Here we go again. It seems funny to me that we can’t have discussion about this stuff without name calling. Just for the record I looked at the 2007 and 2006 I-O tables and the subsidy to GDP ratios were high so the argument that 2008 was an outlier doesn’t wash. We don’t have the data for 2009 because Statistics Canada’s I-O tables lag by several years.
As for folks who don’t like the Statistics Canada data or say it is ‘doctored’, I guess anything is possible but really if we can’t use Statistics Canada as a credible source of data – what can we use?
If I was a promoter of the film production sector in this region, I would want to do deeper research into these numbers rather than just sending a columnist nasty emails. Statistics Canada could be retained to do a broader output shock on the industry to trace where industry output is going by province and by industry sector. This data could be used to develop a broader understanding of the industry. A direct industry survey could be done to assess the extent of industry leakage – how much activity is leaving the province? Not a rah rah survey but an honest one. My point is that maybe some of the leakage could be curtailed and remain in the province.
In my view (I could be wrong), this industry eventually will need a far lower subsidy to GDP ratio in order to be sustainable. Instead of just crapping all over me why not spend some time trying to figure out how to have a sustainable industry long term?
Just my thoughts.