Transcript, Hearing 23 November 2023

Attendees and Location

Held at:

Conference Centre
Portage IV
140 Promenade du Portage
Gatineau, Quebec

Attendees:

• Chairperson: Vicky Eatrides
• Members: Alicia Barin, Vice Chairperson, Broadcasting
  Adam Scott, Vice Chairperson, Telecommunications
  Nirmala Naidoo, Commissioner, Alberta and the Northwest Territories
  Joanne T. Levy, Commissioner, Manitoba and Saskatchewan
• Legal Counsel: Valérie Dionne
  Bianka Lauzon
• Secretary: Jade Roy
• Hearing Managers: Courtney Fitzpatrick
  Marie Lyse Lavallée

Table of Contents

Presentations

2380 ACCORD

2410 SOCAN

2435 L’Association des professionnels de l’édition musicale

2458 Société professionnelle des auteurs et des compositeurs du Québec

2579 L’Association des radiodiffuseurs communautaires du Québec

2643 Association des radios régionales francophones

2742 Community Radio Fund of Canada

2858 NCRA/ANREC

2871 Radio Queen’s University

2971 Screen Composers Guild of Canada

3068 Radio Sidney

3087 Karim Mosna

3105 Ken Zakreski

3119 Ron Evans

3134 Colleen McCormick

3246 Nettwerk Music Group Inc.

3317 FACTOR

Transcript

Gatineau, Quebec
23 November 2023
Opening of Hearing at 10:31 a.m.

Gatineau, Québec

‑‑‑ Upon commencing on Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 10:31 a.m.

2376 LA SECRÉTAIRE : Bon matin à tous. Bienvenue.

2377 Before we begin, I would just like to say that today we have 17 intervenors. It's an important schedule, so I encourage people to try to be concise in their answers and questions so we can make sure that everyone will have a chance to be heard. Thank you very much for being here.

2378 Nous allons maintenant entendre les participants suivants : ACCORD, l'Association des professionnels de l'édition musicale, SOCAN, et la Société professionnelle des auteurs et des compositeurs du Québec qui comparait virtuellement. Nous entendrons chaque présentation, puis les membres du Comité d'audition poseront des questions à tous les participants.

2379 Nous commencerons avec la présentation d'ACCORD. S'il vous plaît vous présenter et vous pouvez débuter.

Presentation

2380 MR. JOHNSTON: Good morning, Chairperson, Commissioners and Commission staff.

2381 My name is Greg Johnston. I am an active songwriter, producer, performer, session musician and AV composer. I also volunteer as a music creator advocate. I am a past President and current Director at the Songwriters Association of Canada, as well as Co‑Chair of Music Creators North America, a U.S.‑Canada creator‑led organization that globally advocates on behalf of songwriters and composers. Today I am here on behalf of ACCORD, a coalition representing over 185,000 English‑ and French‑Canadian songwriters, composers and music publishers.

2382 I’m here to tell the Commission that Canadian Content Development (CCD) contributions matter, and I speak from personal experience.

2383 CCD investments have positively impacted almost every professional experience I’ve encountered in my 33 years as a Canadian creator.

2384 Of the 30 plus audiovisual series I’ve been a composer on, 100 percent of them have been supported by investments in Canadian content.

2385 I met my future wife when she hired me as her bass player, touring and promoting a FACTOR‑funded record. We’ve been married for 24 years. Thank you, FACTOR.

2386 CCD investments elevate Canadian voices, foster diversity, encourage innovation, facilitate the export of Canadian intellectual property and talent, direct millions into the creative economy, provide jobs and opportunities, and allow us to forge our unique cultural identity as Canadians.

2387 While ACCORD focuses its comments on contributions made towards Canadian music, we are also supportive of contributions made in support of Canadian audiovisual programs as our members, myself included, often create music for those programs. All of these contributions matter.

2388 The ultimate objective of the Commission’s new regulatory framework should result in increased representation for Canadian music, for Indigenous, Black and other racialized groups, and to help sustain and grow strong Canadian companies, companies that are essential to a healthy and vibrant Canadian creative community.

2389 To achieve this objective, the Commission needs to increase the market share of Canadian music on digital platforms and bring more contributions into our broadcasting system to invest in Canadian‑owned music and intellectual property.

2390 The Commission is asking three questions today: where contributions should go, how should contributions be calculated, and who should contribute.

2391 Contributions should go to FACTOR and Musicaction. These organizations are the best recipients of this funding. They have an impressive track record of administering CCD contributions and delivering successful programs for the Canadian music industry and Canadian audiences for over forty years. It is important for funding decisions for the Canadian music industry to be made by Canadian organizations because they know what the funding needs are in the industry and make sure funds are distributed across all of Canada. The reach of FACTOR and Musicaction programs is incredible and it is not a stretch for me to assume that every songwriter I know has benefitted in some way from these organizations.

2392 Most importantly, the music funded by the new regulatory framework must be created by Canadians and owned by Canadians. Canadian‑owned and ‑created music is the backbone of a healthy domestic market and is what will ensure the future success of our industry as well as ensuring Canadian voices continue to contribute to our collective cultural identity.

2393 Some have suggested that online undertakings ought to be allowed to direct their contributions to their own independent funds.

2394 ACCORD disagrees with the creation of new funds for the following reasons:

2395 ‑ new funds are not necessary and they would increase administration costs, taking away funding from the very audience they are supposed to support, Canadian creators themselves; and

2396 ‑ new funds would ultimately just delay the delivery of the contributions to the Canadian broadcasting system.

2397 How should contributions be calculated?

2398 Traditional broadcast undertakings have had contributions ranging from 0.5 percent of gross revenues (commercial radio) to 5 percent of gross revenues (satellite radio). For satellite radio, a higher contribution rate was based on lower amounts of Canadian content being available.

2399 Online undertakings are different and difficult to compare to traditional services. The availability of Canadian content and online undertakings’ ability to promote and recommend that content will be determined in a separate proceeding.

2400 At this stage, ACCORD recommends that the Commission look at setting an initial base contribution rate at a minimum of 5 percent of the gross revenues of online undertakings until we have more information from these services on how they can promote and recommend Canadian content. Then we can reassess whether that rate is appropriate or should be increased.

2401 Who should contribute?

2402 All online undertakings who meet the contribution threshold set by the Commission should contribute to CCD.

2403 We recognize that the Commission has already made the Online Undertakings Registration Regulations and established an exemption for services generating less than $10 million in annual revenues from registration requirements. We encourage the Commission to consider non‑revenue‑based thresholds for contribution obligations such as subscriber numbers and to include services that have a material impact on the Canadian broadcasting system but may have low revenues.

2404 In conclusion, ACCORD is of the view that:

2405 ‑ The initial base contributions should be directed to FACTOR and Musicaction.

2406 ‑ Initial base contributions should be set, at a minimum, at a rate of 5 percent of online undertakings’ gross revenues.

2407 ‑ While the Commission has set a $10‑million revenue threshold for registration obligations, ACCORD recommends the Commission consider non‑revenue‑based thresholds for contribution obligations to include contributions from services that materially impact the broadcasting system.

2408 Thank you for giving me the opportunity to present my coalition’s views today. I welcome your questions.

2409 I will hand it over to Fraser Turnbull from SOCAN.

Presentation

2410 MR. TURNBULL: Good morning, Chairperson Eatrides, Commissioners and Commission staff.

2411 My name is Fraser Turnbull and I am Legal Counsel at SOCAN.

2412 SOCAN agrees with the position taken by ACCORD in this proceeding. We are appearing today to elaborate on some of the data referred to in the ACCORD intervention and to provide the Commission with more information about online undertakings’ use of Canadian music.

2413 In our oral remarks, we will caution the Commission on using revenue‑only‑based thresholds for online music services and speak to the use of Canadian music on traditional broadcast undertakings as compared to online undertakings.

2414 First, we recognize that the Commission has established a registration exemption for services generating less than $10 million in annual revenues.

2415 While a revenue‑based threshold sounds relatively simple, it is not always an objective measure, particularly for online music services and their unique business models. For example, many services bundle broadcasting activities that do not directly generate revenue with non‑broadcasting activities that do generate substantial revenues.

2416 An example of this would be an online music service bundled for free with the purchase of a new smartphone. For example, Apple sometimes offers 6 months of Apple Music for free with the purchase of a new iPhone. In that case, the revenue may be allocated to the purchase of the hardware, rather than the broadcasting activity.

2417 As another example, Amazon Prime is a bundled service that provides shipping, audiovisual streaming and audio streaming, among other features, for one set price. This is a bundle made of broadcasting and non‑broadcasting activities that both generate revenues.

2418 In these cases, setting a threshold that is only based on revenues generated from broadcasting activities will exempt undertakings that undoubtedly do and will have a material effect on the implementation of Canada’s broadcasting policy.

2419 Setting a revenue‑only threshold may also incentivize a service to allocate revenues to its non‑broadcasting activities to qualify for the exemption and/or lower its contributions.

2420 Instead of relying only on revenues, we propose the Commission also consider subscriber numbers, average monthly active users and average monthly viewing or listening hours as additional metrics in setting thresholds.

2421 We appreciate that non‑revenue‑based data will take some time to collect and do not propose to slow down this process, but this data will paint a comprehensive picture of a service’s impact on our broadcasting system.

2422 Second, SOCAN is in a unique position to observe the market share for Canadian music on online music services. We represent virtually all copyright‑protected musical works in Canada, both foreign‑owned and Canadian‑owned, so we can see the whole picture of how music is used in Canada and what music is used.

2423 SOCAN gets its data from the online undertakings that we have licence agreements with, which are the majority of the online undertakings that are the subject of this proceeding. The data we receive includes detailed reporting on the musical works those services reproduce, communicate or publicly perform on their services. This detailed reporting sets out what music Canadians are listening to and then SOCAN distributes the royalties collected under those agreements to the music rights holders: both Canadian and foreign songwriters, composers and music publishers. We also receive similar reporting data from traditional broadcasting undertakings.

2424 The reported data we receive from each individual undertaking is confidential. However, we can speak to aggregated data to share the overall trends we see.

2425 We have found that based on our data there is a dramatic difference between the use of Canadian music on traditional broadcasting undertakings and online undertakings.

2426 Turning to the first PowerPoint slide, which is reproduced as Exhibit "A" to these oral remarks, we have looked at distributions for audio services from traditional media (such as commercial radio) and digital media (the online music services) to see how much Canadian‑owned music is used.

2427 You can see that for traditional media the market share for Canadian‑owned content is 30 percent for 2022. This share has stayed consistent since 2016. We expect this share is due, at least in part, to the conditions of licence historically placed on licensed broadcasting undertakings by the Commission.

2428 On digital audio media, you will see that the market share for Canadian‑owned music is 11.1 percent. To put this in economic terms, for every dollar SOCAN collects on traditional audio media, 30 cents goes to Canadian‑owned music, while on digital audio media, only 11 cents does.

2429 On the second PowerPoint slide, we looked at the distributions for AV services from traditional media (such as TV and cable) and from digital media (online AV streaming services). The difference here is even worse. For traditional AV, the market share is 33.4 percent Canadian‑owned music. For digital AV, that market share is 5.9 percent Canadian‑owned music.

2430 As more listeners migrate away from traditional to digital services, this is a major issue for the Canadian music industry. Canadian music is not finding a place on online music services operating in Canada.

2431 On the third PowerPoint slide, we break down the total difference between traditional media and digital media, inclusive of both audio and AV services, to show the impact to Francophone music in Canada.

2432 As you can see, the market share of Francophone music on traditional media is around 7 percent in 2022. These numbers drop dramatically on the shift to digital services, to 1.4% for Francophone music. This is a huge risk to the survival of Francophone music in Canada.

2433 We need to increase the share of Canadian music and notably Francophone music in the online services market. The goal of the Commission ought to be to increase the share of Canadian music represented online. Increasing investments in the production and promotion of Canadian works is the first step to accomplishing this.

2434 SOCAN appreciates the opportunity to present this information today and I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.

Presentation

2435 M. PAYETTE : Bonjour, Madame la Présidente, chers Commissaires, employés du CRTC. Je vous remercie de m'avoir invité à m’exprimer devant vous aujourd'hui.

2436 Mon nom est Jérôme Payette. Je suis le directeur général de l'Association des professionnels de l'édition musicale. On représente les éditeurs musicaux québécois et francophones du Canada. Partenaires des auteurs‑compositeurs, les éditeurs musicaux soutiennent la création d’œuvres musicales, les valorisent et les administrent. Partout où il y a de la musique, il y a de l’édition musicale, notamment en ligne sur les services audio, mais aussi sur les services vidéo.

2437 Notre association partage les grandes lignes de l’intervention de la coalition ACCORD, mais je vais approfondir la perspective pour le secteur de la musique francophone et la réalité de nos membres.

2438 Les revenus de nos membres perçus de la SOCAN ont baissé depuis 2016. Cette baisse s’explique par le recul des revenus en provenance des médias traditionnels et par notre incapacité à tirer des revenus des entreprises en ligne.

2439 De plus, comme vous le savez sans doute, la musique québécoise peine à joindre son public via les plateformes. Cela a un effet d'entraînement sur l’ensemble des revenus du secteur au niveau de la valeur des catalogues d’édition musicale de nos membres. En effet, plus une chanson est connue, plus elle a de la valeur, et, à l’inverse, un catalogue de titres méconnus procure peu de revenus.

2440 Dans ce contexte difficile, nous vous félicitons pour votre rapidité d’action et nous vous encourageons à mettre en œuvre le plan proposé dans les plus brefs délais afin que toutes les entreprises contribuent enfin à notre système.

2441 Nous avons besoin que le CRTC recrée en ligne les impacts bénéfiques de la réglementation des entreprises traditionnelles, qui a fait ses preuves et qui est toujours pertinente aujourd’hui.

2442 Alors, qui devrait contribuer?

2443 Tous les types d’entreprises qui diffusent de la musique ou des vidéos et qui ont un impact sur les objectifs de la Loi doivent contribuer.

2444 Pour certaines entreprises audio, les revenus générés au Canada ne devraient pas être le seul indicateur examiné pour savoir si elles devraient contribuer ou non, car certaines entreprises pourraient ne pas avoir 10 millions de dollars de revenus et tout de même avoir un impact important sur notre secteur. Pour ces entreprises, d’autres métriques, comme le nombre d’abonnés ou d’utilisateurs, devraient être examinées.

2445 Le CRTC doit s’intéresser davantage aux activités des entreprises pour déterminer si elles diffusent ou non des contenus audio ou vidéo qui tombent sous la portée de la Loi, que de tenter de déterminer si les entreprises sont un service de média social ou non.

2446 Vous comprendrez que je suis en désaccord avec la position de YouTube qui veut que ses activités vidéo soient totalement exclues.

2447 Maintenant, quelle devrait être la hauteur des contributions?

2448 Historiquement, les contributions financières des radiodiffuseurs traditionnels audio ont varié entre 0,5 pour cent et 5 pour cent de leurs revenus et sont déterminées en prenant en compte l’ensemble des obligations qui leur sont demandées. Aux contributions annuelles des radiodiffuseurs traditionnels s’ajoutent des montants découlant d’avantages tangibles lors de transactions de propriété.

2449 Les entreprises qui diffusent de la musique en ligne se comparent mal aux autres entreprises du système canadien de radiodiffusion et leur contribution à la mise en valeur et à la recommandation de notre musique sera déterminée dans un processus distinct. Vous comprendrez donc que pour nous la tâche est difficile de nous prononcer sur une partie de l'équation seulement.

2450 Considérant la hauteur des besoins actuels, l’urgence de combler ceux‑ci, et les modifications à la Loi pour renforcer le soutien à certaines communautés, qui va nécessiter des sommes supplémentaires, nous croyons que les entreprises qui diffusent de la musique en ligne devraient contribuer à la hauteur d’au moins 5 pour cent de leurs revenus canadiens et que cette contribution pourrait être réévaluée lors des prochaines audiences.

2451 Les contributions devraient être destinées aux fonds existants. La mise en place de nouveaux fonds multiplierait les frais de gestion et augmenterait le fardeau administratif des bénéficiaires, qui devraient s’adresser à plusieurs endroits pour obtenir du soutien. De plus, la mise en place de nouveaux fonds prendrait du temps, ce qui est incompatible avec l’urgence d’agir.

2452 Musicaction et FACTOR sont bien établis, ont fait leurs preuves et répondent aux besoins du secteur de la musique. Ils sont en constante évolution et peuvent s’adapter tant au niveau des programmes que de la gouvernance.

2453 Pour répondre aux besoins particuliers du secteur de la musique francophone, 40 pour cent des sommes devraient être destinées à Musicaction et 60 pour cent à FACTOR. Ce partage correspond à la formule proposée par le CRTC dans sa plus récente décision sur la radio commerciale au partage du Fonds de la musique du Canada et est conséquent avec la reconnaissance du contexte minoritaire du français en Amérique du Nord, qui figure désormais dans la Loi.

2454 En conclusion, j’aimerais rappeler que la Loi sur la radiodiffusion est une loi culturelle qui touche à qui nous sommes et à ce qui nous unit. Le CRTC a un rôle déterminant à jouer afin de protéger la langue et la culture francophone, et toutes les autres langues et cultures qui sont en danger au Canada.

2455 Pour conclure, je vais paraphraser l’allocution de clôture de Louis‑José Houde prononcée lors du dernier Gala de l’ADISQ : « Une langue, ça peut mourir. Une langue vivante est une langue qui est chantée. »

2456 Nos cultures doivent non seulement survivre mais doivent surtout continuer à évoluer d’une manière unique et distincte. Vous avez le pouvoir d’être un rempart contre l’uniformisation culturelle. On compte sur vous.

2457 Je vous remercie. Je répondrai à vos questions.

Presentation

2458 MME CHARBONNEAU : Bonjour, Madame la Présidente, chers Commissaires et membres du personnel.

2459 Je suis Ariane Charbonneau. Je suis la directrice générale de la SPACQ, la Société professionnelle des auteurs et des compositeurs du Québec. La SPACQ représente depuis 40 ans les intérêts moraux, économiques et professionnels des auteurs et compositeurs de chansons francophones à travers le Canada et de tous les compositeurs de musique de commande au Québec. Aujourd'hui, nous représentons plus de 600 membres.

2460 Les contributions au développement du contenu canadien (DCC) sont d’importantes sources de financement pour l’écosystème de l’industrie de la musique et de l’audiovisuel, soutenant de nombreuses organisations, entreprises, initiatives et artistes, tant au niveau national, régional que local.

2461 Établir une contribution de base initiale est une première étape importante pour mettre en place les conditions requises pour envisager de retrouver un marché concurrent et sain.

2462 L’industrie musicale, confrontée à un secteur de la radio et de la télévision traditionnelles dont les revenus sont à la baisse, doit également composer avec une baisse importante des contributions aux fonds soutenant la création, la production et la commercialisation.

2463 Selon l’analyse des redevances du droit d’exécution provenant de la SOCAN et réalisées entre 2012 et 2022, les redevances annuelles des auteurs québécois ont diminué de façon générale de 15 pour cent depuis 2016. Cette baisse de redevances s'explique principalement par une diminution de 29 pour cent des redevances en provenance des médias traditionnels, notamment le câble, la radio et la télévision.

2464 Les redevances annuelles pour le numérique, par ailleurs, ont seulement augmenté de 854 000 $, ce qui n’est pas suffisant pour compenser la perte engendrée par la baisse des redevances en provenance des médias traditionnels.

2465 Où devraient aller les contributions?

2466 Pour les services audio, la contribution de base initiale des entreprises en ligne devra être dirigée vers les fonds existants, FACTOR et Musicaction. Pour les services audiovisuels, la contribution de base initiale devra être dirigée vers le Fonds des médias du Canada. Ces organisations sont très bien établies et ont réussi à faire leur preuve en soutenant les créateurs canadiens depuis des décennies.

2467 Les contributions à ces fonds doivent être réparties de manière équitable, en tenant compte de la nécessité de fournir un financement adéquat aux créateurs et artistes francophones, en plus d’assurer la production et la commercialisation de contenus culturels canadiens diversifiés.

2468 La SPACQ est défavorable à la création de nouveaux fonds et de nouveaux mécanismes.

2469 Comment les contributions doivent être calculées?

2470 Nous mettons en garde le Conseil contre l’application d’un cadre de contribution uniformisé pour les entreprises de radiodiffusion traditionnelles et en ligne. Ces entreprises ont des modèles d’affaires et des offres de services complexes et très différents.

2471 La SPACQ recommande que le Conseil envisage de fixer une contribution de base initiale d’au moins 5 pour cent des revenus bruts des entreprises en ligne jusqu'à ce que nous ayons plus de renseignements sur la façon dont ces services peuvent mettre en valeur et recommander le contenu canadien. Nous pourrons alors réévaluer si ce taux est approprié ou s’il devrait être augmenté.

2472 Nous soutenons, par ailleurs, que les contributions doivent servir à financer la musique et les œuvres audiovisuelles créées et détenues par des Canadiens.

2473 Le Conseil ne devrait pas reconnaître les paiements de redevances aux ayants droits comme une forme de contribution au système canadien de radiodiffusion.

2474 Les sommes perçues à destination des fonds existants devraient être réparties à raison de 60 pour cent aux fonds anglophones et de 40 pour cent aux fonds francophones.

2475 Qui devrait contribuer?

2476 Toutes les entreprises en ligne qui atteignent le seuil de contribution fixé par le Conseil devraient contribuer au DCC.

2477 Cependant, les revenus ne sont pas un indicateur clé de la taille, de l'importance du service et de sa contribution à favoriser la consommation de contenu canadien. D’autres indicateurs devraient être considérés, tels que le nombre d'abonnés, la mise à disposition du répertoire canadien et la part de marché, entres autres.

2478 Pour conclure, la SPACQ est d'avis que :

2479 1. Les contributions de base initiales doivent être versées à FACTOR, Musicaction et le Fonds des médias du Canada.

2480 2. Les contributions initiales de base doivent être fixées à un taux minimal de 5 pour cent des revenus bruts des entreprises en ligne.

2481 3. Dans le cas d’entreprises n’atteignant pas le seuil de revenus fixés par le Conseil, d’autres paramètres devraient être considérés.

2482 La SPACQ remercie le CRTC de l’opportunité? de faire valoir ses observations. Je suis prête pour vos questions.

2483 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Merci beaucoup pour vos présentations ce matin.

2484 On va commencer avec notre vice‑présidente de la Radiodiffusion, madame Barin. Merci.

2485 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Merci beaucoup, Madame la Présidente.

2486 Je tiens à remercier les intervenants devant nous. J'ai plusieurs questions et des fois elles vont s'adresser à vous tous et des fois ça va être plus pointu. Alors, on va essayer de gérer ça de façon efficace.

2487 Alors, je commence avec une première question qui sera adressée plutôt à la SOCAN.

2488 ACCORD semble de l'avis que l'utilisation d'un seuil de 10 millions est trop élevé pour déterminer quels services audio devraient être assujettis à une contribution initiale du service en ligne. Plusieurs services seraient exclus selon les données de SOCAN.

2489 Est‑ce que SOCAN serait disposée à élaborer davantage sur les informations qui lui permettraient de tirer cette conclusion, le fait que le seuil est trop élevé?

2490 MR. TURNBULL: Certainly. Thank you for the question.

2491 So with SOCAN, with our data, how we collect royalties for most of the online services is based on a percentage of revenues. So we will be able to get a sense or an estimate of what those revenues will be or we may receive the revenues, their actual revenues.

2492 Now, the revenues that SOCAN receives for the purpose of royalties may be different from the revenues that the Commission is looking at for its threshold, so it might not be an apples‑to‑apples comparison. But from what we've seen from our own data is that a $10 million threshold for audio services will exempt all but a handful of services operating in the online music space.

2493 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Would you have any concrete examples of services that you feel have a material impact on the broadcasting system that would not be caught by the 10 million threshold?

2494 MR. TURNBULL: So the only problem I have with answering that question is that would be based on confidential information we've received according to our licence agreement, so I wouldn't be able to name any services to answer your question besides saying that everybody is excluded except for a handful of services.

2495 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Okay. Now, I know that, in fact, I think most of you on this panel have proposed that in addition to the monetary threshold, that the Commission consider other criteria. So if that were the case, is there one criteria that you think we should prioritize?

2496 MR. TURNBULL: So I think that's a great question. And I don't think I would be able to give you a solid answer. I think the approach we would suggest for the Commission is to collect as much information from the services as possible to be able to see what those numbers look like, whether it's subscriber numbers, views, or like I said, ad‑supported, and then from that information‑gathering, be able to delineate which criteria is the best.

2497 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Okay, so let me get back to something that I think that you mentioned in your presentation, Mr. Turnbull, and that it would be in collecting this other information that could take time, because this isn't information that is readily available, it could potentially delay the applicability of an initial contribution versus a revenue threshold, which is much more readily available. Would you comment on that?

2498 MR. TURNBULL: Certainly. I think as I said in my submission, we do not want to delay the imposition of initial base contribution at all. So if we have to lean more to one side, it is on the side of urgency to get contributions set up and started now.

2499 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Okay. I appreciate that. Merci.

2500 Alors, en ce qui a trait aux contributions à travers les fonds, croyez‑vous que les fonds existants, autres que FACTOR et Musicaction, par exemple, RadioStar, Starmaker et le Fonds canadien de la radio communautaire, devraient aussi bénéficier de la contribution de base des entreprises en ligne, et, si oui, quelle proportion de la contribution de base devrait être allouée à chacun de ces divers fonds?

2501 Alors, peut‑être Monsieur Payette, est‑ce que vous avez...

2502 M. PAYETTE : Du côté de l'APEM, on pense que les fonds devraient aller à FACTOR et Musicaction. Donc, comme j'ai dit dans mon allocution, 40 pour cent à Musicaction et 60 pour cent à FACTOR.

2503 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Merci.

2504 Madame Charbonneau, oui, allez‑y.

2505 MME CHARBONNEAU : Oui. Pour ma part, il y a le Fonds des médias du Canada, évidemment. Donc, ça c'est aussi du côté audiovisuel.

2506 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Merci.

2507 Je vous donne la chance, Mr. Johnston.

2508 MR. JOHNSTON: I am in a slightly difficult position to answer that, as I'm here representing French composers, songwriters, and French and English publishers as well. I would just encourage the Commission to listen to the individual parties. That includes Indigenous and racialized groups as well.

2509 For myself, on the SAC Board, from English songwriters, I would characterize them as being happy with the way the divisions of the funds are right now, but I'm here to also support all of my other fellow creators and their asks, so I will leave that to the Commission's discretion.

2510 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you very much for those answers.

2511 Alors, l'industrie de la musique est une industrie complexe comprenant plusieurs intervenants. Selon vous, est‑ce que les fonds qui bénéficient actuellement le cadre de contributions permettent à tous les maillots d'obtenir du soutien ou bien est‑ce qu'il y a des segments de l'industrie de la création, de la production et de la promotion musicale qui ne peuvent accéder à ces fonds?

2512 M. PAYETTE : Je pense qu'il y a toujours des sommes limitées qui ne permettent, malheureusement, pas de servir tout le monde. Donc, davantage de sommes permettraient à FACTOR/Musicaction d'aider davantage de personnes. Les fonds comme Musicaction sont des fonds qui sont flexibles, qui peuvent s'adapter, qui peuvent aussi parfois répondre à des besoins particuliers avec des enveloppes dédiées. Donc, ces mécanismes‑là, s'ils sont bien mis en place et s'ils sont adéquatement financés, peuvent servir bien notre secteur.

2513 MME CHARBONNEAU : Je voudrais aussi rajouter qu'au niveau de Musicaction, c'est surtout la production et la commercialisation. Musicaction existe depuis 40 ans et a fait vraiment ses preuves, mais de dois dire que la situation financière de Musicaction est critique. Donc, je souligne encore la nécessité de verser des fonds dans Musicaction pour pouvoir soutenir les créateurs francophones en situation minoritaire au Québec, mais aussi tous les artistes autochtones.

2514 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Merci beaucoup.

2515 So this is going to be my last question, and then I'm going to pass it back to the Chair and have my colleagues follow up.

2516 So the proposal is that initial contributions go through funds. Mr. Johnston, I heard you speak about the importance of CCD contributions, which I understand to be different than funds that are coming through a fund for the support of programming. Can you speak to whether you think that there are, in a bit of a variation on my previous question, other ways to support the music industry than via funds? Are funds the only solution?

2517 MR. JOHNSTON: Thank you for the question. For our community as professional songwriters and publishers, we need ‑‑ I mean, I'll break it down. We need music to be made, and we need music to be played. So we need more records made, more records toured, more records played on traditional broadcasting mechanisms and also on online undertakings.

2518 Songwriters, we don't get paid until that song gets played. So that's why we think it's so important to encourage and to invest into the making of these sound recordings and then to have them toured and to have them played publicly. Because that's our bread and butter.

2519 A lot of my songwriting and composer friends as well, if someone's making a record, we might get hired to produce that record. We might get hired to play bass on that record. I've played bass on countless records. My friends own the studios. The studios hire catering. There's touring. There's all these ancillary effects from the direct investments into the simple process of making more records. And that's how people get money in their pockets, and that's how my friends pay their bills and pay their taxes.

2520 And so for us, it's like we're not social media. We don't generate social media content. We make records and we use social media to promote those records. And artists are increasingly having to move to social medial to encourage the promotion and the marketing of those records. But primarily, we make records and we tour records and we write the songs for those records. We're like ‑‑ songwriters are like the farmers of the business. We make the seeds, and then the artists take them and they make them into records, and the record companies make them into exportable products. I hope that answers your question.

2521 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: It does. Thank you very much.

2522 MR. JOHNSTON: Thank you.

2523 MME CHARBONNEAU : Madame Barin, j'aimerais pouvoir ajouter quelque chose aussi...

2524 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Oui, absolument.

2525 MME CHARBONNEAU : ...au niveau de la découvrabilité. Je sais que cette consultation mène sur les contributions, mais je dois quand même souligner l'importance de la découvrabilité et de la visibilité des contenus canadien et francophone en ligne. C'est important pour nos artistes. C'est des cartes d'affaires pour nos artistes et aussi des façons de monétiser ces contenus professionnels en ligne. Donc, sans budget, il n'y a pas de création. C'est très simple.

2526 Dans la création, comme toute autre chose, le budget est l'honneur de la guerre. Donc, en ce moment, les gens, ils produisent plus et plus rapidement. Il y a une cadence accélérée. On a des artistes qui sont entrepreneurs, on a des artistes autoproducteurs, et on a des artistes qui s'épuisent. Donc, il faut vraiment tenir en compte la portion découvrabilité qui est vraiment reliée avec les contributions. Les deux vont ensemble. Merci.

2527 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Merci beaucoup.

2528 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Merci pour les réponses. Merci à madame la vice‑présidente.

2529 I think you've got a good tag line there with your "We need music to be made and music to be played."

2530 I will turn things over to Vice‑Chair Scott. Thank you.

2531 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you. My question isn't quite as catchy as that answer, but I'll...

2532 So we hear you loud and clear on support for FACTOR and Musicaction. Are you aware of any barriers to those funds that make it difficult for categories of creators to access them or is it equal?

2533 And a related question: Is there a role for either new funds or some of the initiatives that we've heard from online undertakings, measures that they're taking of their own account that can serve particular types of creators?

2534 M. PAYETTE : Si je peux tenter de répondre.

2535 Bien, la première barrière, je vais me répéter, mais c'est qu'il manque de fonds, il manque d'argent. Donc, ça c'est la première barrière.

2536 Après, on reconnaît qu'il y a des besoins particuliers de certaines communautés, puis je pense que la Loi va les aider à tirer davantage de revenus. Donc, c'est pour ça qu'il faut qu'il y ait davantage d'argent qui aille aux fonds également. C'est pour servir notamment les autochtones et les groupes en quête d'équité. Donc, ça c'est assez clair.

2537 Je pense qu'il y a plusieurs avantages à aller avec les fonds existants. Ils sont déjà en place, c'est plus rapide, ils sont flexibles, ils évoluent déjà, ils s'adaptent déjà, et ils peuvent gérer des enveloppes dédiées. Je pense que la création de nouveaux fonds à ce moment n'est pas souhaitable.

2538 MR. JOHNSTON: If I might add too, I think FACTOR is doing an excellent job at recognizing the needs of Canadians and the diversity of Canadians.

2539 Just a couple things. There's been a keychain initiative for women and gender minority. I know at the SAC it is a priority for us as well. We've run a songwriting camp for women and non‑conforming gender persons. And we work closely with all of the equity‑seeking groups at ACCORD, and on a whole, ACCORD supports the work that FACTOR and Musicaction are doing to those ends.

2540 You know, but if there was the need for a specific fund or a subset of the fund to be set up for a particular equity‑deserving group, then ACCORD would be supportive of that as well.

2541 But I think that the needs are best served within this community because this community understands each other the best as opposed to a foreign‑owned service.

2542 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Great. Thank you both very much. Merci beaucoup.

2543 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much, Vice‑Chair Scott.

2544 We'll go over to Commissioner Naidoo.

2545 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Hi. My question is directed to SOCAN. Do you have a specific example of online services which in your view have a significant impact on the broadcasting system but may have low revenues? And of course I don't want you to breach any confidentiality or anything.

2546 MR. TURNBULL: Certainly. Thank you for the question. Yeah, I don't think I could name or say anything specific beyond the examples that I've already provided of bundled services or services using music as a loss leader, essentially, to get people in the door. So these are things that we have seen, without naming any specific service, that I do think could materially contribute to the Canadian broadcasting system.

2547 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Thank you, Commissioner Naidoo.

2548 Commissioner Levy?

2549 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Given that you are very conscious of your confidentiality, I did wonder just in terms of a dollar amount, what sort of threshold would be more appropriate to capture more of the entities that you feel should be contributing and would not be captured if we maintain the $10 million threshold?

2550 MR. TURNBULL: That's another really good question. So yeah, I don't know if I would commit myself to a specific number, but at least in looking at what the Commission has done with other services, originally commercial radio was set at a 1.25 million threshold, so that could be a starting point. But noting that that threshold is changing with I think the latest commercial radio decision.

2551 COMMISSIONER LEVY: I think I am going to be talking to Nettwerk later on today. They have some concerns about setting fees for online undertakings and, you know, saying that the unintended consequences might be a withdrawal of support rather than more support and increased prices to Canadian consumers that might increase the value of going to VPNs and so forth, which are already taking up ‑‑ you know, which are eating your lunch, essentially. So how should we manage that balancing act?

2552 MR. TURNBULL: I will take the first crack at this one. I think it would be very disappointing if the online services move out of Canada after being asked to contribute. I think what we've seen from a lot of their interventions as well is they're promoting what they're already doing in Canada. They're telling the Commission they are doing a lot for the Canadian market. So I think asking them to continue doing things for the Canadian market should be something that they would be on board with an in line with.

2553 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you.

2554 MS. CHARBONNEAU: If I can add something, I think it's an opportunity also for these companies to be part of something big, you know, promoting Canadian content and contributing to the system. It's a level playing field. So they have to be ‑‑ if they're part of our economy, they have to contribute to it.

2555 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you for that, and thank you, Commissioner Levy.

2556 We would like to turn things back over to you to perhaps share any final thoughts with us and maybe everyone can just individually take a minute or however long Madam Secretary gives us to just finish with any concluding remarks. Thank you.

2557 MR. TURNBULL: Sure. I will start off and be very brief. First, I just wanted to thank all of you for allowing us to speak today.

2558 The other thing I wanted to mention is we've talked a lot about music on this panel, but we're also supportive of the audiovisual sector and contributions and regulations there. Music and film and TV, they go hand in hand.

2559 But to summarize SOCAN's remarks, I think what I'd like to leave you with today is there is an urgency to start initial base contributions now. Basically, what we've shown you from the SOCAN data is that Canadian creators are getting lost in the digital shuffle. So they're going to experience lower contributions as traditional revenues go down, and then on the other hand, we are seeing lower royalties. So they're facing losses on both sides right now, so there is an urgency to start. Thank you.

2560 M. PAYETTE : Donc, je partage le sentiment d'urgence. Donc, à très court terme, il faut niveler par le haut. Donc, c'est important de niveler par le haut. On a besoin du soutien.

2561 Puis ma collègue Ariane en a parlé, il n'y a rien qui peut remplacer le lien avec le public. Donc, il faut que vous passiez rapidement sur le volet mise en valeur et recommandations.

2562 C'est là aussi où on va permettre de générer d'autres revenus. Donc, évidemment, les revenus directement quand on est écoutés sur les plateformes, mais il y a aussi d'autres revenus qui découlent d'être connus du public. Évidemment, des billets de concert, on vend des produits dérivés, ça permet à nos chansons d'être reprises par d'autres interprètes, de trouver leur place sur un écran. Donc, il y a plusieurs autres retombées d'être connus du public, et je pense que ça c'est clairement une clé très importante.

2563 Je voulais quand même revenir un peu sur une déclaration de YouTube que je pense qui est inappropriée. Ça n'a pas de bon sens que YouTube dise que seulement leur contenu audio devrait être assujetti à la Loi. Ils ont des contenus vidéo professionnels sur les plateformes des médias sociaux qui sont clairement sous la portée de la Loi, par exemple, des vidéoclips. Donc, je vous suggère de bien regarder cet aspect‑là. Ils doivent contribuer pour l'ensemble de leurs activités audio, mais également vidéo. Voilà!

2564 MME CHARBONNEAU : Bonjour. Donc, merci de nous avoir donné la parole aujourd'hui.

2565 Je réitère donc que l'industrie musicale, elle s'est profondément transformée et elle doit vraiment relever des défis vraiment importants. À cela s'ajoute en plus la nécessité de mieux répondre aux besoins des communautés reflétant la diversité au Canada. Alors que les contributions ont cessé de diminuer, les besoins, ils ont vraiment augmenté.

2566 Au‑delà de fichiers audio que nous avons le plaisir d'écouter en line ou de films pour lesquels on écoute des trames sonores, la musique représente une industrie au grand complet qui emploie des milliers de personnes, qui compte des auteurs, des compositeurs, des interprètes, des artistes entrepreneurs, et j'en passe, qui oeuvrent à préserver autant notre culture que nos langues.

2567 Donc, il est fondamentalement urgent d'agir afin que notre industrie ait les moyens de continuer à protéger notre souveraineté culturelle, que nos artistes puissent vivre de leur musique et faire vivre notre musique. Merci.

2568 MR. JOHNSTON: I am going to try and be as direct as possible here, because these are my friends and they're my colleagues, and the publishers are our partners.

2569 I wish that the potential contributors would look at this as an opportunity instead of an obligation. When you think about the testimony yesterday from CIMA, all the examples that were listed from Andrew Cash of the success stories, and they were just the smallest amount ‑‑ this system works. It produces incredible success stories.

2570 SiriusXM said the very thing yesterday, that they were proud of the accomplishments that the contributions that they made produced, and then also proud of the accomplishments that the discretionary funding ‑‑ that they're proud of those results as well.

2571 You know, I don't want our music to always be considered a loss leader, something to be bundled with a phone. It's insulting. This is cultural content. This is our voice as ‑‑ our collective voice as Canadians. And I think that we deserve a little bit of respect. And these are ‑‑ I want to partner with these potential online contributors online. Like that's an incredible opportunity to keep building our story and bragging rights for them to be part of it. So thank you very much.

2572 THE CHAIRPERSON: Well, I think that is a great note to end our first panel on for day four of our hearing.

2573 Thank you for your participation. Merci beaucoup pour les présentations et les soumissions. Thank you.

2574 LA SECRÉTAIRE : Merci.

2575 J'inviterais maintenant...

2576 MME CHARBONNEAU : Merci.

2577 LA SECRÉTAIRE : Merci.

2578 J'inviterais maintenant l'Association des radiodiffuseurs communautaires du Québec à s'approcher.

‑‑‑ Pause

Presentation

2579 M. BERTRAND : Bonjour. C'est un peu intimidant d'être tout seul ici en avant.

2580 Bonjour. Je suis Denis Bertrand. Je suis le directeur général par intérim de l'Association des radiodiffuseurs communautaires du Québec. Je suis en poste depuis trois mois. Donc, soyez indulgents avec moi, s'il vous plaît.

2581 L’ARCQ rassemble 37 stations présentes dans plus de 450 municipalités et 16 régions. Elles comptent près de 300 employés, plus de 600 bénévoles et près de 15 000 membres. Avec tout près de 50 travailleurs dans le domaine de l’information de proximité, l’ARCQ est collectivement la plus grande salle de nouvelles régionales québécoise.

2582 Depuis ses débuts au Québec il y a 50 ans, la radio communautaire se distingue des autres radios. Elle offre une tribune de proximité à la population, diffuse des informations locales, développe une main‑d’œuvre locale, permet à la diversité qui caractérise nos régions de s’exprimer, et appuie les artistes émergents.

2583 Une étude réalisée l’été dernier pour l’ARCQ par la firme StatsRadio démontre qu’environ 780 000 auditeurs écoutent chaque semaine une des 28 stations sondées. Au total, en ajoutant les stations CIBL, CINQ FM à Montréal et les autres, nous frôlons le million d’auditeurs chaque semaine.

2584 Soixante‑dix‑huit pour cent des auditeurs interrogés par StatsRadio considèrent leur station communautaire comme la meilleure source d’information au niveau local, loin devant les autres médias. De plus, 65 pour cent des répondants perçoivent leur radio communautaire comme étant la meilleure source d'information pour les évènements culturels locaux.

2585 Pour obtenir une notoriété dans l’industrie musicale francophone, le passage d’artistes à un palmarès ou sur les ondes des radios communautaires est essentiel. Cela démontre qu’il existe une synergie entre nos membres et les artisans de ce milieu. Nous estimons que, en moyenne, ce sont près de 200 auteurs et autant de sculpteurs, réalisateurs et artisans de toute sorte qui profitent d’entrevues ou de reportages sur les ondes des radios communautaires québécoises.

2586 Nos radios sont des pépinières de talents. Nombre de journalistes, d’animatrices et d’animateurs, parmi d’autres, ont fait leurs débuts professionnels chez nous. Offrir la formation requise à tous ces nouveaux venus exige du temps et une supervision constante.

2587 Le rôle des radios communautaires à titre de formatrices de talents doit être reconnu et soutenu. C’est ainsi que nous nous rallions à des énoncés inclus dans le décret adressé au CRTC par la ministre du Patrimoine canadien, Pascale St‑Onge, le 14 novembre dernier.

2588 D’abord, il est important de soutenir une programmation communautaire axée sur les nouvelles et l’actualité, y compris la production et la diffusion de nouvelles locales et régionales originales. Ce qui peut paraître évident n’est pas un cliché pour autant.

2589 Par exemple, lorsque surviennent des catastrophes naturelles, inondations ou feux de forêts, les gouvernements recommandent à la population de consulter leurs médias locaux. Des stations membres de l’ARCQ ont géré de telles crises et leurs auditoires ont compté sur elles pour savoir comment réagir aux circonstances.

2590 Nous sommes disposés à travailler avec le CRTC pour examiner comment nous pouvons encourager l’innovation et appuyer la pérennité des radiodiffuseurs communautaires. D'ailleurs, les radios innovent constamment. Ces changements sont accompagnés de défis, qu’il s’agisse de soutenir des artistes locaux méconnus ou d’assurer une représentation de la diversité des groupes présents dans nos communautés.

2591 Il est essentiel que les radios aient les connaissances et les outils requis pour assurer une représentation efficace de tous ces segments. Heureusement, nous pouvons compter sur les expériences de nos radios urbaines adaptées à ces réalités.

2592 Nos collègues de l’Alliance des radios communautaires du Canada en savent quelque chose. D'ailleurs, mon collègue Pierre Sicard de l'ARC du Canada est ici. Si je dis des bêtises, c'est de sa faute.

2593 Plusieurs de leurs stations ont recruté des employés issus de l’immigration francophone. La radio communautaire au Canada enrichit les voix francophones et acadiennes, tout en incluant une place de choix pour la francophonie mondiale. Elle contribue au renforcement des communautés francophones en situation minoritaire.

2594 Nous soutenons, justement, un appui du CRTC aux radios communautaires qui évoluent en situation minoritaire linguistique pour qu’elles créent et diffusent des contenus adaptés à leur réalité.

2595 Plusieurs radios membres de l’ARCQ qui sont au service de la communauté anglo‑québécoise profitent d’un réseau d’échanges et de collaborations. Récemment, une collaboration entre CHIP dans le Pontiac et CJMQ dans les Cantons de l’Est a permis à cette dernière d’accroître ses revenus de 75 pour cent. Nous espérons sensiblement les mêmes résultats avec les stations CJAS à Sainte‑Augustine et CFBS à Blanc‑Sablon.

2596 Nous demandons donc au CRTC d’allouer les fonds associés au projet de loi C‑11 comme financement de base stable à toutes les radios communautaires titulaires d’une licence.

2597 L’initiative pour la radio communautaire du Fonds canadien de la radio communautaire propose que 25 millions de dollars soient fournis au secteur chaque année par le biais des fonds C‑11 et d’une contribution de Patrimoine canadien si nécessaire. Cela permettrait aux stations d’améliorer leurs conditions de travail, d’augmenter la production d’informations et d’émissions locales.

2598 En somme, les radios communautaires sont des laboratoires voués à l’innovation et à l’émergence de talents locaux. Pour ce faire, nous comptons sur l’appui continu de nos communautés, du CRTC et des autorités gouvernementales. Merci.

2599 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Merci beaucoup pour votre présentation.

2600 Je vais céder la parole à notre vice‑présidente Barin. Merci.

2601 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Merci beaucoup.

2602 Bienvenue, Monsieur Bertrand. Oui, on va être très gentils avec vous.

2603 M. BERTRAND : Merci.

‑‑‑ Laughter

2604 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : D’ailleurs, merci pour toutes vos soumissions, vos études et vos listes de personnages qui ont participé à ce laboratoire ou pépinière dans la radio communautaire. J’ai cru reconnaître quelques collègues parmi les gens sur la liste.

2605 Alors, ma première question pour vous. Avec votre perspective de radio communautaire, est‑ce que vous pouvez identifier les fonds actuels qui soutiennent le mieux les créateurs de la francophonie et de la minorité linguistique de langue anglaise au Québec, ainsi que ceux issus des communautés racisées et représentatives de la diversité et de l’inclusion au Canada?

2606 M. BERTRAND : Si on parle dans le domaine de la chanson‑musique, évidemment, je m’en remets à mes collègues qui ont participé à l’audience un petit peu plus tôt. Évidemment, il y a des sources gouvernementales liées à la production artistique de toute sorte, Conseil des arts du Canada et autres, mais je ne peux pas m’avancer au‑delà de ça.

2607 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : C’est bien.

2608 J’allais vous demander si vous voyez qu’un pourcentage des contributions devraient être alloué à ce type de fonds. Actuellement, les propositions que nous avons de plusieurs intervenants c’est de se servir des fonds actuels, et je sais que vous proposez un nouveau fonds. Alors, nous avons déjà le Fonds canadien de la radio communautaire, et vous proposez qu’un nouveau fonds soit établi pour soutenir la radio communautaire.

2609 Ce nouveau fonds, comment est‑ce qu’il compléterait ou comment serait‑il différent du financement qui est déjà administré par le Fonds canadien de la radio communautaire?

2610 M. BERTRAND : Mes collègues du Fonds de la radio communautaire vont intervenir tantôt, vont vous fournir plus de détails à ce sujet‑là.

2611 Mais nous, on le voit vraiment comme une façon de bonifier ce qui existe déjà. Au Québec, les radios communautaires, plusieurs d'entre elles réussissent à tirer leur épingle du jeu en étant capables de générer plus de revenus autonomes, ce qui n’est pas le cas pour l’ensemble des radios communautaires au pays.

2612 Plusieurs radios communautaires travaillent avec des effectifs réduits. Je pourrais vous parler de radios qui sont essentiellement souvent opérées par une à deux personnes seules. Donc, avec ce manque de moyens là, ces radios‑là, malgré toute la bonne volonté des personnes qui y travaillent et les gèrent, se retrouvent quand même dans des situations très précaires avec les fonds existants.

2613 Une bonification de ce financement‑là viendrait certainement aider ces radios‑là qui sont un petit peu plus précaires à l’heure actuelle.

2614 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Alors, je mets l’emphase sur ce que vous avez dit : une bonification. Si cette bonification est par l’injection de fonds pour soutenir la radio communautaire, selon vous, est‑ce que ça pourrait se faire à travers le fonds existant? Parce qu’on a entendu plusieurs intervenants qui nous parlent d’inefficacité de fragmenter une contribution à travers plusieurs fonds et aussi des coûts administratifs qui viennent, et, en plus, du délai qui pourrait être encouru en établissant un nouveau fonds. J’aimerais avoir vos commentaires.

2615 M. BERTRAND : Bien, moi, je vous dirais qu’on serait certainement prêts à en discuter, de discuter de ce que vous mettez sur la table, c’est‑à‑dire s’il y a moyen de bonifier ce qui existe déjà sans nécessairement créer un nouveau fonds, pourquoi pas.

2616 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Merci.

2617 Là, j’ai ma dernière question. Je sais que dans vos interventions, vous parlez de différents types de soutien à la radio communautaire, que ce soit la formation, encadrement. Selon vous, que ce soit par la création d’un nouveau fonds ou un fonds existant, est‑ce que vous pensez que les fonds devraient d’abord appuyer la promotion du contenu canadien et non ce type d’appui, qui n’est pas un appui direct, à la création et la promotion du contenu?

2618 M. BERTRAND : Bien, les radios communautaires sont toutes vouées, sans exception, à la création puis à l’appui au contenu canadien. Ça, c’est clair. Les radios chez nous ont appuyé bon nombre d’artistes en début de carrière qui ont maintenant des carrières florissantes en chanson‑musique, en littérature et autres. Il y a des gens qui se retrouvent maintenant, qui sont des fixtures sur des réseaux nationaux, qui ont fait leurs débuts chez nous.

2619 Il est certain que toute cette formation‑là, qui est offerte à ces nouveaux venus qui éventuellement débouchent ailleurs, entraîne des dépenses puis des investissements de temps et d’argent assez importants de la part des radios communautaires.

2620 Un appui de ce côté‑là serait bienvenu. Parce que, comme j’ai dit, il y a des radios qui fonctionnent avec un bon nombre d’employés, mais d’autres qui fonctionnent avec très, très peu de ressources. Et le temps investi à soutenir cette formation‑là, et du temps et des ressources qui ne sont pas investis ailleurs.

2621 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Monsieur Bertrand, merci beaucoup pour vos commentaires.

2622 M. BERTRAND : Merci.

2623 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Je vais repasser la parole à la présidente.

2624 M. BERTRAND : Merci.

2625 LA PRÉSIDENTE : D’accord. Merci beaucoup.

2626 Alors, je pense qu’on a peut‑être une autre question. Je peux passer la parole peut‑être au vice‑président Scott? Merci.

2627 VICE‑PRÉSIDENT SCOTT : Merci. Bonjour.

2628 Nous savons que vos stations et, en fait, votre secteur partout dans le pays sont étroitement liés à vos différentes communautés. Comment déterminez‑vous les besoins de vos communautés en temps de programmation, et en particulier, comment déterminez‑vous les besoins de vos communautés en matière d’information? Quelles structures mettez‑vous en place pour répondre à ces besoins?

2629 M. BERTRAND : Bien, chaque radio est en contact pratiquement quotidiennement avec sa communauté. Il y a des mécanismes aussi plus formels qui sont mis en place, soit des mécanismes de consultation, par exemple, périodes, selon les besoins des radios puis des réalités locales.

2630 Il y a aussi le fait, évidemment, que les personnes qui gèrent les radios circulent dans la communauté, sont en contact avec les gens constamment, participent à des événements communautaires, rencontrent les gens d’affaires, les responsables de municipalités, et cætera. Donc, il y a toujours un dialogue en cours, qu’il soit formel ou informel, et, de cette façon‑là, il y a toujours chez la radio communautaire le souci d’être représentative de ce qui se passe dans la communauté et de l’ensemble de la communauté.

2631 Les radios communautaires ne sont pas des entités isolées de leur environnement. C’est par la nature même de la radio communautaire d’avoir ce contact‑là constant avec ses auditoires.

2632 VICE‑PRÉSIDENT SCOTT : Merci, Monsieur Bertrand.

2633 M. BERTRAND : Merci.

2634 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Merci beaucoup.

2635 Alors, c’est quoi le message clé que vous voulez laisser avec le Conseil? Est‑ce qu’il y a quelque chose qu’on n’a pas discuté ce matin que vous voulez ajouter?

2636 M. BERTRAND : Je pense la seule chose que je peux ajouter, c’est dans toutes les réflexions du CRTC ‑‑ puis l’univers de la radio‑télédiffusion est quand même un univers très vaste et dominé par des gros joueurs ‑‑ je vous invite à garder en tête le rôle quand même de base ou très important joué par la radio communautaire, la télé communautaire, entre autres au Québec et ailleurs au Canada français en particulier, parce qu’elles sont des composantes essentielles non seulement dans le secteur mais dans les rapports que le public entretient avec l’accès à l’information, l’accès aux artistes.

2637 La découverte de nouveaux artistes, ça se fait souvent par l’entremise des radios communautaires. Parfois, quand les artistes sont établis, on les retrouve ailleurs, mais quand ils sont en début de carrière, ils sont chez nous.

2638 LA PRÉSIDENTE : On vous remercie pour votre participation. Merci beaucoup.

2639 LA SECRÉTAIRE : Merci.

2640 J’inviterais maintenant l’Association des radios régionales francophones.

‑‑‑ Pause

2641 LA SECRÉTAIRE : Merci d’être ici. Vous pouvez débuter lorsque vous êtes prêt.

2642 Juste ouvrir votre micro, s’il vous plaît. Oui, parfait.

Presentation

2643 M. CHAMBERLAND : Alors, Madame la Présidente, Mesdames et Messieurs les Conseillers, d’entrée de jeu, je tiens à vous remercier de me permettre d’exprimer aujourd’hui une partie des préoccupations des radiodiffuseurs francophones dans le cadre de la présente instance.

2644 Permettez‑moi de me présenter. Je suis Sylvain Chamberland, président d’Arsenal Média et président de l’Association des radios régionales francophones, ou l’ARRF. Notre association regroupe 34 stations au Québec, en Ontario et au Nouveau‑Brunswick.

2645 Notre intervention aujourd’hui est primordiale pour nous qui, au quotidien, multiplions les efforts pour assurer la pérennité de la radio dans nos communautés respectives.

2646 J’ai l’impression de répéter les paroles de mon collègue des radios communautaires.

2647 Comme plusieurs l’ont exprimé, le cadre réglementaire actuel est devenu non seulement inefficace et obsolète, mais surtout inéquitable, compte tenu de l’émergence d’entreprises en ligne qui ne sont pas réglementées depuis beaucoup trop longtemps.

2648 À cet état de fait, j’ajoute et s’ajoute une constante réduction des revenus publicitaires des médias traditionnels.

2649 Nous sommes désormais à la croisée des chemins. Malgré les nombreuses initiatives des radios privées régionales pour faire un virage numérique ‑‑ plateformes d’informations en ligne, boutiques en ligne, information, Infolettres, Podcast ‑‑ la chute des revenus est telle qu’elle compromet maintenant notre capacité à continuer de jouer notre rôle si important dans, et pour, nos communautés.

2650 Au cours des dernières années, les radiodiffuseurs ont tout fait pour ralentir l’érosion des revenus, et ce, tout en poursuivant l’objectif de demeurer concurrentiels, accessibles et à l’écoute de nos concitoyens. Nous l’avons fait en respectant le cadre réglementaire canadien, tout en sachant très bien que les règles du jeu sont non seulement inéquitables mais surtout déloyales.

2651 Je pourrais parler longuement de ces iniquités, mais je vais concentrer mon intervention sur l’information et plus précisément sur l’information locale et régionale à la radio privée.

2652 Contrairement à la radio communautaire, la radio publique ou encore la presse écrite, notre industrie ne reçoit aucun soutien financier pour la production de nouvelles locales.

2653 Alors que des milliers de francophones du Québec, du Nouveau‑Brunswick et du nord de l’Ontario résident dans des régions que l’on peut qualifier de déserts médiatiques, nos radiodiffuseurs tiennent toujours le fort pour informer leurs concitoyens.

2654 Les journalistes en poste dans nos stations s’affairent jour après jour à produire de l’information de proximité. Chaque mois, plusieurs millions de francophones se tiennent au courant de ce qui se passe chez eux grâce à nos radios et à nos plateformes en ligne. Très souvent, cette présence constitue la seule source d’information locale de leur communauté.

2655 Soulignons aussi le rôle essentiel, comme le soulignait mon collègue précédemment, soulignons aussi le rôle essentiel que nous jouons en situation de crise. Je ne pense pas avoir à élaborer la liste sans fin des événements au cours desquels nos radios régionales ont joué un rôle crucial d’information auprès de nos populations.

2656 Je mentionnerai tout de même que des tragédies comme Mégantic ou Amqui, aux feux de forêt qui ont fait rage partout au Canada, en passant par les tempêtes qui ont ébranlé le nord du Québec l’hiver dernier, la radio locale était là avec « son monde » pour diffuser jour et nuit, et même à Noël. Nos équipes sont toujours là pendant que, trop souvent, la radio publique diffuse des bulletins d’information de ces événements à partir de Montréal.

2657 Malgré cette iniquité qui saute aux yeux, la grande majorité d’entre nous avons délibérément choisi de continuer de supporter nos services d’information pour véhiculer des valeurs comme la coopération, la solidarité, la démocratie, la justice sociale, l’équité entre citoyens, et surtout pour continuer de parler de nos communautés à nos communautés.

2658 Si je parle, par exemple, de La Tuque, une petite communauté en Haute‑Mauricie au Québec, qui va leur parler du début de la période d’inscription de la Guignolée; des feux de forêt qui dévastent leurs terres; du bilan du festival de chasse; des fonds ramassés pour le gâteau latuquois; des problématiques que vit la nation attikamek; ou encore de la performance des Loups de La Tuque au hockey?

2659 Autant de nouvelles locales qui peuvent paraître insignifiantes pour les citoyens des grandes régions urbaines du Canada. Pourtant, ces nouvelles résonnent dans les communautés que nous desservons quotidiennement, et ces nouvelles résonnent puissamment pour nos communautés.

2660 Pour sauvegarder l’information régionale, il nous apparaît opportun, voire impératif, de proposer la mise sur pied d'un fonds national : un fonds qui améliorera la couverture, la création et la diffusion de bulletins de nouvelles locales de qualité, et ce, pour tous les citoyens canadiens, peu importe où ils habitent.

2661 Et c’est une bataille que nous avons depuis des années au Québec, sur un territoire qui est immense, pour dire que chacun des citoyens devrait être traité de façon égale. Et nous avons fait nombre de représentations auprès du gouvernement provincial pour lui expliquer que tout ce qui passe comme publicité sociétale à Montréal ou à Québec devrait aussi avoir une résonance à l’extérieur des grands centres urbains pour que chacun des citoyens soit informé de la même façon.

2662 Alors, si c’est vrai pour le gouvernement provincial, il en va de même pour le gouvernement fédéral, ainsi que pour n’importe quel citoyen qui habite notre terre.

2663 L’ARRF est d’avis que ces fonds devraient être financés par les nouvelles contributions des entreprises en ligne qui participent, quand c’est le cas, bien timidement à l’ensemble du système de radiodiffusion canadien.

2664 Évidemment, tout le monde veut un morceau de cette tarte. Beaucoup d’institutions veulent même la tarte au complet. Ces demandes ne font aucun sens en 2023. Nous devrions tous pouvoir manger à la même table.

2665 Je vous rappelle que l’information, tout comme la musique, bien sûr, fait partie intégrante de nos programmations régionales et l’information devrait être considérée prioritaire, encore plus dans le contexte politique et social actuel. Tout cela, bien évidemment, n’a pas à se faire au détriment de l’écosystème musical canadien, qui doit, lui aussi, assurer sa pérennité, bien évidemment.

2666 Je ne compte plus le nombre de politiciens qui, dans les derniers mois, voire les dernières semaines, et je dirais même, voire les derniers jours, je ne compte plus, oui, le nombre de politiciens qui ont appelé à préserver l’information régionale, la démocratie, l’indépendance, comme si un coup de baguette magique suffisait.

2667 Alors, comme on dit en région : « Il est grand temps que les bottines suivent les babines ».

2668 Nous ne sommes pas ici pour demander une réduction des obligations de production de nouvelles. Ça fait changement, quand même. Nous sommes ici pour vous demander de réparer les iniquités qui persistent et nous donner les moyens de batailler à armes égales avec tous les médias qui bénéficient déjà d’avantages auxquels les radios régionales n’ont malheureusement pas droit.

2669 Alors, ou bien on donne l’accès aux radiodiffuseurs au programme de crédits d’impôt pour la main‑d’œuvre journalistique canadienne, qui pour l’instant n’est accessible que pour la presse écrite, et qui vient justement encore d’être bonifié pas plus tard que mardi lors de la mise à jour économique; ou encore on crée un fonds similaire au Fonds des nouvelles indépendantes qui s’adresse aux opérateurs indépendants de petites stations de télé locales, ce qui a déjà été mis en place précédemment; ou encore on donne aux radios privées régionales des droits de s’autofinancer comme les radios communautaires; ou encore on partage le financement de la radio publique.

2670 Mais dans tous les cas, on doit trouver une solution, et cette solution n’est pas de savoir combien d'argent nous devons injecter dans le système. Il s’agit plutôt de savoir si le journalisme local, comme le disait aussi mon collègue précédemment, a encore de l’importance aux yeux des décideurs et quel effort on est prêt à faire pour le soutenir.

2671 Conséquemment, la question est combien d’argent le système est prêt à investir dans ce qu’il devrait considérer comme essentiel et crucial, c’est‑à‑dire le maintien et l’accès à de l’information indépendante pour l’ensemble des Canadiens et des Canadiennes.

2672 Parce que, étant un gars d’information, ça fait 35 ans, j’ai eu une assez longue carrière, quand même, heureusement ou malheureusement, et je dois vois dire une chose, on peut parler de culture tant qu’on veut, mais dans les faits, quand on vit dans une société libre, la culture peut facilement se détendre, grandir et progresser. Mais quand on vit dans une société où l’information est bâillonnée, n’existe plus, les discours sur la culture vont devenir inutiles.

2673 À tout événement, je peux vous confirmer que nous sommes les spécialistes pour informer dans les déserts médiatiques, et justement, en parlant de désert, il y en a un énorme en ce qui a trait au financement de l’information régionale en radio.

2674 Madame la Présidente, Mesdames et Messieurs les Conseillers, vous avez aujourd’hui l’occasion de corriger ces distorsions en créant un fonds destiné à ceux et celles qui produisent de l’information dans nos différentes radios régionales, à travers le pays d’ailleurs, et de permettre à ces radios de l’ensemble des petites communautés canadiennes d’avoir un peu d’oxygène pour poursuivre leur mission essentielle. Parce qu’en réalité, on va se le dire, à bien des endroits, c’est la seule et dernière voix qui reste. Faisons ce qu’il faut pour sauver cette voix.

2675 Je vous remercie de votre attention et je demeure évidemment disponible pour répondre à vos questions.

2676 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Excellent. Merci beaucoup et merci pour vos exemples détaillés.

2677 Alors, moi je vais commencer avec quelques questions, puis je vais céder la parole à notre vice‑présidente Barin.

2678 Alors, nous avons beaucoup entendu des intervenants parler de l'impact des entreprises en ligne étrangères en ce qui concerne les revenus publicitaires. On a entendu mardi matin de BCE, par exemple, que les entreprises étrangères en ligne continuent d'accumuler une plus grande part des recettes publicitaires et que sans ces revenus, les radiodiffuseurs traditionnels ont de la difficulté à financer les informations locales.

2679 Alors, ma question c'est : Pouvez‑vous nous parler un peu des défis qui touchent particulièrement le marché de la radio francophone?

2680 M. CHAMBERLAND : Alors, j'aime toujours... Ça n'a peut‑être pas l'air dans mon discours, mais j'aime nuancer mes propos, quand même.

2681 Alors, je vais vous dire, si on commence par nos propres responsabilités avant de regarder ce qui se passe ailleurs, je pense que d'avoir le discours d'être proche de nos communautés, c'est une chose, mais de l'appliquer, c'en est une autre, et ça commence par le lien que nous avons avec nos auditeurs dans le cas de la radio et, je vais dire, nos lecteurs. Parce qu'on a quand même des plateformes d'information qui viennent avec nos stations de radio, et ce lien‑là avec ces gens‑là doit être privilégié avant n'importe quel autre lien.

2682 Et trop souvent, et moi j'ai décrié ça pendant... d'abord dans ma propre entreprise, mais je l'ai dit aussi même en conférence et tout ça. J'ai dit : « Vous devez arrêter de mettre vos nouvelles sur les médias sociaux. » Je comprends pourquoi, là. On comprend tous pourquoi il faut le faire. Mais « Vous devez vous forcer à créer un lien avec vos gens, d'abord. Vous devez vous forcer pour les garder sur vos plateformes pour s'assurer que vous êtes capables... »

2683 Parce que ce lien‑là est intime, et le jour où tu prends ton auditeur et tu l'envoies participer à un concours quelconque sur Facebook, tu viens de prendre ton auditeur et tu viens de l'envoyer sur une plateforme concurrente, sur laquelle, d'ailleurs, il peut rester très longtemps.

2684 Donc, ton rôle c'est de le garder sur ta plateforme, dans ton environnement, d'abord. Et ça, je pense qu'il y a une responsabilité, là, qui doit être partagée. Oui, les grands groupes, on n'aime pas ça, mais, en contrepartie, il y a une responsabilité de développer ce lien‑là.

2685 Et la preuve c'est que j'entendais depuis que Meta a décidé de bouder, évidemment, de faire la transmission d'informations, là, tout le monde dit : « Oui, venez nous voir directement sur notre site, bien sûr », t'sais, comme si on vient de se réveiller, là.

2686 Non, mais ça aurait dû être ça toujours, et si ça peut servir de réveil pour dire aux gens : Tout n'est pas noir, tout n'est pas blanc. Parce que moi je peux dire que pour notre entreprise, l'impact est quand même minime, parce que c'est ce que nous avons... on a toujours entretenu ce lien‑là d'intimité avec nos communautés.

2687 Maintenant qu'on s'est dits ça, alors, il y a une responsabilité, je pense, de la part des radiodiffuseurs, et c'est leur travail de s'assurer qu'ils sont en lien et pas juste de tout centraliser, tout faire... et finalement, bien, ouin, t'sais, on fait des concours, puis on donne 100 piastres les fins de semaine, puis youpidou, t'sais. Oui, c'est correct, tu peux faire ça, mais t'es pas en lien avec ton monde, t'es pas en lien avec tes gens. Tu les prends, tu les envoies sur une plateforme concurrente que tu démonises, par ailleurs.

2688 Et c'est encore le cas. Malgré tout, il y a encore des radiodiffuseurs qui continues de faire des concours sur Facebook. C'est‑tu réaliste, quand même? Il faut le faire. Donc, personne n'a rien compris. Donc, gardez le lien avec vos gens.

2689 Cela dit, moi je pense que les grands groupes ont une responsabilité fondamentale. Évidemment, c'est au gouvernement canadien de gérer ça. C'est un bras de fer incroyable qui va se passer. On a tous hâte de voir comment ça va finir. Mais moi, je pense que le gouvernement a la responsabilité de tout faire ce qu'il peut, à tout le moins, pour qu'une partie de ces argents‑là puisse revenir chez les radiodiffuseurs.

2690 Et, Madame la Présidente, je prends soin aussi de mentionner un point important.

2691 C'est que quand je parlais tantôt du programme pour la presse écrite qui est soutenu par Revenu Canada, ce qu'on détermine comme média est très ciblé très souvent aux grands médias écrits des grands centres urbains.

2692 Et j'ai donné l'exemple de La Tuque tantôt pour vraiment prendre conscience que les nouvelles pour les Latuquois que nous parlons, et nous ne centralisons aucune nouvelle. On n'a aucune nouvelle dans nos infolettres, dans ce qu'on fait, mis à part, évidemment, par exemple, les nouvelles régionales ou nationales qui méritent un traitement. Mais autrement, toutes les nouvelles sont locales, parce que c'est important pour les gens.

2693 Donc, je pense qu'il y a une méconnaissance et une incompréhension de l'importance médiatique que jouent les petites radios dans les petites communautés. Alors, si on ne peut pas avoir de reconnaissance journalistique, les radios n'auront jamais un sou d'une éventuelle entente avec les grands groupes. C'est ça la réalité.

2694 Même si on réglait le problème avec les grands groupes comme Meta, qu'est‑ce que ça change pour les radiodiffuseurs? Rien. Puisque, de toute façon, on n'aura pas droit à ces argents‑là, puisque, de toute façon, on n'est pas reconnus comme médias officiels, alors que, pourtant, à tous les jours, quotidiennement, on envoie une infolettre d'informations avec quatre, cinq, six informations locales par jour, par région, par station. Mais pourtant, on n'est pas reconnus.

2695 Bien sûr qu'on n'est pas reconnus. On n'est pas à Toronto, on n'est pas à Montréal, on n'est pas à Québec, on n'est pas à Calgary. On est dans des toutes petites régions comme La Tuque, comme Sept‑Îles, comme le Saguenay‑Lac‑Saint‑Jean, des toutes petites stations. Donc, je pense qu'il y un enjeu, là, de reconnaissance qui est fondamentale.

2696 Et donc, Madame la Présidente, pour terminer ma longue réponse, c'est qu'on n'aura pas accès à ces sous‑là, peu importe la résultante à la fin de la journée.

2697 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Merci pour votre réponse. Alors, j'ai juste une autre question, puis je vais céder la parole.

2698 On a beaucoup entendu le mot « équité », « équitable », un cadre réglementaire équitable, et vous l'avez déjà mentionné, et pas nécessairement égal mais équitable, et vous l'avez déjà entendu, on a beaucoup d'intérêts opposés.

2699 Alors, comment est‑ce que le Conseil peut s'assurer qu'on a un cadre réglementaire équitable avec ces points de vue qui sont si opposés?

2700 M. CHAMBERLAND : Oui. Je pense que c'est... Évidemment, c'est tout un défi pour le Conseil de ramener les intérêts de tout le monde. Et là, on n'a pas discuté de la musique autochtone, des quotas de musique, et cætera. Donc, on en aurait pour encore plusieurs semaines.

2701 Mais c'est clair pour moi que les radiodiffuseurs font beaucoup. Évidemment, je suis dans le système depuis longtemps et je comprends très bien les impératifs, par exemple, pour les radios communautaires, les impératifs pour la presse écrite, idem pour la télévision.

2702 Mais pour moi, par exemple, il y aurait un moyen rapide, et c'est pour ça que j'insiste sur l'information. Parce que, pour moi, passer par l'information locale est une bonne façon et une façon, moi je pense, même cruciale de supporter la radiodiffusion locale, tout en ne créant pas d'autres structures, d'autres choses, mais vraiment de se concentrer sur le vide qu'il y a pour les radios régionales au Canada. C'est vrai pour l'Association des radios régionales francophones, mais c'est vrai pour l'ensemble des diffuseurs régionaux canadiens.

2703 Donc, je pense qu'il y aura ensuite après... par la suite, il pourrait y avoir une réflexion aussi pour est‑ce que vous devez agrandir cette aide‑là pour l'ensemble des radiodiffuseurs. Mais moi, je pense que l'aide aux radiodiffuseurs régionaux... puis vous pouvez l'encadrer. Si vous décidez, vous pouvez l'encadrer. Et comme je disais, je ne suis pas ici pour demander une réduction des heures de nouvelles. Moi, ce que je dis c'est, à la limite, encadrons‑le. Exigeons même un minimum dans certaines régions ou dans les régions pour avoir accès aux subventions ou à l'aide gouvernementale. Pourquoi pas?

2704 Vous vous assurez donc... C'est en ligne avec le discours. Vous vous assurez que l'information est faite. Vous vous assurez de l'information dans les régions précises, dans les déserts médiatiques. Vous vous assurez qu'il y en a. Vous dites : Parfait. Je vais te donner la carotte, mais tu vas courir un petit peu pour être sûr que tu vas le faire. Donc, on ne trichera pas. On va s'assurer d'engager des journalistes. On va s'assurer que des journalistes sont présents sur place, comme c'est le cas pour à peu près toutes les stations de notre association.

2705 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Merci beaucoup.

2706 J'aimerais donner l'occasion à la vice‑présidente de demander une question. Merci.

2707 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Merci beaucoup.

2708 D'abord, merci, Monsieur Chamberland, pour la passion que vous apportez à ce sujet. On vous a bien entendu du besoin criant pour les nouvelles et pour la radio régionale.

2709 Vous avez commencé à aborder le sujet des communautés autochtones. Alors, je vais poursuivre avec quelques questions.

2710 Dans votre intervention, vous précisez que la plupart de vos stations diffusent dans les régions et cohabitent avec les peuples autochtones. Avez‑vous créé des partenariats avec des groupes autochtones, et, si oui, pouvez‑vous nous en parler?

2711 M. CHAMBERLAND : Oui. Pour donner un exemple, puis là, je vais prendre l'exemple d'Arsenal Media précisément. Dans ce cas‑ci, on est déjà, par exemple, à Sept‑Îles. Donc, évidemment, il y a des anecdotes même que je pourrais raconter.

2712 Mais essentiellement, oui, on a, par exemple, une journée de partenariat qui se fait. Donc, c'est un déjeuner commun où on anime ensemble, à moitié français et à moitié dans la langue autochtone de l'endroit, puis on fait ça à toutes les années, de façon annuelle.

2713 Donc, c'est un succès, parce que, évidemment... C'est toujours drôle un peu d'animer en français, puis ensuite, t'entends dans une langue que tu comprends plus ou moins, mais, évidemment, l'échange se fait quand même assez bien.

2714 Je dirais aussi que, dans notre cas, on est en lien, comme je disais tantôt, avec les Attikameks à La Tuque, et aussi, par exemple, en Abitibi, où on est aussi très près de plusieurs communautés autochtones.

2715 Donc, dans notre cas ‑‑ et là, je ne veux pas en faire un cas d'espèce. Mais dans notre cas, on joue de la musique autochtone. On en a fait, là... On a pris note de ce qui avait été suggéré, et, dans notre cas, on le fait.

2716 Et là, moi, vraiment, le point là‑dessus le plus important c'est que je pense vraiment qu'on devrait encourager fortement, comme ça déjà été fait, de, par exemple, jouer de la musique autochtone, de se rapprocher. Faire des partenariats, c'est bien. Jouer leur musique, c'est encore mieux.

2717 Mais ça devrait se faire selon les endroits précis géographiques des endroits où tu es. Si, honnêtement, t'es dans un bled à 10 kilomètres de Montréal, où, sincèrement, il n'y a pas un autochtone autour et tout ça, moi, je pense que, avec l'ensemble des quotas, on pourrait attendre un petit peu avant d'en jouer, personnellement.

2718 Mais pour nous qui sommes, par exemple, à Sept‑Îles, donc sur la Côte‑Nord, qui sommes en Abitibi, qui sommes à La Tuque, en fait, on est dans plein de régions éloignées où on est très près de nos communautés autochtones, moi je pense qu'il y a une responsabilité qui se fait dans la mesure, évidemment, où ça été discuté, où ça été encouragé, où on demande aussi de suggérer, d'encourager et de faire jouer la musique autochtone, moi, j'en suis.

2719 Mais moi, je pense que ça devrait être géographique d'abord, et on devrait laisser quand même le soin aux radiodiffuseurs de choisir ce qu'il en est. Et moi, je... En fait, là, je comprends que ce n'est pas imposé, c'est parfois un peu moins efficace, mais vous aurez quand même le loisir, avec les rapports qui seront remplis, de voir qu'est‑ce qui en est un peu à travers le pays, et vous pourrez réagir à partir de là.

2720 Mais je donne l'exemple. Dans notre cas, nous l'avons fait systématiquement dès le départ. Tout de suite après le mois de décembre 2022, on a décidé ‑‑ dès le mois de janvier ou février ‑‑ de mettre un thème à tous les soirs. Puis là, on fait jouer de la musique autochtone.

2721 Mais je ne veux pas en faire un cas... Je ne dis pas que ça devrait être un principe pour tous.

2722 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Non, mais merci beaucoup. Merci d'avoir élaboré. Ça le rend plus concret.

2723 Alors, en plus de votre proposition sur la création d'un fonds pour soutenir les nouvelles locales, est‑ce que vous pensez qu'une partie des contributions de base devrait être allouée à des fonds qui ont des enveloppes pour les artistes autochtones?

2724 M. CHAMBERLAND : Ça dépend si c'est en ajoutant ou en lieu et place, parce que, au fond, si on dit que par rapport aux contributions de base, il y a de l'argent qui va aux artistes autochtones, pour moi, ça devient une orientation générale que le CRTC, et même ultimement le ministre de la Culture ou peu importe, veut mettre... disons enligner les planètes pour le développement de cette cause‑là.

2725 Si on parle d'ajouter des sous, je vous dirais, là, je viens de vous parler que la problématique c'est qu'on en manque cruellement pour faire de l'information. Donc, c'est sûr que si vous me dites : « Je n'ai pas d'argent pour faire de l'information, mais il faudrait que j'ajoute encore des sous », un petit peu moins chaud à la base. Il faudrait qu'on en discute, en tout cas.

2726 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Parfait. Alors, ça fait le tour de mes questions. Merci beaucoup, M. Chamberland.

2727 M. CHAMBERLAND : Merci.

2728 VICE‑PRÉSIDENTE BARIN : Je vais passer la parole à la présidente.

2729 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Excellent. Merci beaucoup.

2730 Alors, comme d'habitude, on vous offre le dernier mot. Merci.

2731 M. CHAMBERLAND : Donc, je vous remercie beaucoup pour votre écoute et vos sourires quand même complices, là. C'est toujours un peu apprécié.

2732 La seule chose que je vais ajouter en terminant c'est que j'ai insisté beaucoup sur l'information, puis je l'ai dit quand même dans mon texte à deux reprises. Ce n'est pas au détriment de la musique, parce que bien sûr qu'on vit de la musique, bien sûr que nos partenaires musicaux à qui on paie des ayants droits quand même à tous les mois sont importants dans l'équation, en fait, sont nécessaires. Ce que je veux dire c'est que je comprends très, très bien aussi les demandes de chacune de ces organisations‑là, mais j'ai mis de côté la musique spécifiquement pour mettre en valeur le fait que dans nos radios partout au Canada, l'information est importante à travers le pays.

2733 Quand on écoute une station de radio random, vous avez des commentaires, de l'information, il y a quelque chose qui se passe dans la communauté. Ce n'est pas que de la musique, et j'ai insisté sur ce point‑là, parce que, pour moi, je pense que c'est vraiment une bonne façon pour le CRTC, disons, de façon indirecte, de venir aider et de régler un problème.

2734 Je voulais surtout insister sur l'importance parce qu'on ne réalise pas à quel point on est en train de vider complètement l'arrière‑pays pour se contenter d'un peu de journalisme centralisé, pour finir finalement à laisser la place à tous les grands joueurs internationaux qui vont s'occuper de régler notre compte. Donc, au lieu de se le faire régler, faisons ce qu'il faut pour le régler nous‑mêmes. Voilà!

2735 LA PRÉSIDENTE : Merci beaucoup.

2736 M. CHAMBERLAND : Merci à vous.

2737 LA SECRÉTAIRE : Merci.

2738 Nous prendrons une pause de 10 minutes et nous allons revenir.

2739 We will come back with the Community Radio Fund of Canada and then the panel NCRA and Radio Queen's University, and then we will go for lunch. Thank you.

‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 12:07 p.m.

‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 12:18 p.m.

2740 THE SECRETARY: Welcome back.

2741 We’ll now hear the presentation of Community Radio Fund of Canada. Please introduce yourself and your colleague, and you may begin.

Presentation

2742 MR. FREEDMAN: Thank you so much, and thank you, Commissioner, Madam Chair, Commissioners, staff for all of your support today.

2743 My name is Alex Freedman. I’m the Executive Director of the Community Radio Fund of Canada. We are in a position to support and provide funding for as many as 235 community, Indigenous and campus radio stations across Canada.

2744 I’m joined by my colleague, Mark Maheu, today.

2745 So broadcasting is at an important crossroads right now. The decisions from this hearing will have a monumental impact on the media landscape. Right now, Canadians are the beneficiaries of boundless choices when it comes to media, especially audio via new and emerging technologies. At the same time as we enjoy this bounty, listeners and viewers find themselves with fewer and fewer choices for local news and the reliable sources of information we once took for granted.

2746 We’re losing local sources of news and information at an alarming rate, in fact, particularly in radio.

2747 We’ve seen large scale layoffs with increasing regularity as advertising revenue migrates in the direction of unregulated competitors and digital service providers. This has an immediate impact on all Canadians who are struggling to find sources of local information, local arts that they can trust.

2748 Since 2008, we’ve seen a net reduction of nearly 300 local news outlets, and the trend continues.

2749 At the same time, data also shows that, across Canada, community radio is filling this void and becoming an increasingly vital source of news and information. A recent study as cited by my colleagues from the ARCQ, shows that 79 percent of respondents see community radio as the single most important and reliable source for community news and information.

2750 Elles diffusent des contenus dans plus de 65 langues, dont plus d'une douzaine de langues autochtones. Les radios communautaires, de campus et des autochtones fournissent un contenu francophone essentiel à la fois au Québec et à un réseau de communautés de langue officielle en situation minoritaire. Elles jouissent donc d'une confiance unique de la part de ces communautés.

2751 Additionally, these stations are innovators in the digital spectrum, with many broadcasting line through podcasts and others.

2752 And finally, they’re all not for profit and, as a result, every dollar invested in community, Indigenous and campus broadcasters is immediately reinvested in the communities they serve. It doesn’t go to shareholders, doesn’t go to profit. It goes back to the communities.

2753 Indigenous communities rely heavily on their radio stations for local news and information. There’s no group to advocate for these stations nationally, but these stations are critical. They are key to supporting language and culture and, until now, they have been excluded from Canadian Content Development funding, while only a handful are eligible for the Northern Aboriginal Broadcasting support. The CRFC has recently raised more than a million dollars in private funding to support Indigenous language programming, but more needs to be done. We need to be true partners with Indigenous broadcasters.

2754 The community, Indigenous and campus stations can generate modest revenue from advertising and fundraising, but it’s a challenge. The only consistent funding available right now to community and campus broadcasters has been Canadian Content Development, or CCD dollars. That program was always supposed to be stable and consistent, providing regular support for these stations, but because it’s tied to transactions, it has never been either reliable or consistent. Under the current model, by the way, CCD will diminish and, ultimately, disappear in the coming years, as it is tied to transactions.

2755 In its recently published policy direction, Canadian Heritage supports the commonly held position that support must go to ensuring meaningful participation of Indigenous persons, equity‑seeking groups, principles of diversity and inclusion, supporting Canadian programming, and specifically supporting community broadcasters, all of which make an exceptional contribution to the objectives of the new Act that we’re discussing. Community, Indigenous and campus stations play a role in every aspect of the objectives of the new legislation.

2756 In our submission, the CRFC proposes that the Commission direct funding to supporting the Community Radio Initiative, not a new fund, but a fund that would exist within the Community Radio Fund of Canada but have more eligibility to do greater things. This would be a defined funding program which would materially support the objectives of the broadcasting policy.

2757 The Community Radio Initiative proposes to provide support funding to all community, Indigenous and campus licensed radio stations in good standing with the CRTC. The criteria for funding is open for discussion, but we recommend that it be directed at labour and technology related to news and information services as well as supporting the arts. It proposes an average of $90,000 in support per qualifying radio station annually.

2758 By directly supporting these stations financially, you will be giving them the much‑needed resources to continue filling the larger and larger gaps created by commercial radio. We have great confidence that direct financial support will work. We know it will work. If you look at Australia, there’s a proven case study there and, by the way, our colleagues in Quebec.

2759 Along with helping stations gather and report more local news and information, the CRI would also provide funding to support special projects, continuing the work of radio through CCD, and audience measurement tools, which are currently financially prohibitive. That data would be combined with a sector wide survey which would allow for a material improvement in support of decision‑making, funding requests and appropriate advertising rates due to the access to quantifiable data.

2760 When social media controls who sees what news and disinformation and misinformation go unchecked, communities are increasingly in need of reliable, trustworthy, current and local news and information, much more than ever.

2761 The CRFC has demonstrated our capacity to support all of the community, Indigenous and campus radio stations. Together we can fix this, and we look forward to working with the CRTC to chart a new path forward for all Canadians.

2762 And I’m happy to answer your questions either in French or in English.

2763 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much for your presentation and thank you for bringing forward specific proposals.

2764 I will turn things over to Commissioner Levy. Thank you.

2765 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Good afternoon. Thank you for your participation in these proceedings. There are many of us who were attracted to media because of our experience with community and campus broadcasters, so you certainly play an important part in attracting more people to the industry, so thank you for that.

2766 In your intervention, you indicated that the Community Radio Fund of Canada has not received consistent funding from the federal government, and I wonder if you could expand on that a bit.

2767 MR. FREEDMAN: So we receive from the federal government support for the local journalism initiative, which, as many of us know, is set to expire in the next little while. Other than that, we don’t get funding from the federal government. We get funding from commercial broadcasters through CCD.

2768 As I say, I’m very happy to report that we’ve been able in this year to receive funding from three separate private funding sources to be able to support the Indigenous language work that we’ve committed to in our strategic plan. But other than that, we don’t get support from the federal government.

2769 COMMISSIONER LEVY: How do you currently determine how much funding gets allocated between the English and the French language community radio sectors?

2770 MR. FREEDMAN: Well, we try to ensure that there’s an appropriate balance. I think that, you know, we have regular reporting back to the CRTC. We make sure that official language minority stations, by and large, almost always receive funding. And we make sure that we provide equal funding to the various associations.

2771 So there are three associations, NCRA, ARCC and ARCQ. Each of them receive the same amount of funding for their support for their stations.

2772 And we keep language charts of how that funding is distributed, and I would say that in almost every year, given the aggregate number of stations, francophone stations, receive more than the anglophone stations do.

2773 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Can you give us proportions?

2774 MR. FREEDMAN: Well, I think that the ‑‑ without having it at hand, but I do believe that the funding proportion is about 45 percent of the funding goes to francophone stations with 55 percent going to anglophone stations and mixed in there at this point is Indigenous stations, but again, a reminder that we’re not able to give CCD dollars to Indigenous stations as it currently exists, so they benefit from the local journalism initiative.

2775 COMMISSIONER LEVY: The funding allocation in support of the official language minority communities, I mean, I appreciate there’s English, there’s French, but there’s also the French outside Quebec, et cetera. So are they part of that 45 percent?

2776 MR. FREEDMAN: Absolutely they are. Yes.

2777 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Can you tell me how the Community Radio Initiative that you’ve proposed would complement the funding that’s currently offered through your radio meters/radio mètre program?

2778 MR. FREEDMAN: The Community Radio Initiative ‑‑ the challenge right now with radio meters is that because of the constraints set out by CCD funding, it’s an annual project, so it is ‑‑ they have to reapply every year. There are set limits on how much we give out because we’re trying to make sure that we hedge for the future, the future decline of that funding. And they are focused specifically on content production, which we do feel is critical.

2779 The CRI, though, is different in the sense that it would give them the operational support, the ability to pay for salaries, for example. Now, right now, we can give $50,000 through the local journalism initiative to a journalist in a station where the station manager may be making 25, 30 thousand dollars. We have a real challenge with human resources and, of course, in radio, we’re all about people. Fundamentally, we’re all about people.

2780 So this would allow us to do that.

2781 Recently, it was mandated that our stations have to improve their Emergency Broadcast capacity. That was a $50,000 cost borne directly by the radio stations. Now, that’s money that is not going to programming.

2782 They do raise money through special projects, through fundraisers, through a variety of other means. That should go to programming.

2783 We feel that it’s critically important that these stations have a leg up when it comes to the bare bones cost, the cost of renting a broadcast tower, the cost of renting a radio station. We want to give them that support.

2784 This $90,000 will not pay for everything, but it’ll give them a leg up.

2785 COMMISSIONER LEVY: There’s been a lot of talk about a lot of these stations requiring upgrades to equipment and so forth. Would some of that money go to that sort of thing as well?

2786 MR. FREEDMAN: Absolutely. And as we know, the rate of technological expansion is increasing exponentially, and it is very difficult for stations to keep up with that. They know the future of broadcasting for community radio is in two places. We must remain on the AM/FM towers because so many of our constituents or listeners don’t have access to broadband, particularly within Indigenous communities where ISED’s latest figures have 24 percent penetration for broadband connectivity amongst Indigenous communities.

2787 We need to stay on the towers.

2788 We also recognize, though, that, at the same time, livestreaming, podcasting, other digital sources are other media that we need to be able to provide content on. To do that, we need an immense amount of technology and, as COVID showed us, we also need technology to be able to broadcast remotely when the time comes.

2789 And so the technology piece is very challenging and we would like to see that included in the CRI.

2790 COMMISSIONER LEVY: There’s special attention, rightly so, to ensure that Indigenous broadcasters get support. You’ve supported a portion of contributions being dedicated to a funding project created by and for Indigenous broadcasters. You’ve said that you would partner with this group.

2791 Would you like to expand on the recommendation and have you already consulted with Indigenous broadcasters on this and what your role would be if this new fund is to be set up and managed by Indigenous peoples?

2792 MR. FREEDMAN: So we have a number of elements of what we’re doing right now. So the Living Languages Project, which is one where we create Indigenous language programming and supply that to the whole network of community, campus and Indigenous stations is up and running and funded. We have an Amplifying Voices program that was created to provide funding for community‑based language programming.

2793 In the process of setting up those programs, we consulted with more than 60 broadcasters, language experts, Elders, community members in terms of the design of that project. We have an Indigenous Advisory Board that continues to give us advice on how to do this in a good way.

2794 In my previous career, I was Chief of Staff to the Assembly of First Nations National Chief Perry Belgard, so I’ve been involved in many elements of Indigenous conversations.

2795 We have created partnerships and we have allies within the Indigenous community. Our Vice‑Chair of our Board is the CEO of the First Nations Six Nations on the Grand, and we have Indigenous people working on these projects and having full creative control on these projects. So we have done an extensive amount of consultation.

2796 As I mentioned in my opening statement, there is no national organization to advocate for these stations, and that’s one of the reasons why CCD was designed without support for Indigenous broadcasters, so the CRI brings in community, campus and Indigenous licensed stations to ensure that they are all eligible for that sort of funding.

2797 I’ll remind you that in the CRTC’s early work around the Indigenous broadcasting review that there was a report generated that was called the “What We Heard Report”, and in that report it was very clear, training and staffing, core costs are critical to the existence of these radio stations.

2798 I can tell you there’s a radio station called CKRZ Six Nations on the Grand as well where the station manager and the financial manager had to take no salaries for six months because there isn’t money for them. They’re not eligible for the NAB and we can’t give them money for radio meters.

2799 What we’ve proposed in the CRI is a stopgap to ensure that all community element radio broadcasters are able to access some meaningful funding to continue to work for their communities.

2800 COMMISSIONER LEVY: So it’s a stopgap to their own fundraising or to some larger fund, or...?

2801 MR. FREEDMAN: They will continue to do their own fundraising and that money should go towards Canadian content and supporting what their community expects of them. What we’re trying to do is give them a leg up on the operational side, make sure that they have the ability to keep their stations running so that any money invested by the community is again reinvested in the content that they expect from these stations.

2802 COMMISSIONER LEVY: And I just want to clarify, you’re asking for part of that initial base contribution that might come through to go to this initiative.

2803 MR. FREEDMAN: Yes.

2804 COMMISSIONER LEVY: But you’re ‑‑ are you also supportive of most of the rest of that money going to the existing institutions like FACTOR and Musicaction, et cetera?

2805 MR. FREEDMAN: Absolutely. We need to look at the broadcasting environment as an environment, as not individual expenditures.

2806 FACTOR and Musicaction do wonderful work. I’d like to quote the gentleman from earlier, “we need music made and music played”. I couldn’t agree with him more.

2807 They need to make the music, but they need somewhere to play the music. Our radio stations provide access for new and emerging artists at all levels. We regularly exceed Canadian content regulations as set out by our licences because it’s what our communities want.

2808 So yes, I support funding continuing to go to the existing funds set up because they have an important role to play. What I am also saying, however, is that traditionally we have received less. And we need to make sure that not only are we funding the artists, but we’re funding the vehicle through which they will get their first spins or where they will begin to be heard.

2809 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you.

2810 MR. FREEDMAN: Thank you.

2811 THE CHAIRPERSON: I understand why you quoted music to be made, music to be played, but I also would like to hear ‑‑

2812 MR. FREEDMAN: Great, isn't it?

2813 THE CHAIRPERSON:  ‑‑ radio. We’re all about people.

‑‑‑ Laughter

2814 THE CHAIRPERSON: I will turn things over to Commissioner Naidoo. Thank you.

2815 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Hi, there.

2816 MR. FREEDMAN: Hi.

2817 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thanks being here today.

2818 In your opening remarks, you mentioned that the Community Radio initiative would be focused on expenditures related to news. Other intervenors ‑‑ you may have been watching over the past week ‑‑ have suggested the creation of a fund to support local news specifically, indicating that that fund could be open to radio stations offering news content as well. What are your thoughts on that proposal?

2819 MR. FREEDMAN: Generally, I think we are doing a pretty good job already within the community ‑‑ Radio Fund ‑‑ of supporting journalism on radio. And I think that on a global level, there is a challenge when we start creating new funds and new funds and new funds and not looking to the expertise that exists within the existing funds. As I say, we have a program through the Local Journalism Initiative that supports as many as 50 stations this year alone. We have a website that has hundreds of thousands of hits on that information, and this information, because it’s Creative Commons, is shared broadly.

2820 We have the expertise within the Community Radio Fund of Canada to do that level of ministration. I don’t know that we as a group want to be creating new funds regularly, with increased administrative overheads and everything else that goes with that. At the same time though, I am absolutely confident in the statement that we need more local news and information. And if the Commission chooses to create a new fund in support of local news and information, the CRFC will be there to work together with them.

2821 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: When it comes to community and campus radio stations, a lot of them are staffed by volunteers; right? And so, I’m wondering how you meet the training needs to provide strong local journalism when a lot of the people who are staffing those roles are not being paid for them.

2822 MR. FREEDMAN: So, we ‑‑ it's a wonderful observation. We at the Community Radio Fund actually provide for national editors for all stations that receive funding. These are editors who have extensive experience in journalism. They do not control the editorial content of those stations, but they provide feedback for the stations who do not have the expertise. I think this is a great example of how innovative we need to be for our own sector.

2823 Funding that goes to periodicals, for example ‑‑ there is editorial structure built into any newspaper that exists out there. They don’t have the same need for that. But we do need to be able to provide that for our stations. So, we also need to be able to provide training, and training costs money. And at the end of the day, we need to be able to afford that. We could ‑‑ and we are in early conversations with groups like Google around the Google News Labs, et cetera, about your journalism training. It’s early at this point, and of course, a lot of it is on hold pending other decisions in the political landscape.

2824 But training is critical. We need good broadcasters, writ large, but we need great journalists because we need our communities to have faith in those journalists. And so, what we are doing is, we are trying to ensure that that knowledge and expertise exists, and I will refer you to some of what you say in the ARCQ’s submission in terms of the number of alumni. The same goes for Anglophone community radio stations.

2825 I can name any number of the top national anchors and national reporters that are out there, and 90 percent of them have come through community radio. And we are the training ground for the future of Canadian broadcasting ‑‑ and the future of Canadian journalism, which is why we need the support to make sure that these stations not only survive, but thrive.

2826 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you for that answer. You mentioned in that answer ‑‑ I just want to follow up ‑‑ you mentioned this Google initiative. I’m wondering ‑‑

2827 MR. FREEDMAN: Yeah.

2828 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO:  ‑‑ if you can ‑‑ without giving away anything that you can’t say ‑‑ if you can expand ‑‑

2829 MR. FREEDMAN: Well, no, I can ‑‑

2830 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO:  ‑‑ a bit on that?

2831 MR. FREEDMAN: I can tell you because are not in ‑‑ we don’t have anything written out with them, but they are offering to provide us, through their Google Media Labs, access to journalism, journalism training. They tell us it is independent of C‑18. There are many bridges to cross before we get there.

2832 We are always looking for the capacity to find new training sources for our journalists. Ideally, what we would do is we would pay the trainers so that we can bring in the appropriate level of training. I spent 15 years myself at the CBC; I have a long Rolodex of people who would come in and do this. The challenge is, right now, we don’t have the funding to be able to bring that sort of level of training in.

2833 One my dreams ‑‑ and I will just go on a bit of a tangent here ‑‑ is that, along with the work we do paying for journalists’ salaries, is that we would be able to create a code of conduct for our sector in collaboration with our partners at the associations. And we would be able to create a training school for future broadcasters, because we are seeing Mohawk College shut down their training schools. We are seeing a number of colleges across the country shutting down their broadcast training schools. We need to keep training these people. They can’t just walk in and turn on a microphone.

2834 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much.

2835 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

2836 We will go to Vice‑Chair Scott.

2837 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you. So, one of the complexities with this hearing is that Canadians engage with content in so many different ways, and you have spoken very well about those who so engage through community radio. For those Canadians for whom that might be a bit of a different concept ‑‑ particularly younger Canadians, particularly urban Canadians, who are thinking about the future of broadcasting and are thinking about the internet and thinking, ‘Shouldn’t we push out broadband to those communities rather than focus on radio?’ ‑‑ it’s a little bit of a devil’s advocate question, but where does community radio fit in when we talk about the future of broadcasting compared to some ‑‑ and especially, because you’ve highlighted some of the technological advancements that you are market; you are online, you are partnering, you’re doing all these creative things ‑‑ to people who aren’t kind of radio users, can you speak to them about radio?

2838 MR. FREEDMAN: Absolutely. I think, first of all, we need to think about all of these different avenues as separate media in terms of being able to transmit what we’re best at ‑‑ telling Canadian stories. They are each different platforms, and they reach different ears. But what’s core about radio is that we tell stories every single day. So, I’m going to tell you a story.

2839 When I was station manager at CJLO ‑‑ Concordia Radio ‑‑ this is many years ago, more than 20 ‑‑ we started a new radio station. So there were two: one at Concordia ‑‑ one at Loyola and one at Sir George Williams, in Montreal. As you all know, there are no frequencies left in Montreal. So, we were on a five‑watt transmitter, but broadcast over the internet, and it was one of the first radio stations to do that whole hog. Today, CJLO broadcasts into the United States and all across Southern Quebec.

2840 We’ve always been the innovators, because we’ve always been forced to look for new sources of how to get our sound out, how to get our stories to the Canadians who want them.

2841 If you look at the Indigenous communities, the role of the internet broadcast in getting the words from their community to the diaspora of people who have moved to other cities to try and make their fortunes. It’s critically important.

2842 What I am saying today ‑‑ and I’ll say this time and again ‑‑ it’s not about one or the other. It’s about leveraging everything. If you look at the amount of Canadians that still get their audio content from AM and FM, that’s 40 percent. The next closest is YouTube; it’s somewhere around 23 percent. We’re not off that, but we need to look at the entire system as how we disseminate these stories. So, if we don’t have the ability to stay on top of the technological advancements, that’s a major challenge for what we do.

2843 We will find ways to get there. What we are saying today is, this fund can help the objectives of this Broadcasting Act by ensuring that all of these stations have access to basic funding levels, to be able to make that shift, to be able to incorporate those different platforms into what we are doing ‑‑ including streaming, including podcasting, and including whatever device we are going to plug into our head next.

2844 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

2845 MR. FREEDMAN: Pleasure.

2846 THE CHAIRPERSON: I figured I should jump in quickly because I think our Vice‑Chair of Telecomm would probably like to get into a technical discussion about transmitters.

‑‑‑ Laughter

2847 THE CHAIRPERSON: And so, maybe at this point we could just turn things back over to you to share any concluding remarks with us. Thank you.

2848 MR. FREEDMAN: As I said a moment ago, we have to look at the broadcasting environment in which we live. We have done a great job of supporting the CBC over the years. We do a good job of supporting some commercial broadcasters.

2849 The role that community radio plays in all of these communities is so important, and someone alluded to this earlier, but until you get out and live in some of these more remote communities, you just don’t understand how important ‑‑ how vitally important this information is. We’re the first ones who play the artists. We’re at the core of the community centres. We’ve got stations who have supported the building and the upgrade of local hockey rinks ‑‑ because they are part of their community.

2850 It was asked earlier, how is it the community has a say? Every one of these stations’ staff members leaves their station and lives amongst the people that they broadcast to. This is a vital part of the Canadian broadcasting system.

2851 I am not here to touch on regulation; I am not here to touch on anything but the fact that we need to find ways to support these stations ‑‑ to make it so that they can then, in turn, support their communities to the best extent possible, and these stations, because they are rooted in those communities, have the most core understanding of how that works.

2852 We need to make sure they have the power to do that.

2853 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.

2854 THE SECRETARY: Thank you.

2855 MR. FREEDMAN: Thank you all.

2856 THE SECRETARY: I will now ask NCRA to come to the presentation table, and we will connect with Radio Queen’s University.

‑‑‑ Pause

2857 THE SECRETARY: We will hear each presentation, which will then be followed by questions by the Commissioners to all participants. We will begin with the presentation of NCRA.

Presentation

2858 MR. ROOKE: Good noon, esteemed Commissioners and attendees. My name is Barry Rooke. I am the Executive Director of the National Campus and Community Radio Association, a collective voice for almost 130 independent, not‑for‑profit radio broadcasters across Canada.

2859 In an era when misinformation is rampant, the role of community radio has never been more critical. We are often at the heart of a community, providing local news, information, independent music, and other local programming where commercial broadcasters and the CBC cannot.

2860 Examples of our impact include CKOA in Glace Bay, Nova Scotia, as a life‑saving source of emergency news during Hurricane Fiona. Met Radio in Toronto provides invaluable programming for Syrian refugees in Syria. In Manitoba, our station CJNU fosters ties between seniors and local community organizations. The CIVL Music Awards in Abbotsford, B.C. celebrate local music talent. CKWE in Kitigan Zibi champions Indigenous language revitalization. And in Prince Edward County, CJPE's hourly newscasts are the sole source of local news in the region.

2861 During the pandemic, our stations lost over 40 percent of their volunteers, and with Meta blocking our stations from sharing any content, attracting new volunteers is more challenging than ever for our members’ 450 or so staff. A student referendum to de‑fund Ottawa’s CHUO, which passed but was not ratified, shows how precarious community media is now. Bay FM, however, which received a time‑limited provincial grant to strengthen operations, is a prime example of a station that, when properly supported, is making a significant difference in its community. They just raised six hundred and fifty thousand dollars for the Corner Brook health community.

2862 All of this ‑‑ and we haven’t touched on the critical part we play in emerging artists, supporting music not heard on traditional radio and the vital work our stations do for multicultural communities where content in their language is often only available through our stations. We are also one of the leading training grounds for new media and broadcasters. The closing of broadcasting and journalism schools around the country means we have a greater impact in developing the next Adrienne Arsenault, Joe Bowen, or Grimes.

2863 Our stations need operational support to continue their essential work sustainably, and focus on producing high‑quality local content, doing recruitment and training without worry if they have to raise enough money to keep the lights on. We also need easier access to accurate data for decision‑making, and enhanced content discoverability for our sector to flourish. Funding can help our sector address these needs.

2864 We urge the CRTC to allocate C‑11 funds to provide core and stable funding for all Indigenous, community, and campus‑licensed radio stations. The Community Radio Fund initiative proposes that 25 million dollars be provided to the sector annually, an average of about 90 thousand dollars for CRTC‑licensed radio stations through C‑11 funds, and a contribution from Canadian Heritage if necessary. This would allow stations to pay living wages, increase local news and programming, and help with technology transformation.

2865 With support, we can modernize our equipment, ensure that broadcasts are not interrupted by power failures and other technical issues, and enhance our digital presence, making us easily accessible. Community radio isn’t just about broadcasting; it’s about preserving local voices and culture. The sector is growing as commercial broadcasters withdraw from financially unsustainable communities, and not‑for‑profit stations often fill that gap.

2866 Our membership has grown from 89 to almost 130 stations since I started here in 2015, and we know another dozen stations or so groups that plan to apply for CRTC licenses to serve their underrepresented communities. We urge you, the esteemed Commissioners, to tune into our stations, hear our stories, and recognize our impact as the third pillar of the Canadian broadcasting system, now enshrined in Section 3(1)(b) of the Broadcasting Act.

2867 In conclusion, every dollar invested in community radio is reinvested in the community, fostering informed and connected societies.

2868 Thank you for your time.

2869 THE SECRETARY: Thank you.

2870 We will now hear the presentation of Radio Queen’s University. Please introduce yourself, and you may begin.

Presentation

2871 MS. JANSEN: Hello, good morning ‑‑ or rather, afternoon. My name is Dinah Jansen, Executive Director, CFRC FM at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario.

2872 We are the second‑oldest radio station in Canada and one of the world’s longest running campus stations globally. Since 1922, our station has continued to create entertaining, innovative and informative musical and spoken word programming, ensuring there is really something for everyone on our airwaves. And we take pride in providing the most diverse mix of music and topical spoken word shows in our region, reaching 29,000 listeners weekly, terrestrially and through our webstream at cfrc.ca.

2873 For ten decades, thousands of student and community volunteers have also produced a wide range of topical programs covering Indigenous culture, 2SLGBTQ+ rights, science and innovation, social justice issues, local news, sports broadcasting, and more. CFRC also promotes arts and artists in our community with a focus on coverage of Canadian, emerging, and Indigenous artists as well as local events, performances, and exhibitions. We also host in person interviews and live musical performances in our studios, and we provide free PSAs to arts groups and community grassroots and not‑for‑profit organizations. Further, we run radio theatre festivals and youth camps, DJ workshops, and more.

2874 And thanks to the Local Journalism Initiative, we’ve also expanded our capacity for local and regional news coverage. We carry now six weekly news programs that keep our listeners informed about news headlines and big stories that matter, in addition to weather, sports, traffic, events and concerts. I will also note that our station is the only radio station in the Kingston area that carries six half‑hour news broadcasts every week in our city.

2875 Our programming also directly supports our local MP Mark Gerretsen’s Employment and Social Development national priority areas relating to supporting local tourism development, cultural communities, and community‑based and not‑for‑profit organizations in Kingston and the Islands.

2876 Overall, CFRC FM provides meaningful and inclusive access to community members to broadcast local news, ideas, creativity, and viewpoints ‑‑ and share these with listeners. We are more than a radio station, we are a community hub. In recent years, more groups and artists than ever before have come to us with media releases and interview requests indicating both the continued relevance and power of community radio to share matters of local import and interest. We are very proud to help grow our community by sharing information and helping its members to make connections, to learn, and to engage.

2877 CFRC FM joins others in our sector in our call for the CRTC to support the Community Radio Fund of Canada’s Community Radio Initiative. Core funding is critical for all campus, community and Indigenous stations to maintain essential operations. Our station is almost solely reliant on optional student fees and fundraising each year amounting to only about $250,000. And it takes us many months every year to undertake outreach to students and donors to secure fees and gifts, and we must do this now without the competitive advantages that shareable Facebook and Instagram posts provide, following META’s removal of news‑carrying stations like ours from its platform in response to Bill C‑18. The work that we do for fundraising and outreach to students to seek for them to opt into their student fees ‑‑ this requires a significant amount of time among myself, as the only full‑time staff member, and two part‑time staff members, and all of our operational tasks are often just pushed right back, to prioritize our really desperate need to campaign for operational funds through these optional student fees and fundraising.

2878 In spite of these major efforts, students and donors have less money to give, and we see smaller returns year‑over‑year in our student fees and funding drives, while costs for our station continue to grow. Our capacity to attract and retain full‑time staff, support our 120 volunteers, train more on‑air talent, and maintain or procure costly equipment, has dramatically weakened. We, like other stations in our sector, have been incredibly challenged with rapidly rising costs and inflation that our revenue streams cannot sustainably meet, and we need your help.

2879 There are currently no options for us to apply for core operational funding. Our staff are overtaxed by workload as we can’t afford to augment our current human resources to fully support program production, volunteer training, and technical operations, or even nurturing revenue‑generating business relationships and fund development.

2880 There is also the issue of staff burnout. I work 35 hours a week, and I am currently in hour 55, and my calendar is full tomorrow as well. I am very tired, but I can’t afford to hire new staff or upgrade my part‑time staff to assist in the work that I do.

2881 Core stable funding is necessary to ensure operational stability, technical repair and renewal, and ultimately, sustainability and growth for our station and all stations in our sector across Canada. CFRC asks you to please support the Community Radio Fund of Canada’s Community Radio Initiative so that 235 licensed campus, community and Indigenous stations countrywide can continue to operate and serve their respective communities.

2882 Thank you so much for your time and your kind consideration.

2883 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. I think you have very clearly articulated the positive impact that you have on communities, so thank you for that.

2884 I will turn things over to our Vice‑Chair for Broadcasting.

2885 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you very much.

2886 Thank you, Ms. Jansen and Mr. Rooke, for being here today, and for your presentations.

2887 I think you add the campus element to what we have been hearing today. So, we’ve heard a lot about community radio, and I just want to maybe ask you ‑‑ maybe, Ms. Jansen, for the record ‑‑ I heard you say that the sources of funding for campus radio are coming from student fees and donations. Are there any other government sources of funding that campus stations have access to?

2888 MS. JANSEN: Other than grants, no. We receive ‑‑ most of our grants are community‑based arts project grants. We benefit from the Local Journalism Initiative, through the Community Radio Fund of Canada as well as their Radiometres Program, and we are able to access funding through Canada Summer Jobs, but that’s it.

2889 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Okay. Thank you, Ms. Jansen.

2890 Mr. Rooke?

2891 MR. ROOKE: I would also add that the Government of Quebec does provide some funding for the community stations, and that’s one of the reasons why their programming is so strong. They don’t provide that funding for campus stations themselves. So, even in a province, there is a separation between those two as well.

2892 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you very much.

2893 So now you did not pronounce yourselves in your submissions as to what an appropriate level of initial base contribution would ‑‑ the percentage of annual revenues that would be potentially imposed on online undertakings, what that number would be.

2894 Have you, in the course of this process, come to some kind of proposal that you could share with us?

2895 MR. ROOKE: Sure. So in some of the earlier submissions made to the CRTC through, I believe it was, hearing 139 and 140, there was the proposal of 10 million. We had recommended that that baseline level be lowered to 2.5, which is double what the current traditional broadcasters would be required to put into that process, but beyond that, where the funds come from and the impact levels we’re just simply asking for, we know what we need as a sector to be sustainable and we’re hoping that we play a part of that system where it goes forward.

2896 So again, I couldn’t speak directly to where all those funds would come from, but we know that 25 million is a very strong starting point that we believe will let the stations move past those capacity issues and really focus on what they do, which is creating local programming.

2897 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you.

2898 And with regards to this $2.5 million threshold that you talked about, would that be a threshold that you would see applying to both foreign and domestic online undertakings?

2899 MR. ROOKE: Again, that would be something that the Commission would be looking at. From our standpoint, we simply looked at what the previous requirements were for broadcasters in Canada and thought that 10 million was maybe a little bit large and we could capture more people that benefit from the process, understanding that they are outside of Canada and our Canadian partners are at the 2.5 ‑‑ or the 1.25 mark.

2900 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you for that.

2901 So I understand that your position is not that any additional funds be flowed through a new fund. You’re actually looking at what your colleagues, if you will, at the CRFC suggested, which is a separate envelope within the Community Radio Fund of Canada.

2902 Do you have any views on the amounts that would be distributed to that envelope within the Community Radio Fund?

2903 MR. ROOKE: Yes. So in part of setting that up, this was a discussion that was across the three associations, discussions with member analysis and so on, and the reason why the 90,000 was set was because it allows the stations based on their local environments to be able to meet those needs.

2904 So as we’ve talked about, sometimes it’s the transmitter is in dire need of repair. That would be close to $100,000 in some cases. In other spots, it’s making sure staffing is topped up or moved to a liveable wage or new content production is done. So it’s always done at the individual level.

2905 When we looked at all the financial numbers that our stations were dealing with, that number of approximately 90,000, again, to be determined how it is spread out at a later date makes the most sense because it does allow for that stability at that local level.

2906 I’ll give you an example. We have approximately 50 of our 130 members operate on less than $50,000 a year, and within that group, some are volunteer only run organizations, so being able to bring an individual staff member in for them, whether it’s full‑time, part‑time or whatnot was going to make an incredible amount of stability in those small groups to really support the communities, whereas a place like CFRC, you can see that larger but not one of the bigger groups are still in need of core funding and dealing with those challenges and staffing costs and technologies and so on.

2907 So it’s ‑‑ the numbers came from within the sector of what we believe is necessary for us to really take the next step from just trying to survive to pushing back and really thriving.

2908 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Ms. Jansen, do you want to ‑‑ go ahead.

2909 MS. JANSEN: If I may piggyback on Barry’s astute comments, just as an example, just in recent weeks for CFRC FM, we’ve learned from Rogers Communications from whom we rent space for our antenna and transmitter equipment on their tower, they are decommissioning this 40‑year‑old tower within the next couple of months, forcing us to move to the new tower, but we also have to replace all of our cabling. This is going to run us about $40,000 because we have to pay for all of this equipment, the steeplejacks to climb the tower to dismount our antenna and then put it back up on another thing.

2910 This is a catastrophic impact on our station. I don’t have the money in my bank account ‑‑ or not my bank ‑‑ the station’s bank account to be able to really just play around with that kind of price tag for some of the equipment we have to have in order to stay on the air.

2911 This has dramatic impact on our budget lines for this year and what we still need to spend money on, it has dramatic impacts on our ability to plan for next year. I don’t know if I’m going to be able to hire one of my staff members next year. I certainly won’t be able to onboard additional staff.

2912 It’s really imperative that we have this kind of funding available to us because we really do need to survive.

2913 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you for that.

2914 So in the course of the process, we’ve had different parties coming to us proposing that any additional monies that come into the system be allocated for different things. So I hear what your position is on the needs around campus and community radio station.

2915 We’ve had also submissions that talked about the importance of funding things like the Broadcast Participation Fund and the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

2916 Do you have any views on what the priorities should be for the Commission in terms of allocating funds to all of these different areas?

2917 MR. ROOKE: As you heard from Alex Freedman from the Community Radio Fund, it is a system. It’s necessary to have these types of supports and opportunities to participate in them.

2918 The Broadcast Participation Fund is incredibly important for organizations to be able to utilize it to do their work.

2919 Looking at the internal structures of those organizations, I can’t really comment on, but I know that there is that need and we have accessed the Broadcast Participation Fund in the past in order to be able to present at places like this or to have funds to be able to do the research to share our information at.

2920 So beyond the statement of we are all part of the system, I don’t think I could provide anything else to it in that sense.

2921 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you.

2922 Ms. Jansen, did you want to add anything?

2923 MS. JANSEN: From the station's perspective ‑‑ or our station’s perspective, I think that we would be very happy to be able to have access to funds in order to be able to participate in precisely those kinds of programs.

2924 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Fair enough. Thank you.

2925 So that’s it for my questions. I’m going to pass it back to the Chair and potentially more questions from my colleagues.

2926 Thank you.

2927 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Vice‑Chair.

2928 I will turn things over to Commissioner Naidoo.

2929 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you. Thank you very much.

2930 Community radio stations are often staffed by long‑time volunteers and supporters of those types of stations. You’ve got a real following, for lack of a better way to describe it.

2931 So it begs the question about ‑‑ I know that you’ve said in your opening statements that you’re expanding, the number of stations are expanding, but it does beg the question about long‑term viability. Are there ‑‑ are you seeing that there’s ‑‑ that when this crop of supporters moves on that there is going to be another crop to replace them of people who are willing to take those positions, who are willing to volunteer and willing to tune in and so on?

2932 And I’m wondering if more work needs to be done, in your view, to capacity build and to develop interest in these stations and whether you think that you’re getting enough funding to do that, if that is an issue.

2933 MR. ROOKE: So yes, we do a lot of training and specifically training the stations to help them train those broadcasters.

2934 As noted, a lot of people start in the sector and make their way through and move into media or other areas, CBC, et cetera. Our list is easily 20 pages long of well‑known people that have come into the sector. We also see the result on the other side where, as people retire or step away, that passion for what they do and the need for sharing information to their community brings them back into it. So we’re often seeing people who have just retired from broadcasting, they can’t get away from it because they love what they do.

2935 The other element that we offered and we’re seeing a lot more with stations is we’re shifting away from being pure radio, right. The station is run by volunteers. The Board of Directors are volunteers. They’re making those decisions.

2936 Stations do much more than simply train and put people on the air. They’re hosting events. They’re down at the local community centres. They’re providing opportunities for people to come into the station to learn not only how to broadcast, but how to run a not for profit or shoot TikTok videos or get headshots for their LinkedIn profile or there’s a green screen room with a band that comes in and does a live show. Those last examples are all found at CFRU, the University of Guelph radio station.

2937 That’s what they do. They’re media hubs beyond that.

2938 So it’s the idea of bringing in and providing the opportunity for voices that don’t normally have a chance, and when those individuals access the stations, they find that they stick around. And we get so many people that are broadcasting for 10, 15, 20 years, right.

2939 I’m not the youngest here. I started when I was 15, right. So I have 20 plus years on the air as an experience and the reason that I stay in what I’m doing is because of that passion and because we’ve been trained and have the opportunity.

2940 So it’s not as though these stations are simply running out of people to be involved. There’s the challenge to reach them right now. There’s the challenge to train them right now in ways that we need to, but there is the interest, and that’s why we’re seeing new stations attempting to get licensed to service the communities that don’t have them.

2941 MS. JANSEN: If I may also add from a campus station perspective, I would like to note that at CFRC we have one volunteer who has been on airwaves for 52 years, several more that are in their above‑40‑year range, and we have volunteers, about 20 of them now, in training who are university students. A couple of them just started last week. So there's a good and very wide range. And we also are enjoying more student interest than I've seen in my six years at the station.

2942 At the beginning of the pandemic, March 2020, when our campus evacuated, we were left with five students on the air. And some of them were recording what they could from their homes, wherever their homes were. We now have close to 40 student‑run programs back on our airwaves again. And we have so many demos coming in on a weekly basis, we've had to expand our broadcast day in order to accommodate the student interest.

2943 And critically, too, a lot of our students actually come on the air because some of them really just want to have some fun, make some friends, learn about new music, and play fun music, and bring their friends in on the air and have a nice time. So it's a really important outlet, certainly, for students as an extra‑curricular activity. However, I will also note from the campus perspective that many learning opportunities are taught at all radio stations, but also just having ‑‑ being able to have a radio program or even a podcast, we also do that too, where we have students who were able to speak about their research interests and areas and topics of interest to them. From a learning perspective and for building careers into their future when we have folks from masters students from public health sciences talking about public health, and we have law students talking about big issues in Canadian law on our airwaves, these are really translatable skills that they are also being able to put onto their CV into the CVs and carry forward into their careers, whatever they may be, even if they're outside of radio. We have had a dramatic increase of interest in from the younger generations.

2944 And I will also note too, even this summer, we launched our first series of radio theatre camps for youth, particularly newcomer youth in our community whose socio‑economic situations may prevent them from enjoying other camp opportunities that cost a lot of money. We provided these free opportunities to kids between ages 12 and 16. Those kids want to come back next year and participate again. We are working hard to also nurture the next generation.

2945 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: All right. Thank you for that, Ms. Jansen.

2946 I wanted to ask you one other question. You had mentioned that Radio Queen's University gets a portion of the student fees to fund your station. And typically, a lot of campus radio stations are doing the same thing. But I have actually toured some campus radio stations in the last few years who say that they're not being seen by some universities as a priority and that they're not receiving student funding anymore. And I just wanted to have you respond as to whether that's a very real concern for campus stations.

2947 MS. JANSEN: Oh, absolutely. We, like other campus stations, have to compete periodically through triennial review and referenda. And we have to do so every couple of years and twice because we have to compete for student fees from the graduate and professional students and also the undergraduate students. And at the same time, if you don't pass your fee, you don't get any money, and then you have to try again.

2948 We have not lost our fee yet, but we did lose our mandatory fee following the student choice initiative in 2019. That has, yeah, we used to be collective in student fees just about $200,000 a year. This year we pulled in 150. That has had dramatic impact on our ability to have staff. We used to have six staff members. Now there are three, one full time, two part time.

2949 The ability for campus stations to rely on students for those fees ‑‑ that's what we have to do. And we continue to earn their fees and do the outreach so they are aware of the opportunities that we have and the value of our radio station.

2950 Yes, we continue to work hard to ensure that we earn those fees. We have to, however, constantly, constantly do these referenda and try to retain these funds. And we're always at risk that we may fail just because that's the political climate, I guess, that we're in.

2951 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you.

2952 MS. JANSEN: And again, with the optional fee, we're still losing money downward every year.

2953 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much for that. I appreciate it.

2954 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Naidoo.

2955 Let's go over to Commissioner Levy.

2956 COMMISSIONER LEVY: I think that my question might best be formed up in an RFI. So I think I will pass at the moment. But I did want to thank both of you for appearing. The work you do is important, and I think that you should sort of go forth and conquer, get those fees. Thanks very much.

2957 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thanks, Commissioner Levy.

2958 So it sounds like you will have Request for Information coming your way. Thank you again for talking about the impact that you have on communities. We can certainly feel the passion.

2959 Like usual, we will turn things back over to you to share a final word. Thank you.

2960 MR. ROOKE: I will start, Dinah, if that's okay.

2961 So two small things. one is that we do support Indigenous radio stations. We acknowledge that we are not an Indigenous organization. When I started, we had one station. We now have 12 or 13 and more are interested. As part of our board of directors and our mandate, we have put forth a proposal to bring together Indigenous radio stations and groups to try to help formulate an Indigenous national radio association. So our first meeting is happening next Friday because we understand that these communities are exactly like community radio stations. They service the people that they work with, and they need to have a voice. So our hope is to help to develop that community coming together. And we would like to be able to see them up here with us as we go along the road.

2962 The last thing I'll leave you with is a bit of a question for yourselves to think about. I haven't really talked about this to my other colleagues or whatnot. We know that you as the CRTC have essentially said broadband access is a human right herein Canada. I'd like to pose the question for you to think about should local news also be included as that right, the ability to get access to news information and community going‑ons at the level. Is that something that the CRTC should be thinking about doing.

2963 So thank you very much for your time today.

2964 MS. JANSEN: And thank you, Barry.

2965 Operational staffing resources for CFRC and every campus community and Indigenous station across Canada is absolutely critical and desperately needed. We need staffing, for example, to help us with our ‑‑ to support the programming to deliver to the 29,000 weekly listeners we have, to support the work that our 120 volunteers engage in, and support the roughly 250 campus and community groups and countless artists that also rely on us as a radio station, as a community broadcaster that's situated at Queen's University to ‑‑ they rely on us to share not only music and entertainment, but critically information about events, initiatives, and services, and certainly local news in our community. We need the core of stable funding. We need to be able to have money to pay staff, attract staff with reasonable salaries and retain them and retain skilled, qualified staff members at that. We need money for making sure that we can keep the lights on, and certainly our transmitter and antennas running as well as all of the other bits and pieces in our studios in good repair. Some of our equipment at CFRC is 35, 40 years old and some of our equipment is a little newer, but we have a lot of old equipment. Harder to get parts when things break. But it's also very expensive to replace. And we just need some core funding to be able to support what we need for our technology, what we need to train people to be on the air, and ensure that we have the appropriate staff complement in order to fulfill our mission and mandate.

2966 Thank you very much for your time.

2967 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Thank you for taking the time to participate and for being with us today.

2968 THE SECRETARY: Thank you very much. We will now take a 45‑minute lunch break, so we will be back at 2:05. Thank you.

‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 1:22 p.m.

‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 2:07 p.m.

2969 THE SECRETARY: Welcome back. We will now hear the presentation of Screen Composers Guild of Canada.

2970 Please introduce yourself and you may begin.

Presentation

2971 MR. ROWLEY: Thank you.

2972 Good afternoon, Chairperson Eatrides, Vice‑Chairs Barin and Scott, and Commissioners Levy and Naidoo.

2973 My name is John Rowley, and I'm here today in my capacity as vice‑president of the Screen Composers Guild of Canada or SCGC. I'm also a working screen composer and music supervisor.

2974 SCGC is the national association certified under the federal Status of the Artist Act to represent professional anglophone composers and music producers for audiovisual media productions in Canada. SCGC has a unique perspective, as the screen composers we represent are the only point‑generating key creators in the Canadian system who work without the protections of a collective bargaining agreement with Canadian producers. This reality informs our position on the questions before the Commission in this public hearing.

2975 While AV productions are made by a large workforce, a musical score is often written, performed, and produced solely by the composer. The composer's work is most often performed in their own studio space, using expensive computers, hardware, software, recording instruments, and musical instruments in which they have invested over many years.

2976 By contrast, other key creators in the Canadian content world perform the majority of their services in workspaces paid for by the producer, utilizing expensive gear also paid for by the producer.

2977 Over my 20‑year career, I've worked as a composer and music supervisor on over 40 productions including Pretty Hard Cases, Mary Kills People, Rookie Blue, and Letterkenny. I have also worked in the music publishing world. Prior to entering the entertainment industry, I studied law and received my call to the Ontario bar in 2001. It is from these experiences that I situate SCGC's remarks today.

2978 First, on the question of applicability, SCGC agrees there should be an objective and quantitative threshold to determine to whom a new contributions framework should apply, including the assessment of initial base contributions on online undertakings which meet this threshold. In the interest of expediency, I will say, as members of ACCORD, SCGC supports its position on the appropriate percentage of initial base contributions which should be directed to existing funding bodies.

2979 We agree that initial base contributions should be equitable, but unlike some intervenors such as MPA‑C, we do not define equitable as flexible, which may be code for self‑directed or self‑determined. We define equitable as transparent and applying equally to each undertaking which meets the threshold.

2980 Second, SCGC agrees generally with intervenors who have recommended that funds derived from the initial base contributions should be allocated among established parameters, with 80 per cent accruing to legacy production funds, and 20 per cent accruing to certified independent production funds. We take no position on further sub‑allocations or earmarks.

2981 With respect to which revenue sources should factor into the calculations of both thresholds and initial base contribution levels, we submit that any music revenues, including royalties, earned in Canada by broadcast and online undertakings should be factored in.

2982 The single largest impediment to Canadian screen composers contributing to and fulfilling the objectives of the Broadcasting Act is the growing practice of media producers and online undertakings imposing demands for ownership of our intellectual property and the associated revenues in the scores we create for film and television productions. Unfortunately, and unjustifiably, assignment of our copyrights and the right to collect future royalties is often a non‑negotiable condition of securing an engagement for Canada's anglophone screen composers. For this reason, SCGC strongly supports IP retention criteria for legacy and independent production funds, including prohibitions against forced assignment of rights from creators to producers.

2983 While the contractual and copyright aspects of IP retention may fall partially outside the scope of this current proceeding, in the context of establishing exemption thresholds and initial base contribution levels, SCGC recommends that where broadcasting and online undertakings have taken ownership of copyright in audiovisual scores, any resulting music revenues generated in Canada should be included in those undertakings' annual financial returns to the Commission alongside other broadcasting revenues. In other words, they should be considered eligible revenues for the purposes of calculating revenue‑based thresholds and contribution levels.

2984 Third, we note that MPA‑Canada and several of its members have recommended that calculations on initial base contributions should include routine business expenses tied to their Canadian operations. SCGC opposes this idea and notes that some online undertakings have gone so far as to position their Canadian office rent as a contribution to the objectives of the Broadcasting Act.

2985 That said, if the Commission determines that non‑content‑related business expenses may be considered in calculations to determine the scope of an online undertaking's initial base contribution, we respectfully submit that those expenses should be subject to the same degree of transparency and public reporting as other forms of tangible benefits.

2986 My final point today relates to the written record of this proceeding, specifically CRTC 2023‑138 and the opportunity this oral hearing phase provides us to correct the record with respect to inaccurate statements made in the reply phase submission of the Canadian Media Producers Association.

2987 The recently finalized Cabinet direction speaks of supporting Canadian ownership of intellectual property, which is one of the common threads connecting the three issues outlined in paragraph 27 of the Notice of Consultation. Nothing has a greater impact on screen composers' ability to make a living than the retention of our copyrights and equitable participation in the revenues that they generate.

2988 In its reply phase submission to this proceeding, CMPA misleadingly suggested that its members do not insist on rights assignments between screen composers and producers. At the same time, CMPA implied that its members must control our musical creations in order to exploit their audiovisual works.

2989 This suggestion is simply untrue. I am living proof of this fact. Over my career, I have composed the score on 18 film and TV productions, and of those I have retained ownership of my copyrights in 14. I should add that those productions have been exploited successfully around the world without impediment.

2990 So while it is true that many producers wish to control the score rights so that they can receive the royalties associated with them, that's entirely different from needing to own and control our rights. CMPA's own position on the need for codes of practice with broadcasters and streaming services demonstrates this.

2991 Incidentally, SCGC supports CMPA's call for codes of practice. We believe codes of practice would also be useful to ensure a fair commissioning environment for Canadian screen composers.

2992 In conclusion, our key takeaway is that rights and royalties are highly relevant to any discussion of thresholds, initial base contributions, IP retention, and creator remuneration.

2993 To summarize, one, where broadcasters and online undertakings take ownership of the copyright in audiovisual scores, the associated music revenues earned in Canada should qualify as broadcasting revenues for the purposes of calculating exemption thresholds and initial base contribution requirements. Second, online undertakings' routine business expenses should not be deductible from revenue‑based models to determine initial base contributions. Third, and CMPA's statements notwithstanding, there is no business or regulatory need for audiovisual producers to take ownership of screen composers' intellectual property, and it is misleading to suggest otherwise.

2994 I look forward to your questions and truly appreciate the opportunity for SCGC to participate in this important proceeding.

2995 Thank you.

2996 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Thank you for your participation, and thank you as well for the presentation and the summary.

2997 I will turn things over to Vice‑Chair Scott.

2998 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Great. And I will thank you as well. I think your background and expertise position you very well to shed some light on a corner of the ecosystem that doesn't necessarily come top of mind to everyone. So very glad to have your perspective here.

2999 I'll start with a really specific question about your very specific proposal. So the proposal you made for in situations where online undertakings have taken ownership of intellectual property, your proposal that any subsequent revenue flowing from that should be contribution‑eligible. And I can understand the principle of why that's important. Can you speak to its importance in absolute value? What's the magnitude of the revenue in question?

3000 MR. ROWLEY: So thank you so much, Vice‑Chair Scott.

3001 As you saw from the presentation earlier this morning, SOCAN has lots of data on this. The data that is most pertinent is its revenues last year, 487 million. Roughly half of that is attributable to audiovisual performances and musical works in audiovisual works, so a quarter of a billion. And we saw that 30 per cent of that we accruing to Canadian creators in traditional media, sadly around five to six per cent only for online streaming services.

3002 But you can see that the numbers are big. And where those rights are flowing, where those royalties are flowing away from the creators into the producers, it's a significant hit. I can reference one show I worked on recently. The total royalties earned to date are $165,000 or so over seven years, and half of that has gone to the producer, half has gone to me. You know, so it was a roughly $10,000 a year bump to my income, $2,500 a quarter because the payments are quarterly. That means a lot to me. I'm not sure it means as much to a producer whose primary business is in making money selling the audiovisual work.

3003 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you for that. The aggregate number is interesting, and the personal number also puts it in a certain light. I appreciate both.

3004 So staying on the topic of IP, where your submission put a particular emphasis, some other intervenors have proposed adding a criteria to the certified independent production funds with respect to ownership of the intellectual property resting with Canadians. Would you support that proposal? And if so, what would that criteria or what could that criteria look like?

3005 MR. ROWLEY: Thank you so much for that question. Yes, SCGC would absolutely support that. We've been engaged with CMPA since 2015 trying to get a conversation regarding collective bargaining going. And to date, all of those attempts have been politely declined.

3006 So we're looking for a solution, because as I say, hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars are being diverted away from who we feel are the rightful recipients of it today from past projects and going forward until there is a solution.

3007 So if there were criteria that said you don't get the point, you don't get the composer point unless the composer, A, retains their copyright or has agreed with CMPA as to appropriate disposition of rights and appropriate rights payments. Failing that, there is no point. And also there are potential remedies through the tax credit system where tax credits may not be given in the event that rights have been sort of wrested away from who we view as the rightful recipient.

3008 And we view that, them as the rightful recipient, because that's what the Copyright Act says.

3009 It's quite clear on who owns those rights. And it's not only in the composition side and the performance royalty side; I should mention it's also in the sound recordings that we create. We're producers of audio works in the same way that AV producers are producers of audiovisual works.

3010 Our members are entrepreneurs. There are no funding sources for our members, like a FACTOR or Musicaction. Our members build their studios on their own dime. They build their skill set, they build their hardware, their recording instruments, microphones in the hope that they'll land a good project down the road and they will get good fees on that project and they will receive decent royalties. So it's troubling to them, as you can imagine, when the back end is they're told no, as a condition of working on this project, we're taking a significant portion of that away from you.

3011 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you.

3012 Given the nature of the relationship between your members and the people who are seeking to acquire those rights, is there any risk that imposing that criteria could further sour the relationship? Or is there any unintended consequence that might actually make it harder for you to negotiate if that card were overplayed?

3013 MR. ROWLEY: Thank you. I have to be honest, I don't foresee a negative consequence. Our current commissioning environment is a Wild West. We did a member survey recently surveying our membership across the country. The responses we got back were that 70 per cent of our members have had to give up ownership of their rights; 44 per cent have been asked to work for free in many of those cases and still give up their rights. So it's a Wild West.

3014 Nine out of the 10 points‑earning ‑‑ current points‑earning key creators are engaged under collective agreements. Seems to me that bringing some clarity around these issues would be useful for all parties.

3015 And I have to say, as a personal anecdote, I'm married to a producer. I love our Canadian producers. I'm, you know, one of the biggest proponents of our whole CanCon environment. You know, I'm proud of what we do, and I'm proud; I want it to continue. I want everybody to benefit.

3016 And it's for this reason, you know, we support the need for Canadian producers to own the content that they produce and to own the intellectual property on a going‑forward basis when new contributions come into the system. That's why we think the money should be directed to existing funds, so that that IP retention is baked into the system.

3017 But it seems unfair when nine out of the 10 points‑earners ‑‑ not all of them ‑‑ not all of those positions generate copyright. But those who do, if you look at their collective agreements, there are healthy rights payments that have been negotiated collectively for directors, for writers. And if you look at the writers' agreement, it's very explicit that the writer retains their copyright in the script materials and then receives a healthy bump in their fee once the project is greenlit and goes to picture.

3018 So it seems discriminatory to treat one class of writer on a project differently than another class of writer because we are writers on these projects. We write the musical soundtrack for these projects.

3019 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you.

3020 I’ve just got one last question before I turn it back to the Chair, and it’s almost a broader version of my previous question, but because you’re one of very few voices, maybe the only one on ‑‑ speaking on behalf of your constituency.

3021 When you look at the record, are there other ideas coming forward where people who aren’t consciously thinking of the impact on screen composers could invoke some unintended consequences? Are there good ideas going ‑‑ are there ideas coming forward that you look at and have concerns that affect you and your membership that others might not be aware of?

3022 MR. ROWLEY: Nothing that I’ve heard of that pops to mind. Thank you for the question.

3023 On the contrary; I have heard some lines of questioning that give me twinkles of ideas.

3024 You know, currently, as I was mentioning before, there is no funding for the work that our members do. The only money that comes into the system is when we’re engaged on an audio‑visual work. Up until that point, you know, I can tell you I write every day. I do that speculatively. I do it because it’s what I love to do, but I also ‑‑ when the project comes along, they’re so intense and the delivery times are so quick that you have to be ready.

3025 So I write every day. I do that for free.

3026 Perhaps in the CMF world or other funding bodies, perhaps there is a way to support some of that unpaid labour that goes into the developing of one’s career because it is very much a career where the first 10 years you put in, you’re not really making a living doing it. You know, I have been a teacher to emerging composers through Sheridan College, and what I tell them is you need several irons in several fires to make it. It’s a long game position.

3027 So if there was some kind of funding available, you know, there are things like Ontario Music Fund that supports performers and songwriters. FACTOR does the same, but there’s nothing similar to that for screen composters and the work that they do, so that’s a possible benefit to what I’ve heard.

3028 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Thank you very much for your thoughtfulness and sharing your expertise.

3029 MR. ROWLEY: Thank you so much for your questions.

3030 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Those are my questions, Madam Chair.

3031 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Vice‑Chair.

3032 Let’s go over to Vice‑Chair Barin. Thank you.

3033 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Rowley, for being here this afternoon.

3034 So I think I heard you say that your members are not protected by a collective bargaining agreement and, understandably, that has an impact on the predictability of the revenues as members. So as we think of how best to ensure there’s investment in cultural products that are the benefit of our broadcasting legislation, what areas would you say would best benefit your members?

3035 MR. ROWLEY: Thank you, Vice‑Chair Barin.

3036 There are two that spring to mind immediately. The first is not in this phase, but in the Canadian content redefinition phase. There is some possibility, I would think, to implement some criteria around the points awarding, as I had mentioned, but one further idea that I would add to that is that perhaps a point is not available unless that point earner is engaged under a collective agreement or under an agreement that’s been promulgated by the organization certified to represent that class of creator and that has been adopted by the engaging party. So that’s one possibility.

3037 I think I’ve lost my train on ‑‑ of thought on what the first possible ‑‑

3038 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Well, how about if I put to you the funds that are ‑‑ the money that’s flowing through funds and how that impacts on the ability of your community, if you will, to benefit?

3039 MR. ROWLEY: Well, this ‑‑ thank you. You’ve jogged my memory.

3040 What I found hopeful in the policy direction is the idea of maximum use of Canadian talent. Certainly in the six out of 10 versus 10 out of 10 world, while our members work in both, I think it’s fair to say that the majority of our members do work in the 10 out of 10 world.

3041 What we see in a lot of six out of 10 productions is production comes here and post‑production heads south or overseas or elsewhere. The notion of making maximum use of talent, to me, gives a glimmer of hope that perhaps post‑production can be ‑‑ there’s an argument, making maximum use to keep that here, or perhaps it’s something that can be incentivized through regulatory measures or tax measures to benefit Canadian composers who are resident here.

3042 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Fair enough. Thank you very much.

3043 MR. ROWLEY: Thank you.

3044 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Vice‑Chair. We'll go over to Commissioner Levy for the final question.

3045 COMMISSIONER LEVY: If there was to be a collective agreement, what organization would you see sort of doing that work on your behalf similar to the DGC or the WCG and so forth? And would you want some dedicated support for that effort?

3046 Thank you.

3047 MR. ROWLEY: Thank you so much, Commissioner Levy. That’s a wonderful question.

3048 As you can imagine, a collective negotiation is a costly resource‑heavy endeavour. We are a small organization. We’re all volunteers with the exception of our Executive Director. We are funded in large part by SOCAN Foundation.

3049 We’re an extremely dedicated community, but we’re all working composers to varying degrees, so the idea of taking three years out of the primes of our careers to sit down and negotiate is daunting, to say the least, and where would we get the money and how would we engage the lawyers.

3050 So if there was a provision, for example, in the next phase at a point we must be engaged under a collective agreement, then yes, I see the idea that perhaps funding could be made available for that process to get us to a first agreement, that would be very helpful.

3051 Now, in terms of which organization would do it, if there is funding available, then there’s a possibility that there could be SCGC. We could convert into a full union. We also have discussed the possibility of partnering with another of our sister creator orgs who do this kind of work, and it's a possibility, you know, that we would come under the umbrella of one of those organizations and be one of the classes of members that they represent, one of the points earning classes that they represent.

3052 I think we’re open to any avenue that ensures that the value of our rates is recognized, respected and that the revenues that flow from them we’re able to participate in equitably. I don’t think how we get there is as important as the principle and the goal.

3053 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you.

3054 MR. ROWLEY: Thank you so much.

3055 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

3056 So perhaps now you could share with us any concluding thoughts.

3057 MR. ROWLEY: Thank you so much.

3058 My closing thought is just to say thank you so much. SCGC is so pleased to be able to be here to express our thoughts and views on this important process. There’s an expression that says if you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu. Our rights have been on the menu of producers for far too long and they’ve been gobbling them up.

3059 We’re only asking for the fair ‑‑ the same fair treatment that all of our fellow points earners receive in this Canadian content system. We think it’s improper that the rights of screen composters would be a casualty in a publicly supported system and so we thank you for taking our submissions. We’re hopeful that there are solutions ahead which will prevent that situation from continuing down the line.

3060 Thank you.

3061 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you to SCGC. Thank you for being here, and thank you for sharing your personal experience with us as well. It’s very valuable.

3062 THE SECRETARY: Thank you.

3063 We will set up the next panel, so take a couple minutes, but I would ask Radio Sidney, Karim Mosna, Ken Zakreski, Ron Evans and Colleen McCormick to prepare themselves.

3064 Thank you.

‑‑‑ Pause

3065 THE SECRETARY: So thank you for being here.

3066 We will here the first participant, Radio Sidney.

3067 Please introduce yourself, and you may begin.

Presentation

3068 MR. COLLINS: Thank you.

3069 Hello, esteemed Commissioners of the CRTC and, if I can add, listeners of Radio Sidney listening from home right now via livestream. I’m Bill Collins, Station Manager of Radio Sidney.

3070 Radio Sidney is an online only station servicing the communities of Sidney, North Saanich and Central Saanich just north of Victoria on Southern Vancouver Island. We are honoured to be located in the territories of the W̱SÁNEĆ First Nations. We are a not‑for‑profit organization that provides critical local news, information and entertainment through volunteers. I’m speaking to you today about the importance of core and stable funding for community radio. Radio Sidney has an impact and is inclusive.

3071 Radio Sidney went online in the summer of 2018 in direct response to a growing polarization of opinions on municipal decision‑making. A prime example was the discussion over downtown development. Fiery public meetings and protests seemed to define the debate, while the substance of the discussion was lost in the pictures showing angry people. Out of determination to bring voice to those under‑represented such as seniors, youth or Indigenous communities, Radio Sidney was born.

3072 One of Radio Sidney’s first “remote” broadcasts was from Parklands High School. During a two‑day local environmental summit, budding journalists had the opportunity to interview local change makers and become part of voicing solutions. This is how community participation by youth is delivered.

3073 Community leaders had already been thinking about better ways to communicate and had the foresight to build broadcast space in the brand new Community Safety Building. The Town of Sidney even revised the local zoning to accommodate broadcasters. This was a testament to the community support for radio.

3074 Radio Sidney has opted to take a growth path starting as an online only broadcast offering with a planned future expansion to the FM band. Community engagement is mission critical.

3075 Take for example Mr. John Watts, jazz audiophile. In his seventies, Mr. Watts has become a world class DJ. Consider Bruce, a 30‑year veteran of the Canadian Press who wrote news scripts for Brad, a retired CBC announcer. Or Nicola Furlong, a mystery writer who reports true crime stories every month for the show “Seeing Dead People”. And of course, the Peninsula Players, who come into the studio to record their stage plays so friends and relatives outside of Sidney can listen to the show.

3076 As a public service with information that is accessible during the early days of the pandemic, Radio Sidney broadcast live each day bringing our community official information to help them plan and stay safe. As the only broadcast media outlet providing daily and accurate information specific to the 40,000 or so folks that live in this part of the world, this was an extremely valuable asset during a difficult time. Radio Sidney delivered the opportunity for citizens to speak directly with the authorities on topics critical to their well‑being.

3077 As a station focused on local issues, Radio Sidney has played an important role in a number of Town initiatives. From workforce housing to official community planning, Radio Sidney’s show Peninsula Affairs with former local Councillor Mr. Peter Wainwright as host is now a community staple.

3078 There is economic and social return on investment in community radio. Since 2018, Radio Sidney has produced more than 780 shows. Many of these were live broadcast events which were especially beneficial to persons with disabilities, who often find it difficult to attend in‑person events. For example, Radio Sidney was awarded project funding by BC Healthy Communities to connect seniors via their iPads to sing‑along music from the band who would normally play live at the seniors centre.

3079 Credible funding sources, including the Canadian Red Cross and United Way have supported good ideas enabled by our radio. We can do much more to leverage available support funding.

3080 At election time, Radio Sidney delivers feature length interviews from the vast majority of candidates across all levels of government. Over the past four years, our community has listened to more than 42,000 minutes of interviews. Listeners have written to us saying thanks because the interviews helped them with their voting decisions.

3081 In a recent by‑election, almost five percent of the community's population listened to the interviews with the three candidates. This is democracy in action.

3082 Our station operates on less than $50,000 per year, and this is not sustainable. Having core and stable funding will allow us to spend more time generating local programming.

3083 I’d like to thank the CRTC for giving me and Radio Sidney the voice to speak today on the value of our community radio station.

3084 THE SECRETARY: Thank you very much.

3085 We will now hear the presentation of Karim Mosna appearing remotely.

3086 You may begin.

Presentation

3087 MR. MOSNA: Greetings. My name is Karim Mosna, and what I really would like to cover today is that community radio is our final hope in a time of absolute turmoil in this industry.

3088 I’ve had the opportunity to work in commercial radio, but it felt far from what I had dreamed of doing since I was a 12 year old. When I saw how the people I looked up to be heartlessly terminated, being in an atmosphere of constant impending doom, looking at an empty on‑air studio to see radio had been reduced to an automated jukebox with imported mp3 tracked files coming from who knows where. Was this even radio any more?

3089 My hope in a future in media continued to be sucked dry as, let’s face it, this industry is collapsing. We are now seeing radio stations being completely shut down.

3090 There have been many times that I have felt I had to throw in the towel. I have even sacrificed family and friends to stay true to what I believe in. The amount of times I have been told to “move on, just get a real job”.

3091 But I found community radio. Canoe FM is an award‑winning community radio station in Haliburton, Ontario. Previously, I had never been to the village of Haliburton, but something about this station made me feel like I had always been there. Voices live in studio sharing the music they love, vital information to the community, and genuinely happy to be there with a manager who truly loves, lives and breathes Canoe FM.

3092 Contrast that with my experiences in commercial radio there was a punching bag for those left to take their frustrations out on.

3093 Yes, community radio are that final candle flickering in the darkness. I found passion and a shared sense of love to keep this station strong.

3094 I was there for an eight‑week Canada Summer Jobs position, and so I had to say goodbye earlier this year, but there was discussions with the station manager that if funding was there, a longer term position such as a program director could be created who could provide essential training and mentorship to new volunteer host which limited resources don’t allow. It could also free up time for other staff to, say, cover council meetings and local events.

3095 I identify as someone with a disability on the autism spectrum and certainly the work environments that I found in the commercial radio were especially treacherous, threatening and deeply traumatic, where nothing you ever did was good enough and you lived in constant fear you would be the next casualty when the quarter ended.

3096 Now, I did not find that at all while working in and being a part of community radio. There was support and a sense of guidance and mentorship, and I even got the chance to mentor new volunteers and even design a project interviewing listeners and the community about what the station meant to them.

3097 Talk about true empowerment and being valued for what I could bring to the table.

3098 But without stable funding in place, even community radio runs the risk of going the way of commercial radio. I experienced firsthand the lingering effects of what the student choice initiative did to campus radio in Ontario, and yeah, that aforementioned commercial radio atmosphere, unfortunately, found its way into campuses and look to the threat of an imminent shutdown at a community radio station near Ottawa.

3099 Let’s face it, having our sector’s survival depend so much on community generosity, given the challenges that we all face today, is a highly precarious existence. If campus and community radio could be in a place of financial stability, ensuring those basic costs can be covered, we can begin to think bigger about leading and creating larger initiatives to truly continue to engage our communities. We can make sure we have stable job opportunities for professional and passionate people. Campus radio can run without fear of the university pulling funding or another student choice initiative.

3100 Establishing this fund, we can keep real radio alive instead of continuing to watch this once great industry fall to pieces. Why can’t we be excited about this medium again? Let’s create a chance for this generation of broadcasters to have a rewarding career. It’s now or never.

3101 Thank you.

3102 THE SECRETARY: Thank you very much.

3103 We will now hear the presentation of Ken Zakreski.

3104 You may begin.

Presentation

3105 MR. ZAKRESKI: Thank you.

3106 I’m excited to be here. It’s been probably five years in my planning schedule to show up at this hearing and talk about Facebook. Glad to be here to have the chance, so I appreciate everything you’ve done to get me here.

3107 I’m a 10‑plus year admin for the largest, most active and oldest online group on Gabriola. We service Gabriola, Mudge, Link and De Courcy Islands in British Columbia. Life on Gabriola is very much online.

3108 Commissioner Levy asked some interesting question. Monday, “What is social media?”. And Wednesday, about more money to musicians. I’ll refer to that one as the bigger pie, “Can we grow the pie? Can we make Canadian revenue bigger?”.

3109 First, social media. Social media posts on social platforms are about what happened to me, the user. Community media posts, news on social platforms are about what happened to us. If you can view your monitors and let me show you some outcomes of what’s been happening to Gabriola and our media environment, I propose that Gabriola is the exception to the exception referred to in the Broadcasting Act. These are our stories.

3110 We had a power outage again. This time the internet and the power went down and one of our members was there when the helicopter brought the wires back to the island. This is news. This is Canadian news. This is the kind of news that people pay a lot of money to be prepared to do. And in our particular case, we had citizen journalism ‑‑ opportunity there ‑‑ and were able to post video on news, as it happened.

3111 Now, it’s not just about having news that’s event‑oriented or ambient‑oriented. There’s also what I would call social media about me, but it’s to do with all of us. And this is something that really the Commission is going to have to wrestle to define ‑‑ what is ‘social media’, what is news on a social platform?

3112 This would be an example of what I would call a social platform. This is ‑‑ this is something that happened to an individual that they are sharing. Is it news? I don’t think so. I mean, the person was interested enough to post it, but I don’t really think that classifies as what happened to us in an important civic journalism perspective.

3113 Just to remember though, if it’s posted to the Community Bulletin Board, Life on Gabriola, it happened to us, and it’s known to have happened to us, for as long as Facebook Canada decides to archive our stories.

3114 The following comments rely on Section 4 of the Broadcasting Act and the Commission’s favourable ruling on our new evidence we submitted and ultimately decide, what is social media? Is our little Facebook group ‘connecting the Province with other Provinces and extending beyond the limits of the Province’? It is up to the Commission to determine if our local undertaking is a community media service worth of funding. I agree with Commission Levy’s comment to keep hands off social media, but video news reportage over Facebook Canada’s community groups are not social media. We are the exception to the exception, and I ask you to rule us thus.

3115 Now, looking at Paragraph 27 of possible initial base contributions, specifically, annual Canadian broadcasting revenues. I’d say, make the pie bigger. Let’s look for ways to make the pie bigger.

3116 Respectfully ‑‑ because I understand that you don’t have the authority to regulate the API that Facebook uses for distributing their content ‑‑ when you write the Minister of Heritage, please consider including reference to the following counters to the network effect that is driving Facebook’s and Google’s ad revenue platforms. My request is the CRTC regulate certain elements of Facebook Canada at its core API. My legal advisor says you cannot. Chair, you have more lawyers. Can you capture those Facebook Canada APIs that you do regulate, and grow the pie?

3117 Thank you.

3118 THE SECRETARY: Thank you. We will now hear the presentation of Ron Evans.

Presentation

3119 MR. EVANS: Hi. I’m Ron Evans. I’m a volunteer and a Board member at 100.9 CKHA Canoe FM and yes, this is the same Canoe that Karim just mentioned a few minutes ago, and I swear it’s a coincidence. I didn’t even know he was going to be applying for this. But anyways, since we are here to discuss the merits of long‑term funding and really the survival for, amongst other things, community and Indigenous radio stations, instead of the usual doom and gloom, I’m actually here to tell you about a real success story.

3120 A little over twenty years ago, a group of radio enthusiasts realized that our region ‑‑ the Haliburton Highlands ‑‑ had an urgent need for a local, community‑based media outlet. We have a couple of small weekly newspapers and a satellite radio station for a large Canadian broadcast chain which has little to no content locally, but nothing that could they be called our own.

3121 So, these enthusiasts rubbed their nickels together ‑‑ and it really was nickels ‑‑ they begged, borrowed, and borrowed some more, found some broadcast equipment, and they put together a business plan for the CRTC. And after all the bureaucratic rigamarole, a tiny community radio station ‑‑ Canoe FM ‑‑ was born. So, in my intro I said I was going to tell you about a real success story, so here we go.

3122 In the twenty years that Canoe FM has been on the air, for most of those years the station has turned a profit. Not a large profit, mind you, that would have our accountants twitching in worry about our not‑for‑profit status ‑‑ and you really don’t want upset the bean counters. But, in addition to having the station’s economic engine driven by our Sales Department, we have undertaken a few fundraising campaigns that were, initially, quite frankly a crapshoot. Concerts. Raffles. Trip Draws. An annual Radiothon. Radio Bingo.

3123 Now, Radio Bingo is exactly what it sounds like. It’s folks buy bingo sheets at various stores, and then sit around their houses at a table and listen to an old‑style bingo ping‑pong ball machine at the station spit out balls, and the on‑air host calls out numbers and verifies the winners ‑‑ and occasional losers. Radio Bingo was tried out as an experiment some fifteen years ago with half of the proceeds being distributed to other local not‑for‑profit organizations. In that timeframe, as part of our municipal licensing agreement, the station has doled out $484,000 to approximately 85 different local not‑for‑profits.

3124 Our annual Radiothon started out several years ago as a small fundraiser to raise operating dollars for the station’s operating budget. In 2023, the Radiothon raised for the station’s budget $55,000 ‑‑ a real sign that our community has taken to Canoe FM and considers it a vital part of their daily lives.

3125 Over the years, our community has grown to rely on Canoe FM for local content ‑‑ news, weather, interviews, community information, music from local artists, and so much more. When the Gull River overflowed in 2017 and flooded the downtown portion of local community Minden, Ontario, Canoe FM worked for weeks hand‑in‑hand with the municipality in providing updates on everything from road closures to social services available for those affected. Equally important was the community outreach shown in the first year of Covid lockdowns, letting people know what was available and open or accessible, which was huge, considering the initial confusion and policy roll‑out.

3126 So, with all this sunny news, why am I here to talk about this proposed government funding? Simply put, Canoe FM is in a good place financially and has a stable operational team and support community, but we’re the exception rather than the rule. So many local radio stations are not so lucky and are hanging on, literally on a month‑to‑month basis.

3127 A huge issue we’re seeing is the increased cost of broadcast equipment. One of the projects our station has undertaken over the past several years is the feasibility of adding a repeater transmitter. In the Haliburton Highlands, we’re at the mercy of the local topography, which creates many pockets of dead broadcast space and leaves a number of our listeners with little to no signal. When we started looking at the cost of a repeater several years ago, it was about $20,000. Today, it’s north of $50,000, and it’s going up every year.

3128 And as an added bonus, our region is internet‑poor. The infrastructure for reliable internet simply doesn’t exist here, so a great many of our listeners are forced to tune in via the old‑fashioned airwaves rather than online. The cost is steep, but we feel is absolutely necessary as a community radio station to reach out to the portion of our community that simply cannot listen in.

3129 The bulk of our broadcast equipment is also 20‑plus years old and is in need of continual repairs or replacement, and that’s a dollar figure where stable, consistent funding would go a long way to helping out. Anyway, to finish, all I can say is that community radio is far more important than meets the eye (or ear), and stabilized funding would go a long way to keeping all of our communities connected.

3130 Thank you.

3131 THE SECRETARY: Thank you.

3132 We will now hear the presentation of Colleen McCormick, who is appearing virtually.

3133 You may begin.

Presentation

3134 MS. McCORMICK: Thank you.

3135 Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Vice‑Chair, and Commission Members. My name is Colleen McCormick and I am honoured to be here today to share how important Campus Community Radio is, as a volunteer with the University of Victoria’s CFUV 101.9 FM, located on the unceded and ancestral homelands of the

3136 the ləkʼʷəŋən Peoples ‑‑ the W̱SÁNEĆ, Songhees, and Esquimalt First Nations ‑‑ also known as Victoria, British Columbia.

3137 I’m here in support of the National Campus and Community Radio’s submission, and to reinforce the importance of: one, core, stable and sustainable operational funding for campus, community and Indigenous broadcasters; two, to highlight the need for special project funding to better support innovation; and three, stress the importance of data collection to support increased listenership.

3138 Independent media matters, and as a believer in the power of campus radio to change lives, I’d like to take the next few minutes to share why community broadcasting is vital to the wellbeing of Canadian society and future local media leaders in this country.

3139 CFUV is a natural hub for community connections ‑‑ an inclusive place where students and supporting members can find their voice and bring diverse communities together, offering invaluable opportunities for students to gain practical experience in broadcasting, journalism, podcasting, production, and other key media‑related skills. This hands‑on experience is crucial for those pursuing careers in media, arts, music, and communications.

3140 Campus radio often offers an alternative to mainstream media, providing a platform for perspectives and voices that might not be heard in commercial outlets. This diversity of viewpoints contributes to a more vibrant and inclusive media landscape when Canadians are increasingly losing access to local media. Community broadcasters are a critical, inexpensive, and highly effective solution to Canada’s current media consolidation challenges ‑‑ a targeted response that delivers highly trusted, diverse, and localized content.

3141 Campus radio stations often cover local and national issues, contributing to the political and social awareness of students. This can lead to informed discussions and increased civic engagement. According to Elections Canada, voter turnout among youth in 2021 fell by 3.2 percent. Sustainably funded campus radio programs can significantly help engage students in constructive political discourse and democratic values.

3142 It’s exciting to see the rise of campus podcasts and students trust other students, so during a time when dangerous disinformation campaigns are dominating the social media airwaves, students can find reprieve in local shows delivered by stations like CFUV, and its team of dedicated community volunteers.

3143 We know that campus and community radio plays a crucial role in supporting and promoting local music and independent art scenes. It also fosters a sense of kinship by connecting students, faculty, and the broader local community, and builds a sense of belonging and shared identity on campus. In a country as culturally diverse as Canada, campus radio plays a vital role in preserving and promoting various languages and cultures, especially Indigenous voices. As we strive to achieve the Truth and Reconciliation Calls to Action, campus and community radio provides a platform for content in multiple and traditional languages, to better reflect the rich tapestry of Canada’s multicultural society. One of the most effective ways I think the Government of Canada can achieve and act on its Diversity and Inclusion Calls to Action on Anti‑racism and Equity goals, is by ensuring community‑led public broadcasting is strengthened through core funding.

3144 In my travels throughout British Columbia, it always amazes me to hear some of the best radio talent and programming coming from First Nations communities like Nuxalk and Haida Nation. We need far more of these types of community‑building broadcast programs dedicated to showcasing homegrown talent.

3145 To conclude, campus and community radio is fundamental to strengthening the social fabric of our society, especially in rural and remote communities. Now is the time to address this chronically underfunded resource. CFUV operates on a shoestring budget. We only have three staff members that support just over a hundred volunteers who do much of the programming as hosts. Having stable operational funding would allow our volunteers to spend far more time on generating engaging local programming instead of stressing about how to keep the lights on.

3146 Every penny invested in the Community Radio Initiative will go towards amplifying diverse voices and promoting Canadian artists. This return on investment is solid. Sustainable funding will support the growth of Indigenous broadcasters, Francophone and minority language broadcasters, connect immigrants to their communities, and build greater listenership through data insights.

3147 I thank you for your time today, and your commitment in supporting a vibrant campus and locally diverse community broadcast sector through sustainable operational funding, dedicated project funding to inspire innovation, and key investment in data collection to support greater listenership ‑‑ and I welcome any questions or comments. Thank you.

3148 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much for your presentations. We have heard the ‑‑ I would say ‑‑ passion and concern and optimism, all at the same time.

3149 I will turn things over to Commissioner Naidoo. Thank you.

3150 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much for your presentations and thank you for being here today. I’ve read all of your interventions, so I’m familiar with them. Thank you.

3151 I’m going to direct this to Radio Sidney. You proposed that an annual 25 million dollars should go to the proposed Community Broadcasting Fund. How should the contributions be distributed among all the community radio stations, which is what you had laid out in your intervention?

3152 This is a multi‑pronged question. I’m happy to repeat it shortly, if you need me to. So, first of all, how should they be distributed to all community radio stations? Should online radio stations be eligible for this funding? And if so, under what criteria or definition?

3153 MR. COLLINS: Excellent. Thanks for the question.

3154 First of all, we rely very, very heavily on the organizations such as the NCRA and colleagues across the language spectrum in Canada. By becoming a member of those organizations, you get a broader picture of how funds should be distributed. So, I would be a heavy advocate for allowing the folks that are managing these funds such as the Canadian Radio Fund and the Community Radio Initiative ‑‑ they are on the frontline of receiving information from communities such as Sidney ‑‑ so, the distribution should be managed through those channels, I think would be very à propos, and you would ‑‑ as a Commission, you would touch many of the communities in Canada that we’re talking about.

3155 Secondly, online radio is a very interesting proposition because when we first started, there were as many high school students engaged in our discussion as there were old farts like me. And that was part of the inspiration that said, ‘All right, we have to put in place structures and platforms to be able to accommodate change. And change won’t come from us; it’s going to come from the grade school and high school kids today who are engaged, because they are on platforms that facilitate engagement.’

3156 Now, however, where we live in a world that has to be regulated ‑‑ because I wouldn’t advocate for just an online ‑‑ say, from somebody’s bedroom, for example, or somebody’s den, to come up through. To me, that wouldn’t be an effective way to manage the range of possibilities that the internet provides ‑‑ and I haven’t even mentioned AI yet. So, I would say that the bars that exist today under the licensing scheme in Canada are appropriate for radio, for online radio, if we meet the test as proposed by the existing regulations today which describe Canadian content and other forms of barriers or thresholds that must be met.

3157 So, I think ultimately that’s the answer. We have in place today what we need, both in distribution of funds and in a regulatory barrier, as long as we recognize that there is going to be innovation happening every year all the time, and we need to be able to accommodate that.

3158 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much. In what ways would the proposed Community Broadcasting Fund complement or differ from the funding that’s already administered by the Community Radio Fund of Canada?

3159 MR. COLLINS: Well, I am not the best person to ask that. Alex was here earlier, and he obviously is in tune specifically. I will answer it this way, however. My job as a community leader trying to foster discourse between disaffected organizations and provide voice to those underrepresented, I need to ensure (a) that I have people, and (b) that the technology exists to render those voices effective. So, my way of thinking is stable core funding means for me about a hundred‑thousand dollars a year, 50 percent to go to people, 50 percent to go to technologies that are needed to be able to drive ourselves into the future being well‑informed in a democratic society.

3160 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you.

3161 I am going to direct this question at Karim. How can the Commission ensure that the funding is used to support the creation of Canadian and Indigenous content, especially if online community radio undertakings are eligible for this funding?

3162 MR. MOSNA: I’m just going to need a little bit of clarification with what you’re asking. Can you maybe give me a bit of an example of what you’re asking, just so I correctly understand?

3163 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Yes. How can we ensure that the funding is used to help equity‑seeking groups and Indigenous content, more specifically?

3164 MR. MOSNA: And when we speak about support, would that be a sense of those resources being able to go towards working with those groups to get their voices heard? Is that sort of what we’re getting at?

3165 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: It's content, it's ‑‑

3166 MR. MOSNA: Okay.

3167 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO:  ‑‑ employment, it’s ‑‑

3168 MR. MOSNA: Employment, content.

3169 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO:  ‑‑ reflection. Yeah, all of it.

3170 MR. MOSNA: Okay. Well certainly, again, when we have those other basic essentials covered, that’s when there can be definitely ‑‑ there can be that time that can be given to mentoring perhaps those who have been marginalized historically in society and who still experience barriers to this day. A dedicated individual could be ‑‑ with the proper training and professionalism, can be that mentor, can help that person find that voice. I mean, that’s one thing that I also do, is I run workshops to help people find it through podcasting. But what if we could incorporate that into campus and community radio so that they feel that they do have a voice and that they can share their stories and share their music, share any form of content that is important to them?

3171 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much.

3172 I am going to let you guys decide who wants to take this next question. I think that it’s probably going to be Radio Sidney or it would be Colleen ‑‑ one of the two of you.

3173 How does your organization meet the training needs to provide strong local journalism when your stations are pretty much run by volunteers?

3174 MR. COLLINS: Colleen, you can go with this one, if you’d like.

3175 MS. McCORMICK: Happy to. One, you know, it is a commitment. It’s a commitment to the people who are taking the time out of their day‑to‑day, whether it’s from their studies or their families or just other responsibilities, to be those responsible voices of journalists and to bring the best information that they can to the airwaves. And there’s a lot of due diligence, and there’s a lot of kind of peer‑to‑peer support that happens in order to enable that, but I think additional funding could certainly strengthen that.

3176 And when I look at the media landscape in Canada right now, I think it’s critical that we want to inspire the next generation to look at journalism, to look at reporting and sharing stories. And we have an open‑door policy where we’re even inviting communities from different regions around the province like Heiltsuk Nation in Bella Bella, who have community members who want to bring language programs alive and want to actually express some of the challenges that they’re facing. And we always try to work with them in terms of supporting their messaging and their understanding of how to actually do critical analysis around bringing, you know, arguments forward or showcasing stories.

3177 I think that’s where there is a lot of just independent will and commitment, which is what’s so beautiful about this sector; you don’t find that in other sectors where people are so committed to bringing information ‑‑ the best quality of information they can ‑‑ forward to share with their audience and with their communities. So, I think additional funding could certainly support that, but we have just an incredible community that’s dedicated to bringing the best information they can, and they’re held accountable on their campuses, they’re held accountable in their communities if they’re not bringing that information forward in a good way. So, whatever we can do to further support that, but we also encourage ‑‑ and I do mentorship and any type of support I can to the voices that are coming on air and trying to showcase different issues.

3178 And there is a news ‑‑ you know, we're missing a news component, I think, on campuses across Canada. And I think that we've seen where that can be an area where nefarious forces might want to be promoting different ideologies on campus. So to have a neutral and a supportive community‑led organization to make sure that we are bringing the best quality of information forward is certainly a commitment myself and other volunteers within CFUV are committed to support in any way possible.

3179 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much for that answer.

3180 I am going to direct this one to Radio Sidney, because in your intervention you talk about how ‑‑ I've heard this from a lot of community radio stations; I'm sure we all have ‑‑ that extra funding will actually help you not just focus on keeping the lights on, and it will actually allow you to put more thought and investment into content, right?

3181 So my question to you is, considering that in your intervention you say that you're completely staffed by volunteers, how would that money actually go to content? If you're not paying salaries at this point, how is it going to help?

3182 MR. COLLINS: Thanks for the question. It will help tremendously in this way. I turn away people weekly from wanting to participate, but the capacity isn't there for them to participate. So the money, specifically funding for us, would go to a hiring of an individual that would allow for coordination of volunteers and allow the board the scope it needs to secure other funding. There is a tremendous amount of community support funding available, and we're able to tap into it, but we're not able to tap into two per cent of what's available.

3183 So for us, it's really about bringing people to the table, paid people that can help coordinate. And then from there, we can leverage a lot more supports. I think that's really what we're talking about when they said that.

3184 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: All right.

3185 I have one more question, and I'll let you decide who you would like to take the question, because I know my colleagues have questions as well, and I want to make sure that we get to them.

3186 In your intervention, you also mention how crucial it is, even in your opening statement today you talked about how crucial it is to have news and election coverage, especially, you know, on Vancouver Island. Some intervenors have actually suggested, as you've been watching the hearing, the creation of a fund to support local news. What are your thoughts on that? And do you think it would help?

3187 MR. COLLINS: Yes is the simple answer. The community, the local journalism initiative was a prime example of the uptake on that. For example, I've had discussions with our local newspaper who went from two editions a week to one edition a week and down to less than or around one reporter for our community.

3188 There's ways to collaborate and communicate. We could perhaps even share a journalist. Because the media are different. People are getting their news in many, many different ways, and therefore, we have to adapt to that.

3189 So from the Radio Sidney perspective, their news is a hundred per cent important. And I quite often say we're protecting democracy one interview at a time. But it's not just news from the back of a car or from a fishing boat. Somebody's posting to Facebook or Instagram. That, to us, is not news. What news is asking questions. When Radio Sidney first started, it was probably me jamming the microphone in front of the mayor, saying, Can you comment on this or that? That's journalism.

3190 And we have young folks today craving to do this, so let's give them an opportunity through more funding to local journalism initiatives and similar funding on the print media. Let's do it that way. I think we have all the tools available, just not the cash.

3191 COMMISSIONER NAIDOO: Thank you very much.

3192 And Madam Chair, that's all I have.

3193 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Commissioner Naidoo.

3194 Commissioner Levy?

3195 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Yeah, just really briefly, Ms. McCormick, you talked a bit about wanting some support for data collection. Now, is that data collection having to do with trying to show what your viewership is as compared to other outlets in the community? Or is it data collection regarding what the needs and wants of your listenership are about? So I'm just trying to clarify what you're talking about there.

3196 MS. McCORMICK: Thank you. I would say it's both. You know, it's important as we try to support sponsorship opportunities and to generate different sort of interests in the radio shows that are being broadcasted on CFUV. It's key to better understand what our listenership interests are and where there's some key areas of potential focus. But there it's also important to make sure that what we're bringing forward in terms of content delivery meets the needs of our listenership basis.

3197 And you know, since I've been working with CFUV as a volunteer, we haven't been able to really pinpoint what is our listenership and what are their key interests and how do we make sure that we're bringing shows forward? And there's a lot of people who are interested and want to build confidence to deliver different programs. But to make sure that we have an understanding of what those needs and interests are, I think we can significantly build listenership within the community and certainly within the campus community, how we can deliver on what their needs and expectations are and also make sure that they're aware that there's this incredible resource that they can access.

3198 And if they have ideas ‑‑ and some people don't realize what type of support they can have within the campus radio stations. So to have a robust ability to have surveys and provide data insights, we can really tailor and, you know, kind of get our programming best as we can to meet the interests and the needs of the campus community as well as our broader community.

3199 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Yeah, the needs are very high. A lot of the community stations are, as Radio Sidney mentioned, really are necessary for covering off local news, because in many small places, it's really dire.

3200 But it does raise issues, and you've talked a little bit about how you supervise and so forth. But news is a delicate thing, especially in this day and age. The possibilities of misinformation, disinformation are very high. You have to have balance. And generally, you need to have an established and agreed‑upon code of ethics.

3201 How do you proceed to provide your communities with reliable and proper journalism in this kind of atmosphere? And I'll ask Radio Sidney and perhaps Mr. Evans to comment on that.

3202 MR. COLLINS: Thank you for the question. We rely very heavily on the NCRA. That organization ‑‑ from Radio Sidney's inception, we ‑‑ I did not know anything about radio. I picked up the phone and I talked to Barry and colleagues. And they said, Right, here's a list of resources that we can provide to you to help your radio journey. And we followed much of their advice.

3203 When I need information on journalistic standards, for example, codes of conduct, these are well‑positioned folks that have those resources available. Training as well, Commissioner Naidoo, you mentioned. The access to training from governments to public access, disabilities access, to insurance ‑‑ all those resources are there from a vast variety of sources, all culminated by the NCRA. So that's where I would go when we do our code of conduct around journalistic standards.

3204 I'll mention, though, because we've utilized seasoned veterans in the news business, they impart that kind of training. And we, at the first, we would pair those seasoned veterans with high school students because you need to impart that wisdom.

3205 So that's how we would do it. As I said, the tools are in place today to be able to do it effectively, I believe.

3206 MR. EVANS: And I would also echo that as well in that the NCRA is a fabulous resource for any of these questions that we have. And we've had Barry come and actually speak to our annual board meeting. We always pick something every year to talk about. This last year was like what are the guidelines that we can follow in terms of being better practices.

3207 And where we are, it's really difficult to cover news. So having sustained funding there where we can improve on that is fundamental. Because right now, what we really rely upon is the local newspapers. And we give them credit, and we ‑‑ our news broadcast is essentially twice a day. And it's looking at what the couple top news stories are locally and perhaps one provincially or federally. And we try to kind of boil that down and make it really short so that the on‑air people don't have to spend like six hours writing something that's going to be five minutes long.

3208 And it is a challenge, but like I said, increased funding, it will really help us in terms of getting more availability where we can get information and also bring in some training for these folks.

3209 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you very much.

3210 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. And thank you, Commissioner Levy.

3211 Vice‑Chair Barin will ask the last question for the Commission. Thank you.

3212 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Yes, thank you.

3213 So my question is directed at Mr. Zakreski. Given your comments today and what we're hearing about the production of local news, do you think that support for different kinds of local information should be related to the cost of producing news for different broadcast media?

3214 MR. ZAKRESKI: Good question. Thank you for that question.

3215 We have run for 10 years with zero dollars expenses, zero dollars revenues. We accept no advertising. All the advertising is posted for free. We have no TX. We have no transmitter. We don't need to go up to the mountain and plug in the meter. We don't need to retune or rephase our FM transmitters. We don't need to buy new antennas. We don't need to move to a new tower, whatever station that was, Kingston. God.

3216 Yes. The answer is yes. I think the medium determines the budget. Print, different. Online, different. FM, different. AM, different. So I would say yes.

3217 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you for that.

3218 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Thank you very much. That ends the questions for the Commission. We will turn things back over to you. Perhaps everyone could just take a minute to share any concluding thoughts. Thank you.

3219 MR. COLLINS: I would like to start, if I may. Thank you very much. I want to put in a plug for paid journalism. It's one thing to report news from a zero budget base. But I think, if it costs nothing, that's just what it's worth.

3220 I think we need to make sure our budding young journalists have a career path that allows them to provide us with the news and information that we, as society, really need, authentic news and information.

3221 And my guess is there are radio stations, for example, today that are using radio GPT. It exists. It's being planned for. And that news needs to be ‑‑ oversight in that, the editorial privilege must be there. And that has to come from paid journalists and editors. So that's part of the funding equation that needs to be addressed.

3222 MS. McCORMICK: I am happy to chime in. I just believe that in a time where disinformation is an all‑time high that this is a great opportunity for us to support the training and development of the next generation of journalists done through hands‑on training that's readily available for students on their campuses and to really understand the importance of the fourth estate and what their contribution can be.

3223 So in terms of looking at the whole landscape in Canada, how can we best support local talent, putting a lot of opportunity around training and development for future broadcasters, and making sure that we are ensuring that the future for Canada broadcasting is strong and that we're getting diverse voices, not consolidation and ownership voices kind of dictating the news to people.

3224 So this is a great opportunity for us to really support that development pathway for students and community volunteers who want to play a role in protecting their communities and supporting, you know, equal voices and democracy at its best.

3225 MR. MOSNA: I will just expand a little bit on what my colleagues have said regarding the journalistic side as that's where I started my broadcasting career. And yes, and I love that we're hearing terms like support and being mentored by, you know, those with that experience.

3226 But without the sufficient funding, these really vital things that are needed for someone just coming out of school, just, you know, moving perhaps to a whole new part of the country to start their career, if they're coming into an environment that there isn't that support, where, you know, there isn't a sense of guidance in that, if it's just sort of, you know, here's your ‑‑ here's what you got to do. Here's the contract. Get all this. But without that, you know, you'd be up ‑‑ it's a feeling of never ‑‑ it's such a feeling that is so hard to feel like you can keep your head above water. And how can we then get that quality journalism out there when these new graduates are going out into these rather hostile environments where they're not able to feel like they're being guided, not able to feel like they're being valued?

3227 So funding, you know, to have these types of mentorship, being able to provide these opportunities, to have, you know, an actual director of these departments is crucial to feeling like, you know, yeah, like there is a future in this.

3228 So that'd be my thoughts to expand on that. So thank you.

3229 MR. EVANS: Yeah, and I would just like to add ‑‑ and this really has not a heck of a lot to do with funding or anything ‑‑ but just the fundamental value of community radio.

3230 Fourteen years ago, I was a refugee from Toronto moving to a place that I'd never been to before, a very small community. And the first thing that I did when I moved there was I looked for someplace that I could reach out and be part of the community. And radio was that.

3231 And nowadays, I can't walk down the street without anybody knowing who I am and saying hello, even though I'm just a voice on the air. But you cannot underestimate the value of community radio, especially in a small community. And funding like this, it's just ‑‑ it will go so far to keeping so many communities together.

3232 MR. ZAKRESKI: In closing, I'd like to say I'd like to see the Commission make the pie bigger for the Canadian broadcasters. Use whatever tools you have to regulate this juggernaut, big social, big media, big tech.

3233 I mean, Facebook's a telephone service, really. I mean, can't you regulate that part of it? You don't have to regulate the whole thing. Just because I sell tacos at my shoe store doesn't mean I'm a taco stand.

3234 The whole thing really has to come down to what you're allowed to do. And I'm sad to say I was brought up you were gods; you could do everything. But now I find out you can't regulate Facebook or Google the way I would have you do it ‑‑ goddesses ‑‑ as an API, right, as an API, as Microsoft in the US came to agreements to do.

3235 But you can ask the Minister. The Minister occasionally writes me letters. I don't get a lot, and I don't know if they read the letters I send them. But I think if you wrote the Minister of Heritage and said, We don't have the authority to regulate Facebook the way it should be regulated at its core API, for those services that you've deemed to be not social media.

3236 Now, reading somebody's diary is not the same thing as those group posts that are news, that the new evidence will demonstrate is news and in interest of the broadcast network.

3237 So I think you need to bring in all hands on deck. Make the pie bigger. Entertain new ideas like are posited in The Rebel Sell, the book.

3238 Advertising is a hundred per cent tax deductible as a business expense. I think the Minister should look at that. I mean, that really doesn't make sense, not in this environment. The broadcast media is no longer served by the advertising‑funded model. The broadcast network isn't getting the value it used to out of advertising. Advertising benefits the companies; it doesn't benefit the public. And it raises the price of bread. And I think we need to be aware of that.

3239 Advertising raises the price of bread: make it less than a hundred per cent tax deductible for foreign publishers as Canada has done in the past, and expand the pie for the Canadian broadcasters. That's something the Minister could do. I can't. But maybe you can help.

3240 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

3241 MR. ZAKRESKI: Thank you.

3242 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much, everybody who participated virtually and who came here. I know that some travelled a long way, and we really appreciate it. And we appreciate your engagement. So thank you very much.

3243 THE SECRETARY: Thank you. We will now take a break and be back at 3:40. Thank you.

‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 3:32 p.m.

‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 3:42 p.m.

3244 THE SECRETARY: Welcome back, everyone. We will now hear the presentation of Nettwerk Music Group.

3245 Please introduce yourself, and you may begin.

Presentation

3246 MR. ALDOUS: Good afternoon, my name is Patrick Aldous. I'm the senior vice‑president, Business and Legal Affairs for the Nettwerk Music Group in Vancouver, British Columbia.

3247 Thank you, Madam Chair, Vice‑Chairs, and Commissioners. I'm honoured to appear before you today from the unceded ancestral territory of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil‑Waututh First Nations.

3248 As Nettwerk was one of the first independent record labels to openly embrace an online digital music streaming environment, we believe we can offer a unique point of view on a number of the questions before the Commission.

3249 Should the overall contribution commitment be comparable to the existing contribution levels of traditional broadcasting? While Nettwerk does not take a specific position on contribution thresholds, we believe that streaming is fundamentally different from traditional broadcasting. Treating streaming services as distinct will help ensure that Canadian music content providers continue to realize the commercial value of their music on these platforms. If this is not understood or recognized within a regulatory framework, a distorted Canadian music marketplace could result.

3250 Should base contributions flow only to existing funds or be directed to newly created funds? Nettwerk believes that the infrastructure for distribution of any new funds contributed by streaming services already exists through the Canada Music Fund and organizations like FACTOR.

3251 Would the proposed new contribution framework achieve desirable policy outcomes for the Canadian audio and video broadcasting system? The commercial realities of how Canadian music companies interact with streaming services must be considered when considering new regulations. Nettwerk has never had a direct contractual relationship with any traditional broadcaster. Our artists' music is made available for exploitation by broadcasters through a regulatory licensing regime.

3252 By contrast, Nettwerk has direct licensing relationships with the major streaming services, which Nettwerk has worked diligently over time to develop and refine. The imposition of new contribution obligations adds a new element to those carefully developed private commercial relationships. This direct relationship with streaming services creates a point of exposure for Canadian music companies that simply doesn't exist with broadcasters.

3253 We believe that the streaming services will, quite understandably, look to do what private companies often do: pass on new operational costs to their suppliers. That could mean a reduced share of streaming revenue to Canadian content providers. Simply put, the costs of the new contribution framework could ultimately be borne not by the streaming services themselves, but by Canadian record labels and artists.

3254 While I am not here to discuss the details of Nettwerk's direct licensing agreements with the streaming services, suffice it to say that these are complex agreements that contain multiple contractual mechanisms for cost recovery on the part of the streaming services. As Nettwerk operates on a revenue share basis with all of its artists, if our share of revenue is eroded, that will ultimately result in reduced revenue to our Canadian artists.

3255 The digital streaming services may also pass these costs along to Canadian consumers through higher prices. While the digital music streaming marketplace has flourished in Canada, the interaction between pricing and marketplace penetration is a delicate one.

3256 The rate of digital music streaming growth has slowed in recent years, and consumers have alternatives. We believe it is vital to the health of the Canadian music economy that royalty‑paying streaming services remain accessible at a reasonable price, and that pricing does not have the effect of slowing or reversing paid streaming adoption rates in Canada.

3257 Even if the Commission were to somehow ensure that the streaming services were not able to pass along the costs of their contributions to their Canadian suppliers or consumers, the streaming services may look to recapture these costs by cutting their other Canadian operational expenses.

3258 Nettwerk has developed good working relationships with the Canadian staffs of the major music streaming services. Canadian personnel at these companies have all communicated to us that they view it as part of their jobs to advocate for us, and for other Canadian content providers, within their respective companies.

3259 It should not be lost on the Commission how easy it would be for the streaming services to cut their Canadian staff and consolidate their Canadian business with their US operations. Were this to be a byproduct of the contribution framework it could undo years of beneficial relationship progress that we have made at these companies.

3260 Should the Commission recognize other forms of contributions to the Canadian broadcasting system? Royalty payments made by the digital streaming services to rights holders should not, in our view, count as contributions towards Canadian content development. Royalty payments are simply a cost of running a legal, licensed business in Canada.

3261 However, we do believe that investments in Canadian staffing and infrastructure should be considered by the Commission when assessing contributions. In addition, to the extent that streaming services make artist and content marketing initiatives available to Canadian music companies and artists at a reduced cost or on a no‑cost basis, we believe that the streaming services should be able to account for the value of those discounts in calculating their contributions.

3262 We also believe that music business educational and professional development programs sponsored by the streaming services should also be considered a form of contribution. The funding of music business educational and professional development programs not only supports the music business in Canada, but it also supports the health and viability of provincial music industry associations and federal music organizations such as CIMA, who have traditionally delivered these types of programs.

3263 What is the role of content curators and aggregators and playlists in assisting with promotion and discoverability? Our research has made it clear to us that listener loyalty on streaming service platforms depends upon the integrity of the listening experience. If new regulation introduces an element of listener manipulation on streaming services, we believe listeners could be driven to unlicensed music services.

3264 In the currently healthy digital music streaming environment, it's easy to forget how dark the days were for music companies at the height of the online piracy era, when unlicensed and infringing online music services paid nothing to rights holders.

3265 If the regulation of Canadian content on legitimate, licensed, royalty‑paying streaming platforms drives listeners back to unlicensed services, it would undo much of the progress that has been made in the digital streaming era.

3266 I thank you for your time today, and I look forward to answering any questions you may have.

3267 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much to Nettwerk for your presentation.

3268 I will turn things over to Commissioner Levy for questions. Thank you.

3269 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Hello. Thank you very much for appearing. Thank you to Nettwerk for discovering or bringing to the world Sarah McLachlan among many others.

3270 I guess I'm a little bit confused about your presentation, because, you know, if I read it correctly, your notion is that we shouldn't set any thresholds and shouldn't set any base amount for the online streamers. Am I correct?

3271 MR. ALDOUS: We're not taking a position on what that threshold should be. I think, you know, our position on this ‑‑

3272 COMMISSIONER LEVY: But it's okay if we have a threshold?

3273 MR. ALDOUS: I don't think it's our place to say whether there ‑‑ it's okay or not as to whether there's a threshold. That's not what I'm here to discuss.

3274 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Okay.

3275 MR. ALDOUS: I'm here to discuss some of the practical ramifications that may flow from the setting of a threshold in the environment that we find ourselves.

3276 We find ourselves with a successful relationship with online music streamers. We're doing very well. Our artists are doing very well. And that's a successful relationship. We are obviously nervous about any new regulatory regime that influences that relationship.

3277 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Well, undoubtedly, there is going to be an influence. You know, we've heard multiple intervenors talk about what the threshold should be and what the initial base amount should be. If I read you correctly, that's not your focus.

3278 You've talked in terms of incentives rather than mandates. And I'd like to know what you think would incent the kind of support that would be most beneficial to Canadian artists. Because I think we've got to put the artists at the centre of our conversation, the artists and the audience. So what would incent the kind of behaviour that would do the most for the Canadian music scene?

3279 MR. ALDOUS: I would certainly agree with your position that we need to put the artists at the centre of this. And I think how we do that is ensuring the Canadian artists have access to an open and flourishing international streaming music market.

3280 And that's really our point about the approach of this exercise versus sort of a traditional borders‑bound terrestrial radio regulatory regime. All artists today are looking for international success. The days of aspirations of simply carving out a domestic career within a country Canada's size is certainly not what I see when I talk to Canadian artists these days. They all want access to bigger markets. They want access to the world.

3281 And so having a thriving Canadian music company landscape and Canadian music content provider landscape that allows for open relationships with the kind of organizations of companies that can offer that access to international markets is what ultimately will serve Canadian artists the best.

3282 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Funding from FACTOR has been a strong impetus for Canadian‑owned music. Do you consider that that's still where the funding priority should lie as it relates to support for Canadian artists and where any new contributions might flow?

3283 MR. ALDOUS: I do. Nettwerk has a long, successful history with FACTOR. We're very grateful for all of the support that FACTOR has provided Nettwerk over the course of the company and to this day. I think there's no doubt that the FACTOR system has been a tremendous success in the development of the Canadian music economy. I don't believe that from a funding organization perspective there is anything broken about our current system. And I think very much the perspective of it's not broken, we don't need to fix it. And certainly, the FACTOR system is one that functions very well from our perspective.

3284 COMMISSIONER LEVY: In that whole ecosystem, do you get the sense that they are equipped and prepared to take on some of the challenges of meeting equity requirements? Because of course we are also seized with ensuring more support for Indigenous artists and other equity‑seeking groups.

3285 MR. ALDOUS: I do get the sense that there is a real conscious ‑‑ there's an awareness and a conscious effort to address those challenges and those concerns at the FACTOR level and throughout the Canadian music business. I think that's a frequent point of discussion and an aspirational goal of many in the Canadian music industry. And I think that, again, the best way to do that is to ensure that there are viable market pathways to bring our unique Canadian voices of all kinds to the world. And I think that ‑‑

3286 COMMISSIONER LEVY: How do you go about doing that? If you're going to be an example to others as to how to draw in more equity and more diversity.

3287 MR. ALDOUS: We have through our or in our artist and repertoire system are the people that find talent that is going to speak to Nettwerk, is going to speak to our audiences and our communities.

3288 For example, there is a singer‑songwriter that we signed named Carson Grey who's from the Haida First Nation in British Columbia. We didn't sign Carson through any sort of initiative or any sort of incentive program. We signed her because she's incredibly talented. And we believe that her voice is an important one and one that we can help bring not only to a broader audience in Canada but to an international audience.

3289 And that's a great example of someone who we believe we can help take to the world just as we have other Canadian artists in the past. And it's a conscious effort to find those voices and find a place for those voices within our company and within the community generally.

3290 COMMISSIONER LEVY: I think I am going to wrap up with a final sort of open question to you. We heard earlier today that instead of looking at contributions from the online streamers as a sort of hangdog obligation, that it should be looked upon as an opportunity for the online streamers to do more to partner with artists and others in the Canadian cultural ecosystem. What do you think we can do to move that dial from looking more at opportunity rather than obligation?

3291 MR. ALDOUS: Yeah, I think that that is a matter of open discussion between the Canada Music Fund, between FACTOR, between the streaming services themselves and organizations like CIMA and Music Canada. I think more discussion, more open discussion about how to frame this as an opportunity for continued investment into Canada as opposed to an imposition of an obligation that's purely a monetary one would be a constructive way forward.

3292 And certainly, my experience with our streaming partners is that they are eager to invest more in Canada, to develop this country's music economy even further. I think we have to realize how the international music marketplace views Canada, which is a country that punches way above its weight class in terms of the contribution that Canada makes to the international music community.

3293 So I don't think there's any lack of appetite for investment in Canada by music streaming services. It's a matter of finding the most constructive way to do that. And I think open and ongoing dialogue amongst all the stakeholders is the best way to achieve that.

3294 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Just finally, you know, we saw some slides from SOCAN earlier today, and it does give pause for how Canadian artists are doing in the new environment. How have your artists benefitted from online streaming, and what can we learn about your approach and how you have stickhandled the new environment?

3295 MR. ALDOUS: Well, first of all, many of ours have benefitted greatly from the streaming era. I think, as I referenced in my presentation, it’s easy to forget how dark things got at the height of the filesharing and illegal downloading era of the music business. I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say we entered what was probably a fifteen‑year recession between 2000 and 2015 regarding the music economy, not only in this country, but around the world. As the physical music business eroded, we were in the wilderness there for a while.

3296 And what replaced that ‑‑ or what has started to replace that ‑‑ and could actually eclipse it, if it’s allowed to flourish, is a paid streaming service. And that took a number of our artists from questionable viability in that recessionary period into flourishing careers in the digital streaming era. And it has also opened markets for them that we never thought would be open.

3297 We don’t know now where an artist is going to break. We may have a hit in Belgium that we never saw coming. We may have a hit in Southeast Asia that we never saw coming. And it’s a matter of striking where the iron is hot when those opportunities arise. And having strong relationships with our streaming partners allows us to do that.

3298 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you very much.

3299 MR. ALDOUS: Thank you for your questions.

3300 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Commissioner Levy.

3301 We will go to our Vice‑Chair of Broadcasting.

3302 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Thank you. Welcome, Mr. Aldous. So, I have a question ‑‑ a follow‑up question on something you said in your presentation. You talked about the fact that imposing contributions on music streaming services could have the potential to impact agreements that you have negotiated with these platforms. I’m wondering if you could be more specific?

3303 MR. ALDOUS: Sure. We are one of the few independent labels in the world, and I can’t speak to how many Canadian independent labels are in this position, but we have direct licensing agreements with the major music streaming services, which means we don’t go through a distributor, we don’t go through an aggregator; we get on Zoom and we negotiate directly with Spotify our deal with Spotify. It’s a complex agreement, and ironically, as I appear today, I am awaiting the draft of our renewal agreement from Spotify that we will be opening up over the next few months.

3304 They are complex agreements. They’re not simple in the sense of, you know, ‘License us your music; here’s your royalty; you know, sign here.’ There is a lot of ‑‑ there are a lot of mechanisms in those agreements that allow for cost adjustments, cost recoveries that could leave us exposed. If the streaming services take a position that, ‘Well, this market is not as viable for us because there is a cost of doing business associated with this market that lessens our ability to realize revenue in that market,’ the question is, who bears the cost of that when there is a private contractual relationship?

3305 You know, we don’t ‑‑ as I have said, we don’t have a relationship with any of the major terrestrial broadcasters in Canada. We don’t have a direct relationship, so if costs at Bell or Corus go up, they have no way of passing those on to us as the rightsholders and the content creators ‑‑ at least not directly. I think that’s one of the great distinctions that needs to be made here is, there is a direct contractual relationship between the parties here that is exposed, from our point of view, to additional costs being imposed on one party to that contract.

3306 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Okay. So, if I hear you say that there is the potential for the quote, unquote, “regulatory costs” to be passed on to the suppliers from the platforms?

3307 MR. ALDOUS: Correct.

3308 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: Okay. Thank you.

3309 MR. ALDOUS: Thank you for your questions.

3310 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Perhaps we could turn it back over to you now for any concluding remarks, if you have any key takeaways that you would leave the panel with, or anything that we have not had a chance to talk about this afternoon that you would like to add? Thank you.

3311 MR. ALDOUS: I would just like to add that, amongst my colleagues in legal and business affairs at record labels and music publishers around the world, the Commission should be aware that the world is watching Canada on this. We currently have an open international music market in digital streaming, and the position of national regulatory regimes on music streaming must be done carefully so that market protectionism does not creep into our sector.

3312 As a relatively small nation that overperforms compared to its size in the music business, we need to be conscious that what we do in Canada does not restrict or close markets currently available to our artists outside of our borders. And with that, I would wish you all a good afternoon and thank you for your time.

3313 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you so much for your participation. We really appreciate it.

3314 MR. ALDOUS: Thank you.

3315 THE SECRETARY: Thank you. We will now connect with FACTOR.

3316 Welcome. You may introduce yourself and you may begin.

Presentation

3317 MS. SYMSYK: Thank you. Good afternoon. Bonjour, Madam Chair, Vice‑Chairs and Commissioners. My name is Meg Symsyk, President & CEO of FACTOR, The Foundation Assisting Canadian Talent on Recordings. I am honoured to have the opportunity to appear before you today.

3318 FACTOR is a private, non‑profit organization that has been managing federal funds by delivering music programs to the music sectors for English and all other languages besides French for over 40 years. The Commission has called FACTOR, along with MusicAction for the French‑language music sector, “the most important vehicles for the development of a variety of Canadian artists.” FACTOR’s programs have supported the emergence of many well‑known Canadian artists, such as Aysanabee, The Beaches, Debby Friday, and Patrick Watson. FACTOR is one of the most significant sources of financial investment offered to help sustain and grow the Canadian‑owned music industry.

3319 FACTOR administers funds derived from both the Canada Music Fund and through Canadian Content Development (“CCD”) contributions from Canada’s private radio broadcasters. As a current and direct recipient of CCD contributions, FACTOR, and the Canadian artists and entities it funds, are directly affected by this notice of consultation and the Commission’s modernized regulatory framework regarding contributions to support Canadian and Indigenous content.

3320 FACTOR has seen a steep decline in CCD contributions from the radio sector over the past five years, dropping from 16 million in fiscal 2019 to a projected 6.8 in fiscal 2023/24. This is a drop of 10 million over the last four years, and has had a tremendous impact on FACTOR and its funding recipients, namely, Canadian Artists.

3321 As a result of these declining CCD funds, FACTOR has experienced a current decrease in its regular funding. This limits FACTOR’s ability to create and implement its objectives, including to support the sustainable development of artists, businesses, and organizations that support diverse artists in their careers, in tandem with the priorities on equity seeking groups.

3322 FACTOR delivers funding to the Canadian music sector via three key program laneways: the Artist Laneway; the Company Laneway; and the Collective Initiatives Laneway for events such as Junos, Polaris, and the Indigenous Music Summit. These programs are all focused on Canadian artists and are designed for flexibility, to allow FACTOR to support a range of activities across the Canadian music industry, including recording, marketing, promotion, touring, and showcasing. As the Commission has previously observed, these types of FACTOR programs “are especially valuable for artists who do not qualify for funding from the Radio Starmaker Fund.”

3323 In 2020, FACTOR launched the Canada Music Fund modernization initiative. This process involved reallocating Canada Music Fund funding to better foster the development of Canadian artists and entrepreneurs, and the promotion of Canadian‑owned music. Since 2020, FACTOR has seen significant positive results from these changes implemented during the modernization initiative.

3324 FACTOR’s modernized framework aligns with the Commission’s stated objectives in this proceeding. As part of its modernization, FACTOR has worked to remove limitations for underrepresented genres, and expanded eligibility requirements for various programs, opening up higher tiers of funding to more diverse artists. In 2021, FACTOR launched the Company Envelope program, which is now FACTOR’s largest single program at 14 million dollars. The program invests in over 60 vital music companies that represent and directly invest in over 700 Canadian artists. The Company Envelope provides financial incentives for companies to invest in Indigenous artists, Black and racialized, 2SLGBTQ+, persons with disabilities, official language minority communities, and women, in all regions of Canada. FACTOR has seen clear progress year‑over‑year in the Company Envelope program, with total program investments targeting artists from equity seeking groups rising in the last three fiscals from 21 percent to 29 percent, and at a current 33 percent.

3325 During the pandemic, in addition to modernizing its funding framework and continuing to offer regular programs, FACTOR also launched emergency distributions to assist Canada’s live music sector. From 2020 through 2023, FACTOR effectively and efficiently delivered over 75 million dollars in emergency funds received from the Department of Canadian Heritage to over 800 music industry live sector recipients. FACTOR was able to offer a financial lifeline to the Canadian live music sector during a time of significant uncertainty and need, all while undergoing its own programming overhaul to modernize funding initiatives.

3326 FACTOR recommends that the majority of the new CCD contributions continue to go to FACTOR, as well as MusicAction for the French‑language music sector. We are uniquely positioned to understand the divergent perspectives and various needs of the Canadian music industry. Our board of directors is comprised of representatives from every facet of the Canadian music industry, with an equal number of representatives from Canada’s private radio broadcasters and music company owners and artists.

3327 FACTOR has demonstrated that it has the capacity and industry support to continue key funding for Canadian Artists and the music sector. FACTOR is best positioned to administer new contributions effectively and efficiently, and to deliver on the Commission’s objectives.

3328 Thank you for your time, and I will be happy to answer any questions you may have.

3329 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much to FACTOR for your presentation. We’re actually quite pleased to end the day together because we’ve heard a lot about FACTOR today, so if you’ve been listening in, you would have heard some of that.

3330 MS. SYMSYK: I have been listening.

3331 THE CHAIRPERSON: I will turn things over to Commissioner Levy. Thank you.

3332 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Yes, it has been a veritable lovefest for FACTOR today, so you have ‑‑

3333 MS. SYMSYK: I love to hear that.

3334 COMMISSIONER LEVY: You had a lot of fans appearing before us. There appears to be a gap for funding programs managed by and for Indigenous Peoples, and if contributions specifically dedicated to this kind of support were to be directed to FACTOR, how would you manage this within your current structure, governance and otherwise?

3335 MS. SYMSYK: Well, I would like to start with we have supported Indigenous artists and applicants throughout all of our programs, and we will continue to do all we can to prioritize these applications. And to that end, our Board made a special three‑year commitment to direct funds that specifically came from CCD contributions in order to help launch the Indigenous Music Office.

3336 We began by funding the Indigenous Music Alliance, which resulted in the Indigenous Music Summit, and we were proud to see Curtis Clear Sky hired as the IMO’s Executive Director just a few weeks ago from that direct funding from FACTOR. This will help maintain our great lines of communication with the Indigenous community with respect to our program guidelines, and ensure future success stories.

3337 We have also significantly funded Indigenous Music Summit, as well as our Indigenous music labels, Ishk?dé Records having a huge success with Aysanabee as a specific example. And I do believe that those CCD funds that were given in the last three years to the Indigenous Office to build that structure is planting that seed that was necessary as a first step.

3338 COMMISSIONER LEVY: So, what portion of an initial basic contribution do you think should be devoted to this kind of support? If you had extra money, what proportion would go to this kind of an initiative?

3339 MS. SYMSYK: Well, if I look at our overall budget for the year in terms of if we are going to ‑‑ are you asking me if there is a specific percentage just for Indigenous content overall, or a specific program for Indigenous?

3340 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Well, we were talking in terms of support specifically for the Indigenous artists, and you have obviously gone some way to supporting this. But if there was extra money in the system, what proportion would you see going to that initiative?

3341 MS. SYMSYK: The structure that the Canada Music Fund had undergone with the modernization, I think, has worked out quite well in terms of a model and a structure, so that the applications, when they come in, and how we can incentivize the applicants, I think from a percentage standpoint ‑‑ you heard a little bit earlier in today’s proceedings that the music industry is complex, and I think that there’s a number of applications that ebb and flow, and we have a number of application jury rounds, for example, that come through, and you can have ‑‑ I’m just going to throw out examples that the Commission might be familiar with ‑‑ you might have the Weeknd and Haviah Mighty and Jessie Reyez all come in in one kind of group, and if you had specific percentages that you were assigning to a quota, it diminishes merit on the value of a song.

3342 So, what we do at FACTOR is we like to make sure we have a considerable amount of money in the right program, and then make sure that the best songs are being funded to be committed to ‑‑ or events that are committed to. So, again, I think that balance of a percentage of funding in those programs with the success of the merit of applications, is the striking the balance, much like I’m sure, you know, there’s a lot of people in the industry that like to find the balance of not just algorithms that feed a music streaming service, but have a balance of feedback from real listener humans.

3343 So again, an exact percentage ‑‑ I do believe that in the last two years, we have had anywhere from six to ten percent across the board of all our programs for Indigenous. The difficult part is not everyone has filled out their data percentages, so we can’t get a firm number on that. We have an idea of what we think we can increase to, as long as those numbers keep going up. So, I am challenged to give you a specific percentage in that regard.

3344 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Okay. You indicated that there is a lot that still needs to be done for the broadcasting sector to reflect Canada’s diversity. What would you see is currently lacking in your programs, or something obvious that FACTOR could contribute to improve diversity?

3345 MS. SYMSYK: Well, I think, again, the level of funding is key ‑‑ because we have seen the decline; it unfortunately came at the exact same time as the modernization, and then we also had the pandemic on top of that. So, it’s been a tremendous three years for FACTOR and most importantly the Canadian artists as the recipients. As part of its modernization though, FACTOR has worked to remove limitations for underrepresented genres, and that expanded eligibility requirements for various programs opened up those higher tiers of funding to more diverse artists. So, I believe that by doing the modernization through the Canada Music Fund, we have already kind of set the table, and now the only piece that’s really missing is a consistent flow of funds to stabilize it so we can make the right decisions. And not knowing what’s coming from the Canada Music Fund or for CCD in the coming year makes that very difficult for the Board, and most importantly for the recipients to understand what they can apply and be invested with.

3346 COMMISSIONER LEVY: So, how much additional money ‑‑ what additional contributions would be needed, in your view, to ensure the sustainability of FACTOR and in particular those new initiatives? What would it take, do you think, to fill those gaps and enable you to sustain and grow those programs?

3347 MS. SYMSYK: The amount of money we currently receive at FACTOR, the way it is disbursed, again is ‑‑ like I said before, it’s predominantly merit‑based on success of those artists like Patrick had alluded to earlier in his release, where we have artists that have responses to other marketplace indicators and international, and we want to be able to fund everyone, but it’s very much merit‑based on success. And so, to have equity seeking groups on a layer on top of that, I think has to be balanced. So, you know, when we look at our big table of what we’re funding, we always feel we’re short a third of everything.

3348 So, when we look at our balance of the 36 million dollars that we are currently using this year, we found that when we had the emergency funds that came into the sector in the last two years, when we hit around that 50 million mark where we were also able to include the live sector, not only do we incentivize the marketplace by the Envelope program to incentivize those equity seeking groups, but we also find by adding the live portion into it as well, that everyone made that a priority, and the industry, I felt, reacted in quite a positive manner. And the only frustration was that it ended, and had we kept going on that trajectory, I think we would have seen some amazing results, and I am hopeful that in the next year to come that we will still continue to see that turn around and invest in Canadian artists.

3349 COMMISSIONER LEVY: Thank you very much.

3350 MS. SYMSYK: Thank you for your question.

3351 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Commissioner Levy.

3352 Let’s go to Commissioner Scott.

3353 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: Good afternoon. So, we heard from SOCAN this morning that Canadian artists maybe aren’t doing as well with online ‑‑ on online services as they had been doing with traditional broadcast partners. But then we also heard from Nettwerk, just in the previous presentation, that they’ve got a very strong relationship with some of the online streamers, and it sounded like maybe they’re concerned that we might introduce some unintended consequences.

3354 What is really going on with Canadian artists and the streaming platforms, and what is FACTOR doing to continue to support Canadian artists on those platforms?

3355 MS. SYMSYK: Thank you for your question, Vice‑Chair Scott.

3356 Again, I will start by saying that the music industry is complex, and the reason that it’s complex is that there are a number of different microecosystems inside of it.

3357 And so, you can have an artist that does very well on traditional broadcast radio stations. You can also have an artist that through streaming ‑‑ because Canada is such a diverse country, we have a number of clients that sing and have in different languages other than English but are Canadian and will pop out from pockets in other areas of the world, and I also think that, you know, in listening to the community radio and campus radio submissions earlier, we also have a number of records that we make that, you know, begin their homes in that environment.

3358 And so, we have such a huge different level of artistry that goes on in terms of music that I think that it matters that there are multiple pathways to success for artists. And so, we are constantly looking at making sure that we’re not creating any barriers for success in any one particular pathway.

3359 You know, when I came on into FACTOR three years ago, we had that conversation internally about making sure that we were breaking down barriers for access, because we could appreciate that there were some artists that were building audience but were not being measured against our previous traditional ways of measuring it, whether it was radio chart numbers, number of tour dates, et cetera. And now we have a multitude of ways that we ask for artists to show us how they’re building audience, and those that are, we consistently try to match in investment.

3360 So, I can appreciate the comments that Nettwerk made today, but I think there is a balance to a number of different artists. What I can say is, creators across the board are having difficulty, and I do believe that Canadian artists ‑‑ even the ones that would traditional financially be able to make this their full‑time career and not have a side job to continue on making music ‑‑ are struggling with the current cost of touring, which we saw during the pandemic has a clear relation to building audience. And when those artists were hampered from touring, that really separated those that had a radio hit, so to speak, and not, and how to build that audience.

3361 And so, I think that those are things that we’re constantly looking at in terms of supporting artists and the investments that the companies make that are investing in them.

3362 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON SCOTT: That's great. Thank you for that thoughtful and nuanced answer.

3363 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay, and over to you, Vice‑Chair Barin.

3364 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: So, you just mentioned touring, and I think that FACTOR, during the COVID‑19 pandemic, had an emergency fund program that helped the live music sector. And I am wondering whether you would see value in supporting the live music sector on an ongoing basis if there were more funds available to FACTOR?

3365 MS. SYMSYK: I can’t impress upon the Commission more heartily that that would be an absolute prioritized fund if that was to be the case, in terms of funding live. We do fund live in part of an overall scheme, in terms of artists applying to us, but I do believe that there is much more capability to help build audience, as I have mentioned. But I think touring and building audience go hand‑in‑hand, and we do have artists that do punch above their weight and are finding their starting seed not necessarily in their backyard in Canada, but it might be in a different international market.

3366 And so, for us, funding more significantly in the live sector and more significantly in international markets is where I think there is a huge gap currently. And we could take it to that next level. I think that ‑‑ you know, I know that FACTOR is viewed internationally and is quite the envy of my international colleagues, and I think that adding that extra layer to those international markets and touring for artists would be ‑‑ not only do we have the opportunity and artists to fill that void and be successful, but I think it would be a great last piece of the ecosystem that has been missing for a long time. And that includes promoters, as well as going directly to the artists in the ecosystem.

3367 VICE‑CHAIRPERSON BARIN: I appreciate that. Thank you.

3368 THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thank you very much.

3369 So, we will turn things back over to you for any concluding remarks.

3370 MS. SYMSYK: Again, I thank you for your time today. I know that the music ecosystem is complex. We are very passionate and deal with this on a daily basis, and are always trying to do right by the Canadian artists and making sure that their songs are heard around the world.

3371 I want to reiterate that FACTOR has demonstrated that it has the capacity and the industry knowledge support to continue key funding for the Canadian music sector, but we are also best positioned to administer new contributions effectively and efficiently, to deliver on the Commission’s objectives.

3372 The music community and Canadian artists are at a critical time, and those challenges remain for new artists, discovery for Canadian artists, and costs of touring to build audience, and yet FACTOR has seen a massive opportunity for Canadian artists and music companies that didn’t exist five years ago, and we have had a huge increase in the number of artists and applications that are coming from music entrepreneurs.

3373 So, now is the time to invest in Canadian artists, Indigenous artists, making Canadian music, and the companies that support them, and we are ready to support the framework that you deliver.

3374 Thank you for your time today.

3375 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. And again, very happy to be ending our day today with FACTOR. Thank you.

3376 MS. SYMSYK: Oh, that makes me happy. Thank you very much.

3377 THE SECRETARY: Thank you.

3378 Before we finish, for the record, I just need to announce something.

3379 So, on 9 November 2023, Ken Zakreski filed a procedural request to be permitted to file new evidence, which is a video presenting the Facebook group Community Bulletin Board ‑ Life on Gabriola. After examining the video later provided by the intervenor, the Commission considers that the new evidence can be added to the public record since the video is supporting statements he already made on the record. The Commission hereby approves Mr. Zakreski’s procedural request and invites the intervenor to provide the link to the video in question in his final written reply.

3380 This concludes today’s hearing, and we will be back tomorrow at 9:00. Thank you.

‑‑‑ Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 4:29 p.m., to resume on Friday, November 24, 2023 at 9:00 a.m.

Reporters
Deana Johansson
Monique Mahoney
Lynda Johansson
Tania Mahoney
Brian Denton