Supporting equity‑deserving communities and the screen sector organizations that serve them is essential to the growth, international relevance and evolution of the Canadian screen sector.

3859 This is a historic moment, to see many of our colleagues here today from vital organizations from equity‑deserving and sovereign communities. Many of us dreamt of this moment but didn’t think we would see it in our lifetime. We deserve to be invited to this table, to see ourselves in the regulatory policy conversation, and to have a voice in this debate.

3860 The new policy directives given to the CRTC offer the chance for us to reimagine and redefine what Canadian content is and who its creators are, who should own it, contribute to and profit from it, and who should get access to public funds to create it. For many of us as Black, Indigenous, racialized, 2SLGBTQIA+ people and persons with disabilities, this is the first time we’ve ever been welcomed to the table and valued for our contributions. This is an opportunity to create a new framework for the broadcasting sector, one that prioritizes equity and liberatory policies and practices that allow for our full participation, autonomy and success.

3861 BIPOC TV & Film proposes four key priorities for this new framework: dedicated funds prioritizing equity‑deserving communities; new international discoverability commitments for our productions; harmonized data collection and public reporting methods, and finally, that the CRTC undertakes an equity audit and implements a comprehensive equity strategy, including representation in its staff and leadership.

3862 MR. JOSHI: The Commission must take into consideration the systemic inequities of the past, both with respect to the lack of Canadian and Indigenous content contributions from online streamers, as well as the lack of contributions from and the undervaluing of traditional broadcasters and online streamers for Canadian and Indigenous equity‑deserving communities. Addressing these inequities cannot be further delayed. Our community requires equitable access to Canadian audiences urgently.

3863 Given that online streamers have broadcast in Canada without regulation for over 10 years and that the rise of online foreign content has directly affected the revenues of Canadian broadcasters, we believe that an equitable approach to the base contributions for online streamers should be eight percent of their revenues for the purposes of content and two percent of their revenues for the purposes of news.

3864 While our community does not work in creating news content, we are affected by the impacts of disinformation. We believe that our democracy would benefit from the support of local news content that reflects and respects the diversity of our communities.

3865 We call upon the Commission to set a target across production funds, programming expenditures and increased access initiatives, a 35 percent threshold allocated towards content created by equity‑deserving communities. Fifty (50) percent of that should be designated to Black and racialized communities, both in the traditional and online broadcasting system.

3866 The Canadian Independent Screen Fund and the Black Screen Fund are suitable recipients of funding for Black and racialized creators and production companies. We recognize that the Canada Media Fund has taken significant strides to support equity‑deserving communities within their wide set of programs and consultations and commend their leadership.

3867 Telefilm Canada has also been an active supporter. Namely, their Talent‑to‑Watch program has established formidable careers for equity‑deserving creators, supporting them through winning Best Picture at the Canadian Screen Awards and premiering at festivals like Sundance and Cannes.

3868 To ensure this content is successful through both quantitative and qualitative measurements, the Commission should introduce regulatory commitments for the promotion and discoverability of this content, both domestically and internationally.

3869 Let me give you an example. “The Porter”, a uniquely Canadian story with all Black key Creatives, including two Black women showrunners and performers, made history this year with 12 wins at the Canadian Screen Awards. It was produced with the support of the CBC and the Canada Media Fund and pre‑licensed to BET+ in the United States.

3870 While the Canadian producers, Sphere Media, produced a high‑quality Canadian show that received critical acclaim, the project received a strong level of support for its production but far less for its marketing and discoverability both in Canada and abroad, leading to its cancellation after just one season.

3871 Projects from equity‑deserving communities require enhanced discoverability support to compete domestically and internationally. The current system has established a cycle where content produced by our communities fail to find a substantial audience and are, therefore, seen as of lesser value. Additionally, as our borders adapt to an online world of interconnectivity, we must recognize the value of content being recognized internationally and we must introduce mechanisms to support our content abroad. These investments are vital for the economic health of the Canadian screen sector.

3872 Considering that immigrants could represent over 30 percent of the Canadian population by 2041, Canadian content must include a broader range of languages and aid in exporting Canadian content and culture to international audiences. Including thematic online undertakings such as Crunchyroll and SonyLiv into our broadcasting system can be meaningfully beneficial for our creators to find their audiences.

3873 MS. VALENCIA‑SVENNSON: With regard to data collection, without metrics on how our communities are being represented, we cannot adequately redress the past and advance equity.

3874 The CRTC should openly endorse adequate tools and methods for safely gathering voluntary self‑identification information that uses consistent language and terminology, including data on aspects like race, gender, sexuality and disability.

3875 The ultimate goal is to compare and report this data to the appropriate parties, like producers, funders, broadcasters and the Commission, to assess a project’s representation of Canadians from equity‑deserving communities.

3876 The Canada Media Fund’s Persona ID should be considered a template others can adopt.

3877 An intersectional model must be taken to collect data. The process and framework for data collection to assess and advance equity should be done in consultation with groups and organizations representing equity‑deserving communities. This work must also be adequately funded and resourced to measure the impact of the Commission’s regulatory measures effectively. If not done with care and forethought, there is the possibility of bad faith actors taking advantage of loopholes, making equity more of a performative check rather than a genuine commitment to establishing regulations on equitable representation of our communities.

3878 Finally, obligations, not simply incentives, must be introduced.

3879 MS. DOUGLAS: Finally, in order to effectively executive these directives, the Commission itself must lead by example. T he CRTC should develop a strategy and framework in consultation with experts and leading organizations from equity‑deserving communities. This strategy should diversify leadership and staff at the CRTC, create new criteria to review licence renewals and build a new policy framework for CIPFs.

3880 Taking inspiration from the CRTC’s 2016 amendment to the CIPF policy framework, which stated that selection committees must have at least one representative from an OLMC, we recommend that at least one‑third of a CIPF’s project selection committee represents equity‑deserving communities, noting the wide diversity of our unique communities.

3881 We also recommend that the CRTC mandates 10 percent of its funding to go towards industry development and capacity building that advances equity‑deserving communities.

3882 MR. JOSHI: By implementing these recommendations, we believe online undertakings can play a vital role in achieving greater representation and opportunities for BIPOC communities, ensuring success for all involved.

3883 We thank you for your time and we welcome any questions you may have.

3884 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Thank you for your presentation.

3885 Thank you also for the photos that you were showing up on the screen. You had some really great action shots there, so really enjoyed those.

3886 So I will turn things over to Commissioner Naidoo to start the questioning. Thank you.

3887 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Hi there. Thank you so much for your presentation today.

3888 In your written intervention, I read it quite thoroughly, you discuss many issues relating to the Certified Independent Production Funds, but you didn’t submit any views on the Canada Media Fund in the written submission. And of course, we know that that’s the largest of the existing Canadian programming funds.

3889 So the question is, if the majority of the initial base contributions is allocated to CMF, would BIPOC creators be adequately supported, in your view?

3890 MR. JOSHI: I would say primarily, you know, the good thing is we’re in direct conversation with the CMF and we know that they have additional flexibility measures that are coming through Heritage, which is welcomed. I think one of the key barriers that our communities have faced with regard to CMF and the reason why we have more insights towards CIPF funding versus CMF funding is because of the broadcast trigger.

3891 The broadcast trigger is ‑‑ I mean, especially, I would say, in the last five years alone, is its own exclusionary method by which broadcasters who granted, in the last 10 years, have lost a substantial amount of revenue, can only, you know, commission a handful of projects. And so oftentimes, those projects are not from members of our community and even when they are from members of our community, they’re often through producers who are not members of our community who work with creatives who are members of our community.

3892 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much.

3893 I want to talk a little bit about self‑identification information.

3894 How do you envision the CRTC utilize self‑identification utilization information to ensure it effectively serves the needs of equity‑deserving communities and helps in achieving the Broadcasting Act’s objectives?

3895 And part and parcel to that question is, in your opinion, do you think that a third party could centralize such a function and what specific features and functionalities do you think have to be prioritized in order to maximize its impact?

3896 MR. JOSHI: So I can go ahead and start, and Lisa spoke ‑‑ Lisa formerly was our managing director for REMC, so she has quite a bit of insight on this.

3897 But what I would say is that, as we said in our oral remarks, right now the systems of data collection have been focused around the funders, so Canada Media Fund has Persona ID, Bell Fund has been collecting data through their own method. Telefilm does the same. And it’s all decentralized, right. It’s all sort of like in different pockets.

3898 And I would say especially one of the key conduits of employment is the producer. And the thing is that ‑‑ I mean, I would say specifically for my production company, we’ve been collecting that data informally in a sense of we’ve been including that in our crew demos, but there’s been no mandate for us to do so.

3899 And you know, obviously, there’s ‑‑ CMF has introduced funding mechanisms to support projects through those communities, but the thing is that there is that barrier with regards to privacy where the producer has an uncomfortability with asking those questions without a centralized method, for example, like a CAVCO ID, where you can sort of collect a number or some piece of information that isn’t specific to that data, plug that into a system and then get a result which is my production is, you know, this percentage Black, this percentage Indigenous, this percentage LGBTQ, and you’re not necessarily identifying or outing someone in the production while still understanding the representation of your production, especially with regards to people with, you know, invisible disabilities or people who are, say, white passing. You may not know, right.

3900 So I would even point to the NFB, who collected their data by looking at people’s bios and hoping that people’s bios mentioned that kind of information. And sometimes people are not interested in outing that information in a public setting, but in a private, you know, secure setting where that data is sort of harmonized and collected in a secure space, that would be really, I think, welcome.

3901 MS. VALENCIA‑SVENSSON: Last winter I conducted about, I’m trying to remember, 30 to 40 conversations with people across this sector in Canada around this very question, including some of your own staff, and it’s incredibly intricate. Should it be a federal body, should it be a combination of CMF, Telefilm, NFB, CBC as the four key federally funded organizations in the sector? They each have different mandates. They have different levels of privacy responsibility.

3902 Then you have the provincial bodies. They are responding to different legislative requirements in each of their provinces or territories.

3903 So there was no simple, quick answer to who should be collecting data. There’s also the problem of data being collected purely for analysis versus data being collected so that funding and commissioning decisions can be made.

3904 So it requires an intense ‑‑ like in‑depth study. There’s not going to be the one right answer, necessarily.

3905 I remember as I was doing the research conversations thinking to myself that maybe one way to start because a lot of organizations and agencies are already collecting data is to ensure that there’s a uniformity of data being collected, so the same terms across the country even if it’s being collected by a number of different bodies. But I think it's something that the CRTC should continue to look at, and the Department of Heritage as well, what is the best.

3906 I do think likely that something that’s federally funded is likely going to have the most impact because there’s going to be a need for, you know, a budget of a million, couple million dollars just to think this through and put it in place.

3907 The data, the IT considerations alone would make your brain explode, so that’s ‑‑ I don’t know if that helps, but hopefully.

3908 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: It does help. Thank you.

3909 In your submission, you also suggested that targets should be using qualitative as well as quantitative targets. And you mentioned community impact as an example of that.

3910 So I’m wondering if you can explain how that might work and then I guess it begs the question, how would you recommend approaching qualitative targets?

3911 MR. JOSHI: So qualitative measurements are already used by CPIFs and the CMF, more so in the adjudication stage of funding applications, but less so with respect to the completion of it, right.

3912 So right now, once a project is complete, you know, certain bodies require the financial data with respect to how much money did the project make. And obviously, as we’re talking about Canadian culture, that’s not necessarily the only metric we’re interested in looking at. And also, differentiating the difference between money generated in Canada versus money generated internationally.

3913 So with respect to qualitative, what we’re looking at is we’re talking about awards, we’re talking about festival acclaim, we’re talking about critical acclaim, audience responses. And you know, a great mechanism by which this can happen is just basically, you know, requesting that a producer present a report which already sort of happens right now, but there’s no way by which to sort of flow that through.

3914 But if you go back to the adjudication method that the CMF uses, for example, they break out, you know, sort of like they’ll adjudicate a project out of 100 and they’ll have sort of evaluation criterias like 40 grades just like, you know, you do in school. You have 40 grades for this, 20 grades for this, you know, and sort out of 100.

3915 And within that, they’re looking at, okay, what other pieces of data is this producer presenting, points of data, right. So did ‑‑ you know, if you’re making something for the ‑‑ you know, for the trans community, for example, and you have a number of trans people on Twitter responding, you know, in droves and you can sort of capture that data and present that and say, “Look, this is actually directing impacting the community in this way”, getting audience numbers, getting audience responses.

3916 Those mechanisms can then flow to a funder or, you know, broadcaster and then they can sort of adjudicate and present that, you know, in a quantitative measurement, but ultimately, it’s flowing through a qualitative report.

3917 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much. You’ve answered all my questions.

3918 I know my colleagues have some, though, so Madam Chair, I’m done.

3919 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. And thank you for that granular example as well on the audience response.

3920 We will go over to Vice‑Chair Barin. Thank you.

3921 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you for being here and thank you for your presentation.

3922 I have a follow‑up question. I know you touched on the topic of the CMF. And earlier this week, we had Bell, and their position was that establishing any new Certified Independent Production Funds was not needed to represent either equity‑seeking groups, OLMCs or community groups. And their position was that they felt the unique needs of these groups were being adequately addressed through the partnerships with the CMF and other existing Canadian funds.

3923 Can you respond to that perspective?

3924 MR. JOSHI: Yes, for sure.

3925 I would first speak to the financial side of things, right. So when you’re putting together a project, you’re rarely going to one source of funding. It’s a collection, right. So you’re bringing in your tax credits, you’re bringing your CMF money, you’re bringing in your broadcast licence, and oftentimes, especially, I would say, for English language productions, you don’t hit 100 percent with all that. You need some sort of additional gap finance, something to close the gap.

3926 And so ‑‑ you know, commonly right now or what sort of a lot of producers are required to do is go out to the international marketplace and try and pre‑sell territories to close that gap, basically.

3927 The market as it is right now is quite intolerable to cultural content, I would say. Like it ‑‑ or content in general, I would say. We’re into a bit of a tough time as the business model completely shifts into an online space where, you know, the dollars that are being received are not sort of flowed through, you know, theatrical box office, DVD. You know, all those ancillary revenues that you would see has sort of been shrunk into one bucket, which is SVOD or AVOD.

3928 So the market has a sort of intolerance for this, and especially when it comes to Canadian cultural content. I think it behooves us to see opportunities where, for example, the Bell Fund has their TV fund and Cogeco TV fund which helps close the gap. These sort of small funds through the CIPFs help close the gap for the financing.

3929 And so no, I mean ‑‑ and the CMF has a limitation by which they can finance, you know, 49 percent through the envelope and up to 86 percent through their additional programs.

3930 So I mean, granted, maybe there’s this unicorn production that can access up to 86 percent of their money out of the CMF, but that’s rarely the case.

3931 So funds like the CISF, the Black Screen Fund, even the ISO, they help close those gaps. I had a production last year where we were able to close our gap actually through the CMF through the pilot program for racialized communities, but that was a feature film with Telefilm and Ontario Creates and other funds.

3932 So that’s the financial side, is you need a diversification of funding so that you can close your gap and actually have a ‑‑ and not reinvest your producer fees so that, you know, you’re not making money on these productions and, you know, going out of pocket on these.

3933 And then on the side of the ‑‑ why not just the CMF, why can’t the CMF just do this by themselves, we like the CMF. You know, we work with them quite a bit. But I would say that there are productions, like I said, that may not get that necessary broadcast trigger or may not be able to get that 10 out of 10 requirement that are still Canadian productions and warrant, you know, that support.

3934 So right now the Canadian Media Fund has that sort of 10 out of 10 restriction, so for example, if I’m doing a project with a Chinese‑Canadian family and my showrunner comes to me and he says ‑‑ and this actually happened ‑‑ “I want to work with, you know, a Chinese editor who’s a landed immigrant, who pays taxes in Canada, but he’s a landed immigrant”. He's not a permanent resident. He’s not a citizen yet. He's moving in that direction, but we can’t wait for him to be a PR before we want to hire him because he’s so talented.

3935 And so we lose that one, you know, Cancon point, but we do it in sort of a movement towards, you know, equity, diversity and inclusion.

3936 And you know, same thing, we had a writer who was a landed immigrant from India who was on her way to get her PR probably within a year, but didn’t have it just then and so, you know, funds like the Bell Fund or IPF open up that sort of bandwidth that allow, you know, our colleagues who are on the trajectory towards citizenship or permanent residency to be part of our productions.

3937 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: That was very helpful. Thank you.

3938 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Vice‑Chair.

3939 And again, thank you for those granular examples, which we find very helpful.

3940 I have to say you actually answered some of our questions in your opening remarks, which were very clear and complete, so maybe at this stage we can turn it back to you. As you’re leaving the hearing room in Gatineau today, this afternoon, what is it that you hope our Panel has taken away?

3941 MR. JOSHI: Thank you.

3942 So BIPOC TV & Film is among the vital organizations sustaining the equity‑deserving communities in the Canadian screen sector, creating and nurturing the talent pool contributing to the country’s economic vitality.

3943 BIPOC TV & Film applauds the Commission’s efforts to support Canadian content in a new and modernized framework and welcomes the Commission to support programming from equity‑seeking communities through mechanisms including a harmonized data collection tool, leadership and decision‑maker requirements and enhanced discoverability support for diverse Canadian content domestically and internationally.

3944 We are committed to working with the CRTC broadcasters, funders, studios and other stakeholders to create a more inclusive screen industry in Canada. Our work and equity principles, more generally, are not separate needs of the industry but foundational to its success culturally and economically.

3945 MS. VALENCIA‑SVENSSON: I think for me, we all have to think of why. I’m born and raised in Canada. I grew up consuming media that absolutely had nothing of me in it at all, and so I have spent much of my adult life thinking I’m less worthwhile. It's just the fact, and many, many people are growing up with this same message to themselves from the media we consume that we don’t matter as much.

3946 And I think arguably there might be those of you in the room who have also grown up with the message that ‘I don’t matter as much as you do.’

3947 And so, the question is, is that the country we want to build? And that’s why storytelling by diverse voices where we see ourselves reflected, and we know that we have told that story and the audience is consuming it, realize they’ve seen themselves reflected and shown as important. That’s the kind of society we certainly want to build, and I can only imagine it’s the kind of society that the CRTC wants to help to build through the regulatory process.

3948 Thank you.

3949 MS. DOUGLAS: Thank you for this. For us, I just want to close to say what BIPOC TV & Film ultimately wants, and we speak on behalf of a large, mobilized, talented community of people who are creating dynamic content, who want to work in the system, want to take Canadian content globally as well, and also to collaborate with their communities across the world.

3950 We put forward that a multifaceted collaborative approach is urgently needed to accelerate and bolster Black and racialized people’s participation and leadership in the screen industry. Over the past decade, we’ve witnessed so much rapid technological advancement, disruptive business practices, and new forms of creative expression. A global pandemic upended our lives and we were made to confront the legacies of racism and colonialism.

3951 Our communities have intentionally been marginalized and excluded, only now seeing possibilities we merely dreamed of. We are playing catch‑up in an unfair system not designed for us. While our storytellers, technicians, innovators, and entrepreneurs focus on making great art, we must also ensure that we are breaking down existing barriers and building new, accessible, and equitable pathways.

3952 On this note, I want to echo a recommendation made by one of our colleagues earlier today ‑‑ that we fully endorse the appointment of a chief equity officer and department within the CRTC to oversee the implementation of the Commission’s equity strategy and framework. Entities that fall under the Commission’s regulatory purview should be required to report their achievements and shortfalls, including related demographic data and expenditures, to this office.

3953 We are so happy to be here today. We’re so proud of this. BIPOC TV & Film started twelve years ago as a community group by a writer named Nathalie Younglai with a vision just to create camaraderie amongst us so that we could fight this fight together, and it has blossomed into something this beautiful and dynamic across the country. So, it’s an honour to be here with you today.

3954 MR. JOSHI: Thank you so much.

3955 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much for being here. I thank you for your authenticity, and for sharing your stories with us.

3956 THE SECRETARY: Thank you. I will now ask the Black Screen Office to come to the presentation table.

‑‑‑ Pause

3957 THE SECRETARY: Welcome, and when you are ready, you may present your colleagues and begin.

Présentation

3958 MS. JENKINSON: Good afternoon. My name is Joan Jenkinson and I am the Executive Director and Co‑Founder of the Black Screen Office. With me today are Richard Jean‑Baptiste, a Board member of the BSO and based in Montreal. He is the Vice President of Development and Innovation, and Executive Producer at Attraction. Marsha Greene is a Toronto‑based screenwriter and showrunner of many prime‑time dramas, including The Porter and Mary Kills People. Also with us today is Kelly Lynne Ashton, our much appreciated regulatory consultant.

3959 I just wanted to say off the top that being here, talking to you about the modernized Broadcasting Act ‑‑ and that such a strong emphasis is being placed on equity, inclusion, and accessibility in Canadian broadcasting policy is a massive shift ‑‑ and it’s just happened in three years ago, let alone 30 years ago. And to be talking about content created by Black Canadians ‑‑ I can’t emphasize enough how optimistic we all are that real change is about to happen.

3960 The Black Screen Office was founded three years ago by some of Canada’s top Black film and television producers and creatives. At that time, there were only four TV drama series by and about Black Canadians on any major TV network, in the history of Canadian television. And it was taking Black filmmakers between nine and thirteen years to make a second feature film after the critical success of the first.

3961 The BSO is a national, bilingual organization. Our goal is to help build a screen industry free of anti‑Black racism. We work with industry decision‑makers to change practices and build systems of accountability. We directly catalyze the production of Black‑led content and support the career advancement of Black professionals.

3962 BSO was named ‘Changemaker Organization of the Year in 2022’ in recognition of its efforts, by Playback, Canada’s screen industry publication. We’ve conducted three ground‑breaking research studies ‑‑ Being Seen, Being Counted, and Being Heard ‑‑ and we have worked with the industry to implement the findings to create long‑lasting change. Based on this research, we have also developed and operate career accelerator programs that combine training with real work, real pay, real credits, and real credibility within the sector.

3963 We are particularly proud of the Rogers‑BSO Script Development Fund, for which we have raised over 1.6 million dollars to span a six‑year period. The program pays and mentors scriptwriters to develop scripts to pitch to producers and broadcasters for the potential to greenlight and become fully produced series. We are pleased to have collaborated with the CISF to provide administrative support for this important fund.

3964 We are also very pleased to say that we have recently been approved by the CRTC as a Certified Independent Production Fund, or CIPF ‑‑ the Black Screen Fund. We are active in advocating for Black talent in policy development and legislative reform. In fact, BSO was instrumental in advocating, together with a coalition of other equity‑seeking organizations, for amending the language of Bill C‑11 to refer to ‘Black and other racialized’ talent and audiences, rather than just ‘racialized’. We did this to ensure that the Canadian broadcasting system takes into consideration the specific history and needs of Black Canadians ‑‑ which brings us here today.

3965 This is an opportunity to work with the CRTC and other stakeholders to break down barriers and make lasting changes in the Canadian broadcasting system. We want the system to reflect and provide opportunities to all Canadians, and in particular, Black Canadian talent and audiences. The modernized Broadcasting Act provides us with the opportunity to include all platforms doing business in Canada in the regulatory framework. It also ensures that the framework supports Canadians of all backgrounds, abilities, and identities.

3966 As we shared in our written submission, in 2019, Statistics Canada identified that Black Canadians experienced greater barriers to inclusion ‑‑ and greater incidents of racism and oppression ‑‑ than other racialized Canadians. For that reason, we want to see a Canadian broadcasting system that is equitable, inclusive and accessible for everyone ‑‑ and we want to have specific, targeted strategies for Black creators and Black content. We want to meet the needs of Black audiences to see themselves, but we also want the content created by Black talent to be enjoyed by all Canadians.

3967 Richard?

3968 M. JEAN‑BAPTISTE : Merci, Joan. Bonjour. Alors, comme Joan l'a mentionné, nous préconisons un cadre réglementaire du CRTC qui soutient évidemment l'équité, l'inclusion et l'accessibilité. Nous sommes ici également pour proposer la création d'une source de revenu pour financer des programmes gérés par des organisations en quête d'équité. On pourrait appeler ce volet obligatoire. Il serait donc complémentaire aux contributions générales existantes afin de construire un système de radiodiffusion canadien véritablement inclusif.

3969 De nombreux intervenants ont suggéré que les contributions de base initiales, sans égard à tout engagement futur en matière de dépenses de programmation, devraient représenter 5 pour cent ou plus des revenus des services de diffusion étrangers. À partir de cette somme d'argent, nous proposons que le FIPC, le Fonds de Production Indépendants Certifiés, du Bureau de l'écran des Noirs, reçoive une contribution de 5 pour cent à titre de contribution spécifiquement ciblée pour les organisations axées sur l'équité comme le fonds du Bureau de l'écran des Noirs.

3970 Selon nous, l'accès au volet obligatoire doit être réservé aux FPIC gérés par des organisations comme le nouveau FPIC du Bureau de l'écran des Noirs. Tandis que les fonds généralistes contribuent également à l'enrichissement de notre paysage médiatique, les organisations spécialisées dans la recherche d'équité disposent de l'expérience et de la compréhension nécessaires pour adresser précisément et efficacement les besoins des communautés qu'elles servent.

3971 Nous comprenons que la Phase 2 du processus du CRTC, qui vise à moderniser le cadre réglementaire, traitera des définitions et de l'éligibilité à ce volet obligatoire. Toutefois, il est essentiel que les contributions de base en cours de discussion lors de cette audience publique soient immédiatement dirigées vers ce volet obligatoire, afin que les fonds soient disponibles sans délai pour les FPIC éligibles, et puissent être utilisés rapidement pour financer le contenu.

3972 Le Bureau de l'écran des Noirs recommande fortement une allocation de fonds au Fonds de Participation à la Radiodiffusion. Des organisations en quête d'équité, telles que le nôtre, doivent être en mesure de participer aux audiences du CRTC afin de porter les voix et de représenter les intérêts de nos communautés. Étant des organisations peu capitalisées et sans financement opérationnel constant, l'accès à un Fonds de Participation à la Radiodiffusion bien financé et doté de revenus stables est indispensable pour appuyer notre participation continue aux audiences du CRTC, comme celle‑ci.

3973 Je vais laisser la parole à Marsha qui va aborder plus en détail les FPIC et notre initiative de nouveau FPIC au sein du Bureau de l'écran des Noirs. Merci.

3974 MS. GREEN: I would like to talk about the criteria for Certified Independent Production Funds, or CIPFs, which may need to be reviewed in a separate hearing, but which many have discussed in their submissions as part of this hearing. We support the underlying policy that CIPFs were created as an alternative to, or to meet a gap in, the Canada Media Fund’s programs. For that reason, should an organization successfully make the case that they are meeting a gap or a need in the funding framework, we feel they should be able to create a new CIPF. And as we have just been approved as a new CIPF, we do not think that equity and inclusion would be served by locking the door behind us.

3975 We acknowledge that many of the CIPFs have revised their mandates to support more inclusive content and target emerging creators from underrepresented communities. But not all have. We recommend changing the criteria to require that all CIPFs set DEI mandates and demonstrate how they are working toward those goals in their annual reports. This accountability and transparency will ensure that equity, inclusion, and accessibility are not seen as “nice to have” or a “current trend”, but are implemented as a legal requirement, consistent with the broadcasting policy outlined in the modernized Broadcasting Act.

3976 We further recommend that the CIPF criteria be amended to exclusively support 10‑point production, so that the funds are assured to produce fully Canadian content. Only with a 10‑point requirement can we be certain that the revenues generated by Canadian audiences go to the creation of content written by, directed by, and starring Canadians. We need to make sure we are not entrenching a 6‑point system that will, and has, left Canadian creators behind. And I believe that my series The Porter, which had an all‑Black Canadian creative team ‑‑ from the writers to the directors, and the cast ‑‑ is a shining example of what a 10‑point system can achieve, particularly for underrepresented communities.

3977 The BSO would like to thank the Commission for processing our CIPF application in time for the public hearing. While we were just approved, we have done a lot of work as part of the application process, and we anticipate launching in 2024.

3978 The Black Screen Fund will fund high‑volume production from Black creators in English or French. Unlike most other funds, successful applicants will participate in training as a requirement of the funding, to ensure Black creatives at all levels are fully prepared to take advantage of the funding, from application to exploitation. We will provide guidance to increase their odds of success as they move through the creative process and move on to other projects. With this scaffolding or targeted support, we hope to have a real impact on the size and strength of the Black talent pool and break down the barriers they face in their careers.

3979 We ask that the CRTC determine that the Black Screen Fund should have access to initial base contributions, however they may be assessed, without any restrictions to funds already in operation. As we have said, we have great plans to create systemic change for Black content creators in the industry, but we will need access to funding to be able to create that change.

3980 MS. JENKINSON: In conclusion, the BSO is here today and every day to advocate for systemic change so that Black Canadians can see ourselves on our screens, and we can participate in creating that content so that all Canadians can see our stories. Towards that goal, the BSO recommends: Initial base contributions set at five percent or more of revenues; Mandatory allocation of five percent initial base contributions to the Black Screen Fund; Allocation of funding to the Broadcasting Participation Fund; Revision of CIPF criteria to require all CIPFs to have DEI mandates and report on their progress in annual reports; and Revision of the CIPF criteria to require 10‑point Canadian content in funding.

3981 We would be happy to answer any questions that you might have.

3982 THE CHAIRPERSON: Great. Thank you so much for all of that. It sounds like you’ve been keeping very busy.

3983 I will turn things over to Vice‑Chair Scott.

3984 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you, Chair.

3985 Thank you very much. I think your final thought there ‑‑ your little summary ‑‑ reflected the notes I’ve taken for myself exactly.

‑‑‑ Rires

3986 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: I should have saved myself the trouble and just let you do it for me.

3987 So, there are a couple themes I’d like to cover, but let’s start with the money and the scope of the need. So, we’ve heard a number of numbers floating around ‑‑ the five percent, and the five percent of the five percent; we’ve also heard about a 35 percent envelope within existing funds that should be dedicated; and we’ve heard about a specific budget for a 20‑million‑dollar program, earlier this morning.

3988 What’s the right way of looking at the scope? If the goal is to make progress towards equity, what is the financial scope of the challenge? And should we be looking at a top‑down application of equity principles? Or should we be looking at a bottom‑up assessment of the need and the readiness on the ground?

3989 MS. JENKINSON: I can talk about how we approach the number that we came to. As everybody knows, we’ve been talking about this 250 million dollars representing five percent, and we did what you recommend, Vice‑Chair Scott ‑‑ that we look at a needs analysis, which is what we did. We studied or reviewed what other CIPFs that are currently providing funds ‑‑ what their budgets are. And we looked at what it is that we were trying to accomplish, and we came up with a number that in essence is five percent of that 250 million dollars. So, when it comes to the overall system, and 20 percent, and 35 percent, it’s ‑‑ you know, there are a lot of numbers that have to be weighed against what ends up being the priorities that you determine.

3990 I think we have each presented what we hope to do ‑‑ the Indigenous Screen Office did; the CISF has done ‑‑ and other organizations. We realize that there are many, many interests that have to be addressed, and what we can speak to is the work that we’ve done, the need that we’ve seen, and the funding that we think that we would need to do an exceptional job.

3991 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Great. Thank you very much. So, in a somewhat related question ‑‑ and you were starting to get there already ‑‑ so, we’ve heard a lot about different existing ‑‑ the general purpose funds, the current ‑‑ including the recent CIPFs ‑‑ and the possibility of new funds. What’s an appropriate constellation? So, if you look at all those pieces, what are all the pieces that we need to have in place to make progress, without making the landscape so complicated that we end up, quite frankly, just confusing people or making things ineffective due to the complexity of the system?

3992 MS. JENKINSON: I think we need to focus on moving forward on what the gaps are. We’ve heard, certainly, about what the requirements are across the board on so many levels, from the Indigenous community, from Black and people of colour communities, from news, from feature films. There are a lot of things that need to be done, and only a certain amount of money to do it. We were really thrilled about the Chair’s opening remarks that made putting equity and inclusion up front. And there has been such a history of negligence around our communities that we feel that now is the time ‑‑ that this is the priority that we all have to consider, moving forward.

3993 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: How prescriptive does the CRTC need to be in directing the allocation of funds? So, for example, CIPFs are eligible to receive contribution, but it’s not always mandatory. If we are going to have an expanded CIPF framework, how hands‑on should the CRTC be, and how much can be allowed to flow, quote unquote, “naturally”?

3994 MS. JENKINSON: I think there has to be an overall framework. To look at, again, the pie ‑‑ what is the pie, what needs to be ‑‑ the ingredients of the pie need to be. And I think, you know, general good principles need to be put in place. There are some things that should be mandated and some things that should happen organically. But again, I don’t think that anyone is asking you to be really hands‑on and micromanage anything that anyone is doing. I think once we set up that framework ‑‑ that we identify the priorities ‑‑ and that we move forward with those priorities, you know, at levels that you deem appropriate, it’s very difficult to be so prescriptive right now, again, because there are so many numbers we don’t know at the end of the day what the number actually is going to be. But we trust that you will really see what the priorities are, and we certainly want to be among those priorities, but at the end of the day, I think you need to set the direction, and let us do the work.

3995 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you. My last question is a specific one. You had mentioned the benefits of a 10‑point system, and you brought out a fantastic example of what it can achieve. Is there a downside risk that moving from six points to ten points might disincentivize people from partnering through the CIPFs?

3996 MS. GREEN: It’s hard for me to answer whether or not I think it would disincentivize people. I really approached the 10‑point system from the kind of people on the line, you know, who are the points. You know, I'm a writer, and so when I thought about the writers and the directors, the actors, and the composers, and all the people on that, I thought, well, do they want flexibility or do they want jobs? And I thought that they might want jobs. You know? I think that that's the danger to me of not having it, is that I worry that, you know, we're talking kind of about creating opportunities for Canadians. And I worry about who's going to be left behind. And I particularly worry about that for the underrepresented communities.

3997 So as we're here at this moment, I think it's really important ‑‑ and this actually diverse content, the content itself is actually so desired right now, I think it's really important that we're making sure that those jobs are staying in this country with the Canadians.

3998 And I think what's really important, I'll just say about the Black Screen Fund in particular, is the idea that training is a part of it. Because I think one of the way in which we're often counted out is that we don't have enough experience. And when you have that flexibility to go find someone with more experience, it's often outside of our communities or outside of our country. So I don't know kind of on the business side, but I'll say we'd be excited about it.

3999 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Great. Thank you all very much.

4000 Madam Chair, those are my questions.

4001 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much.

4002 Let's go over to Commissioner Levy

4003 COMMISSIONER LEVY: I think it would be a missed opportunity not to congratulate Monsieur Jean‑Baptiste for the output deal that he has made with Netflix, which is an interesting example. And I wonder whether it's easier to sidestep some of the issues of 10 out of 10 points when you're producing even for a streamer like Netflix in the province of Quebec in French.

4004 MR. JEAN‑BAPTISTE: Thank you for the question. In French: that is the key of that deal is to have French content. And I think the question, you know, what was raised earlier by Marsha regarding, you know, Canadian content, in this case we're talking about Québécois content. And we feel extremely comfortable with that approach because it actually enhanced or it gives this amazing amplification tool for Quebec content and therefore Quebec artists. So yes, we are very proud. And thank you for noting it of this deal.

4005 And if I may, I think I can push a little bit further your question, if I did answer it, is it's interesting to see how, you know, there's a possibility of combining them both, streamer financing with the more traditional financing. And I think I've been asked, you know, which is best. I think it's not a question of either‑or. It's both have a necessity. And they can certainly co‑exist because they serve different purposes. And I think, you know, time will tell, but we are looking extremely like in a positive mindset that we're not abandoning one kind of system towards another, or we're certainly not abandoning a market towards another, you know, global versus national. We think both are where we have to be. And I think that's what we need.

4006 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you. I appreciate, because, you know, it's always nice to hear about the opportunities that have arisen when we're talking so much about, you know, obligations and how to meet the rules and do the best for our culture. Thank you very much.

4007 MR. JEAN‑BAPTISTE: Thank you. And you know, one last thing I want to add on this, is in with Attraction, we see this as relieving, you know, removing certain pressure. Because, you know, you've heard it before, the market is under a lot of pressure. So if we can remove some pressure from the traditional financing model in having, you know, money from abroad, then so be it. But we won't do it at the cost of losing our identity.

4008 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Maybe I can just do a quick follow‑up on that. When you talk about the pressure that the ecosystem is under, let's call it that, can you just touch on the issue of urgency? Because again, we've heard a lot about that: not urgent, take your time, do the full review, then think about this initial base contribution versus it's urgent and it's needed right now.

4009 MR. JEAN‑BAPTISTE: Well, I think you all saw what happened in Quebec just two weeks ago where 447 people lost their job overnight. We're talking about, you know, people with 25‑year careers. I think that says how urgent or under stress the market is, and that's for the Quebec market.

4010 But I think the rest of Canada is also under stress. I mean, the whole entertainment television‑cinema industry in the world is under stress. The business model needs to be reviewed. We can talk about that for hours. But so that's the reality of, I would say, the mainstream people.

4011 But then when you look at underrepresented communities such as Black creators, then it's even worse. I mean, you're looking at someone who, you know, has 35 years of experience in entertainment. I spent 20 of those years in advertising. And to this day, I'm still considered one of the rare non‑White experienced producers, I think. So imagine if I evolve into an industry that for the last 15, 20 years was okay, and it's now being under extreme pressure, financial pressure, then there is an emergency, there is a sense of urgency.

4012 This being said, I think we can chew and walk at the same time. Right? So let's go fast on certain things, and let's take the time to plan some things that we won't have to regret. But we have to move forward. Status quo is managing a decrease, and I think there's a great opportunity right now for all of us.

4013 THE CHAIRPERSON: Merci beaucoup pour votre réponse.

4014 So maybe at this stage we can ask you is there anything that we did not cover during our discussion this afternoon or anything else that you would like to leave us with?

4015 MS. JENKINSON: There is one very important thing to us, and that is how the system can support equity‑seeking groups to be more active participants in this process. The policy direction instructs the CRTC to consult with equity‑seeking groups, and we want to be here. We want to work in partnership with you at the CRTC and other stakeholders. And we want to represent the interests of Black Canadian content creators.

4016 But we're thinly capitalized and depend on project funding to operate. To be true collaborators, we need operational funding. We ask that you keep that in mind throughout this process.

4017 I want to say again that the modernized Broadcasting Act has triggered a seismic shift in a very short time. We are pleased to be working with you to implement our shared vision of a regulatory framework so that Black Canadians can pursue thriving careers as content creators.

4018 Canadian audiences want to see more authentic and representative stories like The Porter, Après le Déluge, Brother, Shelved, and Diggstown. These are just a start. But where are the stories of the Maroons in Nova Scotia or about the Haitians in Montreal or the Nigerians in Lethbridge, which is one of the largest Black communities in Canada. If we're bold and give Black creators support, then we're going to see a Canadian broadcasting system that truly reflects us all. And as the late John Lewis, civil rights activist, said, the time is always right to do what's right.

4019 THE CHAIRPERSON: Well, I think that is a great quote to end on. And also, I would like to come to a word that you used in your opening remarks, which was optimistic. So thank you for your optimism, and thank you for participating in this proceeding.

4020 M. JEAN‑BAPTISTE : Merci beaucoup.

4021 THE SECRETARY: Thank you. We will now hear the last intervener for the day: Racial Equity Screen Office. When you are ready, please introduce yourself, and you may begin.

Présentation

4022 MS. LEE: Hello Madam Chair, Commissioners, Panel Members, and staff. My name is Barbara Lee, and I am the founder and board chair of the Racial Equity Screen Office of RESO.

4023 I understand that I am the last speaker on a Friday at the end of a whole week of presentations, so I did a slide show that would add some colour and hopefully add to the fact that I am the last one and you get to go home after this.

4024 So the Racial Equity Screen Office is a national not‑for‑profit organization based in Vancouver. We are the only screen office outside of Greater Toronto Area. So we would like CRTC to keep geographical equity in mind when you go through your deliberations.

4025 Our mission is to elevate and empower racialized creatives by creating pathways and export business opportunities from Canada to global markets.

4026 At RESO, our focus is on the distinct nature of the immigrant diaspora and the opportunities, realities, and stories from our communities and our lived experiences. RESO is founded on the core principle of collaboration as a counterbalance to the culture of scarcity in our current funding climate that has historically inhibited racialized community organizations from cooperating with one another. Through active collaboration, we resolve to move from a mindset of scarcity to one of abundance.

4027 RESO is built on the 25 years of foundational advocacy work of the Vancouver Asian Film Festival or VAFF. It is the oldest Asian film festival in Canada that showcases the best of Canadian Asian screen content.

4028 RESO was the driving organization behind Knowledge Network's racial equity audit and was successful in advocating for mandated racial equity targets of 50 per cent commissioning funding to BPOC producers and production companies. We also published the racial equity audit report entitled “National Film Board of Whose Canada?” which was instrumental in NFB's recent commitment of ensuring that by March 31st, 2025, over 30 per cent of its productions and co‑productions underway at that time will be directed by artists and filmmakers who self‑identify as Black and people of colour.

4029 We are of the position that real, measurable, material change in this industry can only happen when significant racial equity targets are set for production, development, and capacity‑building.

4030 On a side note, RESO defers to the advocacy efforts of the ISO in matters relating specifically to First Nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples of Canada. Our interventions are complementary to any provided by the ISO and primarily will address racialized creators.

4031 I don't know if you can put the slide on. Oh, okay, all right.

4032 I just wanted everyone to see that I wanted to talk about what is a Canadian story. And on your handouts, you will see four film stills from diverse Canadian stories. But these are rarely available to the Canadian public.

4033 CRTC must redefine the meaning of Canadian content to avoid excluding contributions from Canada's diasporic and racialized communities, who are often directly or otherwise excluded by CRTC regulations. Redefinition must be followed by investments in discoverability, promotion, capacity‑building, and production. Diverse languages other than French, English, and Indigenous languages should not be excluded as Canadian content since 21 per cent of Canadians speak languages other than these.

4034 A key recommendation is that of the base contribution amount, whether it is five per cent or more, direct funding should be given to the following before distributing to CMF and other mainstream certified independent production funds or CIPFs.

4035 First, 20 million, off the top, should be given as an annual direct contribution to the Canadian Independent Screen Fund, or CISF, as it is the only BPOC‑governed CIPF with a mandate to support Black and racialized creators. RESO does not have its own CIPF like the BSO and ISO, but instead plans to work closely with CISF.

4036 Second, direct core funding is needed for BPOC service organizations, key national and regional organizations that build infrastructure and capacity, create opportunities, and offer training for BPOC creatives and production companies similar to RESO. As we have been told, CMF cannot provide core funding, though they have a bit more flexibility.

4037 Third, create a discovery and promotion fund for Black and racialized content so the Canadian public has an opportunity to watch this incredible content.

4038 And as a note, RESO is in favour of support for ISO and BSO's CIPFs.

4039 Another recommendation is that there needs to be mandated minimum of 35 per cent of racial equity targets for black and racialized producers and production companies for the current system of funds such as CIPFs, CMF, Telefilm, NFB, traditional broadcaster, et cetera. This is necessary to accelerate and repair historical underrepresentation and marginalization of Black and racialized communities.

4040 As well, by 2041, Stats Canada is forecasting that between 38.2 per cent to 43 per cent of the Canadian population will be racialized. This should be seen as an opportunity for Canada to export Canadian content to the world, and we can use South Korea as a successful example of this.

4041 We need to fill the gaps and recognize the opportunity. These three trees represent the racialized diaspora's deep roots across continents. We have settled everywhere; we can be found anywhere; but we are nowhere to be found in any of the decision‑making roles in Canada that ultimately determine which stories get greenlit and which do not, who gets seen and who does not.

4042 RESO recognizes the economic potential of the racialized diaspora communities in Canada and all the untapped stories and content just waiting for the proper targeted investment, incubation, and development. Canada's screen industry is small, but with adequate investments, these fresh yet familiar stories are well positioned to find global audiences.

4043 We are in a moment where true transformation can be achieved, but it requires vision, commitment, and fortitude. Change is never easy, especially for those that have benefited at the expense of the underrepresented and underfunded communities and will make staying the course difficult. But we are here to assure people that with accelerated investment in and meaningful inclusion of Black, Indigenous, racialized along with additional equity‑deserving communities, we will have a much bigger pie and a much bigger table for all. Thank you.

4044 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Thank you for your presentation and for the slides. And I can assure you that even though it's Friday afternoon, our Panel is very well caffeinated and we are actively listening.

4045 I will turn things over to Commissioner Levy. Thank you.

4046 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Good afternoon. You've recommended implementation of a tiered system to determine initial base contributions made by streaming services to the Canada Media Fund in particular. Would you mind elaborating on what that could look like?

4047 MS. LEE: Well, as I said, off the top of the base contributions, I think there needs to be direct funding. And then the remaining funds that are going to CMF and other CIPFs, there needs to be still a commitment of 35 per cent of what their funding should be used for equity‑deserving production, if that ‑‑

4048 COMMISSIONER LEVY: So are you suggesting 20 per cent come off the top of any new funds, and then the rest go to CMF and so on, and that 35 per cent of that should also go to equity‑seeking groups?

4049 MS. LEE: Right. So off of the base contributions, we have said that it should be a minimum of five per cent, and ‑‑

4050 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Five per cent.

4051 MS. LEE: Five per cent. And but there were certain amounts that ‑‑ we haven't come up with specific amounts, but we believe that 20 million should go to CISF. Then there should be an amount that should be some core funding. Because with this money that's coming in for production, a lot of the equity‑deserving communities need organizations like RESO, BSO, you know, BIPOC TV & Film, all these organizations to help them get to the finish line, because they have been historically underfunded, so they need a lot of supports. And the organizations that we represent, we have the training, we have the ability to help to get these creatives through the process.

4052 Under the Vancouver Asian Film Festival, we run a program we call the Mighty Asian Movie Making Competition, and we give money. And part of what we do is we help the creatives with mentoring; we help them with production; we help them with script‑writing mentoring to get them so that their output is of a quality, the production value, and the product is comparable. It's of a quality that can compete with anybody else. And because historically you've been underfunded and under‑resourced, you often didn't have that training or that ability to build capacity in the community.

4053 So that's why that has ‑‑ that core funding is also needed, to help with the production funding that's coming through.

4054 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Again, if we start slicing and dicing the initial base contribution in multiple different directions, it does eventually have an impact on what's available for strictly production. So how should we think in terms of portions? And is the initial base contribution the only place where you could get that support? Because it strikes me that there may be provincial, municipal, arts council grants, et cetera, et cetera, on a more regional and local basis that could help to contribute to this instead of looking specifically to this one source.

4055 MS. LEE: Well, we have not received core funding from any of those provincial or municipal grants. It's ‑‑ core funding is very difficult to get. We get project funding. So it's project by project. And we get a little bit of core funding out of there.

4056 So there needs to be some. And I understand that it gets sliced down too much. But there has to be some portion of that off the top that should be there to help with the core funding of the BPOC organizations that are helping the creatives to get into production, to help with their productions.

4057 COMMISSIONER LEVY: So have we sufficiently covered the proportion of contributions that should go to CMF and to CIPFs? So are you fixed on ...

4058 MS. LEE: So I would say that from the contribution ‑‑ off the top of the contributions, definitely, we need to fund CISF. The $20 million is the amount that we have specifically identified. We would like to have some more funding off that. We amount ‑‑ we haven't come up with a dollar figure because we do know that it gets sliced, and everybody loses, you know, it gets less and less as you move down.

4059 But we would like to have some amount committed to some core funding for the organizations that are helping moving this ‑‑ how would I say it? ‑‑ facilitating some of production funds. Because just throwing money at production there ‑‑ it needs support. I would say that it needs support.

4060 And I sometimes often use the example of, you know, we've been asked to run a race, and we're competing with people who are decked out full‑out in athletic gear, and we're running in flip flops. We need to help get them, you know, up to speed, so that they compete with everybody else. And that's what I see our organization helping to do once the production funds come through.

4061 COMMISSIONER LEVY: You've suggested that the Commission establish some guidelines to ensure that funding provided to BPOC producers who own the intellectual property or to BPOC‑owned companies in order to discourage the negative industry practice of non‑BPOC producers and production companies hiring simply to access earmarked funds. Could you elaborate a bit on what those guidelines might look like?

4062 MS. LEE: I think they need to retain at least ‑‑ you know, there was a talk of 51 percent, but I don’t think 51 percent is enough. I think 60 percent. Between 55 and 60 percent would be maintaining that IP.

4063 We hosted the East by Northwest Conference and we brought in a creative racialized Zarza Nawaz, who had Little Mosque on the Prairie, and she talked about how she had to give up her IP because it was the only way to get her show made. And we want to avoid that, so any way that we can help protect the IP for, you know, black and racialized creatives, that’s what we want to do.

4064 So making sure that if production companies come in to work with a black and racialized creatives, that they get to maintain their IP at least the 66 percent level.

4065 COMMISSIONER LEVY: You’ve expressed a need for the Broadcast Participation Fund to maintain a stable source of ongoing funding and to, you know, help organizations such as yourself participate in these kinds of proceedings.

4066 Can you talk a little bit about the impact of the BPF?

4067 MS. LEE: Well, we haven't been able to access it. It is a reimbursement fund, so as you can see, it’s only myself. I am a Board member. It wasn’t something that we could afford.

4068 We had volunteer ‑‑ to do our submission that you were looking for, we had a group of young women out of Toronto who are policymakers who approached us and said, “We believe in this. We’re going to do it for you”. We had no money.

4069 So it is very important and has to be more accessible. It has to be maybe not reimbursement, but perhaps applying ‑‑ now that we’ve been a part of this process, perhaps we can apply for it, you know, as getting the funds ahead of time before as opposed to having to put it up front and then apply for it and not knowing if we’re going to get it back or not.

4070 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Yeah, that’s pretty precarious.

4071 Are there other ways that we could support public participation?

4072 MS. LEE: Come to Vancouver. Come out west.

4073 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Wouldn't we love to.

4074 MS. LEE: I think it’s intimidating, so a lot more ways to engage that may not be so formal. I think the people who get to engage have to have a certain level of understanding, a level of confidence. In the ‑‑ I can only speak in the racialized communities, this is very intimidating. It's very daunting. The amount of work to prepare and the amount ‑‑ you know, we have all these people, our BIPOC comrades here all coming together to support each other. We want to show solidarity, that we’re here, that we had lot of meetings to prepare for this, to help each other out.

4075 So those are the sort of things that the community needs. It can’t just always be formal. There needs to be some informal to show us the process and that it’s not so scary and that we are all here talking human to human and trying to find a way to make this world and make Canada’s broadcasting system better for everyone, and more inclusive.

4076 COMMISSIONER LEVY: I think that's all that I have at the moment. I’d really like to appreciate your surmounting some of your fears about us. I hope you’ve realized ‑‑

4077 MS. LEE: Oh, no, no. No.

4078 COMMISSIONER LEVY:  ‑‑ that we hardly ever bite ‑‑

4079 MS. LEE: No.

4080 COMMISSIONER LEVY:  ‑‑ and that you will ‑‑

4081 MS. LEE: No, no. I’m not so fearful.

4082 COMMISSIONER LEVY:  ‑‑ that you will come back and participate in the future.

4083 Thank you.

4084 MS. LEE: Thank you.

4085 THE CHAIRPERSON: Maybe if I could just add to what Commissioner Levy is saying, certainly we hear you. We’ve heard this before. Some of us were in Whitehorse in the spring at a hearing. We heard similar comments in terms of the accessibility and the type of engagement.

4086 It’s a quasi‑judicial tribunal and it's very formal. It’s just the nature of the process. But we are looking for ways to engage further and we will be coming out with some more details on that because that’s certainly ‑‑ that’s something that we’d like to do.

4087 I should also say we have six regional Commissioners across the country. You have a regional Commissioner out there, so find them.

4088 MS. LEE: I have spoken with ‑‑

4089 THE CHAIRPERSON: I’m going to turn things over to Commissioner Naidoo.

4090 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Yes, and I’m from the west as well.

4091 The current CIPF policy encourages CIPFs to allocate funding for promotion and discoverability initiatives. And in your presentation, you had mentioned it a little bit. You recommend a discovery and promotion fund, but specifically for black and racialized content.

4092 So I’m wondering if you can put some meat on the bones of that, if you can just elaborate on your proposal and detail whether you’re proposing creation of a new fund for this.

4093 MS. LEE: Well, if the existing CIPFs have the ability to put aside funds that’s directed for discovery, then there doesn’t need to be one. But making ‑‑ ensuring that they do use that money for discovery of black and racialized content is another story, so in that case, I would say that there needs to be some sort of mandated target for discovery.

4094 I also am the founder of the Vancouver Asian Film Festival and, over the 27 years, we have had incredible content that goes nowhere, that the Canadian public should definitely see, but there is no path.

4095 Broadcasters don’t want to see or they don’t know how to package this content. We have some ideas. We would like to make an anthology of all these stories and package it and ‑‑ but we don’t have the funds for that.

4096 We don’t understand the licensing and all that, so if there’s some way that we could take content that’s already there that’s incredible, package together anthologies, have it broadcast on any one of the Canadian broadcast networks, that would be one way.

4097 I have lots of ideas. I don’t think we have enough time today.

4098 I’ve been doing this for a long time. I’ve seen incredible stories that don’t get that, the eyeballs, and they do deserve it.

4099 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you.

4100 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.

4101 Let's go over to our Vice‑Chair.

4102 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you.

4103 So I think we had the privilege today to hear from many groups representing under‑represented communities and a lot of them, including the ISO, spoke about the critical need for funding for under‑represented groups, but they also highlighted the need for flexibility.

4104 And I’m wondering if you can comment on this element of flexibility when it comes to funds and how can the Commission ensure that equity‑deserving groups not only receive the funding they need, but that they also have the flexibility to produce and to output in a successful manner.

4105 MS. LEE: Well, I think the flexibility comes with the fact that we’re in a system that was set up not to be welcoming to racialized stories or stories from under‑represented communities, so the flexibility ‑‑ if there are certain ‑‑ like I can’t think of any right now, but there is some inflexibility of ways to do business that is not common to certain racialized communities.

4106 I would say for myself, I know so many just because of the culture, many people cannot just give up their day job and just go full in the arts. They have to ‑‑ you know, family obligations. They maybe started their career much later, but they’re an emerging filmmaker, so things like that where ‑‑ or that they can only do so many films within a certain period of time and some of the rules are you have to have two films within a five‑year period, but maybe they have two films in a 10‑year period just because of certain obligations that they have.

4107 So certain things that are ‑‑ that seem a little inflexible for them to qualify might be one way.

4108 If there’s a cultural layer that you have to look to see if that’s a barrier because of the cultural or just ‑‑ or why is that requirement there, is it really necessary to be there.

4109 So I would say the flexibility is in looking at each specific requirement and asking why that was built in and is it a barrier, so flexibility meaning that, yeah, a ways of taking cultural nuances into the ‑‑ into consideration would be important.

4110 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you. The concrete examples are very useful. Thank you.

4111 THE CHAIRPERSON: Great.

4112 So now’s the time when we turn things back over to you for any closing remarks.

4113 Thank you.

4114 MS. LEE: I do have one. I have a personal story to tell, and I wanted to close it off with this.

4115 In 2004, I was one of the five NFB Real Diversity winners and I was given less than half of the funds to shoot the film as a white filmmaker and when it was completed ‑‑ the film was about a deaf comedian who also was in inter‑racial marriage, so this was 15 years ago when diversity was not even on the radar. And after I shot that film, I was told that the U.S. sales agent didn’t feel that there was a market for it, so he didn’t even send it to any festivals.

4116 And so there was really no path for the second film.

4117 And this time around, when we’re really talking about diverse stories and getting them out there and giving a path, I hope, I truly hope and I want to leave it with the Commission that I hope this time around that we do things properly and that it’s not just at the entry level, but it goes all the way down the pipeline for a whole career because there are fantastic stories and Canadian stories. The world wants to see them.

4118 So thank you.

4119 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you for sharing that story with us and for participating and for joining us for the final presentation and discussion of the day and of the week. Thank you.

4120 MS. LEE: Have a nice weekend, everyone.

4121 THE CHAIRPERSON: Same to you. Thank you.

4122 THE SECRETARY: Thank you.

4123 This concludes this week’s hearing. We will be back Monday at 9:00 a.m. Have a nice weekend.

‑‑‑ L'audience est ajournée à 14 h 11 pour reprendre le lundi 27 novembre 2023 à 9 h 00

Sténographes
Deana Johansson
Monique Mahoney
Lynda Johansson
Tania Mahoney
Brian Denton