Last month Telefilm announced it will finally initiate a working group to hash out how to achieve a more representative Canadian film industry, reflecting the nations women, diversity and Indigenous communities. It didnt specify a target but set a date for improvement: 2020.
The working group comes after a year of consultations Telefilm has been having with female filmmakers, after an October 2015 Women in View report revealed that only 17 per cent of the productions financed by public funding agency had female directors. And those were mostly in micro-budget fare. Only 4 per cent of productions with Telefilm investments over $1 million had female directors.
That October 2015 report wasnt the first time the lack of female representation in Canadian film was brought to light. The Ministry of Heritage and Telefilm Canada commissioned a 2010 report prepared by consultant Marilyn Burgess, who had fewer hard numbers but enough data to conclude that women have been lacking support.
Telefilms working group announcement described cooperation with the Canadian Media Producers Association (CMPA) and its Quebec counterpart, AQPM, the unions representing producers across the country (yes, the majority of members are males). They have since added SARTEC, WGC, DGC (the English- and French-language Writers and Directors Guilds), ACTRA, Women in View, Realisatrices Equitables and Women in Film + Television Vancouver.
Weve been told that Telefilms executive director, Carolle Brabant, will be available for an interview later this month. In the meantime, we speak with Marguerite Pigott, vice president of outreach and strategic initiatives at the CMPA, about what she hopes to achieve with this working group.
Radheyan Simonpillai: A lot of people are very upset that after all this time theres still no initiative. Were just starting a working group now. How long has this conversation been going on in your end?
Marguerite Pigott: CMPA has been involved in all kinds of initiatives related to advancing women in media for a long time. Weve been involved with the Women in View initiative 2X More. We initiated a study on gender leadership in the media with many industry partners, investigating the best initiatives around the world for advancing women in media. There are many initiatives that we do: initiatives out in BC, getting women in the directors chair and lots that weve supported, like the St. Johns International Womens Film Festival. Weve been very active on this for a very long time.
That said, at this point in time, Telefilm is really advancing the conversation from a policy perspective. We have our first opportunity to really impact how films are developed and produced in this country, and by whom. So we are enthusiastically grasping the opportunity to influence that conversation and the policy so that it will be effective, long lasting and hopefully quick.
RS: Women in View produced a report last year that provides stats in terms of female participation in Telefilm-funded projects. And in 2010, the Burgess report also showed the dire situation for female representation in the industry. Is this the first time youre hearing of an actual initiative to affect a practical change through funding structures?
MP: There have been smaller initiatives all across Canada, many of which Ive already mentioned. This is the first major initiative that has happened at a federal level that Ive heard of.
We absolutely plan to embrace the opportunity to work with our partners to ensure that the funding structures change. When we change the funding structures, and we change who is telling the story, we change the story. And thats what we want to see. We want to see the projects that are on Canadian and international screens reflecting who we really are as a country. And we are really excited to work toward that in a way that isnt just about what we do as producers, but how the system works as a whole.
RS: When you say your partners, who are you referring to?
MP: Well, it takes a village to make a movie. When I say partners, Im referring to writers, directors, other funders everybody who is involved.
RS: In terms of the demographics of the CMPA, what percentage is female?
MP: Production companies join the CMPA, not individuals. So thats not a stat that we have.
RS: Who is going to be representing the CMPA in this working group?
MP: At this point, thats still under discussion internally, but we take the issue and the opportunity really seriously, so our president and CEO will be at the first meeting.
RS: Part of what Im discussing in my article is how the entire industry is at fault here. Women just dont get opportunities. That falls on producers as well. If you have male-dominated production companies who cant see past the unconscious bias and dont hire women, they are already part of the problem.
Thats why Im finding it weird that Telefilm is working with the people who are part of the problem. Why does Telefilm need to do this? Why not just implement a new policy or point system funding structure to make sure women and minorities are represented?
MP: Rad, I think a lot of policy is generated in that top-down way that you just laid out, and its ineffective because of that.
RS: Why do you say that?
MP: Because if the policy makers dont understand the perspective of the people that theyre trying to benefit, if they just stay in their ivory tower and dont consult, thats how you get bad policy. Were in this to create good policy. And were thrilled and encouraged that Telefilm is giving us the opportunity to do that, rather than taking a top-down perspective.
We are actively engaging our membership in this, and our membership includes really strong women producers who are making movies and television series that export all around the world.
RS: Can you give me an example as to why a top-down approach wont work? If Telefilm said, Here is a new point system to make sure your productions are representative, why couldnt producers and production companies adhere to that?
MP: Im going to get a little policy-wonkish on you for a second, Rad. Look at an organization as important as the Canada Media Fund, which funds television and digital content. Whenever they change their guidelines, they do cross-country consultations. They meet with every group thats going to be affected. They take in all those different perspectives and all that information and can craft policy that has real knowledge of whats going on in the marketplace every day, so people are using a policy thats going to be effective, not one created in a pretty little bubble that doesnt make actual sense in the real world. Thats what top-down policy actually is. Its policy in a pretty little bubble that may sound good in a press release, Rad, but doesnt work at the end of the day.
RS: Do you have any idea what kind of policy you would like to see put in place?
MP: The whole point of the working group is to have a discussion with our partners. What the discussion is working toward is a policy that puts women and diverse creators at the centre of the content. Thats the goal we want to achieve.
We want to see women directing, producing and writing. We want to see diverse creators making stories that reflect Canadian society back to itself and that we can export around the world. The specific policy mechanisms are something that will be discussed in the working group.
RS: What upset a lot of people in terms of Telefilms announcement is theres no target. It said more diversity. Thats not a goal. I dont know if you guys have a goal in terms of representation.
MP: We are looking to see Telefilm finance and promote a portfolio of films that represents Canada as it is. Canada is half women. Thats not a surprise to anyone. And the population of diverse people here is huge. We want to see that reflected in the films that we produce.
RS: So are we saying 51 per cent female on film, and, what, 20 per cent diverse?
MP: I think at this point, Rad, Im not going to engage in a conversation about specific percentages. Were looking at best-in-class models from around the world to see what has worked internationally. Were clear about the results, and thats a shared goal.
RS: In terms of what has worked internationally, Sweden outlined some amazing work that it did to achieve gender parity. Is that the ideal model?
MP: Its absolutely one of the models were looking at. Everybody recognizes that Sweden has a very, very good story to tell. Sweden is different from Canada, so to simply replicate something that worked in one country without really considering our own context is not a great way to proceed. We have to be more rigorous than that. We have to be more committed to a better outcome than to just take someone elses idea and apply it in Canada.
Thats why were going to be looking at models from all over the world, and what can work here. Were going to come up with a made-in-Canada solution. This is a change we have wanted to see for a long time, and we really look forward to helping make it happen.
Read: Because it’s 2016: the Canadian film industry’s gender gap.
movies@nowtoronto.com | @FreshAndFrowsy
