ELECTION WORD ON THE STREET

CCA BULLETIN / BULLETIN DE LA CCA

Ottawa, June 21st, 2004 - With only one week remain­ing in a heated elec­tion cam­paign, the Cana­dian Con­fer­ence of the Arts (CCA) is work­ing with our mem­bers to keep arts and cul­ture in the minds (and hearts) of polit­i­cal can­di­dates and the vot­ing public.

Toronto Arts Coali­tion has posted sur­vey responses at www.torontoartscoalition.org/Elections2004-Feds.htm which out­line the Greater Toronto Area’s can­di­dates’ posi­tions on arts and cul­ture issues.  One state­ment in par­tic­u­lar, by NDP can­di­date Peggy Nash (Parkdale-High Park), caught the atten­tion of CCA:

“The NDP will lock in all fed­eral arts and cul­ture fund­ing and guar­an­tee a 3 per­cent increase per year on all cur­rently allo­cated funds to cover infla­tion.  As well, we will infuse an addi­tional $240 mil­lion per year over the next two years for Cana­dian cul­ture, and increase that to $340 mil­lion addi­tional funds by 2007.”

This is a clear artic­u­la­tion of the need for sta­ble, increased, multi-year fund­ing for the cul­tural sec­tor, for which CCA has advo­cated for a num­ber of years.

Responses from Lib­er­als and Bloc Québé­cois to let­ter from cul­tural indus­try organizations

On 11 June, twelve direc­tors of Cana­dian cul­tural indus­try orga­ni­za­tions signed onto a let­ter to the lead­ers of the five major polit­i­cal par­ties, solic­it­ing their posi­tions on:

• Cana­dian own­er­ship of Cana­dian telecom­mu­ni­ca­tions and broadcasting.
• The main­te­nance of Cana­dian con­tent reg­u­la­tion in broad­cast­ing and broad­cast distribution.
• Pro­vi­sions for sta­ble long-term finan­cial sup­port for Canada’s cul­tural industries.

Accord­ing to the Friends of Cana­dian Broad­cast­ing, only two of the major par­ties have replied to date.  (For the com­plete text of the let­ter let­ter and replies, go to www.friends.ca .)

Lib­eral Party response :

“The Lib­eral gov­ern­ment has devel­oped a strong broad­cast­ing sys­tem that meets the cul­tural objec­tives of Cana­di­ans.  We will con­tinue to build a strong and vibrant sys­tem that reflects the lives and the val­ues of Cana­di­ans from all parts of this coun­try..  [We] under­stand that cul­tural insti­tu­tions begin pro­duc­tion of their pro­grams and films sev­eral years in advance.  We sup­port the rec­om­men­da­tion of the Stand­ing Com­mit­tee on Cana­dian Her­itage to pro­vide these insti­tu­tions with sta­ble multi-year fund­ing..  The Lib­eral gov­ern­ment places a heavy empha­sis on Cana­dian con­tent..  Canada has the right and the duty to pro­tect its cul­tural iden­tity.  Cana­dian pro­gram­ming inter­ests will not be sold to or con­trolled by for­eign inter­ests..  [Our] com­mit­ment to a Canadian-owned broad­cast­ing sys­tem is unshakeable.”

Bloc Québé­cois response :

“. Gov­ern­ment sup­port for cul­ture allows artists to express a view­point on every­thing that touches human­ity..  The [BQ] believes the fed­eral gov­ern­ment is doing a poor job of defend­ing Cana­dian and Que­be­cois cul­ture.  Gov­ern­ment mea­sures to sup­port, pro­mote, and pro­tect cul­ture need to be pro­tected and rein­forced..  The Bloc is opposed to the idea of remov­ing restric­tions on for­eign own­er­ship in telecom­mu­ni­ca­tions and broad­cast­ing as it would weaken the author­ity of the CRTC ..  [We] believe that who­ever con­trols access also con­trols con­tent..  Fur­ther­more, the Bloc believes that the Cana­dian gov­ern­ment must rein­force the author­ity of the CRTC to bet­ter enable it to deliver its man­date of scrutiny and reg­u­la­tion of broad­cast­ing and telecom­mu­ni­ca­tions..  [We believe] cul­tural insti­tu­tions. must receive sta­ble, reli­able, multi-year fund­ing.” (CCA translation)

Excerpts from the “Pol­icy Brief­ing Note For Canadians”

CCA has obtained a copy of the hand­book cir­cu­lated to all 308 Con­ser­v­a­tive Party can­di­dates at the begin­ning of April, devel­oped in lieu of a pol­icy con­ven­tion given the short time­lines before the elec­tion call.  The pol­icy state­ments excerpted below put into seri­ous ques­tion the party’s state­ments that issues not appear­ing in the offi­cial elec­tion plat­form doc­u­ment will be “sta­tus quo” if they are elected.  (See CCA bul­letin 28/04, “CCA Gets to Know its Neighbours.”.)

“For­eign Own­er­ship Restric­tions: The Con­ser­v­a­tive Party sup­ports relax­ing for­eign own­er­ship rules on Cana­dian indus­try in con­cert with our major trad­ing part­ners in the telecom­mu­ni­ca­tions, broad­cast dis­tri­b­u­tion, and air­line indus­try.  We will con­duct an imme­di­ate review to deter­mine whether to reduce or com­pletely remove these rules.”

“CRTC: . sup­ports the restruc­tur­ing of the Cana­dian Radio-Television and Telecom­mu­ni­ca­tions Com­mis­sion, reduc­ing its man­date to reg­is­tra­tion and/or mar­ket­ing of band­width and to deal­ing with inter­na­tional com­mu­ni­ca­tions negotiations.”

“Satel­lite Broad­cast­ing: . believes a sound Direct-To-Home (DTH) satel­lite pol­icy rep­re­sents an oppor­tu­nity to sup­port Cana­di­ans’ abil­ity to develop an inter­na­tional mar­ket for their pro­grams.  Our approach would be to nego­ti­ate a reci­procity agree­ment with the United States to cre­ate an open mar­ket in the licens­ing of tele­vi­sion satel­lite dis­tri­b­u­tion.  This agree­ment would make Cana­dian pro­gram­ming avail­able in the United States and allow for­eign pro­gram­ming to be avail­able here in Canada for the free choice and ben­e­fit of all Canadians.”

” Cel­e­brat­ing Canada’s Diver­sity of Cul­ture :  . believes that Canada’s mul­ti­cul­tural soci­ety Is a val­ued real­ity and accepts the need to fos­ter under­stand­ing and equal­ity of oppor­tu­nity while pro­mot­ing com­mon val­ues across Canada.  A Con­ser­v­a­tive gov­ern­ment will uphold the free­dom of indi­vid­u­als and fam­i­lies to nur­ture aspects of cul­ture that are impor­tant to them.”

“Her­itage :  . affirms the fed­eral government’s role in the preser­va­tion of Canada’s nat­ural and his­tor­i­cal her­itage (such as national parks, muse­ums and his­toric sites) for the ben­e­fit and enjoy­ment of all and as an endur­ing reminder to all Cana­di­ans of our com­mon inheritance.”

Con­spic­u­ous absence at some can­di­dates’ debates

Can­di­dates Andy Scott (Lib­eral), John Carty (NDP), and Daron Letts (Green) par­tic­i­pated in the Fred­er­ic­ton Arts Alliance’s all can­di­dates’ debate on cul­ture, held on 15 June.  The Fred­er­ic­ton Gleaner (17 June) reports that:

” Kent Fox, the Con­ser­v­a­tive Party of Canada can­di­date, did not attend the meet­ing due to a pre­vi­ous com­mit­ment to meet gun own­ers that evening.  The absence was noticed.  His oppo­nents cap­i­tal­ized on his absence, using facts and fig­ures from the Con­ser­v­a­tives’ own plat­form to bury the party in the course of the debate.  This is a dan­ger­ous rid­ing to be indif­fer­ent in, con­sid­er­ing that Mr. Scott has a fine record of sup­port­ing the arts on the fed­eral level…”

On 16 June, a standing-room only crowd gath­ered in Toronto for another all can­di­dates’ debate . Artist-Run Cen­tres and Col­lec­tives of Ontario (ARCCO) reports in their online newslet­ter that three broad themes were dis­cussed: jus­ti­fy­ing arts and cul­ture in terms of their social, not just eco­nomic, value; Canada’s cul­tural sov­er­eignty; and con­cerns about free­dom of expres­sion and Bill C-12 ( http://www.arcco.ca/html/Information/Current_NewsFlash.html ).  The meet­ing was attended by can­di­dates Sar­mite Bulte (Lib­eral), Peter Tabuns (NDP), and Mark Vitala (Green), though the ARCCO Newslet­ter notes:  “There was another empty chair at the meet­ing.  It was a void that occu­pied the thoughts of all in atten­dance.  Two of the event orga­niz­ers. had invited six Con­ser­v­a­tive can­di­dates in an effort to get some­one to take a place at the table. They also sought help from the Con­ser­v­a­tives’ national office to get par­tic­i­pa­tion, but to no avail. The assem­bled can­di­dates made heart­felt affir­ma­tions about the value of cul­ture.  But, at the end of the evening, no audi­ence mem­ber left with a clear sense of where all the par­ties stood.  In fact, voices that were absent from the debate, par­tic­u­larly the Con­ser­v­a­tive no-show, left many peo­ple more con­cerned. ”

Analy­sis of plat­form budgets

The Cana­dian Cen­tre for Pol­icy Alter­na­tives, the think tank which brings you the Alter­na­tive Bud­get each year, has released a finan­cial analy­sis of the party plat­forms ( www.policyalternatives.ca ).  The fol­low­ing is excerpted from the document’s conclusion:

“The Con­ser­v­a­tives can­not pay for what they say.  We project that the Con­ser­v­a­tives will run cumu­la­tive bud­get deficits of $11.4 bil­lion.  This obliges the Con­ser­v­a­tives to tell Cana­di­ans how they intend to deal with this short­fall.  Do they intend to make fur­ther cuts to gov­ern­ment spend­ing to bal­ance their books?  Or are they intend­ing to increase the fed­eral debt?

The Lib­er­als can pay for what they say.  How­ever, their cumu­la­tive $24.2 bil­lion sur­pluses between 2004/05 and 2008/09 are far in excess of the mar­gin that the Lib­er­als typ­i­cally leave for ‘con­tin­gency reserves’.  The Lib­er­als usu­ally set aside $3 bil­lion per year for this con­tin­gency fund, or a total of $15 bil­lion between 2004/05 and 2008/09.  Thus the Lib­er­als are again under­es­ti­mat­ing the fis­cal capac­ity for pro­gram spend­ing.  As past per­for­mance has indi­cated, this is likely to result in the diver­sion of these ‘sur­prise’ sur­pluses into debt repayment.

The New Democ­rats can pay for what they say — in fact, we fore­see them run­ning higher sur­pluses than they them­selves fore­cast.  This $14.6 bil­lion in cumu­la­tive sur­pluses pro­vides the NDP extra capac­ity to enact fur­ther spend­ing increases or tax cuts.  Alter­na­tively, this $14.6 bil­lion sur­plus may be used to absorb any unan­tic­i­pated short­falls in their rev­enue pro­jec­tions, or over­runs in their cost projections.”