Delay of Game

FURTHER TO THE FRUSTRATED rant I posted yesterday, David Kinahan of the Writers Guild of Canada sent out an email blast to members today (and most members probably ignored it. :)) that expresses the same issues in a clearer, and more evenhanded fashion.

There's still no way to categorize this as other than a farce. Fee For Carriage has now been discussed at the last three or four hearings. Fee for Carriage will do nothing to help you as consumers or TV viewers. It's corporate welfare -- and the fight over it is nothing but a fight between two spoiled interest groups who have made millions from CRTC protection. But the CRTC, it seems, does not work for you and me. I know it's supposed to, and all. But it doesn't.

Anyway, here's what the WGC had to say:

You have all heard by now that, in response to Bell’s filing to the Federal Court of Appeal over fee-for-carriage, the CRTC TV Policy Review has been postponed from September 29 to November 16. The CRTC notice of postponement noted that the re-scheduled hearing will now include, yet again, the issue of fee-for-carriage. With that, Bell has said it will now withdraw its Federal Court application.

The initial public notice for the hearing was issued in early July, giving us just one month to prepare our submission. This was an enormous amount of work, involving coordination with industry partners, numerous meetings, the hiring of outside consultants and lawyers, commissioning a research firm, and working through vacations. In smaller organizations like the WGC, preparations for hearings such as this are a tremendous drain on resources, human and financial, and to have it derailed like this at the last minute is extremely frustrating.

This is particularly so given the importance attached to this hearing and the length of time we have been waiting for it. This was to be the long overdue TV policy hearing that would chart the course of TV production in Canada for many years to come. It was at this hearing that the CRTC was to redress the drop in expenditures on Canadian drama through new policies and regulatory obligations concerning Canadian programming, framing the parameters within which the broadcasters will operate when they renew their licences next April.

Now that fee-for-carriage – a huge point of contention between the BDUs and the broadcasters – is once again part of the discussion, we are concerned that our issues about quality Canadian programming may be marginalized. Canadian creators and TV viewers are being caught between these warring factions.

The delay means everything remains for a while longer in a state of uncertainty. The September hearing was to decide about levels of Canadian drama, documentaries and children’s programming, and look at placing a brake on spending in Hollywood. Until we have those conversations and get clarity around broadcaster obligations, the situation remains precarious. And this delay surely will mean further delay down the line, pushing further out the ownership-group licence renewal hearings scheduled for April 2010. This will in turn affect the production cycle. It will also delay our collective bargaining process around our IPA agreement which expires at the end of this year – negotiations were to take place after the hearing.

There is very little we can do about this except be vigilant and, when the conversation is being dominated by the broadcasters and BDUs squabbling over revenues, remind them that providing Canadians with the ability to choose quality Canadian content is the sole reason they exist and their primary deliverable for the privilege of operating in a protected environment. So talk and Twitter, comment on online news articles, write letters to the editor – remind people not to forget about content.

We will of course keep you informed as things on this front develop. We will be posting our submission on (for now) September 14

.