Time in Canada and Canada in Time

Journal of Canadian Studies/Revue d'Etudes Canadiennes 0 Editor Associate Editor Editorial Board Advisory Board Time in Canada and Canada in Time flJ DENIS SMITH BERNARD R. BLISHEN MAURICE J. BOOTE ROBERT D. CHAMBERS LEON DION M. G. HURTIG KENNETH E. KIDD W. L. MORTON PHILIP STRATFORD T. H. B. SYMONS W. E. TAYLOR MELVILLE H. WATKINS Redacteur Redacteur adjoint Comite de redaction ANTHONY ADAMSON Comite consultatif CLAUDE T. BISSELL DONALD G. CREIGHTON KATHLEEN FENWICK DAVID M. HAYNE JOHN HIRSCH JEAN PALARDY CLAUDE RYAN B. D. SANDWELL RONALD J. THOM In times past, when its interests have been threatened, the publishers and editors of the Canadian edition of Time Magazine have gone to considerable lengths to demonstrate that the magazine was a good Canadian corporate citizen. They made much of the several pages of Canadian news, of their interest in things Canadian, and of the way in which Canadian readers have responded with a large growing circulation. Editorial policies, we were told, sought to reflect Canadian attitudes and concerns; the magazine, so the more grandiloquent defenders claimed, presented Canada to the world and the world to Canada. Its fidelity to things Canadian was not unrewarded: in 1964 Time was given, along with Readers Digest, a privileged and pre-eminent place in Canadian publishing. Having at its disposal resources beyond any possible Canadian competitor, Time was deemed de facto Canadian by our lawmakers who specifically exempted the magazine from the provisions of legislation whose object was to encourage businesses to advertise in Canadian magazines. This exemption occasioned some puzzlement at the time: if one wanted to encourage a Canadian periodicals industry, giving Time special status seemed a curious way to go about it. In light of these factors it is illuminating to read Time's 10 Journal of Canadian Studies 1 August, 1970 account of the preliminary report of the House of Commons Committee on External Affairs on foreign ownership in Canada. The Committee has clearly sensed the growing unease felt in the country over the extent of foreign, and especially American, ownership of Canadian industry and resources . To check and reverse this process the Committee proposes a number of controls and regulations. Were these to become national policy provision would be made in the future for the acquisition in Canada of at least 51 % of the voting shares of companies operating here. Since immediate repatriation of all foreign owned firms is clearly impossible , the Committee has further proposed the establishment of a Canadian Ownership and Control Bureau whose responsibility it would be to make recommendations as to those foreign firms or industries that might be 'bought back' selectively and gradually before the 51 % rule came into general effect. The Bureau would also act as a general information gathering agency and would ensure that subsidiaries of foreign firms were not being restricted by the operation of foreign laws. The Committee also recommends that in all cases a majority of directors of firms be Canadians, and in cases where Canadian ownership exceeds 51 %, Canadian stockholders be empowered to elect directors in proportion to the percentage of shares owned. The Committee, inter alia, endorses the recently proposed CRTC guidelines on Canadian content in broadcasting; it supports the idea of greater autonomy for Canadian members of international unions; it encourages Canadian Press to increase its representation abroad so as to ensure Canadian interpretations of international events; and it recommends an end to the special privileges enjoyed by Time and Reader's Digest under the Income Tax Act. These proposals are likely to prove controversial : the endorsation of a nationalist position by a Commons Committee is not an everyday event. Unquestionably the report raises some important and difficult legal and economic questions, but the political questions are likely to be the most vexing. Some members of the Committee, with greater ingenuousness than tactical sense, have publicly speculated about the political acceptability of their recommendations: Prime Minister 2 Trudeau, after all, falls something short of a committed nationalist. The report, nonetheless , is likely to be an important contribution to the widening debate on the national question , and because of its parliamentary imprimatur , some Canadians are now likely to feel that the issue is one to...