The George Orwell Award
As it is award season in the film industry, it is time to announce the George Orwell Award for repressive thinking to Canadian Heritage Minister, Josée Verner. Ms. Verner has, with the assistance of federal bureaucrats, proposed Bill C-10 that is about to have third reading in the Senate. Bill C-10 is on the verge of becoming law. Our parliamentarians, media and arts advocates have allowed this Bill to progress without public debate.
Bill C-10 amends the Income Tax Act-in particular, the sections of the act that endow eligible television, video and film producers with tax credits. The tax credits were introduced to vitalize Canadian film and television production; Bill C-10, when passed, will restrict the awarding of tax credits to those productions that meet certain moral standards. The Conservative government does not want federal dollars supporting film or television that is "contrary to public policy."
This is censorship, hence the George Orwell Award to Ms. Verner. Conservative party representatives have countered charges of censorship by saying artists who want to make films that violate the government's opinion of what is acceptable can still do so, but without government funding. What is in the public good, what conforms to public standards is always debatable; there are going to be censorship wars in the courts as artists use the Charter to fight this blatant act of censorship.
A government that wants its support of film and television production to meet certain standards is going to want other forms of financial arts support to conform to their definition of what is in the public good. Whereas I cannot recall having heard of a parliamentarian rant against a film deemed indecent, I have heard of several denunciations of the Canada Council due to its awarding of grants to artists deemed to have created "indecent" art.
Felix Holtmann, the former Conservative MB from Manitoba could always be counted on to ridicule the Canada Council jury process in parliament. Now, evangelist Charles McVety, head of the Canada Family Action Coalition, is the poster boy championing the movement to censor government financial support programs to artists. I am concerned that Bill C-10 is the tip of the iceberg - that the Canada Council will be targeted next.
As I write this column, it is the morning after the Genie Awards, Canada's annual film award night. Ms. Verner cancelled her scheduled appearance and issued a statement saying the proposed changes to the Income Tax Act "have nothing to do with censorship and everything to do with the integrity of the tax system." How stupid does she think we are? The Tax Act has very clear requirements for eligibility for tax credits; "decency" clauses exist in the legislation (preventing funding of pornography). There is a certain irony that this issue prevented the Minister from attending last night's Genie awards - a year in which Canadian films (Juno, Away From Her, Eastern Promises, Shake Hands With the Devil) have done well both in Canada and abroad.
Even Christian fundamentalists are concerned about this Bill. In the March 4th Globe and Mail, John Stackhouse, a professor of religion at Regent College in Vancouver and a self-identifying fundamentalist says that he believes that the decision of what is art should be left to the artistic community. "The only alternative is ideologically correct art, which is just propaganda," he is quoted as saying. Clearly there is more balance and wisdom in the fundamentalist community than there is in the Conservative party.
The backpedaling has begun now because the issue has hit the mainstream media. Ms. Verner is busy trying to assure everyone that the new regulations will not affect mainstream films, but her assurances do not address the concerns of the film and television community that the amendments amount to censorship.
The Globe of March 2nd ran an editorial against Bill C-10. Thank goodness. In the same issue they ran a critical article about the role of Charles McVety in the Bill C-10 controversy written by Margaret Wente. In the aforementioned edition of March 4th, the Globe ran another two articles on the issue-one on the front page. The editorial and all the articles are full of outrage, as they should be, but why were they published so late into the process I wonder? Where were they during the Bill's passage through the House of Commons and two readings in the Senate?
Where have our arts advocates been? Where were the opposition MPs and the media? I rely on the members of these communities to monitor parliament and bring concerns that threaten our artistic environment to the attention of the public. Censorship is a "hot button" topic - the threat represented by Bill C-10 should have been brought to our attention long ago. Its relevance to all artists should not be doubted.
By the time this editorial is read, Bill C-10 may be law. If it is not, consider writing to your representative in the Senate if you value a society in which artists are free of government censorship. It is easy to do, visit www.sen.parl.gc.ca to see the list of Senators and links that allow you to email your views on this issue.
ctyrell@shaw.ca
Opus Customer Service: