CCA Bul­letin 37/08

Ottawa, Mon­day, Sep­tem­ber 16, 2008

In order to assist all those who are pre­oc­cu­pied with the place arts and cul­ture occupy in the cur­rent elec­toral cam­paign, the Cana­dian Con­fer­ence of the Arts (CCA) has iden­ti­fied seven broad areas of prime impor­tance for artists, cre­ators, cul­tural insti­tu­tions and indus­tries. The CCA has devel­oped a set of ques­tions for each issue: these ques­tions can be asked to all can­di­dates when they come knock­ing at the door or par­tic­i­pate in an all party debate.

Sec­tion 2 of the Fed­eral Elec­tion Doorstep Kit exam­ines two key Bills which have been pro­posed by the Con­ser­v­a­tive gov­ern­ment as well as the role each party sees civil soci­ety play in pol­icy mak­ing. Bill C-10, which has caused a lot of con­tro­versy, pro­poses to revise the Income Tax Act, while grant­ing what many con­sider to be undue dis­cre­tionary and retroac­tive power to the Min­is­ter of Cana­dian Her­itage. Bill C-61 would amend the Copy­right Act and bring it in line with the World Trade Orga­ni­za­tion Inter­net treaty. The third issue dis­cusses the role of civil soci­ety in devel­op­ing pub­lic pol­icy, while ques­tion­ing the evolv­ing sta­tus of advo­cacy and lob­by­ing in this process. Each set of sug­gested ques­tions is pre­ceded by a short back­grounder on the issue. We encour­age you to dis­sem­i­nate as much as pos­si­ble the replies you may get, either in writ­ing or in a pub­lic forum.

Issue: Bill C-10 – Pro­posed Revi­sions to the Film and Video Cer­ti­fi­ca­tion Criteria

Back­ground

Bill C-10 is a pro­posed set of leg­isla­tive revi­sions to the Income Tax Act deal­ing with broad ques­tions of for­eign invest­ment enti­ties and non-resident trusts. C-10 is a volu­mi­nous and highly tech­ni­cal bill that addresses pro­posed changes to the cri­te­ria for the cer­ti­fi­ca­tion of film and video pro­duc­tions for tax purposes.

The ini­tial bill was intro­duced by the Hon. John Man­ley and the Hon. Sheila Copps in 2003 and did con­tain the phrase “con­trary to pub­lic pol­icy”.  C-10 was intro­duced by the Min­is­ter of Finance, the Hon. James Fla­herty, and con­tains the same phrase which has raised con­cerns within many com­mu­ni­ties of inter­est in Canada.

By grant­ing dis­cre­tion to the Min­is­ter of Cana­dian Her­itage to decide whether a pro­posed film or video pro­duc­tion is “con­trary to pub­lic pol­icy”, many are con­cerned that this could lead to sub­jec­tive or prej­u­di­cial judg­ments by any Min­is­ter or senior offi­cials. The leg­is­la­tion already pro­hibits cer­ti­fi­ca­tion for film and video projects that vio­late the Crim­i­nal Code.

The Sen­ate Com­mit­tee on Bank­ing, Com­merce and Inter­na­tional Trade was study­ing the pro­posed leg­is­la­tion when Par­lia­ment was dis­solved for the fed­eral elec­tion. Sen­a­tors heard from the may­ors of our major cities, artists, civil rights lawyers and aca­d­e­mics con­demn­ing the overly broad “con­trary to pub­lic pol­icy”  lan­guage in the leg­is­la­tion. They fear that this will lead to a chill in the film and video pro­duc­tion indus­try which will in turn mean the loss of jobs and oppor­tu­ni­ties for Cana­dian cre­ative workers.

Sug­gested ques­tions

• Do you sup­port the removal of the “con­trary to pub­lic pol­icy” pro­vi­sion in the Bill C-10 pro­vi­sions on the cer­ti­fi­ca­tion of film and video productions?

• Will you and your Party sup­port the amend­ments pro­posed by Sen­a­tors Fran­cis Fox and Wil­fred Moore restrict­ing the pro­vi­sions to vio­la­tions of the Crim­i­nal Code and pro­vid­ing an avenue of appeal to film and video pro­duc­ers whose projects are rejected by the Depart­ment of Cana­dian Heritage?

Issue: Bill C-61 – Revi­sions to the Copy­right Act

Back­ground

In June of this year, the fed­eral gov­ern­ment intro­duced the long-awaited amend­ments to the Copy­right Act. The intent of this leg­is­la­tion is to bring Cana­dian copy­right law into har­mony with the World Trade Orga­ni­za­tion treaty on intel­lec­tual prop­erty. The Bill has received first read­ing but the House has risen for the sum­mer recess before the leg­is­la­tion could be referred to Com­mit­tee for fur­ther study.

The pro­posed leg­is­la­tion offers a broader range of excep­tions than pre­vi­ous copy­right leg­is­la­tion and describes itself as a “mar­ket­place frame­work’ rather than the usual attempt by gov­ern­ment to reach a” bal­ance of inter­ests” between cre­ators and copy­right own­ers and user communities.

Con­tem­po­rary tech­nolo­gies and the cre­ative econ­omy rely on copy­right pro­tec­tion for their growth and devel­op­ment. For artists and cre­ators, copy­right is an eco­nomic and moral bill of rights which allows them to enjoy the finan­cial ben­e­fits from the pub­lic use of their work.

It is essen­tial that, what­ever Party forms the next gov­ern­ment, Bill C-61 be intro­duced as quickly as pos­si­ble and that a detailed study of the pro­posed leg­is­la­tion be under­taken by a joint leg­isla­tive com­mit­tee com­posed of mem­bers of the Stand­ing Com­mit­tee on Cana­dian Her­itage and the Stand­ing Com­mit­tee on Indus­try, Sci­ence and Tech­nol­ogy. Such a hybrid com­mit­tee will cre­ate a bal­ance in the per­spec­tives of the two Depart­ments that have tra­di­tion­ally taken dif­fer­ing approaches to copy­right legislation.

Sug­gested ques­tions

• Will your Party re-introduce revi­sions to the Copy­right Act as a pri­or­ity in the next Parliament?

• Is your Party pre­pared to pro­ceed with revi­sions to the Copy­right Act as a pri­or­ity in the next Par­lia­ment? What would be the approach of your Party regard­ing this impor­tant issue?

• Does your Party sup­port the Que­bec pol­icy of exempt­ing a por­tion of copy­right and resid­ual income from tax­a­tion as an incen­tive for greater inno­va­tion and pro­duc­tiv­ity and would you intro­duce this mea­sure at the fed­eral level?

Issue: Civil Soci­ety and Pub­lic Policy

Back­ground

The role of civil soci­ety in the devel­op­ment of pub­lic pol­icy at the fed­eral gov­ern­ment level is being uni­lat­er­ally rede­fined. The cru­cial role of not for profit orga­ni­za­tions in the devel­op­ment of poli­cies and the deliv­ery of ser­vices is high­lighted in the report of the Blue Rib­bon Panel on Grants and Contributions.

The next fed­eral gov­ern­ment should move to con­sol­i­date the con­struc­tive rela­tion between civil soci­ety orga­ni­za­tions from all parts of our soci­ety into the pol­icy devel­op­ment and ser­vice deliv­ery frame­work. This may require draw­ing a finer dis­tinc­tion between advo­cacy and lob­by­ing rather than equat­ing the two terms.

Sug­gested ques­tions

• Does your Party equate lob­by­ing with advo­cacy? If not, how do you define the two types of activ­ity?

• Should Cana­di­ans have the unfet­tered right to com­mu­ni­cate with elected and pub­lic offi­cials with­out run­ning a gaunt­let of red tape and scrutiny? What changes would your Party imple­ment to safe­guard this right?

• How would a gov­ern­ment formed by your Party con­sol­i­date and expand the rela­tion­ship with civil soci­ety orga­ni­za­tions in all areas of Cana­dian life?