Speeches and Interviews

March 14, 2002

Statements made to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage by Carole Taylor and Robert Rabinovitch

Statements made to the Committee by Carole Taylor, Chair of the Board of Directors, and Robert Rabinovitch, President and Chief Executive Officer

• Full text of the CBC submission (PDF - 404 Kb)
• Power Point Presentation (PPT - 439 Kb)

Preserving a distinctive voice for Canadians

Presentation to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage on the State of the Canadian Broadcasting System

Mr.Chairman, Members of the Committee. We welcome the opportunity to appear before you today and to contribute to this important review.

My name is Carole Taylor, and I am Chair of the CBC Board of Directors. Joining me today is someone already familiar to all of you, Robert Rabinovitch, President and CEO of the Corporation. I am also pleased to introduce to you Michel Tremblay, Vice-President, Strategy and Business Development.

I'd like to begin our presentation on a personal note. I want to tell you a little bit about what drew me to CBC/Radio-Canada, and why I accepted the appointment last year as Chair. I have spent a large part of my career working as a journalist in central Canada, both for the CBC and for CTV. I was fortunate to have had the opportunity to cover what I thought were many of the top news events in this country and around the world.

I have since moved to Vancouver actually, some 27 years ago, and continued to be active in broadcasting as well as serving in politics at the municipal level and working in business, both locally and nationally. My relocation to the West has given me the chance to see Canada from a different perspective. It has helped me to appreciate the strength, diversity and importance of our country's different regions. It has also given me a much deeper understanding of how important CBC/Radio-Canada is to Canadians and to our unique Canadian culture.

I believe no other cultural institution has done more to define what it means to be "Canadian" than the CBC. $36 million annually in direct payments to artists. $64 million annually in direct payments to independent producers. That's $100 million worth of support to our cultural community.

I've also seen and heard how important the CBC's range of services is to Canadians:

Our news - in English and in French - sets the standard for journalism and public affairs in this country. Look at this map of Canada. Each symbol represents a place where full time CBC journalists are giving Canadians the news they depend on, in English and French, on radio and television. Every day these journalists ensure CBC lives up to its responsibility as Canada's largest news organisation, providing news from every region of this country to all Canadians.

So, what does CBC mean to Canadians? Let me tell you some stories…

• Ben Heppner. He performs to sold-out concert halls around the world. Last week… he took home a Grammy. And Canadians across the country heard him first…on the CBC. That was 23 years ago…when he won our network's Young Performers talent competition. That's the kind of Canadian talent our radio services showcase.
• There's a hip-hop duo from Oakville, Ontario called Snakeye. For ten tough years…they didn't get much attention. They haven't got a CD release yet, but they did get a call from Universal. You know why? The recording company heard them on our Radio 3 Internet site. That's part of what we do. We give young Canadian bands a place to post their songs and get some exposure. We give Canadians, and others, a place to hear them first - before they are officially discovered.
• Should a public broadcaster help Canadians who want to improve their lives? Emma Bourassa is an English teacher in Kamloops, and she's using the stories we run on Canada Now as a tool for teaching English and Canadian culture. Through our "Know Canada" web site, we're able to help new Canadians find better jobs and build a better life for themselves because they can learn English through our news.
• For many Canadians their CBC services are a lifeline. Take Denis Desgagné, a francophone living in Regina. In a sea of English, Denis and his young family remain connected to their French heritage through our French services on radio and television. His story is the story of a lot of Canadians across this country.
• During your recent tour out West some of you met Chris Haynes, a talented CBC Recording Engineer in Regina who went to school in the United States but came back to Canada because he wanted to work for CBC, where he could do state of the art production.
• Then there's Danielle Dezort (DE-ZO). She and her husband, Steve, were living in Korea when the horrors of September 11 struck. Who did they turn to? They, like millions of Canadians, turned to CBC services for a true Canadian perspective on these tragic events.

These are the stories that make me proud to be part of CBC. Proud to be part of a hothouse of Canadian talent. The best creative artists, technicians, producers, directors, writers, journalists, and performers. All drawn to the CBC because we do the things that are uniquely Canadian, and we do them well.

How many Canadians learned to care about their environment by watching The Nature of Things or about science from Découverte? How many were inspired by the dedication of young Canadian athletes they cheered on CBC sports? How many shared in the big Canadian events, referenda, elections, Canada Day, by tuning into CBC news?

Who but the CBC will take millions of Canadians back to 19th century Newfoundland for the clearly Canadian story, Random Passage?

Who but the CBC will take the risk and offer Canadians across the country the story of their own flesh and blood, their ancestors who built this country, as we did with the epic series Canada: A People's History?

At a time of unprecedented challenges in broadcasting… …from diverse technological platforms …from almost unlimited channel choices, it is imperative that we as a country develop policies and initiatives that ensure a space for independent, canadian public broadcasting.

I sense a new stirring of pride in our country, along with a growing concern about sovereignty. Within this context, CBC stands as a national institution dedicated to supporting Canadian values, Canadian athletes, Canadian artists and performers, Canadian identity.

So, is the CBC still important to Canada? In our view, the CBC is more important today than ever before.

I'd like to ask Robert to elaborate on that theme and I look forward to taking your questions…. Robert?

Again, our thanks to you, Mr. Chairman, and to the Committee members for the opportunity to appear before you and contribute to this timely review.

I think I should preface my remarks with a quote that goes to the core of your review.

"The only thing that really matters in broadcasting is program content; all the rest is housekeeping."

Timely words. Words that first appeared 37 years ago, when the Committee on Broadcasting made its report to the Secretary of State back in September 1965. Words that are as apt and relevant today as they were then.

The only thing that really matters is program content.

Since the declaration of this simple statement of fact we have had: 

• the 1968 Broadcasting Act, 
• new Canadian content regulations for radio and television, 
• an updated Act in 1991, 
• and a billion dollars of public money to build, support and strengthen the independent production sector in Canada in the last 5 years alone. All designed to ensure that Canadian programs would not only be made, but also showcased on Canadian broadcasting stations.

Clearly there have been some successes. Some elements of the Canadian broadcasting system are in better shape now than they were a decade ago when the present Act came into force. The private radio sector, for example, is currently more profitable than it has been in the last ten years and radio stations have been selling over the past few years at unheard of EBITDA multiples.

CBC/Radio-Canada is a vastly different organisation than it was even 10 years ago, as we reach out to Canadians on a multitude of platforms ranging from radio to television to specialty services and to new media. Not only are our radio services now available to a greater number of Canadians in both official languages, but we're also attracting record numbers of listeners.

Our television schedules are overwhelmingly Canadian. We also own or partner in five English and French-language national specialty television services, as well as the user-pay audio service of CBC Galaxie.

The Internet did not even exist when the current Act came into force, but today CBC/Radio-Canada's Internet services are among the best in Canada and are recognized for their quality around the world.

Through all of these services, our objective is to deliver programming to Canadians in the form and at the time that they choose. Whether it is wireless news, youth Internet programs, or non-commercial music, we are there to serve Canadians with Canadian stories, and Canadian views.

But the reality is that, despite our successes and those of the private sector, there are still serious problems in Canada's broadcasting system. Some things are working. Some things are not, and we must prepare for fundamental changes on the horizon. This is as true for the CBC as it is for the private players in the system.

Since 1996, the Canadian television industry has benefited from a significant amount of public funding - receiving almost $1 billion through the CTF and additional millions through provincial and federal tax credits.

If the purpose of these incentives is to merely increase the amount of Canadian programming - tonnage as it is called - then the funding system is working.

But despite all this public investment in Canadian television over the last decade and the increased availability of Canadian programming, the viewing audience for Canadian programming - both French and English - has simply not increased, whether measured throughout the day or in prime time.

In fact, for French television, in the last ten years viewing of Canadian programming, while healthy, has declined by 10% during prime time. Nevertheless, the 20 most popular programs are all Canadian.

On the English television side, one cannot deny the popularity of U.S. programming. The programming is well made and entertaining. Also you cannot deny the economic imperatives that drive the private sector to load their prime-time schedule with American content.

It's true you cannot and should not be able to force Canadians to watch Canadian programs. So, why be concerned? Because, if we cannot draw more Canadians to Canadian programming, how will Canadians get a sense of Canada and their place in it?

How can we expect Canadians to be interested in other Canadians - be they up-and-coming stars in music or sports, or just ordinary people - if they are watching stories about another country's citizens?

So, why aren't Canadians watching more Canadian shows?

Market fragmentation is a major factor.

The last ten years in Canada have seen an explosion of new specialty services. This is good news for consumers, but market fragmentation has had the effect of spreading viewers out over a greater number of services.

We have added many American programming services such as A&E, CNN, MSNBC, etc., that do not produce or have a responsibility to the Canadian broadcasting system.

As a result, new Canadian programs represent a very small proportion of programming available to Canadians. No wonder that time spent watching Canadian programs has not increased!

Our experiences at the CBC have confirmed that - given the opportunity, large numbers of Canadians will turn to high-quality, original Canadian programming. Our experience also confirms that Canadians will not accept cheap alternatives simply because they are Canadian.

As Carole mentioned, our broadcasts of Canada: A People's History - Le Canada: Une histoire populaire, a production that reached over 16 million Canadians and cost over $25M to produce, or Random Passage, with an average of 1.2 million viewers, or Music Hall with 1.7 million viewers in the francophone market, are perfect examples of that.

In fact, CBC/Radio-Canada television delivers more than one-third of all viewing to Canadian television in prime time in both the French and English markets.

Take a look at prime time, from 7 to 11 p.m. That's when most Canadians watch television, that's when the U.S. networks air their best and most popular programs.

By purchasing these prime time U.S. shows, Canadian private broadcasters are able to use simultaneous substitution to expand their audiences dramatically, generating large advertising revenues.

When a U.S. program costing between $3-14M per episode to produce is purchased for showing in Canada at a cost of $100,000 per episode and can generate $300-400K in advertising revenues, is it any wonder that the private sector loads up on U.S. content?

Naturally, Canadian private networks - like CanWest Global and CTV - need to focus on the return to investors, and cannot give up their most profitable U.S. shows in favour of less lucrative home-grown programming. I must emphasise that quality Canadian programs are expensive to make and attract less advertising dollars. For example, a popular program like Da Vinci's Inquest cost $1 million per episode, yet generates less than $100 000 in advertising revenue.

And, let me be clear: there is nothing wrong with a bottom-line approach. Private broadcasters must satisfy their shareholders with an acceptable return on investment. From a business or economic point of view, this behaviour is rational and will not change.

The private/public partnership envisioned in both the 1968 and 1991 Broadcasting Acts is at the base of our broadcasting system where each player should be allowed to do what it does best to meet the public interest. In turn, public policy must provide all players with the necessary tools they need to meet their needs.

Some broadcasters have told you that their Canadian content requirements should be reduced or modified or that infomercials should count as Canadian content.

We welcome a comprehensive analysis of Canadian content regulations involving all broadcasters and the government. We are convinced that any such analysis cannot be piecemeal but must be comprehensive.

It should be based upon encouraging each sector of the broadcasting industry to do what it does best and acknowledging each sector's contribution. Creative thinking "outside the box" is called for.

While it is unrealistic and wrong to think the CBC, or any other single broadcaster, can convince Canadians to turn their backs on American programming, we can say that a strong and vibrant national public broadcaster is the most effective way of ensuring Canadians have a high-quality Canadian choice.

We are able to take the risks, devote the resources and create programs that the privates simply cannot afford to do.

Let's think for a minute about the positive contribution of CBC/Radio-Canada television.

• A safe place where you know your children can watch entertaining television without violence, without commercials, every day; 
• Complete election coverage in every province;
• Programs considered innovative and risky like "A People's History — Le Canada: Une histoire populaire" or La vie, La vie. 
• Programs about the regions and about the regions' history, such as Random Passage; 
• Extensive year-round amateur sport coverage leading to complete and quality Olympic coverage in prime time.
• Substantial platforms for Canadian performers and artists such as Opening Night and Les Beaux Dimanches.

Take a look at this chart of the prime time English television schedule. Canadian content is in red. Those large red blocks are Canadian content on CBC. Those blue blocks are simulcast American programs.

If CBC does not broadcast Canadian programs, who will? Why would the private sector change its approach and fill the gap? Any change in the private sector's behaviour would be economically irrational.

As I have said, we can't make Canadians watch more Canadian programs. No one can. No one wants to. But the CBC is the only broadcaster that guarantees that there will be high-quality Canadian programming at any time of day, any day of the week, and - in particular - during prime time, when most Canadians are watching television.

So, the message we'd like to leave you with is this:

Without the CBC, market fragmentation and the economics of Canadian programs will further erode viewership. That, in turn, will further weaken the influence of the Broadcasting Act and will damage Canada's cultural policies.

In our written submission, we've offered a number of recommendations to ensure CBC continues to play a pivotal role in both the protection and enrichment of Canadian culture and identity.

Let me just highlight some of our key recommendations.

1. Today there is a greater than ever need for a distinctive Canadian voice. There must be a re-confirmation of the CBC's role in the Canadian broadcasting system, and the CBC must be provided with the necessary tools and flexibility to fulfil its mandate and properly serve the Canadian broadcasting system.

2. We also recommend a review and re-balancing of policy and funding instruments to provide greater support to broadcasters who have a genuine commitment to Canadian programming.

3. Finally, we recommend that the current year-by-year approval of the CBC's funding be replaced by a multi-year funding system, in order to provide the CBC with greater certainty and flexibility in its operations.

CBC/Radio-Canada has weathered a lot of storms in the past ten years, and through it all we continue to offer Canadians the best in programming on Television, Radio and the Internet, in English and in French.

Mr. Chairman, once again as we were in 1991 we are on the verge of major changes in broadcasting. The digital revolution will result in different methods of managing content. In part the old concept of separate services Radio, Television, Internet, English and French is rapidly disappearing. During your tour across the country you saw: 

• some of these changes at Radio-Canada's Centre de l'information in Montreal. 
• the integration of radio and television news services in Winnipeg. 
• the interrelationship of platforms at CTV in Toronto. 
• the experiments with new services and the enthusiasm of young program developers in Vancouver.

Another example of radical change: Just this week, Radio-Canada announced the return of Simon Durivage to public broadcasting - a major figure in broadcasting that will now work for both Radio and Television, just as his colleague Bernard Derome has been doing this last year.

Another example is the work of CBC/Radio-Canada's foreign correspondents. Every day, from all around the globe, and most recently from Afghanistan, our journalists provide a Canadian point of view on world events. No other broadcasters benefit from a pool of high-calibre journalists that work in both English and French, reporting to radio and television - that's four networks.

That's what we call convergence. And it's all about program content.

This is just the beginning Mr. Chairman. Personal Video Recorders (PVRs ) may very well change the way in which television is watched and may undermine the financial basis of television. Broadband and Video On Demand will have an incalculable impact.

As Lord Denning said "The only thing we know for certain is that change is inevitable. Survival is but an option."

CBC/Radio-Canada provides a place for Canadians to learn, to hear about each other, in English and French, on radio and on television, in every region of this country.

A place where Canadians have carved out a powerful voice on the Internet.

A place that is a model for public broadcasting the world over.

We are convinced CBC/Radio-Canada is a vital component of the Canadian broadcasting system and that its role is growing in importance.

You have an immense task before you. Your recommendations will help determine what our Canadian broadcasting system will look like in the next ten years. Your work here is vital.

Mr. Chairman, we welcome your questions.