Bill C10 - C'mon dear, when is violence ever gratuitous?

Nothing with nipples, nothing that shows off pie, two people cannot be in love with a third person, no talking horses etc

Ah, careless me.

Bill C10 is colloquially entitled An Act to amend the Income Tax Act, including amendments in relation to foreign investment entities and non-resident trusts, and to provide for the bijural expression of the provisions of that Act and was passed by the House of Parliament on October 29, 2007.

You can download a copy of Bill C10 An Act to amend the Income Tax Act, including, etc, etc by clicking here.

It appears this is not part of the recent federal Canadian budget. I was mistaken, misinformed, confused and/or too lazy to talk to Uncle Internet, who knows all. Mea Culpa. I hope you didn’t bet the farm or break up with your boyfriend over an argument based on data that I uttered carelessly.

But, now, if you did let’s chalk it up to a painful life lesson for you and move on. Let’s turn to page 346 of Bill C10 An Act… and start reading the amendments that the House passed and that now sit before the Senate Standing Committee on Banks, Trusts, etc as they relate to the film industry in Canada

So. Have you read it? It’s on page 350, after the changes to the definition of labour, the payment ratios, the qualified dates, etc. It doesn’t read very clearly since it’s amending the Income Tax Act. So there are a lot of “drop the and after subsection b and insert yawn". It’s not a coherent whole picture – it’s just the changes

On page 350 Bill C10 An Act to amend… amends Subsection 125.4(6) and this is what is causing all the trouble. I think.

The Act allows the Ministry of Heritage to revoke certificates after the fact if the Ministry decides the production in question violates the guidelines with which they’ll come up. Bill C10 is silent on the sorts of guidelines it expects but comments from government spokespersons indicated they would limit content such as gratuitous violence and pornography.

The problem for a filmmaker is the uncertainty of not having money if the content doesn’t meet with approval after the fact.

Great art needs its nuances. And to have guidelines that eliminate nuances, or impose political agendas to replace artistic sensibilities always results in poor, crappy art. Layered, complex continuums and multiple readings can give life and meaning to art. Abridging these complexities to satisfy political pressures isn’t good.

Sometimes provoking discomfort through art results in reflection and rumination. And God knows we need more rumination.

xoxo

M