Canadian Taliban: Harper's Department of Propaganda

by C. L. Cook
For those believing Stephen Harper's emphasis on "family values" was just another of the many Republican inspired marching mantras adopted by his "Tory" party and not indicative of a slide down the extremist form of social control familiar to the unfortunates of pre-liberated Afghanistan, or current day China, some unsettling news regarding how the arts will, or will not be funded, with or without the New Government of Canada's help broke from Hollywood today.

Canadian media being what it is, The Hollywood Reporter reports; the Conservatives propose amending the Tax Act to make tax credits for film and television productions depend on whether a panel of government approved apparatchiks consider the project worthy, or "offensive."

 

 

 

Rightly, the Hollywood industry paper's first concern is whether "foreign" i.e. American film companies shooting in Canada, (due in large part to tax and labour breaks and incentives) will be subject to the same Star Chamber treatment.

THR reporter, Etan Vlessing says; the amendment to the Act is a part of Bill C-10, now before the House. The provision under consideration would put the power over a picture's life or death in the hands of the Heritage Minister, for the favour of whom the meek and mighty of tinsel town will prostrate and grovel.

 

While the opportunity for venality and abuse this scenario portrays is blockbusters, the real fear here is the chilling effect such legislation will have across the artistic spectrum in Canada, where many avant garde and mundane productions alike rely on already jealously guarded government dollars.

 

What kind of art can Canadians expect when its authors are spending as much energy second guessing the tastes and fearing the diktats of the distant gray bureaucrats on a crusade for cultural purity?  

It could be, the Harper administration having already failed to force the opposition in parliament to bring down the government over the two odious predecessors to Bill C-10; C-2, which makes of Canadian law a mirror for the cracked facade of American Justice, with its minimum sentences, drug wars, and over-enthusiasm for enriching police and government agencies through seized "proceeds of crime;" and C-3, which mires the nation's military in the heart of the fighting in southern Afghanistan through 2011.

 

If the prospect of making hundreds of thousands of Canadians convicts by dint of outdated and ill-considered drugs laws, or sacrificing thousands more to the horrors of war are not dire enough to move the opposition to oppose in vote as well as in voice, then perhaps Harper believes threatening the last of the Holy of Holies our depreciated society has left to offer, The Movies will finally inspire the Liberals to take up arms against Harper's Roundheads and force the election he thinks he wants?

 

The Canadian Broadcast Corporation's, (CBC) news flagship, 'The National' ran the story briefly tonight, featuring two iconic Canadian film makers, David Cronenberg and Atom Egoyan; Cronenberg says the proposed amendment makes him "very angry;" adding it was something more expected in Beijing than Ottawa. Otherwise, it's hard to get more on this in the Canadian press.

 

Back in Hollywood, the Hollywood Reporter's Etan Vlessing did manage reaction from Stephen Waddell, national executive director of ACTRA, the actor and directors union, who says;

• "The government is overstepping its bounds and interfering in an arms-length process. Witholding public funding for film and television productions it deems offensive is a dangerous direction for this government that smacks of censorship."

More to the point, the money, THR quotes entertainment lawyer, David Zitzerman, who says C-10 is "problematic" because films and Teevee shows take a lot of time and planning and money hustling.

 

It's hard to hustle money from investors who don't want to lose it. They want certainty, as much as they can get if they're gonna lay down the dough. Zitzerman makes the salient observation;

• "You're not going to know if a film is controversial, whether it's acceptable, until the committee, if it chooses to, reviews and rules on your project."

Yes and that is the rub. I'm sure Mr. Zitzerman is a very clever man and doubtless cunning with a contract negotiation, but I think he's not entirely in on the plot of this one if he thinks  "problems" are unanticipated by Harper.

 

You see, I believe this bill is about more than forcing an election with a piece of fish so old someone has to throw open a window, or about making again pure the Canadian airwaves, (for the sake of the kinder of course) this is about creating that atmosphere of uncertainty, precisely as it will be the result of this bill's passage.
Once again, Mr. Harper has illustrated through his medium of choice, State power his distaste for the values of the country he finds himself lording it over. Values like freedom of speech and expression and the "separation of church and state" wherein patrons leave art to the artists. Whether through the carrot of the people's money they hoard as though it be their own, or through the deployment of state actors against the better interests of the people as a whole, hindering the proper functions of a legitimate democracy, this new government of Canada is no white hat in Hollywood these days.

 

It's no surprise Harper's legislation would serve to sabotage the social fabric of the nation, it's become something of a pattern with the prime minister. What is surprising is; this time his is not a Canadian emulation of the Bush regime but is as David Cronenberg says;

• "More like something they would do in Beijing."

Canada tax credits: strings attached  by Etan Vlessing  Feb 29, 2008

The National