TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
FOR THE CANADIAN RADIO-TELEVISION AND
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
TRANSCRIPTION DES AUDIENCES DU
CONSEIL DE LA RADIODIFFUSION
ET DES TÉLÉCOMMUNICATIONS CANADIENNES
SUBJECT / SUJET:
CBC LICENCE RENEWALS /
RENOUVELLEMENTS DE LICENCES DE LA SRC
HELD AT: TENUE À:
Place du Portage Place du Portage
Conference Centre Centre de conférence
Outaouais Room Salle Outaouais
Hull, Quebec Hull (Québec)
June 7, 1999 Le 7 juin 1999
Volume 11
Transcripts
In order to meet the requirements of the Official Languages
Act, transcripts of proceedings before the Commission will be
bilingual as to their covers, the listing of the CRTC members
and staff attending the public hearings, and the Table of
Contents.
However, the aforementioned publication is the recorded
verbatim transcript and, as such, is taped and transcribed in
either of the official languages, depending on the language
spoken by the participant at the public hearing.
Transcription
Afin de rencontrer les exigences de la Loi sur les langues
officielles, les procès-verbaux pour le Conseil seront
bilingues en ce qui a trait à la page couverture, la liste des
membres et du personnel du CRTC participant à l'audience
publique ainsi que la table des matières.
Toutefois, la publication susmentionnée est un compte rendu
textuel des délibérations et, en tant que tel, est enregistrée
et transcrite dans l'une ou l'autre des deux langues
officielles, compte tenu de la langue utilisée par le
participant à l'audience publique.
Canadian Radio-television and
Telecommunications Commission
Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des
télécommunications canadiennes
Transcript / Transcription
Public Hearing / Audience publique
CBC LICENCE RENEWALS /
RENOUVELLEMENTS DE LICENCES DE LA SRC
BEFORE / DEVANT:
Françoise Bertrand Chairperson of the
Commission, Chairperson /
Présidente du Conseil,
Présidente
Andrée Wylie Commissioner / Conseillère
David Colville Commissioner / Conseiller
Barbara Cram Commissioner / Conseillère
James Langford Commissioner / Conseiller
Cindy Grauer Commissioner / Conseillère
Joan Pennefather Commissioner / Conseillère
ALSO PRESENT / AUSSI PRÉSENTS:
Nick Ketchum Hearing Manager /
Gérant de l'audience
Carolyn Pinsky Legal Counsel /
Alastair Stewart Conseillers juridiques
Carol Bénard Secretary / Secrétaire
HELD AT: TENUE À:
Place du Portage Place du Portage
Conference Centre Centre de conférence
Outaouais Room Salle Outaouais
Hull, Quebec Hull (Québec)
June 7, 1999 Le 7 juin 1999
- ii -
TABLE OF CONTENTS / TABLE DES MATIÈRES
PAGE
Intervention by / Intervention par:
Canadian Cable Television Association 3148
Communications, Energy & Paperworkers 3180
Union of Canada
Center for Research-Action on Race Relations 3204
National Film Board of Canada 3224
Alberta Motion Pictures Industries Association 3239
Newfoundland Broadcasting Company 3254
S&S Productions 3270
Fédération nationale des communications 3279
Corporation of the City of Windsor 3293
Aysha Productions 3311
Daryl Duke 3326
Telefilm Canada 3349
Canadian Conference of the Arts 3386
Canadian Independent Film Caucus 3409
D.C. Dawson 3435
Hull, Quebec / Hull (Québec)
--- Upon resuming on Monday, June 7, 1999 at 0900 /
L'audience reprend le lundi 7 juin 1999 à 0900
15704 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good morning.
15705 As Commissioner Langford is saying,
don't be -- comment dire? Ne vous faites pas prendre.
It's not India, it's Ottawa, but it is quite warm
today. So if anyone wants to take their ties off, it's
fine.
15706 Madame Bénard, would you please
introduce our first intervenor of the week?
15707 MS BÉNARD: Thank you, Madam Chair.
15708 The first presentation will be by the
Canadian Cable Television Association / l'Association
canadienne de télévision par câble.
15709 Mr. Watt.
15710 MR. WATT: Thank you.
15711 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good morning.
INTERVENTION
15712 MR. WATT: Good morning, Madam Chair,
Commissioners.
15713 My name is David Watt and I am
Interim pPesident of the CCTA.
15714 With me today, on my right, are Gary
Pizante, Vice-President of Economics; Andrew Briggs,
Director of Economics; and on my left, Bev
Kirshenblatt, Director of Legal and Regulatory Affairs.
15715 The Canadian cable television
industry has been a key partner with programming
services, working towards ensuring the success of the
Canadian specialty services, including Newsworld and
RDI. CCTA's goal, which is shared by its partners in
the Canadian broadcasting system, is to provide
Canadians with the greatest choice of high-quality
programming at affordable prices.
15716 As you all know, wholesale
affiliation payments make up a very large part of the
cable company's business. In 1998, the Canadian cable
industry paid $566 million to Canadian specialty and
Pay-TV licensees. This is approximately 30 per cent of
its operating expenses and represents the cable
industry's single largest expense item. For this
reason, we believe that it is very important that
requests to increase wholesale fees be based on sound
forecasting assumptions and that they receive rigorous
scrutiny.
15717 On May 5, CCTA filed an intervention
opposing the rate increase requests of both Newsworld
and RDI. In that written intervention, we focused our
comments on Newsworld's proposed rate increase. We
also supported the written intervention submitted by
the ACQ opposing RDI's proposed rate increase.
15718 Our comments today will focus on
Newsworld's application for an increase in its
authorized wholesale rate -- a 15 per cent increase --
from the current monthly rate of 55 cents to 63 cents
per subscriber.
15719 CCTA believes that Newsworld's
forecast of subscribers is flawed, causing Newsworld to
severely underestimate its future revenues. If the
appropriate adjustments are made to Newsworld's
projections, Newsworld will have significantly more
funds available than they have forecasted.
15720 In addition to the text, I have
handed out a package of slides that I will be referring
to during the comments.
15721 As shown on page 2 of the package of
charts we have provided to you, you can see that
Newsworld says it will reduce programming expenditures
by $24 million over its seven-year licence term if it
does not receive an 8 cent rate increase.
15722 When corrections are made to
Newsworld's revenue forecasts, this projected shortfall
is more than fully offset. After correcting
Newsworld's forecast, as shown in the middle column on
page 2, we estimate that Newsworld will receive
$37.3 million more in revenue that it has forecast. In
fact, this is sufficient for Newsworld to also meet its
five proposed goals, which it says will cost
$35.8 million over its licence term.
15723 Simply put, Newsworld can do
everything it wants to do without increasing subscriber
fees.
15724 The main problem with Newsworld's
business plan is that it assumes virtually no
additional subscriber growth. It overlooks the impact
of two key factors.
15725 First, Newsworld's forecast overlooks
the growth in subscribers from new distribution
undertakings such as DTH satellites which have extended
the reach of Newsworld to uncabled areas of the
country. Proper recognition of this growth will
provide an additional $11.4 million to Newsworld. You
can see the $11.4 is the bottom section of the middle
column on page 2.
15726 Second, Newsworld overlooks normal
growth in TV households. Proper recognition of this
growth provides an additional $17.7 million to
Newsworld. These growth factors will lead to a
substantial increase in subscribers and a corresponding
increase in advertising revenues, estimated at
$8.2 million, as more subscribers will translate into
more viewers.
15727 Turning to the specifics, page 3 of
the handout shows Newsworld's assumptions regarding
subscriber growth. The number of cable subscribers
stays flat, while DTH subscribers will increase from
218,000 to 239,000 over seven years.
15728 Newsworld says that DTH subscribers
may grow by more than this projection but that this
additional growth would be at the expense of cable
subscribers and would leave its forecast of total cable
and DTH subscribers unaffected.
15729 As a result, Newsworld projects that
total subscribers will increase from a starting point
of 6.422 million in Year 1 to 6.443 million in Year 7.
This represents growth of 21,000 subscribers over seven
years, for an annual growth rate of only 0.05 per cent
per year. That is one-twentieth of 1 per cent per
year.
15730 Contrary to Newsworld's assumption,
the number of subscribers to Newsworld are increasing
at a very significant rate. Page 4 of the chart
handout shows a comparison of March 1998 and March 1999
Newsworld subscribers in English Canada as compiled by
Mediastats. As you can see, the total number of
subscribers has increased by 7 per cent or 434,000.
15731 At 55 cents per subscriber per month,
this alone amounts to an annual subscriber revenue
increase of $2.9 million for Newsworld. The biggest
source of subscriber growth is DTH, which added 245,000
English Canadian subscribers in just one year. Most
importantly, this growth was not offset by a decline in
cable subscribers, which also increased by 3 per cent
or 175,000 subscribers.
15732 Thus, even with no increase in its
subscriber wholesale rate, Newsworld stands to enjoy a
substantial revenue increase from growth in the number
of cable and DTH subscribers.
15733 Let us look more closely at the
problems with Newsworld's DTH projections. At present,
10 per cent of Canadian households are not passed by
cable, while another 22 per cent of TV households that
are passed by cable do not subscribe to cable.
15734 DTH provides Newsworld the
opportunity of reaching these 32 per cent of TV
households that are currently not receiving specialty
services. This is a brand new market for Newsworld and
other specialty services. Newsworld overlooks this
large element of the DTH market and instead, as
mentioned earlier, assumes that most of DTH's new
subscribers would come at the expense of cable.
15735 Page 5 illustrates a substantial gap
between Newsworld's view of DTH subscriber growth and
an RBC Dominion Securities forecast of DTH growth.
This portion of the RBC forecast includes only
customers who did not previously take cable service,
the point being that from Newsworld's perspective these
are new customers.
15736 Using the RBC Dominion Securities
forecast of DTH growth in non-cabled areas and of
non-cable customers it rises up to $709,000 in Year 7.
The CCTA estimates that based on the existing rate of
55 cents per month these DTH subscribers will provide
Newsworld with an additional $11.4 million in revenue.
As you can see in every year but the first year, the
RBC Dominion Securities forecast exceeds significantly
the Newsworld's forecast.
15737 This $11.4 million in revenue was
shows to you on page 2 of the package we have handed
out. Remember, this is new additional revenue and does
not include any revenues from cable customers who have
migrated to DTH.
15738 Second, let's look at household
growth. Historically, household growth in Canada has
averaged approximately 1.5 per cent per year. Again,
Newsworld's forecast overlooks this growth. As we
noted earlier, by growing DTH customers in its
financial forecast by only 1.5 per cent per year from
its small starting point and not growing cable
customers at all, Newsworld's forecast grows overall
customers by a mere 0.05 per cent per year.
15739 Based on Newsworld's current 55 cents
per month rate, and assuming household growth of 1.5
per cent per annum in the cable universe, we have
estimated that additional subscribers from new
household growth will generate $17.7 million in
revenues for Newsworld.
15740 There are additional problems with
Newsworld's forecast of advertising revenues. As
illustrated on page 6, during the period of 1995 to
1998 Newsworld increased its advertising revenues by an
average rate of 9 per cent per year. Nine per cent
growth is certainly a substantial gain.
15741 However, now Newsworld is forecasting
an abrupt reversal in its growth trend. After
forecasting a 14 per cent decrease in annual
advertising revenue from 1998 to 2000, Newsworld
forecasts annual advertising revenue growth of only
2 per cent per annum during its licence period.
15742 Our corrections to Newsworld's
forecasts do not include any adjustment to the period
1998 to 2000. Instead, our third correction follows
from our adjustments to its subscriber growth
forecasts.
15743 Because Newsworld has ignored
subscriber growth from normal household growth and from
the extended coverage of DTH, it follows that its
forecast of views and advertising revenue is also
underestimated. We have therefore increased its
forecast of annual advertising revenues in proportion
to our projection of its additional subscribers. This
results in additional revenues of $8.2 million over the
licence term.
15744 Newsworld responded to the
association's intervention by submitting a Media Buying
Services study that examines the Canadian television
advertising market. The association notes that this
study does not address any of the adjustments we put
forth in our written submission regarding subscriber
growth and is therefore largely irrelevant to our
points.
15745 This summarizes the specific
adjustments we have made to Newsworld's forecasts. We
wish to make two additional general observations
regarding Newsworld's forecasts.
15746 First, Newsworld received a
substantial rate increase in 1993 from 32 cents to
55 cents. It is interesting to note that Newsworld's
actual 1998 subscribers exceeds the forecast from its
previous licence renewal application by over one
million subscribers. In this renewal application, we
believe Newsworld is once again underestimating its
revenue levels.
15747 Second, it is interesting to note
that when applying for a new French-language service
last year, CBC projected considerably higher subscriber
growth in Canada from both cable and DTH. These
projections are shown on page 7.
15748 In this case, CBC applied an average
annual growth rate of 2 per cent. This stands in stark
contrast to the 0.05 per cent annual growth in this
renewal application.
15749 In conclusion, we believe that with
the appropriate adjustments made to Newsworld's
financial projections, you will agree that Newsworld
will have sufficient resources to accomplish its goals.
15750 If the 55 cent rate is maintained,
subscriber revenue will continue to increase and will,
in fact, provide Newsworld with $37.3 million in funds
than Newsworld has forecasted. This will more than
offset the $24 million shortfall that Newsworld is
projecting. This will provide Newsworld with
sufficient financial resources to do everything it
wants to do, including its five proposed goals.
15751 Thank you, and we welcome your
questions.
15752 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very
much.
15753 I would ask Vice-Chair Wylie to
address the questions, please.
15754 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: Good morning,
Mr. Watt, Madame and gentlemen.
15755 You apply, I gather, to both cabled
and non-cable areas the same growth factor. We have
22 per cent of TV households that are passed by cable
and do not subscribe to cable. What percentage do you
ascribe to them subscribing to DTH, the same as
non-cabled areas?
15756 MR. WATT: There is no explicit
assumption made on that point.
15757 Just to clarify exactly what was
done, the additional subscribers are broken into two
pieces. One is the piece that comes from non-cabled
areas and people who do not take cable. The number
there was taken directly from the Dominion Securities
forecast. So that is the number going from, I think,
187,000 up to 709,000.
15758 So there is no -- the 1.5 per cent
growth in households is not applied in that number.
RBC will have some forecast growth in that number. We
don't know what it is.
15759 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: But there is no
differentiation, as far as you know, as to the
percentage of growth in cabled areas, where people
choose not to take cable, and those areas that are not
cabled and that may take DTH. I find it difficult to
believe that the same calculation can be applied when
one knows that currently there is not a lot of
difference between cable and DTH offerings and, if
anything, the financial outlay at the outset may be
larger.
15760 I find it hard to believe that those
households, between 22 per cent and 25 per cent that
could have cable and choose not to take it will take
DTH in large numbers.
15761 MR. WATTS: Okay. Actually, the
Dominion Securities forecast does not make the
assumption that the penetration of services in areas
that were uncabled is the same as the penetration into
areas that were cabled but did not take the service.
15762 We can provide the actual Dominion
Securities report to you, and there on page 4 what it
shows is it has it labelled "Satellite TV Share of
Total Homes" and it comes through and it has a range of
years. It goes "Homes not Passed by Cable" and it
rises from 15 per cent up to 63 per cent, saying that
by the end of the period 63 per cent of those homes
that were not served by cable are actually taking DTH
service.
15763 When it comes to the second category,
that is "Homes Passed by Cable" but who have chosen not
to take cable -- I stumble over that -- goes from a
number of 2 per cent in the first year up to 8 per cent
in the last year.
15764 So I think they have taken into
account the point that you are making, that if people
have chosen not to take cable it probably indicates
that they haven't felt the value was there for whatever
reason, either the price or the services that are
offered, and now that they do have an alternative, some
more people choose to take the programming packages,
but not a great deal more.
15765 So it is only an 8 per cent
penetration into that market versus the 63 per cent
penetration into the market where people couldn't get
anything before.
15766 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: So if I look at
your written intervention at page 6, Chart 1,
"Estimated DTH Customers from Non-Cable Areas and
Non-Cable Subscribers", the calculation made here takes
into account a lower percentage from non-cable
subscribers who could have cable and non-cabled areas.
Is that what you are saying, that there is a different
percentage of take from these two categories?
15767 MR. WATT: Yes.
15768 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: And 2 per cent
growing to 8 percent, In non-cable areas what is the
percentage applied?
15769 MR. WATT: It grows from, in the
first year, a 15 per cent penetration up to 63 per cent
penetration.
15770 I suspect the thought process that
went on with the forecasters there was that these were
people who couldn't receive the service.
15771 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: And would if
they had an alternative?
15772 MR. WATT: Exactly. So it would rise
up to roughly the penetration, a little bit less, than
what cable has today.
15773 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: What does the 2
per cent in first year, 3 per cent in first year --
from cabled areas where people choose not to subscribe,
have you calculated separately what that would amount
to in dollars?
15774 MR. WATT: No, I haven't done that
calculation.
15775 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: The total, the
15 per cent and the 2 per cent blended is -- I forget
now. That is the growth related to adding DTH
subscribers from non-cabled areas and from cabled areas
where people don't subscribe.
15776 MR. WATT: That's correct. The total
of the two is $11.4 million over the licence period.
15777 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: Because you
stated this morning again, at the bottom of page 5, as
32 per cent of TV households are currently not
receiving specialty services one must make a difference
between the two. It's not really 32 per cent, I would
say, because people who could have cable and don't
subscribe to it are less likely, en masse, to subscribe
to an alternative service because they have had a
choice until there is a differentiation that is greater
between the two. But that has been taken into account
in arriving at the numbers.
15778 MR. WATT: Yes, that has been taken
into account.
15779 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: Even 2 per cent
in first year, 3 per cent in second year may be high
until there is a greater differentiation that, for some
reason, would entice the subscribers to choose a
distribution system when they had one and didn't choose
to subscribe to it, either in the form of greater
differentiation of offering or a lower price.
15780 You also state on page 5 of your
written intervention that -- you refer to StarChoice
having indicated that 36 per cent of its customers have
come from areas not served by cable as opposed to
displacing cable. Where do those figures come from?
From StarChoice itself?
15781 MR. WATT: Yes, they do come from
StarChoice themselves. Their public quarterly
financial statements.
15782 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: The rest would
have come from areas not served by cable and the rest
would be displacing cable subscribers, disconnection?
15783 MR. WATT: Well, it comes down to the
same issue we were discussing before. There are really
three categories: There are consumers who take cable
today; and then there are consumers who could take
cable but don't take cable; and then, finally, there
are consumers who can't take cable, they are simply not
served. This 36 per cent number refers to the latter
category, those people who don't have cable available
to them. The other 70 or 64 per cent comes from people
who could take cable but don't and those who do take
cable --
15784 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: So it would mean
a full 64 per cent of StarChoice customer base would
come from areas that are cabled and people didn't
subscribe to cable and people who disconnect cable to
connect to DTH?
15785 MR. WATT: Yes.
15786 MR. PIZANTE: That last statement
they are not sure about.
15787 The way that StarChoice expresses the
numbers is in terms of where the subscribers come from
in respect of cabled areas. They don't break it down
in terms of whether they were previously cable
customers or not.
15788 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: Oh, I
understand. But it is still 64 per cent that would be
a combination of those two, people who disconnect cable
or people who could have had cable and never were
connected to it, or at least at that moment who are not
subscribers.
15789 MR. WATT: Yes.
15790 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: Your advertising
revenue, or your projected increases in advertising
revenues, of course, are largely related to your
forecasts of subscriber growth materializing.
15791 MR. WATT: Yes. They are directly
related.
15792 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: Your theory
would be because there are more subscribers you would
have more chance to increase your advertising revenue.
15793 I don't have any other questions,
Madam Chair, but I believe some colleagues may have.
15794 Thank you very much.
15795 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Good morning.
I have just two or three questions. Maybe they will
grow, but I don't think so.
15796 Let's assume that everything you say
is right and everything Newsworld has said is wrong.
Just they got it wrong. We are not going to apply
motives to anybody. They just got it wrong and you got
it right.
15797 Let's assume they still want the
8 cents, because even looking at your numbers, there is
a lot of stuff they want to do -- I am just making this
up as I go along, but you can make it up as well. You
can find a scenario.
15798 They are worried about wage
settlements, equipment costs are going up, who knows,
rental on buildings. They would still essentially like
to spend more money and do a better job. Let us just
take a very simple assumption.
15799 Would you still be opposed to the
8 cents? In fact, if they had just come in here and
said, "Yes, we are going to make more money in
advertising. We are going to make more money on
subscribers, but we would still like 8 cents more.
We will do a better job."
15800 MR. WATT: I think we would not
necessarily be opposed. I suspect we would -- I think
the point to make is that if they were to come in and
identify what they wanted the additional eight 8 cents
for -- which was over and above what they had
identified here, because that was a premise of your
statement -- and they were able to convince the
Commission that those were appropriate things to do,
then I think that would be an appropriate way to go at
this.
15801 However, it would definitely not be
appropriate in this circumstance to say, "Well,
undoubtedly, there are other things that Newsworld
would like to do with an 8 cent increase" and approve
the 8 cent increase.
15802 We have indicated here that, again
working from the assumption that our numbers are right,
that there will be sufficient funds for Newsworld to
perform and meet all the objectives that it has stated
in its submission without increasing the rate.
15803 So to approve the 8 cent increase, it
would be akin to writing a blank cheque where they
would have complete freedom of discretion to do
whatever they wanted with that money. It would be money
that would not have been reviewed by you with respect
to its use.
15804 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Okay, but you
are stepping ahead a little. I know my question comes
a little from left field but I would like to go back to
it if I can.
15805 Let's just leave aside our job,
whether they have made the case to us, and let's just
look at your relationship with Newsworld.
15806 Let's assume that all your figures
are right and they agree, but they feel they need
8 cents more: They want to buy some more equipment,
they want to do more stories, they want to have more
regional presence, whatever reason you want to put
on it.
15807 Would you be opposed to them --
leaving aside all of the battle of the numbers here,
would you be opposed to them over the next seven years
increasing their rates 8 cents? Would that trouble
your association, your association members in some way?
15808 MR. WATT: Again, I will actually go
back to my previous answer. I think that is a question
for the Commission to rule on.
15809 I know what you are saying, you are
saying "What are you going to come and tell us when you
are considering that."
15810 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Your previous
answers -- I don't like to interrupt, but your previous
answer is really clear. I understand it. Probably I
agree with it.
15811 I am just trying to get at the
relationship between your members, the cable companies,
and Newsworld.
15812 Is there something about an increase?
It doesn't have to be 8 cents.
15813 I mean, essentially, are cable
companies opposed to increases naturally? Do they
dislike them? Are they worried about losing
subscribers or customers? Is there just something
about increases that intuitively cable companies
dislike, before we get to the reasons for them and the
numbers?
15814 MR. WATT: As a first comment, what
cable industries like from the programming service is
good quality programming which will make people
subscribe to cable.
15815 Having said that, we are always
concerned about cost increases, as I mentioned in the
first page of our comments this morning. We pay very
close to $600 million in affiliation payments to
programming services.
15816 So when we see a 15 per cent rate
increase request from one of the services, we
instinctively get concerned because we take the 15 per
cent and we apply it to the $600 million figure and
think, geez, if everything went this way, we would be
up in the $90 million range and that's a considerable
amount of money. That will either flow through to
customers, which will hurt the penetration directly, or
it will cause us to consider our competitive position
relative to other players as to whether we think it is
a prudent thing to do to pass through the rate increase
and increase our rates, because one has to make a guess
as to what the competition will do in our competitive
positioning.
15817 I think our key point here today is
that the rate increase should be founded on a clear
articulation of what will be obtained from the rate
increase and then based on proper forecasting methods.
15818 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: I want you to
know that I am in no way negating the work you have
done. It is very valuable work and we appreciate
having it. I am trying to get at something a little
more basic, a bit of a starting point.
15819 You indicate, if I have written your
words down correctly, you said what you would like to
have from the program providers is good quality
programming that will make people subscribe to cable.
15820 Does Newsworld provide that?
15821 MR. WATT: As you know, Newsworld has
the highest carriage numbers of any specialty service
on cable and its viewership numbers. So let me return
to that point.
15822 So the cable industry certainly sees
the value of Newsworld. Viewership numbers. Newsworld
has significant viewership numbers.
15823 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Now,
Newsworld told us when they came before us, their
representatives told us that they kicked around higher
numbers, 12 and 13 cents I think they said, but
certainly the number 13 cents was there. Whether it
was 13 and 15 or 12 and 13, I can't remember, but
13 was one of the ones they kicked around. I guess
they sit at a strategy table, like anyone else, and
they decided, we are led to believe, that they didn't
feel that those numbers would fly. Although they felt
they could have used the income, they just didn't feel
they would fly. So they settled on eight, somehow.
Great Canadian compromise, I guess.
15824 I guess what that tells me is that
they perceive a need for more revenues in the future.
They are not convinced by your case, obviously, but you
may be right.
15825 It is conceivable, though, that if
their first numbers were right, they need more than
8 cents. and they may need something like 8 cents plus
everything you are forecasting, assuming your numbers
are right, your forecasts are right, or maybe 5 cents
plus everything you are forecasting.
15826 You are not then, by very nature,
opposed to a rise in their rates. They are a valuable
program provider, as you say. People like them. I
guess they bring customers -- I hope I am not reading
into it, but you will correct me if I am -- they bring
customers to your members' businesses.
15827 I guess what I come back to again is,
if your numbers are right, but their numbers are right
too, or their needs are right too, is there anything
inherent in the position of your customers which would
be against a rise of some sort, assuming that we
accepted your numbers but accepted as well that there
was a need for more revenue?
15828 MR. WATT: I think the difficulty
there is that we, in the record of this proceeding,
would not know what that additional money would be
spent on, and I think that that is a problem. I think
in terms of increasing rates one should know what the
increased revenue will be spent on.
15829 Our position is that with respect to
everything that Newsworld has said that it wants to do
over the seven-year period, the existing rates
corrected for subscriber growth will give it adequate
money. With respect to whether there are additional
things that they would like to do if they were to
receive more money, that really has not been explained
in this particular proceeding.
15830 So it is hard to say whether that
would be a good idea or not.
15831 My answer is simply that it would not
be a good idea to approve that, because the necessary
information on which to approve that rate increase
isn't available and hasn't been studied.
15832 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: The final
question: The numbers aside again, are your members --
maybe excited is too big a word, but enthusiastic,
keen, positive about the five goals or the five new
challenges set out in the Newsworld application? Do
you think having more video journalists, more satellite
trucks will make for a better product, make for better
quality programming, to use your term?
15833 MR. WATT: We haven't extensively
canvassed our members on those very specifics of the
application. We have had rate discussions with them
about the application and the overall numbers. They
haven't indicated any great feeling one way or the
other with respect to the five objectives.
15834 If we thought that they were not
something that was worthwhile, then we would be here
today asking that the rate actually be rolled back,
because logic would dictate that if the subscriber
revenue is growing and the five objectives are not
worthwhile then the five objectives shouldn't be put
into place, and hence the money wouldn't be needed and
the rate actually could be rolled back. That is not
the position we have taken here today.
15835 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: So we can
assume they are probably positive about them? At least
they are not negative?
15836 MR. WATT: Yes.
15837 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Thank you
very much.
15838 THE CHAIRPERSON: Vice-Chair Wylie
has an additional question.
15839 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: My understanding
of the rate for Newsworld is that it is a maximum rate.
Did you take into consideration, in calculating the
additional revenues from growth, the fact that there
must be a number of subscribers on bulk rates? Are you
aware of how many of those there are?
15840 MR. WATT: On bulk rates?
15841 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: Because like
every other service, that must apply to them too so
that the increase has to be tempered by the fact that
subscribers of any service, I suspect, in bulk rates is
paying less.
15842 MR. WATT: Well, the bulk rate is
actually the right to charge by the cable company to
the multiple dwelling unit, to the MDU.
15843 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: But it doesn't
mean that the cable company, if it gets less from the
unit, gives the same amount to Newsworld?
15844 MR. WATT: No, I am not aware of
that. I can check into that.
15845 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: Well, doesn't
bulk work that both the wholesale and the retail rate
are lower than the maximum?
15846 MR. WATT: I'm not aware of that.
15847 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: Because there
was some discussion of that, with RDI at least.
15848 I see that you have some comments and
ideas, but we will leave that discussion to the
Quebec -- in your written presentation.
15849 MR. WATT: That's correct.
15850 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: Now, we really
appreciate you doing these calculations, it is helpful
to us. But at the end of the day, the Commission has
to be satisfied that the rate increase asked for is
reasonable and is to cover, in this case, improvement
in programming.
15851 You seem to be concerned that we
wouldn't know that. We don't think we have any means
of deciding which of these five objectives are
acceptable to the Commission to justify a rate increase
and to ensure that they are actually put in place.
15852 MR. WATT: No, that really wasn't my
point. My point was that with proper calculation of
revenues, the money does exist to do all five of the
objectives.
15853 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: Oh, I
understand. I understand that.
15854 MR. WATT: Other objectives have not
been articulated, so I'm not --
15855 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: I understand the
number crunching and we appreciate that. They did the
numbers in one way, we asked questions, we are going to
ask for further breakdowns. They have been asked to
provide further breakdowns.
15856 So that is one point of it, is to
look at whether or not they underestimated their
revenues, therefore their ability to perform under
these five goals, or whatever goals, and you have
numbers that show greater revenues through various
calculations, which shows that they can do all that
without a rate increase.
15857 Past that, I thought I heard you
express a concern that we ought to know what it is they
are going to -- if we were to accept their numbers
rather than yours, what they are going to do with the
money.
15858 MR. WATT: Actually, what I was doing
was responding to Commissioner Langford's question,
which was to say that Newsworld in the early stages of
its deliberations thought of asking for 13 cents.
15859 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: Oh yes, I
understand.
15860 MR. WATT: Therefore, now that --
even with the corrected numbers, if you just made the
assumption, well, now we make the correction, well,
given our druthers, we had initially identified a need
for 13 cents, we scaled it back to 8 cents because of
the magnitude of it. Now that the magnitude is going
to be less, we will stick with the 8 cents to pay for
additional objectives which haven't been explained or
placed on the record in this proceeding.
15861 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: It comes back to
my comment that the Commission would hardly be
satisfied with that, considering it has asked for what
these goals are and has even asked them to break down
further how much each of these goals will require,
broken down and labour assets, whatever.
15862 You know that the last rate increase
that Newsworld asked for, there was some of the
projects suggested that were found not to be acceptable
as a justification for a rate increase.
15863 My last question: Your concern is
mostly that rate increases annoy customers and may lead
them to disconnect. Have you experienced great
difficulties in raising cable rates in the last
12 months -- or your members, not you, especially since
you are only Interim President? I would hate to
ascribe it to you.
15864 As a subscriber myself, I have seen
my cable bill rise quite substantially in Ottawa. I
haven't disconnected yet.
15865 MR. WATT: Our point in appearing
here today was not really to address the issue of
consumer reaction to rate increases. Rather, it was to
address the issue of how to properly construct a
forecast of revenue growth so that the review of
wholesale fees would be done on a rigorous basis.
15866 So that is really what we are
addressing here today in terms of the impact of rate
increases.
15867 We know a couple of things. One, we
know that the competitors to cable, DTH providers are
growing very rapidly, about 30,000 subscribers a month.
There are increasingly competitive options available to
customers. Cable operators certainly take that into
account before they make any changes to their rates and
before they add services, et cetera, and how they will
treat the addition of those services.
15868 I think that is really all I can say
on that point.
15869 COMMISSIONER WYLIE: I reiterate that
we appreciate the calculations and the advice you have
about whether the revenues were underestimated by
Newsworld.
15870 Thank you very much.
15871 Thank you.
15872 THE CHAIRPERSON: Before you go, we
appreciated so much your contribution in terms of
calculation. Would it be possible to put the RBC
Securities Study on the public record so that not only
we have benefit of it but everybody?
15873 MR. WATT: Yes, absolutely. We can
do that.
15874 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
15875 So you could do that before the end
of the day?
15876 MR. WATT: I can leave it with you
today, yes.
15877 THE CHAIRPERSON: Oh, great.
15878 Thank you so much.
15879 Thank you madame, messieurs. Thank
you.
15880 MR. WATT: Thank you.
15881 MS BÉNARD: The next presentation
will be by Mr. Michael Temelini.
--- Short pause / Courte pause
15882 MS BÉNARD: Mr. Temelini does not
appear to be here, so we will go to the next one.
15883 The Communications, Energy &
Paperworkers Union of Canada / Sydicat canadien des
communications, de l'énergie et du papier.
INTERVENTION
15884 THE CHAIRPERSON: Madam, monsieur,
good morning.
15885 MS LEM: Good morning, Madam Bertrand
and fellow Commissioners.
15886 My name is Gail Lem, I am the
National Vice-President, Media, for the Communications,
Energy & Paperworkers Union of Canada. With me is
Michael Sullivan, who is national representative of our
union and is the servicing representative for our
1,800 members at the CBC.
15887 We represent the technicians, camera
operators, graphic artists and so on at the CBC across
the country.
15888 Mike will give our presentation this
morning.
15889 Thank you.
15890 MR. SULLIVAN: Good morning, Madam
Chair and Commissioners.
15891 We are not going to stray very far
from our written brief which you should already have,
it was submitted some weeks ago, except with regards to
Newsworld which, as you know, announced some layoffs
prior to this hearing which affected us directly, and
we will deal a little bit with Newsworld.
15892 But in general we are supportive of
the CBC's application, obviously. We are not very good
at biting the hand feeds. Our members earn a living
from the Corporation. Our members are very supportive,
generally, of the Corporation and there are lots of
things we would love to tell the world about about how
badly it is managed, but not in public and not for the
Commission.
15893 So in general we are supportive of
the application by Newsworld for a rate increase, which
seems to be taking up a lot of the energies of the
Commission because that is the money issue here.
15894 We are in general support of the
CBC's plans to move back into regional production in a
big way, both with Newsworld and with English
television.
15895 We are supportive of radio's plans to
improve and expand its services with Radio Three --
although that is not an application here, that is
certainly something that you will be talking about --
and with new media.
15896 We also have some comments about the
governance of the CBC and how it is managed in the
overall. Now, again that is not necessarily at the
purview of the CRTC to decide, but it may be something
you want to consider throughout your debate about the
CBC and its future. They are asking for a seven-year
application, maybe their governance should be part of
the discussion.
15897 Going specifically to Newsworld -- I
only start with that one because of the fact that they
did kind of change their plans after their application
went in.
15898 We have always been supportive of
Newsworld's rate increases. If I had my druthers, I
would take the money back from the cable company that
is sent to CNN and A&E and give it to Newsworld in a
flash, but I can't do that, because nobody knows how
much money I send to the United States. I would rather
not. I don't have a choice.
15899 So if there is money to be spent on
producing Canadian news for Canadians, then let's do
that first before we send money south of the border.
15900 With regards to the timing of the
rate increase, we understand that your decision, if it
is rendered, won't be rendered until some time in
December. Unfortunately, our members have lost their
jobs -- now that's been put off some by summer vacation
work until September, but there will a big gap before
Newsworld starts hiring people again.
15901 We have had preliminary discussions
with the Newsworld management about taking some of
these people and using them to fill the jobs of video
journalists and satellite news gathering operators in
the regions, which is where these people come from,
Calgary and Halifax, and some of them would be quite
willing to do that to continue their careers at
the CBC.
15902 But they can't do that and put bread
on the table if there is no money for Newsworld. They
can't do that. They can't keep the 100 or so years of
experience that is being laid off in the next few
months with the CBC if there is a huge gap between the
time that Newsworld can afford to keep them on and
Newsworld finds the resources for new jobs.
15903 So they will leave and their
expertise and their knowledge and their experience and
their -- to quote Newsworld's application, their sense
of being a trusted guide for Canadians in the news
media in this country will disappear.
15904 Now, you may think of it as, "Well,
it is only 14 people in our unit and 7 in another
unit", but these are people who are at the core of a
lot of what Newsworld does and have devoted their
careers to it for the past seven years. Those
people -- more years than that for some of them.
15905 Those people are -- well, it is a
shame to lose them. It is a shame for Newsworld to
have to lay them off. I understand that they are under
some budgetary squeezes, I understand that they have
moved some resources from Calgary and Halifax to
Toronto in order to make more efficient use of their
resources, but in so doing they are reducing the
resources available in the regions. That seems to be
at odds with a lot of what the CBC Television and
Newsworld are saying to you, is that they want to
reinvest in the regions.
15906 It is hard for us to come to grips
with that apparent irony that they are saying one thing
and doing another.
15907 We also question the effect of moving
wholesale into a regime of video journalists and video
journalists only. We have seen what the results of the
layoffs in other networks have been. They end up with
a few, a very few, a handful of video journalists and
not much news production capacity.
15908 So that if you live in Maritime
Canada, all of news production for Maritime Canada
outside of the CBC comes from Dartmouth and Halifax.
There is a few news gathering individuals outside of
that, but CBC is all there is anywhere else, in
Fredericton, in Charlottetown and in Saint John,
New Brunswick.
15909 There is nothing wrong with video
journalists per se, but we question the single-minded
reliance on video journalists as being the only way to
produce news. If that is all the money you have, okay,
let's do that. But the experience has shown, we were
an active participant in something called "The Windsor
Experiment" years ago. in 1994, when they reopened
Windsor -- I noticed Mr. Hurst is coming up behind us
to talk to you from Windsor -- that that experiment
proved that video journalists have their place, that
they are, in fact, an important part of the news
landscape, but they can't do it all. You can't produce
everything you need to produce using just video
journalists. We welcome the jobs, welcome the
expansion of the CBC's resources and Newsworld's
resources, but question it.
15910 Moving to English television, our
brief talks in terms of encouraging you to encourage
the CBC to put more regional production -- more money
into regional production. We question where the money
came from that is suddenly now available that wasn't
available three years ago when people were being laid
off. The CBC and English television decimated regional
broadcasting to the point now where all that is done is
supper hour newscasts most everywhere, and some sports.
We applaud the CBC for still being in sports.
15911 However, English television doesn't
have any regional capacity outside of news and we
applaud them getting it. We just wonder where the
money is coming from. That is a consistent theme
throughout our brief is, "Where does this money come
from?" As far as we are aware, there haven't been any
new Parliamentary appropriations, but if there have
been maybe they have snuck them in and haven't told us.
15912 We welcome English television's
commitment to upholding its promise of performance with
regards to news broadcasts, but we would go so far as
to suggest that if CBC or any broadcaster fails to meet
that particular promise of performance, that they
should be hauled before this Commission again to
explain themselves, and if the explanations aren't
sufficient their licence should be in jeopardy. That
should go for the CBC as well.
15913 If CBC makes a promise and can't meet
it over seven years, they shouldn't have to wait until
the end of the seventh year to explain themselves, as
they are doing now. There should be an automatic
process by which CBC, and any other broadcaster, comes
back here.
15914 We are, in our brief, suggesting that
CBC reinvest in in-house drama production. As you may
be aware, there is virtually none left. There is
certainly none left in the regions and, as far as I
know, the capacity for producing drama in the CBC, even
in Toronto, is limited to one film a year, maybe two.
15915 As a result of that, unlike French
television, CBC has a single-minded dependence on
independent producers. Those independent producers
have CBC over a barrel, because now CBC no longer has
automatic access to Telefilm funds -- or whatever the
fund is called these days, because it changes name
quite frequently. Cable Production Fund, Telefilm
fund, they are all merged together and I lose track.
15916 There is some money out there that
CBC used to have some guaranteed access to. They don't
now. As a result of their not having any capacity
in-house to produce drama in a big way they are stuck.
They have committed themselves to a 90 per cent
Canadian content, or more in prime time, and more than
that throughout the year, and if they can't get it
produced using Telefilm funds they don't have the
resources to replace it.
15917 French television went a different
way. They have about a three-way split between raw
independent production, in-house production and what
are called co-productions, where there it is about
50/50. That is a much more sane balance. But to rely
completely on the outside world to provide your
television production doesn't make sense to us.
15918 With regards to a comment on -- the
word "complementary" keeps coming up, and it concerns
us. It concerned us the last time we were here and it
concerns us again. The last time we were here was for
the private sector global review of the structural
hearings, where the word "complementary" came up.
"Complementary" can have so many meanings we want to
make sure it is not the detrimental meanings that it
can have.
15919 If I was a private broadcaster, I
would think "complementary" meant anything I don't want
to do and isn't profitable I will leave to CBC.
Anything that is profitable that I want to do I will do
myself and CBC should get out of it.
15920 You may have heard some of the
private broadcasters suggesting in this set of hearings
that CBC get out of news.
15921 Why would they want you to do that?
Why would they want CBC out of news? It is so they can
make the profits in the centres where they want and not
to have to worry about competing with the CBC in the
centres where they don't want. So they can withdraw
their news resources from places like Lethbridge and
Saskatoon and Prince Albert, and knowing that nobody
else there is going to produce news because somebody
has told CBC to get out of news.
15922 I hope that the Commission doesn't
pay any attention to broadcasters who make those kinds
of requests, but we are very concerned about this
constantly reoccurring word "complementary".
15923 If "complementary" means that CBC
should be the core, be the foundation upon which the
others spring, then that's okay.
15924 But if "complementary" means let's
let CBC be a niche broadcaster that does only things
that nobody else can or want to do, then that is wrong
and that would destroy it.
15925 With regards to radio, there have
been, as you probably know, dramatic decreases in
resources and, again, radio has some grand new plans,
but we wonder again whether those plans will come at
the expense of the existing networks. Will they come
and reduce Radio One and Radio Two in order to launch
Radio Three? Where is the money going to come from?
15926 We are fundamentally opposed to
advertising on radio.
15927 We are not opposed to advertising on
television for the simple reason that it is a third of
CBC is what is generated by the advertising revenue.
Until somebody comes up with a way to replace it, we
have to encourage the CBC to make as much money as they
possibly can in advertising. But radio has
successfully managed to stay on the air without
advertising. It stays distinctive, it stays something
that people want to listen to, and it should stay out
of advertising.
15928 Now, the French have a suggestion
that where there is an event that is sponsored by an
advertiser that the sponsor can get some mention on the
air as part of the purchase of the event. That's an
okay thing. But not wholesale advertising on any of
the radio channels.
15929 We also draw attention to the fact
that we are concerned that with the decline in the
available resources for radio, in particular some
technical resources, that music production in the
regions will suffer.
15930 Many, many, many Canadian musicians
owe their living to the fact that they got their start
with the CBC. They would not have existed without
there being a CBC to put them on their drive-home shows
between 4:00 and 6:00 in the regions, to let the people
of Canada hear them for the first time in a national
audience when they were broadcast nationally. That is
threatened, we think, by the reductions in resources
that are going on in the regions.
15931 Toronto is big enough to absorb a lot
of this stuff, but the regions are not. So we would
ask the Commission to ask the CBC what they intend to
do about music production in the regions.
15932 With regards to new media and other
applications, we realize that they are not actually
before the Commission, although they are mentioned all
the way through this. Again, we say where is the money
coming from to launch them?
15933 If CBC is behaving like any other
business and borrowing capital to launch a service, if
they were to put in an application to purchase TSN, for
example, by borrowing money from somewhere to buy it,
we would support it. But we have seen no such evidence
of the CBC getting into the capital markets to launch
new services. If they are robbing from one service to
start another one, we question how far that will take
the CBC.
15934 We are not questioning the notion
that CBC should have more windows, that there should be
more places to view it. I wish that I had more
channels that were available that were CBC or CBC
programming, on television and on radio, but there is a
question of financing and a question of resources.
15935 Finally, we draw your attention to
the issue of governance. I realize it is not an issue
that the Commission itself can decide, but we have
noticed an alarming trend -- and maybe it is only a
trend, maybe it is only a perception -- that the people
running the corporation at the very senior levels tend
to be more political appointments than cultural
appointments.
15936 Unlike yourselves, who are cultural
appointments, the CBC Board of Directors may or may not
have conflicts of interest, may or may not have some
kind of political bias, may or may not be appointed to
be administrators rather than directors.
15937 We are concerned about that
appearance. It may only be an appearance, but it is
something that we have noticed over the past few years,
that in the past board members have spoken out quite
vociferously in support of the CBC. There has been
very little of that in the last three or four years.
15938 So for us, that is the thrust of our
brief and we would welcome any questions you might
have.
15939 THE CHAIRPERSON: We certainly do.
15940 MR. SULLIVAN: Oh, okay.
15941 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
15942 I would ask Commissioner Langford to
ask the questions.
15943 Thank you.
15944 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: I don't have
a lot of questions. It is a good brief and I don't
believe in asking questions just to make people feel at
home.
15945 But I would like to get a little more
of your views on -- I don't think questions should be a
reward. Some kind of indication that you have done a
good job, like a gold star. It is a good brief. It is
very clear.
15946 MR. SULLIVAN: They are going to be
test questions too.
15947 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: It is a good
brief. It's very clear.
15948 I wanted to talk to you a little bit
about this complementarity, because in one sense you
say "I hope the CRTC doesn't pay attention to those
urging the CBC out of news". I guess I would say to
that, well, of course we pay attention to everybody but
we don't necessarily do what they suggest. That is a
general rule.
15949 In another sense, though, at another
point in your brief you talk about how it is left to
the CBC to fill the vacuum left by the privates. That
the privates are pulling out, that they are only to be
found in the east, in the Halifax-Dartmouth area, and
really it is up to the CBC to fill it. So, in a sense,
you are kind of "riding both horses at once", aren't
you?
15950 I mean, basically, you are saying
don't push them out because the privates want it, if I
understand what you are saying. Don't push them out of
an area that the privates want, but if the privates
leave an area that we think is important, push them in.
15951 MR. SULLIVAN: I' not suggesting push
them in, I am suggesting don't push them out.
15952 The CBC is already in in areas where
the privates aren't, and that has the privates upset
because CBC gets the revenue.
15953 What we are concerned about is that
somebody will get the notion somewhere that this word
"complementary" will suddenly mean that if the privates
don't want to do it then CBC has to, if it's
non-revenue generating, and that that is all that CBC
will do. So if what is left is the dregs, that that
will be left for the CBC, and that anything that has
any significance, whether it is cultural, political,
sports, news, particularly revenue-generating, that
that will be left to the private sector.
15954 We are concerned that some people get
the notion that the word "complementary" means that
there is a role for the CBC that is not that done by
the private sector. The the word "competitive" is much
more appropriate in some parts of what CBC does.
15955 Sure, CBC is complementary to the
private sector in that it doesn't have advertising on
radio and the private sector does; in that it produces
things, takes risks that the private sector won't and
can't take. I understand that. But it also has to be
competitive because otherwise there is no incentive for
the private sector to continue.
15956 If you are faced with a newscast list
market, why would you bother putting one on that would
serve the market well. If you are faced with a market
that doesn't have a good strong CBC in it, producing
news, then the incentive to have local reporters, local
people disappears. There is no need for it. You can
still produce a newscast in London, Ontario for
Windsor, and they do it.
15957 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Thank you for
that clarity.
15958 I just wasn't sure of precisely where
you were.
15959 Ms LEM: Commissioner Langford, if I
could just add one thing to Mike's response, and I say
this as a former journalist myself.
15960 The idea that the CBC should not be
in news is, I think, a very scary idea. I would hope
that the Commission would look carefully at the
rationale behind those who are arguing that the CBC
should not be news.
15961 One private network that has been
most vociferous about this is, arguably, the network
that puts the least amount of resources into news. I
say this as someone who represents people not only at
the CBC but our union also represents employees at
private broadcasters across the country.
15962 I guess we are using Atlantic Canada
examples rather heavily this morning, but if you look
again at the Atlantic Region, with the last layoffs at
CTV, there is not a single ENG camera operator outside
of Halifax-Dartmouth working for CTV, and whatever
small resources CTV puts into news Global puts even
less in.
15963 This is, I think, a very dangerous
thing, to start giving credence to the private
broadcasters who simply want the CBC out of news so
that they don't have to compete. We have seen time and
again, and we saw it over the last several years of
cutbacks at the CBC, that when the CBC reduced its
regional and local news programming the privates also
reduced theirs.
15964 The CBC provides a standard to which
the privates have to compete. It is a very important
standard, one that is important to Canadians across the
country. We are quite passionate in how we feel about
that.
15965 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Thank you
very much.
15966 I can assure you that the Commission,
to quote W.B. Yeats, "casts a cold eye on all that
comes before it."
15967 I wanted to talk to you a little bit
about VJs, video journalists.
15968 I have heard some words of caution
from you this morning, and read in your brief as well I
have read them, but I understood that the unions had
worked out some sort of an agreement on video
journalists in the sense you are all now singing from
the same hymn sheet on them.
15969 MR. SULLIVAN: In terms of who
represents them only. That's fine. There is no
problem there. The problem is one of: Can you do the
job with just video journalists? It's not a question
of who represents them, but can you do the job
appropriately?
15970 If all you have is a video
journalist, you can't -- and if I had some video
journalists here to talk to you they could tell you,
that it is too difficult a job to do all that CBC does
by one person. You need the available resource to be
able to have two sets of eyes and ears on some stories.
15971 There are lots that can be done by
one and the CBC is now one of the world leaders in this
technology and how it can be used.
15972 We are just concerned that it becomes
a panacea, that it becomes something that will solve
all the ills of the CBC by converting all of these
people into video journalists, and it just doesn't
work.
15973 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: So are you
seeing this then, to use the oldest cliché, as the thin
edge of the wedge, that eventually they will be
replacing more bureaus with VJs.
15974 The impression I got when we heard
from Newsworld, particularly, on this was that this
would be to augment, to add a presence in the regions
they don't have and cannot afford.
15975 Do you see this as more than an
augmentation, as a movement away from traditional
bureaus and towards video journalists, one-person
shows?
15976 MR. SULLIVAN: If Newsworld is just
augmenting, and is just augmenting with video
journalists, then that is one thing.
15977 We saw a pre-release of their brief,
so we saw some other kind of scary things that you
don't know about and we won't talk about.
15978 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: There are all
sorts of scary things out there that we don't know
about.
15979 MR. SULLIVAN: I will give you an
example of something that was at one point being
thought by CBC as a way to get more television
journalism out there, is just hand cameras to all the
radio reporters.
15980 Now, they already have a full-time
job and a full day doing it. It is not going to
immediately produce great television to just hand
cameras to all the radio reporters.
15981 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: There was a
sense of that in their brief.
15982 MR. SULLIVAN: It is being thought
about.
15983 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: They did
speak about the possibility of multi-tasking radio, if
I recall correctly.
15984 MR. SULLIVAN: Yes. There are
probably situations where it may be appropriate.
Currently, there are, certainly in some of the bureaus,
people who work for both radio and television, both
English and French, do all four things. They don't
necessarily work as video journalists.
15985 A video journalist is a very
specialized breed of person who -- television
journalism is pictures first, most of the time. There
is a story to be told in pictures. It is often
difficult to be being the person who can gather that
story in pictures at the same time as you are
interviewing the next person that you have to
interview. You can't do both.
15986 All we are cautioning is that if this
is a trend by either the CBC or Newsworld to dismiss
all of their camera people and make everybody video
journalists as some kind of panacea, it isn't going to
work. It cheapens the journalism to the point where
nobody will watch it.
15987 That is what we are concerned about.
It is not the expansion, by any means. We are in
favour of putting resources in places that don't have
them.
15988 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Those are my
questions.
15989 Thank you.
15990 THE CHAIRPERSON: Merci.
15991 Out of curiosity, you were making the
comparison between the French and the English networks,
saying that in the French network a good proportion was
in-house production in drama form. In English there is
more sports. Isn't that in-house production, sports?
15992 MR. SULLIVAN: I don't know that
there is more sports than on the French side though.
15993 THE CHAIRPERSON: There is much more.
15994 My question is: Isn't sports an
in-house production?
15995 MR. SULLIVAN: Sometimes. It's not
entirely.
15996 THE CHAIRPERSON: Well, hockey.
15997 MR. SULLIVAN: Hockey is generally
in-house, though there are sometimes when CBC picks up
feeds,from the States in particular.
15998 THE CHAIRPERSON: The Olympics.
15999 MR. SULLIVAN: The Olympics is
entirely an in-house production.
16000 THE CHAIRPERSON: So the flagships of
the CBC, in French and English, are in-house
production?
16001 MR. SULLIVAN: If drama is the
flagship of the French, then it's in-house.
16002 THE CHAIRPERSON: No, no. You are
making a comparison, talking about drama in-house
versus independent producers.
16003 MR. SULLIVAN: Right.
16004 THE CHAIRPERSON: But the day that
you have a different schedule in French and English,
and you have more sports in English, that means that if
you would want to do in-house drama that you would need
much more staff people in order to be able to do that?
16005 MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, absolutely.
16006 THE CHAIRPERSON: No. It's just to
complete the picture, you know.
16007 MR. SULLIVAN: You are right, there
is a greater reliance on English Canada for sports,
primarily because of the revenue. That is clearly
where that is coming from and we support it. We
support that. Our members in some cases earn a lot of
living from the sports revenue.
16008 The CBC wasn't afraid to cut back
though, particularly in the west where they laid off
considerable numbers of people who were attached to
sports and they only hire them when they need them. So
we are into a situation in which, even in sports, the
CBC has lost significant amounts of its resources in
western Canada.
16009 I know you did a tour, and
unfortunately it was while we were otherwise occupied.
But had you been wandering through the halls in a
normal day in Edmonton, in Vancouver, in Regina, you
would have seen a pretty empty place. There is not
very much going on in those places.
16010 THE CHAIRPERSON: Well, thank you
very much, madame et monsieur, for your presentation.
16011 MS LEM: Thank you.
16012 MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you.
16013 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
16014 Madame Bénard.
16015 MS BÉNARD: Thank you, Madam Chair.
16016 The next presentation will be by the
Center for Research-Action on Race Relations / le
Centre de recherche - Action sur les relations
raciales.
16017 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good morning, sir.
INTERVENTION
16018 M. NIEMI: Bonjour, madame.
16019 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Ah! C'est encore
mieux. Bonjour.
16020 M. NIEMI: Je suis devenu un habitué.
16021 Madame la présidente, mesdames et
messieurs les conseillers, je vous remercie, au nom du
CRARR, de nous recevoir ce matin.
16022 En fait, je devais être accompagné
par une collègue, et malheureusement, vous savez, les
lundi matin, quand il fait chaud comme ça, c'est pas
toujours une garantie.
16023 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Cela nous a passé par
la tête nous-mêmes.
16024 M. NIEMI: D'accord. Donc, on va
faire ça de manière plus informelle et très agréable,
j'espère, avec l'air climatisé.
16025 LA PRÉSIDENTE: J'en suis certaine.
16026 M. NIEMI: Madame la présidente,
messieurs et mesdames les conseillers, l'intervention
de notre organisme, aujourd'hui, consiste
principalement à faire le point suivant en ce qui
concerne la représentation, la diversité culturelle et
raciale au sein de la programmation et au sein des
opérations de CBC et de Radio-Canada. Il faut signaler
que dans notre intervention, on fait toujours la
distinction entre CBC, qui représente pour nous le côté
anglophone, et Radio-Canada, le côté francophone.
16027 Nous avons plusieurs points que nous
aimerions peut-être vous soulever pour votre attention.
Il est important de signaler que depuis notre fondation
en 1983, nous avons eu une relation privilégiée avec
Radio-Canada Montréal et CBC de manière générale dans
nos interventions et dans les activités de
sensibilisation et de recherche afin de faire refléter
la diversité de la société canadienne et québécoise à
l'écran de la télévision française et anglaise de cette
corporation.
16028 Nous avons eu quand même, au-delà de
ces relations, disons, fructueuses et privilégiées, de
temps en temps, nous avons pris des positions assez
critiques à l'endroit de notre radiodiffuseur public
national lorsque celui-ci présentait des émissions dans
les deux langues, qui selon l'opinion de plusieurs,
étaient biaisées et contraires aux normes
journalistiques de l'entreprise.
16029 À titre d'exemple, en 1989,
l'émission "Disparaître" a suscité de fortes réactions
au sein des grands publics francophones et anglophones.
Aussi l'intervention récente, en 1997, lors de la
couverture des élections fédérales, durant laquelle
nous avons noté que le consortium composé de
Radio-Canada, CBC, CTV et TVA a largement exclu dans
leur couverture et dans leur constitution des panels
d'experts de Canadiens issus de diverses origines,
notamment ceux des minorités raciales et des
autochtones.
16030 Donc, ce genre de lapsus est arrivé
de temps en temps, et même plus récemment dans les
missions à Newsworld avec Pamela Wallin sur la question
parfois émotive de l'immigration où on a présenté des
points de vue assez biaisés sur la question. Malgré
tout ceci, nous avons trouvé que CBC représente quand
même un canal exceptionnel pour la transmission et pour
façonner l'identité canadienne, surtout l'identité
canadienne moderne, pluraliste et ouverte sur le monde.
16031 We believe that as the country's
national public broadcaster the CBC and SRC represents
one of the three pillars of the Canadian broadcasting
system. It is indispensable to Canadian culture with
its linguistic duality, as well as its multicultural
character, multiracial character.
16032 It is the principal, distinctive and
public broadcasting voice for all Canadians, and it is
within this perspective that we hope to make an
intervention so that the CBC becomes truly one of the
ties that bind diverse Canadian communities and regions
in ways that give them a unique opportunity to learn
about one another, something that few other Canadian
broadcasters, particularly private broadcasters, have
been able and willing to do.
16033 We believe that the CBC/SRC is
fundamental to the Canadian broadcasting system and
culture and, as the previous speaker has said, we are
concerned about the use or the concept of
"complementary", especially with the rise of the
specialty services and the pressure brought on by
private broadcasters on the CBC to back away from
certain practices that keep it viable in light of the
increasing government cutbacks in its budget.
16034 So this is one of the recommendations
which we hope -- just to reiterate the point, is that
the concept of the CBC and SRC playing a complementary
role to private broadcasts in this country be deleted
from the CRTC universe and vision for Canadian
broadcasting for the 21st Century.
16035 Now, with regard to the role that the
CBC has played in dealing with Canadian identity and
diversity of Canadian society. In the brief that we
made to the Canadian Parliament back in 1988 and again
in 1990 during a debate on what is now the Broadcasting
Act, we have successfully and vigorously argued for the
inclusion of the word "multiracial" in the Bill,
because we understand that the word "multicultural" is
open to different interpretation from coast-to-coast,
and that the word "multiculturally" does not
necessarily mean "multiracial", and that it is possible
to achieve a multicultural yet monoracial workforce and
programming, and we would like to come back to this
matter a little bit later.
16036 We also believe it is important to
keep in mind that in reviewing the licence of both CBC
and Radio-Canada, the concept of multicultural and
multiracial be kept in mind because, first, this Crown
corporation is subject to the Employment Equity Act;
secondly, it is subject to the Multiculturalism Act,
which both laws set out certain requirements with
regard to the federal institution's obligation towards
Canadian society and towards Canadians in general.
16037 Il faut que nous soulignons aussi,
avant de rentrer dans les aspects plus critiques des
soumissions en français et en anglais des deux côtés du
radiodiffuseur, que nous désirons féliciter CBC et
Radio-Canada de ses initiatives proactives par rapport
à son obligation statutaire de refléter le caractère
multiculturel et multiracial du Canada.
16038 Nous savons que ce radiodiffuseur
demeure jusqu'à maintenant peut-être le seul
radiodiffuseur public national, sinon le seul
radiodiffuseur national, qui possède une personne à
temps plein qui s'occupe de l'équité en emploi et de
l'équité dans la programmation et qui -- et leur
soumission en témoigne -- ont investi un nombre
considérable de ressources dans la réalisation de cette
obligation statutaire.
16039 Donc, nous aimerions le féliciter
sauf que dans l'exécution de ce mandat, il faut noter,
à plusieurs reprises et selon nos expériences avec ce
radiodiffuseur, que la volonté corporative, notamment
de la haute direction en ce qui concerne l'équité et la
diversité, semble éprouver des grandes difficultés à se
traduire en des pratiques ou des politiques au niveau
régional et local.
16040 C'est à ce niveau-là que nous croyons
qu'il est nécessaire, et c'est une recommandation de la
part du CRARR à votre attention, que le CRTC exige que
Radio-Canada et CBC élaborent davantage sur les rôles,
les responsabilités et les besoins des personnes qui
oeuvrent au sein de cette structure en matière d'équité
dans la programmation et au niveau de l'emploi et de
regarder de manière plus précise les difficultés de
faire concrétiser la volonté corporative en matière
d'équité et de diversité, aux niveaux local et
régional.
16041 Now, let us get to some of the more,
we believe, substantive points, particularly as to the
future of the television strategy for both CBC and
Radio-Canada.
16042 We believe that in the statements and
in the submissions to the CRTC there are confusing
references which reveal perhaps either a lack of
consistent thinking or conceptualization of the place
of diversity and programming in broadcasting, or there
is an approach which is not very, shall we say, clear
as to what one means by "diversity".
16043 We believe that, for example, in the
licence renewal submission of the CBC English language
television, the expression "cross-cultural" was
employed in a context that refers to English and French
culture dynamics and co-operation, for example, in
paragraphs 139, 301, 333 and 334.
16044 Secondly, the expressions
"multicultural minorities" ou "minorités
multiculturelles" in French, are used in the section on
multicultural representation, perhaps as a result of
the decision of the CRTC in 1994 to refer to Canadians
who are members of ethnocultural minority groups.
16045 Now, because of the evolution of
Canadian society and evolution of the diversity of our
demography to refer to Canadians from minorities as
"multicultural" and not using the word "multiracial",
it seems to us that this requires further clarification
and discussion, because it can have serious
ramifications on the kind of programming and the kind
of operations that the future television in French and
English will have.
16046 Également, il faut souligner que dans
la nouvelle demande de renouvellement de licence
soumise par Radio-Canada, on parle des minorités
culturelles au niveau de l'emploi et des efforts de
recrutement alors que la Loi sur l'équité en matière
d'emploi réfère à des minorités visibles. Donc, on
craint que l'expression "minorité culturelle", telle
qu'appliquée par Radio-Canada en français, peut être
problématique et porte à confusion.
16047 We believe that the legislative
intent of the Broadcasting Act clearly foresaw the fact
that Canadian society is evolving, particularly to the
point where we are now talking about at least 15 per
cent of the Canadian population is composed of members
of racial minorities and aboriginal peoples, both in
French Canada and in English Canada.
16048 But many Canadians from these groups
are feeling that they are continually excluded from the
national public broadcaster's programming and
operations in both languages, and this is the reason
why we believe that the strategy for the future and the
vision of CBC and Radio-Canada should be very clear on
this matter.
16049 Lastly, we would like to talk about
the fact that the employment equity data presented in
this submission, both in French and English, are not as
comprehensive and clear as we would like to see it, We
believe that in spite of the Employment Equity Act
there could be a more quantitative and qualitative
description of how the breakdown is concerned.
16050 We are very concerned also about the
fact that the data lumps both the representation in
English Canada with the representation in the French
language television, because it is generally accepted
that in the Francophone sector, French language sector
of Radio-Canada, the representation is usually much
lower.
16051 It is for this reason -- and this is
the main recommendation that I would like to leave with
you if our intervention can make any difference at all
among the multitude of intervenors on this important
issue -- that we suggest that the CRTC break with its
tradition of using incentives and encouragement towards
broadcasters and towards CBC in general, and to break
with the tradition of setting out only expectations by
making the representation of cultural and racial
diversity in programming and employment a condition of
licence.
16052 By breaking with this tradition, we
believe that the CRTC can send a very powerful signal
to the broadcasting industry and to Canadian society in
general as to the kind of direction it wants to lead
the country in terms of broadcasting into the
21st Century.
16053 We also believe that this is very
important because the renewal of the licence of all the
private broadcasters such as CTV and Global, for
example, will be forthcoming, and it is about time
because of the changing nature of Canadian society and
the kind of diversification that our population has
experienced in the last 20 years and will continue to
experience in the next 20-25 years, this is the time to
break with tradition and to make diversity a condition
of licence.
16054 Lastly, we would like to mention, and
as you have seen the position that we are taking to
make diversity a condition of licence has been
supported by a number of organizations in the three
main cities: Ottawa, Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver,
including in many national organizations. Because
increasingly organizations such as ours and those who
are supporting or working towards a more equitable
society in the future, we believe that there is no
other choice but to send a strong and clear signal to
make diversity a condition of licence and we should
stop relying on goodwill and incentive, because, shall
we say, the flaws in the patterns of mistakes have
demonstrated that it takes more than just encouragement
to institutionalize diversity in the broadcasting
system.
16055 Je vous remercie de votre patience et
de votre attention et j'espère pouvoir entretenir vos
questions. Merci, madame la présidente.
16056 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Merci beaucoup.
16057 Je demanderais à la conseillère
madame Grauer de vous poser les questions du Conseil.
16058 M. NIEMI: D'accord.
16059 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: Thank you.
16060 I just have a couple of questions.
16061 One is, I know you have raised this
question of complementarity, as have several other
intervenors, and you have also taken the position that
the CBC/SRC is one of the three pillars of the Canadian
broadcasting system, which I take to mean it is one of
three, the three of which complement one another.
16062 I am trying to get at what in your
view is very troubling about the term -- so troubling
about the term "complementary" that you would like us
not to ever speak the word again, which is what it
sounds like, eliminate it from our universe.
16063 MR. NIEMI: It sounds like to delete
in a computer microchip.
16064 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: Yes.
16065 MR. NIEMI: The position that we have
is that the concept of the three pillars is evident and
it is outlined in the Act. What we are concerned about
is there is a growing pillar that we are not sure where
it will fit, it's the specialty channels, particularly
those that are promoted by the private broadcasters and
also the onslaught on the part of private broadcasters
on the CBC in dealing with its advertising and some of
its programming practices.
16066 There is a concern, and we have
discussed it, to the effect that as long as the word
"complementary" is used to reflect the notion of three
pillars of the -- in French, we call it des assises --
each having its distinctive, fundamental role within
the broadcasting system, that's fine.
16067 But if the concept of complementarity
is used to send a signal to the effect that private
broadcasters can increasingly, because of market forces
alone coupled with the reduction in government funding,
and if that concept is used to the effect that the CBC
is losing its primary and fundamental importance in the
Canadian broadcasting system, then we are concerned
about the notion of complementary, and perhaps there
may be a need for a clearer demonstration of the intent
on the part of the CRTC with regard to that term.
16068 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: So it sounds to
me like what you are saying is that there has been an
intent ascribed to the use of the word which may or may
not be there?
16069 MR. NIEMI: Perhaps, yes.
16070 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: Perhaps, okay.
16071 MR. NIEMI: This is something that
personally I would -- in a sense, if I put the ball in
your court to clarify what that word means because it
seeps into the stream of consciousness and the next
thing you know it will be irreversible, and especially
with the decreased support of both financial and
perhaps political support for some aspect of CBC, we
have to be very vigilant.
16072 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: I understand
what you are getting at I guess. I think it ascribes
intentions. If you look at what "complementary" means,
it is not a derogatory term, and certainly we never
intended it to take a derogatory meaning.
16073 My other question to you is: You are
very supportive of the CBC. I gather you have a very
productive working relationship with them. You have
made that point very strongly, and yet you take
exception, in some cases -- you are very concerned,
apparently, about their ability to implement their
stated diversity policies. Is that --
16074 MR. NIEMI: It is the notion of
having the corporate will and commitment at the top
trickle down to local and regional operations, both in
terms of operations and in terms of programming.
16075 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: Is this
something you have discussed with them?
16076 MR. NIEMI: Yes. We have
discussed --
16077 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: How have they
respond to that when you --
16078 MR. NIEMI: Well, if you look at the
structure of the CBC and the office of equity in
programming and employment, and now there is an
official languages, that is a tremendous responsibility
for a small office and it is a national responsibility
from coast-to-coast.
16079 It is only recently that the CBC and
maison Radio-Canada in Montréal has an advisor and a
conseillère en ressources humaines who also plays a
role of equity advisor in charge of this issue. But
that is a formidable task and it has been constantly
been faced with cutbacks and restriction of resources.
Most companies dealing with employment equity usually
rely on one person to do the job and that one person
can be easily shifted, if not having his or her
responsibilities downgraded.
16080 There have been a number of, shall we
say, mistakes in terms of diversity in programming
made. The most recent that we are aware of is our own
query of the CBC's lack of diversity during the 1997
federal election coverage. It is not normal to see
ordinary Canadians not representing the diversity of
this country.
16081 There have been some other -- we call
it, shall we say, that mistake was similar to
omissions. The Congress of Black Women has asked us to
raise the issue of the negative portrayal of black
women in one of the most popular shows in French:
"Les Héritiers Duval", in which a woman is portrayed as
being in a very less than honourable position.
16082 There have been other instances,
mostly omissions.
16083 So what we are trying to say is, it
is important in assessing the CBC licence renewal to
look at, closely, exactly where do the problems lie in
having this corporate commitment trickle down.
16084 The corporate commitment is not only
statutory, it is not only legislative, but we believe
that the leadership of CBC has always been aware, had a
vision, when it comes to the local and regional. This
is where the -- in Halifax we hear the same thing. In
Winnipeg, we also hear the same thing. Often the
emphasis is on Aboriginal peoples, but not on the other
groups.
16085 COMMISSIONER CRAM: I was going to
ask you this, an incident in 1997, as well as the one
with the panel on the others you have raised, did you,
on those occasions, for instance, go to the CBC and
say -- what I am trying to get at is: Do you have an
ongoing working relationship so that when these things
come up you can deal with them and your members across
the country, as well, and are they responsive when you
raise this with them?
16086 MR. NIEMI: For our own experience,
yes. That is because we have had, since 1985, a very
privileged working relationship with the CBC. We know
exactly who to call. We know how the system works. We
know how to even formulate our quote/unquote
"complaint" in such a way that we can get a very
constructive response, because the objective
intervention often is to sensitize and to avoid future
mistakes.
16087 For some other organizations, the
experience is not the same. The Congress of Black
Women has told us that their objection was addressed to
the ombudsman but they never got a final answer.
16088 We must say that usually we always go
to the top, the CEO, especially in the case of the
federal election. Each time we make an intervention,
there is a very thorough quote/unquote "internal
search" for facts and reasons. Even way back in 1989
with the show "Disparaître", there was also a
mini-investigation done as to what went wrong, what
kind of derogation to journalists practices happen.
16089 So we feel that is very useful to
have that position. Credit must be given, also, to the
fact that the CBC does publicize that it does have an
office responsible for that. But what we have been
told at the office is less than, I think, the five
fingers on my hand to oversee a national operation and
that is a lot to do, particularly when one deals with
producers.
16090 We have talked a lot in terms of
diversity in terms of the employees or the people we
see on the air in front of the camera, but we also have
to think about whether they have dealt with independent
producers.
16091 One filmmaker who produced a film
with National Film Board tried to sell her work to CBC,
could not. It is because the response to her work was
too specific, was special interest and estoteric, but
Vision TV picked it up.
16092 So what we are trying to say is,
perhaps in each city and each region it depends a lot
on the individual in charge. What we are trying to
say, is we want it more institutionalized and we would
like to make it more systemic in order to overcome some
of these patterns of omissions or exclusions.
16093 COMMISSIONER CRAM: I guess what I'm
really getting at is, I don't know what this condition
of licence would look like, and I don't know how we
would measure it. I wonder, can you give us a proposed
condition of licence and tell us how we might measure
this?
16094 MR. NIEMI: We discussed that. We
believe that in the Broadcasting Act there are sections
dealing with what to do in the case of a breach of a
condition of licence.
16095 COMMISSIONER CRAM: No, no.
16096 MR. NIEMI: So let's start from
there.
16097 How are we going to translate that in
terms of measuring, in terms of programming content? I
believe that the CRTC does have some methodological
tools and knowledge to that effect. Also with regard
to the analysis of the employment equity being
subjected to the Employment Equity Act, an annual
report very detailed, very comprehensive is tabled
annually with the Parliament of Canada.
16098 So with the combination of those
methodological tools for assessment analysis one can
establish an analysis grid to come up with some sort of
elements of a condition of licence.
16099 This is the same question that was
asked almost before I finished college about: How do
you impose the conditions of licence and the portrayal
of women and gender portrayal and avoid sexism in
broadcasting. This is the same step that can be done.
16100 We believe that the knowledge is
there, the tool is there, perhaps it is just a matter
of the will to move forward and to be bold in setting a
new precedent for the broadcasting industry.
16101 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank you very
much.
16102 I appreciate you taking the time and
presenting us with this thorough intervention.
16103 Thank you.
16104 THE CHAIRPERSON: Merci beaucoup,
monsieur.
16105 MR. NIEMI: Merci, madame. Merci
beaucoup.
16106 MS BÉNARD: The next presentation
will be by the National Film Board of Canada / L'office
national du film du Canada.
INTERVENTION
16107 THE CHAIRPERSON: Bonjour.
16108 MS MACDONALD: Bonjour.
16109 THE CHAIRPERSON: Bienvenue.
16110 MS MACDONALD: Good morning, ladies
and gentlemen. My name is Sandra Macdonald. I am a
Government Film Commissioner and Chairperson of the
National Film Board of Canada.
16111 With me this morning is Genevieve
Cousineau, the NFB's legal counsel and Secretary to the
Board of Trustees.
16112 The National Film Board of Canada, as
a national cultural agency with a mandate to produce
and distribute films in the national interest, shares
many goals in common with the CBC, Radio-Canada.
16113 National Film Board films appear
frequently on both television networks as well as on
RDI and Newsworld. The Board, consequently, has a deep
interest in the renewal of the CBC's broadcasting
licences, both as colleagues who share the goal of
service to the public and as collaborators in the
creation and presentation of distinctly Canadian
programs.
16114 Our comments will be addressed only
to the television services, although we support the
renewal of all the CBC's licences.
16115 Clearly, the central issue before the
Commission in these hearings is what interpretation of
the mandate described for the CBC in the Broadcasting
Act should guide the Corporation for the next licence
term. The interpretation the CBC itself has presented,
one of the many competing views expressed by
intervenors before you at this hearing and by citizens
who met with you during your consultations earlier this
year, may be some amalgam of all of these. As usual,
there is no shortage of views about what constitutes
the proper role of the CBC.
16116 As a national cultural institution
with a similar public interest mandate, the NFB has
wrestled, on a smaller scale, with many of the same
problems which confront the CBC: A mandate couched in
such broad terms as to imply that the institution must
be all things to all people, shrinking resources, a
rapidly changing communications environment, and a need
to clearly distinguish what we do from what the
commercial industry does.
16117 Our reflections led us to many
similar conclusions, so in fact we find the general
orientation which the CBC has adopted very familiar
and, in our view, quite appropriate for Canada's
national public broadcaster at the end of the
20th Century.
16118 In our written submission, we address
several aspects of the CBC's programming strategy for
the next licence term. Given the limited time here
today, and the context of the recent decisions with
respect to French-language specialty services, we would
like to concentrate this morning on the constellation
strategy and on the place of documentaries on the CBC.
16119 Public institutions like the CBC and
the NFB have a unique role to play in ensuring that the
linguistic, cultural and social diversity of the
country is explored and celebrated so that the bridges
of understanding we exist to foster do indeed
get built.
16120 Contributing to a shared national
consciousness and identity, as the Broadcasting Act
requires of the CBC, demands that at least a
respectable proportion of the programming offered be
popular, in the sense of seeking to reach many people.
While there is obviously a role which a public
broadcaster must play with respect to more specialized
fare with commensurately smaller audiences, a public
broadcaster which offers only niche programming would
find it very difficult to play its mandated and
essential role in our national public life.
16121 Finding the right balance between
broad and narrower appeal programming is an enormous
challenge. The ability to simply have more
broadcasting hours in the day in which to program is an
obvious way of responding to that challenge. For that
reason the NFB believes that the CBC's strategy of
seeking additional outlets through more specialty
services and the Internet is a logical approach to
serving Canadians better.
16122 This is not a new idea. As the
Commission well knows, the CBC has been seeking
additional outlets since it applied for CBC 2 more than
20 years ago. Over the last decade it has become part
of the conventional response of broadcasters to
fragmenting markets to broaden their portfolio of
outlets and, in effect, become their own fragmentation.
All the major Canadian broadcast ownership groups have
branched out into specialty services with the
Commission's blessing.
16123 As a maker of niche programming, our
experience has been that the advent of speciality
services has offered the Canadian public an
unparalleled opportunity to see our films, both current
releases and older works.
16124 We have also been very pleasantly
surprised at the cumulative audiences which can be
achieved on specialty services. An audience of
20,000 once may not be impressive, but that same
audience for each of 10 plays is very worthwhile.
16125 Last year our films had accumulative
broadcast audience in Canada of about 175 million, in
large part due to multiple plays on specialty services.
16126 In the fragmented market all
broadcasters occupy, it is inevitable that the audience
share of conventional general service broadcasters will
decline. The ability to maximize the public's
investment in production by offering several viewing
possibilities for a title makes good sense. It makes
good sense for the CBC.
16127 Obviously, there are pitfalls to be
guarded against. New services should enhance rather
than drain the programming capacity of the general,
over-the-air services, and new services should not
become a ghetto for programming with smaller audience
and advertising potential.
16128 While one of the things which
distinguishes the CBC from private broadcasters is its
programming of documentaries. It is a concern for the
NFB, and presumably for all documentary producers, that
the CBC television networks devote so little of their
broadcast schedule to documentaries. This is a
particular concern with Radio-Canada, which has had
only sporadic slots available for documentaries outside
of news and current affairs.
16129 Documentaries typically address
themselves not to the news of the day but to
longer-term issues. They frequently have, as mentioned
earlier, deep regional roots which help to balance the
naturally centrist tendencies of national news
programs, and because they have a point of view, they
provoke discussion and debate in a way different from,
and sometimes livelier than, conventional journalism.
The debate which has taken place in Quebec on forestry
policy in the wake of "L'erreur boreal" is a good
example.
16130 We believe that documentaries have an
important place in the pantheon of information
programming and should be considered an essential part
of the CBC's information service.
16131 In terms of the audience for
documentaries, research performed at our request by the
CBC's own research service demonstrates clearly that at
least on the English network, which has regular
documentary slots, the audience performance and quality
rating index of documentaries is very healthy. These
figures were filed with our written intervention.
16132 Because the French television network
currently has no regular documentary slot, similar
comparisons could not be made. On the occasions where
our documentaries have appeared on "Beaux Dimanches",
for example, they have done well in the ratings,
usually exceeding 500,000 viewers.
16133 Furthermore, documentaries tend to be
notably less expensive per hour, both in terms of
overall budgets and in broadcast licences, than drama,
for example. The cost-to-audience ratio is actually
quite favourable in comparison. As an element in the
continuing Canadianization of the English service, this
may be a factor which deserves consideration.
16134 Both for cost and audience reasons,
and because one of the things which truly distinguishes
the CBC English network from the competition is its
programming of documentaries, we strongly advocate a
greater presence for documentaries on both networks,
but particularly on Radio-Canada, where obviously there
is much further to go.
16135 We, like most other who have come
before you to discuss the future of the CBC, are really
focussing on the present or even the past. It is what
we can speak about with some certainty.
16136 I would like, in closing, to try to
really talk for a minute or two about the future.
16137 Since the last time CBC network
licences were awarded, the broadcast environment in
general, and the CBC's in particular, have changed in
ways that no one predicted at the time. The huge cuts
to the CBC's budget were not anticipated. The degree
of consolidation, of communications ownership groups
were not anticipated.
16138 The blurring of boundaries among
production, broadcast and telecommunications entities,
if notionally anticipated, have taken some surprising
turns. The addressable decoder and pick-and-pay, which
were expected to be pervasive by now, have not
materialized. Meanwhile, the internet has taken on a
dynamism quite unexpected seven years ago. We must
expect that the licence period about which decisions
are being taken now will produce as many surprises as
the one now ending.
16139 The tendencies I see in my own
crystal ball are for the resources available for
distinctively Canadian programming to be under
continuing seige; for the larger Canadian producers and
private broadcasters to aggressively pursue foreign
opportunities, with consequent effects on the
Canadianness of their programming; for addressability
to finally arrive, causing a shake-out among specialty
services; and for bit-streaming technology to give
major American studios a way to deliver their products
direct to a worldwide audience, altering the supply
equation for unrelated broadcasters and for the
efficacy of regulation.
16140 If even some of these potential
scenarios become reality, the effect for Canadian
viewers will be, as it had been for the past 60 years,
that the bastion and defense of Canadian expression
will be the CBC. We need it to be strong.
16141 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
16142 I would ask Vice-Chair Colville to
address the questions.
16143 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: Thank you
very much.
16144 Good morning, Ms Macdonald,
Ms Cousineau. Welcome to our hearing and thank you for
your presentation this morning and your written brief.
16145 Just a quick question on the
constellation issue, and this is a question that I
posed to another intervenor.
16146 In supporting the constellation
notion, do you believe the CBC has any particular right
to specialty licencesm or would your view be that the
approach that the Commission has taken in the past,
that CBC can apply with other private broadcasters, and
consider its applications among many others at the time
that it is considering those applications?
16147 Ms MACDONALD: Well, I think that my
answer today for the future might be a different one
than I might have given a few years ago, because -- as
the Commission itself has recognized with the last
round of specialty hearings in English where there were
a number of licences awarded that were contingent on
future events occurring.
16148 At some point, the degree of
fragmentation in the market presumably means that the
Commission has to take a more permissive approach and a
less perhaps structural one in the sense of saying:
This niche is now occupied, nobody else will be there.
16149 So what I would be inclined to say is
that as the availability of various kinds of spectrum
enlarges, whether it is via the Internet or through
direct broadcast satellites, or whatever it is, that
the ability to take areas where there is a mandated or
a previously licenced cluster of programming, news and
current affairs for example, or children's programming
or arts programming, if you are already in that field
you have obligations in that field. It seems to me
that your ability to multiply the uses of the material
that you have already invested in and paid for is
something that should give you some kind of prior
claim.
16150 I'm not sure that it is absolute, but
I think that it should be at least something that means
that the people who have made those investments are
entitled to special consideration.
16151 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: Focusing on
one of the other issues that you have stressed in your
written brief and again this morning, and I think the
words were almost exactly the same in this morning's
brief and your original written one. I am looking at
page 3 of your written brief. You talk near the top of
the page about:
"... the importance of an active
programming presence beyond news
and sports on CBC's regional
outlets cannot be overstated."
(As read)
16152 You went on to say:
"We believe the documentaries
have an important place in the
pantheon of information
programming and should be
considered an essential part of
the CBC's information service."
(As read)
16153 Then, finally on this point, as
preface to this issue or question:
"Furthermore, documentaries tend
to be notably less expensive per
hour, both in terms of overall
budgets and broadcast licences
than drama." (As read)
16154 I am wondering your views in
particular on the CBC's proposal with respect to
putting monies into regional non-news programming and
the specific proposal that they had put forward in the
context of your particular concern for documentaries.
16155 Ms MACDONALD: Certainly, we regard
it as a very positive and exciting step that they were
ready to make some commitments to programming other
than news in the regions, and the opportunities to have
some local air time and some resources available for
documentaries seems to us to be a wonderful
opportunity.
16156 As you know, people make
documentaries all over the country. We make
documentaries all over the country. Some of them have
more of a regional than a national interest. This is
normal. It is sometimes difficult to find a place for
those to be seen on a broadcast outlet. The CBC ought
to be the place where those things can be seen.
16157 To some degree that is true, but
certainly the enhancement of that, I think, is good for
the films we make and the people we work with, but we
think that it is good for creators from everywhere and
certainly for the local audiences because many of these
programs draw on and reinforce a sense of community
that is, I think, part of the role of the CBC to help
support and enhance.
16158 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: Do you think
on an individual regional basis that the proposal is
adequate to do the kind of productions that you are
familiar with in this genre of programming? Do you
think the proposal is adequate?
16159 Ms MACDONALD: Well, I would have to
say that I haven't analyzed it in detail.
16160 I could obviously say there is no
limit to the resources that one could spend if one
wished, however I think that the balance that the CBC
has to maintain with having a strong network presence
means that finding the right equilibrium between
regional programs and national ones is a constant
weighing and I would not wish to jeopardize a strong
network schedule by going too far in taking the
resources out of that.
16161 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: That was
going to be the last question I was going to ask you
because you raised that issue in your brief too. A lot
of people posed questions to us in that,but I guess I
would like to turn the question around to you and ask:
What do you think is that appropriate balance?
16162 Ms MACDONALD: Well, it comes back,
of course, to a resources question, and one of the
unknowns is, in the scheme of things, first of all, the
CBC for non-news and sports programming is now so
dependant on other sources of government funding for
the programs that are aired. A documentary typically
gets a licence from the CBC of 10 per cent and then the
other 90 per cent is found elsewhere, usually from
other public sources of one kind and another.
16163 If anything should happen, if, for
example, next year when the government has to renew the
Canadian Television Fund, it decides either not to
renew it or to renew it at a lower rate, then in fact
the capacity to make a good proportion of the programs
that CBC airs on the network and regionally to the
extent that non-news and sports programs are there,
will be deeply compromised.
16164 Similarly, if the advertising
revenues, for one reason or another, diminish, then the
capacity to pay for the entire panoply of services,
even at these levered rates of 10 per cent and 20 to
25 per cent for drama, are going to be severely
compromised.
16165 That is a terrible equation to try to
respond to, but my reaction would, I think, have to be
that if you have to choose I think you have to have a
network.
16166 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: Okay.
16167 Thank you very much.
16168 Those are all my questions.
16169 THE CHAIRPERSON: Madam, merci
beaucoup.
16170 MS MACDONALD: Merci.
16171 THE CHAIRPERSON: We will take our
morning break and be back in 15 minutes.
--- Short recess at / Courte suspension à 1105
16172 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Alors, Madame Bénard?
16173 MS BÉNARD: Thank you, Madam Chair.
16174 The next presentation will be by
Alberta Motion Pictures Industries Association.
16175 THE CHAIRPERSON: Bonjour. How are
you?
16176 MS EDWARDS: Very well, thank you.
16177 THE CHAIRPERSON: Welcome.
INTERVENTION
16178 MS EDWARDS: My name is Connie
Edwards and I am here representing the Alberta Motion
Picture Industries Association.
16179 My associate, Diane Janzen, is our
consultant with project management and research.
16180 I would like to begin by thanking you
very much for the opportunity to present the Alberta
Motion Picture Industries Association's point of view
and recommendations on the CBC licence renewals.
16181 For 25 years the Alberta Motion
Picture industries Association has represented
independent producers and members involved in all
aspects of the film and television industry in Alberta.
16182 The mandate of this association is to
ensure the growth and development of the indigenous
industry. Central to this mandate is maintaining an
environment in which Alberta producers can initiate,
develop and produce films and programs over which they
have creative and financial control.
16183 We are here today in relation to CRTC
Public Notice 1999-3 the CBC Licence Renewal. Our
comments will relate to that portion of the CBC's
mandate to be found in Paragraph 1, Section III, Item 2
of the Broadcasting Act which states that:
... CBC programming should
reflect Canada and its regions
to national and regional
audiences while serving the
special needs of those regions.^
(As read)
16184 It is our opinion that for this part
of the mandate to be realized it is critical that the
CBC be strong in all regions of the country and that it
develop licence and invest in Canadian programming
produced or co-produced by independent producers based
in the regions who either own or co-own these programs.
16185 The region where we see ourselves
situated encompasses the three prairie provinces and
our primary focus today is on Alberta independent
production.
16186 A year ago in response to membership
concerns about: one, the current trend toward longer
broadcast licence terms; and, two, the lack of annual
review by the CRTC of broadcaster promises of
performance to the independent sector, AMPIA
commissioned project management and research to
undertake a study titled "A Watchful Eye".
16187 The first part of that study entitled
"Report I: Conditions of Licence" was delivered to
AMPIA on December 15, 1998. This was a comprehensive
review of all Alberta-based broadcaster promises of
performance in their current licence terms regarding
the independent production sector.
16188 This document is utilized by AMPIA as
a benchmark for the purpose of comparison to the actual
expenditures incurred by the broadcaster. It is
interesting to compare the differences between the
private Alberta stations and the CBC Alberta stations.
16189 The second part of this study
entitled "Report II: The Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation - CRTC Promises of Performance and
Broadcaster Report Card" was delivered to AMPIA on
January 31, 1999.
16190 In the spirit of collegial
disclosure, AMPIA sent a draft copy of Part II of the
study to Joe Novak, Regional Director for CBC Alberta
for his input. AMPIA felt that it was important that
the CBC have the opportunity to provide feedback so
that the final version would be absent any inadvertent
errors and/or omissions.
16191 Mr. Novak forwarded his comments on
March 1st, which were reviewed by project management
and research, and the information was integrated into
the final version of Part II of the study. We have
left you copies of both studies of this material for
your own review and analysis.
16192 To briefly review the findings of
both Part I and Part II of the study, we would like to
draw your attention to the following points: In the
not too distant past, support by the CBC for Alberta
independent production has been relatively strong.
However, since 1995-1996 it declined by more than
50 per cent.
16193 Calgary and Edmonton CBC licences
lack any quantifiable commitment to the Alberta
independent production industry, with no identification
of budgets or the establishment of funds to assist in
the development of the industry. There are no
commitments from the Alberta stations to purchase
programming from the independent production sector in
Alberta.
16194 Not only is that inequitable with
regard to private Alberta broadcasters, all of whom
have made such commitments, some of whom are also
network affiliated, but the result is that there is a
little impetus for the CBC at the network level to
direct expenditures to independent producers in
Alberta.
16195 In our opinion, this negatively
impacts the CBC mandate of reflecting the regions to
ourselves and to other parts of Canada.
16196 A recent schedule review shows: one,
an overall lack of commitment to Alberta regional
programming; two, a lack of commitment to independently
produced regional programming and, three, a lack of
support for production outside of local news.
16197 For example, if you look at a typical
1999 weekly CBC Edmonton schedule which consists of
132.5 hours you would find the following: 106 hours of
CBC network programming or 80 per cent of the schedule;
eight hours of regular regional programming all in the
news category and representing 6 per cent of the
schedule; 18.5 hours of foreign programming or 14.5 per
cent of the schedule; zero hours of regular regional
programming in the categories of drama, music/variety,
documentary or children's production; and zero hours of
regular programming produced or co-produced with the
Alberta independent production community.
16198 In fact, if you are a CBC Alberta
viewer, you do not have the opportunity to watch any
regularly scheduled Alberta-produced drama, children's
documentary or music variety programming, but you can
watch six hours a week or 312 hours a year of
"Coronation Street" and "The Simpsons".
16199 It should be mentioned that we share
these concerns about CBC regional programming with
others such as The Mandate Review Committee, CBC, NFB,
Telefilm commissioned by the federal Minister of
Canadian Heritage in 1996 and chaired by Pierre Juneau,
the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, who recently
conducted a study on declining regional television
production and concerns expressed by the CRTC itself in
the last two national CBC Broadcast licence renewal
hearings.
16200 While the CBC has been highly
successful in the Canadianization of its schedule, for
Albertans these increases have not seen more Alberta
programming, more Alberta stories told, or more access
by the Alberta public to Alberta programming in
anything but news programming.
16201 Finally, certain national licence
requirements such as those relating to quotas for the
purchase of television programming from the independent
production sector -- 40 to 50 per cent -- are not
carried through at the local level. In total, we
believe that the CBC and its Broadcast Act-driven
mandate has been severely compromised by its budgetary
cuts which has forced restructuring that has negatively
affected regional operations across the country.
16202 AMPIA supports the CBC as a strong
national public broadcaster rooted in the regions. We
believe that in order for the CBC to meet its mandate
nationally, and in Alberta, it must commit itself
philosophically and financially to strong regional
operations and to a revitalized relationship with the
Alberta independent production community.
16203 We expect the recent appointment of
the new CBC Regional Director for Alberta is a signal
that there is a new level of commitment to a strong CBC
Alberta presence and a desire for a renewed
relationship with Alberta independent producers.
16204 We would like the CRTC to consider
the following recommendations with regard to the CBC
and its mandate, specifically in relation to its
support for Alberta independent production.
16205 As a condition of its licence, that
the CRTC support the continued Canadianization of the
CBC schedule.
16206 That the CRTC, through its approval
process of both the national and the Alberta station
licences, make a commitment to the importance of
regional programming by requiring that CBC Alberta
operations designate five hours over and above its
current licence requirements for local news programming
per week of programming, schedule time and prime time,
with other available slots to be filled with
programming in the under represented categories of
drama, children's programming, documentaries and music
variety that is produced or co-produced by Alberta
independent producers.
16207 That the CRTC require the CBC at a
national and regional licence level, Edmonton and
Calgary, to commit to the development and airing of
Alberta independent productions by establishing a
regional production fund of no less than $2 million in
cash annually to support script and concept
development, licences and airing of Alberta independent
productions. We urge that this fund be administered
and decisions be made at a local Alberta level.
16208 On that last point, in terms of
precedent, it should be noted that the A Channel, who
also have two Alberta licences in Edmonton and Calgary,
have committed $2 million per year from the A Channel
Drama Fund. CFRN in Edmonton has a commitment of
$1 million per year through the CFRN TV Fund, and CFCN
in Calgary has a commitment of $1.5 million per year
through the CFCN Production Fund. In the latter two
examples, both CFRN and CFCN are CTV network-owned
stations, yet their independent production expenditure
commitments are over and above the network's
commitments.
16209 Finally, we recommend that the CRTC
require that the CBC network purchase at least 50 per
cent of its programming from Canadian independent
producers up from its current licence requirement of
40 per cent.
16210 What all of this adds to is what we
believe that the Alberta public and Alberta producers
merit and are entitled to a proportionate and fair
share of CBC funding.
16211 I thank you very much for the
opportunity to present our point of view.
16212 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very
much.
16213 I would ask Commissioner Grauer to
address the questions of the Commission.
16214 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: Thank you very
much.
16215 This is a very comprehensive
presentation you have made, and particularly I want to
thank you for the bedtime reading you have left
with us.
--- Laughter / Rires
16216 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: I was going to
ask you for the report. I am delighted we have it.
16217 Actually there were a few questions I
was going to ask that are really, for the most part,
covered in your oral presentation today.
16218 I just want to make sure that in your
detailing of the commitments that the A Channel and
CFRN and CFCN have made, are these all the private
broadcasters in Alberta? I mean, is there anybody
else?
16219 MS EDWARDS: There are some. Some of
them are.
16220 MS JANZEN: Yes, WIC stations,
Western International Communications, has CICT out of
Calgary and CITV out of Edmonton and they are under
licence committed to $11.7 million each over seven
years.
16221 So the pattern that you are seeing in
terms of $1 to $2 million annually is not an anomaly.
I would say it is sort of a normal pattern for Alberta
stations at this time.
16222 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: So there is a
pretty consistent commitment on the part of the private
broadcasters who have conventional licences in Alberta
to be making these kinds of commitments?
16223 MS JANZEN: Yes.
16224 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: It may be in
your study, but I wondered: What is the regional
non-news programming time commitments made by some of
those other broadcasters? Did you look at thatç
16225 MS JANZEN: That is an issue held not
only by CBC but other broadcasters. Most Alberta
broadcasters are airing less than 1 per cent of their
schedules with Alberta independent productions. The
highest in the review that I looked at was 6 per cent
and that was by WIC in Edmonton.
16226 So when you look at that issue -- and
we also reviewed the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting
study on the reduction of regional programming, they
looked at Winnipeg and Vancouver, but that issue
extends as well very highly to Alberta. I think some
of it is due, in large part, to the proliferation of
networks that can develop more economies of scale and,
of course, in order to keep costs down the economies of
scale mean that you can put more on regional stations
from the network to limit the costs.
16227 So the issue here is consistent as
well with the other issues in Alberta.
16228 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: Okay.
16229 With your proposed conditions of
licence -- I know that you have talked about
specifically Alberta, but in your view would this be
something we should consider for all regions and all
provinces?
16230 MS EDWARDS: I think to properly
reflect the mandate of the CBC it would certainly be a
consideration.
16231 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: Have you had
any discussions with the CBC? I know you have said you
have given a copy of your report to the Regional
Director. Have you had any further discussions with
them about the report you have done or any of the
results here? Have you had any feedback from them?
16232 MS JANZEN: I think that they are
definitely interested in a better relationship with the
independent sector and have listened well to the issue
of shelf space. Again, I mean I think the almighty
dollar question comes into question.
16233 One of the things that AMPIA is quite
concerned about is in the strategic plan. I believe
they referred to putting in $50,000 regionally for the
first year in terms of investment and $250,000 for a
series. If you look at a series costing, a 13-part
series, say in the neighbourhood of $6 million,
anywhere from $350,000 to $500,000 an hour. It is not
taking you anywhere.
16234 The other point with CBC is, in
1993-1994 they invested close to $5 million in Alberta
and the bottom has just dropped out of that. So I
think that in principle, CBC at a regional level would
love to do more, but that their hands are somewhat
tied, as well. I don't sense, at all, an adversarial
relationship and if we could move forward on that I
think it would be great.
16235 MS EDWARDS: Not at all. In fact, we
had a meeting when the new regional director was first
brought on board and certainly he was very open to
discussion and to suggestions. So we feel that there
is a dialogue that is continuing, but we are certainly
concerned about the monetary issues.
16236 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Yes, I was just
going to ask you, where would you think the $2 million
for each region would come from?
16237 MS EDWARDS: Out of the current
budget. I don't think it is unreasonable to request
that amount of dollars to a region such as Alberta.
16238 COMMISSIONER CRAM: So $2 million
times 10 provinces, let's say, that's what, $20 million
a year.
16239 Can you identify any particular area
of the overall budget that --
16240 MS EDWARDS: I'm not familiar with
the overall budget. I'm sorry, I can't.
16241 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Have you had any
discussions, aside from the regional people, with any
of the national network people, the kind of people
that --
16242 MS EDWARDS: No. I mean, I think
that AMPIA is trying to be realistic in terms of
understanding that CBC is likely maybe not going to be
able to get a whole lot of extra resources, that what
they might have to do is to look internally at
restructuring the way in which they disperse their
monies across the country.
16243 I know that whenever you say the
words "regional envelope" people will flip out, but I
would suggest to you that that is something that really
needs to be looked at. Because the regional mandate of
the CBC, as we have said in our presentation, I think
is basically under seige. There is nothing other than
local news and information programming on a regular
basis.
16244 So I think we would suggest an
internal review and some kind of a look at better
reflecting our regional concerns equitably across the
country.
16245 COMMISSIONER CRAM: I don't actually
think I have any other questions. I think it is quite
clear.
16246 I don't know if you have anything you
would like to add before we conclude?
16247 MS EDWARDS: No. We are finished.
16248 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank you very
much.
16249 MS EDWARDS: Thank you very much.
16250 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Madame Chair?
16251 THE CHAIRPERSON: No.
16252 Thank you very much. Thank you.
16253 MS BÉNARD: The next presentation
will be by Newfoundland Broadcasting Company.
INTERVENTION
16254 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good morning.
16255 MR. S. STIRLING: Good morning.
--- Off microphone / Sans microphone
16256 THE CHAIRPERSON: We understand. We
have been victims of that flu ourselves.
16257 MR. S. STIRLING: It is going around.
Okay.
16258 THE CHAIRPERSON: We even have cough
syrup, we have all the -- I have some Vicks here.
16259 MR. S. STIRLING: Maybe a
suppressant.
16260 Madame Chairperson and Members of the
Commission and ladies and gentleman, my name is Scott
Stirling and I am President and CEO of Newfoundland
Broadcasting Company Limited.
16261 At the table with me today is
Mr. Doug Neal, General Manager of Newfoundland
Broadcasting; Mr. Greg Stirling, who along with me is a
shareholder in Newfoundland Broadcasting. Also
present, Mr. Keith Soper, our Sales Manager at NTV.
16262 NTV is appearing here today because
we believe the commercial practices of CBC are slowly
destroying the private broadcasting industry in
Newfoundland and Labrador. In today's economy it is
especially unfair to pit a subsidized Crown Corporation
with the might of the CBC against a small regional
broadcast network like NTV, but that is precisely what
has been done up to now.
16263 We are here today to ask that the CBC
be relieved of the burdens of billing, accounting,
traffic orders, salaried sales people and their
managers, the overhead of offices, as well as all the
other costly paraphernalia required to make money
through local and regional sales.
16264 We believe if the Commission does not
act upon what we are saying here today, and what we
have said in our written intervention, you will
discover that the future of private broadcasting will
be in jeopardy, not only in Newfoundland and Labrador
but perhaps in the entire country.
16265 We believe that Newfoundland and
Labrador represents a microcosm of the national scene.
CBNT in St. John's is charging both advertising airtime
and production rates which bear no relationship to the
ratings or their operating costs. So let's consider
the rates.
16266 In our written submission, we clearly
offer evidence of CBNT's unrealistically low
advertising rates. We ask that the CBC be required to
show you its records in order to allow the Commission
to verify our belief that it has engaged in unjust,
unfair and uncompetitive sales practices in
Newfoundland and Labrador. We have uncovered this
through access to only a few of their contracts, which
support what we have long believed to be true.
16267 We also believe that CBNT's costs are
significantly higher than the revenues generated
locally by its sales of advertising and commercial
production.
16268 CBNT's sales activities depress the
marketplace in Newfoundland and Labrador. As the
Commission is aware, private broadcasters of course
live and die on their ratings. We use those ratings as
the basis for NTV's advertising rates. The revenue
generated from the sale of advertising based on a good
rating pays the bills. If NTV has the ratings and the
sales, but our revenues are depressed due to under
selling on the market's cost per point, it will be
difficult for NTV to survive in an increasingly
fragmented broadcasting system.
16269 Simply put, we won't be able to
generate the revenue required to improve or even
maintain today's levels of service that we need to
survive in today's television universe. Meanwhile, CBC
will continue to go along skimming the fat from the
top, offering low rates to those potential advertisers
who will purchase a local television spot, thereby
depressing the cost per point in our marketplace and
the other markets served by the CBC.
16270 As we stated have in our written
intervention, CBNT offers unrealistically low
advertising prices for even its top-rated show in
Newfoundland, "Here And Now". It is an easy sale for
CBNT, representing some extra money, regional or local,
but they don't consider the implications this has on
other media operating in our market.
16271 Even if an advertiser has no
intention of buying CBNT the knowledge of these low CBC
prices for a show with comparable ratings to NTV is
used by advertisers as a stick to beat down our rates,
and thus beat down the overall value of advertising in
the market of St. John's.
16272 CBC has become very aggressive on the
cost-per-spot approach for their special packages that
include their top shows such as "Here And Now", "Land
And Sea", et cetera. These packages are targeted
towards accounts that are advertising on NTV.
16273 In the local market, the only major
stumbling block with clients comparing NTV and CBC is
absolutely price per spot for comparable shows in
package deals for weekly, monthly or yearly buys.
16274 We feel that CBC is pricing below
what the market can bear with no relationship to cost
recovery or, of course, profit.
16275 Overall, the CBC is having an effect
by forcing the price to be kept down in an industry
where expenses are continually increasing.
16276 Some years ago, the CBC was selling
"Here And Now's" cut ins for the west coast of
Newfoundland at $25 for a 30-second spot. NTV
complained, but the Commission felt at that time that
it was better to maintain the CBC presence in those
communities. As a result, NTV was forced to close our
Cornerbrook station because we could not compete with
those rates.
16277 Some years later, fairly recently in
fact, a local radio station started in Cornerbrook, but
was reduced to selling 30-second spots for $7.00
because that is all they could get. CBYT was selling
local TV spots for $35. The owners of that radio
station eventually sold to Newcap Broadcasting. CBC,
in the end, closed its station after its public funding
was reduced.
16278 It would appear that the CBC knew, as
we did, that they could not continue operation selling
at those rates without their heavily subsidized budget.
Since NTV has no subsidy, Cornerbrook was closed.
NTV's Grand Falls-Gander TV studios also were closed
just prior to our closure in Cornerbrook.
16279 It is obvious that the CBC's practice
of underselling results in forcing out the private
broadcaster. Then, faced with budget constraints, the
CBC themselves abandon the small markets first,
resulting in little or no direct community involvement
by either broadcaster in those communities.
16280 A potentially similar situation
exists today in St. John's where CBNT's unfair selling
practices have severely depressed the advertising
market and significantly affected our revenues. In our
view, Cornerbrook is a microcosm of St. John's. If
another downturn in the economy yields more drastic
budget cuts for CBC in the future, they could decide to
remove their studios from St. John's in favour of a
regional presence centred out of Halifax.
16281 Newfoundland Broadcasting is
Newfoundland owned and operated. If we are going to
survive, it will be in Newfoundland. We have been here
for almost 50 years but, unlike the CBC, we have
nowhere else to go.
16282 In order to generate the revenue to
purchase and produce the programs, to provide the
capital necessary to buy our equipment, to employ our
staff, to pay the taxes and the operating expenses, NTV
must be allowed to sell at rates which are considered
reasonable by our clients. Since the local CBC
severely undercuts our rates, when both "Here And Now"
and "The NTV Evening News Hour" enjoy almost equal
ratings, if you were a potential customer, what would
you do?
16283 There is a condition in CBNT's
licence that requires it to sell at fair and
competitive rates. A copy of the conditions were
attached to Decision CRTC 95-654 and they are appended.
If you don't mind, I would just like to review those
which directly talk about sales practices.
16284 This on their Cornerbrook station as
well as their St. John's station:
"The CBC may continue to solicit
and broadcast local commercials
on television in Newfoundland on
the condition that:
a) CBC rates charged for
commercials will be fair and
competitive with the private
sector, and will be based on
current industry criteria such
as cost-per-thousand and/or
cost-per-rating point;
b) the CBC will not expand its
sales force for the purpose of
increasing its proportional
share of the television
advertising market in
Newfoundland;
c) rates, discounts and
conditions of sale are formally
authorized and published will be
strictly observed;
d) the CBC will ensure that its
commercial practices in
Newfoundland are consistent with
those in other parts of the
country;
e) the CBC will not vary its
discount prices in Newfoundland
from the framework consistently
applied to all its stations;
f) the Run-of-Schedule discount
plan which applies uniformly to
all CBC local sales operations,
may be subject to minor
adjustments from time to time in
Newfoundland but will not
substantially change character
or impact."
16285 It is apparent to us, that they have
not complied with these conditions, nor has CBNT lived
up to its promise of performance to produce 8.3 hours
of news each week. There is, therefore, no reason for
the Commission to believe they did or will abide by the
conditions regarding their sales practices.
16286 NTV asks the Commission to consider
that CBNT's new mandate in this coming licence term
should be to get out of local and regional markets
altogether in Newfoundland.
16287 We believe that there is evidence
which indicates that CBNT has not complied with its
past conditions of licence and NTV does not want to
endure another round of this unfair competition during
the next licence term of CBC.
16288 On the national selective TV
advertising scene, all broadcasters face the threat of
fragmentation. Cable and Direct-To-Home will bring
even more channels into our market. So we must compete
against major stations from the U.S., on one hand,
followed by the seemingly inexhaustible numbers of low
budget, 24-hour, automated specialty channels,
repeating whole blocks of programming daily.
16289 These cable and DTH-delivered
specialty channels with no over-the-air transmission
expenses can offer very reasonable national rates. NTV
will lose an estimated $1 million to these services in
this year alone.
16290 Advertisers and their agency of
record pit specialty TV against national selective TV,
another example of the brutal pressure we face in rate
erosion. Further compounding this is a CBC publicly
funded entity pricing itself without relevance to cost
or market forces and market value.
16291 In general terms, recognizing the
size and importance of the Newfoundland market within
the framework of today's national TV sales climate, any
increase in the supply of airtime for sale without a
corresponding increase in demand for that airtime will
mean, for this market, a reduction in available
national revenue.
16292 Static demand plus increased supply
equals fall in price. Agencies will play the market at
the same rate or lower than last year and adopt an even
more inflexible negotiating position on rates. This
will mean an effective reduction in the overall market
revenue pie. More players will be competing more
ferociously for a smaller share of a smaller pie.
16293 With advertising sales declining and
fragmentation increasing, private broadcasters will be
forced to implement cost-cutting measures imminently.
16294 In Atlantic Canada a major station,
ATV, has already laid off 28 people, citing their
decreases in national revenue due to increased
fragmentation as the cause. NTV is no different.
Layoffs and cutbacks will occur if corrective measures
are not put in place now.
16295 While not much can be done about the
fragmentation threat, the solution to CBC's local
underselling is presently within the Commission's
grasp. You have a window of opportunity existing
today, the next CBNT licence renewal may be too late.
The Commission alone has the power today to correct
these unfair, unjust and un-competitive practices.
16296 Madam Chairperson and Commissioners,
it is all about revenue. In order for NTV to improve
the levels of service required to compete for adequate
ratings in an increasingly fragmented market, NTV will
have to produce local programs that are relevant to the
people of Newfoundland and Labrador. That takes money.
16297 To deliver the technical quality and
programming designed to entice the viewer to watch and
thereby garner ratings also takes money. To keep the
transmitters on, the satellite feeds up, the employees
required to make it all happen, takes money. The CBC
certainly has more money than we do. They can, and we
believe do, compete unfairly.
16298 As a point of what we believe is
historically significant we quote what Ann Boden,
Senior Vice-President and National Media Director of
McKim Advertising, said in 1990 regarding the CBC's
venture at that time:
"Although this is great news for
advertisers and agencies, I
predict that private
broadcasters will once again be
vocal against the CBC. They do
have a point, given CBC's
government subsidy." (As read)
16299 The CBC is using its economies of
scale, economies which are supported by government
subsidies to effect an unfair competitive advantage
over the private sector, the private broadcaster.
16300 NTV asks that the Commission take
action in this licence renewal to correct the damage of
the past and allow private broadcasting, in the light
of the perils of emerging fragmentation, a chance to
maintain its place in the Canadian broadcasting system
free from the CBC's commercial involvement in its local
and regional marketplaces.
16301 The CBC's viewers will even be
impressed.
16302 Thank you.
16303 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very
much.
16304 I would ask Commissioner Pennefather
to ask the questions.
16305 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you,
Madam Chair.
16306 Good morning, gentlemen.
16307 MR. S. STIRLING: Good morning.
16308 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you
for being here today.
16309 Thank you for your written submission
and your comments this morning. They are very thorough
and you have presented your points very clearly
regarding your concerns about CBNT's advertising
practices.
16310 I really have no questions, since
your presentation was very clear and detailed, and we
look forward to CBC's reply on this matter.
16311 I only have one area perhaps for
comment outside of that whole discussion.
16312 Clearly, your concern deals with CBC
advertising practices in the local regional market.
That's clear.
16313 In your written submission you did
make a comment regarding the absence of local weekly
programming other than news.
16314 I was wondering whether you have any
comment on CBC's commitments announced during this
hearing to do two new weekly half hour series of
non-news programming and in terms of increased regional
production and in terms of increased regional presence
the national network. Do you have any comments on
that?
16315 MR. S. STIRLING: I read their
application and I guess that came out here in the
hearings. So I am not very familiar with it except
what they have put out. But it is not on their
schedule. So it is a rather vague commitment. It is
not apparently going to actually air in the fall, but
perhaps it will down the road.
16316 I guess one thing they said in their
pamphlet that they have here on the table, it says:
"To not have regional programs
reflecting the community and the
region from which they are drawn
would be at odds with the very
nature of this country and at
odds with the reasons why CBC
was created in the first place."
(As read)
16317 I mean they have Newsworld. I mean,
there has got to be more to Newfoundland culture than
just news. But I haven't seen what they are promising.
I mean, it is a great thing to come in and make a
promise in the twelfth hour.
16318 I also noticed that in Newfoundland
they normally cut back to a half hour newscast in the
summer, and this year they are going to wait until
these hearings are over I guess.
16319 I think they are obviously putting
their best face on it.
16320 We don't have anything against CBC,
it's just that we want to survive. We want to continue
to offer our viewers in Newfoundland a service. That's
really the problem.
16321 Right now we have 65 employees, they
have 380. They have four times our revenue and we are
producing twice as much news as they are. So what is
wrong with that picture?
16322 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Just so
I'm clear, you do agree that CBC should have a local
regional presence?
16323 MR. S. STIRLING: Yes. We are not
saying they should be removed.
16324 We would be happy if you could have
enforced the conditions of licence last time. We would
be happy to keep those licences in and not ask them to
get out of local. But it is impossible to police. It
is impossible to enforce.
16325 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: All right,
yes. That is very clear from your presentation and we
will look to CBC's reply in that matter.
16326 I have no further questions.
16327 Thank you.
16328 MR. S. STIRLING: Thank you.
16329 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you
for being here today.
16330 MR. S. STIRLING: Thank you.
16331 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you,
Madam Chair.
16332 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very
much, gentlemen, for participating.
16333 Ms BÉNARD: The next presentation
will be by S&S Productions, Mr. Steve Smith.
INTERVENTION
16334 MR. SMITH: Madam Chair, Members of
the Commission, thank you for allowing me the privilege
of coming here and speaking to you today.
16335 I am here to support, with vigour,
the CBC licence renewal application.
16336 I have been an independent producer
for over 20 years, producing almost 500 half hours of
television, the most notable being the Red Green Show,
which runs nationally on CBC and is on 85 PBS stations
in the U.S.
16337 I have worked with most of the
private broadcasters and my company is currently doing
several productions for the specialty channels.
16338 Let me begin by giving you my
perspective of the CRTC.
Laughter / Rires
--- Off microphone / Sans microphone
16339 MR. SMITH: I will do it publicly.
16340 Very early in my producing career I
met with a broadcast executive to pitch a program idea.
He started the meeting by telling me that: Every
Canadian broadcaster only needs three employees, one to
purchase the American programs, one to sell ads for the
American programs, and one to push a button so the
American programs go on the air. Now, what was it you
wanted to talk about?
16341 There is no doubt in my mind that the
CRTC regulations are the main reason I have been
allowed to work in my chosen profession in my own
country. So naturally I support any broadcaster who
embraces the CRTC agenda. That's why I'm here today.
16342 The CBC goes beyond just meeting the
letter of the CRTC regulations. It actually meets the
intent.
16343 The CBC can't bury their Canadian
programs or schedule them as throwaways or package them
with American shows. Canadian shows have to work well
on the CBC schedule, because they are the CBC schedule.
16344 The CBC and I are fundamentally in
the same business: producing, marketing and promoting
Canadian shows that Canadians want to watch. To me,
the CBC is the spirit of a group of us working
together, jousting at windmills, masters of our own
domain. Together, we focus on the job at hand, which
is making our voices heard.
16345 This is a big one. Our bosses are
not in L.A. or New York. And, with all due respect,
they are not even in Ottawa. They are in livingrooms
and family rooms from Gibson's Landing to Joe Batt's
Arm. More and more of them are showing up in the
ratings books watching Canadian shows on CBC.
16346 Why? Yes, the shows are high quality
but that is not the reason. Canadians watch the CBC
because it is relevant to them and it is relevant to
them because it reflects their culture.
16347 I was hoping I wouldn't have to say
the "C" word, because it is so overused, but it is also
the fundamental reason for the existence of the CRTC
and the CBC and the entire Canadian broadcasting
industry. So I felt I should at least mention it.
16348 Television is a cultural medium. For
Canadian television to endure with purpose it needs to
be a cultural endeavour with a business component,
rather than the other way around.
16349 I believe the CBC is on that track.
16350 I travel extensively in the United
States, meeting thousands of Americans every year
face-to-face. Hundreds of them make the trip to come
up to the CBC broadcast centre in Toronto to watch the
taping of my show.
16351 I am here to testify that American
culture and Canadian culture are significantly
different, and that is important. Unfortunately, it is
not important to the Americans. So it is up to us to
draw the line.
16352 We all know that the way people see
themselves determines who they are and who they
eventually become. Every year more and more Canadians
see themselves as American, because those are the
images that dominate the media.
16353 CBC is working hard to get Canadians
to see themselves as Canadian.
16354 Yes, the CBC is financially
subsidized, but it is not culturally subsidized. You
get what you pay for.
16355 I know there is room for improvement
at the CBC, as there is in almost all large
corporations, but it is better to do the right thing
with flaws than to do the wrong thing to perfection.
CBC is doing the right thing.
16356 In closing, I believe that
broadcasters should be judged by what they add to the
viewer's menu. American simulcast adds nothing. The
CBC adds Canada.
16357 Thank you.
16358 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very
much.
16359 I would ask Commissioner Langford to
ask the questions.
16360 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Thanks very
much.
16361 Thanks for coming out, as they say.
16362 MR. SMITH: I live in the area.
16363 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: I'm glad you
didn't bring your chain saw and make us a green salad.
We can't afford the furniture.
16364 I want to ask a little bit based on
your success, especially this Red Green Show you do.
There are various voices that we have heard already,
and we will hear more of judging from the written
interventions that we have read ahead on, who paint
this kind of a picture of the CBC's role. I think I
could characterize it that they see it as an incubator
kind of role.
16365 They see the CBC as getting out there
and taking chances on shows that other people won't
touch, that the privates won't touch. But then they
seem to take it an extra step and say that once those
shows get successful, whether it is the "Air Farce" or
"This Hour Has 22 Minutes", or other shows, that they
should let those go and let the private broadcasters
take them. That they shouldn't bid to hold onto what
they have created. That they should view themselves as
incubators and say, "Okay, that one was a success, we
will kiss it goodbye. We will go out and look for the
next zany, next new development, whatever it might be,
whether it is in drama or in comedy."
16366 MR. SMITH: Right.
16367 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: How do you
respond to that?
16368 MR. SMITH: I just don't agree.
There is a huge gap in that logic for me.
16369 For one thing, working as a producer
I can't overestimate the value of the environment in
which you are working. If you working side-by-side
with a broadcaster who is completely at risk with you
in terms of, as I said in my presentation, is in the
same business. They live or die on the success of
their Canadian programs.
16370 That brings a whole different light
to it. You do your best work. You value their opinion
more, because they are right along side-by-side with
you fighting the same battle.
16371 If someone has another main agenda,
if there is another engine driving that broadcaster's
main business, then that relationship just changes
tremendously and would affect the whole process. So
there is one issue.
16372 Another issue is, I don't understand
why the CBC would be penalized for success when they do
what you ask them to do, take the chances, develop the
shows, stay with the people when others won't, and then
make it a success, and they are penalized? I don't get
that.
16373 If I was working there on the inside,
that would completely demoralize me. What you would be
looking for is mediocrity, because you know you can
keep it.
16374 There are a few holes in that for me
that could be filled, but they need to be filled first
and then we could look at it.
16375 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: I just have
one other area that I want to explore, just to sort of
trade on your experience.
16376 We hear a lot here about PBS as a
comparison, and we have been told ferociously that CBC
shouldn't be "PBS North". We have been told just as
ferociously that they should be.
16377 There seems to be a lot of
schizophrenia out there on what PBS means and how it
works. Can you give us any guidance?
16378 You have worked with both. You are
working with both now. I don't want you to bite either
hand that feeds you, so you can keep it as positive as
you want, but we are just trying to get a sense here as
to the difference between a PBS and a CBC environment,
and with you as an independent producer, you might be
in a position to do that for us.
16379 MR. SMITH: Okay. Well, in a way you
are asking me what colour is plaid, but I will do my
best.
16380 I mean, who would think the
"Red Green Show" would work on PBS. We say it is an
educational channel, we are a recess. We do this kind
of stuff to try to break the mould.
16381 But the elements of PBS that I relate
to are that it is very much a bottom-up network, it's a
ground swell. If the people are there to support it.
If they feel passionately about the television they are
watching, then on PBS you can keep your program on the
air and allow it to flourish.
16382 The down side of PBS, in my mind, is
that there is a tendency for it to be elitist, that you
get so high-brow actually no one is watching. We are
doing all these great shows and nobody is watching.
16383 In my presentation I wanted to stress
to get our voices heard -- to get our voices heard by
the most number of people. Great ratings on the CBC is
what we are after, not just great shows that nobody
sees or great cultural breakthroughs that nobody
watches. It won't affect anybody who didn't see it.
16384 So my major complaint with the PBS
would be, number one, it is elitist; and number two,
they don't really rate that well and it tends to be not
on the agenda for most viewers.
16385 CBC is already a million miles ahead
of that. CBC has tremendous ratings. When I told you
about that meeting I had early in my career, if you
would have told me that there will be a Canadian
broadcaster sometime in the future that will win its
time slot with 100 per cent Canadian programming in
prime time, I would have fainted.
16386 The headway here has been tremendous.
I think, in fact PBS, as they get more involved with
CBC, will try to emulate them, the other way around.
16387 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: So how do you
feel about the CBC?
--- Laughter / Rires
16388 MR. SMITH: Oh, I'm kind of
ambivalent.
16389 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: I thought so.
16390 Those are my questions.
16391 Thank you.
16392 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very
much.
16393 Thank you, Mr. Smith. Thank you.
16394 Mme BÉNARD: Merci, Madame la
Présidente.
16395 La prochaine présentation sera celle
de la Fédération nationale des communications.
INTERVENTION
16396 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Bonjour.
16397 Mme LAROUCHE: Bonjour, Madame la
Présidente, mesdames et messieurs du Conseil bonjour.
16398 Je me présente, Chantal Larouche,
présidente de la Fédération nationale des
communications. Je suis accompagnée de mon confrère,
le secrétaire-général de la Fédération, Pierre Roger.
16399 J'ai joint à notre présentation
verbale un document qui est une déclaration solennelle
qui a été faite hier par les quatre présidents vivants,
disons-nous, de la CSN depuis 1965 à savoir MM. Marcel
Pepin, Norbert Rodrige, Gérald Larose et le président
en titre, Marc Laviolette.
16400 La Fédération nationale des
communications est une fédération processionnelle qui
est affiliée à la Confédération des syndicats
nationaux. La Fédération représente 105 syndicats dans
les secteurs de la télévision, de la radio, de la
presse écrite, de l'édition donc 7 000 membres au
total. Nous représentons tant les journalistes que les
techniciens et l'ensemble des employés de soutien de
même que les pigistes qui oeuvrent dans l'industrie de
la production indépendante, soit l'Association des
professionnels de la vidéo du Québec et l'Association
des journalistes indépendants du Québec.
16401 La FNC croit que le mandat de la
Société Radio-Canada défini par la Loi de la
radiodiffusion doit être maintenu et soutenu.
16402 Depuis le début des années 90,
Radio-Canada a subi des diminutions de crédits
parlementaires de plus de 20 pour cent ce qui complique
considérablement la concrétisation de son mandat. La
SRC doit de plus financer ses opérations de
radiodiffusion à partir de revenus obtenus à la
télévision.
16403 Ce contexte contraint Radio-Canada à
recourir aux variétés et aux sports pour attirer des
auditoires et des revenus. Ce type d'émissions,
pourrions-nous dire, altère le mandat de la SRC mais
elles s'avèrent utiles et même nécessaires compte tenu
des besoins de revenus en auditoires.
16404 Nous croyons, cependant, que la SRC
doit bien sûr faire des efforts particuliers pour
devenir un radiotélédiffuseur complémentaire et offrir
au public des contenus qui se distinguent de ceux
diffusés par le privé. Nous croyons que la Société
assumerait ainsi pleinement le rôle qui lui est confié
par la Loi sur la radiodiffusion.
16405 Nous ne pouvons cependant faire
abstraction de la situation financière de la SRC et lui
imposer d'offrir une programmation marginale qui la
rendrait davantage vulnérable. Elle doit pouvoir
diffuser des contenus qui attirent des auditoires et
des revenus publicitaires.
16406 Toutefois, Radio-Canada doit aussi
déployer les énergies nécessaires pour occuper des
créneaux laissés pour compte par l'entreprise privée.
La SRC doit en conséquence offrir aux téléspectateurs
des émissions, des catégories d'émissions canadiennes
qui ont tendance à être sous-représentées dans les
grilles horaires des télédiffuseurs canadiens,
notamment les dramatiques, les émissions de musique,
les émissions pour enfants et les documentaires.
16407 Rappelons qu'au Québec les
télédiffuseurs privés généralistes ont réduit le nombre
d'heures d'émissions destinées aux enfants et ce depuis
l'adoption en 1980 de la Loi sur la protection du
consommateur qui interdit la publicité commerciale
destinée aux enfants de moins de 13 ans.
16408 Dans son avis d'audience publique
1999-3, le conseil écrit que:
"La SRC, à titre de
radiodiffuseur public national,
mettra en oeuvre son mandat dans
un marché plus fragmenté et plus
concurrentiel."
16409 Le Conseil poursuit:
"Un radiodiffuseur public
national canadien fort est
indispensable dans ce contexte."
16410 La Fédération nationale des
communications partage cette analyse. C'est pour cette
raison qu'elle presse le Conseil de résister aux
demandes de plusieurs diffuseurs privés et de
commentateurs qui revendiquent une restructuration
radicale de la programmation de la Société.
16411 La Fédération ne croit pas que les
objectifs de la Loi sur la radiodiffusion seront
atteints en forçant la Société Radio-Canada à se
retirer massivement des catégories d'émissions les plus
populaires. Elle est convaincue qu'une telle approche
se traduirait inévitablement par une baisse généralisée
de l'écoute, y compris pour les catégories
sous-représentées.
16412 Dans son plan stratégique la Société
écrit que:
"Radio-Canada présentera
également aux Canadiens ses
promesses de réalisation
annuelles portant sur la
programmation et d'autres points
précis."
16413 Cet engagement nous apparaît un bon
moyen de voir à ce que la Société Radio-Canada joue son
rôle de diffuseur public. Encore faut-il que les
auditeurs qui sont aussi des contribuables capables de
définir ce qu'ils entendent par service public aient la
chance de se faire entendre.
16414 La Fédération demande donc au Conseil
d'obliger Radio-Canada à diffuser largement ses
promesses de réalisation annuelles ainsi que
d'autoévaluation annuelle des résultats de la Société.
La haute direction de Radio-Canada devrait aussi être
tenue de discuter du contenu de ces documents à
l'antenne de chacun de ses réseaux.
16415 Par rapport à l'information, la SRC
soutient que RDI fournit des bulletins de nouvelles aux
trente minutes à chaque jour, des émissions spéciales
sur les grands événements de l'actualité, une fenêtre
quotidienne sur toutes les régions du pays.
16416 Nous constatons que la SRC doit
cependant améliorer le traitement accordé à
l'information à caractère régional. L'expérience
démontre que peu d'énergies sont consacrées à adapter
l'information pour le public auquel elle est destinée.
16417 Il est primordial que la SRC s'assure
que les nouvelles régionales présentées sur le réseau
soit mises en perspective de manière à intéresser la
population canadienne. La Société Radio-Canada devrait
s'inspirer de l'émission notamment "Le Midi 15" et le
bulletin de 13 heures diffusés au Québec pour définir
convenablement l'information à caractère régional. Ces
deux productions font un effort valable pour présenter
correctement l'information régionale.
16418 La Société Radio-Canada devrait en
fait préciser quelles émissions ont une vocation
régionale et définir par écrit les objectifs visés et
les moyens retenus pour atteindre cette partie du
mandat. Cette information devrait aussi être
communiquée aux artisans des émissions.
16419 La Loi sur la radiodiffusion précise
que la Société Radio-Canada à titre de radiodiffuseur
public national devrait offrir des services de radio et
de télévision qui comportent une très large
programmation qui renseigne, éclaire et divertit.
16420 Pour accomplir ce mandat, la SRC doit
disposer de ressources suffisantes mais aussi d'une
sécurité financière. Pour être en mesure d'assumer
réellement la diffusion d'une programmation qui
renseigne et éclaire, la SRC doit jouir d'une réelle
indépendance éditoriale. Cette indépendance est
constamment mise à l'épreuve.
16421 En effet, les décisions budgétaires
ne sont pas neutres. La menace qui pèse depuis
plusieurs années sur la situation financière de la SRC
peut générer des choix et des comportements nuisibles à
la capacité de la SRC d'offrir une programmation qui
permet réellement de renseigner et éclairer la
population canadienne.
16422 Les conditions de financement de la
Société doivent circonscrire toute forme de pressions
politiques partisanes, même non apparentes.
16423 La Fédération nationale des
communications a bien sûr un intérêt pour qu'un
équilibre soit établi dans l'industrie de la
radiotélédiffusion de manière à permettre la viabilité
du secteur privé et public de la radiotélédiffusion
ainsi que celle du secteur de la production
indépendante.
16424 Nous croyons que dans un contexte de
convergences technologiques et de multiplication des
services de radiotélédiffusion canadiens et étrangers
le CRTC doit veiller à assurer la viabilité des
services canadiens et l'adhésion du public à ces
services ce qui nécessite, à notre avis, la production
de contenus canadiens originaux de qualité et la
présence d'une offre suffisante de services canadiens
de télévision généraliste et spécialisée pour
encourager l'écoute de contenu canadien.
16425 Quant au financement nous croyons que
le financement de la production d'émissions destinées à
la télévision doit avoir pour principal objectif la
protection, la diffusion et l'écoute de contenus
canadiens.
16426 En ce sens, la FNC croit que
l'industrie de la production indépendante ayant fait
ses preuves, le CRTC devrait laisser aux télédiffuseurs
le choix des moyens pour atteindre les objectifs de
protection, de diffusion et d'écoute des contenus
canadiens.
16427 Nous croyons que les deux modes de
production, soit la production interne et la production
indépendante peuvent bien servir l'intérêt public et
nous pensons qu'il est possible de faire mieux pour
davantage stimuler la production, la diffusion, la
promotion et la mise en marché d'émissions canadiennes
de haute qualité, notamment en permettant à toutes les
composantes de l'industrie de s'engager envers la
qualité des contenus.
16428 Plus que jamais la réglementation et
les politiques de subventions doivent viser à augmenter
l'écoute des émissions canadiennes. Jusqu'à maintenant
les efforts ont été placés dans la production et
l'offre de services canadiens. Nous avons aujourd'hui
une production indépendante bien établie et une offre
sans précédent de canaux généralistes et spécialisés
canadiens. L'heure est venue, croyons-nous, de
développer les obligations et les incitatifs appropriés
pour amener les diffuseurs à présenter des émissions
canadiennes à des auditoires plus vastes.
16429 Les fonds de financement de la
production doivent être distribués sur la base des
objectifs définis en matière de diffusion et de
production de contenus, sans pour autant garantir un
pourcentage fixe à quelque intervenant que ce soit,
qu'il s'agisse des télédiffuseurs ou des producteurs.
16430 Par ailleurs, au niveau des
technologies, la convergence des technologies de la
radiotélédiffusion et de l'informatique évolue de telle
sorte qu'on ne peut prédire avec exactitude son
aboutissement.
16431 Le CRTC doit permettre
l'expérimentation et la diversification des activités
de manière à sauvegarder l'avenir des acquis actuels de
l'industrie des communications.
16432 Le travail accompli pour promouvoir
et diffuser la culture canadienne doit pouvoir
subsister aux changements technologiques en cours.
16433 En conclusion, nous croyons que le
mandat de la Société Radio-Canada définit par la Loi de
la radiodiffusion doit être maintenu et soutenu. En
raison de la diminution des crédits, la SRC doit
pouvoir recourir à une programmation variée pour
conserver et attirer des auditoires et des revenus.
16434 La SRC doit faire des efforts
particuliers pour devenir un radiodiffuseur
complémentaire et j'insiste ici pour dire
complémentaire dans la mesure où nous avons une marge
de manoeuvre financière qui nous permet de nous
distinguer, et offrir aussi au public des contenus qui
se distinguent de ceux du privé.
16435 La SRC doit diffuser largement ses
promesses de réalisations annuelles ainsi que
l'autoévaluation annuelle des résultats de la Société.
En matière d'information la Société d'État doit jouir
d'une réelle indépendance face aux pressons politiques
qui se reflètent trop souvent par des décisions
économiques.
16436 L'espace réservé aux régions doit
prévoir un traitement de l'information en fonction de
l'auditoire auquel elle est destinée. Un équilibre
doit être établi dans l'industrie de la
radiotélédiffusion de manière à assurer la viabilité du
secteur privé et public ainsi que celle du secteur de
la production indépendante. Les fonds de financement
de la production doivent être distribués sur la base
des objectifs définis en matière de diffusion et de
production de contenus sans garantir un pourcentage
fixe à quelque intervenant que ce soit.
16437 Dans un contexte de changements
technologiques, le CRTC doit permettre
l'expérimentation et la diversification des activités
de manière à sauvegarder l'avenir des acquis actuels de
l'industrie.
16438 Voilà ça complète notre présentation.
16439 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Merci, Madame
Larouche.
16440 Je demanderais à la vice-présidente,
Madame Wylie, de vous poser des questions.
16441 Mme LAROUCHE: Merci.
16442 CONSEILLÈRE WYLIE: Bonjour, Madame
Larouche, bonjour Monsieur.
16443 Si je comprends bien c'est
l'équilibre pour vous qui compte donc même dans
l'interprétation du mandat de la Société comme il est
inscrit à la Loi elle-même, il s'agit d'équilibre.
16444 Donc au départ vous préféreriez que
le radiodiffuseur de l'État soit complémentaire mais si
il y a manque de fonds à ce moment-là vous préconisez
aussi qu'il se lance plus dans la programmation plus
populaire qui attirera des auditoires plus larges et
donc des revenus.
16445 Est-ce que je comprends bien?
16446 Mme LAROUCHE: Vous comprenez bien
dans la mesure d'autant plus où Radio-Canada, depuis,
les tous débuts a été quand même un télédiffuseur
généraliste qui a reflété adéquatement à notre avis la
culture canadienne bien qu'on puisse questionner
quelques émissions, nous constatons que ces émissions
qui font souvent l'objet de critiques de la part des
télédiffuseurs privés sont quand même le reflet de
notre réalité en tant que société.
16447 CONSEILLÈRE WYLIE: Donc même s'il y
avait des fonds suffisants pour le faire vous ne
préconiseriez pas que la Société Radio-Canada recours
seulement à devenir un radiodiffuseur complémentaire et
offrir au public des contenus qui se distinguent de
ceux diffusés par le privé. Même s'il y avait des
fonds suffisants ce n'est pas pour vous un but que
d'interpréter les mandats de cette façon-là
complètement?
16448 Mme LAROUCHE: Non, parce qu'on pense
que Radio-Canada a une rôle, bien sûr, de
complémentarité mais ne doit pas se limiter à cette
mission, d'autant plus que la crainte que nous avons
c'est qu'en marginalisant à l'extrême Radio-Canada, en
la confinant à des catégories d'émissions, je dirais
peut-être un peu trop limitatives, on aurait tendance,
on pourrait, je pense, faire fuir les auditoires de
Radio-Canada et limiter ainsi la chance de notre
société de profiter des contenus qui ont été développés
peut-être pour enrichir davantage la population.
16449 CONSEILLÈRE WYLIE: Alors voilà les
objectifs. Si ce n'était pas une question de revenus
en ce moment, quel changement ou redirection
trouveriez-vous nécessaire à l'offre de Radio-Canada
pour interpréter son mandat comme vous le voyez, s'il
n'y avait pas de considérations financières?
16450 Mme LAROUCHE: Nous croyons qu'au-delà
des considérations financières, Radio-Canada devra
toujours faire un effort particulier pour offrir des
contenus que d'autres radios ou télédiffuseurs
n'offrent pas. Cependant, nous sommes bien conscients
qu'à ce moment-ci Radio-Canada, pour être en mesure
d'assumer pleinement ses responsabilités, doit recourir
parfois à des choix de programmation je dirais un peu
plus légers de manière à aller chercher des auditoires
et améliorer sa capacité d'offrir de la programmation.
16451 Mais en tout temps, Radio-Canada --
et je pense qu'on fait un effort à ce moment-ci déjà
pour offrir à la population une programmation qui se
distingue mais on a des limites financières qui font
qu'on donne parfois peut-être un peu plus dans la
variété qu'on voudrait le faire normalement si on avait
une situation financière un peu plus sécuritaire je
dirais.
16452 CONSEILLÈRE WYLIE: Je vous remercie.
Merci Madame, Monsieur.
16453 Mme LAROUCHE: Merci.
16454 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Madame, Monsieur,
merci beaucoup.
16455 Nous allons interrompre nos travaux
pour l'heure du déjeuner. Nous reviendrons à deux
heures.
--- Suspension pour le déjeuner à /
Luncheon recess at 1225
--- Upon resuming at / Reprise à 1400
16456 THE CHAIRPERSON: Madame Bénard.
16457 MS BÉNARD: Thank you, Madam Chair.
16458 The next presentation will be the
Corporation of the City of Windsor.
16459 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good afternoon and
welcome to this proceeding.
INTERVENTION
16460 MR. HURST: Madam Chair, members of
the CRTC, good afternoon.
16461 Let me say first of all that I very
much appreciate your staff working with me to
accommodate my schedule. I was supposed to be here
this morning. I was asked by the Deputy Prime Minister
of Canada to stay at home because he had a wonderful
announcement to make, and I can share with you that the
Organization of American States will be having their
Summit in the Year 2000 in Windsor, Ontario. So it was
certainly a good piece of news for us in Canada South.
16462 THE CHAIRPERSON: Congratulations.
It was worth staying home.
16463 MR. HURST: Thank you very much.
16464 THE CHAIRPERSON: We understand.
16465 MR. HURST: My name is Mike Hurst.
Again, I am the Mayor of Windsor, Ontario, Canada.
With me is Hugh Edmunds, formerly of the University of
Windsor and Professor Emeritus of the University of
Windsor, Department of Communications.
16466 I last appeared before you almost
seven years ago. Both Hugh and I were young. We had
jet black hair at the time. That is no longer,
unfortunately, the case. At that time Windsor and area
were without any local television service at all. My
appearance was in support of Baton Broadcasting's plan
to bring some local television to Windsor as part of
its buy-out of the CFPL-TV properties in London,
Ontario.
16467 A year earlier, John Milson, my
predecessor, vividly described to you the sorrow, the
anger, the feelings of abandonment, even betrayal felt
by our citizens when the CBC had terminated its local
TV service. Eight thousand protestors demonstrated in
the streets one cold December afternoon, school
children donated loonies to the cause, and within one
10-day period 57,000 citizens signed petitions. These,
we would submit, were unheard of numbers of people
demanding to receive Canadian broadcasting services.
16468 In its time the Commission has
certainly heard many a protest to permit more and more
American services. Here was a much larger instance of
protest. It was a case of Canadians passionately
demanding Canadian broadcasting services.
16469 The demonstration, as I already
mentioned, had been triggered by the loss of the local
CBC TV news and information, but really at its core the
protest was about the deep sense of loss, of
abandonment by people living in a sea of American
content. The concerned demonstrators were people who
love this country, who wish to fully participate in it
and desperately want their children to grow up as real
Canadians. It is with this in mind that I appear
before you today.
16470 Really, as no other Canadians,
Windsorites know how important it is to have Canadian
services. After all, we are awash in U.S. media.
Adjacent are six strong U.S. TV stations, six less
powerful ones, and about 54 U.S. radio stations.
16471 Late in 1994, after almost four
years' absence, the restoration of local television
services began. The Baton plan for a separate Windsor
news feed from London went ahead and the CBC restored a
large part of their former service.
16472 You know, in a sense we have been,
and we would submit are, the future, a predictor of
what will happen in the rest of Canada. Prior to CBC
cancelling local service its strong efforts to fully
cover local news and current affairs had succeeded in
producing some very respectable ratings in spite of the
immense competition from across the border.
16473 When CBC cuts its local service and
reduced its local staff by two-thirds, the results were
unconditionally disastrous. Without local content, the
CBC station quickly lost almost three-quarters of its
audience. It appeared as well to lose a great deal of
advertising revenue and what had been a strong lead
into the rest of the evening evaporated.
16474 The CBC experience probably showed
that the removal of the local element in early prime
time severely reduced viewing of later programs, and
even though rapid channel surfing is more prevalent
now, larger audiences in the earlier hours, through
exposure to program information and promotion are, in
our estimation, more likely to look for this content
during the later hours.
16475 The City of Windsor would strongly
urge the Commission to conduct research into the past
impact on the viewing of national prime time CBC
programs in the wake of the removal of local services.
What happened in Calgary might be a cautionary tale.
16476 In reviewing the role of the national
public broadcaster, it is particularly important for
the Commission to recognized that the local service on
the CBC is not only very important to communities, it
is probably vital to the future strength of the CBC.
It is our belief that the shedding of local TV service
by the CBC significantly damaged the Corporation in its
larger role as the strongest purveyor of those programs
which the Commission most wishes to support.
16477 The City of Windsor is not opposed to
strengthening national programming in those areas
indicated by the Commission as under represented.
However, recent public hearings seem to indicate that
the Commission assumes that local television is either
already well taken care of or that market forces will
ensure that this need is adequately served.
16478 It is the contention of the City of
Windsor that local broadcasting services are
fundamental to building and protecting audiences for
these national programs as well as being necessary in
determining and responding to the needs of our
community.
16479 The Windsor situation, you must know,
is unique in a number of aspects. With the exception
of the CBC transmitter, no private Canadian television
station, Global, CTV, CHUM, and so on, can locate a
conventional transmitter close enough or strong enough
to provide a clear signal into most Windsor homes.
16480 To do so would mean that any U.S.
content on that signal would have to be purchased at
Detroit market prices which are greater than those
charged for release in all of Canada outside of
Windsor. Only cable -- only cable makes it possible to
view most of our Canadian channels. There is no need
to subscribe to cable in order to view American
channels.
16481 While a reasonably good level of
local service has been restored to our community, to
the return of the CBC local news and the licensing of
CHWI-TV, it is a level of service, in our estimation,
considerably less than in Canadian markets of
comparable size. Particularly in view of the large
spillover of U.S. media, local television is our first
line of defence, and this spillover is a particularly
potent competition because much of the U.S. local
service is relevant, of course, to the entire
Windsor-Detroit area.
16482 During the absence of the local TV
service, it was more difficult to pursue a number of
initiatives for strengthening our local economy and
increasing the quality of our citizens' lives.
16483 But I am happy to tell you that our
plans for increasing tourism, developing our
riverfront, revitalizing our city centre with the
Daimler-Chrysler Canadian headquarters and expanded
convention centre, a sports and entertainment complex,
are proceeding quite well. The restoration of local
service has improved greatly the breadth of community
involvement, community input and, perhaps most
importantly, community support.
16484 As all of you are well aware,
municipalities are under increasing pressure to provide
more services as the federal and provincial governments
download their prior historical responsibilities. With
this occurring as a background, changes in broadcasting
regulations, which do not recognize the necessity of
maintaining and promoting solid community information
choices, have a very real potential to work to the
detriment of the interests of municipal government.
16485 The Commission, in our estimation,
must safeguard the community's right to define itself
through the televised media available to it. If it
does not ensure that there are enough local choices to
fulfil this role, we believe decreasing awareness of
issues on the part of our citizens and a consequent
decline in their participation in municipal democracy
will result.
16486 In our estimation, CBC Radio and
Television are integral parts of the community playing
an active role in enhancing our quality of life, and
they do this by getting out into the community,
providing media sponsorship of cultural events and
reflecting our community to itself.
16487 In spite of its huge market, Detroit
no longer has a quality music radio station because
market economics could not support it. We are
fortunate, then, in having the CBC and CBC Radio Two.
16488 You know, the situation in Windsor is
much improved from five years ago, yet we think further
improvements should be made. For example, from Friday
night to Monday morning nothing happens, period. There
is no local live reporting on weekends, and there are
still no local programs produced in content areas other
than news or public affairs.
16489 In the past there have been a few
unfortunate situations with respect to public safety
when important information simply was not available to
the public. In one case, a paint factory might have
required a major evacuation and only a Detroit station
was on the scene to communicate emergency instructions.
Most recently, the only notification of a killer
tornado just a few miles across the international
border came from U.S. stations.
16490 Since then, our Canadian stations
have made sincere efforts to improve the situation but,
members of the Commission, a city and a community of
350,000 needs the capability to have televised
emergency messages seven days a week. The situation
has steadily improved, but weekends remain
problematical.
16491 You know, at a time in our history
when unity and identity are consuming issues, it is
discouraging to think that the broadcast media concerns
of Windsor, which require a strong and even
strengthened CBC local presence may be jeopardized.
16492 Certainly more and better national
programs are most desirable. But for those of us who
look across the river and see the United States of
America, we know that the strong Canadian content we
want must be supported by strong local radio and TV
services that only the CBC can provide in this area.
16493 Changing technologies and
distribution systems will have a profound effect on
viewing patterns. The advent of the direct broadcast
satellite brings no local service in its program
schedule. This poses two problems in Windsor.
16494 U.S. dishes are readily available and
switching to local stations really means also accessing
cable since rabbit ears or a modest antenna simply will
not suffice. And you know, it may be that in the
larger picture of Canada as a whole, stations with a
firm base and local programming are the bastions of the
national expression of our Canadian objectives and
without this base our stations become purely marketing
devices in a plethora of choices.
16495 With specific reference to your
questions: Yes, the CBC is vital to Canadian life as a
national broadcaster. In the new millennium, in the
face of ever proliferating program choices, the CBC, in
our estimation, must strengthen its local and regional
grasp of the audience embracing the new technologies
such as the Internet to further this goal.
16496 In a world according to the Disney
Corporation where our literature is reversioned, our
heroes forgotten or replaced by another culture's toy
action figures, we must have a CBC which can tell our
story. As our few magazines become victims of
split-run economics, as commercial media interests gain
entry into our classrooms, we must have our voice.
16497 The question posed recently in The
Globe & Mail was this, and I quote:
"Should the CBC be good or
should the CBC be big?"
(As read)
16498 In our estimation, if we treasure
Canada, it must be both.
16499 Thank you.
16500 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very
much.
16501 I would ask Commissioner Cram to ask
you the questions.
16502 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank you,
Mr. Mayor, Mr. Edmunds.
16503 I must say, first, that I was in
Windsor on our consultations and I agree with your
concept of the area being awash. Simply standing
looking at the U.S. border and the size of Detroit is a
little bit --it actually shows the picture very well.
16504 Anyway, I just had a few questions.
16505 The one that was interesting to me
is: If you have a conventional broadcaster there, they
have to pay Detroit American rates for the rights for
any American show. Is that what you said?
16506 MR. HURST: That is my understanding.
16507 Perhaps I could defer to --
16508 MR. EDMUNDS: Yes, it is of no matter
whether the border actually lies in the middle of the
Detroit River, it is what penetrates with a clear
signal into Detroit, and since they have, of course --
at one time they even had a network station -- the
market price is simply the Detroit market price because
of the presence of the program.
16509 If you will recall, at one time
Global put in a station and backed off their
transmitter roughly 30 miles away from Windsor. It
wasn't sufficient. So therefore for a long time they
had to run all their programming with the American
content blacked out. So from about 8:00 until 10:30 at
night they would operate in the black. Then finally
the transmitter burnt down and I think they got a few
dollars for it and they backed way off.
16510 We have the same thing with London
put a station down. It had to back off 93 kilometres
from a Toledo station on the same frequency. Again, if
the signal is good enough to be really seen well in
Windsor, it is too good to be allowed -- the Detroit
market.
16511 They are not disallowing the station,
they are disallowing the sale of those programs because
their market price is larger than the rest of Canada.
16512 Now this has worked in reverse a
couple of times, the channel and the series and the CBC
years ago would not be released on the CBC station in
Windsor because it might have predicated a future sale
to North America -- that is the U.S. -- because it was
seen in a major U.S. market. Of course, we have black
out rules that effect hockey and so on.
16513 I have probably over-extended the
answer.
16514 COMMISSIONER CRAM: But you can get
the CBC off-air?
16515 MR. EDMUNDS: Oh, yes. At one time
they had to cover all their American content with
programming that either they had purchased or was
Canadian that didn't bother. You see, it's the
programs that bothered the Detroit station. If you are
running --
16516 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Well, I wanted to
talk about "The Simpsons", because up here in Ottawa,
or anywhere else in Canada, they have "The Simpsons" on
at 5:30 every weekday.
16517 MR. EDMUNDS: No.
16518 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Do you not get
"The Simpsons"?
16519 MR. EDMUNDS: No. That would be a
good example.
16520 The only U.S. content the CBC might
run in Windsor, or did, was something that was so
stump-end that they could buy it at a Detroit price. I
mean, it got rock bottom.
16521 No, we do not get "The Simpsons",
they start a news program at 5:30 in the Windsor area.
16522 COMMISSIONER CRAM: I wanted to get
another -- and I looked at your written intervention
and you talked at paragraph 20 about:
"CBC must strengthen its local
and regional grasp of the
audience." (As read)
16523 How would you advise CBC to do that?
It is line 3, Mr. Hurst, of paragraph 20.
16524 MR. HURST: Yes, I am not suggesting
that I have the answers, that I possess the magic
bullet.
16525 I think the point that we are trying
to make is that if there is a strong grass roots
support level for the national CBC, it certainly
enhances the probability of the success of CBC. If the
CBC is going to be in a position to meet its
quote/unquote "financial requirements", then it just
seems to me that the CBC has to pay a lot of attention
to the individual local communities who certainly would
be prepared, based on my experience, to support the
programming schedule of the CBC.
16526 So again, no suggestion that there is
a firm answer. A caution, perhaps, to spend some time
thinking about the real connection that must exist
between the CBC and individual local municipalities in
order to allow the CBC to succeed financially on the
one hand and to serve the interests of communities like
the City of Windsor on the other hand, who very much
want to be, I would argue, real Canadians.
16527 COMMISSIONER CRAM: When you talk
about the term "regional", and you talk about a
regional grasp, what is a "region"? Is it, you know,
the five or six counties that surround Windsor and are
Windsor? How do you --
16528 MR. HURST: As I recall, there was an
effort to introduce the concept of regionalism. I can
recall seeing some news stories about Windsor on a
Toronto broadcast. That certainly is not what I'm
talking about. It certainly is something less than
that.
16529 Perhaps in our particular instance it
is the Windsor tri-county area. But I believe if you
go any further than that, you are probably heading down
a path that will not provide the benefits that we think
could be provided.
16530 MR. EDMUNDS: There is a period then
when I think the CBC got caught up in an idea that they
could keep local advertising money without providing
local service if they defined a province as a region.
From this they got a marvellous idea that they had a
whole new programming concept of regions which really
involved a transmitting -- or owned and operated
station in the provincial capital, and somehow this, by
trading with a few other -- and not taking into account
the fact that the time at which they were broadcasting
was not CBC network time, it therefore would never be
shown on the affiliates. So we got a provincial
concept to it.
16531 But I think, as Mayor Hurst has said,
it is somewhat less than a province and occasionally
somewhat more.
16532 As you heard this morning, the
Maritimes with local origination in just
Halifax-Dartmouth and the rest of the Atlantic
provinces being somewhat without locally developed news
and public affairs.
16533 It is fundamental. The idea that the
CBC should become only the purveyor of national
content, probably of an unexciting cultural nature, and
no interference to the money-gathering of the CBC -- or
get the CBC out of that money-gathering business, is
the death knell of the CBC. If it doesn't have the
local roots and the grass roots participation, then it
will no longer --
16534 I think Windsor proved that, that the
public in a sea of American content desperately wanted
the grass root CBC connection, and from there they
built.
16535 COMMISSIONER CRAM: I don't know if
you heard last week, English TV was proposing that over
the next five or so years they would add first a half
an hour and then an hour full to each region for
regional programming, and it would come out of prime
time and be devoted to the region for them to do their
own programming.
16536 Is this too little? Too much?
Enough?
16537 MR. HURST: Would it be in addition
to their local programs?
16538 COMMISSIONER CRAM: As I understood
it, yes.
16539 MR. HURST: I think that is positive.
16540 MR. EDMUNDS: It is a very difficult
concept. The CBC found an absolute disaster when it
programmed the half hour of so-called regional programs
when they took feeds from Ottawa, Windsor and Toronto
and called it an Ontario regional program. It not only
didn't attract an audience in Ottawa and in Windsor,
they lost their audience in Toronto. They had a real
disaster I think.
16541 How you make the appeal of a regional
program as a magazine-type thing I think is a very
difficult programming concept.
16542 They have always had trouble with
reflecting the regions to each other. I think it
begins with as much of a grass roots as you can get,
money permitting.
16543 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank you very
much, gentlemen.
16544 Those are all my questions.
16545 Thank you for coming up here and
giving us your advice.
16546 MR. HURST: Thank you for the
opportunity.
16547 Thanks very much for the opportunity.
16548 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very
much, Mr. Mayor.
16549 Sir, thank you.
16550 Ms BËNARD: The next presentation
will be by Aysha Productions.
16551 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good afternoon and
welcome.
INTERVENTION
16552 MR. CUFF: Thank you for allowing us
this 10 minutes to express some of our concerns about
this licence renewal.
16553 My name is John Haslett Cuff. This
is my partner, Sun-Kyung Yi. Sunny has asked me to
speak first and she would be happy to contribute and
answer any questions you might have.
16554 I am a little overwhelmed after
listening to the presentation from Windsor because I
have for a long time been fundamentally opposed to
regional broadcasting and the whole idea of the CBC
having regional programs. But I don't want to get into
that here, I want to talk about the bigger issues.
16555 To begin with, I am speaking here
wearing a number of hats. I was a television critic
for The Globe & Mail for a good number of years and it
gave me, I think, a unique opportunity to watch and
study the television environment as it was unfolding
and, of course, react to some of your decisions.
16556 I also come as a documentary producer
with my partner, Sunny.
16557 More importantly than both of those,
I come as a citizen of Canada.
16558 I heard a lot of talk here about
grass roots and all of that. I think I know what that
means but, I mean, I am living in Toronto and I don't
think that makes me any less grass roots than anyone
else. While I haven't lived in Toronto my entire life,
I have lived in other parts of this country and I am a
Canadian citizen first and foremost.
16559 I would like to say that I am here
for the first time because I do fully support the
renewal of the licences for the CBC and for CBC
Newsworld. I have never felt more passionately in my
entire life than I do -- this thing is really bugging
me. What it is?
16560 Can you hear me?
16561 I am very, very passionate about
public broadcasting, and the CBC represents public
broadcasting in this country.
16562 Watching what has happened in the
past 15 years with the extraordinary growth of cable
television and viewing alternatives, it has become more
and more apparent to me that public broadcasting is now
more important than it ever was before.
16563 There are two main issues here for
me, and the one again that I can't really address
fully, but I have said this for the last 15 years, I
think the CBC has an unrealistic and a terribly
outmoded mandate to follow and to try to live up to.
16564 I think the CBC Newsworld, the folks
at CBC Newsworld, the folks at CBC Radio and CBC
Television, have had an extraordinarily difficult job
trying to actually make some decent programs while
dealing with this impossible mandate, this mandate
which seems to ask them to please absolutely everyone
in the province from one-legged people to Aboriginals
to -- name it, it doesn't matter what. It is an
impossible job. It is simply overwhelming.
16565 That, plus something like
$400 million in cutbacks financially has placed an
enormous burden on them as well.
16566 Now that I am involved with the
business of trying to make television I know how hard
that is and how difficult that is. It amazes me that
the CBC has produced as many good programs as they have
under these enormous pressures and difficulties.
16567 In some ways, it makes me kind of
upset to see the people of the CBC, the national
broadcaster having to sit and be accountable to any
body, given that there are so many television outlets
out there and so many private broadcasters who have
been making a fortune off the public airwaves and off
the public of Canada, producing very little of any
consequence.
16568 I mean, good bad or indifferent,
whatever the quality of CBC programming, they have
consistently over a great number of years produced many
fine programs and, more than that, they are constantly
trying to do something which is, in itself, worthwhile.
16569 They are trying to improve civic
discourse and public dialogue, trying to inform the
citizens of this country, in a way that I don't see
anyone else doing. In terms of drama, in terms of
comedy, in terms of news and information, there is no
one out there in the private sector that comes close to
achieving what they have achieved so far under these
enormous difficulties.
16570 I do get very emotional about this,
because long before I got involved in production I felt
this was fundamentally a democratic issue, that in an
environment where there are so many pressures from
American broadcasters, from the private broadcasters --
the Mayor of Windsor was pointing out this idea of
Windsor being awash in American programming. Well,
that is true of all of Canada. You don't have to be in
Windsor to be awash in American programming, you can be
anywhere in Canada and turn on your TV and you are
awash in it. You are awash in American programming
from Global television, you are awash in American
programming from CTV and all the cable alternatives
that are out there as well.
16571 So what this says to me is that
public broadcasting is the last bastion of free
expression and the last bastion for Canadians, the last
bulwark they have against this incredible multinational
corporate swamp of American programming.
16572 The values that are represented by
American programming -- and whether it is an American
program produced in Canada or in the States -- are
serious values and they are important values and we
need something to counteract that. I think a public
broadcaster is probably the only institution that can,
on behalf of the citizen, on behalf of you and me,
offer opportunities for diversity of expression and
opinion and ideas that just simply would not exist if
they weren't there.
16573 So obviously the point I'm making is,
you have on the one hand a television environment which
is 99 per cent corporate commercial consumer's
ideology. That governs everything they do. They can
call it news, they can call it information programming,
whatever, but that is the governing ethos. That is
what drives it.
16574 What do we have to counteract that in
any way? Well, what we have is the CBC. What we have
is an opportunity that does not exist probably anywhere
else. For someone like Sun-Kyung Yi, who is a Canadian
citizen but once upon a time an immigrant, to tell
stories and express things that would not be allowed to
be expressed anywhere else. I think it is important
that she be allowed to do that and that other
filmmakers like her be allowed to do that. It just
simply wouldn't exist if there wasn't a CBC.
16575 If I had anything to urge you, it
would be simply this: Don't harass them. Don't give
them unreasonable conditions to fulfil. Do everything
in your power to make sure that they remain strong,
that they get stable funding, and that they continue.
16576 Thank you.
16577 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
16578 That is quite, not only emotional,
but very convinced and very clear.
16579 I will turn the questioning to
Commissioner Pennefather.
16580 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Good
afternoon.
16581 Thank you both for being here and for
sharing with us your concerns and thoughts about
the CBC.
16582 I didn't know what you would say when
you came here and I wrote down a question, and it was
this: Some say the CBC's public interest mandate means
it has to be all things to all people.
16583 I think that is the unrealistic
mandate you are referring to, or not. Could you
comment on that? Do you agree with that
interpretation? Is that the challenge you see as
unrealistic.
16584 MR. CUFF: I think that touches upon
it, yes. I think that encompasses it.
16585 I have always had a particular idea
about the CBC, which is an ideal. I mean all of public
broadcasting to me is an important democratic ideal
that I support, but I have always seen it achieving
what it should achieve best by being incredibly
national, incredibly strong and centralized, in the
sense that it is taking the best that there is in the
country from all the regions and everywhere else and
producing the very best kind of programming that it
can do.
16586 I mean, the models of public
broadcasting that exist out there, of which the CBC is
a kind of amalgam in some respects, each have something
different to offer, but the broadcaster I keep going
back to that produces the best kind of public
programming, or the best kind of television period,
tends to be a central one.
16587 I understand the concerns of regions.
I understand the importance of having those regions
heard. But I think that the way you do that best is by
finding the talent that is out there and giving them a
chance to be heard.
16588 You don't necessarily have to have a
large infrastructure out there to do that. I don't
think that is true at all.
16589 But, yes, trying to be too many
things to too many people, trying to meet too many
mandates is just not realistic and not possible.
16590 I think if it has any mandate at all,
it should be to produce excellent programming. Above
all else, to produce excellent programming and
programming that reflects the diversity that is this
country.
16591 The standards of excellence should
apply to everything that they do and it should not be
different standards for women, different standards for
Aboriginals, different standards for whoever. It
should be just this central emphasis on making
excellent program.
16592 I'm sure if you ask Thompson Highway,
who has had stuff on CBC and will have it again, is he
there because he is an Aboriginal? No, he is there
because he is a very talented individual with something
to say. I am sure he would resent the idea that he is
there only because he is Aboriginal.
16593 So this is an idea that I think we
have to deal with ultimately down the road. We have to
change that mandate or we have to ask something
different of the CBC from what we have been asking. It
is just too much.
16594 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So you are
right, or what is the mandate then? How would you
describe the mandate of the CBC?
16595 MR. CUFF: It has to be, as you said,
all things to all people. It has to in some way try to
represent every person out there, every community out
there in the country. And, yes, I think it has to do
that, and the best way it can do that is by producing
excellent programming that will reflect something of
their concerns, something of their ideas, and will
entertain them and engage them and contribute to the
debate about democracy, which is more important now
than ever.
16596 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: When you
say "it is more important now than ever", do you refer
then to the new technological environment? You
mentioned cable distribution, but I know you have
written on new media.
16597 What do you think about the CBC's
role in new media? Where does that fit in?
16598 MR. CUFF: I have to be honest with
you and say I don't have a tremendous amount of
interest in new media, Internet or any of that sort of
thing. I have always wanted to be, and always believed
in the power of story telling, and I think ultimately
that works more than anything else.
16599 I don't want to comment on -- if you
ask me flat out: Should they be sending a lot of money
on new media? I would say no. I would say take the
$15 million and put it into documentary or drama or
something really, really valuable. But that is another
issue.
16600 I think they should be focusing, as I
said, on making excellent programs.
16601 I mean so much has happened in the
past few years which again has highlighted for me the
difficulty under which the CBC operates. I would
think, for example, the thing that happened with Terry
Milewsky, that reporter. That man was kind of gagged
and stifled. A situation like that where the
government is coming down and clamping down on the CBC
frankly terrifies me. Frankly, it really worries me as
a citizen, because the CBC to me is, and should be,
able to operate in a controversial and stimulating way
without having to worry about the Prime Minister taking
issue with something that they are doing or some story
that they are telling.
16602 All around me in the last 15 years, I
see truth being stifled. I see everything being
overwhelmed and everything having a dollar value put
upon it.
16603 I mean, the corruption that has
happened to the CBC purely as a result of having money
taken away and being forced to become more commercial
has already done a tremendous amount of damage. I
would like to see a way in which that could be stopped.
16604 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Okay. I
think that is clear.
16605 Do you have anything you want to add?
16606 MS YI: I don't think I can top my
partner here.
16607 We are basically here, especially
myself, to represent the independent filmmaking
community from Toronto.
16608 I got my start in documentary in CBC
Radio with idealist program and I was very fortunate to
be the first western journalist to be allowed in North
Korea for about three weeks to a month to cover a very
big event there.
16609 I know for a fact that if it wasn't
for the support of the CBC Radio that that opportunity
would not have existed, especially myself being a
freelancer at the time.
16610 From there I went to make
documentaries for CBC Newsworld, "Rough Cuts", which
again, given the story ideas that I presented to them,
would not have been accepted by any other private
broadcaster.
16611 John and I enjoy a lot of privilege
in that we are still continuing to make documentaries
for both CBC Newsworld and the main network, "Witness".
16612 Over the past few years, my first
documentary was broadcast on "Rough Cuts" and it was
one of the first documentaries that was also broadcast
on "Witness" and enjoyed a number of awards. From then
on I continued to make documentaries for "Witness".
16613 One of the issues that I would like
to bring up and emphasize is that as an independent
filmmaker we do have a lot of frustrations, a lot of
difficulties trying to make one hour documentaries for
CBC, or any other broadcaster, especially for CBC
Newsworld, for "Rough Cuts", because we have no access
to Telefilm. It has been a tremendous problem for
independents.
16614 I mean, we don't exactly make that
much money to start with but it is getting to the point
where we have to get a second and third and fourth job
just to be able to have the privilege to make the
films.
16615 If I can only say one thing this
afternoon, it is to urge that whatever mandates,
whatever guidelines that you come up with, do not
exclude CBC Newsworld from Telefilm.
16616 MR. CUFF: If I could just add to
that little thing, because there was a point I wanted
to raise.
16617 What is happening in the industry, in
the environment in which the CBC operates, is that
there is a tremendous amount of consolidation, and I
have seen it from day one.
16618 All of the companies they are in
competition with, The Alliance Atlantis Group and
Global and CTV, are all managing to consolidate their
resources and recycle stuff and make money in a way
that the CBC doesn't seem to be allowed to. There
seems to me I am getting an impression that you are
constantly forcing Newsworld and CBC to somehow become
separate and discreet.
16619 If I would urge you to do anything,
it would be able to somehow allow them to use the
fullness of their resources together and operate fairly
in an environment in which the odds are stacked against
them, frankly, considering the growth that has happened
in the private sector.
16620 Thank you.
16621 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you
both very much.
16622 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very
much.
16623 I apologize. I had misunderstood
that you were speaking first and that you were speaking
second. I'm sorry, I kind of cut you short by not
asking you. I am sorry. I apologize.
16624 MS YI: Thank you.
16625 MR. CUFF: That's all right.
16626 MS BÉNARD: I would now invite
Mr. Daryl Duke to come forward.
16627 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good afternoon.
16628 MR. DUKE: Good afternoon.
16629 THE CHAIRPERSON: It's nice to see
you again.
16630 MR. DUKE: Thank you.
16631 It is a little warmer than when you
last put out to sea on the west coast.
16632 THE CHAIRPERSON: Oh, indeed, yes. I
kind of brought back a big cold from Vancouver.
16633 MR. DUKE: A cold?
16634 THE CHAIRPERSON: Oh, yes.
16635 MR. DUKE: I'm sorry to hear that.
16636 THE CHAIRPERSON: It wasn't your
fault. I wasn't dressed properly.
16637 MR. DUKE: I think that chill is
still in the air out there, or it was last night.
16638 LA PRÉSIDENTE: La parole est à vous.
INTERVENTION
16639 MR. DUKE: Thank you, Madam Chair and
Members of the Commission.
16640 I appreciate very much this
opportunity to speak to you. My name is Daryl Duke. I
am a film and television director and producer.
16641 In the course of my career I have
worked for the CBC in Vancouver and Toronto, for all
three of the main U.S. networks, and for most of the
major studios in Hollywood.
16642 My work in TV and film takes me to
many countries and I often see first-hand the enormous
value of a public broadcaster such as the CBC.
16643 I have also been an owner and a
founder in the private sector, appearing successfully
before the Commission in 1975 to establish and head up
CKVU, Vancouver's then independent TV station.
16644 I thank you for this opportunity. I
am conscious of the heavy schedule you have with these
hearings and over what a great number of days you must
maintain a focus and a concentration of one of our
country's most important issues, the future of this
public broadcaster, the CBC.
16645 I am also conscious as I make these
remarks of the many talented people who have laboured
throughout their working lives to make the CBC the
valuable institution it is today. I am aware too that
the CBC staff who appear at these hearings are
labouring under financial constraints and often
vindictive political attitudes which, taken together,
must sorely test even the most confirmed optimist
among them.
16646 As I stated in my written submission,
I support the CBC and its licence renewal. To urge
otherwise would be to lobby for madness, for a kind of
national suicide of the spirit.
16647 My support of the CBC, however, is
not unqualified. As I have but a few minutes before
you I wish to raise, in a brief manner, a few
fundamental questions regarding today's CBC. These
questions will, I hope, help you to put into
perspective the wishes of the CBC that in terms of the
future appears to act on the assumption that it can be
business as usual and that the only challenges it faces
are ones of the changing technology and the increased
competition of the media world.
16648 I would argue the opposite. Change
is very necessary, but for different reasons. I
seriously question how the CBC is governed. By that I
mean the quality of its management as well as the
make-up and competence of its Board of Directors.
16649 I question the political appointment
process of the CBC's President and its members of the
board. I hope the Commission might examine the
selection process and ask why the board members seem to
contain only the politically faithful? Why are members
so heavily weighted in business? Why it ignores
important people in labour and the union movement and
ignores a significant range of persons in the arts,
journalism, broadcasting, filmmaking, health care and
so on.
16650 I would also like you to ask why is
there no ethnic diversity on the CBC Board, no Chinese
Canadians, Iranian Canadians, Seikhs, North Africans,
and others, so that this public body may be led by a
truly representative group of our citizens.
16651 Next, I question how the CBC is
staffed and whether that staff is representative of the
country I see around me and whether after years of
downsizing, there remains the erudition needed to
program for this diverse country.
16652 Finally, I must ask: Is such a
heavily centralized network as the CBC is today proper
for a public broadcaster, or must more regional and
local influences shape the decisions and the
programming of a renewed CBC?
16653 It is not new media, Members of the
Commission, not the Internet or the establishment of
new specialty channels that must preoccupy the CBC, but
I submit the examination of some of the most basic
aspects of the CBC's existence.
16654 American essayist, Phillip Moffat,
wrote in a piece called "A Tribute To Difference":
"What gives a society its life
and breath is the communal and
often unspoken effort by the
members of the society to make
it a just and enlightened one."
(As read)
16655 Moffat continues by speaking of the:
"... process that every healthy
society must experience: a
continuing debate about its
history to discern which events
matter and how they occurred.
This is an organic process of
redefining values and exploring
new interpretations of the past,
and this is the only way for a
society to reach a consensus
from which a vision of the
future can emerge." (As read)
16656 It seems, Madam Chair, that the CBC
leadership gives short shrift to such a redefining of
values and that the task falls upon this Commission to
see that value, knowledge, culture are given full
consideration and the network be not simply driven by
demographics and a rating point delivery.
16657 What is the meaning of "culture", as
those running the English Network of the CBC think of
it? Indeed, what is English Canada in their minds?
16658 For me, there is the need to redefine
the very word "content". What should a public Canadian
broadcaster be programming? Are we seeing the right
things, the right kinds of dramas, the right sorts of
newscasts to satisfy the needs of a complex population?
16659 Are we hearing the range of music we
should, a range that taps into the rich and diverse
backgrounds of all our citizens and not just that of
the superstars who have entered the hallowed halls of
American superstardom?
16660 Do we betray the traditions of our
civilization by not presenting on the main service the
classics of music and drama and dance of all the world,
not just those with European origins?
16661 Will our children never see the top
Canadian performers of the National Ballet or Ballet
B.C., nor an opera, nor a symphony, because of a
program decision taken by a few individuals at CBC
Toronto? This was a move that shifted music to radio
and left our screens and our talent bereft.
16662 Will the sense of spectacle for our
young merely be the half time show at the Grey Cup or
the Super Bowl or the retirement party for Wayne
Gretzky?
16663 The trouble with TV, public or
private, is that we know what we get but we just do not
know what we do not get.
16664 Can we trust the CBC's program
arbiters to act in the public interest on the issues
and entertainments that we have a right to expect?
16665 What should be on the main service of
CBC Television, only hockey, commercial drama, and
mainstream news or much, much more?
16666 Should the main television network
feature different types of dramas, different music,
classic performances, the literature and the great
works from all the world?
16667 Must we be on guard that
Canadianization not be a cruel hoax, trapping us all
into some kind of intellectual prison farm?
16668 Should the main TV channel be the
network of record for all Canadians, the network which
reestablishes the concept of universality amongst us
all, not shunting us off into different specialties but
unifying us with the surprise and abundance of our
world?
16669 Should we go beyond news and seek
understanding and cohesion by returning to the public
affairs programming that the CBC once did so well?
16670 These questions, Madam Chair, could
tumble on and on. They deserve answers and I hope you
will find some time to deliberate upon some of them.
16671 I have two concerns in particular and
it is these I would like to dwell on in wrapping up
these remarks.
16672 First, the issue of local
broadcasting.
16673 Second, the CBC's failure to provide
significant multicultural broadcasting.
16674 In terms of local broadcasting, a
kind of cultural clear-cutting has been going on in
recent years, every bit as repellent as that waged by
any logger on our mountainsides. CBC Vancouver was a
significant member of Vancouver's entertainment and
cultural scene and a significant contributor to the
national network.
16675 No number of episodes of that fine
series "Da Vinci's Inquest" can make up for the
freefall that local programming was sent into by a
single pronouncement of former CBC President, Gérard
Veilleux. Appearing before the Commission at the
beginning of the 1990s, he proclaimed that henceforth
the regions would be served -- and that was his word --
by the supper hour news.
16676 Gone at a single stroke were decades
of commitment to talent, to a fine and highly trained
staff, to a robust in-house production capacity, to the
citizens sense of themselves and their community.
16677 Local broadcasting and multicultural
programming. These two issues are pivotal for any
renewed CBC as it tackles the future.
16678 On the multicultural front, the
question is: Do we have a broadcasting of inclusion or
exclusion? Is the CBC as a public broadcaster going to
reflect all the people or only some of them?
16679 As you know, Madam Chair, we have
many diverse groups in this country and in Vancouver in
particular. Chinese Canadians, for instance, make up a
sizeable percentage of Vancouver's population. They
have two cable channels in Cantonese and Mandarin,
which of course they pay for.
16680 This population plays no role on the
CBC. Its culture and its activities are invisible.
The issue for today's CBC is simple: Is the
Corporation going to leave the Chinese Canadians on
their own, even though, by the way, they are taxpayers
like the rest of us, or is it going to include them
before it is too late, before they don't even need a
CBC or even think of a CBC, and who will be the loser?
Not just the Chinese Canadians but the CBC and,
therefore, all the rest of us.
16681 We are not talking about some fringe
numbers but a sizeable population of Canada's west
coast. Some 31 per cent of the Vancouver school
district has a Chinese language, Mandarin or Cantonese,
as its home language. Other Asian communities would
bring that language total used in the home to around
44 per cent.
16682 Across Canada, the number of Chinese
Canadians reach into the hundreds of thousands, even
soon to approach a million. The heritage of these
Canadians, their poetry, their novels, music, pop
entertainers, filmmakers, language, history and present
day participation in Canada is, on the CBC, next to
zero. Not even a Mandarin or Cantonese reporter on the
news.
16683 Recently I took part in Vancouver in
a day-long panel on the freedom of the press. There
were journalists from around the world. One whom I
chatted with during coffee breaks was a reporter from
Indonesia. He had had his own considerable troubles
with the Suharto regime so the subject of the forum was
close to his heart.
16684 But what really excited him about his
visit to Canada and to Vancouver was the great mix of
nationalities on our streets. He thought we were
creating a new and energized city of the Pacific which
reflected all the countries around that great ocean
until, however, he went to his hotel room and turned on
the TV.
16685 It was a shock, he said. Suddenly,
all the people of colour, all the races and
nationalities he saw in our streets vanished.
Cleansed. Our TV was a different country, sanitized,
back in time, in some never, never white world.
16686 What I heard at this hearing, Madam,
about the CBC's plans for minority hiring do not give
me confidence -- too little, too late, too slow -- and
certainly not revolutionary enough to get the job done.
Content must be redefined. Airtime must be opened up
to include all Canadians.
16687 Multicultural Canada is us. We are
they. There is no other kind of English Canada. The
English Canada of my great grandparents does not exist.
We don't have to globalize, Madam Chair. This is a
silly delusion. We are globalized already with our
richly diverse population. We should tap into that
resource.
16688 Local broadcasting must be opened up.
A sense of adventure, of experiment, of innovation must
return to those empty CBC Vancouver studios which used
to house so much. Now, they are rented out and we are
the losers.
16689 So are we doubly the losers if CBC
does not meet its responsibilities to a multicultural
Canada, the real Canada. We are a country which
reaches into every country in Asia and around the
globe.
16690 Thank you, Madam Chair and Members of
the Commission for this time to address you on these
concerns.
16691 I wish you well in your
deliberations.
16692 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Duke, thank you
very much.
16693 I would ask Vice-Chair Colville to
address the questions.
16694 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: Thank you
very much.
16695 Welcome, Mr. Duke.
16696 MR. DUKE: Thank you.
16697 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: As someone
from the other coast, it is a pleasure to meet you in
the middle.
16698 MR. DUKE: All right. Thank you.
16699 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: Although my
colleague, Commissioner Cram, will remind us that
Winnipeg is actually the middle, I guess.
16700 MR. DUKE: Actually the middle.
16701 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: You have
posed a lot of questions, in your presentation this
afternoon to us. Let me turn it around, I guess, a
little bit.
16702 Towards the end of your written
brief, you said:
"I respectfully urge the
Commission to make the CBC
redefine itself in the light of
both its obligations and the
stunning new opportunities for
program content which emerge
from this new Canada."
(As read)
16703 How would you propose we do that?
16704 MR. DUKE: Well, I think you could
start doing it by next week. I am not being flippant
or facile.
16705 There are other ways of defining how
to arrive at program content the moment you say it all
doesn't have to be made in Canada but can be abroad if
it is appealing to significant portions of our
population.
16706 The Canadianization drive was to
limit U.S. programming, which was a very worthy goal
but even in this latest New Yorker, the Chinese
actress, whom I directed in "Tai Pan", Joan Chen,
worked as a Director and has a new film out which was
in Vancouver last year at the Vancouver Film Festival
and was looking for a Canadian distributor and Canadian
releases. Today, it gets a very good review in the
New Yorker.
16707 If we could start certain vehicles
that could show material like that, that would be one
way.
16708 Other ways are through literature.
Some of the finest novels, short stories in the world
are being written in South America, in Taiwan, and
Vietnam has marvellous literature. Some of these can
be adapted and even shot in Canada. They don't
necessarily have to be shot in Asia and we do have
coproduction treaties with many countries.
16709 I always remember that one of the
finest Vietnamese films I saw recently was "The Scent
of Green Papaya", which was shot in a studio in Paris.
The Director just had every detail right and you didn't
miss not being in the heat and humidity of Vietnam.
16710 There are ways of including Chinese,
Seikh, Vietnamese reporters in newscasts. There has
been a hue and cry about the federal government's
cutback to funding for ESL classes. The CBC could make
an enormous contribution by giving some time on
Saturday morning and creating for itself, and for
others around the world, a very definitive lecture
series or program series on the teaching of English as
a second language.
16711 When I was working in Thailand, I
heard in the middle of the night, being awake on jet
lag, the BBC World Service doing a remarkable show on
teaching people to learn English.
16712 I think there are many ways to
connect with that side of content that is just not
being addressed.
16713 I was at Emily Carr College in
Vancouver when Vancouver's sister city, which is
Yokohama in Japan, was opening an art exhibit and
donating paintings to Emily Carr and Emily Carr was
sending a show to Japan and the place was filled with
officials, dignitaries, artists, Vancouver artists.
There wasn't a single camera there. There wasn't a
single radio microphone, nor a camera.
16714 A week ago, I had dinner with one of
Asia's finest writers who had been in prison in
Indonesia for 14 years on a prison island. He wrote
the "Baru Quartet"(ph), his name is Premu
Genatatour(ph). He had been written up in the New York
Times. This is his first time out of the country.
After he got out of prison, he was kept in house arrest
and even when he got a major award in Asia he couldn't
travel to get it. He is now being spoken of or
nominated for a Nobel Prize.
16715 I went to the hall where he was going
to speak for the first time in Canada -- he is the
author of some 14 books -- and the hall was packed and
there were about 20 Vancouver organizations who were
sponsoring his appearance. He is, as I say, a major
writer. He is 74 years of age. He has gone through
hell to keep writing.
16716 Penn Canada(ph) supported him. Again
I have the sad story, there wasn't a single camera
there. There wasn't a single microphone there. His
visit would have gone unrecorded, except I grabbed a
cameraman that I knew and said, "You have to come and
shoot this for me because I want a record of it".
16717 I could go on with details like this
for as long as you would wish me to and it is a kind of
pathetic story of opportunities missed and
opportunities overlooked.
16718 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: Let me ask
you -- I'm sorry.
16719 MR. DUKE: It has been too long and
too sad a story.
16720 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: You mentioned
in your oral presentation that there were two issues
that you were particularly concerned about. One was
local broadcasting, the other being the multicultural
programming or the reflection of Canada's diverse
cultural nature today on television.
16721 Taking the first issue, local
broadcasting -- and I presume you mean other than news
and public affairs programming -- you have talked about
regional programming and you mentioned earlier about
the Internet.
16722 I am just wondering, are you familiar
with the CBC's particular proposal in terms of doing
non-news regional programming, and how would you
contrast that with the CBC's expenditures on the
Internet?
16723 MR. DUKE: Well, I think I would put
the priorities as certainly very handy, I am one who
uses it and uses that Internet source, and I have.
During the APEC story I certainly looked up the CBC's
Internet Web site, and prior to Premu Genetatour's
visit a couple of weeks ago I got an enormous amount of
material about him.
16724 So that is valuable, but I think it
is not a priority concern, nor a priority expenditure
right now that the CBC has other thinking that it has
to do and other analysis of what are we in this
country, and should a centralized network -- is that
the proper vehicle for the expression of public affairs
programming.
16725 When I first produced programming in
Vancouver -- and I did the very first show that CBUT
did in 1953, and I stayed in the CBC Vancouver for five
years -- well, I just one of six or seven producers and
we were busy constantly on a range of programming
from -- I did a variety series that had dancers and
choreographers and comedians and writers. I did a
classical chamber music series by one of the west
coast's best string quartets. I did a series with
Arthur Erickson(ph), the architect, who wasn't well
known then, but we covered the painters who were
emerging in B.C. in the 1050s.
16726 I did a film with Bill Reid, who
later became famous as the Haida carver; a pilot for a
folk song series that went for many, many episodes.
You know, I could go on. I mean, it was a very busy
place. I did a nightly magazine show.
16727 As I say, I am not trying to make
this an exercise in ego, I was but one of half a dozen
and everyone was very busy. There was a great deal of
contact between all the arts in the city and all the
cultures in the city. The symphony was not some
strange bunch that never gets spoken to or the art
gallery never visited.
16728 So there was a unity approach that,
as things were stripped away, the CBC no longer
maintains, and I think that's why I referred to that
Commission hearing in the beginning of the 1990s when
the regions were suddenly going to be served by a
supper hour news.
16729 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: The CBC is
proposing to spend about $20 million a year on the
Internet and about $2.5 million a year on regional
non-news programming. Do you think the CBC should
think about flipping those expenditures around?
16730 MR. DUKE: I certainly do. In fact,
I would urge that it be even increased for local news.
Because what I also noticed, both at the local level
and national level, there is a tremendous lack of
innovation and experimentation. That's the only way we
are going to get new programs and new series and new
ventures for the future, is through innovation and
experiment.
16731 I was aware, you know, with -- I
think somebody said here earlier that they were going
to give half an hour a week to the regions or
something. Well, this is an insult.
16732 I mean, what they should be doing is
saying, for instance, last August on the
50th anniversary of the independence of India, they
should give Winnipeg or CBC Vancouver, or whatever --
I'm not lobbying just for Vancouver here -- but they
should just give it to Vancouver and say, "We give you
the evening. This is the most important democracy, one
of the world's most important democracies, rich with
literature, filmmaking, religion, history and with
many, many of its citizens living in our country, we
are going to give you from 8:00 to 11:00 and we want
you to put together a multifaceted show of both
documentary and music and comment and drama."
16733 Instead, they sent one Beta cam
reporter, Satinder Bhinder(ph), who went around and
visited his home village. A couple of short news
reports. That is not satisfactory because Canadians
needed to know essential things about that
50th anniversary which they never got to know.
16734 So that is, to my mind, the kind
of -- that is where you redefine what local
broadcasting is. It is not spoon feeding out some
little mouse of a program, but having imagination and
size to capture viewers' imaginations and capture
viewers' attention.
16735 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: Last
question.
16736 Your last point was on the
multicultural programming, and I think the example you
gave was quite striking, of the gentleman who saw the
diversity on Vancouver streets and then watched the
television.
16737 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: How would you
propose that we, as a regulator, deal with that issue
relative to the CBC?
16738 MR. DUKE: Well, that is a tough one
and I don't have an answer.
16739 I remember when Madame Bertrand
chaired a hearing in Vancouver in September of 1996,
there was a young man, a fourth generation Chinese
Canadian, who addressed the Commission and said he was
tired of looking at the television screen and not
seeing people who looked like himself.
16740 I was at the funeral of an elderly --
not so elderly Sikh man, and after the ceremonies at a
reception his widow -- and they were second generation
Sikhs -- was complaining that their children, now grown
up and third generation, they spoke no Punjabi or Hindi
or Gurarati, they know nothing about their own culture.
They know nothing about their own past, because
anything on cable is not in a language they understand.
16741 So there are pressures building that
the CBC could take advantage of and tap into enormous
loyalty and populations and attentions.
16742 How you, as a regulator, I think
other than making it a condition of licence or a
licence renewal, saying "This has to be done", that you
cannot have a tax-supported organization that leaves
out significant numbers of taxpayers and their concerns
and, by the way it defines itself, eliminates much of
the significant programming that we all, whether we are
of those cultures or not, all of us need to know now.
There is no such thing as being able not to know
something.
16743 You mentioned my reference to the
Internet. The interesting thing about the Internet is
that it has no centre. I remember in the 1960s the
Toronto Star did an interview with me and I remember
saying -- and it came back to me thinking about it this
afternoon -- that whoever holds the camera stands at
the centre of the world.
16744 I think that some rethinking has to
be done by the CBC so that a new kind of focus of
attention and inclusion is done, because there is a lot
of content out there that would meet your concerns,
would answer very quickly a lot of mine, that Canada be
properly represented. Because, you know, I certainly
believe there is no "they" and "us". They are us now
and we are them, because wherever you go in this
country it is a totally different country than my great
grandparents came to.
16745 I think if you could put that into
being -- both about local, because they kind of go
together, because if you exclude local you exclude a
lot of multicultural things, and if you exclude one,
you exclude the other. That is, to me, the building
blocks of the future.
16746 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: Well, thank
you very much, Mr. Duke.
16747 We appreciate you coming all this way
to give us your advice.
16748 MR. DUKE: Thank you.
16749 Well, it is a pleasure to be here and
I do wish you well in a really tough but important
deliberation.
16750 Thank you, Madame Chair.
16751 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much
for making the trip to come and participate again,
because you were active in the regional consultation
and here today.
16752 MR. DUKE: Thank you.
16753 Those were very useful, I have had a
lot of comment about them in Vancouver that you came
and took that trouble to put them together.
16754 Thank you.
16755 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
16756 Have a safe trip back home.
16757 MR. DUKE: Thank you very much.
16758 MS BÉNARD: The next presentation
will be by Telefilm Canada.
16759 M. LAPIERRE: Bonjour.
16760 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Bonjour.
INTERVENTION
16761 M. LAPIERRE: Madame la présidente,
mesdames et messieurs les commissaires, I wanted to
take you to Roleveau(ph) for wine and we could have had
our session there because it seems to me that the days
must be long and long and long and long and I feel
sorry. Every now and then, of course, Daryl Duke comes
around and the Prophet is with us. Consequently, we
listen.
16762 With me today is monsieur François
Macerola. My name, by the way, is Laurier Lapierre,
and I am the -- what am I? I am the Chairman of
Telefilm Canada. With me is monsieur François Macerola
who is the Executive Director of Telefilm Canada.
16763 We are very pleased to participate in
the Commission's deliberations on the future of the
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, CBC, and la Société
Radio-Canada.
16764 The last time we appeared before you,
last fall during the Commission's deliberations on the
future of Canadian television, I spoke to you about my
dream for Canadian television: that I wanted my
grandchildren to be in full possession of Canada's
stories so that they will have the passion of the
country. I would like to continue that theme.
16765 This time I have come to tell you
that to achieve my objective, I have in my arsenal no
more privileged an instrument than the Canadian
Broadcasting Corporation. I wish that this were so, or
taken to be so, within the interior of the walls of the
CBC and Radio-Canada as across this beloved country.
16766 No one in his right mind can deny
that in these days of globalization and of limited
national cultural sovereignty, a national sovereignty
that continues to be more and more restricted,
Canadians and Canadiens must have an effective, strong
and true public broadcaster.
16767 In polls and in consultations across
the country we, the people of Canada, demand a strong,
effective and true CBC and Radio-Canada. You have
heard much on how this is to happen, and out of what
you have been told I wish to make two comments.
16768 It has been said that the CBC must
expand its reach. I would like to tell you that to
expand its reach the CBC need not build an empire.
16769 Secondly, you have been given much
information and proposals by the private broadcasters,
and it is very well to remember that the CBC in its
mission is not complementary to the private sector and
that it should therefore occupy only those areas that
private broadcasters do not want to occupy.
16770 The CBC/Radio-Canada's mission in a
multichanneled universe is to be Canadian and only
Canadian. There is no other mission.
16771 I have been around a long time --
many, too many, would say perhaps too long -- and
coming out of that lengthy experience, I can affirm
without fear of being contradicted that the CBC knows
quite well how to interpret and how to live its
mandate. It has done so more often that its critics
like to admit, and it has done so with innovative,
intelligent, passionate, and risk-taking programs that
are in the national interest.
16772 More often than not the CBC has
placed Canadians and Canadiens in the centre of
national and international news and issues.
16773 Through the CBC, I have learned to
question the intricacies of life about me and those who
make it so.
16774 Through the CBC, I have discovered
and have come to love ballet and opera.
16775 Through the CBC, I have found myself
and the people to whom I belong, through the dramatic
programs I have watched on the CBC.
16776 Through the CBC, I have laughed at
myself and at the Canadian human condition.
16777 Children have told me that they
became aware that a square is not a rectangle on
the CBC.
16778 Furthermore, there was a time in
which the regional voice I had found expression on the
airwaves of my CBC.
16779 I can now also say without fear of
being contradicted that much as been lost, no doubt due
to all kinds of reasons. I dismiss them all as
immaterial and self-serving and, if I may be so bold,
you should too.
16780 What is at issue here is that
Canadians and Canadiens want the CBC/Radio-Canada to
focus only on high-quality programming which is not
found anywhere else on TV. We want to be able to ask
every day: What on earth are they up to today?
16781 We don't want something that is all
concocted in the dungeons of the CBC in Toronto or the
dungeons of Radio-Canada. We want spontaneity of
expression. We want to be able to find ourselves in
the process of it.
16782 We the Canadians will take the risk
to watch the CBC and Radio-Canada in larger numbers,
but only if they themselves take the risk to be unique,
to be truly different and, above all, to be passionate.
16783 Le temps est venu pour la CBC et
Radio-Canada, pour le gouvernement fédéral, le CRTC, le
secteur privé, le Fonds canadien de télévision,
Téléfilm Canada et les autres joueurs de faire fi de
leur propre réalité institutionnelle et de participer
collectivement à la recherche de solutions qui
permettront d'atteindre cet objectif. Cela suppose
également que tout le personnel de la CBC et de
Radio-Canada ait la volonté et la passion pour adopter
une nouvelle attitude et de nouvelles façons de faire
afin de nous offrir le diffuseur public que nous
désirons vraiment et que nous avons le droit d'avoir.
16784 Voilà, madame la présidente, c'est la
fin de mon sermon pour aujourd'hui. Amen.
16785 Monsieur Macerola.
16786 M. MACEROLA: Je vais continuer, si
vous permettez.
16787 Dans un premier temps, madame la
présidente, messieurs et mesdames les conseillers,
j'aimerais vous présenter Maria DesRosa et Guy
DeRepentigny, qui travaillent à Téléfilm Canada.
16788 Je dois vous dire que j'ai également
une vision du rôle que Radio-Canada et que la CBC
devraient jouer dans les systèmes de radiodiffusion
canadiens. Cette vision s'appuie sur une expérience de
plus de 25 ans dans le secteur culturel, en
particulier, dans le secteur public.
16789 J'estime qu'un des défis majeurs de
Radio-Canada et de la CBC est de se réconcilier en
quelque sorte avec le gouvernement et avec son public.
Ceci devrait se traduire par un engagement ferme à
offrir une programmation distincte, à prendre plus de
risques au niveau des formats, du contenu et des idées,
que Radio-Canada et la CBC soient en fait la pierre
angulaire du système de radiodiffusion canadien, comme
l'indique la Loi sur la radiodiffusion.
16790 Radio-Canada et la CBC doivent se
repositionner dans un univers télévisuel en pleine
transformation. Ce nouveau positionnement pourrait
prendre appui sur un certain nombre de réflections.
16791 Nous à Téléfilm Canada, nous sommes
d'accord avec nos principaux partenaires, notamment les
producteurs indépendants que Radio-Canada et le CBC
doivent recevoir un financement stable afin qu'elles
puissent continuer à établir des partenariats avec les
producteurs indépendants et les autres diffuseurs de
toutes les régions du pays dans le but d'offrir aux
Canadiens une programmation distincte.
16792 De toute évidence, un financement
stable est une condition nécessaire mais pas
suffisante. Le gouvernement pourrait aussi vouloir
modifier le présent équilibre entre l'allocation
parlementaire et les revenus tirés de la vente du temps
d'antenne. Aussi, il appartient à Radio-Canada et à
CBC de démontrer au gouvernement et au grand public la
valeur de leur investissement public, dans un premier
temps, et aussi l'utilité d'injecter 1 milliard $ par
année dans une télévision publique, ce qui n'a jamais
été fait, quant à moi.
16793 À titre de directeur général de
Téléfilm Canada, j'appuie une société Radio-Canada et
une CBC vigoureuses car elles constituent des
partenaires de premier plan pour les producteurs
indépendants. Inutile de rappeler ici qu'elles ont été
impliquées au fil des années dans des émissions qui
comptent parmi les meilleures que le Canada ait
produit.
16794 Parallèlement, j'estime qu'il est
nécessaire que Radio-Canada et la CBC veillent à bâtir
une programmation qui est bien enracinée dans toutes
les régions du pays, ce qui signifie non seulement d'en
être le fidèle reflet mais aussi un contributeur au
développement des industries locales.
16795 Nous sommes particulièrement heureux
à Téléfilm Canada de voir que Radio-Canada et la CBC
comptent toutes deux accroître significativement leur
contribution au long métrage canadien. Comme vous le
savez, le long métrage est au coeur de nos
préoccupations et Téléfilm Canada cherche à faire en
sore que plus d'argent y soit consacré, que de
nouvelles approches de financement soient développées
et même que l'on envisage sérieusement la création d'un
bureau de promotion du long métrage canadien.
16796 Ces décisions de Radio-Canada/CBC
viennent d'être prises il y a peut-être un mois
d'injecter plus d'argent dans le milieu du long métrage
et je dois vous dire que cela a été admirablement bien
accueilli par le milieu et par Téléfilm Canada qui
faisaient les mêmes demandes depuis très longtemps.
16797 Nous appuyons les initiatives mises
de l'avant par Radio-Canada et la CBC dans les nouveaux
médias et l'Internet. À titre d'administrateur de
Fonds pour le multimédia, nous savons que l'industrie
canadiennes des nouveaux requiert une bonne dose
d'expérimentation et d'innovation pour atteindre
graduellement le statut acquis par l'industrie
canadienne de la télévision.
16798 Among other things, Radio-Canada and
the CBC should do more program exchanges and
partnerships with other public broadcasters around the
world. They should work more closely with the NFB,
enabling the Board to brand their programs on the
CBC/Radio-Canada.
16799 On an international level, the
CBC/Radio-Canada should take a leading role in bringing
us the best of programs from around the world that
would enrich Canadian television in a way that is not
being done by private television.
16800 On the whole, the CBC/Radio-Canada
must focus on fulfilling their core mandate to inform,
enlighten and entertain with programming that is
distinctive. I believe that only then can the
Corporation find its ways back to what it was intended
to be: dedicated to Canadian content.
16801 Et voilà, cela termine mes
commentaires. Merci.
16802 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Merci. Est-ce que
c'est un sermon, vous aussi?
16803 M. LAPIERRE: Il ne fait que des
commentaires.
16804 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Mais c'est bien senti
aussi.
16805 M. LAPIERRE: Il ne fait que des
commentaires.
16806 M. MACEROLA: Je n'ai pas le sermon
très fort. Je suis plutôt porté à faire des
commentaires.
16807 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Je pensais que
c'était le frère de monsieur LaPierre qui faisait les
sermons.
16808 Je vais demander à la conseillère
madame Pennefather de poser les questions s'il vous
plaît.
16809 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Merci,
madame la présidente.
16810 Messieurs. Good afternoon.
16811 MR. LAPIERRE: Good afternoon.
16812 MR. MACEROLA: Good afternoon.
16813 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I was
saying to my colleague, Commissioner Grauer, before we
began this afternoon, that although I found the written
submission very interesting, I asked her what she
thought the best question would be to get you both to
tell us what your vision is for the CBC and its future.
You have done that and I thank you very much for that.
16814 We welcome you and we welcome your
eloquent and experienced views on this important
institution.
16815 If I may, I would like to explore
some of the ideas you have tabled this afternoon and
then go to the written submission where there are some
questions just to clarify your proposals.
16816 Monsieur LaPierre, I think what I
found amongst the many ideas that are here -- I would
love to hear more about all of them, but there is one
area where it would be, I think, very useful to hear
you a little more.
16817 You say on page 3 of your oral
comments:
"What is at issue here is that
Canadians and Canadiens want the
CBC/Radio-Canada to focus and
only to focus on high-quality
programming which is not found
anywhere else on TV."
16818 On the previous page you note, with
some concern, I think, about this whole question:
"Its mission is not
complementary to the private
sector occupying only those
areas private [sectors] do not
want to occupy."
16819 When we put these two comments
together, there are some who would conclude that what
we are proposing here is a CBC which may become very
narrow in its focus, very niche-focused. Some have
used the term "marginalisé" en français. Some have
said that this will mean an elitist form of
programming.
16820 Could you elaborate a little bit on
your key issue here, which is that you will find on CBC
programming you won't find elsewhere versus CBC is
there to do what the private sector won't do? Does
that marginalize the CBC?
16821 MR. LAPIERRE: Well, Madam
Pennefather, I was objecting to the attitude which I
have seen, or at least perceived in the presentation of
private broadcasters to you that the CBC should remove
itself from any areas of programming largely because
the private broadcasters want to use them alone for
revenue and other purposes and that it should therefore
deal with programming that the private broadcasters do
not want to do.
16822 I think that is a pile of nonsense
and it is not even to be given any attention to because
I don't think that is the way that it ought to work.
Therefore, the CBC is not complementary to them. It is
not there to exist in order to fill the voids that they
have to fill. The private broadcasters have their
responsibilities within the system, as does the CBC.
16823 What I am trying to say here is
that -- I will give you a little example.
16824 When the Canadian Television Fund
decreed that we would support with the Fund Canadian
programs that had a high -- and we defined that by
creating various criteria. People said, "Well, we
won't be able to do this and we won't be able to do
that and we won't be able to do this." I said, under
Canada or Canadian, every human emotion, every human
avenue, every human process encounter that is found on
the planet is within the Canadian.
16825 So what I am trying to say here, when
I say they don't see it this way, it isn't the subject
matter, all right -- and Daryl Duke, I think, has
touched upon that -- but it is also in the method of
presentation.
16826 Plasticization has taken over the
broadcasting world that I see on my screen. You can
interchange anybody with anybody and it seldom makes
any difference whatsoever, all right?
16827 Consequently, it seems that it is the
risk-taking that I am talking about and the passion
that I am talking about that I do not see elsewhere on
my channels. But if I don't see it at the CBC I see it
nowhere. What I object to the CBC and I think that it
has lost is the passion to move, is the passion to go
from A to B with creativity, is the passion to animer
l'âme afin qu'au bout du chemin il va être possible
pour les Canadiens de prendre conscience de ce qu'ils
sont et ce qu'ils sont essentiellement dans l'ensemble
de la planète."
16828 That is what I'm talking about.
16829 I have another example that goes,
Madame, before you were born, and it has to do with
"This Hour Has Seven Days", this little program that
has turned out to be much more significant now, some
45 years later or 1,000 years later than it was then.
16830 People at the CBC kept saying, "You
cannot have a public affairs program which is popular
because there are not enough intelligent Canadians to
understand public affairs." I used to call them the
40,000 immortals.
16831 Consequently, what you must do if you
have a public affairs that is fun, that takes risks,
that makes you call your station in a rage, that makes
Parliament, both the Parliamentarians in the Senate and
in the House of Commons, ask questions Monday morning,
that sends the administration of the CBC around the
block 10 times and almost dying of a heart attack, if
you do that, then that means that you have cheapen the
content of public affairs to do that.
16832 Now, I am using that example to
demonstrate to you that the CBC can very well decide
what it can do. My problem is the method that it uses,
the content of its program, its inordinate fear -- its
inordinate fear to create some form of "badeng" which
is an Internet word that the Klingons would use.
16833 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I know
that language.
16834 If that is the case, I know it is a
big question and I don't expect you to take us all the
way down that road, but what is the key to changing
that fear?
16835 MR. LAPIERRE: Hiring people who have
guts.
16836 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Anything
else?
16837 MR. LAPIERRE: Hiring people who have
a vision. Hiring people, you know, who are capable of
saying, "I don't care if I have a cent. I am going to
make a damn good program out of this. I don't care."
16838 Now it seems to me that nothing gets
done, or it takes a long time to get anything done or
people are saying, "We cannot do this, we cannot do
this because we have no money." That is such an
irrelevant, boring issue. It is as boring as the
alienation of the west, all right? It is as boring as
separatism. It is as boring as everything you can
think of. I am tired of the CBC saying it has no
money, all right?
16839 The CBC has a lot of money. All it
has to do is to know what to do with it.
16840 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Which
leads me to --
16841 MR. LAPIERRE: By the way, I must
tell you that Téléfilm has no views on these matters.
--- Laughter / Rires
16842 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: And now
it's your turn.
16843 Bonjour, Monsieur Macerola.
16844 M. MACEROLA: Bonjour.
16845 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Continuons
avec le même thème mais je peux peut-être diriger la
question à un point que M. LaPierre a soulevé dans sa
présentation aussi quand il a fait la remarque qu'on a
perdu quelque chose: "The regional voice I had found
expressed on the airwaves of my CBC."
16846 Toute la question d'une diversité qui
vient des régions, la programmation anglaise et
française, soulignée d'une façon très importante
aujourd'hui et dans votre soumission écrite.
16847 Vous parlez surtout du rôle de
Radio-Canada avec le secteur indépendant en région, en
anglais et en français, comme parmi d'autres
télédiffuseurs et je vous cite en anglais:
"Telefilm depends on Canadian
broadcasters including CBC/SRC
to trigger these productions in
the regions." (Tel que lu)
16848 Ce n'est pas question que c'est le
fait qui m'intéresse mais que vous dites que
Radio-Canada et les autres télédiffuseurs un peu sur le
même ordre d'idées sont là pour faire avancer la
production en région.
16849 Qu'est-ce qui fait la différence avec
CBC/Radio-Canada dans cette idée? Est-ce qu'il y a un
rôle spécifique pour Radio-Canada ou est-ce que c'est
la même chose que le secteur privé en terme des
productions régionales?
16850 M. MACEROLA: Vous vous rappelez que
la dernière fois que j'ai eu le plaisir de comparaître,
on avait parlé de la définition d'une production
régionale et j'avais mentionné qu'à Radio-Canada/CBC
une production régionale c'est ce qui est fait
localement, indépendamment de l'origine du réalisateur
ou de l'équipe de création alors que chez nous à
Téléfilm Canada, ce qui est important c'est d'où
viennent les créateurs. Et partant de là c'est bien
évident que quant à moi Radio-Canada/CBC a un rôle très
important à jouer au niveau de la régionalisation non
pas simplement qu'en reflétant la réalité mais en
aidant à mettre sur pied des infrastructures de
création des productions qui éventuellement vont
permettre aux populations locales d'être capables de
transporter leur réalité à la télévision.
16851 Par conséquent, vous vous rappelez
sans aucun doute qu'on a discuté très souvent de
l'enveloppe de CBC, de Radio-Canada et cetera et un des
problèmes qu'on avait à Téléfilm Canada à l'époque
c'était d'être capables de justement cerner cette
réalité-là de la régionalisation. On ne voulait pas
que les projets qui supposément étaient "de nature
régionale" soient des projets qui viennent de Toronto
ou de Montréal mais qui soient tournés à l'extérieur de
ces deux centres.
16852 Par conséquent ça prend une
définition de la région qui est réellement ancrée dans
la réalité du milieu et dans le processus créateur.
16853 CONSEILLÈRE WYLIE: C'est un peu ça
de dire qu'est-ce que c'est le rôle spécifique de
Radio-Canada dans ce sens-là parce que j'ai eu
l'impression dans la soumission écrite que c'était un
rôle qui appartenait aussi au secteur privé.
16854 M. MACEROLA: Oui, ça appartient
aussi au secteur privé. On ne peut pas dire que le
secteur privé, sauf peut-être quelques exceptions, joue
ce rôle-là avec beaucoup d'enthousiasme mais à un
moment donné les organismes publics, que ce soit
l'Office national du film, Téléfilm Canada,
Radio-Canada vont comprendre que si on veut être
réellement organisme public il va falloir adhérer à des
mandats qui sont différents de ceux du secteur privé et
un des mandats importants dans ce pays au niveau
culturel c'est de tout simplement être capables de
transmettre la diversité culturelle du pays.
16855 On ne peut pas être un organisme
public comme Radio-Canada/CBC, l'Office national du
film ou Téléfilm en essayant de décrire la réalité de
Montréal ou de Toronto et je pense que présentement il
y a des efforts qui sont faits à Radio-Canada/CBC mais
il faut continuer dans ce sens-là de façon encore plus
importante.
16856 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Vous êtes
au courant des propos que Radio-Canada et CBC ont fait
pendant ces audiences concernant une production en
région à part des nouvelles. Cela veut dire à peu près
25 millions de dollars en région pour les productions
d'une demie-heure, et cetera, vous êtes au courant?
16857 M. MACEROLA: Oui, oui.
16858 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Est-ce que
pour vous c'est assez ou c'est...
16859 M. MACEROLA: Moi je suis un peu
comme mon président. J'ai de la misère,
comprenez-vous, à accepter l'idée qu'avec un milliard
de dollars on a de la difficulté à développer des
programmes imaginatifs qui réponde réellement aux
besoins du public et à ce moment-là c'est une question
de priorité et je pense qu'à Radio-Canada/CBC les gens
sont conscients que depuis une dizaine d'années la
ligne qui démarque le privé et le public a été franchie
tranquillement. Les gens sont conscients de ça et par
conséquent il s'agit de prendre des mesures pour
redresser cette ligne-là et une des mesures c'est la
régionalisation.
16860 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: C'est dans
ce contexte-là que vous l'avez indiqué à l'intérieur
d'une présentation sur Radio-Canada, vous avez utilisé,
je pense, le mot "critical".
16861 M. MACEROLA: Oui, absolument.
16862 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Pour
l'avenir.
16863 M. MACEROLA: Oui, moi j'arrive d'une
tournée du Canada. Je ne vais pas seulement à Cannes,
je vais ailleurs aussi, et j'arrive d'une tournée du
Canada où j'ai rencontré des producteurs et tous les
producteurs, que ce soit des producteurs de langue
française ou de langue anglaise, se plaignaient sur le
fait qu'il n'y avait pas suffisamment de projets qui
naissaient dans leur coin et à Téléfilm Canada vous
savez que nous on ne fait pas naître les projets, on ne
fait que les financer, et ça prend une lettre d'un
diffuseur et les gens trouvaient que ces lettres-là
étaient de plus en plus rares à obtenir.
16864 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Vous avez
mentionné un élément très important dans toutes ces
discussions. C'est de trouver que le mandat soit
décrit d'une certaine façon et quelles sont les
priorités en conséquence. Vous venez de mentionner que
la production en région c'est une priorité.
16865 M. MACEROLA: Oui.
16866 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Mais en
même temps on introduit un projet pour les
longs-métrages et les indications qu'on a c'est qu'il
n'y pas de l'argent nouveau pour cette priorité, cette
initiative disons. On ne voit pas où se trouve en
effet quand on voit les prévisions financières pour la
Corporation, on ne voit pas exactement où se trouve ce
programme-là.
16867 Est-ce que vous avez les informations
qui vous indiquent que ce programme sera vraiment
financé comme décrit et deuxièmement est-ce qu'il y a
la possibilité qu'il en supporte un? Les
longs-métrages on va laisser tomber d'autres projets
comme mini-séries, dramatiques, et cetera.
16868 M. MACEROLA: C'est certainement une
question de choix à Radio-Canada/CBC. Maintenant, je
n'ai pas été impliqué d'aucune façon même si à Téléfilm
Canada on gère 50 millions de fonds dévoués au
long-métrage en production et en distribution, on n'a
pas été nécessairement impliqués et ce que je connais
de ce programme c'est ce que j'ai lu via les
communiqués de presse. Mais, d'une autre côté, je
pense que c'est important que Radio-Canada joue un rôle
aussi au niveau du long-métrage.
16869 Dans tous les pays du monde qui ont
une cinématographie qui se respecte c'est un effort
collectif de financer des projets de longs-métrages et
la télévision privée et publique joue un rôle très
important et aussi, bon, la télévision privée pourrait
jouer un rôle très important.
16870 Maintenant, à ce moment-là,
Radio-Canada va devoir possiblement faire des choix et
présentement, comment je vous dirais bien, il faut
s'éloigner de la philosophie qui essaie "to be all
things to all people" et essayer d'établir des
priorités en expliquant au gouvernement canadien que ce
ne sont pas tous les services qui ont être capables
d'être gérés et administrés malgré que je reviens à mon
affirmation du début. Avec un milliard de dollars,
avec une transformation de la morphologie du dollar, de
dollar administratif en dollar de programmation, je
pense qu'on peut faire énormément.
16871 Maintenant libre aux gens de
Radio-Canada de prendre des décisions qui s'imposent au
niveau de l'établissement de leurs priorités.
16872 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Is this
what you are referring to when you spoke of revisiting
the current balance of funding between Parliament and
advertising revenues?
16873 M. MACEROLA: Moi, voyez-vous, ma
philosophie c'est qu'il y a environ une douzaine
d'années quand le gouvernement a commencé à réduire les
appropriations parlementaires des agences publiques, la
tentation la plus facile pour un directeur d'agence --
et je le sais parce qu'à l'époque j'étais à l'Office
national du film, c'est-à-dire on va augmenter nos
revenus et Radio-Canada a si bien augmenté ses revenus
que présentement ses revenus-là totalisent 300 millions
de dollars.
16874 Maintenant j'ai écouté, j'ai lu
beaucoup sur ce qui se passe au CRTC et on nous dit que
la grille est établie et ce n'est que lorsque la grille
est établie qu'on va voir les acheteurs, et cetera,
mais moi je vous dis que c'est bien évident que la
volonté de Radio-Canada d'augmenter ses revenus joue
sur la pertinence de la production et de la
programmation et que, par conséquent, il va falloir à
un certain moment donné rééquilibrer le tout.
16875 Où est-ce qu'on arrête? Est-ce qu'on
continue à augmenter les revenus ou est-ce qu'on décide
d'augmenter l'allocation parlementaire? Je ne vous dis
pas que Radio-Canada, comme les diffuseurs privés l'ont
dit, ne devrait pas avoir accès à des revenus
commerciaux mais il n'en demeure pas moins, cependant,
qu'il y a une ligne encore une fois qui est là et qui
est très fragile et on ne me dira pas moi que
Radio-Canada quand ils achètent un long-métrage anglais
ou quand ils achètent un long-métrage canadien -- et
j'ai vécu l'expérience -- et exigent qu'en "package" on
leur donne deux films américains, que c'est au nom de
la culture canadienne. C'est tout simplement en
fonction de la cote d'écoute et, par conséquent, la
cote d'écoute est synonyme de revenus pour tous les
diffuseurs et je pense qu'il va falloir rééquilibrer ça
et donner à Radio-Canada un traitement juste et
équitable.
16876 Et quand je mentionne que
Radio-Canada soit se réconcilier, Radio-Canada doit se
réconcilier avec le gouvernement. Ils doivent faire la
démonstration qu'on a besoin de "Y" millions de dollars
ou milliards de dollars pour avoir un organisme qui se
respecte et qui fait de la radiodiffusion dans ce pays.
Ils doivent se réconcilier avec les citoyens pour que
les gens sachent qu'un dollar chez Radio-Canada c'est
aussi important qu'un dollar en santé.
16877 Et partant de là, quand ces
réconciliations-là auront été faites il y a aura
possibilité que le gouvernement, via des conditions de
licences, je ne veux pas m'embarquer là-dedans je ne
suis pas l'expert en arrive à un nouvel équilibre qui
va plus ramener Radio-Canada de l'autre côté de la
ligne -- et quand je parle de Radio-Canada c'est CBC
aussi, qu'il ne l'est présentement. Il est plus là
qu'il ne devrait l'être quand à moi.
16878 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Mr. LaPierre?
16879 MR. LAPIERRE: There is another thing
that has preoccupied me about this business of giving
money because you produce programs that bring in the
money in order to have more money of course and do
other things with it, but also it is based on ratings.
16880 Outside of "les argents commerciaux",
outside of commercial money, there is also the fact
that we cannot escape, that too much encrusted in the
political will of this country is the feeling that if
the Canadian taxpayer pays $800 or $900 million to the
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation there should be a
return upon that investment that is really, really
accountable and, consequently, they tend to see that it
is the ratings that determiner whether that
$800 million has been well spent. More and more I
speak to politicians and they tell me that, "But we
spent $800-$900 million on the CBC and nobody is
watching them."
16881 That in the first place is a lie. In
the second place, it is the same attitude and mentality
that prevails in all of our arts, in all of our culture
in this country. If 10 people look at an opera that
the CBC does it is as important that it ought to be
done. It is not that the 10 people are elitist, it is
just that it is important that the opera be done.
16882 Furthermore, it seems to me that the
Canadian taxpayers do not give subsidies to Téléfilm,
do not give subsidies to the Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation. What they do is invest public money in
cultural assets and we have got to change the national
mind-set and the political mind-set on that issue and
that it is as important to spend money on an opera, on
a film or television program, as it is to spend money
on building an aeroplane.
16883 It is very important that we keep
repeating that over and over again, because the
battle -- at least the struggle will never be resolved.
16884 Thank you.
16885 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I have one
last question.
16886 You bring diversity into your
proposal and you state its importance, and we just had
a discussion with Mr. Duke on that matter.
16887 What would you suggest we do here at
the CRTC in regard to diversity and the
CBC/Radio-Canada as you have underlined its importance
in your paper? What does that mean in terms of the
CRTC? Do you have any particular recommendations for
this?
16888 M. MACEROLA: Il y a toutes sortes de
façons d'arriver à -- comment je vous dirais bien -- à
une programmation qui pourrait être dévouée mais si on
prend pour acquis que la programmation de
Radio-Canada/CBC devrait être publique, devrait être
généraliste, devrait être distincte cependant et
devrait être à l'écoute des besoins du public et, par
conséquent, il n'y a rien qui empêcherait
Radio-Canada/CBC sans nécessairement d'avoir à passer
via le CRTC et d'organiser des assises générales où on
rencontre le public, où on discute avec eux.
16889 La seule façon, quant à moi, et on a
démontré que c'était rentable de le faire c'est en
établissant des enveloppes de production. Cela ne veut
pas dire nécessairement que tous les projets vont être
programmés mais ça veut dire cependant qu'il va y avoir
une banque qui va se constituer et les projets
tranquillement vont atteindre le petit écran. Et c'est
peut-être une façon de le faire.
16890 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Merci.
Merci beaucoup, Messieurs, pour vos commentaires, votre
temps, votre présence aujourd'hui.
16891 Merci, Madame la Présidente.
16892 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Merci.
16893 J'aurais plusieurs questions mais
j'aimerais ça une en particulier. Compte tenu votre
expertise et le lieu privilégié où vous vous trouvez,
différemment de nous, mais un peu comme nous vous avez
un regard sur l'ensemble du système de radiodiffusion
via les projets qui vous sont acheminés tant du côté
privé que public en même temps que provenant de
l'anglais, le français toutes sortes en fait de points
de vue qui vous sont acheminés.
16894 Beaucoup de la discussion, en
particulier avec Radio-Canada -- on sait l'importance
de la dramatique à l'intérieur de la programmation de
Radio-Canada -- beaucoup de ce qui nous a été amené par
Radio-Canada est empreint de l'inquiétude du fait que
les fonds ne seront plus garantis pour Radio-Canada
commençant l'an prochain, je crois?
16895 M. MACEROLA: Oui.
16896 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Bref, et que donc ça
peut avoir toutes sortes d'incidences sur d'une part
leur stratégie, d'une part leur cote d'écoute, enfin
tout ce qu'on sait. J'aimerais ça, compte tenu votre
expertise -- je sais que vous ne manquez pas de
personnes qui font la queue dehors quand vient le temps
des projets -- j'aimerais savoir dans votre
connaissance du milieux, votre connaissance de la
capacité de la collaboration avec le secteur
indépendant et la Société Radio-Canada et CBC à cet
égard-là, comment vous évaluez leur capacité d'aller
chercher une quote-part qui met ou ne met pas en péril
en fait leur futur de ce point de vue-là?
16897 M. MACEROLA: Moi, voyez-vous, j'ai
certaines difficultés. Quand vous avez des gens qui
viennent ici et qui disent, "Radio-Canada/CBC devrait
se retirer des commerciaux" et en même temps ils
disent, "Radio-Canada/CBC ne devrait plus avoir d'accès
à une enveloppe. Par conséquent, il faudrait qu'on
soit un peu, quant à moi, logiques dans la façon dont
on traite Radio-Canada/CBC et que si on lui enlève un
privilège de nature privée à droit, peut-être que le
privilège de nature publique lui pourrait être mieux
évalué.
16898 A Téléfilm Canada, avant la mise sur
pied du Fonds canadien de télévision, on avait une
entente avec le ministère qui disait que Radio-Canada
avait droit jusqu'à 50 pour cent et c'était parfait
parce que ça nous mettait dans une position de
négociation, au niveau des régions, au niveau des
petites et moyennes entreprises. On était capables de
s'asseoir en disant, "Écoutez, ce projet-là, hmm-hmm,
maintenant celui-là qui répond réellement aux besoins
de la régionalisation, peut-être" et Radio-Canada
utilisait en moyenne 40 pour cent.
16899 Du jour au lendemain, suite à des
pressions, Radio-Canada obtient 50 pour cent. Bon,
bravo, tout le monde est content. Et l'année d'après
ils se retrouvent avec plus rien. Par conséquent c'est
très difficile quant à moi de gérer une boîte quand
vous vous promenez de même et vous ne vous promenez pas
avec cinq millions mais vous vous promenez avec
50 millions de dollars.
16900 Maintenant, ça peut avoir un effet
négatif mais, en même temps, ça peut aussi avoir un
effet positif. Si Radio-Canada décide réellement
d'augmenter ses coûts de licence, si Radio-Canada qui
produit des émissions de très grande qualité financées
de façon équitable et juste et raisonnable pourrait
avoir accès à plus de fonds. Moi ce que je soupçonne
c'est que la part du Fonds canadien de télévision va
diminuer à Radio-Canada/CBC et à ce moment-là, avec les
conséquences que ça va entraîner.
16901 Cette année Radio-Canada avait
50 pour cent de Téléfilm Canada ce qui fait
50 millions, avait un autre 30 quelques pour cent du
droit de diffusion, ça fait à peu près 80 millions. Si
du jour au lendemain vous vous trouvez -- et c'est ça
que je n'aime pas. C'est l'idée de dire, "Écoutez, là
vous allez compétionner avec le secteur privé." Par
conséquent avec un chapeau on leur dit, "Allez vous
battre avec le secteur privé pour un dollar" et avec
l'autre chapeau on leur dit, "Oui, mais faites
attention, par exemple, vous êtes publics, vous êtes
distincts, vous êtes ci, vous êtes ça".
16902 Par conséquent, je pense qu'il
faudrait réellement réfléchir à cette procédure-là et
moi en tant que responsable à Téléfilm Canada je dois
vous dire que le "Opt Two" me satisfaisait énormément.
Je pense que ça satisfaisait aussi mes collègues de
Radio-Canada/CBC et ça injectait une quarantaine de
millions de dollars chez Radio-Canada et ça leur a
permis, selon ce qu'ils ont dit ici, de canadianiser
leur programmation.
16903 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Mais est-ce que je
dois comprendre de votre commentaire qu'il pourrait y
avoir un retour par rapport à la décision prise?
16904 M. MACEROLA: Écoutez, ça c'est une
décision que ne relève pas de Téléfilm Canada. C'est
une décision qui relève de la ministre, c'est une
décision qui a été prise à l'unanimité par un conseil
d'administration et par conséquent je ne vois pas le
jour où cette politique va changer mais je vous dis que
l'autre avait aussi certaines vertus et si on avait
plus de temps, je pourrais autant vous faire la
démonstration que l'absence d'enveloppe ne nuirait pas
nécessairement et pourrait éventuellement, mais de
prime abord -- et la semaine passée on a rencontré des
producteurs, Laurier, et eux autres c'est un peu leur
crainte que tout à coup Radio-Canada se retrouve
complètement éjectée de tout le processus et que leur
implication dans le domaine de la dramatique diminue
radicalement. C'est une crainte.
16905 Moi ma crainte n'est pas celle-là.
Je ne pense pas que ça va diminuer radicalement mais
cependant Radio-Canada va certainement revenir à la
charge pour avoir une garantie.
16906 MR. LAPIERRE: And it will be given
to them, for the sole and simple reason that I predict
that within five years the private broadcasters will
ask that the Canadian Television Fund cap the CBC.
16907 M. MACEROLA: Un peu comme ce qu'on
avait avant.
16908 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Du côté de Téléfilm,
oui ou de crainte qu'il n'en prenne trop de la part du
lion.
16909 M. MACEROLA: C'est ça.
16910 MR. LAPIERRE: The problem, though,
that we have to bear in mind is that we are asking in
the Canadian Television Fund and at Téléfilm Canada the
very high, high, high degree in criteria of Canadian
content for everybody, and since we do not make
decisions on "grilles horaires" but only on
project-to-projet which are been submitted with a
license, then it is up to the broadcaster to determine
how valuable that program is on his or her "grille
horaire". Consequently, this is bound to happen in due
course, I would think, and furthermore the possibility
of the CBC having access to the fund I think will grow
and it has now.
16911 Furthermore, if I may be so bold,
Madame, to give you a piece of advice, if you agree
that the CBC should have less minutes of commercial
time, say fine, and impose upon the private
broadcasters to return that into a fund to be put in
the Canadian Television Fund only for the CBC so that
you will "sauver le chou et la chèvre" en même temps,
Madame.
16912 Merci bien.
16913 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Une dernière question
avant que vous ne partiez. Je m'excuse, j'avais noté
ça. Vous parlez qu'il est important d'avoir des
infrastructures en région. Dans l'importance du reflet
et de l'activité en région, vous parlez
d'infrastructure. Or, et on peut se chicaner le niveau
des ressources, les choix qui sont faits, mais ça nous
a été dit en particulier par Mme Fortin, mais un peu
aussi par les gens de CBC, M. Redekopp aussi, que si
les dollars sont rares -- ou enfin, les dollars -- le
choix est davantage d'aller vers le programme et ne pas
revenir à une étape d'infrastructure.
16914 Quelle est votre évaluation? Vous
semblez, vous, penser que la question d'infrastructure
est importante. Est-ce que j'ai mal compris?
16915 M. MACEROLA: Mon président pourra
s'exprimer, mais moi quant à moi je ne parle pas
d'infrastructure aucunement. Pour moi ce qui est
important c'est d'avoir la présence en région mais
c'est bien évident que quand je parlais tantôt de
transformer la morphologie du dollar c'est d'être
capable de plus en plus d'investir dans des programmes,
d'investir dans du talent et surtout d'oublier les
éléphants blancs qu'on voit un peu partout quand on
fait une tournée du Canada. Ce n'est pas de ça que les
gens ont besoin.
16916 Moi ce que je trouve c'est que les
Canadiens ont un besoin d'identification à un grand
organisme culturel et Radio-Canada/CBC pourrait
tellement être cet organisme-là qu'on n'a pas besoin
d'avoir d'immenses studios un peu partout dans le
Canada, on a simplement besoin d'avoir des messieurs et
des madames Radio-Canada/CBC qui sont prêts à établir
le contact avec la communauté.
16917 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Merci infiniment,
Messieurs.
16918 M. MACEROLA: Merci.
16919 M. LAPIERRE: Merci, Madame.
16920 Nous prendrons une pause et nous
revenons à 4:15.
--- Courte pause à / Short recess at 1600
--- Upon resuming at / Reprise à 1615
16921 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Alors... alors.
16922 Madame Bénard, avant que nous
passions au prochain intervenant, legal counsel have a
big document to put on the public record.
16923 Mr. Stewart and Ms Pinsky.
16924 M. STEWART: Merci, madame la
présidente, c'est simplement pour informer les
personnes que le Conseil a reçu une lettre du Conseil
des directeurs médias du Québec Inc., en date du 4
juin, qui traite de plusieurs questions qui ont trait à
cette instance publique. Compte tenu que cette lettre
a été envoyée très tard dans le processus, le Conseil
ne peut l'accepter comme une intervention. En
conséquence, la lettre ne fera pas partie du dossier
public et sera retournée au Conseil des directeurs
médias du Québec Inc. Merci.
16925 MS PINSKY: I would just like to
note, as well for the public record, that the CBC has
filed its responses to several undertakings that it had
made during the course of questioning for the CBC
English Radio application, and specifically they are
the responses to the information relating to quality
control program relating to the base line review.
16926 Secondly, the position of English
Radio and the use of Canadian composers to meet
Category 3 music requirements.
16927 Thirdly, the clarification of
financial information related to spoken word
programming.
16928 Fourthly, the use of repeat
programming by CBC Radio.
16929 Fifth, information about the new
voice initiative.
16930 Sixth, specifics on how CBC Radio
strives to be accountable to its listeners.
16931 Seventh, an estimate on the impact of
the proposed condition of licence and sponsorship in
terms of increased programming.
16932 Thank you.
16933 MS BÉNARD: The next presentation
will be by the Canadian Conference of the Arts / La
Conference canadienne des arts.
INTERVENTION
16934 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good afternoon.
16935 MS WILLIAMS: Good afternoon.
16936 MR. CRAWLEY: Good afternoon.
16937 MS WILLIAMS: Madame Chair and
Commissioners, my name is Megan Williams, I am the
National Director of the Canadian Conference of the
Arts and I am joined by my board member, Alexander
Crawley, who is the board member for film and
broadcasting.
16938 I have submitted a brief to you in
May, More Than Just a Broadcaster, which I am sure you
all have copies of. I have a short set of remarks that
I want to make and then I would welcome any questions
that you have.
16939 It has been a very interesting
afternoon here and many of the things that the CCA
included in its brief have been touched upon by the
previous intervenors.
16940 Ever since its inception in 1945, the
CCA has been a strong and steadfast advocate for the
CBC and that is the tone that we are bringing to this
presentation this afternoon.
16941 We approached the licence renewal
hearing in the same optimistic and constructive spirit
we always bring to discussions of the CBC. That is
because the CBC has been a primary force in the
remarkable development of Canadian arts practice and
cultural expression that we have witnessed in Canada
since mid-century.
16942 As Canada's oldest and largest arts
advocacy organization, it is only fitting that the CCA
should be among CBC's biggest supporters.
16943 Now, I just have a few remarks to
make here.
16944 The timing of the licence review is
unfortunate, coming as it does on the heels of months
of labour unrest, years of staff layoffs and an
impending change of leadership. It will be important
for CRTC to take this into account in making its
recommendations for licence renewal.
16945 Other witnesses have come on the
CRTC's influence in the growth of the music industry
and the broadcast industry. CBC has prospered under
the regime of CRTC's regulation now producing nine of
the top 10 Canadian English and four of the top five
programs in French.
16946 On the flip side of this is Canada's
recent success in selling its broadcasts
internationally. So we have seen a lot of growth in
our cultural industries thanks to CRTC's careful
regulation.
16947 CCA fully supports the CRTC in its
efforts to foster excellence in Canadian programming
for both TV and radio, although we would have
appreciated more attention to our recommendations for
production of Canadian content in new media.
16948 The main focus of the brief that the
CCA submitted is CBC's role as a public broadcaster.
In the words of Perrin Beatty, there has to be a public
broadcaster that sees Canadians first as citizens and
secondly as consumers.
16949 Our brief also makes recommendations
regarding the importance of regional production, about
the crucial links that CBC develops with arts,
community and independent producers. These are
specially evident in the regions.
16950 I commend the recent proposal of CBC
to add half an hour of prime time programming to its
regional broadcasts. We think this is very important.
16951 We also commended the proposal for
the Land and Sea channel, which didn't receive its
licence, but which would have worked to show Canadians
to each other. We believe that regions of the country
should be presented to each other through more national
broadcasts of regional programs.
16952 When the CCA was in Newfoundland
recently, we were asked an interesting question by our
Newfoundland members, who wanted to see more
translations of Quebec programs in Newfoundland.
16953 The CCA has made many presentations
to the CRTC and the Standing Committee on Canadian
Heritage and we have always maintained the position
that Parliament should commit stable multi-year funding
to the national broadcaster so that would enable it to
phase out commercial revenue generation.
16954 This is the only way for it to
differentiate itself in its role as the national
broadcaster.
16955 Equally, we advocate that coverage of
professional sports should be greatly reduced and
replaced by more coverage of amateur sport and
community events, but artistic and cultural. We
advocate the use of more independent productions on
CBC, which would reduce the cost while promoting
development of producers where they live.
16956 We support a phased introduction of
aspects of the constellation that CBC has proposed --
although I realize that since we wrote our brief
several of these have been denied -- as long as they
can be maintained commercial free.
16957 The emphasis should be on arts
programming and youth and children's radio. We note
the success of CBC Radio in establishing its position
of one of the ties that binds our country together. We
believe that a national children's radio network would
contribute greatly to both social cohesion and
development of audiences and artists of the future.
16958 The proposed use of sponsored names
for arts programming is interesting and the CBC's track
record in linking with the arts community gives us
confidence that this will be handled sensitively.
16959 Finally, I was very impressed by what
Mr. Daryl Duke had to say earlier about the structure
of the board of the CBC and we had included
recommendations about this in our brief.
16960 It is very important that the CBC
board should have the power to appoint its own
president. The president's loyalty should not be
divided between the Prime Minister's office, which
appoints him, and the board of directors, which he or
she serves.
16961 We would also like to make
recommendations about board appointments so that the
board would more accurately reflect the diverse
Canadian experience. In selecting the president,
consideration should be given to a wider circle than
the current process affords.
16962 So those are my few remarks and I
would like to ask Sandy to add to them.
16963 MR. CRAWLEY: Thank you very much
again for having us here today.
16964 I have been very impressed with what
I have heard today here as well from previous
intervenors this afternoon.
16965 I was just reflecting on the fact
that Daryl Duke gave me my last job in a real Canadian
feature film, Laurier Lapierre taught me about 10 years
ago how to present myself in public without a
playwright's words, and Monsieur Macerola currently
provides the core funding for the organization which I
now head up as my first job. I finally grew up. So I
felt like I was in good company, and we are in good
company.
16966 But there are some points that we
make in our brief.
16967 We are very supportive, obviously, of
the CBC and, like many other groups that have been
represented here, as Megan said in her earlier brief,
bashing the CBC is a national pastime: Everyone loves
the CBC, they just don't like the one they have got.
16968 Obviously there does need to be a new
vision, I think, for the role of public broadcasting.
But we do have to remember that it has been our compass
in cultural development across the country. We
wouldn't have orchestras and theatre companies across
this country if we hadn't had the public broadcaster
rolling itself out across the country and developing
the regions in that way.
16969 So I would, on behalf of the CCA,
strongly disagree with Mr. Cuff's remarks earlier that
regional broadcasting is not what the CBC is supposed
to be about. It is a difficult thing to maintain.
There are all kinds of factors, but I think we at the
board of the CCA, who really do draw our representation
from across the country, are very, very aware of the
importance of the public broadcaster across the country
and somehow they have to find that balance and they
can't pull it back all into the centre. This would be
a self-defeating exercise, I think, for the public
broadcaster.
16970 The other thing which we touched on,
which is more of a nuts and bolts issue that you are
dealing with now is this issue of professional sports
being no longer the purview of the CBC, and we would
support, again, I think what Mr. Beatty said to you is
that we can't deny that hockey, for instance, is
Canadian culture and that perhaps now there is a
business for the privates to take on that
responsibility, but they have to pay for it.
16971 So in other words, if that revenue --
and Mr. Macerola was exploring this in some detail, as
well. That the private broadcasters have to be willing
to pay for that. If they want to take on that
responsibility they have to put some of those resources
back in through the CBC. It could be done by a direct
levy on their revenues from that transfer, or it could
be done, as I think Mr. Macerola said, not you, but
Parliament decided that they were going to make up the
difference, and I think it would be in our interest to
pay a little bit more than 10 cents a days for Canadian
for the service that we are getting from the CBC.
16972 So although it is not about money, in
some ways I totally agree with what Laurier said,
obviously, the CBC needs adequate resources to fulfil
the role it has been playing and to develop its new
role.
16973 I would just underline what Megan
said about the governance issues, that CBC really needs
to have its independence underlined and I think it
needs to take a look at that. It is unfortunate that
this hearing was timed before new leadership was coming
at the CBC, which we assume is going to happen.
16974 I think that is all I have to add
really.
16975 Thank you.
16976 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very
much.
16977 I would ask Commissioner Grauer to
ask you the questions.
16978 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: Thank you,
Madame Chair.
16979 Welcome.
16980 I have a couple of questions I want
to ask you just to elaborate a little bit.
16981 As you know, one of the principle
goals that we are here to do is to look at the CBC's
priorities with respect to their budgets and their
activities and their plans for the licence term. I
know you supported the proposed radio initiatives,
which we aren't actually considering at this hearing.
16982 I think one of the things that has
been raised, as you know, is that there have been
cutbacks which the CBC has had to make choices with
respect to their various programming services, English
and French television and radio. Now it is a matter of
looking forward to the next seven years and what are
their priorities.
16983 I know that you have talked about the
importance of focusing on their core services in here
and in particular, you touched on the regional
programming.
16984 So in that context, I just wonder if
you could elaborate a little bit on what specifically
you would suggest we might do with respect to the
regional initiatives they have made, which is, I think,
$2.7 million per year over the term of the licence, in
the context of, I think Commissioner Colville mentioned
earlier, $20 million a year for new media, the half an
hour a week as opposed to -- I mean, should they be
doing more? Do you think this is sufficient?
16985 MR. CRAWLEY: I don't know. I'm
afraid I haven't done enough homework on whether those
monies are coming from the same envelopes.
16986 You may know better than I do, but I
am not sure that the initiatives in new media, which I
think are important for the public broadcaster to make,
whether they could simply allocate those funds to the
regions.
16987 I know that the board of the CCA
would want to see a lot more than $2.7 million spent in
assuring that we are reflecting ourselves to each other
across the country. There are many ways to do that.
But, as I said before, the presence in the communities
of the public broadcaster has made a huge, huge
positive effect on developing, as I said, theatres and
orchestras across the country. You don't think of it
in that way ,but if you are a working artist, a
freelance artist, that is the reality. That is how we
have done it over the last 20 years or so.
16988 This is something that we have always
emphasized in terms of defending a substantial
allocation to the CBC, is that it serves a tremendous
human resource development function in the country. I
mean if you look at the private broadcast sector and
how it has grown up, many, many of those people who are
working in that sector have come through the CBC and
they have learned certain values, which I think are
reflected. You can see the difference between our
private broadcasters and those south of the border, for
instance. I think ours are more interesting, for us
anyway, and more useful.
16989 So I think that that is something
that is kind of taken for granted and it is hard to
measure it, although you can measure it. But the CBC
has a tremendous human resource role to play. It is
those regional offices -- I mean I forget where our
national news reader came from, I think it was
Churchill, or something, where he started his career.
16990 Sometimes people forget, once they
are sitting in the centre that, oh, we don't need those
people out here. All the smart people are here. If
they are any good, they come here anyway. This is a
dangerous trend.
16991 I don't know whether it is actually
written down anywhere but the decisions that are made
and the economies that are made there always seems to
be this need to protect the centre, protect that
structure, that hierarchial structure which the huge
corporation is bound to develop.
16992 I hope that the next future vision
that comes out strong with the new leadership will
spread that back out into the regions. I can't give
you a sort of Board-approved formula of how they should
do it, but they must do it. It should be a priority.
16993 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I don't
think the question is Board approved. I think it is
important to understand that when we ask these kinds of
questions it is not that we are necessarily being
critical, we are trying to say "Here is an opportunity
for all of us to have this public discussion."
16994 In terms of what organizations, like
yours and the others, and individuals that have been
here, what they think the priorities of the CBC should
be, and when you talk about priorities is where do you
put your resources.
16995 I think that you clearly feel fairly
strongly and with some passion that, as many people
have said, including the CBC themselves, that their
strength is in their roots in the regions.
16996 MR. CRAWLEY: That is right.
16997 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: This feeds
the centre, if I could put it that way.
16998 MR. CRAWLEY: Absolutely.
16999 Ms WILLIAMS: I would just like to
add something to that.
17000 The example that I am most familiar
with is the regional broadcast centre in Halifax, since
I recently left Halifax, much to my dismay. In the
last month or so a group of arts organizations, which
share accommodations in the CBC Radio building in
downtown Halifax, made a sort of public manifestation
of their support for the CBC in the form of a postcard
campaign, and there are at least six organizations in
that building which have developed a sort of
synchronous relationship with the CBC.
17001 Speaking as an arts organization, and
Sandy touched on how important the CBC has been to the
development of individual artists in the country, it is
also very important to the arts infrastructure to the
support of festivals and training and that kind of
thing.
17002 So I don't know what world John
Haslett Cuff was talking about, but I think he had in
his mind some kind of local cable news about lost dogs
or something when he was talking about regional
broadcasts. When you look at the broadcasts that are
coming out of the Atlantic region, which include
"22 Minutes" and "Street Cents" and "Emily of New
Moon," I mean these are not regional in any sense. They
are sold internationally and they are of interest to
anyone who lives in the world in the present day.
17003 So it is extremely important that CBC
re-establish its relationship with the regions of the
country.
17004 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you.
17005 As I say, it is a matter of us
getting a sense of what the priorities are from people
like you and organizations like yours.
17006 MR. CRAWLEY: I think that would be a
priority. We still, obviously, are working on creating
a critical mass of a drama of our own stories, and the
CBC is indubitably still the leader in that area.
17007 So I wouldn't want to say we will do
regional programming at the expense of having drama. I
mean we can't make those tradeoffs, obviously.
17008 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: No.
17009 MR. CRAWLEY: I don't think that the
CBC should sort of withdrawn from a world of new media
and exploring what that is going to be in the public
interest as opposed to people who are doing it in the
private interest.
17010 The other thing, I guess, and one of
the things that I would just reflect on was the --
Laurier LaPierre is a great speaker and I tend to
believe everything he says, but he said what we need on
the CBC is programs that we won't see anywhere else.
There is some truth in that.
17011 However, 10 years ago people wouldn't
have contemplated the public and private broadcasters
sharing windows on programming, which they are doing
now. That is creative and that is, again, the way
to go.
17012 We are hoping in the arts community,
particularly in the film community, that we are going
to make some progress, perhaps in a difficult climate,
towards the Canadian feature film industry and the
development of that.
17013 Again, as Monsieur Macerola has said,
the broadcasters, there are great models in Europe and
so on, but the broadcasters, both private and public,
have to play a role there and the CBC has a real
leadership role to play there. I don't know whether it
is being articulated, but certainly in the community we
would expect, as with emerging issues of rights
management for artists and so on, and the status of the
artists and all those things, the CBC has a job to play
as a broadcaster, but it also has a job to play as a
cultural institution with its partners, and we would
think that the independent artists in the country are
some of its most important partners.
17014 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I think
for us it is a matter of what is the right balance
between all of these competing issues.
17015 I wonder if you could just elaborate
for me a bit on your position on sponsorship.
17016 I know you have said today that you
are convinced that the CBC can handle this matter
sensibly. This is on the radio side.
17017 I think in your written submission
you suggested a period of consultation and working with
organizations, and certainly that is what we have heard
from some others who have been before us.
17018 Are you suggesting today that you
think the revised sponsorship proposal -- that we
should approve it at this point?
17019 Ms WILLIAMS: Obviously, the revised
proposal came out subsequent to the writing of this
document.
17020 Given that the CBC is a very
important partner of many radio broadcasts especially,
and they have developed successful partnership models
with all sorts of jazz festivals, new music festivals
and that kind of thing, if this proposal is to the
benefit of these arts organizations, as it seems to be,
then we will support it.
17021 We think it is very important that
they have clarified that, whatever financial benefits
accrue from this, go to the arts organizations which
are partnering with the CBC and not directly to CBC
itself.
17022 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: One of the
concerns that has been raised with us is that there
needs to be some mechanism in place to ensure that this
issue of the sponsorship funds, even though they would
go to a third party and not to the CBC, that no
programming decisions of the CBC could be influenced by
the exchange of sponsorship funds, if I could put it
that way.
17023 I am just wondering if this is a
concern to you and if you have any suggestions about
how we might deal with that.
17024 MR. CRAWLEY: It is to me. If I can
steal Laurier's trick again, it certainly is to me, as
an individual and as an artist and so on, I think there
is a slippery slope there. It's pretty tough.
17025 But I think, as Megan has said -- and
we have taken the position because we don't just
represent film makers and broadcasters but the whole
arts community -- that if it is handled sensibly along
the line and consultations are there and some criteria
and some transparency is developed, as long as it is
not seen simply as a much needed revenue generator for
the CBC because its allocation keeps shrinking.
17026 First of all, we are certainly
historically on the record of being against shrinking
the allocation. We think that was a mistake. Maybe it
was something inevitable that had to happen. Perhaps
we will be able to do something about that in the
future with the political will.
17027 It is an unsettling development that
we should be moving towards, something that looks like
advertising or even sponsorship on the one
communications channel we have that is completely and
mercifully free of advertising, as long as it doesn't
come off as advertising. I mean the thing is that --
17028 Well, I think I am just babbling now,
but I have concern about it.
17029 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I think
the question is: What can we do to provide the
assurances that you are talking about and others have
talked about?
17030 MR. CRAWLEY: I guess it would have
to do, I think -- and correct me, Megan, just jump
in -- it would have to do with this relationship
directly with arts organizations and cultural events
and so on. There would have to be some transparency in
the process so that, in fact, the arm's length between
the CBC and private corporations and arts organizations
wouldn't start to diminish our freedom of expression or
a sense of our own freedom of expression. Set up a
chill of some kind. That would be the danger. I
haven't got an instant formula that would preclude
that.
17031 Ms WILLIAMS: If I could just add to
that, that in the part of our paper that discusses the
CBC's relationship with independent producers, which we
think is very important and fruitful, we recommend an
ombudsman who would deal specifically with that
relationship. Maybe that is the sort of answer we are
looking for. Because when you mentioned programming
decisions, it is very difficult to track that kind of
thing. No matter how much transparency is built in,
you would always heard people complaining and griping
about decisions that might or might not have been made.
17032 So maybe the answer is to appoint an
individual, for at least the transition period, who
would be responsible for looking after complaints and
regulating that.
17033 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Is that a
valid concern in your view, that it might affect
programming decisions?
17034 Ms WILLIAMS: I think it could, yes.
17035 The example I used in my paper was
intentionally mischievous because I mentioned the
DuMaurier New Music Festival and I know that CBC would
not want to mention the DuMaurier New Music Festival.
Perhaps they would decide not to broadcast anything
about it because of the odious name of the sponsor. So
certainly that could happen.
17036 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: One last
question.
17037 You supported the phased introduction
of the constellation model on the condition that it be
commercial-free.
17038 Again, as you know, the issue of
funding for the CBC is a major one and I am wondering
how, again a matter of priorities, how you would see
this happening. If it was to be commercial-free, where
would the revenues come from?
17039 MR. CRAWLEY: I guess we haven't been
at all disappointed that the concept of mandatory
carriage hasn't disappeared altogether in the country.
Perhaps maybe there is a clue there for you.
17040 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: A clue?
17041 MR. CRAWLEY: As to how you might be
able to avoid -- I mean that people might be willing to
pay. In fact, there has been some research and we
allude to it in our brief, that people are willing to
pay for quality broadcasting in the public interest,
despite some editorial departments in a number of
newspapers that don't think it is a good idea.
17042 Apparently, there are people in
Canada who think it is worth it and they are willing
10 or 15 cents a month, maybe extra, for some of this
depth.
17043 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Yes, you
have alluded to it in your brief. I wasn't sure if you
meant that the entire cost of these channels, if there
were news ones, might be borne by the subscribers.
17044 MR. CRAWLEY: Again, I think maybe we
are getting into the strictures that are placed on the
Corporation through its governing structures and models
and so on that, with the best of intentions, the
Commission has tried to influence as appropriately
you do.
17045 This is again where I think the new
vision is what we are waiting for, because I think
there should be a way for some cross-subsidization to
happen within those public services. I think. I
understand that the privates don't like that, and I
understand why.
17046 As Laurier said, it's not their job
just to complement the privates, they have to look at
the big picture and make the best contribution that
they can make in the big picture. I don't know, I
can't give you a very, very clear answer on that, but I
think --
17047 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: It is
helpful.
17048 MR. CRAWLEY: I think certainly from
the point of view of our board and our organization, we
would love to keep the new public interest broadcasting
that will happen commercial free. I think it works
better that way for people.
17049 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you
very much.
17050 Those are all of my questions.
17051 Thank you, Madame Chair.
17052 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, madame,
monsieur.
17053 Thank you very much for your
participation. Thank you.
17054 MS BÉNARD: The next presentation
will be by the Canadian Independent Film Caucus / le
Caucus canadien de la vidéo et du cinéma indépendent.
17055 THE CHAIRPERSON: Maybe I should
mention that whenever we have a cough attack and we go
into the other room we are provided with the sound of
everything that is discussed here so that we are not
cut off from any important interventions.
INTERVENTION
17056 THE CHAIRPERSON: Bonjour.
17057 MS COHEN: Bonjour.
17058 MR. BOWIE: Bonjour.
17059 Good afternoon, Madame Chair and CRTC
Commissioners. We are happy to be here and be able to
participate in these important hearings. It was very
enjoyable to hear Daryl Duke and Laurier Lapierre
particularly. I support many of the things they have
said.
17060 My name is Geoff Bowie and I am the
National Chair of the Canadian Independent Film Caucus.
My colleague is Barri Cohen, who is an Ontario member
of the National Executive of the Canadian Independent
Film Caucus.
17061 As you may recall from the Canadian
television policy review and the new media hearings
that you conducted last fall, the CIFC, as we call
ourselves, or the Caucus, represents over
350 independent documentary producers and filmmakers.
We are an organization that has been instrumental in
securing documentary strands on our public sector
broadcasters like TV Ontario, CBC and Newsworld.
17062 At this point I would like to hand
the floor over to Barri Cohen, who has been responsible
for leading our intervention concerning the CBC.
17063 MS COHEN: Thanks, Geoff.
17064 I must say that after hearing what we
have heard today, certainly hearing what I have heard
today, I kind of feel like some of our remarks are a
bit redundant. So I beg your indulgence in advance, I
guess. Forgive me if you have heard all of this
before, and I am sure you have.
17065 We are here today to argue for
renewal of the licences, but also to do so within a
framework that contains several recommendations for a
substantive change within the CBC structure,
programming and corporate culture. We realize that the
Commission can only go so far in imposing conditions
upon the CBC, SRC and Newsworld, RDI, et cetera. So
consider our brief and our remarks as a much needed
opportunity for critique and dialogue, not just on the
CBC but on the entire question of public broadcasting.
17066 Does Canada presently have a national
public broadcaster? Some would argue that we do not.
Many, though not all of our members in the Caucus,
would argue that we do not, while others would argue
that at best we have a contradictory system. I think
we all know that.
17067 But make no mistake, despite our
concerns with how the main English network, in
particular, runs itself, we are fervently passionate
supporters of national public broadcasting and for all
the reasons that many of the intervenors spoke about
today. The Ameri-continentalization of our culture
that has gone one since at least radio broadcasting
went mainstream, the current globalized tendencies of
potentially unbalanced trade regimes that have and will
continue to challenge the sovereignty of our culture,
its forms and its cultural workers, the overall
consequence of these tendencies and forces that create
a climate of poor expectations, where mono-cultural
forms or homogenized TV product becomes the new
standard.
17068 We don't need to rehearse these
arguments, as we say, they have been stated and we
endorse them whole-heartedly. Indeed, it is because of
our passion, our idealism with respect to public
broadcasting, that motivates our participation in these
hearings, yet we are strongly committed to the process
by which renewal must occur within a context of
rigorous constructive critique.
17069 Now, we offered recommendations in
our brief and I would like here to summarize some of
the key ones which we hope will make a modest but
necessary intervention to really, once and for all,
make the CBC the -- well, what I call the jewel in the
cultural crown, if you will if that is not too old
fashioned a term.
17070 First and foremost, we wish the CBC
were truly a public broadcaster. It is not, and we
know it and they know it and many other Canadians know
it. As Mark Starovich(ph) has put it in an article
that was published in the Ryerson Journalism Review, I
think it was last June of 1998, quote:
"This is an intensively
commercialized network driven to
the point of distortion by the
exigency of commercial revenue
that is, itself, inimical to the
documentary form ..." (As read)
17071 Which is obviously our concern.
17072 Now we think there seems to be a
concern out there that if you criticize the CBC then
you are halfway on the road to privatizing it, and we
think that that is nonsense and we are big enough to
recognize that.
17073 So rather than blaming private
broadcasters and their ad revenue shares or
simultaneous substitution allowance or blaming the
historical enmity between successive governments of the
day and the Corporation or the present government's
current funding cutbacks, we would rather start in a
different place and ask: What is public broadcasting?
What is reasonable to expect in the Canadian context?
17074 Now, these are weighty questions
indeed, and we can't possibly do more than offer a few
directional and structural suggestions. But if these
questions are not asked in any substantive way, then we
are overlooking the heart of the matter.
17075 Now, for us a public broadcaster is a
trend setter, not a follower. You have heard this
phrase before, it is the risktaker in a system
dominated increasingly by homogeneity. A risktaker who
anticipates and crafts programming needs for an
intelligent audience, not one that needs to be talked
down to nor necessarily an elitist one. We think
audiences are sophisticated enough not to fall into one
or the other camp as we so often dismayingly hear from
the Corporation's senior managers.
17076 If public TV is not challenging the
hearts and minds of audiences, or if programmers are
afraid of audience reaction, then it is not
contributing to civil society and an exciting critical
public discourse.
17077 A public service programmer is one
who is not seeking to be a generalist with every
program, but across the program schedule. A public
broadcaster is one that puts programs ahead of
maintaining an outmoded technological infrastructure.
17078 Public broadcasting -- and this is
the real no-brainer -- is not driven by ratings, nor
driven by competition vis-à-vis other broadcasters
within a system. To paraphrase Starovich again,
distortion is inevitable when programs are selected for
marketability and shoved into 47 minutes. But it is
the nature of the Darwinian world of prime time where
only that which draws ratings survives.
17079 To become public, then, means not
relying on advertising as the driving force in
programming.
17080 We know, despite mandates and good
intentions and policy directives, that there is a
corporate or programming psychology that governs the
chase for ad revenues. This means the programs, of
course, are the free lunch for selling audiences to
advertisers.
17081 We thus feel that central to the
restructuring of the corporation should be its
uncoupling from advertising, especially around under
represented categories.
17082 We note that ads for major sports
events should continue, and yes, we do support the
continuation of sporting events, especially NHL games
because we believe these games are as much culturally
as commercially significant. After all, as you have
doubtless heard, about 40 per cent of ad revenue, I
think, for the English side for the orporation derives
from advertising around the NHL.
17083 We feel that the broader context of
broadcasting will have to be re-examined if the CBC is
to be thoroughly restructured. This will require
looking at the role of other broadcasters in support of
a truly public service, as well as reinstating the
CBC's access to the CTF.
17084 Now, by that essentially I am
thinking of Mr. Lapierre's comments about potentially
thinking about private broadcasters contributing a
portion of revenues to a fund or to the CBC. I don't
know that there will ever be any consensus around such
an approach and our concern at the Caucus would be the
extent to which private broadcasters would require
concessions on Canadian content if they were to do so.
17085 That is just a caution at this point,
but we do feel that these things should be explored,
and that if the CBC were to uncouple itself from
advertising, then the cap that presently exists at the
Canadian Television Fund should be removed.
17086 Now, in corporate cultural terms, it
must be objectively recognized that the staff and
current managers cannot possibly know what "public"
means, because they have never been allowed -- or at
least not for decades -- to operate within its terms.
Their corporate culture is governed by a frame of
reference that has always been and might well continue
to be that strange mixture of public interest
programming and audience satisfaction.
17087 We need to have debate on what these
things actually are. I can tell you that we couldn't
really find them amongst the nostrums cited in the many
pages of the CBC's strategic plan or licence renewal
applications. We do know that they are not necessarily
reflected in something called ratings.
17088 Now, in our own brief we focussed a
lot -- well, primarily on specific recommendations
around relations between independent documentary
filmmakers and the networks.
17089 Now, relations between the
independent production community and the CBC is rather
strained, to say the least. Part of the historical
legacy, to my mind anyway, of the CBC, once being the
only broadcaster in town, means that the Corporation's
unions, for example, still hold tremendous power to
argue against more independent production. Now, this
is truly a difficult situation, but it must somehow be
overcome.
17090 We are not experts in this area, so
we can only speak to improving present relations. Here
we offer up some suggestions, both in terms of, well,
what I have called, perhaps inelegantly, business
issues and aesthetic or cultural ones.
17091 On the business front, the CIFC will
participate with the CFTPA, the Canadian Film and
Television Producers Association, to negotiate a terms
of trade agreement with the CBC. We are aiming for a
terms of trade agreement similar to the one that is in
place between the BBC -- that is BBC One and Two -- and
any independent producer or filmmaker who approaches
them or is engaged in an independent coproduction with
them, whether in England or outside.
17092 What this is is a set of protocols
that governs a relationship regardless of who initiated
a particular project. It requires clear and consistent
programming mandates, a respect for all producers to
get back to them in a timely fashion about the status
of their projects, proper rights sharing and creative
control parameters, et cetera.
17093 We are pleased that the CBC in fact
did recognize in their licence application renewal that
they -- they recognized the need for such a regime as
well, and we hope their enthusiasm for this initiative
remains after their licence renewal process is over.
17094 Now, we cannot stress enough the
importance that rights sharing plays in this
negotiation.
17095 I will now turn it back to Geoff to
address you with this issue.
17096 MR. BOWIE: Thanks.
17097 I want to deal right off with a
concrete example around rights which came up in the
response by the CBC to interventions filed by the
CFTPA, the CIFC and the ACT on a letter dated May 21.
17098 In this document the CBC states that
rights is a primary concern for CBC. I quote:
"Owning inventory allows a
broadcaster to maintain profile
and it means potential revenue,
particularly in foreign sales.
The CBC reinvests that revenue
into supporting even more
programs, a situation unlike the
private sector where revenue
often means profit."
17099 To me this statement surprised me, it
was so baldly stated. It reveals that at bottom the
CBC sees itself as a competitor with our members. As a
broadcaster, a distributor and a program producer, it
is behaving as a vertically integrated corporation in
the public sector and acting predatorily against
independent documentary filmmakers who are neither
broadcasters nor distributors following the same
business strategy as the largest media conglomerates in
the private sector. I think Mark Starovich's quotes
that Barri mentioned bear this out.
17100 The CBC is using its public financial
resources to unfairly compete against small independent
documentary companies. We see this as a contradiction
with the part of their mandate that speaks about
supporting the independent sector.
17101 The CBC claims hiring freelance
directors on service contracts is one way in which they
support the independent community. A share in the
rights is not offered these directors. While this work
is important to the directors involved in this climate
where self-employment is becoming the norm, it does not
help create a viable independent documentary production
community. In fact, quite the opposite, it shuts out
documentary companies.
17102 The CBC goes on in their response
document to insult independent documentary filmmakers
by insinuating that they cannot be relied upon to do a
complete and meticulous job of research.
17103 Finally, the CBC maintains that the
"History" series is mandate programming, programming
which performs a public service, programming the
private sector isn't likely to produce. Well, their
view of the private sector demonstrates an ignorance of
what independent documentary filmmakers are all about,
and they should know that because they have dealt with
enough of us.
17104 The CBC has worked with enough
independent documentary filmmakers to know that our
companies are mostly small with a few mid-sized
companies, and that public interest programming almost
defines independent documentary filmmaking.
17105 The CIFC would like the CRTC to do
whatever it can to urge the CBC to abandon its arrogant
fortress-like stance in favour of a partnership with
independent documentary filmmakers and a fair sharing
of rights. Independent documentary filmmakers could
and should be the CBC's greatest ally.
17106 An alliance could be mutually
beneficial and is the best way to muster the creative
and financial resources that are urgently needed to
revitalize Canadian public broadcasting.
17107 But what is revealing about the CBC's
remarks about the "History" series is their policy
decision to be a public sector vertically-integrated
media corporation in the American style, vying to be a
winner in the global television marketplace. This
strategic policy, their response to cutbacks is causing
them to compete unfairly with independent documentary
filmmakers and distorting their role as a public
service broadcaster.
17108 MS COHEN: I am winding into a
conclusion here.
17109 As for the cultural and aesthetic
issues, being in the vanguard of programming means that
the public broadcaster must seek out new talent.
Again, you have heard a lot about this today and I'm
sure on other days. It does not entail using the same
set of filmmakers and producers, as has often been
observed about the programming and commissioning
practices of the documentary unit at the main English
network.
17110 We observe, for instance, that
according to the same Ryerson Journalism Review article
of last year, by way of example, of 49 original
documentaries aired on "Witness" in the seasons from
1995 to 1997-1998, about half were produced or directed
by current or former CBC employees, including seven by
one team alone. For us, this is not the way to fulfil
the programming mandate of broadcasting diversity.
17111 Now admittedly, in the last year I
would say, the documentary has opened up somewhat, but
merely to let new players in, not to change the rules.
17112 For the CIFC, we said in our brief
that changing the rules would require a vastly pared
down commissioning editing system, not unlike that
which exists at Newsworld and TV Ontario, both
broadcasters that we have high praise for.
17113 TVO, for instance, has a staff of one
commissioning editor and two associate producers who
program and commission work for more than three
documentary strands, independently produced documentary
strands for which programs are acquired and/or
coproduced.
17114 Moreover, the commissioning editor is
not part of the old current affairs culture, the old
journal culture, but comes from an independent
perspective. It is an approach and style which has
proven immeasurably helpful in other broadcasting
entities, like the ABC in Australia or Channel 4 in
Britain, or the BBC --
17115 THE CHAIRPERSON: Ms Cohen, you have
exceeded your time by about five minutes.
17116 MS COHEN: I'm sorry.
17117 THE CHAIRPERSON: If you could
summarize, please.
17118 MS COHEN: Yes. I will just move on
there.
17119 Anyway, the idea is that key to
our -- to summarize our recommendations then, is to
uncouple from advertising to create a commissioning
editing system ,to vastly restructure the Corporation
so that issues of diversity in regional production can
continue but not necessarily with a regional
infrastructure.
17120 Anyway, I will leave it at that.
17121 THE CHAIRPERSON: I'm sure through
the questioning there will be ample chance --
17122 Before I ask Commissioner Langford to
ask the questions -- no?
17123 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: I guess so.
17124 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes? It's because
I have made a few mistakes over the week, so I'm just
kind of --
17125 I want to reassure you that it's true
that it may seem that we are hearing the same kind of
comments, but that proves the value of a very thorough
public process. That really brings many intervenors to
the table, plus all the written briefs we have had,
which are really the basis for us in order to learn
about the reality of today and the vision of tomorrow.
17126 So please don't be intimidated by the
fact that you are coming towards the end of the
proceeding and kind of not having the scoop that others
may have had, but it is very, very important that we
hear, and the more we hear the same comments there are
always nuances and you will see, through questioning,
there is always a way to really get the flavour and
your particular contribution.
17127 Commissioner Langford.
17128 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Thanks very
much.
17129 I will stay on the counselling theme
here. Be assured as well that your brief is on the
record and all your recommendations, of which there
were many, are on the record. So it is not the end of
the world that you didn't get every point out today.
It is all there.
17130 I also hope you will forgive me,
because I have that in mind in kind of framing the
questions. I don't really want to till that field
again. It's not that I think the field isn't worth
tilling, but it is there and it is on the record. You
have said most of it again today.
17131 Just a couple of little points,
because we can't do everything in a few minutes, at
5:00 or whatever.
17132 I am tickled a little bit,
intellectually that is, by this whole ratings thing.
Laurier LaPierre, I assume, in his usual flamboyant
style, said he didn't care if 10 people watched. I'm
sure if it dipped much below 12, he would be concerned.
17133 You are saying ratings aren't the
game. But there has to be a point somewhere. I mean,
there just has to be.
17134 I ask you to kind of share with us
some notions of where that point is. I mean, it is
trite to say it, but taxpayers are paying for this.
They want some sort of bang for their buck, more than
10 of them, I would assume.
17135 Can you give us some guidance of
where your members are on that question of popularity
versus public broadcasting in its purest form and where
the line should be?
17136 MR. BOWIE: Yes. I think one way of
putting it is ratings sort of link it to money,
essentially. Ratings and commercial advertising are
what are linked together. While money needs to be a
consideration of public broadcast production, it
shouldn't be the last word. It can be a word, but not
the last word. I think that is a big difference.
17137 I think the motivation for,
especially documentary programming, which is our
concern, is that they should be willing to take on some
of the most important issues facing all of us, and that
can make the shows incredibly popular.
17138 Yes, Barri.
17139 MS COHEN: I was just going to say
exactly what you said, which was, and make it popular.
17140 MR. BOWIE: Yes. If you are taking
on those issues, you can discover -- and they really
are the issues that are important to Canadians -- they
will be popular. But I think that the first
consideration has to be getting at those issues, not
getting at how can we secure ratings first? It is all
revolving around a game that is set by the commercial
broadcasters.
17141 MS COHEN: Just to add to that, if
you don't mind, just briefly. I think ratings you have
to -- look, I mean my perspective personally, and I
think this would be shared by many of our members, is
that ratings mean different things in different
contexts.
17142 What do ratings mean in a public
broadcasting context? That is a question that has to
be asked and answered in a sense.
17143 What does it mean in the commercial
context? They mean two different things.
Consequently, popularity and success indicators are
going to mean different things.
17144 Do success indicators mean great
reviews, foreign sales? If we were to use ratings for
an Atom Agoyan film, he would never have been funded
after his first two films. But he was successful
outside of Canada, and I don't even know how many
Canadians actually see his films now to be quite
honest.
17145 But ratings aren't the only
indicator. I would just advise you very strongly to
think very carefully about how it is defined in a
public broadcasting situation, which does require, I
think, thinking a bit in a vacuum because we don't have
one.
17146 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: But do you
concede that there is a downside to low ratings?
17147 I am not trying to paint you into a
corner, but I really find it -- we had -- who is the
real "Red Green"? I can't remember all the names.
17148 Steve Smith was before us today. He
was quite clear. He wants people to see his stuff. He
wants to do good shows, but he doesn't want to do them
and sit around only with his family and watch them. He
wants lots of people, as many people as possible, to
see his shows.
17149 MS COHEN: Well, we do too. We want
many people to see our programs. It is hard to know
how successful they are or they are not.
17150 We addressed this in the fall
actually when we were before you at the hearings at
that time. When there is no promotion -- we addressed
this in our brief -- when there is no promotion because
it is not national, because of the nature of the
affiliate agreements and the way in which our so-called
national documentary programs are not in the absolute
reserve section but they are in the optional section.
17151 So I don't want to get arcane here,
but when there is not a fair chance even at promotion,
let alone the fact that CBC doesn't even promote
properly feature films and that kind of thing, when
there is not a priority placed on that, then it is hard
to really talk about ratings and what success is.
17152 I am not trying to be elusive here.
I think it is a very complicated issue and it is
fraught with contradictions.
17153 MR. BOWIE: An example I would like
to give, on CBC is a show called "The Trouble With
Evan". I don't know if anyone saw that. It was about
three years ago. It was a very interesting documentary
about the kind of mental and physical abuse of a
13-year-old boy, directed by Neil Dokerty(ph) inside
CBC. I think it was a very, very popular show. The
ratings were huge for it and it appealed to Canadians
of all kinds.
17154 Yet, the inspiration for that show --
the drive for that show was not: Is this going to be
the blockbuster of all time? It came from a public
interest place.
17155 So it can be extremely popular,
depending how well you can do that, how talented you
are, how you can tap into those ideas that are those
most important issues and how creatively you do them.
17156 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Yes. I was
looking more at the point that not only can it be
popular, but shouldn't it be popular?
17157 MR. BOWIE: Yes. That's the goal.
Yes, that is the goal.
17158 MS COHEN: Difficult work though, I
must say. Difficult work sometimes requires creating
an audience and not necessarily just serving it.
17159 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Moving right
along, as they say, the question of independent
production versus in-house production.
17160 We have heard a little bit about
that, as you can imagine. We have heard more from you.
I was kind of tickled by the notion -- here I am being
tickled today, cerebral tickles all around -- that you
were quoting Starovich(ph) who, on one hand, is I
gather setting himself up as something of a guru, and
on the other hand is putting together the biggest
in-house production in history.
17161 Are you feeling a little
schizophrenic about this gentleman?
17162 MS COHEN: Can I address that?
17163 I think that we have complex, not
so-called black and white reactions to individuals, and
we think he is a very smart fellow who does know the
Corporation probably in its politics better than we do,
and certainly anybody else, and he is fairly savvy
about what he is up against.
17164 That doesn't mean that we don't
disagree. It is possible for two things to be true at
once: (a) that we disagree with an approach and an
ideological approach and so on, but that we also agree
with him in the broader view of what the fundamental
contradictory and structural problems are that beset
the Corporation.
17165 MR. BOWIE: I would like to add that
I think he is very perceptive, but he is also very
accepting. He is accepting of a strategy for the CBC
that we disagree with, and he is very articulate about
it. I think in the response about rights vis-à-vis the
independent sector, he is saying the same thing. That
is what the CBC is about now. It is about
market-driven things, because that is the way of the
world. Well, that is not a Canadian solution and it is
compromising our public broadcaster.
17166 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: But should
the CBC be allowed to do in-house production or would
you strip it completely of that role?
17167 MR. BOWIE: Perhaps there is an
argument that could be made for news and current
affairs to be kept in-house, but I think all the under
represented programming could be done in co-operation
with the independent sector.
17168 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: You don't
find that just a tiny bit self-serving? Is there no
argument that could be made for in-house production?
17169 MR. BOWIE: I think it could be a
partnership. I don't see why -- why shouldn't it be.
17170 There are people in our -- our
filmmakers, I mean we are filmmakers, that want to do
public interest programming. I mean, there is no
barrier there as far as: Well, there is a certain kind
of programming that only in-house CBC people can do.
17171 Ms COHEN: Can I just address that?
17172 I think a distinction has to be made
between in-house and still working with independent
artists, creators, filmmakers, producers, and
co-productions.
17173 I don't think you would get consensus
amongst our members that everything should be a
co-production.
17174 But at the same time, using "History"
project as an example, if they are working with
independent filmmakers on contract, in service
contracts, there should be rights sharing.
17175 The BBC's agreement that they have
with independent producers, there are several
negotiated options you can have. It all comes under
the rubric of an independent production agreement.
17176 One is, they pay for the whole thing.
They own the rights, they hire you. It is maybe still
your idea. You come to them. You have a great idea.
It requires the commitment of a public service
broadcaster and its resources, but it is your idea.
They will hire you, they will pay you, and they will
share rights. But they will be in charge of
distribution and they will have shelf product and
so on.
17177 The other option, and it is a bit of
a continuum, the other option is, yes, the
co-production situation where there are different kinds
of creative control parameters and different rights
sharing regime.
17178 With the BBC, I mean it is not the
ultimate model and there are other kinds of models, but
that is an example where, yes, there is a role for
in-house production, but not necessarily in-house
generated ideas.
17179 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: You have
given us a huge meal here of many, many courses and I
wish we could sit around with the candles lit and the
wine and talk about it longer, but we have to give
other people a turn too. So those are my questions.
There may be others, but those are mine.
17180 Thank you very much.
17181 THE CHAIRPERSON: Indeed,
Commissioner Colville has a question for you.
17182 COMMISSIONER COLVILLE: Just one
question.
17183 If the CBC was doing all of its
non-news and public affairs programming, if all of that
programming came from the independent sector, I am
struck by the comments that you and several other
groups have made in that respect, while at the same
time saying how important CBC is.
17184 What does the CBC become, then, any
more than simply a scheduler of independent programs?
17185 MR. BOWIE: I think one of the most
important things CBC has is its mandate, and that is a
mandate that the private broadcasters don't have and
aren't interested in.
17186 There could be a much more sort of
harmonious world between the public broadcaster and the
independent production community if they would make
sure that their mandate is met but in partnership with
the independent sector.
17187 Their statement that this is mandate
programming and so the private sector is not interested
in it, well, they are talking about a different private
sector than the one that we represent.
17188 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very
much, Madam, Monsieur.
17189 Ms BÉNARD: I would now invite Madam
Dawson to come forward.
INTERVENTION
17190 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good afternoon.
17191 Thank you for being that patient
with us.
17192 Ms DAWSON: I was just thinking of
what a long day you people have had and how tired you
must be. Since I drove 12 hours plus to get here --
17193 THE CHAIRPERSON: Did you? Where are
you coming from?
17194 Ms DAWSON: From Saint John,
New Brunswick.
17195 THE CHAIRPERSON: Oh, well, we
appreciate.
17196 Ms DAWSON: So we will hope to wrap
this up.
17197 THE CHAIRPERSON: Take all your time.
You certainly deserve to be heard properly, and we
appreciate the fact that you came all that way to meet
with us. It says a lot about your attachment to the
CBC.
17198 Ms DAWSON: Exactly.
17199 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: We would have
had you bring a trunkload of lobster, if we had known
you were coming in.
17200 Ms DAWSON: I should have too, yes.
17201 COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: We have
missed our chance here. You could have really
influenced this Commission.
17202 Ms DAWSON: I should have. I never
thought of that. We are not in season right now. It
is Nova Scotia season.
17203 I live in Saint John and I am a
second generation CBC listener, which makes my
grandchildren fourth generation CBC listeners.
17204 Through the years I have lived in
five provinces from Nova Scotia to Manitoba and my
children have lived in three others, and the thread
that connects us is the CBC.
17205 What has been allowed to happen to
Canadian radio and television in recent years to pursue
the almighty dollar is truly discouraging.
17206 That is why I was so disappointed I
was unable to get to Moncton when you were there,
because of the icy roads that day, because I believe it
is crucial to our survival as a nation that Canadian
radio and television broadcasting reflect the people,
the history, the culture and the environment of this
wonderful land.
17207 We have writers, singers, classical
musicians, bands, comedians, technicians, actors,
journalists, who have been given an opportunity to hone
their skills, and it is obvious they are in demand all
over the world because that is where many of them have
gone.
17208 That is why I considered it so
important to travel from New Brunswick today to bring
to your attention the needs of communities outside of
the Ontario view. Their proposal that CBC remove
itself from local programming -- and I went down to our
local station to look at that pile of stuff in that
binder, and discovered that we are not considered local
programming, we are called sub-regional. I do love
jargon.
17209 The biggest clue in my mind is the
lack of understanding that I feel CBC has -- does not
have to keep Canadians in touch with each other. Cuts
to funding, and perhaps not the best use of
resources -- and when I arrived this morning and bought
a paper I was pretty stunned by this article which
brought two things to my mind. One is "fiduciary
responsibility", a term I learned of recent years; and
the other is, "it must appear to be just." So I leave
that with you on that.
17210 The cuts to funding have affected
people. They have gutted the ability of the
Corporation to present talent, as well as to provide
the opportunity for its development and dissemination.
It was a little later, I didn't hear everybody who was
here today, but I certainly agreed with a goodly part
of what I heard.
17211 The intrusion of politics into the
CBC has been conspicuous for some years. More than one
party has attempted to influence the way events are
portrayed. This is a direct contradiction to the
purpose of a public broadcaster.
17212 While CBC is recognized worldwide for
the excellence of its service, forces within Canada
seem to be working to destroy this jewel. Don't we
like that word. Everybody has taken a fancy to it.
17213 I beg you to understand how important
CBC is to Canada. It is obvious to the most casual
observer that there is plenty of room for improvement.
I am concerned that the voices of Canadians are not
heard at the board level. I am most distressed that
management in Toronto has no idea what goes on in the
rest of the country and I am totally disgusted with
their campaign to centralize everything.
17214 I watched at home while Mr. Beatty
and Mr. Frame talked about focus groups. I was a
little disappointed that nobody asked them where they
got these focus groups, because my guess is they came
from York University and U. of T. which was handy to
the office.
17215 New Brunswick at this time gets two
hours of provincial coverage on afternoon radio per
day. We get three hours of local coverage in the
morning, and we are pretty happy to say that in Saint
John, New Brunswick our CBC morning program has the
largest audience in the area. We get one-half hour of
television news five days a week that originates in
New Brunswick. So that is for a total of 27.5 hours
per week for New Brunswick, and my guess is that must
be the smallest coverage of any province in the
country.
17216 Now, it is my understanding that CRTC
makes decisions about what is shown on Canadian cable
television and I want to know why it is mandatory to
have those American stations? I don't know why
Newsworld isn't on basic cable. I, personally, would
like to see CPAC on basic cable, and that is not even
CBC.
17217 A member of my family who lives in
the States wonders why Newsworld is not mandatory as a
trade. If we are going to have to have those American
stations, they why can't we trade Newsworld to American
cable companies. Perhaps they don't want Americans to
see what a good channel Newsworld is, because we do
have a lot of Americans who are great CBC fans,
particularly in the border states.
17218 I would like to thank the CBC and
congratulate them for the long-running metropolitan
opera sponsored by Texaco that is a memory of mine as
far back as I can remember.
17219 I would like to shake the hand of the
person who introduced "CBC Overnight". As a former
night worker I am often sort of wakeful in the night
and it is really, really interesting to turn on the
radio and listen to Canada as viewed from somewhere
else. It is fascinating.
17220 I would like to see CBC board members
chosen from ordinary Canadians who would volunteer to
serve and who understand the broad national view and be
willing to perform this service with remuneration only
for expenses, or perhaps salary replacement, if a
person had to leave their work in order to be present.
17221 I am most distressed that management
in Toronto has no idea what goes on in the rest of the
country.
17222 The final straw is this proposal by
CBC brass that we have advertising on radio, which they
insisted really isn't advertising, because national
public radio does it so nicely.
17223 I can see it now. I sat down and
tried to figure out how this would work, and so this is
what I came up with.
17224 We could have" Ideas" presented by
Dow Chemical; or "David Suzuki" presented by Talisman
Energy; or "The World at Six" presented by the Prime
Minister's Office; or the "New Brunswick News"
presented by Irving Oil; or "Agriculture" by Monsanto,
or, my last one, "As It Happens" by Paramax. There is
just no end to the possibilities.
--- Laughter / Rires
17225 MS DAWSON: Last week, I was
extremely irritated. I was watching nicely on
Newsworld while they covered the unveiling of the
statue of René Levesque on the Legislature grounds in
Quebec City. The next time I came by the television it
was gone. Some fellow that I never saw in my life
before from New York wanted to talk about Kosovo, as if
we haven't talked about that forever, and they just cut
if off in the middle. It was very well covered and I
really enjoyed it on RDI, but I have no idea why
Newsworld cut off a Canadian historical event to put on
some fellow from New York. I was not happy.
17226 New Brunswick suffers from news
coverage influenced by very large companies and the CBC
gives us a view of the world which is not available to
us from any other source. Please understand how
important CBC is to New Brunswick and to Canada. Our
country depends on our ability to speak to each other.
17227 Now, if I could figure out my notes
here I would be all set.
17228 There is nothing to stop programming
for children being done on the radio right now. It was
there when I was young, and believe me that was not
yesterday. Surely it is time for CBC to be run by
people who understand Canada and Canadians and radio.
17229 I am not a big television fan, so I
am not as -- you know, I don't have a lot of opinions,
I guess, about television. It is not my thing.
17230 But the hands-on staff in CBC have
ideas, they have expertise. I listened to Laurier
Lapierre talking about the opportunities that are
within the corporation that aren't being used. Their
input is rarely sought, and on occasions when
suggestions have been made that I have heard about,
they have been ignored. Canada and Canadians and the
CBC workers deserve better.
17231 Canada's survival depends on our
ability to communicate. Please, listen to us.
17232 Thank you.
17233 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very
much.
17234 I would ask Madame Pinsky, because I
don't want to confuse you any further, but your
assessment of what are the obligations, for example, of
the mandatory carriage --
17235 MS DAWSON: Yes.
17236 THE CHAIRPERSON: -- of U.S. signals.
17237 Did I take you by surprise, Madame
Pinsky. I'm sorry.
17238 MS DAWSON: We had to spend several
years getting rid of Detroit off of our cable.
17239 THE CHAIRPERSON: No, there is no
obligation there. It is available to cable.
17240 MS DAWSON: So if we were to lobby
our local cable company to say we would rather have
Newsworld than NBC, we could do that? I will start
first thing in the morning.
17241 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
17242 Carolyn?
17243 MS PINSKY: Yes.
17244 The mandated services are Canadian
services in terms of what the cable company would have
to carry, so it would be your CBC station, local
stations and then they sort of go out from there in
terms of regional. But there would be no obligation,
strictly legally, to carry the American programming.
17245 THE CHAIRPERSON: What we could do in
order to help you is we will discuss your presentation
and on that particular question maybe we can advise you
on what are the possibilities that are open to you in
terms of trying to get the kind more the kind of
line-up you would like from your cable system.
17246 MS DAWSON: Thank you very much.
17247 We would certainly appreciate all the
help we can get.
17248 THE CHAIRPERSON: It is Commissioner
Cram who is asking the questions for the Commission.
So I leave you in really good hands. She is from the
prairies, but very open to the regional issues.
17249 MS DAWSON: I have heard us described
as "Outer Canada" one time.
17250 THE CHAIRPERSON: Well, she is not
that outer, it is Commissioner Grauer, she's on the
other side of the Rockies.
17251 COMMISSIONER GRAUER: Halifax,
Vancouver, Manitoba.
--- Laughter / Rires
17252 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank you for
coming, Mrs. Dawson.
17253 It seems the weather really -- first
there is snow in March and then you are here 40 degrees
with the humidity. It has been quite a drive I think.
17254 MS DAWSON: Yes, exactly.
17255 COMMISSIONER CRAM: I wanted to talk
to you about some of your suggestions and sort of go a
little further into them.
17256 I have read your written paper too,
and you were talking about "There is plenty of room for
improvement."
17257 What improvements do you think would
be on your priority list if you were on the board
of CBC?
17258 MS DAWSON: Well, I am very concerned
about the attitude that everything should come from the
national. We are a country of places. I would like to
see a lot more exchanges. We have great reporters in
New Brunswick, television reporters and radio reporters
and half of the radio ones we have exported across the
country in the last couple of years. I think it may
well be a matter of planning of how to make these
exchanges.
17259 Because if Vancouver doesn't know
that we did a thing on Atlantic salmon that -- you
know, we are all interested in salmon these days. One
area's concern can affect and perhaps provide
information that would be helpful to another area that
has basically the same problem at the other end of
the country.
17260 But we tend not to exchange the -- I
spent two months in Calgary last year and the best news
of New Brunswick that I got was on the Weather Channel.
So it seems to me that there is programming out there
that would be of interest, it is Canadian, done by our
own people, and I think it is interesting that the
independents have some concerns about how to have their
programming onto the network, because that is where it
gets seen.
17261 I don't think whether you are a
private producer or you are a CBC producer there is any
money-back guarantee that the program you produce is
going to be welcomed with opened arms by the viewers on
any particular night, you know.
17262 That isn't the point of CBC. CBC is
to provide opportunities for talents to develop and for
people to be able to hear something different. When I
turn my radio dial I know the minute that I hit the
CBC, and it doesn't matter whether I am in the States
with my shortwave and my ear up to it because I can't
stand down there radio, it's so awful.
17263 But when you do that with the
television, you don't know. You don't know. I'm in a
hotel that -- I can't tell what station I'm on, and
this particular machine -- mine at home tells you when
you flick the channel, it gives you the number to tell
you where you are, and this is an older machine so it
doesn't do that. I could go up and down that whole
dial without knowing for sure where I am with any given
program.
17264 So we have to make Canadian
television every bit as distinctive as our radio is to
a viewer, just, you know immediately when you see it:
That is CBC.
17265 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Do you think that
part of this is exchanges between the regions of
information?
17266 MS DAWSON: I would like to see much
of that, yes.
17267 COMMISSIONER CRAM: I know exactly
how you feel, because when I am here in Ottawa and I
want to know what's happening in Saskatchewan, you are
right, the Weather Channel --
17268 MS DAWSON: This is our election day
and there is no CPAC in my hotel room. I'm pretty
annoyed. I hope there is good coverage on Newsworld
tonight.
17269 COMMISSIONER CRAM: There may
well be.
17270 So what you are talking about is
exchanges within the radio and within the TV networks?
17271 MS DAWSON: Yes.
17272 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Okay. Then you
talk about interaction between CBC and Radio-Canada.
Are you talking about --
17273 MS DAWSON: I would like to see -- as
one lady said while I was here this afternoon that in
Newfoundland they would like to have some translations
of some of those great Quebec programs. I would like
to see some bilingual programs. I could use the
practice.
17274 But I don't get the impression that
the Canadian people or the people who work at the
hands-on level for CBC are considered when these
people, wherever they are up there, make these
decisions. They just don't seem to connect with those
of us that are on the receiving end and I think there
needs to be a great deal more contact between the
people who handle the money and supposedly make the
decisions and the people who are going to receive the
end product.
17275 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Sort of like
consultation groups across the country kind of a thing?
17276 MS DAWSON: Well, I don't know. I
don't know how you would do that. Everyone that I have
ever gone to, and I started with the Charlottetown
Accord and worked my way down, left me with the
impression that you could talk until you are blue in
the face, but it didn't mean that anybody who had the
power to make a change really intended to do anything.
17277 I find that the most frustrating part
of the whole thing, is that the people who could do it,
don't, whether because, as Mr. Lapierre said, they are
too tied up with: Well, they might not get the right
ratings or it might offend somebody or whatever, or
whether they just don't understand what the country
needs. Because I heard somebody say today that nobody
should be allowed to vote in Canada until they have
gone by train from one side to the other to really
see it. If we can't see it on the television and we
don't hear it on the radio, where are we going to hear
it?
17278 I mean, we have never needed more for
people to understand what a fabulous country this is.
I always find I spend two weeks in the States and I
could kiss the ground when I get home. I'm sure it is
a fine place, but Canada is a fabulous country and I
think we should be out there waving the flag and making
sure that our children and our grandchildren know what
a great place it is.
17279 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Mrs. Dawson, you
were talking about the advertising on the radio, and I
don't know if you were listening last week, the people
in Toronto changed their minds somewhat and talked
about it being essentially almost the same as the
Metropolitan Opera --
17280 MS DAWSON: But it's not. It's not.
17281 COMMISSIONER CRAM: You don't
think so?
17282 MS DAWSON: It is the news by
Paramax(ph).
17283 COMMISSIONER CRAM: They do say --
17284 MS DAWSON: -- environment by the oil
company and it is the possibility of the influence of
that. It's fine and dandy to say, "Oh, it won't
influence our programming". I don't believe that for a
minute and I don't think anybody else does.
17285 If there is a sponsor, by whatever
name somebody chooses to call you, it is still to have
an influence and there is the self-regulation that
comes with that kind of thing. You know, I watched --
and I don't even like hockey, I watched "Net Worth" the
other night because when I flicked by it caught my
attention. It was a fabulous piece. I don't know that
any other network would have even made it, never mind
shown it.
17286 This is the kind of thing that CBC is
there to do. It is to do the things and to show the
country each part to the other so that we can all be as
proud as we should be of the wonderful place that we
have and how lucky we are to be here.
17287 COMMISSIONER CRAM: So even if we
narrowed it down to non-news, non-information
programming, the money going to a third party, not the
CBC, and it ended up being the National Ballet
sponsored by the Royal Bank, but the Royal Bank paid
the Ballet and CBC simply aired it.
17288 MS DAWSON: Yes, but they do that
now. When you go to the -- we have a beautiful new
theatre in Saint John, a remodelled treasure that
everybody's welcome to come and visit, it is well
worth -- and every time you go to something there the
supporters in the community are on the program. But to
have it on the radio to say that this program is
virtually sponsored by the Royal Bank, I don't know.
There has to be a better way than that.
17289 I agree that the funding of the CBC
is an investment, it is not a debt. And as long as we
can make people understand that it is an investment, it
is not a debt, then all of this complaining about how
expensive it is and broken down to per person per year,
it is, you know, two cups of coffee and practically
nothing. So it is a question of trying to get across
to Canadians that this is a valuable thing that we have
here and we would be very foolish to let it go.
17290 COMMISSIONER CRAM: You say you don't
watch TV, but you do watch Newsworld.
17291 MS DAWSON: I watch, yes, Newsworld
and -- yes, news and current affairs.
17292 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Do you know they
are asking for a hike in the rates?
17293 MS DAWSON: Yes, I saw that in
something I was reading there today.
17294 COMMISSIONER CRAM: If you had a
ballot, how would you vote?
17295 MS DAWSON: For what, 6 cents a
month --
17296 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Eight.
17297 MS DAWSON: Eight cents. Worth every
penny, although I must admit, I can only take so much
of "Antiques Roadshow".
--- Laughter / Rires
17298 COMMISSIONER CRAM: By the way, that
is one of the most popular programs.
17299 MS DAWSON: I know. Every time I
look at it, I can't understand it, but somebody likes
it, that's fine with me.
17300 COMMISSIONER CRAM: My mother does.
17301 MS DAWSON: Well, there.
17302 COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank you,
Mrs. Dawson.
17303 You can go out and paint the town,
and drive home carefully.
17304 MS DAWSON: Okay. Thank you very
much.
17305 That is exactly what I plan to do,
and I think you people deserve a rest.
17306 Thank you very much.
17307 THE CHAIRPERSON: Madame Dawson,
thank you so much for making the trip.
17308 MS DAWSON: Thank you for having me.
17309 THE CHAIRPERSON: I hope you win your
election. Isn't it tonight?
17310 MS DAWSON: Who do you think we want
to win.
17311 THE CHAIRPERSON: I hope you don't
need to kiss the ground when you come to New Brunswick
after having been in the capital.
17312 MS DAWSON: It's a wonderful city, I
love it. It's a great place.
17313 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much
for coming. We have enjoyed your participation.
17314 Thank you so much.
17315 That concludes the list of
intervenors for today. We will be back tomorrow
morning at nine o'clock.
17316 Thank you.
--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1745, to resume
on Tuesday, June 8, 1999 at 0900 / L'audience est
adjournée à 1745, pour reprendre le mardi 8 juin
1999 à 0900
|