Can a Government review of CBC mandate save English TV so it matters to us again?

Patrick Gossage • January 16, 2024

CBC English TV mattered a lot to anyone alive in the sixties and seventies when comedy programs like Wayne and Shuster were must watches in households in Canada and on the Ed Sullivan program in the US. The 11:00 pm news anchored by hosts like Eral Cameron and Stanley Burke dominated the airwaves. The seventies brought the popular The Beachcombers which enjoyed a lifetime of heavily watched 350 episodes. No longer.

CBC TV seems to enjoy the same much diminished popularity as its chief benefactor, the Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who drastically increased CBC’s government funding now at $1.3 billion a year. Viewing numbers for English TV are grim. In the last five years, its prime time viewing audience dropped to only 4.4% meaning most Canadians don’t tune in at all. Pierre Poilievre hits a nerve when he promises to defund CBC English. Some ask if it is beyond saving.


CBC does have strengths. It knows how to do popular and high-quality radio and the results speak for themselves - English radio has 14.1 per

cent of Canadians listening with CBC morning radio is regularly at or near the top of their markets: CBC Toronto enjoys a 12.3 per cent; Montreal, 14.9 per cent; and Vancouver, 10.9 per cent. How can TV too find a way to produce quality programming that people want to watch?


Political Will


With Olivier threatening its very existence, it has now dawned on the government in the form of its Heritage Minister Pascale St. Onge who in a New Year’s interview said now’s the time for the Liberal government to begin working with Canadians and experts to define what the CBC should like over the next year and decade. “Canada’s news and cultural sectors would be at serious risk should the Conservatives form government under leader Pierre Poilievre,” she said. “(Conservatives) have shown they think that the arts and cultural sector should be left to the free market… “ And we know that with foreign companies and foreign entities that take so much space online, it means that we would basically abandon our cultural sector in Canada.” Now a relevant CBC English is a political issue.


It is interesting that St. Onge’s preoccupation with preserving a strong Canadian presence amidst the deluge of high quality largely US movies and programs on streaming services echoes the 1928 Air Commission’s findings that led to the CBC’s creation. Then private Canadian radio stations were not only beginning to fall into American hands but were unable to offer a popular Canadian alternative to programming that was flooding across the border from the US. We face a similar situation today. With the added challenge that a well-funded CBC English service with the exception of radio seems challenged to make high quality programs that appeal to Canadians.


It’s not that in the not-too-distant past CBC has proven it could to just that. Programs like Little Mosque on the Prairie, Kim’s Convenience and

especially Schitt’s Creek have been huge successes with audiences here and in the US as well as breaking new ground in the way only the CBC

can.


More funding not less?


However, if CBC is to retain its very broad mandate of virtually being everything to everyone - i.e. its age-old mission to “inform, enlighten and entertain” as well as maintaining French services across Canada, a northern service with indigenous languages, five discretionary television channels and four Canada-wide radio networks, it is going to require more public funding not less. This need falls precisely at the time CBC is in dire financial troubles with a $125 million budget shortfall. This forced a recent announcement of a 10 per cent cut in its workforce and a reduction of its English and French programming budgets for the next fiscal year. About $40 million was cut from independent production commissions and program acquisitions. CBC programming will take a $25 million hit and Radio-Canada will see a $15 million reduction.


It’s well known that CBC Radio Canada’s programming is hugely well received in Quebec – it does not have a popularity problem. Perhaps

this is due to a little-known imbalance in funding between the two networks, English and French. Richard Stursberg, who was the executive vice president of English Services from 2004 to 2010, wrote revealingly last March in the HUB: “Given that Canada’s population is roughly 38 million people, {this means that the} 8 million French- speaking Canadians receive a per capita public broadcasting subsidy of almost 70 dollars, while the rest of the country receives 23 dollars. In effect, this makes Radio-Canada one of the better-financed public broadcasters in the world and CBC one of the worst”. Follow the money but given Quebec’s cultural sensitivities, no federal government would dare change this unfair formula.


Digital CBC


Canadians are increasingly choosing digital platforms for their viewing and listening needs, and CBC English cannot be faulted for not keeping

up with the digital and streaming revolution. Its long-established digital news service performs amazingly at times of enhanced national news

interest such as elections. At the last CRTC CBC hearing the Commission recognized, for the first time ever, the significant contribution of our

digital streaming services – CBC Gem, ICI TOU.TV, CBC Listen and Radio- Canada OHdio – to the Canadian regulated system. More streaming

services are coming: the 24/7 streaming channels CBC Comedy and CBC News BC will land this fall, following last November’s launch of CBC News Explore, and will be followed by more local news channels. Indeed, CBC in this department seems prepared for the future.


The CBC has proven that it can do what no commercial network could and attract huge audiences when it behaves as a true Canadian public

broadcaster. The huge production with both English and French networks Canada: A People's History with 17- fully produced episode, on the history of Canada attracted an audience in its first seasons of over two million per episode and still enjoys an impressive afterlife in school use. This is the kind of ambitious Canadian project could win the hearts and minds of Canadians again.


There is general agreement that CBC TV English News - its unrivalled reach and staff including the almost the only Canadian international correspondents - should be the go-to news service for Canadians. It is not, and if it was there would be less talk of defunding CBC English. The CBC ombudsman in the most recent CBC Annual Report shone a revealing light on a tone in CBC news that turns off many Canadians. Here is his finding: “The prevailing theme of complaints is that reporters and editors are not making editorial decisions based on public interest, but rather to serve a social or political agenda. This comes up frequently in stories relating to the pandemic. But it comes up as well for stories that relate to partisan politics, race, gender, and other subjects related to equity and justice.” Clearly there are major changes needed to bring audiences back to CBC TV news.


What kind of review will fix it?


The question remains – can some sort of yet to be defined CBC “review” as foreseen by the Heritage Minister save CBC English. Bringing back lost audiences to CBC English productions and CBC news is a huge challenge given budget cuts and strong ongoing US streaming competition. But It’s not impossible. We also need public pressure to lobby for the importance of the CBC as a national cultural and information institution. This is a challenge. Unfortunately, there is no longer a robust Friends of Canadian Broadcasting which in the past when CBC faced drastic budget cuts mounted national campaigns supported by labour unions. The historic arguments for public broadcasting are very relevant today. Graham Spry of the Canadian Radio League which was responsible for the launch public of broadcasting under PM R.B. Bennet’s Conservative government are still pertinent: "It is a choice between commercial interests and the people's interest. It is a choice between the state and the United States," Spry said. The same argument works today. The Canadian public interest, particularly the interest of millions of new Canadians welcomed in the last decades is the same: who will tell our stories and explain what is happening in our country? Will US streaming services or mega US social networks increase our knowledge of ourselves and tell our stories.. Unlikely. That is why we will always need the CBC – it’s that simple. At least the federal government understands this. Hopefully a review, faced with the Conservative threat to the CBC, will continue to lead it to strategies that will make it more indispensable to Canadian audiences.

Patrick Gossage Insider Political Views

By Patrick Gossage July 7, 2025
When I was at university in the sixties, it was easy to love being Canadian. Patriotism was easy in the era of Pearson, peacekeeping and his Nobel Prize. He introduced defining landmark social programs like the Canada Pension Plan and universal health care. He also was crucial in launching the new Canadian flag, promoting bilingualism, and fostering a more inclusive immigration policy. His government got into the business of Canadian cultural promotion with the establishment of Telefilm Canada in 1967 to fund Canadian filmmakers. (The crown corporation, the National Film Board, was established in 1939.) The Pearson era went out with a proud Canadian bang at Expo67. Canada was prosperous, our identities, either largely British and French, were secure. The writer and philosopher George Grant, put it this way: “English speaking Canadians have been called a dull and costive lot. In these dynamic days, such qualities are particularly unattractive to the chic. Yet our stodginess has made us a society of greater simplicity, formality, and perhaps even innocence than the people to the south.” This is the society in which most anglo seniors today grew up. Not chic, looking with some envy at the glamour of Hollywood and Broadway, but modest and content. But the seeds of change were there. In Toronto. Italian and Portuguese laborers were being brought in to build subways and suburbs. Canada was about to add to the core French and English culture, and value assumptions far more diverse, and multicultural influences. Multiculturalism became official government policy in 1988. In his speech to the House of Commons, Trudeau stated that no singular culture could define Canada, and that the government accepted “the contention of other cultural communities that they, too, are essential elements in Canada.” A policy of multiculturalism was implemented to promote and respect cultural diversity, and to in fact fund ethnic efforts to preserve and develop their cultures within Canadian society, the opposite of the US “melting pot” objective. Section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms officially recognizes multiculturalism as a Canadian value. In a 1971 speech in Winnipeg to a Ukrainian audience, Trudeau said: “What could be more absurd than the concept of an “all Canadian boy or girl! “ Trudeau greatly enlarged the makeup of the body of immigrants by expanding the ‘family class’. In 1978 immigration act changes allowed new Canadians to sponsor their parents of any age. Those from less-developed nations found this particularly appealing. Trudeau senior’s major accomplishment which ensured the protection of all minority rights was the repatriation of our constitution woth the Charter of Rights and Freedoms Now In Canada, approximately 23.0% of the population are first-generation immigrants, meaning they were born outside of Canada. This figure represents the highest proportion of immigrants in Canada in 150 years and is the highest among G7 countries. Over half of our population are either of English or French heritage. The torch of openness to refugees and immigrants and “diversity is our strength” has been taken up by Justin Trudeau in a big way. He told the New York Times Magazine in October 2014 that Canada could be the “first post national state”. He added: “There is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada.” Many would argue that, yes, there is a core set of Canadian values. Often not recognized, they are regularly reflected in government policies. They set us apart from the United States, form part of our identity, and enrich our life experiences. Pearson and the Trudeaus have been instrumental in implementing Liberal values, ensuring equality of opportunity across the country and that no minority is trampled on. Foremost is universal publicly funded health care, whatever its problems. His son will be remembered for the Canadian Child benefit which today grants parents up to over $6,000 per child, which greatly reduced child poverty and $10 a day daycare. Justin Trudeau also launched publicly funded denticare and started a pharmacare program. Recipients of these programs obviously see them as essential parts of being Canadian. The generally shared values of Canadians include the importance of collective wellbeing, co-operation and social equality and a belief that active governments can improve our lives. Justin Trudeau’s self-declared “feminism” and his making cabinet one half women showed a dedication to equal rights for women which he tirelessly promoted. He was forever promoting the value of “diversity is our strength”. We genuinely welcome immigrants and show a high degree of tolerance for differences. Perhaps the best indication of this is the late seventies welcoming of over 60,000 Vietnamese boat people. As well, after 2015, over 44,000 government and privately sponsored Syrian refugees were settled and helped to establish themselves in Canada. Prime Minister Trudeau personally welcomed the first arrival in Toronto. While seemingly uncontrolled immigration of foreign students and refugees has become more controversial recently, it is accepted that we need immigrants, and the flow is now more rationally controlled. His father also ruled over a Canada that was very pro-Canadian and even anti American – not hard when the United States was immersed in the nightmare of Vietnam. He was well aware of the dangers signaled by George Grant in Lament for a Nation, which predicted the virtual integration of the Canadian and US economies. He established the Foreign Investment Review Agency to break the wholesale takeover of Canadian businesses by US firms. He established Petro Canada to get a window into the largely foreign owned oil and gas sector. And his government was very active in supporting and encouraging Canadian culture. The CRTC mandated Canadian content on our airwaves, spawning a healthy music industry. His son substantially increased funding for the public broadcaster CBC. Then in 1988 came a major shift in our identity and sovereignty. Prime Minister Mulroney wanted a free trade deal with the US and John Turner, the defeated Liberal leader, finally found his voice: “I will not let Brian Mulroney sell out our sovereignty. I will not let this great nation surrender its birthright. I will not let Brian Mulroney destroy a 120-year-old dream called Canada, and neither will Canadians”. But Turner lost, and a new deal sealed the situation we are in today with over 70% of our exports going stateside and Trump determined to wage economic warfare with a country he feels does not have a right to exist and should be the 51 st state: “Economically we have such power over Canada.” In fact, we have inadvertently given him “all the cards” as Trump likes to say. Turner might well say from the grave, “I told you so!” Sovereignty means more than building our own economy more independent of the United States. It means rebuilding the pride we have as Canadians and actually knowing and cherishing its values so different from those south of us. And this seems to be happening ironically, thanks to Trump’s trumpeting us as a 51 st state. Flags are everywhere and as we celebrate our 158 th birthday there is a new patriotism bursting out across the nation. The national anthem is being enthusiastically sung by audiences at all sorts of gatherings and performances. And worry as we may about the diverse cultures and beliefs of the hundreds and thousands of immigrant adults from every corner of the Globe, we know their children going to public schools will become knowledgeable, committed Canadians. There is a Canadian soul which will not be destroyed.
Doug Ford in a suit and tie is talking into a microphone
By Patrick Gossage June 11, 2025
Who is the is the real Doug Ford? Is it the smiling man walking beside Premier of Alberta Danielle Smith into the meeting of the Premiers with the PM intoning “love is in the air”(!) or the inept initiator of the Green Belt scandal which sold protected land to his developer friends – for which he apologized while reversing the order?
More Posts