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This page has been archived on the Web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 BEFORE
THE CANADIAN RADIO‑TELEVISION AND
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
TRANSCRIPTION DES AUDIENCES DEVANT
LE CONSEIL DE LA RADIODIFFUSION
ET DES TÉLÉCOMMUNICATIONS CANADIENNES
SUBJECT:
Review of the Commercial Radio Policy /
Examen de la Politique sur la radio commerciale
HELD AT: TENUE À:
Conference Centre Centre de conférences
Outaouais Room Salle Outaouais
140 Promenade du Portage 140, Promenade du Portage
Gatineau, Quebec Gatineau (Québec)
May 18, 2006 Le 18 mai 2006
Transcripts
In order to meet the requirements of the Official Languages
Act, transcripts of proceedings before the Commission will be
bilingual as to their covers, the listing of the CRTC members
and staff attending the public hearings, and the Table of
Contents.
However, the aforementioned publication is the recorded
verbatim transcript and, as such, is taped and transcribed in
either of the official languages, depending on the language
spoken by the participant at the public hearing.
Transcription
Afin de rencontrer les exigences de la Loi sur les langues
officielles, les procès‑verbaux pour le Conseil seront
bilingues en ce qui a trait à la page couverture, la liste des
membres et du personnel du CRTC participant à l'audience
publique ainsi que la table des matières.
Toutefois, la publication susmentionnée est un compte rendu
textuel des délibérations et, en tant que tel, est enregistrée
et transcrite dans l'une ou l'autre des deux langues
officielles, compte tenu de la langue utilisée par le
participant à l'audience publique.
Canadian Radio‑television and
Telecommunications Commission
Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des
télécommunications canadiennes
Transcript / Transcription
Review of the Commercial Radio Policy /
Examen de la Politique sur la radio commerciale
BEFORE / DEVANT:
Charles Dalfen Chairperson / Président
Michel Arpin Commissioner / Conseiller
Rita Cugini Commissioner / Conseillère
Andrée Noël Commissioner / Conseillère
Joan Pennefather Commissioner / Conseillère
ALSO PRESENT / AUSSI PRÉSENTS:
Chantal Boulet Secretary / Secrétaire
Peter Foster Hearing Manager /
Gérant de l'audience
Bernard Montigny General Counsel,
Broadcasting / Avocat
général, Radiodiffusion
Anne-Marie Murphy Legal Counsel /
Conseillère juridique
Robert Ramsey Senior Director, Radio
Policy and Applications /
Directeur principal,
Politiques et demandes
relatives à la radio
HELD AT: TENUE À:
Conference Centre Centre de conférences
Outaouais Room Salle Outaouais
140 Promenade du Portage 140, Promenade du Portage
Gatineau, Quebec Gatineau (Québec)
May 18, 2006 Le 18 mai 2006
TABLE DES MATIÈRES / TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE / PARA
PRESENTATION BY / PRÉSENTATION PAR:
FACTOR 1433 / 8193
Radio Starmaker Fund 1466 / 8439
ANR Lounge 1504 / 8666
Canadian Satellite Radio 1515 / 8747
Impératif français 1532 / 8825
Canadian Conference of the Arts 1557 / 8937
Evanov Radio Group Inc. 1584 / 9110
Coalition of Nine Provincial/Territorial Music 1602 / 9229
Industry in Process Association
Michael Fockler 1623 / 9345
Canadian Music Centre 1640 / 9474
Fondation Radio Enfants 1656 / 9591
Wayne V. Plunkett 1681 / 9741
CPSC 1698 / 9837
Magda de la Torre 1728 / 10021
Gatineau Quebec / Gatineau (Québec)
‑‑‑ Upon commencing on Thursday, May 18, 2006
at 0904 / L'audience débute le jeudi
18 mai 2006 à 0904
LISTNUM 1 \l 1 \s 81868186 THE CHAIRPERSON: Order, please. À l'ordre, s'il vous plaît.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18187 Good morning, everyone. Bonjour, tout le monde.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18188 Madam la Secrétaire.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18189 LA SECRÉTAIRE: Merci, monsieur le Président.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18190 We will now call the first participant for this morning, which is FACTOR.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18191 Mr. Jim West and Ms Heather Ostertag will be appearing for FACTOR.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18192 You will have ten minutes for your presentation. Please go ahead.
PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 18193 MR. WEST: Thank you, Mr. Dalfen and Commissioners, for granting FACTOR this opportunity to appear today.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18194 My name is Jim West and I am the Chair of FACTOR.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18195 Joining me today, beside me, is FACTOR's President, Heather Ostertag.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18196 FACTOR is a non‑political, non‑aligned organization and it was not our initial intention to appear at these hearings. However, given the nature of the issues and the responses and positions put forward, it is apparent that there is confusion surrounding the important work done by FACTOR.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18197 It is our goal to support this process by ensuring that the facts on FACTOR are placed on the record.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18198 Throughout these hearings there have been many acknowledgements on the importance of FACTOR continuing its good work. In hearing of the concerns expressed around a need for a greater transparency of how the foundation operates and where its funding is disbursed, I would like to suggest that all interested parties meet to discuss our common objective of supporting the development of Canadian artists.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18199 We advocate that we explore the possibility of a common administration for the various funding programs. We would also like to see that these discussions include the possibility of redefining and reconstituting FACTOR to enable it to be the conduit for supporting the visions of the various boards of directors of these organizations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18200 I will now turn the presentation over to Heather.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18201 MS OSTERTAG: Thank you, Jim.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18202 FACTOR is a successful private/public partnership that has produced some very significant results.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18203 Currently, FACTOR provides funding to assist with all stages of the development of the career of an artist, from demos on through to the support of commercially released recordings. Support is also provided to assist with the marketing and promotion of these recordings, both nationally and internationally.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18204 A significant benefit for Canadian artists from this partnership is FACTOR's ability to blend the public and private funds. Treasury Board rules do not allow for a carryover of commitments. The carryover that occurs at FACTOR can only happen because of the blended private/public funding, which provides the artist the ability to complete projects, allowing complete freedom within the creative process.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18205 Some FACTOR results include:
LISTNUM 1 \l 18206 Since April 1999, 43 FACTOR‑supported artists have received 89 certifications and over 221 various domestic awards ranging from Juno Awards to the Urban Awards to the Country Music Awards.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18207 From April 1, 1999 to March 31, 2006, FACTOR has disbursed final payments on completed projects totalling $55 million. This funding has been matched by the industry's own investment of just over $114 million.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18208 While FACTOR requires applications to put up minimally 50 percent of the budget, the industry has actually absorbed 68 percent of the costs.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18209 A national network of music industry associations that is supporting the growth and development of Canadian grassroots artists coast to coast to coast. Through FACTOR's National Advisory Board there are two face‑to‑face meetings per year to discuss industry challenges and issues.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18210 It has also afforded provincial music industry associations the opportunity to network with each other as well as with other key industry people. The exchange/access to information has supported the growth of the industry at the grassroots level.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18211 Canada has become the number three exporter of music in the world. FACTOR‑supported artists such as Nickelback, Alanis Morrisette, k.d. lang and Sarah McLachlan, are among those that have put Canada into such a significant place in the global market.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18212 All of those artists have been supported by FACTOR.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18213 The Nickelback story, for example: They made a CD, took it to radio and before radio could play it, they asked them to re‑mix. The band was out of money and unknown. FACTOR loaned them $5,000, and in the words of Chad Kroeger, lead singer of Nickelback, "the rest is history".
LISTNUM 1 \l 18214 Since inception FACTOR‑supported sound recordings have sold over 30.2 million copies worldwide with a retail value in excess of $680 million.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18215 FACTOR's future plans: Following FACTOR securing a five‑year commitment from Canadian Heritage in 2005, the board of directors had a full review of the foundation undertaken.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18216 Surveys were sent to over 4,600 potential respondents and approximately 1,000 stakeholders took the time to provide feedback through interviews and on‑line surveys.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18217 The following groups were included in the surveys: the Department of Canadian Heritage; broadcasting sponsors; music industry associations; applicants (both successful and unsuccessful); jurors; the board of directors and staff of FACTOR.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18218 This review is enabling FACTOR to re‑invent itself and revamp its programs in very significant ways. However, with the business changing radically and FACTOR's desire to be sensitive to the need for change, we will continue to consult with the industry to ensure the programs remain responsive.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18219 We are also aware of the importance of recognizing the need for change and that it needs to be effectively implemented.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18220 We are currently developing a new website that will be even more interactive and will be available for use by the visually impaired.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18221 Programs are being overhauled and new ways of interacting with the artists and applicants are being developed. We are targeted to roll out the newly renovated FACTOR on July 1, 2006.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18222 We will, of course, continue to consult with the industry to ensure the programs and funding we provide continue to be responsive to the rapidly changing environment.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18223 FACTOR's challenges are:
LISTNUM 1 \l 18224 (1) the high level of applications not successful in securing funding;
LISTNUM 1 \l 18225 (2) the limited financial resources currently available to FACTOR making it impossible to meet full artists' needs;
LISTNUM 1 \l 18226 (3) how to effect change that results in a positive, constructive difference, not a change for the sake of change or, even worse, change that results in a negative outcome.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18227 Why a common administration?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18228 With a common administration, there are the economies of scale to be enjoyed; as well, the benefit of ensuring that the programs provided operate at a high level of complementing other initiatives while preventing double funding of the same projects.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18229 It would ensure the funds are spread out in the most equitable fashion.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18230 Why FACTOR?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18231 FACTOR has a proven track record of 24 years of supporting Canadian independent artists.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18232 We have a solid working relationship that has had the broadcasting and music industries working together for what is best for the artists.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18233 We have a successful track record of managing significant amounts of both public and private funds.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18234 We have a trained, experienced staff.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18235 FACTOR has participated in a minimum of five federal audits, the most recent having been concluded in October 2003.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18236 A copy of this report can be found on the website for Canadian Heritage.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18237 Some highlights of the audit include:
"The objective of this audit was to provide senior management with assurance on the soundness of processes and to determine where the organization is most exposed to risk and to identify which remedial actions are available and appropriate."
LISTNUM 1 \l 18238 In general, the audit team found that:
"(1) the management control framework is appropriate to ensure compliance, effectiveness and financial integrity;
(2) information used for decision‑making and reporting is timely, relevant and reliable;
(3) risk management strategies and practices are suitable to deliver the intended results and the program design and implementation reflects the objectives of PCH"
LISTNUM 1 \l 18239 FACTOR's response to submissions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18240 There have been a number of comments made in submissions to this hearing that beg our response, including those of the CAB/PriceWaterhouseCooper Report, Canadian Music Centre, Canadian Association of Ethnic Broadcasters and Canadian Independent Recording Artists Association.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18241 However, due to the time constraints of this hearing process, we will only be briefly speaking to the CAB submission and specifically to their PriceWaterhouseCooper Report.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18242 We would like to thank Glenn O'Farrell and the Canadian Association of Broadcasters for including the comment in their submission acknowledging that, quote:
"FACTOR may have certain reservations regarding the manner in which the data is compiled and/or presented."
LISTNUM 1 \l 18243 This is correct.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18244 However, due to the limited time available, we are unable to cite all the errors in this report. In the meantime, it is our view that the PWC Report does not represent an acceptably accurate assessment of FACTOR's performance in the execution of its mandate.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18245 Should the Commission so direct, we are prepared to undertake the preparation of a full report identifying all the discrepancies in the PWC document. We would however appreciate being given several days to prepare this report.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18246 We direct you to the additional comments on the other submissions contained in the annex.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18247 Thank you and we welcome any questions you may have for us.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18248 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18249 Commissioner Arpin.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18250 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18251 Regarding the comments that you were contemplating for the CAB PriceWaterhouse Report, as you probably know, we stated at the beginning of this hearing that we were allowing up to June 12th for interested parties to file comments in response to the various submissions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18252 MS OSTERTAG: I wasn't, but I will; thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18253 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So you have up to June 12th.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18254 If you want to make further comments also on other submissions ‑‑ I just notice that you have comments on other submissions as an appendix, but if you have attended the hearing or read the transcript and think that other comments have to be brought to the attention of the Commission, you have up to that very date.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18255 If we were to ask you for some more detail, you will only have until May 29th to do so. But replies will be allowed until June 12th.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18256 MS OSTERTAG: We will take the June 12th date and file; thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18257 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Based on your oral presentation this morning, you mention you have twice a year meetings with various parties of the industry, which include provincial music industry associations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18258 Are the broadcasters attending these meetings?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18259 MS OSTERTAG: No. They are ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18260 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So they are music related only.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18261 MS OSTERTAG: It is music related.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18262 It is the challenges facing the development of FACTOR's programs and what have you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18263 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So the meeting of the minds between the broadcasters and the music industry is either at a CRTC hearing or at the Canadian Music Week annual gathering, I suspect.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18264 MS OSTERTAG: No. We actually have a representative, the Chair of our National Advisory Board. Whatever recommendations come out from the meetings are actually minuted, documented and provided to the board of directors where all the directors meet for two days. And we have found that our board of directors, which is a volunteer board, doesn't have the time to be able to sit for those two days and work through a lot of this stuff.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18265 Some of it is just them sharing information on how they were successful in approaching this sponsor or that sponsor for funding.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18266 It is at a very basic working level, not high end stuff.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18267 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I see.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18268 So it is almost an introductory course to the music industry, what you are describing here.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18269 MS OSTERTAG: It's a little more than an introductory level kind of conversations that are going on because what they do, one of the main purposes of the board of directors ‑‑ and for the record, we have five broadcasters sitting on our board and six music industry representatives.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18270 They are there for the main purpose of having disseminated information and gathered it up from their communities and the artists that are members of their organizations on the things they would like to see FACTOR address in terms of program development, all of which gets distilled, once they have discussed it as a group.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18271 Sometimes one province or territory can have an idea about something, but there could be an adverse effect if that change were to be implemented.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18272 So it is allowing that program development type of discussion to take place.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18273 Aside from that, they take a bit of time to discuss their other challenges, not FACTOR‑related.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18274 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: If I heard you well, you have 11 members on your board.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18275 MS OSTERTAG: That's correct.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18276 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Five broadcasters and six coming from the music industry.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18277 MS OSTERTAG: Yes. We also have two observers. We have a representative from the Canadian Association of Broadcasters, Pierre‑Louis Smith and Jean‑François Bernier on behalf of Canadian Heritage are at the table also.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18278 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: But they are not directors.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18279 MS OSTERTAG: They don't vote, but they are there.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18280 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: They don't vote. So they are not part of the decision‑making process.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18281 MS OSTERTAG: No.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18282 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Is the board of directors only making policy decisions or are they making financial decisions, allowing money to ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18283 MS OSTERTAG: They make both.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18284 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: They make both.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18285 MS OSTERTAG: The board of directors ‑‑ we have a process by which there is a creative decision made, and the board of directors of FACTOR never gets involved in making creative decisions. That is such a subjective process.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18286 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: That is left to the juries.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18287 MS OSTERTAG: That's correct.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18288 And if you are successful in getting through a jury on the sound recording programs that are juried, the board would give you funding. They are just going to look at the financial commitment.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18289 But it is the board of directors that makes all the funding decisions on all of the programs.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18290 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: How are the members of the board chosen?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18291 MS OSTERTAG: The broadcasters have founder seats, and with all five seats that the broadcasters have on our board ‑‑ for example, with Rogers, Rogers will choose who they want to serve on the board.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18292 We have a six‑year rotation policy and it is really up to them who they appoint on their behalf.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18293 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So Rogers always has a seat on the board?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18294 MS OSTERTAG: Yes. You have Rogers, Standard, CHUM ‑‑ I'm sorry, Corus and Global.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18295 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: And Global. So those five broadcasters are the only ones who can appoint directors to the FACTOR Board?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18296 MS OSTERTAG: They actually have it amongst themselves, because at the time FACTOR was formulated we had a set of by‑laws which are also going to be revamped in June to expand it further.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18297 But the broadcasters discuss amongst themselves who they thing should be ‑‑ talk to each other and talk to each other corporately and they come up with their own game plan and we just accept who they recommend.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18298 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Are the appointees of the broadcasters attending the meetings?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18299 MS OSTERTAG: Yes. They are attending as many as others.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18300 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So to some extent you are more successful than Musicaction, because Musicaction's problem is that the broadcasters don't go to the meeting.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18301 MS OSTERTAG: No, We are fortunate that they show up. You get the odd one where it is challenging for our board, because it is a minimum of 12 meetings a year and then you have your approvals meetings and stuff. So it can get a bit challenging.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18302 Actually, recently with the change of a couple of the directors on the board, it is really exciting with the new blood that has come in, and I know that their commitment and passion to supporting music I consider and say that I know because of them and their specific knowledge and expertise they brought to the table it has affected positively some artists and the funding they have gotten.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18303 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: How are the music members picked up?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18304 MS OSTERTAG: The music industry, we have six seats there. Four of them have criteria attached to them. Two are appointed by CIRPA, the Canadian Independent Record Production Association; one is appointed by the CMPA. In the same way that the broadcasters decide CIRPA decides from its board how that works, CMPA from theirs.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18305 We also, with the merger of FACTOR and the Canadian Talent Library back in 1985 for FACTOR to acquire the assets of the Canadian Talent Library, whose assets were owned by the American Federation of Musicians, they actually allowed the assets to be transferred on the condition that there was a member of the AFofM that was a fully paid dues member in good standing. So one of them has to be that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18306 The other two are voted on by the board at large. We try to take into consideration ‑‑ in fact, we want an artist on the board, we want regional representation and we try to spread it as far as we can to encompass as many sectors of the industry as possible with the seats we have available.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18307 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I may have misunderstood you, but I'm now up to eight members of the music industry. You said there were four coming from CIRPA, one from CMPA ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18308 MS OSTERTAG: No, two from CIRPA.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18309 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Two from CIRPA, okay. We are back to six.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18310 MS OSTERTAG: Sorry. Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18311 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I apologize.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18312 Heritage Canada just implemented the MEC program.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18313 MS OSTERTAG: That's correct.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18314 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: What kind of impact will that have on FACTOR?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18315 MS OSTERTAG: We had actually hoped in some respect, because we are so challenged financially ‑‑ I know one of the criticisms that FACTOR gets is our low approval rate, but it is directly attributed to the fact that we have been successful in getting the word out there about the program.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18316 The MEC program, when it was talked about in theory, thought it was going to free up funds at FACTOR, but in actual fact there are only six companies in English Canada that were dealing with FACTOR, so it is still not enough of a relief. There is still more money needed for us to be able to respond to the other artists.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18317 I think there is a lot of confusion surrounding the program right now, and once people understand it I think things will settle down.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18318 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I'm giving you an opportunity to explain what that program is, because we don't have, at least for the record, enough information about it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18319 MS OSTERTAG: All right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18320 The MEC program ‑‑ and I'm not working for the department.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18321 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: No, no.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18322 MS OSTERTAG: But from my understanding, is the ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18323 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: But they are not appearing here.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18324 MS OSTERTAG: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18325 My understanding is that it is there to help build the infrastructure of the larger Canadian‑owned independent record labels and they are being given envelopes of money with which they can do what they need to do to operate their businesses successfully.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18326 My understanding is there is also going to be an assessment process and a criteria to ensure that they can stay in the program. No company can get more than $650,000.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18327 I know there was talk that it would be a minimum of $200,000, but in rolling the program out I know there is several that are getting significantly less than that money.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18328 So as a program, it is yet another one that is being launched under financed and, like everything in the music industry, we just aren't getting access to enough funds to effectively meet the needs.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18329 Because the concept of a MEC program ‑‑ from my understanding, and this goes back a number of years ‑‑ was pitched by the Canadian Music Industry to Heritage, but it was requesting $100 million. When the program finally was announced they said $10 million, and then all of a sudden it became $8.5 million because $1 million was being set aside for publishers and another half a million for administrative costs in the department.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18330 So all of a sudden it is weaning down and it can, in actual fact, be quite scary for those companies that are in there, because as more companies rise up and are able to go into that program the pie is going to get even smaller?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18331 So when it started out with a tenth of what was needed, I think that there is a lot of expectation it is going to free up a lot of money, but realistically it is not enough of a change.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18332 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: The Heritage Department commitment towards the MEC goes up to the year 2010.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18333 MS OSTERTAG: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18334 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I think it is the fiscal year ending on March 31, 2010.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18335 That is correct?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18336 MS OSTERTAG: That's correct.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18337 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: The funding to FACTOR, has it been already set up to the same date?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18338 MS OSTERTAG: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18339 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Or is it a yearly commitment?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18340 MS OSTERTAG: No. We were suffering through that and it has caused a lot of challenges for us, but at the present time we have an agreement, a fully executed document.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18341 However, it has the proviso, as I think it is with all government documents, that it can be cancelled at any time for any reason with no repercussions on our part.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18342 So how good is the ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18343 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Your contract with the Department of Heritage, does it stipulate that you will need to have broadcasters' commitment to it, or direct funding from the broadcasters?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18344 MS OSTERTAG: We are committing that we have that. Not that we will get it or maintain, but that we have to have it, yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18345 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So at the time of signing the agreement obviously the broadcasters were ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18346 MS OSTERTAG: We were completely unaware that there was the possibility of other things in the works.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18347 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So the submission that the CAB makes of a Super Starmaker Fund ‑‑ obviously there have been a variety of views expressed throughout this hearing and when you read the filing of the CAB you come to the conclusion that there will be no more money going to FACTOR. We have commitments from the CAB and the major players know that the Starmaker will provide the funding to FACTOR rather than the money coming directly from the broadcaster.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18348 If that was the scenario, the money was channelled through Starmaker to FACTOR, will that impair your ability to getting the money from Heritage?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18349 MS OSTERTAG: I can't speak to that. I just know that Canadian Heritage has gone on record as saying that in the event that the broadcaster money is no longer being provided to FACTOR they are rethinking what they are doing with FACTOR.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18350 I have actually asked them ‑‑ it's kind of a scary place to be when you hear something like that ‑‑ here are a lot of artists out there with a huge expectation what we do ‑‑ and I said, "Is this a poker game?" and they said, "We don't play games." So I think it is a very real threat.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18351 The idea that FACTOR would, after 24 years of service, be in the position ‑‑ and it's unknown because it is not clear at this point in time, how the CAB would actually funnel this money. How do you develop programs and plan things if you are at the mercy yet again ‑‑ you need some stability.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18352 We have just come through a very unstable time with the department in having one‑year contracts and the impact to the industry is very clear, it has us behind in program development. Because if you are not sure you are going to be around in 12 months you go, "Well, what is the point in doing it all?" It's difficult to do it when you don't know what your money is going to be.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18353 If FACTOR is going to continue to be effective it needs to be in control of its own destiny.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18354 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I know that Musicaction is not appearing at this hearing, it hasn't filed anything, but to your knowledge is Musicaction in the same situation?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18355 MS OSTERTAG: I don't believe so, because at Musicaction they have been recognized as the agency and are currently operating with two respective Boards of Directors with two different mandates. They are managing the funds for both, so they know what is going on.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18356 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18357 MS OSTERTAG: It is the complete opposite for us.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18358 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: But my question relies more on the commitment made by Heritage to Musicaction.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18359 Or is there a commitment by Heritage, to your knowledge? If you don't know, you don't know.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18360 MS OSTERTAG: It would be the same as ours.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18361 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I guess it will be the same as yours.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18362 MS OSTERTAG: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18363 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: All right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18364 When we look at your annual report one of the complaints that we are hearing is that you are only reporting top‑of‑the‑line information. You don't give that many breakdowns or information on who get's what and how much or whatever.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18365 Is there a reason?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18366 MS OSTERTAG: There was a reason, but also it is the first time ‑‑ we have actually very recently heard about the complaint so we are actually disclosing all of those numbers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18367 One of the reasons we didn't is because there is an assumption when people attach a number to a project that that is what the project costs, when in actual fact our contribution to it may only be 10 or 12 percent of the cost and it can result in there being a negative thing, "Oh, well they made that record for so little it can't be very good", and it could have hurt people.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18368 In our desire to try to not let any of the information be prejudicial to a project, to allow it to stand in the marketplace on its own, we perhaps come up against some criticism, but it is our intention that our annual report that will be released at the end of June for the fiscal ending March 31st will include those numbers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18369 They have been available. We were never asked for them before and understand the desire, so we are prepared to give it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18370 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Mr. Chairman, I think those were my questions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18371 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18372 Commissioner Cugini...?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18373 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Good morning.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18374 MS OSTERTAG: Good morning.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18375 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Just relating back to your Nickelback example that you mentioned in your oral presentation this morning, I'm assuming at that time that Nickelback received the $5,000 from FACTOR you considered them to be an emerging artist, at that point?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18376 MS OSTERTAG: An unknown.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18377 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18378 MS OSTERTAG: They are not even emerging.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18379 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: All right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18380 Do you, as FACTOR, have a definition of "emerging artist"?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18381 MS OSTERTAG: You know, it's an excellent question and I have heard the question has been asked in this forum a number of times.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18382 It would take probably greater minds than mine to actually come up with a definitive because you can say it is the number of releases they have had, it could be airplay potential that is achieved, it could be based on number of years in the business, it could be that they are profitable. There are many, many things.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18383 But what I can do is, I can give you a real example of an artist that I think is an emerging artist to try to illustrate a bit the complexity of trying to come up with that definitive definition.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18384 I was having lunch this week with a young country artist by the name of Erin Pritchard. He is out of British Columbia. He has been in the business quite a number of years, 10, 12 years. A number of years ago he competed in a FACTOR and Corus jointly funded initiative called Project Discovery. He was actually the winner of the competition.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18385 He has gone on, he released his first album, he got some success at radio airplay. He has released his second album and his first single from that album went No. 3 on the Canadian charts. He is just releasing his second one.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18386 He went into a Tim Hortons to buy a coffee and there was a fan there working behind the counter, "Oh my God, it's Erin Pritchard", you know, and all excited and everything. And he is kind of cute, so it didn't hurt.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18387 Anyway, he was standing there and he was absolutely embarrassed, because he was paying for the coffee with his debit card and he didn't know if he had enough money and the card wouldn't let him pay the $1.40 for his coffee.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18388 So it's like ‑‑ it's all over the map in trying to really nail it down because to me he is emerging still because he is not able to financially sustain himself and every penny he has is being reinvested back into his career. There isn't anything left over to be able to accumulate anything.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18389 All of it and then some, because he is still having to knock on our door to get the support. So in my mind he is still emerging, yet at radio I'm sure they would say, "No, he is established now because he has had three hits on radio."
LISTNUM 1 \l 18390 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: So in applying for FACTOR funding there isn't a box where someone would check "emerging" and that would put them into one category or another to receive funding?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18391 MS OSTERTAG: You do that through the programs we have where you have those artists who are applying to, say for example, our Independent Recording Loan Program. That is a program for artists who have absolutely no distribution and they are at the very, very beginning, in many cases making their first CD.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18392 So we will give them up to $20,000 to get started and we give them matching production funds. They are emerging.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18393 But also you have them where some of them have distribution and they are still emerging.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18394 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: So Nickelback doesn't qualify any more for FACTOR funding?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18395 MS OSTERTAG: No, they are not emerging any more. No.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18396 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Or for any FACTOR funding?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18397 MS OSTERTAG: I honestly ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18398 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Do they still qualify or would they be eligible?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18399 MS OSTERTAG: I doubt that they would, because the only program probably left that they would be eligible for would be touring, and on a tour you only actually receive funding from FACTOR if you are losing money. If they are losing money on a tour, then they so need a new team working for them.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18400 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18401 Thank you, Mr. Chair.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18402 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18403 Commissioner Pennefather.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18404 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18405 Good morning.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18406 MS OSTERTAG: Good morning.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18407 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Mr. West, in your remarks you said:
"We advocate ‑‑ we explore the possibility of a common administration for the various funding programs." (As read)
LISTNUM 1 \l 18408 Could you expand for us, please?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18409 MR WEST: You know, FACTOR has worked extremely well for 24 years and there has been a lot of talk lately about transparency of the programs and we feel we are extremely transparent in that any information requested from us is certainly available to anybody at any time.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18410 You know, when you look at people applying for money right now, the way it is applied for, it could be an organization or a label or it could be the artist directly, if you are applying to FACTOR and you receive your funding then you go on to the next level of funding, which is Starmaker.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18411 They are housed in two complete different places, two complete different administrations. The dialogue has to be very close between the organizations in order to make sure there are no what people perceive to be as double dipping, you know, marketing funds that are expended. You have to be very careful.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18412 FACTOR offers marketing money as well and some of that marketing money to get to the next level is offered by Starmaker. we want to make sure that money is not received twice, by mistake or whatever process, but it would really, really help the process if it was under one common administration.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18413 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So similar to the Musicaction, La Fond Radiostar?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18414 MR WEST: That is a perfect scenario, and that is what we would have liked to have happened.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18415 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: That's what you have in mind discussing over the next while?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18416 MR WEST: Absolutely, with all the stakeholders. Sit down at a table and say, "Let's formulate something here and make it work."
LISTNUM 1 \l 18417 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18418 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18419 Commissioner Arpin...?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18420 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Mr. West, you just referred to one of the goals of having a common administration for the two funds is to make sure that there is no overlap or no double dipping.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18421 Has there been any double dipping in the recent past? Because Starmaker has only existed for three or four years now.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18422 MR WEST: I will have to defer to Heather for that answer.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18423 MS OSTERTAG: I wouldn't say that it has happened intentionally, but yes, it does happen. Currently there is a representative from Starmaker who shares information with one of my staff to compare things, but it is doubling up on the paperwork and everything.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18424 Something I would like to add to Jim's comment, there is an ease for the industry if they know where to go and it is all laid out in one place, the one‑stop shopping. It is a very complicated thing in understanding where it is that you should be going and for what and to be able to actually have it that you could say, "Okay, with the FACTOR funding it goes to here" and then "With the Starmaker money it goes to here" and then this would go to here.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18425 There is a huge logic to it and I think that the success that is happening at Musicaction really speaks to why we should be doing that and we should be taking a page from their book.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18426 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18427 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Those are our questions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18428 MS OSTERTAG: I had a report. I understand yesterday you were asking for the amounts of money radio has given to FACTOR. You were asking one of the broadcasters.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18429 I have had the report emailed to me and I printed out a copy if you want it. It records the funding since our inception ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18430 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18431 MS OSTERTAG: ‑‑ on what each broadcaster ‑‑ just to assist you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18432 THE CHAIRPERSON: If you hand it to Madam Secretary ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18433 MS OSTERTAG: Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18434 THE CHAIRPERSON: ‑‑ we will have it on the record. Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18435 Madam Secretary, would you call the next item, please.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18436 THE SECRETARY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18437 I would now invite Radio Starmaker Fund, Mr. Chuck McCoy, to come forward for his presentation.
‑‑‑ Pause / Pause
LISTNUM 1 \l 18438 THE CHAIRPERSON: Whenever you are ready, Mr. McCoy.
PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 18439 MR. McCOY: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. I had the pleasure of being up before you yesterday in my role as a programming executive for Rogers but today I am here as the Chairman of the Radio Starmaker Fund.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18440 I would like to start by thanking the Commission for the opportunity to appear and take part in this proceeding.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18441 Before I begin, I would like to introduce the members of our panel and we are fortunate to have both of our independent Board members with us today.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18442 To my far right is Andy McLean and he is the founder and the Managing Director of the North by Northeast Festival in Toronto which opens next week ‑‑ a little plug‑in there for Andy ‑‑ one of Canada's most important events for discovering new music. Andy is also an artist manager and an accomplished musician.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18443 Beside him, to my immediate right, is musician/writer/producer Jian Ghomeshi. Many of you may know Jian from his musical career as a lead singer and songwriter in the platinum‑selling Canadian band Moxy Fruvous and more recently you probably know him from his work as a national host on CBC Television Newsworld and CBC Radio One.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18444 To my far left is Rachel Oldfield who has been the Finance and Administration Manager of the Starmaker Fund from its inception. She is the keeper of all the statistics and financial information.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18445 And next to me is our current Executive Director Mr. Chip Sutherland who, in addition to fulfilling the role of Executive Director is also the original architect of the Starmaker Fund. In May of 2001, Chip was hired by the first Board of Directors to design the fund and he has been involved in its evolution and operations ever since that time. He is a well‑known entertainment lawyer who has been involved in the music business in many different capacities for the past 15 years.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18446 Now, you have our submission, our written submission, and I thought we would simply highlight a few points. I will do some and then I will ask Jian and Chip to say a few words.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18447 As Chair of the fund for almost four years now, I think I am first and foremost the most impressed with the mandate of the fund and how well it has worked in practice. In some ways, I think the Radio Starmaker Fund established the concept of truly artist‑centred funding.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18448 The fund's primary objective is to support artists with established track records regardless of their industry structure or affiliation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18449 The secondary objective is to recognize the role of the independent record industry and how we can help preserve all forms of independent recording in Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18450 When we look at the proposed funding, the first question is always how will this benefit the artist and the second question is are there any adjustments or accommodations that need to be made to ensure that this policy is fair to the independent sector. This is how we define the artist‑centred approach.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18451 Now, the interesting part of this for me is that these are all just ideas until they are actually put into practice and in practice these broad guidelines have proven to hold true to achieving our goals.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18452 Here, I would like to point out some of the statistics in relation to the fund.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18453 Major labels receive 20 per cent of our funding; CIRPA‑independent companies receive 35 per cent; non‑CIRPA‑independent companies receive 35 per cent; and quasi‑indies ‑‑ those would be artists who own their own records but license them to majors ‑‑ they receive approximately 5 per cent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18454 Part of this is explained by the fact that we have built in accommodation for the indies that allow them to access 2:1 funding for dollars invested, whereas major labels are only able to access 1:1 funding.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18455 As for the artists, as an example, I noticed this week that Black Crows were here in Ottawa and they were supported by Matt Mays as an opening act. We are happy and proud to say that we provided the funding for Matt Mays to make that possible.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18456 As a broadcaster, it was also particularly important to me to see that the fund is able to foster the careers of artists that we can play on the radio. This represents the true nature of the partnership between music and radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18457 To do that, we knew we needed to spread the funding across a broad spectrum of artists and that had to include many genres. The result is 83 per cent of Starmaker‑funded artists received significant airplay in this country.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18458 Finally, I would like to say a word about our administration. I don't think I truly appreciated the full value of our website. It is truly an amazing administrative tool and it has been invaluable to us in managing the fund and allowing us to easily adapt program and criteria for the website.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18459 Now at this point, I would like to ask Jian Ghomeshi to give you some of his thoughts from an independent perspective.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18460 MR. GHOMESHI: Thanks, Chuck. And thank you, if you will forgive me, I will make my comments somewhat informally or anecdotally.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18461 I have been on the Board for two years and I have been directly involved in the music business for about 15 years. I am quite proud to be part of the Radio Starmaker Fund experience.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18462 I think these are great days for Canadian music, for Canadian artists. I have said that a few times as a broadcaster. I really think, and the results are there, we are doing disproportionately great work, not just domestically but internationally ‑‑ Canadian artists are ‑‑ and I am so proud of that and I think Radio Starmaker has been a big part of that in the last two, three, four years especially, obviously.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18463 The bottom line for me is that Radio Starmaker Fund works. It is lean, it is supportive, it is effective, it is not bogged down in administration. It is artist‑centric, and really the artists that we look at and support and fund are quite a diverse lot, you know, both in terms of the genres and whether they are signed to major labels or independent labels or major indies, et cetera.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18464 I don't think it is comprehensive. I think that there are artists out there that don't meet the criteria to apply for this fund. But in terms of the mandate of this fund and the artists who are at a level to be taken to the next level and become stars, whether it is on radio, sales, et cetera, I think this fund has done its job and done its job very, very effectively.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18465 I will just say, as an artist, after spending many years in a band and selling half a million records and touring and doing that, to me, it comes down to ‑‑ and being a producer and manager ‑‑ it comes down to a couple of nutshell elements of what it takes to get somewhere as an artist in this country and to carry music abroad.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18466 On the one hand, you have to create the content to make a record, et cetera. On the other hand, you have to get it out there.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18467 In terms of creating the content, the world has changed and we know that. You can now make a world‑class quality record out of your basement because of new technology that you wouldn't have been able to in the past.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18468 In terms of getting it out there, we still ‑‑ it still takes resources, it still takes support, it still takes funding, marketing, promotion and touring, and that is where Starmaker has come in.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18469 Chuck mentioned matinees.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18470 We could look at an artist like Joel Plaskett on the east coast who is touring with Ottawa's Kathleen Edwards right now in the States with Starmaker support.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18471 We could look at a band like Metric who is an underground critically acclaimed band from Toronto that, with the support of Starmaker, has gone on to open for the Rolling Stones at Madison Square Garden and do effective things.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18472 So in a nutshell, I think from an artist perspective, I am proud to see what this fund is doing in carrying artists at a certain level to the next level.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18473 MR. McCOY: Thank you, Jian.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18474 Andy would be, I know, happy to answer any questions you might have.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18475 Before we get to those questions though, I am going to ask Chip Sutherland to say a few words and just clarify a few points for us.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18476 MR. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Chuck.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18477 I have been listening this week and I thought it would be helpful, since I am sort of the mechanic of the fund, to just address a couple of issues to clarify. I have got five of them.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18478 The first one is the commercial fund. Everyone has been throwing the phrase around "commercial fund" but what does that mean?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18479 There is sort of a presumption that it means big established pop rock artists like Avril Lavigne and Nickelback.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18480 But "commercial" for our purposes means "where the artist intersects with people paying for their music." So we have people like Jane Bunnett, Alpha Yaya Diallo, Montreal Jubilation Gospel Choir, Daniel Taylor and Taima, to just name a few.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18481 Our written submission includes in Appendix 1 a breakdown of all of our funding to date by genre. You will see that pop rock artists make up only 50 per cent of our funding. The other 50 per cent are niche genres in some of these lower levels.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18482 Also, our sales levels for being approved for the fund. If you are a jazz artist, you only have to sell 2,500 records to get onto our fund. If you are an independent artist in pop rock, it is 10,000. If you are a major label artist, it is 15,000.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18483 So we don't have one threshold. We adjust the thresholds for the genres.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18484 The amount of funding. There definitely was confusing, I think, about this and for good reason. It is very complicated. I see Lynn Buffoni sitting here today and if it wasn't for her, I would still be trying to figure out these numbers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18485 I have provided a chart of the CAB contributions to date. We have turned that into a three‑year rolling capital funding model and that is how we rationalize our funding because we only have one source of funding.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18486 You can see on this chart if you turn to it ‑‑ it is a lovely hot pink graph ‑‑ it goes from 1999 to 2010 and you can see that there is a very precipitous drop‑off at the end and this is because of how the transactions are paid. So we will ‑‑ obviously, in the next two or three years our funding drops right off. I can talk about that more in question and answer if you would like.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18487 Artist‑centring. Chuck gave you some examples of artist‑centring. I just want to clarify this doesn't mean artist payment. It doesn't always mean the payment goes into their bank account. Sometimes the labels who are driving marketing, they are the best people to administer that money.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18488 But it does give us the flexibility. For example, Jimmy Rankin has his own record label song, Dog Music. We pay him directly. It is irrelevant to us. We are based on sales criteria for the artist. So it doesn't matter how their industry is structured.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18489 It also allows us to pay artists direct touring subsidies. In many international countries, the artists don't have a record label and therefore by paying artists directly we are able to infuse that, as Jian was addressing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18490 Emerging artists. I know this is a big issue. There are lots of questions and, of course, we don't have any position regarding the CanCon issues there. But I would like to point out that 52 per cent of the artists that we fund, we are funding on their first or second record.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18491 The concept of Starmaker was to grab artists as they are starting to take off and provide incremental investment right at that point where they need it to shoot off into the next level and that is what we are trying to do.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18492 The control of the fund. Just a couple of references. Honestly, I think because the name is Radio Starmaker Fund, I think people think it is radio's fund. But there are only four out of 10 radio Board members on our Board.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18493 We have by‑laws that we spent quite a bit of time revising the first year of the fund, that were unanimously adopted by the Board, that have very detailed criteria about how decisions are made.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18494 So just to be clear, we are very serious about governance and how the Board operates with a strict set of by‑laws and radio has four out of 10 seats on the Board.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18495 So those are my comments.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18496 MR. McCOY: That really completes our oral presentation and we are here to answer any questions that you might have.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18497 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18498 Commissioner Pennefather.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18499 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18500 Good morning, everyone, and thank you for the presentation. It is very helpful, indeed, filling in some of the blanks but I have got a few more.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18501 Let us start with the governance question first, and kicking off from Mr. Sutherland's comments about the composition of the Board, how is the Board chosen?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18502 MR. McCOY: Well, there are ‑‑ each body ‑‑ for instance, the four broadcasters ‑‑ the CAB appoints the representatives they want to have on that Board and it is done via the four major broadcasters: Rogers, CHUM, Corus and Standard. They make the decision as to who is going to represent them.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18503 The same is the case for CIRPA. Their board appoints members to be part of our Board, as does CRIA. And the two independent members are selected by the Board itself.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18504 I am not sure ‑‑ Chip, have you anything to add to that?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18505 MR. SUTHERLAND: No, thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18506 MR. McCOY: Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18507 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Should the CAB proposal, which, simply put, would redirect all funding through the Starmaker Fund, would the composition of the Board or its selection process change?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18508 MR. McCOY: Thank you, Madam Commissioner. I don't like to duck a question but I think that Radio Starmaker Fund was formed five years ago on the basis of some governing principles and guidelines from the Commission and some money from the broadcasters and we are prepared to respond in the same way should those change, either the governing principles or the amount of money.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18509 I don't think that I am in a position or my Board members here are in a position to discuss what we might or might not be able to do, certainly not without discussing it with our own Board.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18510 But I guess to say we have been given some principles and some money before and we made it work and we would do the same with whatever decision you make.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18511 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: One of the principles is the breakdown with major labels, indie funds. That was part of the, going in, principles and premises and I just wanted to clarify.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18512 On page 3 of the presentation this morning, the percentages add up to 95 per cent, first point; and second point, the annual report that I have in front of me here of 2004‑2005 has a significant difference in the percentages to each of the groups. So perhaps you could just explain that to us.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18513 MR. McCOY: Yes, and if you are getting into the mechanics and numbers, I am going to ask our Executive Director Chip Sullivan to follow up on that one.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18514 MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18515 The other 5 per cent is music associations. We do sponsor the East Coast Music Association and the WCMAs. We give them travel grants for artists to get to their conferences. We do the same thing with the Junos. It is one of our ways to trying to provide some regional outreach.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18516 When the Junos started travelling, one of the problems they have is there are many artists that are independent being nominated for Junos and they live in Edmonton and they are a classical violinist and they don't have a label paying for them to go to the Junos in Halifax. So we provide grants for Juno nominees. So that is the other 5 per cent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18517 As for the difference in the financial ‑‑ Rachel.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18518 MS OLDFIELD: The difference between the annual report and the written submission in March to the CRTC is the annual reports track the funding by artist. If you are a major label artist, the money was 100 per cent major label.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18519 In our submission in March, the money was tracked by company, which is a more detailed breakdown where if that major label artist was to receive touring money, the touring money was paid directly to the artist company and the label initiatives would have been paid to the major label.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18520 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So today when you say CIRPA‑independent companies receive 35 per cent, and I am looking at the annual report, it says indie labels 69.9, it is not the same?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18521 MS OLDFIELD: Yes, it is not broken down by ‑‑ it is just simply indie artists as opposed to indie companies and the breakdown of the companies.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18522 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18523 MR. SUTHERLAND: And if I can just say, Madam Commissioner, why would we break it down that way, and the point is that there are all kinds of levels of the independent music industry and we are just trying to reflect that there are different aspects to that infrastructure and we are aware of it, that's all.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18524 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Okay, that is helpful. I guess perhaps if there is follow‑up, you might want to give us a little bit more of that because I think that ‑‑ as I said, it is one of the principles going in and as we look at the future it is important to understand, not necessarily drill down to the point where we are right in there ‑‑ we shouldn't be ‑‑ but just to get a better sense of it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18525 You heard Vice‑Chair Arpin ask FACTOR about the MEC. Could you also give us your perspective on, for example, the difference between the Starmaker Fund and the Heritage MEC program and how you understand that program to be functioning?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18526 MR. SUTHERLAND: Well again, we don't. They are just rolling it out. We have only had preliminary discussions in the fall when Heritage was kind enough to inform us what they were planning so that we could start predicting it as we rolled out our programs.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18527 What we understand to date is that it is business plan funding for the bigger independent companies that provides them with significant funding on a business plan model as a per‑project‑based model.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18528 Since the program is brand new, we haven't determined yet ‑‑ our board hasn't yet decided how will we manage funding MEC companies. That is something the Board has yet to look at because we haven't had them apply yet as MEC companies.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18529 But the basic premise, as we understand it, is Heritage is putting additional money into the music industry. They are putting money targeted specifically at independent infrastructure, the bigger independents, based on their performance I believe is how they are doing it. So it is basically additional funding in the ‑‑ I believe you have heard the word "ecosystem" a few times this week, so there is more fish food in the fish tank I would say.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18530 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: It usually brings more fish, too.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18531 MR. SUTHERLAND: Well, hopefully some more varied colourful fish.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18532 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: The demand is always there.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18533 But so I understand, then, a company accessing money through the MEC program could also access money through Starmaker for marketing and promotion?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18534 MR. SUTHERLAND: We haven't discussed that at the board level because we didn't know ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18535 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Potentially?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18536 MR. SUTHERLAND: Potentially, absolutely. We have made no decisions on that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18537 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Then again concerning the chart that you have given us I did have a questions on the financials. You have also laid that out in your written intervention.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18538 In the written intervention you also make the point that you will have stable funding in the next three years.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18539 I was reading from that, that next three years is the CAB proposal three‑year transition period.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18540 Did I read that correctly?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18541 MR. SUTHERLAND: You are very close. Three years starts for us 2006. So it is actually the first two years of the CAB. So we have stable funding right now because of our capital funding model.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18542 If you look at this little ski hill, what the board did in 2005 is we rationalized the funding and spread it out on a balance basis so that we wouldn't end up with programs that we couldn't fund over the next three years. So '06‑'07.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18543 Our fiscal is September to September like the broadcast year, so '06‑'07, '07‑'08, '08‑'09 are the three stable years.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18544 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: The $3 million approximately is the demand number that we saw in the CAB proposal based on historic demand on the Starmaker Fund, and that would be secured and guaranteed?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18545 MR. SUTHERLAND: Yes. What we have in our budget, the capital fund model is $3.2 million a year. It is $800,000 per quarter for our grant program; it's $300,000 a year in the association funding that I referred to earlier. We are running at roughly $450,000 in administration. So about $4 million is the real ‑‑ that is what our capital fund model allows for right now.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18546 The only thing I would add to the CAB model is that our international touring program is very popular and it is broad. It has only been in place for 18 months and in terms of an arc of funding I suspect the demand will go up for that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18547 So there is likely ‑‑ if I was truly giving a picture of the true demand today, it is probably more in the $4.5 million range.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18548 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So am I looking at demand here on this, or contribution?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18549 MR. SUTHERLAND: No, this is the painful chart of taking the transactions from the MLO approvals that you have. We went to the CAB. The very first thing I did was say to them, "How much money are we going to have and how do we get it and how do I know?" We agreed with the broadcaster ‑‑ they were very cooperative ‑‑ to say we will stagger our payments in equal instalments over seven years and guarantee you those instalments, and they have lived up to that promise.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18550 So this is if you took all the multiple licence transactions, divided them up by the time of when they occurred and how the money is collected over a 7‑year period, as you would all know from being involved in it ‑‑ there was a big spike in these transactions, that's why you see the spike in the funding, and then it trails off now that the transactions have trailed off.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18551 So this is literally ‑‑ this is drawn right out of our capital fund model. This is how we budget ourselves. These are the numbers we expect to receive.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18552 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Receive, all right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18553 MR. SUTHERLAND: That's right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18554 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: All right. That's helpful.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18555 Which connects a little more to the annual report in terms of the contributions line and then the expenses line.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18556 MR. SUTHERLAND: If I could just one issue on the annual report, we are very strict about GAAP accounting rules on fund accounting and it is a little bit different.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18557 The CAB collects for us because it is an efficient thing to do, they are already in touch with all the transactions and tracking it. When we receive the money we have to report it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18558 So I think somebody suggested in one of our years there was $5 million, but that is just a cashflow issue. It is really irrelevant. We don't model on cash or we would run out of money and would not be able to fund programs. We model on this contributions chart and then we just manage our cashflow appropriately from there.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18559 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: The drop off, again to be clear, this is based on tangible benefits contribution only?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18560 MR. SUTHERLAND: The lexicon, I call it MLO money because I just made that up, but it's the multiple licence ownership transaction.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18561 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: We mean the same thing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18562 MR. SUTHERLAND: If that's tangible benefits, then that's what it is.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18563 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: All right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18564 Technically CTD contributions can also come via other contributions, as in the 3 percent in the CAB plan.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18565 Is that a quantifiable number and is that include in this amount or is this just the tangible benefits?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18566 MR. SUTHERLAND: This is just tangible benefits.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18567 We do receive from time to time, not very often, a few small CTD amounts. There are some new license commitments we have received recently.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18568 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18569 MR. SUTHERLAND: Newcap has been very supportive of us. So there will be a few of those, but they are so new that they haven't hit this model yet.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18570 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: The reason I'm asking I guess is obvious: Would that waylay, would that change the drop? If this is related just to tangible benefits, if there were other contributions through other doors would that change the drop off?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18571 In other words, do you have another plan, another backup plan to take care of this drop off?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18572 MR. SUTHERLAND: We have no backup plan. The Starmaker funds, as Chuck mentioned, the mandate was: There are going to be these multiple license transactions. We think this would be a good use of this money to put it into a star system so please build it. We have known from the beginning that it had this arc and we have built it that way, stabilized in the last three years.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18573 One of the things about our capital fund model ‑‑ and it is one of the advantages of not being in a government model where you have to answer every March 31st for the money I suppose ‑‑ is we can model it like a business over three years and provide ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18574 To answer your question, if somebody showed up tomorrow and said, "Here is $2 million", we don't just spend it that month, we build it into our three‑year ‑‑ it's a three‑year rolling capital fund model.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18575 Because one of the problems with building your programs is, you can either build 15 programs and then not be able to fund any of them because you have too much demand for too many programs.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18576 One of the real challenges when we first started with this was to say, "Well, what can we afford to do, because we have a finite amount of money and it is for a specific purpose."
LISTNUM 1 \l 18577 For instance, we didn't do international touring at first because we didn't feel we had enough money for it, and then once the transactions increased we said, "Well, now we do have enough budget" so we added international touring.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18578 I hope, to answer you question, there is no plan. As money comes in we will adjust the capital funding model, and it comes in generally in these spaced out increments so we just adjust as we go along.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18579 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: One of the comments that I read in one submission ‑‑ and you have mentioned it yourself ‑‑ is that Starmaker Fund is funding ‑‑ I think you used ‑‑ no that's the airplay, 88 percent, or a similar amount, of response to the demand.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18580 MR. SUTHERLAND: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18581 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Am I more or less correct on that, that you are responding to the demand at that level?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18582 MR. McCOY: Yes. Ninety‑one percent of all the qualifying applications are approved, and they are approved to, I believe, just over 80 percent of the total funding.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18583 MR. SUTHERLAND: Yes. We measured two things. One is the number. You get 30 applications, of those 30 generally 27 of them will be approved. Of the 27 that are approved, they generally get about 83 percent of them ‑‑ which I think is the number you are talking about ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18584 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18585 MR. SUTHERLAND: ‑‑ of the money they ask for. Now, that is because we are able to set very specific criteria around what it is you are qualified ‑‑ our website is very detailed in terms of what you can get from us so it helps to steer that funding and make it more certain for everyone.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18586 MR. GHOMESHI: Which is, I might add, one of the things I like, which is that it is not whimsical or subjection on behalf of the board in terms of where the money is going, it is if you meet the criteria and you have sold some records, you will probably get the funding.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18587 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: speaking of that, one of the main components of the programs is the direct board approval segment. That would appear to cover a large part of the grants.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18588 Is that correct?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18589 MR. SUTHERLAND: Direct board approval is FACTOR's process.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18590 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: All right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18591 MR. SUTHERLAND: We don't have a direct board approval because everything is sales‑based criteria. An artist could show up tomorrow that has no track record, that is not on a label of any kind that anyone has ever heard of but, as Jian can talk to, can be the next big thing and if they hit that 10,000 unit level, they stick an application in, they get money.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18592 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: The question I asked earlier I wondered if you would comment on, Mr. McCoy, the possibility of a common administration of the funds in the context as described by FACTOR.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18593 Do you have any comment on that?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18594 MR. McCOY: Well, I'm going to duck the question again a bit, because I really don't think that I can comment on what changes we might make to Radio Starmaker fund, what might work better for all the funds that are out there, including Radio Starmaker and FACTOR.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18595 I think I would only say that ‑‑ as I say, first of all, we haven't discussed that with the board an in terms of governance we wouldn't make a public statement on that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18596 But I guess I would say and reiterate that what we have been doing for four years has been working and we are comfortable in continuing with the way it has been going.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18597 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: But the concept of a common administration is a little different, like let's say the way that Musicaction, Fond Radiostar are currently administered together. This is what I believe has been put on the table as potential going forward.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18598 It's a little different than all the funds going through Radiostar.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18599 Is that something that could be contemplated or is it again something that you would want to discuss?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18600 MR. McCOY: You know, Madam Commissioner, going back to what we were saying in our oral presentation, in reality we are a very independent fund. We have a board that is comprised of people from all segments of the industry, both music and radio. As Chip said, five years ago this Commission provided us with some governing principles and the broadcasters supplied some money and we built a fund. That included administration. We are really willing and able to take direction again and whatever funding is provided, including administration or however you see fit to construct it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18601 MR. SUTHERLAND: If I could just add, just on the administration because it sounds like just a vague word, we have two and a half employees and we have a website. That is the extent of our administration. It is not exactly a cumbersome ‑‑ I think Jian described it as lean.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18602 But the one advantage of having put such an investment in our website is that we are a 100 percent paperless web‑based application. It is a fairly slim operation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18603 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. Very helpful. Thank you very much.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18604 THE CHAIRPERSON: Vice‑Chair Arpin.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18605 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Obviously in this graph you are making the assumption that there will be no more transactions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18606 Why are you making that assumption?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18607 MR. McCOY: I will answer that ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18608 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Because you are living in the real world or you are living on the ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18609 MR. McCOY: Well, Commissioner Arpin, I will answer that and then I will ask Chip to follow up.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18610 Preparing the capital funding model we never want to or we are not able to anticipate funding that might or might not be coming. So we are really preparing our funding model based on the certainties that we have. Again, that may change and there may be funding from other places and that would change the capital funding model.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18611 Chip, if there is ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18612 MR. SUTHERLAND: I think the other thing, what you don't see here, I was being very specific about the existing contributions, but we have a three‑year rolling model. So if next month in your wisdom ‑‑ or somebody else's wisdom I suppose if they want to buy somebody ‑‑ we find out there is another million dollars, we know it is being paid the seven years, we can easily adapt for new changes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18613 But really we do not have another source of money and so we really can't say to the public, "Oh yes, we probably will have money", so we have to budget accordingly.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18614 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: When in 1988 the CRTC allowed the creation of the Starmaker fund it was based on an assumption ‑‑ and the CAB created the Starmaker on the assumption that it will have a life of about seven to nine years. I can see from your graph that what you are showing here is that you will have had a real life of about 10 years. Well, you are showing 12, but in year 1 and year 12 you don't have any significant impact, particularly in the year 12.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18615 Wasn't the goal attained?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18616 MR. SUTHERLAND: I think the goal was attained. That's an excellent point.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18617 I think I said this earlier, this fund was brought about because of a specific circumstance in the marketplace that radio thought this would be effective. They gave us a few principles and some money and we turned it into the fund and it worked for what it was supposed to do.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18618 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So why expand the lifespan of the fund?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18619 MR. SUTHERLAND: We are not. We are not expanding the lifespan of the fund. This is the fund is what it is for today.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18620 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: No, no. I think the question should have been asked to the CAB and they could address it on June 12th.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18621 There are CAB representatives in the room.
‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 18622 MR. SUTHERLAND: I think what Chuck is saying is that we are all set up, we have the website, we have the administration. The concept of artists entering seems to be working well and if there is more work to be done we are happy to take it on, but at present we are happy that we have done exactly what I feel we were asked to do.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18623 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: And with success. I think your annual report shows that the money has allowed Canadian artists to further develop and to become known at the international level.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18624 MR. GHOMESHI: I would say that we continue to be effective and that we are, as you say, living in the real world in terms of the mandate that has been dealt to us, but that we continue to be effective and make a difference in the lives and careers of artists and were that to continue I would consider that a good thing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18625 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: With the previous intervenor we discussed the possibility of double dipping problems between FACTOR and Starmaker. I know that Ms Ostertag said that you had put in place some mechanisms which, from her own end, is a paper burden.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18626 Do you have any comments?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18627 MR. McCOY: Yes, Commissioner Arpin. Obviously this is something that we are as concerned about as the people from FACTOR are.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18628 We have had many conversations with FACTOR and Rachel has been to the FACTOR office and we have looked and we examine all of the funding, and I am going to just ask Chip to give you maybe a bit of a rundown in terms of what the results were, because we did a fairly exhaustive examination of that possibility.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18629 MR. SUTHERLAND: Well, there are two things.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18630 When we built the fund we built it around FACTOR of course, because FACTOR had been around for 20 years when we started and we were well aware of the good work that FACTOR was doing so we weren't going to stumble all over what they were doing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18631 They are obviously putting a lot of money into creating product, records and videos. We don't do that. So right away a huge chunk of their funding and none of ours is directed in an area where we don't go.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18632 They don't fund any major label artists. Well, they do in some small segments of their program but they don't have that and we do. Twenty percent of our money goes there, so 20 percent of our money generally is fine. So it was designed to get around that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18633 Now, where we had a problem or a perceived problem was we had independent, the bigger independent companies who are making lots of investments and artists and they have successful artists so they are applying to both because they don't know whether they are going to get money from one or the other, so we have made it clear that they have to disclose if they are applying for FACTOR, then we exchange all of this information.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18634 In the first round of funding we might have had three because nobody knew the rules. We caught all of them. I think the five years ‑‑ Rachel, you can correct me ‑‑ I think we have had seven instances of double dipping.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18635 I think we have caught all of them. I think maybe four of them were from one company because they didn't understand a rule on how the invoices could be submitted, and therefore out of the whole fund I think maybe it was $30,000 total that we had overlap.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18636 Do you want to just take that?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18637 MS OLDFIELD: Yes, I think probably today there have been 250 fully reconciled files, and I think the instances are less than ten. And as Chip has alluded to, it was one individual larger indie company who was responsible for ‑‑ I think it was six of those double‑dipping instances.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18638 We do have a mechanism in place where I am in contact with FACTOR and they are in contact with me. I send every single Radio Starmaker Fund fully reconciled independent label account statement to FACTOR, and they have it on file.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18639 That is every single one, whether they indicated they applied to FACTOR or not.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18640 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: On another area, one of the record companies, Fading Ways, just to name them, is saying that no CTD funds should be given via FACTOR or Starmaker, or any other similar programs, for project artists who no longer control their intellectual property or that the company is not 100 percent Canadian owned.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18641 Do you have any views on that?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18642 MR. McCOY: Well, again, we are not a centered fund. Our funding is based on the artist. We are here to develop Canadian talent and the artist is at the centre of it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18643 We don't believe ‑‑ and this is how we operate the Radio Starmaker Fund ‑‑ that the funding should be dependent on the business arrangement that the artist has made.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18644 We have particular guidelines in terms of we predominantly fund independent artists but it is not our role to play in determining what business deal an artist makes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18645 If they are Canadian, they are Canadian. And if they meet the other criteria, then we will review them for funding.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18646 I'm not sure, Andy or Jian, perhaps you have a comment to make on that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18647 MR. McLEAN: Yes. I just wanted to say that in about three weeks about 450 new bands will be coming to Toronto to play at the festival that I and my partners organize. This is our 12th year of running it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18648 The theme this year is "DIY", Do It Yourself. Now, a lot of artists are really making their own business decisions to be an independently run artist business in the same way as you would start any other little business; in fact, a very viable way for artists to try and make a living.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18649 The traditional model is either starving artist or superstar. I think it is much better to see it in terms of trying to create a middle ground where the new Canadian artists are self‑supporting; that they are taking control of their own business and they can access funds and manage it in a way that any other small start‑up business would be perceived.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18650 So that is the kind of information that we are giving to artists who are developing and just encouraging them to run it. Even though it is the music business, it just like any other independent business. And it should really be run under the same kind of guidelines.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18651 If you have a good product, which is great songs you can play, then you will reach your market at some point.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18652 And you should certainly keep control of owning this intellectual property. As Jian says, you can record in a basement. There is no real reason not to hang on to the masters of your recording.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18653 Traditionally in this business the sad thing is that many artists will never own the songs that they have created. They are owned by labels.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18654 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Those are my questions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18655 MR. SUTHERLAND: If I can just add for a second, because the quote you gave was effective ‑‑ giving up control of their masters and Andy was talking about ownership.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18656 The effective control sounds like an easy test, but it is not really an easy test. If the ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 18657 THE CHAIRPERSON: Tell us about it.
‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 18658 MR. SUTHERLAND: Well, the idea that the artist makes the record and then decides who is going to help me in my whole economy, not just the record business. Of course it is important, but it is only one part of the music business. Right?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18659 The music business is touring and merchandising and song writing. For an artist, there is a whole economy out there and we are focused on improving all of that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18660 The effective control isssue is well, you make your record and whether you choose on a business deal, because of the investment levels, to give up ownership or you don't, we have faith that the artist makes good decisions about their own business decisions and why would we tell them how to structure their business.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18661 We don't judge them by their business structure. We judge them by being a Canadian artist.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18662 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18663 Madam Secretary, the next item, please.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18664 THE SECRETARY: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18665 We would now invite the next participant, ANR Lounge, Ms Anna Maria Russo, if she could come forward for her presentation.
‑‑‑ Pause
PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 18666 MS RUSSO: Sorry, it's just booting up right now.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18667 THE CHAIRPERSON: Are you using dial‑up?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18668 MS RUSSO: Sorry, Dell computers.
‑‑‑ Pause
LISTNUM 1 \l 18669 THE CHAIRPERSON: Is your entire presentation video?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18670 MS RUSSO: Pardon me?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18671 THE CHAIRPERSON: Is your entire presentation video?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18672 MS RUSSO: It's going to exemplify everything that I mention.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18673 I am just going to introduce myself while I fold this over so that you can see it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18674 THE CHAIRPERSON: All right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18675 MS RUSSO: Good morning. Sorry about the wait.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18676 My name is Anna Maria Russo. I am the manager of the ANR Lounge website.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18677 Here with me today, and running the AV, is Sam Baardman, Executive Director of the Manitoba Audio Recording Industry Association, also known as MARIA.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18678 MARIA is one of the 15 music industry associations in the ANR Lounge. We would like to thank the CRTC for allowing us the opportunity to speak about the ANR Lounge as a vital internet tool for the Canadian music industry, and more specifically for emerging artists.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18679 I will be conducting a visual presentation to better describe our services. By employing real‑life scenarios artists commonly encounter, I will show you how the ANR Lounge helps get their music out there and be heard.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18680 Before I start, I wish to clarify that we are here as a non‑partisan, independent group committed to developing talent in this country.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18681 We also want to show how ANR Lounge is a perfect example of how Canadian Talent Development funds are efficiently used to help create the stars of tomorrow.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18682 The discovery and development of emerging artists is vital as they are among Canada's most valued cultural resources. The ANR Lounge recognizes the need to nurture this resource because without new music there would be nothing to fuel the Canadian music industry.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18683 Through the website, located at www.anrlounge.com, up‑and‑coming artists like Luke Doucet, The Perms, Damhnait Doyle, BrassMunk and Doc Walker are able to promote their music to radio stations across Canada for free.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18684 But that is not all we do.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18685 We provide targeted information to help artists acquire the knowledge and help they need to develop their craft.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18686 As the saying goes, no person is an island and this is true for any artist trying to make it in the music business, particularly with the culture of connectedness the internet affords. Artists need the infrastructure provided by managers, record labels, promoters, etc., to help get their career to the next level.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18687 Therefore, in addition to our radio promotion service, we provide what is arguably the most comprehensive database of information containing Canadian sources that will help artists build the necessary network in order to get their music heard.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18688 I will now ask you to pay attention to the screens in front of you as I will demonstrate our claims.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18689 Let us take, for example, a new rock group that has just finished a release and are looking for ways to promote it. Naturally, the first question that is asked by artists is how can they get their music played on the radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18690 Through their free ANR Lounge account the rock group has access to the Music and New Releases section. In this section artist members can create a profile that includes their biography, sound clips, and album artwork among other information, which resembles an electronic press kit.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18691 When completed and reviewed by one of our 13 regional administrators across the country, their profile is posted in the Music and New Releases section.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18692 Each week we send out a notice to over 600 radio stations, which includes commercial, campus and community, setting out what new releases have just been uploaded. This gives artists an incredible advantage because they are saving thousands of dollars because there is no need to pay out the money it would take to mail out packages, nor does it cost them any money to upload the release to our website.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18693 Therefore, without having to spend a dime, they increase their chances of being heard by key radio station personnel and being considered for airplay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18694 Since the launch of this service, artists listed on the ANR Lounge have appeared over 300 times on campus radio charts and added 515 times to commercial radio. Currently a radio station can access 1,300 releases containing over 10,000 songs found in the Music and New Releases section.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18695 Other ways to augment the promotion of a release is by sending a press release out to major media, hiring a radio promoter or planning a tour of live performances.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18696 The Listings section of the website can help the group initiate any of these activities by providing them with up‑to‑date contacts in the music industry. In our searchable database of 16,000 contacts we provide contact information for 1,275 media outlets, including print, television and radio; 115 publicists; and over 1,400 venues across the country.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18697 These listings can be narrowed down by genre, province, city and sub‑categories. For example, you can limit your venue search to a range of different sizes from coffee houses to stadiums.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18698 If I may digress for a moment, going back to the idea mentioned earlier about building a support network, the listings also provide contact information for 418 management companies, 325 record labels and 219 promoters. Artists can peruse their search results to target who they want to contact to potentially build a working relationship.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18699 As you can see, the listings provide one‑stop targeted searching in over 40 different music‑related categories in Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18700 As with the Music and New Release section, the listings save time spent on searching for the right contacts and again help bring their music closer to the masses.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18701 Networking is a very important part of being in the music industry and on many occasions it can be equally as beneficial to know and to have the right contacts as it is to have a good release.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18702 Our listings provide key music industry contacts. However, our events calendar will indicate where the key contacts will most likely convene. The events calendar lists conferences, award shows, educational seminars and trade shows.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18703 Revisiting our rock group looking to promote their release, if they decide to plan a tour and book some dates, they can list their tour dates here.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18704 Let us take a few steps back, before our imaginary rock group went into the studio with a fist‑full of songs to record. The principal question in the mind of the artist is: How are we going to pay for this?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18705 Fortunately, there are over 200 funding programs in Canada that provide grants to finance artists' endeavours, such as a recording project.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18706 The ANR Lounge's Funding MatchMaker helps organize the overwhelming number of programs by employing an interactive filter process to narrow down the list to a select few that are relevant to the needs of the artist.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18707 Many members have benefited from this service, including Troy Neilson of New Brunswick, who successfully received $5,000 in grants from the New Brunswick sound initiative, and Arnold van Labalgen of Saskatchewan who received funds through a touring grant.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18708 Through these four services I outlined today, the ANR Lounge provides a broad range of functionalities suited to increase business opportunities for artists.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18709 The tangible benefits to the industry are profound, as demonstrated by the latest web traffic statistics. To date, the website receives an average of 387,000 hits per month, which amounts to 30,000 unique users during the same period.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18710 While the majority of our visitors come from Canada, 43 percent of our users come from outside the country, many from the United States, Europe and Australia. This proves that by using this service, our artists have the potential to reach beyond the borders of our country.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18711 The ANR Lounge did not achieve success on its own. The creation of the website forged an unprecedented collaboration among 15 music industry associations, including all provincial and regional associations and four national ones. They are now linked in a unique way, working closer together ‑‑ perhaps in a way that has never been done before in Canada's music history.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18712 The initiative allowed the opportunity for the associations to exchange policies and ideas. I would even go ahead and say that the ANR Lounge is partly responsible for the formation of the Coalition of Nine Provincial/Territorial Music Industry Associations that will be speaking to you later today.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18713 This proves that working together is a more powerful way to a common goal: to build the Canadian music industry and sustain its economic and cultural health.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18714 The music industry would lose a valuable resource if the ANR Lounge were discontinued due to lack of funding. Currently the ANR Lounge is financially supported by the Foundation Assisting Canadian Talent on Recordings ‑‑ also known as FACTOR ‑‑ exclusively through the Radio Marketing Fund.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18715 We express our gratitude to the broadcasters and FACTOR for the opportunity to create the ANR Lounge. The initiative has entered the last year of a five‑year funding commitment with no guarantee of renewal. Many individuals and companies have benefited from the resources provided by this important database and many more stand to benefit in the future.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18716 The ANR Lounge provides valuable services at no cost to its users because of the generosity of the Canadian broadcasters and their commitment to developing talent in this country.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18717 Once again, the ANR Lounge is a perfect example of how Canadian Talent Development funds are officially used to help create the stars of tomorrow.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18718 The ANR Lounge would be able to further contribute to developing Canadian talent if we secure long‑term sustained funding for this project. Sustained funding could be attained by renewing support through FACTOR or securing monies directly from the Canadian Talent Development Fund.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18719 We thank you for your time and we welcome your questions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18720 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18721 Commissioner Pennefather.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18722 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18723 Thank you for the demo. I did go to the site but this allowed me to go a little further in because I could only get to the first front pages where we talked about the collaboration amongst the music associations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18724 So perhaps later we will talk to Maria about that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18725 MS RUSSO: Sure.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18726 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Just one quick question.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18727 When you mention the 30,000 unique users and the hits, who are the users? Is it the artists? Is it the companies? Is it the broadcaster?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18728 MS RUSSO: It's a combination of all three.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18729 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Do you have some follow‑up, some way to evaluate that?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18730 MS RUSSO: Well, I can give you an example of what happened two days ago.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18731 We actually are constantly improving the website to fulfil the needs of our users. Of course, one of our users are radio station personnel.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18732 So what we have done is we streamlined the way the notification works for radio. So we sent out a notice about that and within the hour, within one hour, 40 radio stations had already gone and revamped their accounts. So that is one example.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18733 Also with artists, artists are constantly going up on the website. I think they would ‑‑ the spike would be for broadcasters because every Wednesday they get the notification for new releases.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18734 So the spike would be mostly broadcasters on Wednesday, music industry on Tuesday as we post our news every Tuesday called the WhistleBlower, and then I guess a general spraying of artists coming in at anytime of the day every day.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18735 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: You say you send a notice to over 600 radio stations, commercial, campus and community.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18736 MS ROUSSEAU: Mm‑hmm.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18737 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: What about the CBC?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18738 MS ROUSSEAU: Yes, CBC is included.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18739 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18740 MS ROUSSEAU: I am sorry.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18741 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18742 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18743 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18744 We will break now and resume in 15 minutes. Nous reprendrons dans 15 minutes, at 10:55.
‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 1040 / Suspension à 1040
‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 1101 / Reprise à 1101
LISTNUM 1 \l 18745 LA SECRÉTAIRE: Monsieur le président, I will introduce the next participant, the Canadian Satellite Radio and Mr. Steven Tapp will introduce his colleague, after which you will have ten minutes for your presentation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18746 Thank you.
PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 18747 MR. TAPP: Thank you very much. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, Commission staff.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18748 I'm Steven Tapp and I'm the President and Chief Operating Officer of Canadian Satellite Radio, licensee of Satellite Subscription Radio Service XM Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18749 First and foremost, I want to tell you what an honour it is to be here today and to thank the Commission for giving us the opportunity through this licence to provide our service to the Canadian public.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18750 We think this is a great decision for Canadian Consumers and a wonderful decision for Canadian artists and we're very proud to be here today.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18751 With me here today on my left is Stewart Lyons, the longest standing member of the XM CSR team. I think is going on like five years now, right Stewart? Stewart Lyons is our Executive Vice President.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18752 Beside Stewart is André DiCesare who is our Directeur, responsable de la programmation francophone. And beside André is Daren Kirkwood who is our in‑house Legal Counsel.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18753 On my right we have Ross Davies who is our Vice President of programming, no stranger to the Commission and the radio industry here in Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18754 Beside Ross is Cam Carpenter, the hardest working man in showbiz, the guy who is responsible for all of our Canadian talent development, Cam Carpenter. And that is our small team here today, as I've said, we're very happy.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18755 As the Commission is aware, we were licensed about 12 months ago to operate one of Canada's two competitive satellite radio services and that decision back on June 16, 2005 flowed from an extremely thorough competitive licensing hearing which obviously took place in this hearing room back in November of 2004.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18756 At that hearing the Commission had an opportunity to review with the applicants and with many of the same parties who are participating in this review this week, a broad range of policy issues that relate specifically to the role of subscription satellite radio services in the Canadian broadcasting system.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18757 Our XM Canada service, the first of its kind launched in Canada ‑‑ we were the number one to the launch pad ‑‑ went on the air on November 22nd 2005, signing up our first subscriber and allowing XM Canada to provide one of the hottest‑selling holiday gifts for last year's holiday gift giving season, the most important selling season for satellite radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18758 We have now been broadcasting in Canada for nearly six months, it's about 170 days so far, we have already implemented one set of significant amendments to our conditions of licence. And the last half year has been both challenging and very exciting for us at XM Canada. It is a very competitive business and we're happy Canadians have choice in their satellite radio services.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18759 As we anticipated, XM Canada launched its service into a Canadian market that had a considerable pent‑up consumer demand already for a non‑grey market, legitimate, Canadian‑owned, Canadian‑delivered satellite subscription radio service.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18760 Also as we expected, we have been face with very strong competition in the market place from our competitor, SIRIUS Canada ‑‑ I think that's good for Canadian Consumers ‑‑ but we are proud to report that XM Canada has made great progress to date, both in programming and marketing our service.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18761 We've put in place an ambitious Canadian talent development program, one that focuses on initiatives to support both anglophone and francophone new and emerging Canadian artists. We are convinced that our XM Canada service is and will be a great success and will make very significant contributions to strengthening the Canadian Broadcasting system and we're proud to be part of that community.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18762 Through our appearance this morning we would like to provide the Commission with a status report on the satellite radio industry in Canada and to outline what we have done in particular to showcase on a North American delivery platform, the new and emerging Canadian music and comedic talent. We would also like to review some of our major Canadian talent development initiatives to date.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18763 Although for competitive reasons as a public company I am not able to provide the Commission today with precise subscriber numbers to date, we are obviously obliged to report on a quarterly basis as a publicly traded company.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18764 I can confirm that we are ahead of our projected sub‑numbers that were contained in the business plan that we filed with our licence application.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18765 We are currently programming ten Canadian‑produced channels out of Montreal and Toronto and we provide XM Canada subscribers with a choice of up to 100 diverse radio programming channels, spanning a wide range of choice in news, entertainment, sports and, of course, music.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18766 We have implemented all of our conditions of licence, including those contained in broadcasting decision CRTC 2006‑37 of the 10th of February 2006.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18767 CSR's English and French music channels play virtually 100 per cent Canadian content music, a very high proportion of that music is new Canadian artists. We are extremely proud of the fact that XM Canada has, as we promised at the 2004 licence hearing, provided access for new and emerging Canadian performing artists, both anglophone and francophone. And we are broadcasting their unique talents over six million listeners throughout the XM platform across North America.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18768 Young Canadian bands such as Geneviève Bilodeau, Jets Overhead, The Most Serene Republic, they're all examples of new and emerging Canadian artists who receive airplay not only on XM Canada‑produced channels such as The Verge and Air Music, but also on U.S. based XM music channels such as XMU, The loft, XM Café, just to name a few.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18769 Mr. Chairman, I'd like the Commission to hear from those directly responsible for making this magic come to life, our program executives and talent development ambassadors. I would like to ask Ross Davies, André and Cam to briefly outline for you some of the notable programming success that XM Canada has experienced to date.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18770 MR. DAVIES: Thank you Steve. Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, Steve has already identified a few of the new young Canadian bands that are receiving airplay and North American exposure on both U.S. and Canadian XM music programming channels.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18771 I could add to that list the names of emerging Canadian musical artists such as Jason Collett, Luke Doucet, Octoberman, Quinzy, Elliott Brood, Small Sins, Hey Rosetta!, Moufette and on and on.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18772 As well, more established Canadian musical artists such as Ron Sexsmith, Bruce Cockburn, Blue Rodeo, The Tragically Hip are all receiving regular airplay and exposure in the United States and Canada on XM's other commercial‑free music channels.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18773 A good part of our success in ensuring that Canadian musical artists get airplay on the various U.S. program XM channels is a result of our Canadian Music Ambassador program which is headed by Cameron Carpenter and Cam will speak with you about that in a moment.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18774 But our XM Canada satellite radio service is not all about music. We also program from our XM Canada studios in Toronto and in conjunction with Mark Breson of Yuk‑Yuks an English language comedy channel called "Laugh Attack". That channel, not surprisingly has proven to be very popular with XM radio listeners in the U.S.A. as well as in Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18775 In addition, we provide our subscribers, including the large number of XM Canada subscribers who are snowbirds with both English and French language 24/7 Canadian news and cultural information channels.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18776 I would ask now my colleague André to outline what XM Canada has done since launch in respect of our French language program.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18777 MR. DiCESARE: Thank you, Ross.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18778 Monsieur le président, mesdames, messieurs; dès le début du projet de l'implantation de la radio satellite XM au Canada j'avais personnellement un objectif bien précis en n'impliquant dans cette aventure.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18779 C'était d'obtenir le meilleur positionnement possible pour les artistes francophones du Canada dans cette nouvelle technologie. Je souhaitais entendre la musique francophone d'ici partout en Amérique. Je croyais fermement qu'on ne pouvait pas se permettre de manque notre rendez‑vous avec cette technologie de communication de l'an 2000.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18780 À titre de responsable du développement des stations francophones canadiennes, je souhaitais que nos deux chaînes musicales, Air Musique et Sur la Route aient un contenu francophone à 100 pour cent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18781 De plus, je tenais à ce que nous fassions entendre partout en Amérique la musique de nos artistes établis, mais également celle du plus grand nombre d'artistes émergents que l'on entend pas sur les ondes des radios traditionnelles. Après six mois d'opérations, je suis fier d'annoncer : mission accomplie.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18782 Déjà, nous avons fait plus de 50 portraits radio d'artistes de la relève et d'artistes plus connus. Nous avons le plaisir également de présenter des performances exclusives et des entrevues que nous enregistrons et diffusons sur nos ondes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18783 À ce jour, nous avons reçu dans nos studios Catherine Durand, Christian Legault, Jamil, Geneviève Bilodeau, Gilles Valiquette, Jim Corcoran, Véronique Dicaire, Dan Bigras, Edgar Bori, Patrick Normand, Karin Clerc, Zone Urbaine, Senaya, Chris Stills et Camaro et d'autres.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18784 Par ailleurs, nous avons des discussions constantes avec les associations professionnelles de l'industrie musicale pour développer des collaborations qui profiteront aux artistes d'ici.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18785 Par exemple; nous étions en avril aux rencontres de l'ADISQ. Nous sommes partenaires des MINI, Montreal Independent Music Initiatives, que nous avons enregistré hier leur premier concert qui seront en ondes dans quelques semaines chez nous et nous seront également présents au Festival de Jazz à Montréal.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18786 Enfin, nous avons eu le grand plaisir de distribuer nos premières bourses de 50 000,00 $ chacune à deux artistes pour les soutenir dans leur conquête du marché européen. L'annonce publique de notre soutien financier dans les carrières de Steffy Shock et du Groupe Les Trois Accords nous a permis d'avoir un impact considérable auprès du milieu artistique.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18787 Suite à cette annonce, nombreux sont ceux et celles qui ont voulu en savoir plus sur la radio satellite XM, son implication dans l'industrie musicale canadienne et ses engagements futurs pour contribuer financièrement à son essor.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18788 Nos chaînes de radio ont à peine six mois d'existence et déjà nous avons acquis une solide et bonne réputation dans le milieu de l'industrie musicale canadienne et nous en sommes fiers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18789 Je vais passer la parole à Cam.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18790 MR. CARPENTER: Thank you, André. Thank you. It's nice to be here today. Since the day XM launched last November we have made a point of reaching out to the Canadian music industry to lend our support to a number of music events across the country.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18791 XM Canada has worked with and provided financial support to the East Coast Music Awards, New Music West, Canadian Music Week and Juno Fest. and Halifax on Parade, as part of this year's Junos.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18792 At this year's Junos, in conjunction with Halifax on Parade we produced a free concert for 16,000 people featuring local Maritime acts such as Jimmy Rankin, Bat Mays, Julia Plasket, Garrett Masson and The Trues.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18793 We are continually looking for new emerging Canadian talent and we are pleased to tell you that so far we have programmed dozens of previously unclaimed Canadian bands. These artists were not being played on conventional radio, but have found a home on XM. Brand new artists such as the Museum Pieces from Halifax and 16 million metres from Vancouver have contacted us directly stating that they have been receiving CD artists from across North America due to their play on The Verge, our English music Canadian station.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18794 Many bands have also commented and how many comments and friends' requests they have been receiving on my space because of their exposure on The Verge.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18795 An example of what we can do would be a band called Murder City Sparrows who are from Edmonton. I met them recently at Canadian Music Week in the lobby of the hotel, they played me their video and gave me their independent CD. I gave it to our program director at The Verge, and he immediately liked it and added it to the air.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18796 We sponsored new music class this year in Vancouver and the Murder City Sparrows were voted next big thing at that conference. We interviewed the band while we were there and then, we have since done a special on our station from New Music West highlighting the independent bands.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18797 They will now be coming to Toronto for North by North East in the next couple weeks and we'll have them in our Toronto studios to record live there. Hopefully, the next step will be to prove to the American stations the success that the bands had on our station and get them added on their play list as well.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18798 We have been recording bands for the last ten weeks and have done 40 already at our studios in Toronto and Montreal as well as we have arranged recordings in our Washington offices for such bands as Stars and New Pornographers and Blue Rodeo as they tour across America.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18799 It's these rare exclusive performances that we will turn through our U.S. stations. Also for airplay we had a band in this week's Small Sins who recorded in our studio that XMU will also be programming on their schedule in the States.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18800 Ron Sexsmith and Jason Collett recently gave two remarkable enthusiastic performances are regularly heard on The Loft, one of our popular U.S. channels.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18801 This is just a few examples of how we are spreading the word about Canadian music across North America.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18802 MR. TAPP: Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission, that completes our brief progress report of XM Canada on the status of our business and we would be pleased to respond to any questions that you have. Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18803 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. We appreciate this update. I just have a few questions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18804 Mr. Carpenter, I don't know whether you were here for the AVR presentation around 3:00 A.M. last night, I think it was?
Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 18805 MR. CARPENTER: No, sir.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18806 THE CHAIRPERSON: You weren't. Well, I guess you mentioned that you are still offering performances and promoting groups. Do you promote any aboriginal groups in that context?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18807 MR. TAPP: We haven't as of yet.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18808 THE CHAIRPERSON: You haven't. Have you got any plans to carry aboriginal music as an example of spreading the word about Canadian music across North America?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18809 MR. DAVIES: Mr. Chair, if I may, our plans for that studio are to cover all genres of music. We are now as Stewart said, I think 170 days into this. We have been primarily bringing bands in that are comparable to our channel specific right now, The Verge, that Cam mentioned.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18810 However, I think it was just yesterday, we had Haydn Neil in there who... from Jacksoul who has recorded I think five songs. He probably ‑‑ well, he won't get played on The Verge channel per se, but we are going to take that record and get it ‑‑ that recording and send it down to the studio down in Washington.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18811 And so that is aboriginal will absolutely be part of that and we are just in the early days just still trying to reach out to the artist community with that in mind.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18812 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. I don't know again yesterday whether you heard the National Campus and Community Radio Association presentation alluding to commitments that the satellite applicants had made at the '04 hearings and they didn't name names, but they implied that one of the groups hadn't returned the phone calls and so on. Have you had dealings with them and have you got anything to report on your relations with Campus and Community Radio Station?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18813 MR. DAVIES: Mr. Chair, I hope they weren't referring to me because I always make a point of returning my phone calls and e‑mails. I can tell you, I did not hear the submission by the Campus people last night, but I was made aware of it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18814 I can tell you that in that particular instance, we have had communication with them and I would like to believe that we are still in communication and they submitted a proposal to XM radio about maybe, I guess maybe a month ago.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18815 Now, it did take me a few days to get back to them, but it basically gave us a proposal for two full‑on channels, one music channel and one spoken word channel and we simply can't afford that band with right now and I informed them of that in the reply and, however, said, you know, we still need to talk about this and see what ways we can, you know, work together on this, but their proposal as they sent to us, wasn't ‑‑ couldn't work at this time.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18816 I can also tell you that we have had communication with CKUA and Mr. Regan, he and I have exchanged e‑mails over the last few months and although we had spent the last couple of months, we haven't been in touch with each other, but I think the ball is in Mr. Regan's court about he was going to have his people submit a three‑hour demo of a proposed CKUA show that we are going to broadcast on the XM platform. So that conversation is still taking place.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18817 THE CHAIRPERSON: He also wants you to heavily contribute to a CTD fund, I don't know whether you have any reaction to that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18818 MR. DAVIES: I'm going to let Stewart Lyons answer that, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18819 MR. LYONS: Yes. In our CTD plan as submitted, we actually have amounts allocated to NCRA. We haven't had a chance to distribute those amounts yet because they're based on our fiscal year revenues which have not been built up because we have only been in business as Ross pointed out for 170 days, but as we get up there, definitely they have been part of the plan approved by the Commission. So, they are on our list and we plan to commit to them for sure.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18820 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Those are our questions. Thank you very much. Madam Secretary?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18821 LA SECRÉTAIRE: Merci, monsieur le président.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18822 I would now invite the next participant.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18823 J'inviterais maintenant le prochain participant à l'ordre du jour, monsieur Jean‑Paul Perreault d'Impératif français s'il voudrait se présenter pour sa présentation, s'il vous plaît.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18824 Après que vous nous aurez présenté vos collègues, vous aurez dix minutes pour votre présentation.
PRÉSENTATION / PRESENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 18825 M. PERREAULT: Alors, j'aimerais d'abord vous présenter les personnes qui m'accompagnent. Madame Armelle Vallée, chargée de projet Impératif Français, madame Claude‑Annick Samson également chargée de projet au sein de notre organisme et monsieur Paul Simard, membre du conseil d'administration.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18826 Écoutez, dans un premier temps, je tiens à remercier le CRTC pour l'invitation qu'il nous a lancée afin de vous faire connaître notre point de vue concernant la radio commerciale et de ce pas, j'emboîte immédiatement.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18827 Nous nous sommes présentés à plus d'une reprise devant le CRTC depuis 1998 et en 2002 nous avons aussi partagé nos réflexions avec le Comité permanent du Patrimoine canadien.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18828 D'où vient notre intérêt pour la radiodiffusion, c'est que nous sommes d'avis que le développement de la Francophonie en Amérique du Nord, son avancement, son rayonnement dépendent en grande partie des médias visibles accessibles et soucieux de diffuser nos artistes francophones.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18829 Comme vous le savez, plus de la moitié des québécois demeurent dans le sud du Québec, soit en Estrie, dans la région de Montréal et en Outaouais et sont donc bombardés par des médias états‑uniens ou Canadians anglophones à contenus états‑uniens élevés. On ne parle ici que de la radio et de la télévision classique.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18830 En p lus de la radiodiffusion terrestre traditionnelle à laquelle la majorité des québécois et autres francophones du pays ont accès, il y a la télévision et la radio distribuées sur câble et par satellite qui nous inondent de centaines de choix provenant du continent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18831 Parlant de radio, seulement à Montréal, outre trois signaux sur bande AM en provenance de Plattsburg, Champlain et Burlington, on peut entendre clairement la radio états‑unienne sur les fréquences FM 92,9, 94,7, 99,9 et 107,9.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18832 Une des stations au format rock hip‑hop, laquelle cible un jeune public de 15 à 25 ans avec un studio à Chateauguay, ville pas très éloignée de l'État de New‑York et émetteur situé dans l'État de New‑York, la station WYUL va même jusqu'à prétendre maintenant être une station de Montreal and Northern New York.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18833 Elle a mis sur pied en mars 2006, vous le savez, un site web complètement bilingue et lorsque je dis *bilingue+, je parle d'un site en anglais et en français conçu expressément pour charger le jeune auditoire québécois.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18834 Je ne suis pas contre le contenu en français du site web, cela va de soi, d'une station de radio états‑unienne, mais il s'agit ici d'une station qui ne fait qu'exporter vers le Québec du matériel non soumis aux objectifs de la Loi canadienne sur la radiodiffusion puisque sa licence lui a été émise par le Federal Communication Commission des États‑Unis.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18835 Sans la radio francophone commerciale, communautaire et publique, nos artistes n'auraient pas accès à leur public. Sans une radio forte et sans ses artistes, la population francophone aurait accès à quoi? Au matériel culturel que le reste de l'Amérique du Nord consomme et lui offre gratuitement en grande quantité.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18836 Il est donc essentiel que la radio et la télévision francophone soient bien distribuées par câble et par satellite et qu'elle soit visible et facile d'accès. Il y a va de la rentabilité de ces médias et du développement de la francophonie sur ce continent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18837 En ce sens, l'Impératif français se rallie aux objectifs énoncés au paragraphe 8 de l'Avis Public, certaines suggestions du CRTC sont intéressantes. Par contre, le CRTC aura‑t‑il le courage d'imposer quelques nouvelles règles qui sont conséquentes à la Loi sur la radiodiffusion.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18838 Le premier objectif parle d'une radio commerciale dynamique et bien financée dans les deux langues officielles de la Fédération canadienne est capable de contribuer à la réalisation des objectifs de la politique énoncée dans la Loi.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18839 Les données publiées dans l'Avis d'audiences publiques aux paragraphes 26 et 27 sonnent l'alarme sur la rentabilité des stations de langue française indépendante par rapport à la moyenne canadienne. Il y a des mesures que le CRTC devrait prendre pour aider la radio de langue française.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18840 Pour assurer la notoriété des stations commerciales de langue française, le CRTC devrait appuyer davantage la distribution des stations de radio de langue française par les entreprises de distribution par satellite. Voici quelques observations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18841 Bell ExpressVu ne diffuse pas CKOI, pourtant la station FM la plus importante en terme de cote d'écoute dans le marché de Montréal.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18842 Sur 19 stations de radio publique et commerciale, ExpressVu n'en diffuse que quatre en français dont seulement deux sont des radios commerciales.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18843 Aucune entreprise de distribution par satellite n'offre une gamme de stations de radios commerciales de langue française en provenance de l'extérieur de Montréal. Depuis 1998 Star Choice diffuse des stations de radio de SpokeCan et Seattle, État de Washington dans le renouvellement de licence, décision de radiodiffusion CRTC 2004‑84.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18844 Le CRTC renouvelle la licence de Star Choice avec les stations FM suivantes dont la liste... et là, je ne vous passerai pas la liste, il s'agit de stations en provenance des États‑Unis.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18845 Le CRTC a accepté ce renouvellement de licence par cette entreprise de distribution par satellite qui ne trouve de la place que pour seulement sept stations de langue française dont uniquement cinq stations commerciales sur un total de 65.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18846 Les chiffres mêmes du CRTC indiquent qu'une rentabilité plus solide des stations de radio appartenant à des groupes de propriétés. Il aurait donc été logique pour le CRTC d'accepter des demandes de licence de propriétés de groupes, par exemple, lors de l'attribution de licence en 2005 pour le marché de Gatineau et Ottawa.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18847 Impératif Français ne comprend donc pas le refus du CRTC énoncé dans sa décision de radiodiffusion 2005‑257 à Corus Entertainment pour une station de radio commerciale. Il y avait pourtant de la place pour au moins une autre station de langue française dans la région.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18848 Il faut se rappeler qu'en 2001 aussi sur quatre nouvelles stations, il n'y avait qu'une seule nouvelle station de langue française. Le déséquilibre s'est élargi en quelques années, ce qui a encouragé le glissement de l'auditoire vers les stations anglophones.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18849 Il est question de transfert d'auditoire vers les stations de radio anglaise dans le mémoire du Ministère de la culture et des communications du Québec, paragraphes 19 à 25. Ces transferts sont dus en grande partie au manque de choix radiophonique en français. Une meilleure gamme de services radiophoniques en français réduirait l'effet de transfert de l'auditoire francophone vers les stations anglophones.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18850 Impératif français fait état de la situation dans les régions de Gatineau et Ottawa dans un article qui a été publié en 2005 dans les principaux médias.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18851 Impératif français a d'ailleurs dénoncé la proportion trop peu élevée de nouvelles licences de radiodiffusion en Outaouais. Le deuxième objectif cible porte sur la promotion des artistes canadiens et québécois.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18852 Je peux vous assurer que non seulement Impératif Français appuie l'exigence de 65 pour cent de contenu vocal francophone de catégorie 2 formulé par le CRTC pour favoriser le rayonnement de la langue et de la culture d'expression française, mais il souhaite que ce seuil soit porté à 75 pour cent. L'exigence d'au moins 55 pour cent de pièces vocales de langue française du lundi au vendredi et durant les heures de grande écoute est une politique louable.
Ce minimum devrait être haussé à 60 pour cent devrait être haussé à 60 pour cent et devrait aussi s'appliquer aux heures de grande écoute pendant les week‑ends.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18853 Le CRTC doit s'assurer qu'il s'est doté des outils de surveillance du contenu canadien et de langue française pour s'assurer qu'il n'y a pas de délit.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18854 Alors que les stations de radios de langue française sont soumises à une double obligation en matière de musique vocale, soit le contenu canadien et le contenu francophone minimal, les stations de langue anglaise ne sont tenues qu'au contenu canadien.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18855 Alors que le premier objectif de la politique de 1998 vise une programmation canadienne et qu'une autre porte sur la dualité linguistique, le fardeau de ses obligations devrait être mieux partagé, sinon il est trop facile pour un radiodiffuseur anglophone d'implanter une station de langue anglaise où que l'on soit au Québec.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18856 D'aucuns essaieront. Par exemple, le 20 mars dernier Standard Radio se présentait devant le CRTC à Québec pour y exposer un projet de radio commerciale de langue anglaise de musique rock.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18857 Pourtant, selon le recensement de 2001, la région métropolitaine de recensement de Québec compte 9 845 personnes dont la langue maternelle est l'anglais, sur ses 673 100 habitants, soit 1,46. C'est évident dans ce cas‑ci que c'est le jeune auditoire francophone que cette station vise.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18858 Globalement, Impératif Français suggère que le CRTC exige des stations à contenu musical élevé de langue anglaise au Canada, que celles‑ci fassent leur part pour la diffusion de musique vocale de langue française et ainsi contribuer à l'atteinte des objectifs de la Loi.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18859 En outre, entre autres, Impératif français suggère que les stations de musique de langue anglaise diffusent au moins 10 pour cent de leur musique vocale d'artistes francophones dont au moins les trois quarts d'artistes francophones canadiens et québécois et ce, sept jours sur sept et autant aux heures de grande écoute de 6 h 00 à 18 h 00 que durant les heures de moins grande écoute.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18860 Impératif Français suggère que le CRTC exige des stations à contenu musical élevé de langue anglaise opérant au Québec que celles‑ci diffusent au moins 20 pour cent de leur musique vocale d'artistes francophones dont au moins 80 pour cent d'artistes canadiens et québécois et ce, sept jours sur sept autant durant les heures de grande écoute, 6 h 00 à 18 h 00 que durant les heures de moins grande écoute.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18861 Impératif Français suggère que dans le cas des studios de stations anglophones situées près du territoire québécois et dont le périmètre de rayonnement est situé en grande partie en sol québécois ou dont l'antenne émettrice est située au Québec, par exemple, les stations radiophoniques FM d'Ottawa diffusant ici à partir de Camp Fortune, que le contenu musical exigé de langue française se situe au même niveau que dans le cas des stations anglophones du Québec.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18862 La règle voulant que les pièces musicales de langue française soient diffusées intégralement doit être maintenu. Tournons‑nous vers l'objectif portant sur la variété plus large de genres musicaux et d'enregistrement d'artistes canadiens.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18863 D'après les études du CRTC de 1997 et de 2005 sur les artistes dits de la relève, il est évident que les stations de radios commerciales de langue française font quelques efforts pour encourager les artistes de la relève, les nouveaux talents, du moins, si on les compare aux stations anglophones.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18864 Impératif Français se réjouit du progrès observé en 2005, 16,4 pour cent pour les stations de langue française et suggère qu'un seuil minimal, il est bien minimal de 15 pour cent soit maintenant exigé.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18865 Lors de l'attribution d'une...
LISTNUM 1 \l 18866 LA SECRÉTAIRE: Excusez‑moi, monsieur Perreault. Votre temps s'est écoulé. J'aimerais peut‑être vous demander de conclure vos remarques, s'il vous plaît.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18867 M. PERREAULT: Oui, alors, merci, je vais aller immédiatement aux recommandations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18868 Alors, à la lumière de notre présentation et du document que vous avez en main, le CRTC doit agir... doit par contre agir en conséquence de ses propres objectifs et devrait notamment imposer la distribution des stations radios commerciales francophones par satellite.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18869 Encourager les artistes canadiens en exigeant des stations anglophones du Canada et des stations anglophones du Québec des seuils minimaux de diffusion de musique vocale francophone d'artistes canadiens et québécois.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18870 Encourager les artistes canadiens francophones en augmentant les minimums requis de contenu vocal de langue française diffusé par les stations de langue française.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18871 Encourager l'émergence de nouveaux talents en imposant un seuil minimal, encourager la programmation locale et canadienne, aider financièrement certaines stations, surtout les stations indépendantes qui doivent investir dans le passage à la technologie numérique.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18872 C'est avec plaisir que nous répondrons à vos questions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18873 LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci. Madame la conseillère Noël.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18874 CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Bonjour mesdames, messieurs, monsieur Perreault.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18875 Monsieur Perreault, d'abord une question sur votre commentaire écrit au paragraphe 5, vous parlez de données inquiétantes et vous faites référence aux recettes brutes des stations de langue française qui ne représenteraient que 17 à 18 pour cent de l'ensemble des stations AM‑FM commerciales au Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18876 Pouvez‑vous nous dire en quoi... comment vous en êtes arrivé à nous dire que c'était inquiétant? Est‑ce que... j'aimerais comprendre.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18877 M. PERREAULT: Eh bien! écoutez; seulement 17, 18 pour cent de l'ensemble des recettes brutes alors que la proportion francophone au Canada est d'à peu près 25 pour cent, vous conviendrez avec nous qu'on pourrait s'imaginer et croire qu'il serait à peu près sensé, normal que ces recettes brutes aillent aussi chercher à peu près 25 pour cent de l'ensemble du total des recettes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18878 Vous avez là un écart en proportion.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18879 CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Est‑ce que vous avez des statistiques à l'effet qu'il y aurait 25 pour cent de francophones à l'heure actuelle au Canada?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18880 M. PERREAULT: Bien, c'est des statistiques publiées par Statistique Canada, recensement 2001, 25 pour cent de francophones et les québécois représentent aussi 25 pour cent de la population. C'est des statistiques officielles, ça, publiées...
LISTNUM 1 \l 18881 CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: J'avais l'impression que les taux avaient un peu baissé étant donné le peu de progression démographique notamment au Québec par rapport à certaines autres provinces comme l'Ontario, l'Alberta ou la Colombie‑Britannique.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18882 M. PERREAULT: Vingt‑cinq pour cent, madame, à plus ou moins un pour cent, je peux vous l'assurer, étant branché à l'année longue sur les statistiques officielles du dernier recensement, je peux vous garantir que c'est dans des proportions de facilement un sur quatre, 25 pour cent, et si les recettes brutes des stations de radios de langue française ne représentent que 17, 18 pour cent, vous conviendrez avec nous qu'il y a un écart qui joue en faveur des stations de radios de langue anglaise et, évidemment, il est important pour un organisme comme le nôtre de vous permettre de le constater.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18883 Il y a un écart qui doit être comblé par des mesures qui pourraient aider à corriger cette situation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18884 CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Pour ce qui est de la diffusion de musique populaire vocale de langue française, vous souhaitez... vous souhaitez que le Conseil hausse la norme à 75 pour cent en période de grande écoute, 75 pour cent et que le montant passe de 55 à 60 pour cent aux heures de grande écoute, avez‑vous pu mesurer l'impact d'une telle augmentation, compte tenu de ce qu'on a entendu cette semaine, qu'une telle augmentation pourrait avoir sur les radiodiffuseurs francophones qui se trouvent déjà pénalisés, d'après ce qu'ils nous disent, par le double critère, par rapport aux stations anglophones?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18885 M. PERREAULT: D'abord, je ne vois pas en quoi elles sont pénalisées selon un des communiqués émis par le CRTC sur la santé financière des stations de radios.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18886 De 2004 à 2005 globalement, les profits de l'ensemble des stations de radios canadiennes qu'elles soient de langue française ou de langue anglaise ont augmenté les bénéfices avant impôt et intérêt ont augmenté de 24 pour cent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18887 En ce qui concerne les radios FM de langue anglaise, les bénéfices avant impôt et intérêts ont augmenté de 2004 à 2005 de 20,9 pour cent et pour les stations de langue française de 8,2 pour cent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18888 Vous conviendrez avec nous que la situation, si le 65 pour cent et le 55 pour cent avaient été à ce point dramatique, nous ne parlerions pas d'une augmentation des bénéfices comme de celles de je viens de vous faire part et ça, à partir d'un communiqué émis le 4 mai 2006 par le CRTC dont j'ai une copie devant moi.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18889 Néanmoins, je pense que... néanmoins, je pense qu'il est tout à fait normal de demander aux stations de radios de langue française d'être de langue française et d'augmenter le contenu de pièces vocales de langue française diffusées. De demander de passer de 65 à 75 pour cent, c'est tout simplement de demander une mesure de correction, de telle sorte que les stations de langue française soient davantage de langue française, qu'elles soient davantage axées sur la mission qui est la leur, la diffusion de la langue de la francophonie et de la culture d'expression française.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18890 CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Les radiodiffuseurs nous ont expliqué cette semaine que le nombre de pièces musicales nouvelles ne leur permettaient pas d'en ajouter autant que vous souhaitez et que ce qui arrivait, c'est qu'on avait un phénomène où on brûlait les artistes émergents.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18891 Pouvez‑vous me faire vos commentaires là‑dessus, en imposant un montant trop élevé de nouvelles pièces?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18892 M. PERREAULT: Je suis particulièrement étonné de ce commentaire puisque, selon une étude réalisée par le Ministère de la culture et des communications du Québec, un très grand nombre de pièces, je pense, dans les 25 pièces vocales les plus importantes, elles vont chercher 50 pour cent du temps de diffusion.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18893 Je pense que... et c'est aussi une autre de nos recommandations, il faudrait qu'on accorde plus de temps de diffusion aux nouveaux talents, aux artistes de la relève.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18894 Vous savez, je pense que s'il y a une chose de certaine, c'est qu'il y a au Québec une culture très riche, très créative qui demande d'avoir accès aux ondes des stations de radios. Malheureusement, les stations de radios diffusent très souvent les mêmes pièces vocales d'une station à l'autre, répètent très souvent les mêmes pièces, ce qui fait que les nouveaux talents et c'est un des soucis important des objectifs de l'Avis 2006, et il est important à mon avis.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18895 Et vous savez, quand les stations de langue anglaise d'ailleurs qui disent manquer de contenu canadien pour respecter ‑‑ je parle des stations de langue anglaise ‑‑ qui manquent de contenu canadien pour respecter le 30 pour cent, eh! bien il faudrait peut‑être qu'elles apprennent...
LISTNUM 1 \l 18896 CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: C'est 35.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18897 M. PERREAULT: Il faudrait peut‑être qu'elles apprennent la réalité québécoise et francophone parce que jusqu'à preuve du contraire, ce qui se produit au Québec et ce qui se produit au sein de la francophonie canadienne est aussi canadien.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18898 Et s'ils manquent de pièces vocales pour respecter le 30 pour cent, eh! bien il y a un bassin très productif de chansons.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18899 CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Monsieur Perreault, depuis 1998, c'est 35 et non pas 30.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18900 M. PERREAULT: Merci beaucoup, mais ils ont de la difficulté avec le 35, alors on est prêt à les aider en vous demandant...
LISTNUM 1 \l 18901 CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Maintenant, vous suggérez que les stations anglophones au Québec et les stations anglophones hors Québec soient tenues à des niveaux de musique de langue... à diffuser des niveaux de musique de langue française, 20 pour cent si elles sont au Québec ou si leur antenne est au Québec ou si elles sont captées au Québec et de 10 pour cent dans tous les autres cas.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18902 Pour ce qui est du Québec, est‑ce que ça ne vous inquiète pas une proposition comme ça? Est‑ce qu'il n'y aurait pas un glissement encore plus grand de l'écoute francophone vers les stations anglophones, et une réduction en conséquence des recettes publicitaires qui sont basées sur les sons BBM pour les stations francophones?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18903 M. PERREAULT: Je n'aurai véritablement aucune inquiétude vous savez parce que, déjà les stations de langue française diffusent à peu près 35 pour cent de pièces vocales en langue anglaise.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18904 Je pense que la contrepartie... vous savez, quand on connaît la situation asymétrique des cultures en Amérique du Nord et des langues, je pense que les mesures à adopter sont différentes d'une réalité à l'autre.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18905 D'imposer un minimum de musique vocale de langue française de 75 pour cent et de 60 pour cent aux heures de grande écoute, ça c'est une mesure responsable, compte tenu de la situation de la langue de la francophonie et de la culture d'expression française et de la présence massive de la culture anglophone et américaine, surtout américaine autour.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18906 De demander, d'imposer un seuil minimum de 10 pour cent et de 20 pour cent aux stations de langue anglaise, ça je pense que c'est une autre mesure responsable, mais différente, qui tient compte de la situation asymétrique pour les obliger à reconnaître qu'il y a une autre réalité, la réalité francophone du Québec, la réalité francophone de la Francophonie canadienne et de leur donner une place importante, d'autant plus qu'elles se plaignent de manquer de contenu canadien.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18907 CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Monsieur le président, ce sont là mes questions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18908 LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci. Monsieur le vice‑président Arpin.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18909 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Je vous ai vu pour la première fois aujourd'hui, donc je présume que vous n'avez pas assisté aux audiences au cours des jours précédents?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18910 M. PERREAULT: Grâce à la technologie moderne, j'ai pu écouter à partir d'internet. On vous en remercie d'ailleurs.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18911 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Donc, bienvenue. Quand le groupe Standard Radio a comparu, la question de la musique francophone sur les stations de langue anglaise particulièrement celles de Montréal a été soulevée et monsieur Braide qui est le directeur général des stations de Montréal a fait l'observation suivante : il a dit : vous devriez plutôt poser la question aux radiodiffuseurs francophones, il me semble qu'ils ne veulent pas.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18912 Et la raison, il ne l'a pas donnée, mais elle nous est connue au Conseil, c'est de connaissance du Conseil, ça remonte dans le temps. C'est que ça favorise le glissement des auditoires francophones vers les stations de langue anglaise.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18913 L'expérience a été tentée par la station CHOM pendant plusieurs années et à tel point qu'un jour le Conseil a été obligé de demander à CHOM d'arrêter de diffuser de la musique de langue française. À ce moment‑là, CHOM diffusait cinq pour cent de musique vocale de langue française et la majeure partie de son auditoire était essentiellement des francophones.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18914 Le Conseil d'ailleurs a noté dans sa question autant à l'ACR qu'à Astral Radio, Cogeco et à Standard que l'auditoire des jeunes francophones de Montréal, 68,4 pour cent des auditoires des trois stations FM de Montréal étaient essentiellement constituées de francophones.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18915 Avez‑vous... pouvez‑vous peut‑être nous dire pourquoi ce phénomène‑là, qu'est‑ce qui attire les francophones vers ces stations de langue anglaise et qu'est‑ce qui attire aussi les francophones à la station WYUL que vous avez mentionnée?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18916 M. PERREAULT: C'est le degré d'anglicisation des francophones qui et en cause. C,est un problème qui excède de beaucoup la discussion ici aujourd'hui, bien qu'elle en fasse partie.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18917 Vous savez, 91 pour cent des anglophones au Canada sont unilingues anglais, donc vous avez plus de neuf canadiens anglais sur dix qui ignorent, qui ne sont pas capables d'accéder à notre réalité. Le taux de connaissance de l'anglais chez les francophones est au‑delà de 40 pour cent. Si vous enlevez les enfants qui, évidemment, n'ont pas appris l'anglais, vous constaterez que c'est souvent dans des proportions de un francophone... six francophones sur dix qui connaissent l'anglais.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18918 Cette anglicisation par la bilinguisation des francophones les amène, leur donne la possibilité d'écouter et d'accéder à l'autre culture. Cet isolement du Canada anglais par son unilinguisme à quelque part, je pense que le Canada une responsabilité à laquelle peut contribuer le CRTC, mais je pense que l'unilinguisme anglais défavorise les stations de langue française et le bilinguisme des francophones, l'anglicisation des francophones avantage les stations de langue anglaise; je m'excuse.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18919 Et à cet égard, je pense que vous me demandiez une explication, je pense que l'essentiel de l'explication est là. L'unilinguisme très répandu au sein du Canada anglais versus la connaissance très avancée de l'anglais au sein de la francophonie, ce qui crée, évidemment, une érosion de l'auditoire en faveur des stations de langue anglaise, mais au détriment des stations de langue française.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18920 Quand vous me dites que le temps d'écoute chez les jeunes de 12 à 17 ans, et c'est mentionné dans le mémoire du Ministère de la culture et des communications du Québec que 33 pour cent du temps d'écoute est consacré aux stations de langue anglaise, vous conviendrez avec nous que si les stations de langue anglaise ne diffusent aucun contenu canadien et pourtant canadien et elles se plaignent de manquer de contenu canadien, ne diffusent aucun contenu canadien de langue française, je pense que, là, il y a un phénomène d'érosion assez évident et l'érosion est double parce que même au sein des stations de langue anglaise, ils n'ont pas accès aux artistes de la francophonie.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18921 Je peux comprendre le côté délicate de la recommandation que nous faisons, je pense qu'à cet égard il y aurait lieu, à mon avis de bien y réfléchir, mais néanmoins, il va falloir briser ce cercle qui va en s'accentuant de l'anglicisation et de l'érosion des auditoires à la faveur des stations de langue anglaise.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18922 Il va falloir trouver une façon de briser ça. et ça, là‑dessus, jusqu'à preuve du contraire, la bilinguisation des anglophones n'a pas donné de résultat extraordinaire, ce qui fait qu'ils consomment très peu nos produits de langue française qui, pourtant, sont d'excellents produits puisqu'ils sont reconnus et nos artistes aussi, internationalement, mais ils ne peuvent pas les découvrir, ils n'ont pas accès à la...
LISTNUM 1 \l 18923 Ils n'ont pas de connaissance par la langue et les stations de radios ne les aident pas à leur donner le coup d'y accéder, ils ne diffusent aucun artiste de langue française.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18924 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Monsieur Perreault, ça va être ma dernière question. Vous vous présentez devant le Conseil pour faire des recommandations. Vous avez dit que vous avez comparu devant le Comité du Patrimoine probablement avec les mêmes préoccupations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18925 Est‑ce que vous avez déjà pris l'initiative de rencontrer des radiodiffuseurs eux‑mêmes, soit individuellement, soit par l'entremise... l'intermédiaire de leurs associations?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18926 M. PERREAULT: Un très grand nombre de nos interventions se font justement par média interposé, par interventions publiques.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18927 Vous savez, c'est ici même, je pense qu'Impératif Français vous avait sensibilisé à l'exclusion dont nous sommes victimes dans cette région‑ci par Bell ExpressVu dans le domaine de la télédiffusion. Bell ExpressVu refuse toujours de diffuser entièrement la station Radio‑Canada régionale de langue française, alors que Bell ExpressVu diffuse la station régionale de langue anglaise, CBOT.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18928 Nous avons fait plusieurs interventions et même notre organisme a remis à plusieurs reprises un prix citron à Bell ExpressVu pour ses pratiques d'exclusion et pourtant dénonçait et plus d'une fois par notre organisme, mais par d'autres également. J'ai lu des éditoriaux dans le journal Le Droit, et pourtant ces pratiques d'exclusions continuent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18929 Il y a eu des rencontres... il y a des rencontres chaque fois que nos intervenants... il y a des rencontres par l'intermédiaire des médias. Quand nous exposons des situations aussi inacceptables que celles qui ont une forte odeur de discrimination par la non‑diffusion de l'antenne régionale de Radio‑Canada, et je parle de la télé ici, vous conviendrez avec nous que... rencontres... s'ils souhaitent nous rencontrer à partir des déclarations que nous faisons, c'est avec plaisir que nous répéterons ce que nous avons dit publiquement et que nous vous répétons encore aujourd'hui et que nous vous avons dit à une des rencontres que nous avons eues ici concernant justement le cas de la radio publique.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18930 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Je vous remercie, monsieur Perreault. Je n'ai plus d'autres questions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18931 LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci beaucoup messieurs, madame et mesdames.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18932 Madame la secrétaire, le prochain item, s'il vous plaît.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18933 M. PERREAULT: On vous remercie infiniment. Au plaisir.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18934 LA SECRÉTAIRE: Merci, monsieur le président.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18935 I would now invite the next participant, the Canadian Conference of the Arts, monsieur Alain Pineau, if you could come forward for your presentation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18936 Mr. Pineau, when you are ready, you have ten minutes for your presentation.
PRÉSENTATION / PRESENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 18937 M. PINEAU: Merci. Monsieur le président, mesdames et messieurs les commissaires.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18938 Depuis novembre dernier, j'ai l'honneur d'être le directeur général de la Conférence canadienne des arts.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18939 The Canadian Conference of the arts is a unique national organization with a long and proud tradition of service to the community and to a succession of Canadian governments and public agencies.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18940 For more than 60 years the CCA has represented the interests and been the national voice of Canada's arts and cultural communities from north to south, east to west, English and French.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18941 Artists, cultural producers and their associations from every medium and every part of the artistic continuum, creators, producers, distributors, exhibitors and the Heritage Institutions are under the CCA umbrella.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18942 Many are individuals CCA members, tens of thousands more are connected to us through professional cultural organizations in every arts discipline and trade association in all cultural industries.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18943 Il me fait grand plaisir de vous présenter aujourd'hui le point de vue de la CCA dans le cadre de cette audience dont l'importance ne fait aucun doute. Il y a plusieurs années que la CCA n'avait pas comparu devant le CRTC.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18944 Quant à moi, ma dernière intervention remonte à 1995 quand je présidais la délégation de Radio‑Canada requérant une licence de services audios payants. Mes neuf dernières années à Radio‑Canada ont été consacrées au lancement et à la gestion de Galaxie, le service commercial de musique continue de Radio‑Canada actuellement encore le service dominant du genre au pays.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18945 À ce titre, j'ai acquis une certaine familiarité avec les questions de quotas contenus canadiens, de contributions financières au développement du talent de chez nous
LISTNUM 1 \l 18946 There is no doubt, this is a time of significant transition for Canadian radio broadcasters and for the music industry with which they have a long standing symbiotic relationship.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18947 Audiences particularly younger Canadians are increasingly using new distribution technologies to receive music, news and information.
Web casting, broadcasting, downloading and all the other buzz words are having a real insignificant impact on both sectors.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18948 Young people are as passionate about music as ever, but they are moving away from radio. There are many reasons for this, but as was mentioned in this hearing, commercial radio is largely responsible for that reality.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18949 Over the life of the policy you are going to establish radio broadcasters will indeed be facing increased competition from streamed audio that can originate anywhere in the world to the recently licensed satellite radio subscription services.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18950 Pourquoi la CCA se préoccupe‑t‑elle de la santé de l'industrie de la musique et des finances de la radio commerciale?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18951 À cause du contenu culturel dont elles sont responsables, les musiciens, les compositeurs, les interprètes et les producteurs contribuent de façon significatives à la définition de ce que nous sommes et de ce que nous avons à contribuer au dialogue mondial.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18952 Les succès actuels de notre musique sont biens connus. Il ne fait pas oublier que cette activité culturelle était pratiquement inexistante avant la réglementation actuelle.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18953 We must build on this success and continue to provide Canadians and the world with a rich diversity of Canadian music in every imaginable genres as well as Canadian perspective in news, sports and other information programming, that is local, regional and national.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18954 History shows that where we regulate, the Canadian presence is much stronger than where we don't regulate. We need only look at Canadian television and movies for proof. For television? There are public funding programs, Broadcasting Act provision, CRTC rules and regulations, Content rules and licence requirements. For movies, there is only ‑‑ limited primarily to funding.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18955 The significant missing piece is Canadian content rules in movie theatres which have not been introduced for a variety of reasons and what has been the outcome? After 50 years, we have a generally effective television system.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18956 Many believe that the recent problems concerning English language television drama have a lot to do with regulatory changes that CRTC made in 1999.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18957 In cinema, we continue to struggle to achieve even a two per cent market share in English Canada. Yet, the talent pool of the two industries is more or less the same. So, the primary differences are regulations and control of distribution systems, two issues that are very close to the heart of the CCA.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18958 Notre intervention insiste sur la nécessité non seulement de consolider la réglementation pour la radio commerciale, mais de l'étendre à toutes les plate‑formes de distribution. Avec respect, nous nous demandons où en est la révision de l'exemption de 1999 promise pour 2004.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18959 La CCA croit qu'il est critique d'assurer une offre substantielle de contenu canadien sur les services de musique offerts sur internet par abonnement ou autrement et de revoir la décision aberrante et potentiellement pernicieuse de contenu canadien sur la radio satellite.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18960 CCA believes internet and DAB if it ever comes to pass, broadcasters can and should be regulated to ensure that they provide an appropriate supply of Canadian materials in their public offerings.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18961 These regulations probably cannot be Canadian content rules as they exist in the traditional media since the material is not necessarily scheduled and broadcast the same way. But the present situation seems untenable to us.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18962 We all want Canada's broadcasters to take full advantage of the new technologies offered by internet or DAB, but when they do so, they are no longer regulated and they can effectively be in competition with their own regulated offerings.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18963 Internet service provider should also be asked as distribution undertakings to provide access to Canadian sites and content and to make a financial contribution to arms‑length funding agencies that can be used to develop new Canadian content for the internet and other media.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18964 In CCA's views, if such regulations are not introduced soon, we will see precipitous declines in the production of Canadian content materials of all kinds and our cultural industries will either become marginalized or merely browns plant producers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18965 Pour en revenir à la radio commerciale, nous croyons qu'il est tout à fait approprié et réaliste d'augmenter le contenu canadian pour la musique de catégorie 2 à 40 pour cent ou plus, d'avantage si on songe à instaurer un système incitatif dans lequel cas il faut établir au moins un plancher de 35 pour cent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18966 Dans le cas de la musique classique, mon expérience comme responsable des cinq chaînes classiques de Galaxie me convient de la faisabilité de porter le contenu canadien à au moins 25 pour cent et pour le jazz à au moins 20 pour cent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18967 Dans tous les cas, ces proportions devraient être mesurées sur une base de trois heures de diffusion, de façon à mettre définitivement fin à toute tentation de *gettoïser+ la musique canadienne aux heures de faible écoute.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18968 Encore une fois mon expérience à Galaxie m'a démontré de façon très claire que la musique canadienne particulièrement les nouveautés ne font pas fuir l'auditoire si la programmation est faite de façon compétente.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18969 Côté francophone, nous appuyons les représentations faites par nos collègues et membres de maintenir la politique actuelle.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18970 The commercial radio system is financially sound and there is a good reason to expect that it will continue to be so for the next five to ten years. Radio is a useful vehicle for advertisers because the medium is local, targeted and easily measurable.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18971 CCA believes it's appropriate for the Canadian talent development contributions made by commercial radio broadcasters to increase dramatically to levels at least to return it to the 1995 ball park.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18972 We also believe strongly that new media, internet, satellite radio notably, be asked to contribute significantly more to Canadian talent development, this contribution being inversely proportional to the Canadian content that they offer.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18973 Let me finish by making a few comments about the debate on how these Canadian talent development funds should be disbursed. CCA believes that Factor, Music Action, should continue to play the lead role in the system. They presently operate about 20 different programs across a broad spectrum.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18974 There may be a role for the more targeted program offered by the Radio Star Maker Fund, Fonds Radio Star, which assist artists who have already achieved a certain level of success.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18975 There may also be a role for the provincial music industry associations who have a better handle of local needs than anyone else.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18976 But there must continue to be a place for Factor Musique Action, and arms‑length agencies that receive public funds and thus, adhere to strict operating and accountability standards.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18977 In closing, if I may add, I think quite frankly that broadcasters' contributions for the next few years are probably more reliable than federal funding, at least until proven wrong.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18978 Il me fera plaisir de répondre à vos questions si vous en avez.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18979 LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci, monsieur Pineau. Commissioner Cugini.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18980 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Good morning, Mr. Pineau.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18981 M. PINEAU: Good morning.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18982 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Your oral presentation today was pretty true to your written submission, so I only have a couple of questions that are perhaps a bit more philosophical than they are detail‑oriented with regards to your submissions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18983 You do advocate varying levels of Canadian content for different genres of music and as you've said today, popular music at 40, classical at 25 and jazz to at least 20.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18984 Based on what you've heard this week, I am wondering if you could for us assess what you think the impact would be of Canadian content at one level for all genres of music?
LISTNUM 1 \l 18985 M. PINEAU: Quite frankly, I don't think that's realistic. I mean, we don't have... we don't provide the same... I mean, for example, there is currently no or hardly any hip‑hop music being produced here. I mean, when services like Galaxie offer a hip‑hop channel, it offers a platform. Regulation and distribution provide an opportunity for music to develop. I think you have to realize that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18986 There was a long discussion internally and we consulted our membership because our membership covers a number of organizations who were here before and they are all over the map in terms of that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18987 We try to strike something that is reasonable, achievable. There were arguments, for example, that jazz could be more than 20 percent. I think if it is so it should be gradual, because when we started with CanCon regulations there was hardly anything to speak of, so there is a first period where production comes but there are lots of weeds and everything gets played and eventually natural selection leads to the best to survive. The more there is outlet, the more production there is.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18988 So I think you could look at raising the level progressively over various genres, but you have to take into account the reality of life, which is that these things will evolve over time. So there could be step‑up procedures. You are looking at five years so I don't think it is material. If you were looking at 10 years I think you should really look at graduating steps in various genres.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18989 By they way, if I may use this platform to say why we think that the Canadian content regulation for satellite radio is a burden, is that you don't create audiences by putting a big dustbin in the middle of the room where all genres confused are thrown in.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18990 This is not the way people listen to music. They don't listen to Canadian content. People don't say, "Oh God, yes, I got the satellite service here. I'm going to check what Canadian content is like today." They want to hear, jazz, they want to hear rock 'n roll, they want to hear progressive, they want to hear ambient. That is the way people use radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18991 What is important is that the Canadian content be weaved competently throughout the programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18992 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: As you know, just about every broadcaster who has appeared before us this week has said if you raise Canadian content levels you will simply drive radio listeners to internet radio, to satellite radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18993 You obviously don't agree with that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18994 MR. PINEAU: No, I don't agree with that. I think if they do their job properly they will find the right music and they will be able to put it into the programming the way that it fits. I know that because they all use the same software that we use at Galaxie to do programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18995 It is all a matter of choosing the music and establishing the proper rules and you push the button and out it comes. You check to make sure that the outcome is what you wanted, because no software system is perfect, but that is the way you do programming and that is the way you introduce talent. And you do that no by hiring hackers who just plunk whatever comes in and say okay, I have my Canadian quota in today.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18996 I don't want to sound disparaging to the radio industry, that is not the point, but there are ways of doing it that will not drive people away at all.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18997 In nine years at Galaxie ‑‑ and we had Canadian content, 38 percent spread over 45 channels. That means that some channels had to be ‑‑ 1950s, you don't have much Canadian content to put there, so you have to make up at the other end by putting more Canadian content.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18998 We had lots of Canadian content on the classical channels because there is lots of material. Quite frankly, users of services like Galaxie or commercial radio don't really give a damn whether it is this conductor that conductor, as long as it is the piece that they like, because they are all competently recorded.
LISTNUM 1 \l 18999 THE CHAIRPERSON: You haven't checked your audio files recently, have you?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19000 MR. PINEAU: Sorry?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19001 THE CHAIRPERSON: Those are fighting words.
‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 19002 MR. PINEAU: Sorry?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19003 THE CHAIRPERSON: Choice of conductors is extremely important for many.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19004 MR. PINEAU: Oh, it is, sir. That is why I have a record collection at home. But when I'm listening to Galaxie I am quite happy to listen to Beethoven's Fifth or Schubert's Eighth by a Canadian orchestra.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19005 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Just one final question.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19006 In your written submission you say:
"A judicious reinterpretation of the definition of a Canadian recording..."
LISTNUM 1 \l 19007 And you note that artists such as Diana Krall may not qualify as Canadian.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19008 MR. PINEAU: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19009 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Are you suggesting a retooling of the MAPL system?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19010 MR. PINEAU: Well, we didn't delve into that question and I will just answer on a personal level.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19011 When I was responsible for Galaxie I had a problem with the fact that she wouldn't qualify, quite frankly, as I have a problem with the fact that if it is Léopold Simoneau, or if it's Jon Vickers, this is not Canadian content? I have a problem with that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19012 I would not pose as an expert to say ‑‑ because there are many considerations to this, but I can only state that yes, we do have a problem.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19013 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Thank you, Mr. Pineau.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19014 Those are all my questions, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19015 THE CHAIRPERSON: Just to follow up on that, when you refer to your own experience which I'm interested in here when you were in charge of classical for Galaxie, when you say you think, as you put it here:
"...me convaincre de la faisabilité de porter le contenu canadien au moins à 25 pour cent."
LISTNUM 1 \l 19016 (Tel que lu)
LISTNUM 1 \l 19017 You are saying that was content level achieved at Galaxie for classical?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19018 MR. PINEAU: Actually it was higher than that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19019 THE CHAIRPERSON: What was it?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19020 MR. PINEAU: It was only for compensation in other sectors and there is also lots of material available. It depends. We had five classical channels at Galaxie. Opera was not very high. There is not many opera ‑‑ quite frankly, I was very tempted to count as Canadian content an opera that had Jon Vickers in it even though it wasn't MAPL.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19021 Chamber music there are abundant recordings. You don't have all the important stuff, but you have a lot of it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19022 The pop classic, which is mostly what off‑air radio broadcasters are offering, there is ample choice.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19023 Where there are holes is somewhere in symphonic music and concertos, classical concertos, the most popular ones, but even those are coming available.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19024 And there are other ways of doing that, too. I mean, it's possible to purchase rights to recorded concerts or things like that. I mean, when you want to there are ways of doing it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19025 I am a steady listener of the classical radio stations, it is my passion, and the kind of stuff that I hear there, they should have no problem meeting 25 per cent at all. Quite frankly, I think it is a modest target.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19026 THE CHAIRPERSON: Under the MAPL rules?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19027 MR. PINEAU: Yes. Of course it will lead to a lot of royalties flowing into TEFL musique and l'Orchestre symphonique de Montréal, amongst others, to the CBC also, but ATNA and ELECTA, Marquis ‑‑ the gentleman was here earlier this week. This was all material that we used extensively.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19028 So there is more of a debate about the quality of Canadian recordings fitting MAPL for jazz, so we took a sort of compromise position there.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19029 THE CHAIRPERSON: Right. Okay. Thank you very much.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19030 MR. PINEAU: You are most welcome.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19031 LE PRÉSIDENT : Monsieur Arpin...?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19032 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Vous parlez avec abondance de la musique classique. Une audience qu'on a eu récemment, dont le Conseil n'a pas encore pris de décision, mais le requérant, qui était monsieur Collier, nous a dit qu'il était capable de supporter 40 pour cent de musique classique canadienne.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19033 Est‑ce que vous trouvez, basé sur votre expérience, que c'est une proposition réaliste?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19034 M. PINEAU : Moi, je vais vous dire franchement, j'ai programmé personnellement la chaîne des Grands classiques, et j'ai programmé personnellement la chaîne Baroque, et un niveau de 50 pour cent est facile à atteindre quand vous comptez la rotation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19035 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui, évidemment. Oui, oui. Je suis sûr qu'il comptait la rotation, puis il avait suffisamment d'expérience pour répondre à la question.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19036 M. PINEAU : Quarante pour cent, je... puis, d'ailleurs, monsieur Collier sait de quoi il parle là.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19037 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19038 M. PINEAU : Je le respecte beaucoup à ce chapitre‑là. C'est un grand amateur de musique classique, puis il connaît ses enregistrements.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19039 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Et, donc, il y a suffisamment... parce que vous avez mentionné Jon Vickers et quelques autres qui ont enregistré sur des labels étrangers, et je pense à monsieur Hamelin, je pense à Alain Trudel. Je sais qu'il y a beaucoup d'enregistrements qui sont faits en Europe. Mais c'est encore le même problème que vous avez mentionné avec Diana Krall.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19040 M. PINEAU : Oui. Oui. Mais malgré ça, même en disant que ces gens‑là ne compteraient pas comme contenu canadien ‑‑ et, encore une fois, j'ai un problème à ce chapitre‑là ‑‑ je pense que le contenu... MAPL devrait peut‑être être un peu modulé en fonction des genres musicaux.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19041 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Bon, d'accord.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19042 Il y a d'autres intervenants qui ont soumis au Conseil, encore dans le secteur de la musique classique, que le Conseil devrait penser à une réglementation qui favoriserait les compositeurs canadiens. Un groupe a mentionné 3 pour cent, et un autre groupe a mentionné 5 pour cent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19043 Croyez‑vous que ce sont des demandes qui sont réalistes? Je parle bien de compositeurs canadiens. Donc, c'est de la musique beaucoup plus contemporaine. Est‑ce qu'il y en a suffisamment, basé sur votre expérience sur disque et puis...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19044 M. PINEAU : Il y en a suffisamment, je le crois. Oui, il y en a une bonne quantité.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19045 Mais là, vous avez mis le doigt sur quelque chose qui est extrêmement difficile à discuter. J'étais toujours dans une position très difficile à Galaxie quand j'allais devant le Conseil québécois de la musique pour donner des bourses à des artistes, où on se faisait interpeller, justement, sur le fait que sur 45 scènes, il n'y en a pas une qui soit consacrée à la musique contemporaine.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19046 Vous avez le même débat qui est soulevé chaque fois que Radio‑Canada apparaît devant vous. Il y a un problème là, puis moi, je dois dire que de ce côté‑là... le côté commercial chez moi l'emporte sur le côté nationaliste. C'est qu'il faut être réaliste aussi.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19047 Est‑ce que... il faut que cette musique‑là soit diffusée, mais ce n'est peut‑être pas dans le broadcasting que ça se fait. Les nouvelles technologies permettent d'offrir ce genre de musique‑là. Cette musique‑là, le public doit y être introduit par le biais des concerts et tout.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19048 Il y a toute une infrastructure derrière ça. Demander à des gens qui doivent vivre de revenus commerciaux puis attirer du monde, de jouer de la musique qui est tellement marginale, je regrette de le dire là, je vais peut‑être me faire tuer par les membres que je représente, mais personnellement, ma sympathie est partagée.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19049 CONSEILLER ARPIN : On risque de l'entendre à 6 h 00 le matin ou à 11 h 00 le soir?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19050 M. PINEAU : Oui, probablement, un peu comme c'était à Radio‑Canada, d'ailleurs, où ça passait à 11 h 00 le soir les fins de semaine.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19051 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Je vous réfère à votre page 6... et là, la question, je vais vous la poser en anglais. Vous pouvez y répondre selon votre choix. Effectivement, c'est dans votre dernier paragraphe en anglais de la page 6.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19052 Ma question, c'est : Do you have substantive proof to sustain that if internet rules are not shortly introduced production of Canadian content will decline?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19053 M. PINEAU : Je m'excuse, je cherche...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19054 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Parce que vous dites :
"If such regulations are not introduced soon, we will see precipitous declines of the production of Canadian content materials of all kinds." (As read)
LISTNUM 1 \l 19055 M. PINEAU : Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19056 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Est‑ce que vous avez... pouvez‑vous documenter cette affirmation‑là?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19057 M. PINEAU : Non, pas au sens statistique du mot. Puis ça serait difficile de le faire, d'ailleurs, parce que c'est une prédiction.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19058 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19059 M. PINEAU : Maintenant, precipitous, on peut argumenter sur qu'est‑ce qui est precipitous là, est‑ce que c'est cinq ans ou est‑ce que c'est 10 ans.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19060 Ça pris 30 ans pour construire l'industrie de la musique qu'on a actuellement, qui réussit à travers le monde.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19061 Ça peut prendre beaucoup moins de temps pour la démanteler parce que... je vais prendre l'exemple qui était... les gens qui me précédaient ici tout à l'heure.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19062 On le sait que ça prend une seule génération pour effacer un groupe linguistique. Je connais plein de gens dont les noms sont tout à fait francophones et dont les parents parlaient français et qui ne comprennent pas aujourd'hui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19063 Bien, c'est un peu la même chose aussi. Avec l'explosion des moyens de distribution qu'on a maintenant... et toutes ces questions‑là sont interreliées. Ce n'est pas pour rien qu'on mentionne ici la question de la propriété étrangère, qui va certainement faire l'objet d'un débat politique...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19064 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19065 M. PINEAU : ...très actif chez vous et ailleurs, et on y sera.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19066 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Je suis sûr. Sûr, sûr, sûr.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19067 M. PINEAU : Absolument.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19068 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Donc, si je vous comprends bien, c'est que vous nous invitez à la vigilance et non nécessairement à introduire une instance réglementaire dès la semaine prochaine?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19069 M. PINEAU : Non, mais je vous dirais que le mois prochain serait déjà pas trop tard.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19070 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Ah! bon.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19071 M. PINEAU : Et si je peux me permettre, on aura peut‑être des suggestions à faire qui pourraient être constructives à ce chapitre‑là, parce que je comprends les réalités commerciales de la radio satellite, qui était ici plus tôt.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19072 Quand les chaînes viennent des États‑Unis, ça va prendre du temps avant que le contenu canadien soit très élevé là‑dessus. Mais il y a d'autres façons, puis j'écoutais avec intérêt comment est‑ce qu'ils contribuent au développement.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19073 Bien, s'ils ne sont pas capables de contribuer au développement en exposant puis en donnant des tribunes, parce que ce n'est pas deux chaînes francophones qui vont donner beaucoup, beaucoup d'exposure. Ce n'est pas rien que de mettre ça en l'air, c'est de voir qui l'écoute.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19074 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19075 M. PINEAU : Demandez‑leur quand ils reviendront chez vous quelles statistiques ils ont sur l'écoute qu'il y a de ces chaînes‑là spécifiquement. Ils sont assez riches pour se payer cette recherche‑là, je pense, avec les backers qu'ils ont.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19076 CONSEILLER ARPIN : On s'est fait dire à l'audience par les gens du groupe Jim Pattison ‑‑ évidemment, ils ne nous ont pas donné des données sur l'écoute francophone, mais ils nous ont donné des données globales ‑‑ que la part de marché de la radio par satellite, selon BBM du printemps 2006, dans le marché de Kamloops, c'était 9 parts de marché.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19077 M. PINEAU : Oui. Mais ce qui est important de regarder là‑dedans pour ceux qui viennent dire, on fait du contenu canadien, holà, holà, c'est qui l'écoute.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19078 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui, oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19079 M. PINEAU : Ce n'est pas rien que d'en mettre sur une tablette. Si c'est là, puis que personne n'y touche, puis que c'est couvert de poussière...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19080 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Et je comprends que c'est 9 parts consolidés des 200 canaux qui sont là, parce qu'il y a deux entreprises, hein.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19081 M. PINEAU : Je reconnais, cependant, qu'ils font une contribution, puis j'étais très intéressé de les entendre parler de ce qu'ils font en terme d'exposure, puis en terme d'entrevue, puis en terme de publicité, puis en terme d'argent surtout, parce que s'ils ne sont pas capables de donner une tablette ou un débouché que le monde va écouter pour vraie là, bien, qu'ils compensent en donnant plus d'argent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19082 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19083 M. PINEAU : C'est ça, puis c'est la même chose pour internet. Puis vous allez nous revoir réintervenir sur une autre demande qui est devant vous concernant la distribution de ces signaux‑là sur le câble, parce que ça, c'est the thin edge of the wedge là.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19084 CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui. Écoutez, on se reverra à ce moment‑là. Je vous remercie, Monsieur Pineau.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19085 M. PINEAU : Je ne pense pas qu'il y aura d'audience publique, mais vous allez me lire.
‑‑‑ Rires / Laughter
LISTNUM 1 \l 19086 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Pineau, when you were programming the classical stations for Galaxie, did you ever track record sales?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19087 One of the arguments that we have heard is that record sales of Canadian recordings appear to be at the 16 percent level overall. I don't think it was broken down by category.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19088 Do you have any idea of classic record sales percent Canadian of the classical record sales?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19089 MR. PINEAU: No, I'm sorry, I don't have that information.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19090 THE CHAIRPERSON: You have never tracked that?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19091 MR. PINEAU: No, I'm sorry, I don't have that information.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19092 THE CHAIRPERSON: Do you think it is a pertinent consideration in establishing content quotas?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19093 MR. PINEAU: I don't think so, quite frankly.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19094 THE CHAIRPERSON: Why is that?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19095 MR. PINEAU: As long as a recording is available it can be played there. It generates royalties, it is another way of feeding the system, it is another way of exposing our artists. Record sales is one way, royalties on services like this.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19096 By the way, when I suggest that regulation and contributions be proportionate, you have the precedent in Galaxie for example. Galaxie was asked to provide 4 percent of its gross revenue for talent development. That is not what radio is providing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19097 So you can modulate, and you can modulate with commercial radio, you can have a different level much higher because they don't contribute in other ways with satellite radio or with internet providers like Rogers or like anyone else, Sympatico who offers only MSN music. How much Canadian content is there?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19098 I am wired at home. I can listen to MSN channel anywhere in the home. It comes from my computer. This is direct competition with everything else that has to do with Canadian content, let alone commercial radio. I think you have to bear that in mind.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19099 One of my concerns, quite frankly, coming here ‑‑ and I'm glad to see that the debate is not that way and you seem to be open to the concept also ‑‑ we cannot look at any of these components separate from the big picture.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19100 THE CHAIRPERSON: I certainly think there is general consensus on that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19101 Thank you very much, Mr. Pineau, for appearing today.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19102 M. PINEAU: Merci beaucoup.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19103 LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci beaucoup.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19104 Madam Secretary.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19105 THE SECRETARY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19106 Before going to the next participant I would just like to indicate for the record there are three participants who have advised us that they will not be appearing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19107 One is No. 44 on the Agenda, Monsieur Jean‑Robert Bisaillon, Société pour la promotion de la relève musicale de l'espace francophone; No. 51, La Fédération nationale des communications; et également le numéro 50, Mr. John Stevenson.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19108 I would now call on the next participant, who was expected to appear yesterday but due to a serious consideration he was asked to participate today.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19109 I am calling Evanov Radio Group Inc., if you would come forward for your presentation.
‑‑‑ Pause
PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 19110 MR. B. EVANOV: Before we begin, thank you for considering our problem of yesterday.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19111 We have appeared before everyone on the Panel, I believe, in previous hearings but this is the first time before one of the Commissioners. So we would like to say bonjourno.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19112 Bonjour and good morning, Mr. Chairman, Monsieur Vice‑Chair, Commissioners and Commission staff.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19113 My name is Bill Evanov. I am here today with my team to present comments that are in addition to those we filed in these proceedings.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19114 With me today, and seated at my right, is Carmela Laurignano, Vice‑President of our Radio group; and to my left is Paul Evanov, Vice‑President of Programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19115 Carmela will summarize the comments we submitted in the written phase of this process.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19116 MS LAURIGNANO: We think competition is vital to the long‑term health of any industry. Given the recently published revenue figures for the industry, it is undeniable that the 1998 decision by the Commission to change the ownership rules has made the radio industry more profitable.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19117 However, we would believe it has not necessarily served to strengthen it. Fewer companies control more of the radio spectrum and tuning among key demographics has declined.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19118 We feel that it is the independent radio operators ‑‑ unfettered by public offerings and unable to amortize the cost of operations across stations in profitable markets ‑‑ that are really responding to consumer needs. Beyond just our own group we can point to many other small operators across this country who have taken risks with formats, found underserved demos and created truly local initiatives in both programming and CTD.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19119 And most importantly these operators have found success, in hours tuned and in advertiser support.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19120 Smaller operators may not report the same high level of earnings as the larger companies, but this should not be the test of their success or contribution. It goes without saying that we are not adverse to profits, but it is clear that the larger operators have consistently chosen to serve markets and audiences that are most advertiser friendly.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19121 In the Canadian broadcast system it is the smaller operators by and large who are filling in the gaps in service, making sure that ethnic groups, youth, smaller communities and niche markets are served.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19122 Their collective contribution is also sharply demonstrated in the innovative contributions to Canadian Talent Development that are evident at most licence hearings. After we reviewed several applications spanning multiple markets and proceedings, we were left to conclude that it is generally the smaller operators that bring forward the truly local initiatives for developing talent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19123 Much has been said about the role of FACTOR and StarMaker in these proceedings. There has even been a position put forward that 80 percent of all monies should be split between these two groups in English Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19124 However, we think this position completely undermines the very goal of funding Canadian Talent Development.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19125 Music, like art, is a matter of taste. So, too, then is the decision of who gets funding and how much. And while we do not presume that our assessments are superior to that of either of these funding organizations, we do recognize they are different. And in that difference there is value.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19126 We think the more people engaged in the decision of who gets funding in this country, the better off we all will be. This includes artists, consumers, broadcasters and regulators.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19127 We feel that broadcasters should not only be encouraged but also rewarded for their innovative local initiatives that expand the opportunities for talent from all over this country to access funds and develop their craft.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19128 We noted in our filing that when we write a cheque to FACTOR we have no really idea where the money goes. Thanks to the audited report by PWC that was filed by the CAB, we now do.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19129 And while we do not question the very real talent of the recipients, we note with dismay that several recipients of funding have successful careers, receive radio airplay and are Canadian success stories in their own right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19130 This sadly explains to us why so many young and aspiring artists find their way to our door complaining that they need help.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19131 If you limit the monies that radio operators can direct to these artists by forcing the funding to two national organizations with mandates that include funding established and successful acts, you will do so at the detriment to community based initiatives.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19132 Artists are not born ready to record, and if we do not fund the artists who are in their pre‑recording phase, who will?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19133 Concentrating funding will serve the interests of the recording industry and certainly make it much easier to pull together an application. But it really does not serve the intent of the Canadian Talent Development, nor we believe the needs of the artistic community.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19134 MR. P. EVANOV: One of the areas of concern that we would like to touch on is Canadian Content. I would like to address this by responding to the comment filed on the levels of CanCon.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19135 We do not think that the level of Canadian Content should go above the current 35 percent. We say this although we, too, have committed at hearings to play at least 40 percent in some of our most recent applications.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19136 Some formats, including the two we have pioneered, can easily handle this commitment because the supply of artists and the genres of music being played is sufficient. For other genres, however, this is not the case and increased requirements will result in higher repetition of a few artists.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19137 Gold formats, for example, are unable to include new and emerging artists at a level that truly promotes Canadian talent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19138 The predominance of Gold based formats contributes the consumer perception that a lot of radio sounds the same because the same artists are played frequently and everywhere. This does no one any favours. As a programmer, I am very sensitive to issue of listener fatigue and artist or title burn‑out.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19139 When an artist is burned out in programming terms, it means that listeners actually tune out when they are played, and from a business perspective this makes no sense. We lose listeners and for the artist there will be fewer CD sales and lower attendance at live performances.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19140 We support a Smart 35 that encourages broadcasters to play more Canadian selections by rewarding then through reducing the overall percentage requirement. This means that broadcasters will be better positioned to meet the consumer need for diversity and variety in music ‑‑ a recurring theme in all of the programming research we look at.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19141 MR. B. EVANOV: Digital radio. Over the years the Commission has encouraged the industry to invest in digital. At licence applications and renewals the broadcast industry has been directed to adopt and adapt the L‑Band digital technology. Broadcasters have incurred considerable capital and ongoing carrying costs with no results. The L‑Band digital experiment has thus far failed.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19142 When Canada adopted L‑Band digital, or Eureka, the United States, for reasons we will never know, rejected its use. That message did not reach Ford and General Motors in Canada, which more than three years ago announced that digital radio would be in their cars and would be rolled out in numerous models.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19143 This is what Canadian broadcasters needed for the experiment to succeed. They could now launch a campaign promoting both in‑car use and portable use of digital radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19144 Then out of the blue ‑‑ for reasons we will also never know ‑‑ the two major car manufacturers did an about‑face, a 180‑degree turnaround, and announced that they would not put digital in their cars. Later they announced they would carry satellite radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19145 The selling thrust of digital radio was based on state of the art sound quality. Therein lies the mistake and the failure of the digital experiment in Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19146 If we had created unique programming that appealed to niche markets, a demand for the digital frequency would have been established. In Toronto alone we would have served more than 20 distinct niche markets. When you serve 20 niche markets, they each create passion and enthusiasm for that particular service, which collectively with the total 20 could have convinced other car manufacturers to include digital.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19147 Even Ford and GM, for a few pennies more, could have added digital in the car as well as a satellite band.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19148 But our focus was on digital sound clarity, and the automobile roll‑out would have made it very, very easy. Yet the emphasis should have been on programming, and 14 hours alone does not create niche programming appeal.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19149 Without the automobile, it is redundant to carry mainstream programming on both FM and digital channels simultaneously.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19150 The options are clear.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19151 We keep doing what we are doing ‑‑ broadcasting to no one ‑‑ while waiting to see what happens with new technology, as the CAB has suggested.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19152 Or we shut down the digital transmitter sites and cease broadcasting.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19153 Or we are proposing, for a five‑year experimental period, totally deregulate digital radio and allow broadcasters to program a unique service to underserved segment of the population. This niche broadcasting will create a demand for digital radio. Eventually that demand will convince car manufacturers to include L‑Band.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19154 Give us free rein to create the content, address niche markets and we will create a demand for digital receivers. If we do not have the latitude in a highly competitive multimedia to create offerings that distinguish the value of the digital platform, all of our investments to date will have been lost.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19155 MR. P. EVANOV: In summary, we strongly urge the Commission to implement any changes to policy only after the impact on the independent broadcasters has been thoroughly considered. Any change that strengthens their position or expands their role would be a direct contribution to the goals of the Broadcasting Act.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19156 We thank you for inviting us to appear and for us to present our case.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19157 We will be happy to answer any questions you might have.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19158 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19159 I am going to lead off and my colleagues will pick up other questions possibly.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19160 I appreciate the situation you are in, Mr. Evanov, in regard to the L‑Band and your sense of the stranded investment and so on.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19161 I am wondering about some of the assumptions, though.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19162 Your assumption is that with niche broadcasting, essentially allowing you to find formats without regulatory constraints, I assume is what you are saying, you believe that you can create enough demand to convince the car manufacturers to install in‑car receivers that will then provide you with the critical mass you need.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19163 I am wondering about those assumptions, given the size of the Toronto market, the Canadian market, how you believe that this will actually occur.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19164 MR. B. EVANOV: First, I believe we have to do something. We can't just let this channel sit there.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19165 We could hold it for future use, but we can do that anyway while we experiment.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19166 I guess what we are saying is what we are experimenting with now is really going nowhere. There is no one listening to digital radio. Unlike the Vice‑Chair, I don't even own a digital radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19167 I guess what turned everyone off is when the car manufacturers said they were not going to put it in there.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19168 We have had a good track record of creating niche programming, and very successful niche programming: with an ethnic station that had a poor signal in the Toronto‑Brampton area; with even Z103 in the early days, which is CIDC‑FM, which doesn't cover the whole CMA; with FOXY, which has a poor signal.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19169 But with all these we more or less went after niche programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19170 Initially on CIDC‑FM we created the dance music format. Then we had ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19171 THE CHAIRPERSON: If you could just bear with me on the question.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19172 MR. B. EVANOV: I'm sorry.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19173 THE CHAIRPERSON: I am questioning your assumption that even if you did that, you would be able to somehow convince the car manufacturers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19174 MR. B. EVANOV: Let me jump forward.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19175 It is not based on any research with the car companies, but I know that if you create a market of 20 specialty channels in Toronto and call them digital, and those channels have a following, then you have a collective total of those. I think you have a very good case to make with the car manufacturers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19176 I think Duff Roman mentioned ‑‑ and I'm not sure if it was in the hearing or outside the hearing ‑‑ that to add L‑Band to the receiver is not a major problem. It's a matter of one or two chips and it's not a costly factor. The car radios can carry L‑Band. They can carry ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19177 THE CHAIRPERSON: Your statement that even Ford and GM for a few pennies could add digital, are you basing it on your conversation with Duff Roman ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19178 MR. B. EVANOV: With other broadcasters and people we have talked to.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19179 THE CHAIRPERSON: ‑‑ or any knowledge that you actually have as to the costs?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19180 MR. B. EVANOV: Okay. I haven't assessed the costs but I've talked to various engineers. I've talked to people that I've dealt with, people in Europe, that have basically conveyed to me ‑‑ and pennies may be not the right word, but you are not looking at an astronomical cost to include various bands on a digital radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19181 We think it would happen if there was ‑‑ if there were 20 channels operating or 25 channels operating in Toronto, as the specialty channels do, I think that someone is going to look at this and say there is a real market here. And if I put them in my cars, these people will want to have them.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19182 THE CHAIRPERSON: You are saying, given the other alternatives, as desperate as that one is, it is probably no worse than just abandoning the channel or going forward.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19183 I don't see the economic argument making much sense, frankly.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19184 I see that you are in a desperate situation or you feel that you are, and you want to try and figure out something.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19185 MR. B. EVANOV: I am not coming to you with any great research on this.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19186 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19187 MR. B. EVANOV: I guess I am coming to you with years of broadcast experience in terms of niche marketing. I know what we can do.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19188 I think it could be a successful venture in the Greater Toronto Area, for example.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19189 THE CHAIRPERSON: Have you talked to other broadcasters about this proposal?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19190 You are assuming 20 other broadcasters or 20 other stations will set up and use their L‑Band frequencies to do the same.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19191 MS LAURIGNANO: If I could just add to that, yes, we have spoken with other broadcasters when we cry the blues together about the annual renewals for the transmitter and the cost, and at meetings.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19192 THE CHAIRPERSON: Sure.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19193 MS LAURIGNANO: I can also speak, for example, of the CAEB, the ethnic broadcasters, that we are on the same page in terms of we need to do something, especially in the larger areas, larger markets such as Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, Calgary, and so on, where the space on the dial is so limited and the demand, as you know, is so great for some services, be they ethnic or specialty or other niche kind of formats.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19194 We do believe that there is room for some service to be accomplished through digital. If the service is unique and you can't it anywhere else, it will drive people to buy a digital radio receiver. And eventually, if the demand is there, it just makes economic sense for the car manufacturers and other people eventually to get on board.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19195 It is not unlike the SCMO type of scenario where people went out and bought the receivers. We certainly think that digital has a better chance than the SCMO in terms of equipment and sound, and that kind of thing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19196 THE CHAIRPERSON: General Sarnoff's philosophy was the opposite. He handed out radios free so that there would be listeners ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19197 MS LAURIGNANO: That's right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19198 THE CHAIRPERSON: ‑‑ be able to broadcast ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19199 MS LAURIGNANO: Right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19200 THE CHAIRPERSON: Coming at it the other way.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19201 MS LAURIGNANO: But we can't do that unless we can offer the programming. If the programming is good and great and it is niche and it is not available anywhere else, then we the broadcasters would be happy to go get the radios and give it the people.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19202 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19203 Monsieur Arpin.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19204 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Only for the record, because it is not a question but I think it has to be said at some point in time.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19205 There are reasons why the manufacturers like GM and Ford did quit. They felt that the broadcasters were not investing enough into the technology. They didn't develop the Windsor‑Quebec City corridor fast enough.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19206 They are not interested in Toronto. They are not interested in Montreal, because obviously people commute between localities and they were looking at the long haul, particularly GM with their service ‑‑ I forget the name.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19207 MS LAURIGNANO: OnStar.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19208 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: OnStar. They were seeing that DAB was a very good way to introduce OnStar in cars, and obviously they were looking for the highways. They were looking for the Trans‑Canada Highway.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19209 How long will it take us to develop from St. John's to Victoria?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19210 They felt that the plan that the broadcaster had, which was voluntary based on the various participants, some interested, some not interested, some looking towards IBOC rather than DAB. So they made their decision.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19211 As Duff Roman stated, it cost $13 million to GM to quit.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19212 And that, I think for the record, has to be said.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19213 A multiplex receiver is coming. Only a week ago, RadioScape, which is a receiver manufacturer based in the U.K., announced that they were coming out with a new receiver that integrates AM, DAB, FM, DRM. And obviously they will be capable also over a short period of time to have satellite services.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19214 So it is coming. But I understand what you said. You said it may be worth trying other alternatives.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19215 But as long as we don't develop the corridors, the car manufacturers won't be there.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19216 MS LAURIGNANO: Well, it's good that the digital receivers are coming. We think under the current conditions, where we are practically simulcasting on both bands, with only 14 hours, that too will not drive the roll‑out or the sales of the radios.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19217 If people have it over the air and it is already so much more portable and convenient, they will not go out and invest in that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19218 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19219 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much for appearing before us.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19220 MS LAURIGNANO: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19221 THE CHAIRPERSON: I think we will break now for lunch and resume at 2:00 p.m.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19222 Nous reprendons à 14 h 00.
‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 1240 / Suspension à 1240
‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 1407 / Reprise à 1407
LISTNUM 1 \l 19223 THE CHAIRPERSON: Order, please. À l'ordre, s'il vous plaît.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19224 Madam Secretary, would you call the next item.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19225 THE SECRETARY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19226 I would now invite the Coalition of Nine Provincial/Territorial Music Industry in Process Association to make their presentation. Mr. Sam Baardman will be appearing for this participant.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19227 Mr. Baardman, you have 10 minutes for your presentation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19228 MR. BAARDMAN: Thank you.
PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 19229 MR. BAARDMAN: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19230 My name is Sam Baardman and I am Executive Director of the Manitoba Recording Industry Association and Chair of FACTOR's National Advisory Board.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19231 I am pleased to be speaking today on behalf of a coalition of nine provincial and territorial music industry associations representing the regional interests of the Canadian music industry outside of Quebec.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19232 As we noted in our submission, we are new to the ongoing dialogue between the music industry, broadcasters and the CRTC, and we sincerely appreciate the opportunity to participate in this important national conversation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19233 Our intent here today is to respond to two key issues that have been raised in this review to date.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19234 First, to CanCon. As you recall, in our original submission we asked that the Commission consider strengthening Canadian content regulations across five different dimensions but the aspect of CanCon that seems to be garnering the most attention is the issue of emerging artists and how to define them for the purpose of broadcast.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19235 The most reasonable definition offered from the intervenors, in our opinion, is the plan in which artists are defined as emerging for a period of 12 months after reaching the Top 40 or after reaching 50,000 units in certified sales.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19236 We believe, however, that sales levels should be irrelevant to the definition. The concept of emerging artist should relate to the emergence of an artist from obscurity into the radio marketplace and, in our view, no logical connection to sales can be drawn from this definition.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19237 We would also suggest that 18 months rather than 12 is a more appropriate time frame for artists trying to establish themselves in the radio marketplace.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19238 Regarding chart placement, we would prefer that the cutoff be set at achieving the Top 20 rather than the Top 40. We know that there are various suggestions regarding chart placement and we would encourage the Commission to test out a variety of models before making a decision.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19239 Finally, we believe that a bonus system will incentivize the process and we would support this as long as incentives do not allow CanCon levels to fall below 35 per cent overall.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19240 Regarding the issue of CanCon, the learning curve for us has been steep, and since the March deadline we have been reading the submissions of other intervenors with great interest.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19241 We have great respect for the complexity of radio programming and we appreciate the challenges and risks inherent in playing new and unfamiliar music.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19242 But despite this, we would like to reiterate what the CAB itself pointed out to the Commission on Monday morning when it noted that:
"The future success of radio will rest on its ability to localize and editorialize to assist their listeners in navigating the growing array of choices present in the music marketplace and to point them towards new and exciting music."
(As read)
LISTNUM 1 \l 19243 We would encourage broadcasters to begin to initiate that relationship with their listeners now, thus making room for new Canadian artists in the process.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19244 I would like to turn to the matter of Canadian talent development.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19245 We would like to express our sincere appreciation for the CTD contributions that have been made in the past by broadcasters, especially those who have supported some of our associations directly and also for the support offered by radio through its participation in FACTOR.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19246 As we have said before, nothing could be more important to our artists and other constituents than sustaining and increasing the CTD contributions made by broadcasters.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19247 In our submission, we made specific suggestions regarding increased level of CTD funding and we welcome questions from commissioners regarding those suggestions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19248 However, I would like to comment today on the proposal by the CAB to consolidate its CTD contributions entirely within the two Starmaker funds, effectively eliminating all CTD contributions to FACTOR and Musicaction.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19249 We find the CAB's proposal to be nothing short of alarming and we believe its implementation would be disastrous for the industry.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19250 It is clear to us that the loss of CTD contributions to FACTOR would result in a drastic reduction in the funds that FACTOR has available to distribute through its programs.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19251 What alarms us even more is that the Department of Canadian Heritage has stated that if private broadcaster contributions were withdrawn from FACTOR, their own contributions to FACTOR would be reconsidered and possibly withdrawn, resulting in a complete collapse of the organization.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19252 What would the downsizing or even the loss of FACTOR mean to us and to our constituents?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19253 In our written submission, we described our work in providing development initiatives to grassroots artists and other members of the Canadian music industry in every region of this country. We are here to tell you today that our effectiveness is in large part directly attributable to the support that we have received from FACTOR.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19254 Our involvement with FACTOR began several years ago when, in an effort to increase its responsiveness to the needs of the independent music industry outside of central Canada, FACTOR instituted its National Advisory Board made up of representatives from our associations from coast to coast to coast.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19255 Through the NAB we were not only able to advise FACTOR on the effectiveness of its programs but we were also generously given time in our twice yearly meetings to work with one another to share insights on how to best serve and support music industry professionals who are geographically isolated from the centres of the Canadian music industry.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19256 Eventually, with FACTOR's help, we began to develop programs collaboratively, contributing jointly to the development of some initiatives and sharing resources whenever possible. The results, as we have outlined in our written submission, have been remarkable and we are only beginning to realize our potential.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19257 The thousands of artists and service providers across the country who participate in our own development programs therefore owe much to FACTOR. Add to these the huge number of artists and businesses who are direct beneficiaries of FACTOR funding programs and the impact of FACTOR on the independent music industry begins to become clear.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19258 This remarkable organization reaches into every corner of the country, across every genre of music, and serves artists and industry service providers alike.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19259 Each of our organizations receives support from FACTOR to assist us with our training and marketing initiatives and to assist us in developing the ANR Lounge and we also receive some small support in return for our service as regional affiliates of FACTOR. Such a partnership is critical to our own work in the grassroots development of the industry.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19260 Let me give you an example of the kind of grassroots development that we are talking about.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19261 Two years ago, my own organization launched the country's very first Aboriginal music program and hired a full‑time Aboriginal music program coordinator.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19262 The program engages in significant outreach, liaising with Aboriginal artists, promoting their work, connecting them to key players in the mainstream industry and assisting in the development of the niche market for Aboriginal music.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19263 We engage in constant one‑on‑one consultation with Aboriginal artists, developing training seminars, national and international showcases, marketing material and we offer travel support.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19264 We are proud to note that one month ago we launched aboriginalmusic.ca, a full service website that showcases Aboriginal artists from Manitoba.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19265 The program also included a week‑long national Aboriginal music retreat with artists participating from nearly every region of the country.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19266 Not only did FACTOR support aspects of this work financially but FACTOR's continued sponsorship of our network of associations allows us to share information about this work with each other in a remarkably efficient way.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19267 As a result, provincial and territorial music industry associations will be promoting this year's upcoming national Aboriginal music retreat in their own regions. In doing so, they will strengthen their own outreach to Aboriginal artists.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19268 In every way measurable, this program has been a success. The artists who participate learn much about marketing, recording, touring, funding, performance skills and songwriting, and many have begun to achieve significant airplay on NCI Radio and other Aboriginal radio networks.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19269 Examples of this kind of imaginative programming abound in all of our associations but while we have achieved much in terms of grassroots development, our real goals are still far off.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19270 We have been working towards a fully integrated network of provincial and territorial association which can delivery a complete slate of services, providing information, communication, education, business development, market development, market access and industry outreach in each of our regions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19271 At a time when our industry is experiencing tremendous pressure and radical change, those artists struggling to develop their careers beyond their respective regions require just this kind of intelligent support.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19272 It is clear to us that our goals are considerably tied to the ongoing support of FACTOR. To put it bluntly, FACTOR gets it and is doing everything it can to help. But we also know that under the current funding regime, FACTOR does not have the financial resources even to meet the basic needs of artists and industry professionals in our regions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19273 Make no mistake, we constantly challenge FACTOR. We constantly challenge FACTOR to increase its funding to grassroots development in our regions through its current programs dedicated to this purpose but we also understand FACTOR's dilemma, which is that its mandate is tremendously broad in scope.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19274 Through its 20 or more programs, FACTOR's financial support is felt by thousands of members of the Canadian independent music community, if not through direct project funding, then through its support of industry events, training programs, award shows, festivals, business development programs and on and on.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19275 The demands are tremendous and the money currently available is scarce. And with every success FACTOR achieves, the demand for more resources increases significantly.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19276 Our own success as music industry development organizations is a case in point. FACTOR helped us develop opportunities but those opportunities need to be supported in a real and meaningful way.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19277 It is for these reasons that we implore the Commission to continue with the current funding regime in Canada and not to jeopardize what FACTOR has achieved.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19278 What we need desperately is more money, more resources, not a rethinking of the model but a recognition that adequate funding is what will make the current model work exactly the way it is supposed to.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19279 I want to thank you so much for your time and I look forward to your questions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19280 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr. Baardman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19281 Commissioner Pennefather.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19282 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19283 Good afternoon. I wanted just to start ‑‑ now, you have actually added more information this afternoon. It is very helpful to us to understand the role of the various provincial associations, which you say: "Our real goals are still far off."
LISTNUM 1 \l 19284 MR. BAARDMAN: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19285 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: This very good example you gave us of one of your programs, the Aboriginal music and all its aspects, can you give us an example, since you are here on behalf of the Coalition, of other programs, what kind of programs the provincial associations provide?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19286 MR. BAARDMAN: Sure. I think probably ‑‑ four years ago, the very first Music Industry Resource Centre was opened in our province ‑‑ now, there are four ‑‑ and the functions of the resource centre are probably quite present in virtually every association.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19287 Our resource centre has full‑time staff. We have a ‑‑ since its inception, we have had more than 5,000 visits from independent artists and people working at the grassroots level. We provide several different modes of training and professional development through the resource centre in terms of workshop series, seminars, short courses.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19288 One‑on‑one consultation is a really, really huge, huge part of what we do. It is everything from what do I put in my media kit to I just made a record or I am thinking of making a record and I don't know what to do next, right up to some very sophisticated questions that come from people who have been at this for quite some time.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19289 One of the things that we strive to do is to make sure that there is adequate information within the resource centres for people to be able to access either virtually or in person.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19290 We have just set up a partners corner where we have partnered with 20 organizations regionally and nationally, the CMPA, the Music Managers Forum, the Songwriters Association of Canada, CIRPA, all the rest of it, where there is a conduit for their information to be made present in all of our associations, and all the associations are going to start to be establishing not just a kind of working relationship but also a constant information flow.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19291 So there is that kind of activity.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19292 In terms of the marketing activity, many of us now make it a regular part of our job to host showcases of our regional artists at national and international events and we support those showcases with marketing materials that we develop. Some of us are lucky enough to have small funds where we can provide travel support, but our biggest job is to integrate all of this kind of support.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19293 Just to give you an example, several years ago we noted that none of our local labels, small, tiny, little local labels had any international presence and none of them were in a position to be able to access international markets, so we sourced funding to assist them in getting to MIDEM.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19294 But just getting these labels to MIDEM wouldn't have been enough for us, so what we did was we brought officials from the Canada Stand into Manitoba to talk with the people who were identified as ready to go to that event. We also brought in another pre‑event to help those particular labels understand what they were going to do, and develop marketing materials for themselves.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19295 Then, once the event was over, we hosted another kind of post‑MIDEM event so that they could consolidate what they had learned, share what they learned with everybody and what kind of business they had done, and we continued to support those same companies in addition to others over a period of ‑‑ we just finished our fourth year.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19296 The thing is, that kind of integrate support ‑‑ you are not just giving them a travel fund and saying "Go to MIDEM. Tell us how it was when you get back", but providing them with real solid information and giving them a forum and an opportunity to not only work individually but to work together and to work with us has been a really powerful model.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19297 I would just like to add another piece to that, and that is that when those companies hit that event they hit the ground running. They were really on fire and some of them made some amazing things happen.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19298 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you very much. That is very helpful.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19299 Your funding, you have made it clear, comes from FACTOR to some extent. We will get back to that in a moment.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19300 Do you also get funding from broadcasters directly through local initiatives or other benefits or other types of CTD funding?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19301 MR. BAARDMAN: I think three of our nine associations access direct contributions who have established relationships with their local broadcasters and some of them wouldn't be able to survive without that contribution. It is tremendously appreciated.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19302 We basically try to access funding. Most of us get a small operating grant from our local provincial governments through our departments of culture, or whatever it happens to be. In our case, we get a single operating grant of $50,000. Upon that operating grant rests hundreds of thousands of dollars of programming, depending on any given year what programs we are able to access.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19303 We try to access money across different levels of government and across different departments, from Industry, from Education and Training ‑‑ so from Industry Development, from Education and Training, from the Department of Canadian Heritage, from Culture, wherever we can find it, wherever it makes sense.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19304 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: You say in your written intervention that you:
"... would like to see a dedicated contribution of $2 million annually targeted specifically to provincial, territorial music industry associations." (As read)
LISTNUM 1 \l 19305 MR. BAARDMAN: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19306 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I assumed that $2 million would be from FACTOR, but is it $2 million from all these sources and is it $2 million to each association?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19307 I wasn't clear.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19308 MR. BAARDMAN: Oh, no, no.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19309 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Could you explain that to me?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19310 MR. BAARDMAN: Sure. Absolutely.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19311 I think we had to pick a number and I think we were content to be generous. We value the work we do of course.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19312 What we wanted to make sure was we are happy to have those funds administrated by FACTOR. We have a great relationship with FACTOR and we know that there is kind of a really responsible relationship going in both directions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19313 We know that any fund that is established has to serve every corner of the country. We also know that once this network finally becomes completely established there will be a Music Industry Association in Ontario which is going to need tremendous resources to serve the grassroots industry.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19314 That is currently the biggest hole in the network. There is no local provincial Music Industry Association that exists in Ontario, serving Ontario grassroots artists and others that exists.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19315 We also know that there is a new association coming online in Prince Edward Island. There is even a new Music Industry Association coming online in the Northwest Territories called RAANT, which is the Recording Artists Association of the Northwest Territories. Those people are already in discussion with a very mature and sophisticated Music Industry Association that operates out of the Yukon. Obviously we have a strong collaborative relationship with those folks and we are always excited about what is going on out there.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19316 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: RAANT.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19317 MR. BAARDMAN: RAANT, absolutely.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19318 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: You expressed your concern in your paper this afternoon regarding the CAB proposal, which you say would eliminate effectively CTD contributions to FACTOR and Musicaction.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19319 Have you been following the hearing this week?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19320 MR. BAARDMAN: I followed the hearing on Monday and today, I wasn't able to on Tuesday and Wednesday, so I'm assuming there have been some developments?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19321 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I think there was certainly a commitment or a proposal from, for example, Rogers and Standard in terms of a guarantee, while the funds would all come from Starmaker Fund there is a proposal to guarantee a certain amount of funding, $1.8 million in fact, which is, as you know, under the policy, the CAB plan, to FACTOR/Musicaction.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19322 Do you want to comment on that?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19323 MR. BAARDMAN: Sure. I have a couple of comments.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19324 One is, that is significantly less money than needed. I will just leave it as bluntly as that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19325 The second comment that I have to make is that in our original proposal we made a really strong statement about who we believe should be in control of CTD contributions. We believe that it represents a transfer of capital from industry to another.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19326 We are not experts in broadcasting, but what we are experts in is in music industry development. I can say that is my occupation, that's my job, that's what I really do well. I think that another point that we made is that ‑‑ and the other thing that I have a concern of is that the Radio Starmaker Fund's mandate is extremely narrow in comparison to the kind of work that we know needs to be done to develop the music industry, especially across the regions, especially in the grassroots areas. It is extremely narrow.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19327 Because its purpose is primarily to develop music for radio, we know that is an effect of the work that we do in the long run, but it can't be the central concern of what we do.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19328 Ultimately what we believe is that Canadian radio needs a healthy Canadian music industry, but the Canadian music industry can't be healthy if it only served the interests of Canadian radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19329 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: You mentioned grassroots quite a bit this afternoon. I take it you feel that is very much in your mandate.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19330 MR. BAARDMAN: Yes, it is.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19331 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Is that the same for the other associations across the provinces?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19332 MR. BAARDMAN: I think clearly. It doesn't mean that none of the people that we serve operate outside of the grassroots of the industry, but it does mean that is primarily what we do.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19333 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: That leads to my question.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19334 You do mention in your written intervention that the introduction of the department's music entrepreneur component is having an effect on FACTOR.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19335 What is the connection between the MEC and the provincial associations? Is there any impact there?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19336 Will there be a connection between what you do and the support given to artists through the MEC?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19337 MR. BAARDMAN: I think the answer is relatively little. The MEC serves kind of mid to high‑level independent labels. Some of them do exist in the regions of Canada, but much of the work that we do lies outside of the day‑to‑day operations of those labels and the MEC's support of those labels really doesn't ‑‑ although we celebrate it, doesn't affect the day‑to‑day work that we do.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19338 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you very much.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19339 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19340 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19341 MR. BAARDMAN: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19342 THE CHAIRPERSON: Madam Secretary...?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19343 THE SECRETARY: I would now call on the next participant to make his presentation, Mr. Michael Fockler, if you would come forward?
‑‑‑ Pause
LISTNUM 1 \l 19344 THE SECRETARY: Whenever you are ready, you will have 10 minutes for your presentation.
PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 19345 MR. FOCKLER: Thank you, Madam Secretary.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19346 Good morning, good afternoon or good evening, depending on what your own personal clock says. You have all been working very hard this week and from this side of the table we appreciate that. So thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19347 In this case, good afternoon, Mr. Commissioner and Members of the Commission. Thank you for the opportunity to allow me to appear at this proceeding.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19348 My presentation today will cover three main areas, the regulatory process; small independent broadcast operations, and the necessity of localism in radio broadcastings.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19349 But in order to lay the groundwork for my comments, I would like to first briefly highlight my background.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19350 I am a second generation radio broadcaster, virtually growing up in small town radio. I remember listening to my family's radio stations constantly, swap shops, birthday trains, open microphone programs and junior hockey broadcasts.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19351 I know now that that wasn't always the greatest sounding radio, but it was sure great local radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19352 Those experiences taught me that when used properly radio is a powerful medium to connect and inform communities. Now, with my involvement in radio programming and regulatory affairs, I am an able to apply my experience to help small independent owners and operators create new radio stations and further develop their existing services.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19353 This is the basis for my presentation today. I feel strongly that small independent radio operators are the cornerstone of this industry and, by necessity, have a direct connection with the communities they serve.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19354 Since there has been so much discussion already regarding Canadian content and Canadian talent development, I will only touch briefly on these points.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19355 First, Canadian Content.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19356 There certainly has to be provision made for including new and emerging artists in any new CanCon policy, but regardless of the outcome any new formula must be concise and user friendly. Radio programmers are notoriously poor mathematicians.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19357 Canadian Talent Development. National music funds such as FACTOR provide an invaluable resource for new and emerging artists on a national level, but before artists can achieve national recognition, even before artists can qualify for national funding, they have to start somewhere. Renting a 4‑track, cutting a demo, finding a performance venue and garnering radio airplay, this is where all musicians start.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19358 CTD expenditures directed locally and managed by the broadcaster are often the only source of support for these local garage bands. In other words, there is a funding vacuum between aspiring artists playing music in a basement and becoming established enough to utilize national services.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19359 Broadcasters, in addition to supporting these national organizations, should be encouraged to allow a portion of CTD dollars to be directed to the local level.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19360 In my experience, there is deep concern among existing broadcasters that new entrants once on the air and after receiving their licence are not fulfilling the promises made during the public hearing and regulatory process.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19361 The Commission goes to great lengths to analyze applications, including format news and spoken word, to ensure the proposal will provide the best fit for the area served. However, in some cases once a licence is granted all bets are off, as they say. Formats go from Easy Listening to Hip‑Hop, news drops from 20 hours per week to 10, relevant spoken word disappears. In other words, the on‑air product bears little resemblance to the original application.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19362 Reinstating a Promise of Performance model from years past would improve the quality of applications submitted, ensure applicants are proposing realistic and achievable objectives, and provide a level of comfort for the incumbent operators in that market.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19363 The Commission need not extensively monitor these Promises of Performance themselves. Existing broadcasters rabidly scrutinize the competition on a regular basis, particularly with new stations. Any breach of licence would be quickly noted.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19364 Thus, the Commission would only act on well‑documented complaints made by broadcasters. Any substantial deviation from the Promise of Performance would have the same gravity as low CanCons levels for example and the licensee held accountable.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19365 With respect to independent broadcasters, amongst the reams of paper submitted by many diverse groups in this proceeding, one sentence stood out above all others, and I quote:
"Our system can't continue to cling to the romantic notion of the small mom and pop radio station." (As read)
LISTNUM 1 \l 19366 I was deeply shaken by that. One of our country's largest broadcasters was making this assertion. Does Canada really want the equivalent of a U.S. style Clear Channel dominating the industry?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19367 My experience in research shows the opposite. Using BBM fall 2005 figures I quickly uncovered eight markets with populations of over 50,000 in which a small independent commercial broadcaster led the market in audience share between 3 and 11 percentage points over a station belonging to the top 10 national operators. Several other markets had the small broadcaster in a close second place.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19368 This finding to me was not surprising. According to the CRTC Monitoring Report 2005, the top 10 national operators have been losing audience share to the tune of 3 percent between 2002 and 2004, while at the same time Canadian commercial radio as a whole only declined by 1 percent over the same time period.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19369 Commissioners, I believe the reason for the smaller decline in audience tuning to independent stations is because small operators can only survive by aggressively supporting their community. They cannot depend on national economies of scale, trickle‑down revenue and deep discount national buys.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19370 This is not to say that the top 10 operators fail to provide localism ‑‑ some do it quite well and on a regular basis ‑‑ but listeners can recognize when a broadcaster is effectively serving its audience with news and information and when a radio station is simply an automated jukebox.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19371 As stated in the Broadcast Act, the airwaves are owned and controlled by the Canadian public. That ideal remains and thus the onus is upon the CRTC and the broadcast industry to examine how radio is to reflect the best interests of listeners, over and above last night with Jay Leno segments and Hot 40 music lists.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19372 Is it in the public interest for radio to be a music jukebox? A recent Globe and Mail article extolled the virtues of one station's no DJ policy. Certainly in large markets with a highly evolved diversity of local media to choose from, one station's novelty is of little impact, but in markets with only one or two licensees, programming stations using large market theories and formulae is doing an immense disservice to the audiences these stations purport to serve.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19373 Independent surveys conducted for new licence applications consistently show that local news, community information and surveillance are the key determinants for audiences selecting radio stations. Excuse me, they are amongst the key determinants for selecting a radio station.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19374 However, it has become well‑known that some radio stations are completely automated in the evenings, or from Friday night to Monday morning. Many people I speak to across the country can point to instances of local emergencies going unreported on local radio for this very reason.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19375 Frankly, I don't have the answer to this lack of relevant local programming. Some operators do have a genuine need to reduce local news services and to voicetrack as a cost‑saving environment requirement, but there must be consideration given to including live‑to‑air content as an element of the local programming policy to ensure that radio continues to serve its audience in the most effective manner possible.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19376 Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, by shifting the focus back to localism in radio the industry will ultimately be in a better position to combat the threat of new and emerging technologies that we have heard so much about this week.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19377 Localism is the key to the success of radio. It is also the cornerstone of the Broadcast Act.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19378 I respectfully submit that the Commission recognize the benefits that small and independent broadcast operators provide to the communities they serve:
LISTNUM 1 \l 19379 allow the regulatory process, including competitive licensing, to include localism as a determinant factor;
LISTNUM 1 \l 19380 find ways to encourage local spoken word and live‑to‑air programming;
LISTNUM 1 \l 19381 make provision for locally directed and administered CTD initiatives as a complement to national funds;
LISTNUM 1 \l 19382 reinstate a Promise of Performance policy for new licensees and changes of ownership; and
LISTNUM 1 \l 19383 continue to demand integrity, parity and programming of the highest quality from all in the Canadian broadcast industry.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19384 Thank you very much for your time and attention. I look forward to any questions you may have.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19385 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19386 Commissioner Cugini.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19387 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Good afternoon, Mr. Fockler.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19388 You have a very clear presentation for us to consider this afternoon.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19389 I just wanted to ask you what you feel the role of competition and choice in a market has when deciding how relative a radio station is to its community.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19390 In other words, as a radio listener, we all have the choice to either tune into one radio station or another, and if that radio station is not meeting my needs as a listener, it is very easy for me to switch to another one.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19391 So what responsibility does the radio station have to continue to be relevant to its community?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19392 MR. FOCKLER: Thank you, Commissioner.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19393 If as a radio listener the stations in your market are not meeting your needs ‑‑ for example, you cannot find a station that plays the songs that you like to hear ‑‑ you now have an innumerable number of options.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19394 And that's what we have heard so much about, from satellite to ‑‑ we don't need to go through them all again.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19395 What we need to do is shift the focus to what should these radio stations be providing to hold the listeners.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19396 My feeling is that it must focus on localism. It must talk about what the Junior A hockey scores were last night and where the storm is coming from and is there a blizzard next week, or what happened at Town Council.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19397 Those are the things that connect your community and hold it together.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19398 If all you are looking for from a radio station is a constant stream of music punctuated by the odd DJ banter, if you will, you have so many other options to choose from that you will be turned off of radio anyway.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19399 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Are you suggesting that the Commission be responsible for going out and finding out what the local needs are ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19400 MR. FOCKLER: No, certainly not.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19401 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: ‑‑ of those communities and issuing calls for those particular types of radio stations?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19402 MR. FOCKLER: No, certainly not.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19403 What I am saying here is that local, small independent broadcasters that live in the communities they are serving already know this and are already providing it, to the best of their ability.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19404 COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Thank you, Mr. Fockler.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19405 Those are my questions, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19406 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19407 Commissioner Pennefather.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19408 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19409 Good afternoon. Thank you for bringing your thoughts to us.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19410 I just wanted to go back to your CTD.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19411 You make provision for locally directed administered CTD initiatives as a complement to national funds. That is the concept.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19412 In your written comments you talk about a formula, and I assume that formula is the balance of national to local.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19413 Could you just expand on that?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19414 MR. FOCKLER: I was frankly trying to get away from formulas. There have been so many thrown around that just adding another would complicate the mix.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19415 However, with regard to CTD, there is already a formula in place for changes of ownership.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19416 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19417 MR. FOCKLER: That is the 3, 2, 1.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19418 It would just seem logical to me that there would be the similar formula for new applications as well as ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19419 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Renewals.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19420 MR. FOCKLER: ‑‑ application renewals.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19421 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So somewhat the same. The 1 percent would be for the local ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19422 MR. FOCKLER: In your wisdom however you would choose to separate it, yes. But certainly localism must be a part of it, I believe.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19423 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I see. Thank you very much.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19424 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19425 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19426 Commissioner Arpin.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19427 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19428 You are stressing the localism factor and I don't know what is the current state of the assessment of applications in the U.S. but at some point in time, four or five years ago, or maybe more, localism was a very high priority. The FCC was requiring broadcasters who were applying to file a survey of local issues, and then the applicant had to address the conclusions of those surveys.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19429 Are you suggesting a similar approach?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19430 MR. FOCKLER: I am not entirely familiar with the American surveys from a few years ago.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19431 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I'm not either. I know that they had to do an in‑depth review of local issues and how they were dealt with.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19432 MR. FOCKLER: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19433 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Obviously in most of the market there was already incumbent players.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19434 MR. FOCKLER: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19435 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So they had to take into consideration what the incumbents were doing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19436 MR. FOCKLER: I understand your question, sir.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19437 In every new licence application that I have been involved with ‑‑ and I think it is becoming a standard requirement from the Commission for all new licence applications that there be market researched done, independent market research done, prior to the application being submitted.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19438 It is clear to me in the independent surveys that I have read that consistently local information, local news, sports, weather surveillance, ranks near the top of the information pile.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19439 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Yes, that's true maybe in the survey, but it is not always addressed in the supplementary brief.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19440 My question is: Should the Commission make it a requirement that those issues be addressed in the supplementary brief?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19441 MR. FOCKLER: I believe absolutely.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19442 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: They sometimes are addressed with a very large perspective.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19443 MR. FOCKLER: I understand. And I believe absolutely, Mr. Commissioner, that ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19444 The one word that I have been trying to avoid using through this whole thing is regulation. I don't want to see, I don't want the people that I work with to have to say: Oh, God, not another number ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19445 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Layer.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19446 MR. FOCKLER: ‑‑ layer of regulation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19447 But at the same time, I also see so many broadcasters starting to take away, slowly take away from this localism concept, because either it is not affordable, it is not cost‑effective, or that is not how they do it in Toronto or that is not how they do it in Calgary. So we will apply the Calgary principles to Brandon, Manitoba or Kingston, Ontario.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19448 As I say, that is not doing a service to the people in those markets.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19449 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: You introduced yourself as having been a consultant for new applicants but also for existing broadcasters.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19450 Over the last couple of days there has been some discussion about digital radio, including IBOC.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19451 Are your clients talking to you about IBOC or about any digital technology? What are their views?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19452 MR. FOCKLER: They are speaking of digital. But in the markets that my clients operate in, it is not an effective medium for them to choose, simply because the markets themselves are not sophisticated to that level.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19453 I don't want to make this sound derogatory to the market, but it is not certainly at a level of technological knowledge that a Toronto or a Vancouver may be at.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19454 So the people in those markets are quite happy with the products that they are receiving over their AM and FM and thus digital would have a novelty effect at best.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19455 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: But obviously they are ready to wait for others to develop the market before they themselves make the investment.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19456 MR. FOCKLER: Yes. As someone earlier today said regarding Canada versus the United States, Canada will be a follower.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19457 These small markets will also be a follower of the large markets.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19458 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Of the larger markets.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19459 MR. FOCKLER: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19460 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: In your oral presentation ‑‑ and I am addressing myself to your paragraph 17 ‑‑ you say that your own experience and research shows that in some markets the local operator is faring much better.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19461 Could you provide us with the list of those markets?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19462 I don't need to have it today, but could you provide that list to the Commission for May 29th?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19463 MR. FOCKLER: Certainly. I have it available today.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19464 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19465 Those were my questions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19466 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much, Mr. Fockler.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19467 MR. FOCKLER: Thank you very much.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19468 THE CHAIRPERSON: Madam Secretary.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19469 THE SECRETARY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19470 I would now call on the Canadian Music Centre to come forward for their presentation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19471 Mrs. Elisabeth Bihl is representing the centre.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19472 You will have ten minutes for your presentation after introduction of your colleague.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19473 Thank you.
PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 19474 MS BIHL: Good afternoon. I am the Executive Director of the Canadian Music Centre.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19475 I have with me James Rolfe, composer and also an associate of the Canadian Music Centre, as well as an executive board member of the Canadian League of Composers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19476 I will begin my presentation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19477 First of all, the Canadian Music Centre very much appreciates the opportunity to comment on the matters raised to day.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19478 The Canadian Music Centre is a not‑for‑profit registered national arts service organization and is an essential foundation for developing and maintaining professional Canadian composers' music.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19479 We have five centres across the country. We are fully bilingual. Our centre is in Montreal and another one in Sackville, New Brunswick, Toronto, Calgary as well as Vancouver.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19480 These centres have full music lending libraries open to the public and to performers to get their sheet music.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19481 We have an office in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Five months ago we opened it to capitalize on the growing interest of Canadian composers' music, a networking centre to facilitate international musicians to perform Canadian classical music.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19482 We have already had the chance to facilitate a good dozen groups to now perform Canadian music.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19483 Currently the Canadian Music Centre has 647 active classical, jazz and electroacoustics composers by making the music available for sale in Canada and worldwide.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19484 I am going to use the term classical music from now on as a collective.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19485 We hold some 18,000 works from these composers in our archives, all available for sale through our on‑demand publishing division.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19486 The Music Centre's clients are conductors, orchestras, performers, broadcasters, educators, researchers, students and those who listen to music.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19487 And important for this hearing is that the CMC also produces, distributes and sells CDs featuring the works of strictly Canadian composers and holds currently 1,000 titles ‑‑ in other words, some 7,000 works ‑‑ all readily available for airplay. We add each year some 90 to 100 more to this.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19488 Our contemporary classical music composers have a vital stake in Canada's cultural future and benefit professionally when their works are heard. We believe it is essential that works of these Canadian classical music composers be present and can be heard on commercial classical stations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19489 The Broadcasting Act has established that Canadian radio broadcasters are obliged to provide programming which is predominantly Canadian and is varied and comprehensive. Therefore, we believe the absence of contemporary classical music from our airwaves means that we are not achieving the objective.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19490 Historically, the careers of Canadian classical composers have depended, in part, on their music being broadcast on the CBC Radio Two or Radio‑Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19491 We are concerned, however, that in the future CBC's commitment to broadcast Canadian classical music may erode significantly.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19492 We are looking to you today to introduce perhaps regulation and to correct the problem, beginning with the current process concerning commercial radio policy, but also continuing when CBC appears before you to renew their licences.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19493 At this time there are only two commercial radio stations in Canada ‑‑ Toronto and Montreal ‑‑ which feature classical music as their main programming mandate. Unfortunately, these broadcasters rarely, if ever, include contemporary Canadian classical music.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19494 We understand that when applying the MAPL system, one is able to satisfy a Canadian selection by fulfilling at least two of the conditions. It is therefore possible to entirely circumvent the Canadian composer or lyricist and still qualify as having met Canadian content requirements.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19495 My example is the Toronto Symphony performs in their concert hall in Toronto Beethoven. It still is Canadian content.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19496 The Canadian Music Centre urges the CRTC to introduce a requirement that no less than 6 percent of the music programmed by commercial radio stations be either:
LISTNUM 1 \l 19497 a) composed entirely by a Canadian and after 1945 ‑‑ so the younger ones;
LISTNUM 1 \l 19498 b) if vocal, then the music be composed by composers and lyricists written entirely by one or more Canadian, also after 1945.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19499 This 6 percent requirement would need to apply to the 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. major periods and ensure that a variety of composers, rather than just one or two popular ones, be broadcast.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19500 With respect to the minimum Canadian content level for contemporary classical music ‑‑ it is currently set at 15 percent, I believe ‑‑ CMC proposes that it be established at the same level as for popular music.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19501 A minimal presence may be required for special interest music. However, CMC does not believe there is any further such requirement for Canadian classical music.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19502 We can assure the CRTC that there is sufficient supply of high quality Canadian works to support a minimum content level substantially higher than the current level of the 15 percent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19503 Perhaps I should point out the difference between popular music, where a constant supply of new materials is required, and classical or jazz music which has a much longer shelf life, and the overall inventory then becomes significant.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19504 We very much believe this inventory is adequate to satisfy the needs of existing radio broadcasters.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19505 To support this recommendation, CMC would like to reiterate that it has over 7,000 works readily available for airplay, but we don't have anyone to play it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19506 On the subject of talent development, we note with regret that the contemporary Canadian classical composers have no access to the CTD funds distributed by either Radio Starmaker Fund or FACTOR/MusicAction.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19507 CMC has a Centrediscs label that is celebrating its 25th anniversary. It's a not‑for‑profit label.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19508 When we learned about the Starmaker Fund two years ago, we did make inquiries on several occasions but learned that the CMC Centrediscs label does not meet the funding conditions and acceptance criteria. They are much too high for us. We never produce 2,500 units. It is more in the 1,000 range.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19509 Similarly, our artists who apply to FACTOR are mostly turned down. It really appears that these organizations are set up to serve primarily the pop industry. The qualification requirements are structured in such a way that effectively precludes classical music composers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19510 We believe that it is inappropriate given that the above commercial radio stations licensed to broadcast classical music and are making contributions to one or the other should not be coming to the classical musical composers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19511 At present the only public support for recording specialized music in this case comes from an extremely small budget at the Canada Council, and classical music production falls in that category.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19512 So how do we develop new stars? How can we establish a Canadian classical composer industry?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19513 Our audience is not as large because we insist on saying that it is marginalized music, but it is only so because we have not sufficient access to airplay and development funds.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19514 We urge the CRTC either to direct that the CTD be also directed to the Canadian Music Centre for use in our talent development program, or that amendments are made for classical music in either one of these existing talent funds.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19515 Finally, many of our contemporary music composers are recognized and regularly broadcast on the airwaves internationally. There are equally many award‑winning composers who are celebrities abroad. James Rolfe is definitely one of them. He has just returned from a celebrated concert in New York at Carnegie Hall and he can tell you more about that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19516 I have attached in fact a list of a commercial radio that has featured Canadian music from our centre. Consistently, every day for the last two months it is attached.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19517 Similarly, there are radio stations all over Europe. We had seven hours in the Concert Centre in the Netherlands, and so on.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19518 In other words, we do have content that is much appreciated outside Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19519 This concludes my presentation. Thank you very much
LISTNUM 1 \l 19520 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19521 Vice Chair Arpin?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19522 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19523 The list that you have attached, that is not a Canadian radio station, is it?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19524 MS BIHL: No, it is an American commercial radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19525 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: It is an American commercial radio station. So it is not part of NPR, it is very similar to the station in Montréal and in Toronto?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19526 MS BIHL: Similar to that, yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19527 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I noticed that obviously you are saying "rarely", but surely the Montréal stations play quite often some André Mathieu music, particularly "le Concerto de Québec" recorded by Alain Lefèvre with the Montréal Metropolitan Orchestra. As a matter of fact, that record has been quite successful. I think they have sold more than 10,000 copies of that recording.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19528 André Mathieu was born before 1945, but died after 1945 because he was still living in the early '60s.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19529 MS BIHL: Yes, I am aware of that. The Montréal station does a little more than the Toronto station. It is lamentable that there are only two classical stations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19530 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: There is a third one here in Ottawa. Couleur FM, CHLX‑FM, is a mixture of jazz during certain hours of the day and classical music in other hours of the day. So it is a hybrid format I will say, but they play a lot of classical music.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19531 MS BIHL: Including contemporary classical composers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19532 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I didn't say that. I'm saying for the record that there is not only two classical radio stations, two full classical radio stations, but there is a third one which is a hybrid of some kind with jazz during a certain part of the day and classical music.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19533 The jazz component is the portion that is the shortest of the two. So they are much more classical music than they are jazz‑driven.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19534 My first question is that you are recommending a 6 percent Canadian composer component. Where did you take that 6 per cent number?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19535 We also heard other intervenors during this process who suggested three, another was five and you are six.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19536 So how did you arrive at six?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19537 MS BIHL: I really can't go into details, but it was a discussion between our members at the CCA, Conference for the Arts, and we arrived that this would be a suitable start at least for the number of works we have available. As you also know, it is not identified content‑wise what the content should be, except that it should be, if at all possible, equal to that of the popular music side, because we do have enough music.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19538 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So it is only an educated guess that you are making? You said that you had discussions with your members, but you finally all agreed based on the goodwill of everybody, "We will ask for six and we will maybe come out of there with five"?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19539 MS BIHL: Very much, yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19540 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Very much that way?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19541 MS BIHL: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19542 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I see.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19543 Just for the record, because you have been saying that the current regulation makes the Canadian content for classical music 15. It is 10.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19544 But you are recommending that we increase that number. To how much? You didn't say.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19545 MS BIHL: I deliberately didn't want to say, sir, because ‑‑ well, first of all, I read in 2001 when the last licence was extended that it was moved to 15 percent. However, we did not give a content because we do not know at this stage how high or what the percentage will be of the popular music side, but we would like to be treated equally.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19546 That is more the thinking behind it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19547 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Alain Pineau from the Canadian Conference of the Arts, were you here when he appeared this morning?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19548 MS BIHL: Yes, I was. Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19549 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: He suggested 25.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19550 MS BIHL: We have a lot more music than that, but ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19551 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: He was suggesting 25 per cent Canadian content.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19552 MS BIHL: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19553 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: But he also wasn't committal regarding Canadian composers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19554 MS BIHL: Well, let's put it this way, we would like it to be higher because the music is available, definitely available. We have very active and very established composers, the music has been recorded, it is a matter of actually getting it on the air. And how does one build a Canadian composer industry without hearing it?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19555 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: You gave us a list of composers and their titles that have been recorded, but have they been recorded by ‑‑ we don't know who, by major labels.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19556 MS BIHL: The Canadian Music Centre has another arm and it's called the Distribution Services arm and it distributes Indies in the specialized music section. It is true that we have the 1,000 titles.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19557 All of these are medium, small independent recording artists and it goes through a jury at the CMC literally before they are accepted for distribution. So they are established, they are highly professional recordings.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19558 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: If the Commission was to agree to your request of 6 percent, do you have any idea how much money will flow through SOCAN to the composers?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19559 Have you made some kind of estimate, financial estimate?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19560 MS BIHL: I can do that, but it certainly would help.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19561 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Anything will help, it's clear, but you haven't figured it out by yourself?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19562 MS BIHL: No. I don't dare yet.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19563 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: You mentioned that your members try to apply to Starmaker Fund and the experience was shown to be negative because obviously you didn't get the appropriate number of records produced to meet the floor of the Starmaker program.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19564 Do you have recommendations to make regarding classical music?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19565 MS BIHL: Yes, I would, please, and that is if indeed a section could be set up within Starmaker or FACTOR, either one, that would be sensitive to the needs and requirements of classical music, contemporary classical music composition, and the recordings that come out, because indeed it would take us 2, 3 years to sell 1,000. So it is a different environment.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19566 Also, the recordings are not as expensive. You can record something for $15,000, $20,000 and you have a higher quality recording. So it is a different environment all around and it would need to take that sensitivity into ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19567 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Into account.
‑‑‑ Pause
LISTNUM 1 \l 19568 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Obviously FACTOR is helping in the production of classical music. They have classical music programs because they are classical music producers, Marquis being one and Electa and Atma being two others that I could think of who have done certainly a good number of productions over the years.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19569 But that is financial help for production.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19570 MS BIHL: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19571 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: What you are saying here today is that you also need financial support for touring.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19572 MS BIHL: Promotion.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19573 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: For promotion and marketing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19574 MS BIHL: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19575 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: How is the CMC financed?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19576 MS BIHL: Two sources. One is the Canada Council right now and SOCAN Foundation and the rest, we have a $2.2 million organization across the country. In the west we fund raise.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19577 So only about 27 percent comes from the government so to speak and SOCAN. The rest is literally what I call "dialling for dollars".
LISTNUM 1 \l 19578 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: With that financial capacity you are capable of maintaining five centres in Canada and one in the Netherlands?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19579 MS BIHL: The Netherlands at the moment is free of charge, but yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19580 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Oh, I see.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19581 Are you getting support from External Affairs for the Netherlands one, because I know that they have programs of that nature.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19582 MS BIHL: We are in discussion right now. It is a brand new contact to have a centre abroad, but we are in discussion, yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19583 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Mr. Chairman, those were my questions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19584 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19585 Madam Secretary...?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19586 LA SECRÉTAIRE : Merci, Monsieur le Président.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19587 J'inviterais maintenant la Fondation Radio Enfant à se présenter pour faire leur présentation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19588 LE PRÉSIDENT : Bonjour, et merci d'être venu aujourd'hui. Vous étiez sur l'agenda pour demain, et on vous remercie d'avoir avancé votre présentation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19589 M. DELORME : Ça nous a vraiment surpris et bousculé complètement notre présentation. On avait une délégation importante du milieu culturel qui était censé venir avec nous, le Conseil des écoles et tout, qui n'ont pas pu venir, évidemment, avec cet avis à courte durée. Ça fait que là, on est complètement chamboulé, mais on va, j'espère, vous susciter beaucoup de questions, parce qu'on veut discuter de cette question des enfants et des services de radio au Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19590 LE PRÉSIDENT : Allez‑y. Merci.
PRÉSENTATION / PRESENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 19591 Mme BERNARD : Alors, bonjour. Natalie Bernard. Je suis coordonnatrice à la Radio Enfant/Ado. Alors, voici la petite intervention qui a été écrite.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19592 Alors, merci à vous également de bien nous avoir reçu aujourd'hui à cette audience qui porte sur la révision de la politique de la radio commerciale.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19593 Nous sommes ici aujourd'hui pour une seule raison : d'abord, offrir à nos enfants une place sur les ondes de la Radio Enfant au Canada. Nous sommes persuadés que la radio est un excellent média pour développer leur créativité et de mieux intégrer les enfants à la société. Les enfants et le public en général profiteraient beaucoup d'entendre ce qu'ils ont à dire.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19594 La Loi canadienne de la radiodiffusion est bien claire sur ce point. Les enfants doivent avoir des services de radio qui répondent à leurs besoins et aspirations. Or, au Canada, les enfants forment le public le plus négligé en la matière.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19595 En 2003, le Conseil accordait une licence de diffusion radio AM commerciale à la Fondation Radio Enfant. Cette licence commerciale, attribuée à un projet de nature éducative sans but lucratif qui vise à utiliser la radio dans un cadre scolaire, ne convient pas à la mission de la Radio Enfant. Cette licence constitue plutôt une barrière et pose beaucoup d'obstacles à l'essor de la radio pour les enfants.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19596 Le CRTC a refusé d'accorder aux enfants une fréquence FM. Il a, par la suite, refusé de reconnaître la dimension communautaire de la démarche des parents et des institutions, et, enfin, il a nié que cette activité de la radio en milieu scolaire constitue du développement de talents.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19597 Visiblement, le Conseil n'a pas tenu compte des besoins et aspirations des enfants, de la Loi de la radiodiffusion et des droits des enfants reconnus par le Canada dans la Charte des droits des enfants. Plutôt que d'encourager la création de radio dédiée aux enfants, il a posé une série de limites qui, aujourd'hui, met en péril cette initiative.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19598 À l'occasion de la révision de la politique de la radio commerciale, nous demandons au Conseil et au gouvernement canadien d'établir un cadre qui favorisera la création de radio spécifiquement dédiée aux enfants de 4 à 18 ans, que ces services soient de nature éducative, non commercial et communautaire, dont une importante dimension sera d'être un outil pédagogique en milieu scolaire.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19599 La radio dédiée aux enfants doit être le résultat d'une contribution communautaire visant à laisser une place aux enfants sur nos ondes. La radio dédiée aux enfants ne peut être une activité commerciale. Elle est un outil d'éducation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19600 Il est interdit de diffuser de la publicité aux enfants. Alors, comment pouvez‑vous accorder une licence commerciale à une radio éducative pour les enfants?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19601 La licence commerciale a exclu le projet de l'aide gouvernementale dédiée à la radio communautaire. Il complique la recherche de financement en raison du créneau spécifique de la Radio Enfant, soit une radio éducative et des lois sur la protection de l'enfance.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19602 Nous demandons au Conseil d'établir un cadre plus conforme à la nature de la radio dédiée aux enfants. Le type de licence de radio dédiée aux enfants devrait constituer une autre variante de licence communautaire, comme les radios étudiantes autochtones, francophones le sont. La Radio Enfant forme, avec les autres catégories de radio, un ensemble de services communautaires.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19603 La Radio Enfant est de nature éducative et vise à créer un outil pédagogique utilisé dans un cadre scolaire. Nous demandons au Conseil de reconnaître que cette pratique constitue du développement de talents, et, à ce titre, doit être éligible aux contributions de la radio commerciale et les entreprises de diffusion directe au foyer accordées pour le développement des talents.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19604 La radio a une fonction éducative importante qui doit être reconnue et soutenue. Cette contribution du secteur privé à la création d'une radio éducative dédiée aux enfants serait distribuée par un mécanisme semblable à ceux créés pour distribuer l'aide aux artistes, c'est‑à‑dire via un fonds indépendant de la radio pour les enfants.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19605 C'est là notre seconde demande, celle de créer un fonds de la radio dédiée aux enfants. Le financement de ce fonds proviendrait de trois sources : le secteur privé de la radiodiffusion, le gouvernement fédéral et les fondations privées. Ces ressources financières serviraient au développement de services de radio de nature éducative dédiée aux 4 à 18 ans au Canada, sans restriction de langue ni de région.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19606 La radio dédiée aux enfants pourrait, si le Conseil établit une politique qui encourage cette pratique, devenir une nouvelle génération de média, un mode de communication globale et de convergence.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19607 Le défi que nous vous lançons consiste à reconnaître que les enfants constituent un investissement, un potentiel, et que vous devez vous employer à traduire cette réalité en mesures concrètes. Pour relever ce défi, la contribution de la radio commerciale est essentielle, et même très essentielle.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19608 Dans le cadre de cette révision de la politique de la radio commerciale, nous invitons les radiodiffuseurs privés à tenir compte des besoins des enfants et à volontairement contribuer à cette initiative.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19609 Je cède maintenant la parole à monsieur Michel Delorme, le directeur de Radio Enfant.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19610 M. DELORME: Donc, je ne lirai pas les autres présentations que mes collègues avaient prévu vous faire comme communication parce que ce sont des textes qui vont être remis dans le... comme l'audience aujourd'hui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19611 J'aimerais plutôt qu'on aborde tout de suite la question par un échange avec les commissaires, répondre à vos questions sur toute cette question des enfants, des services aux enfants, des services de radio aux enfants.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19612 C'est pour ça qu'on vient ici ce matin, c'est notre contribution à cette réflexion sur la révision de la politique de la radio, mais comme vous nous avez donné une licence commerciale, bien on vient aujourd'hui, par ce biais‑là, vous parler de radio au service des enfants.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19613 Merci.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19614 LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci. Monsieur Arpin.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19615 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Merci, monsieur le président.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19616 Mais si je vous ai bien compris ‑‑ parce que je ne veux pas refaire l'audience où vous avez obtenu votre permis ‑‑ mais si je vous ai bien compris, monsieur Delorme, dans votre bref exposé, et madame, vous avez quand même clairement laissé entendre que, finalement, ce n'est pas de la radio commerciale puis que ça pourrait peut‑être être l'opportunité.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19617 Votre présentation aujourd'hui c'est peut‑être de créer l'opportunité pour que le Conseil crée une nouvelle catégorie de station de radio plutôt que de... comme il a créé la radio communautaire, la radio de campus, la radio que... la Loi a créé trois catégories : le public, le privé et le communautaire, mais le Conseil a quand même créé d'autres catégories : la radio ethnique, la radio...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19618 M. DELORME: Autochtone.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19619 CONSEILLER ARPIN: ... autochtone, la radio de campus, donc, et la radio éducative également. Donc, il n'y a pas juste la Loi qui crée et qui a créé. Donc, si j'ai bien compris votre cri du coeur, c'est : libérez‑nous du carcan de la nature commerciale. Ce n'est pas ça un peu aussi?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19620 M. DELORME: Exact. Ça, c'est une grosse embûche, c'est une des barrières qui a été posée. C'est de nous avoir attribué une licence commerciale alors que ça n'avait aucun sens une licence commerciale parce que... même quand on a rencontré les gens de l'ARC, puis, là, je pointe des gens de l'Association, ils ont dit : bien, vous n'êtes pas commercial, c'est évident. Et c'est quoi une radio commerciale?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19621 Une radio commerciale, c'est de la radio qui vit de publicité puis, nous, on vit de quoi? On ne vit pas de publicité.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19622 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Et comme vous le dites...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19623 M. DELORME: Donc, ça, ça a été la première embûche. La deuxième embûche, c'est que ça nous a coupés carrément du financement de l'État.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19624 Quand on a été au Patrimoine canadien, ils ont un programme d'aide aux radios communautaires en milieu francophone Ontario... on travaille beaucoup avec l'Ontario. Ils ont dit : non, vous n'êtes pas une radio communautaire. On ne finance pas une radio à licence commerciale.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19625 La même chose, on a été au Gouvernement du Québec, la Ministre est venue ici dans la région nous le dire : on ne peut pas vous aider tant que vous avez une licence commerciale, ça n'a pas de sens, on n'aide pas les radios commerciales, nous.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19626 Même si on leur disait : regardez tout le restant, vous voyez tout ce qu'ils disent. Mais non. Donc, cette idée‑là, ça nous a fait perdre sur trois ans à peu près 150 000,00 $. On a été exclus pendant trois ans de l'aide financière. Ça, c'est une perte nette que de nous avoir attribué cette licence commerciale.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19627 CONSEILLER ARPIN: C'est 150 000,00 $ par année ou 150 000,00 $ sur trois ans?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19628 M. DELORME: Non. C'est par année, 50 000,00 $, 60 000,00 $ qu'on aurait pu s'attendre de l'aide de Québec et d'Ottawa pour nous aider à développer et puis 50 000,00 $ à peu près par année qu'on évalue puis pendant trois ans, 150 000,00 $ qu'on n'a pas obtenu, on n'avait pas droit à l'accès, parce qu'on avait cette licence commerciale.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19629 Ça, c'est le premier point.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19630 Le deuxième point, c'est d'avoir dit que les enfants, ce qu'ils font, ce n'est pas du développement.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19631 Quand on a dit c'est du développement, de ce fait, ils devraient avoir accès aux contributions du secteur privé qui donne de l'aide au développement de talent canadien. Puis, là, les gens du CRTC nous ont dit : non, ce n'est pas du développement ce que vous faites.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19632 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Non; c'est de l'initiation, c'est de l'éducation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19633 M. DELORME: C'est de l'éducation, c'est de prise de pouvoir des enfants, c'est l'accès aux médias puis c'est purement éducatif.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19634 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Vous avez, dans votre présentation orale, je regarde votre cinquième paragraphe et vous dites : le CRTC a refusé d'accorder aux enfants une fréquence FM.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19635 Généralement, CRTC ne refuse pas. Il a attribué les fréquences à d'autres. Ce n'est pas... vous, vous en déduisez que c'est un refus.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19636 M. DELORME: Bien, on a eu un refus carrément parce qu'ils nous ont dit : non, la demande que vous venez de présenter, elle est refusée.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19637 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Oui, mais pas pour les motifs que... ça, les motifs que vous nous donnez ici, c'est ceux que vous vous imaginez, mais la réalité, c'est que les fréquences ont été attribuées à d'autres titulaires, à d'autres requérants.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19638 M. DELORME: Absolument, puis... oui. Puis, ils nous ont dit les fonctionnaires, si vous voulez avoir une licence, allez du côté AM, ça, ça va passer puis ça a passé comme du beurre dans la poêle comme on dit. Vous étiez à Québec, on ne s'est même pas rendu à Québec puis la licence nous a été attribuée, mais oup! surprise, tout le monde a été vraiment surpris, étonné, licence commerciale. Oup! puis ils disent : non, ce n'est pas du développement ce que vous faites et puis vous devez être considérés comme les autres radios commerciales. Mon Dieu!
LISTNUM 1 \l 19639 Je veux dire, c'est parce que... je ne sais pas si vous avez écouté la Radio Enfant, ce qu'on fait, on diffuse actuellement ici dans la Capitale, on est sur internet, ça fait trois ans avec des licences de courte durée et puis on a travaillé à peu près avec 300,, 400 écoles à travers le Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19640 Sur nos ondes ont passé tout près de 100 000, 110 000, 150 000 enfants qui sont venus faire de la radio et puis c'est ça qu'on fait et puis les gens, tout le monde du milieu de l'éducation ont dit : mon Dieu, quel bel outil puis, là, on s'est rendu compte de l'expérience que les enfants y avaient d'abord droit.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19641 Dans la Loi, je ne sais pas si on se trompe, si on la lit la même Loi, mais dans la Loi, les enfants ont droit d'avoir des services de radiodiffusion qui répondent à leurs besoins, aspirations et tous les logos et tout ça, comme les hommes et les femmes. Les enfants ont des droits.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19642 On s'est dit : est‑ce que les enfants au Canada ils ont des services de radiodiffusion qui répondent à leurs besoins, à leurs goûts, à leurs aspirations? Non. Parce que c'est quoi le besoin des enfants? C'est de s'exprimer. Ils veulent faire de la radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19643 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Et au moment où on se parle, la Radio Enfant se finance comment?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19644 M. DELORME: Très peu. Je veux dire, ça... vraiment on est...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19645 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Ça marche avec de *l'huile à bras+?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19646 M. DELORME: Exact; c'est‑à‑dire qui paie l'Hydro?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19647 M. DELORME: Exact. C'est toutes ces...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19648 Mme BERNARD: Là, c'est monsieur le maire.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19649 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Pardon?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19650 M. DELORME: Non. Monsieur le maire a payé le loyer. Monsieur le maire a payé le loyer. Moi, j'ai payé personnellement les comptes de téléphone, mais on n'a pas de sou, on n'a pas eu de subvention de personne pour faire ça. Puis, là, cette année, conséquence du boycott, il y a eu très très peu d'écoles au Québec qui ont fait de la Radio Enfant, à cause du boycott d'activités parascolaires.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19651 Du côté Ontario, les gens ont dit : on voudrait bien en faire, mais votre puissance de 18 watts, il n'y a pas une école qui reçoit notre signal parce qu'avec 18 watts, si on avait une radio, je vous dirais : mettez‑vous à 101,9, vous ne pourriez pas l'entendre.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19652 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Ça, 101,9, c'est quand même une fréquence FM.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19653 M. DELORME: FM, faible durée, 50 watts, 18 watts, ça fait qu'à tous les mois, 28 jours, on fait une autre demande à Industries Canada, qu'on envoie à monsieur Ricky Burton à Sault‑Sainte‑Marie qui, lui, nous accepte pour un autre 28 jours.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19654 Cette année, ce mois‑ci, ça va être le Conseil des écoles publiques. Avant ça, c'était le Club Optimiste. Avant ça, c'était l'Association d'ados. Avant ça... et caetera, de mois en moi.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19655 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Puis, est‑ce que vous signifiez ça au Conseil?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19656 M. DELORME: Ça, le Conseil est... bien oui, on vous a rencontré et vous le savez.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19657 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Bien oui, mais je veux dire...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19658 M. DELORME: Et puis on a rencontré les fonctionnaires et tout le monde puis tout le monde l'école, tout le monde le sait qu'on est en onde finalement. Je veux dire, on est en onde et puis... mais tout ça, à la base, tous ces gens‑là autour sont bien conciliants pourquoi? Parce que les enfants, là, ils veulent faire de la radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19659 Si vous disiez demain : aie! on coupe ça, là, bien il y a six, sept écoles qui s'en viennent au mois de juin du côté de l'Ontario qui vont être... tout le monde va être en maudit. Ils vont dire : c'est quoi, ça cette histoire‑là?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19660 La semaine prochaine, on fait le Festival des secondaires en spectacle, toute une programmation. On a fait la semaine passée Quinze jours de voix d'enfants avec les Choralies, trois soirs de suite on a diffusé les Choralies. Puis pendant 15 jours, 80 pour cent de notre programmation c'était des enfants qui chantaient.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19661 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Y compris la chorale de l'École Lasalle?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19662 M. DELORME: Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19663 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Au moins je suis ce qui se passe dans la région.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19664 M. DELORME: C'est ça, exact. Donc, 15 jours. C'est la première fois qu'au Canada il y avait pendant 15 jours de temps à la radio une programmation donc 80 pour cent du contenu musical, c'était des enfants qui chantaient puis il y a du contenu inimaginable au Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19665 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Vous nous demandez...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19666 M. DELORME: De laisser place, dites oui à la Radio Enfant. C'est ça qu'on vous demande.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19667 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Oui. Mais vous nous demandez aussi de regarder l'accès au programme de développement de talent canadien.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19668 M. DELORME: C'est‑à‑dire...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19669 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Dans votre présentation orale, vous n'avez pas indiqué de somme qui...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19670 M. DELORME: On a évalué la somme. On a évalué la somme.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19671 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Mais je dirais que dans votre présentation écrite, vous l'avez mise, donc c'est ma question.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19672 M. DELORME: Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19673 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Effectivement, vous avez identifié vos besoins comme étant de l'ordre de 500 000,00 $.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19674 M. DELORME: Pour la Francophonie canadienne. Avec 500 000,00 $, on peut faire un an mur à mur de radio au Canada, de local à mis sur un réseau, soit sur satellite, soit sur internet, soit sur le câble par ExpressVu et tout ça, à travers le Canada, diffusé avec 500 000,00 $, 600 000,00 $, on fait une programmation d'un an avec 365 écoles différentes branchées et puis tout ça et puis on ira chercher d'autres contributions du secteur privé puis tout ça pour faire...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19675 Puis si on ajoute les anglophones, on multiplie par deux, dont un million et demi, on aurait possibilité... ça, c'est notre hypothèse.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19676 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Cinq cent fois deux, ça fait un million et demi...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19677 M. DELORME: Oui, mais ça... non, mais c'est‑à‑dire, c'est un million pour les anglophones puis 500 000,00 $ pour les francophones, pour les deux tiers en terme de proportion.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19678 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Un tiers, deux tiers.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19679 M. DELORME: Un tiers, deux tiers. Donc, avec un million et demi, deux millions, on pourrait mettre, c'est notre hypothèse avec notre expérience depuis 10 ans, on pourrait mettre un service continu d'accès, de production de radio au service des enfants à travers le Canada. Ça, c'est notre hypothèse.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19680 Ça fait que nous, on a présenté au Patrimoine canadien une hypothèse, on a dit : laissez‑nous réaliser un projet expérimental un an, 365 jours de 365 communautés, écoles, groupes différents, à chaque jour il y a un groupe d'enfants différents qui fait une journée radio, avec un budget autour de ça et puis qui serait géré.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19681 Puis pendant cette année‑là d'expérimentation, projet pilote, vous mesurez, vous regardez ça, vous dites : regardez comment ça... est‑ce que ce sont des bons résultats? L'impact est‑il intéressant, pour les enfants, pour la communauté, la société, comment ça se passe, le financement, comment pourrait‑il venir puis tout ça.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19682 Nous autres, c'est toutes des hypothèses qu'on lance en fonction de notre expérience, ça fait dix ans qu'on fait ça.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19683 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Maintenant, ça, c'est votre projet. Maintenant, moi, ce qui m'intéresse pour les fins de cette audience‑ci là, c'est la gouvernance de ce fonds‑là
LISTNUM 1 \l 19684 M. DELORME: Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19685 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Si je comprends bien de votre présentation d'aujourd'hui, les fonds proviendraient de trois sources : les radiodiffuseurs, le gouvernement fédéral, ce qui m'étonne parce que l'éducation relève des provinces.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19686 M. DELORME: Non, ce n'est pas... on parle de radiodiffusion. On ne parle pas d'éducation‑là. On parle d'accès des enfants à la radiodiffusion. On ne parle pas d'éducation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19687 CONSEILLER ARPIN: D'accord, d'accord. Et de fondations privées.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19688 M. DELORME: Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19689 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Maintenant, les fondations privées, vous pouvez... vous connaissez la réponse du gouvernement, pour l'instant, vous ne vous qualifiez pas pour avoir accès au fonds de la radiodiffusion. Est‑ce que vous avez commencé à frapper aux portes des fondations privées?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19690 M. DELORME: Oui, c'est sûr, les fondations privées, par exemple, le Club Optimiste était avec nous autres, il aurait été là hier. Ils sont prêts à ajouter du gros financement pour installer l'antenne.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19691 La Fondation McConnell a déjà donné du financement. Il y a d'autres partenaires qui sont prêts, mais tout ce monde‑là, quand nous on leur présente notre hypothèse, ils disent : aie! ça prend quand même des indications, comme vous dites, ça, c'est un terme que vous utilisez souvent, des indications du Conseil et du Patrimoine canadien comme quoi la radio au service des enfants c'est considéré comme important, ça fait que va les convaincre, tu sais.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19692 Là, le Patrimoine a été sensibilisé
LISTNUM 1 \l 19693 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Vous êtes convaincant, monsieur Delorme, ça fait des années... ça fait dix ans que vous le dites.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19694 M. DELORME: Ça, c'est toujours... exactement puis ça, ça c'est toujours la même chose que vous nous dites, toujours la même.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19695 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Et vous survivez.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19696 M. DELORME: Bien, je survis, mais je suis en train de crever.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19697 Non, mais finalement, c'est un peu la limite; c'est‑à‑dire qu'aujourd'hui, là, si vous dites non, là à ça, ça fait que nous autres on va fermer. Moi, personnellement, je vais fermer boutique, je vais dire, je vais aller faire d'autres choses.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19698 Mais toute l'expérience qu'on a vécue pendant les dix dernières années, vous devriez au contraire dire : aie! on va utiliser ça pour faire quelque chose au service des enfants, au service des enfants, c'est juste notre hypothèse.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19699 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Qui serait responsable de...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19700 M. DELORME: Le fonds, vous avez parlé de la gouvernance.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19701 CONSEILLER ARPIN: La gouvernance du fonds?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19702 M. DELORME: Oui, c'est ça. D'abord, disons qu'on ne veut pas compliquer rien; utilisons le modèle en place. Vous avez inventé, vous avez mis en place des modèles de gérance de fonds qui sont peut‑être Musique Action ou les autres, à peu près le même type de structure mais, là, qui viendrait, un, du milieu de l'éducation, milieu scolaire qui sont partenaires là‑dedans, au niveau de la gérance, de la distribution de ce fonds‑là.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19703 Deux, le milieu associatif; toutes les organisations qui se dévouent pour les enfants.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19704 Trois, les jeunes qui seraient là.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19705 Donc, imaginons une dizaine de personnes qui viennent de ces trois sources‑là puis qu'eux autres sont là pour dire : on a 500 000,00 $, on a un million à redistribuer, mais d'une façon tellement simple. C'est une école, puis c'est toujours redistribué à des écoles ou à des organismes, pas à des radios, qui diraient, nous autres on veut faire une activité radio, une semaine, une journée, deux jours, on fait... les applications se font là puis il y a un financement qui couvre à peu près le tiers de l'activité.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19706 Parce que, en gros, faire une journée, deux jours, c'est 2 000,00 $, 2 500,00 $ tout compris, bénévolat et tout ça, les audiences, les techniques, tout ça, 2 000.00 $. Vous donnez 1 000,00 $ à ce groupe‑là, le restant ils vont se le chercher, ça fait que ça, c'est le genre d'entente que, nous, on pourrait... qu'on a fait comme expérience et puis qu'on pourrait mettre en... on est sûr qu'on pourrait mettre en application.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19707 Au début, francophone, tout de suite, dans un an, deux ans, les anglophones vont dire : aie! nous autres aussi on a le droit. Parfait. Deux ans, on établit ça, anglophone, francophone à travers le Canada, mécanisme très simple qui vise que l'accès des enfants à la radiodiffusion et qui prend une proportion assez rapide multimédia aussi avec l'internet, parce que c'est ça qui est en arrière de la radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19708 Puis, ça, c'est le plus bel outil, plus que la télévision, plus que l'écrit. C'est la radio pour les enfants.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19709 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Monsieur le président, ça complète mes questions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19710 LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci. Merci beaucoup.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19711 M. DELORME: Je ne sais pas si vous terminez comme ça l'expérience, mais madame Pennefather qui a expérimenté... qui est venue nous voir à quelques reprises peut peut‑être exprimer des questions ou poser puis voir un peu qu'est‑ce que c'est qu'elle a vu, tu sais, quand elle est venue voir la radio des enfants.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19712 Elle est venue à quelques reprises et puis on n'a pas eu beaucoup de visite, mais on a eu une visite et puis qu'est‑ce que c'est que ça vous dit cette question‑là des droits? Est‑ce que vous avez l'impression que les enfants ont ce qu'ils méritent en terme de services de radio au Canada?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19713 LE PRÉSIDENT: Bien, je comprends votre question, mais je pense que ce n'est pas le forum pour en discuter.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19714 M. DELORME: Mon Dieu, si ce n'est pas ici dans le cadre de la révision de la politique...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19715 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Mais oui, c'est parce que ça c'est... ça c'est... on essaie de comprendre votre problème, mais je pense que le fait qu'on a octroyé une licence en 2003 a démontré qu'on est sensible et qu'on supporte la conception.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19716 Évidemment, il y en a des problèmes d'appellation, de libellé et puis on va essayer de faire une étude plus approfondie de votre problème pour qu'on puisse avoir... pour qu'on puisse acheminer votre but c'est d'établir une telle station. Mais je pense que le Conseil a démontré sa bonne foie et son support pour une telle conception.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19717 Le problème, il me semble de ce que je lis dans votre intervention et de ce que j'entends de votre représentation est une question de fait, d'essayer de vous placer dans notre cadre réglementaire dans une manière appropriée pour votre succès et jusqu'à maintenant, je comprends qu'on n'a pas bien réussi ensemble.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19718 M. DELORME: Pas du tout. Ça a été même des barrières; le contraire. Ça a été des embûches qui ont été mises à l'initiative.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19719 LE PRÉSIDENT: Non, mais je ne pense pas que c'était le but. Le but était... le but était de vous appuyer et de vous octroyer une licence et si, normalement, dans une telle situation ou un requérant réussit enfin d'avoir une licence du Conseil et s'il y a des problèmes, il essaie de les résoudre avec le personnel après le fait.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19720 On est maintenant à presque trois ans après le fait, l'octroi de votre licence et vous venez nous voir aujourd'hui dans un forum public et c'est votre droit de participer à notre politique, mais ce n'est pas au sujet étroit de votre licence.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19721 M. DELORME: Mais ce n'est pas de ça qu'on est venu ici, ce n'est pas du tout du tout de voir la question de notre licence. C'est la question de l'accès des droits des enfants à l'accès de la radiodiffusion.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19722 LE PRÉSIDENT: Non, mais ce que je dis, monsieur, puis on a déjà... on a déjà répondu en vous octroyant une licence. Il y a un problème avec cette licence‑là, mais pas avec le principe d'une station où la cible est les enfants et la jeunesse.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19723 On a bien approuvé une requête par votre fondation pour une licence de radio. Ça, ça établit notre décision sur le principe.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19724 M. DELORME: Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19725 LE PRÉSIDENT: Mais il y a des problèmes d'implémentation et ça, il faut résoudre avec, essayer de trouver un moyen où vous pouvez réussir dans votre but et, apparemment, dans notre but, en vous octroyant une licence.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19726 Mais ce n'est pas le forum pour en discuter parce que ça soulève des questions plus techniques, plus juridiques et tout ça. Et je vous conseille de faire une réunion avec notre personnel pour qu'on puisse vous aider.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19727 M. DELORME: Exactement, ce n'est pas le forum parce que, nous, d'ailleurs, on va se présenter sous peu. On a notre site d'installation de l'antenne puis on va représenter au CRTC une demande puis, là, on va demander une modification de licence du commercial au communautaire.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19728 Ça, ça va se faire, mais notre propos aujourd'hui, c'est surtout pas ça. Il ne faut pas confondre puis de dire : ils sont venus nous parler de leur licence, pas du tout.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19729 On est venu vous dire, un, le cadre réglementaire que vous avez prévu, ce n'est pas adéquat, donc, changez‑le.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19730 Deux, dites que c'est... ce que la radio peut être utile aux enfants, c'est un outil de développement pour les enfants, donc c'est du développement éducatif et tout ça, qu'on fait avec ça.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19731 LE PRÉSIDENT : J'ai déjà entendu ça, la première, la deuxième et la troisième fois.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19732 M. DELORME : Exact. Merci.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19733 LE PRÉSIDENT : Merci beaucoup.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19734 M. DELORME : Merci.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19735 LE PRÉSIDENT : O.K.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19736 M. DELORME : J'espère qu'on est entendu et clairement entendu. Merci.
‑‑‑ Rires / Laughter
LISTNUM 1 \l 19737 LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19738 Madame la Secrétaire.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19739 LA SECRÉTAIRE : Merci, Monsieur le Président.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19740 I would now call on the next participant, Mr. Wayne Plunkett. If you would come forward to make your presentation, please.
PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 19741 MR. PLUNKETT: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice‑Chair and Members of the Commission.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19742 I thought I was going to be dead last on this hearing and that's why I said thanks for leaving the best for the last, but I'm not quite at that point.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19743 I have been a consultant in Toronto for new applicants and smaller broadcasting companies for the last several years after a long run in the senior financial end of the broadcasting and advertising business.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19744 Therefore, it may be a little surprising that my tact on making comments on this radio review policy is in the technical area, but that is also an area that I have a great deal of interest in, hopefully a little bit of expertise in, although I'm certainly not a consulting engineer by any means.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19745 My main thrust is to do with the FM second adjacent considerations, as I call it and this is as it particularly affects the most densely populated regions in the country, the three obvious ones: Southern Ontario, Montreal and the Eastern Townships, and Vancouver and the lower B.C. Mainland and over on Vancouver Island.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19746 A shortage of ‑‑ a situation of a shortage of FM frequencies in these three markets has existed and has been recognized for a long time, back to at least the mid‑1970s. I do remember the radio situation back then when I was directly involved with a major company.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19747 And this was largely precipitated by the much more rapid growth of FM broadcasting in the U.S. than in Canada from the period from post‑World War II up to, I would say, about 1980.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19748 Just as a for instance, there has not been a new commercial FM station take the air in the stagnant Buffalo market for literally 40 years, but up to about 20 years ago the Western New York FMs certainly had the jump as a whole on the Toronto FM stations and total number of commercial stations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19749 However, since that time period of about 1986 to now, there have been five new commercial stations licensed in Toronto. Each time ‑‑ I've been at all those hearings, each time utilizing the so‑called "last available frequency in the market", quote unquote.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19750 In chronological order I list the stations served: CJEZ, CJAQ ‑‑ Jack‑FM today ‑‑ CFXJ, FLOW 93.5 and CJSA, Canadian multicultural radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19751 I even forgot that CFMX when they established in Toronto started off in Mississauga and got moved to Toronto and also would fall into that category.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19752 And the move of CBC Radio 1 to 99.1 in 1998 also meant the utilization of another scarce FM frequency in Toronto.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19753 So, by the late 1990s it was obvious that no more stations could be accommodated on the FM band without changes being made to the existing protection rules and that's when the amendments to the third adjacent rules came into effect.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19754 I was involved with the WAVE 94.7 in Hamilton with Doug Kirk when it first was being applied for and started and that's been on the air for ‑‑ since September, 2000, licensed on May the 5th, 2000.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19755 There are quite a few more examples follow, some of which are the new stations in Toronto that I've already mentioned and this trend has obviously spread to all the major markets across the country.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19756 So, now we are faced with the question: Is this the end of the line for any new commercial or, for that matter any type of FM stations in the future in particularly the three ‑‑ the border markets and the three I mentioned where the band is saturated with a combination of Canadian and U.S. stations, or is there a possible answer to this dilemma?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19757 In my opinion, yes, there is an answer to be had and that is loosening the present hard and fast rule that to locate a second new station on a second adjacent frequency to that of a present station in any given market you need the permission or sign‑off of the latter station.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19758 My experience has been that generally speaking it's next to impossible to obtain such a sign‑off and I really feel why primarily, not because there is necessarily a high degree of likelihood of interference caused by the proposed new station but, no, the real underlying reason is, to be honest, simply to hide behind the present second adjacent rules to stifle competition of new stations in the marketplace wherever that's possible.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19759 The CBC is also involved in this. As I have been following the new licence that was granted to Fitzroy Gordon who I was the consultant for in his first go‑around and so I'm glad that he's got a licence now and the problem is getting a spot on the dial.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19760 And I mentioned the CBC's at the present time unwillingness to sign off on what would be the best frequency in the opinion of a number of people.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19761 I also mentioned four other examples which I will not read verbatim in the interest of time, but they're all I think of an interesting nature and I'll just categorize them.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19762 The first one is to do with three stations that CORUS Entertainment own in sort of a triangle between Toronto and Burlington and Cambridge and I had no quarrel with them trying to change the frequency of their Cambridge station to a new frequency, and since they were able to sign‑off on their own two other stations, it became effective and, in fact, there's a new power increase before the Commission at this point for the Cambridge station, a considerable power increase.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19763 And there's also the situation in Toronto which is interesting ‑‑ and I've also followed over the years ‑‑ where there's a mutual cooperation between Martin Rosenthal of CFMX, Classical 96, and Mr. Kirk of Durham Radio and there are a couple of times their respective stations have been able to increase their power and be able to better penetrate the buildings in Toronto and, in Classical 96's case, get a better signal into the Niagara Region because of first adjacent interference to a Buffalo station.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19764 Not so long ago in 2003 ‑‑ I'm going to read this verbatim ‑‑ in Montreal both the CBC and CHCR Limited, Canadian Hellenic Cable Radio, were licensed simultaneously on July 2nd, 2003 for new transmitters.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19765 One was a relay of Radio 1 in Montreal to correct some signal problems and the other was a new ethnic station, CKDG‑105.1.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19766 As the two decisions pointed out, although they may not have want to cooperate with each other at the beginning, by at the time the hearing rolled around the two parties cooperated and encouraged the Commission to license both stations and thus overcame the usual rule that would have prohibited such licensing as occurred.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19767 And I got to mention, since I remember clearly, even 30 years ago in the mid‑70s when the station on 97.7 in St. Catharines increased their power from 250 to 50,000 watts, I recall that this was only possible with a sign‑off being obtained from Rogers Broadcasting to do with CHFI and 98.1.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19768 And at that time I was comptroller of the Rogers group of radio stations in Southern Ontario and that's why it has always stuck in my mind.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19769 My point then really boils down to strongly encouraging the BTIC Committee, representatives from the Commission and the Department of Industry and consulting engineers to give top priority to paving the way for a change to the BPR rule to allow second adjacent stations to operate successfully in the same market.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19770 Sorry I'm using a hackneyed phrase here that I've heard many times at this hearing, a hearing on the audio in Toronto, the playing field needs to be levelled so that favouritism is not allowed where a broadcaster will rightly sign‑off for a co‑owned station but plays the trump card to block another party obtaining technical approval for the same type of a second adjacent situation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19771 My personal perspective in this matter is that over the last couple of years, particularly a number of prospective worthy applicants have talked to me about applying in Toronto and really have been dismayed to find that there are no more frequencies available on the FM band that don't need the cooperation of mostly main line major, major company stations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19772 The years you'll add to the incumbents is, you know, what's in it for us if we sign off.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19773 My final point on this matter is to observe that here's a case where Canada can lead the way technically in my mind as compared to the situation in the U.S., rather than the other way around.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19774 And I note that in an article in the February, 2006 issue of Popular Communications ‑‑ probably the world's largest selling communications magazine ‑‑ on low power FM in the U.S., out of 640 recently licensed new low power stations pursuant to new FCC rules of a few years ago, there's exactly one in the top 25 U.S. markets, happens to be in Atlanta, and only a dozen or so in the overall top 100 markets.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19775 Why is this? As I understand it, because the FCC backed off from their initial plan to allow these stations with a maximum of 100 watts to be slotted in the jam‑packed band in the major markets as second adjacent to existing stations but rather, after lobbying by the National Association of Broadcasters, changed their rule‑making procedure that the new low power stations, community Fms must provide third adjacent protection and ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19776 THE SECRETARY: Excuse me, Mr. Plunkett, your time has expired. If you would like to conclude, please.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19777 MR. PLUNKETT: Okay. My other point was about IBOC and that's been talked about many, many times at this hearing and I simply raise the concern and I hope I might be questioned on this to give a few examples of the yet unproven interference‑free situation of IBOC digital broadcasting but on the AM band, particularly at night, but I also have experienced the situation during the daytime even since I wrote these notes a few days ago.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19778 So, I shall conclude with that and look forward to any questions you might have.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19779 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr. Plunkett.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19780 Commissioner Arpin.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19781 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank you very much.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19782 Mr. Plunkett, thank you for your submission and my questions will, as you say yourself, the second adjacent issues are more a matter for Industry Canada than for the CRTC, but it is good for us to understand the issues and I thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19783 MR. PLUNKETT: It's difficult for me, not being a consulting engineer, to really get my ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19784 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: No, but ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19785 MR. PLUNKETT: ‑‑ two cents' in worth, since we're speaking of Industry Canada, so...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19786 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I think you probably were capable to explain it in more layman's terms, so that we have more sense than we understand than some of the professional engineers who come with their own language and only their peers could really understand what they say. So, I appreciate what you have done.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19787 My questions will be directed towards IBOC. I don't know if you heard or if you had a chance to listen through the Internet to these proceedings, but we surely had two significant interveners who made comments on IBOC. It was a representative of iBiquity and ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19788 MR. PLUNKETT: I did hear that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19789 MR. ARPIN: And also the CBC on Wednesday morning.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19790 MR. PLUNKETT: Because the order got changed which I wasn't aware of, I did not hear that, but I've read their written comments.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19791 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: And you have read their written comments.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19792 MR. PLUNKETT: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19793 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: But they did emphasize on ‑‑ in using the testimony of Mr. Shortlenner.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19794 Do you have any other comments to make, because we heard most of the broadcasting group there ‑‑ except a few ‑‑ what they have been saying to the Commission, you should allow us to experiment with each and every technology that is available for a certain time so that we could make the determination of which technology most suits best with us.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19795 Some others came and said, well, IBOC is the North American standard and we cannot, particularly those who are operating radio stations north of the border, we cannot be ‑‑ if our competitors on the U.S. side are IBOC and we are not, then we are at a disadvantage because our own listeners will end up with having IBOC receivers and so they will stop listening to their Canadian service.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19796 MR. PLUNKETT: No, I understand that fully and I support those kind of comments, the general posture that the IBOC system needs to be, you know, thoroughly considered for Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19797 Of course, when I wrote my original submission two months ago I was not really aware of how many other people were going to comment on IBOC to get to the hearing here.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19798 If I may, I'm a great believer in not just using generalizations, but maybe a couple of specific examples to do with IBOC and, you know, the concerns that other people besides myself are expressing about the AM IBOC side of things.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19799 And although my written comments are to do with IBOC at night, I do want to relay last Sunday I happened to be out in the Durham Region north of Oshawa and Whitby and one of the major stations in New York State is WHAM in Rochester on 1180, which is one of the old clear channel stations and it's owned today by Clear Channel Communications which obviously is part of the Equity ‑‑ part of iBiquity.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19800 I was really shocked I must say that even during the day the amount of interference ‑‑ jamming, jamming to use my phrase ‑‑ on the adjacent channels 1170, 1190 was fierce, to use a word.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19801 And so I am somewhat even more concerned now even to do with the daytime situation let alone the night time skyway situation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19802 And, as I say, I certainly look forward to testing that will go on, I'm sure, in Canada and maybe even be able to play some small role in that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19803 And another situation I want to refer to, a friend of mine is one of the engineers at WSM‑TV in Nashville. Although he's on the TV side he has a great interest in the broadcasting, the radio side too and so he's recently relayed a comment to me which also was a bit shocking that a station only 20 miles away from Nashville ‑‑ a small station, I will name it, to be CKD‑1490 in Lebanon, Tennessee ‑‑ so, not just the first adjacent, but a second adjacent from one of the big power houses in Nashville, WLAC‑1510 is experiencing daytime interference on IBOC, such that when you drive from Nashville to Lebanon you cannot properly hear this Lebanon in its own area until you're practically within the city limits of the community, as I say, within about 20 miles away from Nashville.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19804 So, I think that that is an example I just wanted to put on the record for people to be aware of. I'm sure there are others, but that one I think is a bit telling.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19805 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: In your oral presentation that you had to skip over, but you are referring to some FM also concerns that you have, particularly with the frequency 88.1 and channel 6 and 107.9 and obviously with NAFCON.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19806 MR. PLUNKETT: These things just occurred to me, but I mean it's one thing the FM band itself but we're always contending with channel 6 below the band and the aeronautical services above and I simply am raising the question, without knowing really the answer, has this been properly looked at or will be properly looked at.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19807 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: But if I understood you well, you are supporting that at least we do this thing here in this country.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19808 I know the CBC in their oral presentation on Wednesday they will be testing IBOC in Toronto over the summer.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19809 MR. PLUNKETT: Okay. I will be anxious to read the transcript to see all what they said and that doesn't surprise me, I mean, but I'm interested to hear those exact words.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19810 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Okay. Mr. Chairman, those were my questions. Thank you very much for coming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19811 MR. PLUNKETT: Okay, thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19812 COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I appreciate it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19813 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr. Plunkett.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19814 Just on your oral presentation, your reference to the article in Popular Communications, I am not ‑‑ I am trying to make sure I have your point.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19815 You say of 640 recent licensed stations there is only one in the top 25 U.S. markets and a dozen in the 100, why, because the FCC backed off from their initial plans to allow these stations maximum 100 watts to be slotted in the jam‑packed FM band in the major markets in second adjacent existing stations.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19816 I am not sure whether you think that is a good thing or a bad thing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19817 MR. PLUNKETT: Well, maybe I didn't quite explain the full point I was making there, so I will now.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19818 It's a bit ironic to me anyways that compared to the Canadian situation where we have a variety of community ‑‑ we have community stations that have a variety of sized markets of all sizes, whereas the U.S. because of the FCC rule‑making, the way I look at it anyways, the community stations that the low power FM rules in the U.S. were designed to help are helping in the smaller markets but precluding being able to get into the bigger U.S. markets and particularly in the top 10, 100 markets because they have to provide third adjacent protection rather than second.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19819 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. But would it be that much of a help to them to get into what you refer to as jam‑packed FM markets as distinct from those other communities? I guess that was the question.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19820 You are thinking it would have been better from their point of view if they could have been ‑‑ jam‑packed though they are ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19821 MR. PLUNKETT: Yeah.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19822 THE CHAIRPERSON: ‑‑ allowed into those markets.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19823 MR. PLUNKETT: Yeah. Well, I mean, my feeling would be they should have stuck to allowing the second adjacent, then the number of ‑‑ the new stations that would have been licensed to this point would have been a much more nice variety of community stations in all the various sizes of U.S. markets rather than being concentrated in just the smaller ones.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19824 THE CHAIRPERSON: Right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19825 MR. PLUNKETT: But I ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 19826 THE CHAIRPERSON: You think this was the result of NAB lobbying to avoid competition to those stations...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19827 MR. PLUNKETT: That's ‑‑ I'm repeating what I have read.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19828 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Thank you very much for coming before us, Mr. Plunkett.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19829 MR. PLUNKETT: You're welcome.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19830 THE CHAIRPERSON: We'll now take a 15‑minute break and resume at 4:15.
‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 1602 / Suspension à 1602
‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 1622 / Reprise à 1622
LISTNUM 1 \l 19831 THE CHAIRPERSON: Order, please. À l'ordre, s'il vous plaît.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19832 Madame la Secrétaire.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19833 LA SECRÉTAIRE : Merci, Monsieur le Président.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19834 J'inviterais maintenant le Conseil provincial du secteur des communications et le Syndicat canadien de la fonction publique à nous faire leur présentation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19835 Vous pouvez peut‑être introduire vos collègues, et vous aurez 10 minutes pour votre présentation. Merci.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19836 M. PARÉ : Merci.
PRÉSENTATION / PRESENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 19837 M. PARÉ : Bonjour, Monsieur le Président. Mesdames, messieurs les conseillers, bonjour.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19838 Je m'appelle Stéphane Paré. Je suis Vice‑Président Radio‑Télévision du Conseil provincial du secteur des communications (CPSC) du Syndicat canadien de la fonction publique.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19839 Le CPSC représente 7 000 travailleuses et travailleurs dans le secteur du domaine des communications, dont la radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19840 Permettez‑moi de vous présenter les personnes qui m'accompagnent : Bruno Perron, journaliste à la radio CHRC Info 800 à Québec, et Lisa Djevahirdjian, responsable de recherche au CPSC.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19841 Nous sommes heureux de participer à ces audiences sur l'avenir de la radio commerciale en un moment charnière de son évolution.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19842 La progression fulgurante de la technologie influence, certes, notre façon de consommer l'information, mais la radio continue de jouer un rôle essentiel, un rôle inscrit dans la Loi sur la radiodiffusion et maintes fois reconnu par le CRTC.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19843 Toutefois, il faut s'assurer que l'information soit accessible et qu'elle soit de qualité. Le réglementation demeure un principal moyen d'atteindre cet objectif.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19844 Il est clair que l'évolution de la technologie a créé, avec les nouvelles plates‑formes de distribution, un contexte plus concurrentiel, mais la radio, en tant que média de communication de masse, demeure puissante en raison de son ubiquité et sa gratuité.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19845 L'Association canadienne des radiodiffuseurs dessine un portrait plutôt menaçant de cette nouvelle technologie. Pourtant, ces nouvelles plates‑formes peuvent être considérées comme une occasion en or pour ses créateurs de contenu vocal.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19846 La radio analogique joue toujours un rôle déterminant pour l'identité nationale et la souveraineté culturelle. Elle demeure un bien public et un outil incontournable pour l'épanouissement de la démocratie et des collectivités.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19847 Cependant, l'information et les nouvelles sont devenues les parents pauvres de la radio, qui a sabordé sa mission d'information.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19848 Nous restons, toutefois, confiant que le Conseil verra le mérite et la nécessité de redresser la situation et pourra s'inspirer de ses propres succès réglementaires pour le faire.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19849 Passons à l'engouement actuel pour la musique québécoise, qui n'aurait pas pu se produire s'il n'était des politiques culturelles régissant la production canadienne de musique.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19850 Depuis 1993, il n'y a pas d'exigence concernant les quotas de nouvelles, mais seulement des exigences de production locale. Cette approche n'a pas été concluante, et les Québécois, du moins, affichent un déficit quant à l'accès des émissions d'information et une information de qualité à la radio. Cet avis résonne dans toute instance qui se penche sur la question.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19851 L'an passé, le gouvernement affirmait que le maintien de la diversité des voix, aux niveaux local et régional, dans un contexte de communication changeant révèle une question pressante.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19852 Dans le même document, on cite un sondage, datant de février 2005, affirmant que 60 pour cent des Canadiens sont tout à fait d'accord avec la déclaration que la radio et la télévision locales devraient jouer un rôle actif pour que les collectivités reçoivent une information locale de grande qualité.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19853 Bruno.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19854 M. PERRON : Donc, avoir des bulletins de nouvelles à la radio ne suffit pas. Encore, faut‑il qu'il y ait du contenu local et régional avec un tant soit peu de qualité et de recherche.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19855 Quand on fixe la durée totale d'un bulletin de nouvelles à 90 secondes, météo et sports compris, il y a très certainement lieu de se questionner.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19856 Un journaliste n'est pas un lecteur de nouvelles qui pige son information de sources facilement accessibles, mais un professionnel payé pour cueillir, vérifier, traiter, analyser et diffuser de l'information. L'objectif est, entre autres, d'éviter de reproduire la tendance actuelle qui consiste à présenter une opinion comme une information.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19857 On assiste depuis quelques années à la multiplication d'émissions dites * talk +, où l'animateur émet toute une série de commentaires et d'opinions. Est‑ce là un service d'information?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19858 Quand il n'y a pas de travail journalistique à la base pour bien établir les limites d'un débat, on se retrouve trop souvent avec des opinions émises à tort et à travers, et l'auditeur se fait berner.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19859 Il serait grand temps que quelqu'un prête oreille, prête attention à cette dérive désolante. Il ne faut pas pointer du doigt les artisans de la radio. Les conditions dans lesquelles ils exercent leur métier sont devenues tellement précaires qu'ils n'ont pas d'autre choix.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19860 Il faut exiger de tout radiodiffuseur des services d'information crédibles, avec plus d'heures de nouvelles et une attitude responsable, sans faux‑fuyant et sans recours à des artifices tels les bulletins de nouvelles pré‑enregistrés longtemps à l'avance.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19861 On nous a rapporté des situations aussi irresponsables que des bulletins de nouvelles pré‑enregistrés le vendredi pour diffusion le dimanche, histoire d'accumuler des heures de diffusion de nouvelles pour bien paraître aux yeux du Conseil.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19862 Nous demandons au Conseil d'agir pour fixer des limites raisonnables à ces pratiques et mettre fin aux abus.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19863 Par ailleurs, il ne faut pas oublier que c'est la radio qui s'adapte le mieux aux situations de crises. N'importe quel citoyen qui a vécu la crise du verglas au Québec peut témoigner de la grande valeur du médium et de son efficacité en situation d'urgence.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19864 Dans les régions plus éloignées des grands centres, chaque station de radio, autrefois, desservait sa population avec des journalistes dignes de ce nom, qui produisaient leurs nouvelles et informait leur communauté adéquatement.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19865 Les radios privées ont presque éliminé les outils de communication régionale capables de produire une qualité et une quantité décente de nouvelles locales. À notre avis, les ondes constituent un bien public qui doit, d'abord et avant tout, desservir le public de la région qui fait vivre la station.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19866 Dans son avis pour cette audience, le Conseil insiste sur l'importance du rôle des stations de radio pour la diffusion des nouvelles et de l'information locale et a fait valoir que la couverture de nouvelles locales avait chutée au Québec à la suite de la consolidation de propriétés qui a précédé la révision de la politique de 1998.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19867 Que l'on s'y mette. Lors de la vente du réseau Radiomédia à Corus, le Conseil a pu constater la vive réaction d'un grand nombre de communautés à travers la province. Ces gens réclamaient à haut cri que cesse la montréalisation des ondes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19868 Les stations pigent souvent leur information là où elles le peuvent, dans les communiqués, les fils de presse, les sites web souvent basés à et centrés sur Montréal. La vérification d'information devient quasi‑inexistante, et le degré de pertinence pour les citoyens en région par rapport à Montréal est dangereusement diminué.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19869 Dans sa décision sur l'échange d'actifs entre Astral et Corus au Québec, il est noté que le Conseil partage les préoccupations soulevées par certains intervenants, à savoir si les effectifs journalistiques prévus pour les stations en région sont suffisants pour assumer une information d'intérêt local de qualité.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19870 Les intervenants soulignent l'importance d'avoir un nombre suffisant de journalistes locaux pour en assurer la cueillette, le traitement et la diffusion. À défaut, le rôle du journaliste en ondes pourrait être restreint à la lecture de l'information provenant de diverses sources externes, ce qui aurait pour effet d'homogénéiser les ondes et les voix en région. Aussi bien dire adieu à la diversification des voix.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19871 Aux audiences publiques précédant la décision que je viens de mentionner, le Conseil a demandé et obtenu un plan décrivant le nombre d'effectifs journalistiques que les deux réseaux devaient avoir une fois la transaction complétée.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19872 Le Conseil est forcé de constater qu'il y a, aujourd'hui, plus de lecteurs de nouvelles que de journalistes desservant nos communautés. Personne ne cueille sur le terrain l'information, personne ne la traite, et, en gros, les radios diffusent toute la même chose.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19873 Il est urgent que le CRTC impose des conditions de licence aux propriétaires radiophoniques. Non seulement le CRTC doit imposer aux radiodiffuseurs un minimum d'émissions de nouvelles et d'information locale, mais il doit aussi imposer par condition de licence un minimum d'heures de production de nouvelles.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19874 Il y a maintenant toute une nouvelle génération de journalistes à la radio qui ne se sont à peu près jamais déplacés pour couvrir un événement ou qui ont presque jamais réalisés d'entrevue avec les acteurs de l'actualité régionale. Cette situation n'est pas due à un manque de talent, mais plutôt aux conditions actuelles qui forcent les journalistes à agir de la sorte.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19875 Nous savons que nos demandes ont un certain prix, mais, après tout, il faut garder en tête que l'utilisation des ondes publiques et un privilège qui n'est pas gratuit.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19876 Heureusement, les radio commerciales connaissent une situation financière saine. Le communiqué du CRTC du 4 mai 2006 vient confirmer que les revenus et les bénéfices de la radio commerciale canadienne sont à la hausse.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19877 Pour faire face au défi, la nouvelle technologie doit être vue comme une nouvelle source de revenu pour les diffuseurs. Ils doivent miser sur l'exploitation de leur contenu sur plusieurs plates‑formes afin de palier à l'érosion de l'audience radiophonique. La ballade haut diffusion pourrait, par exemple, offrir une valeur ajoutée aux émissions de nouvelles.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19878 Ces nouvelles technologies présentent d'excellents débouchés permettant à la radio traditionnelle d'information de rejoindre de nouveaux publics ou de récupérer une partie des recettes publicitaires perdues par l'effet de la fragmentation des marchés.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19879 En conclusion, nous croyons que si le Conseil mettait autant d'effort à baliser l'exercice du volet information de la radio que celui du volet musical, les conditions de redressement de la situation seraient grandement favorisées.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19880 Nous demandons au CRTC de donner le coups de barre qui s'impose.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19881 Merci.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19882 LE PRÉSIDENT : Merci beaucoup.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19883 Monsieur le Vice‑Président.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19884 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Merci.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19885 Je présume, Monsieur Perron, que vous êtes celui qui fait les bulletins de nouvelles en 90 secondes, parce qu'à la vitesse où vous avez lu...
‑‑‑ Rires / Laughter
LISTNUM 1 \l 19886 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : ...votre mémoire, je ne suis pas sûr que les interprètes ont été capable de vous suivre.
‑‑‑ Rires / Laughter
LISTNUM 1 \l 19887 M. PERRON : Nous leur avons mis... vous voyez, c'est ça la mauvaise habitude de la radio en 90 secondes. Mais non, je dois vous dire que chez nous, on peut prendre plus que le temps qu'il faut, mais vous savez, mon collègue a grugé dans le timing pas mal.
‑‑‑ Rires / Laughter
LISTNUM 1 \l 19888 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Vous parlez de la précarité... des conditions précaires du métier de journaliste, ou des artisans de la radio, parce que je comprends bien que le SCFP, vous ne représentez pas que des journalistes, vous représentez l'ensemble des artisans qui sont dans certaines des stations qui sont affiliées?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19889 M. PARÉ : Oui, c'est ça. Il y a plusieurs facteurs. Dans le domaine des communications, on représente en télévision. On peut représenter aussi dans d'autres secteurs comme les travaux publics et tout ça. Les journalistes et tout ce qui englobe la communication, le SCFP a beaucoup de sections locales dans ce domaine.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19890 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Oui. Mais spécifiquement dans des stations de radio, vous ne représentez pas que les journalistes?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19891 M. PARÉ : Non.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19892 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Vous devez représentez les animateurs, les techniciens, le personnel de soutien...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19893 M. PARÉ : Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19894 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Bon.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19895 M. PARÉ : On peut représenter tous les...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19896 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Parce que le mémoire qu'on a devant nous, et surtout la présentation orale est très centrée sur les besoins spécifiques de l'information et des nouvelles.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19897 Mais est‑ce que les préoccupations générales au niveau des grands principes généraux comme, notamment, la précarité de l'emploi, les conditions spécifiques, ça s'applique uniquement aux gens de l'information, ou si ça s'applique à l'ensemble des employés que vous représentez?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19898 M. PERRON : Ça se vit davantage au point de vue information et nouvelles. Le volet musical de la radio s'est développé de façon assez phénoménale au cours des dernières années, de sorte que nous avons choisi de toucher un volet qui ne semblait pas beaucoup être abordé dans le cadre de ces audiences sur l'avenir de la radio commerciale.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19899 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Cependant, il y avait quand même... un des objectifs de la revue de la radio, c'est la production d'émissions locales...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19900 M. PERRON : Mm‑hmm.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19901 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : ...et l'information était évidemment spécifique, sauf chez les réseaux, les têtes de réseau, l'information est pour consommation locale...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19902 M. PERRON : Mm‑hmm.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19903 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : ...et aussi de production locale. Vous avez dit que...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19904 M. PERRON : Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19905 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : ...c'est surtout des lecteurs qu'on retrouve plutôt que des...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19906 M. PERRON : Bien, on a...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19907 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Mais pouvez‑vous être plus spécifique?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19908 M. PERRON : Oui. Je pense que... oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19909 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Je comprends que vous, Monsieur Perron, vous êtes dans une station qui fait beaucoup d'information...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19910 M. PERRON : Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19911 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : ...mais dans l'ensemble de votre membership, vous représentez de très petites stations puis de plus importantes. J'essaie de faire un peu l'état de la situation de l'information, pas uniquement à CHRC. D'ailleurs, vous l'avez même dit que vous étiez un peu privilégié par rapport à d'autres.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19912 Mais est‑ce qu'on pourrait avoir un espèce de...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19913 M. PERRON : Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19914 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : ...vue plus large?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19915 M. PERRON : Oui. Écoutez un peu, il suffit de se reporter à il y a quelques années. Un peu partout dans toutes les stations de radio au Québec, il y avait des salles de nouvelles d'une certaine importance, où, à tout le moins, on avait, règle générale, un chef de pupitre le matin, un chef de pupitre l'après‑midi, puis un ou deux reporters.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19916 Mais si je me reporte dans les années 80, on était à Québec, il y avait des salles de nouvelles. Il y avait CJRP, il y avait CKCV, il y avait CHRC ‑‑ je vous donne cet exemple‑là, mais on pourra l'appliquer à d'autres endroits également en région ‑‑ où il y avait des salles de nouvelles de 10 à 12 journalistes, facile. Aujourd'hui, on ne retrouve plus ça dans aucune des stations de radio dans le marché de Québec.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19917 Et ailleurs, prenez la même... le même phénomène s'est produit ailleurs à travers la province au complet, de sorte que, sur la route, parlez à n'importe journaliste de l'écrit et de la télé, ils vont vous dire, un journaliste de radio, de la radio privée au Québec, on ne voit jamais ça sur le terrain, nous autres, ou à peu près pas.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19918 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Mais ils font la cueillette de l'information de quelle façon?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19919 M. PERRON : Bien, ils peuvent en prendre par téléphone, mais le problème, c'est que ça l'a une limite. Souvent, ils vont prendre ça des sites internet. Ils risquent de piller l'information à un autre média tout simplement pour réussir à arriver à faire un bulletin de nouvelles.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19920 Je vais vous donner juste un exemple. Pas plus tard que cette semaine, au début de la semaine, je suis au Palais de Justice de Québec, je couvre un procès. À la suite du procès, je fais une clip avec la procureure de la Couronne, qui émet son commentaire sur la cause en question.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19921 Un de mes collègues de l'écrit entend à la radio la clip en question de la procureure de la Couronne. Il dit : Travailles‑tu pour cette station‑là, toi? Je dis : Non. Qu'est‑ce que ça veut dire qu'ils l'ont? Il dit : Il n'était pas ici? Je dis : Non. D'où elle vient? Je ne le sais pas, mais il y a un problème.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19922 Des exemples comme ça... régulièrement, les journalistes se plaignent de ce phénomène du plagia.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19923 Pour bien vous expliquer, parce que je sais, Monsieur Arpin, que vous avez déjà vu ça, la radio, vous.
‑‑‑ Rires / Laughter
LISTNUM 1 \l 19924 M. PERRON : Pour vous expliquer, la progression de l'information a toujours fonctionné un peu selon le principe suivant. C'est comme si on se faisait un party à soir, puis on dit tout le monde apporte quelque chose.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19925 De tout temps, la radio a piqué une nouvelle dans les journaux, le journal écoutait la radio dans la journée s'il y avait un développement pour pouvoir alimenter sa propre recherche, la télé aussi. Tout le monde apportait de quoi.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19926 Mais là, la radio devient de moins en moins contributive. Dans la diversité des voix, elle devient pas mal plus freeloader qu'autre chose.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19927 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : C'est un phénomène que vous observez au Québec? Parce que je sais que...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19928 M. PERRON : Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19929 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : ...le SCFP, vous êtes CUPE, donc, vous êtes associé au Conseil du travail du Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19930 Est‑ce que c'est un phénomène que vous constatez dans d'autres provinces?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19931 Mme DJEVAHIRDJIAN : Le SCFP a seulement des membres en communication au Québec.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19932 COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Donc, CUPE n'a pas de membres en communication ailleurs qu'au Québec?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19933 Mme DJEVAHIRDJIAN: Exactement.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19934 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Et vous n'avez jamais fait d'étude comparative avec d'autres provinces?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19935 Mme DJEVAHIRDJIAN: Nous avons concentré nos efforts pour des études pour cette révision sur le Québec.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19936 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Bien, c'est parce que c'est un sujet qui vous préoccupe depuis plusieurs années parce qu'il y a eu beaucoup d'audiences et, d'ailleurs, monsieur... vous en avez fait... monsieur Peron en a fait allusion.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19937 Vous avez comparu à diverses occasions, ça fait que c'est pour ça que je vous posais la question si vous aviez regardé des comparatifs avec d'autres... à savoir d'essayer de déterminer si la préoccupation est très localisée ou bien si la préoccupation que vous auriez serait à l'étendue du système et votre réponse, vous me l'avez donnée.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19938 M. PERON: C'est très certainement répandu au Québec. Ailleurs, malheureusement là, je ne pourrais pas vous le dire. D'ailleurs, je pense que d'autres vous l'ont souligné dans des mémoires également pour cette audience‑ci.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19939 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Vous avez aussi dans votre mémoire principal, vous avez aussi parlé de programmation locale et vous avez d'ailleurs fait état vous‑même dans la présentation orale de la décision du Conseil concernant l'acquisition des stations AM par Corus, des inquiétudes qui s'étaient manifestées par rapport à la programmation locale.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19940 Avez‑vous établi des objectifs minimum pour...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19941 M. PERON: Vous voulez dire des quotas, là, des...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19942 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19943 M. PERON: Écoutez, on en a discuté, sauf qu'on voulait d'abord et avant tout attirer l'attention du Conseil sur la nécessité d'encadrer, mais on n'a pas voulu nécessairement se rendre dans le détail du cadre nécessaire ou d'entreprendre une espèce de négociation d'heure et de...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19944 Mais, ce qu'on veut vous dire, finalement, c'est regardez ça, analysez ça, peut‑être y aller de façon progressive, mais il faudrait revenir à des quotas minimum de nouvelles et encadrer ça mieux que ça ne l'est actuellement, pour s'assurer ce que les gens ont demandé.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19945 Vous vous souvenez des audiences sur la vente à Corus un peu partout au Québec, le Ministère des communications dans son... culturelles des communications du Québec dans son mémoire en fait état. Les gens veulent avoir une garantie d'avoir des services de nouvelles de qualité et du temps d'antenne raisonnable.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19946 Maintenant c'est quoi, ça, exactement, raisonnable? Je pense que le Conseil pourrait s'asseoir avec les gens de l'industrie et pourrait s'asseoir avec d'autres personnes pour le regarder.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19947 CONSEILLER ARPIN: C'est ça qu'on fait là. Cette semaine, c'est ça qu'on a fait. On était assis puis je peux vous dire qu'on a été assis pendant plusieurs heures.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19948 M. PERON: Oui?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19949 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Puis on a écouté.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19950 M. PERON: Oui, oui, mais c'est bien simple. Écoutez, on en fait état un peu. Quand on parle de bulletin de nouvelles de 90 secondes là, à peu près comme j'ai lu le mémoire tantôt, c'est ça qu'on veut essayer d'éviter qu'on dise, bien on veut écouter un peu, vous avez des bulletins de nouvelles, mais que la durée minimale soit de quatre minutes, de cinq minutes, qu'il y ait des rendez‑vous dans la journée où les gens pourront avoir l'information de façon autrement que très résumée à la radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19951 C'est ce type d'abus‑là qu'on veut éviter puis qu'on veut redonner une certaine place à l'information locale et régionale à la radio, avec des équipes de journalistes dans les régions capables de faire une job un tant soit peu décente sur le terrain.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19952 Et dans le mémoire, en tout cas, on va plus loin un peu et, ça, je dois vous dire que c'est particulièrement le syndicat chez nous qui adopte cette position‑là, si on réussissait à créer des pools de journalistes radio, quitte à ce qu'ils alimentent différentes antennes dans le milieu, mais qu'on redonne les lettres de noblesse à l'information radiophonique, quitte à en partager la facture et la facture à travers différentes stations de radio, différentes plate‑formes de nouvelles technologies.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19953 Mais *bonyenne+ qu'on ait des... au moins être capable d'envoyer des journalistes sur une base régulière sur le terrain couvrir les événements.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19954 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Cependant, vous préconisez la diversité des voix. Si on a un centre de collègues de l'information puis diffusion de l'information, on vient de limiter les voix.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19955 M. PERON: Oui, mais ça je comprends ce que vous dites là, mais multipliez les muets, ça ne sert pas davantage.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19956 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Maintenant, chaque station, cependant, a sa propre mission. Par exemple, prenez chez vous, vous avez la mission générale de l'information continue dans certains blocs horaires. D'autres stations sont plutôt des stations de divertissements puis ils vont avoir un minimum d'information parce que ce n'est pas l'objectif de la station et ce n'est pas ce que les auditeurs de ces stations‑là recherchent, du moins c'est ce que l'on se fait dire.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19957 M. PERON: Oui, mais ça, je comprends ce que vous dites. Mais entre 90 secondes puis un bulletin de quatre minutes là, peut‑on avoir un espace pour ceux qui...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19958 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Il y a deux minutes et demi.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19959 M. PERON: Oui, c'est ça, mais en deux minutes et demie on a peut‑être le temps d'avoir quelqu'un qui passe un reportage sur un sujet avec le lead et tout ça, et qui fait une minute au total, ce qu'il est impossible à faire dans 90 secondes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19960 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Dans son mémoire, le Ministère de la culture et des communications du Québec propose la mise en place d'un fonds à la production de nouvelles et d'information qui serait au bénéfice des stations de radios communautaires et des stations de radios commerciales, un fonds qui... puis un fonds destiné à l'information locale et ils proposent...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19961 Est‑ce que vous avez une opinion sur cette proposition‑là?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19962 M. PERON: Oui. Nous, on ne l'a pas... écoutez un peu, c'est leur suggestion, mais on estime que les radiodiffuseurs devraient être suffisamment responsable pour faire la job là. Je pense qu'il n'est pas nécessaire de créer un fonds.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19963 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Un fonds supplémentaire parce qu'il y en a de...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19964 M. PERON: Bien là, écoutez un peu, il nous semble que ces gens‑là utilisent les ondes publiques et doivent retourner au public un certain nombre de services, autrement que de prendre leurs oreilles pour vendre de la publicité, là.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19965 Il y avait... c'est un simple retour des choses. Un jour un ancien président du Conseil de l'alimentation du Québec me disait : écoutez un peu, il y a des compagnies qui vendent... qui détiennent le marché de la soupe au Québec et qui n'achètent pas un pois vert pour mettre dans la soupe.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19966 Il dit : nous, on fait des pressions. Il dit : ce n'est pas du... il dit c'est une simple justice économique à un moment donné.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19967 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Le Conseil de presse nous a aussi déposé un mémoire dans lequel il demande que les radiodiffuseurs... aux radios diffuseurs de se conformer au Guide des droits et responsabilités de la presse, que le Conseil a évidemment publié.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19968 Avez‑vous des commentaires sur est‑ce que les radiodiffuseurs devraient adhérer au Guide des droits et responsabilités de la presse?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19969 M. PERON: Oui, bien certainement. Vous savez qu'il y a plusieurs guides, il y a plusieurs codes d'étique et tout ça.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19970 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19971 M. PERON: À un moment donné, il va peut‑être falloir faire le...
LISTNUM 1 \l 19972 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Est‑ce que votre groupe a son propre code de déontologie?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19973 M. PERON: Vous voulez dire?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19974 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Corus... Corus a un guide... un Code de déontologie journalistique.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19975 M. PERON: Oui. Bien là, qui doit être fourni bientôt et tout ça, là, oui. Mais c'est sûr que tout le monde a ses règles qui vont à peu près toujours dans le même sens. Il y a des règles de base en matière journalistique. Il y a des règles d'étique là que l'on retrouve un peu partout, mais c'est bien sûr que tout le monde a un peu son code.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19976 Ce serait peut‑être l'occasion pour le Conseil d'uniformiser en quelque sorte ces codes d'étique‑là.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19977 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Vous avez aussi dans votre présentation orale et dans votre mémoire abordé la question des technologies et puis notamment, au premier paragraphe de la page 2 vous dites... vous parlez des nouvelles plate‑formes et vous dites :
*Pourtant, ces nouvelles plate‑formes peuvent être considérées comme une occasion en or pour ses créateurs de contenu vocal.+
LISTNUM 1 \l 19978 Ces créateurs, quand vous parlez des créateurs, vous parlez des radiodiffuseurs ici?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19979 M. PERON: Oui.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19980 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Bon, c'est à eux que vous faites allusion.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19981 M. PERON: Oui, oui. Autrement dit, c'est parce que la radio, à un moment donné, ont une crainte justifiée que l'auditoire... qu'il y ait une érosion de l'auditoire par ces nouvelles technologies, mais je pense que c'est à eux de saisir l'opportunité aussi dans une certaine mesure, pour pouvoir aller récupérer ce qu'ils perdent d'un côté.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19982 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Plusieurs des grands joueurs qui sont venus ici nous ont dit qu'ils cherchaient ces opportunités‑là et donc, qu'ils investissaient dans de multiples plate‑formes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19983 M. PERON: Mais le problème, c'est la multiplication des plate‑formes possibles. On est rendu avec la diffusion par le téléphone cellulaire, la diffusion satellite, la balado‑diffusion, le YFI, la radio numérique... à un moment donné c'est sûr que ça devient un problème là, mais quand on verra clair dans ce qui va se dessiner comme main stream de ces technologies‑là, ça sera peut‑être.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19984 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Est‑ce que vous dites, on devrait attendre de voir clair ou bien... parce que le jour où on verra clair, peut‑être qu'on ne sera plus là parce qu'on aura trop attendu?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19985 M. PERON: C'est pour ça qu'on vous dit dans notre mémoire que, pour l'instant, on ne recommande pas au Conseil d'intervenir rapidement, mais ça se développe tellement è un rythme effarant que je suis bien embêté de vous dire que l'an prochain ou dans deux ans je vais vous dire la même chose.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19986 Si on apprend, par exemple, que tout à coup, il y a toute une forme de radio qui se développe d'ici à un an et qui accapare des parts de marché importantes par le biais du téléphone cellulaire, bien là, c'est sûr que, à un moment donné, je vais changer d'idée.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19987 Mais c'est parce qu'intervenir trop rapidement au moment où ces technologies‑là se développent, ça peut peut‑être freiner justement le développement et le positionnement des radiodiffuseurs traditionnels dans ces technologies‑là.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19988 Sauf que je suis un peu d'accord avec ceux qui disent : il faut *monétariser+ ça et puis s'assurer de ne pas être justement trop tard lorsque... pour intervenir.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19989 CONSEILLER ARPIN: Monsieur le président, ça complète mes questions.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19990 LE PRÉSIDENT: Conseiller juridique.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19991 Mme MURPHY: Merci, monsieur le président.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19992 La définition de programmation locale, c'est une définition qui date d'un Avis Public en 1993 et a été réitérée lors de la revue de la politique sur la radio commerciale en 1998.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19993 Tout récemment, dans la décision de Corus Astral, le Conseil a amené une certaine importance sur la programmation locale en utilisant cette définition.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19994 À votre avis, est‑ce que cette définition demeure adéquate?
LISTNUM 1 \l 19995 M. PERON: Bien, écoutez, je ne l'ai pas en tête exactement, mais là, ce qu'il faut bien se comprendre, moi, ce dont on parle, à un moment donné, c'est faire de la programmation locale, faire des émissions, à un moment donné de blabla, de *placotages+ qui peuvent en elles‑mêmes être très bien.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19996 Mais si on fait toujours ça et qu'il n'y a jamais de radio alimentée à base journalistique de quelqu'un qui va rechercher, va sur le terrain et fait une recherche, en fait part aux auditeurs pour alimenter une discussion, à un moment donné ça donne lieu à de la radio ou des débats publics qui sont un peu stériles parce qu'ils reposent parfois sur pas grand‑chose.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19997 Je donne souvent l'exemple à cet effet‑là, à un moment donné il y avait un animateur de radio dans une station où je travaillais, le fil ET venait de sortir à l'époque, l'animateur faisait une émission sur le film ET. Lui, ne l'avait pas vu. L'auditeur à qui il parlait ne l'avais pas vu.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19998 À un moment donné, ils ont un argument ensemble et c'est l'auditeur qui a gagné parce qu'il a dit que sa belle‑soeur l'avait vu.
LISTNUM 1 \l 19999 Alors, ce que je veux dire par là, c'est que, à un moment donné, il faut amener... il faut amener quelque chose au débat public et il faut peut‑être en terme de nouvelles préciser le contenu justement de ces productions‑là pour au moins s'assurer que dans la portion de production locale qu'on ait des journalistes sur le terrain couvrant l'actualité et pouvant apporter quelque chose qui va contribuer sur le fonds au débat public dans différentes régions sur différents sujets.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110000 M. MONTIGNY: Vous avez tout à l'heure dit qu'il y avait une nécessité d'uniformiser les codes d'étique. Pourriez‑vous élaborer davantage?
LISTNUM 1 \l 110001 M. PERON: Bien, écoutez un peu, il y a des codes d'étique de la Fédération professionnelle des journalistes, du Conseil de presse, des normes des radiodiffuseurs, des normes des télédiffuseurs, différentes associations, à un moment donné... on voit bien que tout se rejoint un peu en quelque sorte là.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110002 Si on veut faire quelque chose pour parler tout le monde le même langage, bien ce serait peut‑être bien que, à un moment donné, ces organismes‑là se regroupent et qu'on puisse avoir un code pratiquement unique, avoir un code qui se répand un peu partout à travers la profession.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110003 Mais remarques bien que je ne pense pas que ce soit une urgence nationale parce que l'ensemble des codes souvent font référence exactement au mêmes principes de justice, d'équité, et caetera, font références au mêmes principes. La formulation est parfois différentes, des choses comme ça, mais c'est sûr que, à un moment donné, plutôt que d'en avoir dix ou vingt, il faudrait ou ce serait bien d'en avoir un sur lequel on pourrait se coller et se comprendre tout le monde lorsqu'on parle ce langage‑là.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110004 Mme MURPHY: Pour terminer ma question, je vous demanderais si vous avez des propositions quant à la programmation locale ou des suggestions, de bien nous les faire parvenir pour le 29 mai.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110005 M. PERON: Le 29 mai?
LISTNUM 1 \l 110006 Mme MURPHY: Oui. Toutes les parties ont la chance de faire des soumissions finales le 12 juin, plus que 20 pages, et avec...
LISTNUM 1 \l 110007 M. PERON: Alors, vous aimeriez qu'on réponde davantage aux quotas ou aux choses comme ça et au contenu.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110008 Mme MURPHY: Si vous avez des propositions additionnelles, si vous voulez en réponse à ma question programmation locale, vous pouvez nous remettre ça le 29 mai. À ce moment‑là, les parties ont toutes la chance de voir vos propositions pour préparer leur position finale qui est due le 12 juin.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110009 M. PERON: Ça va.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110010 Mme DJEVAHIRDJIAN: Avec plaisir.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110011 Mme MURPHY: Merci.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110012 LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci beaucoup d'être venu et aussi d'avoir avancé votre position. J'imagine que ce n'était pas tout à fait facile.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110013 M. PERON: Bien, je l'ai devancée, c'est pour ça que j'allais si vite.
(rires)
LISTNUM 1 \l 110014 CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Vous êtes parti tôt de Québec ce matin?
LISTNUM 1 \l 110015 M. PERON: Non. Moi, j'étais ici, mais c'est mes collègues. Mon collègue de Montréal est arrivé à...
LISTNUM 1 \l 110016 M. PARÉ: Je suis arrivé juste pour l'audience.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110017 M. PERON: Il n'avait même pas eu le temps presque de lire le document parce qu'on voulait profiter de l'après‑midi pour peaufiner puis finaliser notre présentation orale. Alors, on y est allé comme on pouvait.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110018 LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci bien. Madame la secrétaire.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110019 LA SECRÉTAIRE: Merci, monsieur le président.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110020 I would now call on our last appearing participant at this hearing, Mrs Magda De la Torre. If you would like to come forward for your presentation. You will have ten minutes for your presentation. Thank you.
PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION
LISTNUM 1 \l 110021 MS DE LA TORRE: Thank you. Good evening. I'm the last one finally. After sitting here for the last four days and hearing the different verbal presentations and comments, the above is the only title for a presentation in front of the CRTC, the only one that can help us. The title is: "Help, I'm independent, Help, Help, Help, I'm diverse too".
LISTNUM 1 \l 110022 First, I would like to thank the CRTC for allowing me to speak in this important procedure and also for giving me the last position so I was able to hear and learn from the previous presentations. I have changed our presentation on a daily basis.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110023 My name is Magda De la Torre and I am a double immigrant and a citizen of Canada and proud to be part of the diverse Canada.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110024 In Canada, I have learned the meaning of giving to the community on an none for profit basis and for the last four years a group of us that want changes are working very hard with Super Latin World Arts Festival Inc., using music and arts to reach and foster our communities.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110025 On multicultural day together with the City of Toronto under the initiative "City Clean City Beautiful" we are promoting the Jane & French Walk of Fame where in those corners we will highlight the good people in Jane & French and, believe me, we have a lot of those.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110026 Closer to our routes is the initiative we launched to protect, foster and promote our diverse independent latin artists that need our help and for sure the help of the CRTC.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110027 The Fear Factor. We diverse citizens are very familiar with this feeling as we have to face them on a daily basis when we leave our countries and comfortable lives to experience the unknown in new and not familiar surroundings.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110028 These four days have helped us experience here and almost touch the fear factor in all the presentations when referring to diversity.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110029 I will address three issues that bring about those feelings: Statistic and industry institutions, listeners and revenues.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110030 Enclosed for your peruse copies four pages of the paperwork between members of the hispanic community and Stats Canada and the changes in the count of hispanic residents in Canada registered in the 2001 census.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110031 Members of our community very aggressively requested a revision and the numbers jumped from 200,000 plus to 520,260, more than double.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110032 From Stats Canada we were also enclosing pages with graphs including the Top Languages in Canada and the four languages with more youth, 12 to 34.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110033 As you can see the largest is the Spanish, followed by a combination of Chinese Cantonese and Chinese Mandarin, and finally Portuguese. Combined, the total is 589,445 diverse possible listeners.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110034 Maybe CAB members are not reaching to all persons 12‑plus or teens 12‑to‑17, or do not know these figures, do not know how to reach them, or are simply scared of a Pandora box.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110035 Based on the numbers of our consulates and the amount of Hispanics waiting for their resident papers or simply illegals, we truly believe we are around a million.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110036 Similar situations are happening with other communities.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110037 CRTC: Back in 1999 after longer than planned hearings ‑‑ it happens every time ‑‑ the Commission heard our voices and amended some of the policy requirements to the benefit of our diverse Canadian world.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110038 Today, six years later, in the review of the commercial radio policy, you are still addressing our diversity in a very loud and clear way.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110039 Including these issues within the commercial radio policy will allow us to be an integral part of the Canadian mainstream communications and music mosaic.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110040 Many second and third generation residents do not hear ethnic stations unless those stations openly are catering to their unique demos, with host DJs, music, et cetera.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110041 BBM: Contrary to a common belief, BBM is capable of researching diversity, if paid.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110042 I personally received copies in 1997 when Energy 108 paid them to do the research and check our ratings. Then Shaw arrived.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110043 By the way, in 1997, counting all hours, as per BBM, 98.1 FM was the station with more Hispanic listeners.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110044 SOCAN: We mentioned it in our written comments. They collect royalties from radio stations and they distribute payments to artists performing third language music, but they do not produce statistics of the diversity of the artist.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110045 CIRPA: They are always very helpful, helping out. And they take to their trips around the world third language artists. I personally went to one in PopCom.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110046 But their mandate is ‑‑ and I quote Cori Ferguson:
"CIRPA is the national trade association representing the interests of the English‑language, Canadian‑owned companies in the sound recording sector."
LISTNUM 1 \l 110047 CAB: Tremendous and commendable effort. Our comment: been there done that.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110048 I saw it coming when about three months ago CHUM started a diversity website for ethnic resources to assist us in reaching companies that can help.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110049 They know this policy review could change their status quo and the fear factor is working. Better to anticipate and promise changes than ignore and let the CRTC act on its own.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110050 With more time we will gladly analyze and respond to each and every one of their suggestions and propose better and more reliable changes. Like we always say, it is better late than never, especially when the CRTC will see the other side of the spectrum and be able to rule with a better market knowledge.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110051 CRIA: They do have a very effective mechanism of measuring data and could be an enormous help regarding accountability, transparency and monitoring.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110052 We were amazed at the fact that they did not mention the word diversity when at times they have done wonders for all of us. Maybe it is because the ethnics, especially Hispanics and Asians, are the ones that are experts in pirating CDs.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110053 This is another issue that has to be addressed to protect the industry and diversity.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110054 FACTOR and Radio Starmaker Funds: I am skipping the first paragraph.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110055 Looking at the their submissions and records, it is minimal what they allot to diversity. In the case of the Hispanics, it is sad to see how big bulks of funds are given to a selected few when the budget could be divided into several, creating a better image in the industry and helping more than a few.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110056 We were happy to see the approval of the proposed application by A. Fitzroy Gordon for an English‑language FM radio station in Toronto catering to the Caribbean and African communities.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110057 Their CTD budget is planned in a way that will enhance the exposure of the station while maintaining the diversity of the audience.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110058 With better accountability and guidance, both funds should work separately and avoid any type of monopoly that does not bring a prosperous future. They need to compete to better their way of releasing funds.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110059 American Federation of Musicians: Not a word about diversity. It seems that in both Canada and the United States, the only two languages spoken are English and French.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110060 All of the above‑mentioned entities and commercial radio stations will reflect their changes based on the decision that the CRTC will assume after these hearings.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110061 Yes, we are putting a heavy load on your shoulders and your decisions. Please do remember that we need help, help, help.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110062 Listeners: Instead of real world samples, we will use real Canadian samples.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110063 Spanglish Radio Show: In these hearings we learned that the radio stations live or die by attracting listeners. Well, we have good news. In Spanglish, the music in Spanish and the spoken word in English, on a Sunday night, 8:00 to 10:00 p.m., via BBM, we found out that we had become the number one station above 98.1 FM in the elusive 12‑to‑34 demographic.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110064 Also, we had an event spin‑off that was bringing 100,000 listeners to the four‑day event.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110065 Even though we were much alive, Shaw killed us. But today I can safely say that diversity brings listeners, and it was BBM that certified it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110066 Please note that at the same time Shaw (Corus) cancelled our program on Energy 108, they were investing in Telelatino, first with a 50.1 percent and later 100 percent.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110067 Hey, the same listeners!
LISTNUM 1 \l 110068 Macarena: I bet you've all heard Macarena, or even danced to it, but I also bet you did not know it was a CanCon product.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110069 Thanks to the vision and the ability to take risks at Z103.5 FM ‑‑ that's Bill Evanov. He was the one that went to Mexico; I just heard about it ‑‑ a song written in Spain and heard by one of its executives ‑‑ Bill ‑‑ in Mexico, Canada became a CanCon leader with a Spanish song.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110070 THE SECRETARY: Excuse me, Mrs. de la Torre, you have about 20 seconds to conclude your presentation.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110071 Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110072 MS de la TORRE: Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110073 Maplethnic: On March 17, 2006 an article was published in the Toronto Star "Diversity in Canada". I think we should all read it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110074 We are very close to the initial stages of Maplethnic.com, as at that time we were producing the Spanish program at CHIN Radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110075 When I initially looked at www.maplethnic.ca ‑‑ I'm sorry, I put "com" on the top ‑‑ I had a very positive reaction as it's a good looking site; very complete and handy, as it is able to provide the expected purposes as stated in the ethnic policy.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110076 The mechanism is able to do it but the contents, I'm sorry to say, are completely obsolete.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110077 Enclosed is a study of the contents for your perusal.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110078 The participating radio stations are not listed correctly as they differ from what appears in Mr. Lombardi's presentation. We do not understand why all ethnic radio stations are not included. To work it properly, it should be mandatory.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110079 The site promises "maintains and updates". The site does not deliver.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110080 THE SECRETARY: Mrs. de la Torre, I believe your time has expired. Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110081 MS de la TORRE: You have it in front of you. You read it. We all want to go home.
‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 110082 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110083 We may have some questions for you, though.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110084 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: We do.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110085 MS de la TORRE: Go ahead.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110086 THE CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner Pennefather.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110087 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you very much.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110088 We have your presentation and thank you for the new information which you have attached, because you left me wanting a little bit more from you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110089 MS de la TORRE: You got it and you are going to get more before the 29th.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110090 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Exactly.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110091 What I wanted to comment on is you have made comments on various organizations. I grant you there is a spin‑off but we would have to focus on the organizations and the specifics of this hearing in commercial radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110092 MS de la TORRE: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110093 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: This bring me to the area that you say that you would comment on, and that is the CAB best practices proposal.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110094 I assume you have had a chance to look at it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110095 MS de la TORRE: Yes. But it is too, too much for me to be able to do it, sitting down here, and then working at night.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110096 But I will have time before May 29th.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110097 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: That was what I was hoping, but you have until June 12th.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110098 MS de la TORRE: Oh, thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110099 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Better?
LISTNUM 1 \l 110100 MS de la TORRE: That's sweet; thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110101 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: In any case, if you would focus on that because, as you know, there are a number of best practices dealing with private commercial radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110102 MS de la TORRE: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110103 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Both in terms of employment and in terms of programming.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110104 MS de la TORRE: M'hmm.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110105 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So I think it would be important also to get your comments on that in a practical sense and obviously, too, the CTD and Canadian content.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110106 MS de la TORRE: Right.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110107 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Just to let you know, we are aware of the "Diversity" article and the study, and we will be looking at that as well in reference to ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 110108 MS de la TORRE: Me too. I haven't read it.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110109 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I will leave you with one general question.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110110 In talking about diversity, as you know, the CAB task force on diversity in television completed its report pursuant to our policy. That report has come in with results to date.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110111 In the television world, that's the approach we took: research, task force, from the industry itself and then going forward looking at diversity plans that come to us within licence renewals, for example, or licence requests.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110112 When you look at radio, if you had to focus on a priority for radio and diversity, what would it be?
LISTNUM 1 \l 110113 MS de la TORRE: The 15 percent. Make it mandatory.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110114 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Fifty percent?
LISTNUM 1 \l 110115 MS de la TORRE: Fifteen.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110116 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Fifteen.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110117 MS de la TORRE: You have 15 that they can exercise on it without calling you, and then you go until 40 that they have to get in touch with you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110118 That's what I think I read. Maybe I'm wrong.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110119 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I am not sure what you are referring to.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110120 MS de la TORRE: There is a clause, I think, in ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 110121 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Are you talking about ethnic radio music?
LISTNUM 1 \l 110122 MS de la TORRE: No.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110123 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Or are you talking about ‑‑
LISTNUM 1 \l 110124 MS de la TORRE: The mainstream, yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110125 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: The mainstream.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110126 MS de la TORRE: That they are allowed to put diversity 15 percent without asking permission from the CRTC.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110127 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Oh, I think you are talking about the ethnic radio policy in terms of languages and what you are allowed to do at some point in time. Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110128 MS de la TORRE: It's not commercial radio?
LISTNUM 1 \l 110129 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: No. It's in the ethnic policy governing, and it's also related to commercial radio in the sense of what commercial radio is allowed to carry in terms of third language.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110130 MS de la TORRE: Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110131 If you look at all the TV, they have done it TV. They give the Saturdays or the Sundays, that people are sort of relaxing, and they give it to ethnics.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110132 They give it and they make money. But it also gives the ability to contact the consumer, the Canadian consumer.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110133 We are not here to promote ourselves with our own peers. We were born there. We were raised there. We speak the language. We eat the food. We dance the music. But we want to talk to the Canadian consumers, to Canadians.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110134 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So you are looking at focus on not just ethnic stations but mainstream radio.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110135 MS de la TORRE: Definitely.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110136 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110137 We will look forward to your further comments in June.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110138 MS de la TORRE: Thank you. You gave me time.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110139 MS MURPHY: Just a reminder that for the final submissions, there is a limit of 20 pages and at a font of 12 or more.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110140 MS de la TORRE: So it has to be 12 or more.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110141 MS MURPHY: Yes.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110142 MS de la TORRE: But less than 20.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110143 MS MURPHY: Twenty pages is the maximum number of pages and the font is 12 or more.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110144 MS de la TORRE: Okay.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110145 MS MURPHY: The size of the letters.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110146 MS de la TORRE: Okay. I usually use it. I need glasses.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110147 COMMISSIONER NOEL: We understand.
‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 110148 MS MURPHY: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110149 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much, Mrs. de la Torre.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110150 Are you both Hungarian and Spanish origin?
LISTNUM 1 \l 110151 MS de la TORRE: No, but my mother took the name from Hungary.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110152 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110153 MS de la TORRE: Thank you. Have a nice weekend.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110154 THE CHAIRPERSON: This brings the hearing to an end.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110155 I want to thank the parties who appeared before us. I want to thank our hard‑working staff for all the work they did to prepare the documentation; the interpreters for their hard work; the stenographer for her patience; and of course my fellow Commissioners for sitting here with me to take all your presentations and prepare all the questioning.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110156 This concludes the oral part of this hearing.
LISTNUM 1 \l 110157 There are follow‑up documents that have been requested that are due by May 29th, and then the second round of written comments by no later than June 12th ‑‑ in 12‑point font, no smaller, 20 pages, no more.
‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires
LISTNUM 1 \l 110158 THE CHAIRPERSON: We are adjourned.
‑‑‑ Whereupon the hearing concluded at 1715 /
L'audience se termine à 1715
REPORTERS
_____________________ _____________________
Lynda Johansson Fiona Potvin
_____________________ _____________________
Jean Desaulniers Madeleine Matte
_____________________
Monique Mahoney
- Date modified: