OTTAWA — George Laidlaw, president of Ottawa Independent Writers, says his organization has called on the Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce to repeal or amend Bill C-10.
A letter sent to The Senate of Canada Mr. Laidlaw says:
In its present form, Bill C-10, an Act to amend the Income Tax Act, is an idea whose time should never come. While this may not have been the intention of the bill’s framers, the legislation could lead to the sort of wholesale censorship that has no place in Canada, or in any other democratic society. We of the Ottawa Independent Writers strongly oppose this legislation, and urge the Senate Banking, Trade and Commerce Committee to amend it so that it no longer constitutes a threat to free artistic expression in Canada.
Bill C-10 would amend the Income Tax Act so that tax credit support would only be provided to films or television productions if the “… public financial support of the production would not be contrary to public policy.”
To date, the government has not said what it means by “contrary to public policy.” In the extreme, it could mean anything that criticized the government of the day, or anything that those administering the Act didn’t like.
An equally grave concern is that the film industry was not consulted as the legislation was being drafted, and would apparently have no hand in administering it. Decisions that would determine which films would receive tax credits and which would not would be made by government department bureaucrats with, conceivably, little or no knowledge of contemporary
cinema.
Some have suggested that the purpose of Bill C-10 is to deny public funding to films and TV productions that contain child pornography or promote hate. In that case, however, the bill would be redundant, as the Criminal Code already contains ample prohibitions against such things.
‘Fixing a problem that doesn’t exist’
Moreover, as a member of Heritage Minister Josée Verner’s staff admits, no film containing “criminal content” has ever applied for tax credits. (It seems implausible, to say the least, that the maker of any such film would ever apply for public tax credits). The bill is therefore “fixing” a problem that doesn’t exist, in the apt words of NDP leader Jack Layton.
While responding to a problem that doesn’t exist, the bill would create several real and quite serious problems for the already embattled Canadian film industry. The economic reality, given Canada’s small market size, is that without tax credits, most Canadian films would not be made. Canadian filmmakers also typically require assistance from banks or others investors.
If those outside investors knew that essential tax credits could suddenly be withdrawn, even after the film’s completion, on the basis of extremely vague criteria, they might no longer be willing to lend money to Canadian filmmakers, particularly those whose works contained any hint of controversy.
The Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA) national executive director Stephen Waddell has noted that major lenders are already talking about not funding Canadian productions as a result of Bill C-10, a development that puts Canada’s film and video production industries “in peril.”
Many arts groups are publicly opposing Bill C-10. In addition to ACTRA, these groups include (though they are not limited to) the Directors’ Guild of Canada, the Saskatchewan Writers’ Guild, the Saskatchewan Arts Alliance, and the Canadian Conference for the Arts. The bill has also been attacked by editorial-writers and columnists in The Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, and Capital Xtra, to name but a few.
The Ottawa Independent Writers is proud to add its name to the list of arts groups opposing this thoroughly pernicious piece of legislation. From a philosophical perspective, Bill C-10 is fatally flawed, as it would introduce potentially broad artistic censorship of the type that has no place in any democratic society. From a practical economic perspective, the bill is equally flawed, as it would imperil the future development and possibly even the survival of Canada’s film industry.
For all of the above reasons, we urge the Senate Banking, Trade and
Commerce Committee to repeal or amend Bill C-10, before untold harm is done to the Canadian artistic community and to the broader fabric of Canadian society.
______
Background Q&A’s, Bill C-10
1) What is Bill C-10, and why is it of concern to the arts community?
Bill C-10 is an act to amend the Income Tax Act. It’s of concern to the arts community because of one sentence having to do with granting tax credits to films or television productions. The fear is that the bill could lead to censorship of the Canadian film industry.
2) What exactly does that one sentence say?
It says that tax credit support will be granted to films and television productions only if the “. . .public financial support of the production would not be contrary to public policy.”
3) What’s so bad about that?
The problem is that the term “contrary to public policy” is so vague that it could mean pretty well anything the government of the day wanted it to mean. Films could conceivably be denied tax credits for criticizing the government, for treating certain themes, or simply for offending the bureaucrats administering the act.
4) Was the film industry consulted during the drafting of this provision?
No, nor would it have any hand in administering the legislation. In other words, the legislation could be administered by bureaucrats with little or no knowledge of contemporary cinema.
5) If Bill C-10 was so bad, why did it sail through three readings at the House of Commons with all-party support?
Frankly, it appears that no one really noticed the provision about tax credits for films until some right-wing evangelist named Charles McVety, a prominent member of the Canada Family Action Coalition, claimed credit for it. Bear in mind that the tax credit provision was just one sentence in a bill of more than 500 pages devoted primarily to things like closing tax loopholes. The government’s strategy on the tax credit provision seriously lacked transparency, to say the very least.
6) Why do Canadian films need tax credits in the first place?
It’s a matter of simple economics. The economic reality, given Canada’s small market size, is that without tax credits, most Canadian films would not get made.
7) Why have some arts groups protesting the legislation, such as the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Radio, and Television Artists (ACTRA), suggested that the fallout from C-10 could go beyond simple denial of tax credits?
Again, this is mainly economics. In addition to needing the tax credits, many Canadian filmmakers rely on assistance from banks or other investors. If those outside investors knew that essential tax credits could suddenly be withdrawn, even after the film’s completion, on the basis of extremely vague criteria, they might no longer be willing to lend money to Canadian filmmakers, particularly those whose work contained any hint of controversy.
According to ACTRA’s national executive director Stephen Waddell, major lenders are already talking about not funding Canadian productions as a result of Bill C-10, a development that puts Canada’s film and video production industries “in peril,” in Waddell’s view.
8) What are some of the other arts groups opposing the legislation?
They include the Directors’ Guild of Canada, the Saskatchewan Writers’ Guild, the Saskatchewan Arts Alliance, and the Canadian Conference for the Arts.
9) Where is Bill C-10 now?
The bill is before the Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce, to whom we have written the letter you are being asked to approve.Please make your views known at your earliest convenience.
______