ARCHIVED - Transcript / Transcription - Gatineau, Quebec - 2002-05-10
This page has been archived on the Web
Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.
Providing Content in Canada's Official Languages
Please note that the Official Languages Act requires that government publications be available in both official languages.
In order to meet some of the requirements under this Act, the Commission's transcripts will therefore be bilingual as to their covers, the listing of CRTC members and staff attending the hearings, and the table of contents.
However, the aforementioned publication is the recorded verbatim transcript and, as such, is transcribed in either of the official languages, depending on the language spoken by the participant at the hearing.
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
FOR THE CANADIAN RADIO-TELEVISION AND
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
TRANSCRIPTION DES AUDIENCES DU
CONSEIL DE LA RADIODIFFUSION
ET DES TÉLÉCOMMUNICATIONS CANADIENNES
SUBJECT / SUJET:
RECONSIDERATION OF DECISION CRTC 2001-757
RÉÉXAMEN DE LA DECISION CRTC 2001-757
HELD AT: TENUE À:
Conference Centre Centre de Conférences
Portage IV Portage IV
Outaouais Room Salle Outaouais
Gatineau, Quebec Gatineau (Québec)
May 10, 2002 Le 10 mai 2002
Volume 2
Transcripts
In order to meet the requirements of the Official Languages
Act, transcripts of proceedings before the Commission will be
bilingual as to their covers, the listing of the CRTC members
and staff attending the public hearings, and the Table of
Contents.
However, the aforementioned publication is the recorded
verbatim transcript and, as such, is taped and transcribed in
either of the official languages, depending on the language
spoken by the participant at the public hearing.
Transcription
Afin de rencontrer les exigences de la Loi sur les langues
officielles, les procès-verbaux pour le Conseil seront
bilingues en ce qui a trait à la page couverture, la liste des
membres et du personnel du CRTC participant à l'audience
publique ainsi que la table des matières.
Toutefois, la publication susmentionnée est un compte rendu
textuel des délibérations et, en tant que tel, est enregistrée
et transcrite dans l'une ou l'autre des deux langues
officielles, compte tenu de la langue utilisée par le
participant à l'audience publique.
Canadian Radio-television and
Telecommunications Commission
Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des
télécommunications canadiennes
Transcript / Transcription
RECONSIDERATION OF DECISION CRTC 2001-757
RÉÉXAMEN DE LA DECISION CRTC 2001-757
BEFORE / DEVANT:
Charles Dalfen Chairperson / Président
Joan Pennefather Commissioner / Conseillère
David McKendry Commissioner / Conseiller
ALSO PRESENT / AUSSI PRÉSENTS:
William Howard Legal Counsel /
Conseiller juridique
Jane Britten Hearing Coordinator /
Coordonnatrice de
l'audience
Pierre LeBel Secretary / Secrétaire
HELD AT: TENUE À:
Conference Centre Centre de Conférences
Portage IV Portage IV
Outaouais Room Salle Outaouais
Gatineau, Quebec Gatineau (Québec)
May 10, 2002 Le 10 mai 2002
Volume 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS / TABLE DES MATIÈRES
PAGE / PARA
PHASE I (Continued)
World Television Network/Le Réseau Télémonde Inc. 88 / 508
PHASE II
INTERVENTIONS BY/PAR
Canadian Cable Television Association 235 / 1260
Canadian Association of Broadcasters 260 / 1359
Maria Minna, M.P. 278 / 1442
Multicultural Association of Nova Scotia 292 / 1489
Paul A. Winn 298 / 1517
Gerry Weiner, John Mancinelli, Clarence S. Bayne 307 / 1556
Telelatino Network Inc. 329 / 1651
Communication and Diversity Network 349 / 1750
Fairchild Television Ltd. 363 / 1829
Joseph Volpe, M.P. 380 / 1915
Ken A. Stewart 391 / 1961
Canadian Ethnocultural Council 401 / 2007
PHASE III
REPLY BY / RÉPLIQUE PAR
World Television Network/Le Réseau Télémonde Inc. 411 / 2051
84
1 Gatineau, Quebec / Gatineau (Québec) 2 --- Upon resuming on Friday, May 10, 2002 at 0930 / 3 L'audience reprend le vendredi 10 mai 2002 à 0930 4 474 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good morning, 5 everyone. 6 475 Mr. Secretary? 7 476 MR. LEBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 8 477 I do believe that Mr. Ken Marchant 9 has a point to raise this morning. 10 478 MR. MARCHANT: Thank you, 11 Mr. Secretary. 12 479 Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, good 13 morning. 14 480 Mr. Chairman, we were told yesterday 15 by Commissioner Pennefather, on behalf of the panel, 16 that the standard by which WTM's request for carriage 17 in particular would be judged would be uniqueness 18 across the entire schedule and the entire application 19 in relation to one paragraph of the Broadcasting Act, 20 paragraph 3(1)(d)(iii). 21 481 Now, I make the assumption, and I 22 stand to be corrected, that this was the standard 23 developed by Commission staff. WTM does not believe 24 this is an appropriate standard, nor do we believe that 25 it's a fair standard.
85
1 482 I, therefore, have two requests. 2 First, could Commission legal counsel be asked to 3 explain why in their view this is test is, first, 4 grounded in the Broadcasting Act and consistent with 5 the Broadcasting Act? 6 483 And secondly, how it's consistent 7 with administrative law principles of fairness, or if I 8 could used American legal parlance, consistent with 9 procedural due process and consistent with substantive 10 due process? 11 484 My second request, Mr. Chairman, 12 would be that WTM have an opportunity to make its 13 submissions on those subjects so that this panel and 14 the Commission could make its determination as to what 15 the appropriate standard should be. 16 485 I would in that connection, and in 17 conclusion, refer to Section 17 of the Broadcasting Act 18 which says that: 19 "The Commission has the 20 authority to determine questions 21 of fact or law in relation to 22 any matter within its 23 jurisdiction under this Act". 24 486 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 25 487 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
86
1 488 One moment, please. 2 --- Pause 3 489 THE CHAIRPERSON: Counsel? 4 490 MR. HOWARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 5 491 Dr. Marchant, I think that you have 6 to understand that from time to time we do use a bit of 7 shorthand around here when we are talking and I don't 8 think the implication was that it was a stand-alone 9 test. 10 492 I think it was meant to guide you 11 with regard to giving an answer because the Commission, 12 of course, has your submission, but what you are saying 13 is that there are, I think, 27, 28 -- anyway, a number 14 of the subsections of Section 3 are the ones which you 15 fulfil, that you should be judged upon. 16 493 I don't think anything is carved in 17 stone, and if you have any submissions you would like 18 to make as to exactly what the appropriate standard is, 19 beyond of course what you have already said, the 20 Commission, of course, would be more than happy to 21 accept it and take a look at it. 22 494 MR. MARCHANT: Can I just consult 23 with my client for a moment here? 24 --- Pause 25 495 MR. MARCHANT: Mr. Chairman, I think
87
1 we would like to make a submission. I would say that 2 it's a submission entirely consistent with and 3 elaborative of what we have submitted. We feel a much 4 broader range of questions are raised. 5 496 Might I have five minutes to collect 6 my thoughts? 7 497 MR. HOWARD: If you want to make that 8 in writing so that when the Commission is looking at 9 the evidence overall, you are saying this is the 10 framework in which it should be assessing the evidence, 11 that would be fine too. 12 498 I mean, I don't want to put you on 13 the spot now. 14 499 THE CHAIRPERSON: That might be 15 better, Mr. Marchant, if you wanted to do that. I 16 don't think that there was any effort to set up a 17 standard other than the standard of the objectives of 18 the Broadcasting Act in assessing your application and, 19 as Mr. Howard says, it was shorthand. 20 500 But feel free to either orally or in 21 writing -- I would just as soon not break at this point 22 in the proceeding, but you could either do it orally 23 after the break or you could put it in writing later. 24 501 MR. MARCHANT: Well, Mr. Chair, I 25 think that it is sufficiently important and I think
88
1 that the considerations we would advance are ones that 2 Commissioners might wish to have in mind in approaching 3 the questioning with respect to our submission. 4 502 I therefore think it would be best if 5 I did try to outline them briefly even though it might 6 have been giving you a slightly more organized 7 presentation had I -- I am not complaining about your 8 decision that you want to proceed, but I would like to 9 make a brief submission on these points, if I might. 10 503 I don't think doing it in writing -- 11 perhaps I can briefly explain that by way of a short 12 introduction to what we would say. 13 504 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Marchant, 14 rather than you doing that, why don't you do that after 15 the break? We will proceed at this stage and you will 16 have collected your thoughts. 17 505 MR. MARCHANT: Okay. 18 506 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 19 507 Commissioner Pennefather? 20 508 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, 21 Mr. Chairman. 22 509 We will continue with questions on 23 programming areas. We were at the point of looking at 24 the world programming proposals. 25 510 There were, however, just a couple of
89
1 clarifications from yesterday's discussion on Canadian 2 programming, if you wouldn't mind. 3 511 We had left you with a question about 4 the amount of original Canadian programming in the 5 proposed service. Do you have a number on that? 6 512 MR. IANNUZZI: If I may, there are at 7 least four things from yesterday's questioning period 8 that I would like to have corrected into the record by 9 having Michael McHale read into the corrections as far 10 as Schedule B on the questions that you asked 11 yesterday. 12 513 Do you want to do that so that we can 13 clean that up? 14 514 MR. McHALE: There is a small number 15 of changes to reconciliate the totals. If you look at 16 page 34, Schedule B, Canadian produced. 17 515 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: The April 18 8th...? 19 516 MR. McHALE: Submission. I was going 20 to print a copy, but the printer, unfortunately, in the 21 public examination room isn't working. 22 517 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I'm having 23 a little trouble hearing you. Perhaps your microphone 24 is a little low. If you could pull it a little 25 forward.
90
1 518 MR. McHALE: We will provide a 2 printed copy later today when we have access to a 3 printer. 4 519 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: That would 5 be helpful. Thank you. 6 520 Page 34? 7 521 MR. McHALE: Correct. The total for 8 specials should read 177,000. So the overall total is 9 4377 which ties into our financial projections. 10 522 Total original hours, 494 and a 11 repeat factor of three. So the total hours for this 12 category is 1482. 13 523 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Could you 14 just repeat, Mr. McHale, the number of original hours 15 again? 16 524 MR. McHALE: It's 494, 4-9-4. 17 525 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Per week 18 then it would break down to? 19 526 MR. McHALE: I haven't calculated. 20 It would be 494 divided by 52, approximately eight 21 plus. 22 527 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So are 23 those the corrections and the response? 24 528 MR. McHALE: That's the corrections 25 for the Canadian produced.
91
1 529 The Canadian commissioned, the line 2 item for specials was omitted and should read 247,000. 3 The number of repeats for "Port of Entry" should read 4 130 and intercom should read 260 original and 260 5 repeats. So the total number of original hours is 455 6 and over the course of the year a repeat factor of 7 4.29. 8 530 It gives a new total for that 9 category of 4397 which again ties into the financial 10 statements. That includes English and French 11 production. It's an overall total. 12 531 International, just one change. The 13 number of repeats for animation should read 52 and not 14 156. 15 532 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Fifty-two? 16 533 MR. McHALE: Fifty-two, yes. And the 17 number of original hours is 806 over the course of a 18 year and the repeat factor is 3.87 and again ties into 19 the financial statements. 20 534 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 21 535 You have expanded on the follow up on 22 that, I appreciate it. 23 536 There was another follow-up point 24 that I would like to raise -- two, in fact. 25 537 The first is, at the June hearing you
92
1 confirmed a commitment to Canadian programming 2 expenditures of 40 per cent of the previous year's 3 gross revenues. Can you confirm that you still 4 maintain that condition and accept it as a condition of 5 licence? 6 538 MR. IANNUZZI: Yes, we do. 7 539 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 8 540 And one further point of 9 clarification which is less of the numbers, just a 10 concept again on the French programming so that we are 11 absolutely clear on what is on the air. 12 541 MR. IANNUZZI: If I may -- 13 542 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I came 14 away with an idea, but I want to be sure I was right 15 about what I heard. 16 543 MR. IANNUZZI: I would like to call 17 on Rock Demers to clarify that. 18 544 M. DEMERS: Merci de me permettre de 19 revenir sur cette question. 20 545 Ce qu'il faut bien comprendre et bien 21 saisir c'est qu'il y a au moins un tiers de la 22 programmation qui sera en français, qui sera 23 francophone. Un tiers du budget disponible va être 24 consacré à produire ces émissions-là, et un tiers du 25 temps d'antenne sera des émissions francophones.
93
1 546 Ce qu'il faut également noter c'est 2 qu'il y aura des blocs d'émissions francophones de 3 sorte que ce soit plus facile de permettre à 4 l'auditoire francophone du pays de savoir à quel moment 5 ils peuvent écouter le français, ils peuvent avoir les 6 types d'émissions directement en français. 7 547 Ce qu'il faut également ajouter c'est 8 que le reste de la programmation qui n'est pas 9 d'origine francophone sera disponible avec des 10 sous-titres français à la grandeur du pays, et ça cet 11 aspect-là je pense qu'il est très important parce qu'il 12 avantage ceux qui parlent le français au pays sur le 13 reste du pays, parce qu'il ne faut pas oublier que 14 d'une part les francophones sont moins réfractaires aux 15 sous-titres que la population anglophone, et d'autre 16 part, il y a au-delà de quatre millions de 17 non-francophones qui ont appris le français et qui 18 parlent le français à travers le pays. 19 548 Si ces quatre millions là ont pris la 20 peine d'apprendre le français c'est qu'ils ont une 21 curiosité par rapport à ce qui se dit, ce qui se fait, 22 ce qui se pense en français. 23 549 Donc tout ceci mis ensemble, je pense 24 démontre très clairement la présence francophone à 25 l'intérieur du réseau Télémonde.
94
1 550 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Merci, 2 monsieur Demers. 3 551 C'était en effet le concept que 4 j'avais conclu et c'était le résultat de notre 5 discussion d'hier. Ça veut dire un service, dans 6 lequel il y a un tiers de la programmation française -- 7 552 M. DEMERS: Minimum. 8 553 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Un tiers du 9 budget approximativement, et un tiers du temps 10 d'antenne. 11 554 M. DEMERS: C'est ça. 12 555 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Et ça veut 13 dire qu'un francophone peut voir le tout, le tout avec 14 sous-titres sur la programmation anglaise et 15 nécessairement la programmation... 16 556 M. DEMERS: Internationale. 17 557 CONSEILÈRE PENNEFATHER: Et il y aura 18 aussi les programmes originaux en français, et quand 19 c'est le cas, le côté anglais le voit et l'entend en 20 anglais avec sous-titres. 21 558 M. DEMERS: C'est ça. 22 559 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Voilà. Je 23 pense que c'est clair. Merci. 24 560 MR. IANNUZZI: Commissioner, also on 25 the other question that was brought up yesterday
95
1 dealing with the intercom community programs on 2 Saturday and Sunday for a total of five hours per week, 3 there was a question there of how we would fairly deal 4 with the distribution of these programs and I would 5 like Kerry Johnston to read into the record our policy 6 on how our Advisory Ombudsman Committee would work. 7 561 Kerry? 8 562 MR. JOHNSTON: World Télémonde is by 9 its nature of service a multicultural service. That is 10 its programs, both Canadian and World, reflect the 11 realities of the canadian cultural diversity. It is an 12 inclusive service available to all Canadians. 13 563 WTM will, under the chair of Dr. Gail 14 Valsiakis, formerly Dean of Arts, Concordia University 15 and a person of Aboriginal heritage, have an Ombudsman 16 Committee whose mandate shall include: Monitoring WTM 17 in regard to industry codes, raising questions as to 18 balance the sources and appropriate portrayal of 19 persons of all cultures. 20 564 The Ombudsman Committee will be 21 responsible for investigating complaints on these 22 matters and the Chair of the Committee is on the Board 23 of WTM and will report at each Board meeting on the 24 activities of the Committee. 25 565 In addition, we will have community
96
1 feedback. WTM will in each half of the year convene 2 groups from the multicultural communities in five to 3 six regions of the country to receive community 4 feedback on the balance and appropriateness of its 5 program in respect to local communities, regions, 6 Canada and the world. 7 566 MR. IANNUZZI: Thank you, Kerry. 8 567 Last, but not least, Madam 9 Commissioner, is the question that you brought up 10 yesterday for a better definition of how, in answer to 11 the Order-in-Council is the question of reflecting and 12 connecting Canada's multicultural communities to the 13 broader audiences, and specifically WTM's regional 14 programming. 15 568 The Order-in-Council 2002-330 asks 16 the CRTC to: 17 "... fully assess the 18 appropriate options for the 19 carriage of... services that 20 aspire to reflect and connect 21 Canada's multicultural 22 communities to broader 23 audiences". 24 569 For a multicultural service like WTM, 25 and I quote:
97
1 "Communities will be defined in 2 many ways". 3 570 Each census Statistics Canada 4 prepares profiles of communities across Canada: 25 5 large metropolitan areas, 112 urban areas, and 6,000 6 communities. These Statistics Canada profiles show 7 that every one of these communities is multicultural. 8 571 WTM aspires to reflect and connect 9 these multicultural communities to the broader 10 audiences. These multicultural communities are the 11 production sets for WTM programs like "Day and Night", 12 "Mainstreets", "Eye on Canada", "Port of Entry" and our 13 nightly WTM "News Day" which will make local stories 14 about our multicultural communities national stories. 15 572 WTM will do so on a regionally 16 balanced basis. As we said for the purposes of 17 Decision 2001-757, WTM expects to source its 18 commissioned Canadian productions in the following 19 proportions. 20 573 The Maritimes would be 15 per cent; 21 Quebec, 25 per cent; French-language outside Quebec, 22 5 per cent; and Ontario, 30 per cent, for a total of 23 100 per cent -- and Western Canada. I was totalling 24 that up for the last Commissioner -- 25 574 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I can hear
98
1 Commissioner Cram -- 2 --- Laughter / Rires 3 575 MR. IANNUZZI: -- at the last 4 hearing, and Western Canada, a whole 25 per cent. We 5 are putting Western Canada on the same level as Quebec 6 here, and they would like that. 7 576 This is how we will reflect, but we 8 also need to connect and that means carriage which 9 makes WTM accessible to all Canadians, not just to 10 communities we reflect, but connecting each community 11 to every other community. 12 577 Thank you. 13 578 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, 14 Mr. Iannuzzi, for those clarifications and comments on 15 the Canadian programming component. 16 579 If you will, we will move on to the 17 world programming component of your proposal. Granted, 18 they are all part of the concept, but I think for our 19 purposes it might be a good idea to look at that 20 component specifically. 21 580 It remains that the world programming 22 which, if we take a broad stroke of your schedule, 23 consists of world cinema and world variety. Now 24 variety has a number of different aspects. But that 25 they remain the centrepiece of the nine to midnight
99
1 period. Is that correct? We have the schedule you 2 proposed on April 8th. 3 581 Perhaps then I would like to look at 4 the world cinema section which is seven days a week, 5 nine to eleven in the evening, in other words within 6 our peak time that we discussed yesterday, which makes 7 it a very important component of your proposal, one 8 which might also be called another backbone of the 9 proposal as per the Canadian programming, and you might 10 want to comment on that and its positioning. 11 582 In terms of world cinema, could you 12 describe to us what kind of films you see in this 13 section of the schedule, why you have chosen to 14 schedule world cinema through the scheduling of the 15 seven days at this particular hour, and some practical 16 questions would follow in terms of signed agreements, 17 have you a list of the proposed films? 18 583 One of the aspects of my questioning 19 is a straightforward one. You have put forward that 20 your service would provide films and/or other 21 programming which is not seen currently in the Canadian 22 broadcasting system. 23 584 If we could go a little further on 24 that and you could demonstrate to us the fact that you 25 have a selection of films in-house ready to go, or
100
1 there are films that you have in mind showing which are 2 not, in fact, available in this country in a more 3 specific way than just that general statement, but 4 specific titles, specific proposals that you. 5 585 So starting at the top, this world 6 cinema component which is nine to eleven every night of 7 the week is, I would say, perhaps I am wrong, a very 8 strong component of your schedule. 9 586 Why have you chosen to have it occupy 10 such a large, very predominant space in your schedule? 11 What will we, in fact, be seeing? Have you signed 12 agreements regarding these films from distributors 13 elsewhere so we can be assured, in fact, that that is 14 what is going to be on the screen? 15 587 MR. IANNUZZI: First of all, before I 16 turn it over to the programming section, the fact is 17 sure that within our schedule this is an anchor, but 18 the fact is that film, if we are going to tell stories 19 and the kind of stories that Canadians will come to see 20 and appreciate and in doing so will understand better 21 the cultures of their own neighbours here in Canada. 22 So by buying films in these countries of original that 23 do tell stories, and only through film can we really 24 tell these stories a hell of a lot better than say 25 documentaries for that particular purpose.
101
1 588 So that's where we have made our 2 investment because these are the best stories that have 3 yet to be told in Canada. These are some of the 300 4 films that are shown every year at Banff that never see 5 the light of day in Canada. Very few people get a 6 chance to see the quality of world programming that is 7 available. 8 589 So I am going to turn this over now 9 to our programming department and they can tell you 10 what is available, how we expect to do this, and how 11 can we make our choices. 12 590 MR. BERNSTEIN: Good morning. 13 591 I have just returned from MIPCOM in 14 France and one of the things I did at MIPCOM was I 15 toured mostly non-English, non-French countries' booths 16 and companies just to see what was out there. 17 592 One of the things I found was 18 countries like Korea, countries like Greece, are 19 begging to get their product on North American 20 television and they have catalogues -- I happen to have 21 a Turkish catalogue in front of me, and I happen to 22 have a Tai catalogue and this one, I think, is 23 Slovenian. 24 593 They have catalogues of films that 25 have not been seen in North America. Some of them are
102
1 excellent, some of them are the perfect sorts of 2 programming for what we want to do which is about 3 multiculturalism in their country, about how their 4 people feel about foreigners, about how their people 5 feel about North America and the west. There is a list 6 in each country of the world now of very good cinema. 7 594 Having said that, I want to point out 8 that this year at Banff, the Banff Festival will be 9 handing out an award for Korean cinema. There is no 10 market in this country for Korean cinema. This is 11 Korean cinema that Canadian programmers have said is 12 excellent and they would love to see, but there is no 13 place to put it on the air here. The only people who 14 will see this cinema are the people at Banff. 15 595 I have had programmers from -- I had 16 a programmer from Korea come up to me at MIP and say: 17 "You know, if you could get this on the air in North 18 America I will give it to you for free. I just want it 19 on the air in North America". 20 596 As some of our management people have 21 said 94 per cent of the programming in the world made 22 for television is not seen in North America. There is 23 no lack of programming. 24 597 The kind of movies I would love to 25 put on the air. I don't know if the Commission saw the
103
1 movie "Yi Yi" from Taiwan. One of the things that 2 struck me when I watched this movie, besides that fact 3 that it's an excellent movie, was it was about love and 4 loss of love, which a lot of movies are about, and you 5 had this incredible scene of where the young kids hang 6 out. It kind of surprised me that in Taiwan the kids' 7 favourite hang out was a bagel shop. 8 598 That's the kind of thing when we see 9 this, when we see how we are different and how we are 10 the same, that these movies will play well to a 11 Canadian audience. 12 599 Other successful movies like -- 13 forgive my Spanish -- "Y Maman Tu Tambien", which a 14 Mexican film which is highly successful. It's a coming 15 of age movie about three young people in Mexico. There 16 is a wonderful movie in the Georgian language produced 17 in Israel that is doing very well. It's called "Last 18 Wedding". These are all movies for which there is 19 really no interest on any other network, but Canadians 20 are flocking to see them when given the opportunity. 21 600 The problem for a lot of people is if 22 they don't live in Montreal, Toronto or Vancouver, 23 there is not a lot of this sort of thing getting into 24 the theatres in those places. 25 601 So we can bring these kinds of movies
104
1 and this kind of cultural exchange to the entire 2 country. 3 602 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, 4 Mr. Bernstein. 5 603 It helps, since we are talking about 6 television, to get a visual sense of where you are at. 7 I think in a business sense, I was also interested in 8 how much is ready to go, what agreements you have, et 9 cetera, but I can tell from your discussion that that's 10 where you are heading on that. 11 604 MR. IANNUZZI: Madam Commissioner, if 12 I may? 13 605 On the question of supply, we do have 14 agreements with La Fête Productions in Quebec whose 15 catalogue is very ample as far as the kind of 16 programming we are talking about, and also with UTV 17 that covers Asia and other parts of the as far as 18 programming supply. These are both signed contracts. 19 606 We have an agreement in principle to 20 work together with SBS in Australia. They have a 21 library of films that they have subtitled over the past 22 20 years, but there are many, many films in that 23 particular library that are classics and evergreens, 24 and so on, that deal in the area of the multicultural 25 aspects that reflect these world films and how they
105
1 interact with communities in Australia. Australia is 2 very similar to the Canadian make up if we actually 3 look at it. 4 607 So it becomes more difficult when you 5 have a lot more choices that you can make. If one 6 would narrow it down, then it would become a lot 7 simpler, but in reality our programming department will 8 have an unlimited number of choices to make, and that 9 is going to be difficult because there is a lot of good 10 programming and finding those that we can present 11 through Canadian eyes because it will be our Canadian 12 programming department working with knowledgeable 13 people within these multicultural communities across 14 the country. 15 608 As Kerry was saying earlier, we will 16 have -- he calls them sort of an outreach kind of 17 thing, but to me it's no different than focus groups 18 that we test certain types of films on and that's the 19 way our choices will be made. 20 609 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: But you 21 have predicted my next question and I would like to 22 continue that discussion. 23 610 Just quickly though you mentioned the 24 SBS. Just for the record, what we have on file are 25 agreements or potential agreements, dated 1996. Are
106
1 you saying that they are still in play? 2 611 MR. IANNUZZI: I was in Australia 18 3 months ago, and we are still in touch with them. It 4 gets embarrassing after a while to keep asking 5 supporters for another letter, and to keep asking your 6 partners for another commitment in writing. All they 7 do is take the stationary, change the dateline and off 8 we go. 9 612 I mean, one has to believe that there 10 is the credibility that SBS is sticking by with us in 11 this alliance. After all, we were the ones that set 12 them on the path for multicultural programming back 13 in 1978. 14 613 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 15 I appreciate that, but I am sure you appreciate why, 16 for the record, we should clarify that point. 17 614 MR. IANNUZZI: I appreciate putting 18 that back on the record, I can tell you that. 19 615 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Just in 20 terms of your important comments as we discuss world 21 programming, now looking at not only world cinema but 22 the whole approach to world programming. 23 616 You have just described -- and I 24 would like you to expand a little further for the panel 25 on how you will make the selection from this vast
107
1 unseen material which you well described. 2 617 The point I am getting at, and again 3 pursuant to the comments this morning, I hope you will 4 take my question in the spirit in which it is asked, 5 and that is your own proposal and your own objectives 6 for this service. You have repeated them again this 7 morning, and even in this discussion on the 8 multicultural aspect of Australian society, on the 9 multicultural aspect of our society and their 10 comparisons and why then you feel that, for example, 11 SBS' library would be extremely useful for your 12 purposes. 13 618 How then, again, is this world 14 programming going to be selected to reflect the 15 Canadian multicultural society which, I believe, is 16 your goal and I don't think I am imposing that goal on 17 you in so saying. I think you have said it many, many 18 times. 19 619 Could you elaborate for us again in 20 making your selections, what is driving the selections? 21 How will you be making those choices? How is this 22 world programming as a package really reflecting, 23 serving and connecting Canada's multicultural society? 24 Is that a fair question? 25 620 MR. IANNUZZI: Certainly a long one.
108
1 621 I am going to give it a try since I 2 have been at this for some time and then the 3 programming department. 4 622 First of all, the choice has to be 5 made that it has to be entertaining. I mean, we are in 6 a business and, therefore, the quality of the film and 7 the entertainment value of the film would certainly be 8 no different at that point than any other broadcasting. 9 That's where we start, where they finish. 10 623 In making our choices, we are trying 11 to see that there are stories that would show other 12 Canadians that part of another person's culture in 13 Canada, and therefore that is part of the connecting. 14 624 Second, the storylines have to be as 15 we would choose them to make sure that the portrayal 16 and the dynamics of the country of origin is placed in 17 such a way that it would not displeased, we would not 18 be entertaining at the expense of any other culture in 19 Canada. That's where we start and we bring it over. 20 625 So we make sure that if we have ample 21 choices, that rather than choose two very entertaining 22 films, that we choose the one that whilst it is 23 entertaining and the quality is there, we can appeal to 24 the wider audience of Canadians that we cannot forget 25 the fact that there are people in Canada that are
109
1 representative within that story that is being told, 2 within the background on which it's being shot, and so 3 on. 4 626 Where we can do this on a positive 5 basis, then we are enhancing the image and the 6 portrayal of our neighbours, of other people in Canada. 7 There is a positive aspect to the whole question of 8 portraying the multicultural reality in Canada. We owe 9 that to each other. 10 627 If we are going to get beyond the 11 question of tolerance, as we are today, into the point 12 where we can accept each other, that must come through 13 the screen in a very entertaining way. I mean we are 14 not running a school. This is not the Learning 15 Channel. That's something for Moses Znaimer to take 16 care of. 17 628 We are out to be very entertaining, 18 but at the same time that's how we get the attention of 19 the viewers and by entertaining them with the stories 20 that they can appreciate, and through that see 21 themselves, their neighbours or in reality the world 22 and how Canada relates to the world. Canada is the 23 world in one country. Well, television doesn't say 24 that. We know that. Whether you live in Toronto or 25 you live in Montreal or maybe even in Bellechasse there
110
1 is probably some multicultural aspect taking place 2 there as there are in the 6,000 communities that 3 StatsCan is talking about. That is who we are 4 programming to. 5 629 That's why we have to bring these 6 images of the world, very entertaining, in the privacy 7 of your own home. When we have done that, we have 8 accomplished our mandate. 9 630 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: You 10 understand the nature of my question is coming from 11 your own comments and those of others as we have looked 12 at this concept as to how the world programming meets 13 the goals of the Broadcasting Act in terms of the 14 reflection of Canada's society. 15 631 That's the reason I asked you this 16 question. It's not a new question and I think it's 17 very related to what your goal is. Some would say that 18 the world programming does not really have anything to 19 do with the Canadian multicultural society and its 20 diversity and the needs that we have. That's why I 21 asked you the question and I think you responded well. 22 632 Monsieur Demers seems to have a 23 comment. 24 633 M. DEMERS: Oui, juste deux petits 25 détails. Le premier sur l'approvisionnement.
111
1 634 Mardi prochain je quitte pour le 2 festival de Cannes. Je pourrais revenir à la fin du 3 mois avec cent films, avec cent films qui pourraient 4 être programmés à Télémonde qui viennent de toutes les 5 parties du monde. 6 635 Il y a une abondance de produits de 7 très grande qualité qui sont disponibles. On n'a pas 8 idée à quel point il y a une richesse qui est d'origine 9 de tous les pays et qui ne nous est pas accessible. 10 636 L'autre chose que j'aimerais ajouter 11 à ce M. Iannuzzi vient de dire, c'est qu'un des 12 éléments du choix qui va être très important c'est que 13 si on est en Italie ou en Pologne ou en Chine, on va 14 choisir les films disponibles susceptibles d'intéresser 15 toute la population canadienne et non pas les films 16 susceptibles d'intéresser la communauté chinoise ou 17 italienne ou grecque. 18 637 Ça c'est très important parce que si 19 on prend, par exemple, dans le sens inverse on connaît 20 tous les "Boys ou Men with a Broomstick". Ces films-là 21 peuvent être intéressants pour des communautés 22 québécoises à l'extérieur du pays, mais ils n'ont aucun 23 intérêt pour le public français ou pour le public 24 allemand ou pour le public italien. 25 638 Donc dans le canal ethnique des ces
112
1 pays-là on peut y programmer ces films. Il y a 2 d'autres films faits ici au Canada susceptibles 3 d'intéresser les publics de quelque culture que ce 4 soit. 5 639 Aussi sur le respect des communautés, 6 à ma connaissance aujourd'hui le pays qui pousse ça le 7 plus loin c'est la Chine. On ne peut pas vendre un 8 film en Chine si les Chinois perçoivent que peut-être 9 il y a des éléments dans ce film-là qui peuvent être 10 offensant pour les Allemands ou pour les Ukrainiens ou 11 pour les Italiens. 12 640 Peu importe la qualité du film s'il y 13 a des éléments susceptibles de blesser quelqu'un on 14 refuse de programmer le film. On peut s'inspirer de la 15 façon dont ils travaillent -- en tout cas moi je suis 16 très sensible à ça -- dans les critères de choix de 17 films qu'on aura à programmer à Télémonde. 18 641 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Merci, 19 monsieur Demers. 20 642 Si j'ai bien compris, juste un petit 21 point, ça veut dire quand même que la sélection du film 22 disons de la Chine ou d'autres pays, peut provenir des 23 mêmes sources que, en effet, les films choisis par les 24 services qui visent une population chinoise. C'est 25 possible qu'on aille aux mêmes sources. Est-ce que ce
113
1 n'este pas vrai? Même si on choisit pour un auditoire 2 plus large, ça reste en effet que la sélection peut 3 être faite aussi par les services qui sont destinés à 4 des publics plus ciblés, ça veut dire public qui parle 5 chinois. 6 643 M. DEMERS: Effectivement, si on 7 prend surtout l'exemple de la Chine où c'est encore 8 très nationalisé, les sources sont peu nombreuses pour 9 l'ensemble de la production qu'il y a, mais le choix 10 des films sera fait selon des critères très différents 11 de ce qu'on canal qui s'adresse à la population 12 chinoise canadienne ferait. 13 644 Si on prend l'Inde, par contre, où on 14 produit au-delà de 800 longs métrages par année, et je 15 ne me souviens pas d'en avoir vu un dans les salles de 16 cinéma ou sur nos télévisions généralistes même 17 si --d'abord les sources sont très diversifiées en Inde 18 parce qu'il y toute la production de Bombay, de Delhi, 19 de Calcuta, du sud. Les films qui seront choisis 20 seront ceux capables d'intéresser la population 21 canadienne. 22 645 Donc, à mon avis, il n'y a absolument 23 aucun conflit étant donné que la mission de Télémonde 24 est très différente de ce que peut être celle d'un 25 canal éthnique.
114
1 646 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Merci. 2 647 If you would turn to page 46 of your 3 April submission. There is a clarification I have on 4 the condition that you have suggested be substituted 5 and it's an alternative condition of licence you have 6 proposed, with respect to the limits on programming, 7 from any one region of the world. 8 648 How would this alternative impact on 9 your program schedule? This deals with: 10 "... 10 per cent of non-Canadian 11 programming aired in each 12 three-month period commencing 1 13 September, 1 December, 1 March 14 and 1 June of the broadcast year 15 may originate in any single 16 country...". 17 649 MR. IANNUZZI: Yes, yes, I am sorry. 18 I finally got it here. That was page 46. 19 650 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: That's 20 right. 21 651 MR. IANNUZZI: We would have: 22 "A maximum of 10 per cent of 23 non-Canadian programming aired 24 in each three-month period 25 commencing 1 September, 1
115
1 December, 1 March and 1 June of 2 the broadcast year may originate 3 in any single country other than 4 Great Britain and the U.S.". 5 652 And the following condition would be 6 substituted for that: 7 "A maximum of 10 per cent of 8 non-Canadian programming 9 aired in each three-month 10 period 1 September, 1 11 December, 1 March and 1 June 12 of the broadcast year may 13 originate in a single 14 country". 15 653 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: My 16 question is, having proposed an alternative condition, 17 how will that affect your program schedule? 18 654 MR. IANNUZZI: It doesn't affect our 19 program schedule in any way. 20 655 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Now that 21 we have looked at this proposal for no more than 10 per 22 cent, given that a number of countries throughout the 23 world speak English, what effect do you think this 24 proposal will have on the amount of English language 25 programming from several different countries, if you
116
1 will? 2 656 I think the point of my question was 3 raised at the previous hearing as well in terms of this 4 10 per cent of world programming. Will the effect be 5 to have, nevertheless, a considerable amount of English 6 language world programming? Obviously, with our 7 earlier discussion, you are looking for a diversity of 8 world programming -- 9 657 MR. IANNUZZI: That's right. 10 658 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: -- which 11 is a diversity of world languages I would assume. 12 659 The potential here may be for more 13 English language programming even though there is a 14 limit of 10 per cent on regions or countries. Is it 15 your sense that this allows for more English language 16 world programming than 10 per cent? 17 660 MR. IANNUZZI: No. I think that the 18 fact of the 10 per cent laid out for languages, in 19 using the country rather than the language, is that in 20 some countries, India is an example, there are programs 21 that are produced unfortunately in English but are good 22 multicultural programs and would fit our kind of 23 schedule, so this is why we had originally tried to 24 limit -- to show that we weren't out to fill our 25 schedule with English programming by trying to limit
117
1 Great Britain and the United States. Then we find 2 ourselves discriminating against two countries and I 3 understand that was one of the reasons we would have 4 changed that to being any single country. 5 661 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I follow 6 you. 7 662 MR. IANNUZZI: The intention was 8 there. 9 663 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Yes. I 10 read the transcript and I see the evolution. It is a 11 question then of understanding that new condition and I 12 understand it as written. Right on the point, what 13 does it mean in terms of how much English language 14 world programming will there be? Even with this 15 condition, what is your estimate of how much English 16 language world programming we will have on the surface 17 and, similarly, how much French language world 18 programming? Do you have a sense of that? 19 664 MR. IANNUZZI: Not as yet. We have a 20 sense for the French because the whole idea was to 21 increase the French context in the selection of world 22 programming that there are areas of countries where 23 French is part of the Francophonie and therefore we 24 would be choosing some of these programs, maybe as much 25 as 10 per cent again, to increase the French content of
118
1 spoken language on the French service and, again, 2 subtitle into English on the English line. 3 665 The English factor in the English 4 service, the mere fact that we have a high percentage 5 of Canadian content that is all produced in English, 6 for us to go into our world programming and to try and 7 increase more English programming defeats the purpose 8 that we are talking about, so that the spirit of this 9 condition of licence tries to impose on us in a way and 10 assure the Commission and other broadcasters that we 11 are not invading their territory by running out and 12 choosing as much English programming as we can in order 13 to avoid even subtitling on the English channel. 14 666 We are a multicultural service and we 15 intend to use the original productions from those 16 countries we believe reflect the peoples of the world 17 who are the people in Canada. Therefore, that is our 18 guiding line. 19 667 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 20 I appreciate you coming back to that point, that you 21 are a multicultural service. That is exactly why I am 22 asking this question, because the assumption is we are 23 looking for multilanguages as well. I believe that is 24 your goal. Again, the spirit of the questions I am 25 asking is having yourselves set out a goal of a very
119
1 exceptional multicultural service it is important that 2 all these aspects are discussed as clearly as possible. 3 668 Subtitling is key to this and that is 4 my next subject. You have touched on it already. 5 669 Just to be clear, then, all the world 6 programming would be subtitled. 7 670 MR. IANNUZZI: Correct. I would like 8 to ask Michael McHale to speak to that. Michael. 9 671 MR. McHALE: All programming, 10 including Canadian, will be subtitled in at least one 11 of the official languages. So a French language 12 Canadian production will have English subtitles and the 13 opposite for the opposite markets. All third language 14 programming will be subtitled in both languages. 15 672 But our approach to subtitling is 16 different than what you see on the air at the moment. 17 We will use colour-coded subtitling so it is easier to 18 read. You will not have white subtitles on top of a 19 white background. 20 673 We will also use the archives that 21 SBS has. One of the keys to SBS' success is that they 22 have hired -- and at this stage they are up to over 100 23 translators, all who are proficient in a local language 24 and they subtitle from scratch all of their movies. We 25 will have access to those subtitles.
120
1 674 The subtitles have been a key 2 component of SBS' success. Their numbers are quite 3 impressive and they have maintained their audience and 4 I have the numbers from their last annual report that 5 they sent to us. Their numbers are up 6.1 per cent 6 from 1998 to 1999. That was in an era when satellite 7 TV finally arrived in Australia and cable systems were 8 developed in Sydney, so SBS is very competitive with 9 SABC and maintaining market share. 10 675 The subtitling in both languages also 11 makes it accessible to everyone. No one is excluded. 12 That is part of our mandate, that we are accessible to 13 all multicultural communities in Canada. 14 676 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, 15 Mr. McHale. I just want to go over the points again 16 just to be clear. 17 677 The world subtitling English and 18 French, so film X would have English subtitles for 19 anglophone viewers and French subtitles for francophone 20 viewers which means one film has two subtitling efforts 21 made. In the budget -- I am basing myself on 22 Schedule 24 in the budget -- your subtitling budget for 23 English language I think was $300,000, French language 24 $300,000. I believe that is the world programming. 25 Are those the correct figures?
121
1 678 MR. McHALE: That is the annual 2 budget. The budget for the seven year licence period 3 is $3.15 million for both. 4 679 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Yes, I was 5 looking at the annual budget just -- I think it is -- 6 680 MR. McHALE: Yes, and we allocated it 7 50/50. It goes back to we have no way of working out 8 what is the exact amount of languages, how much will be 9 English, how much will be French. 10 681 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: It is an 11 important question. The reason for the detail is any 12 adjustments you may want to make in that over time 13 because it is such an important component of the 14 concept. 15 682 For example, if SBS are supplying you 16 with already subtitled films, would you not think that 17 there would be more English language subtitling 18 available and you would have to spend more to subtitle 19 your body of films in the French language and therefore 20 change the budget accordingly? Are you suggesting that 21 might happen over the course of the seven years? 22 683 MR. McHALE: What we will acquire 23 from SBS is the subtitles not the actual movies. They 24 have licensed the movies for use in Australia only and 25 they have created their own subtitle --
122
1 684 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So you 2 will just take the subtitling program and leave it at 3 that. 4 685 MR. McHALE: The subtitle itself and 5 insert it into ours. Correct, they subtitle in English 6 only. 7 686 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So your 8 acquisition budget, SBS, would include the subtitling 9 costs or does that turn up in the subtitling budget? 10 687 MR. McHALE: In the subtitling 11 budget. 12 688 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: You 13 referred to the kind of subtitling. I guess you called 14 it state of the art in your submission. Is that what 15 you were describing to us? 16 689 MR. McHALE: Yes. 17 690 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Are you 18 currently equipped to undertake that subtitling? 19 691 MR. IANNUZZI: I would like to speak 20 to that, if I may, because I am quite familiar with SBS 21 and my discussions with them over the years. 22 692 SBS, because it is a state-owned 23 broadcasting system, was the first to subtitle all of 24 their programming so that all taxpayers could have 25 access to the programming. To do this they decided
123
1 that it wasn't a question of buying subtitled material 2 or programs, movies already subtitled by the producer 3 in the country of origin, for the simple reason that 4 the quality of the subtitling was not there. The text 5 did not match the scenes and it was the kind of 6 subtitling that would generally frustrate the viewer. 7 693 They decided and set up a department 8 of 90 rewriters, translators and scriptwriters. The 9 arrangements they made with producers when I first met 10 them in the early eighties at MIP, they were buying 11 programming, specifically movies, without the 12 subtitling, they wanted the original master, and made 13 the arrangements with the producers to buy that 14 particular film without subtitles. They would then 15 have the masters sent to London for which they would 16 make a work print. They would have the original script 17 given to them by the producer. The work prints and the 18 translation is made in Australia. They would then 19 write the script for every scene in the movie. All of 20 the subtitling was also colour-coded, which is the 21 other frustrating thing when you watch movies from some 22 countries. It just made it impossible on certain light 23 scenes that you couldn't read the type. But with the 24 computerized system that they are using, and that is 25 why we say state of the art, the colour coding actually
124
1 makes it pleasing to read. It is usually in a gold 2 colour and it becomes lighter and darker. 3 694 If we watch Show Case, if we watch 4 CBC, some of these films are now done in the same mode. 5 This has been taking place in Canada as far as other 6 broadcasters over the past few years. That is why we 7 are saying that our arrangement and our alliance with 8 SBS is, aside from the fact that they have films within 9 their library -- assuming we wanted to take, I don't 10 know "The Life of Galileo". We think that is an 11 excellent film and there is a storyline there, there is 12 history, there is everything else. That film would be 13 available through a producer. We would end up paying 14 the producer the rights for that. A simple agreement. 15 We don't want his master; we don't want anything. We 16 would have the arrangements sent to us directly from 17 Australia and all we would pay is the Australians would 18 get a 15 per cent royalty on the price that we paid the 19 film, so that if we pay the film $5,000, we would give 20 them $750 for the key subtitling. That is the 21 arrangement. 22 695 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you 23 for that. I assume, though, that not all the 24 programming will be from SBS. 25 696 MR. IANNUZZI: No.
125
1 697 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So my 2 question really also was, considering the level of 3 subtitling that you are looking for, is the budget 4 sufficient? Secondly, are you currently 5 capital-equipped to do that yourself or how will that 6 be done? 7 698 MR. IANNUZZI: No. We are personally 8 not equipped to do that. We have arrangements with a 9 subtitling firm in Quebec and in Ottawa that we will be 10 doing subtitling there. 11 699 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 12 700 The point also that Mr. McHale raised 13 and you have raised earlier was the acceptability of 14 subtitling in terms of viewership both in English and 15 French in this country. Your demand studies, as I 16 recall, even though they are dated back a bit seem to 17 be a little unclear on how well Canadians would accept. 18 Mr. Demers just mentioned perhaps Quebecers would 19 accept more the subtitled approach. 20 701 What is your thought on how 21 acceptable the subtitling will be to audiences in this 22 country since the entire schedule, as you have said, 23 Mr. McHale, will be subtitled? 24 702 MR. McHALE: You are correct. The 25 entire third language schedule will be subtitled. We
126
1 also will never dub, because we think that is not 2 acceptable to our audiences. It is much better to have 3 the original language with subtitles. You just have to 4 look at the success in the box office of international 5 movies that are subtitled. There is an appetite for 6 that type of programming. I don't think our audience 7 will object at all. Subtitling is more acceptable 8 today than it was maybe a decade or two decades ago. 9 703 MR. IANNUZZI: The fact that the 10 other broadcasters, the mainline broadcasters, are 11 inserting these films every so often, people like 12 Showcase that run it in prime time, brings not only the 13 awareness but the acceptance to the wider audience, the 14 same people that we are going to, the difference 15 being -- I mean, we are equal as far as the subtitle, 16 it is a question of the program of the movies -- the 17 choices made are different than Showcase. 18 704 Showcase runs movies because it is 19 owned by Alliance. The fact is that they buy films in 20 packages and so on and have to pick up a certain amount 21 of these other films that have subtitles and they run 22 those in their schedule. So their choice is made 23 simply because it is inventory that they buy when they 24 buy a package of films from some European or other 25 world distributors. In our case, we are choosing
127
1 within packages, but single choices are made for this. 2 705 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: This is an 3 entire schedule, though, subtitles so again it is 4 something that you have put forward as one of the 5 unique aspects of your proposal. I think it is 6 important we understand how successful you are going to 7 be in terms of maintaining audiences with that much 8 subtitling. I only raised it because there was some 9 somewhat lower, certainly under 50 per cent if not 10 under 40 per cent in the earlier studies, as I recall, 11 that were not clearly comfortable with that. 12 706 Just one point too, if you would, 13 Mr. McHale. In the transcript of the previous hearing, 14 I think it is Volume 3, paragraph 1182, you can check 15 this later, I think there was a discussion that not all 16 the schedule be subtitled, all but 33 per cent or 17 33 per cent would be of world programming. Perhaps you 18 could double check that. You are confirming with us 19 today that the entire schedule would be subtitled. 20 707 MR. McHALE: The entire schedule will 21 be subtitled in at least on language. If the 22 international programming is in French or English then 23 there is only a need to subtitle in one, but yes all 24 programming will be subtitled, all international 25 programming.
128
1 708 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Canadian 2 and world. 3 709 MR. McHALE: Yes, because in the 4 minority language markets we will have to subtitle. 5 710 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 6 711 MR. McHALE: Going back to the 7 acceptability in numbers, I would again go back to SBS 8 and their experience. You know, a 6.1 per cent 9 increase in audience in one year is quite dramatic. 10 Awardlinks, a satellite television service in the 11 United States, is starting to broadcast a lot of 12 international programming with subtitles, again 13 acquiring the subtitles from SBS, and their numbers are 14 quite impressive as well. 15 712 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 16 I am going to go to another -- sorry. 17 713 MR. IANNUZZI: I will just finish 18 this one off because we are talking -- in the case of 19 Australia, thanks to the subtitles, the largest number 20 of viewers came from Australian-born rather than the 21 ethnic communities. 22 714 I would like Kerry to just elaborate 23 a little moment -- you used the 40 per cent factor as 24 far as the demand for -- the acceptability of 25 subtitles.
129
1 715 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I was 2 guessing back to what I had read. I don't have it 3 right here. But as I recall the figures were in 4 there -- 5 716 MR. IANNUZZI: You are correct. 6 Right. But I would like Kerry to just speak to that 7 please. 8 717 MR. JOHNSTON: You are right, that 9 was a 1966 study, gallop poll, and it rang in about 10 35 to 40 per cent. It was actually highest in Ontario, 11 second was in Quebec. We believe, although we haven't 12 gone back and done the exact study again because 13 everything else keeps growing every time we go in and 14 look at the market place, that there is a greater and 15 greater acceptance and understanding of subtitling. 16 718 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 17 719 I am going to go to the subject now 18 of what I term employment equity. It is part and 19 parcel of a discussion which I assume you agree we can 20 take forward that in fact the programming on this 21 service would be not only multicultural and diverse but 22 that those creating it would be from the multicultural 23 communities of this country. 24 720 I am sure you recall, Mr. Iannuzzi, 25 Mr. Demers, sometime ago discussions within the
130
1 international institute of communications on the whole 2 aspect of women in film making and television under the 3 rubric it matters who makes it; in other words, the 4 results on the screen will be very much influenced by 5 the diversity of the producers, the diversity of ideas, 6 the diversity of the creators brought in, commissioned 7 or in house to do the work. 8 721 In going through your application, I 9 want to understand your approach, then, to employment 10 equity, your approach to reaching out to different 11 diverse producers in this country. A bit of a 12 challenge on this one, if you will, and I will let you 13 take it forward. 14 722 In Schedule E of your June 15 submission, I found a paragraph which referenced the 16 following: 17 "WTM will build into its program 18 schedule specific times for the 19 showcasing of programs produced 20 within the minority communities. 21 It is anticipated that within a 22 reasonable period of time after 23 its start-up, WTM will be in a 24 position to co-sponsor 25 development workshops for the
131
1 talent development within these 2 minority communities across the 3 country." (As read) 4 723 I may be unfair in saying this, but I 5 did not see many other references to the use of third 6 language producers or minority language producers or 7 producers from the diverse communities of this country. 8 Are you saying in referencing development workshops 9 only that you are not prepared to work with producers 10 from the different cultural communities of this country 11 and making that a specific goal of this service. 12 724 The reason I am asking again, in 13 reference to previous comments, is that you have set a 14 goal here that this is a mainstream multicultural 15 service for this country looking at who is going to be 16 providing the Canadian-produced product in the first 17 instance. Are you telling us that there are not 18 ready-to-go producers who have the talent and the skill 19 to actually produce these programs across the country; 20 and do you have a strategy to engage them? 21 725 M. CLÉMONT: C'est juste pour 22 adresser la question. Nous sommes dans le pays, dans 23 le Canada, entrés en démarche avec différents 24 producteurs de diverses cultures. 25 726 Comme exemple, on a deux projets dans
132
1 lesquels je suis impliqué en ce moment où il n'y a pas 2 de fenêtre de discussion, mais il y en aura une fois 3 que VTM est en place. 4 727 Je travaille avec une personne qui 5 vient de l'Inde. Elle travaille sur un projet ça fait 6 deux ans. Avec elle on a essayé de vendre le projet à 7 différents réseaux de télévision dans le Canada sans 8 succès. C'est une histoire fantastique de sa culture 9 ici au Canada et de son pays d'origine en Inde. 10 728 On travaille aussi avec une 11 productrice polonaise. Même situation. Encore un 12 projet très intéressant avec la communauté polonaise 13 dans le Canada. 14 729 Alors des productrices et des 15 producteurs indépendants dans le Canada de diverses 16 cultures nous attendent, sont disponibles. Dans 17 certains cas, il y a des interventions de ces 18 producteurs qui ont été soumises ici pour notre réseau 19 de télévision. 20 730 Alors pour nous, il n'y a pas de 21 question que nous allons avoir une gamme de divers 22 producteurs, de différentes cultures dans notre pays. 23 Ça c'est sans question. C'est énoncé déjà avec nos 24 discussions avec différents producteurs dans 25 différentes régions du pays.
133
1 731 Alors juste pour une indication, à ce 2 point-ci, oui, vis-à-vis la politique des commandites 3 et les coproductions, les productions avec eux. 4 732 Peut-être que je peux passer ça à 5 Dan. 6 733 MR. IANNUZZI: Madam Commissioner, 7 the experience that we bring to the table is experience 8 that has been gained in an earlier life in my 9 broadcasting experience and others around the table. 10 734 In dealing with the ethnic 11 broadcasters as an example, each time we come up to the 12 Commission I have an opportunity of speaking with the 13 various ethnic broadcasters wherein I am saying to them 14 that we are not only complementary but the fact that 15 your services are either local or regional and there is 16 an area in which we can work together with your 17 producers in some of the coverage that they are doing, 18 that we can take certain stories, as Howard Bernstein 19 mentioned yesterday in "News Day". This is material 20 that they have covered locally and specifically for 21 that ethnic community. This is material that we can 22 repackage and represent as national stories or national 23 features. 24 735 In dealing with Intercom community 25 programs, again these associations have their "ethnic"
134
1 programs and are working with ethnic producers that are 2 covering some of their events. Again, we have this 3 connection of working with them. 4 736 The whole idea of ethnic 5 broadcasting, the independent producers there, really 6 don't have elsewhere to go. There is no ethnic 7 national network at this particular time, and when that 8 would happen it would be complementary to the 9 multicultural network. There is a sharing there of 10 material, experiences of coverage and economies of 11 scale for certain things. 12 737 So our relationship is one with the 13 ethnic broadcasters. It is an experience that I have. 14 Many of them, we gave them the opportunity. They were 15 born in the womb of Channel 47 and have gone on to do 16 things on their own. As an example, APTN, parts of 17 Telelatino and some of the other services that are 18 available. We are on a first-name basis to begin with 19 with most of these and we expect to keep that going, so 20 the Commission should not be worried about that. 21 738 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Two 22 aspects of my question and you have covered the -- yes, 23 I understand your experience in this whole area. I 24 would also propose, if I may, that in presenting a 25 project such as you have, which has set itself to be
135
1 Canada's most inclusive and most unique multicultural 2 service, that we might be looking for some very clear 3 and specific goals as regards putting the cameras, if 4 you will, the tools in the hands of multicultural 5 producers. That is the spirit of my question. 6 739 In addition to that, you are aware 7 that the Commission has been pursuing this whole area 8 of cultural diversity within the broadcasting system 9 with all the players in this country and in that sense 10 has laid out the elements of what is called a corporate 11 strategy on cultural diversity. In your case, cultural 12 diversity is the heart of what you are doing. One 13 would assume then that such a corporate strategy which 14 is quite specific as far as employment equity is 15 concerned and engaging of producers that you would have 16 such a plan in place. 17 740 For example, the plan as laid out in 18 various decisions, recent decisions, with the major 19 broadcasters tells you what the Commission would look 20 for in such a plan in terms of employment within your 21 own production group. At the table today, you have 22 representatives of who you are putting in place to 23 engage in terms of production, what you are doing in 24 terms of portrayal guidelines. Such a comprehensive 25 plan should be available.
136
1 741 Do you have such a plan and if not do 2 you intend to create one and table it with the 3 Commission? 4 742 MR. IANNUZZI: Yes. We certainly 5 know what our action plan is because it is the mainstay 6 of our application and what we expect to see as far as 7 the screen is concerned and those people involved in 8 the elements for the production or the creation of this 9 multicultural service. 10 743 I would like to ask Lon, in the area 11 of production, maybe to add something there. 12 744 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Just 13 before you do, because the production component is a 14 very important part, Schedule G of your June 15 application does list about five or six elements of an 16 employment equity strategy. In terms of employment 17 equity, would you agree to submit with us a corporate 18 strategy which would expand on those points and itemize 19 your plans over the course of the licence term to 20 really engage in an employment equity strategy and how 21 you will go about doing that? 22 --- Off microphone / Hors microphone 23 745 MR. IANNUZZI: A mission statement 24 that spells all of that out. 25 746 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you.
137
1 747 MR. IANNUZZI: We will get that to 2 the Commission within a few business days, early next 3 week. 4 748 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 5 And on the production side. 6 749 MR. APPLEBY: I just wanted to 7 address how we actually will be working with producers, 8 young producers, from culturally diverse backgrounds. 9 I want to point you to one show only, just one of many, 10 in which we were working with young producers. 11 750 At six o'clock on Wednesday evenings, 12 kicking off prime time, is a show called "Debut". 13 Essentially, what that show is is we will be taking 14 films and videos, winning films and videos from 15 post-secondary institutions across the country, 16 community colleges and universities, in film and 17 television programs, and we will be showcasing the best 18 of those. But in addition, and this is where we have 19 something that we are very excited about and we believe 20 is very distinct for our service and will be a serious 21 investment in the young production community, with 22 those winners we will be developing a movie and some of 23 those winners will be given the opportunity to develop 24 a 60-minute movie which will be seen on WTM nationally. 25 They will be given the equipment, the camera equipment
138
1 and the editing equipment, they will be paid themselves 2 to produce that movie, and they will work with our 3 programming team to develop the scripts so that those 4 movies that are actually exhibited are entertaining and 5 can be seen widely. 6 751 I can give you an example of one more 7 of why those are culturally diverse voices. If you go 8 into any university these days or any community college 9 in any film or television program, and I know this 10 because I hand out awards in these institutions, when 11 you see the winning films and the credits rolling by as 12 to who the directors were, who the crews were, I can't 13 even recognize the syllables of some of these names. 14 752 What we are looking at is we are 15 going to be working with these young producers who come 16 from culturally diverse backgrounds to be developing 17 films that are also extremely entertaining, so both the 18 voices are unique, from many different backgrounds, but 19 the actual content, the plots, the drama will be very 20 strong. 21 753 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 22 754 I just wanted to ask the programmers 23 a quick question, how the program "Canadians, eh" 24 became "Rabell"? You don't have to answer that. 25 755 MR. BERNSTEIN: No. I would like to
139
1 answer that. 2 756 This is a proposal that came in to us 3 as "Rabell". Frankly, there were some people involved 4 in our organization who thought that there might be 5 communities who might not like that name. As 6 programmers, we thought it was hip, it was interesting, 7 it was edgy and we pushed very hard to go back to the 8 original name. 9 757 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: All right, 10 then. I am going to move on to a couple of last areas, 11 two last areas, and then ask you to wrap in the 12 programming. 13 758 Again, I hope you will take this in 14 the spirit in which I ask it. In light of the carriage 15 proposals you have and the resulting revenues, you say 16 that you should be accessible to all Canadians. Does 17 this not include visually-impaired Canadians and if so 18 what is your commitment in this regard starting in year 19 one if you receive the carriage you are proposing and 20 even not? What is your proposal in this regard? 21 759 I believe at the last hearing you 22 hesitated on this matter. You said you had a board for 23 described video and you would use the SAP channel for 24 these purposes, but have you gone further in your 25 thinking on this matter?
140
1 760 MR. IANNUZZI: Yes, we have. In that 2 we start off with the fact that the subtitling in 3 reality is open captioning, so we are saying that we 4 have a tremendous amount of access there to the hearing 5 impaired with open captioning. 6 761 What you are talking about is the 7 close captioning which goes one step -- 8 762 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I am 9 talking about visually impaired. 10 763 MR. IANNUZZI: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm 11 sorry. I thought it was the hearing impaired. 12 764 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I'm sorry. 13 Described video. We will get to the close captioning. 14 765 MR. IANNUZZI: No, no. I'm sorry. 15 I'm sorry. 16 766 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Described 17 video, yes. 18 767 Do you have a more cohesive and 19 developed plan to make your programming available to 20 all Canadians, including those who are visually 21 impaired? This was discussed at the last hearing and 22 you said you had a board for described video and would 23 use the SAP but you did not have any budget set aside 24 or any greater detail on how you propose to make your 25 programming available for visually impaired Canadians.
141
1 768 Are you prepared to table such a plan 2 with us today? 3 769 MR. IANNUZZI: We would have 4 something for you by the end of the day on that 5 particular matter. Thank you. 6 770 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 7 771 Now on the closed captioning, 8 Mr. Iannuzzi, just to reconfirm your commitments, close 9 captioning of English and French language programming 10 on each of the French and English feeds by the end of 11 the licence term, that would be all programming would 12 be close captioned. Do you still maintain that 13 commitment? 14 772 MR. IANNUZZI: Yes, that is still our 15 commitment. 16 773 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Captioning 17 of at least 90 per cent of the programming which is not 18 subtitled on each of its English and French feeds by 19 the end of the licence term. 20 774 MR. IANNUZZI: Correct. 21 775 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I have 22 reached the end of my questioning. I do have a final 23 question. 24 776 You said at the beginning, to answer 25 the questions we did not ask -- the spirit of this
142
1 question is just to give you a chance to explain once 2 again from a programming point of view how your service 3 will truly be an alternative, unique and an exceptional 4 service. 5 777 In your application I note that you 6 listed 29 objectives of the Broadcasting Act. You have 7 made a very clear point that what you are after is a 8 multicultural service, so obviously certain objectives 9 stand out and you have made considerable comment on 10 those particular objectives. 11 778 Can you once again tell us in today's 12 environment, today's television environment, where 13 perhaps one could see that, a number of the programs 14 you have described and your approach to access to 15 programming from different cultures is available by 16 virtue of zapping through the system as it is by virtue 17 of world communications as they are? 18 779 Can you tell us once again why is it 19 that your program concept is unique, all inclusive and 20 of exceptional importance of fulfilling the objectives 21 of the act as you have laid them out in your proposal? 22 780 MR. IANNUZZI: First and foremost, 23 the fact is that the broadcasting system as we know it 24 today does not include or reflect the multicultural 25 reality of our country. Therefore, we see our
143
1 service -- someone used the term "the last spike" to a 2 balanced broadcasting system that would reflect one of 3 the seven largest industrialized nations in the world. 4 781 We are a country that was responsible 5 for satellite and cable distribution. We are ahead of 6 our time technologically. That is probably because we 7 gave a lot more emphasis on technological diversity 8 than we did to cultural diversity in the past decade. 9 Therefore, we see our service again, and I want to use 10 the term but I don't want to live with it, that you 11 will measure everything that I say or everything that 12 we do or that we promise to do that must be of a unique 13 standard that, you know, you have put it so high that 14 it makes it difficult to jump over. 15 782 We believe that there is room in this 16 country for a number of multicultural channels because 17 it is the environment that is being created here. The 18 Commission can go and ask industry to find all sorts of 19 programming ideas. In fact, I have seen some of the 20 material here from earlier renewals where this thing is 21 creeping in and all of a sudden there are bumpers on 22 their stations, "We're multicultural", as if they just 23 discovered the country. 24 783 Well, we haven't discovered the 25 country; we have lived the country. Multiculturalism
144
1 is a way of life. It is surprising that we had to, in 2 this country, actually bring an act out for government 3 institutions, agencies and so on that in an earlier 4 time would have reflected the multicultural reality of 5 the country. But now because of statistics we are able 6 to understand these numbers and how the country has 7 unfolded and how all of a sudden there may be cash in 8 diversity. Therefore, people within our own industry 9 are now appealing to the Commission to either leave WTM 10 as a Category 2 or better still call for new licences, 11 but by the way, Mr. CRTC, when you do, make sure that 12 it is a Category 1 with mandatory carriage. 13 784 So it is all right for them to say 14 that a service such as ours is to be relegated to a 15 Category 2, but if they were going to attempt it, 16 should you call, make sure it isn't a 2, it is at least 17 a 1 with mandatory carriage. What does that mean? It 18 means that they understand. The big boys of the 19 industry understand that if you do this thing right 20 there might be cash in diversity, otherwise they 21 wouldn't be appealing this. Because all of a sudden 22 the ethnic aspect of this has gone into a totally 23 discretionary mode and there is an opportunity here 24 that if the Commission does respond to the positive 25 aspects of what we are trying to do and give us the
145
1 opportunity on analog, whether it be on basic, which we 2 rightfully believe is the right answer, to modified 3 dual status, that we have an opportunity of being the 4 first multicultural service. 5 785 I have been there before, with the 6 first multilingual television service in the world in 7 Toronto and it became a laboratory for a lot of 8 understanding and development of programming, and it 9 trained a lot of people that today, when you are 10 looking at the credits, whether it is Citytv or CBC and 11 so on, and Global, you find a lot of people who are, 12 you know, experienced in the womb of Channel 47. 13 786 We expect to be that again. We will 14 be the first. We will be the laboratoire. These will 15 be the examples that other broadcasters can pick up. 16 We will be sharing programming with them. I have no 17 qualms about sharing a program with Global. They may 18 want a second window to run Saturday afternoon. If he 19 wants to run night and day, whatever the case may be, 20 we are open. My policy has always been open whether I 21 am working with ethnic broadcasters or with 22 conventional broadcasters. 23 787 So this is the reason why we are 24 saying give us the opportunity. I would go one step 25 further. I would make it a condition of licence that
146
1 if after three years we are not able to answer the 2 Commission, you could call us before the Commission and 3 absolutely see that if we haven't met any of the 4 conditions of licence, then I say to you unless we can 5 correct that within a short time that you call for 6 someone else to do this job. 7 788 But at that time we deserve an 8 opportunity to prove to you, to go beyond all the 9 explanations, because explaining multiculturalism is 10 certainly not easy. It is like explaining a way of 11 life. Yet we want to put these in quantities and 12 measurements and inches. It just doesn't work. This 13 is a whole experience and it comes from experience. It 14 comes from a cross-section of the people that you see 15 before you, our own ethnic backgrounds. 16 789 Although I am a fourth generation 17 Canadian, my grandparents came over in 1880, I am just 18 as much ethnic on the one hand but multicultural for 19 the most part. So are my children. Therefore, we have 20 this experience. We want to share that. We have come 21 together and we have stuck together for a number of 22 years in the hope that one day we would be sitting 23 before a panel that would understand -- we have spent a 24 lot of time to go, you know, just to explain the 25 difference between ethnocultural, broadcasting and
147
1 multicultural broadcasting. 2 790 For many, they were still locked in 3 the 1985 aspects of the Broadcasting Act. But we have 4 been working at this since 1991, after the new act came 5 in. We have lived with it, we have crochet our 6 application, and we are here before you today with all 7 our cards on the table. We have absolutely nothing to 8 hide. We have some to learn but there are things that 9 remain slightly academic until we get the chance to 10 prove this, until the chance to go out and see what 11 these independent producers can do and how we can 12 motivate them to start seeing the country in its true 13 light, not producing things that look American for 14 Americans, yet we count that as Canadian production. 15 791 That is not our park. That is 16 someone else's bailiwick. They can get the credits for 17 that and you can call upon them for how they invest 18 their money. But here, with our limitations of budgets 19 and so on and so forth, we try to be realistic, but 20 each thing will be tested. 21 792 I say to you, unless we are able to 22 prove to you within three years, not the full term of 23 licence which most people would ask you, I am saying 24 within the first three years, that we can correct that, 25 then on the fourth year I make that a condition of
148
1 licence that you can call for new applications and that 2 we would have the opportunity of course to reapply. 3 793 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 4 --- Laughter / Rires 5 794 THE CHAIRPERSON: On that note, we 6 will take a 15 minute break. Thank you very much. 7 --- Upon recessing at 1100 / Suspension à 1100 8 --- Upon resuming at 1115 / Reprise à 1115 9 795 THE CHAIRPERSON: Order, please. A 10 l'ordre, s'il vous plaît. 11 796 Commissioner Pennefather has one or 12 two points of clarification arising from the earlier 13 discussion. 14 797 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, 15 Mr. Chairman. 16 798 Indeed, could we just clarify, in the 17 Canadian programming one-third of the programming is in 18 the French language, as I understand it. 19 799 MR. IANNUZZI: Correct. 20 800 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: The 21 remaining two-thirds will be in what language? 22 801 MR. IANNUZZI: In English. 23 802 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: English 24 only. Will there be any other third language 25 programming in the Canadian programming in a language
149
1 other than English? 2 803 MR. IANNUZZI: It is not our 3 intention to produce third language programming unless 4 of course we are doing a documentary and the occasion 5 lends itself to people speaking their own language 6 within the documentary or the program and we would be 7 subtitling that portion. 8 804 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So 9 minority language producers will be producing in 10 English essentially for the service. 11 805 MR. IANNUZZI: Or French. 12 806 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Or French. 13 807 MR. IANNUZZI: Correctly. Yes. 14 808 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 15 809 On the foreign language, the world 16 programming, we did ask this but I wasn't sure I was 17 clear on your answer, how much of that programming will 18 be in English and how much will be in French? The 19 world programming. 20 810 MR. IANNUZZI: We don't have that 21 broken down because the choices that we have open to us 22 as far as world programming and the countries that do 23 have English as their language, language franca, would 24 lead us to say that we want to keep that to a minimum 25 without ignoring the products coming from those
150
1 countries that English is their language, as in the 2 case with French. 3 811 We are saying that as far as French 4 is concerned, it is something we can measure much 5 better at this particular time without having the full 6 experience of putting a schedule to bed over the first 7 year. But in the case of the French language 8 programming, we would think that we would have 9 approximately an additional six hours coming out of our 10 world programming. 11 812 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So of the 12 world programming total, are you saying six hours will 13 be in French? 14 813 MR. IANNUZZI: A minimum of six hours 15 would be French dialogue. 16 814 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: All right. 17 It is getting a little clearer. 18 815 You understand where we are coming 19 from on this one as well. The proportion of the world 20 programming that is in English is one thing; the 21 proportion of the world programming that is in French 22 is another. You are only able to tell us how much of 23 the world programming will be in French. 24 816 MR. IANNUZZI: Right. 25 817 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Six hours
151
1 minimum. 2 818 MR. IANNUZZI: Right. But I wouldn't 3 believe that the English would go beyond 12 hours a 4 week, as an example, but it is not a commitment at this 5 particular point. I am just saying that the spirit of 6 what we tried to build into some of these conditions of 7 licence are actually showing that our preference is to 8 cover as many of the countries, and that is why we have 9 even specified a minimum number of countries to be 10 covered and a minimum number of languages to have 11 within our schedule. We want these as conditions of 12 licence that, prior to closing today, we would want to 13 submit all of that to the Commission. 14 819 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, 15 Mr. Iannuzzi. Those are the follow-up questions on 16 programming. 17 820 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 18 821 Mr. Marchant, did you want to now 19 make your comments? 20 822 MR. MARCHANT: Yes, I would, 21 Mr. Chairman. 22 823 THE CHAIRPERSON: Go ahead. 23 824 MR. MARCHANT: I will be brief. 24 Thank you for the opportunity. 25 825 As I said when I raised the matter
152
1 this morning, the principles on which we approach this 2 are that it be grounded in the Broadcasting Act and 3 consistent with the Broadcasting Act; and, second, be 4 consistent with administrative law principles of 5 fairness. 6 826 The exceptional importance test is 7 set out in Public Notice 1997-33 as follows: 8 "Applications proposing new 9 English and French language 10 services that are premised on 11 carriage on basic tier or on a 12 high penetration discretionary 13 tier must justify such 14 distribution on the basis of 15 agreements with distributors or 16 on the basis of evidence 17 demonstrating the exceptional 18 importance of the proposed 19 service to the achievement of 20 the objectives of the 21 Broadcasting Act." (As read) 22 827 I am not going to address the 23 question of agreements with distributors. I won't take 24 your time with that. We think there are some problems 25 with that, but I won't take your time today with that.
153
1 828 What is meant by exceptional 2 importance? We feel a fair standard is one which is 3 defined and defined in advance. In Decision 757 -- we 4 will use that shorthand, if I may, to refer to 5 2001-757 -- exceptional importance was defined 6 retroactively or it was undefined. The majority said 7 our Canadian content levels weren't high enough. 8 829 The dissenting Commissioner prepared 9 a chart showing that WTM's Canadian content was 10 superior to many other services which had been given 11 the carriage WTM was asking for. So it appeared to us 12 that for WTM there was a different, undefined standard, 13 that WTM had to meet, or maybe that because it was 14 undefined it never could meet it. 15 830 Also in Decision 757, WTM was judged 16 retroactively as inadequate in peak time. In Building 17 on Success, the Commission said peak time applied only 18 to conventional networks. It specifically did not 19 apply to specialty services. 20 831 In addition, peak time was defined in 21 Building on Success as 7:00 to 11:00 p.m. Yet in 757, 22 and I refer to paragraphs 22, 23 and 26, WTM was found 23 wanting against a peak time standard and against an 24 even higher standard than Global, CTV and TVA, 8:00 25 to 11:00.
154
1 832 In its submission of April 8, WTM 2 proposes to meet the standard set in building on 3 success for conventional networks even though it is not 4 a conventional network: a minimum of three hours 5 priority programs as defined in Building on Success, in 6 peak time as defined in Building on Success. 7 833 Let me turn to defining exceptional 8 importance as meaning unique. It was pointed out that 9 WTM had described itself as unique in its submission. 10 I haven't done a search but this is an adjective which 11 I am confident is used by almost every applicant which 12 appears before you, but not every applicant or licensee 13 is summoned to meet that high, possibly moveable bar as 14 a standard. 15 834 I think it is important to note the 16 two specific contexts in which WTM describes itself as 17 unique in its April 8 submission. It does so twice in 18 relation to two Broadcasting Act objectives other than 19 3(1)(d)(iii). 20 835 On page 12, the objective which is 21 summarized as "broadcasting system primarily in the 22 English and French languages, the first bullet says: 23 "A unique program package which 24 no one else provides subtitled 25 in both official languages,
155
1 complementary to other existing 2 services." (As read) 3 836 The second reference comes at page 41 4 to page 42 under the heading "Foreign Programming". 5 That section begins by reciting paragraph 3(1)(i) of 6 the Broadcasting Act, that provided by the Canadian 7 broadcasting system should: 8 "(1) be varied and 9 comprehensive, providing a 10 balance of information, 11 enlightenment and entertainment 12 for men, women and children of 13 all ages, interests and tastes; 14 (2) be drawn from local, 15 regional, national and 16 international sources;" 17 (As read) 18 837 I will skip to (4): 19 "provide a reasonable 20 opportunity for the public to be 21 exposed to the expression of 22 differing views on matters of 23 public concern." (As read) 24 838 The recitation of that section is 25 followed by the following sentence:
156
1 "WTM's world programming is 2 unique. In the English language 3 broadcasting system in Canada, 4 international programming means 5 overwhelmingly American 6 programming, which also 7 dominates prime time. 8 Foreign programming on French 9 language services includes but 10 is less dominated by American 11 series and films. WTM's 12 programming will be truly 13 international, drawn from many 14 countries." (As read) 15 839 Mr. Chairman, WTM is unique in the 16 sense that it is differentiated from other services. 17 Even the majority in Decision 757 concluded on page 1 18 that, and I am putting the word WTM in instead of the 19 indefinite article, the WTM service would complement 20 existing mainstream, multilingual and third language 21 services. 22 840 There are also important elements of 23 the WTM service which are unique. But WTM did not 24 propose that exceptional importance be defined as 25 "unique". No service, not WTM, not CBC Newsworld, not
157
1 Bravo!, not TSN, not arTV, not APTN, not the Weather 2 Channel, not MuchMusic can be totally unique. If any 3 applicant or licensee depended on being completely 4 unique it would never get a licence or never get 5 appropriate carriage. 6 841 If unwavering uniqueness is a 7 standard WTM must meet, it is a standard it cannot 8 meet, it is a standard it should not be asked to meet, 9 because the extreme danger in the standard of 10 uniqueness is that it also becomes a unique standard, a 11 standard that only WTM is summoned to reach. 12 842 We believe that a standard which 13 applies only to one applicant or licensee would be, if 14 I may use the language of the jurisprudence in this 15 area, a patently unreasonable standard. There is a way 16 out of this dilemma I submit. It is based on the 17 Broadcasting Act, it is based on fundamental principles 18 of fairness, and it gives the Commission a fair 19 latitude for inquiry and for decision. That standard 20 we submit is twofold. 21 843 First, it is all the relevant 22 objectives of the act, each given significant weight in 23 accordance with parliament's intent. Second, WTM is 24 compared to actual services which have actual carriage 25 which make actual contributions to some objectives and
158
1 not others. The comparative approach is a patently 2 reasonable approach. It is the approach which best 3 tracks the Commission's actual decision so they are 4 comparable from decision to decision. 5 844 As set out in our April 8 submission, 6 WTM will make a contribution to 29 objectives of the 7 act. It asks to be compared, on a fair basis, with a 8 contribution to the act of comparable services. If WTM 9 has Canadian content levels comparable to Bravo! or 10 arTV, WTM should be treated as comparable and 11 considered for similar carriage. If WTM projects to 12 mainstream audiences, central characteristics of 13 Canadian society, as defined by parliament, like APTN, 14 it should be treated as comparable and considered for 15 similar carriage. 16 845 If WTM reflects and connections the 17 multicultural communities of Canada as well or better 18 than CBC Newsworld or TVA outside Quebec, it should be 19 treated as comparable and considered for similar 20 carriage. 21 846 Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, there is 22 one corollary point that I think we need to raise and I 23 again refer to section 17 of the Broadcasting Act. The 24 Commission has the authority to determine questions of 25 fact or law in relation to any matter within its
159
1 jurisdiction. A key premise, a key stated premise of 2 the exceptional importance test, is that there is a 3 shortage of analog capacity. 4 847 There are two points we believe are 5 critical. First, for the purposes of the Broadcasting 6 Act, analog capacity must mean total capacity. It 7 cannot mean vacant capacity. Total capacity is the 8 only concept consistent with paragraph 3(1)(t) of the 9 act which says distributional undertakings: 10 "(1) should give priority to the 11 carriage of Canadian programming 12 services; and 13 (2) should provide efficient 14 delivery of programming at 15 affordable rates, using the most 16 effective technologies available 17 at reasonable cost." (As read) 18 848 Total capacity is the only concept 19 consistent with the definition of available capacity in 20 the distribution regulations which basically sets out, 21 as you know, a core set of channels and then looks 22 beyond that at what channels are available. 23 849 Promoting digital carriage. 24 Technological diversity does come within the purview of 25 the Commission under subsection 5(2), but cultural
160
1 diversity, multicultural diversity, linguistic duality 2 are in section 3. The Commission has been charged by 3 parliament with giving priority to section 3 over 4 section 5. 5 850 Finally, Mr. Chairman, there is an 6 important question of fact. We believe the Commission 7 should reconsider the cable industry representation if 8 there is a shortage of analog capacity. Between the 9 last WTM hearing, when the CCTA proclaimed a shortage 10 of analog capacity, and this hearing, there has been a 11 large increase in analog capacity. There is a simple 12 reason, we believe, for that. Most of the coaxial 13 cable has a 1 gigahertz capacity and it is a matter of 14 lighting up additional capacity which many systems have 15 done. 16 851 In our replies to interventions, 17 because this material was not available to us on 18 April 8, we only got it later, we point out that the 19 number of systems with more than 61 channels went from, 20 if my memory serves me and I'm sorry I don't have it in 21 front of me, a little over 80 per cent to 99 per cent. 22 The number with more than 71 channels analog went from 23 56 or 57 per cent to over 90 per cent just in the few 24 months between our last hearing and this one. They 25 have not been harvesting analog channels to make room
161
1 for digital. They have not come to you and said, 2 "Please do not licence services in Vancouver, 3 multilingual, or in southern Ontario, two services, 4 because we can't accommodate them on analog capacity." 5 852 So finally, in conclusion, 6 Mr. Chairman, we believe there is an important question 7 of fact in the context of total capacity, which we 8 believe is the relevant standard under the Broadcasting 9 Act. 10 853 I thank you Commissioners, for your 11 time. 12 854 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, 13 Mr. Marchant. 14 855 Counsel, have you any comment? 15 856 MR. HOWARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 16 I have no comments. 17 857 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 18 858 Mr. Marchant, I have just one or two 19 questions arising from what you said. 20 859 I take one of your points to be that 21 in applying the exceptional importance standard of 22 1997-33, that uniqueness is too hard a test and that 23 that should not be the test of exceptional importance. 24 Is that correct? 25 860 MR. MARCHANT: Yes. Although I think
162
1 that where there are unique elements to a licence or an 2 application, it can contribute to that. 3 861 THE CHAIRPERSON: Right. Okay. I 4 think I understand your point. 5 862 As you know, the test for licensing 6 of the Commission is implementation of the objectives 7 of the Broadcasting Act, generally speaking, as you 8 have said. In 1997-33, the Commission, in respect of 9 carriage as distinct from licensing, and in particular 10 in respect to analog carriage or high penetration, 11 whether basic or high penetration discretionary, set up 12 the test of exceptional importance. 13 863 As I understand this proceeding, this 14 is what you are trying to establish, that in fact your 15 service, for the reasons we have discussed and will be 16 discussing, meets that test and therefore should 17 qualify for that carriage. Is that a fair summary? 18 864 MR. MARCHANT: Yes. But I would like 19 to say that it can only be done if the exceptional 20 importance test can in fact be grounded in the 21 Broadcasting Act. So I don't think it can be kind of 22 invited outside the act. Some of our opposing 23 intervenors, it seems to me, take the latter approach. 24 They simply see it as a standalone test. It has to be 25 one which can be grounded in, elaborated with reference
163
1 to, the Broadcasting Act and specifically section 3 or 2 subsection 3(1). 3 865 THE CHAIRPERSON: I couldn't agree 4 with you more since it says, "the exceptional 5 importance of the proposed service to the achievement 6 of the objectives of the Broadcasting Act." So I think 7 we are in agreement on those points. If that was a 8 problem, then I think we have cleared it hopefully 9 away. 10 866 I would now ask Commissioner 11 Pennefather to continue. 12 867 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, 13 Mr. Chairman. 14 868 We will move on to questions on 15 distribution. 16 869 My task right now is quite 17 straightforward. It is one of clarification, in other 18 words, questions on the distribution options just by 19 making sure that we understand the options as you have 20 presented them, what is on the table, what is not, and 21 how you understand those objectives. 22 870 As per your submission April 8, I 23 have two sections. The first section is Options for 24 Distribution in Language of the Majority; the, second, 25 Options for Distribution and Language of the Minority.
164
1 Okay. 2 871 MR. IANNUZZI: I would like to ask 3 Ken Marchant to start that off because there are some 4 legal aspects to this as well, and how we want to bring 5 this down. 6 872 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Sure. 7 873 MR. IANNUZZI: Ken. 8 874 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: If I could 9 ask the question -- 10 875 MR. MARCHANT: I will answer the 11 question. 12 876 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: All right. 13 I followed actually the breakdown you have in your 14 submission, so I thought that was a clear approach. 15 But again, what we are doing here in this section is 16 just understanding the options you have proposed, 17 making sure we agree on what those options are. I have 18 some questions about that. 19 877 The first, if we look -- again, I am 20 referring to the executive summary, page i, where you 21 have listed those options in paragraphs 3 and 4, so 22 that is the starting point. 23 878 The Commission's definition of 24 modified dual status for specialty services is, and I 25 quote:
165
1 "The service is distributed on a 2 discretionary basis unless both 3 the service and the BDU agree to 4 basic carriage." (As read) 5 879 In the April submission, in fact 6 paragraph 3(c), you present one of your distribution 7 options in the following way: modified dual status on 8 the highest penetration tier as proposed in the WTM 9 application or in accordance with Decision 2000-386, 10 which is the Télé des Arts decision. 11 880 My first question: are you 12 presenting here in this (c) two entirely different 13 options or do you consider them interchangeable? In 14 other words, is the modified dual status on the highest 15 penetration tier to you the same as Decision 2000-386? 16 881 MR. MARCHANT: I think they are not 17 exactly the same. I think I should answer this 18 question by referring back to the previous hearing 19 which accounts for why it is here. 20 882 The application on the basis of which 21 decision -- the filed application for Decision 757 22 asked for a highest penetration tier in majority 23 language markets. At the hearing, there was discussion 24 about this and there was some encouragement to look at 25 other options. The question of the arTV decision was
166
1 raised and in the concluding remarks, using the Télé 2 des Arts decision as a regulatory model for majority 3 language markets was offered by WTM. I think we used 4 the figure -- a minimum tier of 60 per cent coverage is 5 what we used, so I say the spirit of the carriage is 6 modified dual status on a high penetration tier. 7 883 I would also note there is that 8 language in the exceptional importance test paragraph. 9 There is a little bit of play, if you will, between 10 those two. The central concept I think is the same. 11 884 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Let's be 12 sure that we understand the two points. On the Télé 13 des Arts model, let's just go through that model to be 14 sure that we understand the same thing. 15 885 In Decision 2000-386, Télé des Arts, 16 the decision on distribution, the result of the 17 decision is, and I think this was discussed at length 18 at the previous hearing, that Télé des Arts is not able 19 to negotiate with the distributor to be placed on 20 basic. Furthermore, that carriage on the highest 21 penetration tier would be subject to the extent of 22 available channels as defined in the regulations. 23 886 Is that your understanding of the 24 Télé des Arts decision? In other words, as was 25 discussed with you at the June hearing, the Télé des
167
1 Arts model, the result would be you would not be able 2 to be carried on basic in the market of the majority. 3 Do you agree that that is the model of 2000-386? 4 887 MR. MARCHANT: Commissioner 5 Pennefather, I am wondering if I might be of assistance 6 both to the WTM and to you, if I could just reserve 7 that question and check and get back to you. Might I 8 do it that way? 9 888 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: That's 10 fine. So I will just leave the discussion of the Télé 11 des Arts model because obviously we have to be clear on 12 what your understanding of the model is. 13 889 MR. MARCHANT: I didn't meant to 14 unduly -- I would like to co-operate in pursuing the 15 lines of questions you wish to -- perhaps if we were to 16 say this, because it is a very critical point. The 17 worst case scenario for WTM, consistent with viability, 18 is carriage on the highest penetration tier in majority 19 language markets. I think we should perhaps work on 20 that assumption that anything that significantly 21 compromises that significantly compromises viability. 22 890 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Just to be 23 clear, and you may want to get back on this point, the 24 Télé des Arts model as I have just gone through it with 25 you and as it reads in Decision 2000-386, the result of
168
1 using that same model is you would not be carried in 2 the majority market on basic. There is that model. 3 891 Note that in paragraph (c) you said, 4 "that or modified dual status on a highest penetration 5 tier", which is a different option then. Do you agree? 6 So in that paragraph you have two different options, in 7 paragraph (c). 8 892 MR. MARCHANT: Yes, I would agree 9 that they are different. 10 893 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Okay. It 11 is just so that we are clear on what you are saying 12 here. 13 894 On the matter of the modified dual 14 status on the highest penetration tier, you did table 15 an option at the last hearing, and you just mentioned 16 it, for 60 per cent or more penetration. Is that 17 option still on the table? 18 895 MR. IANNUZZI: Again, we were 19 committed to that at that time, trying to rather than 20 raise the standard lower the standard in order to get 21 at least modified dual status and satisfy the cable 22 industry as far as the penetration level. But as we 23 look at it today, we would think that we would want the 24 absolute highest penetration that would be somewhere 25 closer to the 75 per cent level rather than the 60.
169
1 896 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Once 2 again, let's be clear. You have just tabled I think 3 another option. We had better go back to that. 4 897 The revised list of options that you 5 have here in the April 8 submission, are those the 6 options you wish us to consider? Have you dropped the 7 options which were discussed at the hearing in June, 8 inclusive of the 60 per cent tier? We will get to your 9 last point in a moment. 10 898 MR. MARCHANT: We will provide a sort 11 of final clarification with you, if you will, but 12 consistent with the order in council asking for an 13 assessment of options, which we believe should be 14 qualified as consistent with viability, yes a clear 15 option is not being carried on basic, if that is the 16 spirit of your point about ATR, but being carried 17 instead on a high or the highest penetration 18 discretionary tier. Yes, that is a clear option and it 19 has clear implications not only for WTM but, for 20 example, for the cable industry that we later 21 discussed. 22 899 So if it is a matter of clarifying 23 these options, I'm sorry, that is one of the purposes 24 of this exchange I would believe -- 25 900 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: That's
170
1 right. 2 901 MR. MARCHANT: -- yes, not being 3 carried on basic but being carried on the highest or a 4 very high penetration tier is an option, yes. 5 902 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 6 903 In your amendments again, if we look 7 at 3(b) in that list, another option you have listed 8 is: dual status as proposed by the dissenting 9 Commissioner in Decision 2000-393. In saying that, are 10 you referring to Decision 393 where WTM had applied for 11 approval only on condition of dual status distribution? 12 Is that your meaning there? 13 904 MR. MARCHANT: Yes. 14 905 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 15 906 In this case, neither the decision 16 nor the additional information you have submitted 17 indicates your proposed distribution plans for MDS and 18 DTH under this option. Can you provide those to us? 19 907 MR. MARCHANT: DTH would be included. 20 MDS is something I guess we are prepared to have a 21 discussion about. 22 908 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So you 23 will get back and provide us with what your option is 24 in terms of MDS if we take this route of 2000-393? 25 909 MR. MARCHANT: Yes.
171
1 910 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: You have 2 not also specified any proposed distribution 3 obligations for Class 3s in your filed amendments. Are 4 the Class 3 obligations similar to your original 5 application whereby in all of your distribution options 6 in the language of the majority, carriage of your 7 service would be at the discretion of the Class 3 8 distributor? 9 911 MR. MARCHANT: Yes. 10 912 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: If we look 11 now at the 3(a) on your list, one of the options you 12 have proposed, when offered in the language of the 13 majority, is the same basic carriage as the Commission 14 has granted APTN in Decision 199-42 and TVA in Decision 15 98-488. To achieve this same distribution status, is 16 it your expectation that if the Commission were to 17 approve this option that the Commission would issue a 18 mandatory distribution order as provided for in 19 section 9(1)(h) of the act? 20 913 MR. MARCHANT: Yes. 21 914 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: In so 22 saying then, this would require all Class 1 and Class 2 23 distribution undertakings, including MDS and DTH, to 24 carry your service. This broad distribution option 25 would grant WTM mandatory carriage on systems
172
1 representing a vast majority of Canadian subscribers. 2 What reasons do you have for requesting that the 3 Commission take such extraordinary measures to ensure 4 mandatory distribution of WTM and how does WTM in 5 responding, could you tell us how you then compare to 6 APTN/TVA? 7 915 MR. MARCHANT: Let's take a brief 8 step back here. 9 916 The power to order carriage under 10 section 9(1)(h) is a new power given to the Commission 11 by the 1991 Broadcasting Act. It was part of a package 12 of amendments that parliament proposed. I would submit 13 that it is a reasonable interpretation that in changing 14 the objectives of the broadcasting policy and 15 refashioning them to the extent that parliament did, 16 and in particular the emphasis it gave to new 17 objectives, in particular to ones with the words 18 "multicultural" associated with them, that there are 19 three such objectives where that term is used. The 20 only other concept which is mentioned more frequently 21 in subsection 3(1) is linguistic duality. 22 917 I guess it is our belief that because 23 WTM is a service which reflects a central 24 characteristic of our country in such a substantial 25 way, in much the same way that the Aboriginal Peoples
173
1 Television Network expresses a very central 2 characteristic of our country in much the same way that 3 national carriage for the French language commercial 4 network, making that available to all francophones and 5 francophiles across the country, reflects a central 6 characteristic that WTM is a candidate for similar 7 treatment. I guess that is the short answer to it. 8 918 We have provided, in addition, an 9 extensive range -- and we don't just mean this as a 10 laundry list. I mean, we gave a lot of time and 11 thought to that. 12 919 Dan Iannuzzi is the pioneer in this 13 field in fashioning this application and does so as a 14 committed Canadian. So when we list the 29 objectives 15 of the Broadcasting Act that we are making a 16 contribution to, I appreciate that some are more 17 important than others but it does matter to us that 18 this is a service in both of Canada's official 19 languages, that we are catering to both groups. We are 20 trying to do it in a sensitive way, as Rock Demers 21 outlined this morning, because we know there is another 22 objective there that says even though we are a single 23 service, even within that single service we are trying 24 to respect the important differences between our 25 official language communities.
174
1 920 So the second part of the answer, 2 Commissioner Pennefather, is that WTM believes it makes 3 a very substantial contribution to the objectives of 4 the act and particularly to the new objectives to the 5 act that we believe are the reason parliament gave you 6 that power in section 9(1)(h). 7 921 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Just on 8 this point if you would, to expand the discussion just 9 a bit more, on page 11 of the April submission you say 10 that WTM is a specialty service and its importance 11 should be judged in relation to other specialty 12 services. In that same section you say what appears to 13 be a contradictory thing saying that WTM should be 14 licensed for carriage on a basis similar to services 15 which serve similarly broad spectrum audiences. 16 922 Neither TVA nor APTN are specialty 17 services. You are applying, you have a specialty 18 licence, your nature of service is specialty. In this 19 option you are seeking mandatory distribution rights 20 which are superior to all other specialty services and 21 equivalent to APTN/TVA, even though they are not 22 specialty services. Could you help us understand how 23 we should accept this distribution office in what 24 appears to be a situation of contradictory statements 25 here?
175
1 923 MR. MARCHANT: I am very pleased to 2 get that question. That is one we have wrestled with 3 and I have wrestled with. You know, I have done a lot 4 of key word searches trying to get a clear answer to 5 that. 6 924 Specialty, as far as I can tell, is a 7 regulatory category whose precise contact and criteria 8 are ones I am not able to establish, so when a service 9 like APTN is licensed let me say I, particularly as 10 somebody who has worked a lot in the aboriginal field, 11 so welcome that decision, but APTN is a service that 12 looks a lot like a specialty in the ordinary sense of 13 that word. The kind of programming that it is 14 presenting is of -- you know, it has got a particular 15 theme, as it well should given its mandate. 16 925 I think yesterday Mr. Iannuzzi 17 mentioned that WTM's programming, being different and 18 unique and reflective of the multicultural character of 19 our country, is also one of the important elements. 20 926 What led APTN, although it was 21 offering a specialty category of programming theme, to 22 be considered and then licensed under 9(1)(h) was, as I 23 read that decision, or the critical thing was, that it 24 was directed to mainstream audiences. It was going to 25 bring the aboriginal people's perspective and
176
1 aboriginal theme programming and make it available on 2 every television screen in Canada that it could be 3 provided on. 4 927 A second rationale, an important one, 5 again directly relating to objectives of the 6 Broadcasting Act, was to provide the necessary 7 resources to ensure carriage to generate the revenue 8 stream that they needed. Now, there is a specific 9 provision, as you know, in the act that as resources 10 become available it is important to get aboriginal 11 program services. 12 928 There is a more general one that says 13 as resources become available services should be 14 provided across Canada in both Canada's official 15 languages. We believe that supports, in conjunction 16 with the other objectives of the act, the service that 17 WTM is offering. 18 929 So the word specialty, we offer a 19 specialty in the sense of a particular approach and a 20 particular kind of programming, but like APTN, we reach 21 out to all Canadians, to the mainstream audience. Like 22 APTN and like arTV, this service needs adequate 23 resources which will come substantially from 24 subscription revenues. 25 930 It will also be advertiser-supported,
177
1 which we welcome as a very important discipline because 2 advertisers support programs that people are watching. 3 But for those two reasons, mainstream audience and 4 adequate resources, all understood in relation to the 5 objectives of the Broadcasting Act, we believe that WTM 6 is a candidate for 9(1)(h). 7 931 The word specialty we think is a 8 flexible term and I think it is more a question of the 9 regulatory choice that you ultimately will make about 10 carriage. 11 932 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 12 933 Let's move now to the section of 13 paragraph 4 in your executive summary, the section on 14 language of the minority again to clarify the options 15 you have tabled. 16 934 The first question. In your original 17 application and confirmed at the last hearing, you 18 stated that where WTM is offered in language of the 19 minority that you were seeking digital carriage on 20 cable. In the additional information, that is, in the 21 April 8 submission, it appears you have changed this 22 request to Category 1 digital where analog not 23 available. 24 935 First of all, have you dropped the 25 initial option for minority market carriage; and,
178
1 secondly, can you explain what Category 1 digital where 2 analog capacity not available means? 3 936 MR. MARCHANT: Let me first say that 4 the spirit of these options, as with the previous 5 discussion, was to try to address the challenge of the 6 order in council to set out options. 7 937 With respect to Category 1 digital 8 where analog capacity is not available -- and I 9 apologize for the fact that there is a misprint there, 10 it seems to be "analogy"; oh, it got corrected, I'm 11 sorry; in my copy it is not -- I think this is a 12 commons sense matter, that if there is analog capacity 13 available for that, and I think we mean that in the 14 discretion of the cable or DTH distributor, we might 15 not put this service on. Why keep it off analog when 16 there is capacity available? The concept of Category 1 17 digital is to make sure it is carried because it is an 18 important service. 19 938 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So when 20 you state Category 1 digital, you are asking then for 21 the same access rights for WTM in the language of the 22 minority as Category 1 digital services have been 23 given? 24 939 MR. MARCHANT: Yes. 25 940 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Back
179
1 again, just so I am sure I understand, to the proposals 2 and Category 1 digital where analog capacity is not 3 available, just a couple of scenarios so that we can 4 see if we understood you. 5 941 If a particular system's channels 6 were fully occupied on analog, no matter what services 7 those channels contained, would WTM accept mandatory 8 digital carriage? In its minority, yes. 9 942 MR. MARCHANT: In minority markets, 10 yes. 11 943 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Do you 12 mean that in the absence of available channels as 13 defined in the regulations you will accept mandatory 14 digital carriage? Is that what you mean in this 15 proposal? 16 944 MR. MARCHANT: Yes. As defined in 17 the regulations, yes, but only minority. 18 945 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Minority 19 again. That is why we have separated the sections, to 20 be clear. 21 946 MR. MARCHANT: Yes. Yes, yes, yes. 22 947 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Again, 23 your amendments do not contain a specific DTH/MDS 24 distribution requests for WTM and language of the 25 minority. Are you requesting mandatory carriage on DTH
180
1 and MDS in the language of the minority? 2 948 MR. MARCHANT: On DTH, yes. On MDS, 3 we are going to give you a clarification later today. 4 949 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Okay. 5 950 In your original proposal, again in 6 the language of the minority you stated that you were 7 requesting digital carriage on cable, DTH and MDS in 8 the most favourable French language package or tier in 9 an anglophone market and in the most favourable English 10 language package or tier in a francophone market. Your 11 latest submission did not contain a stipulation. Have 12 you dropped this request which specifies placement 13 within packages or digital tiers? 14 951 MR. MARCHANT: No. 15 952 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So your 16 request remains? 17 953 MR. MARCHANT: That request stands, 18 yes. 19 954 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: In a 20 letter in response to interventions dated May 1, 2002, 21 again discussing distribution language of the minority 22 you used the term "mandatory discretionary carriage in 23 minority language markets". Could you just clarify for 24 us if that is the same as what we have just discussed 25 or another option that you have put on the table?
181
1 955 MR. MARCHANT: I think it is the same 2 and I am sorry that I don't know which -- we wrote a 3 lot of letters that day. We had a total of three 4 business days to reply to interventions. I think what 5 we filed -- anyway, we had a very short time. 6 956 Let me say this. In our submission 7 we actually set out two options, both of which are 8 consistent with mandatory discretionary. You know, one 9 is Category 1 digital where analog not available and 10 the other is modified dual status in some version of 11 the Télé des Arts approach. We identified both of 12 those in our submission and I think in our replies to 13 interventions we had both concepts in mind. 14 957 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: For the 15 minority language? 16 958 MR. MARCHANT: For minority language 17 markets, yes. There are some pricing issues that at 18 some point we might want to get to because we have 19 given some thought to them with respect to minority 20 language markets. 21 959 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I am sure 22 we will get to that. My colleague will continue with 23 some questioning but, again, if we look at what was in 24 the original proposal and what is here, certainly we 25 see what is in the submission here as your proposed
182
1 options and in the course of our discussion you have 2 retabled or not options that were discussed in the 3 previous hearing and in your original application and 4 if that is not clear could you get back to us on that 5 point? It wasn't clear to me which of the original 6 proposals remain on the table and which do not. 7 960 MR. MARCHANT: Yes, we will get back 8 to you although I -- yes, we will get back to you. 9 961 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 10 962 Those are my questions, Mr. Chairman. 11 963 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 12 964 Commissioner McKendry. 13 965 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you, 14 Mr. Chair. 15 966 I have a couple of questions for you 16 to follow on Commissioner Pennefather's questions 17 because we want to make sure we understand the 18 distribution aspects of your application. We would 19 like to clarify those with you. Then I will have some 20 questions for you on the financial aspects of your 21 proposal, particularly the rate, the wholesale rate 22 that you are proposing. 23 967 Have you had any discussions with the 24 cable distributors about distribution of your service? 25 968 MR. IANNUZZI: No. My experience has
183
1 been over the last decade that each time we have 2 approached the cable industry trying to meet with what 3 they call new services committees, these are ad hoc 4 committees and they never seem to be in place at the 5 time the new service, at least in our case, when you 6 are trying to meet and discuss the matters with them. 7 969 I have discussed with the president 8 of the CCTA, on a couple of occasions, what our plans 9 were, what our service was, to see if we couldn't come 10 to a meeting of the minds and get off their mindset 11 what our service was. 12 970 We have written to every cable 13 operator, and I have done this probably four times to 14 be exact, and maybe it is actually five times, in our 15 recent history, the latest one being the last time we 16 filed our application we wrote every cable operator in 17 the country and, believe it or not, we did not get one 18 reply. 19 971 In checking back with these people 20 they say, "Our association speaks for us on that 21 particular matter". So in my earlier life of WTM, I 22 have actually travelled this country. I have been from 23 Fundy Cable all the way out to British Columbia. I 24 have spoken to just about every, I will call them, 25 medium and large cable operators and I have never had
184
1 the satisfaction. 2 972 We have appeared at a CCTA 3 convention, not this year but certainly the one a year 4 ago, and we had a booth there trying to get our -- paid 5 our $5,000 fee for that, our membership and everything 6 else, trying to get close enough to the cable industry 7 to let them know who we are, what we are and that we 8 weren't just another ethnic service competing with one 9 or two of the country's major cable operators who are, 10 in essence, themselves in the area of ethnic 11 broadcasting. We have gone way out to let them know 12 that we are a multicultural service. 13 973 I attended this convention, was in 14 the booth with my daughter. We spoke to some of the 15 cable operator and we were able to -- once we got the 16 chance to explain this to a few operators in Alberta, 17 the Westman in Manitoba, a couple of small operators in 18 the maritimes, but that was about it. I mean, they 19 were nice people who love to talk about their town and 20 what they are doing and the odd ethnic program that 21 they have on their community channel, but that is all 22 we ever got out of them. There has never been a 23 commitment for carriage in any way. So our 24 relationship with cable and in the case of a digital 2 25 carriage is absolutely ludicrous. It is an
185
1 impossibility. I am talking from someone who is on the 2 outside looking in with his face up against the glass 3 trying to get some reasonable recognition. 4 974 Yet we look at the situation of a 5 number of the larger companies and people who have a 6 lot more money than I will ever have, who have gone and 7 taken up digital 2 licences and still to this day have 8 not had cable carriage. Their discussions, from what I 9 understand, is all a question of negotiations. It is 10 not so much of carriage, it is a question of ownership, 11 it is a question of supply program, all of these 12 things, that would make it impossible for the future, 13 for the future of program providers. That is what we 14 are, we are program providers, but we need access in 15 order to have the exhibition of our productions or of 16 our creativity. 17 975 But if we have to stand in line -- 18 and I know that as a personal situation when Channel 47 19 was first licensed, the pressure that was put on the 20 Commission at that time. We appealed in the same way. 21 That was the first ethnic or multilingual third 22 language broadcasting system in the world. Yet at the 23 end, with the opposition that was put on by the cable 24 industry, the Commission then buckled down and made it 25 so that here we were with one of the high-powered
186
1 transmitters on the CN Tower, as large as that of the 2 CBC, we were limited to greater metropolitan area on 3 basic service yet under the act we were entitled to a 4 yard and a half, not just the yard. 5 976 It took seven years and four public 6 hearings before the CRTC corrected that deficiency and 7 gave the regulatory support Channel 47 required, but it 8 took six years, and only then did we gain 441,000 extra 9 basic services in and around Toronto and the Niagara 10 Peninsula. That was worth $1 million extra dollars in 11 the following year in national advertising, which means 12 that Channel 47 in its first years had been deprived 13 approximately of $5 million worth of advertising. Why? 14 To satisfy the cable industry and to satisfy the fact 15 that to move CBS from Channel 4 to Channel 15 where it 16 still sits today. 17 977 That was at the same time that 18 simultaneous substitution came in. The same people who 19 opposed it then, like the ones that are opposing today, 20 were the beneficiaries of the simultaneous substitution 21 so that when we went as Channel 47 on to Channel 4 and 22 moved the Americans up, that gave the Global of the 23 day, the Citytv, and all of those a chance to get out 24 there and make hey of another regulation that the CRTC 25 brought in on the question of simultaneous
187
1 substitution. 2 978 So what we are seeing here or have 3 seen -- how today will end up, God only knows, but the 4 fact is that what we are seeing, if it goes that way, 5 we will see history repeat itself when it dealt with 6 things that were ethnic in the early -- in '79. Here 7 we are 30 years later, we are dealing with the same 8 thing, but society, Canada, has changed and yet we are 9 treating multiculturalism the same way as we treated 10 ethnoculturalism and the masses of influx of immigrants 11 at the time when they needed the question of 12 communications that wasn't there. 13 979 Here we are creating something this 14 wide and then, through regulation, we get it forced 15 down the funnel so that it comes out this small. It 16 need not come out that small. We have the technology 17 that God gave us, that ability to create and develop 18 and this country and every other country around the 19 world has shared this. In Australia, they took the 20 benefits of our creativity on how we would deal with 21 multiculturalism and they went ahead 20 years before us 22 and they were given credit. Canada gave them one of 23 the highest awards for achievement of multicultural 24 programming development. 25 980 Here we are. That is why I am saying
188
1 dealing with a cable operator is an impossibility. 2 Nothing less than basic or dual status would be 3 satisfactory for the viability of this particular 4 service or any other service like it in the future. 5 981 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: You say that 6 dealing with the cable operator is an impossibility 7 with respect to your proposed service. Is that because 8 the cable operators believe that there isn't sufficient 9 demand for the service? 10 982 MR. IANNUZZI: If they would have 11 thought of that they might have mentioned that. But 12 they keep talking about the copout, which is the fact 13 that we would be taking up capacity and for a service 14 which has limitations because they still keep, they 15 still keep -- and hopefully, maybe with all the answers 16 we have given them in their last intervention, and we 17 have answered Janet Yale on this one here for the fifth 18 time, that there is a difference between ethnocultural 19 programming and ethnocultural facilities as against 20 multicultural as we are applying today. 21 983 If you read the interventions of the 22 cable industry and the CAB, because they sort of -- 23 this last time around they got a little chummier, the 24 fact is that they spell out, and they used the 25 Commission for this, they said "and the Commission has
189
1 licensed so many of these" -- 2 984 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Iannuzzi, I am 3 going to have to interrupt because, you know, we are 4 going to let you say what you have to say and we have 5 done so but please try and answer the questions. The 6 question was on demand and I think you answered it 7 so -- 8 985 MR. IANNUZZI: Well, that is his -- 9 986 THE CHAIRPERSON: Right. 10 987 MR. IANNUZZI: I am saying they keep 11 saying that it is the question of the shortage of 12 capacity, not so much on the demand, because they 13 compare it to ethnocultural programming rather than 14 multicultural. 15 988 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you. 16 989 I want to make sure, following on 17 Commissioner Pennefather's questions, that I understand 18 or that we understand what you regard to be the most 19 appropriate distribution option where your service is 20 offered in the language of the majority and the 21 language of the minority. I take it from the 22 discussion -- and I am looking at the executive summary 23 of your application, page i -- I would take it from 24 there then that it is 3(a) and 4(a). Is that correct? 25 990 MR. IANNUZZI: Yes.
190
1 991 MR. MARCHANT: That is basic carriage 2 in accordance with -- we are looking at the executive 3 summary, 3(a) and 4(a)? 4 992 MR. IANNUZZI: Yes, that's correct. 5 993 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Yes. 6 994 MR. IANNUZZI: His answers are much 7 shorter than mine. I will let him answer them all. 8 995 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: My 9 understanding now is that you would be looking, if we 10 approve this application, for two access rights in each 11 cable system that you would be eligible to be carried 12 on, and one for the -- it would be the same video feed 13 but different subtitles, one feed in French subtitles 14 and one feed in English subtitles. Is that correct? 15 996 MR. IANNUZZI: They are two services. 16 I mean, one is the French service and we treat it as 17 such. The other one is the English service and we 18 treat it as such. That is why in the major markets we 19 are looking for the analog basic and in the minority 20 markets, then we are treating that as you have in other 21 decisions. 22 997 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Given that 23 you are looking for two access rights for the same 24 video feed, and I understand that one is French 25 subtitled and one is English subtitled, I take it the
191
1 feedback you have had from the cable industry is a 2 capacity concern and a concern I suppose for disruption 3 of consumers in their viewing habits and so on. Do you 4 give any weight at all to those kinds of concerns given 5 the apparent capacity limitations on analog? 6 998 MR. MARCHANT: Of course we take 7 seriously any comment by any industry partner. There 8 is no question about that. As I outlined, and if you 9 wish we can go into more detail, we are somewhat 10 sceptical about the overall capacity issue. We do not 11 think it is supported by the facts. 12 999 We also note that there are 13 realignments that are coming as a result of lots of 14 other changes, the realignments that BDUs do on their 15 own motion pretty much every year. So we do think this 16 is a manageable manner. 17 1000 I would also appeal to the opinion of 18 Commissioner Wilson in her comments in 757 on this 19 subject. 20 1001 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I want to ask 21 you now about the carriage of your service in the 22 minority markets. I take it that you are familiar with 23 PN2001-25 which deals with distribution rights for the 24 carriage of language in the minority. 25 1002 MR. MARCHANT: Yes. If you would
192
1 like me to try to get it in front of me I will try to 2 do that. 3 1003 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I will give 4 you a moment to get it in front of you. 5 1004 MR. MARCHANT: Pose your question and 6 I will see if we can -- 7 1005 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Consistent 8 with the Commission's regulations with respect to the 9 distribution of the services in the language of the 10 minority, all Class 1 and Class 2 cable distributors 11 using lower capacity digital technology, and that is 12 less than 750 megahertz, are required to operate at 13 least on Canadian specialty service in the minority 14 official language in either analog or digital mode for 15 every 10 Canadian on non-Canadian programming services 16 distributed in minority or the majority of official 17 language. 18 1006 As I understand it, your application 19 would require either some form of mandatory analog or 20 mandatory digital carriage for your service in the 21 language of the minority regardless of the system 22 capacity. Is that right? 23 1007 MR. MARCHANT: I think in the reply 24 to the Canadian Cable Systems Alliance intervention, I 25 believe Commissioner McKendry you raised the point that
193
1 you are raising. In that reply I think we gave a 2 general answer which was that we understood the 3 Commission's policies and were anxious to be 4 accommodating of smaller systems. 5 1008 If you would like us to make that 6 more specific in relation to this, to 2001-25/26, I 7 guess it is both of those, yes we will do that and why 8 don't we get back to you with a specific answer on 9 that. The answer would be we would wish to comply with 10 the Commission's approach to that matter for small 11 systems. 12 1009 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: And you are 13 telling me that you will have a subsequent answer to 14 this question. Is that correct? 15 1010 MR. MARCHANT: Yes. I would just say 16 that is what we were referring to in general terms in 17 our reply to that intervention. 18 1011 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: All right. 19 Thank you. Just excuse me for a minute please. 20 --- Pause 21 1012 THE CHAIRPERSON: We are going to 22 break in a moment, Mr. Iannuzzi. I just have one 23 follow up on the carriage issue. 24 1013 I know that you are going to fine 25 tune the carriage proposals, but what is coming through
194
1 is that you really want the video feeds to be carried 2 twice on every cable system I guess you are going to 3 fine tune majority and minority language. But am I 4 essentially correct that you would like every cable 5 system to carry both feeds? 6 1014 Are you aware of Public 7 Notice 2001-115 where we provided for the carriage of 8 the House of Commons and we said that there would be 9 one video feed and then the use of the SAP to carry 10 audio feeds available to the minority language? 11 1015 Given that the test of exceptional 12 importance that we are discussing is one that you are 13 trying to meet, are you not adding to your burden by 14 saying that the exceptional importance would apply to 15 both video feeds being carried when there are issues of 16 access to the analog channels that have gone back at 17 least five years? 18 1016 MR. MARCHANT: We have not considered 19 that point. We will and we will get back to you. 20 1017 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 21 1018 We will break now and resume at 1:30. 22 --- Upon recessing at 1220 / Suspension à 1220 23 --- Upon resuming at 1335 / Reprise à 1335 24 1019 THE CHAIRPERSON: Order, please. A 25 l'ordre, s'il vous plaît.
195
1 1020 Did you want to begin, gentlemen, 2 with anything from this morning or should we proceed 3 immediately with the questions? 4 1021 MR. MARCHANT: Yes, Mr. Chairman, we 5 do have some brief answers to questions that were left 6 outstanding. 7 1022 As was indicated in part, WTM will 8 very shortly file both a diversity and an employment 9 equity plan. 10 1023 Secondly, we looked at the inquiry 11 about -- it was said to be on page P1182 regarding 12 subtitling. Our numbering doesn't correspond to that 13 but I think that the answer it this, and if it isn't we 14 will clarify further, that all WTM programming will be 15 subtitled in at least one official language. 16 1024 With respect to the SAP, WTM feels 17 that it needs that SAP channel for it to meet the 18 described video requirement for the visually impaired. 19 WTM proposes that it be done in accordance with the 20 minimum number of hours set out in CRTC Decision 21 2001-669 at paragraph 26, dated November 2, 2001 and 22 there will be a budget provided for that. 23 1025 With respect to carriage, and 24 carriage and linguistic duality, this is a service in 25 both of Canada's official languages and consumers and
196
1 Canadians having access to our service in both official 2 languages is for us a very fundamental matter that 3 informs our approach to carriage. I guess we owe a 4 small apology to the Commission. I think we put too 5 many options on the table and I am going to try to 6 simplify. It was partly in response to the invitation 7 in the order in council to look at all options, so we 8 have looked at them carefully and we are going to 9 narrow them down to the following I think clear 10 options. 11 1026 In majority language markets, for 12 Class 1 and 2 cable systems and for DTH, either modify 13 dual status on the highest penetration tier or failing 14 the highest penetration tier, basic. So we are going 15 to take the complications introduced by the 16 Télé des Arts model off the table. 17 1027 I would also note that another reason 18 for simplifying this option is that the CCTA indicated 19 at the last hearing that any option on a high 20 penetration tier is the most disruptive for their 21 industry. The basic is actually a lot easier for them. 22 So we have simplified that option. 23 1028 So one option, modify dual status, 24 high penetration tier or basic; or number two is basic, 25 either through dual status or through an order pursuant
197
1 to section 9(1)(h) of the Broadcasting Act. 2 1029 In minority language markets we have 3 reduced it to one option regardless of which option is 4 chosen in majority, and that is mandatory digital. So 5 that removes all the complications about packaging and 6 things of that kind. 7 1030 For MDS and Class 3, carriage will be 8 discretionary. With respect to minority language 9 issues, 2001-25 will apply. 10 1031 As I said, this matter of carriage 11 and particularly basic carriage is very important to 12 our concept of linguistic duality. Because I think we 13 are going to get to this, let me put it on the table 14 for you because I hope it will be helpful so that we 15 can respect our linguistic duality. If basic carriage 16 is granted we propose a 35 cent wholesale rate in 17 majority markets, which is what we presently have. 18 With the mark-up that would mean about a 38 cent rate 19 in majority markets. 20 1032 We think it would be desirable to 21 equalize the retail rates in both majority and minority 22 language markets so that whichever official language 23 group your persuasion is or your persuasion is on that 24 night of WTM service, you would be paying the same, or 25 that month. So that would be a 19 cent wholesale rate
198
1 in minority language markets, and I am assuming here a 2 50 per cent or 100 per cent mark-up depending on how 3 one calculates it. But let's assume the 19 cents is 4 doubled to 38 when it is in minority language markets. 5 1033 That would be our approach to basic 6 pricing and we would also be proposing to increase the 7 proportion of revenues to Canadian programming to 8 45 per cent of revenues. 9 1034 I hope that concludes, Mr. Chairman, 10 the points that were raised on a small amount of 11 digital information that I think will or hope will be 12 helpful. 13 1035 MR. HOWARD: Could I just ask one 14 question of clarification? 15 1036 You said highest penetration and then 16 I heard high penetration. Which is it? 17 1037 MR. MARCHANT: It is highest 18 penetration tier. 19 1038 MR. HOWARD: Thank you. 20 1039 MR. MARCHANT: Modified dual status 21 on the highest penetration -- highest, yes. 22 1040 MR. HOWARD: Thank you. 23 1041 MR. MARCHANT: Thank you for the 24 clarification. 25 1042 THE CHAIRPERSON:
199
1 Commissioner McKendry. 2 1043 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you, 3 Mr. Chair. 4 1044 Could you just explain to me the 5 rates that you just discussed, because you referred to 6 a 19 cent rate? Just elaborate on that again for me, 7 if you don't mind. 8 1045 MR. MARCHANT: Most certainly. 9 1046 Our objective was to have consumers 10 pay the same rate, whether they were paying a minority 11 or a majority language rate, for the WTM service. This 12 is on an assumption of basic carriage. So that in 13 majority language markets if we are on basic it is 14 35 per cent plus 10 per cent roughly that the cable 15 industry would charge, which leads me to a 38 16 cent rate. 17 1047 On the assumption that when it is on 18 mandatory digital in the minority language market there 19 would be 100 per cent mark-up or that the wholesale 20 rate would be doubled at the retail level. I took the 21 38 cents and divided by two to create a wholesale rate 22 of 19 cents so that the BDU could offer that service at 23 the same retail rate to a minority language subscriber 24 as to a majority language one. 25 1048 Have I clarified that for you, sir?
200
1 1049 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I think so. 2 But just to summarize then, put me in the shoes of a 3 subscriber. As a subscriber, what am I going to pay? 4 I have the majority language service on basic and I pay 5 35 cents plus the mark-up. The minority language 6 service is on digital and how much am I going to pay 7 there as the subscriber to that cable system for that 8 service? 9 1050 MR. MARCHANT: Yes. I think where 10 you are going is one has no choice but to pay twice if 11 one is buying an extra -- and I think that is right. 12 1051 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: So it would 13 be 70 cents plus whatever mark-ups are involved and 14 taxes and so on. 15 1052 MR. MARCHANT: It would be that, yes. 16 1053 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you. 17 1054 I wanted to turn now, and I suppose 18 that is a good entrée into this area, to talk about 19 money and the fee that is being proposed here. It is 20 an important area for us and for you because if we do 21 what you would like us to do we have to approve that 22 fee so we want to make sure that the fee is fair to you 23 in the sense that your investors earn a reasonable 24 return on their investment and at the same time we have 25 to be satisfied that subscribers don't pay any more
201
1 than what is reasonable to pay for the service. 2 1055 I suppose in this case it is 3 particularly important because I think you would agree 4 there are some subscribers who have no interest in your 5 service and who will not watch the service yet will 6 have to pay the fee if we give you the kind of carriage 7 you are looking for. You would agree with that, 8 I think. 9 --- Off microphone / Hors microphone 10 1056 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: In order to 11 understand the fee that you are proposing, it seems to 12 me we need to look at the expenses that have gone into 13 developing that fee and the impact on your revenues of 14 the kind of carriage that is being proposed here. 15 Looking at the expenses first, I took it from reading 16 your application and from reading the record of the 17 last proceeding you used the word "deductively". I 18 took that to mean you had built up your fee or you had 19 calculated your fee by building up your expenses: how 20 many expenses would you incur, what did you need to pay 21 a reasonable return to your investors and so on and 22 come up with a fee. 23 1057 Is that right? Is that what 24 deductively means? 25 1058 MR. IANNUZZI: I am not too sure I
202
1 understand the question in that sense. 2 1059 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Did you take 3 a bottoms-up approach to setting the rate? Did you add 4 up all your expenses and say there is what we need for 5 a rate? 6 1060 MR. IANNUZZI: That's correct. I 7 mean, you would start off by what your plant costs are, 8 what your programming costs might be and so on. Then 9 once you have that then you figure out based on the 10 carriage that we originally predicated our business 11 plan on worked out to be 35 cents at that particular 12 time. 13 1061 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: So when you 14 are adding up your expenses, your programming expenses 15 and so on, looking through your application and your 16 business plan one of the expenses you included was 17 interest expense, the interest you would have to pay 18 the investors who invested in the company through debt, 19 and you have set forward in there your interest rate 20 assumptions and so on. 21 1062 It wasn't clear to me, though, what 22 assumption you had included in setting that rate as a 23 return for the equity investors in the company. 24 1063 MR. IANNUZZI: First of all, there 25 was no interest going to shareholders. The only
203
1 interest was on the debt equity which, in essence, came 2 from bank advances for the leasing and/or the 3 purchasing of broadcast equipment. As far as the 4 shareholder is concerned, the estimated return possible 5 based on the business plan was 15 per cent at the end 6 of the year, which is not as high as most broadcast 7 facilities would be. 8 1064 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: So the 9 35 cents includes a 15 per cent return to the equity 10 investors in the company. 11 1065 MR. IANNUZZI: Correct. 12 1066 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I want to 13 look now at some of the specific expenses. I looked at 14 the business plan that was filed the last time because, 15 as I take it, that is the business plan that is being 16 carried forward into this proceeding we have today. 17 With respect to the interest rate that you used in your 18 calculations, I noticed that you used a prime rate of 19 7.5 per cent. I take the current prime rate to be 20 4 per cent. 21 1067 Is there any reason why we shouldn't 22 adjust your business plan to take into account the 23 decline in the prime rate? 24 1068 MR. IANNUZZI: The interest rates do 25 fluctuate. Those were the ones at the time that --
204
1 when we approached the bank on the question of leasing 2 and/or purchasing, the rate was set out by the Banque 3 Nationale du Canada and we put that in there. 4 1069 Since then, thanks to Mr. Greenspan, 5 some of it has come down, but who knows within the five 6 year period, the next five years, how -- I don't have a 7 crystal ball on that one. But if it is, we would 8 adjust the interest rates based on prime rate plus two. 9 1070 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: When you 10 filed your business plan the last time, which was 11 November 6, I took it the information in there was 12 effective as of October 25 -- November 6, 2000, and the 13 information there was effective October 25, 2000 -- at 14 that time 7.5 per cent was the best estimate you had of 15 what the prime rate would be and you incorporated it 16 into your plan. 17 1071 MR. IANNUZZI: Right. 18 1072 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Now it is 19 4 per cent, so -- 20 1073 MR. IANNUZZI: We would adjust that 21 accordingly and if anything pass it through. 22 1074 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Okay. Thank 23 you for that. 24 1075 MR. McHALE: May I add on to that 25 question?
205
1 1076 You are talking about the prime rate. 2 We have the cost of the lease. Just like credit card 3 companies, lease companies are not dropping their 4 interest rates as dramatically as the prime rate so the 5 marginal difference in the interest rate we would pay 6 is minuscule. You know, retained earnings of 7 $7 million after seven years is not an exorbitant 8 profit and very little room to manoeuvre on the 9 subscriber rate -- in fact, no room to manoeuvre. 10 1077 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: As I recall, 11 looking at your business plan, the interest rates used, 12 the prime rate, is their foundation and added on extra 13 basis points depending on the kind of borrowing, so it 14 would seem to me, and you can correct me if I am wrong, 15 that if the prime rate dropped by 3.5 per cent then the 16 interest rates in your projection should drop by 17 3.5 per cent as well. 18 1078 MR. MARCHANT: Where is that 19 reference in the business plan? 20 1079 MR. IANNUZZI: No. It is on the 21 leasing of equipment and the bank rate that is being 22 charged. I think the answer is just as I gave it 23 before, that if there is that we will make the 24 adjustment and pass it through. 25 1080 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I will find
206
1 those rate assumptions for you, if you just give me a 2 minute, or are you agreeing that in fact those -- 3 --- Off microphone / Hors microphone 4 1081 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Oh, you are 5 agreeing that those were the rates that you used? 6 1082 MR. IANNUZZI: I am agreeing with you 7 because we have had this discussion internally before. 8 1083 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Okay. 9 Thanks. 10 1084 The business plan also includes cable 11 promotion fees of $2.4 million. My question is, if you 12 are on basic, as you would like to be, what are those 13 cable promotion expenses because intuitively one would 14 assume, or at least I would assume, that there wouldn't 15 be a lot of promotion involved if the Commission 16 ordered basic carriage.? 17 1085 MR. IANNUZZI: At the time that 18 business plan was put together, I am sure you will 19 remember that the new services going to air, the new 20 service providers, were in essence I don't want to use 21 the words being held up for but were asked to sort of 22 kick in to promotion development and launches and 23 combines that did in some cases reach $2 million. So 24 we had set aside the sum of $2.4 million not thinking 25 that we were going to give any cable operator
207
1 $2 million surely. 2 1086 The fact was that this is a large 3 country and there are a lot of communities that we 4 would want to go into. There are a lot of newspapers, 5 ethnic and otherwise that we would want to promote this 6 service in, so we have a budget there that certainly 7 would cover quite a lot. 8 1087 I will agree with you that on basic 9 service that might not be as necessary and therefore 10 again if we were to make an adjustment on that 11 particular portion we would pass that through. 12 1088 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: The 13 difficulty for us is, if push comes to shove, what kind 14 of adjustment do you think should be made? We are 15 going to have to set a rate. We don't want to include 16 expenses in there that may in fact not be incurred. 17 What I am hearing from you is of that $2.4 million some 18 of it may not be incurred because of a change in 19 circumstance. 20 1089 MR. IANNUZZI: That is correct. Let 21 us assume for a moment that in the promotion budget 22 there may be maybe a half a million dollars there and 23 on the question of interest there may be a quarter of a 24 million. We added all of this up, there may be 25 $1 million worth of cost saving in our expenses that
208
1 could be applied to the question of a rate adjustment 2 and we would leave that to the Commission. 3 1090 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: With respect 4 to the $2.4 million, do you have a suggestion as to 5 what the adjustment should be at this time? 6 1091 MR. IANNUZZI: Approximately 7 $750,000. 8 1092 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: It should be 9 reduced to $750,000. 10 1093 MR. IANNUZZI: Yes. If we had basic 11 and mandatory carriage, not having to deal with the 12 cable operator in that sense, then we would invest 13 maybe on a one-to-one basis with the cable operator. 14 1094 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: So we would 15 reduce that from $2.4 million to $750,000. What 16 essentially would the $750,000 be used for? 17 1095 MR. IANNUZZI: It would probably go 18 into our subtitling and Canadian program production. 19 1096 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: So there 20 shouldn't be really anything in the cable promotion 21 line but you are saying you would like to increase your 22 subtitling expenses by $750,000. 23 1097 MR. IANNUZZI: That's right. We can 24 move that from that one category to the other the same 25 way as we would deal with being on basic carriage and,
209
1 at that rate, the increased revenues. We are saying 2 that would go in to increase our rate from -- 40 per 3 cent to 45 per cent of revenues would be dedicated to 4 Canadian programming. 5 1098 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: If your 6 subtitling budget was sufficient in the information you 7 filed the last time, why does it need $750,000 more 8 now? Is there some change in the way you are 9 approaching subtitling? 10 1099 MR. DEMERS: As it had been pointed 11 out this morning, subtitling would be new to many 12 Canadians. There will never be enough money to promote 13 the fact that looking at programming subtitles enhances 14 the quality. To get Canadians used to looking at 15 subtitling as something that adds something to a film 16 or a program, it is my personal conviction that if all 17 the money cannot be used or will not be used or will 18 not necessarily be used in a certain part of the budget 19 becomes available it should be used to promote the new 20 venues we are offering. There will never be enough 21 money for that if we want to have a fast access and 22 acceptance of the type of programming we are offering. 23 1100 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you for 24 your answer. I suppose one of the difficulties is that 25 if you are on basic acceptance -- how does acceptance
210
1 factor into this? Is it because you can collect more 2 advertising revenues the more acceptance you have? 3 1101 MR. IANNUZZI: That's right. We 4 start off first that the subscriber revenues are 5 increased because we are going to mandatory basic, I 6 mean you have increased 3 million subscribers in 7 our case. 8 1102 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: But it 9 doesn't matter if anybody watches it if you are on 10 mandatory carriage in terms of your subscriber rates. 11 1103 MR. IANNUZZI: Pardon? 12 1104 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: In terms of 13 your subscriber rates, if you have mandatory carriage 14 on basic it doesn't matter, from a revenue point of 15 view, whether or not anybody watches it. You will get 16 the same revenues. 17 1105 MR. IANNUZZI: That's correct. 18 That's correct. 19 1106 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I guess what 20 I am asking is, though, perhaps that impacts 21 advertising, the acceptance, apart from the fact that 22 you want to have viewers. I am just setting aside and 23 looking at it from a revenue point of view. 24 1107 MR. IANNUZZI: That's correct. 25 1108 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Okay.
211
1 Thanks. 2 1109 This is a question similar to the 3 prime rate. The inflation rate that has been 4 incorporated into your business plan is 2.5 per cent 5 and the current CPI is 1.8 per cent. Should we adjust 6 the expenses to reflect a lower CPI? 7 1110 MR. McHALE: No. I don't think we 8 should adjust it because we are going to be buying 9 international programming and at the same time the 10 Canadian dollar has plummeted more than this. CPI has 11 been reduced. 12 1111 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: So you are 13 saying that your programming expenses have gone up 14 since you filed this original information because of a 15 drop in the Canadian dollar. 16 1112 MR. McHALE: The Canadian dollar has 17 dropped, so I don't think there is any need for an 18 adjustment. 19 1113 Going back to cable promotion, we 20 will still have to promote that the secondary language 21 is on a digital tier, so we will have to spend money to 22 promote that. 23 1114 MR. BERNSTEIN: I would further add 24 that the cost of Canadian programming has gone up 25 because the investment dollars needed to trigger
212
1 funding are now higher. 2 1115 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: The problem 3 from our point of view is we don't really have a good 4 handle on that because you didn't refile a business 5 plan with us, as I understand it, so the only numbers 6 we have to work with are the ones that have been filed. 7 1116 I guess after we go through a number 8 of these items, to forewarn you about what I will be 9 asking you to do, what I will be asking you to do is I 10 will be asking you to refile your business plan. So in 11 that business plan that would be one of the things that 12 we would like to see you incorporate then is explicitly 13 what the impact of the Canadian dollar decline has been 14 and how that impacts your business plan. We would like 15 you to make the other kinds of adjustments we have 16 discussed, the lower inflation rate, lower prime rate, 17 the fact that the cable promotion budget doesn't seem 18 to be as necessary as it was and you may want to adjust 19 that. There may be some other adjustments you want to 20 make as well. 21 1117 So rather than asking you now what is 22 your program budget given the decline in the Canadian 23 dollar I will be asking you to refile your business 24 plan. 25 1118 Maybe we could go through, then, some
213
1 of the other items I have in front of me here. 2 1119 The payroll benefits. You assumed 3 that the benefits would be 15 per cent of your 4 salaries, your salary expense. That strikes me as 5 high. Let me give you a benchmark that I took a look 6 at before I came over. 7 1120 In the conventional TV business, the 8 information we have, which is based on filings by the 9 conventional TV broadcasters, shows that salaries and 10 benefits are 10.1 per cent. Why are yours 15 per cent? 11 1121 MR. IANNUZZI: Because we also have a 12 benefit plan that goes in there as well and that takes 13 up a good portion there. 14 1122 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: So you are 15 proposing to pay benefits that are 50 per cent higher 16 in a start-up business than what conventional 17 television broadcasters pay their employees. 18 1123 MR. IANNUZZI: I don't know what 19 benefits -- health and hospital and dental kind of plan 20 that they are doing. Ours was an estimate based on 21 costs at the time of filing that application that we 22 knew and we were paying within our own organization as 23 it stands today. 24 1124 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Maybe when 25 you refile your business plan you could provide some
214
1 analysis of how you got to the 15 per cent. That 2 presumably is -- 3 1125 MR. IANNUZZI: Absolutely. 4 1126 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Okay. So you 5 would show the benefits and how they get up to 15 per 6 cent. 7 1127 MR. IANNUZZI: The benefits package. 8 1128 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I wanted to 9 ask you a question about depreciation. 10 --- Pause 11 1129 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: You have 12 depreciated your fixed assets over five years, as I 13 understand it. Is that correct? 14 1130 MR. IANNUZZI: Yes. I think it was 15 20 per cent per year straight line -- 16 1131 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Over five 17 years. 18 1132 Why would you select five years? 19 Based on my experience, five years is a short period of 20 time over which to depreciate those assets. Are they 21 only going to contribute to your revenues for five 22 years and in year six they will not contribute to your 23 revenues? 24 1133 MR. IANNUZZI: No. Our experience 25 has been that by the time you get into your fourth,
215
1 fifth year you are upgrading and there is all of that 2 that is required. So it is not that you have written 3 off your equipment, it is still productive, but you are 4 upgrading and you are adding more facilities to the 5 same equipment in order to do that. 6 1134 It happens, you know, with all the 7 computerized equipment that we have today. I mean, we 8 continually plough in -- in our computers it is an 9 average of three to three and a half years, so we 10 thought that five years, from an industry standard, was 11 the average. 12 1135 MR. McHALE: Also, the correct 13 accounting treatment is to state fixed assets at the 14 lower of cost or realizable value and after five years 15 the realizable value of equipment that has been used 16 for five years constantly is almost zero. 17 1136 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I would have 18 thought the principle behind depreciation was to 19 allocate the costs of the assets to the years in which 20 revenue would be derived from those assets and -- 21 1137 MR. McHALE: Sorry. The prudence 22 concept overrides the accrual concept in accounting. 23 1138 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: And you are 24 telling me that a five year write-off of these assets 25 is typical and standard --
216
1 1139 MR. McHALE: Is a prudent accounting 2 approach. 3 1140 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: And is 4 standard for the industry. 5 1141 MR. McHALE: And standard practice. 6 1142 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Your deferred 7 expenses you have written off over seven years, as I 8 understand it. 9 1143 MR. McHALE: That is standard 10 accounting practice to write it off over the term of 11 the licence period. 12 1144 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Why would 13 your deferred expenses have a longer write-off period 14 than depreciation? 15 1145 MR. McHALE: Again, I would go back 16 to you state fixed assets at the lower of cost or 17 realizable value and after five years that approximates 18 zero. The other accounting treatment is allocating the 19 expenses based on the accrual concept over the life of 20 the licence period, which is seven years. 21 1146 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: If we 22 adjusted the depreciation to write it off over the 23 seven year study period, would that be something that 24 you would think was a problem given Mr. Iannuzzi's 25 comment that the equipment would still be productive
217
1 after five years? 2 1147 MR. McHALE: The two are not related. 3 It is an accounting issue and we followed journal 4 accounting standards and practices drawing this. We 5 would have to talk to our accountant that this was 6 acceptable. 7 1148 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: What is the 8 capital cost allowance write-off period for these 9 assets for income tax purposes? 10 1149 MR. MARCHANT: There are different 11 rates for different classes. Where the rate is less 12 than 100 per cent, it is on a double declining balance, 13 so in theory you never get to zero because you are 14 always knocking off 20 per cent or 30 per cent for a 15 vehicle. But as a practical matter, if you have a 16 20 per cent double declining balance depreciation rate 17 you are going to get close to zero after five or six 18 years. That is the general principle. 19 1150 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: One of the 20 other things that struck me about the assumptions in 21 your business plan was that you show your accounts 22 receivables being collected in 50 day yet you are 23 paying your accounts payable in 30 days. That of 24 course increases your financing costs because there is 25 a longer period of time to collect your receivables
218
1 than you are paying your suppliers. 2 1151 Why do you plan to pay your suppliers 3 in 30 days yet only collect your receivables in 4 50 days? Why wouldn't you take 50 days with your 5 suppliers? 6 1152 MR. IANNUZZI: I suppose those would 7 have to be negotiated, but generally when your 8 principal goes in your terms are 30 days when you are 9 dealing with that. The practice then eventually, once 10 you have established a good credit standing, is that 11 you are able then, with distributors and certain 12 suppliers, to gain anywhere from 40 to 50 days. 13 1153 But the fact is that the receivables, 14 even though we are dealing primarily with cable 15 companies and advertising agencies, even though both 16 will tell you that it is 15 plus two days, advertising 17 agencies take 30 plus and maybe as much as 40 and not 18 all cable operators, big or small, pay their dues on 19 time either. 20 1154 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I understand 21 that. I am asking you, for forecasting purposes here, 22 whether it wouldn't be a more reasonable assumption 23 that in terms of managing your business out there in 24 the real world that you wouldn't match paying your 25 suppliers with the cash flows you are getting from your
219
1 receivables. 2 1155 MR. IANNUZZI: Absolutely. 3 Absolutely. I mean, most businesses are financed with 4 their payables, I mean a good portion of them anyway. 5 1156 I am saying that once you have gotten 6 away from the start-up operation and you have a 7 practice of what your suppliers are willing to give you 8 as far as credit beyond the 30 days, that is something 9 that probably would go to 45 and 50 days and then there 10 would be a tie-in both for receivables and payables. 11 1157 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: So when you 12 redo your business plan perhaps you could -- 13 1158 MR. IANNUZZI: We would change that 14 assumption and make an assumption that somewhere within 15 the term of licence that would be met. 16 1159 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I just want 17 to go back to the fixed assets for a moment. I found 18 the page I was looking for. It is page 355 on the 19 business plan that was filed. It shows there that you 20 have written your fixed assets off over five years 21 which, given your depreciation method, is what would 22 happen, and in year six you add back in $1.5 million 23 worth of new fixed assets. 24 1160 Given that in year one you bought 25 $3.2 million worth of fixed assets and in year six you
220
1 have only replaced half of those fixed assets, I take 2 it that the other half are still being used in your 3 business in years six and seven but there is no costs 4 being charged against the revenues in years six and 5 seven for those assets that are still being used. 6 1161 MR. McHALE: Correct. It has been 7 amortized in those five years. 8 1162 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: And you are 9 telling me that is in accordance with generally 10 accepted accounting principles and that one of the 11 generally accepted accounting principles being to 12 allocate or to match costs and revenues. 13 1163 MR. McHALE: Yes. You have three 14 fundamental principles in accounting: matching, 15 accruals and the overriding one is prudence. You 16 always take the most conservative outlook. 17 1164 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: So in your 18 view, prudence would override the matching of costs and 19 revenues when it comes to generally accepted accounting 20 principles. 21 1165 MR. McHALE: It is not my opinion. 22 It is Fazbi and SSAP in Europe. 23 1166 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Perhaps you 24 could file that with us. Presumably it is available 25 somewhere. Thanks.
221
1 1167 Let me look now at the revenue aspect 2 of this. What I have done is taken the revenues as 3 filed in your business plan and then I have taken a 4 look at the revenues. This is just for the Class 1 and 5 Class 2 English to make it simple or relatively simple. 6 Any of the numbers I give you of course are subject to 7 check and you will be refiling your business plan so 8 you will have an opportunity to do that. 9 1168 The original application was modified 10 dual status for majority language feed, digital only 11 for minority language feed. In coming to these 12 questions, I have revised that based on information 13 that we had before we started our discussions 14 yesterday. 15 1169 What I have done is assumed a basic 16 carriage for the majority language feed, which I think 17 is what you are still asking for, and modified dual 18 status or digital carriage of minority language feed. 19 Those are the assumptions I made in coming up with the 20 numbers that I came up with here, and the numbers that 21 I am going to give you, as I said, only relate to the 22 Class 1 and Class 2 English. I didn't include the 23 French Class 1 and Class 2. 24 1170 To make a long story short, and I can 25 give you the numbers to come up with it, the revised
222
1 numbers show that your English Class 1 and Class 2 2 revenues will increase 53 per cent over the originally 3 filed submission. I don't know whether or not you have 4 had a chance to make that calculation yourself. 5 1171 MR. McHALE: We made a calculation 6 based on 3519, the proposed rate by Dr. Marchant, on 7 basic and digital for the secondary language. Revenues 8 increased approximately, on an annual basis, by about 9 $13 million, is the numbers I came up with. 10 1172 The other impact of that is that the 11 lead programmer in any category, and especially in our 12 category because we will be the first multicultural 13 channel, is expected to fund between 45 per cent in 14 English language production or 30 per cent in the case 15 of French language production for any acquisitions. 16 What we would do in this case is increase the 17 commitment to Canadian productions from I think it is 18 approximately 41 per cent that is in the projections up 19 to 45 per cent. That would allow us to do that. 20 1173 That would increase Canadian 21 production by approximately $7.1 million a year so that 22 would eat up more than 50 per cent of the increase in 23 subscriber revenue. 24 1174 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: So regardless 25 of what percentage the increase is, you are saying you
223
1 would take half of that and increase your program 2 production budget. 3 1175 MR. McHALE: The impact is that more 4 than 50 per cent would go because you are increasing 5 the expenditure from 41 to 45 on all of the revenue, 6 not just the incremental. 7 1176 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: What about 8 the other half, where does it go? 9 --- Pause 10 1177 MR. IANNUZZI: It certainly would 11 help fuel growth, the balance of that. I mean, if more 12 than 50 per cent of the increased revenues goes 13 directly into Canadian programming then we are saying 14 that we would have sufficient funds to help accelerate 15 the growth of the company and its development. 16 Probably indirectly some of that would even flow to the 17 shareholder to give it a reasonable rate of return of 18 somewhere around 20 per cent rather than 15. 19 1178 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I guess 20 another option would be to reduce the 35 cent rate. 21 1179 MR. IANNUZZI: Yes, that is one of 22 them there. In fact, we did have a model which lowered 23 it, and still they would pick up that extra 45-odd per 24 cent, to 32 cents. It would be 32 and 16 rather than 25 35 and 19. That is one of the things that we are
224
1 willing to put on the table as well. 2 1180 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: You are 3 saying half or approximately half -- and you can be 4 specific about it because this is something that 5 presumably you incorporate into your refiled business 6 plan -- approximately half would go to more program 7 production and some portion would go to reduce the rate 8 to 32 cents. 9 1181 MR. IANNUZZI: Reduce the rate 10 basically. Yes, it was 32 and 16. 11 1182 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Right. And 12 the rest accrues to the shareholders. 13 1183 MR. IANNUZZI: No. The 3 cent 14 reduction practically eats up most of that extra 15 reduction of the revenue. 16 1184 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I see. Okay. 17 Thank you for that. 18 1185 Just in terms of increasing the 19 program production, that would be a relatively 20 significant increase, wouldn't it, in your program 21 production expenditures? 22 1186 MR. BERNSTEIN: Yes. 23 1187 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: What does 24 that do to your schedule that you have filed with us 25 with respect to programming and so on? How does it
225
1 change that? 2 1188 MR. BERNSTEIN: It doesn't change the 3 schedule so much as it changes our ability to create 4 brand new programs and be first windows on programs. 5 So what that means is, with the other plan we might 6 have to acquire a lot of programs at a cut rate. This 7 allows us to actually go out and produce brand new 8 programs at a greater rate. 9 1189 MR. IANNUZZI: Also I might add that 10 in your going in position on any new start-up 11 operation, independent producers are willing to come in 12 at a lower level to get yourself going and so on. By 13 the time they are into you and you are into them it is 14 time that they would like to be paid the kind of market 15 rates, probably in year two -- this is the effect this 16 extra revenue would have, that in year two we would be 17 getting closer to paying the market rates for 18 independent production. 19 1190 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Just then to 20 sum up, I take it that you are agreeing to refile a 21 business plan with us that will incorporate the changes 22 we have discussed, the increase in the program 23 production, the decrease in the rate you are proposing 24 and any other matters that you think should be brought 25 to our attention.
226
1 1191 MR. IANNUZZI: I agreed we would do 2 that and therefore we would have to make the model 3 which is predicated therefore on the type of carriage 4 that we are talking about. I mean, that was our 5 problem all the time, that we had business plans that 6 were put together that were first based on basic dual 7 status and then modified dual status, and then we made 8 adjustments again so that whilst we took care of the 9 revenue side of this and the effect that would 10 establish both rate and so on, we never went all the 11 way back in to the business plan simply because of the 12 type of carriage it would easily adjust itself 13 accordingly. 14 1192 In this particular case, if we come 15 back with a new business plan, an adjusted business 16 plan because the basis is all there, it is to 17 compensate for the kind of carriage we are talking 18 about. So if we give you a business plan, it is 19 predicated on the type of carriage that we have 20 established here today as far as our request is 21 concerned. 22 1193 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I think that 23 is what we would be looking for is a business plan 24 based on your preferred carriage. 25 1194 MR. IANNUZZI: Carriage.
227
1 1195 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: If you have 2 another option that you want us to consider, you can 3 file a business plan for that as well. 4 1196 MR. IANNUZZI: A and B. 5 --- Off microphone / Hors microphone 6 1197 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: We will leave 7 that to you. 8 1198 Those are the questions I had, 9 Mr. Chair. Thank you. 10 1199 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 11 1200 I just have one further question to 12 Mr. Iannuzzi and Mr. Marchant. It is again a follow-up 13 from my earlier question today. 14 1201 I thank you for clarifying your 15 carriage objectives. I am still trying to understand 16 that there will be received, according to your 17 proposal, a service that will be one service in terms 18 of the video and the audio. The difference will be in 19 subtitling, if I am not mistaken, so that the English 20 service will have, where there is French or foreign 21 programming, English subtitles; the French service, 22 where there is English or foreign programming, will 23 have French subtitles, but that the video and audio 24 will otherwise be identical. Is that correct? 25 1202 MR. IANNUZZI: That's correct.
228
1 Though we are not rolling that way. We are rolling two 2 separate services. I mean, there are two uplinks for 3 this, two master controls and so on, because 4 commercials may vary in both services if there is a 5 French commercial. So we are operating two channels. 6 In fact, the second English one, for the time 7 difference, is another channel that we are rolling out. 8 1203 THE CHAIRPERSON: Right. I guess I 9 will go back to my previous questioning where in view 10 of the test that was set out in our earlier policy I 11 wonder why you wouldn't be proposing one change to 12 that, a single feed, which would be the same video and 13 audio, but the only change would potentially be two 14 sets of subtitles in regard to the foreign programming, 15 because in every other respect it would be the same and 16 that that would be the service that you would be 17 proposing. 18 1204 I am not asking you to change your 19 application but I am wondering, in view of where you 20 are and where we are in this process, why that isn't 21 being put forward as an option by you for our 22 consideration. 23 1205 MR. IANNUZZI: Are you saying that 24 you would carry two subtitles under it so that if I am 25 watching I can either read it in English or in French?
229
1 1206 THE CHAIRPERSON: I have been to 2 movies that have had that. 3 1207 MR. IANNUZZI: That would be 4 totally -- it would be unacceptable. 5 1208 THE CHAIRPERSON: Why is that? 6 1209 MR. IANNUZZI: I am just saying it is 7 unacceptable to me as a viewer. I have watched 8 Channel 47 actually run some movies where they have it 9 in Chinese and Mandarin and English and it just takes 10 about a third of the picture. I mean, it is totally 11 frustrating. I don't think Canadians deserve that kind 12 of a service. 13 1210 THE CHAIRPERSON: You were going to 14 get back to me, or maybe you have, on the issue of -- I 15 appreciate that you are proposing to use the SAP for 16 described video presumably both in English and French 17 on the two services, but I guess what I am wondering is 18 that, you know, in view of where you are in this long 19 process that you have described to us, why in the world 20 of trade-offs that isn't a proposal that you are 21 putting forward. If the answer is because two sets of 22 subtitles on, from your application, the diminishing 23 quantity of foreign language programming is 24 unacceptable, I will take that as your answer if that 25 is your answer.
230
1 1211 Is that the reason you are not doing 2 that? 3 1212 MR. IANNUZZI: No. I think that both 4 services deserve the quality and the, how should I say, 5 establishment of the French service and the English 6 service as two separate feeds so that if there was a 7 time shift of a program, for whatever reason, there may 8 be -- wanting to sort of counterprogram in the French 9 market, so we move a program by an hour earlier or 10 later, whatever the case may be, we have to have the 11 flexibility of programmers. It is not a question of 12 just shovelling something on to a channel so that 13 whichever one gets the best feed out of it the second 14 one gets chicken feed sort of thing. 15 1213 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. I guess I 16 have your answer. Thank you very much. 17 1214 Mr. Secretary, would you -- 18 1215 MR. HOWARD: Mr. Chairman, just a 19 couple of small questions. 20 1216 THE CHAIRPERSON: Oh, you do have 21 questions? 22 1217 MR. HOWARD: Yes. 23 1218 THE CHAIRPERSON: I thought that you 24 indicated that you didn't. 25 1219 MR. HOWARD: Just a couple of very
231
1 small, fast, clean-up questions. 2 1220 In your proposal today you talked 3 about modified dual status for DTH. What does that 4 mean to you? 5 1221 MR. MARCHANT: As defined in the 6 distribution regulations. 7 1222 MR. HOWARD: What does it mean to 8 you? 9 1223 MR. MARCHANT: I think it means the 10 satellite services that are an alternative to cable 11 carriage. I am not quite sure where you are going -- 12 1224 MR. HOWARD: What does modified dual 13 status on DTH mean? 14 1225 MR. MARCHANT: Oh, sorry. I think it 15 means you get carried. Right? 16 --- Pause 17 1226 MR. MARCHANT: We are asking for 18 mandatory carriage on DTH. 19 1227 MR. HOWARD: Not mandatory dual 20 carriage, mandatory carriage. Okay. 21 1228 MR. MARCHANT: On DTH, yes. 22 1229 MR. HOWARD: And that would mean 23 where? 24 1230 MR. IANNUZZI: On the highest 25 penetration tier. We are trying to establish the same
232
1 for DTH as we are for cable. 2 1231 MR. HOWARD: So you want it on the 3 highest penetration tier. 4 1232 MR. IANNUZZI: That's right. 5 1233 MR. HOWARD: It just differs a bit 6 from what you said before where I think it was the 7 package of discretionary service containing the 8 greatest number of English services in the majority, 9 but if you want the highest penetration -- 10 1234 MR. MARCHANT: Okay. Now I 11 understand. No. It is the highest penetration tier in 12 majority language markets, whichever it is, yes. 13 1235 MR. HOWARD: For DTH? 14 1236 MR. MARCHANT: I'm sorry; I apologize 15 for not immediately understanding your question. 16 1237 MR. HOWARD: You were going to file a 17 set of projects -- sorry, revised financial statements 18 based on your preferred option for carriage, which was 19 modified dual status. Would it take you a great deal 20 more time to put one in for basic carriage? 21 1238 MR. MARCHANT: I understood we were 22 going to put one in for basic carriage. 23 1239 MR. HOWARD: Okay. 24 1240 MR. MARCHANT: I didn't understand we 25 were going to do one for -- I mean, modified dual
233
1 status on the highest penetration tier is the premise 2 of the application that is now filed -- 3 1241 MR. HOWARD: Okay. I think you were 4 going to revise your figures so, yes, you were going to 5 put it in on the option that you wanted. I am asking 6 if perhaps you could put it in on the other option 7 which I am not sure is the one you state you wanted, 8 which is on basic. 9 1242 MR. MARCHANT: Let me put it this 10 way. I guess we will respond to whatever the 11 Commission is asking us to do. 12 1243 MR. HOWARD: Okay. 13 1244 MR. MARCHANT: Commissioner McKendry 14 has raised a number -- if the request is to take 15 account of Commissioner McKendry's comments with 16 respect to both options and file plans for both 17 options, then that is -- is that the request? 18 1245 MR. HOWARD: That might be helpful 19 for us, yes. Thank you. 20 1246 The last question. If everything 21 turns out the way you want, when would you be launching 22 this service? 23 1247 MR. IANNUZZI: September of 2003, but 24 we would like to have a preview starting on Canada Day, 25 July 1, 2003.
234
1 1248 MR. HOWARD: Sorry. Just one last 2 question. 3 1249 I think I may be a little confused. 4 I thought the Canadian programming that is not 5 news-oriented would be acquired Canadian programming 6 from independent producers. Was I correct there? 7 1250 MR. BERNSTEIN: That's correct. 8 1251 MR. HOWARD: The extra revenue would 9 go to producing your own programs so it would all go 10 into the news programs. Is that correct? 11 1252 MR. BERNSTEIN: No. The extra 12 revenue would almost all go into the acquired programs. 13 1253 MR. HOWARD: Okay. Thank you. 14 1254 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Secretary. 15 1255 MR. LEBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 16 We have now reached Phase II of the hearing of this 17 application where we will provide appearing intervenors 18 with a period of 10 minutes to intervene. 19 1256 While WTM does retire, I would 20 indicate for the record that Intervenors Nos. 3, 4, 10 21 and 16 on the agenda have elected not to appear. These 22 interventions will remain on the public record as 23 non-appearing. 24 1257 The first appearing intervention will 25 be presented by the Canadian Cable Television
235
1 Association. Appearing on behalf of the CCTA is Janet 2 Yale and Lori Assheton-Smith. 3 1258 THE CHAIRPERSON: Whenever you are 4 ready. To quote the secretary, you have 10 minutes. 5 1259 MS YALE: I am familiar with that 6 rule. 7 INTERVENTION 8 1260 MS YALE: Good afternoon. My name is 9 Janet Yale and I am President and CEO of the Canadian 10 Cable Television Association. With me today is 11 Lori Assheton-Smith, CCTA's General Counsel and 12 Vice-President, New Media. 13 1261 We are pleased to appear before you 14 today to comment on the application by World Television 15 Network for a national specialty service licence. 16 1262 Le réseau télémonde a déposé une 17 demande de licence en vue d'exploiter un service 18 spécialisé avec des droits d'accès bien particuliers et 19 préférentiels. WTM exige au minimum la distribution 20 analogique obligatoire sur le volet facultatif 21 affichant le plus fort taux de pénétration, à un prix 22 de gros de 0,35 $. WTM souligne bien que la 23 distribution sur le service de base serait encore 24 préférable. 25 1263 For the reasons outlined in our
236
1 written submission and as we are going to summarize in 2 these oral remarks, CCTA submits that WTM's request 3 should be denied. 4 1264 As the Commission is aware from 5 CCTA's written comments, we fully support the 6 Commission's previous decision to grant WTM a 7 Category 2 specialty television service licence for 8 digital distribution. We believe that licensing WTM 9 for mandatory analog carriage would be inconsistent 10 with the Commission's digital licensing framework and 11 would fail to recognize the potential of digital 12 technology to deliver a greater diversity of services 13 in accordance with the Broadcasting Act objectives. 14 1265 In December of last year, following a 15 careful and comprehensive review of WTM's application, 16 the Commission denied WTM's request for guaranteed 17 access to analog distribution on cable. The Commission 18 concluded that WTM's proposed service could complement 19 existing mainstream, multilingual and third-language 20 services and awarded WTM a Category 2 digital licence. 21 1266 Dans deux décisions distinctes 22 relatives au service proposé par WTM, le conseil a 23 conclu que le service n'avait pas, en vertu des 24 objectifs énoncés dans la loi sur la radiodiffusion, 25 l'«importance exceptionnelle» qui aurait justifié qu'on
237
1 lui garantisse l'accès à la distribution obligatoire 2 sur un canal analogique. 3 1267 In our view, WTM's carriage request 4 remains inappropriate given increasing and competing 5 demands for capacity and in light of existing 6 broadcasting policy objectives. 7 1268 Our industry has invested $5 billion 8 over the last 5 years to upgrade our networks in order 9 to deliver high quality, two-way digital services to 10 consumers. However, cable operators continue to face 11 considerable and growing demands on their capacity. 12 1269 The vast majority of Canadian cable 13 subscribers now have access to all of the new 14 Category 1 digital services, various Category 2 digital 15 services and a number of French language services in 16 anglophone markets. In addition, cable operators have 17 already been asked to consider future requirements for 18 capacity for new services, such as over-the-air digital 19 broadcasting and high definition television. 20 1270 In light of these increasing demands 21 on capacity for new services, analog distribution of 22 specialty services is simply no longer a viable option. 23 As the Commission stated in its earlier decision, cable 24 operators would be forced to remove or displace an 25 existing service to accommodate WTM on analog. Not
238
1 only would this constitute a significant disruption to 2 subscribers, it would be wholly at odds with the policy 3 goal of advancing the transition from analog to digital 4 distribution. 5 1271 The Commission has recognized in a 6 number of decisions that digital technology creates 7 abundant new opportunities to deliver diverse specialty 8 services aimed at both niche and general audiences. It 9 also provides consumers with the long-awaited ability 10 to choose the content that interests them most and to 11 effectively determine the price that they are prepared 12 to pay for that content. 13 1272 In this regard, we fully agree with 14 WTM that the starting point in assessing appropriate 15 carriage should be section 3(1)(t) of the Broadcasting 16 Act. As noted by WTM, section 3(i)(t)(ii) states that 17 distributors: 18 "...should provide efficient 19 delivery of programming at 20 affordable rates using the most 21 effective technologies available 22 at reasonable cost". 23 1273 In our view, licensing WTM as an 24 analog service with mandatory carriage, either on basic 25 or a tier, would not constitute efficient delivery of
239
1 programming at affordable rates. Nor would it satisfy 2 the objective of using the most effective technologies 3 available at reasonable cost. Licensing WTM as a 4 Category 2 digital specialty service, on the other 5 hand, would be entirely consistent with the objectives 6 contained in section 3(1)(t). 7 1274 Finally, WTM suggests that failing to 8 licence its service for mandatory analog carriage would 9 be contrary to the diversity objectives of the 10 Broadcasting Act. We submit this is simply not the 11 case. 12 1275 First, the link between diversity and 13 analog carriage is not self-evident. In fact, creating 14 an additional analog channel to carry WTM could 15 actually have the effect of reducing diversity by using 16 up capacity that might otherwise be available for as 17 many as 10 or more new digital services. The math is 18 that simple: one analog service or 10 digital ones. 19 1276 Second, the Commission has already 20 demonstrated a sensible and comprehensive approach to 21 satisfying the Broadcasting Act's multicultural 22 objectives. It has licensed a number of analog 23 over-the-air and specialty ethnic television services, 24 including two new over-the-air services in Vancouver 25 and Toronto
240
1 1277 In addition, numerous ethnic and 2 foreign language specialty services are available to 3 cable and DTH subscribers on a digital basis. 4 1278 Given the vast amount of 5 multicultural programming already available to 6 Canadians, it is clearly inaccurate to suggest that the 7 act's multicultural policy objective can only be 8 satisfied by licensing WTM for mandatory analog 9 carriage. 10 1279 In summary, we believe that given the 11 Commission's licensing framework and the growing 12 digital environment, it would be inappropriate and 13 inconsistent with Commission policy to license a new 14 specialty service for mandatory analog carriage at this 15 time. Rather, we submit that the Commission should 16 confirm its earlier decision to award WTM a Category 2 17 digital licence. 18 1280 Thank you for the opportunity to 19 provide these comments. We would be pleased to answer 20 your questions. 21 1281 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very 22 much. I have one or two questions. 23 1282 As you know, this is not a typical 24 CRCT hearing. This is a reconsideration hearing. We 25 have been given a matter that the governor in council
241
1 has referred back to us to consider and to reconsider 2 in fact and hear and that is the appropriate options 3 for the carriage of BDUs of services that aspire to 4 reflect and connect Canada's multicultural communities 5 to broader audiences, so I want to ask you about both 6 parts of that. 7 1283 To begin with, on the carriage and 8 appropriate options for carriage by BDUs, were you 9 present when the applicant modified the carriage 10 proposals that they had originally put forward earlier 11 in the afternoon? 12 1284 MS YALE: Yes. 13 1285 THE CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any 14 comments and would your position change at all in light 15 of those modifications to their carriage proposals? 16 1286 MS YALE: I don't think their 17 modifications change our position. At the end of the 18 day, the fundamental question in front of you is 19 whether or not to grant them a mandatory analog 20 service. Our view is very simply that digital is the 21 way of the future and that there is nothing in their 22 proposal that warrants the exceptional treatment that 23 they are proposing for analog distribution either in a 24 high penetration tier on basic. 25 1287 THE CHAIRPERSON: Do you think that
242
1 in light of the criteria for our consideration that I 2 discussed with Mr. Marchant, I don't know whether you 3 were present in regard to that, the criteria flowing 4 from the earlier public notice, essentially exceptional 5 circumstances. 6 1288 Do you think that you say that you 7 don't believe that they have met those criteria? 8 1289 MS ASSHETON-SMITH: I would be 9 pleased to answer that. 10 1290 I think that the Commission has made 11 it very, very clear on a number of occasions what kind 12 of test has to be satisfied in order to licence a 13 service for mandatory carriage under 9(i)(h) of the 14 Broadcasting Act. It has decided on two separate 15 occasions, using its own criteria of exceptional 16 importance, that WTM did not satisfy that criteria. 17 Our view is that the Commission is entirely well-suited 18 to determine the appropriate test for determining 19 whether or not a service merits licensing under 20 9(1)(h). 21 1291 We fully support the application of 22 that test of exceptional importance. It has to be 23 exceptional importance. If it wasn't such a high 24 standard, it would be too easy for virtually any 25 specialty service to make the argument that they merit
243
1 licensing under 9(1)(h). In order for it to be treated 2 as an exceptional type of a section, which I think 3 everybody acknowledges that it is, the test for 4 licensing the service under that section has to be that 5 somehow there has to be something exceptionally 6 different than all other services in order to merit 7 that kind of a carriage option. 8 1292 In our view, the Commission has 9 correctly applied that test on two separate occasions. 10 We continue to believe that is the correct test. 11 1293 THE CHAIRPERSON: Right. We find 12 ourselves in the situation where the matter has been 13 referred back to us and attention has been drawn to the 14 carriage of services that aspire to reflect and connect 15 Canada's multicultural communities to broader 16 audiences. Additional information has been filed by 17 the applicant in order to show that it is in such a 18 service or has I guess two services, is its position, 19 that aspire to reflect and connect Canada's 20 multicultural communities to broader audiences. 21 1294 In my discussion earlier with their 22 counsel, we agreed on the statement of the test that 23 you have just alluded to, exceptional importance of the 24 proposed service to the achievement of the objectives 25 of the Broadcasting Act. I am asking you whether at
244
1 this stage in the process, and in light of the 2 additional material that they have filed, if you think 3 that they may have actually passed that test or not? 4 1295 MS YALE: Let me take a crack at 5 that. 6 1296 The way I look at their services, 7 that they are really two distinct parts of their 8 programming undertaking that you can think about in 9 terms of whether or not the test has been met. The 10 first piece is the foreign product that they propose to 11 bring in on a subtitle basis that would be targeted to 12 the non-ethnic community. The question is whether or 13 not that exposure of Canadians to that foreign 14 subtitled programming would somehow enhance the 15 multicultural understanding in this country. In my 16 view that simply will not happen. 17 1297 I think that the foreign programming 18 will be of primary interest to whom that language of 19 programming is appealing and it will not be of interest 20 to a mass Canadian audience. The Commission stated as 21 much in one of its earlier decisions. I continue to 22 agree with that view, that is not the way in which you 23 are going to promote multicultural understanding. In 24 fact, there are many specialty services, ethnic 25 services and so on, and you are going to be hearing
245
1 from some of them later today, who in fact do that kind 2 of thing already, bring in foreign programming and 3 either dub or subtitle it, so I don't see that is going 4 to contribute in any kind of way. 5 1298 The second piece of their programming 6 is the Canadian programming element where they are 7 saying that somehow they will, through the way in which 8 they do their Canadian programming, contribute to the 9 multicultural understanding in this country. Again, I 10 would have to say that there are a full range of 11 existing over-the-air broadcasters, both multicultural 12 and general interest, who make a substantial 13 contribution in that area, both in terms of the 14 programming they offer and in terms of the diversity of 15 their on-air personalities. 16 1299 Again, I am sure the Canadian 17 Association of Broadcasters can answer that aspect more 18 fully but I just think that the existing broadcasting 19 system taken as a whole contributes fully to that 20 objective of the act and that there is not the kind of 21 gap that would warrant the exceptional treatment of 22 this particular service. 23 1300 THE CHAIRPERSON: Of course they say 24 that when TVA was presenting a similar proposal and 25 when the aboriginal community was presenting a similar
246
1 proposal the cable industry took the same position 2 naturally because mandatory carriage means that the 3 price of cable rates goes up, and we are aware of that. 4 Yet they are saying Canada has granted the francophone 5 community carriage in English Canada. It has granted 6 the aboriginal community a channel of their own. Now, 7 in keeping with the demographic realities of Canada, it 8 is time that we have a multicultural programming 9 service that has the same access to Canadians as the 10 Commission granted those and so the time has now come 11 for that. 12 1301 Do you have any comments on that? 13 1302 MS YALE: Certainly I think the 14 Commission, in recently licensing further multicultural 15 over-the-air services has recognized that there may 16 well be a demand and those over-the-air services will 17 get priority carriage and the cable industry will have 18 to carry them. Whether that might be our first choice 19 or not, the fact of the matter is that if there is a 20 mandatory obligation to carry something, whether it is 21 a priority carriage situation or otherwise, we will do 22 that. 23 1303 The question is: is the only way to 24 achieve the multicultural objectives of the act to have 25 a single service that carries that burden? I think my
247
1 previous answer was designed to suggest that there are 2 a variety of ways in which that objective is achieved 3 through the mix of over-the-air general interest 4 services, over-the-air specialty or ethnic services. 5 There are specialty services like Fairchild, Telelatino 6 and so on. There is the community channel that 7 provides a fair degree of multicultural programming as 8 well as there are 40 new Category 2 digital services in 9 third languages. I just don't see that there is a gap, 10 frankly. 11 1304 MS ASSHETON-SMITH: I would just like 12 to add something to that. 13 1305 I think in the case of APTN and TVA 14 particularly there is a perception that there was a gap 15 among the Broadcasting Act objectives that somehow was 16 not being satisfied that required the licensing of 17 those services on a mandatory analog basis. The 18 objective in the act is that the system reflect 19 multicultural objectives or multicultural- 20 multilingual-multiethnic identities of Canadians. It 21 doesn't say that one particular channel has to be 22 devoted to reflecting that objective. Provided that 23 the system meets that objective then the overall policy 24 objectives of the act are being met. 25 1306 I think that is what we are trying to
248
1 get at here today is that the objective has already 2 been fully met throughout the system at all different 3 levels. As you will hear from intervenors later on 4 today, they are doing a pretty good job and the 5 Commission has done an excellent job of trying to 6 encourage and promote that throughout the system. 7 1307 THE CHAIRPERSON: Could the same 8 arguments not have been made about aboriginal 9 programming or French language programming at the time? 10 1308 MS ASSHETON-SMITH: Certainly in the 11 case of aboriginal programming I don't think that 12 argument was ever made that that was something that was 13 being fully reflected on the system. Similarly, 14 minority language markets, there was an argument 15 perhaps that French language programming in particular 16 was not being reflected in majority language markets. 17 1309 THE CHAIRPERSON: Right. If you go 18 outside the major urban centres now, where would you 19 say that multiculturalism programming is reflected? 20 1310 MS ASSHETON-SMITH: Janet went 21 through a whole list of services that are carried both 22 in urban and outside urban markets over the air. 23 Broadcasters such as CHUM, Citytv, CFMT, CFMT-TOO, just 24 to name a few. If you look at the long list of ethnic 25 specialty services that are appearing before you, those
249
1 are available to every Canadian through satellite 2 signals. I am not sure it is an urban/rural 3 distinction to be made. Those services are available 4 throughout Canada. 5 1311 THE CHAIRPERSON: Is CFMT available 6 throughout Canada? 7 1312 MS ASSHETON-SMITH: Probably 8 throughout most of Canada through using a distant 9 signal type of policy or through significant 10 portions -- 11 1313 THE CHAIRPERSON: The new licensee in 12 Vancouver is probably not going to appreciate that if 13 it is. 14 1314 MS YALE: I can't speak to whether or 15 not every single service is in every community. I 16 guess the fundamental question, though, that I come 17 back to is whether or not this service actually does 18 that. I think my answer really is that it doesn't. I 19 don't think subtitled foreign language programming is 20 going to facilitate an understanding of the 21 multicultural nature of Canadian society. I think it 22 is going to be incredibly unpopular. 23 1315 I think that programming, as I said, 24 appeals primarily to the ethnic group -- depending on 25 the slice of the programming you are talking about --
250
1 to the ethnic group in whose language that programming 2 is offered. For those people, they would much prefer 3 to have a channel devoted exclusively to programming in 4 that language. 5 1316 As far as the Canadian programming is 6 concerned, as I said, I think when it comes to the 7 Canadian portion of their program schedule that the 8 existing over-the-air broadcasters and the specialty 9 services do a very good job through their programming 10 and through their on-air presence of doing that job of 11 promoting and enhancing that understanding of the 12 multicultural nature of Canadian society. 13 1317 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 14 1318 Have you read the applicant's reply 15 to the CCTA intervention dated May 1? 16 1319 MS YALE: Yes. 17 1320 THE CHAIRPERSON: I wanted you to 18 address any comments you wish to on any aspect of it. 19 But I wanted to draw your attention particularly to the 20 point regarding capacity, total analog capacity, in the 21 table that they provide on page 3 and the following 22 paragraphs. Are those accurate as far as you are 23 concerned? 24 1321 MS YALE: I would say that what is 25 true is that total capacity is increasing but the
251
1 reference that they take to the idea that there is 2 planned additions to analog capacity I think is 3 erroneous. The way the cable system is currently 4 structured, analog capacity is primarily found below 5 550 megahertz, so all of the plant additions that are 6 taking these cable systems to 750 megahertz and beyond 7 may be talked about in terms of planned additions to 8 capacity or planned analog capacity, but the fact of 9 the matter is above 550 megahertz it is all engineered 10 to the provision of digital services and devoted to the 11 provision of digital services. So there is no new 12 vacant analog capacity. 13 1322 THE CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any 14 other comments on the reply that you would like to draw 15 our attention to? 16 1323 MS YALE: I don't know if this is the 17 best time to make it but I think one of the things that 18 I would like to comment on is, in particular, the 19 notion of this incredibly large advantage they have 20 from analogue relative to digital distribution. I 21 think a lot has changed from when they first filed for 22 a licence. 23 1324 We were at the start of the launch of 24 direct-to-home digital, cable was kind of barely 25 started several years ago, and so whatever the business
252
1 plans -- and we have been talking about whether the 2 business plan needs to be updated or whatever they were 3 comparing, that business plan is comparing the need for 4 analog in that environment. If you look at current 5 numbers, by the end of this year alone there will be 6 between 3.7 and 4 million digital homes in this country 7 between cable and satellite. That is just a completely 8 different scenario than what we were considering 9 several years ago when this applicant first came 10 forward. By the time the applicants would launch, 11 which is -- I heard him earlier refer to a date of 12 September 2003 -- it will probably be another million 13 beyond that so we are looking at close to 5 million 14 homes as a potential market in terms of digital 15 distribution. That is bigger than the base of 16 potential homes that saw the launch of the tier three 17 analog services. 18 1325 I think the events have overtaken us 19 a little bit in terms of this huge disconnect between 20 the world of analog and digital. As I say, from the 21 cable industry's perspective, the question is not 22 really a capacity issue. The question is: what is the 23 best use of that 6 megahertz of capacity? Is it one an 24 analog service or is it 10 or so digital services of 25 which this would be one?
253
1 1326 THE CHAIRPERSON: The difference of 2 course being that the rate is negotiated, access is 3 negotiated and a new licensee has to be able to 4 conclude satisfactory agreements as distinct from 5 access on the basis that is being requested. So from a 6 financial view, even with the numbers, those two 7 scenarios are quite different. 8 1327 MS YALE: I don't disagree the two 9 scenarios are different financially, but any applicant 10 could come before you and say, "Make me whole from a 11 business plan perspective". That is not a reason for 12 giving anybody analog carriage in this competitive 13 environment. There are many specialty ethnic services 14 that have struggled for years without that kind of 15 carriage and have figured out how to continue on, 16 notwithstanding more limited penetration and 17 distribution and have found their market. 18 1328 I understand why that is the story 19 they are selling. It is not clear that is why you 20 should buy it in the sense that every service in this 21 competitive marketplace has to find its consumer base. 22 1329 THE CHAIRPERSON: I guess their 23 position is that the category of licence they were 24 awarded is just a non-viable licence. Are you 25 suggesting that in your view, under the circumstances
254
1 you are describing, with more digital penetration, that 2 is incorrect and that now the service would be viable 3 in this environment? 4 1330 MS YALE: I have no idea whether or 5 not it would be viable any more than any of the other 6 digital services know whether or not they are viable 7 when they launch. The question is: what would take 8 them out of being like any other digital ethnic service 9 that it coming forward or third language service that 10 is coming forward and trying to establish a base? It 11 comes back to the exceptional importance test which we 12 believe they haven't met. 13 1331 All I am saying, though, is that the 14 circumstances and the potential they have is much 15 greater than it would have been several years ago 16 because of the huge growth in fact beyond what we had 17 predicted ourselves. The CCTA was asked when these 18 digital services were licensed several years ago to 19 provide forecasts that were used by many of the 20 applicants in that digital licensing proceeding to put 21 their business plans together. At this point, we are 22 at the top -- the reality is actually ahead of our 23 forecasts. 24 1332 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 25 1333 Commissioner McKendry.
255
1 1334 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I take it 2 that you see Mr. Iannuzzi's service primarily as 3 another ethnic service because you have cited examples 4 of other ethnic services to make your point that there 5 is no need out there, that the market is well-served 6 already. Is that how you see his service, as another 7 ethnic service? 8 1335 MS YALE: The short answer is, yes, 9 at the end of the day what is appealing about that 10 service is the third language programming to the subset 11 of consumers that might be interested in that third 12 language. I do not see that this would have appeal to 13 a wider audience. 14 1336 MS ASSHETON-SMITH: If I could just 15 add to that quickly. 16 1337 Even if it is a more broad appeal 17 service, my view is that is not determinative. At the 18 end of the day, the test is still exceptional 19 importance. Even if it is a broad appeal service, 20 which many specialty services in fact are, it does not 21 necessarily mean that they get priority carriage over 22 other existing programming services. I wouldn't want 23 to rest the distinction on whether it is an ethnic or 24 somehow a more broadly described service. The bottom 25 line at the end of the day is whether it is of such
256
1 importance that it needs to be licensed in this fashion 2 in order to achieve the objectives of the act. Our 3 view is that the Commission has correctly said that is 4 not the case. 5 1338 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: It seems to 6 me there is a bit of a disconnect here. You see it 7 primarily as an ethnic service. I take it Mr. Iannuzzi 8 doesn't see his service as an ethnic service and he can 9 speak for himself about that. But what I have taken so 10 far from the hearing is that in fact he doesn't view it 11 as an ethnic service at all. He views it as something 12 quite different. 13 1339 Your position is coming from the view 14 that it is an ethnic service. His view is, and I think 15 he has explained it reasonably well, that it is not an 16 ethnic service, certainly at least in the traditional 17 sense of things. You know, he has described 18 multiculturalism as a way of life. He said it is a 19 particular expression of the Canadian reality. One of 20 his colleagues talked about programming that would be 21 selected first because it was entertaining to a broad 22 spectrum of Canadians, not because it was entertaining 23 to a particular ethnic community. Another one of his 24 colleagues talked about programs that dealt with a 25 clash, and I think he meant that in a positive sense,
257
1 interaction between different multicultural groups and 2 how they interface with each other and live with each 3 other and resolve problems and take advantage of the 4 benefits of each other and so on. I took it from 5 Mr. Iannuzzi that he doesn't see this at all as an 6 ethnic service. 7 1340 MS YALE: That is absolutely correct. 8 He doesn't see it that way. But I guess I would 9 respond in two ways. The first is that the Commission 10 itself in previous decisions has been doubtful that the 11 service would be of appeal to a broader Canadian 12 audience and I echo the Commission's views on that. 13 1341 Having said that, what Lori 14 Assheton-Smith just said is the fundamental point, 15 which is that even if we take him at his word that that 16 is what the service is about, that is not determinative 17 of whether or not it meets the exceptional importance 18 test. 19 1342 MS ASSHETON-SMITH: I would also like 20 to add that even if you describe it as a multicultural 21 service as opposed to an ethnic service, WTN does not 22 have a monopoly on multiculturalism, as we have said 23 before. It is not just competing against ethnic 24 services. The multicultural facets of Canadian life 25 are reflected all over the digital and analog channels
258
1 today. You will hear more about that from other 2 intervenors as the day goes on. 3 1343 The Commission has already expressed 4 its concerns in this regard and has asked for a 5 cultural diversity plan to be put forward by the CAB, 6 has looked in other avenues to make sure that those 7 clashes or experiences or lifestyles are in fact 8 reflected in mainstream and in specialty programming 9 services. 10 1344 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: But I guess 11 in fairness you would acknowledge there are intervenors 12 that don't feel that multiculturalism is being 13 reflected as it should be in our broadcasting system. 14 1345 MS ASSHETON-SMITH: I acknowledge 15 that. 16 1346 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: The other 17 question I had was you indicated, Ms Yale, that you 18 felt that if a program was broadcast in, say, German, 19 that the primary audience would be German-speaking 20 people. I think Mr. Iannuzzi's view is different, as 21 we have discussed. 22 1347 What leads you to the view that the 23 primary audience will be German-speaking people. What 24 do you base that on? 25 1348 MS YALE: Just on the willingness of
259
1 people to watch subtitled programming on a regular 2 basis. I am not saying there wouldn't be some interest 3 in it. In fact, the specialty ethnic services that 4 exist today, and you will be hearing from some of them 5 this afternoon, do both subtitled and dubbed 6 programming. Absolutely the reason they are doing it 7 is to appeal to an audience that is broader than the 8 one in whose language the programming is offered. 9 1349 I am not saying it has no appeal, but 10 again it comes to whether or not this is going to 11 enhance our understanding of different cultures in this 12 country. There may be people for whom foreign language 13 programming is of interest and is made accessible 14 through subtitling and dubbing. I have no quarrel with 15 that. I think there is quite a range of that product 16 already available through the existing licensees. 17 1350 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you 18 very much. 19 1351 MR. HOWARD: Just one fast question. 20 1352 If I understand the argument 21 correctly, you are saying that there is a requirement 22 for multicultural programming in the Broadcasting Act 23 and that one of the ways of serving that is by 24 licensing the ethnic services that have been licensed; 25 in other words, subsumed within the multicultural is
260
1 ethnic. Is that your position? 2 1353 MS ASSHETON-SMITH: Yes. The word 3 multicultural and I believe multiethnic and 4 multilingual are all mentioned in the act and I think 5 they have different facets. Certainly ethnic 6 programming does undoubtedly reflect one element of the 7 multicultural objectives under the act. 8 1354 MR. HOWARD: Thank you. 9 1355 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very 10 much. 11 1356 Mr. Secretary. 12 1357 MR. LEBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 13 1358 The next appearing intervention will 14 be presented by the Canadian Association of 15 Broadcasters. Appearing for the CAB, Mr. Glenn 16 O'Farrell with somebody else. For the record, it is 17 Madam Sylvie Courtemanche. 18 INTERVENTION 19 1359 MR. O'FARRELL: Good afternoon, 20 Mr. Chair. 21 1360 We had notes for our presentation 22 thinking that it would be for this morning, but having 23 heard the exchange we had to toss aside our prepared 24 notes because, as you said, this is a different hearing 25 for a variety of reasons. Consequently, our comments
261
1 will not be able to reflect all of the components of 2 the exchange we heard with the Commission because we 3 would like to absorb them and some, frankly, we still 4 do not understand. 5 1361 For the record, my name is 6 Glenn O'Farrell. I am President and Chief Executive 7 Officer of the CAB. 8 1362 To my right is Sylvie Courtemanche, 9 Vice-President, Policy and Regulatory Affairs. 10 1363 In 1992 and again in 2000, the 11 Commission denied similar applications by World 12 Television Network for a national service with 13 distribution on a high penetration analog tier. 14 1364 Then in 2001, the Commission approved 15 a Category 2 digital licence for World Television 16 Network. 17 1365 For the past 10 years, the Commission 18 has denied the various applications for analog cable 19 distribution citing a variety of reasons. 20 1366 MS COURTEMANCHE: These ranged from, 21 one, concerns over Canadian content levels to, two, 22 deficiencies in programming to, three, the applicant's 23 failure to justify analog carriage based on the 24 exceptional importance of the service. 25 1367 Essentially, the CAB's position can
262
1 be summarized as follows. The Commission was 100 per 2 cent correct when it awarded World Television Network a 3 Category 2 digital licence. 4 1368 From where we stand today, and we are 5 only basing our comments on what is written because we 6 have not seen what is going to be filed but what we 7 know is on the public record, we believe that there is 8 nothing that warrants any decision other than a 9 Category 2 digital licence. 10 1369 If the Commission believes that a 11 service of the type proposed by World Television 12 Network should receive a greater distribution than that 13 accorded to a Category 2 digital licence, it should 14 issue an open call for competitive applications for a 15 Category 1 digital licence. 16 1370 The Commission's decision in 2001 to 17 award World Television Network a Category 2 digital 18 licence we think accurately reflects the Commission's 19 January 2000 policy of licensing new specialty and pay 20 services on digital only. This is of course the 21 cornerstone of the Commission's digital licensing 22 framework policy. Each new analog service absorbs 23 enough bandwidth for 10 to 12 new digital services. 24 1371 The CAB believes strongly in the 25 merits of the Commission's policy that all new
263
1 specialty and pay services should only receive digital 2 licences since this constitutes the best method of 3 ensuring choice and diversity in the broadcasting 4 system. 5 1372 Given the importance of the digital 6 platform to the future of the Canadian broadcasting 7 system, the CAB is compelled to refute a spurious 8 argument advanced by World Television Network in its 9 responses to several intervenors. Specifically, World 10 Television Network cites paragraph 3(1)(t) of the 11 Broadcasting Act which requires BDUs to make use of the 12 most effective technologies available at a reasonable 13 cost. World Television Network goes on to assert: 14 "Digital has been shown, 15 contrary to some predictions, to 16 be inefficient, expensive and 17 ineffective, and is a method 18 which should not be used." 19 (As read) 20 1373 This is patently false and is a clear 21 misrepresentation of the current state of the digital 22 distribution system in Canada. Digital penetration in 23 Canada is proceeding at a pace that has outstripped 24 even the most optimistic estimates at the time of the 25 2000 digital licensing hearing. All of the digital
264
1 services launched in the autumn of 2001 are still on 2 the air. This was the single largest launch of new 3 channels in the history of broadcasting. Its success 4 can be seen in the growing popularity of the new 5 digital services. 6 1374 Digital penetration is proceeding at 7 a faster rate in Canada than in the United States. 8 This means that Canadians, in growing numbers, are 9 discovering the quality and choice of digital 10 television. 11 1375 Les raisons fournies par le réseau 12 télémonde à l'appui de son affirmation qu'il n'est pas 13 approprié d'assujettir son service à une licence 14 d'exploitation en mode numérique sont trompeuses et mal 15 avisées et doivent être corrigées aux fins du dossier. 16 1376 L'ACR ne s'est pas présentée ici 17 aujourd'hui pour débattre le mérite de la catégorie de 18 programmation ethnique par rapport à d'autres 19 catégories. 20 1377 Enfin, nous applaudissons le Conseil 21 pour avoir autorisé en 2000 50 services numériques 22 ethniques de Catégorie 2. A ce chef, nous notons qu'à 23 date neuf de ces services ethniques de Catégorie 2 ont 24 lancé leurs services de programmation. 25 1378 Ces services ont été autorisés après
265
1 le déroulement d'un processus public et ouvert et en 2 respectant complètement le cadre de politiques relatif 3 à l'autorisation des services en mode numérique. 4 1379 Si le Conseil modifiait sa décision 5 maintenant, il remettrait en question les politiques, 6 les pratiques et les précédents établis en permettant 7 aux requérants de passer en première ligne, ce qui 8 n'avantagerait aucunement le système de radiodiffusion 9 canadien. 10 1380 Pour ces raisons, les politiques et 11 les précédents, l'ACR félicite le Conseil d'avoir pris 12 la décision en 2001 d'autoriser le réseau télémonde à 13 tire de services numériques de Catégorie 2 et nous 14 l'incitons de maintenir cette décision. 15 1381 In its December 2001 decision, the 16 Commission found several shortcomings in World 17 Television Network's proposed programming. We 18 understand that World Television Network has taken a 19 number of steps and continues to do so in the context 20 of this proceeding. Based on what we know in the 21 public record today, we don't think that these 22 adjustments have provided sufficient grounds for the 23 Commission to change its previous conclusions. 24 1382 Turning to the issue of carriage, 25 quite frankly, we are no longer sure what statement we
266
1 can make on that basis. We understand that there is 2 going to be a more concrete proposal put in in that 3 respect and some business plans that are going to 4 support that proposal because I have never seen so many 5 models being proposed in respect of a particular 6 service. We are certainly not clear what comments we 7 can provide in that regard. 8 1383 What is clear I think is that what 9 World Television Network is seeking is a much higher 10 degree of penetration, that which it was denied in 11 2001, so I think that is clear. We will see how that 12 is or is not supported with the business plans that 13 will be filed at a later date. 14 1384 Again, we would like to reiterate 15 that we think the Commission's digital licensing 16 framework is a good policy. It is a sound policy 17 because it allows for an open and competitive process. 18 It is a forward-looking policy and it balances public 19 policy and market considerations. It ensures that 20 programmers will contribute to make the maximum 21 possible contribution to the objectives of the 22 Broadcasting Act as well. 23 1385 But if the Commission was to 24 conclude, based on the record that is going to be 25 compiled in this particular proceeding, that another
267
1 national multicultural service is warranted and that 2 this service should receive greater penetration than 3 that which was ordered in 2001, then we think the 4 Commission should issue an open call for competitive 5 applications for a Category 1 licence. We think that 6 this call would achieve a number of objectives. We 7 think it would reflect the important considerations 8 inherent in the digital licensing framework policy with 9 respect to making the best possible use of the limited 10 capacity of Canadian distributors and it would also 11 reinforce the Commission's dedication to ensuring that 12 Canadians have access to the best possible service. 13 1386 Before I conclude our remarks, I do 14 want to say that we look forward at the CAB to having 15 an opportunity to comment on the revised business plans 16 and that we understand will be filed at a date to be 17 determined. We will obviously provide our additional 18 comments at that time. 19 1387 In the meantime, this concludes our 20 remarks and we would be pleased to answer your 21 questions. Thank you. 22 1388 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very 23 much. I have a few questions. 24 1389 As you know, and as Mr. O'Farrell 25 correctly pointed out, this is not a normal licensing
268
1 proceeding but a reconsideration and hearing 2 proceeding. We are charged with fully assessing the 3 appropriate options for carriage. 4 1390 I don't think you meant to be unfair, 5 Ms Courtemanche, in your comments but in trying to do 6 that we are exploring with the applicant various 7 options so that we can fulfil the mandate that the 8 governor in council has required of us. Sometimes it 9 shifts and there will be new filings, but I wonder 10 whether you would have anything more to address on 11 their current proposal as they put forward just after 12 lunch in regard to their carriage. 13 1391 I can review them as I have them down 14 if you like, unless you did on your own. Perhaps you 15 can help me with the specifics of those carriage 16 options that they put forward for both majority and 17 minority carriage of their service. 18 1392 MR. O'FARRELL: Perhaps I could 19 start, Mr. Chairman, and I will pass it to Sylvie. 20 1393 We applaud the fact that you have 21 conducted the hearing the way you have to allow for a 22 full discussion on all options so that the order in 23 council can be properly responded to. We were simply 24 commenting, and certainly not in any way, shape or form 25 suggesting that that was inappropriate but suggesting
269
1 that our ability to be helpful to you and to the 2 process is somewhat impaired by that and that we would 3 look forward to filing comments with you when the 4 revised business plans are available and so on and 5 forth. 6 1394 That would be very much, I think, in 7 keeping with the dynamic process that you have led here 8 to explore all the options. 9 1395 THE CHAIRPERSON: That is fair enough 10 and if you want to wait until then you will be given an 11 opportunity to comment at that point. 12 1396 I also wanted to discuss with you the 13 issue of the point that you made, in fact, I raised it 14 at the outset of the hearing with the applicant, which 15 is should the Commission decide that a multicultural 16 service should be given, call it priority carriage just 17 for discussion purposes, such as their requesting the 18 competition should be thrown open and the Commission 19 should have the best proposals before it from which to 20 choose. 21 1397 The applicant's response to that was 22 that would actually not be fair in its view because 23 they have been there since the beginning, they have put 24 forward the proposals, where were other people along 25 the way. They have been here, have put forward this
270
1 proposal. I suppose if one looked back on the two 2 cases that they cite where the Commission declared 3 certain services to come within the special importance 4 category of the regulations, 9(1)(h), in those cases, 5 there weren't competitive applications either. There 6 was TVA, which was then given carriage across the 7 country, and there was APTN, which didn't have a 8 competitive applicant against it. 9 1398 So balancing off the fairness 10 considerations on both sides, I wonder whether you 11 would comment on the applicant's response to the 12 question you have raised and the additional factor of 13 the precedence that I just raised. 14 1399 MR. O'FARRELL: I will let Sylvie 15 speak to the precedence. 16 1400 As to the applicant's contention that 17 they are entitled to some special treatment by the 18 Commission in view of the fact that they have applied 19 numerous times over the years for a licence of this 20 genre, mind you, I think it is fair to say it has 21 evolved somewhat over the course of time, that 22 certainly was not the Commission's practice to give any 23 particular status or privilege to an applicant if I 24 think of -- and his name escapes me right now, but I 25 think of the individual who applied for almost 10 years
271
1 in Alberta, on at least two occasions that I can recall 2 if not three, seeking a licence. Ultimately, when the 3 Commission awarded a licence it went to another player. 4 1401 You know, this is not I don't think 5 the Commission's practice nor would it be sound 6 practice to entitle or award a privilege to an 7 applicant who has brought previous applications before 8 the Commission that have been turned down on their 9 merits. A competitive application would in fact 10 produce what competitive processes generally do, 11 qualitative and quantitative measurements of what is 12 the best application under the circumstances. 13 1402 As to the precedence -- 14 1403 THE CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps just before 15 you get to the precedence, I took that point to be 16 slightly different from that because I don't disagree 17 with what you have said. I think that you are -- 18 nobody has grandfather rights in a competitive process. 19 But I took their point to be that this is a 20 reconsideration proceeding and it was in the context of 21 the options available to us in this proceeding. I 22 think their point was why would you have to rescind our 23 decision, because that would have to be the order, you 24 would rescind the decision but somehow find that there 25 was room for a priority carriage, multicultural system
272
1 and then you would call for open applications. They 2 were saying: you don't have to do that; you have 3 another option which is to confirm the decision with 4 variation and vary it by granting us the carriage we 5 seek because we have been here and we are the applicant 6 before you and we have a track record of having been 7 proposing this kind of service for a very long time. 8 1404 Perhaps you have a comment on that. 9 1405 MR. O'FARRELL: I thank you for 10 clarifying that. I would respond in the following 11 manner, that from what I can read into the order in 12 council, your responsibility in carrying out its 13 direction is to evaluate carriage options and carriage 14 options for a type of program service, not for this 15 service only or for this applicant only, which is why I 16 believe that again a competitive process would yield 17 the result of determining the interest of others to 18 offer such a service and you would be in a position, I 19 believe, having determined what is the appropriate 20 carriage option for that type of service, to give 21 notice thereof so that applicants would know what the 22 rules of the game were. 23 1406 I don't know if that helps you. 24 1407 THE CHAIRPERSON: So what you are 25 saying is that the use of the term services in the
273
1 order in council and not WTM, for example, means that 2 the Commission need not confine itself to the applicant 3 before it but in fact should look at any and all 4 services that wish to do so and, as a result of that, 5 hold an open competition if it is open? Is that what 6 you are saying? 7 1408 MR. O'FARRELL: That is precisely 8 what I am saying. 9 1409 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. 10 1410 MR. O'FARRELL: Because of the word 11 services, one could almost suggest that is an 12 invitation to the Commission to issue a call so that 13 competing applicants in the genre could come forward 14 and maybe you would licence more than one. Who knows? 15 1411 In the past, we saw the Commission in 16 Toronto, not too long ago, when the money was on 17 licensing, not licensing one, it licensed two. You 18 have the opportunity to determine what the market can 19 bear and what is in the interests of the system and 20 what are the appropriate decisions on applications. 21 1412 If that satisfies you, I will ask 22 Sylvie to speak to the precedence. 23 1413 THE CHAIRPERSON: Would you say that 24 would apply to existing services as well, that one 25 could simply, without licensing new services, for
274
1 instance, take services that exist and that aspire to 2 reflect and connect Canada's multicultural communities 3 and explore carriage options for them? 4 1414 MR. O'FARRELL: No. No, I would not. 5 I would suggest that it is with regard to new entrants. 6 That is how I understand and interpret the order in 7 council. 8 1415 THE CHAIRPERSON: It doesn't say that 9 either, but that is how you are interpreting it. 10 1416 MR. O'FARRELL: If we want to get 11 into the exact wording of the order in council, you 12 will agree that there are a number of things that one 13 can interpret into some of the words that are stated 14 there. 15 1417 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 16 1418 MS COURTEMANCHE: With respect to 17 your question, and I am hoping I will be answering 18 correctly, but I think what may be the argument here is 19 that there is no requirement under the act, if you are 20 going to require mandatory carriage under 9(1)(h), to 21 have first conducted a competitive process. I think 22 that is clear. I mean, obviously you did that in the 23 case of TVA and APTN. It was not a competitive process 24 and you did accord that type of carriage. 25 1419 I guess at that point, the test at
275
1 that time is whether or not that particular service, 2 given the record and what you have before you, warrants 3 that kind of exceptional carriage. So that is really 4 how you -- you have to base it on its merits. That is 5 how I understand it. 6 1420 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very 7 much. 8 1421 Commissioner Pennefather. 9 1422 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Just on 10 that point, Madam Courtemanche, I think you are aware 11 of the amendments tabled on the public record as of 12 April 8. I wondered if you had any further comment on 13 that point. Your written reply dealt with the original 14 application, and the amendments that have come forward 15 have offered some change. 16 1423 I wondered if you had any comment on 17 that in terms of your point about the merit of the 18 service and if in fact you see that those changes have 19 affected the way we look at the service in terms of its 20 sectional support for the objectives of the act, the 21 points you just raised. Based on the merits of the 22 service, have these changes altered your opinion? 23 1424 MS COURTEMANCHE: I guess what you 24 are trying to say is whether in my particular opinion I 25 think they have achieved that particular objective.
276
1 1425 I guess I would have to say that 2 trying to determine whether or not a service has met 3 that exceptional standard is a very difficult one. I 4 think we will be in a better position once we have seen 5 what is going to be filed and the changes because I 6 think that it is not only the programming changes that 7 they have proposed but also whether the funding that 8 they have -- you know, if the type of moneys that they 9 are going to allocate to that programming really 10 supports and enriches and provides you something that 11 is quite valuable and exceptional I will be in a better 12 position to answer that. 13 1426 So it will depend on how all the 14 revisions work out for me to be able to honestly answer 15 that question. I still in my mind have not fully 16 worked it out because you can add some hours but with 17 the kind of money that you are going to be allocating 18 to that, it will be helpful once I know all of the 19 particulars to answer that. 20 1427 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 21 1428 I understand that, from a general 22 point though, world programming -- we just had a 23 discussion with the CCTA representatives on the 24 interest to broad audiences of world foreign 25 programming subtitled in English and/or French. What
277
1 is your comment on the viability of such programming? 2 1429 MR. O'FARRELL: We tend to agree with 3 the views of the Communications and Diversity Network 4 that were filed with the Commission that state 5 effectively that the format might be deficient in 6 advancing the real need in multicultural communities to 7 go beyond niche or targeted programming to programs 8 which help all communities understand one another. 9 1430 From our understanding, that seems to 10 reflect our view from what we understand of the type of 11 service. 12 1431 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 13 Obviously, there are differences of opinion on that 14 whole point inclusive I am sure of those who currently 15 have world programming in their services. 16 1432 Thank you very much. Those are my 17 questions. 18 1433 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very 19 much. 20 1434 MR. O'FARRELL: With your permission, 21 Mr. Chair, on the subject of the interpretation of the 22 OIC, I just wanted to go back to it for a moment to 23 make sure that my views were clearly understood. 24 1435 When I interpret that this applies to 25 options for carriage for market entrants, I don't
278
1 believe the government had any intention to have you 2 conduct a review of the terms of carriage of existing 3 multicultural stations by using the language "that 4 aspire to reflect". Those that are already launched up 5 and running in their various niches are already in that 6 business. So I would expect that meant that was for 7 future applicants or services to be licensed. 8 1436 THE CHAIRPERSON: Existing applicants 9 don't have aspirations. 10 1437 MR. O'FARRELL: Existing licensees do 11 it very well. 12 --- Off microphone / Hors microphone 13 1438 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Secretary. 14 1439 MR. LEBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 15 1440 The agenda will be shuffled a little 16 bit because we have to accommodate some intervenors' 17 schedules. Next we will hear Maria Minna. 18 1441 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, 19 Mr. Secretary. You mean because you have been gracious 20 enough to accommodate them. 21 INTERVENTION 22 1442 HON. MARIA MINNA: Thank you, 23 Mr. Chairman. I really appreciate your extending this 24 case.
279
1 firstly a little bit about my understanding of 2 multiculturalism because I think that is an important 3 premise to what is in front of you today in terms of 4 understanding the importance of the application that is 5 in front of us. 6 1444 I have spent a good many years of my 7 life, before becoming a member of parliament, in the 8 field of working with multiculturalism issues and 9 working with the integration of immigrants into the 10 larger Canadian society. To me multiculturalism has 11 always been something that indicates inclusivity. It 12 is the equalizer, if you like, a vision and a mechanism 13 to help Canadian society take diversity, which we have 14 in our country, and to turn it into a strength rather 15 than a weakness, as is the case in societies outside of 16 Canada. We are very proud to say that diversity is a 17 strength for us. 18 1445 Multiculturalism includes all 19 Canadians, not just some. It includes the English, the 20 French, the Italian Canadians, everyone. It is an 21 umbrella. It is not for "the ethnics" but everyone 22 else. It is what Canada is, which is a multicultural, 23 multiracial society. 24 1446 I read Ms Andrée Wylie's speech of 25 February 15 stating that the CRTC had revised the
280
1 definition of an ethnic program. In that vision it 2 stated the definition of an ethnic program: 3 "Given the differing needs of 4 neogenerations of Canadians and 5 the different patterns of 6 immigration to Canada, now an 7 ethnic program is one that is 8 specifically directed to a 9 culturally or racially distinct 10 group other than a group that is 11 aboriginal Canadian or from 12 France or the British Isles, 13 whether or not it is in a 14 language other than French, 15 English or an aboriginal 16 language." (As read) 17 1447 It goes on to say: 18 "We believe that new policy now 19 better reflects the great 20 importance of official 21 language-ethnic broadcasting as 22 a bridge between the non-ethnic 23 and ethnic members of Canadian 24 society and between different 25 generations of Canadians."
281
1 (As read) 2 1448 I find, to be honest with you, this 3 type of definition quite offensive. It perpetuates in 4 my mind something that I have fought for a very long 5 time, and that is the definition of ethnics of the us 6 and them status relegating to some degree the peoples 7 who do not come from the British Isles and France as 8 second-class citizens in a sense because they will be 9 ethnics forever. It is us and them that I have always 10 dealt with throughout the last 20 years. Those are the 11 ethnics and these others are the mainstream, or these 12 others are the establishment, as we used to refer to 13 them when I was involved. It perpetuates forever a 14 second-class thinking. It does not allow for 15 mainstream to be defined as it should be. 16 1449 Mainstream is not CTV or CBC or 17 others by themselves, because they are also ethnic 18 broadcasting in a sense because they are broadcasting 19 in -- they are only depicting, to a greater extent, 20 thus far, one ethnocultural dimension of Canada. 21 Mainstream should be determined as broadcasting that 22 depicts all of the cultures of Canada, not just one 23 main one. 24 1450 Quite frankly, I think that this is 25 something that should be dropped because
282
1 multiculturalism, as I define it, must be understood, 2 as I said in my letter to you previously, as the 3 umbrella of means that we have developed to create this 4 multicultural nation. Having a policy of the CRTC, a 5 federal institution, that constitutes, continues to 6 have as its foundation, the hierarchial status of 7 Canadians based on ethnicity makes a mockery of the 8 legislative and policy directions established by 9 federal and provincial governments over the past three 10 decades. I certainly believe that. 11 1451 As well, to continue in the speech 12 again from Ms Wylie, it was saying that within 13 mainstream media the core objectives of the policy 14 remain the same; in other words, the aspect of the -- 15 in the speech she goes on to say that the core 16 objectives are: develop broadcasting services that 17 reflect Canada's cultural and linguistic plurality 18 which is essential to the Canadian social structure; 19 ensure access to ethnic programming for as many 20 Canadians as possible given resources, limitations; 21 and, foster opportunities for greater understanding 22 among people of different cultural backgrounds. 23 1452 Further, the CRTC has now taken the 24 steps to ensure that TVA and Global develop plans 25 outlining the concrete actions they would take to
283
1 better reflect the presence of cultural and racial 2 minorities and the aboriginal people in the community 3 that they serve. 4 1453 This is a step in the right direction 5 because being inclusive is fundamental to the cohesion 6 of our country. However, as I have said before, with 7 respect to -- there are two things. Firstly, it is not 8 necessarily mainstream in the sense that we are 9 referring to those stations or broadcasters as 10 mainstream that do not yet, in my view, reflect the 11 whole of Canada. In addition to that, however, with 12 respect to ethnic broadcasting, we need more than one 13 community talking to its own members, such as Italian 14 Canadians talking to Italian Canadians. 15 1454 I come from that background. I have 16 spent many years talking in Italian to the community 17 about their rights, about social issues, and those are 18 very fundamentally needed, there is no question. But 19 we cannot have a dialogue between the Italian to the 20 Italian, Portuguese to Portuguese and so on. We need 21 to also be talking to each other across cultures. This 22 is very important in order to facilitate an 23 understanding and respect for each other regardless of 24 our ethnic origins, otherwise we cannot understand and 25 never learn about each other's differences if we don't
284
1 talk across cultures and only in one way. 2 1455 I believe that the truly integrated 3 and inclusive society is evidenced by the participation 4 of all its citizens in the social, economic and 5 political fabric of the country. Therefore, it seems 6 to me that if we are going to have a station and a 7 broadcaster that can provide information and 8 understanding to break down barriers of one another 9 from across cultures, not just in one dimension but in 10 multidimensions, I think it is another aspect of what I 11 would call a mainstream broadcasting, an integrative 12 part of the multicultural policy of this country and 13 that it is critical that we break down the kind of 14 barriers that, to some degree, we have created -- are 15 not official in many ways in our country. 16 1456 I would recommend therefore that, 17 firstly, we drop ethnic versus non-ethnic from your 18 thinking, if we could, and from your publications, if 19 there are any, in addition to the speech that I saw, 20 because I think it establishes the us versus them 21 situation, it perpetuates it, and that we live up to 22 the spirit and principle of the Multiculturalism Act, 23 as I understand it. I think some of us include 24 imaginative programming that fosters learning of one 25 another, breaks down myths and misunderstandings among
285
1 Canadians, diverse communities and encourages 2 inclusivity. This is important to break down. 3 1457 So you have in front of you, as I 4 have said to you before, an application from World 5 Télémonde, whose focus is on the multicultural process 6 which addresses the cultural diversity of Canada and 7 provides a unique window on the world. It is national 8 in reach, is multicultural, but accessible to all in 9 both official languages. How can it not be understood 10 as having the potential to make a significant 11 contribution to the broadcasting system and to the 12 peoples of Canada? 13 1458 WTM recognizes that we have a 14 multicultural country here, a country that has been 15 described as having within it the whole of the world. 16 Yes, within Canada there are culturally diverse 17 communities. You could be hardpressed to find one that 18 isn't. There are ethnic groups, English, French, 19 Greek, Arab, Italian, German, Chinese, and I could go 20 on. 21 1459 What makes Canada multicultural is 22 the means we have developed to live and thrive 23 together. After having spent two and a half years in 24 different parts of the world where ethnic strife is 25 very strong, it is important that this country continue
286
1 to be the model that it is and encouraged to become an 2 even stronger model. The only way to do that is to 3 ensure that within our own borders the multicultural 4 principle and goals that we have set for ourselves are 5 strengthened to every possibly imagined broadcasting 6 that we can think of, and this is one of them, where 7 people can see cross-cultures in English and French 8 subtitles. 9 1460 Thank you. 10 1461 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very 11 much, Ms Minna. I enjoyed your presentation. It is 12 interesting that the policy that the ethnic program 13 definition came out of is in fact called "Broadcasting 14 Policy Reflecting Canada's Linguistic and Cultural 15 Diversity". I guess when it came time -- 16 1462 HON. MARIA MINNA: The title sounds 17 fine, but when you break it down to non-ethnic versus 18 ethnic and into all of the refined thinking, what it 19 shows to me, with respect, is a thinking that I find 20 someone dangerous in this country. 21 1463 THE CHAIRPERSON: I take your point. 22 So it would be interesting if you could help us come 23 out with a word that would replace that to define a 24 program that is specifically directed to a culturally 25 or racially distinct group. As you described yourself
287
1 wanting to address the Italian community in Italian, 2 for example, on rights or whatever other subject, it 3 was I think in an effort to find a shorthand way of 4 describing that, an adjective that would differentiate 5 that, that was come up with. If it offends 6 sensibilities, I am sure that is not the Commission's 7 intention. 8 1464 HON. MARIA MINNA: My view is more 9 than offending my sensibilities. I have had those 10 happen to me before. It is more to make sure that it 11 is not what is believed. I would be much happier to 12 know that that is not what you really think in terms of 13 that is not the thinking behind the words, in other 14 words. 15 1465 So I could say to you we could use -- 16 multiculturalism is a broad term, but we are looking at 17 different linguistic and cultural broadcasting because 18 when you are talking about the Haitians it is French 19 but it is a different -- you are talking about culture 20 here, you are not talking about language so much. If 21 you are talking about some other carriers where English 22 is the mother tongue, again you are talking about 23 culture not language so much so you can refer to it in 24 other ways. 25 1466 But it seems to me that the word
288
1 "ethnic" to me describes the ethnocultural heritage of 2 all of us and it is not -- 3 1467 THE CHAIRPERSON: I can assure you 4 certainly on Madam Wylie's part, as well as my own and 5 anybody at the Commission that the bad side of that 6 thought is not present. If you want to help us devise 7 a word that -- 8 1468 HON. MARIA MINNA: Be happy to. 9 1469 THE CHAIRPERSON: -- removes any of 10 that aftertaste, we would certainly be open to it. It 11 is an effort to actually be as constructive and helpful 12 as possible in allowing that kind of programming that 13 you and I have just discussed to be on the 14 broadcasting -- 15 1470 HON. MARIA MINNA: Mainstream. The 16 mainstream, as I call it. 17 1471 THE CHAIRPERSON: Well, is it really 18 mainstream, though, when you are speaking in Italian to 19 the Italian community? 20 1472 HON. MARIA MINNA: No. But there are 21 two aspects here. There are two or three areas. One 22 is the need for people to communicate both their 23 heritage and information to be able to -- which also 24 facilitates integration. It allows retention of 25 culture and a great many things. There is a lot in
289
1 there which deals with language and culture, the ones 2 that we are not talking about. 3 1473 The other is when we talk about 4 mainstream, CBC, CTV or any of the other stations, I 5 don't consider them mainstream yet because they don't 6 reflect the whole of Canada. They don't reflect the 7 culture and the people of Canada yet in their 8 broadcasting quite frankly and until such time as they 9 do that -- the mainstreams to me, which is the 10 multicultural Canada, includes all of us, this is what 11 I am saying, that until such time as we have a truly 12 mainstream broadcasting in this country which we don't 13 have. 14 1474 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 15 1475 Commissioner McKendry. 16 1476 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you for 17 your comments today, Ms Minna. I think they are 18 helpful to us. As the Chair has indicated, we are 19 always anxious to come up with the kinds of language 20 that will be appropriate to the issues as you have 21 described them. 22 1477 I just have one question with respect 23 to the applicant that is in front of us in this 24 hearing. 25 1478 We have already granted the applicant
290
1 a licence, but we have been asked to reconsider the 2 kind of carriage that the applicant would get on cable 3 television and direct-to-home television I suppose for 4 that matter. The issue really in front of us is 5 whether or not the applicant should be granted carriage 6 on basic cable television so that all cable subscribers 7 would have to pay for the service regardless of their 8 interest in the service. Because basic cablevision 9 service is full up or near full up, it might cause some 10 disruption in terms of reallocating channels and so on. 11 1479 Is it your view that the kind of 12 carriage that is being sought by Mr. Iannuzzi is the 13 right kind of carriage for this kind of service? 14 1480 HON. MARIA MINNA: It seems for me 15 that it is, for the reasons that I was talking about 16 earlier. Having been involved in community work for 17 about 20 years, as I said before, it is important for 18 me to see that in this -- I live in Toronto. It is a 19 fairly multicultural city, all of Canada is, but there 20 is probably just about every corner of the world 21 reflected in that city. For all of those different 22 pieces of that city to talk to each other, it is very 23 viable to have a broadcast that provides the news or 24 some broadcast in Russian or in what have you with 25 subtitles so everyone else can read it. It crosses
291
1 cultural boundaries and racial boundaries so that we 2 can each understand one another. 3 1481 Just think of listening to the news 4 or what has happened in Chechnya, for instance, first 5 thing, or a program directly from Russia in Russian. 6 The people who understand it will understand it and 7 those of us will read it in subtitles but you will hear 8 it directly as opposed to watching it -- you know, 9 waiting later to watch it broadcast through our own 10 channel hoops then reinterpret what is going on, which 11 is fine, we will watch that too, but that gives you a 12 balance. Watching a movie or whatever other program 13 you might like from India in Hindi or Punjabi for that 14 matter or whatever other language. 15 1482 For the first time I don't 16 understand -- I flip the channels all the time. I 17 would love to understand what is going on in some of 18 the movies that I see on TV that are going on in Hindi 19 and Punjabi. I don't. But it would be great because 20 it would help me to understand a lot about the culture 21 and about the background, the history of the people in 22 those areas when there are documentaries or what have 23 you. 24 1483 This is a way to reach out across 25 cultural lines and linguistic lines. To me, I think it
292
1 is a very valuable addition to our quest to break down 2 barriers to integrate and build a cohesive society in 3 our country so that we not only are proud of who we 4 are, where our heritage is and where we come from, as I 5 am of my Italian heritage, but at the same time can 6 also understand and appreciate one another across 7 cultural and linguistic lines which in this country I 8 think is very fundamental given the number of 9 immigrants that come in our country every year and the 10 number of nationalities that I represent in our country 11 already. 12 1484 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thanks very 13 much. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 14 1485 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very 15 much, Ms Minna. 16 1486 HON. MARIA MINNA: Thank you. Thank 17 you for letting me go at this time. I need to catch my 18 flight. 19 1487 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Secretary. 20 1488 MR. LEBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 21 The next appearing intervention will be presented by 22 the Multicultural Association of Nova Scotia, 23 Mrs. Barbara Campbell. 24 INTERVENTION 25 1489 MS CAMPBELL: Thank you,
293
1 Mr. Chairman, for giving me the opportunity before I 2 catch my flight at four o'clock. I came all the way 3 from Halifax to tell you how anxious we are to have a 4 multicultural television program in our region. 5 1490 I represent the Multicultural 6 Association of Nova Scotia. All of our programs are 7 directed at mainstream Canadians as well as our 8 membership, which is multicultural. This television 9 program would actually complement all of our 10 programming that we do. We can actually make reference 11 to the variety of cultures in our region which is at a 12 very low rate at the moment due to very low immigration 13 levels. 14 1491 This is another reason why we think 15 multicultural programming in Atlantic Canada would not 16 only attract new immigrants to our region but also 17 would keep them there because they can see themselves 18 on the screen, they will have some reference point as 19 to where they might hear their language, how they might 20 get the news from home, how they might view movies in 21 their own language because they may not understand 22 French or English and speak it well, so that they feel 23 welcome, they feel secure, they feel wanted and 24 welcome. 25 1492 Multicultural programming in Nova
294
1 Scotia is not available. Previous speakers have told 2 you that there is really no gap, that there is 3 ethnocultural programming, there is multicultural 4 programming. We haven't seen any. Maybe they are in 5 Toronto but they are certainly not in Halifax and 6 certainly not in the rest of the Atlantic provinces. 7 1493 I want to draw your attention to the 8 fallout of 9/11 and the efforts that we all have to 9 make to bridge cultures, to educate people about other 10 religions and other cultural behaviours and traditions. 11 How are we going to do this unless we have the major 12 television stations project the diversity and the 13 multicultural reality of this country and to provide 14 connecting mechanisms so that people can actually learn 15 what Muslims are all about and why -- and Arabs that 16 have been persecuted because of the 9/11? We need to 17 educate ourselves and television has been watched 18 constantly and that is the best medium and it is the 19 only medium that can really reach all of our Canadians. 20 1494 I also want to point out that our 21 young people need to see themselves -- if they are of, 22 say, a visible minority, for instance -- on the screen. 23 We need to have our young people understand the global 24 reality within our own region, within our own 25 provinces, within our own country. We need to see them
295
1 as being citizens of the world. Such a program will 2 project to them that there is something beyond Canada, 3 beyond Nova Scotia and that the people they meet in the 4 school system or on the street are to be respected and 5 understood because of their cultural difference. We 6 can appreciate their difference much better if we learn 7 something from them. 8 1495 I have something written down but I 9 don't really want to start reading. I want to relate 10 to you in a very human and very realistic way. I am 11 not familiar with the technicalities of digital 1 and 12 digital 2. This is your business. My business is 13 people and people need to be serviced as Canadians 14 should. We have a multicultural country, we have a 15 multicultural policy and so we need to have a 16 multicultural channel. I support WTM wholeheartedly 17 and I wish them all the best. 18 1496 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very 19 much, Ms Campbell. 20 1497 Could you tell us a little bit about 21 the Multicultural Association of Nova Scotia? Your 22 intervention didn't go into detail. 23 1498 MS CAMPBELL: No, no. I am not much 24 of a detail person. I am a big picture person. But 25 let me tell you, we have been in existence for 27 years
296
1 and I have been this long with them. Mr. Weiner, who 2 is in the audience today, he well remembers us. 3 1499 Our program is basically training 4 mainstream about the ethnicity or the diversity and 5 multicultural reality of Canada. In return, we train 6 our minority people to actually be able to access the 7 services that Canada provides, whether it is health 8 care, education, policing and so forth. 9 1500 THE CHAIRPERSON: How many members do 10 you have? 11 1501 MS CAMPBELL: We have a board that is 12 made up of approximately 14 umbrella organizations. We 13 have a regional multicultural council sitting there. 14 We have the Nova Scotia teachers union who has a 15 multicultural policy. They have input into our 16 programming as well. The Human Rights Commission is 17 there, the Bicultural Centre, the health council, the 18 education council, these are umbrella organizations for 19 the province that help us develop programming for 20 multiculturalism. 21 1502 THE CHAIRPERSON: How are you funded? 22 1503 MS CAMPBELL: We have core funding 23 from our province, we are very privileged to have that, 24 only because the multicultural association is a member 25 of the Cultural Federations of Nova Scotia. The
297
1 program funding comes from the federal government. 2 1504 You know, there is a paper out. It 3 is being put out by Minister Copps. It is a reflection 4 on multiculturalism because this year we are 5 celebrating the 30th anniversary of multiculturalism. 6 Do read it. It is quite interesting. It is short. It 7 will give you a very good picture. 8 1505 Let me tell you that ethnicity is a 9 scientific term for a group of people that have common 10 values, so every one of us is ethnic, including the 11 aboriginal people, because they too are in a group that 12 have common values, understanding and religion, and 13 communication and language. They are also ethnic. It 14 is scientifically proven. So let's not play with the 15 terms. Ethnic is inherent to all of us. 16 1506 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 17 1507 Commissioner McKendry. 18 1508 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I was 19 interested in your comment that there was I think you 20 said no multicultural programming available in Halifax 21 and in Atlantic Canada. I just wanted to confirm that 22 I had heard that correctly. There is nothing on your 23 television set when you go through the dial or across 24 the remote control? 25 1509 MS CAMPBELL: No. I'm sorry. I
298
1 might run into Vision TV and there is something about 2 the Indo-Canadian programming. On cable they might 3 show the results of our multicultural festival. They 4 come and tape and they show it on TV, but there is no 5 consistency there. The East Indian program is an 6 ethnocultural program. It is directed at one ethnic 7 group. A multicultural program incorporates all of our 8 groups. It is directed at all Canadians and 9 multiculturalism is for all Canadians. It is also for 10 the aboriginals, believe it or not. 11 1510 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you 12 very much. 13 1511 MS CAMPBELL: You are welcome. 14 1512 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, 15 Mrs. Campbell, for taking the trouble. You have 16 travelled so far and waited so long to speak. We 17 welcome your contribution. 18 1513 MS CAMPBELL: Thank you. Thank you. 19 1514 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Secretary. 20 1515 MR. LEBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 21 1516 The next appearing intervention will 22 be presented by Mr. Paul Winn. 23 INTERVENTION 24 1517 MR. WINN: Thank you, Commissioners, 25 for allowing me the opportunity to address you.
299
1 1518 My name is Paul Winn. I am from the 2 lower mainland of British Columbia so I am the other 3 end of the country. You just heard from the east. Now 4 it is from the west side. 5 1519 I am a supporter of WTM's 6 application. As you may know by my correspondence to 7 you, I am a member of the board of WTM. I am also the 8 President of the Black Historical and Cultural Society 9 of British Columbia and the President of the B.C. 10 Festival of the Arts Society of British Columbia which 11 is, for information, the largest multidiscipline arts 12 festival in the country. It allows me an opportunity 13 to touch base with not only a lot of cultural groups 14 but a lot of artistic groups as well at the same time. 15 1520 I wanted to emphasize the importance, 16 I think, of WTM being on an analog system as opposed to 17 digital system simply because it can reach a larger 18 number of people instantly. This is probably -- I am 19 taking a guess now -- maybe my 10th time appearing 20 before a CRTC Commission since 1977, encouraging the 21 CRTC to force people with licences to reflect who I am 22 in this country on Canadian television. 23 1521 By way of background I have a little 24 more background. I guess I would describe myself as a 25 multigenerational, multicultural Canadian. My family
300
1 has only been in Ontario since about 1840 so I think I 2 have some roots here and yet I never see myself truly 3 reflected on Canadian television from a cultural aspect 4 of me and my peoples. So I think that WTM, what they 5 are proposing is to finally allow me to be included in 6 mainstream television. 7 1522 Mainstream television tends to 8 characterize the racial minorities in this society when 9 there is conflict and confrontation or, on the other 10 side, if it is something extremely unique where 11 somebody has achieved something so high above the 12 standard that they think it is important that they 13 reflect that. Otherwise, you never see yourself on 14 television and you never see yourself in the 15 programmings. 16 1523 You will see programmings that have 17 touched on issues of Scottish families and their 18 hardships and their toils of coming to this country and 19 building it, but you never see them about the black 20 community, you never see them about the Chinese 21 community except for maybe building a railroad, and 22 that was the only thing that they contributed to this 23 country. I think it is these kinds of things that WTM 24 is going to change and I think, as a result, will 25 increase the viewing audience of Canadian television as
301
1 well because there are things that happen in this 2 country that people just don't seem to know about or 3 understand. 4 1524 I was here yesterday as well 5 listening and there was comments about unique and 6 exceptional. The fact that what WTM is trying to do in 7 bringing the rest of Canada together by reflecting who 8 we are and what we do in this country, I think that is 9 unique because mainstream television as it exists today 10 certainly doesn't do that. Because that is unique, I 11 think that makes them also exceptional because they are 12 going to be the first ones to do that, but to do it in 13 a manner which is going to allow us to reach the 14 maximum population in this country I believe it has to 15 be on an analog system. It can't be done digitally 16 because if it takes as long to try and get, you know, 17 the cultural society reflected on mainstream television 18 as it has for the last 25 years of me trying to do that 19 in other ways, then it will be 2020 before we actually 20 reflect the new mainstream of Canadians on mainstream 21 television through digital and I think that would be a 22 big mistake. 23 1525 MR. WINN: I think that when we are 24 looking at racial minorities in this country, and if 25 you look at your television and you look at the people
302
1 who comprise the decision makers in those 2 organizations, they don't look like me. I know. I 3 have been in their boardrooms and I have tried to talk, 4 to convince them, and they don't listen too well. 5 1526 They think they know best and they 6 seem to cater to a certain denominator that looks more 7 than themselves that it does like myself or other 8 people who are of colour. 9 1527 I think that we have to be very, very 10 certain about this, and one of the reason I associated 11 with WTM is because their board is certainly reflective 12 of that cross-cultural entity in this country. There 13 is a very, very vast group of us who come from 14 different religious and racial backgrounds that sit on 15 that board and the things in our experiences -- you 16 heard Kerry Johnston who is one of the architects of 17 multicultural policies in this country, when he was in 18 the public service. 19 1528 Again, myself I was responsible for 20 setting up the Employment Equity Program for Visible 21 Minorities in the federal government. So we know about 22 employment equity, we know about multiculturalism, we 23 know about those kinds of things that are of interest 24 to those what I will call marginalized Canadians who 25 don't find themselves on television these days and
303
1 reflected except, as I mentioned, if there is 2 confrontation or something that is so highly 3 exceptional in their achievement, they get reported on 4 the television. 5 1529 I think that from that perspective 6 WTM is unique and I think it is exceptional, and while 7 I know it's not the debate about the standard that was 8 being set and it shouldn't be measured in that way, but 9 I think if we look at the words and simplify them, yes, 10 something that has not been done before, something that 11 is being proposed, something that is going to change 12 how Canadians look at television, where they are going 13 get their information from. 14 1530 I like to see stories and things 15 about other countries and other cultures and how other 16 people view us as Canadians. If I have to do it 17 through subtitles, I think that's great, but if I have 18 to look at a show in a language that I can't 19 understand, I flip the channel, quite frankly, because 20 I am not getting much out of it. 21 1531 Sometimes I will stick around if 22 there is just music there because the music might 23 capture me, but if I can't understand the language they 24 are speaking I don't stick around very long. 25 1532 I think that I would urge you as the
304
1 Commissioners to grant the request that WTM has put 2 before you to ensure that they get a spot on an analog 3 listing as opposed to the digital which may take years 4 to develop to the point where we get enough of the 5 Canadian population having access to them. 6 1533 Those are my comments. 7 1534 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very 8 much, Mr. Winn, for coming this way to make your 9 presentation. 10 1535 You are from Vancouver and on the 11 Vancouver dial -- I will ask a similar question to the 12 one Mr. McKendry asked of Mrs. Campbell from Halifax -- 13 what services now do you find on the dial that address 14 multicultural programming? 15 1536 MR. WINN: There are some on the 16 cable, the cable system. Any individual groups can go 17 the local cable station and get a specific spot on it, 18 but again it's directed at their particular community. 19 It's not a broad enough spectrum and you do get shows 20 in different languages. The Indo-Canadian community 21 certainly has shows in there. The Chinese community 22 has shows in Chinese, and then every once in a while 23 you will see a show in Polish, but because they are in 24 Polish, I don't know anything else in Polish. I can 25 tell you hello and that's the extent of it.
305
1 1537 But I would like to know, some of the 2 plays look very interesting. They look very comical 3 some of them in these different languages, but because 4 I can't understand the language, I flip the channel. 5 But we do get some. 6 1538 THE CHAIRPERSON: Right and this 7 service will, of course, have a lot of that kind of 8 programming as well from other countries with subtitles 9 that you would see. 10 1539 MR. WINN: Well, that's my point. 11 Then I would be more likely to sit and watch it. 12 1540 THE CHAIRPERSON: Right. 13 1541 MR. WINN: I mean, I don't know, 14 there is an Italian film I saw recently that was 15 subtitled about a concentration camp. I found it very 16 entertaining. I could watch it, I could understand 17 what was being said even though the principal language 18 was Italian. 19 1542 THE CHAIRPERSON: An entertaining 20 program about a concentration camp? 21 --- Laughter / Rires 22 1543 MR. WINN: Well, it was. It was very 23 touching, a very human story and I liked it. But there 24 are others. I never would have watched some other 25 films that I have seen in the movie theatre if they
306
1 hadn't had subtitles. 2 1544 THE CHAIRPERSON: Right. You are 3 familiar with the MultiVan licensing. 4 1545 MR. WINN: Yes. 5 1546 THE CHAIRPERSON: According to the 6 newspapers, this is one that we are not going to get 7 sent back to us to reconsider. 8 1547 MR. WINN: Well, there is a lot of 9 controversy about it because of the way it was done and 10 who is sort of on one side of the equation or the 11 other. 12 1548 THE CHAIRPERSON: Right. But do you 13 think that will plug a gap, in the Vancouver area at 14 least, in the kind of programming that you are speaking 15 of? 16 1549 MR. WINN: Unfortunately it will to a 17 small point because what I found with these stations is 18 if the community has a lot of wealth and can get the 19 sponsors to put shows about their community on the air 20 they will be reflected, but if you are a community who 21 doesn't have a lot of money, then you won't be seen on 22 the television. That's why most of them end up going 23 to the local cable station and getting an hour once in 24 a while. That has been part of the problem. 25 1550 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very
307
1 kindly. 2 1551 MR. WINN: You are welcome. 3 1552 THE CHAIRPERSON: We will now break 4 for 15 minutes at resume at 4:15. 5 --- Upon recessing at 1600 / Suspension à 1600 6 --- Upon resuming at 1618 / Reprise à 1618 7 1553 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Secretary, 8 would you call the next item, please? 9 1554 MR. LEBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 10 1555 The next three intervenors will be 11 appearing as a panel and we will hear from Mr. Gerry 12 Weiner, Mr. John Mancinelli, and Mr. Clarence S. Bayne. 13 INTERVENTION 14 1556 MR. GERRY WEINER: Mr. Chair, 15 Commissioner, I am Weiner, in case you want to blame 16 Clarence Bayne for anything I am doing. 17 1557 I am delighted to be back before the 18 Commission as I was before as a supporter and friend 19 and there are, of course, two main reasons that draw me 20 to spend a Friday with you in Ottawa and they are not 21 because I am an elected person any more, having left 22 elected office on January the 1st. 23 1558 I am in my private period now, so it 24 has given me a chance for reflection and it was 25 interesting to hear that we are about to celebrate the
308
1 30th anniversary of multiculturalism. I think I spent 2 much of the last 30 years being a vigorous defender of 3 minority rights. My background demands no less. My 4 citizenship means that to me. 5 1559 There was an era when I worked very 6 vigorously to bring forward a concept of 7 multiculturalism and a hope that all of the 8 institutions of our society would reflect that view 9 that indeed my country would be building harmony 10 without homogeneity and unity without uniformity and 11 that somehow we would be enriched by that diversity. 12 1560 So my career as a member of five 13 different governments and a constant volunteer demands 14 me to come back and in any way help the Commission in 15 its further understanding that there is a simple 16 requirement that the medium called television, which is 17 a powerful medium, still our most effective educational 18 tool, that it must reflect who we have become, the 19 changing face of this country. 20 1561 Now, my recent travel around the 21 world have been extensive. I do travel in various 22 parts of the world. I had occasion of being in Europe 23 last week, in Paris and Amsterdam, two very hot spots 24 at the moment, not weatherwise, but you can feel the 25 discomfort in terms of the population, discomfort with
309
1 who they have become. 2 1562 I don't want that to happen to us. 3 We are a model of the world. We are a model of what 4 can be when you learn to live with each other, when you 5 have this broader understanding of each other, when 6 understanding is built on this respect, when there is 7 insight into what we are. 8 1563 I don't want my views of the world 9 filtered. I want them direct. Now, it's clear that 10 wherever I am in the world and I open up my television, 11 the CNN and BBC broadcasting seem to be the sameness 12 all over. 13 1564 I want Canada to be something 14 different and here we have a medium that has this 15 opportunity. 16 1565 This, as I said, is my third 17 appearance before the Commission in support of WTM and 18 in a way I am shocked that this innovative and 19 contemporary TV service, which has received your 20 approval, still somehow is not being given the full 21 mainstream approval it requires. So as the Minister 22 Responsible for the introduction of the 23 Multiculturalism Canada Act a number of years ago, I 24 react with incredibility to one of the few rationales 25 provided in the majority decision delivered last
310
1 December 14th. I address directly causes 1 to 8 under 2 the heading: The Commission's Approach to Canadian 3 Cultural Diversity, which incidently constitutes a 4 large part of the rationale for the majority's denial. 5 1566 In this section the decision outlines 6 the initiatives it has taken to give substance to 7 Section 3(1)(d)(iii) of the Broadcasting Act, with its 8 expression of its multicultural objectives for the 9 Canadian broadcasting system. 10 1567 I consider the majority opinions 11 rationalization to at best have been based on failure 12 to understand the multiculturalism, the foundation of 13 WTM. The concrete efforts described in the majority 14 opinion denying WTM were in every instance ethnic in 15 nature, and I heard that discussion about ethics before 16 and until Ms Campbell from Nova Scotia made me feel 17 comfortable that we are all ethnics, I too was upset by 18 the use of the word "ethnic". 19 1568 So as I stated earlier, I was 20 fortunate to be the Minister who introduced the 21 Multiculturalism Canada Act. The Act clearly describes 22 the policy objectives which won unanimous support in 23 the House of Commons and the Senate within the 24 "politique canadienne de multiculturalisme". 25 1569 La politique canadienne en matière
311
1 consiste à reconnaître le fait que le multiculturalisme 2 reflète la diversité culturelle raciale de la société 3 canadienne et ce traduit par la liberté pour tous ses 4 membres de maintenir, de valoriser et de partager le 5 patrimoine culturel ainsi qu'à sensibiliser la 6 population à ce fait. 7 1570 The various other causes -- and I 8 want to give opportunity to my two colleagues to make 9 representations, but it's clear that in terms of the 10 Multiculturalism Canada Act, and other Acts of 11 Parliament, that it must reflect this in terms of how 12 this institution, as well as every other institution of 13 our society, must reflect the changing diversity of 14 Canada and what it is today to be a Canadian citizen. 15 1571 So I would like to give opportunity 16 to my two colleagues to say a few a words. 17 1572 I want to thank you all very, very 18 much for allowing me again, as a vigourous supporter 19 and friend and volunteer, to hopefully help you 20 understand that we do want this as a full mainstream 21 service. We are entitled to it. It will give us a 22 broader understanding of the world. It will help us 23 understand the people that have come up to make this 24 mosaic called Canada. 25 1573 I think today, when there is so much
312
1 difficulty in too many parts of the world, and far too 2 often the only focus that we get on the screen is that 3 15 second bite of disaster, but it tells me nothing 4 about the life that has been lived, the fact that 5 people do have a quality of life around and about when 6 that TV camera rolls and I want to know more about it. 7 1574 Dr. Bayne? 8 1575 DR. BAYNE: Thank you. 9 1576 My name is Clarence Bayne. I'm from 10 Montreal. I'm a professor at the University of 11 Concordia in the John Molson School of Business. 12 1577 Ever since I decided in 1960 to stay 13 in Canada and live and work in Canada, I immediately 14 had to address a psychological problem. I could no 15 longer continue to think that I was just going back 16 home and I was just on a temporary sojourn here as a 17 young man having fun and getting educated at the same 18 time. I had to think immediately as to what my life 19 was going to be and how everyone around me, and how the 20 government decisions, policies and the attitudes of the 21 police. At that time it was nearly a joke to me 22 because, of course, I wasn't going to stay. 23 1578 These things immediately I had to 24 address. I had to address the fact that, of course, I 25 came to this country knowing who I was. I was a Black
313
1 man with a Caribbean culture. I was rooted largely in 2 African traditions and values but, of course, modified 3 by the actions and activities of the people within a 4 new environment. 5 1579 And so I had no problem in with 6 myself in that respect, but I had to immediately 7 address the problem of my not seeing myself reflected 8 in the society that I was deciding to live in. 9 1580 So I made a decision clearly that if 10 I was going to continue to live in Canada that it would 11 be no question that I would exert my energy to changing 12 this country so to reflect me. 13 1581 I didn't think that I could expect 14 other peoples to do that for me. I think I had to do 15 it for myself. So I basically assigned, in a sort of a 16 way, my own philosophy or model, if you would put it 17 this way, that every cultural group has a 18 responsibility for contributing those things of value 19 which they bring with them to this country. 20 1582 And so for me Canada is not a culture 21 which is a fixed culture. It is an emerging culture, 22 and all cultures should be emerging and dynamic to 23 incorporate as many new things and new persons and new 24 experiences as possible. 25 1583 I have worked for 30 years through
314
1 the arts and through many communities. I am on too 2 many community boards and in too many programs to name 3 them here, all aimed at one specific thing: To 4 creating a Canada with which I can identify. 5 1584 Now, I do not deny or negate the 6 importance of a cultural group because I belong to a 7 cultural group. I belong to a cultural group which has 8 also certain racial characteristics and traits, but I 9 think that is important because if Canada is going to 10 be continuously renewed, it must come out of the 11 experience of those root groups. 12 1585 But there needs to be another 13 mechanism somewhere, a process which transforms these 14 things into that which is Canada, which is that which 15 we can all identify with. As a typical example, I was 16 literally sick last night because the Canadians blew a 17 lead in the last -- 18 1586 THE CHAIRPERSON: I was too, 19 Dr. Bayne. 20 1587 DR. BAYNE: I come from a cricket 21 culture. 22 --- Laughter / Rires 23 1588 DR. BAYNE: But that is a certain 24 kind of a symbol. That is why for how many years now I 25 have stuck with this. This is the first time I am
315
1 here, but believe you me I have heard of this. I have 2 communicated and sent e-mails, et cetera, I have spoken 3 to Kerry and members of the Board for nearly ten years. 4 1589 If this is granted, I will be, I 5 think, one of the -- I wouldn't say grandfathers, I 6 guess I would be a sort of a godfather type of thing in 7 a sense. 8 1590 Why? Because I believe that this is 9 a mechanism. What has been defined here gives us a 10 sort of mechanism by which we can bring about the kind 11 of Canada that I am talking about, where everyone 12 speaks to everyone, where everyone learns about 13 everyone, where everyone can choose to borrow or not 14 borrow the keys from everyone else, where we can all 15 create a situation where this Canada will emerge with 16 which we can all identify. So that is why I support 17 this. 18 1591 Now, I understand here the issue is 19 not whether this is a good thing. I understand from 20 everything I have heard said -- if I can interpret 21 signs and body language and read minds -- that it is 22 not that this is not a good thing. It is how should it 23 be done? What structure, what models, what type of 24 programming -- not programming so much as whether it's 25 analog or digital. The technologies of that I
316
1 understand in only one sense that is important to me: 2 A model of technology that is going to make it possible 3 for this to involve the maximum amount of Canadians in 4 different groups as quickly as possible and efficiently 5 and as effectively as possible. 6 1592 I am told, and from what I can 7 understand from the literature that I have read, that 8 that is an analog and not a digital technology. That's 9 why I am here. I am here to support the concept of an 10 emerging Canada and the use of a technology that 11 ensures that we bring that about or we facilitate it in 12 the most efficient way possible. If analog is going to 13 do that, then that is what I am supporting. 14 1593 MR. MANCINELLI: Mr. Chairman, 15 Members of the Commission. My name is Joe Mancinelli. 16 I am International Vice-President for the Labourers 17 International Union of North America. 18 1594 I represent 850,000 workers 19 throughout North America. Our head office is in 20 Washington, D.C. Our office here in Canada is in the 21 centre of the universe which is Hamilton, Ontario, and 22 we have 80,000 members in Canada. 23 1595 My travels take me right across North 24 America and the one thing that stands out in my mind is 25 the diversity between the two countries. I have an
317
1 opportunity to travel extensively and feel, if I can 2 put it that way -- and I am by no means an expert, but 3 I can feel the differences in the diversity of both 4 countries and that diversity exists primarily because 5 of the multicultural aspects of Canada. 6 1596 In the United States -- and this is a 7 clicheish terminology that we have heard many times 8 before -- it is a melting pot. Immigrants who move 9 into the United States, our members, many of make up 10 the 850,000 workers, primarily in construction in the 11 United States, English is not their first language and 12 they are encouraged in the United States to assimilate 13 as quickly as possible into the clicheish melting pot. 14 1597 In Canada, however, our 80,000 15 members are encouraged differently. When I went to 16 school, as an example -- I was born in Canada -- I 17 didn't speak any of the two official languages when I 18 went to grade one. It was Italian and it didn't hurt 19 me in my career and in life to have grown up and gone 20 to school not speaking any of the two languages. 21 1598 Well, most of the immigrants, most of 22 the folks who come to this country, don't speak any of 23 the two official languages and they do extremely well. 24 The reason why they do well here -- and they maintain 25 their identity and they strive to maintain their
318
1 cultural ties to their original countries -- is because 2 of the way our culture is set up and that is 3 multiculturalism. To promote the system, and to 4 promote it in any way, and that being in the form of 5 another station that would promote multiculturalism, is 6 to enrich the fabric of the Canadian society that 7 exists already and to enhance it would mean to give 8 this application credence and extend it to mainstream 9 Canadians. 10 1599 I have five children and you can 11 imagine what a challenge it is with five children 12 battling with U.S. television. A battle for television 13 is one thing in itself, and then a fight for 14 programming and what they want to see from music 15 videos, and the exposure is quite significant. Our 16 children nowadays are exposed to a very large 17 percentage of U.S. programming in television. 18 1600 Anything that would balance that 19 content that our children are exposed to -- and that's 20 exactly what World Television Télémonde is offering 21 here -- is an opportunity to our generations to 22 celebrate that cultural diversity that we so cherish 23 ourselves, their parents, and an opportunity for them 24 to experience those cultures, whether it be in movies 25 or in music, or whatever, but it does something else,
319
1 and it's not just the direct experience that I have 2 watching another movie, but it is the maintenance and 3 survival of that culture within Canada that is most 4 important, that the cultural group that is within 5 Canada gets an opportunity to celebrate their culture 6 by continuing to watch programming that is in their 7 language and part of their previous culture that they 8 grew up with. 9 1601 So this philosophy and plan to 10 introduce worldwide programming sounds like a perfect 11 fit into the make up and fabric of our Canadian 12 society. 13 1602 The demographics shift rapidly here 14 in Canada. We have seen a huge shift in demographics 15 in our own organization. Immigration patterns change 16 rapidly and, in order to accommodate those demographic 17 shifts, we have done a number of things, from 18 legislative changes like some of the legislative 19 changes we have seen at the CRTC that pertain to 20 multiculturalism, to police officers who are hired and 21 who can speak the languages of our citizens, to 22 politicians such as Maria Minna who can speak in her 23 mother tongue to her constituents. 24 1603 If all of this is happening out 25 there, why not complete the picture by introducing this
320
1 plan and this philosophy in opening up a channel for 2 world television that Télémonde is proposing? It makes 3 ultimate sense. 4 1604 So, Mr. Chairman and Panel Members, I 5 am going to cut it short at this point and tell you 6 that I support wholeheartedly the application that is 7 in front of you, and in particular the desire to reach 8 mainstream Canadians which are all the very wonderful 9 and colourful aspects of our multicultural Canada. 10 1605 Thank you for this opportunity to 11 have me here. 12 1606 Thank you. 13 1607 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 14 1608 Commissioner Pennefather? 15 1609 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Just one 16 question, Professor Bayne. One of my questions, which 17 is the obvious one that here we are looking at the how 18 and perhaps you would like to expand a little bit on 19 why you feel this service is one which deserves the 20 carriage that is being discussed by the applicant. 21 1610 And if I may to Mr. Weiner just how 22 you see this service serving French-speaking Canadians. 23 1611 So perhaps Professor Bayne? 24 1612 MR. WEINER: If I may take a moment 25 and reflect on an activity that I witnessed in Europe
321
1 in particular this past week, which is becoming more 2 and more troublesome. Movements again at trying to 3 build pure nation states and hostile anti-immigrant 4 statements, extreme right-wing groups arising and 5 strengthening their position in communities. 6 1613 Canada has been a unique model of a 7 multicultural nation, multilingual, that has the two 8 official languages and we must continue to be that 9 model. 10 1614 Now, when there are problems around 11 the world, it gives us an opportunity -- and I say 12 opportunity because if we don't see it as an 13 opportunity the battles of the countries of origin 14 could be transposed here. If we all we see are battles 15 that are taking place on the streets of countries where 16 our people have come from, it sometimes makes it 17 difficult for us to keep building the environment for 18 the citizenship that I believe in, which is the 19 all-inclusive one. 20 1615 C'est absolument la même chose pour 21 nous qui vivons à Montréal. Pendant plus de 20 ans 22 j'ai représenté des concitoyens qui viennent de toutes 23 les communautés culturelles et sans doute des deux 24 langues officielles, une en situation minoritaire. 25 1616 Je sais aussi que vous, madame la
322
1 conseillère, partagez beaucoup de cette communauté. 2 Vous avec vécu toute cette expérience. 3 1617 There is a very warm welcome for the 4 immigrants in particular. Integration has not been 5 difficult. We still would like to see far more 6 movement and I think that it's an opportunity to build 7 far more understanding. 8 1618 I was intrigued before when one of 9 the people that was making a representation on behalf 10 of the Cable Broadcasters indicated that they felt that 11 programming from abroad in another language subtitled 12 would probably be appealing to almost solely or wholly 13 to the members of that community. 14 1619 Well, I recently went to see a 15 wonderful movie called "Monsoon Wedding" and I was 16 looking around just to see among the 200 or 300 people 17 how many East Indians I saw. There were very few, 18 almost none. Almost all of us in the audience seemed 19 to be from the full diversity of the Montreal 20 community. I saw everybody there, all the people that 21 are usually active on the streets of Montreal. 22 1620 So I see this as an enormous benefit. 23 I think that it brings the world to Canada. Canada is 24 the world and I think this gives us a continued 25 opportunity to represent the kind of democracy and the
323
1 kind of humanity we have built which is an 2 all-inclusive one. 3 1621 DR. BAYNE: If I may respond to that 4 in picking up on what Gerry has just said? I a member 5 and a founding past-President of a company called the 6 Black Theatre Workshop of Montreal. I describe it as 7 an anomaly for a simple reason. I understand we 8 started basically, if you read the historical document 9 since 1868 -- is that right? This is 140 years 10 approximately and we have had immigration in here from 11 the beginning because when we came here there were 12 people before, 400 and something, more 100 and 13 something of immigration, and more intensely recently, 14 since we decided we would be lazy and only have one and 15 a half children, we have to import our children, right? 16 So we have had even more intense immigration over the 17 last 30 years. 18 1622 There is not a nationality or culture 19 in this world that we don't have represented in some 20 way in this country, yet the only national art, the 21 only art and culture celebrated at a national 22 level --some people refer to it as the mainstream 23 level -- is British and consistent with the early 24 traditions of how the British attempted to develop this 25 country which is conformity to British values, and the
324
1 darker your skin was, the farther you were in 2 appearance from the British and the lower you were on 3 the totem pole, and the challenge from the French 4 brought in the French culture mostly at a Quebec level, 5 but also threatening its position at the national 6 level. 7 1623 There is nothing that reflects 8 Italians, Greeks, Indians, Asians, Portuguese, nothing. 9 All of it is where someone told me once in very 10 disparaging terms when I first went to British Columbia 11 as a student, they used the term "DPs". I didn't 12 understand what it meant. They told me these were 13 "displaced persons" and they told me these displaced 14 persons were Europeans. I was quite frankly surprised 15 because I usually thought of myself as an outsider of a 16 different race and maybe they might think that I was 17 more displaced than they were. 18 1624 So the Europeans were considered, 19 when I got into British Columbia in 1955, as displaced 20 persons and they made funny statements about the Polish 21 people as the fascists dancing in their basements. 22 1625 That is how they saw the culture of 23 other peoples. It was either British and later French, 24 or the immigrants dancing in their basements, the 25 immigrants or fascists dancing in their basements.
325
1 That's where our cultures, all these other cultures 2 have been relegated in the symbolic basement. By that 3 I mean not celebrated at the national level. 4 1626 I think that this sort of model what 5 it does is it brings all of us, not just Blacks and 6 Chinese and Greeks, everybody, to celebrate and to 7 create a culture which is a Canadian culture, which is 8 everybody's culture, buy it doesn't relegate it to 9 dancing in the basement. The Ukrainians dancing across 10 the stage on Canada Day. It brings them up to the 11 national, the truly national representation of Canada. 12 1627 This is just one mechanism. There is 13 not only one, but this is one mechanism that can 14 facilitate that. Of course, I expect that it wouldn't 15 go through very smoothly initially and who knows, we 16 might have to bring them back here and challenge them 17 to do what they said they had to do. 18 1628 That is where this structure called 19 CRTC is a good structure, but I do believe also that 20 this structure called CRTC needs some reinventing to 21 these things that we are presenting to you. 22 1629 You are supposed to make sure that 23 these things that we are saying to you, you understand 24 them and you make them happen. 25 1630 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you
326
1 very much. 2 1631 THE CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner 3 McKendry? 4 1632 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: 5 Mr. Mancinelli, one of the issues that we have to 6 consider in the hearing if we do what the applicant 7 would like us to do is raising people's cable rates. 8 And I take it from what you said, your members find 9 what is being proposed a valuable enough service and a 10 service of sufficient interest to them that they are 11 prepared to pay higher cable rates for it. 12 1633 MR. MANCINELLI: There is an old 13 saying that you get what you pay for and if we truly 14 believe in what everybody is saying here about our 15 society and how important it is to share our culture 16 and everything else, then there is a cost attached to 17 it, and I think it's a very small price to pay. 18 1634 My members and all 80,000 of their 19 families here in Canada would be glad to do it because, 20 first of all, it exposes them to possibly programming 21 that's in their own language or from their previous 22 countries, which is a great thing that they can 23 preserve something that they brought to this great 24 country, and give an opportunity to our other members 25 to share in that. I think that's a wonderful thing.
327
1 1635 I have to share with you a story. My 2 father-in-law for the longest time would not come and 3 baby-sit at my house because I didn't have programming 4 for Italian television because you can buy, through 5 cable, a certain package, but then you can buy the 6 other one and at that time we didn't have it. And I 7 couldn't figure out why he wouldn't come and baby-sit 8 and then he finally told me. He said: "Because you 9 don't have that channel at your house so you have to 10 bring your kids to my house so I can continue enjoying 11 that kind programming". 12 1636 Now, that might seem like an 13 insignificant story, but it is one that defines the 14 attachment there is within our multicultural 15 communities to have that kind of programming and it's 16 important to them. It makes them feel like they are a 17 part of things when they can share in things that are 18 familiar. 19 1637 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you 20 very much. 21 1638 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Mancinelli, you 22 said you had 80,000 members in Canada. 23 1639 MR. MANCINELLI: Yes. 24 1640 THE CHAIRPERSON: And I am not 25 familiar. What industry are they in?
328
1 1641 MR. MANCINELLI: Primarily 2 construction, construction workers from general 3 labourers to carpenters, cement finishers, et cetera, 4 in the construction industry, to health-care workers as 5 well and a number of other sectors. It's not just 6 construction. We have been around since 1903. It is 7 our centennial in less than a year from now, our 100th 8 year anniversary and we have grown from general 9 labourers to about 850,000 general workers in many 10 different areas. 11 1642 THE CHAIRPERSON: Are you spread 12 across? Do you have members in all provinces? 13 1643 MR. MANCINELLI: In all provinces in 14 Canada, and in every state in the United States. 15 1644 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 16 1645 Thank you very much, gentlemen. 17 1646 Mr. Secretary? 18 1647 MR. LEBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 19 1648 The next appearing intervention will 20 be presented by Telelatino Network, Mr. Aldo Di Felice. 21 1649 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good afternoon, 22 Mr. Di Felice. You seem to be a glutton for 23 punishment. So carry on. 24 1650 MR. DI FELICE: Unfortunately, yes. 25 --- Laughter / Rires
329
1 INTERVENTION 2 1651 MR. DI FELICE: Thank you, 3 Mr. Chairman. 4 1652 Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, my 5 name is Aldo Di Felice and I am President of Telelatino 6 Network Inc., a Canadian ethnic specialty channel that 7 has been in operation for 18 years. 8 1653 Thank you for this opportunity to 9 briefly elaborate on Telelatino's written intervention 10 in this matter. 11 1654 Telelatino is one of a group of four 12 ethnic specialty channel licensees who jointly 13 submitted an intervention in this matter. The group of 14 ethnic services represented by that intervention serve 15 millions of Canadians with programming variously 16 described as multicultural, ethnic or third language. 17 1655 We strongly support the conclusions 18 previously reached by the Commission in the decision 19 which is under reconsideration today -- what we will 20 refer to as the "WTM Decision". 21 1656 The Commission rightly concluded in 22 our opinion that the substance and quantity of WTM's 23 Canadian and foreign content did not especially 24 distinguish the Applicant's proposal such that it 25 should receive exceptional carriage terms.
330
1 1657 The substance of the WTM application 2 has not materially changed since. The Order-in-Council 3 by which the WTM Decision was referred back to the CRTC 4 for reconsideration refers to the need for the CRTC to 5 "fully assess appropriate carriage options for services 6 that aspire to reflect and connect multicultural 7 communities to broader audiences" but, since this 8 proceeding is focusing on the WTM Decision alone, we 9 submit that WTM's application is neither new nor unique 10 in this respect. 11 1658 There are many services within the 12 existing hierarchy of multicultural Canadian television 13 that aspire to do this "reflecting and connecting" 14 activity and, in fact, more than aspiring, are actually 15 doing this very sort of activity, ie. connecting 16 mainstream audiences to multicultural communities, 17 promoting pluralism, blurring divisions, removing 18 linguistic obstacles, practising diversity not in a 19 measured, empirical and incremental way, but 20 wholeheartedly and with passion. 21 1659 To date, the Commission has, in fact, 22 considered appropriate carriage options in the 23 multicultural broadcasting area by having created, and 24 continuing to create a vibrant hierarchy of Canadian 25 services that are variously distributed.
331
1 1660 From multilingual radio to local 2 conventional multicultural television, to mainstream 3 conventional TV that includes blocks of multicultural 4 programming and, of course, national, dedicated 5 Canadian ethnic specialty channels, the CRTC has, in 6 fact, fostered a multiplicity of broadcast services 7 that reflect the many faces of Canada to everyone. 8 1661 And as far as carriage options, such 9 services are delivered in a variety of ways including 10 over-the-air, analog, cable and digital. 11 1662 With the Commission's recent 12 licensing of new multicultural over-the-air TV channels 13 in both Vancouver and Toronto, and an additional 14 channel in Toronto that has committed to do a material 15 amount of English-language Canadian ethnic shows, we 16 will be even more well served by a whole range of 17 wholly and partially multicultural/ethnic TV services 18 across Canada on both conventional over-the-air TV and 19 through specialty TV channels. 20 1663 If the Commission were to determine 21 in the face of all this multiplicity of multicultural 22 services and modes of carriage that the WTM Decision 23 should be modified and that the matter of appropriate 24 carriage options for these types of services is still a 25 question, then it is respectfully suggested that the
332
1 best way to proceed would be to hold a general policy 2 proceeding on this issue. 3 1664 The Order-in-Council has requested 4 the Commission to: 5 "... fully assess the 6 appropriate options for the 7 carriage of broadcasting 8 distribution undertakings of 9 services that seek to reflect 10 and connect Canada's 11 multicultural communities to 12 broader audiences". 13 1665 A full consideration would extend 14 beyond the merits of the application that is before 15 you. 16 1666 Moreover, such a policy proceeding 17 might consider the variety of alternative and 18 complementary ways for services to achieve connections 19 between multicultural communities and the Canadian 20 public. 21 1667 For instance, dubbed foreign 22 programming may be an alternative or a complement to 23 subtitling foreign programming. Similarly, dual audio 24 tracks between official language and foreign language 25 versions of programs is also another technique to
333
1 broaden accessibility and preserve authenticity. 2 1668 Yet the merits of these techniques, 3 or many other creative techniques, for creating 4 all-inclusive yet multicultural programming has not 5 necessarily been fully explored in the present 6 application. 7 1669 We would also like to point out the 8 problematic fact that the nature of the proposed WTM 9 service seems to be neither ethnic nor non-ethnic. In 10 particular, vis-à-vis the relationship between WTM 11 programming and the programming of the ethnic specialty 12 intervenors in this matter, WTM's reply dated May 1st 13 2002, to these intervenors is important to note. 14 1670 It reads: 15 "These intervenors are claiming 16 their services are 17 `multicultural'. They are not. 18 Asian Television, 19 Fairchild/TalentVision, Festival 20 Portuguese and Telelatino are, 21 by the terms of the licences 22 they apply for, `ethnic', ie. 23 they are narrowcast for 24 particular ethnic groups. They 25 are not `multicultural', which
334
1 implies broadcast, not 2 narrowcast programming. WTM is 3 multicultural -- not `ethnic'. 4 It will never offer ethnic 5 programming as defined by the 6 CRTC, ie. that is specifically 7 directed to only one culturally 8 or racially distinct group". 9 (As read) 10 1671 I should mention as an aside as well 11 that WTM's written reply then goes on, after denying it 12 is going to offer any ethnic programming, to confirm 13 that it will, in fact, include ethnic advertising, but 14 offering to limit such ethnic advertising. 15 1672 The applicant, in its appearance 16 before you, has stressed that it is proposing a 17 multicultural rather than an ethnic service and that no 18 multicultural service exists. 19 1673 With respect, we see that as a 20 distinction without a difference in light of the large 21 menu of existing services that appeal not only to 22 ethnic communities but the broader Canadian public. 23 1674 The applicant seems to be saying that 24 as between Canada's ethnic specialty services and WTM, 25 only WTM can fulfil the role of fostering, promoting
335
1 and reflecting multicultural diversity and unity 2 through television onto mainstream Canada. 3 1675 Without going on at length about the 4 ways Canada's ethnic specialties, and especially 5 Telelatino Network, have been going about this work now 6 for years, a description of the various creative ways 7 Canada's ethnic specialties have created mainstream 8 accessibility to their programming is listed in the 9 written collective intervention we have made. 10 1676 With respect to the issue of direct 11 competition with Canadian ethnic specialty channels, we 12 have made representations in our written intervention 13 which we still believe are still valid, though WTM has 14 attempted to modify its stance in its reply and offer 15 some assurances that Canadian ethnic specialty channels 16 will not be adversely affected by the WTM service. 17 1677 However, we must point out that 18 Mr. Iannuzzi, as the founder and driving force behind 19 the WTM application, is a long-standing Italian media 20 business person who operates both Italian and Hispanic 21 newspapers and has been closely involved in Italian 22 language programming. 23 1678 It is entirely predictable that the 24 WTM service would include and, in fact, the application 25 does often refer to, Italian and Spanish programs in
336
1 quantities, we submit, that would make it directly 2 competitive with TLN. 3 1679 In conclusion, we urge the Commission 4 to confirm its decision granting WTM a Category 2 5 digital licence. 6 1680 We submit WTM has not made the case 7 for exceptional importance that would justify its 8 licensing as an analog service with mandatory carriage 9 on basic service or a highly penetrated tier. 10 1681 If, however, the Commission 11 determines that it should modify its conclusions 12 reached in the WTM Decision, we submit the appropriate 13 carriage mode for WTM should be assessed against the 14 background of the availability to Canadians of all of 15 the existing services which aspire to reflect and 16 connect multicultural communities to broader audiences. 17 1682 This would be consistent with the 18 Order-in-Council's directive that a full assessment of 19 this issue be undertaken. 20 1683 Thank you, Mr. Chairman and 21 Commissioners. 22 1684 THE CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner 23 Pennefather? 24 1685 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, 25 Mr. Chairman.
337
1 1686 Thank you for your intervention. 2 There are a number of important points here and you 3 have laid them out quite clearly. 4 1687 Let me just ask you though to clarify 5 one point for me. At the beginning, I think what you 6 are presenting to us is a statement that currently 7 Canadians are served by a number of different 8 programming channels, networks, and so on, which are 9 multicultural, ethnic or third language. 10 1688 You seem to be saying that the 11 existing hierarchy of multicultural Canadian television 12 does achieve the goals of reflecting and serving 13 Canadian multicultural society. 14 1689 If would appear from that that you do 15 see the objectives of the Act being fulfilled through 16 these various players. So why at the same time would 17 you propose, as I understand it in this submission, a 18 review of the service to multicultural Canadians and to 19 Canada as a whole, if, as you say, things are, in fact, 20 in place to do that? 21 1690 MR. DI FELICE: I'm not suggesting 22 both the issues simultaneously. I am suggesting that 23 in response to the Order-in-Council's directive to 24 reconsider this decision, we should take into account 25 the actual breadth of multicultural programming that
338
1 exists in Canada and the fact that the CRTC has in fact 2 created a hierarchy and has in fact, in the past, 3 considered the carriage options with respect to those 4 various services. 5 1691 But furthermore, and in the 6 alternative, if it is determined that despite that 7 overwhelming evidence of a multiplicity of services, 8 with a variety of carriage options under an existing 9 framework that the WTM Decision ought to be changed, 10 then we are suggesting that the Order-in-Council as it 11 reads is suggesting that that consideration, that 12 assessment apply not only to WTM, but that it apply to 13 all services that aspire to "reflect" or "connect", as 14 the Order-in-Council puts it. 15 1692 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I think I 16 follow you a little better. 17 1693 So if no action were taken, you see 18 the evolution of the system in terms of serving 19 multicultural objectives as well under way, if not 20 quite well along. But in the final paragraph, and as 21 you just said, if the WTM Decision is, in fact, altered 22 in some way pursuant to this hearing, then you would 23 see the necessity of a review and in that sense look at 24 the overall picture. 25 1694 Am I now understanding a little bit
339
1 better? Basically it's fine unless we take action on 2 the WTM review. 3 1695 MR. DI FELICE: Yes, I am suggesting 4 that the Order-in-Council reads that way. 5 1696 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Now, there 6 is an aspect in here where you talk about the impact of 7 WTM -- if, in fact, it were given a carriage over and 8 above the Category 2 carriage granted in the licensing 9 procedure in 757 -- on services, and I think in the 10 joint application there is further reference to the 11 impact on existing ethnic specialty services. 12 1697 Can you expand a little bit more on 13 what that impact would be? For example, if, as you 14 say, this is a service destined to a broad audience, 15 how would that impact on the advertising revenues of 16 services dedicated to a more niche audience. 17 1698 MR. DI FELICE: Well, we have 18 intervened in both previous hearings, or two of the 19 three previous hearings, the two most recent, and 20 provided both written and oral representations 21 regarding the details of those possible direct 22 competitive effects. 23 1699 With respect to the joint 24 intervention by the four ethnic specialities in this 25 case, the impacts could be different for each of them,
340
1 but with respect to Telelatino in particular, and this 2 application, the WTM application, has varied widely in 3 terms of what exactly was being proposed in terms of 4 limits on numbers of languages, numbers of countries 5 from which this programming would come. 6 1700 But when all was said and done, there 7 continued to be what could be an enormous amount of, in 8 our case, Latin programming, Italian and Spanish 9 programming, that could occupy prime time on WTM, and 10 depending on the carriage option that WTM were to be 11 given, it would, in our opinion, in our respectful 12 submission, invoke the Commission's long-standing 13 policy which was recently reconfirmed in the digital 14 framework policy, that directly competitive pay and 15 specialty services in the same genre, in the same 16 category, would not be licensed. 17 1701 In our opinion, the 20 per cent in 18 any language allowance that forms part of the existing 19 WTM decision would permit 40 per cent of their overall 20 broadcast schedule of WTM to be directly competitive 21 with Telelatino because it would be 20 per cent per 22 language. 23 1702 I recognize as well, though, that WTM 24 has offered to reduce that to 10 per cent in any 25 language. That being said though, 20 per cent, that is
341
1 10 per cent Italian, 10 per cent Spanish, is a 2 significant part of any schedule. Certainly 20 per 3 cent being over four and a half hours per day of 4 directly competitive programming would be, I think, 5 enough to constitute direct competitiveness within the 6 meaning of the CRTC's existing policies. 7 1703 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Just a 8 little further on that point. We did discuss this with 9 the applicant in chatting about the world cinema 10 component. 11 1704 The point was made that given that 12 this is a proposal directed to all Canadians, not just 13 to, if I may, Italian-Canadians or to the niche 14 directed towards whom you direct your programming. Not 15 only is it a different audience, but also different 16 programming would be selected. That, in fact, 17 different kinds of films, even if they were Italian 18 films, would be selected. 19 1705 Do you agree with that position? 20 1706 MR. DI FELICE: I'm not sure how that 21 would be monitored. What I can say in terms of my 22 observations is that WTM's reply to the specific 23 interventions by the group of ethnic specialties we 24 were involved with specifically cites two examples of 25 films. "The Gods Must be Crazy", which has aired in
342
1 Canada, and "Italian for Beginners", which has just 2 come out of the theatres, and I am sure will air on 3 Showcase and Bravo! or CBC. 4 1707 So I don't see that those two 5 examples, just as an observation, are films that are 6 any more distinct or any different or unique than films 7 that would otherwise already play or have played in 8 Canada. I'm not sure how that offer were to be 9 monitored or were to be made COL. 10 1708 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you 11 very much. 12 1709 Those are my questions, Mr. Chairman. 13 1710 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 14 1711 Mr. Di Felice, I wonder whether you 15 can elaborate on two elements of your oral 16 presentation. 17 1712 Page 3, at the top of that page, 18 after quoting the Order-in-Council before us in regard 19 to the assessment of appropriate options, and so on, 20 you say that: 21 "A full consideration would 22 extend beyond the merits of the 23 application that is before you". 24 1713 I am not sure I understand the point 25 that you are making.
343
1 1714 MR. DI FELICE: Well, the point I 2 think I am making here -- and I think it has been made 3 by several intervenors today, this afternoon -- is that 4 the actual wording of the Order-in-Council does not 5 limit the full assessment of carriage options to WTM, 6 but to services that aspire to do what WTM is aspiring 7 to do. 8 1715 So I am making the point that the 9 Order-in-Council is suggesting a full assessment of 10 carriage options with respect to services that aspire, 11 not the WTM service. 12 1716 We are dealing, as I understand it 13 over the past day, and a half with the WTM carriage 14 options. 15 1717 THE CHAIRPERSON: Right. I mean, I 16 guess there are two elements of it. A decision is 17 referred back. It's a decision that is referred back 18 and that decision gives the Commission a number of 19 options. The matter that the Commission is asked to 20 reconsider is the matter that you have quoted, the 21 carriage options, and so on. 22 1718 The Commission, at that stage, and 23 before it can reach its decision, has to reconsider 24 that matter in respect of that decision. 25 1719 So you are saying that we would be in
344
1 a dilemma, we couldn't possibly do what we are supposed 2 to do by doing what we are doing. 3 1720 MR. DI FELICE: No, I am not 4 suggesting that. 5 1721 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. 6 1722 MR. DI FELICE: I'm suggesting that 7 in the context of your reconsideration of the WTM 8 decision it is imperative that the full spectrum of 9 multicultural services and carriage options that have 10 already been put in place by the CRTC's policies be 11 taken into consideration. 12 1723 In my opinion the CRTC has already 13 done that, has done that prior to this hearing, but the 14 Order-in-Council is suggesting that that framework, 15 that that assessment happen. It is not suggesting that 16 it happen in the future or that it happen now. In my 17 opinion it has already happened, but I think that -- 18 and I may be mixing two concepts together here -- the 19 reconsideration of the WTM decision has to be done in 20 context. 21 1724 There are many people who have 22 appeared before you today who have said things that are 23 moving, inspiring really, in terms of their love for 24 multiculturalism and their want, their need, their 25 feeling that there is an un-met need for diversity in
345
1 the broadcasting system, but I think that has to be 2 taken in the context of what there actually is and what 3 policy has actually already been developed. 4 1725 THE CHAIRPERSON: If you are 5 basically saying that there are other conclusions 6 available to us, then confirming the existing decision, 7 well that is what it says in the law and that is what 8 we have been dealing with. 9 1726 If that is your point, I take it, 10 there are certainly other options, but it seems to me 11 that in the sheer practicalities of a reconsideration 12 proceeding you are to reconsider a given decision in 13 the light of a matter that you ostensibly did not 14 consider sufficiently, and parties are given full 15 opportunity to comment on that notice as well as on 16 additional material that the applicant files. So the 17 notion of a full consideration can be given in the 18 context of that hearing. 19 1727 If you are saying, among the outcomes 20 you don't have to end up reconfirming the existing 21 licensee in the original decision, or in any changed 22 decision, if that is your point, then I take that 23 point. 24 1728 MR. DI FELICE: And I would agree 25 with what you have just said.
346
1 1729 THE CHAIRPERSON: My second point is 2 this. If we go to the -- it's on your last page, on 3 page 5. Were you here when the CAB made its 4 presentation? 5 1730 MR. DI FELICE: Yes. 6 1731 THE CHAIRPERSON: Well, it's on this 7 notion of whether under this reconsideration we are 8 meant to look at this service that we are focused on. 9 The CAB's position was that: "You should also look at 10 new services calling for a new proceeding" and I asked 11 specifically about existing services and their answer 12 was, "No". But you are saying that is exclusively what 13 you should be looking at is existing services. 14 1732 Am I correct? 15 1733 MR. DI FELICE: No, not necessarily. 16 1734 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. 17 1735 MR. DI FELICE: I can understand the 18 CAB position. I haven't given it much thought was to 19 whether new or existing services should be what you 20 fully assess or continue to assess or, for example, may 21 decide to invoke policy hearings or whatever else. 22 1736 If I think about it, I can understand 23 a position such as the CAB's and I think I would tend 24 to agree with it because, as I have just stated about a 25 minute ago, my belief is that the CRTC already has a
347
1 framework in place, has already considered carriage 2 options. 3 1737 There is a whole panoply of services 4 and carriage options that exist in the various 5 multicultural services that have already been licensed, 6 whether or not launched -- even some recently licensed 7 services. 8 1738 So in my view, I would tend to agree 9 with the CAB's response to you this afternoon that 10 existing services wouldn't be part of a continued 11 consideration or assessment of carriage options. 12 1739 THE CHAIRPERSON: Would not be? 13 1740 MR. DI FELICE: Would not. That 14 proposed services would be, I can understand that point 15 of view. It makes sense to me. 16 1741 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. When then in 17 the light of that, how should I read your last 18 paragraph, where you say that: 19 "... the appropriate carriage 20 mode for WTM should be assessed 21 against the background of the 22 availability to Canadians of all 23 of the existing services which 24 aspire to reflect and connect 25 multicultural communities to
348
1 broader audiences". 2 1742 MR. DI FELICE: I think that is no 3 different than the way I have put it earlier, that the 4 existing spectrum of services and carriage options have 5 to be considered when we consider WTM's submission and 6 when we consider the submissions of individuals, 7 politicians and supporters who want multicultural 8 television, or television that aspires to connect 9 communities to exist on television. 10 1743 I think we have to consider how much 11 of that is already there. How is it there? How is 12 distributed. Does the CRTC already have carriage 13 options and a framework that have allowed this to 14 thrive? Or is there such an un-met need that something 15 drastic, something exceptional has to be done with 16 respect to this one application? 17 1744 THE CHAIRPERSON: I see what you are 18 saying there. 19 1745 Thank you very much, Mr. Di Felice. 20 1746 MR. DI FELICE: Thank you, and I 21 promise I won't be back for a while. 22 --- Laughter / Rires 23 1747 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Secretary? 24 1748 MR. LEBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 25 1749 The next appearing intervention will
349
1 be presented by the Communications and Diversity 2 Network, Messrs. Rasalingam, Lumb and Friedman. 3 INTERVENTION 4 1750 MR. RASALINGAM: Good afternoon, 5 Commissioners. 6 1751 Thank you for the opportunity to 7 present before you today. My name is Raj Rasalingam 8 and I am the President of the Pearson-Shoyama Institute 9 and a member of the Canadian Communications and 10 Diversity Network. 11 1752 The Communications and Diversity 12 Network aims to modernize a portrayal of ethnic and 13 racial minorities and Aboriginals People in mainstream 14 programming so that the multiracial and multicultural 15 reality of Canada is reflected in Canadian 16 broadcasting. 17 1753 The CDN also takes a strong interest 18 in the provision of appropriate services in the third 19 language category. 20 1754 In pursuit of its mission, the CDN 21 shares expertise, resources and models of good practice 22 in an effort to assist broadcasters to respond to the 23 changing demographics and consumer markets in their 24 programming and employment policies. 25 1755 The CND is proud to partner with Bell
350
1 Globemedia, Rogers, CHUM and Standard Broadcasting in 2 the work that we do. We have appeared on numerous 3 occasions over the past three years before this 4 Commission, and it is a matter of public record to both 5 the members of this panel as well as the staff of the 6 CRTC of the Communications and Diversity Network's work 7 with broadcasters. 8 1756 I am going to dispense with our 9 written comments and address some key points that we 10 believe should be addressed in this round before you. 11 1757 I have heard submissions and 12 presentations from about nine o'clock this morning and 13 one of the key aspects that has been presented today is 14 the issue of multiculturalism. 15 1758 The fundamental issue of 16 multiculturalism -- and this is an important arena for 17 both the Commission to consider because, as I have 18 attended many debates around licensing hearings, and we 19 do not get involved in competitive licensing, the issue 20 of ethnic services and multiculturalism comes up on 21 numerous occasions. 22 1759 But fundamental to the issue of 23 multiculturalism is one fundamental principle. 24 Multiculturalism was founded, to my understanding, to 25 give fairness and equity and participation to
351
1 multicultural communities. Therefore, in light of that 2 principle, with respect to you as a Commission, a 3 simple fundamental and equitable principle should be 4 that everybody should be allowed to participate in an 5 open call for licensing. 6 1760 We have no grievance against the 7 present applicant, however we should say that 8 multicultural communities should be given the 9 opportunity to apply in an open call. That is a 10 fundamental principle. It's a fundamental principle of 11 law in Canada that equity should prevail. With a lack 12 of equity, multiculturalism will fail. That's not what 13 we should be building in Canada. 14 1761 The applicant, after an appropriate 15 and open call, if the applicant is deemed to be the 16 most suitable, we, as an institute, will be happy in 17 working with the applicant and supporting the 18 applicant. That is a principle that we, as an 19 institute, we would like to bring to your attention. 20 1762 How would this process work? We 21 believe that as a Commission there should be proper 22 consultations, independent consultations by the 23 Commission which are open to ethnic communities so that 24 they can provide input, and based on those assessments 25 the Commission can evaluate what the criteria are for
352
1 licensing. We believe that that would be equitable and 2 fair. 3 1763 It's in the light of this that we 4 would like to present our opinions on the matter. 5 1764 I have also heard today that there 6 have been references to the Australian broadcasting 7 system. If you go to a lot of the ethnic communities 8 and ask them about the experience of Australia and 9 immigration, you will see that Australia is one 10 country, a leading western democracy, that puts 11 immigrants into penal colonies. We have seen that in 12 the news recently where there have been many riots. 13 1765 Is that what we want in Canada? Is 14 that a model that we should be following? We should be 15 very careful, as a Commission, or when we issue 16 licences, that we do not appropriate models that might 17 not be suitable to the Canadian context. 18 1766 So I would urge you to look carefully 19 and examine before a call should be made because our 20 opinion is that once a call is made, if in your opinion 21 you should decide that a multiethnic service is 22 required in Canada, then a similar one will not come 23 around for a long time. So the importance of issuing 24 and examining this is very critical. 25 1767 The other important point that we
353
1 would like to bring to your attention is there are 2 ethnic specialty services in existence. You have heard 3 from one before. Where do they fit into the 4 multiethnic framework of Canada? How do they project 5 the important values of Canada? Are they going to be 6 impacted? Those are issues that have to be examined 7 and evaluated. 8 1768 We as an institute have not had the 9 opportunity to study this in detail and only a process 10 initiated by the CRTC itself can assist different 11 people to come and express their opinions. 12 1769 I would like to turn it over to Rubin 13 Friedman. Rubin is a member of the Diversity Network 14 and was formerly National Communications Director for 15 the Canadian Jewish Congress. 16 1770 MR. FRIEDMAN: Thank you. Merci 17 beaucoup. 18 1771 Il me fait grand plaisir de vous 19 adresser la parole aujourd'hui et de comparaître devant 20 la Commission sur une question qui me semble très 21 importante et cruciale. 22 1772 I, like my colleague, have been 23 listening to impassioned defences of multiculturalism 24 during the day which are very impressive. 25 1773 I think that in that light you are
354
1 being called upon in this decision in your own terms by 2 the Order-in-Council to consider something that is 3 broader than this particular application. 4 1774 The Act, after all, does not speak of 5 the aspirations of broadcasters. It speaks of the 6 aspirations of people, the aspirations of the people 7 who constitute the multicultural reality of Canada. 8 1775 I think that that is to continue, as 9 Raj was saying, as something that we would like to get 10 a better handle on. What are these aspirations and to 11 what extend have they been met or not been met by the 12 current services? 13 1776 I think there is a great feeling of 14 lack of meaning aspirations which relates to 15 representation and that has been clear from a lot of 16 hearings. 17 1777 When I take a look at the current 18 application that is before us, I am not convinced that 19 they fully met the test of how they are going to 20 improve that representation over everybody else who 21 also has to improve that representation. It's not 22 clear to me in terms of the plans that they have 23 projected yet that they will be doing better than 24 others who have a similar test to meet. So that is one 25 concern I have.
355
1 1778 I would like to be more sure that 2 they are going to be doing better in terms of 3 representation than all the other broadcasters who 4 appear before you and also have to meet that standard. 5 1779 I have a concern about the heavy 6 emphasis on foreign broadcasting. To my mind what is 7 unique about this application, as expressed by some of 8 the people representing the organization, what is 9 unique about it is this foreign broadcasting with the 10 subtitles, not in terms of it appearing, but in terms 11 of the extent and the emphasis on it. So to me that is 12 a unique aspect of the application. 13 1780 On the other hand, I don't think that 14 particularly projects Canada's reality. I don't think 15 that it helps us understand what is being represented 16 on those films, whatever it is, and again we do not 17 know what the criteria will be used to choose those 18 films. 19 1781 We have just heard about all the 20 conflicts that exist in the rest of the world. We 21 heard a suggestion that we should be listening to the 22 news in Russian about Chechnya. I am not sure that we 23 will get a much more objective opinion about Chechnya 24 when we listen to the news in Russian even if it's 25 subtitled in English and French.
356
1 1782 So I do have concerns that this is 2 still a vague notion in terms of what is trying to be 3 represented and how it represents to promoting the 4 reflection to Canadians in a way that they are going to 5 be coming together more strongly. 6 1783 Broadcasting is not a panacea. You 7 can just as easily promote division as unity when you 8 broadcast. Just because you are broadcasting in 9 another language doesn't mean it's going to be more -- 10 it's going to help others understand. It may do the 11 opposite, depending on what you broadcast. 12 1784 So I am not convinced by that tranche 13 of their programming that it is particularly or 14 necessarily going to be promoting multicultural values, 15 which I think they sincerely believe in, but I just 16 don't see it yet in terms of that programming. 17 1785 I am impressed by the kinds of 18 programming the talk about where Canadians will be 19 talking to each other, where they will be more 20 interactive. I think that is certainly something we 21 would like to see more of, but just to have foreign 22 films or foreign newscasts, I don't see. 23 1786 Sometimes in listening to them I had 24 the impression that this was simply a way of reducing 25 the amount of American television that we have. I
357
1 think our challenge is not to reduce the amount of 2 American television. It's to increase the amount of 3 Canadian television. 4 1787 I think the emphasis is a little off 5 and I would like to see more in terms of increasing 6 Canadian television rather than saying: "Well, we are 7 too influenced by the Americans. So instead we are 8 going to substitute all these other influences. Now, 9 we can be influenced by the Germans and the French and 10 the Italians and everybody else around the world 11 instead of just the Americans". 12 1788 I don't see that as the main purpose 13 of our broadcasters to increase the diversity of the 14 people who we are influenced by, but rather to promote 15 Canadian identity which is a different emphasis. 16 1789 So those are the essentials of what I 17 had to say. 18 1790 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 19 1791 Commissioner Pennefather? 20 1792 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, 21 Mr. Chairman. 22 1793 I would like to just clarify a few 23 things. Your written intervention on page 2, first 24 paragraph -- if we are going to talk about the 25 programming points that you have just tabled with us --
358
1 mentions the format of soap operas which would indicate 2 to me that you have not made ourselves aware of the 3 resubmission or the amendments to the programming 4 proposals of April 8th because soap operas are no 5 longer part of that schedule. 6 1794 So are you aware of the changes that 7 have been proposed to the scheduling? 8 1795 MR. RASALINGAM: We had a look at it 9 today on the public record and there were programs that 10 specifically dealt with Canadian issues or attempted to 11 deal with Canadian issues, but we have not had as a 12 network time to evaluate those. 13 1796 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I think 14 that's important because of the stress you have just 15 made on whether or not the concept serves the goals of 16 multiculturalism, both in terms of Canadian programming 17 which address that point, to some extent, and also your 18 comment here that foreign programming does not -- how 19 do you put it -- is not the aim of Canadian 20 multiculturalism. 21 1797 I would like to hear a little more on 22 that because the case was made that, in fact, the 23 existence of programming from around the world would, 24 in fact, affect the way we treat each other, that it 25 would expand our understanding of the different
359
1 cultures of this country and quite often the proposals, 2 apart from film but certainly the proposals in terms of 3 public affairs programming was to put that in a 4 Canadian context with Canadian commentary. 5 1798 I didn't hear you describing it quite 6 that way. In fact, I hear you questioning that it has 7 any value. 8 1799 So considering the way that it is now 9 presented, do you still maintain that view, that it has 10 no impact on multiculturalism in this country? 11 1800 MR. FRIEDMAN: No. What I said was 12 you cannot guarantee what impact such programming will 13 have on Canadian multiculturalism. We do not know what 14 the impact will be. It depends on which programs will 15 be chosen. 16 1801 I heard one of the intervenors today 17 say that they were going to choose programs on two 18 criteria. One, that it wouldn't offend anybody, and 19 two, that it would be entertaining. I think that's an 20 amazing challenge that it's not going to offend anybody 21 and it's going to be entertaining. It may be a 22 difficult goal to achieve. 23 1802 So I am not sure what the impact is 24 of all this programming yet, and that's what we haven't 25 had the chance to fully assess. I think we did say
360
1 that we liked some of the programming ideas that we saw 2 briefly today. 3 1803 MR. RASALINGAM: If I may just add to 4 that, Commissioner? 5 1804 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Certainly. 6 1805 MR. RASALINGAM: This goes back to my 7 original statement which is that given that this 8 principle that you, as a Commission, are setting out to 9 evaluate, it becomes very critical. 10 1806 If the Commission sees fit to have 11 public consultations across a broad range of spectrum, 12 it's conceivable that you might get a lot of ethnic 13 communities, and I know that there is a debate on that 14 term too today, that they might want soap operas. We 15 don't know that. That's the whole point. 16 1807 How do we evaluate that without a 17 proper consultation where people and the communities 18 are informed that there is a process, there is an open 19 call, you have the ability to give your input. 20 1808 That's really what we were 21 addressing. 22 1809 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Let's not 23 mix things too much here. 24 1810 In terms of programming, whether it 25 will work or not, I think you would agree with me that
361
1 one of the challenges of going into the business of 2 television is whether something will work or not. It's 3 always there, particularly in the area of something 4 new. 5 1811 I am sure when we looked at ethnic 6 services, and there is an existing policy in terms of 7 ethnic services, that again people would say: "It 8 doesn't exist. We don't know if it's going to work. 9 Why do it?". 10 1812 You move forward because the goal, 11 the objectives of the Broadcasting Act, certainly 12 require a partnership with a creative community to say 13 this is how it will be done. There are many different 14 ways of achieving these goals. 15 1813 So I have a little trouble with the 16 concept that we resist this because we don't know how 17 it will work. 18 1814 There are a number of other examples 19 here of programs in the new list which are pretty, in a 20 sense too, standard television approaches to things. 21 The important thing here is to look at the goal, the 22 motivation, the concept as a whole, whereas you don't 23 agree which is an approach which says we will look at 24 the multicultural society in this country and do take 25 an approach to this which we think will have an impact.
362
1 1815 So from that point of view I think 2 that what we are talking about here is a system in 3 place where various projects can come forward and make 4 a proposal in terms of programming. 5 1816 Your point, I think, in terms of a 6 call or a process was more of a policy point overall, 7 if I understood you correctly. 8 1817 I think this matter was discussed 9 yesterday as well as today with the applicant in terms 10 of their position that in looking at the various 11 carriage options, certainly in the case of certain 12 comparable situations as they propose with APTN and TVA 13 going national, this was not a competing application 14 situation, but presented as a specific concept. 15 1818 In fairness, I think that's the way 16 they are approaching this at this point. 17 1819 Those are my questions and if you 18 have any further comments. 19 1820 MR. FRIEDMAN: I did want to add 20 something. 21 1821 My point was not that viewing films, 22 foreign films, or viewing foreign broadcasts has no 23 value. That's not my point. 24 1822 My question is how that relates to 25 the promotion of Canadians understanding each other
363
1 better. That's a different question. 2 1823 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: That's 3 fine and there are different opinions on that impact. 4 In fact, that's the very nature of our discussion on 5 programming. 6 1824 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Those are 7 my questions. 8 1825 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very 9 much, gentlemen. 10 1826 Mr. Secretary? 11 1827 MR. LEBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 12 1828 The next appearing intervention will 13 be presented by Fairchild Television Limited. 14 INTERVENTION 15 1829 MR. CHAN: Good evening, 16 Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission. 17 1830 My name is Joe Chan and I am the 18 President of Fairchild Television Ltd., licensee of 19 Fairchild Television and Talentvision. 20 1831 With me today on my left is Louis 21 Cheng, our Assistant General Manager. On my right, 22 immediate right, is Connie Sephton, our Manager 23 Corporate Affairs. To her right is Rob Malcolmson, our 24 legal counsel from Goodmans. 25 1832 We appreciate the opportunity to
364
1 appear before you today. 2 1833 We wish to say at the outset that, 3 like all other ethnic broadcasters who intervened 4 against the WTM application, we support the Canadian 5 Association of Broadcasters' submission and 6 particularly the conclusions reached by the Commission 7 in Decision CRTC 2001-757. 8 1834 We believe that the decision to 9 licence WTM as a Category 2 digital service together 10 with appropriate conditions of licence was correct. 11 1835 In our remarks today, we would like 12 to focus on three issues: WTM's target audience, the 13 changing ethnic broadcasting landscape and the 14 vulnerability of Fairchild Television and Talentvision. 15 WTM has asked the Commission to 16 deviate from its established licensing framework and to 17 grant it a licence with extraordinary carriage rights 18 which would guarantee it over $40 million in 19 subscription revenue alone each year. 20 1836 Moreover, with its vague nature of 21 service description, once it has a licence it could 22 become just about any ethnic programming service. 23 1837 WTM maintains it does not target the 24 same audience as existing ethnic services, that it 25 targets a mainstream and not an ethnic audience, but we
365
1 would like to underscore a point raised at WTM's last 2 public hearing. The audience targeted by service is 3 not necessarily the audience it gets. 4 1838 Our experience as an ethnic 5 broadcaster serving the largest ethnic community in 6 Canada tells us that a Chinese movie with English or 7 French subtitles will have much greater appeal to a 8 Chinese audience than a mainstream audience. 9 1839 If the aim of WTM is to bring more 10 ethnic programming to mainstream audiences, then it 11 needs to dub its programming into French or English to 12 effectively act as a bridge between ethnic programming 13 and mainstream audiences. 14 1840 We do not believe that WTM's 15 substantial amount of non-Canadian programming will 16 advance the multicultural objectives of the 17 Broadcasting Act, particularly if this programming is 18 selected for its importance in other countries rather 19 than its importance to Canada. 20 1841 WTM is asking the Commission to 21 licence a must-carry analog superstation with a heavy 22 focus on third-language programming. To license WTM as 23 proposed would be a departure from the Commission's 24 digital only licensing policy. 25 1842 In our view, the best approach is not
366
1 to issue a call for applications, but a call for 2 comments prior to any licensing action. This will give 3 all interested parties an opportunity to comment on the 4 concept of a must-carry multicultural service, 5 including the impact on the ethnic broadcasting 6 landscape. 7 1843 WTM has cited market studies showing 8 a demand from mainstream audiences for more ethnic 9 programming. We submit that if asked whether one would 10 like more programming choices, most people would say 11 yes, but not if this would come at the expense of the 12 programming they already receive. 13 1844 Before considering licensing a 14 national ethnic superstation, let us fully examine what 15 the impact would be on existing services. 16 1845 Let us define the nature of service 17 and structure it to limit the impact on existing 18 services and to ensure that the growth of ethnic 19 broadcasting in not came at the expense of existing 20 broadcasters. 21 1846 MS SEPHTON: The landscape for ethnic 22 broadcasting has changed dramatically since the 23 Commission's 1999 review of the Ethnic Broadcasting 24 Policy, with 44 new ethnic category 2 digital specialty 25 and pay services and two new over-the-air multicultural
367
1 television stations, Multivan in Vancouver and CFMT-TOO 2 in Toronto. 3 1847 It is important to appreciate the 4 volume of new Chinese-language programming that could 5 be introduced into the market by these new ethnic 6 licensees under their conditions of licence. Multivan 7 can broadcast over 1,000 hours of Chinese-language 8 programming per year in Vancouver. 9 1848 Between Rogers' CFMT-TOO and CFMT-TV 10 in Toronto, it can broadcast almost 2,000 hours of 11 Chinese-language programming each year. 12 1849 This volume of Chinese programming in 13 Toronto and Vancouver will materially change the market 14 in terms of available advertising revenue, competition 15 for program rights and subscriber growth. The ethnic 16 broadcasting market requires time to absorb the influx 17 of new programming that will inevitably come from the 18 recently licensed over-the-air ethnic services in 19 Toronto and Vancouver. 20 1850 To licence WTM's application as 21 proposed would create further disruption in an already 22 marginal Chinese-language television market. WTM's 23 proposed conditions of licence allow it to broadcast up 24 to 20 per cent of its non-Canadian programming in any 25 one non-official language. If Cantonese and Mandarin
368
1 are treated as two distinct languages, this would 2 translate into a total of 1,310 hours nationwide of new 3 Chinese-language programming. This market is already 4 very well served with two ethnic over-the-air stations 5 in Toronto, an ethnic over-the-air station and the Shaw 6 Cable ethnic community channel in Vancouver. which now 7 broadcasts over 2,000 hours per year of 8 Chinese-language programming, all in addition to our 9 national services, Fairchild Television and 10 Talentvision. 11 1851 If WTM maximized its 20 per cent COL 12 in respect of Asian programming, Fairchild Television 13 and Talentvision would suffer significant harm. It is 14 clear that WTM is targeting third language advertisers. 15 WTM is proposing that ethnic advertising be allowed for 16 up to 15 per cent per broadcast hour. This would allow 17 it to broadcast almost four minutes of Cantonese and 18 Mandarin advertising in any single broadcast hour which 19 would have a negative impact on Fairchild Television 20 and Talentvision. If WTM's target audience really is a 21 mainstream audience, then we question why it is 22 targeting ethnic advertising at all? 23 1852 MR. CHENG: With a combined PBIT 24 margin of 5.42 per cent in the year 2001, which is 25 significantly lower than the 18.23 per cent English
369
1 language specialty television average, Fairchild and 2 Talentvision are representative of the challenges faced 3 by ethnic broadcasters who have a limited subscriber 4 and advertising base. If advertisers can now purchase 5 air time within Chinese programming with a potential 6 viewership reach of 10 million viewers, part of 7 Fairchild and Talentvision's advertising base will be 8 substantially eroded. 9 1853 Morever, 95 per cent of Fairchild's 10 subscription revenue comes from 65,000 standalone 11 subscribers who pay $19.95 per month for the service. 12 In addition to the two new over-the-air ethnic 13 services, if WTM is available as a low cost 14 Chinese-language programming alternative, Fairchild is 15 certain to have its premium subscriber base eroded. 16 1854 Finally, as part of the basic tier, 17 with a $40 million financial base in subscriber 18 revenues alone, it will be almost impossible for 19 Fairchild and other ethnic broadcasters to compete for 20 program rights to high quality third language 21 programming. 22 1855 For all of the reasons set out above, 23 we are proposing a condition of licence, which will 24 provide a measure of protection to existing national 25 ethnic specialty services and better ensure that WTM
370
1 stays true to its world programming focus without 2 focusing too heavily on any one world community that is 3 already served by existing licensees. The proposed 4 condition of licence is set out in paragraphs 55 and 56 5 of our written intervention and is attached hereto. 6 1856 MR. CHAN: As stated earlier, we 7 oppose the licensing of WTM as a must-carry analog 8 service. We believe the Commission got it right when 9 it denied WTM's request in Decision 2000-393 and again 10 in Decision 2001-757. As set out in detail in our 11 written intervention, there are also a number of 12 compelling policy reasons why WTM's request should be 13 denied: 14 1857 One, WTM has not met the "exceptional 15 importance" test in the Commission's current licensing 16 framework set out in Public Notice 2000-6 and 2000-22 17 1858 Two, the WTM application raises 18 significant concerns with respect to fairness to the 19 digital services licensed a year ago. To permit WTM to 20 jump the queue and receive guaranteed analog carriage 21 would be patently unfair. 22 1859 Three, WTM has compared itself to 23 TVA, APTN and ArTV submitting it should be afforded 24 similar carriage rights. With respect we disagree. A 25 review of each of these precedents demonstrates that
371
1 much more compelling circumstances were present when 2 the Commission gave these services special carriage 3 status. 4 1860 We thank you for this opportunity to 5 appear before you and would be pleased to answer any 6 questions. 7 1861 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 8 1862 Commissioner Pennefather. 9 1863 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, 10 Mr. Chairman. 11 1864 Mr. Chan, good evening. 12 1865 MR. CHAN: Good evening. 13 1866 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Indeed. 14 Thank you for being here. Thank you for your 15 intervention today and your written intervention. They 16 are quite complete. 17 1867 When you finished speaking, there is 18 an attached proposed condition of licence. Is this 19 your proposal as per the written -- 20 1868 MR. CHAN: That's correct. 21 1869 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: The reason 22 I am asking is the 10 per cent. As you know, WTM have 23 submitted, on April 8, a revised proposal in regards to 24 limiting non-Canadian programming from any one 25 particular country. Does that change your analysis at
372
1 all and does your condition of licence address that? 2 1870 MR. CHAN: If I read it correctly 3 from the August 4 submission, there are actually two 4 issues. One is still on the language restriction which 5 I believe is still a maximum of 20 per cent per 6 language, and there is another revised condition or 7 added condition saying that they will have a cap of 8 10 per cent on programming from a specific country. I 9 think, if I read it correctly, it is two different 10 conditions. 11 1871 What we are proposing here, it is in 12 respect to the 20 per cent per language. We are asking 13 a condition of licence sort of to reduce it to 10 per 14 cent. 15 1872 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I follow 16 you. 17 1873 MR. MALCOLMSON: If I could just 18 interject, Commissioner Pennefather? 19 1874 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Yes. 20 1875 MR. MALCOLMSON: The condition of 21 licence you asked about was the condition of licence 22 pertaining to 10 per cent of the programming 23 originating from any single country. That doesn't give 24 us comfort because there are numerous countries from 25 which Chinese language programming can come. It
373
1 doesn't come just from China. So our thought was the 2 way to tie this down was to put some parameters around 3 the volume of Chinese-language programming that can 4 appear on WTM, regardless of what country it 5 originates from. 6 1876 MR. CHAN: If I may add to that, 7 Commissioner Pennefather. The 10 per cent per country, 8 to us doesn't make any sense. I will give an example. 9 The Chinese language is spoken in China, in Hong Kong, 10 in Taiwan, in the greater part of Malaysia and 11 Singapore. All these countries or all these cities, 12 they all provide programming in Chinese, so if you just 13 say 10 per cent per country it doesn't mean that they 14 could have 10 per cent from China, 10 per cent from 15 Taiwan or 10 per cent from Malaysia. So we think that 16 this proposed condition of licence does not make any 17 sense to us. That is why we propose it is better to be 18 on a per language basis. 19 1877 Another example is Spanish. Spanish 20 is not only spoken in Spain but is spoken in quite a 21 number of South American countries. 22 1878 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you 23 for that clarification. 24 1879 In looking at the April submission, I 25 see the list of conditions and I in fact do see a
374
1 maximum of 20 per cent non-Canadian. That is the one 2 you are referring to in which you were suggesting an 3 alternative to limit language. 4 1880 MR. CHAN: Correct. 5 1881 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 6 I understand your point. 7 1882 The other question I had was in the 8 written intervention as well regarding program rights 9 and the impact of licensing WTM on the basis they have 10 proposed on Chinese-language television and access to 11 program rights. 12 1883 Could you expand on that a little bit 13 and tell us exactly why that would happen in light of 14 the restrictions that you are proposing on Chinese 15 language and, secondly, in light of the proposed type 16 of programming in the Chinese language that WTM is 17 proposing to air? 18 1884 MR. CHAN: From what I looked at 19 there, the proposed schedule with the revised one on 20 August 4, what I can see, especially from the world 21 programming portion of it, to me I can see a mini 22 Fairchild TV and a mini Talentvision, probably a mini 23 Telelatino there too. The way I see it it is because 24 they are proposing to have world cinema, which is 25 movies, they have world comedy and they have world
375
1 drama. All these, in a way, duplicates what we are 2 doing now, although they are subtitled. They are 3 probably going after the same source of program 4 suppliers at the moment we are soliciting, because at 5 the moment we are under fierce competition from some 6 other ethnic television broadcasters in Canada, say, 7 for example, CMFT, to quote an example, when we are 8 talking about movies. 9 1885 CMFT, first of all, itself, is an 10 over-the-air station, and WTM is proposing a mandatory 11 carriage, and with the big broad chest that they are 12 having, because at the end of it if they are entitled 13 to a mandatory carriage, then probably they will end up 14 with a bidding war in terms of licensing of programs. 15 1886 This is a major concern we have, that 16 because of our limited resources, very likely we may 17 be outbidded in trying to get the best programs we 18 can get. 19 1887 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, 20 Mr. Chan. 21 1888 So you think that even though WTM 22 have said that their goal is to reach the broad 23 Canadian audience and your role is to reach the Chinese 24 Canadian audience with Chinese programming, you would 25 still be, in effect, competing for the same
376
1 programming? 2 1889 MR. CHAN: I do not necessarily agree 3 with their description of mainstream audience because I 4 see -- mainstream audience and ethnic audience are not 5 mutually exclusive. In this case, they are bringing 6 in, say for example, Chinese programming, Chinese 7 movies from Hong Kong or from China, even though they 8 subtitle, as I said in the presentation, they will be 9 as attractive to the Chinese community as the 10 mainstream audience. That is why, you know, we see 11 that what they are showing is in fact targeting our 12 Chinese community as well. 13 1890 From the way they present it in their 14 proposal, they are also imagining that they will be 15 soliciting a certain degree of ethnic advertisers. In 16 other words, they are also going after the same group 17 of audience and the same group of program suppliers. 18 1891 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: This is 19 why you call it a national ethnic superstation? 20 1892 MR. CHAN: Exactly right. That is 21 our major concern. 22 1893 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 23 Those are my questions, Mr. Chairman. 24 1894 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 25 1895 Commissioner McKendry.
377
1 1896 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I had a 2 question that relates to what in fact I think you were 3 just discussing with Commissioner Pennefather. 4 Specifically, it is your comments at the bottom of 5 page 2 of your oral comments. You say: 6 "Our experience as an ethnic 7 broadcaster, serving the largest 8 ethnic community in Canada, 9 tells us that a Chinese movie 10 with English or French subtitles 11 will have a much greater appeal 12 to a Chinese audience than a 13 mainstream audience." 14 1897 I assume you are speaking from your 15 experience with your service which is directed towards 16 a Chinese audience. 17 1898 MR. CHAN: Correct. 18 1899 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: If the 19 service, as the applicant is proposing, was marketed to 20 a mainstream audience, would that not tend to change 21 your observation here because you are marketing to a 22 Chinese audience and I understand the applicant to be 23 marketing to a mainstream audience? 24 1900 MR. CHAN: Again, I am referring back 25 to the world programming portion of the schedules. If
378
1 they are talking about dramas, if they are talking 2 about sitcoms, probably we are talking about the same 3 type of programming with the exception that they are 4 just subtitled. 5 1901 So I do not see any reason why it is 6 acceptable that, okay, we are using the same drama 7 series but then we are targeting to mainstream and not 8 targeting to ethnic. The ethnic will be watching. 9 Especially when they have mandatory carriage, the 10 ethnic audience will be watching. If they are free, 11 naturally they will be watching the same programs. 12 1902 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Just to make 13 sure I understand your point, if the applicant was 14 showing a Chinese-language film, movie, my 15 understanding is that the applicant would market that 16 to a mainstream audience. 17 1903 Isn't it logical to assume then that 18 if they are good marketers they will attract that 19 mainstream audience? You are not trying to market to 20 the mainstream markets. 21 1904 MR. CHAN: Of course because of our 22 licensing mandate we are not marketing to the 23 mainstream. What we are seeing here is while they are 24 marketing to the mainstream, at the same time it does 25 not preclude them from marketing to the ethnic
379
1 advertisers and ethnic audiences as well, because it is 2 duplicating what we are doing. That is what we are 3 trying to say here. 4 1905 MR. CHENG: If I may add to that. 5 1906 I have an example actually of an 6 over-the-air multicultural station, CFMT. It is 7 available in southern Ontario to every cable household 8 or even, like, any household, I would say every 9 household. Right? Every Saturday they show a Chinese 10 movie with English subtitles. They are available to 11 everyone but they only and they almost exclusively 12 attract Chinese advertising only. A Chinese movie with 13 English subtitles, available to every household and 14 they attract only Chinese advertising. I think this is 15 our point. 16 1907 MS SEPHTON: If I may add to that, 17 Commissioner? 18 1908 Despite the broadcaster's best 19 intentions, maybe they want to market to the mainstream 20 audience, we really have to look at what actually the 21 program is and who gets it, especially if the proposal 22 is granted for WTM to be carried on basic, then it 23 reaches all Canadians. 24 1909 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you. 25 1910 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. I
380
1 believe that is all. Thank you very much. 2 1911 MR. CHAN: Thank you very much. 3 1912 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Secretary. 4 1913 MR. LEBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 5 1914 The next appearing intervenor will be 6 Mr. Joseph Volpe. 7 INTERVENTION 8 1915 MR. VOLPE: Good evening and bonsoir. 9 1916 Mr. Chairman, I have appeared before 10 such a committee on a couple of other occasions. I 11 thought very briefly about submitting a written 12 statement and I said no, I have made several 13 interventions, that the points that others will 14 probably make will be ones that I could reiterate, 15 probably not as lucidly and without the same passion 16 that comes with self-interest, legitimate as it 17 might be. 18 1917 I looked instead at statements of the 19 past and, in particular, two dissenting positions by 20 Commissioners who sat on a panel in the past in the 21 last two hearings. As you can imagine, I would have 22 agreed with both dissenting opinions, in part, because 23 they captured the essence of the debate that you have 24 heard today, the discussion about the merits of 25 multiculturalism, the impact of the Broadcast Act, the
381
1 intention of the Multicultural Act and a general 2 government policy as seen both through debates in the 3 House but through decisions of the Commission. 4 1918 I thought that the very first of 5 those dissenting opinions some one year ago captured 6 that very, very well. I was convinced that the 7 Commission would include that as part of its corporate 8 memory. 9 1919 I was particularly impressed by the 10 last dissenting opinion by Commissioner Martha Wilson 11 who dissented with the last decision in part because 12 she said on the previous panel that it gave a negative 13 decision. To me it suggested that she had, upon 14 reflection, looked at all of the elements of the 15 application, had studied its history and decided that, 16 notwithstanding the conclusions reached by her 17 colleagues, the last panel should have granted the 18 licence as per request. 19 1920 I think the panel came a long way. 20 It came a long way because in its decision to grant a 21 licence it accepted the concept that I have heard 22 during my stay here this afternoon, essentially that 23 multiculturalism is a fact of life. It is part and 24 parcel of Canada. We no longer have to justify it. We 25 might still have trouble describing it but we live it
382
1 every day even though here I have heard mostly English, 2 some French. 3 1921 The issue then is not so much whether 4 the concept is valid, I didn't hear anybody today 5 suggest that it shouldn't be, but rather the question 6 of its accessibility, its carriage. The Commission in 7 the past I guess wrestled with that too and it decided 8 that the carriage would be limited by virtue of the 9 technology available to the applicant. 10 1922 I disagreed with the last decision 11 primarily because of that aspect of the decision. I 12 was relieved, I was gratified, I was happy that finally 13 somebody had accepted the concept, so I don't think 14 that is ever an issue again nor should it be. 15 1923 I was disappointed, but again I guess 16 because I was disappointed I took pains to address the 17 issue of accessibility. With it of course comes the 18 question of costs which some have raised here before 19 us, comes a question as well of competition which is a 20 discussion that we could have, I suppose anybody could 21 have. But more than anything else, if the concept is 22 real, if the Commission was in fact going to accept the 23 basis of the application, then it could only give it 24 viability by making it accessible to the largest 25 possible number of Canadians.
383
1 1924 An intervenor that preceded me said 2 it in the most lucid and eloquent fashion I could 3 imagine: if the technology existed to make it 4 available to everybody, then that is the technology you 5 should give, otherwise why live the lie of accepting 6 the concept? 7 1925 I dare say that, and I don't want to 8 put the words among the lips or in the thoughts of my 9 colleagues in cabinet, they must have wrestled with 10 this idea as well. How can we say one thing, how can 11 we accept this principle, how can we say that an 12 applicant that has been before us for well over 13 11 years, an applicant who has been singular in 14 responding to the initial call and subsequent calls of 15 the Commission, how can we accept the application and 16 its intent and its concepts and not give it the 17 technology to realize the objectives that we all say we 18 agree with? 19 1926 Of course we have an arm's-length 20 relationship with the CRTC, and the only thing that one 21 can do is do what in fact has resulted in us being here 22 today and yesterday and perhaps even tomorrow. 23 1927 I am hoping that in your 24 consideration you will be able to make the distinctions 25 that I know you will make. I don't know whether you
384
1 will make the same decision that I would make, but I 2 know you will make the distinctions. 3 1928 Many of the other intervenors this 4 afternoon have talked about parcelling up the pie. You 5 know, God bless them. I never want to take anything 6 away from anybody who is an entrepreneur and who has an 7 idea and who goes out there and tries to capture a 8 piece of the market, but I don't think it is up to us, 9 or anybody in fact, to then say that everybody else 10 should be shut out of that market. Were that to be the 11 case, I think that maybe we should do our very best to 12 eliminate ABC from competing with CBS from competing 13 with NBC and maybe from selling their programs over so 14 that CTV, Global, City and on occasion even CBC market 15 their product in our environment. No. I think the 16 true test of commercial viability will be when the 17 public makes a decision, as I have made on many 18 occasions. 19 1929 I flick through that converter. It 20 has become a little bit of an addiction for me. It is 21 the only thing that keeps me from falling asleep when I 22 turn on the TV. I make a decision immediately and I 23 would like to have extra choices. 24 1930 I have to tell you that the reason 25 that I have been before this Commission on several
385
1 occasions is because I am not happy with the limits to 2 choice that the decisions have resulted in in the past. 3 I didn't come to debate any individual intervenor, but 4 there are a couple of points that have been made by 5 others that struck me. 6 1931 In the past I have always -- and this 7 is very personal and subjective, typically, a 8 consumer-oriented observation -- I have been attracted 9 by anything that would give me an insight into 10 something different from what I saw every day, so if 11 there was something with subtitles I followed it as 12 much as I could. You know, I think I am pretty 13 discriminating. Garbage is garbage. It doesn't matter 14 what the language is. You know, the garbage 15 immediately suffered the same decision as the thumb on 16 the converter for all other programs. Were I to make 17 the decision myself, I don't think I would deprive any 18 of my viewers of the opportunity to flick that button. 19 1932 If this concept is worth supporting, 20 then it is worth supporting with the appropriate 21 regulatory and technological means to put it in place. 22 1933 Commissioners, I urge you to make 23 your decision in a way that will result in the granting 24 of a licence on analog and, you know, initially I said 25 as well basic and I continue to say that.
386
1 1934 One of the questions that a 2 Commissioner asked a few moments ago was about whether 3 the distributors ought to be a part of the negotiations 4 for ensuring that the carriage would be appropriate. I 5 looked at the sixth point and on of Commissioner Wilson 6 in her dissenting view and I had a different reading of 7 exceptional importance than two other intervenors have 8 indicated. 9 1935 But, as I say, I know you have read 10 through that dissenting opinion thoroughly so I am not 11 going to bore you with reading the justifications that 12 she elaborated. I just want to repeat that in my very 13 patient yet humble opinion, having followed this 14 application since its inception, the last Commission 15 finally got it right when it said, you know, this is 16 something that we need to do. Where they missed was in 17 ensuring that it had the appropriate means of 18 accessibility for all Canadians. I urge you to provide 19 that in this hearing. Thank you. 20 1936 MR. LEBEL: Excuse me, Mr. Volpe, 21 your time is up. Sorry. 22 1937 THE CHAIRPERSON: You preempted the 23 secretary. 24 1938 Thank you very much, Mr. Volpe, for 25 your presentation which was clear enough that I don't
387
1 have any questions. I don't know about my colleagues. 2 1939 Commissioner McKendry. 3 1940 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you for 4 coming and giving us the benefit of your views. 5 1941 You talked about the limit to choice 6 and that is frustrating for you when you surf through 7 the channels that are available to you. One of the 8 difficulties or one of the challenges for us in this is 9 that there are intervenors who take the opposite view 10 with respect to this application, that in fact if we 11 approve the application we will be negatively impacting 12 their choice. Just let me quote two sentences from one 13 of those intervenors. 14 1942 It is Intervention No. 69. This 15 individual says: 16 "I wish to voice my concern that 17 this application should not be 18 permitted to happen and urge 19 CRTC to decline this request. 20 World television should remain a 21 Category 2 channel. I am 22 becoming sick and tired of 23 having television channels in 24 which I have no interest being 25 shoved down my throat and those
388
1 that I do want to watch being 2 moved into categories that force 3 me to pay additional fees to 4 obtain them." (As read) 5 1943 So there are some intervenors and 6 some members of the public who didn't intervene that 7 undoubtedly would see this as a restriction in choice. 8 1944 One of the difficulties for us here, 9 or one of the challenges for us, is to weigh those 10 issues or those concerns with the kinds of concerns you 11 and other intervenors have brought in front of us. I 12 wondered if you had any comments on how we balance 13 these computing views of choice. 14 1945 MR. VOLPE: I think in the not too 15 distant future that observation by the intervenor might 16 appear redundant inasmuch as technology is moving ahead 17 at a fairly quick rate and I think we will find that 18 competition will appear a lot faster than we can beat 19 it back. But to that intervenor and to that question 20 specifically, I too don't like a lot of the things that 21 are on television on my dial. 22 1946 For example, I can't for the life of 23 me think how the golf channel enhances my lifestyle or 24 my sense of being Canadian. I really don't. I refuse 25 to watch CNN but it has another substation. I didn't
389
1 ask for it but there it is. I didn't ask for the 2 Shopping Network, but it occupies Channel 19 on my 3 dial. I didn't ask for the digital or the video 4 broadcast schedule, but there it is occupying Channel 5 No. 5 on my dial. I guess I am one of those 6 subscribers who is also dissatisfied with having a lot 7 of choices that aren't mine. 8 1947 I live in Toronto. It is a wonderful 9 city. It has got people from everywhere. I speak 10 French. I understand it very well. I try to listen to 11 the news in French. RDI is one of the stations I go 12 to. On occasion, I like to watch TV 5, but I also have 13 Channel 12 and Channel 13. The population of 14 French-speaking Canadians in the Toronto area is 15 something like 50,000. This issue of whether we cut 16 the pie so small that people can't compete and can't 17 survive is clearly not an issue for the 50,000 18 potential viewers of four different single language 19 stations in Toronto. 20 1948 I think instead what the intervenor 21 might recognize is that the more opportunities for 22 expression there are the more likely those advertising 23 dollars are to appear. In other words, the pie is not 24 limited, it grows. To him or to them and to you, I 25 would point out the example of ONG Media advertising.
390
1 I don't know whether you are familiar with it. It is 2 beginning to make its way here in Ottawa. Do you know 3 what it is? It is outdoor garbage advertising. It has 4 revolutionized the way that garbage is collected in 5 cities in Canada and it has done so marvellously well. 6 1949 Where did they get that additional 7 money? They got it because the traditional advertisers 8 said: You know, what; I would like to have an 9 advertising on that garbage box there for a month 10 rather than in a newspaper for one day or on radio or 11 on television for a 30-second clip. Have those 12 advertising dollars dried up for radio, television and 13 newspapers? No. All you have to do is examine what is 14 happening in the community newspaper market. Take a 15 look, as one of the intervenors indicated, at what is 16 happening to the market for advertising on some of the 17 ethnic television stations. It keeps growing. The 18 national producers of product are looking at some of 19 these places and gearing themselves to that market. 20 1950 I think this is sort of a Chicken 21 Little approach. I'm sorry; I don't mean to be 22 critical of them, but the market seems to be expanding 23 all of the time so if it is expanding and you are 24 getting access to it, then you can't make the claim 25 that somebody is going to cut you out of your fair
391
1 share. What is the public's fair share? 2 1951 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you 3 very much. 4 1952 MR. VOLPE: Thank you. 5 1953 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, 6 Mr. Volpe. 7 1954 Mr. Secretary, how many more 8 appearing intervenors? 9 1955 MR. LEBEL: Four more appearing, 10 Mr. Chairman. 11 1956 THE CHAIRPERSON: We will take a 12 break now for 15 minutes and resume at 6:30. Thank 13 you. 14 --- Upon recessing at 1815 / Suspension à 1815 15 --- Upon resuming at 1835 / Reprise à 1835 16 1957 THE CHAIRPERSON: Order, please. A 17 l'ordre, s'il vous plaît. 18 1958 Mr. Secretary, would you summon the 19 next intervenor, please. 20 1959 MR. LEBEL: You will be happy to know 21 that there are only two left. The next one will be 22 Mr. Ken Stewart. 23 1960 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 24 INTERVENTION 25 1961 MR. STEWART: Mr. Chairman, Members
392
1 of the Commission, thank you for the opportunity to 2 make this presentation on behalf of my company, GAPC 3 Entertainment, myself and my family. 4 1962 I believe we are here today because 5 there are those who feel creating, reflecting and 6 delivering cultural diversity is important, important 7 to all Canadians, important enough to warrant this 8 hearing again. 9 1963 For over 10 years WTM has been coming 10 before this Commission to propose the same 11 revolutionary concept for a multicultural television 12 service that is unique, visionary and exceptional. 13 1964 Throughout the process WTM has 14 maintained that the service must be able to be accessed 15 by most if not all Canadians. Carriage and delivery 16 has been as much a part of their submissions as has 17 programming. 18 1965 It is time that Canadians have the 19 opportunity to embrace culturally diverse programming 20 that is delivered in such a way that the barrier of 21 language is overcome, resulting in Canadians having the 22 ability and the choice to hear, understand and 23 appreciate the diverse world which we are a part of. 24 As you can imagine this is even more critical in 25 today's world.
393
1 1966 Make no mistake, the proposed 2 programming by WTM is focused on the needs, interests, 3 circumstances and aspirations of all Canadians 4 regardless of their race, religion or background. 5 1967 Canadians are a culturally diverse 6 people, and as time goes on this diversity will 7 continue to grow and must flower. 8 1968 Canadian businesses rely more and 9 more on exporting their goods and services. Today's 10 business leaders and those of tomorrow must have an 11 understanding and an appreciation of their customers, 12 their clients and their staff. 13 1969 Canadians need to and are interested 14 in appreciating and understanding the world we live in, 15 its peoples and their circumstances. 16 1970 Many Canadians feel that we are a 17 tolerant society, that we indeed are very worldly and 18 culturally sensitive and thus the role of our 19 traditional broadcasters. Their news services and 20 their programming, with ongoing tweaking, will achieve 21 the goals of the Broadcasting Act, and if we give some 22 room to the ethnic broadcasters we will be in fact 23 doing what is needed. 24 1971 I and many others actually disagree 25 and on a day-to-day basis we witness the lack of
394
1 understanding in our culture and in our society. 2 1972 Although there are differences in the 3 reportage of the main broadcasters, they are subtle. 4 Canadians lack the opportunity and the right to access 5 news and information as well as programming from 6 outside North America. 7 1973 Canadians do have the right to be 8 able to receive information and programming that is not 9 tailored for a demographic meltdown of a marketer's 10 perception of the generic Canadian. 11 1974 What WTM proposes is not ethnic 12 broadcasting. Multicultural programming is not focused 13 on bringing one specific message or one story to one 14 group at one time. Multicultural programming reaches 15 out to a diverse audience with diverse content and 16 allows for different perspectives to be heard which in 17 turn promotes understanding of these perspectives. 18 1975 As a country that prides itself on 19 tolerance, we do not reflect the views and opinions and 20 underlying culture and perspective of all of our 21 citizens, and I do not believe that this can or should 22 be done by our main broadcasters. But Canadians do 23 have a right to have access to this content and these 24 different perspectives so that we can continue to grow 25 as a nation, promoting understanding and tolerance.
395
1 1976 The other day I came across an 2 article in the Ottawa Citizen. A mother with her young 3 child was in a grocery store at the check out counter 4 and was asked, "How much did she cost" -- the mother 5 Caucasian, the daughter Asian. It was not the first 6 time the mother had been asked that question. 7 1977 In the article, that contained other 8 examples of intolerance and ignorance, the 9 author/mother went on to say: 10 "For all the Liberals who say 11 that race shouldn't matter, or 12 that we should try to live in a 13 world where race doesn't exist, 14 that we should be colour-blind, 15 you know better. You know that 16 we are living with blinders on 17 or ear plugs in." 18 1978 It is my belief that a service such 19 as WTM will give an important perspective that cannot 20 and is not being addressed by today's broadcasters, a 21 perspective that must be accessible to all Canadians, 22 that is of such a significant and exceptional 23 importance that it warrants basic carriage. 24 1979 As has been pointed out, our system 25 must maximize choice, I wonder if this means that I can
396
1 choose to watch American programming on American 2 channels or watch American programming on Canadian 3 channels. Both the CCTA and Mr. Valanti wish to offer 4 choice and feel strongly that only the consumer should 5 choose, that we need not regulate our broadcasting 6 system. 7 1980 But inherent in the concept of choice 8 and the idea of maximizing choice lies the fact that 9 you must have diversity: diversity of ownership, 10 diversity of editorial perspective, diversity of 11 culture and diversity of choice. 12 1981 I do not want to give up watching 13 "The West Wing" but I do not need it on two or more 14 channels of basic cable at the same time. 15 1982 I and my family are Muslim. My wife 16 is Egyptian born. My neighbours on one side are from 17 Southern India, on the other side our neighbours are 18 from England, second generation. I am from Montreal 19 and the great, great grandson of the first 20 Canadian-born Prime Minister. 21 1983 As the line in the commercial goes: 22 We are Canadian. 23 1984 The production company that I have 24 run for the past 18 years has produced programming for 25 History, CBC, Discovery, Vision and others. On a daily
397
1 basis we pitch programming ideas to broadcasters. Our 2 pitches, not our ideas, lack cultural diversity because 3 of the market not because of the ideas, or those ideas, 4 stories or content. 5 1985 Broadcasters today say: that's a 6 good idea, but it will be of little interest to our 7 viewers, our demographic; what's the Canadian angle? We 8 must let flourish a venue that will challenge and 9 change this, that will create and strengthen the 10 appetite Canadians will and must have for diversity 11 programming. 12 1986 It is our duty to create that hunger, 13 that thirst for knowledge that will take Canadians 14 beyond the perspectives of their own backyard. 15 Canadians must and will see the importance and 16 relevance to themselves and new generations of 17 multicultural programming. We must not fail them in 18 this. 19 1987 WTM will offer a service that is of 20 such an importance to warrant the CRTC to grant it the 21 licence and carriage it has requested. The continued 22 pressure and rejection have not swayed WTM's leadership 23 and vision. World Télémonde has stayed the course. It 24 has pursued its vision relentlessly and we should all 25 embrace it and appreciate that its success will lead to
398
1 our collective success as a nation. 2 1988 I thank you for this opportunity to 3 speak. Thank you. 4 1989 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. McKendry. 5 1990 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Just looking 6 on page 4 of your comments, you note that your 7 production company has produced programming for 8 History, CBC and so on, and "On a daily basis we pitch 9 programming ideas to broadcasters." I am quoting from 10 your oral comments. You say: 11 "Our pitches, not our ideas, 12 lack cultural diversity because 13 of the market not because of the 14 ideas, stories or content." 15 1991 I guess I just want to understand 16 this. The conventional broadcasters or the specialty 17 broadcasters that you are dealing with aren't buying 18 stories and productions that have cultural diversity 19 inherent in them. Is that what you are saying? 20 1992 MR. STEWART: Yes. I think there is 21 not the window of opportunity for programs coming about 22 diverse cultures in Canada, about diverse cultures 23 outside of Canada that have a Canadian perspective. We 24 work with multicultural, independent producers who are 25 developing ideas and stories, and the windows for us,
399
1 the broadcasters -- the opportunities for us are very 2 limited because the broadcasters, in terms of what they 3 wish to -- how they judge their audience and how they 4 judge their viewers and what their viewers specifically 5 want to see do not coincide with a lot of programming 6 that we are putting forth that is usually factual in 7 nature but has a multicultural aspect about it. 8 1993 There are not a lot of opportunities 9 to put forward this kind of programming. 10 1994 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Given the 11 emergence and the existence of a multicultural society 12 that we live in, what accounts for the broadcasters 13 that you deal with not wanting to reflect that in their 14 programs? 15 1995 MR. STEWART: I think their 16 programming schedule is focused less on factual 17 programming, focused more on entertainment, focused on 18 prime time U.S. product and they have little room in 19 their schedules. Their schedules don't allow for the 20 amount of potential ideas and content and stories that 21 are out there that are coming forth from all Canadians 22 but Canadians of diverse backgrounds and multicultural 23 backgrounds. 24 1996 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I take it, 25 should we licence the applicant as they are requesting
400
1 to be licensed, there would be no difficulty from your 2 perspective in satisfying the Canadian-produced content 3 that they are forecasting. 4 1997 MR. STEWART: Absolutely not. I 5 think there is a wealth of content and there is a 6 growing industry. Specialty channels have certainly 7 helped support that growth in that industry, but the 8 important thing about carriage and with respect to 9 World Télémonde is that if we are going to produce 10 quality programming, we have to have the licence fees 11 that will allow us to do so. A designation of service 12 like WTM to where it had been put, a tier two level, 13 digital level, will see licence fees that will not 14 support in any way Canadian production. 15 1998 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thanks very 16 much. Thank you for staying so late. 17 1999 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very 18 much, Mr. Stewart. My history being as poor as it is, 19 I am still trying to figure out who your great, great 20 grandfather is. 21 2000 MR. STEWART: That is always the 22 challenge. That would be John Abbott. 23 2001 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Thank you 24 very much. 25 2002 Mr. Secretary.
401
1 2003 MR. LEBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 2 2004 The last appearing intervention will 3 be presented by the Canadian Ethnocultural Council. 4 Appearing on behalf of the Council, Anna Chiappa and 5 George Frajkor. 6 2005 Mr. Chairman, for the record, I would 7 like to indicate that Intervenors Nos. 18 and 19 on the 8 agenda have elected not to appear at the public 9 hearing. Their intervention will remain on the record 10 as non-appearing. 11 2006 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 12 INTERVENTION 13 2007 MS CHIAPPA: Mr. Chairman, Members of 14 the Commission, thank you very much for giving us this 15 opportunity to be here. Unfortunately, Mr. Hagopian 16 had to take his flight back to Toronto and regrets not 17 being able to speak to you. 18 2008 I am the Executive Director of the 19 organization. I am accompanied by George Frajkor, who 20 is Chairman of the Immigration Committee, and he is 21 also a producer of the "Slovak Spectrum", which is a 22 program with Rogers Cable here in Ottawa. 23 2009 The CEC, the Canadian Ethnocultural 24 Council, is a national umbrella organization which 25 represents over 30 national ethnocultural groups
402
1 throughout Canada. Our mandate is to promote 2 understanding and acceptance of the multicultural 3 reality of Canada. It is a reality which has become a 4 fact of life and part of our Canadian identity. 5 2010 The most recent poll which shows this 6 was conducted by Environics for the Association for 7 Canadian Studies. This was conducted just a couple of 8 months ago. Seventy-seven per cent of Canadians who 9 were polled support the idea that multiculturalism 10 promotes the sharing of common values. Also 11 significant about that is 86 per cent of Quebecers feel 12 the same way. 13 2011 The reality is we believe that 14 Canadians are ready for what WTM is offering, and that 15 is a national, multicultural TV station. What the 16 polls show is that multiculturalism is not just about 17 specialty communities, it is not limited to 18 ethnocultural communities, but is now considered part 19 of the mainstream. 20 2012 Our support for WTM goes back since 21 their first application. They appeared before our 22 board and before our executive and subsequently we have 23 gone on record on many occasions to support broader 24 access and availability to broadcasting and programming 25 which is reflective of the multicultural reality and
403
1 diversity of Canada. We believe that this is in 2 keeping with Canada's Multicultural and Broadcasting 3 Act and we support the idea of national programming 4 which reflects this vision. 5 2013 As we stated last year in our 6 intervention, we still consider WTM to be the missing 7 component in the Broadcasting Act's mission statement, 8 similar to the Television Northern Canada Incorporated. 9 The WTM request should be regarded as equally important 10 and as a matter of public interest. It should be 11 available and easily accessible across the country. 12 The granting of a digital licence does not do this. 13 2014 WTM has two goals. One is to bring 14 Canadians belonging to a particular ethnocultural group 15 the living culture of their ancestral homeland as well 16 as to bring them news and documentaries valuable to 17 them in today's world and in Canada. The second is to 18 give Canadians of all backgrounds exposure to the life, 19 thoughts and actions of the rest of the world as 20 expressed in the artistic and realistic creations of 21 the countries of the world themselves. 22 2015 The programs being offered will have 23 interest to many viewers, not just a select specialty 24 group. "World Journal", "Eye on Canada" and "Day and 25 Night" are examples of such programming. Canadians
404
1 have a high degree of interest in the world around them 2 and these programs will offer a view which at the 3 current time is limited if not unavailable. 4 2016 You have certainly heard today that 5 Canada's constitution recognizes the realities that 6 this is a multicultural nation. Such recognition we 7 feel is meaningless unless it goes beyond policy and is 8 implemented in programming. We feel it is a matter of 9 right that multilingual and multicultural broadcast 10 outlets throughout Canada are available throughout 11 Canada at the local, regional and national levels. 12 2017 WTM is the first application to offer 13 multicultural service at the national level. We 14 applaud the CRTC's decisions in the past which ave 15 enabled programming at the local or regional level. As 16 we have stated, they should continue to exist but there 17 also must be a connection to communities across the 18 country, to the mosaic of cultures which are part of 19 this country no matter where they are. So programs 20 such as "Port of Entry", "Intercom" and "Rabble" will 21 offer opportunity for ways for diverse communities to 22 share their perspective beyond their own cultural 23 communities. 24 2018 We also believe that world 25 programming will be a welcomed choice to many viewers
405
1 who want to see more than the current selection of 2 mostly American programming. Where once we had the 3 disadvantage of geography, because I think we are in a 4 new era now, in today's world of accessible 5 communication, we no longer have to be at the mercy of 6 our powerful neighbour whose cultural products dominate 7 our film, publishing and broadcasting industries. 8 2019 Our struggle has been to come up with 9 an identity that has been, in relation to the United 10 States, to distinguish ourselves from the American 11 dominant culture. If Canada is to develop its own 12 distinctive identity, separate from the Americans, it 13 must encourage all cultures to contribute to this new 14 identity and a national service such as WTM will be the 15 focus by which this can be done. 16 2020 What WTM has to offer can no longer 17 be considered simply a niche or specialty market. It 18 is a service for a general market which is outpacing 19 the policy makers and, to a great extent, the corporate 20 communications world. Technology is operating and 21 increasing at an incredible pace and we have to keep up 22 with it. 23 2021 Just as computers and the worldwide 24 web have allowed individuals to surf the world and see 25 it on screen, television must do the same. The world
406
1 looks at Canada as being open and diverse and as such 2 Canadian media should promote an open and diverse 3 format reflective of today's technology reality. 4 2022 Our country has provided much 5 international leadership in the area of human rights. 6 Our charter of rights and freedoms, for example, is 7 held in high regard and is revered internationally. We 8 have an opportunity in the field of communication to 9 offer similar leadership, a new model of television 10 viewing which is in keeping with a new world of 11 globalization, of cultural and communications synergy. 12 2023 The CRTC is faced with this 13 reconsideration which promises Canadians a great deal 14 more than warmed-over fiction and non-fiction from one 15 programming source south of the border. The CRTC must 16 weigh the application in light of the aims of the 17 Broadcasting Act, which have hardly changed since the 18 dawn of broadcasting in the 1920s. As well, it must 19 weigh the application in light of the Canadian 20 constitution which stipulates that the multicultural 21 reality of Canada must be recognized. 22 2024 The CRTC has recognized the value of 23 this service by granting a digital licence. Now it has 24 to recognize what WTM will bring to all Canadians and 25 to the world by making this service available to all.
407
1 2025 I would just like to repeat the words 2 of Michael McCabe, President and CEO of the Canadian 3 Association of Broadcasters that we quoted last year. 4 I think it is worth merit repeating again this year: 5 "Until we all move beyond words 6 towards action, we risk losing 7 our ability to provide our 8 viewers and listeners at home 9 with a reflection of themselves 10 and their culture and our 11 international audience with a 12 sense of who we are and what is 13 important to us. Face cultural 14 homogenization or fight for 15 cultural diversity? There 16 should be no question." 17 2026 By offering the WTM analog service to 18 all of the Canadian public, we can take the right step 19 to creating the kind of diversity which Mr. McCabe is 20 proposing. We urge you to support the request for 21 basic carriage. 22 2027 Thank you. 23 2028 MR. FRAJKOR: Thank you for the 24 privilege of appearing once again before this 25 Commission.
408
1 2029 As a former journalist, I am somewhat 2 familiar with television programming. I was with CTV 3 as their bureau chief in Montreal and with the Canadian 4 Broadcasting Corporation for quite a length of time 5 before I went to Carleton University to teach 6 journalism, television journalism specifically, so I 7 think I have some right to comment on this. 8 2030 In fact, if I am not mistaken, I 9 think the first time I was ever introduced to 10 Commissioner Pennefather was her first job at publicity 11 at CFCF-TV when I was at CTV there. Nice to see that 12 she has risen in the world higher than most of us. 13 2031 I do wish to of course, like a 14 journalist, declare a conflict of interest. I appeared 15 before this panel once on behalf of the Canadian 16 Ethnocultural Council. I appeared before it the second 17 time in association with WTM, in association with their 18 board, making the case for them, so it is quite clear 19 that I am directly involved in this. I am not going to 20 repeat the arguments that WTM has made or that the 21 Canadian Ethnocultural Council has made. 22 2032 I do want to make a few comments. 23 One is the lack in Canada of the kind of universal 24 spectrum programming that one finds in even some of the 25 most small countries of east Europe.
409
1 2033 Slovenia has a population of slightly 2 more than 2 million people. In Slovenia you can get 3 Italian programming daily, Hungarian programming, 4 Austrian programming, Croatian programming and even 5 Polish programming. 6 2034 Similarly, in Slovakia, where I also 7 did some teaching of television journalism, it is a 8 country with a population of just over $5 million and 9 you can get Ukrainian programming, Russian programming, 10 Polish programming, Hungarian programming, German 11 programming and of course the ubiquitous CNN and Sky 12 Channel. Those kind of resources are available in 13 countries that have a population much, much less than 14 Canada. I think that it is time that Canada, through 15 WTM, should be exposed to those same kind of resources. 16 2035 I do not believe, and I think any 17 journalist will agree, that limiting your sources of 18 information and your sources of entertainment is 19 somehow going to expand your mind or is somehow going 20 to make us more universally conscious or less Canadian 21 or whatever. I don't believe there is a contradiction 22 between promoting Canadian programming and bringing in 23 sources of programming from other countries. I don't 24 believe that at all. I think we become better 25 Canadians and will make better Canadian programs if we
410
1 have access to sources of entertainment and news and 2 current affairs from all over the world rather than 3 from a few sources. I think the expansion of sources 4 is essential and I think that is what WTM is all about. 5 2036 I doubt that many people would 6 disagree with that. 7 2037 MR. LEBEL: Excuse me, Mr. Frajkor, 8 your time is up. 9 2038 MR. FRAJKOR: Excuse me. Time is up. 10 Thank you. 11 2039 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I have no 12 questions other than to say recruiting audiences, 13 excuse my French, were still a lot of fun even though 14 it was a long time ago. 15 2040 I have no questions, Mr. Chairman. 16 2041 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I just had 17 one question. 18 2042 You referred in your comments to the 19 nationally accessible broadcasting system. I take it 20 that is an important dimension of your concerns about 21 the availability of multicultural television 22 programming is that it be nationally accessible. Did I 23 understand that correctly? 24 2043 MR. FRAJKOR: That is correct. This 25 is the only proposal made to this Commission for a
411
1 national multicultural type of programming. 2 2044 I am familiar with ethnic 3 programming. I am the co-producer of an ethnic program 4 here in Ottawa, so I know that it is a small market and 5 it is intended for a limited audience. This is not. 6 This is intended for all Canadians and I think that is 7 a good idea. 8 2045 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you. 9 That was the only question I had. 10 2046 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much 11 for your patience and for your presentation. 12 2047 Mr. Secretary. 13 2048 MR. LEBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 14 We have now reached Phase III of the application. In 15 this phase we do grant 10 minutes to WTM to respond to 16 all the interventions submitted to the application. 17 2049 MR. IANNUZZI: Mr. Secretary, I think 18 that will be 20 minutes because you owe me 10 minutes 19 from our opening presentation. 20 2050 THE CHAIRPERSON: We are almost at 21 peak time, Mr. Iannuzzi. 22 --- Laughter / Rires 23 REPLY / RÉPLIQUE 24 2051 MR. IANNUZZI: Mr. Chairman, since we 25 have reached the witching hour, we will be brief.
412
1 2052 All we want to say in rebuttal is 2 that the arguments, pro and con, are clearly set out in 3 the submissions, the interventions and our replies 4 before you. 5 2053 We wish to take this opportunity to 6 thank you, Commissioners, for your questions. They 7 were quite deep and we hope we gave you all of the 8 answers. Those that we haven't we will be sending them 9 to you shortly. 10 2054 We will file the revised business 11 plan you requested on or before May 20. 12 2055 What can we say at this point but bon 13 weekend. 14 2056 THE CHAIRPERSON: Counsel. 15 2057 MR. HOWARD: Just one moment. 16 Late-breaking news. 17 --- Pause 18 2058 MR. HOWARD: Thank you. 19 2059 In your replies you made a number of 20 statements, strong statements, you know, we would never 21 do this, we would never do that, and this type of 22 thing. Rather than going through them all 23 individually, could I ask you, with regard to the 24 statements of that type, would you accept conditions of 25 licence to that effect?
413
1 2060 MR. MARCHANT: In principle, yes, 2 although as a solicitor you will appreciate I would 3 like to be a little bit more specific. 4 2061 MR. HOWARD: Okay. I don't want to 5 go through them all but it would be statements such as, 6 "It will never offer ethnic programming as defined by 7 the CRTC, i.e., programming that is directed. While 8 there may be occasional subtitle third language 9 advertised on WTM at the request of a national or major 10 advertiser, WTM will never: (a), (b)...", those types 11 of statements. 12 2062 MR. MARCHANT: Counsel, if you are 13 referring specifically to the list of items from which 14 you are reading which is at the end of the reply to the 15 ethnic specialty interventions the answer is yes. 16 2063 MR. HOWARD: Thank you. 17 2064 I take it that would also be with 18 regard to the 10 per cent of its programming in a 19 single third language in any month. I think the 20 point made by one of the intervenors was that Chinese, 21 if I can put it that way, would obviously consist of a 22 great number of languages and they ought not to be 23 lumped together. Is that your understanding of what 24 you are saying there? 25 2065 MR. MARCHANT: Yes.
414
1 2066 MR. HOWARD: Thank you. 2 2067 MR. IANNUZZI: There is also one 3 particular point that I wanted to add on top of that 4 that we carried out there. It is that there would also 5 be a minimum of 15 languages in any one month and a 6 minimum of 20 countries in any one month. By doing 7 this we are showing that there is absolutely no way 8 that even with a 10 per cent would we do that. 9 2068 Although we heard today from TLN that 10 even the 10 per cent we are talking about here, they 11 seem to take exception to it. 12 2069 What I take exception to is the fact 13 that Telelatino was only here this week asking for an 14 increase in 10 per cent of the English language and 15 therefore depriving their original third language 16 ethnic groups of 10 per cent either Italian or English. 17 2070 MR. MARCHANT: Spanish. 18 2071 MR. HOWARD: Thank you. 19 2072 THE CHAIRPERSON: It is Spanish, I 20 think. Right? Italian or Spanish, you meant? 21 2073 MR. IANNUZZI: That's right. What 22 did I say? 23 2074 THE CHAIRPERSON: Italian or English. 24 --- Off microphone / Hors microphone 25 2075 MR. HOWARD: You have stated as one
415
1 of the things that you would adhere to is that you 2 would run no more than 15 per cent of the advertising 3 minutes in an hour in a third language. If the 4 Commission decided that you should not do any third 5 language programming whatsoever, what would be the 6 impact on your revenue, let's say, in year one? 7 2076 MR. MARCHANT: You said no third 8 language programming. I take it, counsel, you meant 9 third language advertising. 10 2077 MR. HOWARD: Sorry. What did I say? 11 2078 MR. IANNUZZI: Programming. 12 2079 MR. HOWARD: Programming. I'm sorry. 13 Advertising. It's late. It's late. 14 --- Laughter / Rires 15 2080 MR. IANNUZZI: The only reason we 16 left that it in there -- I mean it was easy enough to 17 say we don't want to do that because we know exactly 18 what we do want to do. 19 2081 The fact is that there are 20 sometimes -- that the advertiser himself, it may be an 21 agency, IBM, that had that whole series on their 22 Internet and so on. These were all commercials that 23 were produced in other countries and were run on 24 conventional television, so they were done in a third 25 language. We are just saying there is a small
416
1 percentage that would come primarily from the 2 advertisers. 3 2082 MR. HOWARD: What would be the impact 4 on your revenues in year one if you couldn't run that 5 type of advertising? 6 2083 MR. IANNUZZI: I don't know. I would 7 think it would be small enough. I mean, I can say it 8 could be a condition of licence that we wouldn't, but 9 in the event if there was a major account, a national 10 brewery or whatever, I say we would come back to the 11 Commission and ask if we could have an exception 12 on that. 13 2084 MR. JOHNSTON: Could I just add? 14 There was a time when Nortel used to run ads around the 15 country. It doesn't do it too often any more. 16 2085 MR. IANNUZZI: It can't afford it. 17 2086 MR. JOHNSTON: That's right. 18 2087 THE CHAIRPERSON: There was a time 19 when Nortel traded at $120 -- 20 2088 MR. JOHNSTON: I remember those days 21 too. 22 --- Laughter / Rires 23 2089 MR. HOWARD: Please go ahead. 24 2090 MR. JOHNSTON: They did a lot of 25 advertising that was really for the whole world and
417
1 they used a lot of different languages. We wouldn't 2 want to necessarily, although it wouldn't matter today, 3 we would not necessarily have wanted to lose Nortel. 4 2091 MR. HOWARD: That's fine. 5 2092 MR. MARCHANT: I apologize for three 6 of us giving answers because I think this is actually a 7 slightly more important issue than the 15 per cent the 8 lateness of the hour would indicate. 9 2093 I think it is also important to us 10 that advertising is a very important part of the 11 Canadian broadcasting system. Advertisers are a 12 significant component of support for it. We know that 13 they want outlets for their advertising and the venues 14 and the settings and the programming that suits them. 15 So there is that element to it that I would add. 16 2094 MR. HOWARD: So if there were such a 17 condition of licence that you could not do third 18 language advertising, would you still accept the 19 licence? 20 2095 MR. IANNUZZI: Of course. I mean, 21 there is reasonableness and then there is -- 22 2096 The question is: why are we doing 23 this? We are slowly being penalized for things that 24 may have and may not have an impact on others. I would 25 rather lower the level to say maybe even 10 per cent,
418
1 but just for the fact that there is that slight edge of 2 the wedge that is important to some advertisers who 3 have a right to access to every channel. 4 2097 MR. HOWARD: With regard to the 5 described video, you stated that you would accept the 6 conditions that Vision currently has. You cited it by 7 decision number but it is the Vision decision. 8 2098 MR. IANNUZZI: It is the same -- 9 2099 MR. HOWARD: Yes. In the Vision 10 decision there is no actual hours set out. There is an 11 expectation of so many hours. Was there any reason why 12 you don't want to commit to a certain number of hours 13 and you chose the expectation route? 14 2100 MR. MARCHANT: When the question 15 arose, we sought advice from the expert on this within 16 our team who has since had to leave. He said, why 17 don't we do what was -- just to prove provision and 18 showed us the paragraph and we thought -- you know, 19 from the CRTC's decision. We were simply trying to -- 20 pardon me. 21 --- Pause 22 2101 MR. MARCHANT: Our intention was 23 simply to have a constructive response based on a 24 Commission precedent. I guess I would say that we are 25 not advancing it simply because we want to say we will
419
1 do it. We plan to do it. 2 2102 It also bears directly on this 3 question that the Chairman raised about the use of the 4 SAP. We need it for that reason. 5 2103 MR. HOWARD: Yes. I understand that. 6 2104 I was thinking, however that the 7 Global and CTV decisions are a little more stringent. 8 Perhaps as part of the material you are going to file, 9 could you take a look at those and get back to us as to 10 whether or not they might be appropriate? 11 2105 MR. MARCHANT: Yes. 12 2106 MR. HOWARD: With regard to this 13 material, there seems to be a fair amount I must admit, 14 could you file that material -- I think you have said 15 the 20th for the projections, so let's say all the 16 material by the 20th and serve it upon the intervenors 17 and the intervenors will have five days from that time 18 to make their comments on your material? 19 2107 MR. MARCHANT: Yes. 20 2108 MR. HOWARD: Great. 21 2109 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That's all 22 my questions. 23 2110 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 24 2111 Mr. Iannuzzi, I would normally ask 25 you whether you had anything to add but I am kind of
420
1 hesitant to do that. 2 --- Laughter / Rires 3 2112 THE CHAIRPERSON: If you do have 4 anything to add please add it -- 5 2113 MR. IANNUZZI: I will send it in on 6 the 20th. 7 2114 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. 8 2115 This hearing is now adjourned. Thank 9 you very much. 10 --- Whereupon the hearing concluded at 1910 / 11 L'audience se termine à 1910
- Date modified: