The CRTC’s The Path Forward hearing, looking at redefining what constitutes a “Canadian program” continued Friday, with the National Film Board (NFB) arguing for the need to incorporate a “cultural test.”

Chairperson Suzanne Guèvremont said works that receive public funding should reflect the Canadian perspective, language, values and people.

“A modern Canadian content policy must not abandon the very thing that gives our stories meaning – cultural elements. They reflect our creativity, diversity and uniqueness,” Guèvremont told the hearing. “Removing cultural elements creates invisibility. And when we erase cultural context, we lose the depth. We lose the diversity and the moral complexity that define us as a country.”

NFB maintains that Canada should draw inspiration from other countries – like the UK, Netherlands, Italy, New Zealand, France, Spain, Germany and Australia – where public funding is conditional on cultural criteria, including nationality of key creative roles and ownership, social or political relevance, depictions of ways of life, recognizable locations or figures, a measurable number of scenes set in the country of production and distribution potential in the country of production, among other factors.

“We recognize that the Commission’s intent in omitting cultural elements from within the Canadian certification framework was proposed as a means to embrace diversity,” NFB said in its intervention. “Respectfully, we believe that this will have the opposite effect. The difficulty in defining something does not diminish the importance of finding the language to articulate it. Continual omission of cultural elements will lead to the hegemonic erasure of diversity, and the sophistication that lies within it. In other words: we will be going back, not going forward.”

The NFB is recommending that the commission adopt a flexible, exploratory approach to cultural elements that could involve a self-declaration system, where applicants are invited to submit cultural inclusion statements, a “cultural contribution” category that incentivizes Canadian and Indigenous creativity, heritage and diversity on-screen. It would also like to see an advisory council made up of peers and advisors who guide discussions and evaluations on Canadian cultural expression.

Telefilm wants the cultural element excluded from the CRTC framework, saying if a perspective comes from a Canadian director or writer, it should be automatically considered Canadian content.

Corus defends ‘Canadian-ness’ of lifestyle programming

The issue was also raised during Corus Entertainment’s presentation, which was challenged on the “Canadian-ness” of some of its lifestyle programming.

“We have some of the biggest stars in the world in lifestyle television…names like Brian and Sarah Baeumler, Scott McGillivray, Eden Grinshspan. And they are not just stars in Canada, they are stars in the U.S., said Corus Co-CEO Troy Reeb. “They are stars in other territories around the world and the programs they are in are no less culturally relevant than PNI (Programs of National Interest) programs.”

Corus is urging the commission to de-prioritze PNI program requirements to remove – as Reeb put it – “those kinds of overly prescriptive handcuffs.”

The company’s submission argues for a streamlining of Canadian programming expenditure (CPE) requirements, and the dissolution of PNI program spending requirements altogether. The broadcaster is also calling for obligations imposed on traditional broadcasters and standalone streaming services to be comparable, taking into consideration the varied contributions each type of provider makes to the system.

“We’re not talking about getting out of the scripted programming business whatsoever…what we’re talking about is gaining more flexibility to make decisions for our company to allocate our resources as we need,” Matt Thompson, Vice President and Associate General Counsel, Regulatory, Privacy and Public Policy, told the hearing. “We’re a private enterprise, a publicly-traded one, and this is absolutely necessary on a going forward basis.

“I think there is a lot of focus…on the supply side, ensuring a certain amount of production is consistent in specific genres. I would maybe redirect the commission’s attention to the question of capacity. The capacity of the system to continue to deliver production at those levels,” he continued, citing the decline in operating income and margins for conventional and discretionary television in English Canada of 50% over the last five years, alongside fiction genre financial shortfalls in the $300-$400 million a year range, according to the commission’s own Harnessing Change report.

“We’re here to make as clear as we can, we don’t have the capacity to continue to shoulder prescriptive PNI requirements and prescriptive requirements for news,” said Thomas.

Reeb closed the Corus presentation by reaffirming that the lifestyle genre is “no less deserving or meaningful of support than other genres in the system.”

“We are at a time when our cultural sovereignty and our very sovereignty is under attack from south of the border,” said Reeb. “And it has never been more important to have a system that supports Canadians being able to tell their own stories and ensure that those stories receive pride of place on not just Canadian companies, but on companies that travel the world.”