ARCHIVED -  Transcript

This page has been archived on the Web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:

              CANADIAN TELEVISION POLICY REVIEW /
               EXAMEN DES POLITIQUES DU CONSEIL
             RELATIVES À LA TÉLÉVISION CANADIENNE

HELD AT:                                TENUE À:

Conference Centre                       Centre des conférences
Outaouais Room                          Salle Outaouais
Place du Portage                        Place du Portage
Phase IV                                Phase IV
Hull, Quebec                            Hull (Québec)

October 8, 1998                         8 octobre 1998

                           Volume 12
tel: 613-521-0703          StenoTran         fax: 613-521-7668

Transcripts



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.

                           StenoTran

                 Canadian Radio-television and
                 Telecommunications Commission

              Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des
                télécommunications canadiennes

                  Transcript / Transcription

              Public Hearing / Audience publique

              Canadian Television Policy Review /
               Examen des politiques du Conseil
             relatives à la télévision canadienne

BEFORE / DEVANT:

Andrée Wylie            Chairperson / Présidente
                        Vice-Chairperson, Radio-
                        television / Vice-
                        présidente, Radiodiffusion
Joan Pennefather        Commissioner / Conseillère
Andrew Cardozo          Commissioner / Conseiller
Martha Wilson           Commissioner / Conseillère
David McKendry          Commissioner / Conseiller

ALSO PRESENT / AUSSI PRÉSENTS:

Jean-Pierre Blais       Commission Counsel /
                        Avocat du Conseil
Margot Patterson        Articling Student /
                        Stagiaire
Carole Bénard /         Secretaries/Secrétaires
Diane Santerre
Nick Ketchum            Hearing Manager / Gérant de
                        l'audience

HELD AT:                TENUE À:

Conference Centre       Centre des conférences
Outaouais Room          Salle Outaouais
Place du Portage        Place du Portage
Phase IV                Phase IV
Hull, Quebec            Hull (Québec)

October 8, 1998         8 octobre 1998

                           Volume 12
                           StenoTran

            TABLE OF CONTENTS / TABLE DES MATIÈRES

                                                          PAGE

Presentation by / Présentation par:

Union des artistes                                        3528

Impératif français                                        3559

Horizon Interfaith Council                                3589

Canada Family Action Coalition                            3612

Canadian Diversity Network                                3636

CHRC, Cultural Human Resources Council /
CRHSC, Conseil des ressources humaines
du secteur culturel                                       3685

The War Amputations of Canada / Les amputés
de guerre du Canada                                       3724

                           StenoTran

                             3527

 1                                Hull, Quebec / Hull (Québec)
 2     --- Upon resuming on Thursday, October 8, 1998
 3         at 0905 / L'audience reprend le jeudi
 4         8 octobre 1998 à 0905
 5  16665                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Good morning.
 6  16666                Madam Secretary, would you invite the
 7     next participant, please.
 8  16667                Mme SANTERRE:  Madame la Présidente,
 9     est-ce que vous me donnez quelques minutes?  Je viens
10     de me rendre compte que je n'ai pas d'interprètes dans
11     la cabine.
12  16668                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Ça va.  Nous
13     attendons.
14     --- Courte pause / Short pause
15  16669                Mme SANTERRE:  Je m'excuse du
16     contretemps.
17  16670                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Allez-y, Madame la
18     Secrétaire, s'il vous plaît.
19  16671                Mme SANTERRE:  Merci, Madame la
20     Présidente.
21  16672                Alors ce matin je voudrais inviter
22     l'Union des artistes à faire la présentation de leurs
23     commentaires pour l'audience.
24  16673                Allez-y, Monsieur Curzi.
25     PRÉSENTATION / PRESENTATION
                          StenoTran

                             3528

 1  16674                M. CURZI:  Bonjour, Madame la
 2     Présidente, Mesdames et Messieurs les Commissaires. 
 3     Merci de nous recevoir de si bon matin pour entendre
 4     notre mémoire et la réponse à votre avis des politiques
 5     du Conseil relatives à la télévision canadienne.
 6  16675                Je ne doute pas que vous avez lu et
 7     pris connaissance de notre mémoire.  Je vais essayer de
 8     résumer assez brièvement le contenu de ce mémoire-là en
 9     tenant compte du fait que votre avis posait à la fois
10     des questions extrêmement larges et des questions
11     extrêmement pointues.  C'est dans le même esprit que
12     nous avons essayé de répondre à cet avis, à ces
13     demandes, en essayant de dégager quelle était notre
14     opinion plus large et aussi en apportant certaines
15     réponses pointues dans les cas qui nous touchaient plus
16     directement ou au sujet desquels nous étions le mieux
17     informés.
18  16676                Pour l'essentiel, l'opinion de
19     l'Union des artistes au sujet de la télévision...
20     évidemment, cette télévision-là, celle qui nous touche,
21     est surtout d'expression francophone puisque notre
22     juridiction s'applique aux produits et à la télévision
23     francophone.
24  16677                Notre impression, c'est que nous
25     vivons actuellement dans un équilibre extrêmement
                          StenoTran

                             3529

 1     fragile, extrêmement précaire, et que cet équilibre est
 2     basé sur deux principes:  sur la nécessité pour
 3     l'ensemble du public francophone d'avoir accès à une
 4     télévision publique de qualité qui lui assure un
 5     contenu culturel, un contenu de divertissement et un
 6     contenu d'information de qualité... en ce sens, une de
 7     nos recommandations, ou un de nos souhaits les plus
 8     fondamentaux, c'est que la télévision publique soit et
 9     demeure forte, qu'elle soit bien financée et qu'elle
10     assure à tous les Canadiens une présence de qualité.
11  16678                On ne peut pas contrer ce qui se
12     passe à l'intérieur du monde des communications.  Il y
13     a eu, et il y a encore, l'existence, la naissance et la
14     multiplication de nombreux canaux spécialisés.  Nous
15     croyons que le CRTC doit être extrêmement prudent dans
16     le fait d'accorder de nouvelles licences à des canaux
17     spécialisés; non pas que nous soyons opposés à
18     l'existence de tels canaux, mais nous pensons que le
19     principe que le CRTC doit respecter, c'est celui de cet
20     équilibre général et plus largement aussi celui de
21     pouvoir offrir des canaux qui répondent ou qui contrent
22     l'offre qui peut arriver du côté de d'autres canaux
23     spécialisés anglophones.
24  16679                J'essaie d'être le plus clair
25     possible:  Nous ne croyons pas qu'on puisse aller aussi
                          StenoTran

                             3530

 1     loin que d'autres pays où les spectateurs sont beaucoup
 2     plus nombreux et où on peut spécialiser à l'extrême
 3     l'offre de canaux spécialisés.  Nous croyons que dans
 4     notre marché il faut absolument maintenir un équilibre,
 5     fragile je le répète, qui permette à tout le monde à la
 6     fois de conserver l'audience, donc d'offrir
 7     suffisamment pour que tout le monde trouve matière à
 8     manger, à consommer, mais en même temps ne pas sur-
 9     spécialiser tellement que l'on fractionne l'auditoire,
10     que l'on fractionne les revenus, que l'on fractionne
11     les moyens de production.  Ça, ça nous apparaît
12     extraordinairement important pour que l'ensemble de ce
13     marché télévisuel francophone continue à respirer.
14  16680                Je me fais le porte-parole d'une
15     inquiétude profonde que nous ressentons, nous, quant au
16     danger que pourrait apporter ce fractionnement-là quant
17     aux moyens de production.  On sait très bien que la
18     masse des gens n'est pas infinie, surtout du côté
19     francophone.  Nous savons que nous sommes dans une
20     relation de compétition avec un marché anglophone
21     extrêmement puissant.  Donc nous sommes limités dans
22     nos moyens, dans nos ressources, et pour nous assurer
23     qu'il y ait les moyens suffisants pour faire un produit
24     canadien de qualité, nous devons faire attention.
25  16681                En ce sens, l'autre menace qui nous
                          StenoTran

                             3531

 1     semble être extrêmement importante... et là, ça devient
 2     une fonction vitale, je pense, du CRTC.  Nous demandons
 3     que le CRTC soit très vigilant quant à l'utilisation de
 4     la publicité sur les ondes en général.
 5  16682                Il apparaît actuellement des formes
 6     de messages publicitaires où l'on tente de lier la
 7     publicité au contenu des émissions par des sortes de
 8     publicités subliminales, par des formes de publicité
 9     qui envahissent littéralement l'écran.  En ce sens-là,
10     nous avons une profonde inquiétude.
11  16683                S'il fallait qu'une telle tendance se
12     poursuive, nous croyons qu'il y a là un danger de
13     maladie extraordinaire, une espèce de cancer du contenu
14     même des émissions canadiennes.  Ça, c'est une menace
15     énorme.
16  16684                Il y a des recommandations plus
17     spécifiques, mais je pense que vous avez déjà des
18     questions assez précises.  J'ajouterais que, pour le
19     moment, nous nous réservons à la fois deux occasions,
20     celle de pouvoir apporter des recommandations peut-être
21     plus précises à la fin de ces audiences-ci, mais
22     surtout celle de pouvoir intervenir dans des cas précis
23     de renouvellement des licences, dans les cas précis où
24     les audiences du CRTC nous permettront d'être plus
25     directement pointus sur les questions posées.
                          StenoTran

                             3532

 1  16685                Voilà, je serai aussi bref que ça,
 2     vous ayant fait part de mes principales préoccupations.
 3  16686                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Je vous remercie.
 4  16687                La conseillère Pennefather, s'il vous
 5     plaît.
 6  16688                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Bonjour.
 7  16689                M. CURZI:  Bonjour.
 8  16690                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  En effet,
 9     j'ai quelques questions de clarification, et peut-être
10     qu'un peu plus de discussion nous aidera à comprendre
11     vos préoccupations.
12  16691                M. CURZI:  Oui.
13  16692                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  En premier
14     lieu, vous proposez au début de votre mémoire que le
15     cadre de réglementation de la télévision canadienne
16     doit demeurer.
17  16693                M. CURZI:  Oui.
18  16694                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  En même
19     temps vous parlez, comme beaucoup d'intervenants, de la
20     distinction du marché francophone.
21  16695                Est-ce que dans votre mémoire, en
22     disant que le cadre de la réglementation de la
23     télévision canadienne doit demeurer, vous parlez de la
24     totalité de la télévision canadienne, anglaise et
25     française, ou seulement du marché francophone?
                          StenoTran

                             3533

 1  16696                M. CURZI:  Nous croyons que le cadre
 2     devrait demeurer pour l'ensemble de la télévision.
 3  16697                Ce à quoi nous faisions référence,
 4     c'est évidemment, par exemple, que du côté de la
 5     télévision francophone le respect du contenu canadien
 6     ne pose à peu près pas de problèmes, sauf peut-être en
 7     dans ce qui a trait aux canaux spécialisés, où le
 8     contenu canadien a des exigences beaucoup moindres.  En
 9     ce sens, s'il y avait une recommandation ou un souhait
10     que nous ferions, ce serait de graduellement augmenter
11     le pourcentage de contenu canadien qui sera demandé et
12     exigé des canaux spécialisés.
13  16698                Mais comme c'est une préoccupation,
14     le contenu canadien, qui n'est pas la nôtre -- je pense
15     que la Société Radio-Canada se vante cette année
16     d'avoir une diffusion 100 pour cent canadienne -- le
17     seul objet précis de notre préoccupation dans ce cadre-
18     là, ce serait une recommandation précise que les heures
19     de grande écoute passent de 17 h 00 (sic) à 18 h 00, et
20     donc que la période couverte soit de 6 h 00 à 11 h 00
21     le soir, de 18 h 00 à 23 h 00.
22  16699                Pour le reste, l'ensemble des
23     réglementations du CRTC nous convient... que ça passe
24     de 18 h 00 à 23 h 00 et non 19 h 00 à 23 h 00, qu'on
25     augmente d'une heure.
                          StenoTran

                             3534

 1  16700                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Qu'on
 2     augmente d'une heure.
 3  16701                M. CURZI:  Oui, qu'on augmente d'une
 4     heure.
 5  16702                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Vous savez
 6     qu'il y a des intervenants qui parlaient du marché
 7     francophone qui en effet ont proposé des nouvelles
 8     approches.  À titre d'exemple,l'APFTQ a parlé d'une
 9     allocation de crédits supplémentaires pour les
10     catégories sous-représentées pour les productions du
11     secteur indépendant seulement; ça veut dire un
12     pourcentage de 150 pour cent pour les dramatiques
13     lourdes, documentaires, émissions pour enfants et
14     coproductions majoritaires, et 125 pour cent pour les
15     téléromans.
16  16703                Qu'est-ce que vous pensez de cette
17     approche, qui est un effort de vraiment travailler
18     d'une façon plus réglementée dans le marché francophone
19     qu'aujourd'hui?
20  16704                M. CURZI:  Je vais demander à
21     Mme Beauchemin de vous répondre.
22  16705                Mme BEAUCHEMIN:  Bonjour, madame.
23  16706                Si je peux me permettre de juste
24     revenir un peu en arrière, le message fondamental de
25     l'Union des artistes, c'est que les deux marchés,
                          StenoTran

                             3535

 1     francophone et anglophone, ayant leurs spécificités, il
 2     est nécessaire que la réglementation reflète ces
 3     spécificités-là.  Notamment, les habitudes d'écoute ne
 4     sont pas nécessairement les mêmes dans les deux
 5     marchés, les habitudes d'écoute des francophones étant
 6     telles que l'écoute de grande écoute commence plus tôt. 
 7     Donc il serait nécessaire qu'on tienne compte de cette
 8     réalité-là.
 9  16707                Pour revenir à votre question plus
10     spécifique de la recommandation de l'APFTQ, il va sans
11     dire que nous sommes d'accord pour qu'il y ait une
12     attention additionnelle apportée aux secteurs qui sont
13     sous-représentés et que l'APFTQ a mentionnés dans son
14     mémoire.  Les modalités que retiendrait le CRTC pour
15     arriver à cette fin-là, nous ne nous prononçons pas là-
16     dessus.  Nous laissons la liberté au CRTC, qui a toute
17     l'information nécessaire, d'arriver à définir les
18     modalités.
19  16708                Ce qui nous semble important, par
20     ailleurs -- et là, je me réfère au mémoire de
21     l'ADISQ -- c'est qu'il est important qu'en parlant de
22     catégories sous-représentées on fasse bien attention de
23     bien définir les termes, de bien reconnaître la
24     situation particulière par exemple de la chanson, qui
25     est à la fois sous-financée et sous-représentée...
                          StenoTran

                             3536

 1     sous-financée pour ce qui est de la production
 2     d'émissions et sous-représentée par la même occasion au
 3     niveau de la diffusion.  Pour nous, ça, c'est très
 4     important.
 5  16709                Mais les modalités précises que vous
 6     propose l'APFTQ, nous ne sommes ni pour, ni contre;
 7     nous vous laissons la liberté de les évaluer à leur
 8     mérite.
 9  16710                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Mais, en
10     principe, vous voyez la possibilité d'aller un peu plus
11     loin pour supporter la production du secteur
12     indépendant du côté francophone.
13  16711                Mme BEAUCHEMIN:  Très certainement,
14     oui.
15  16712                M. CURZI:  Ah, oui.
16  16713                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Dans ce
17     sens-là aussi on a des propos pour et contre le fait
18     que les télédiffuseurs aient accès au Fonds de
19     production de Téléfilm en plus de ce qu'ils ont déjà. 
20     Qu'est-ce que vous pensez de cette proposition, étant
21     donné le besoin de plus en plus de ressources pour la
22     production?
23  16714                M. CURZI:  À tout le moins on
24     considère que l'accès à ces fonds-là ne devrait pas
25     être comptabilisé comme étant une partie de leurs
                          StenoTran

                             3537

 1     dépenses de programmation.
 2  16715                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Oui, j'ai
 3     vu ça.
 4  16716                M. CURZI:  Ça, ça me semble être
 5     une...
 6  16717                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Alors vous
 7     n'êtes pas d'accord qu'ils aient accès à ce fonds,
 8     qu'il devrait rester seulement disponible au secteur
 9     indépendant de production?
10  16718                M. CURZI:  Pas forcément.  J'avoue
11     que, là encore, jusqu'à un certain point, le
12     financement des émissions... la seule chose qu'on peut
13     dire là-dessus, c'est qu'il nous semble qu'il serait
14     préférable que l'accès à ces fonds-là, s'il y en a un,
15     ne soit pas comptabilisé et ne serve pas jusqu'à un
16     certain point à augmenter une image de profit et
17     diminue les investissements, donc l'injection d'argent
18     frais dans la production de la part des télédiffuseurs. 
19     Ça, ça nous semble être le minimum qu'on peut demander.
20  16719                Quant à la structure de financement
21     elle-même, à l'extrême, nous préférons être prudents
22     pourvu qu'on soit certains qu'elle augmente. 
23     Généralement, c'est notre seul souhait étant donné que,
24     dans l'intérêt de nos membres, qu'elle soit répartie
25     d'une façon ou d'une autre, pour nous, elle a
                          StenoTran

                             3538

 1     sensiblement les mêmes effets si l'on excepte le fait
 2     que la télévision généraliste nous semble encore être
 3     le moyen de dégager des consensus sociaux et que, tant
 4     qu'on n'aura pas fait la preuve qu'on puisse avoir et
 5     obtenir à l'intérieur d'une diffusion... de diffuseurs
 6     des consensus aussi larges que nous assure la
 7     télévision généraliste, ce serait extrêmement dommage
 8     de prendre la proie pour l'ombre.
 9  16720                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Oui.  En
10     effet, vous avez mentionné deux choses qu'il est
11     important pour nous de comprendre.  J'aimerais que vous
12     élaboriez davantage sur la participation des
13     radiodiffuseurs francophones privés.  Votre position
14     sur la SRC est claire, mais du côté privé, quelles sont
15     les priorités pour vous?
16  16721                M. CURZI:  Du côté de la télévision
17     privée c'est bien clair qu'actuellement il y a, je
18     dirais, une domination du télédiffuseur privé, qui est
19     TVA dans ce cas-là, qui est assez importante au niveau
20     du marché.  L'argumentation de la Société Radio-Canada
21     veut que la Société elle-même soit le concurrent et
22     qu'elle empêche une sorte de situation de monopole de
23     la télévision privée.
24  16722                C'est le raisonnement, et j'ai
25     quelque malaise à épouser ce raisonnement-là dans la
                          StenoTran

                             3539

 1     mesure où ce serait une manière de se départir de ce
 2     qui est lourd et coûteux pour une télévision telle que
 3     la Société Radio-Canada.  Que les producteurs privés
 4     cherchent à se multiplier et à augmenter leur marge de
 5     profit, à être compétitifs dans un marché qui l'est,
 6     c'est difficile de s'opposer à ça; ça me semble être
 7     une force économique qu'on ne peut pas contrer.  La
 8     seule chose qu'on puisse exiger, c'est qu'ils aient des
 9     pratiques cohérentes et qu'il n'y ait pas d'esquive de
10     la part du télédiffuseur qui se décharge de ses
11     responsabilités de producteur.
12  16723                En ce sens-là, la seule chose que je
13     pourrais dire, c'est de l'ordre de la vertu ou de
14     l'ordre des principes:  Il me semble que le fait
15     d'accorder des licences à des privés, des licences
16     d'exploitation des zones publiques, implique un certain
17     nombre de responsabilités et de devoirs dans certaines
18     pratiques commerciales actuelles.  Je ne voudrais pas
19     me mêler de ce qui ne me regarde pas, mais dans
20     certaines pratiques il me semble qu'il y a un risque de
21     glissement des télédiffuseurs privés vers un dégagement
22     de leurs responsabilités au sujet du contenu et de la
23     qualité du contenu.
24  16724                C'est tout, je pense, ce que je puis
25     dire maintenant.
                          StenoTran

                             3540

 1  16725                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Je pense
 2     que TVA a fait le point qu'ils ont un pourcentage de
 3     contenu canadien assez haut.
 4  16726                M. CURZI:  Incontestablement.  En ce
 5     sens-là, nous sommes d'accord; nous revenons à ce qu'il
 6     y a de spécifique avec la télévision francophone, et
 7     c'est que les contenus canadiens sont largement
 8     assurés.  L'audience est très fidèle, l'audience
 9     consomme d'une manière privilégiée des produits qui
10     originent de chez nous.  Donc, s'il y a des efforts à
11     faire, c'est au niveau de maintenir la qualité et le
12     niveau de production des émissions canadiennes chez
13     nous.
14  16727                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  En effet,
15     vous avez parlé, à la page 4 de votre mémoire, de la
16     dégradation de la qualité.  Qu'est-ce que vous voulez
17     dire par ça?
18  16728                M. CURZI:  Ce que je veux dire -- et
19     nous en sommes particulièrement affectés
20     quotidiennement -- c'est que le développement de la
21     télévision canadienne s'est fait de telle sorte que
22     nous avons encouragé le développement d'une structure
23     industrielle et nous en étions tous conscients. 
24     L'actuelle prolifération de producteurs, l'actuelle
25     prolifération de canaux spécialisés, le morcellement,
                          StenoTran

                             3541

 1     la multiplication des structures industrielles sont une
 2     menace puisque chacun doit gérer maintenant une somme
 3     qui, semble-t-il, n'a pas augmenté énormément. 
 4     Autrement dit, c'est comme si on avait le même gâteau
 5     mais que le nombre d'intervenants se partageait de plus
 6     en plus.
 7  16729                En ce sens-là, les budgets de
 8     production ont tendance à plafonner et ça, c'est
 9     extrêmement inquiétant parce que, quand il y a un
10     plafonnement au niveau des budgets de production, c'est
11     évident que ce sont les travailleurs et ceux de
12     première ligne qui voient leurs conditions de travail
13     se dégrader.  Cette menace-là, elle est permanente,
14     constante, et c'est notre combat quotidien pour essayer
15     de maintenir des conditions de travail.  Que ce soit
16     dans le temps, dans la durée, dans les conditions
17     physiques de travail, dans les cachets qui sont versés
18     aux artistes-interprètes, on doit dire que depuis
19     quelques années on n'assiste pas du tout à une
20     augmentation ou à une bonification de nos conditions de
21     production, c'est plutôt le contraire.
22  16730                Donc, en ce sens-là, il faut qu'il y
23     ait une sorte de corset, et le CRTC doit absolument
24     maintenir une sorte de réglementation qui établisse
25     clairement les règles du jeu.
                          StenoTran

                             3542

 1  16731                Mme BEAUCHEMIN:  Si je peux me
 2     permettre d'ajouter, ce que M. Curzi décrit a des
 3     conséquences directes sur la programmation puisque, les
 4     cadences augmentant, il y a de plus en plus une
 5     tendance dans les productions à dire que, là où il y
 6     avait peut-être une période de répétitions plus longue,
 7     on écourte; là où il y avait possibilité de faire
 8     plusieurs prises, il n'y en a plus qu'une, et ainsi de
 9     suite.
10  16732                Ceci fait que, pour les artistes-
11     interprètes eux-mêmes, au niveau de la qualité de leur
12     travail et de leur professionnalisme, ils se retrouvent
13     souvent dans des situations extrêmement difficiles où
14     ils savent qu'ils n'ont pas pu donner le meilleur
15     d'eux-mêmes et que le public n'obtiendra pas le
16     meilleur produit qu'il pourrait obtenir à cause des
17     circonstances qui font que les cadences sont
18     augmentées, les budgets sont plafonnés et qu'il y a une
19     prolifération de maisons de production, chacune
20     travaillant évidemment en concurrence avec sa voisine
21     et chacune essayant de livrer le produit, mais dans le
22     sens le moins noble du terme, le plus rapidement
23     possible pour remplir un espace et que ça s'appelle une
24     émission.
25  16733                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Je
                          StenoTran

                             3543

 1     comprends.  Vous cherchez un équilibre dans tout ce
 2     secteur-là...
 3  16734                M. CURZI:  Oui.
 4  16735                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  ... et je
 5     comprends que vous parlez de certaines conditions de
 6     travail.  Mais en même temps il faut aller chercher les
 7     moyens pour supporter de plus en plus de productions
 8     francophones, non pas pour survivre en termes des
 9     francophones au Canada mais aussi dans un monde de plus
10     en plus envahi par les productions qui viennent de
11     partout.  Alors c'est une balance importante à trouver.
12  16736                M. CURZI:  Excusez-moi, on pense
13     qu'une des manières en tout cas d'assurer qu'il y ait
14     un équilibre, c'est que les groupes de créateurs soient
15     présents dans l'ensemble des organismes, à l'intérieur
16     des organismes qui gèrent des fonds publics.  On pense
17     que c'est encore un des moyens très forts pour les
18     créateurs de s'assurer d'une qualité du contenu, d'une
19     qualité du travail.
20  16737                Si on peut être toujours les
21     gardiens -- les gardiens, oui -- de ce que l'ensemble
22     du peuple consacre à sa représentation culturelle, je
23     pense que ça devient la seule façon qu'on a pour nous
24     de ne pas nécessairement adopter un modèle mondial...
25     je pense qu'il y a cette aberration que nous sommes de
                          StenoTran

                             3544

 1     plus en plus confrontés, obligés d'adopter un modèle
 2     qui ne nous convient pas nécessairement.  Si l'État, si
 3     les organismes publics, si les fonds publics ne servent
 4     pas à préserver un modèle de société qui n'est pas
 5     nécessairement le même que celui qui nous entoure,
 6     alors, vraiment, là, on est dans la panade.
 7  16738                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  On parle
 8     souvent dans nos audiences de la diversité en effet de
 9     la programmation, et ce mot peut vraiment souligner
10     beaucoup de questions qui sont importantes.
11  16739                Avant qu'on revienne à ce point-là,
12     une question peut-être un peu plus spécifique.  Au
13     paragraphe 18 vous parlez des canaux spécialisés, des
14     services spécialisés; vous l'avez mentionné aujourd'hui
15     aussi.
16  16740                Est-ce que vous avez quelque chose à
17     nous recommander qui est plus spécifique vis-à-vis les
18     recommandations pour un accroissement graduel du
19     pourcentage de contenu canadien à leur antenne?  Est-ce
20     que vous avez une recommandation spécifique vis-à-vis
21     le pourcentage et cet accroissement graduel?
22  16741                M. CURZI:  Un des moyens pour obtenir
23     l'accroissement du contenu canadien dans le cas des
24     canaux spécialisés nous apparaît être peut-être la
25     possibilité de fractionner le contenu canadien en
                          StenoTran

                             3545

 1     émissions produites et en émissions de langue étrangère
 2     produites ailleurs et diffusées sur les ondes, et
 3     doublées ici, évidemment.
 4  16742                Si on augmentait ou si on avait les
 5     mêmes exigences de contenu canadien face aux émissions
 6     doublées, et que ce soit graduel, sur un certain nombre
 7     d'années, ce serait exiger des canaux spécialisés, qui
 8     consomment beaucoup de productions en langue étrangère
 9     doublées un peu partout... ce serait leur demander à
10     eux de faire un effort supplémentaire pour que les
11     émissions qu'ils achètent qui sont en langue étrangère
12     soient doublées chez nous et soient donc accessibles au
13     contenu canadien, qui est défini, je pense, à 50 pour
14     cent d'une émission produite.  Ce serait une manière
15     douce et pas trop coûteuse d'augmenter les demandes
16     pour que le contenu canadien soit respecté dans le cas
17     des canaux spécialisés.
18  16743                Il y a, plus largement, à l'intérieur
19     de ces canaux-là, évidemment la production d'émissions
20     dont le contenu est canadien.  Encore là, dans le cas
21     du marché francophone, on pourrait je pense avoir des
22     exigences raisonnables face aux canaux spécialisés
23     puisque là encore la loi de la consommation de ses
24     propres produits devrait jouer en faveur de ce contenu
25     canadien.
                          StenoTran

                             3546

 1  16744                Ça pourrait être une des manières, en
 2     tout cas, qui apporterait aussi du travail, un travail
 3     important dans un secteur très pointu du marché
 4     francophone, qui est le secteur du doublage, où on mène
 5     des combats féroces pour développer cette industrie et
 6     la rendre autant que possible concurrentielle et
 7     éventuellement exportable, parce qu'on croit qu'il y a
 8     là un créneau où nous sommes très bien situés, entre
 9     l'Amérique et l'Europe, qui nous permettrait de
10     développer une expertise qui soit exportable.
11  16745                Mme BEAUCHEMIN:  Si je peux me
12     permettre, je m'excuse, d'ajouter...
13  16746                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Pas du
14     tout.  On prend le temps nécessaire.
15  16747                Mme BEAUCHEMIN:  D'accord.
16  16748                C'est simplement pour vous dire qu'il
17     y a deux aspects qui, pour nous, travaillent ensemble. 
18     D'une part, lorsqu'on dit:  "S'il vous plaît, soyez
19     extrêmement vigilants quand il s'agit d'accorder de
20     nouvelles licences pour des canaux spécialisés", on
21     n'est pas en train de dire qu'il ne doit pas y en avoir
22     d'autres mais qu'il faut effectivement faire bien
23     attention parce que la capacité de produire de la
24     programmation n'est pas illimitée et qu'il y a un
25     problème à un moment donné à ce qu'il y ait une
                          StenoTran

                             3547

 1     saturation, une répétition trop grande des mêmes
 2     émissions, ce qui fait que les gens se désintéressent
 3     de toute façon.
 4  16749                Alors, d'un côté, on dit:  Si on peut
 5     être vigilants au niveau du nombre de canaux
 6     spécialisés qui sont présents, on peut ensuite regarder
 7     au niveau de la programmation elle-même de quelle façon
 8     peut-on travailler pour en arriver à un contenu
 9     canadien plus élevé.  Et c'est là, comme l'explique
10     M. Curzi, qu'il y a deux voies; il y a effectivement la
11     voie du contenu pour ce qui est de la production au
12     Canada, et d'ouvrir la possibilité d'accorder des
13     crédits pour le doublage au Canada d'émission produites
14     ailleurs, ce qui aiderait à accroître ce pourcentage de
15     contenu canadien.
16  16750                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Merci,
17     madame.
18  16751                M. CURZI:  C'est plus clair quand
19     vous le dites.
20  16752                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Maintenant,
21     un autre point très important dans votre mémoire est
22     l'autonomie des stations régionales.
23  16753                M. CURZI:  Oui.
24  16754                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Vous
25     proposez que le Conseil "établisse des quotas
                          StenoTran

                             3548

 1     d'émissions locales pour assurer une plus grande
 2     diversité de la production et un meilleur reflet des
 3     réalités régionales."  Je cite.
 4  16755                Pourriez-vous définir la production
 5     locale et régionale et ensuite nous dire quels sont ces
 6     quotas que vous recommandez?  Qu'est-ce que vous voulez
 7     dire?
 8  16756                M. CURZI:  Ce qu'on veut dire, c'est
 9     que le problème que nous avons, c'est évidemment que,
10     de plus en plus, les stations mères constituent
11     l'ensemble de la programmation.  Il y a un besoin
12     patent pour que les productions régionales aient accès
13     au réseau national.  Pour qu'elles aient accès au
14     réseau national, les télédiffuseurs, à même une part de
15     leur budget qui est consacrée aux productions
16     indépendantes, doivent en dépenser une partie dans des
17     productions régionales de telle sorte que l'on
18     maintienne en vie et que l'on bonifie ces productions-
19     là pour qu'elles aient une chance d'accès au réseau
20     national.
21  16757                Est-ce que je suis clair?
22  16758                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Pas tout à
23     fait.
24  16759                M. CURZI:  Pas tout à fait.
25  16760                Je pense qu'à l'intérieur des
                          StenoTran

                             3549

 1     licences qui sont accordées par le CRTC il y a une part
 2     du budget qui doit être consacrée aux productions
 3     indépendantes.  Ce qu'on recommande, ce qu'on souhaite,
 4     c'est qu'une partie de ce budget consacré aux
 5     productions indépendantes soit réservée...
 6  16761                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Qui est
 7     géré par le Fonds de production, pas le CRTC.
 8  16762                Vous parlez du Fonds de production de
 9     télévision canadienne, le fonds de Téléfilm?
10  16763                M. CURZI:  Oui.
11  16764                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Vous parlez
12     de ce fonds-là?
13  16765                M. CURZI:  C'est de ce fonds-là dont
14     on parle.
15  16766                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Il y a déjà
16     une portion pour la production régionale.
17  16767                M. CURZI:  Il y a déjà une portion?
18  16768                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Oui.
19  16769                Est-ce que vous recommandez qu'on
20     l'accroisse?
21  16770                Mme BEAUCHEMIN:  En fait, prenons un
22     exemple concret:  la région de Québec.
23  16771                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Oui.  C'est
24     ça que je voulais.
25  16772                Mme BEAUCHEMIN:  Alors arrivons-y
                          StenoTran

                             3550

 1     immédiatement.
 2  16773                Dans la situation actuelle -- et nous
 3     pourrons y revenir plus en détail au moment des
 4     renouvellements de licences pour cette région-là --
 5     essentiellement, ce qu'on veut dire, c'est qu'en ce
 6     moment, la façon dont les choses fonctionnent, c'est
 7     que pour rencontrer leurs obligations de licence, la
 8     plupart du temps le contenu régional se limite à un
 9     bulletin de nouvelles ou à quelque chose de cet ordre-
10     là, et qu'une fois que cet élément-là a été ajouté à la
11     programmation ou remplace le bulletin de nouvelles
12     venant de Montréal; les gens ont un peu l'impression
13     que, bon, ça y est, notre mandat a été réalisé et tout
14     est beau.
15  16774                Nous, nous constatons, d'une part,
16     qu'il y a au niveau de la ville de Québec un bassin
17     important de comédiens, de réalisateurs.  Il y a une
18     vie culturelle très intense, il y a une vie théâtrale
19     intense, il y a là un bassin de gens qui peuvent
20     travailler à des émissions d'une autre nature que le
21     simple bulletin de nouvelles régional pour offrir une
22     programmation plus proche des intérêts de cette région-
23     là, produire un produit de qualité, et que ce produit
24     de qualité là, s'il y a un intérêt plus large, puisse
25     évidemment être repris par la station, par la chaîne
                          StenoTran

                             3551

 1     nationale, mais qu'il y ait un plus fort pourcentage de
 2     programmation de la région elle-même.
 3  16775                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Dans un
 4     marché restreint, par contre, le marché francophone, si
 5     on met plus d'emphase sur la production régionale du
 6     type que vous avez décrit, quel sera l'impact sur les
 7     autres types d'émissions?
 8  16776                Mme BEAUCHEMIN:  Madame, prenons un
 9     exemple d'un autre secteur, qui est la radio. 
10     Évidemment, on n'est pas ici pour discuter de la radio,
11     mais prenons cet exemple-là.
12  16777                Il y a quelques années, alors qu'il
13     n'y avait pas le phénomène de concentration au niveau
14     des grandes chaînes, on pouvait se retrouver dans une
15     situation où un talent dans une région pouvait se faire
16     entendre sur la radio de sa région, et éventuellement
17     ça venait à l'oreille d'un public plus large, et ainsi
18     de suite.  Ceci n'est plus le cas, mais ça, c'est une
19     autre histoire.
20  16778                On a un peu le même problème du côté
21     des bassins de talents au niveau des régions, où il n'y
22     a qu'une solution qui s'offre aux gens; c'est de s'en
23     aller à Montréal pour essayer de faire carrière là
24     parce qu'il n'y a pas de débouchés autres que le
25     théâtre, qui, comme tout le monde sait, ne nourrit pas
                          StenoTran

                             3552

 1     son homme.
 2  16779                Il y a là, il nous semble, une
 3     possibilité pour la télévision régionale, dans sa
 4     mission justement, d'avoir aussi ce mandat-là, qui est
 5     d'offrir une fenêtre aux talents de cette région-là.
 6  16780                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Maintenant,
 7     madame, messieurs, est-ce qu'on peut se tourner vers la
 8     menace de la publicité...
 9  16781                M. CURZI:  Ah, oui.
10  16782                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  ... et le
11     cancer de contenu que vous avez décrit ce matin.  En
12     effet, vous en parlez dans votre mémoire, et je voulais
13     avoir une clarification là-dessus.
14  16783                Au paragraphe 25 vous parlez de ces
15     nouvelles formes de publicité...
16  16784                M. CURZI:  Oui.
17  16785                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  ... ce
18     qu'on appelle en anglais "infomercials".  C'est un peu
19     ça ou si c'est d'autres types...
20  16786                M. CURZI:  Non, ce n'est pas
21     tellement celles-là.
22  16787                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  C'est plus
23     subtil que ça?
24  16788                M. CURZI:  Ce dont on parle
25     nommément -- et je peux vous donner des exemples; il y
                          StenoTran

                             3553

 1     a des exemples assez patents --  c'est du lien qui est
 2     en train de se faire entre la publicité et le contenu
 3     même des émissions.  Ça, ça nous apparaît épouvantable. 
 4     Je vous donne un exemple.
 5  16789                Il y a une série d'émissions qui
 6     s'appelle "Watatatow", je crois, où l'Agence spatiale
 7     canadienne est commanditaire, mais elle l'est à
 8     l'origine, et le résultat de ce financement-là, c'est
 9     qu'à l'intérieur même de l'émission un des personnages
10     veut devenir astronaute.  C'est un but louable en soi,
11     mais le fait d'intervenir au moment de la conception
12     même d'une émission et que ce soit donc une publicité
13     subliminale nous apparaît être à abolir et à éliminer
14     complètement.  C'est une forme.
15  16790                D'autres formes.  Par exemple, nous
16     sommes dans une série dramatique lourde, importante,
17     une scène entre deux personnages; je vous donne un
18     exemple qui n'est pas tout à fait fictif mais que je ne
19     veux pas nommer.  Tout à coup vous voyez une petite
20     vache qui se met à se promener autour de votre écran. 
21     Il y a un problème, là.  Il y a un problème parce que
22     nous avons un placement de produit qui est plutôt indu. 
23     Ou alors nous sommes dans une série où le personnage
24     central est alcoolique et, dans une scène, il se
25     convertit et il devient un buveur de lait.  C'est, en
                          StenoTran

                             3554

 1     soi, excellent, nous préférons que tous les alcooliques
 2     se mettent au lait, mais est-ce que c'est bien le cas
 3     et le moyen pour intervenir?
 4  16791                Ce type de publicité là est, pour
 5     nous, à proscrire.
 6  16792                En plus, je pense que le nombre de
 7     minutes consacrées à la publicité à l'intérieur d'une
 8     heure de diffusion doit rester ce qu'il est et il ne
 9     doit pas augmenter.  Ce type de publicité là, je ne
10     suis pas convaincu qu'elle soit comptabilisée ou
11     comptabilisable, et il me semble que là, on verse dans
12     un trop plein de publicité dont les effets sont très
13     clairs:  il va y avoir une désaffection du public, une
14     saturation des gens, ce qui a tendance à multiplier le
15     désir des canaux spécialisés, mais c'est en soi une
16     pratique incorrecte, je pense, de la place nécessaire
17     de la publicité et de la commandite à l'intérieur de la
18     structure de production.
19  16793                Il y a donc des formes vicieuses de
20     publicité qui sont en train de s'instaurer.
21  16794                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Je pense
22     que je comprends et je peux saisir votre point de vue
23     vis-à-vis l'effet de ça sur le travail des artistes-
24     interprètes, mais une autre question peut être mise sur
25     la table, et c'est:  Dans une ère où on cherche de plus
                          StenoTran

                             3555

 1     en plus de ressources pour la production, pour la
 2     programmation en soi, pour que les auditoires
 3     francophones aient accès à une programmation
 4     diversifiée, vous trouvez toujours... parce que vous
 5     nous laissez avec une question ici.  Il faut voir à
 6     cette question-là mais, si vous pouvez nous guider un
 7     peu, entre avoir plus de ressources pour la protection
 8     de la programmation et restreindre cette implication
 9     disons des commanditaires dans la production, vous vous
10     trouvez où?
11  16795                M. CURZI:  Il ne s'agit pas
12     d'empêcher, au contraire.  Nous ne sommes nullement
13     opposés aux commandites, aux commanditaires et à la
14     publicité; ce n'est pas là le but. Il y a certaines
15     formes, celle qui lie la publicité au contenu même des
16     émissions, ça, ça nous semble à proscrire.  Pour le
17     reste, nous sommes ouverts à toute forme de publicité
18     et de commandite.
19  16796                C'est sûr qu'il y a des fonds
20     importants qui sont là.  Ce qu'on dit, cependant, c'est
21     qu'il faudra que les gens de cet univers-là s'assoient
22     et qu'il n'y ait pas aussi des effets pervers sur le
23     marché publicitaire lui-même, c'est-à-dire que si la
24     publicité emprunte le canal des télédiffuseurs et saute
25     par-dessus le marché, le lieu de production de la
                          StenoTran

                             3556

 1     publicité, alors là, on met en péril un univers qui
 2     fonctionne très bien et qui est, pour mes membres en
 3     tout cas, une source de revenus importante.
 4  16797                Donc, tout ce qu'on souhaite, c'est
 5     que certaines choses ne soient pas faites, qu'il n'y
 6     ait pas trop d'abus.  En quelque sorte, ce qu'on
 7     demande, c'est que le CRTC s'assure que, dans ses
 8     réglementations, il n'y ait pas de portes ouvertes à
 9     trop de laxisme.  Pour le reste, c'est un travail
10     auquel nous nous attablons actuellement, qui est
11     d'avoir des conversations avec l'ensemble du milieu sur
12     comment gérer les différentes formes de publicité à
13     l'intérieur des émissions pour qu'elles respectent le
14     marché publicitaire et ceux qui le supportent, c'est-à-
15     dire les créateurs, qui en sont les véhicules.
16  16798                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  C'est ça,
17     parce que j'essayais de faire le lien entre vos
18     commentaires et ceux de l'ACTRA... et je fais une
19     traduction:  "Vous devriez prendre des actions pour
20     encourager la production de la publicité canadienne et
21     l'achat d'air time pour cette publicité dans les
22     entertainment programs scheduled in peak time."
23  16799                Est-ce que vous êtes d'accord avec
24     cette position d'ACTRA?
25  16800                M. CURZI:  Mon Dieu, je la découvre
                          StenoTran

                             3557

 1     ce matin, cette position-là.  Je ne peux pas répondre à
 2     ça, je ne sais pas.
 3  16801                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  C'est juste
 4     pour essayer de comprendre.  Les milieux sont
 5     différents, mais c'est un point important.
 6  16802                Mme BEAUCHEMIN:  Je pense que, au
 7     risque de me répéter et de paraître très lourde et
 8     didactique, l'essentiel du message de l'Union des
 9     artistes, c'est qu'effectivement nous ne sommes
10     aucunement opposés à la publicité, nous reconnaissons
11     la publicité comme faisant partie de notre société; ça,
12     la question ne se pose pas.
13  16803                On ne peut certainement pas être en
14     désaccord avec nos camarades de l'ACTRA lorsqu'ils
15     souhaitent qu'il y ait davantage de publicité produite
16     au Canada; ça, c'est évident qu'on ne s'y oppose
17     d'aucune manière.
18  16804                Il y a deux messages.  L'un est celui
19     que M. Curzi vient de vous expliquer de façon très
20     éloquente; l'autre, qui est la question que vous posez,
21     est la question de fond:  Où se trouve l'argent pour
22     une production de qualité.
23  16805                Là-dessus, je reviens encore sur
24     cette notion que M. Curzi a développé à plusieurs
25     reprises:  Nous savons que les fonds sont limités. 
                          StenoTran

                             3558

 1     Dans une situation où les fonds sont limités, est-il
 2     raisonnable de multiplier les canaux et les diffuseurs
 3     sans égard, justement, à cette limitation des
 4     ressources?  N'est-il pas préférable, justement, de
 5     s'assurer que ce qui existe a les moyens de fournir une
 6     programmation de qualité?
 7  16806                C'est un peu ça, notre inquiétude. 
 8     C'est qu'on a l'impression qu'on essaie de faire tout
 9     en même temps.  On essaie de développer une
10     programmation de qualité -- et ça, nous en sommes -- et
11     en même temps il semble y avoir une tendance à se dire: 
12     Mais, parce qu'il y a multiplication de canaux
13     ailleurs, il faut absolument suivre le même modèle.
14  16807                CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER:  Merci. 
15     Merci beaucoup.
16  16808                C'est la fin de mes questions, Madame
17     la Présidente.
18  16809                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Merci beaucoup,
19     Monsieur Curzi, Madame Beauchemin et... c'est
20     Monsieur Choquette, je crois?
21  16810                M. CHOQUETTE:  Oui.
22  16811                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Nous vous remercions
23     de votre participation.
24  16812                M. CURZI:  Merci, madame, pour la
25     qualité de vos questions.
                          StenoTran

                             3559

 1  16813                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Nous vous souhaitons
 2     un bon voyage de retour.  Vous rentrez à Montréal, je
 3     suppose?
 4  16814                M. CURZI:  Oui.
 5  16815                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  À la pluie.
 6  16816                Madame la Secrétaire, voulez-vous
 7     inviter le prochain participant, s'il vous plaît.
 8  16817                Mme SANTERRE:  Merci, Madame la
 9     Présidente.
10  16818                La prochaine présentation sera faite
11     par Impératif français.
12  16819                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Bonjour, messieurs
13     dames.  Allez-y quand vous êtes prêts.
14     PRÉSENTATION / PRESENTATION
15  16820                M. PERREAULT:  Dans un premier temps,
16     nous tenons à vous remercier pour bien avoir accepté de
17     nous recevoir aujourd'hui et nous profiterons de
18     l'occasion pour vous faire part de recommandations, de
19     suggestions ou de commentaires, nous le souhaitons,
20     susceptibles d'améliorer la qualité de la télévision
21     canadienne.  Mais, avant de débuter la présentation,
22     j'aimerais vous présenter les membres de la table: 
23     tout d'abord ici, en arrière, M. Léo Labrie, membre
24     d'Impératif français; Mme Lucie Carrière, adjointe
25     administrative; M. Raynald Charest, conseiller aux
                          StenoTran

                             3560

 1     questions ontariennes; et Mme Nathalie Mathieu, vice-
 2     présidente d'Impératif français.
 3  16821                Nous avons avec nous un document que
 4     nous avons prélevé du site Internet du CRTC.  Il a pour
 5     titre:  "Ici le CRTC".  Je vais vous lire quelques
 6     extraits de ce document-là.
 7  16822                En premier il est dit ici:
 8                            "Partout où se trouve une radio,
 9                            un téléviseur ou un téléphone,
10                            nous veillons au maintien des
11                            caractéristiques qui font la
12                            spécificité des Canadiens et du
13                            Canada.  Nous veillons également
14                            à assurer aux Canadiens l'accès
15                            aux meilleurs services
16                            possibles." (Tel que lu)
17  16823                Il est dit plus loin:
18                            "Le CRTC a pour rôle d'assurer
19                            une programmation diverse et de
20                            qualité, satisfaisant les
21                            intérêts les plus variés, de
22                            favoriser la production et la
23                            diffusion d'émissions
24                            canadiennes et de veiller à ce
25                            que la programmation respecte
                          StenoTran

                             3561

 1                            les normes canadiennes." (Tel
 2                            que lu)
 3  16824                Également, un peu plus loin, il est
 4     également dit:
 5                            "Le Canada d'abord.
 6                            Tout en permettant aux abonnés
 7                            du câble d'avoir accès aux
 8                            services étrangers les plus
 9                            populaires, le CRTC veille à ce
10                            que la majorité des canaux
11                            soient réservés aux services
12                            canadiens.  Cela a pour but de
13                            promouvoir l'essor et la variété
14                            des services canadiens de
15                            programmation." (Tel que lu)
16  16825                À cet égard, nous formulerons
17     aujourd'hui certaines recommandations et nous demandons
18     au CRTC:
19  16826                - De modifier ou d'adopter des
20     règlements et les politiques nécessaires pour que les
21     Canadiens aient accès à un plus grand nombre de
22     stations publiques et privées de télévision canadienne. 
23     Vous n'êtes pas sans savoir, comme nous le savons,
24     qu'un grand nombre de câblodistributeurs vont favoriser
25     la diffusion de stations américaines avant les stations
                          StenoTran

                             3562

 1     canadiennes lorsque la réglementation canadienne ne
 2     l'exige pas.
 3  16827                - D'adopter ou de modifier les
 4     règlements et les politiques nécessaires pour que les
 5     Canadiens du Canada hors Québec aient accès à un plus
 6     grand nombre de stations publiques et privées de
 7     télévision canadienne de langue française.  Compte tenu
 8     de leur fort contenu canadien, les stations de langue
 9     française devraient, à notre avis, bénéficier d'une
10     priorité plus élevée en câblodistribution.
11  16828                À notre avis également le CRTC
12     devrait envisager:
13  16829                - D'imposer la présence de sept ou
14     huit stations de langue française partout au Canada.
15  16830                -  D'adopter des règlements, ou de
16     les modifier, pour que dans la capitale canadienne,
17     Ottawa, la capitale des deux langues officielles, les
18     citoyens canadiens aient accès en priorité aux signaux
19     des stations de télévision canadienne.  Encore là, nous
20     ne sommes pas sans savoir que des stations canadiennes
21     à fort contenu canadien se voient refuser par le
22     câblodistributeur d'Ottawa la diffusion auprès de la
23     population de la région.  Tout de même, lorsque nous
24     regardons la grille de ce câblodistributeur, nous
25     constatons que nous y trouvons dans bien des cas des
                          StenoTran

                             3563

 1     stations américaines.  À notre avis, cela est
 2     doublement étonnant, puisqu'il s'agit de la capitale du
 3     Canada.
 4  16831                - D'adopter les mesures nécessaires
 5     pour que la politique et les règlements du CRTC
 6     relatifs à l'attribution de licences aux réémetteurs
 7     n'ait pas pour effet de priver les Canadiens de
 8     stations de télévision à plus fort contenu canadien. 
 9     En effet, le câblodistributeur est tenu d'offrir les
10     réémetteurs en commençant par la bande de base du
11     service de base, privant ainsi, certaines fois, ses
12     abonnés et la région de la réception de signaux de
13     stations de télévision canadiennes à plus fort contenu
14     canadien.  Dans cette région-ci, il y a cinq stations
15     réémettrices.
16  16832                Dans bien des cas le
17     câblodistributeur invoquera la raison de cette
18     obligation de diffuser ces signaux en provenance des
19     réémetteurs pour justifier le fait qu'il ne peut pas,
20     il n'a plus d'espace de libre dans sa grille pour
21     diffuser des stations canadiennes à plus fort contenu
22     canadien, et également pour justifier qu'une station
23     éducative aussi importante que Télé-Québec soit
24     déplacée au signal 70, que certains câblosélecteurs ne
25     peuvent capter.
                          StenoTran

                             3564

 1  16833                Il faut également savoir que ces
 2     réémetteurs ont une production locale ou régionale
 3     minime ou inexistante.  En grande partie, la
 4     programmation est celle de la station mère
 5     indépendante, et le plus souvent à fort pourcentage
 6     d'émissions américaines.  Il faut également savoir que
 7     ces stations réémettrices ont accès à l'assiette
 8     publicitaire bien qu'il soit spécifié dans certains cas
 9     qu'elles ne peuvent avoir accès à l'assiette
10     publicitaire locale et régionale; néanmoins, elles ont
11     accès à l'assiette publicitaire nationale, ce qui
12     occasionne sûrement des pertes de revenus aux stations
13     régionales et locales qui, elles, le plus souvent, ont
14     une programmation locale et régionale et également à
15     fort contenu canadien.
16  16834                Le CRTC devrait exiger une teneur
17     canadienne plus élevée de la part des demandeurs de
18     licences pour réémetteurs ou refuser carrément
19     l'émission de nouvelles licences si cela a comme
20     conséquence d'empêcher la diffusion de stations
21     canadiennes à plus fort contenu canadien.
22  16835                Nous demandons également au CRTC de
23     modifier ou d'adopter des règlements pour que les
24     câblodistributeurs canadiens réservent les meilleurs
25     signaux aux stations de télévision canadiennes ayant le
                          StenoTran

                             3565

 1     plus fort contenu canadien dans l'ensemble de leur
 2     programmation et aux heures de grande écoute.  Il est
 3     troublant de constater que, dans bien des cas, les
 4     câblodistributeurs offrent dans leur service de base
 5     l'accès à des stations américaines alors que nous
 6     savons pertinemment bien que dans certains cas des
 7     stations canadiennes à fort contenu canadien se voient
 8     refuser l'accès au service de base et même aux signaux
 9     de l'ensemble de la grille de certains
10     câblodistributeurs.
11  16836                Nous demandons également au CRTC:
12  16837                - D'adopter des règlements ou de les
13     modifier pour que les Canadiens aient accès à un plus
14     grand nombre d'émissions canadiennes produites et
15     diffusées par les stations de télévision canadiennes. 
16     Nous savons, et vous le savez, qu'il y a des stations
17     canadiennes de langue anglaise qui ne respectent pas
18     les quotas minimums imposés par le CRTC de 60 pour cent
19     pour l'ensemble de la programmation et de 50 pour cent
20     pour les heures de grande écoute.  Ce phénomène n'est
21     pas sans avoir d'effet sur l'érosion culturelle, dit
22     différemment l'américanisation culturelle des ondes, et
23     par conséquent le nivellement culturel de l'ensemble de
24     la société canadienne.
25  16838                - D'adopter ou de modifier des
                          StenoTran

                             3566

 1     règlements pour que le gouvernement canadien,
 2     l'industrie de la télévision et l'industrie de la
 3     câblodistribution consacrent plus de ressources à la
 4     production et à la diffusion d'émissions canadiennes en
 5     s'assurant qu'un financement adéquat est par conséquent
 6     disponible.
 7  16839                Il y a des stations de télévision,
 8     des chaînes, qui font un excellent travail en termes de
 9     contenu canadien, et les programmes d'accès devraient,
10     à notre avis, favoriser les stations qui font bien ou
11     qui font mieux. Il devrait y avoir une possibilité pour
12     elles d'avoir un accès élargi à l'ensemble des
13     ressources sans néanmoins se soustraire à l'obligation
14     faite à d'autres stations de bien vouloir respecter les
15     quotas minimums imposés.  Il devrait y avoir un
16     incitatif à la canadianisation des ondes.
17  16840                - D'adopter ou de modifier des
18     règlements pour que les téléspectateurs bénéficient
19     d'une plus grande production locale, régionale et
20     communautaire.
21  16841                Encore une fois, j'aimerais vous lire
22     un extrait du document qui a été retiré du site
23     Internet du CRTC, "Le Canada au premier plan".
24                            "Conformément au mandat que nous
25                            a confié le Parlement, nous
                          StenoTran

                             3567

 1                            insistons pour que les
 2                            radiodiffuseurs accordent une
 3                            place dominante à la dimension
 4                            canadienne, en particulier à la
 5                            programmation qui porte sur les
 6                            activités et les dossiers
 7                            d'intérêt local ou
 8                            communautaire." (Tel que lu)
 9  16842                Alors nous demandons au CRTC de
10     modifier ou d'adopter des règlements de telle sorte que
11     le citoyen canadien ait accès à une plus grande
12     production locale, régionale et communautaire en
13     s'assurant que les stations locales et régionales
14     consacrent plus de temps dans leur programmation aux
15     productions locales et régionales.  Et là, ça soulève
16     encore une fois toute la question des réémetteurs, qui
17     n'ont aucune obligation de programmation locale ou
18     régionale et qui ont quand même priorité d'accès sur
19     les signaux auprès des câblodistributeurs et qui ne
20     sont pas sans avoir d'effet également sur l'effritement
21     ou la fragmentation, si vous voulez, de l'assiette
22     publicitaire et la fragmentation et l'effritement des
23     auditoires en région.
24  16843                Il serait peut-être également
25     souhaitable de rétablir l'obligation aux
                          StenoTran

                             3568

 1     câblodistributeurs de fournir une programmation
 2     communautaire à la région qu'ils desservent, ayant été
 3     informés que cette obligation-là avait disparu des
 4     règlements du CRTC.
 5  16844                Nous sommes disponibles pour répondre
 6     à diverses questions si toutefois il y en avait.
 7  16845                Merci.
 8  16846                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Oui, Monsieur
 9     Perreault.  Bonjour.
10  16847                M. PERREAULT:  Bonjour.
11  16848                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Votre présentation,
12     votre soumission écrite et le nom de votre groupe, qui
13     est Impératif français, semblent viser surtout les
14     problèmes d'accès à la programmation en français, mais
15     je crois ce matin que vous allez plus loin que ça; vous
16     parlez de l'américanisation de certains marchés et là,
17     vous vous adressez aussi aux effets pour le marché
18     anglophone de cette américanisation-là.  Je comprends
19     bien?
20  16849                M. PERREAULT:  Oui.  Bien, vous
21     savez, l'ensemble du monde télévisuel, c'est quand même
22     un ensemble, et les parties ont des effets entre elles. 
23     Si le câblodistributeur choisit de donner priorité à
24     une station de télévision canadienne à faible contenu
25     canadien, ou si vous voulez à fort contenu américain,
                          StenoTran

                             3569

 1     au détriment de la diffusion d'un signal d'une station
 2     de télévision canadienne à fort contenu canadien,
 3     notamment les stations de langue française, vous
 4     comprendrez avec nous que nous devrons à ce moment-là
 5     parler carrément, d'un côté, d'américanisation des
 6     ondes et, de l'autre, pour les francophones,
 7     d'américanisation des ondes et d'anglicisation des
 8     ondes.
 9  16850                Finalement, le consommateur de
10     télévision ayant accès à l'ensemble de ces signaux-
11     là... et encore une fois, et vu dans une perspective
12     encore plus globale et en regardant en particulier la
13     situation des Canadiens français, des francophones hors
14     Québec, dans certains cas ils n'ont accès qu'à une
15     station de langue française, et nous savons que les
16     câblodistributeurs vont diffuser une quantité inouïe de
17     signaux de stations américaines, privant donc les
18     Canadiens de ces régions-là de l'accès à des stations
19     canadiennes à fort contenu d'émissions canadiennes.
20  16851                Nous demandons au CRTC, de par son
21     mandat, de réfléchir aux règlements existants pour que
22     des situations comme celles-ci n'existent pas dans la
23     capitale canadienne, Ottawa.
24  16852                C'est troublant d'apprendre que les
25     Canadiens de la capitale canadienne vont avoir accès à
                          StenoTran

                             3570

 1     des stations américaines en toute priorité alors qu'on
 2     leur refuse l'accès à des stations canadiennes à fort
 3     contenu canadien.  Je sais qu'hier on annonçait que le
 4     câblodistributeur de la région d'Ottawa-Carleton
 5     inclurait dorénavant, à la prochaine révision de sa
 6     grille, la diffusion du Canal D en français, mais vous
 7     conviendrez avec nous que c'est très peu et très
 8     insuffisant et qu'à notre avis la capital canadienne,
 9     la capitale des deux langues officielles, devrait être
10     l'exemple sur lequel le CRTC et l'ensemble de la
11     population pourraient s'appuyer pour y retrouver un
12     modèle pour l'ensemble canadien.
13  16853                Je ne comprends pas, et nous ne
14     comprenons pas, qu'il y a certaines régions du Canada
15     où des Canadiens qui devraient être des Canadiens à
16     part entière n'ont pas accès à la télévision canadienne
17     dans leur langue et des régions où ils n'ont accès qu'à
18     une ou deux stations de langue française.  Je pense que
19     le CRTC pourrait exiger des câblodistributeurs
20     l'obligation de diffuser un certain nombre de stations
21     canadiennes de langue française partout au Canada, et
22     je pense que ça va de soi selon le mandat du CRTC.
23  16854                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Je comprends très
24     bien le chevauchement des deux inquiétudes, le contenu
25     canadien et aussi le contenu francophone, mais c'est
                          StenoTran

                             3571

 1     surtout une préoccupation dans certaines régions, comme
 2     celle de la capitale nationale, où il y a beaucoup de
 3     francophones qui voudraient une panoplie plus large de
 4     services et où justement il y a plusieurs réémetteurs,
 5     plusieurs stations accessibles sur les ondes et qui
 6     exigent l'accès à un canal.  Donc les canaux deviennent
 7     assez limités.
 8  16855                Maintenant, si je comprends bien,
 9     vous voudriez une comptabilisation qui mettrait les
10     services qui ont un plus grand contenu canadien en
11     priorité et vous inséreriez dans cette comptabilisation
12     les services francophones dans tous les marchés ou
13     seulement dans les marchés où il y a une forte
14     proportion de francophones?  Évidemment, les Canadiens
15     en général dans tous les marchés où il y a une forte
16     proportion d'anglophones s'attendent aux mêmes services
17     qu'on reçoit dans les autres régions; alors là, il y a
18     un problème.
19  16856                Moi, je crois vous entendre dire que
20     le Conseil devrait comptabiliser le contenu canadien et
21     donner priorité, mais à ce moment-là vous voulez aussi
22     insérer dans la comptabilisation les services
23     francophones.  Comment est-ce que vous marieriez les
24     deux dans les endroits où la population est en grande
25     majorité anglophone et qui, eux, évidemment, auraient
                          StenoTran

                             3572

 1     moins de services anglophones, incluant des services
 2     populaires américains qui sont reçus dans d'autres
 3     secteurs?
 4  16857                M. PERREAULT:  Là-dessus, je dois
 5     vous dire qu'une bonne partie de notre raisonnement
 6     repose sur le contenu canadien des stations de
 7     télévision canadiennes au Canada indistinctement, pour
 8     cette partie-ci du propos pour le moins, de la langue. 
 9     À notre avis, le CRTC devrait adopter les mesures
10     nécessaires de telle sorte que les Canadiens d'un océan
11     à l'autre aient accès en priorité, en toute priorité, à
12     l'ensemble des signaux, avec priorité accordée dans le
13     choix des meilleurs signaux offerts par les
14     câblodistributeurs aux stations à plus fort contenu
15     canadien, ce qui serait à mon avis un incitatif
16     important de la part des stations à canadianiser
17     davantage leur programmation, leur contenu émissions.
18  16858                Quant à la situation de la capitale
19     canadienne, Ottawa, je vais laisser à mon collègue,
20     M. Charest, le soin de commenter.
21  16859                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Monsieur Charest.
22  16860                M. CHAREST:  Oui.  Je suis un
23     résident de la région d'Ottawa et, dans ma région, le
24     câblodistributeur a décidé en 1997... il y avait quatre
25     nouveaux canaux canadiens de langue française dont le
                          StenoTran

                             3573

 1     contenu canadien est assez fort, et le
 2     câblodistributeur a décidé de ne pas nous les offrir. 
 3     Je vois, par exemple, des Space Channels ou du golf ou
 4     des choses comme de la course automobile, de la course
 5     nautique, offerts comme services.  Je vois aussi des
 6     choses comme... il y a trois canaux américains de
 7     nouvelles continues qui me sont offerts alors qu'on ne
 8     m'offre pas Le Canal Nouvelles de TVA, qui est un canal
 9     canadien.
10  16861                Alors il y a des canaux spécialisés,
11     des chaînes spécialisées canadiennes de langue
12     française qui, à mon avis, dans la capitale du Canada,
13     auraient dû avoir une priorité plus élevée que des
14     chaînes américaines ou même des chaînes qui ont un
15     contenu élevé américain.  C'est ça qui est, à mon avis,
16     le problème dans le région de la capitale nationale.
17  16862                Il y a quand même une population
18     francophone assez forte, et j'arrive mal à expliquer
19     qu'on ait oublié le fait qu'on est dans la capitale
20     nationale, qu'il y a une population francophone assez
21     forte.
22  16863                On peut même penser aussi à Cornwall
23     ou au nord de l'Ontario, et on se retrouve avec des
24     problèmes semblables.  Des chaînes américaines vont
25     passer avant des chaînes canadiennes de langue
                          StenoTran

                             3574

 1     française spécialisées.
 2  16864                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Vous visez donc une
 3     réorganisation de la réglementation, parce qu'en ce
 4     moment, comme vous savez, il faut qu'il y ait une
 5     prépondérance de signaux canadiens, si on parle au
 6     départ de signaux canadiens... et j'habite à Ottawa
 7     aussi et je comprends la frustration au niveau de
 8     l'accès aux services francophones.  Alors à ce moment-
 9     là vous voudriez qu'on change, que ce ne soit plus une
10     prépondérance seulement de canaux canadiens et ensuite,
11     dans les étages, la capacité d'offrir un à un, un
12     service étranger et un service canadien, au lieu de ça
13     vous voudriez, je crois que je vous ai entendu dire,
14     Monsieur Perreault, sept ou huit services francophones
15     partout et ensuite des services américains s'il y a des
16     canaux disponibles.  Alors ce serait tous les services.
17  16865                Et à Ottawa, je suis d'accord avec
18     vous, il y a des réémettrices de services qui
19     proviennent de Toronto, il y en a qui sont accessibles
20     à Hamilton, et il y a aussi le service multilingue.
21  16866                Vous avez dit cinq.  Quels sont les
22     deux autres?  Il y a CFMT multilingue...
23  16867                M. CHAREST:  Attendez... Global.
24  16868                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  ... Hamilton, Citytv.
25  16869                M. CHAREST:  Global est pratiquement
                          StenoTran

                             3575

 1     un réémetteur.
 2  16870                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Oui, mais Global...
 3  16871                M. CHAREST:  J'ai appelé Global...
 4  16872                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Non.  Global, c'est
 5     un service ontarien.
 6  16873                M. CHAREST:  C'est un service
 7     ontarien...
 8  16874                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Quel serait le
 9     cinquième?
10  16875                M. PERREAULT:  Ici, on a CHRO
11     Pembroke, CFMT, Citytv, CHCH Hamilton...
12  16876                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Hamilton, oui.
13  16877                M. PERREAULT:  ... et nous avons
14     inclus Global parce qu'il a très peu de production; on
15     a dit "inexistante ou minime".  Alors c'est vraiment un
16     réémetteur.
17  16878                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Il faudrait vraiment
18     revoir à votre avis la réglementation parce que, comme
19     c'est là, quand on est sur les ondes, que ce soit Radio
20     Nord... il y a beaucoup de services sur les ondes à
21     Ottawa, alors à ce moment-là ils ont priorité.  Pour
22     offrir tous les canaux canadiens, il faudrait éliminer
23     évidemment des canaux américains qui sont accessibles
24     ailleurs.
25  16879                M. PERREAULT:  Il y a de fait,
                          StenoTran

                             3576

 1     madame, même sur la bande du service de base des
 2     câblodistributeurs, des stations américaines alors
 3     qu'on refuse... on dira peut-être que le signal est
 4     impur, mais néanmoins...
 5  16880                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Oui.  Ce sont souvent
 6     des canaux... il y en a un service en particulier qui
 7     est un canal limité mais le service américain a accepté
 8     d'être sur un canal limité.  Je suppose que si les
 9     services canadiens étaient prêts à faire la même chose,
10     ce serait une possibilité.
11  16881                Maintenant, comment définissez-vous
12     une région bilingue?  Et est-ce qu'à votre avis une
13     région bilingue -- vous parlez de région bilingue dans
14     votre soumission écrite -- devrait être traitée
15     différemment des autres régions du Canada?  C'est pour
16     ça que j'essayais d'avoir vos positions sur comment le
17     Conseil devrait exiger plus de services francophones.
18     Maintenant, passons de canadien à canadien de langue
19     française au Canada.
20  16882                Comme vous savez, nous nous sommes
21     penchés assez récemment sur cette question avec la
22     demande de TVA, dont nous ne pouvons pas parler puisque
23     la décision n'est pas émise, mais il y a eu beaucoup de
24     discussion sur est-ce qu'on l'exige partout, est-ce
25     qu'on le fait là où il y a une proportion quelconque de
                          StenoTran

                             3577

 1     francophones selon Statistiques Canada, est-ce qu'on
 2     définit des régions bilingues et on les traite
 3     différemment, ou est-ce que vous suggérez que partout
 4     au Canada, quelle que soit la population, on exige je
 5     crois que vous avez dit sept ou huit services de langue
 6     française, autres que Radio-Canada évidemment, quelle
 7     que soit la composition de la population?
 8  16883                M. PERREAULT:  Il faut tout de suite
 9     faire une distinction, je pense, entre les régions où
10     la minorité a déjà accès à plus de services dans sa
11     langue que le groupe majoritaire.  Je pense que, dans
12     des régions comme Montréal et dans des régions comme
13     l'Outaouais, le nombre de stations de télévision de
14     langue anglaise, canadiennes et américaines,
15     accessibles par les abonnés est supérieur à ce à quoi
16     les francophones peuvent avoir accès, ce qui m'amène au
17     point de départ.
18  16884                À notre avis, et quitte à ce que nous
19     ayons à le répéter et à le répéter... à notre avis,
20     partout au Canada les câblodistributeurs devraient être
21     tenus, dans l'allocation ou la distribution des
22     signaux, d'accorder priorité aux stations canadiennes
23     ayant le plus fort contenu canadien; et ça va bien avec
24     le mandat du CRTC.  Sur la base de cet argument-là,
25     nous savons pertinemment bien que nous retrouverons,
                          StenoTran

                             3578

 1     d'un océan à l'autre, une très grande quantité de
 2     stations de télévision canadiennes de langue française
 3     dans la bande de base et le service de base des
 4     câblodistributeurs.
 5  16885                Ça, à notre avis, nous y tenons,
 6     parce que le produit est également canadien et, étant
 7     un produit canadien, en toute équité, et selon le
 8     mandat du CRTC en plus, on devrait le retrouver dans la
 9     bande de base des services de base des
10     câblodistributeurs, à moins qu'il y ait deux poids,
11     deux mesures, et j'ose espérer qu'il n'est pas question
12     de ça ici ou ailleurs pour le moins.
13  16886                Quant aux régions à l'extérieur du
14     Québec... parce qu'à l'intérieur du Québec, comme je
15     vous le disais, dans bien des cas l'accès aux stations
16     en langue anglaise est souvent plus large que celui de
17     l'accès aux stations de langue française; on parle des
18     grands bassins comme l'Outaouais et le bassin de
19     Montréal.  Dans le cas des régions du Canada hors
20     Québec, à notre avis, si on parle de sept ou huit
21     stations pour l'ensemble canadien, la réglementation
22     pourrait permettre, pour le moins en tous les cas pour
23     la région de la capitale fédérale, de la capitale
24     canadienne, un accès encore plus large à un plus grand
25     nombre de stations de langue française.
                          StenoTran

                             3579

 1  16887                Je reviens au cas de la capitale
 2     canadienne.  C'est troublant, comme Canadien, comme
 3     francophone, comme anglophone, de constater que dans la
 4     capitale canadienne des stations canadiennes se font
 5     refuser l'accès aux signaux du câblodistributeur pour
 6     privilégier des stations canadiennes à plus faible
 7     contenu canadien, donc à plus fort contenu américain,
 8     et de retrouver chez le même câblodistributeur des
 9     stations de télévision américaines.  Là, on dit:  Un
10     instant.  Quel est le profil de la capitale canadienne? 
11     Quel profil veut-on donner, ou présente la capitale
12     canadienne?  Quel profil présente le Canada lorsqu'il
13     n'exige pas des câblodistributeurs, dans leur service
14     de base, en priorité la diffusion des stations
15     canadiennes, ce qui est carrément dans le mandat du
16     CRTC?
17  16888                Les réémetteurs, c'est un problème
18     également.  Je pense que le CRTC aura à réfléchir à
19     toute la question.  Réémetteurs dans les régions mal
20     desservies, soit; réémetteurs dans le cas des
21     télévisions éducatives, soit; dans le cas des
22     télévisions d'État, soit, ça va.  Mais si le réémetteur
23     a comme effet, dans des régions bien desservies, de
24     priver les Canadiens de stations canadiennes à plus
25     fort contenu canadien, nous disons là-dessus:  Un
                          StenoTran

                             3580

 1     instant.  Il faudrait peut-être regarder les politiques
 2     et les règlements pour éviter que des situations comme
 3     celle-là se produisent.  Et ce qui est doublement
 4     gênant et embêtant, c'est que ça se produit dans la
 5     capitale canadienne.
 6  16889                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Quand vous proposez
 7     qu'il y ait sept ou huit stations, sept ou huit
 8     services de langue française qui soient accessibles
 9     partout au Canada, comment est-ce que vous établiriez
10     la priorité des services francophones qui devraient
11     être offerts, par exemple, à Calgary, à Winnipeg, à
12     Vancouver?  Parce que dans ces cas-là, si on y allait
13     selon le contenu canadien, c'est évident que la plupart
14     des services et des signaux francophones seraient
15     accessibles si la technologie le permet et si les coûts
16     le permettaient dans des villes comme Calgary, Winnipeg
17     ou... mais disons à Calgary, si on essayait de
18     s'assurer qu'il y ait sept ou huit services de langue
19     française, comment établiriez-vous les priorités des
20     services qui devraient y être accessibles, des services
21     de langue française?  Est-ce que ce serait un service
22     généraliste, un service spécialisé... sans parler de
23     TVA, puisque la situation est devant nous.
24  16890                Est-ce que ce serait la société
25     d'État, par exemple, RDI?  Qu'est-ce que vous
                          StenoTran

                             3581

 1     entrevoyez comme étant une réglementation raisonnable
 2     lorsqu'il s'agirait d'imposer aux câblodistributeurs,
 3     dans les régions où il y a peu de francophones, sept ou
 4     huit services de langue française?
 5  16891                M. PERREAULT:  Il faut tout de suite
 6     savoir qu'il y a peut-être des gens qui peuvent réagir
 7     fortement à la demande de sept ou huit signaux de
 8     langue française distribués au minimum par l'ensemble
 9     des câblodistributeurs canadiens, sauf qu'il faut
10     savoir qu'il restera quand même approximativement au-
11     delà de 70 signaux en langue anglaise dans les régions
12     majoritairement anglophones.  Donc ça n'enlève rien à
13     la quantité de services en langue anglaise que d'exiger
14     des câblodistributeurs de favoriser des stations
15     canadiennes à fort contenu canadien.
16  16892                Maintenant, quant à savoir lesquels
17     devraient faire partie des sept ou des huit, écoutez,
18     sans trop vouloir nous aventurer dans cette voie-là,
19     vous laissant davantage le soin de réfléchir à ce qui
20     devrait faire partie des services de base des
21     câblodistributeurs dans l'optique de cette obligation
22     de diffuser sept ou huit signaux de stations publiques
23     et privées de langue française, je pense qu'évidemment
24     les services de télévision d'État, la télévision d'État
25     devrait avoir priorité, et après -- et après -- celles
                          StenoTran

                             3582

 1     à plus fort contenu canadien.
 2  16893                Je pense que c'est le but du CRTC et
 3     je pense que c'est le choix de la société canadienne de
 4     vouloir canadianiser son mode de vie entre autres par
 5     l'intermédiaire de la radio et de la télévision, en
 6     contrôlant l'offre de produits et en ne laissant pas la
 7     demande entièrement diriger le marché.  Ce choix a été
 8     fait par le gouvernement canadien, par le Parlement, et
 9     par conséquent par la population.
10  16894                Mais quant à vous dire précisément...
11     vous comprendrez avec nous que nous n'osons pas rentrer
12     là-dedans, vous laissant le soin de penser davantage à
13     ce qui devrait faire partie des sept ou des huit, mais
14     nous sommes heureux d'entendre que tout de même,
15     puisque vous posez la question sur les sept ou les
16     huit, ça laisse entendre que l'idée est reçue.
17  16895                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Quand vous dites, si
18     le Conseil établissait une règle d'ajouter sept ou huit
19     canaux, que la population anglophone ne perdrait pas de
20     services, de fait, ils en perdraient parce que, jusqu'à
21     l'implantation de la numérisation, c'est évident qu'il
22     n'y a pas beaucoup de canaux analogues en ce moment
23     dans plusieurs marchés d'accessibles.  Mais là,
24     M. Charest me dirait:  "Enlevez le golf, enlevez le
25     Speed Vision et mettez-y des"... alors c'est une
                          StenoTran

                             3583

 1     question de philosophie.  Mais il y aurait des marchés
 2     où il y aurait des services qui sont maintenant
 3     accessibles qui ne le seraient plus.
 4  16896                Si vous vous indignez des décisions
 5     que le Conseil a prises par le passé, ça, c'est autre
 6     chose.  Ce sont des situations qui ont été permises et
 7     que vous critiquez aujourd'hui, mais il y aurait un
 8     réajustement nécessaire jusqu'à ce qu'on ait un
 9     déploiement de la numérisation qui permette que plus de
10     canaux soient accessible.  En ce moment, ce que nous
11     avons, c'est une réglementation dont tous les
12     câblodistributeurs peuvent bénéficier; donc ils peuvent
13     ajouter des canaux américains pour chaque canal
14     spécialisé canadien.
15  16897                Je comprends vos propos, mais comment
16     les mettre en oeuvre, évidemment, il y a toujours des
17     problèmes selon les attitudes des gens.  Vous savez
18     comme nous que nous avons entendu TVA dernièrement qui
19     voulait la distribution partout, et ce ne sont pas tous
20     les Canadiens qui sont d'accord avec cette approche-là. 
21     C'est une question d'essayer de trouver un équilibre.
22  16898                Vous voulez dire autre chose,
23     Monsieur Perreault?
24  16899                M. PERREAULT:  Oui.  D'abord, je
25     pense également qu'hier nous écoutions la télévision de
                          StenoTran

                             3584

 1     Radio-Canada, et RDI, dans la région d'Alfred... c'est
 2     bizarre que dans une région comme ici nous apprenions
 3     hier que la population canadienne de la région d'Alfred
 4     n'a pas accès au Réseau de l'information de l'État
 5     canadien.  J'ai trouvé ça troublant de voir qu'une
 6     réalité comme celle-là pouvait exister.
 7  16900                Je veux revenir sur la notion de
 8     perte.  Vous dites que les anglophones perdraient s'il
 9     y avait un plus grand nombre de stations de langue
10     française.  Là-dessus, j'aimerais faire le commentaire
11     suivant.
12  16901                C'est toujours dérangeant d'entendre
13     que des Canadiens perdraient parce que le contenu
14     serait davantage canadien.
15  16902                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Monsieur Perreault,
16     je ne pense pas que...
17  16903                M. PERREAULT:  Je veux juste vous
18     mentionner autre chose.  Je veux juste vous mentionner
19     également que si c'est perdre que d'avoir la diffusion
20     de sept ou huit canaux de langue française, imaginez-
21     vous, sur la base strictement linguistique, ça fait
22     combien de temps est-ce qu'il y a des Canadiens qui
23     perdent parce qu'ils n'ont pas accès à une quantité
24     jugée minimale de stations canadiennes de langue
25     française.
                          StenoTran

                             3585

 1  16904                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Monsieur Perreault,
 2     vos propos ne sont pas tout à fait justes.  Je n'ai pas
 3     dit qu'ils perdraient sans ajouter le qualificatif
 4     qu'ils perdraient des services anglophones.  Ce n'est
 5     pas juste de dire que j'ai dit qu'ils perdraient; ils
 6     perdraient quelque chose, qui est autre chose.  Vous
 7     êtes d'accord avec moi?
 8  16905                M. PERREAULT:  Je pense que nous nous
 9     comprenons.
10  16906                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Oui, d'accord.
11  16907                Maintenant, vous parlez du problème
12     de la programmation locale, je crois, la disparition
13     dans plusieurs cas au Canada... je crois que vous vous
14     êtes adressé à ce problème...
15  16908                M. PERREAULT:  Oui.
16  16909                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  ... qui est
17     évidemment un problème, je suppose, au Canada français
18     aussi bien qu'au Canada anglais, à votre avis, où il y
19     a une certaine diminution de l'aspect local de la
20     programmation.
21  16910                Nous avons eu à travers le Canada
22     anglais, et au Canada français aussi... je suis allée,
23     par exemple, à Chicoutimi en juin; nous avons eu des
24     réunions avec le public qui font partie du procès-
25     verbal de cette audience et nous avons eu plusieurs
                          StenoTran

                             3586

 1     représentations de la part du public à ce effet-là.
 2  16911                Est-ce que vous êtes d'avis que c'est
 3     un problème au Canada français aussi?
 4  16912                M. CHAREST:  Là-dessus, ce qu'on a
 5     soumis cette semaine ne porte pas sur la production
 6     régionale comme telle au Canada français.  On n'a pas
 7     une opinion très, très forte là-dessus.
 8  16913                Tout ce qu'on peut dire, c'est que
 9     c'est vrai qu'on constate que la production régionale a
10     diminué, mais le contenu canadien est quand même assez
11     fort dans la télévision francophone canadienne; il est
12     demeuré fort.  Même si on produit moins d'émissions à
13     Québec localement ou à Chicoutimi ou à Rimouski, il est
14     quand même fort.  Le contenu canadien demeure fort.
15  16914                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  C'est une
16     revendication des producteurs des régions, qui trouvent
17     qu'ils n'ont pas autant de possibilités de produire de
18     la programmation localement ou régionalement, que la
19     programmation est produite surtout à Montréal et est
20     une programmation genre réseau.
21  16915                Monsieur Perreault...?
22  16916                M. PERREAULT:  Il faut quand même
23     comprendre que, dans la situation économique actuelle,
24     l'assiette publicitaire dans laquelle pigent la plupart
25     des stations de télévision est réduite, pour ne pas
                          StenoTran

                             3587

 1     dire faible.  Alors si, d'une certaine façon, on a
 2     probablement un courant de centralisation pour réduire
 3     les coûts, aidé par le fait qu'il y a des réémetteurs
 4     qui bénéficient des mêmes avantages sans aucune
 5     obligation de production locale ou régionale, quel est
 6     l'incitatif pour les stations de télévision locales ou
 7     régionales quand ils pourraient importer de leur
 8     station mère toute leur programmation comme les
 9     réémetteurs le font?
10  16917                Alors il y a une concurrence; on
11     demande donc aux stations locales et régionales de
12     supporter des coûts d'exploitation additionnels que les
13     réémetteurs n'ont pas.
14  16918                Dans la révision, dans ce que nous
15     vous demandons lors du réexamen, si toutefois il y en
16     avait un, du comportement du CRTC dans l'émission des
17     licences pour réémetteurs, s'il n'y a pas obligation de
18     production locale et régionale, pour le moins il
19     faudrait peut-être imposer à la station mère
20     indépendante un plus fort contenu canadien pour
21     compenser le fait que, lorsqu'elles arrivent dans les
22     régions, elles viennent livrer une concurrence
23     d'auditoires et de marchés de publicité aux stations
24     locales et régionales.
25  16919                La prolifération du nombre de canaux,
                          StenoTran

                             3588

 1     du nombre de stations, l'assiette publicitaire qui
 2     n'est probablement pas grandement... qui en tout cas
 3     n'est sûrement pas proportionnellement croissante ne
 4     sont sûrement pas sans avoir d'effet sur le contrôle
 5     des coûts, la rationalisation de la programmation, et
 6     fort probablement une perte de production locale ou
 7     régionale.  C'est peut-être celle-là que pourraient
 8     être souvent tentées de faire disparaître en premier
 9     les stations.
10  16920                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Vous souvenez-vous,
11     Monsieur Perreault, si vous vous êtes présenté devant
12     le Conseil, ou Monsieur Charest, lors de l'audience qui
13     a justement permis à CHCH et à City d'installer un
14     réémetteur à Ottawa?
15  16921                M. CHAREST:  Je ne suis pas venu,
16     non, et je l'ai appris par les nouvelles; je pense que
17     c'était dans les journaux.  C'est comme ça que je l'ai
18     appris.  Je l'ai appris, je pense, dans le Globe and
19     Mail, qu'il y avait les réémetteurs ici, à Ottawa.
20  16922                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  CFMT, c'est quelque
21     chose de différent, je suppose, parce que c'est une
22     station multilingue.
23  16923                Évidemment, la philosophie est un peu
24     l'espoir que ça localiserait les stations vraiment
25     locales en les incitant à garder leur programmation
                          StenoTran

                             3589

 1     locale pour être plus près de leur marché et aussi
 2     parce qu'ils ont accès à la publicité locale.  Mais il
 3     semblerait, selon les plaintes que nous avons, les
 4     représentations qu'on nous faites, que ça ne semble pas
 5     nécessairement le cas.
 6  16924                Alors je vous remercie,
 7     Monsieur Perreault, Monsieur Charest, mesdames,
 8     monsieur, et continuez à venir nous voir aussi souvent
 9     que possible.
10  16925                M. PERREAULT:  Nous vous remercions
11     infiniment.
12  16926                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Au revoir.
13  16927                Nous allons maintenant prendre une
14     pause de 15 minutes.  We will take a 15-minute break
15     and be back at a quarter to eleven.
16     --- Short recess at / Courte suspension à 1028
17     --- Upon resuming at / Reprise à 1050
18  16928                Mme SANTERRE:  Messieurs, mesdames,
19     Madame la Présidente, the next group will be Horizon
20     Interfaith Council.  You may start now.
21     PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
22  16929                MR. GILLANI:  Good morning, Madam
23     Chair and the Commissioners.
24  16930                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Good morning.
25  16931                MR. GILLANI:  I believe we meet the
                          StenoTran

                             3590

 1     second time.  Were you in Vancouver sitting as well?
 2  16932                THE CHAIRPERSON:  I have been to many
 3     places.
 4  16933                MR. GILLANI:  So many places.  My
 5     name is Amir Gillani and I am from the American
 6     Institute of Islamic Studies.  I currently am the
 7     President with the Horizon Interfaith Council.  I take
 8     pleasure in introducing my colleagues here.
 9  16934                On my right is John Sullivan from the
10     United Church of Canada.  On my left is Earl Smith from
11     the Church of Scientology.  On my further left is Gil
12     Gillespie from the Unitarian Church of Ontario.
13  16935                The Horizon Interfaith Council was
14     formed 20 years ago to help faith groups make
15     television programming for Toronto community channels. 
16     We organize resources for them and allocate broadcast
17     time.
18  16936                The arrangement has worked very well,
19     both for our members.  We have 28 groups current in our
20     council and have assisted 70 faith groups that have
21     passed through our council.
22  16937                Our group has functioned with a great
23     spirit of harmony and communication for a very long
24     time.
25  16938                We want to talk to you today about a
                          StenoTran

                             3591

 1     reflection of local communities in the television
 2     system.  Like many others that have appeared to you, we
 3     are concerned that our cities and our neighbourhoods
 4     are disappearing from our television screens and we
 5     think this a real loss to Canadians and that something
 6     must be done about it.
 7  16939                At the end of our presentation, we
 8     would like to suggest a new approach, one that relies
 9     on a group that up to now has taken a very minor role
10     in the television system.  This is the voluntary
11     sector.
12  16940                Many people have in this hearing
13     expressed the concern that the local broadcasters were
14     reducing the hours they devote to local affairs.
15  16941                Horizon's, OUR, principal concern, of
16     course, is with the cable community channel.
17  16942                As we said in our written brief, Shaw
18     Cable seems to be turning their community channel into
19     a local news operation.  This may fit the definition of
20     a community channel in the regulations, but it
21     certainly reduces community access to the channel. 
22     Rogers have reduced resources to the point where
23     community access is disappearing.  Horizon is the last
24     group that we know of which has access to Rogers'
25     studios in Toronto, and the staff there has been
                          StenoTran

                             3592

 1     sharply reduced.
 2  16943                MR. SULLIVAN:  Some people may tell
 3     you that this is an inevitable result of the logic of
 4     marketing.  If reflection of the local community is
 5     less profitable than other uses of broadcast time, then
 6     it will disappear.  But before that happens, we believe
 7     that we should think hard about it, and think about how
 8     television affects communities -- both for good and for
 9     evil.
10  16944                If there were no television - if the
11     average person did not spend 22 hours every week
12     watching television, then our communities would be
13     quite different places.  We would probably do many of
14     the things that our grandparents did.  We would meet
15     our neighbours.  We would play our own music.  We would
16     go to community meetings.  We would attend churches in
17     greater numbers.  In short, we would spend a great deal
18     more of our time in actual contact with other people.
19  16945                As it stands, though, much of our
20     contact with society is through the media, not face to
21     face.  In many ways, that has its benefits.  We
22     probably know more about the rest of the world than our
23     grandparents did, and it is possible we know more about
24     our own nation.  But we certainly know less, and care
25     less, about our neighbourhoods and our towns than we
                          StenoTran

                             3593

 1     did, because we do not simply see them on our
 2     television screens.  We may think less about God as
 3     well, because God - unless represented by a television
 4     evangelist - also gets little attention in the world of
 5     TV.
 6  16946                This problem is even greater in a
 7     city like Toronto, where the changing cultural and
 8     religious character of the city has made it imperative
 9     that we take the time to get to know each other if we
10     are to live successfully in harmony.
11  16947                In short, every hour we spend
12     watching rich young people on the beach in California,
13     or watching the police deal with criminals in New York,
14     is an hour we do not spend forming the real bonds that
15     tie us together as families, neighbourhoods,
16     congregations and cities.  The natural ties of social
17     human beings - the ties that give us joy in good times
18     and sustain us in crisis - these ties have been eroded
19     by the dominating presence of 22 hours of television a
20     week in our lives.
21  16948                Well, we cannot turn the clock back
22     but what can we do, in our real situation, to restore
23     the ties of community and the ties of spiritual life?
24  16949                MR. SMITH:  Our response at Horizon,
25     like many other groups across the country, has been to
                          StenoTran

                             3594

 1     try to redress the balance within the world of
 2     television.  We use television to show our neighbours
 3     who we are - in our case we make programs that explain
 4     and explore faith.  We help each faith group that comes
 5     to us to tell its story to whoever is watching in the
 6     metro area and we hope that the people watching will
 7     learn something that may contribute to their own faith. 
 8     Frankly, we hope that some of our programs will get
 9     them to turn their TV off and join a congregation, or
10     at least take whatever part they can in the life of
11     their chosen faith.
12  16950                The kind of programming that we do
13     will never be a big part of the system - we know that. 
14     No one will ever make any money from it, and no one
15     will ever want to put much money into it.  It is run by
16     volunteers - people who do it because they are willing.
17  16951                In fact, we believe that community
18     programming, programming that is about and for the
19     community, should always be made primarily by
20     volunteers.  That way we know it will have only one
21     purpose, to communicate, to create community, not to
22     sell products or fulfil a corporate agenda.  Of course,
23     the volunteers need help, because television is
24     complicated, and professional advice is really useful. 
25     We are very grateful for all the technical assistance
                          StenoTran

                             3595

 1     that Rogers has freely given to members over the years. 
 2     But the content should be in the hands of volunteers,
 3     and their access to a channel should be guaranteed.
 4  16952                In short, we believe that the
 5     television system is not just public and private.  As
 6     the Broadcasting Act says, it comprises "public,
 7     private and community elements."  We believe that it is
 8     time that the community elements took a larger place in
 9     order to perform a role that public and private are
10     increasingly abandoning.
11  16953                MR. GILLESPIE:  But how do we make
12     this happen?  How do we ensure that there is
13     programming that reflects the community?  How do we
14     ensure that it has the resources it needs to be
15     successful?
16  16954                We think that there is a good model
17     for television in the community radio movement.  Why
18     not license voluntary, non-profit groups that represent
19     a broad range of interests in a community to run a
20     channel themselves?
21  16955                We don't mean to show disrespect for
22     those cable companies who are still providing a good
23     access channel for their communities.  If the old
24     arrangements work and people want them to continue, we
25     would not interfere with them.  But in those places
                          StenoTran

                             3596

 1     where the old arrangements are breaking down, we think
 2     that a community-owned model is a better alternative.
 3  16956                Of course, the first question will
 4     be, how can the operation survive financially?  Will it
 5     be re-imposed as a burden on the cable companies?  Or
 6     must the community group seek donations?
 7  16957                We don't think that either of these
 8     options is fair or workable.  To seek donations would
 9     not be practical and not a stable source of income.
10  16958                To put the burden back on the cable
11     companies when they have been the only support for
12     community access for a long time also seems to be
13     unfair.
14  16959                Our view is that all of those in the
15     system who benefit financially from serving a community
16     should share in the responsibility to make community
17     access television possible.  If the resources needed -
18     which are not large to begin with - are spread among
19     many players, then the burden will be very small on
20     each of them.  If local broadcasters, cable companies
21     and the new competitive distributors all share in the
22     support of the community-owned access channel, we
23     believe that it would not interfere with their ability
24     to discharge their obligations or with their
25     profitability, particularly in a television market as
                          StenoTran

                             3597

 1     rich as Toronto.
 2  16960                After all, though we are not
 3     professional broadcasters, many of us run our own
 4     businesses, and we understand how difficult it can be.
 5  16961                In addition, it may be possible for
 6     some local players to provide resources in different
 7     kind.  Or they may find it easier and more convenient
 8     to provide money so the community group can purchase
 9     its own resources.
10  16962                MR. SULLIVAN:  At this point, our
11     idea is no more than that - an idea.  We know it is not
12     possible for the Commission to fully evaluate it in the
13     middle of such a complex hearing as this, with so many
14     issues of national reflection to evaluate.
15  16963                We would suggest that the Commission
16     consider a separate proceeding to look a local
17     programming and local reflection.  We are not the only
18     ones to raise the local issue, and community access
19     programming is not the only kind of local programming
20     that needs attention.
21  16964                So we suggest that the Commission
22     issue a new call for comments on local programming
23     policy.  We would like to see such a call address the
24     issues of, first, a local access channel.  Secondly,
25     the idea of licensing community groups to run such a
                          StenoTran

                             3598

 1     channel.  And, finally, the best way to financially
 2     support such a channel.
 3                                                        1100
 4  16965                In addition, since the Commission has
 5     initiated a new practice of making research available
 6     to the parties in a proceeding, we would like to see
 7     research done that would tell us how much money is now
 8     being derived from broadcasting activities in each
 9     major community across the country and how much of it
10     goes back into local reflection.
11  16966                MR. GILLANI:  Our interest in this
12     study should be very clear.  We want to know how big a
13     burden our idea would present to the broadcasting
14     operations in each community and we would like to work
15     from a common set of figures so we can discuss the
16     principles, rather than argue on figures and numbers.
17  16967                The Broadcasting Act says that, I
18     quote, "programming provided by the Canadian
19     broadcasting system should ... include education and
20     community programs."  We think that the community
21     programs are at a risk in the system we see unfolding. 
22     We also think these programs are very important to the
23     life of communities and to the life of the spirit
24     within those communities, even though they won't many
25     anyone a millionaire.
                          StenoTran

                             3599

 1  16968                We hope you share our concern and we
 2     thank you very much for your kind willingness to hear
 3     our proposal.  We would be happy to answer questions.
 4  16969                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr.
 5     Gillani and gentlemen.
 6  16970                Commissioner Cardozo?
 7  16971                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Thank you,
 8     Madam Chair.
 9  16972                Thank you for that presentation and
10     all the thought you have put into this because I think
11     it's nice to see people who, after a number of years at
12     working at what you have been doing, have put together
13     a rather creative proposal.  I also want to
14     particularly thank Mr. Sullivan for noting that we
15     can't evaluate this proposal in the throes of this
16     complicated hearing, but it's certainly a time to start
17     thinking about it.
18  16973                The one thing, as you probably know,
19     the broadcast distribution regulations which came into
20     effect about a year ago will be up for re-evaluation
21     the end of next year or early the year after that and
22     that would be a time when we would be looking at local
23     -- not to say I am rejecting out of hand what you are
24     suggesting here, but just to let you know that that's
25     our plan at this point as to where we will be looking
                          StenoTran

                             3600

 1     at how local programming has been going over this
 2     period of two years since the regulations were changed. 
 3     We change the regulations, but what happens very often
 4     when we change regulations, we keep an eye on what
 5     happens and decide where to go and evaluate the
 6     situation.  So, there is a plan to do that.
 7  16974                Because of that, I won't get into a
 8     detailed discussion about local programming, but I
 9     would like some of your feedback and your thoughts on
10     it.  What are your feelings about what is missing about
11     the kinds of things that are missing in local
12     programming currently?  I am thinking both of what you
13     see on the community channel, as well as on the regular
14     stations that broadcast channels.  What is the essence
15     of what you are missing currently?
16  16975                MR. SMITH:  I think that one of the
17     things that has happened over the years is the lack of
18     resources that has been devoted to community
19     programming.  For instance, in the metro Toronto area
20     we can go back even the 20 years that most of us have
21     been there.  You have seen the resource gradually erode
22     from something like 50, 60 community programmers down
23     to right now only three.  That's just within the Rogers
24     system.  When we started, of course, many, many years
25     ago, there were six or seven different cable companies. 
                          StenoTran

                             3601

 1     We are down to two, I think, now.
 2  16976                Aside from that, also the lack of
 3     time that has been allocated, in our case in
 4     particular, has dropped from four hours when we first
 5     started 20 years ago to now two hours.  Even the time
 6     that we have been given; we were once on prime time
 7     through the week, Monday to Friday, except on
 8     Wednesdays, and now we are back in sort of a
 9     morning/early afternoon slot on Sundays from 11:00 to
10     1:00.
11  16977                But I think in the last two years in
12     particular also was, of course, the sharpest cut with
13     the lack of -- there the community programs and
14     resources have dropped from about 50 or so community
15     programs down to three.  So, there has been a very,
16     very sharp reduction and we are really not allowed much
17     other than a talking format, with very little or almost
18     no editing allowed at all.  So, our ability to create
19     programs has been hampered.
20  16978                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  When you say
21     "not allowed to do editing", that is because there
22     aren't the personnel to help you with that?
23  16979                MR. SMITH:  Exactly.  There is no
24     resource for people for us to have that sort of
25     resource.
                          StenoTran

                             3602

 1  16980                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  And what are
 2     the genres of programming that you are missing?  Is it
 3     talking heads programming?  I don't mean to put that in
 4     a negative way, but is it people talking about issues,
 5     is it entertainment, is it news?
 6  16981                MR. SMITH:  Mostly it's, I would
 7     suppose, people talking about issues.  Sometimes some
 8     of the groups provide entertainment or spiritual songs
 9     and that sort of thing, but that has been sharply
10     curtailed because there are not the studios to do that
11     in, they don't have the resources to set that up.  It
12     has to be very limited now to -- currently, it's
13     talking heads.
14  16982                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  And there
15     isn't much or was there room for coverage of community
16     events in the past?
17  16983                MR. SMITH:  There was a minor amount. 
18     It's non-existent at this point.  There was on
19     occasion --
20  16984                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Do you want to
21     add something, Mr. Gillani?
22  16985                MR. GILLANI:  There were two special
23     distinct formats that we were on the air over the past
24     20 years.  We had the faith group talking to their
25     congregation on the air and then we had specials where
                          StenoTran

                             3603

 1     a few groups would come by to deal with issues that
 2     were in the community, alcohol, drugs, abuse.  Now it
 3     happens that with the meagre resources that are cut
 4     down, as Earl has mentioned, we have lesser and lesser
 5     availability of the studio time for production and it
 6     turns back to even airing times have been reduced.
 7  16986                At this time I must emphasize that we
 8     are deeply grateful to Rogers Cable with the meagre
 9     resources that we have.  They have been very nice to us
10     to stretch as much as they can, but it doesn't justify,
11     it does not give us a feeling of satisfaction.
12  16987                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  How about the
13     other faith programming that there is?  I am thinking
14     of Vision TV and now the licensing of "Crossroads".
15  16988                MR. SULLIVAN:  I think this has to do
16     with the community because Vision is very much national
17     coast to coast.  So, the kind of thing we have been
18     doing relates very much just to the local community,
19     even though that's a huge one, metro Toronto.  So, it's
20     that aspect that Vision will never really meet the
21     needs of and we feel there are needs there.
22  16989                Your last question raised an answer
23     in my mind, which may not have been what you are
24     thinking, but it seems to me that not just the talking
25     heads, but there is an increasing -- how shall I say it
                          StenoTran

                             3604

 1     -- realization that within our communities are people
 2     the world should meet sort of thing.  I am thinking of
 3     a lady 89 years old.  Nobody knew that she was a
 4     talented artist.  She chose to keep that to herself and
 5     through a media process we were able to acquaint a
 6     whole community with what she was able to do.
 7  16990                It occurs to us that there are many
 8     of these people that it is very good for the community
 9     to know of them.  We would like to share that and, of
10     course, there has been no way in which that can be done
11     at the present time.
12  16991                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Let me come to
13     the centre of your brief, the culmination of your whole
14     exposé this morning, which was your idea for a
15     community channel.  In your written brief you talked
16     about a community channel that would air on all
17     systems, so it would be on cable, as well as the
18     satellite systems.  I would like you to give me some
19     sense of how it would be set up and how it would be
20     run.  I note you say today:
21                            "If the resources are needed --"
22  16992                I don't think there is an "if" there,
23     they are needed:
24                            "-- which are not large to begin
25                            with -- are spread among many
                          StenoTran

                             3605

 1                            players then the burden will be
 2                            very small on each of them.  If
 3                            local broadcasters, cable
 4                            companies and the new
 5                            competitive distributors share
 6                            [in the programming]..."
 7  16993                Is that how you see the thing being
 8     financed?
 9  16994                MR. SULLIVAN:  I think we have to add
10     my line -- I think I was the one who read it -- it's an
11     idea, only an idea.  But in partial answer to your
12     questions -- and I know the others have thoughts here,
13     too -- we would see a sharing amongst community groups
14     which would reach beyond faith groups.  We have reason
15     to believe that that's not an impossible thing to hope
16     for.  I recall the Vision people at the outset saying,
17     "Can we get people to work together", and, of course,
18     they have been able to do that.
19  16995                In the project that we have we think
20     20 years of up to a total of 70 groups working together
21     shows that that working together can come.  I think we
22     see as a real challenge the business of getting various
23     groups working together and we think that that can be
24     done.  Details on the ideas, no, not yet.
25                                                        1110
                          StenoTran

                             3606

 1  16996                MR. GILLANI:  I would like to inject
 2     one more very definite issue, there, that we are
 3     looking towards the Commission to create a situation
 4     where a study can be taken to look at the three
 5     different facets of the whole question that you have
 6     got.  The resources, and we mentioned in our brief
 7     getting those resources from the cable and the local
 8     broadcasters, we do not have a definite solution or a
 9     definite formula.  We feel that if the Commission gave
10     an opportunity where a study was be put to place, there
11     would be some substantial information that we could
12     get.
13  16997                And number three, I am just re-
14     emphasizing John's issue, there, where we would be able
15     to go to local issues that are now disappearing from
16     the television screens.
17  16998                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay, don't
18     count on us to do a study that would make your
19     application, because we can't do that.  We might
20     industry- or city- or region-wide study, and indeed, a
21     lot of figures are available from which you can glean
22     the information that you need.  And I see that is how I
23     think you formulated it in your --
24  16999                MR. SULLIVAN:  I think our thought
25     may have been to -- would the Commission be able in
                          StenoTran

                             3607

 1     some way to create a foundation, a framework within
 2     which a study could be initiated maybe by others.  But
 3     that foundational support would be what we were
 4     wondering about.
 5  17000                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  What are your
 6     thoughts about who else would be part of this?  The
 7     Horizon Interface Council, the material you sent in had
 8     a long list of faith organisations, churches, temples,
 9     et cetera.
10  17001                What are your thoughts about who else
11     would be part of it?  Because we have heard from
12     various people.  We had round tables across the country
13     in the month of June, and we heard from people from
14     Vancouver to Chicoutimi about people from various types
15     of community groups who felt they weren't being heard
16     on the community channel.
17  17002                So my question is, what are your
18     thoughts on who else would be part of it?  Would you
19     have sports groups and, say, parents' groups and anti-
20     violence groups and so forth who could be part of this,
21     or are you looking at primarily an inter-faith channel?
22  17003                MR. SULLIVAN:  I would like to
23     respond to that beginning with a short quote, and this
24     is from John P. Roache, professor of political science
25     at Harvard University, who said some years ago that:
                          StenoTran

                             3608

 1                            "In a healthy democracy the
 2                            majority and the non-conformist
 3                            depend upon each other, and each
 4                            supplies a vital component to
 5                            the whole.  Stability is
 6                            provided by the majority, while
 7                            vitality flows from the non-
 8                            conformist.  Consequently, the
 9                            democrat protects the rights of
10                            the non-conformist, not merely
11                            as an act of decency, but more
12                            significantly as an imperative
13                            for him or herself and the whole
14                            society."
15  17004                And so currently, for example, in the
16     greater metro area, we are getting substantial coverage
17     of amateur sports or sports that are not covered by the
18     major broadcasters.  That doesn't seem to be a problem. 
19     But the kind of voices that are suggested here might be
20     shut down, or have been shut down.  The smaller voices
21     who have this vitality, who have something to say.
22  17005                And we talked already of a special
23     that we would do, for example, where the co-ministers
24     from my particular congregation have just returned from
25     six months' sabbatical which took them through Nepal,
                          StenoTran

                             3609

 1     India, and Greece, Turkey, Romania, up into Germany,
 2     Switzerland, so forth, where they were into the museums
 3     along the way and studying the culture.  And doing a
 4     comparison as well with the other experience that we
 5     are having now in helping -- and this would be
 6     interfaith -- people build schools down in Guatemala,
 7     and their discovery of the lack of that kind of
 8     cooperation, sometimes, in the jurisdictions in which
 9     they were travelling in.  And so here is that kind of
10     small voice but important voice that we can express
11     through community television.
12  17006                So it ranges all across political
13     jurisdictions, or political voices, if you will, and
14     the various ethnic groups who have an important
15     message, sometimes, that informs us as to their
16     identity and their activities within the community, and
17     their ambitions for becoming more participatory in the
18     Canadian scene.
19  17007                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay.  Just to
20     be a bit more specific, then, you are going beyond a --
21     I am not saying it should be one way or the other, I am
22     just trying to understand.  You are going beyond a
23     religious faith-oriented station to one that would deal
24     with other things, like, for example, the Canadian
25     Labour congress was here a few days ago, and we talked
                          StenoTran

                             3610

 1     about the lack of labour programming, sports, and stuff
 2     like that.  Would you see all those being accommodated?
 3  17008                MR. GILLANI:  In our presentation, we
 4     have mentioned that we would be willing to combine with
 5     other community groups and prepare a project where
 6     everybody is involved, although our prime concern at
 7     this time is our own faith group.
 8  17009                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay.  One of
 9     the questions, short of the community programming, what
10     are your thoughts about what you see in the broadcast
11     channels, for those of you from Toronto, whether it is
12     Citytv or the local CBC, CTV affiliate, CFTO -- what
13     are your thoughts about what you are seeing there in
14     terms of the local community being reflected both in
15     news and entertainment?
16  17010                MR. GILLANI:  We have emphasized in
17     our verbal presentation today that more and more
18     community, local diversity, everything is disappearing.
19  17011                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Do you want us
20     to do something about that part?
21  17012                MR. GILLANI:  Definitely --
22  17013                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Or do you
23     think the solution lies only in the community
24     programming?
25  17014                MR. GILLANI:  The point is, the whole
                          StenoTran

                             3611

 1     submission is that -- the prime reason for the
 2     submission is just that those issues are now
 3     disappearing from the screen.  We were a very vital
 4     part of that ongoing activity, and we would like them
 5     to be put in place the way the Broadcasting Act says.
 6  17015                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay.  Well,
 7     thanks very much.  It is an interesting proposal that
 8     you are working on.  I appreciate your recognising that
 9     we can't license ideas, that our system requires stuff
10     to be more thorough, and indeed, you are not there yet. 
11     You want to be more thorough, so we appreciate that.
12  17016                I am particularly taken by your note
13     -- I was just looking for the quote, I couldn't find it
14     -- but you talked about the number of people who did
15     belong to religious affiliations, and that in a city
16     like Toronto it is useful, important, essential to find
17     means through television to be able to share those
18     values and create understanding.  So thanks very much
19     for that presentation.
20  17017                That covers my questions, Madam
21     Chair.
22  17018                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr.
23     Gillani and your colleagues.
24  17019                MR. GILLANI:  Thank you very much.
25  17020                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you for your
                          StenoTran

                             3612

 1     presentation.
 2  17021                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Madam Secretary.
 3  17022                MS SANTERRE:  Thank you, Madam Chair. 
 4     The next presentation will be done by Canada Family
 5     Action Coalition, with Peter Stock.
 6     PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
 7  17023                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Good morning, Mr.
 8     Stock.
 9  17024                MR. STOCK:  Thank you.  Good morning,
10     Commission.  We would first of all like to thank you
11     for the opportunity to appear here this morning, and I
12     look forward to a good discussion.  We appreciate the
13     opportunity, too, the CRTC has presented to Canadians
14     to discuss the quality of television broadcasting in
15     this country, and where we might go in the future.
16  17025                So for us, a pop tune from the 70s
17     sums it up quite well when it says, "57 channels and
18     there is nothing on."  Indeed, Canadians are becoming
19     increasingly disturbed by the violence and pornography
20     they are seeing on many, many more channels nowadays,
21     and many of them have decided just to switch off.
22  17026                Recent surveys have shown, on the
23     other hand, that a smaller and infrequent television
24     viewership has led to book sales increasing, magazine
25     sales increasing.  People are reading more.  Maybe that
                          StenoTran

                             3613

 1     is not such a bad thing.
 2                                                        1120
 3  17027                That sort of activity, reading,
 4     socializing, other forms of entertainment, are probably
 5     more beneficial for society as a whole than plain
 6     television watching.  Certainly, Robertson Davies is
 7     infinitely more important to Canadians than Jerry
 8     Springer.  However, it's also clear that television
 9     does have the potential to serve the common good, and
10     we have seen that.
11  17028                For example, I would point to the
12     recent licensing of the History Channel as an excellent
13     example of the direction the Commission has taken
14     television and a very positive one.  That channel in
15     particular served as a powerful tool in reminding
16     Canadians of their origin, culture and identity.  So,
17     it's exactly this point that we would like to
18     emphasize, that Canadian television can be encouraging,
19     a unifying force and positive in serving the common
20     good.
21  17029                We have a few simple suggestions to
22     make on how to improve the situation over the longer
23     term.  First, we would ask the Commission to reconsider
24     the licensing of the Playboy Channel.  Anti-women
25     programming such as Playboy is not particularly
                          StenoTran

                             3614

 1     Canadian and there is nothing Canadian, of course,
 2     about displaying women as furry, naked creatures who
 3     exist simply for the pleasure of men.  So, I would
 4     recommend that you re-address that question.  That's
 5     the type of antiquated bigotry that belongs alongside
 6     holocaust deniers and the Klu Klux Klan.  It's part of
 7     the past, it's not part of our future as a country.  I
 8     believe the CRTC can do better in this regard.
 9  17030                Next, let's consider developing a
10     standard for decency that no programming may fall
11     below.  We may not all agree on where the line should
12     be drawn, but it's clear that an effort should be made
13     to deal with the worst obscenity and graphic violence
14     that is increasingly filling the TV Guide today.  No
15     standard at all means anything goes and lately this has
16     meant even the real-time acting out of an incest scene
17     between mother and son, full nudity, on a major
18     Canadian network.  We have also had -- and I am sure
19     you are aware of this -- many complaints about the
20     Showcase channel in recent days and months.  Citytv is
21     moving in this direction, too.  We are extremely
22     concerned about this.
23  17031                It is relatively easy, though, to
24     just say, "Ban the bad stuff."  That's a cry we have
25     heard in the past.  We believe it's important to offer
                          StenoTran

                             3615

 1     constructive alternatives as well.  Perhaps the most
 2     important change to be made towards improving the
 3     quality of programming would be to encourage more faith
 4     or principles-based Canadian programming.  It's our
 5     belief that if Canadians are given a real alternative
 6     to the murder-a-minute cop shows and lewd, adolescent
 7     sitcoms, the quality programming will start to raise
 8     the overall standard of the programming menu.
 9  17032                This proposal doesn't have to cost
10     taxpayers a cent.  Many private groups are ready to
11     finance and produce quality faith and principles-based
12     programming and the job created and the export earnings
13     potential will be of net benefit to the Canadian
14     economy.  The only barrier holding these entrepreneurs
15     back so far has been licensure by the CRTC.  The 1991
16     Census indicated that 87 per cent of Canadians self-
17     identify with a particular world religion.  It
18     logically follows that some portion of our population
19     has an interest in television that reflects their
20     mostly deeply held convictions.
21  17033                Faith broadcasting has mostly been
22     denied to Canadians for the past 65 years.  Take, for
23     example, last summer the recent refusal by the CRTC to
24     license EWTN, the world's largest religious or
25     Catholic, I should say, TV channel.  Forty-six per cent
                          StenoTran

                             3616

 1     of Canadians consider themselves Catholic, according to
 2     that 1991 Census.
 3  17034                Now here is something you may not
 4     know.  EWTN is broadcasting legally in every single
 5     country in the western hemisphere, with the exception
 6     of communist Cuba and Canada.  Now, the difference
 7     between Cuba and Canada is that Cuba doesn't license
 8     the Playboy Channel, either.  So, it's time for our
 9     broadcasting policy in this regard to catch up with the
10     rest of the world.
11  17035                However, to the Commission's credit,
12     this year a licence has been granted in Hamilton,
13     Ontario to a station that is now carrying a majority of
14     single-faith programming.  That's in fact a historical
15     precedent.  It's the first major market licence that
16     has been granted in this area.  So, congratulations. 
17     However, serious problems still remain, in our opinion.
18  17036                Two things that we point out with
19     regard to that licence and those that may come along
20     like it are arbitrary requirements that require that
21     station and others like it to broadcast incompatible
22     viewpoints of other faiths on their channel, the
23     balance requirement, and also the imposition of a
24     speech code.  I call these arbitrary because they don't
25     apply to all broadcasters.  If we applied the same
                          StenoTran

                             3617

 1     standards to MuchMusic and others, then we would have
 2     something to talk about, that minimum standard again.
 3  17037                Then, of course, there is the
 4     question of where the Catholic channel is now.  We have
 5     a protestant channel, that's great.  Where is the
 6     Catholic channel?  Perhaps that's down the road and I
 7     would ask the Commission to consider that.  I don't
 8     think I will get into that right now.
 9  17038                Parliament is starting to take some
10     notice of where the Commission has been going in recent
11     years.  I think there is a great deal of satisfaction
12     with some of the recent moves, the licensing of
13     "Crossroads" and so on, but parliamentarians are
14     increasingly concerned about where television is going
15     to.  We have heard from them about this and they are
16     expressing this in the House in increasing numbers.  In
17     fact 10 per cent of parliamentarians now have presented
18     a petition.  Ten per cent of parliamentarians
19     representing 10 per cent of the ridings or 10 per cent
20     of the population coast to coast presented a petition
21     decrying the licensure of Playboy and the denial of
22     religious broadcasting licences.
23  17039                So, I will leave my presentation at
24     that point and perhaps answer any questions you might
25     have.
                          StenoTran

                             3618

 1  17040                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr.
 2     Stock.
 3  17041                Commissioner McKendry?
 4  17042                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Thank you,
 5     Madam Chair.
 6  17043                Good morning, Mr. Stock.
 7  17044                MR. STOCK:  Good morning.
 8  17045                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  I must admit
 9     I have never seen the Playboy Channel, but your
10     submission is attracting my interest when you described
11     the women on the channel as furry.  It conjures up in
12     my mind sort of a "Planet of the Apes" channel with
13     women.  Am I missing something here?  Why are the women
14     on this channel furry?
15  17046                MR. STOCK:  I haven't seen the
16     channel except in passing on satellite TV at one point
17     in time several years ago, but the fact is it has been
18     licensed and I think people are aware of the image that
19     the Hugh Hefner crew placed on women, the
20     objectification of women, dressing them up in bunny
21     suits.  This is nothing new.
22  17047                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  This is a
23     subscription channel, so I take it that one wouldn't
24     watch it unless one made a decision that that's what
25     one wanted to see and was prepared to pay for it.
                          StenoTran

                             3619

 1  17048                MR. STOCK:  That's correct, but that
 2     doesn't justify licensing it.  The CRTC has discretion
 3     to say yes or no to these channels and it's a question
 4     of community standards.  The Canadian community that we
 5     talk to says that this falls below that standard.
 6  17049                So, once again I would refer back to
 7     my earlier point that what we need to perhaps develop
 8     and the Commission should consider developing is a
 9     minimum standard for decency, a minimum standard when
10     it comes to a speech code that applies equally to all
11     broadcasters.  If the Commission wants to say, "Yes,
12     the Playboy Channel is fine", then why wouldn't we say,
13     yes, it's fine to have a Catholic channel, too?  What's
14     so offensive about EWTN and Mother Angelica?
15  17050                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  In any event,
16     I think you would agree with me a member of the general
17     community who doesn't want to watch the Playboy Channel
18     doesn't have to watch it?
19  17051                MR. STOCK:  I could say the same
20     thing about any of the other channels that are on TV
21     and, as I stated at the beginning of my presentation,
22     increasingly Canadians are turning off, but I don't
23     think that's the solution.  I think the solution is to
24     look to the future and say:  What kind of TV do we want
25     to have?  It's not all going to be the same, but
                          StenoTran

                             3620

 1     certainly we can meet a minimum standard, certainly we
 2     can strive towards better quality programming, and
 3     certainly the licensing of Playboy goes in the opposite
 4     direction.
 5  17052                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  This is a
 6     technical point, but the Playboy Channel in fact isn't
 7     licensed by us, it's authorized for distribution in
 8     Canada.  I suspect that point does detract from the
 9     point you want to make with us that it's available.
10  17053                MR. STOCK:  Yes.
11  17054                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Thanks.
12  17055                Let me ask you about what I detect
13     are two options that flow out of what you have
14     presented to us.  If I have those options wrong, please
15     let me know.  The first option, I take it, is the one
16     that's set out about halfway down the first page of
17     your written submission where you suggest or ask us to,
18     and I quote, "develop a standard for decency that no
19     programming may fall below."  That would be one option. 
20     We would have a standard and programming that was
21     unacceptable for the reasons you set out here just
22     wouldn't be on the screen.
23  17056                MR. STOCK:  That's right.
24  17057                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  The other
25     option, I take it, is more diversity.  You would like
                          StenoTran

                             3621

 1     to see more programming that's consistent with the
 2     values and so on that you set out here.  Have I got
 3     that right, that you see two options in front of us?
 4  17058                MR. STOCK:  I see those working
 5     concurrently.  Certainly if somebody wants to pursue
 6     the golf channel or pursue the sailing channel or
 7     pursue faith-based programming, they should be free to
 8     do that.  However, all those channels should meet a
 9     minimum standard.
10  17059                I would refer to the speech code that
11     the CRTC imposes on faith-based programmers.  No
12     intolerance, basically, is the motive there.  Perhaps
13     that's a very reasonable statement to make, but that's
14     not applied to other channels like MuchMusic.  Some
15     might argue that the Playboy Channel, as it objectifies
16     women, is intolerant towards women.  So, certainly
17     there needs to be a debate about what is and what isn't
18     acceptable.
19  17060                What we are saying is apply the same
20     standard across the board.  Don't have special rules
21     for this area of broadcasting and that area of -- or
22     this type of programming and that type of programming. 
23     If somebody wants to do a faith-based channel, they
24     have to meet the same standard that somebody doing
25     MuchMusic or a sports channel does.
                          StenoTran

                             3622

 1  17061                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Your ultimate
 2     goal is a standard and anything that falls below the
 3     standard wouldn't be on our screens.  That is the
 4     standard for decency.
 5  17062                MR. STOCK:  That is correct.
 6  17063                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Just to
 7     understand where the standard or the line should be
 8     drawn, let me ask you about another statement that you
 9     make later on in the first page.  You refer to lewd and
10     adolescent sitcoms.  Can you just give me a couple of
11     examples of what you consider to be lewd and adolescent
12     sitcoms that are available today?
13  17064                MR. STOCK:  I think most of them are
14     nowadays, but "South Park" would be a good example.
15                                                        1130
16  17065                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Do you have
17     any others?
18  17066                MR. STOCK:  "Seinfeld" has been from
19     time to time quite adolescent, quite lewd.
20  17067                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  So once we
21     set the standard that you are suggesting we should,
22     "Seinfeld" wouldn't be on our screens and "South Park"
23     wouldn't be on our screens?
24  17068                MR. STOCK:  That might a possibility
25     in some cases, yes.  Depending where we set that
                          StenoTran

                             3623

 1     standard, it is quite possible that many "South Park"
 2     episodes would not be acceptable to the Commission and
 3     to the Canadian public.  I think you would find that is
 4     the case already, based on the number of complaints
 5     that you may have received about some of those
 6     episodes.
 7  17069                "Seinfeld," it might only be the
 8     occasional episode where either a word is deleted in
 9     the course of conversation, which does happen, quite
10     frankly, already in the States, or, it might be that
11     entire episode is considered unacceptable.
12  17070                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Who would the
13     individual be that would decide that an episode of
14     "Seinfeld" isn't acceptable?
15  17071                MR. STOCK:  Well, there are a number
16     of ways to go about regulation.  There is self
17     regulation that once a standard is set, it depends what
18     the censure is going to be if one violates that.  If a
19     station believes that they are going to go beyond the
20     limits the Commission has set, then maybe they won't
21     want to risk their licence.  So we don't necessarily
22     need a strict censor board.  We may need just a
23     standard set that the Commission sets and licences are
24     either granted or denied or renewed on the basis of
25     whether or not they have been adhered to.  Or a licence
                          StenoTran

                             3624

 1     could be pulled, if it has been grossly violated.
 2  17072                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Just so I
 3     understand again where the line should be drawn, what
 4     about "Frasier," would there be some episodes of
 5     "Frasier," which I think is going into the schedule at
 6     the same time.  "Seinfeld" used to be in the schedule. 
 7     Are there some episodes of "Frasier" that would fall
 8     below the line?
 9  17073                MR. STOCK:  I can't say that I have
10     watched that show quite as much but I suspect that from
11     time to time there may be comments made that are
12     considered abusive, intolerant, obscene and, as a
13     result, might be deleted or entire episodes may not be
14     shown.  That is a decision that, as I say, once we draw
15     that line, we will have a better sense of how to deal
16     with it.
17  17074                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Down at the
18     bottom of page one, you point out that 87 per cent of
19     Canadians self identify with a particular world
20     religion, and I think you use the statistic to
21     reinforce your submission to us.  Now I would
22     anticipate or expect that many of those 87 per cent
23     Canadians watch "Frasier" or "Seinfeld," do you see any
24     conflict there with your position that we should take
25     into account the fact that 87 per cent of Canadians
                          StenoTran

                             3625

 1     self identify with a particular world religion, we
 2     should draw a line that certain episodes of "Seinfeld,"
 3     "Frasier," "South Park" wouldn't show up on our
 4     screens, yet many of these people are watching these
 5     episodes.
 6  17075                MR. STOCK:  It is quite possible that
 7     many people are watching them.  It is also a fact that
 8     many people are writing complaints to the CRTC on the
 9     basis of some of the activities or comments that are
10     made in episodes of shows like "Frasier."  I am not
11     aware if you have complaints about "Frasier" itself but
12     I am certain you have them about shows like "South
13     Park" and others.
14  17076                Now the point there about 87 per cent
15     of Canadians self identifying as being religious, this
16     comes from StatsCan's '91 census.  This is how people
17     have identified themselves to the Government of Canada. 
18     Our point here isn't that 87 per cent of Canadians want
19     to watch faith-based programming or faith-based
20     programming exclusively.  What we are suggesting is
21     that many of them want and that many of them might
22     enjoy that alternative and would have an interest in
23     television that reflects their most deeply held views. 
24     They might also at the same time choose to watch
25     "Frasier" but we think they should be granted that
                          StenoTran

                             3626

 1     choice.  They don't currently have that, in our
 2     opinion.
 3  17077                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  In your
 4     written submission, you noted at the end of the
 5     submission that you would or your organization would be
 6     consulting with Canadians over the summer on this issue
 7     and would be presenting us with some findings as a
 8     result of this consultation at the hearing.  Did you
 9     have an opportunity to carry out those consultations?
10  17078                MR. STOCK:  Indeed, we did.  I guess
11     I would say two things that is really to re-emphasize a
12     number of the things that we have outlined in here,
13     three points perhaps.
14  17079                First of all, they are happy to see
15     stations like Crossroads get licences.  Obviously, it
16     has only been a few days that particular station has
17     been on the air but people are excited by that.  We
18     have heard a great deal of feedback saying, yes, we are
19     glad to finally see this on TV. Where has it been all
20     these years?  That is the statement.  So,
21     congratulations to the Commission on that point.
22  17080                The second point would be that of the
23     worsening of some channels on TV in terms of their
24     obscenity.  "Showcase" is one that I have heard
25     numerous complaints about.  Why is that filth on my
                          StenoTran

                             3627

 1     television set?  People are looking for a movie to
 2     watch late at night and they had never heard of this
 3     movie and it turns to be literally hard core
 4     pornography.  They are upset by that.
 5  17081                Citytv as well has been moving down
 6     this road.  I believe it is a week away we are supposed
 7     to see "Sex in the City" is the name of the show, full
 8     hard core pornography on Citytv, again.  So there have
 9     been, in our estimation, a rise in complaints, a rise
10     in the number of concerned people who are worried about
11     what is, in fact, being shown on television.
12  17082                Then the third point is the one I
13     mentioned.  The question that is asked of us is why
14     isn't there a standard?  How can they be allowed to get
15     away with this?  Where is the standard?  So we ask that
16     question of the Commission.  Where is the standard? 
17     How low will we go?
18  17083                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Let me just
19     come back now to the beginning of your presentation
20     where you note that television viewership may be
21     declining and the book sales are rising and so on. 
22     When I was having a chat in the cab recently with the
23     cab driver who had asked me what I did for a living and
24     I told him what we were doing right now and he had an
25     interesting comment because he said, well, that seems
                          StenoTran

                             3628

 1     like a pretty big proceeding you are having and so on. 
 2     He said it is just television.  I guess I take it that
 3     is your point, too.
 4  17084                There are other alternatives
 5     available to people.  Television is only, first of all,
 6     one dimension in their lives.  They have a family life. 
 7     They have their spiritual life.  They have their
 8     community life.  And they have many options available
 9     to them with respect to entertainment and information,
10     such as books.
11  17085                So I take it that is the point you
12     want to make to us is that people have options.  To the
13     extent they move away from television to exercise those
14     options, the television industry may adjust the nature
15     of its programming on its own initiative.
16  17086                MR. STOCK:  Yes, there is certainly
17     some truth to that.  Of course, because of regulation
18     in this country and because of the failure up to this
19     point up until very recently, in fact, to license, for
20     instance, faith-based programming on the public
21     airwaves in this country, people have sought other
22     alternatives.  Yes, it might be books.
23  17087                It might also be satellite TV.  The
24     pizza dish has made the reception of foreign signals or
25     signals from satellites much cheaper, as you are well
                          StenoTran

                             3629

 1     aware, and has put it in the range of affordability for
 2     most middle class families.  So if a Catholic person in
 3     this country wishes to receive Mother Angelica on EWTN,
 4     they might buy a pizza dish for 500 bucks.
 5  17088                What that means to me is that cable
 6     companies and Canadian television production suffer as
 7     a result because those dollars are flowing out of the
 8     country and in a very literal sense.  I think that is
 9     something that the CRTC needs to be concerned about. 
10     If we are losing market share, whatever market it is -
11     distribution, production, to foreigners because of a
12     failure to provide the services here at home, then I
13     think that is a serious problem that we need to
14     consider.  I mean the job is going south of the border,
15     literally.
16  17089                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Thank you
17     very much, Mr. Stock.  Those are the questions I have
18     for you.  Thank you, Madam Chair.
19  17090                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Commissioner
20     Cardozo.
21  17091                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Thanks, Madam
22     Chair.  Thanks, Mr. Stock.  It is nice to see you
23     again.  The last time we met, it was at the hearing
24     that eventually licensed Crossroads and I am hoping
25     that your opinion of us has changed since then or
                          StenoTran

                             3630

 1     improved since then, as you have mentioned, and I
 2     appreciate the feedback you brought us on Crossroads.
 3  17092                In terms of the programming that you
 4     find objectionable, I am wondering if you have ever
 5     looked at the issue of community evaluation.  And I ask
 6     this in light of the position we find ourselves in
 7     quite frequently when people object to this or that
 8     type of programming.  We consequently get thrown the
 9     argument of freedom of expression, freedom of speech. 
10     Our role is not to censor, et cetera, et cetera.
11  17093                I think at various times the
12     programming, and perhaps we have seen this more in the
13     States, where community groups have gotten together and
14     either evaluated a number of shows or particular shows
15     and tried to exert consumer viewer pressure on stations
16     and stuff like that.  Have you approached it from that
17     perspective?
18  17094                MR. STOCK:  Well, I think the problem
19     that we face in this country is with respect to
20     censorship versus a freedom of expression is probably
21     best summed up in the Butler decision of the Supreme
22     Court back in '92 when they addressed the issue of hard
23     core pornography being sold out of a video store in
24     Manitoba and it worked its way through the courts over
25     several years and the justices decided that they would
                          StenoTran

                             3631

 1     apply something called "community standard of tolerance
 2     test."  And that did not mean what you or I would
 3     tolerate in our own home or being sold to our front
 4     door but rather what we would tolerate our neighbour
 5     watching, listening to, reading, et cetera.
 6  17095                The Supreme Court, in fact, gave a
 7     minimum standard for what was obscene.  They said if it
 8     involves criminal activity of some sort in connection
 9     with the portrayal of sexuality or nudity, that that
10     activity would be considered criminal.  It does not
11     mean that it would necessarily, if it is not criminal,
12     it isn't also obscene or pornographic.  And so I would
13     suggest that the problem we face is one of where has
14     the court drawn the line on a number of these issues.
15  17096                The Playboy Channel may be legal in
16     the sense of whether or not it meets the community
17     standard of tolerance test.  But that doesn't
18     necessarily mean that it is moral and it does not
19     necessarily mean that the community accepts it or wants
20     to see it on TV.  In fact, Commissioner McKendry was
21     quite correct, the average Canadian isn't going to see
22     it on TV unless they pay for it.
23  17097                But the fact of the matter is that
24     Canadians may not tolerate, and it is quite clear from
25     the complaints we have had and that Parliament has had,
                          StenoTran

                             3632

 1     and I believe the Commission has had, that the Canadian
 2     public isn't interested in tolerating that for their
 3     neighbours either, and so perhaps that type of
 4     programming does not meet the community standard of
 5     tolerance test.
 6  17098                As to who should make the final
 7     decision, well, I would submit that many times these
 8     decisions have to end up in a place like the CRTC or in
 9     the courts and work their way up to the Supreme Court
10     level and be decided, hopefully not on a case-by-case
11     basis, because you can imagine that would clog the
12     courts pretty badly.  But certainly the Commission has
13     the power through licensure to say yes or no to a
14     certain standard.
15  17099                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  You are aware
16     of the CBSC, the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council
17     and have you used it?
18  17100                MR. STOCK:  Yes, I guess we find that
19     it doesn't do the job, and I will give you an example
20     why.  A complaint just last year where a housewife
21     complained to the CBSC about a show called "Fashion
22     File," CBC-TV, Newsworld, and the fact that full
23     frontal nudity was displayed at the dinnertime hour and
24     that her child saw this and she was extremely offended.
25     The Broadcast Standards Council said, well, that's
                          StenoTran

                             3633

 1     fine, you know, we don't have a problem with that.  I
 2     don't know what their exact wording was.  I don't have
 3     it in front of me but that --
 4  17101                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  I am not
 5     familiar with that particular decision.  Just for your
 6     information, that is one of the things that is up for
 7     review, perhaps early next year.  So keep in touch with
 8     us on that.
 9  17102                MR. STOCK:  Okay, we appreciate that.
10  17103                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  On local
11     programming, what were your thoughts?  Were you here
12     during the previous presentation by Horizon?
13  17104                MR. STOCK:  Yes, I was.
14  17105                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  What are your
15     thoughts on that?  I mean what these folks were asking
16     for was a community-based interfaith channel that also
17     dealt with other local community level stuff.  What are
18     your thoughts about that type of programming?
19  17106                MR. STOCK:  Yes, I think that is
20     excellent.  It shows, as they described, volunteers
21     taking initiative, wanting to support the community,
22     their own personal communities, and I think that's a
23     very Canadian thing.  We should give serious
24     consideration to that proposal.  It sounds, from what
25     they were presenting, that they weren't looking for a
                          StenoTran

                             3634

 1     handout from the government.  They were looking to
 2     produce this very low budgets and at a volunteer level
 3     and I think that is the kind of thing that benefits the
 4     community as a whole.  I don't see how we could
 5     possibly oppose that type of initiative.
 6  17107                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  But does it go
 7     some way to serving the kind of needs you say aren't
 8     being met?
 9  17108                MR. STOCK:  I believe that certainly
10     does, yes.
11  17109                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Lastly, Mr.
12     Thiessen from Trinity was here last week.  You are
13     familiar with Trinity?
14  17110                MR. STOCK:  Yes.
15  17111                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  One of the
16     points he was making in relation to Canadian content,
17     which is one of the core issues of this hearing, was
18     that he wanted protections to continue in terms of the
19     amount of Canadian programming because it also helped
20     religious programming, a lot of Canadian-based and
21     Canadian-made religious programming.  Is that a view
22     you share?
23  17112                MR. STOCK:  Not necessarily because
24     we don't view religious programming as Canadian,
25     American, whatever.  It is international in its scope
                          StenoTran

                             3635

 1     because religions are international in their scope.  If
 2     there is any type of programming that shouldn't have
 3     those types of restrictions attached to it, it is
 4     probably religious programming, for those very reasons.
 5  17113                Yes, people are catholic in a
 6     particular country, for example, but you cannot draw a
 7     line between Canadian catholics and American catholics
 8     and say their culture is different in terms of their
 9     religion because it certainly isn't.  They attend the
10     same services.  They pray the same prayers and they
11     speak the same words.  If they are going to broadcast
12     that, they are going to communicate that.  They are not
13     communicating a Canadian or American perspective.  They
14     are communicating a religious perspective, which
15     transcends international boundaries.
16  17114                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Interesting. 
17     Thanks very much.  Those are my questions, Madam Chair.
18  17115                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr.
19     Stock.
20  17116                MR. STOCK:  Thank you, Madam Chair.
21  17117                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you for
22     appearing.
23  17118                Madam Secretary, would you call the
24     next participant?
25  17119                MS SANTERRE:  The next presentation
                          StenoTran

                             3636

 1     will be done by the Canadian Diversity Network.
 2                                                        1150
 3     PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
 4  17120                MS CLARKE:  Thank you.  Good morning
 5     and again, thank you very much for giving us the
 6     opportunity to appear before the Commission today.
 7  17121                By way of introductions, my name is
 8     Anne Clarke, I am executive director of the Pearson-
 9     Shoyama Institute.  I am also a community development
10     worker within the immigrant and visible minority
11     community, and former president of the first black
12     women's network focused on black women.
13  17122                Some of the network members with us
14     today are Professor Lionel Lumb, who has got a
15     background in journalism and mass communications, and
16     he has been a television producer.
17  17123                We have Dr. Karim, on my far right,
18     who is also with the school of journalism at Carleton
19     University.
20  17124                Amos and Alfons Adetuyi in the back,
21     who are both with Inner City Films and producers.
22  17125                Jennifer David of Television Northern
23     Canada, and Rubin Friedman with the National Capital
24     Alliance on Race Relations, and one other coalition
25     group member who is not with us today.
                          StenoTran

                             3637

 1  17126                A little bit of background about the
 2     group.  The network was formed as a result of a round
 3     table in June dealing with diversity in broadcast
 4     media, hosted by the Pearson-Shoyama Institute in our
 5     role as a national public policy think tank.
 6  17127                Our institute is geared towards
 7     ensuring that a wider cross-section of Canadians have a
 8     say in the development of private and public sector
 9     policy.  Participants at the round table felt that the
10     network was necessary in order to continue the dialogue
11     and have direct input into Canada's communications
12     policy, which in many ways projects Canada's eyes on
13     the world, not just through language, but also imagery.
14  17128                The network is a loosely-knit group
15     and organisations.  Their main purpose is to deal with
16     issues of culture, race, religion, and linguistic
17     diversity that affects the Canadian communication
18     system.
19  17129                This will be done through exchanges
20     of information with other individuals and organisations
21     across Canada, through research.  And certainly the
22     network would like to work very closely with your
23     Commission, industry, labour, and other people to
24     ensure that communications policy reflects the
25     multiracial and multicultural mosaic of Canada.
                          StenoTran

                             3638

 1  17130                And I will pass you on to Professor
 2     Lumb, who will do a presentation for us.
 3  17131                MR. LUMB:  Good morning, and Madam
 4     Chairperson, Commissioners, we are obviously very glad
 5     to have this chance.
 6  17132                We would like to present some
 7     thoughts, concerns, and possible solutions on Canadian
 8     broadcasting and diversity.  And by diversity, of
 9     course, we do not mean variety of programming.  Our
10     concern is to achieve a more faithful reflection of the
11     wonderful diversity of Canadians' experiences,
12     aspirations, and cultural history.
13  17133                We are not seeking something
14     extraordinary.  We only ask that which is already
15     required of television networks and channels in the
16     Broadcasting Act of 1991, to reflect "the multicultural
17     and multiracial nature of Canadian society," and to
18     reflect Aboriginal cultures to the rest of the country.
19  17134                We know it is within your power to
20     make this happen, and we urge you to take action on
21     five points:  the first of these, to ensure that
22     broadcasters develop a pool of writers, producers,
23     performers and managers drawn from right across the
24     Canadian cultural spectrum so that viewers find a fresh
25     and balanced array of programs.
                          StenoTran

                             3639

 1  17135                Two, to develop a research framework
 2     that monitors the reflection of Canadian minorities in
 3     broadcasting.
 4  17136                Three, to develop a framework to
 5     monitor, measure and evaluate the progress of
 6     broadcasters in this regard.
 7  17137                Four, to ensure that broadcasters
 8     understand that their performance and their progress in
 9     meeting this section of Broadcasting Act will face
10     review at the time of licence renewal.
11  17138                And five, to ensure that broadcasters
12     will be required as part of the license process to
13     conduct an assessment of the diversity needs of their
14     market at the time of licence application, licence
15     renewal, or change of ownership -- and that, I think,
16     is becoming a more important part of the game -- and to
17     couple this with a promise of performance that will be
18     measured and evaluated as a licence condition during
19     subsequent reviews.
20  17139                So why do we think these measures are
21     necessary?  And the answer lies in Canadian
22     television's response, or apparent lack of it, in many
23     cases, to section 3 of the Act.
24  17140                Since you began this policy review,
25     many broadcasters and producers appearing here before
                          StenoTran

                             3640

 1     your have voiced variations on a nice-sounding theme,
 2     and that is, we reflect, or want to reflect, Canadians
 3     to Canadians.
 4  17141                The simple fact is that some
 5     Canadians are being reflected a lot, but others hardly
 6     at all.  Millions of adults and children will go to bed
 7     most nights without seeing their lives, their hopes,
 8     and their experiences properly reflected.
 9  17142                Now we are not here to complain and
10     whine about this, we are here to say, what a waste. 
11     What a terrible waste of a glorious opportunity.  The
12     richness and the promise of Canada's diversity is
13     surely not something to ignore, but to celebrate.  Our
14     industries know how to mine the wonderful resources of
15     the land, but broadcasters barely scrape at the richest
16     resource of all:  the diversity of its people.  It is
17     not just wrong, but also sad that many great Canadian
18     stories go untold.
19  17143                When visible minority groups make up
20     30 per cent or more of the population of Canada's major
21     cities, how can public and private broadcasters get
22     away with this?
23  17144                Certainly, the situation has improved
24     from previous decades, when visible minorities were
25     invisible on television screens, and a diversity of
                          StenoTran

                             3641

 1     accents was absent on the airwaves.  But Canadians can
 2     still watch in vain most night a week for a drama in
 3     which a Canadian Aboriginal or a South Asian or a
 4     Chinese Canadian plays a major role.  When minority
 5     actors do appear, they are usually in marginal roles.
 6  17145                Greater gains have been made in news
 7     programming, in which it is no longer remarkable to
 8     find reporters and anchors of various backgrounds.  It
 9     is time the entertainment industry caught up, which
10     leads us to point number one, the diversity talent
11     pool.
12  17146                Borrowing on a line from a famous
13     baseball story -- "if you build it, they will come" --
14     we suggest Canada's broadcasters should apply this to
15     programs -- "if you make them, they will watch."  Large
16     numbers of Canadians have watched "Anne of Green
17     Gables."
18  17147                More recently, "Due South" and
19     "Traders" have their loyal audiences, despite terrific
20     competition from American programming.  In music,
21     literature, and film Canadians are soaring to new
22     heights.  Why not Canadian television?  Sure the talent
23     must exist there too, but it needs nurturing.
24  17148                It may take a while, but if good
25     Canadian programming is out there, audiences will grow. 
                          StenoTran

                             3642

 1     And perhaps the fastest increase would come from
 2     reaching out to the 30 per cent of Canadians for whom
 3     there is now little or no programming -- a reaching out
 4     not only to viewers, but also to writers and performers
 5     to ensure that they enter the mainstream.
 6  17149                In Britain, the BBC created a special
 7     diversity programming unit based in Birmingham, centre
 8     of many cultural and many minority communities, to fill
 9     gaps in its drama and comedy production.
10  17150                Gaps, we say?  Well, it is safe to
11     say that Canadians who watch British dramas and
12     comedies on TV or on PBS are likely to see more Asian
13     and black actors in major roles than they ever will by
14     watching the CBC or Canada's private networks.
15  17151                And that is another missed
16     opportunity.  If Canadian broadcasters tapped into our
17     rich vein of diversity, they too could increase their
18     export markets to countries with similar populations. 
19     A talent pool that builds on the work done by ACTRA to
20     promote minority writers and performers will boost both
21     our domestic and our export markets.
22  17152                Point number two:  Diversity and a
23     research framework.  To expand on what we mean by
24     "research," let us look at the news business.  There is
25     industry research in this area.
                          StenoTran

                             3643

 1  17153                In 1995, a report prepared by
 2     Goldfarb Consultants for the Canadian Daily Newspaper
 3     Association, as it was then called, found that 57 per
 4     cent of participants in focus groups said daily
 5     newspapers helped to reinforce the feeling that visible
 6     minorities are not part of mainstream Canada.  Yet,
 7     Goldfarb also found visible minorities are avid
 8     readers, and form a growing potential market at a time
 9     when daily newspaper readership is declining.
10  17154                The strong message -- grasp this
11     opportunity, serve all of your potential readership,
12     increase your market, and, of course, earn more
13     advertising dollars.  It is a prescription for better
14     and more balanced reporting, and that becomes a
15     prescription for success.
16  17155                An example of a newspaper that heeded
17     the word and reaches out far better than before to its
18     potential readership is the Montreal "Gazette," which
19     worked very hard at introducing and sustaining greater
20     coverage of diversity.
21  17156                Among television stations, the
22     outstanding example is Citytv, possibly unmatched in
23     its range of on-air personalities drawn from many of
24     Toronto's cultural minorities.  One of its
25     personalities, the music video presenter Monika Deol,
                          StenoTran

                             3644

 1     can say with fire and conviction, Wake up -- I am the
 2     mainstream.  Citytv's viewers can see many role models
 3     to emulate any day of the week.
 4  17157                This kind of forward thinking earlier
 5     caused the advertising industry to improve its
 6     reflection of diversity driven by market surveys. 
 7     Diversity is good business.
 8  17158                But the research data that exists in
 9     the area of diversity and broadcasting is incomplete
10     and out of date.  We would ask that the CRTC develop a
11     research and evaluation framework that monitors the
12     reflection of Canadian society in Canadian
13     broadcasting.
14  17159                Point number three:  monitoring
15     diversity.  Also worrisome is that no framework exists
16     to monitor, measure, and evaluate the progress of
17     Canadian broadcasters in implementing the Broadcasting
18     Act's expectations on diversity.  We urge the CRTC to
19     develop such a framework.
20  17160                Point number four:  diversity and
21     licence renewal.  With little or no progress on
22     diversity in broadcasting since the Act came into power
23     seven years ago, we urge the CRTC to exercise its
24     authority in this regard.  Broadcasters must be made to
25     realise that licence renewal will depend on how they
                          StenoTran

                             3645

 1     have met the requirements of the Act.
 2  17161                And finally point five:  diversity
 3     needs of markets.  Not all markets are the same.  One
 4     shakes one's head in disbelief when drama and
 5     entertainment programs fail to reflect the rich
 6     diversity of a market such as Vancouver's.  And do
 7     producers ever venture out onto the streets, visit
 8     schools, shopping malls, restaurants?
 9  17162                That is why we urge the CRTC at the
10     time of licence application, licence renewal, or change
11     of ownership, to do two things.  First, conduct an
12     assessment of the diversity needs of their market; and
13     two, couple this with a promise of performance that
14     will be measured and evaluated as a licence condition
15     during subsequent reviews.
16  17163                We conclude with this oral
17     presentation by asking you, Madam Chairperson and
18     commissioners, to support the obligations enshrined in
19     the Broadcasting Act.  Armed with research and
20     information about the progress of diversity in both
21     programming and the hiring of talent, we urge the CRTC
22     to take the next and logical step.  Every broadcaster
23     who comes before you at the time of licence renewal,
24     change of ownership, or with an application for a new
25     licence must know that the Commission has before it
                          StenoTran

                             3646

 1     data on that organisation's progress in the field of
 2     diversity.  Every broadcaster must know that the
 3     commitment to reflect aboriginal cultures to the rest
 4     of Canada and to reflect the multicultural and
 5     multiracial nature of Canadian society has indeed been
 6     monitored, measured and evaluated.
 7  17164                The Canadian reality embraces a
 8     gloriously simple message:  there are unheard voices
 9     well worth hearing, and there are untold stories well
10     worth telling.  Thank you.
11  17165                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you Ms
12     Clarke, Mr. Lumb.  Commissioner Pennefather.
13  17166                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Good
14     morning.
15  17167                MR. LUMB:  Good morning.
16  17168                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you
17     for that very informative presentation.  You have
18     actually taken a number of ideas from the written
19     submission forward quite a bit, and I have a number of
20     questions which you may have already answered, but I
21     would like to go back over them.
22  17169                But my first question is, you have
23     changed your name to Communications and Diversity
24     Network, correct?  Why?  What is the name change about?
25  17170                MS CLARKE:  It is clearer, and as I
                          StenoTran

                             3647

 1     said earlier, it is a new network and it is continually
 2     evolving and growing.  As you see, we have Inner City
 3     Films from Toronto who are interested in the work of
 4     the network and would like to get involved and are here
 5     with us today.  And it was the decision of the group of
 6     people that communications, which is what we are doing,
 7     makes it certainly more relevant and clearer.
 8  17171                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Well, I
 9     wondering because before I saw that I had written down
10     a quote from page two of your written submission:
11                            "The network agrees with the
12                            Commission that the Canadian
13                            broadcasting system is currently
14                            reaching a very strategic point
15                            in our history because of
16                            globalization and unprecedented
17                            technological progress."
18     And perhaps what the name change is about as well, is
19     what this means for the diversity in Canadian
20     programming, a diversity which you have said is not
21     variety of programming.  But you do say later viewers
22     find a fresh and balanced array of programs as a result
23     of diversity.
24  17172                So I know what you mean, but one does
25     not exclude the other.  In fact, the variety of
                          StenoTran

                             3648

 1     programming in your thesis is only going to happen with
 2     fresh views.
 3  17173                But if we could just start with this
 4     broader picture, what does globalization and
 5     technological progress mean for diversity in Canadian
 6     television?
 7  17174                DR. KARIM:  If I may answer the
 8     question, or at least try to discuss it in a broader
 9     way.  One of the earlier presentations alluded to the
10     fact that religious programming of all sorts can now
11     come into Canada via digital broadcasting systems. 
12     This also has opened up a broad variety of programming
13     for ethno-cultural minorities in Canada.
14  17175                Of course, we have our own digital
15     broadcasting programming as well, Asian television
16     network, Telelatino and French on television.
17  17176                The transglobalization, deregulation,
18     liberalisation are going to make this more intense.
19  17177                Already, south of the border,
20     minority broadcasters have been increasing their
21     programming on digital broadcasting satellites.  I
22     don't know how possible it is for Canadians to receive
23     that kind of programming, but I am sure that they will
24     try because their needs are not being met at the moment
25     in Canada.
                          StenoTran

                             3649

 1  17178                The challenge for us, I guess, is to
 2     look at the market as Mr. Lumb pointed out, assess what
 3     the needs are, and see how the Canadian broadcasting
 4     system can meet this need.  Otherwise, you will have
 5     more and more pizza dishes cropping up on top of roofs
 6     or on the sides of walls, with Canadians basically
 7     looking at more and more American programming or even
 8     programming coming out from other parts of the world
 9     via satellite.
10  17179                Just to give you an example of what
11     is happening overseas, at one point the French
12     government tried to discourage Arabic language
13     broadcasting in France, despite its large minorities
14     who are Arabic-speaking.  Again, they did not provide
15     for much local Arabic programming, either.  The answer
16     of the Arab communities there was to put up pizza
17     dishes, and point them southwards towards northern
18     Africa, towards their countries of origin, from which
19     they began to receive programming almost 24 hours a
20     day.
21  17180                So this is a choice that faces us. 
22     Yes, globalization is going to make borders less
23     significant, as far as broadcasting goes.  We do have a
24     fairly large talent pool, as Professor Lumb pointed
25     out, in Canada, a very diverse talent pool.  But they
                          StenoTran

                             3650

 1     have very few opportunity to perform in front of a
 2     camera.  It is this kind of absence on the broadcasting
 3     network that may create a situation in which more and
 4     more people may turn southwards.
 5  17181                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Thank you. 
 6     I just wanted to table that there is a broad
 7     discussion, here, which was are not ignoring as we look
 8     at more specific points that you raise, and I would
 9     like to turn to a few of those now, although I am sure,
10     we will have to take a little more time to look at the
11     proposed framework that you have sketched out here for
12     us.
13  17182                But in terms of this talent pool,
14     could you summarise for us what you recommend in terms
15     of taking to the airwaves the existing talent pool,
16     which is an important point, and to continue the
17     development of the talent pool.  What are the steps
18     that you recommend we take to do that?
19  17183                DR. KARIM:  I will start off and then
20     hopefully some of my colleagues who are producers of
21     programming may want to add in as well.
22  17184                First of all, there are resources
23     available to producers who seriously want to reflect
24     all Canadians to all Canadians.  ACTRA comes out with a
25     regular publication called "Into the Mainstream."  It
                          StenoTran

                             3651

 1     is a book that contains the pictures as well as lists
 2     the kind of experience of a range of minority
 3     performers. So this resources already exists for
 4     producers.
 5  17185                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I believe
 6     that the rationale behind such a resource is to avoid
 7     the common comments that, I am sorry, no such talent is
 8     available.
 9  17186                DR. KARIM:  Exactly, yes.  And you
10     often hear that.  Secondly, there is almost a knee-jerk
11     response to diversity.  Producers generally have become
12     aware of the lobbying by minorities for greater
13     inclusion over the last ten to 15 years.
14  17187                But the response tends to be knee-
15     jerk in the sense that there is an anecdote about a
16     director on a set producing -- creating a commercial. 
17     And then realises that none of the performers in the ad
18     are non-white.  So the first thing that comes out of
19     his mouth is, quick, get me someone black or oriental
20     so we can basically have a token kind of a portrayal of
21     visible minorities.
22  17188                This is a very creative business, and
23     yet you have such a lack of creativity when it comes to
24     portraying diversity.  Not only are people of non-white
25     backgrounds, Aboriginal people, put in minor roles in
                          StenoTran

                             3652

 1     most dramatic programming, but there is no attempt to
 2     think creatively as to how their stories, how their
 3     aspirations can be integrated into mainstream
 4     programming or their stories told.  There is a wealth
 5     of stories that remain to be told, but you rarely see
 6     these during one of the screens or in the media.
 7  17189                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Well, we
 8     had Linda Schuyler here last week or the week before, I
 9     believe, and certainly she commented that there is no
10     question in her mind that in producing a program like
11     "Riverdale," she would have a great diversity of
12     actors.
13  17190                And so, as you say in your notes in
14     your papers, there certainly is some progress because
15     people are realising what will work with an audience
16     has to have some reflection.
17  17191                Well, if that is the truth, why are
18     we still here talking about the need to move forward? 
19     What is the blockage constantly coming back to us?
20  17192                I am talking about a framework.  And
21     without reading, I am assuming your framework includes
22     the development of talent, research, and action.
23  17193                Let us get to the action part.  When
24     you talk to producers about this issue, when you talk
25     to ACTRA -- who in their recommendations yes, talk
                          StenoTran

                             3653

 1     about a talent pool through ACTRA Works -- but is that
 2     talent pool really accepting and helping actors and
 3     directors of diversity?  Why isn't it mentioned here?
 4                                                        1215
 5  17194                So, are you dealing in a very
 6     concrete and productive way with producer groups, with
 7     the actor groups, with others, to say, "Let's find some
 8     solutions."
 9  17195                DR. KARIM:  I think I will defer to
10     my colleagues who have actually worked in this field.
11  17196                MR. ALFONS ADETUYI:  I will attempt
12     to answer that.  My name is Alfons Adetuyi.  I am a
13     producer with Inner City Films.  Maybe I should just
14     move over so I can see you.
15  17197                I think what we tried to do -- I have
16     been in the business for about 15 years.  We started
17     out producing industrials and in 1992 we produced a
18     one-hour drama.  That was the first drama that was
19     produced, written and directed by people of colour,
20     broadcast in prime time, at least the NFB tell me so as
21     they were doing a study on this.  In 1996/97 we
22     produced 13 one-hour dramas for CBC on prime time.  The
23     series was called "Ekhaya:  A Family Chronicle".  It
24     was the first Canada-South Africa international co-
25     production.
                          StenoTran

                             3654

 1  17198                When I first came into the business
 2     in the early 1980s, we went to a lot of seminars and
 3     studies and a lot of discussions that sounded similar
 4     to this, about where to move and how we would get
 5     minorities on the screen.  I remember at one of those
 6     particular discussions -- Lincoln Alexander was the
 7     Governor-General at the time in Ontario and he said,
 8     "What we need now is just leadership and movement", and
 9     I think it's a lot of what you are saying.  So, I think
10     certainly at Inner City Films what we took that to mean
11     is we just have to do it.
12  17199                One of the things that we did when we
13     made this drama, the first one hour that we did, is I
14     hired a production manager and said, "I would like
15     maybe 50 per cent of the crew to be minorities."  The
16     look was, "Does that exist, 50 per cent of a crew? 
17     Where are you going to get that?"  At least because of
18     the nature of the show, it had about 17, 18 actors, and
19     16 or 17 actors were people of colour.  That was a lot
20     of people to come together and to be on a prime time
21     one-hour drama at once, but the idea was to find these
22     crew members.
23  17200                When I realized what he needed was a
24     prod, "You must get 50 per cent", what he started to do
25     was look at where are these people, look at Ryerson,
                          StenoTran

                             3655

 1     maybe we will have a trainee, but what we discovered
 2     was we not only had people that were possible trainees,
 3     we had people that were available to do the job. 
 4     Because of the nature of our business, which is I
 5     wouldn't say incestuous, but it's who you know and it's
 6     a small business and a small group and usually you hire
 7     your friends or people that you have worked with and
 8     vice versa, I think it's a natural way for businesses
 9     to grow.  It just grows among people who are working
10     together.
11  17201                Within that, there were not people of
12     colour within that circle, so you have to pull them
13     into that circle and you have to make an effort. 
14     Someone had to lay down the rule.  I was a producer at
15     the time and I said, "We must have 50 per cent."  So,
16     there was a mandate set and we did end up with that. 
17     It was great because it was very empowering for those
18     people and they were good people and we made an award-
19     winning program.  It won a few awards across Canada,
20     including The Golden Sheaf Award.
21  17202                I guess why I am saying that is in
22     order to bring these people into the production does
23     not mean you are giving up anything.  It enhanced this
24     production and it went on to win awards because of
25     these people and their involvement.  We did the same
                          StenoTran

                             3656

 1     thing with our drama series.  We had the same mandate. 
 2     It was bigger, of course, with 13 one-hour prime time
 3     dramas, but it was still the same mandate.  I think
 4     what we need are more companies that will take that
 5     responsibility, having that desire to reach out and
 6     involve the wider spectrum of our society in producing
 7     these images.
 8  17203                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I think
 9     you have also put it in your paper that diversity is
10     good business and I gathered one of the themes you are
11     developing is it makes perfect sense and logical
12     business sense to reach to an audience which will
13     respond to a product as opposed to just an approach
14     that says a certain quota system or certain regulations
15     are important.
16  17204                MR. ALFONS ADETUYI:  Definitely. 
17     What is amazing -- I did a documentary, I guess maybe
18     it was 1994 or 1995 called "Visible Minorities in the
19     Media".  "Where is the Colour?  Racial Minorities in
20     the Media" was its full title.  A lot of the studies
21     that have been done since the 1980s were quoted here
22     that indicated that, yes, the U.S. was moving on and
23     realizing the economic benefit of reaching the minority
24     market.  But in Canada for some reason we weren't doing
25     this and I kept trying to understand:  All these facts
                          StenoTran

                             3657

 1     are here, it makes economic sense for these advertisers
 2     to reach these people and to reach us, so what is the
 3     problem?
 4  17205                Off the record I was asking one of
 5     the people, one of the advertising executives, "It's a
 6     puzzle.  I am going around in circles in these
 7     documentaries.  You have to tell me the answer as to
 8     why you are not catering to something that is
 9     economically viable for your clients and yourselves." 
10     His simple answer was, "Old habits die hard."
11  17206                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  I'm sorry,
12     I missed that.
13  17207                MR. ALFONS ADETUYI:  He said, "Old
14     habits die hard."  These are money-losing habits that
15     we have.  Yes, these people are losing money.  They are
16     losing all kinds of things, but it's just an old habit. 
17     That's the hardest thing to fight.
18  17208                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Yes, it
19     sounds like familiar territory, but it doesn't mean
20     that we haven't made progress.  I appreciate the story
21     that you are telling.  It helps us understand what in
22     the day to day is being done in terms of efforts to
23     educate, to position people in those positions where
24     there is a door open, where the choices and decisions
25     are being made, which is part and parcel of an
                          StenoTran

                             3658

 1     employment equity, which I have read through your
 2     papers here.
 3  17209                But I want to get to the component of
 4     your framework, which is regulation.  I believe, Dr.
 5     Karim, you mentioned an era in which deregulation is
 6     constantly coming forward.  In the environment of this
 7     review, we have also had various players coming to tell
 8     us to let market drive the system and yet you say to us
 9     that it's important that we, in the end -- and tell me
10     if I am wrong -- regulate the system so that a licence
11     condition at the time of licence renewal be applied in
12     terms of a promise of performance regarding the
13     assessment of diversity needs.
14  17210                Could you be a little more specific
15     about what you mean by a licence condition,
16     particularly in the environment that we find ourselves
17     in now?  How will that be received and how will that be
18     managed?
19  17211                DR. KARIM:  I will start off and I
20     imagine Professor Lumb might want to say something
21     about this as well.
22  17212                I would like to put this within the
23     framework of public service broadcasting.  There are
24     certain values that the Canadian broadcasting system
25     has held as being fundamental to our approach to
                          StenoTran

                             3659

 1     broadcasting.  Whether they be Canadian content or
 2     developing the Canadian talent pool, et cetera, et
 3     cetera, there has to be a certain strength, certain
 4     pillars that give the system strength that it continues
 5     to exist.
 6  17213                With the changing population of the
 7     country and the lack of reflection of this population,
 8     the terrain has shifted, but what we are asking,
 9     basically, is that these changes be incorporated into
10     the strengths of Canadian broadcasting, of Canadian
11     public service broadcasting, as well as the private
12     sector broadcasting.  We have certain criteria in terms
13     of Canadian content, French language content rules, et
14     cetera, et cetera, and we see the whole issue of
15     diversity as having been resolved at the time when the
16     Broadcasting Act was revised in the late 1980s and when
17     it was established in 1991.
18  17214                However, we don't seem to have moved
19     on since then.  Section 3 states that the Canadian
20     broadcasting system should reflect the multicultural
21     and multiracial diversity of Canada.  However, there is
22     no monitoring of that evaluation, nothing that the
23     broadcasters seem to be bound to show that this is
24     something that should be a facet of Canadian
25     broadcasting as the law of Canada sees it.
                          StenoTran

                             3660

 1  17215                Now, if we would ask for or the CRTC
 2     would ask for some kind of evidence that broadcasters
 3     are attempting to adhere to the stipulation, I don't
 4     think that it's a particularly onerous kind of
 5     regulation.  It fits very much within the basic
 6     regulatory framework of the Canadian broadcasting
 7     system.  In fact, as I said before, it's one of the
 8     strengths of our system.
 9  17216                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Would this
10     be over and above, however, the Employment Equity Act
11     of Canada, which is, of course, for large broadcasters
12     over 60,000, not employees not in our purview at the
13     moment?  Are you talking about a system which would be
14     over and above that in terms of what we directly
15     regulate?
16  17217                DR. KARIM:  I see them as parallel
17     aspects.  Yes, there is the requirement to show
18     employment equity.  On the other hand, our approach to
19     this is also to look at the kind of portrayal that
20     takes place.  A broadcaster may be hiring all kinds of
21     people in front of the camera or behind the camera or
22     in very menial positions, as office cleaners, whatever,
23     and be able to show that they are hiring people of all
24     backgrounds.
25  17218                The issue here also is:  Are these
                          StenoTran

                             3661

 1     people, first of all, being portrayed at all? 
 2     Secondly, how are they being portrayed?  So, this would
 3     be parallel to the employment equity regulations.
 4  17219                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  On the
 5     portrayal -- and I think in your written submission you
 6     propose a task force and other intervenors have also
 7     come forward to propose a task force on visible
 8     minorities, not only representation in the industry,
 9     but portrayal.  What is your comment on the self-
10     regulation process, which is now in place in terms of
11     compliance to stereotyping, et cetera?
12  17220                DR. KARIM:  I was at a conference
13     yesterday, which is part of the OECD hearings on the e-
14     commerce, and the whole issue of self-regulation in
15     that industry came up to do with new media.  There were
16     people basically from community organizations.  NGOs
17     were present at that conference.
18  17221                The consensus largely was that self-
19     regulation largely allows, whether it's the
20     broadcasting industry or the new media industry, to do
21     the minimum possible, if that.  When there isn't an
22     outside body monitoring what is happening with the
23     self-regulation, if the industry is actually carrying
24     out what it is supposed to and if there are no, for
25     lack of a better term, penalties, then there is very
                          StenoTran

                             3662

 1     little compliance or progress in that area.
 2  17222                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Does your
 3     framework include the other side of the picture;
 4     namely, incentives?  You are aware of a number of the
 5     proposals that have come forward at this hearing
 6     regarding Canadian content, increasing amounts of
 7     Canadian content, expenditures on Canadian content, in
 8     addition credits for Canadian content in prime time. 
 9     Do any of these approaches figure into your framework
10     for increased cultural diversity?
11  17223                DR. KARIM:  I would like to pass this
12     on to Professor Lumb.
13  17224                MR. LUMB:  What we have seen in the
14     past, but particularly in the news side of
15     broadcasting, is because of regulations, because of
16     perceived needs and because of market surveys and
17     research, we have seen that people have reacted
18     properly and we have seen a change.  As a former CBC
19     executive producer, it was part of my task to bring in
20     people from various ethnic backgrounds, and I did that. 
21     I brought them in because they were good.  They are
22     successful.  Many have passed on to higher ranking
23     jobs, not the top jobs but higher ranking.
24  17225                I think we can agree that this works. 
25     What I think we don't have, going back to the framework
                          StenoTran

                             3663

 1     idea, what we do not have as yet in the entertainment
 2     side of the television business, we do not yet have a
 3     willingness to appreciate the fact that a sufficient
 4     number of programs simply are not being made.  These
 5     programs are simply not being made.  Certainly
 6     "Riverdale" is new, but it's replacing perhaps
 7     "Degrassi".  In that sense, it's just an exchange.
 8  17226                You can't point to a whole wide
 9     variety of programs coming onstream.  If you look at
10     the British experience -- and I know you have mentioned
11     that you are looking at that quite intensively -- there
12     is a maturity there.  Because they have built up over
13     the years, over two or three decades, a large variety
14     of programming, they can actually do programs in which
15     they can do in-your-face stereotype programming.  They
16     can actually make fun -- communities can actually now
17     make fun of themselves.  They can make comedies, they
18     can make satires.
19  17227                They can take it because they have
20     entered the mainstream and this is what we are trying
21     to say has to happen.  We have about 30 per cent of
22     Canadians, 35 per cent of Canadians who simply do not
23     get reflected.  The image of them usually belongs on
24     the dark side of the news instead of under the bright
25     lights of drama and comedy and entertainment and music. 
                          StenoTran

                             3664

 1     This is where we think that there has to be kind of a
 2     quantum leap.  It will only be brought about by
 3     regulation, we think.
 4  17228                MR. FRIEDMAN:  Could I just add --
 5  17229                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  Only by
 6     regulation?
 7  17230                MR. FRIEDMAN:  Could I just add
 8     something to that in terms of depiction and
 9     stereotyping?  The problem from the point of view of
10     entertainment is partially absence, people not being
11     depicted at all.  The problem in terms of news coverage
12     and public information programming is stereotyping. 
13     People use quick shots, they use shorthand to
14     communicate a message.  When they do that, they tend to
15     appeal to the lowest common denominator understanding
16     of someone's picture of a group.
17  17231                I was watching "CTV News" today and
18     they were talking about -- they had a shot of Lucienne
19     Robillard talking about immigration to Canada and how
20     it was going to be lower this year.  Immediately they
21     went to a street scene.  We don't know what city this
22     was.  It could have been Hong Kong.  You saw a lot of
23     oriental people walking, crossing streets.  We don't
24     know what city this was in.  It could have been
25     Vancouver, but we have no idea where it was.
                          StenoTran

                             3665

 1  17232                If it was Vancouver, how many of the
 2     people on the screen were actually born in Canada? 
 3     Many of them were probably Canadians and yet they were
 4     presented as immigrants.  That's our image of the
 5     immigrant, that somebody who looks oriental is an
 6     immigrant.  That's the kind of thing that we do all the
 7     time.
 8  17233                It's very hard in terms of setting up
 9     an individual complaints mechanism for every such
10     incident you are going to say.  I think really
11     egregious incidents can be handled by a complaints
12     mechanism, but with things like that, it's too onerous
13     to go through a whole complaint just to make this kind
14     of a point.  You can write a letter to the network and
15     then you will get a nice polite response, but we need
16     something more.
17  17234                We need some kind of overall
18     assessment over a period of time to understand what's
19     going on here and we need to give that feedback to the
20     networks themselves.  That has to be done through some
21     kind of formal process.  Regulation is one of the ways
22     to do it.
23  17235                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  One of the
24     ways, because many of you, if not all of you at the
25     table there who have been or still are in production
                          StenoTran

                             3666

 1     itself, in the business of creativity and, as my
 2     colleague Commissioner Cardozo said in earlier
 3     discussion, what inevitably will come up is freedom of
 4     expression, as we realistically do something as regards
 5     the points you have raised.  The process of changing
 6     systemic opinion, if I can put it that way, or systemic
 7     systems is a long one and part and parcel of it has to
 8     do with dealing with the creative community.
 9  17236                So, I raise the issue of incentives
10     in that regard, that in the creative community and in a
11     creative fashion how do you change those opinions?  How
12     do you open up, as we used to say in terms of women's
13     production, the other eye of perspective?
14  17237                MR. FRIEDMAN:  B'Nai Brith Canada
15     operates the Media Human Rights Awards giving
16     recognition to people in broadcasting and hard media
17     for their achievements in the covering of human rights
18     and diversity issues.  So, people get awards.  Is there
19     something that the CRTC can do in terms of giving extra
20     points to people and isn't that some kind of
21     regulation?  It's not a punitive regulation, but it's
22     still a regulation.
23                                                        1225
24  17238                COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:  No, I take
25     your presentation in that regard.  We do have to look
                          StenoTran

                             3667

 1     at specifically what we are doing, but I appreciate a
 2     discussion which assures that that is done in an
 3     overall context that is appropriate to other steps that
 4     are being taken.  Because, as I said earlier, it is of
 5     concern that these issues still come forward.  I think
 6     you have made that very clear.  Others have as well.
 7  17239                I believe that Joan Grant-Cummings
 8     from NAC took us into a discussion of the culture of
 9     equality when my colleague, Mr. McKendry, raised the
10     word "culture" as a component of the objectives of the
11     Broadcast Act.  And that discussion of equality really
12     was about point of view about different experiences and
13     it is, I hope, part of your framework that when it
14     comes down to it that creativity itself will advance
15     the issue.  The creators themselves will have a chance
16     to change things.
17  17240                That completes my questions, Madam
18     Chair.
19  17241                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Commissioner
20     Cardozo.
21  17242                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Thanks, Madam
22     Chair.
23  17243                I was watching TV last night, the new
24     show called "Da Vinci's Inquest," which is on CBC, and
25     I watched it closely to look for diversity of people
                          StenoTran

                             3668

 1     there and there was a reference to an Aboriginal
 2     person, you will be interested to know.  The fact that
 3     the Aboriginal person referred to was a prostitute on
 4     drugs, and I am not kidding, I think goes to what you
 5     are talking about.  So that is some of our new
 6     programming, which some people are very proud about.
 7  17244                I was struck by one of the comments
 8     you made in your opening comments, Professor Lumb,
 9     where you said:
10                            "It is safe to say that
11                            Canadians who watch British
12                            dramas and comedies on TVO and
13                            PBS are likely to see Asian and
14                            Black actors in major roles than
15                            they ever will by watching the
16                            CBC or Canada's private
17                            networks."
18  17245                I guess I hear the comment that Mr.
19     Adetuyi made with regards to old habits die hard and
20     also a comment about BBC having a diversity programming
21     unit.  But I am wondering if you have any other
22     thoughts or whether that sums it up as to why there is
23     this reluctance, seemingly, to reflect diversity, both
24     the cultural and racial diversity, and the Aboriginal
25     diversity in Canadian programming.
                          StenoTran

                             3669

 1  17246                MR. LUMB:  Perhaps I can begin and
 2     then I turn it over to Alfons.
 3  17247                I think, Commissioner Pennefather,
 4     you put your fingers on it, creativity.  People have
 5     it.  People want to exercise it.  They yearn to
 6     exercise it.  And then they don't get an opportunity to
 7     do so.  Not because their proposal, their project,
 8     their stage play, their television production is not a
 9     good idea, necessarily, but because it simply doesn't
10     fit somebody's idea of what the Canadian public,
11     whoever that is, wants to see.
12  17248                I am a little bit more comfortable in
13     the news area because I know it well and we have had
14     lots of examples of that.  The story selection process
15     is something that frustrates a lot of younger
16     journalists, for instance, because they go into
17     newsrooms run by managers -- gatekeepers, we call them
18     in the news business -- with very set viewpoints and it
19     is very difficult to get those ideas to change.
20  17249                It takes a rare and courageous
21     journalist to challenge the system, to continue to
22     produce ideas that are so very good that they cannot be
23     turned down and rejected.  So, inch by inch, little
24     progress is made.
25  17250                I know the same thing happens in the
                          StenoTran

                             3670

 1     documentary world. I am sure the same thing must be
 2     occurring in the entertainment business.  And what I
 3     see as the only possibility for change, and it runs
 4     parallel to the news business where news media have,
 5     for instance -- this is the result of a workshop which
 6     the news media themselves got together with a few
 7     helpers from the academic side or former journalists
 8     like myself, and they have come up with a checklist
 9     which approaches the whole question of diversity from
10     three viewpoints.
11  17251                One is for beat and general
12     reporters.  One is for producers and desk and
13     assignment editors, the gatekeepers.  And the other one
14     is for senior management.  Because, actually, the
15     process has to stop there.  The process has to stop
16     with senior management.  You have to start with the
17     will to get this underway.  Once you have got that,
18     once people have the message at the middle management
19     level that the guys upstairs, and I say "the guys
20     upstairs," because it usually is the guys upstairs,
21     once the guys upstairs have decided that this is good
22     and this is what we should try, or go for this year,
23     even if it is only the flavour of the year, then that
24     trickles down to middle management.  Middle management
25     suddenly gives a larger licence, if you like, to those
                          StenoTran

                             3671

 1     reporters who want to do something different and it
 2     happens to work.
 3  17252                Of course, sustaining it is very
 4     tough.  This is a framework that exists for the news
 5     business drawn up by news media people themselves which
 6     has these areas, including a system for how to sustain
 7     it.  I will make these, of course, available to the
 8     Commission.
 9  17253                It occurs to me that why can't the
10     entertainment industry do something similar.  If a
11     decision is taken either with or with help, a nudge and
12     a prod and a tiny bit of legislation, possibly, or some
13     licence concerns imposed by the CRTC.
14  17254                I well remember what happened a few
15     years ago when the CTV licence came up for renewal
16     about Canadian content and when they realized that the
17     licence renewal was a little on the shaky side,
18     overnight there was a great plan.  Overnight there was
19     a great plan to have a whole lot of new Canadian drama
20     introduced.  This happened.  It's well documented.
21  17255                So regulation and a CRTC spur can
22     actually work.  And I am suggesting that in the
23     entertainment industry today, if there is sufficient
24     awareness on the part of senior management where it all
25     starts, that this is good business.
                          StenoTran

                             3672

 1  17256                Let's unlock a whole new range of
 2     creative minds in this area.  Let's see what else we
 3     can do other than the predicted, the tried or the true
 4     and if we just put it on the air, if we give it half a
 5     chance, maybe it will stick.  Maybe it is like a
 6     vaccination.  It will actually pop and bulge out and be
 7     there and it will work.  It will take, in other words. 
 8     And I am hoping that that is the kind of thing.  Are
 9     you able to deliver that kind of inoculation or
10     vaccination to the industry?  That is what we are
11     asking for.
12  17257                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  We only do
13     painless things.
14  17258                MR. LUMB:  It doesn't have to hurt. 
15     It is just a scratch.
16  17259                MS. CLARKE:  Actually, I can just add
17     to that.  There was an article recently in MacLean's,
18     20th of September, that said that even though Canadian
19     television is changing, the content is still very
20     narrowly based demographically and that is all white
21     and female.
22  17260                Certainly there is nothing wrong with
23     the fact that there are more females participating in
24     the acting profession, and that is good from a feminist
25     point of view, but within a multicultural, multiracial
                          StenoTran

                             3673

 1     society, according to the article, it is not a good
 2     thing.  And this was by Josh Chidli (ph.), the tube's
 3     cult of youth.
 4  17261                And my daughter spends a lot of time
 5     watching television.  She is 15.  She will be in the
 6     arts and she doesn't see herself reflected at all in
 7     the shows that she watches.
 8  17262                DR. KARIM:  We have attempted to
 9     address the issue of freedom of expression and
10     creativity within the proposed framework to monitor and
11     measure and evaluate the cultural diversity clause of
12     the Broadcasting Act.
13  17263                Basically, we would like to bring
14     attention to the fact that most of the producers and
15     the decision-makers are in their 50s, 40s, 30s and grew
16     up in an environment largely where broadcasting
17     textbooks tended to edit out minorities, even
18     Aboriginal people.
19  17264                Perhaps the socialization that takes
20     place at that time -- Well, we know that childhood
21     socialization is important. Perhaps these people just
22     don't see the changes in society, the need to reflect
23     everyone.
24  17265                And this kind of self-censoring,
25     perhaps if you can call it that, is a greater barrier
                          StenoTran

                             3674

 1     to the freedom, personal freedom of expression and
 2     creativity than a mild sort of approach, whether it is
 3     regulatory or whatever, that encourages these same
 4     producers to be inclusive of all people.
 5  17266                This is perhaps something to keep in
 6     mind as to how we ourselves have what Walter Lippman
 7     50, 60 years ago called "the pictures in our minds"
 8     which don't allow us to see our society as it really
 9     is.
10  17267                ALFONS ADETUYI:  I just wanted to add
11     to that.  Your question of why we are not there.
12  17268                On a practical side, we formed an
13     organization called the Black Front Video Network, by
14     the way.  For your information, it has about 250
15     members of racial minorities that are working in the
16     film and television business.
17  17269                I remember leaving one of the
18     meetings and going to CanPro, where the Association of
19     Canadian Broadcasters get together and when I got
20     there, there was a room of, I don't know, a few hundred
21     people.  There were no minorities represented there,
22     except for one person, one other producer that I saw
23     way down at the end of the hall that I made a good
24     friend with for a number of years who was Southeast
25     Asian.
                          StenoTran

                             3675

 1  17270                I remember going there being fired up
 2     from this meeting of the fact that we can make an
 3     impact and the minorities and trying to talk to
 4     broadcasters about programming possibilities.
 5  17271                What I realized is that we are not
 6     even an issue.  I thought there would be some interest. 
 7     We are not an issue at all.  It was very sobering to
 8     realize the running of the Canadian -- You know, it's a
 9     multi-billion dollar production business that was
10     rolling along there and that's a good place to actually
11     witness and see the decision-makers that are involved
12     in the running of the Canadian television and to
13     realize, yes, of course, they don't represent at all
14     any of the minorities in this group.
15  17272                How do I expect them to be sensitive
16     to these issues?  So I think that was one thing.  To
17     realize that to a large extent we are a non-issue. 
18     Maybe we will become an issue.
19  17273                The only time we will actually become
20     an issue, I believe, is if some of these regulations
21     and if some of these recommendations follow through. 
22     Then we become an issue quickly.  But I don't believe
23     we will become an issue.
24                                                        1245
25  17274                The other thing I wanted to mention
                          StenoTran

                             3676

 1     is another reason I think that we are not there is
 2     because of misinformation.  I mean, the broadcasters,
 3     the producers, the showmakers want public opinion, they
 4     want to reach an audience, and they research.  But a
 5     lot of the research, methods of gathering research, the
 6     structure of research, has not really involved an
 7     understanding of racial minorities.  And in order to do
 8     that in a lot of these research and test markets, one
 9     has to piggyback a study like this, as to how do we
10     reach minorities, or what is the impact of this group. 
11     And that costs money.
12  17275                And during certainly the last few
13     years, and certainly during the recession years there
14     was no room for that extra expenditure to try to
15     understand that market.
16  17276                And now there is still fiscal
17     restraint going on in many corporations and downsizing
18     or companies coming together to truly survive in this,
19     you know, multichannel market.  And to ask them to
20     voluntarily, you know, add something else onto their
21     marketing and study research -- where is that money
22     coming from?  Where is that effort coming from?  They
23     are not going to pay for this, you know.  And I think
24     if they don't have to do it they won't do it.
25  17277                I will just cut it there.  I think
                          StenoTran

                             3677

 1     there are ways it could move ahead, but just to answer
 2     your question two ways, I think that we weren't there,
 3     you know, I think those are two ways, definitely.
 4  17278                What I am getting at is, when we
 5     produce 13 one-hour dramas on prime time on CBC -- so
 6     when they ask, well, how did you get there?  How did we
 7     get 13 dramas produced, written, and directed by
 8     African-Canadians pretty well -- one of them lives in
 9     South Africa now.  He is a Canadian and is a graduate
10     of Ryerson, the writer of all 13 of our dramas.
11  17279                So I will let you know how we did it
12     with CBC, because this is the first time in the history
13     of broadcasting it has been done, the first time that a
14     black actor was nominated as a best leading actor in a
15     dramatic series -- not a supporting actor, but best
16     leading actor.  Maybe we got that because the Mountie
17     wasn't there that year, it was his last year.  So we
18     took his place with our best leading actor.
19  17280                And how we got there, is went to CBC
20     with 13 scripts written, that they did not put any
21     development money into.  And those of you that are
22     familiar with production and how that is done.  We
23     realised that the chances were slim of this kind of
24     development going on, so we developed it ourselves.
25  17281                And then it was still just
                          StenoTran

                             3678

 1     overwhelming to think of giving us Thursday night at 8
 2     o'clock to these new producers, 13 one-hour dramas.  I
 3     think it was too hard to swallow, so there was still
 4     talk of this development approach.
 5  17282                So we went to South Africa, and we
 6     got 60 per cent of the money to do this show, which is
 7     a Canadian show as far as, you know, an international
 8     co-production.
 9  17283                So in essence what had happened is
10     South Africa paid 60 per cent of the money for CBC's
11     first minority-produced prime time drama series.  And
12     it is kind of sad in one way.  Sixty per cent of the
13     money for that came from South Africa.
14  17284                Mind you, it was money well-spent in
15     South Africa, because it was the top-rated series in
16     their country.  They have a population very similar to
17     ours, almost 40 million.  It is a little more.  And it
18     became number one, receiving about 3 million viewers,
19     and it was watched all over that country.
20  17285                I mean, we did okay here, as far as
21     critical acclaim, and we have, for what they paid for,
22     a pretty good audience for CBC.  But I am just making
23     that point from, you know, being in the trenches, that
24     is how you get those things on the screen.
25  17286                I guess I benefitted from the
                          StenoTran

                             3679

 1     leverage that all Canadian productions have because of
 2     the rules that are placed now to have Canadian content. 
 3     What I am saying is I still had to bring 60 per cent of
 4     the money from outside this country to get something
 5     on, and I think, I don't know, there are other Canadian
 6     shows that didn't have to do that that got onto our
 7     market.
 8  17287                So I think that we have to look at a
 9     way of encouraging this kind of programming to get done
10     without going to that extent of bringing in 60 per cent
11     from another country.
12  17288                MS. CLARKE:  I suppose the question
13     for us is how can we sell our products as we expand our
14     global market -- and that is Canada's plan -- and are
15     we showing the true culture of the society?  And that
16     is something that everyone has to think about very
17     seriously.  It certainly has to be the political will
18     to do that.
19  17289                And one slight anecdote, last year  I
20     had an opportunity to attend a pre-screening of "L.A.
21     Confidential," I went to this fabulous reception.  As I
22     was entering the door they wondered what I was doing
23     there.  I did get in -- we had an invitation -- and I
24     took my sister-in-law.  And we were the only people --
25     visible minorities in the reception.
                          StenoTran

                             3680

 1  17290                One of the other things, of course,
 2     was the minorities that were there were those that were
 3     serving, the caterers.  They may not necessarily have
 4     been the chefs, but certainly they were part of that
 5     team.
 6  17291                And that's a sad reminder that Canada
 7     has all sorts of different talents from all different
 8     backgrounds going back in our history of Aboriginal
 9     people.
10  17292                MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  To go to Mr.
11     Cardozo's question about why the reluctance.  We are on
12     the front lines as producers, and so we are in the
13     boardrooms of the different broadcasters and the
14     different production companies and distribution
15     companies.
16  17293                And to go back to the series "Ekhaya"
17     that we did, that wasn't just presented to CBC, it was
18     presented to CTV as well, to the head programmer at the
19     time.
20  17294                And I can recall the letter that came
21     back quite vividly.  He said it was a wonderful
22     project, wonderful proposal, "I think it is a great
23     program, but I don't think it is for our audience." 
24     That is the way he worded it.  And so that is something
25     that has always stuck with me, because I don't
                          StenoTran

                             3681

 1     understand what he figured his audience was then, if a
 2     show portrayed people from a visible minority wasn't
 3     part of it.  He loved the drama, he loved the script,
 4     so.
 5  17295                I think it is -- when we go to these
 6     boardrooms, we are the only people of colour in there. 
 7     Obviously, that happens all the time.  And to reinforce
 8     what Anne is saying, sure, the receptionist will be a
 9     person of colour, a lot of the security guards people
10     of colour, and on and on.  But not the decision-makers. 
11     And that is where the key problem lies.
12  17296                How do you change that without
13     putting any teeth into the Broadcasting Act and
14     enforcing it?  I don't know how that happens.  I think
15     it just carries forward and the status quo sits the way
16     it sits.
17  17297                It was funny reading the CBC's
18     licence agreement with the CRTC -- their old one.  Of
19     course, the new one is coming up, which should be
20     interesting.
21  17298                But the old one talks about them
22     fulfilling this part of the Broadcast Act's mandate and
23     their mandate, and in fact they feel that they exceeded
24     portraying visible minorities -- and it was something,
25     seven or eight per cent.  At the time there was only
                          StenoTran

                             3682

 1     about six per cent minorities.
 2  17299                And the CRTC, in fact, in response to
 3     that said, that is great.  They responded as saying the
 4     CBC is doing very well in that area.  But you turn on
 5     the television, and it is obvious that's not the fact,
 6     unless they are considering the people in the
 7     background as the camera pans through that have been
 8     placed there as secondary actors.
 9  17300                So there is a reluctance there,
10     because there just are no decision-makers in those
11     positions, or that surround them and raise the
12     questions when decision are being made, when the
13     pictures and the creator is coming down that, well, let
14     us have this storyline in this particular series, or,
15     let us look at this series that has storylines with
16     different cultural kind of points of view, world views. 
17     If nobody is saying, yes, I think that is interesting.
18     If those people aren't in those decision-making places,
19     it is not going to come up unless the CRTC says that it
20     should come up.  And if it doesn't come up, well then,
21     there will be some ramifications to that.  Yes, I guess
22     that is my point.
23  17301                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Does anyone have
24     any other comments to make?
25  17302                MS DAVID:  I just wanted to point out
                          StenoTran

                             3683

 1     that TVNC we know for a fact from the Aboriginal
 2     programming that we put on, especially for young
 3     people, Aboriginal programming aimed at youth and young
 4     people where they see themselves reflected increases
 5     the amount of people that you are going to end up
 6     seeing in the industry.  Because children who see
 7     themselves on television, who see their culture
 8     reflected back to them, they say, well, maybe
 9     television is for me.  I could be an actor, I could be
10     a producer.
11  17303                But watching mainstream television
12     now, as a child, as a youth, really as anyone, if you
13     don't see yourself reflected, you don't think that is a
14     viable option for you.  I don't see myself there. I
15     don't see why I should pursue that as an option.  So it
16     kind of goes in a circle.  If we get visible minorities
17     and Aboriginal people reflected in mainstream
18     television, then we will get more talent, we will get
19     more people interested in the industry.
20  17304                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Counsel.
21  17305                MS. PATTERSON:  Thank you, Madam
22     Chair.  I had a question about your methodology for
23     your framework to monitor diversity.  The scoring
24     system appears to be focused on dramatic programming. 
25     My question is, is it your intention to focus on drama
                          StenoTran

                             3684

 1     alone, or would it be appropriate to extend your
 2     framework to other genres of programming?
 3  17306                MR. LUMB:  I will answer that.  This
 4     was just given as examples, these various points.  We
 5     would hope that the scoring system would be extended to
 6     news, to drama, to documentaries, et cetera, the whole
 7     range of programming.  Not just entertainment.
 8  17307                MS PATTERSON:  Okay, thank you. 
 9     Thank you, Madam Chair.
10  17308                MR LUMB:  If I may -- sorry, if I may
11     just add, if by drama you also mean comedy, music
12     programs, entertainment programs, children's
13     programming, all of those, okay?
14  17309                MS PATTERSON:  Okay, yes, that
15     answers my question, thank you.
16  17310                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr.
17     Lumb, ladies and gentlemen.
18  17311                We will resume at 2:30.  Nous
19     reprendrons à 2 h 30.
20     --- Short recess at / Courte pause à 1257
21     --- Upon resuming at / Reprise à 1432
22  17312                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Madam Secretary.
23  17313                MS SANTERRE:  Thank you, Madam Chair. 
24     The presentation will be done by the Cultural Human
25     Resources Council/Conseil des ressources humaines du
                          StenoTran

                             3685

 1     secteur culturel.
 2     PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
 3  17314                MR. TABET:  Hello.  Thank you for
 4     having us today.  My name is Jean-Philippe Tabet.  I am
 5     the Executive Director of the Cultural Human Resources
 6     Council and here with me is Sandy Crawley.  Sandy
 7     Crawley is the Chair of the Audio-Visual Committee of
 8     the Cultural Human Resources Council and also the
 9     Executive Director of the Canadian Screen Training
10     Centre.
11  17315                Thank you for providing us with the
12     opportunity to present our comments regarding the
13     Canadian Television Policy Review.  We would like to
14     start briefly with a presentation on where we are at
15     and what is the cultural sector definition, if you
16     want, and then go into what kind of recommendation we
17     could provide you with, this issue that is at stake
18     today.  So, I am going to go over there to make the
19     presentation.
20  17316                Bonjour, et merci de nous recevoir
21     aujourd'hui.  When we are talking about the cultural
22     sector in Canada, we are talking about 670,000
23     Canadians working in our cultural sector.  This sector
24     contributes $30 billion to the gross domestic product,
25     but the most striking thing is the fact that this
                          StenoTran

                             3686

 1     sector has grown much faster and much bigger than any
 2     other sector in Canada.  In fact the latest statistics
 3     show that between 1993 and 1996 the cultural sector
 4     workforce has grown by 12 per cent.
 5  17317                Fifty thousand Canadians work in the
 6     television and production industry and each Canadian
 7     spends nearly 25 hours per week viewing television
 8     programming.  This is something that we need to remind
 9     ourselves of before we are sort of looking at the
10     global picture about television programming and
11     Canadian content.
12  17318                CHRC, the Cultural Human Resources
13     Council, is a not for profit organization, non-
14     governmental.  We were created by the cultural sector
15     and Human Resources Development Canada to sort of
16     promote, initiate and develop strategy direction for
17     human resources development in the cultural sector. 
18     Hence, the content of our brief was about the idea of
19     how to strengthen the human resources development in
20     the area of television, especially in the context of
21     digitalization.  We represent employers and employees,
22     self-employed, educators and training providers and our
23     membership is 220 organizations, associations and
24     individuals across Canada.
25  17319                I will now just mention to you the
                          StenoTran

                             3687

 1     core of our presentation is the needs and priorities
 2     because of the arrival of digital television and the HR
 3     issues in that regard.  For producers and cultural
 4     workers there will be a need for new techniques in
 5     lighting, set design, construction, make-up/costumes;
 6     digital television will be wide-screen, meaning that
 7     the coordination and complexities of composition and
 8     staging must be re-learned; and digital television will
 9     use multi-channel stereo sound, which will require new
10     skills.  So, that will have a direct impact and has
11     already a direct impact within our industry.  What do
12     we do about it?
13  17320                Producers and cultural workers will
14     not only be affected, broadcasters will also be
15     affected.  There was a presentation in that regard made
16     by the different associations.  Digital television
17     permits additional data to be transmitted, which will
18     require additional technical, as well as sales and
19     management skills; digital television allows more than
20     one program to be transmitted by a single broadcaster
21     at a single time, which requires new coordination and
22     presentation skills; and digital television requires
23     different editing and other skills in order to prepare
24     programs for broadcast.  So, as you can see, there is a
25     need to think about all of this when we prepare some
                          StenoTran

                             3688

 1     kind of strategy for meeting that challenge.
 2  17321                So, for distributors there will be
 3     some issues.  Digital television will provide many more
 4     optional extra charge services, for example, requiring
 5     different marketing and technical management skills of
 6     the distribution network and also again different
 7     control and management techniques to ensure quality
 8     control and viewer satisfaction.  So, there is going to
 9     be something we call a "digital pipeline to the home"
10     and the convergence will have impact on all those three
11     major contributors to television programming.
12  17322                There will be a cost to all of that
13     and it has been sort of assessed around $500 million. 
14     There is already a Canadian digital television
15     organization that has been formed to research, test and
16     liaise with all interested parties in that regard. 
17     Increasing Canadian viewership for us means to develop
18     a better skilled workforce to meet emerging needs of
19     programming and invest through partnership between
20     broadcasters, producers and workers in skills
21     development activities.
22  17323                So, it leads to some kind of
23     recommendation that our Council has put together that
24     all federal cultural policies, programs and substantive
25     projects require human resources impact statements
                          StenoTran

                             3689

 1     identifying contributions to strengthening the cultural
 2     workforce.  I hope in the deliberations that you are
 3     going to take that will be a criteria that you may want
 4     to assess.
 5  17324                Secondly, we hope that you will be
 6     able to support some kind of a cultural human resources
 7     development fund which could include youth internship
 8     programs, for example, or another option would be as a
 9     condition of licence some kind of revenue may be put
10     into upgrading human resources in that area.  Another
11     option will be trying to develop some kind of a
12     registered training plan policy to help the self-
13     employed in our industry.
14  17325                I thank you for this quick
15     presentation and I will be open to respond to your
16     questions.  I am sure you have read our brief.  I will
17     pass on the microphone to my colleague, Sandy Crawley.
18  17326                MR. CRAWLEY:  Thank you, Jean-
19     Philippe.
20  17327                I wanted to open up by just
21     suggesting or reminding you that you already have some
22     considerable expertise at the Commission in human
23     resource issues.  I have noticed over the years when I
24     have come here wearing various hats that I have
25     sometimes raised subjects that people have said -- or
                          StenoTran

                             3690

 1     the Commission seemed to feel, "That's not our job",
 2     but that seems to be changing with the next panel
 3     that's coming up on new media.
 4  17328                I just wanted to suggest that the
 5     work, I think the very valuable work, the Commission
 6     has done over the years in cultural diversity and
 7     gender equity issues, which are obviously because of
 8     the public nature of the work that your licensees do,
 9     the sector that you are regulating, are key and I
10     believe that in human resources development in terms of
11     information, training and professional development that
12     you can also play a similar salutary role as you
13     develop the expertise of the Commission and take into
14     consideration some of the questions Jean-Philippe has
15     raised.
16  17329                Just a few points to share with you
17     so that when you are thinking about human resource
18     development in the broadcasting sector and in
19     television you keep these in mind as landmarks.  One of
20     the features, of course -- and we have had some
21     difficulty convincing some of the social scientists
22     that we have worked with in terms of labour market
23     issues -- is that in the creative fields in television
24     broadcasting an over-supply of labour is natural and in
25     fact to be desired.  It's only by an over-supply of
                          StenoTran

                             3691

 1     labour of creative people that you create the real
 2     excellence that eventually gives you a strong industry.
 3  17330                Innovation is extremely important,
 4     but it requires risk.  The producers and artists are
 5     more likely to take risks than broadcasters, even
 6     though they do operate on tighter margins, particularly
 7     artists but producers as well.  So, therefore, we
 8     support the position that suggests that it's not
 9     appropriate to open up the various production funds or
10     the big fund to the broadcasters at this time because
11     we don't believe that they will in fact take the risks
12     that are required to build a strong sector.
13  17331                The other kind of historical context
14     that we have been playing with at our Council is that
15     we recognize -- it's generally recognized by our
16     particular constituency -- that in the earlier
17     development of broadcasting in Canada there was a
18     perhaps appropriate emphasis on building out the
19     distribution system to the detriment perhaps of the
20     production sector.  We realize now that the Commission
21     -- and we have all grown up enough to recognize that
22     production is very key and very important and a lot of
23     emphasis has been put on the necessity of getting
24     resources directed into production and we like to see
25     that happening.  It's a very good thing.
                          StenoTran

                             3692

 1  17332                We are afraid that in a sense human
 2     resources development and training are under that
 3     somewhere and that we are left for table scraps when
 4     the great new wonderful initiatives that are started
 5     sometimes get started.  So, we are just here to urge
 6     you to consider that the grand dreams of some of your
 7     licensees and future licensees are based on the
 8     creative talents being made available to them and that
 9     a certain investment has to be made in developing that
10     talent.
11  17333                The point that I would like to bring
12     -- I always learn something when I come to the
13     Commission and this morning I was here to hear Union
14     des artistes and they jogged my memory that the issue
15     of regional development is extremely key and I hope
16     it's key in your deliberations over this process.  I
17     think the point that Union des artistes was making this
18     morning was that regional production plays an
19     indispensable role in building viewership for Canadian
20     content.
21  17334                It also has always played a
22     tremendously indispensable role in developing talent
23     and that all our sort of national talents and household
24     names and so on one way or another started in the
25     region somewhere and we shouldn't forget that.  We
                          StenoTran

                             3693

 1     should try to encourage the growth of production
 2     facilities and training facilities in the regions.
 3  17335                I think that's about it.  We know
 4     that we have wandered into perhaps some areas that
 5     aren't directly in your purview, but again we find that
 6     sometimes if we drop a stone at the Commission some
 7     ripples will go through.  We know that there are very
 8     committed and talented public servants at Patrimoine
 9     Canada at Human Resources Development Canada and
10     Industry Canada and sometimes we have the perception
11     that the political leadership have all too narrow a
12     view of how we might build this industry.  So, I just
13     wanted to put that on the public record.
14  17336                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr.
15     Crawley, Mr. Tabet.
16  17337                Commissioner Cardozo?
17  17338                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Thank you, Mr.
18     Tabet, Mr. Crawley.
19  17339                Mr. Crawley, I note you said that
20     whenever you come to the Commission you learn something
21     and then followed it up by the example was that you
22     learned from somebody other than the Commission.  I
23     just observe that.
24  17340                Can I just ask a little bit about the
25     Council?  Especially on the first page of your slides
                          StenoTran

                             3694

 1     today where you talked about the cultural sector, who
 2     would you include in that?  What are the industries
 3     that employ the 670,000 you are talking about?
 4  17341                MR. TABET:  The definition of
 5     "cultural sector" was a key element that led to the
 6     creation of the Cultural Human Resources Council. 
 7     Basically, we consider that we have six sub-sectors, if
 8     you want.  One is writing and publishing, the other one
 9     is visual arts and crafts, the third one -- and it's
10     not by order of priority -- audio-visual and live
11     performing arts, heritage, new media and music and
12     sound recording.
13  17342                What we tried to do when we sort of
14     looked at the cultural sector in Canada was to find a
15     way by which we could easily comprehend what is a
16     cultural sector in Canada and you have basically one
17     way of doing it.  There are many ways of doing it, but
18     one way was to look at the occupational classification
19     of occupations, especially group 51 and 52 which talks
20     about mainly the workers involved in the production of
21     works of art.  That can be done very easily.
22  17343                In fact we are, with Stats Canada and
23     Industry Canada and HRDC and the Department of Canadian
24     Heritage and we hope with the CRTC, trying to develop
25     some kind of ideas around those numbers as well because
                          StenoTran

                             3695

 1     the Census is now more available and because we are
 2     trying to sort of use the work that has been done over
 3     the last five years to define the cultural sector in
 4     order to represent it clearly in the statistics.  The
 5     problem we have is we do not yet a clear Stats Canada
 6     definition of the cultural sector and we are trying to
 7     work on it with them.
 8  17344                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  And this 51
 9     and 52 are Stats Can numbers?
10                                                        1450
11  17345                MR. TABET:  Yes, they are the
12     classification of occupation.  But, unfortunately,
13     those numbers are not enough to define the cultural
14     sector.
15  17346                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  I am just glad
16     that they are not our numbers because 7, 8 and 9 is as
17     far as we go in numbers.  I thought maybe there was
18     something I didn't know about it.
19  17347                Now you talked about your fund.  How
20     does that differ from ACTRA works?  Because ACTRA made
21     a presentation a few days ago and they suggested a
22     similar kind of contribution suggestion towards ACTRA
23     Works?
24  17348                MR. CRAWLEY:  ACTRA Works actually
25     was seeded by a program that was begun by the Cultural
                          StenoTran

                             3696

 1     Human Resources Council and that is how it got going
 2     and the Cultural Human Resources Council is not a self
 3     sustaining mechanism in the sense that if someone else
 4     can do the job better than the council, more power to
 5     them.  We are trying to stimulate and be catalytic in
 6     that way.
 7  17349                I think ACTRA is the first of the
 8     talent guilds in our industry, in the broadcasting and
 9     film industry that has actually put a component in its
10     collective agreement, its scale agreement whereby the
11     producer and the artist who is being engaged make a
12     small contribution towards a fund which sustains
13     training activity.  So it is a model that we think can
14     work and, quite clearly, they are arguing in favour of
15     the same model.
16  17350                There are many different ways that
17     you can go at this and, obviously, the different talent
18     guilds will do it in different ways, but I think it is
19     certainly something you should be aware of as an
20     approach so that the industry itself takes on the
21     responsibility.  We have not always got our hands out
22     to the public purse.
23  17351                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  So the
24     impression I get from your material is that the CHRC
25     fund, development fund hasn't begun as yet and that it
                          StenoTran

                             3697

 1     is at the proposal stage?
 2  17352                MR. CRAWLEY:  That is correct.  The
 3     political context, of course, is that there was a
 4     decision made to devolve labour market training to the
 5     provinces. That decision is far from implemented and we
 6     have been doing some work in the cultural sector,
 7     including this one, which showed remarkable results. 
 8     But, unfortunately, those programs have come to a close
 9     because, supposedly, it is provincial responsibility
10     but the provincial governments don't have the ears to
11     hear yet.  So we are in a rather difficult period of
12     transition in that regard.
13  17353                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  And your both
14     talent development and technical development, is it
15     fair to say that ACTRA is probably more talent
16     development based?
17  17354                MR. CRAWLEY:  In terms of the
18     individual guilds, like ACTRA, the Writer's Guild, the
19     Director's Guild, et cetera, obviously they concentrate
20     on the skills that are required for their specific
21     craft.
22  17355                What CHRC has been taking a
23     leadership role has been in trying to develop some
24     curricula and so on that are appropriate across the
25     sector in things like career management because the
                          StenoTran

                             3698

 1     level of self employment in our particular sector, in
 2     fact, in film and television, I think it's even higher
 3     than in some of the other cultural sectors, sub-
 4     sectors.
 5  17356                It is over 50 per cent of the people
 6     are essentially freelancers and some of those people
 7     need guidelines and some thinking about how to manage
 8     their business affairs, their tax business, the various
 9     aspects that go into building a career without any
10     organization to support you.  So that is one of the
11     areas that we are trying to make some progress in.
12  17357                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  So, currently,
13     do you have programs running that are dealing with
14     training?  Are you developing them?
15  17358                MR. TABET:  Well, the answer is, yes,
16     we do have some programs that are actually operating,
17     one in particular which is a youth internship program
18     in science and technology.  And that science and
19     technology youth internship program is based on a
20     partnership with the industry.  The employer invests
21     and the young person gets a first work opportunity.
22  17359                Prior to that, we had an experimental
23     program called the training initiatives program which
24     was of a much wider scope and that is a program that
25     was the initiator for the ACTRA Works program, but that
                          StenoTran

                             3699

 1     program has been discontinued since the devolution of
 2     training to the provinces has been enacted in effect in
 3     many provinces in Canada.  Except Ontario where there
 4     is no agreement between the federal government and the
 5     provincial government at the moment.  Therefore, there
 6     is a sort of void that has been created which presents
 7     a number of dangers for our industry because many
 8     cultural workers and cultural training was happening in
 9     Ontario and is happening in Ontario.
10  17360                So we do have a sort of an urgency
11     here in trying to promote a cultural human resources
12     development fund.
13  17361                But going back to your question in
14     how it relates to what is the issue today, which is the
15     review on the Canadian television policy, what we feel
16     is that there must be an emphasis on human resources
17     development in any decision that you are going to make,
18     because if we want to have in Canada a competitive edge
19     in programming, we need to have people who are able to
20     really be on the cutting edge of creating that cutting
21     edge programming, and we feel that we need to put an
22     emphasis on this issue.
23  17362                MR. CRAWLEY:  Can I try to answer
24     your question, too, Mr. Cardozo?
25  17363                In the area of film and television,
                          StenoTran

                             3700

 1     there is a recognition of this.  I mean this is not an
 2     original idea.  And there is a certain amount of
 3     expenditure on human resource development and training. 
 4     There are some programs that provide some funds.
 5  17364                They are a little disparate right now
 6     and they are spread around.  We have in one province we
 7     have the Film Commission itself offering training.  We
 8     have four federally funded institutions of which the
 9     one that I am just the new head of is one, The Canadian
10     Screening Training Centre, the Canadian Film Centre,
11     l'INICE (ph.) in Montreal, National Screening Institute
12     on the Prairies.
13  17365                There is some good work that has been
14     happening, but there is not a coordinated strategy and
15     we are going to work towards that.  But I think it is
16     important for the Commission to know that, at least
17     from my point of view.  And if someone comes forward to
18     contradict me, then I would be happy to find out there
19     is a coordinated strategy.
20  17366                But in the same way that
21     commissioners played such a key role in taking the
22     various people who were willing to contribute to
23     funding production at an arm's length by setting up the
24     various funds that have happened, I believe something
25     similar could happen in the training area so there
                          StenoTran

                             3701

 1     would be some rationale.  We wouldn't be competing with
 2     each other in markets that are overcrowded, speaking of
 3     markets for training, and ignoring certain markets that
 4     are crying out for training.
 5  17367                So I think there is a policy
 6     development exercise to go through there.  I certainly
 7     intend to participate in one through the telephone
 8     mechanism but I think you should know about it as well.
 9  17368                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:   I am just
10     trying to clarify in my mind the role of the council. 
11     You are not necessarily concerned with giving the
12     courses, but you are interested in seeing the courses
13     happen and some sort of coordination across the board.
14  17369                MR. TABET:  We are very much
15     interested in providing a career and framework for
16     better human resources development strategy in the
17     cultural sector.  This is really what it is all about
18     and we test some case, pilot testing in certain areas,
19     yes.
20  17370                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  In your three
21     recommendations in the last slide, I believe it is,
22     could you just explain that first one a little more? 
23     You are saying all federal cultural policies, programs,
24     et cetera should require human resource impact
25     statements identifying contributions, strengthening the
                          StenoTran

                             3702

 1     cultural work force.  What are you looking for in an
 2     impact statement?
 3  17371                MR. TABET:  It is an analysis about
 4     the needs in human resources development in that area. 
 5     This is quite important because I think there have been
 6     a number of decisions that have been taken from a
 7     government perspective and they do not really take into
 8     account what are the emerging needs and contribution to
 9     human resources development in that area.
10  17372                As I said, in the television
11     industry, for example, we need to assess what would be
12     the sort of cutting edge element in human resources
13     need. For example, we took the issue of digital
14     television and for us there is repercussion and impact
15     in the way we are going to do television in this
16     country, but have we assessed the impact in terms of
17     strengthening our work force?  And that has, according
18     to me, not yet been done.
19  17373                It is beginning.  We have done at the
20     Banff Centre in June a one-day workshop on that
21     particular issue, but there is not yet a sort of
22     coherent strategy for the Canadian film, television
23     industry in that regard.
24  17374                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  In terms of
25     digital training, okay.  With regards to local
                          StenoTran

                             3703

 1     programming, Mr. Crawley, you mentioned the Union des
 2     artistes recommendation today.  What you would like to
 3     see there is local training programs?
 4  17375                MR. CRAWLEY:  It was a general point
 5     that it is rather a broad brush stroke that I used
 6     before in supporting the position that broadcasters
 7     should never have access to production funds. So I was
 8     trying to temper that a little bit with the suggestion
 9     and I would put specialties potentially, specialty
10     licensees in the same category.  That there is a very
11     specific role that they can play in human resource
12     development as well as developing their businesses,
13     which they obviously have to do.
14  17376                And there is all kinds of ways that
15     people can kind of mask things to look like they are
16     regional and they are really just padding their bottom
17     line.  So it is a tricky area, but the Commission is
18     well versed with tricky areas.
19  17377                I would suggest that perhaps if
20     someone imaginatively came forward with a plan that
21     would put more resources in the hands of local
22     production for local distribution, then I personally,
23     and I am just speaking for myself, I haven't consulted
24     with the Council on this, but my perception would be
25     that people might be open to that idea because it would
                          StenoTran

                             3704

 1     stimulate that grass roots talent development, as it
 2     has done in the music industry.
 3  17378                As UDA was pointing out with the
 4     certain pressures that were put on the radio
 5     broadcasting industry by the Commission, we have
 6     developed a tremendous musical talent in this country. 
 7     I think we can do the same thing in television, but we
 8     do have to recognize that it is not all going to happen
 9     in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver.
10                                                        1500
11  17379                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  What is your
12     sense of the role that community programming plays in
13     training?  Because there is a lot of volunteers --
14  17380                MR. CRAWLEY:  Yes, it is quite
15     considerable, and to a certain extent, I think that the
16     cable companies have been fairly responsible. 
17     Recently, in fact, the Canadian Screen Training Centre
18     did a course of training for one of the major cable
19     casters in the country.  And there are obviously many,
20     many people who come into the industry as a result of
21     their initial experience working in television at the
22     community cable channels.  I think it is quite a useful
23     contribution.
24  17381                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  You mentioned,
25     I think, what amounted to sensitivity training around
                          StenoTran

                             3705

 1     issues of gender equity and cultural diversity.  Any
 2     thoughts about what that would involve and who would
 3     hire --
 4  17382                MR. CRAWLEY:  You know, it is
 5     interesting.  I mean, I have been working with the
 6     talent guilds for a lot of my life and so on, and some
 7     of the unions and so on.  And I think that many of them
 8     are really sensitized to these issues.  I think some of
 9     the work that the Commission did really was with the
10     major employers in terms of broadcasters both what was
11     showing up on the screen, and what was happening inside
12     their shops.
13  17383                And I really was just alluding to
14     that as a way of reinforcing that human resources
15     issues are not foreign to the Commission, and that you
16     have every right to look into them, and we would
17     encourage you to do so.
18  17384                I wasn't suggesting that we had a
19     particular role to play in gender and cultural
20     diversity equity.  I think most of the organisations
21     that I am thinking of that are constituents are well
22     ahead in that regard, in fact.
23  17385                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Now, in terms
24     of digital, can you tell us a little bit about the
25     workshop you mentioned in Banff and the kinds of ideas
                          StenoTran

                             3706

 1     you obtained as the kinds of things that have to
 2     happen?  We have been hearing quite a bit about the
 3     costs of digital, generally a sense that the
 4     broadcasting sector has to move there sometime in the
 5     next few years.  What is the portion of the human
 6     resources development part that has to take place
 7     there?
 8  17386                MR. CRAWLEY:  I think we have been
 9     quite brilliant in this country, actually, the
10     formation of this consortium.  If you compare it to
11     what is happening south of the border where they are,
12     you know, trying for outright competition with each
13     other, and everybody wants to sell their own model and
14     beat everyone else to the punch.  The sort of pre-
15     competitive investments that the consortium are
16     prepared to make, I think, is a very good stroke of
17     good thinking on our part.
18  17387                What we did in Banff was an initial
19     discussion with some of the major players from the US,
20     and some of the major players here, and people who had
21     some experience and training for digital -- was to try
22     and figure out where there was a potential problem and
23     where there wasn't.  And in fact, I don't think it is
24     going to be that difficult to adjust to digital
25     television.
                          StenoTran

                             3707

 1  17388                I think, though, that this consortium
 2     can play a key role in perhaps providing some hardware
 3     to help train people on these new techniques, and so
 4     on.  In terms of the lighting design and aspect ratio
 5     and all that stuff, it is essentially copying film,
 6     rather wisely.
 7  17389                So I think people who have film
 8     training are going to adapt very easily.  People who
 9     are trained only in television will have a harder time
10     adjusting to digital television.
11  17390                But I understand that the consortium
12     has formed a relationship with the Centre of Excellence
13     in the country here, and I think that is going to be
14     very good for their primary sort of high-end training. 
15     I think, though, again, in the regions there is work to
16     be done, and from what I understand, and we have been
17     hearing for decades about the low-cost and wonderful
18     efficiency of these new technologies, that it seems to
19     me that some of the technology providers who have a
20     vested interest should be providing some of that for us
21     to disseminate for them and help to train people on
22     their use.  It is obviously going to help their
23     business, anyway.
24  17391                So I think it is a question of
25     coordinating, identifying those business opportunities
                          StenoTran

                             3708

 1     to people that can also serve human resource
 2     development.
 3  17392                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  In the high-
 4     tech sector, places like Nortel and Newbridge, they are
 5     always talking about a real lack of potential
 6     employees.  And you often hear them saying, If I could
 7     find 100 trained people, I would hire them tomorrow. 
 8     Do you see the same thing happening with digital
 9     television?
10  17393                MR. CRAWLEY:  To a certain extent, I
11     think because it is conceived, and it is really going
12     to go this time, it looks like.  It really is conceived
13     as an upgrade of conventional broadcasting.  So I don't
14     think it is going to be quite as daunting a human
15     resource challenge as some of these, you know, magical,
16     new properties that Newbridge is playing with and so
17     on.  I think it is a kind of technical skill.
18  17394                I don't think the technical
19     readjustment for digital television is going to be as
20     great, depending on how many licensees there are.  They
21     probably need some pretty clever engineers.  But I
22     think they are going to be able to find them.  I don't
23     know, because a needs assessment hasn't been done, as
24     Jean-Philippe has said, and I think that is something
25     we have to get on with.  I am sure the consortium will
                          StenoTran

                             3709

 1     want to do that, and I think the Cultural Human
 2     Resources Council will try to help with that as we can.
 3  17395                Well, maybe we should save this -- I
 4     don't know if you are on the new media panel that is
 5     coming up, but I think that we are really going to get
 6     into these issues in the new media area, and it will be
 7     quite interesting.
 8  17396                Digital TV will, in fact -- you might
 9     argue that it is new media if they really use the full
10     capacity of the technology to get interactive and mix
11     different forms of media in the actual creation of
12     programming and advertising and so on, so there is a
13     new media aspect to it.
14  17397                But I conceive of it as really an
15     upgrade of conventional broadcasting, as opposed to
16     some of the --
17  17398                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  So you see it
18     more a matter of training the current workforce in the
19     broadcasting industry, as opposed to training people
20     coming out of school or moving from other areas?
21  17399                MR. CRAWLEY:  No, I wouldn't say
22     that.  I think it would be brilliant of us to train
23     people in advance of their requirements, for a change,
24     instead of always playing catch-up.  This is why it
25     seems to me an appropriate thing to encourage would be
                          StenoTran

                             3710

 1     to get some of the vested interest in technology to
 2     provide some of those technologies so that we can start
 3     to train people for their use before their hit the job
 4     market.
 5  17400                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay.  One of
 6     the issues we have been talking about, as you know, one
 7     of the central issues is Canadian content, and this
 8     discussion about what is Canadian content.
 9  17401                Is it identifiably Canadian in terms
10     of scenes and locales, or is Canadian content about who
11     does it and the people involved.
12  17402                If I would venture a guess, you don't
13     really care what the themes and locales are, you are
14     concerned about the people.
15  17403                MR. CRAWLEY:  I think that would be
16     fair, from the Council's point of view, with this
17     particular hat on.  I think trying to legislate
18     aesthetics is pretty dangerous.
19  17404                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Trying to?
20  17405                MR. CRAWLEY:  Legislate aesthetics is
21     pretty dangerous.  I heard of recent case, just by
22     example, a friend of mine has an extraordinary
23     opportunity to produce a documentary in South Africa
24     with a leading political figure there, with whom he has
25     long-term relationship personally.  And he has been
                          StenoTran

                             3711

 1     offered an opportunity to explore all the family
 2     records, all the old film.  They have everything from
 3     this particular very high-profile politician in South
 4     Africa.
 5  17406                And he is having trouble getting
 6     access to the production fund, because, of course, he
 7     has to be working with an executive producer with a
 8     track record, which he doesn't have, particularly in
 9     that genre.  And his executive producer is coming back
10     to him, saying, well, you know, I can't find a
11     broadcaster.  Maybe if we could put you on the camera
12     and you could be talking to the person so that it would
13     be Canadian and, you know, you are the Canadian.  That
14     seems silly to me.
15  17407                If a Canadian has an opportunity like
16     that, it is something, obviously, that is going to be
17     of interest to Canadians as well as South Africans or
18     elsewhere.  That seems like silly criteria.  Now, that
19     is just anecdotal.  But if that is the kind of thinking
20     that we have set up, then I think it is a bit
21     dangerous.
22  17408                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  What are your
23     thoughts about counting commercials, advertising, and
24     infomercials as Canadian content?
25  17409                MR. CRAWLEY:  Well, I think that if
                          StenoTran

                             3712

 1     we could guarantee that they are produced here, I am in
 2     favour of exploring that idea, personally.
 3  17410                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Exploring it,
 4     but --
 5  17411                MR. CRAWLEY:  Well --
 6  17412                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  This isn't the
 7     time for exploring --
 8  17413                MR. CRAWLEY:  -- we are wearing other
 9     hats, here. I have suggested for a long time that we
10     should have Canadian content regulations for
11     commercials because they are great training ground, to
12     keep it in this context, but they also, you know, make
13     it possible for people to have a life and to make a
14     little bit of money.  And so they are very important
15     that way.
16  17414                I am not pushing any particular model
17     when I said "exploring," because I didn't come here
18     prepared to argue for a particular model.  But I am
19     glad you are talking about it.
20  17415                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Lastly, let me
21     come back to your last slide, and just talk about what
22     you are recommending we should do.  In terms of the
23     second bullet you have got, with regards to the
24     Cultural Human Resources Development Fund -- this has
25     yet to be set up, okay?
                          StenoTran

                             3713

 1  17416                MR. CRAWLEY:  Yes.
 2  17417                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  So the third
 3     recommendation is that: "the CRTC as a condition of
 4     licence require that a contribution of a percentage of
 5     the gross revenues be made to the Canadian Human
 6     Resources Development Fund."  That would happen once
 7     such a fund was set up, and I suppose you would expect
 8     us to in some way bless it, or endorse it, or have some
 9     input as to what it would be doing, and that kind of
10     stuff.
11  17418                And the last point on there, "a
12     registered training plan policy be developed to help
13     the self-employed."  That would come under the Fund?
14  17419                MR. TABET:  It could very well be
15     coming under the fund, yes.
16  17420                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  Okay.  Now,
17     how about if we went a different route, which was to
18     say that a percentage of gross revenues be put towards
19     human resources development, where we would not specify
20     the fund, so that it would open it to ACTRA Works,
21     this, or any other fund?
22  17421                MR. TABET:  That is obviously a very
23     important proposal.  The question for us, and it goes
24     back to what we said, we need a coherent policy here. 
25     The idea of a fund is that it is based on a coherent
                          StenoTran

                             3714

 1     policy.
 2  17422                The type of people of initiative that
 3     we are envisaging are any Canadian initiatives,
 4     basically, that will allow a better cultural workforce
 5     to be developed.
 6  17423                But the idea that there is a coherent
 7     policy that forms the basis of the fund is essential. 
 8     It is not just an issue of putting money towards
 9     something.  It is really trying to build a coherency
10     around all of this.
11  17424                For example, we know very well that
12     the government of Canada is supporting some training
13     school through Telefilm.  But that support has been
14     fought for for a year and half, and it was through that
15     fight that we believe that there is still a need for
16     coherency policy for human resources development.  And
17     the more we are able to attract CRTC to voice that
18     concern, I think the more it will be helpful for our
19     sector to grow.
20  17425                Going back to digital, it is again an
21     issue.  Digitalization has changed the way the many
22     visual artists are working.
23  17426                You talked about the new media.  We
24     all feel that because there are already some of these
25     techniques that are already operational in the
                          StenoTran

                             3715

 1     audiovisual field, that we believe that the transition
 2     will be minimal.  And I agree with that.
 3  17427                However, we may have some surprises. 
 4     Nobody can predict the future.  And what we are trying
 5     to see is to increase the way that Canadians are
 6     relating to television and to their own television. 
 7     And maybe there are forward-thinking strategies that
 8     need to be brought to that aspect.
 9  17428                MR. CRAWLEY:  Can I just add
10     something?  On the fund, I think the reason we are
11     recommending the creation of a fund alludes to my
12     earlier remark about the political pressures of
13     devolving labour market training to the provinces.
14  17429                I think it is generally accepted,
15     even by people who are kind of regional boosters, that
16     you can't build an industry like television, for one,
17     or film in one province in a silo, even if it is
18     Ontario and thinks that the rest of Canada really
19     should follow.
20  17430                You really have to have mobility.  We
21     are too small a market.  You have got to be able to do
22     something coherently, strategically, for a market of 30
23     million people.  You have got to be able to move people
24     around, move the information around, the knowledge.
25  17431                So the concept of the cultural
                          StenoTran

                             3716

 1     development fund is really to try to get the federal
 2     spending power back in our court so that we could do
 3     something that is useful.  Because unfortunately, I
 4     think the ball has been dropped a little bit there.
 5  17432                COMMISSIONER CARDOZO:  That paints a
 6     complicated field for us, but nevertheless clarifies
 7     the issues.  Thanks very much, that covers my
 8     questions.
 9  17433                THE CHAIRPERSON:  How do you explain
10     the growth of the cultural labour force twice as much
11     from '81 to '93 as the general labour force, if that is
12     how I am to read your slide and the schematics that you
13     have attached at three?
14  17434                And secondly, doesn't that work
15     against your desire to have special funds and special
16     efforts for training the cultural labour force?  If it
17     is growing already twice as fast as the ordinary labour
18     force, that is what I would like you to tell me, why
19     this is occurring.
20  17435                Is it because other things are being
21     done that is making it happen, and that perhaps this
22     slide makes you wonder why this particular area needs
23     more attention at the level of labour and training.
24  17436                MR. TABET:  Growth -- I think it
25     could be easily explained by demographics, and the fact
                          StenoTran

                             3717

 1     that a lot of people are requiring more entertainment
 2     value for their time.
 3  17437                Also, the fact that the older
 4     generation, which has grown old over the years, is
 5     probably more attuned to be more at ease with cultural
 6     products.
 7  17438                And thirdly, the value of our
 8     cultural product in Canada is probably of a very high
 9     quality.
10  17439                Now, that is the first question.
11  17440                The second question is, Why do we
12     need some kind of attention to human resources in an
13     area where there is a growth?  Well, I think -- and I
14     will go back to that again -- it is a fact that there
15     are emerging and strategic needs that needs to be
16     addressed.  It is not enough to just see a growth, but
17     trying to assess where this is going to go in the next
18     century.
19  17441                And we have seen, for example, that
20     new technology has changed the condition of work of 70
21     per cent of cultural workers in Canada, but only 30 per
22     cent of them have been able to really get the training
23     they need.
24  17442                So why is that?  It is because very
25     often they are self-employed.  Their condition of work
                          StenoTran

                             3718

 1     does not allow them to upgrade their skills on an easy
 2     basis.  When you are an employee, you have the
 3     opportunity to have either your employer to pay for
 4     your skills upgrading, or to have the Employment
 5     Insurance Act to be able to give you some training and
 6     skills upgrading opportunities.
 7  17443                But when you are not an employee,
 8     when you are self-employed, therefore it becomes very
 9     difficult for you to access those types of upgradings.
10  17444                So we are seeing that more works and
11     works is created and needed.
12  17445                And in the film industry it is very
13     true, for example, in Nova Scotia, the growth of the
14     film industry has been obvious, and at the same time it
15     has been obvious that the technical skills as well as
16     creative skills needed to be upgraded.  As a matter of
17     fact, ACTRA Works deliver workshops in Nova Scotia.
18  17446                So always we have to take into
19     consideration that growth, but we need to help to shape
20     that growth in order to respond to the emerging need. 
21     And this is what is showing more and more.
22                                                        1520
23  17447                MR. CRAWLEY:  I would just like to
24     give sort of a personal response to that very good
25     question.  I think part of that growth is that through
                          StenoTran

                             3719

 1     that period that is measured in the slide, it became
 2     barely possible to actually make a living as an artist
 3     in this country, so more people were attracted to do
 4     it.
 5  17448                As someone who has worked that way
 6     all my life until just recently, it really is a
 7     question of -- if you look at the economics of it,
 8     artists in this country have always subsidized the
 9     industries in which they work.  They work for very
10     little money.  So, it's just enough to live.  It's a
11     delightful way to live, to live a creative life, if you
12     can take the risks.  So, I think you saw the growth
13     because we reached a certain point.
14  17449                Analog might be the television
15     production industry in this country, which is doing
16     quite well, thank you very much, but then people who
17     are interested in public policy or just taxpayers say,
18     "Why do we need to help them any more?"  I think you
19     know quite well the fragility that exists there.  You
20     build a structure out, but it's dependent on certain
21     ongoing factors and if you don't have them, you know,
22     the whole thing can collapse.  So, it is great to see
23     the growth, but it doesn't mean that we don't need to
24     do some wise spending to see the growth continue.
25  17450                THE CHAIRPERSON:  In constructing
                          StenoTran

                             3720

 1     your graph at page 3 of your slides, what did you put
 2     in the artistic, literary and recreation or when you
 3     talk about a 32 per cent growth between 1981 and 1993
 4     in the cultural labour force -- just very briefly,
 5     would you put in there the engineers that look at
 6     developing greater capacity?  Whether it be HDTV or
 7     digital radio, would you put the engineers in there or
 8     just those who create content, so to speak, rather than
 9     the means of distributing the content?
10  17451                M. TABET:  Je serais très content de
11     vous donner le détail de ces études... et on est en
12     train de les mettre à jour, mais votre question me fait
13     revenir à ce que je disais au début:  Ce sont les
14     groupes occupationnels 51 et 52 de la classification
15     des occupations dans leur ancienne version, car ça a
16     été changé en 1990.  Alors ça n'incluait pas les
17     ingénieurs...
18  17452                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  C'était Statistiques
19     Canada?
20  17453                M. TABET:  Oui, de Développement des
21     ressources humaines Canada, d'Emploi et Immigration. 
22     Ça n'incluait pas les ingénieurs mais ça incluait les
23     producteurs, les techniciens dans le domaine du film,
24     et je pense aussi dans le domaine des
25     télécommunications, je crois.  Il faudrait que je
                          StenoTran

                             3721

 1     vérifie et je serais content de vous donner le détail.
 2     Mais ça n'incluait pas les ingénieurs, non.
 3  17454                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Mais si ça incluait
 4     les gens dans les télécommunications, ça incluait des
 5     gens qui n'avaient rien à faire avec la création de
 6     contenu mais qui étaient surtout occupés à la
 7     distribution?
 8  17455                M. TABET:  Je pense que ça impliquait
 9     les producteurs.
10  17456                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Ah, oui.  Alors au
11     moins on essayait de regrouper le domaine vraiment
12     culturel...
13  17457                M. TABET:  C'est ça.
14  17458                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  ... et de ne pas
15     inclure ceux qui... mais évidemment ça inclut des gens
16     qui sont à la périphérie du contenu mais qui sont quand
17     même...
18  17459                M. TABET:  À ma connaissance.
19  17460                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Oui, les techniciens
20     sont quand même impliqués de très près dans la... ça va
21     être une question assez importante, je suppose, quand
22     on regardera les nouveaux médias parce qu'à ce moment-
23     là il y a une grande proportion qui est plutôt des
24     communications personnalisées plutôt que qui visent à
25     véhiculer un produit culturel.
                          StenoTran

                             3722

 1  17461                M. TABET:  Ce que je puis dire, c'est
 2     que, d'après les études qu'on a faites sur les besoins
 3     dans les nouveaux médias, l'industrie des nouveaux
 4     médias nous dit qu'elle a besoin de talents créatifs,
 5     et c'est quelque chose qui est extrêmement important
 6     pour la croissance de cette industrie et pour notre
 7     pays aussi.
 8  17462                Dans la mesure où le Canada va se
 9     numériser et l'industrie de la télévision va se
10     numériser, quelle va être la part de ces créateurs dans
11     cet environnement?  Et c'est une des questions que nous
12     posons dans notre mémoire et c'est une des raisons
13     aussi pour laquelle on insiste pour que la notion de
14     développement des ressources humaines, d'accroissement
15     des compétences, pas seulement, M. Cardozo, pour ceux
16     qui sont dans l'industrie déjà présentement mais aussi
17     pour des jeunes, qui constituent une grosse portion de
18     ceux qui travaillent dans les nouveaux médias, puissent
19     être intégrés aussi au secteur de la télévision.
20  17463                Ça, c'est quelque chose qu'on devrait
21     vérifier, qu'on devrait tester, et c'est pour ça qu'on
22     pense qu'il devrait y avoir une stratégie cohérente où 
23     producteurs, câblodistributeurs, travailleurs
24     pourraient participer.
25  17464                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Ce serait tous ces
                          StenoTran

                             3723

 1     jeunes qui vont créer des produits pour nous, les
 2     vieillards, qui consommons beaucoup de produits
 3     culturels.
 4  17465                M. TABET:  Je crois qu'ils en
 5     consomment aussi beaucoup pour eux, et ça, c'est
 6     quelque chose dont on n'a pas assez parlé pour le
 7     développement de la télévision canadienne.
 8  17466                Les jeunes regardent de moins en
 9     moins la télévision et de moins en moins la télévision
10     canadienne.  Je pense que si on essayait de se pencher
11     sur la manière dont on peut intéresser le fabricant de
12     contenu et l'intégrer dans la programmation, ça devient
13     quelque chose qui permet peut-être de redonner une
14     chance à la télévision canadienne de rejoindre un
15     public qu'elle a un petit peu aliéné, on pourrait dire.
16  17467                LA PRÉSIDENTE:  Merci.
17  17468                Conseiller juridique.
18  17469                MS PATTERSON:  Thank you, Madam
19     Chair, but my questions have been answered.
20  17470                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you very
21     much; merci beaucoup.
22  17471                Nous allons prendre une pause de cinq
23     minutes en changeant de panel.
24     --- Short recess at / Courte pause à 1526
25     --- Upon resuming at / Reprise à 1530
                          StenoTran

                             3724

 1  17472                THE CHAIRPERSON:  We are back.
 2  17473                Madam Secretary, please.
 3  17474                MS SANTERRE:  Thank you, Madam Chair.
 4  17475                I would like now to invite the next
 5     participant, the War Amputations of Canada/Les amputés
 6     de guerre du Canada.  You may commence now.
 7     PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
 8  17476                MR. CHADDERTON:  Madam Chair, ladies
 9     and gentlemen, as everyone says, it is a great
10     privilege.  This is my third appearance before the CRTC
11     and I always find them just fascinating.
12  17477                My name is Cliff Chadderton, the
13     Chief Executive Officer of the War Amputations of
14     Canada.  I would ask my associates to introduce
15     themselves and explain a little about what they do.
16  17478                Raquel?
17  17479                MS CHISHOLM:  Good afternoon.  My
18     name is Raquel Chisholm.  My title is Director of
19     Electronic Media Relations with the War Amputations of
20     Canada, and the key word is "Relations".  It's my job
21     and my staff's job to build relationships with the
22     broadcast industry throughout Canada and, in doing so,
23     we have met personally with probably 100 community
24     programmers, the program directors of community
25     channels.
                          StenoTran

                             3725

 1  17480                We meet with the promotions people in
 2     television stations to discuss our public service
 3     announcements, we meet with specialty channels and try
 4     to learn as much as we can about them and how we can
 5     promote our video material to them.  We have also
 6     discussed our video promotions with educational
 7     networks and so on.  So, we deal with basically the
 8     broadcast industry right across the country.
 9  17481                MR. CHADDERTON:  Isabelle?
10  17482                Mme DUGRÉ:  Bonjour, mon nom est
11     Isabelle Dugré.  Je suis directrice de la Division des
12     relations avec les médias électroniques pour le Québec;
13     donc j'ai sensiblement la même position que Raquel
14     mais, moi, pour le Québec.  Ma tâche aussi consiste à
15     rencontrer personnellement les responsables de la
16     programmation des télévisions communautaires et aussi
17     des stations de télévision en vue, évidemment, de
18     promouvoir les vidéos que nous produisons.
19  17483                Moi, ça fait cinq ans que je suis
20     pour l'Association et donc, moi aussi, j'ai visité
21     plusieurs stations à travers le Québec, comme Raquel.
22  17484                MR. CHADDERTON:  Thank you.  I think,
23     as you can see, although I do some of the work, I have
24     brought with me the people who are really in the
25     trenches.  I think that the work they had done in
                          StenoTran

                             3726

 1     recent years in developing relations with community
 2     channels would be of interest to the CRTC.
 3  17485                I did prepare a brief and I will make
 4     some comments from it, but, firstly, I think it would
 5     be easier if I just, off the cuff, spoke a bit about
 6     what the War Amps do and just how important community
 7     channels and television generally is to the work that
 8     we do.  I think in a sense we are probably unique in
 9     looking at the people and organizations which have
10     appeared before you.  We certainly are producers and we
11     certainly represent some constituencies I would like to
12     talk about.
13  17486                We have, in the past 15 to 20 years,
14     been able to develop within our own organization what I
15     consider to be quite a respectable production house. 
16     That gives us an opportunity to produce videos which,
17     in turn, are really the basic ingredients of some of
18     the programs which the War Amputations of Canada
19     handles, one of them, for example, being our Champ
20     Program for child amputees and tied in with that is the
21     Playsafe Program, a safety program.  Another program is
22     Never Again, which really translated means no more war,
23     and with that, of course, we develop videos which deal
24     with our military heritage.
25  17487                I would mention that we have had
                          StenoTran

                             3727

 1     experts come into our edit suites.  We have two avid
 2     edit suites now.  We have two first-class editors and I
 3     think the material we are able to produce is certainly
 4     of broadcast standard, if not perhaps a little better.
 5  17488                On the area of financing, we require
 6     no financing whatsoever from any source.  We have had
 7     it offered to us, we don't take it.  All of the
 8     productions that we handle are all financed by
 9     corporate donors and I want to speak a little bit about
10     that later because I realize that many of the people
11     appearing here are speaking about financial assistance
12     from government or financial assistance from the
13     industry or from other sources.
14  17489                We have found that if you have the
15     right idea and you can go to the corporate sector, it
16     is really not too difficult to get them to put up the
17     kind of money that we need.  I must say also that
18     because we are a registered charity, we cannot spend
19     and do not spend funds that are donated to our
20     organization through our key tag service and that type
21     of thing.  So, I think that's rather interesting to
22     bring that out.
23  17490                With regard to the communities,
24     basically we deal with community channels, although we
25     do deal with some regular television channels, but we
                          StenoTran

                             3728

 1     have had no difficulty in speaking with the community
 2     channels and having them accept two of our
 3     constituencies as being part of the community.  I know
 4     the general feeling is a community channel talks about,
 5     for example, the Ottawa Lynx baseball coverage or the
 6     Ottawa City Council or metro council, that type of
 7     thing, but if you look at, for example, our military
 8     heritage, in my mind it would be very difficult for a
 9     programmer working with a community channel to develop
10     a very accurate, if you like, portrayal of our military
11     heritage.  It's a very tricky area and I will explain a
12     little bit about that later.
13  17491                The second constituency we have is
14     the disabled, particularly one group of disabled --
15     that is amputees, child amputees in particular -- and
16     here again it takes a certain amount of expertise. 
17     Therefore, we have in production right now, for
18     example, a film called "In Flanders Fields".  It will
19     be based on the 80th anniversary of the end of World
20     War I.  I would really defy anybody to write the script
21     and do the narrative for one hour of what really
22     happened in World War I unless they have a lot of
23     knowledge on that subject.
24  17492                That's why I think the community
25     channels have said yes, "If it comes down the pike from
                          StenoTran

                             3729

 1     the War Amps, we know that the integrity of the film is
 2     there."  Exactly the same thing happens, ladies and
 3     gentlemen, with regard to the portrayal of the
 4     disabled.  It's a field that is fraught with danger. 
 5     For example, how do you ask a young girl -- and I might
 6     mention that both of these young ladies with me today
 7     are both graduates from our Champ Program.  They are
 8     both amputees.
 9  17493                I wouldn't even dare to suggest how a
10     programmer, without some knowledge, would get into
11     asking intricate questions of either of these young
12     ladies about how their lives are lived without having
13     some basic knowledge.  That's why I believe that the
14     productions, which the War Amputations of Canada,
15     particularly through our Champ Program, have been able
16     to do, have been acceptable to this disabled community. 
17     Then, of course, we have tied it in, as I said earlier,
18     to our Playsafe Program.
19  17494                I will mention very quickly something
20     about PSAs in a minute, but if you see a public service
21     announcement on television -- and we have just finished
22     one now, which will be on Grey Cup day, of a young lad
23     tossing around a football with the Regina Roughriders. 
24     If you see that, I think you have to understand that in
25     order to produce that, there were discussions with the
                          StenoTran

                             3730

 1     youngster, discussions with the youngster's
 2     counsellors, discussions with the family, and it all
 3     ties together.  Then you get to the Regina Roughriders
 4     and you say, "This is how we are going to present
 5     this."
 6  17495                I think you fully understand that
 7     there are so many potholes that you can step in in
 8     doing just one 30 second commercial, but we have been
 9     able to do it and I think with sort of some success.
10                                                        1540
11  17496                I might also add that the War
12     Amputations of Canada, we do produce in-house our 30-
13     second spots, and we have them on television but we do
14     not produce spots which are asking for money, never.
15  17497                Those spots are all part of our
16     program.  It talks about Play Safe or it talks about
17     Never Again or it talks about the 80th Anniversary of
18     the end of World War I, that type of thing.
19  17498                Those are our programs, and I think
20     we have been very successful in producing the kind of
21     television PSAs and spots which do in fact get on the
22     air and you get considerable exposure, if you like.
23  17499                On the question of how do you judge
24     whether the productions that we produce are any good. 
25     Well, firstly, we get a lot of feedback.  We have four
                          StenoTran

                             3731

 1     1-800 lines and if people don't like them, they soon
 2     tell you.
 3  17500                We get feedback from the industry.
 4  17501                Another way is we have distributed
 5     these and I will just quickly mention them.  One of
 6     them is the list of awards from various international
 7     film festivals going back probably no more than --
 8     Let's see, we started with John McDermott.  That would
 9     be in about a year.  And those are the awards that we
10     have won in the English festivals.  And we have also
11     been rather successful, all international awards, world
12     fests, Charleston.  QUESTA awards, New York.  These are
13     productions done in the French language.
14  17502                And we are also very proud of the
15     fact that everything we do, as much as we can, is done
16     in both official languages.
17  17503                What we are expressing to the CRTC
18     today might be said as a fear.  We are just a little
19     bit afraid that regulations are not tight enough and/or
20     more regulations could come down the pike which would
21     free, for example, community channels from having to
22     put too much on the air by way of public service,
23     whether it is public service announcements, but I am
24     talking more about the kind of films we can do.
25  17504                So we will be asking you to take a
                          StenoTran

                             3732

 1     look at whether by regulation you could produce a
 2     guideline which would really give some protection to
 3     organizations such as ours.
 4  17505                Now we all know about multiple
 5     channels.  I, for example, subscribed when I was in the
 6     States last winter to Direct TV and I just shook my
 7     head.
 8  17506                But then I found that of the 262
 9     channels, or whatever I could get on Direct TV, there
10     weren't very many of them that would ever show War Amps
11     films.  They are very selective about television
12     movies, women's programs, golf or what have you.  I
13     didn't see anything in there that would be particularly
14     adaptable to the kind of message, if you like, that we
15     feel that we have to get across in regard to our
16     constituencies.  And I will just repeat them again -
17     military heritage and, of course, the disabled.
18  17507                With regard to the films that we do
19     produce, the blue guide, and you have a copy of that,
20     that lists the productions over the years.  And I must
21     say I was surprised.  We keep putting this together and
22     we keep updating it, but I was surprised that we have
23     done almost 50 productions in perhaps the last 15 or 20
24     years.
25  17508                And we have covered areas that
                          StenoTran

                             3733

 1     Canadians would never say anything about it.  For
 2     example, Korea.  Who knows anything about the war in
 3     Korea?  But we did a film about it.  We did a film
 4     about the Battle of the Shell (ph.).  These kinds of
 5     little known things but we are just doing one right now
 6     about the war in Italy.
 7  17509                The red brochure, that is the French
 8     version of the films that we do.  And this brochure,
 9     this lists 21 films that we have done on military
10     heritage.
11  17510                Perhaps it is time to tell you a bit
12     of a story which I think would interest you.  When
13     Steven Spielberg's film came out on "Saving Private
14     Ryan," we had to put extra people answering our 1-800
15     telephones to answer complaints from veterans and from
16     children of veterans saying, "My God, 'Saving Private
17     Ryan,' it tells a story of what the US forces did. 
18     Where were the Canadians?"
19  17511                And because we have the footage and
20     because we have the capability, there were two films
21     not listed here.  One of them is called "D-Day, The
22     Canadian Assault Forces," and the other one is called
23     "Operation Charmwood," which was about the capture of
24     Cannes.  How successful were they?
25  17512                Raquel's organization, in her office,
                          StenoTran

                             3734

 1     she puts out an information sheet to community
 2     channels.  She says this is the film.  This is what it
 3     is about.  If you would like a copy to put on the air,
 4     let us know.
 5  17513                I think at last count there were more
 6     than, I think 105 or 106 community channels had asked
 7     for and presumably had shown on the air the first film,
 8     which was a kind of a response or a rebuttal to this
 9     "Saving Private Ryan."
10  17514                Then the phones didn't stop because
11     there is a -- I don't know if you have seen "Private
12     Ryan," but there is a crack in there that bothers all
13     Canadian veterans.  Tom Hanks is talking to Ted Danson
14     and it comes out this way.  "Well, where is
15     Montgomery?"  And the answer is, "Well, he is dragging
16     his heels."  Well, of course, any military historian,
17     let alone any veteran who was there, like I was, that
18     gets the dander up.
19  17515                So we did another film saying this is
20     what Montgomery was doing.  While they were saving
21     Private Ryan, we were trying to take Cannes.  And we
22     did a one-hour film on that and, again, we have had
23     something like 65 or 70 community channels have asked
24     for that.
25  17516                So I think that, Madam Chair and
                          StenoTran

                             3735

 1     Commissioners, I think that there is a need out there
 2     for the kind of thing that we can do.
 3  17517                Just referring very quickly to one or
 4     two of the points in my written brief, I think I have
 5     covered most of them.  I think our main, if you like,
 6     submission or what is behind what we are trying to say
 7     is that there is no point in getting corporations to
 8     put up the money and spending time and energy to do
 9     these films unless we can get some access.
10  17518                We have been, I thought, very
11     successful, I still think, very successful in getting
12     access, mostly through, well, Alberta government --
13     What do they call the system again?
14  17519                MS. CHISHOLM:  Access.
15  17520                MR. CHADDERTON:  Access in Alberta
16     have been very good, but it's mostly access through
17     community channels, but we are beginning to see,
18     particularly through Shaw, an idea that, no, they don't
19     have to do this any more. They can go use the time that
20     they were using to put our films on, and films like
21     ours, they can use that as a marketing tool.
22  17521                And I am wondering if on a regulatory
23     basis there isn't something that the CRTC could do
24     about that.
25  17522                What I call the gap between the so-
                          StenoTran

                             3736

 1     called free broadcasters and those that are supported
 2     by advertisers seems to be closing in.
 3  17523                There was a time when we could pretty
 4     well guarantee that if we did a pretty decent film,
 5     whether it was, say, on Play Safe, a Play Safe film,
 6     pretty well guarantee that it was going to get used. 
 7     Right now, we are not too sure.
 8  17524                So far as the regular channels are
 9     concerned, I must get something off my chest.  They
10     love to take our footage when they are doing a news
11     broadcast and they will use it.
12                                                        1550
13  17525                They won't give us any credit -- we
14     don't care about that.  But to go to the regular TV
15     channels and say, Look, this is the story which
16     involves the Regina Rifles on D-Day, and go to a
17     television station in Regina -- forget about it.  I
18     mean, they are not interested.  They don't have the
19     time.
20  17526                If you take it to, let us say -- and
21     I have had this experience, so I can talk about it --
22     take it to CTV, and they say, well, we would have to
23     sell the advertising first, Cliff.  And so we sit there
24     and we say, well, I mean, we want to get this filmed,
25     but what do we mean to sell the advertising?  Well, you
                          StenoTran

                             3737

 1     and I know what we mean.  It is a commercial venture,
 2     and I guess our films are really not suitable.  They
 3     don't think they can sell the advertising on them.
 4  17527                So there is this gap that is closing
 5     in.  But we really have to depend on what we call the
 6     free broadcasters.
 7  17528                I think finally we are looking for --
 8     and I did hear the presentation from Rogers -- we are
 9     looking for a definition of community.  And I heard
10     some of the commissioners asking for that same
11     definition.  And it runs all the way from, yes, we
12     cover the municipal council.  We know that is
13     community.
14  17529                But there is this wider community of
15     veterans, or community of the disabled, and in what way
16     can they possibly be served?
17  17530                I think they can be served by
18     organisations such as ours which are prepared, free of
19     charge, Canadian content, broadcast quality or better
20     -- we are prepared to do those and get them out there.
21  17531                But if the answer is, well, we don't
22     have time to put those on, then I think there must be
23     something wrong.  And the reason I would say that is
24     that we read a lot about the kind of -- I will call it
25     junk, and some people might not like it, but the kind
                          StenoTran

                             3738

 1     of programming that is there.
 2  17532                Then we take a look at the kind of
 3     programming we do.  And if we hadn't won a lot of
 4     awards, if we hadn't gone to the length of hiring first
 5     class editors and that type of thing, then I would say
 6     we have no place before this hearing.  But we do that. 
 7     We have produced very good material.
 8  17533                And you just have to look at the
 9     public interest today, for example -- and I don't want
10     to be pegged as a dinosaur -- take the public today in
11     connection with the merchant seamen.  I don't know if
12     you read last night's paper. I don't know if you read
13     the "Sun" this morning, but that is a big public issue. 
14     And we have already done a program indicating what
15     benefits were available to the merchant seamen.  And I
16     would say to Madam Chair and to you commissioners, who
17     else can do that?  Who else can do a story of the
18     veterans' charter showing what the veterans got from
19     World War II and what the merchant seamen didn't get? 
20     And that is in the public domain today.  That is a big
21     issue.
22  17534                I wrote a letter to the prime
23     minister yesterday.  He may or may not read it, but
24     some people in his office will.  And these issues, such
25     as Hong Kong veterans, they are public issues.  And who
                          StenoTran

                             3739

 1     else can produce the information on them, except those
 2     of us who work in this field?
 3  17535                So I think that the type of thing we
 4     are doing is very much in the public interest, and I
 5     think we have to have a way to get that out.
 6  17536                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Mr. Chadderton, it
 7     has been indicated to me that you have gone over your
 8     presentation limit --
 9  17537                MR. CHADDERTON:  I am sorry.
10  17538                THE CHAIRPERSON:  -- but you may have
11     a conclusion you want to --
12  17539                MR. CHADDERTON:  Oh, thank you very
13     much.
14  17540                THE CHAIRPERSON:  -- get on the
15     record before we pass to questions.
16  17541                MR. CHADDERTON:  Yes, thank you, yes. 
17     I was just getting to the question of just generally
18     saying, Madam Chair, that you might wonder why we are
19     here.  It is a question of without some guideline, we
20     are just afraid that more community channels -- and I
21     am not going to gild the lily here -- that more
22     community channels are going to go the way we see Shaw
23     going.  And if that happens, then the public of Canada
24     are going to have a source drying up. It will no longer
25     be available to them, that they can see programs such
                          StenoTran

                             3740

 1     as the type that we can produce for the community we
 2     serve.  Thank you.
 3  17542                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr.
 4     Chadderton.  Commissioner Wilson.
 5  17543                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Good afternoon,
 6     Mr. Chadderton and good afternoon to your colleagues. 
 7     I would like to ask you just a few very quick questions
 8     of clarification about your written submission, and
 9     then maybe we can deal in a little more detail with the
10     main thrust of your presentation, which really is
11     access to Canadian airwaves for the videos that you
12     produce.
13  17544                On page one of your submission, you
14     state that you have been producing videos and
15     documentaries for the past 20 years on an in-house
16     basis, and I notice, actually, in your news release you
17     do the same thing.  The phrase "in-house" is in
18     quotation marks, and I am just wondering why is it in
19     quotation marks?  Is it in-house, or is it not?
20  17545                MR. CHADDERTON:  No, thank you very
21     much for the question.  It is very definitely in-house. 
22     Our audiovisual department -- the director of the
23     audiovisual department was a producer with CBC for a
24     number of years.  She runs the shop.  She has two or
25     three different assistants, researchers, that type of
                          StenoTran

                             3741

 1     thing.  We do everything within the organization except
 2     camera work.  We hire outside camera people, but other
 3     than that, when it comes back in we do the off-line
 4     edit, and then we go from there.  We do all the
 5     research, and we do all the final edit.  The only thing
 6     we do not do, of course, is the dubs.
 7  17546                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Right.
 8  17547                MR. CHADDERTON:  And once we have
 9     finished it, it is over to the dubbing house.
10  17548                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Yes.
11  17549                MR. CHADDERTON:  And it is available,
12     yes.
13  17550                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  What would be
14     the average cost of one of your productions, just out
15     of curiosity?
16  17551                MR. CHADDERTON:  Yes, we did -- the
17     most expensive one that we have done in the last few
18     years was called "From Juno Beach to Cannes," which was
19     a two-hour production, and that came in at about
20     $65,000.
21  17552                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.  In the
22     second paragraph of your submission, and I may know the
23     answer to this, just from the comments that you have
24     made today, because you have expanded a bit on your
25     written submission by being here today.
                          StenoTran

                             3742

 1  17553                You refrain from going into detail on
 2     your 20 years of experience, but you use the phrase
 3     "your current standing with the television industry." 
 4     And I am just wondering if this refers to the fact that
 5     your videos are not typically broadcast on commercial
 6     television stations?  Is that what you are sort of
 7     referring to --
 8  17554                MR. CHADDERTON:  Yes, it does in
 9     part.  I don't know how you establish a standing within
10     the industry.  Certainly, I think, we have done very
11     well --
12  17555                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Oh, so you are
13     using "standing" the same way that you said you wanted
14     to request standing before the hearing.
15  17556                MR. CHADDERTON:  Yes, correct, yes.
16  17557                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  That is kind of
17     a military term, isn't it?
18  17558                MR. CHADDERTON:  Well, okay, let me
19     put it another way.
20  17559                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  We are not a
21     military tribunal.
22  17560                MR. CHADDERTON:  How do they -- I was
23     -- but that was 50 years ago.
24  17561                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  My dad too.
25  17562                MR. CHADDERTON:  No, how are we
                          StenoTran

                             3743

 1     regarded in the industry?  This is the way I am looking
 2     at it.
 3  17563                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Your
 4     reputation.
 5  17564                MR. CHADDERTON:  Yes.  Certainly, you
 6     can go to, and you can win, and do well in film
 7     festivals.  That is one way.
 8  17565                Secondly, with regard to community
 9     channels, they have no problem in telling my
10     associates, here, that our productions are of broadcast
11     quality or higher.
12  17566                With regard to regular television, I
13     don't think that our productions are being turned down
14     for airing because of the quality.  They are being
15     turned down simply because there isn't room.  It
16     doesn't come within their television programming
17     schedule.
18  17567                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  You said that
19     you have had a fairly good relationship with community
20     channels over the years.
21  17568                MR. CHADDERTON:  Yes.
22  17569                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  And you have
23     been able to get many of your videos aired on the
24     community channels, but that has been decreasing.
25  17570                MR. CHADDERTON:  Uh-huh.  I wonder if
                          StenoTran

                             3744

 1     I could ask Raquel Chisholm to answer that, because, as
 2     I said earlier, she is in the trenches.  She talks to
 3     these people every day.
 4  17571                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Yes.
 5  17572                MS CHISHOLM:  About five and a half
 6     years ago I was hired on at the War Amps as a summer
 7     position.
 8  17573                Cliff and his staff were making
 9     videos and sending them out to community channels,
10     crossing their fingers and hoping that they would get
11     aired.  And I was brought on, just as a summer job, to
12     kind of check out how the community channels operated
13     and see if we could improve our relations.
14  17574                Well, five and a half years later,
15     here I am with two assistants.
16  17575                And our relationship with them is
17     phenomenal.  And I will give you an example of how,
18     though, a bit of it has deteriorated, is that my
19     assistant was in Alberta this past summer, and we visit
20     them, as I say, go right into their stations and visit
21     them personally.  And she met with someone at Shaw in
22     Edmonton who said they played our stuff all the time;
23     they loved our materials.  There are times, actually,
24     when stations will call us and say, I just put
25     something on the machine and something is not working
                          StenoTran

                             3745

 1     because -- and they hadn't even looked at our material,
 2     because they would just assume it is okay.  They know
 3     it comes from us, and immediately put it on the air.
 4  17576                And this woman in Edmonton said, you
 5     know, but I am so sorry, in a couple of months our
 6     whole community channel is changing,  That has come
 7     down from the top. We have no say.  We would love to
 8     play your films -- we can't after such and such a time.
 9  17577                So in Alberta, for example, we have
10     lost the community channel, and in Calgary we have lost
11     the community channel, and in Edmonton.  We are going
12     to be losing it in a few other places.  We have lost it
13     in certain places in Ontario as well.
14  17578                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Are some of the
15     smaller ones still running your material, though?
16  17579                MS CHISHOLM:  Many of the smaller
17     ones are, and for example, Rogers, right across the
18     country, is still playing our materials, even in the
19     bigger centres, Vancouver, and Toronto and so on.  So
20     it is just some of the stations.
21  17580                But our relationships are -- like, we
22     get phone calls, and they know our name personally.  We
23     know, you know, 180 or so community channels.  We know
24     what they want, what they don't want.  We can remember
25     how messy their desks were when we walked in the
                          StenoTran

                             3746

 1     office.  I mean, we know these people.  And a lot of
 2     the times if they can't play our stuff, a lot of the
 3     times it is not their choice.
 4  17581                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.
 5  17582                MR. CHADDERTON:  May I ask Isabelle
 6     Dugré to tell you of the situation in the French
 7     language stations with whom she deals too, because --
 8     well, go ahead.
 9  17583                Mme DUGRÉ:  Oui.  Moi aussi, ça fait
10     cinq ans que je fais un petit peu le tour des
11     télévisions communautaires à travers le Québec.  Les
12     premières années, ça allait vraiment bien au niveau de
13     la distribution de nos films, au niveau de la qualité.
14  17584                Évidemment, il faut dire qu'on fait
15     ces visites-là pour établir un contact personnel,
16     évidemment, avec les responsables de la programmation,
17     parce qu'on se dit que peut-être qu'en ayant ce
18     contact-là on va avoir plus de diffusion, et aussi
19     évidemment pour connaître le genre de productions
20     qu'ils désirent, si nos standards sont vraiment ce
21     qu'ils recherchent, et caetera.  Ça, c'est une première
22     chose.
23                                                        1600
24  17585                Donc nos visites nous ont permis de
25     savoir que nos productions correspondent vraiment à
                          StenoTran

                             3747

 1     leurs besoins, à ce qu'ils recherchent.
 2  17586                Donc, pour les promouvoir, les
 3     relations sont vraiment excellentes, ça, on n'a pas de
 4     problèmes, sauf que ces derniers temps, évidemment,
 5     vous savez que les réglementations concernant les
 6     câblodistributeurs... ils ne sont plus tenus d'avoir
 7     les canaux communautaires.  Ça, évidemment, ça nous
 8     affecte indirectement dans le sens que, en tout cas
 9     moi, de mes stations que j'avais déjà dans ma liste, il
10     y en a déjà qui ont fermé.  Donc ça, ce sont des
11     régions dont d'autres stations vont s'occuper, mais
12     quand même, ce sont des téléspectateurs qu'on ne
13     rejoindra plus directement.
14  17587                Aussi, compte tenu que les
15     télévisions communautaires -- certaines d'entre elles;
16     je ne dis pas majoritairement -- reçoivent moins
17     d'argent du câblodistributeur, il doivent couper dans
18     les heures de leur programmation parce qu'ils n'ont
19     plus autant d'effectifs qu'ils avaient.  Donc, au lieu
20     de, par exemple, mettre un film d'une heure, vu qu'ils
21     vont avoir moins de place dans leur programmation, ils
22     vont peut-être préférer mettre, par exemple, une demi-
23     heure de quelque chose qu'eux ont tourné.
24  17588                Donc ça, on commence à voir ça
25     tranquillement, pas vite.  Ça a commencé surtout cette
                          StenoTran

                             3748

 1     année parce que ça a été mis en branle... c'est une
 2     nouvelle réglementation cette année.
 3  17589                Nous, l'Association, nous sommes
 4     membres associés de l'APTQ, l'Association des
 5     programmateurs de la télédistribution du Québec, et
 6     moi, j'ai la chance justement d'assister à leur
 7     congrès.  Ce que je peux voir qui peut-être s'en vient,
 8     c'est qu'on peut peut-être s'attendre à voir d'autres
 9     fermetures et à voir que d'autres télévisions
10     communautaires vont peut-être être restreintes dans les
11     heures de programmation et on va voir nos moments de
12     diffusion tout simplement éliminés.
13  17590                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I actually
14     would have thought that the fact that you are providing
15     a completed video to the channels is an advantage in
16     terms of keeping your product on the air because it
17     means that you are just delivering a tape to them and
18     all they have to do is play it.  So, I am interested to
19     hear you say that the cutbacks have negatively affected
20     you as well.
21  17591                Mme DUGRÉ:  Oui.  De ce point de vue
22     là, oui, vous avez raison que c'était un avantage parce
23     que dans les visites que moi, j'ai faites au Québec --
24     je ne sais pas pour Raquel ce qu'il en est -- les
25     directeurs et directrices étaient très surpris qu'un
                          StenoTran

                             3749

 1     organisme tel que le nôtre puisse se déplacer et aller
 2     les rencontrer personnellement, établir des contacts,
 3     qu'on puisse leur laisser des copies.
 4  17592                Généralement, si on prend d'autres
 5     organismes qui mettent à la disposition des télévisions
 6     communautaires leur production, ils doivent par exemple
 7     laisser une copie, la station en fait une copie, puis
 8     après ça la cassette se passe dans toutes les stations. 
 9     Nous, on a l'avantage, comme M. Chadderton le disait,
10     grâce aux dons corporatifs, que nous pouvons laisser
11     une cassette du format requis à la station.
12  17593                Donc, oui, dans ce sens-là, c'est un
13     avantage dans le sens que, s'ils veulent mettre...
14     admettons qu'il y a un 30 minutes d'une émission qu'ils
15     n'ont pas, ils prennent notre cassette et ils peuvent
16     la mettre.
17  17594                L'avantage, c'est que, oui, ils ont
18     une copie de notre cassette et ils ont une copie de
19     qualité, ce n'est pas une copie d'une copie.  Ce qu'ils
20     ont, c'est une copie, si je peux dire, du master; donc,
21     au point de vue qualité, oui, sauf que même si parfois
22     ils ont nos cassettes en stock -- ça, il n'y a pas de
23     problème -- comme je disais, à cause des limites, des
24     restrictions budgétaires et du temps peut-être de la
25     programmation, les heures de programmation qui sont
                          StenoTran

                             3750

 1     peut-être un peu plus limitées -- et je pense peut-être
 2     que ça va aller en diminuant -- même s'il sont la
 3     cassette en stock, ils ne pourront peut-être pas mettre
 4     autant que, par exemple, quand ils avaient peut-être
 5     des plus gros budgets ou quand les stations étaient
 6     ouvertes.
 7  17595                Donc, oui, il y a un avantage là-
 8     dessus par rapport aux autres -- ça, je me le suis fait
 9     dire -- mais avec ce qui arrive, à cause de la nouvelle
10     réglementation, ça affecte même s'ils les ont en stock.
11  17596                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  No, absolutely. 
12     If they are reducing the hours on air, then I can see
13     how that would have an effect.
14  17597                MS CHISHOLM:  If I could actually add
15     to that, sometimes it's not just budget cuts.  For
16     example, Rogers continues to have high quality
17     community channels and so on and have made a strong
18     commitment to them from what I gather sort of just
19     walking around their studios, but the culture has
20     changed within community channels.
21  17598                So, for example, it used to be we
22     were told that, "We love having your programming
23     because it's half an hour and if city council goes
24     short, we will throw one of your tapes in and it fills
25     that time up until our bingo game starts", or whatever. 
                          StenoTran

                             3751

 1     So, we were used a lot as fill material and they found
 2     that very, very useful.
 3  17599                A lot of the culture has changed,
 4     however.  Now it has become very regimented.  Community
 5     channels have very strict half-hour, hour long shows. 
 6     It's not the sort of happy-go-lucky kind of thing as it
 7     used to be, which in certain cases I am sure is fine,
 8     but that's where we have been cut out slightly, to the
 9     extent that we had to go into our editing suites and
10     edit all of our productions for Rogers in order to make
11     them their standards, 27 minute/30 second or 57
12     minute/30 second films.
13  17600                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I think what
14     they said when they appeared on Saturday was that they
15     feel with the proliferation of channels out there they
16     have to sort of carve out a niche audience for
17     themselves and people are accustomed to watching
18     programming in half-hour or one-hour blocks.
19  17601                MS CHISHOLM:  But that cultural
20     change has again affected us, which doesn't necessarily
21     have anything to do with CRTC regulations or anything,
22     other than an involvement, and the whole Shaw cable
23     channel, of course, has changed.  I mean that's the
24     biggest cultural change of all.
25  17602                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I was actually
                          StenoTran

                             3752

 1     interested in the submission when you suggested that
 2     you might want to widen the definition of "community"
 3     as it applies to community channels, because some
 4     people would argue that the community channels have
 5     taken it upon themselves to widen their definition
 6     themselves by creating or turning into quasi-local news
 7     channels.  So, I am glad you made the distinction today
 8     when you made your oral presentation that you are not
 9     referring to that, you are referring to the notion of
10     just being more encompassing of all the different
11     groups within your community.
12  17603                MR. CHADDERTON:  If I could just add
13     a little further to that, we haven't pushed the panic
14     button yet.  I could honestly say to you, because we
15     have people who report back to us all the time, that
16     our video productions continue to be used, but what we
17     see down the pike is probably a narrowing of maybe the
18     definition of "community" or a narrowing of access.
19  17604                We don't know, but it may be well be
20     within the purview of the CRTC to take a look at this
21     and say, "Now, just a minute, if there are
22     organizations which are representing national
23     communities or constituencies, yes, we believe that
24     community channels should save some time for that kind
25     of programming."  I think that's our main pitch.
                          StenoTran

                             3753

 1  17605                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Let me address
 2     that just a little bit later.
 3  17606                On page 3 you make a distinction
 4     between commercial broadcasters and so called free
 5     distribution channels, the educational and community
 6     channels.  So, we have talked a bit about the community
 7     channels.  Have your videos been broadcast on any of
 8     the educational networks across the country, TVO or
 9     Access or Télé-Québec?
10  17607                MR. CHADDERTON:  I think probably my
11     two associates would answer that.
12  17608                MS CHISHOLM:  Yes, in the past we
13     have been on educational networks and in fact for
14     whatever reason the relationship between us and the
15     various educational networks has sort of lapsed in the
16     last few years sometimes having to do with the fact
17     that there has been changes, for example, with Access. 
18     In Alberta they have gone through a lot of change.  So,
19     that has recently been brought back into one of our
20     priorities.
21  17609                In this past year I have met
22     personally with the people at the Knowledge Network in
23     B.C., with the person at Access.  We have actually had
24     a really good relationship the last couple of years
25     with SCN in Saskatchewan and I have just started
                          StenoTran

                             3754

 1     talking again with the people at TVO.  Unfortunately,
 2     the whole country doesn't have -- every province
 3     doesn't have an educational network, but where they do
 4     exist, we are trying to and are providing them with
 5     videos.
 6  17610                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Have you ever
 7     had any of your videos broadcast on commercial
 8     television?
 9  17611                MR. CHADDERTON:  Oh, yes.  In the
10     earlier days --
11  17612                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  How early are
12     we talking about?
13  17613                MR. CHADDERTON:  We are talking now
14     -- when did I make my presentation to the CRTC -- 10
15     years.  Ten years ago when there were stations, for
16     example, in Windsor and whatnot, quite often what they
17     -- I think the term they used was local managers
18     programming options.  Yes, they used our films very,
19     very much.  As a matter of fact, I think we were a bit
20     prophetic in saying that once they closed those
21     channels down, we were going to suffer, but certainly
22     the community channels picked up the slack.
23  17614                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  How long has it
24     been, do you think, since the commercial broadcasters
25     have been showing your videos?
                          StenoTran

                             3755

 1  17615                MR. CHADDERTON:  Well, ATV uses our
 2     materials quite often.
 3  17616                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Still?
 4  17617                MR. CHADDERTON:  Yes.  Yes, quite
 5     often.  Global uses them.
 6  17618                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  How would
 7     Global use them?  At what time of day would they play
 8     them?
 9  17619                MS CHISHOLM:  For example, the films
10     that Mr. Chadderton was talking about earlier, the D-
11     day film and "Operation Charmwood", the response to
12     "Saving Private Ryan", they were promoted to television
13     stations across the country, the regular broadcasters,
14     and they were picked up by five of those broadcasters
15     across the country.  The way it works is they order our
16     video and they say, "Thank you very much", and then we
17     don't know when they air them.  Sometimes they will
18     write a little note in a fax that they send us, "We are
19     going to be saving this for Remembrance Day", or what
20     have you.  Often Remembrance Day is a big time for our
21     longer productions to be shown.
22  17620                Another thing that we have done
23     recently through my and Isabelle's relationship with
24     the television people is they have told us, for
25     example, they need sort of two-minute things, that they
                          StenoTran

                             3756

 1     have played the Heritage Moment so many times now that
 2     they want something new or whatever.  So, we have
 3     started making shorter productions, filler productions
 4     that are shown on regular broadcasters, but our longer
 5     documentaries, our Playsafe films and so on, really
 6     don't get shown that often.  I think the "Saving
 7     Private Ryan" thing was especially pertinent to people
 8     and so on, so five out of -- how many -- 40 regular
 9     broadcasters ordered them.
10  17621                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Aside from the
11     commercial considerations that you mentioned earlier
12     today, where they say that they are not sure they can
13     sell ad spots in your programming, why do you think
14     they are reluctant to play those videos?  Could it have
15     anything to do with the fact that maybe they don't
16     really see you as an independent producer?
17  17622                MR. CHADDERTON:  Yes, I believe
18     that's true.  I know that people have -- I have met
19     regular, if you could call it that, producers at film
20     festivals and they say, "What are you doing here?"  I
21     say, "We came down for a gold."  They say, "How do you
22     do that?"  So, I just explain that the judges thought
23     it was good.
24  17623                There is a certain amount of
25     jealousy.  I am not going again to guild the lily. 
                          StenoTran

                             3757

 1     There is a certain amount of jealousy and I think it's
 2     understandable.  The regular broadcasters have their
 3     staff and whatnot and they produce some of their own. 
 4     Then, of course, there are a myriad of private
 5     producers out there who go in, sell an idea to a
 6     network and then they produce a very good program.  In
 7     this sense, we are in competition with them because
 8     there is only so much television time.
 9  17624                I think the prime example would be a
10     program or a film I did last year with John McDermott,
11     the well known singer.  We took a lot of our archival
12     film footage and put it to his songs.  We took it to
13     the CBC, we spoke to -- I had a meeting with a Mr.
14     George Anthony who some of you may know, a respectable
15     gentleman.  We went all through the thing.  They got it
16     to the very point where they were going to put it on
17     and then they called me and they said, "We have some
18     internal problems."  They would not tell me what it
19     was, but I have to say that Pamela Wallin came to our
20     rescue and she said, "We will put it on."  She had some
21     control.
22  17625                I can only say from my experience
23     that it's understandable.  The War Amps is a charity,
24     they deal with young kids, they deal with our military
25     heritage, et cetera, et cetera, but what right do they
                          StenoTran

                             3758

 1     have --
 2  17626                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  So, they might
 3     see you as a special interest group?
 4  17627                MR. CHADDERTON:  A special interest
 5     group, yes, but I think it's more that they don't
 6     recognize the quality of the work, and that may be fair
 7     ball.  I don't know how we judge quality, but, as I
 8     say, we do well in the film festivals and we certainly
 9     get a lot of comment from the public with regard to the
10     productions that we do.  Most of that comment is good,
11     some of it isn't, but I guess most of it -- almost all
12     of it is good.
13  17628                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  One of the
14     solutions that you suggested for dealing with your
15     issue is that you said it may be entirely possible to
16     establish rules which would provide more so called free
17     channels.  You and I both know that nothing is really
18     free.
19  17629                MR. CHADDERTON:  No, that's true.
20  17630                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Of course, you
21     recognize that by calling them the so called free
22     channels.
23  17631                MR. CHADDERTON:  Yes.
24  17632                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  So, who would
25     pay for these free channels?
                          StenoTran

                             3759

 1  17633                MR. CHADDERTON:  Well, what I am
 2     thinking about is in licensing.  If, for example, the
 3     CRTC licensed the History Channel, maybe you look at
 4     Canadian content.  I watch the History Channel very
 5     closely and I am absolutely certain that some of the
 6     productions that we have done on our military heritage
 7     are good enough to be on that channel, but they don't
 8     get there.  I don't know whether the CRTC has the power
 9     to say to the specialty --
10  17634                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  "Play that
11     video."
12  17635                MR. CHADDERTON:  Pardon?
13  17636                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  "Play that
14     video."
15  17637                MR. CHADDERTON:  No, I wouldn't say
16     that.  I wouldn't want to be that specific.  I would
17     say that --
18  17638                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I am sure that
19     we wouldn't, either.
20  17639                MR. CHADDERTON:  No.  I would rather
21     think, though, that a broad guideline might be that
22     there is programming out there which is not done by the
23     regular channels, which is not done by independent
24     producers who get their funds from Telefilm or what
25     have you, but they are interesting.  What they might
                          StenoTran

                             3760

 1     lose in quality, they make up in integrity because they
 2     are done by people who know what they are talking about
 3     and that's sort of a suggestion there.
 4  17640                But I think I probably misled you
 5     when I am talking about the free channels.  I am really
 6     talking about my fear that the avenue that has been
 7     most effective in carrying these messages --
 8  17641                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  The community
 9     channels.
10  17642                MR. CHADDERTON:  -- has been the
11     community channels.  I am told that they really don't
12     have a guideline.
13  17643                You are in the trenches.
14                                                        1615
15  17644                MS. CHISHOLM:  I have met with, I
16     would say, about a hundred community programmers across
17     the country and I have a questionnaire that I ask
18     everybody the same thing and the first question is: 
19     How do you define community programming and where do we
20     fit in?
21  17645                And I have had about a hundred
22     different answers.  Nobody says the same thing.  And
23     whenever I tell them that, they just kind of chuckle
24     and say, oh, of course.  But no one has ever -- and
25     Isabelle probably gets the same thing.
                          StenoTran

                             3761

 1  17646                Everyone has a slightly different
 2     look on community programming.  Sometimes they will
 3     say, well, you fit a certain community within our
 4     community, so we can play your programming.
 5  17647                Or they will say, well, no, we can't
 6     play your stuff because it wasn't made by the community
 7     but we like it anyway, so we will put it on there.  I
 8     mean like we have never gotten a single solitary answer
 9     about what is community programming.
10  17648                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  In reference to
11     the comment that you just made, Mr. Chadderton, about
12     sort of advising the channels about productions being
13     available from different sources, the Commission has
14     never required broadcasters to acquire programming from
15     a particular producer.
16  17649                We have made regulations about the
17     quantity of Canadian content that they carry or how
18     much money they should be spending on that.  But we
19     have never required them to acquire programming from a
20     particular source.
21  17650                Why do you think it would be
22     appropriate for us to change this policy in order to
23     satisfy your desire to have your -- and I guess I am
24     asking this because I guess as I am sitting here
25     listening to you and I am very familiar with your
                          StenoTran

                             3762

 1     organization, and I am familiar with the videos that
 2     you make.
 3  17651                But I am wondering, too, as we are
 4     looking for a solution to this issue that I am
 5     wondering if part of the solution isn't also up to you
 6     in terms of maybe making a choice to do co-productions
 7     with independent producers as a way of trying to
 8     increase the outlets for your videos.  I don't know.
 9  17652                MR. CHADDERTON:  I wouldn't think
10     that that would be a solution.  If the channels were
11     faulting our productions because of quality, that may
12     be true.  But I don't think that's what it is.
13  17653                I think what the access situation is,
14     and let's just keep to community channels, the access
15     situation is that the community channels like what we
16     do. They like the integrity of it.  When you talk about
17     special interests, I don't think they consider us as a
18     special interest.
19  17654                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  No, in fact,
20     that comment really didn't have to do with the
21     community channels because I think we are dealing with
22     two very different things.  If you are talking about
23     the community channels, that is one approach.  But if
24     you are talking about trying to get commercial
25     broadcasters to air your programming.  Is that a part
                          StenoTran

                             3763

 1     of your strategy?
 2  17655                MR. CHADDERTON:  Well, yes, we made
 3     an award-winning film with a producer by the name of
 4     John Zareski on the thalidomide children of Canada and,
 5     boy, the response we got back from the CBC on that
 6     program was just terrific.  And we have gone that route
 7     in co-productions occasionally.
 8  17656                But I really feel that's not our
 9     forté.  That independent producers get ideas and they
10     want to produce them and whatnot.  Let them go ahead. 
11     We have our own niche, as we call it.
12  17657                I hope I haven't totally misled you
13     but I am really talking about the fact that my fear is
14     that there is a definition out there of community
15     channels which seems nobody has pinned it down, and it
16     seems to me that if we could, by regulation or
17     something, or a guideline, something could be said to
18     community channels that their community is wider than
19     city hall, then I think that would sort of satisfy us. 
20     I think that's it.
21  17658                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Okay.  I am
22     glad you were so direct because I think I was going off
23     on a slightly different track.
24  17659                MR. CHADDERTON:  If I can just add,
25     there is no way that I was suggesting that CRTC should
                          StenoTran

                             3764

 1     tell the History Channel to put our programs on.
 2  17660                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I was going to
 3     say that would be quite a bold suggestion.
 4  17661                MR. CHADDERTON:  No, I was just
 5     giving you that as an example of the problems that we
 6     have in trying to get them on regular channels and,
 7     therefore, that leaves open just the community
 8     channels, except for a few educational channels.
 9  17662                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Let me just ask
10     you one final question and this is really just out of
11     curiosity for myself.  Do you make your videos
12     available through libraries or video stores as well?
13  17663                MR. CHADDERTON:  Yes, not video
14     stores.
15  17664                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Not video
16     stores.
17  17665                MR. CHADDERTON:  Libraries, yes, free
18     of charge.  School boards.  We distributed last year
19     around November the 11th, I think something in the
20     neighbourhood of 1400 free videos dealing with our
21     military heritage to school boards right across Canada.
22  17666                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  How many
23     libraries would you be in?
24  17667                MR. CHADDERTON:  The success rate of
25     putting them in the libraries hasn't been too great. 
                          StenoTran

                             3765

 1     We put them in any library.  We write out to them and
 2     say would you like to have this.  Maybe 10 per cent of
 3     them write back and say yes.
 4  17668                Then we follow it up and we say,
 5     well, you know, you must have records.  How many times
 6     have they been logged out?  And it hasn't been too
 7     successful but it does help.  It is part of getting the
 8     message out there.
 9  17669                But I guess to be almost crude about
10     it, if you don't get it on the "boob tube," it is not
11     going to register.
12  17670                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I can't believe
13     you said that.  And you said it right on, too.
14  17671                MR. CHADDERTON:  That is what my
15     friends and some of them are, you know, well spoken;
16     that is what they call it.  I think what I am really
17     talking about is that if you can't get it on television
18     through community channels or something like that, it
19     really isn't worth production funds that you would put
20     if you were depending on distribution through
21     libraries.
22  17672                Now free distribution through
23     schools, that is different.  But then there is a limit. 
24     I mean when you put out 1400 dubs, that is a lot of
25     money.
                          StenoTran

                             3766

 1  17673                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Yes, that is.
 2  17674                MR. CHADDERTON:  So we run out of it,
 3     yes.
 4  17675                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Considering
 5     there are 16,000 schools across the country.
 6  17676                MR. CHADDERTON:  That is true, yes.
 7  17677                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Thank you very
 8     much.  Those are all my questions.
 9  17678                MR. CHADDERTON:  Thank you.
10  17679                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Ms
11     Dugré, Ms Chisholm, Mr. Chadderton.  Thank you for your
12     presentation.
13  17680                This will end today's work and we
14     will resume at 9:00 o'clock on Tuesday morning.
15  17681                Nous reprendrons à 9 h 00 mardi
16     matin, et bon weekend à tout le monde.
17     --- L'audience est ajournée à 1625, pour reprendre
18         le mardi 13 octobre 1998, à 0900 / Whereupon the
19         hearing adjourned at 1625, to resume on Tuesday,
20         October 13, 1998, at 0900
21
22
23
24
25
                          StenoTran
Date modified: