ARCHIVÉ - Transcription
Cette page Web a été archivée dans le Web
L’information dont il est indiqué qu’elle est archivée est fournie à des fins de référence, de recherche ou de tenue de documents. Elle n’est pas assujettie aux normes Web du gouvernement du Canada et elle n’a pas été modifiée ou mise à jour depuis son archivage. Pour obtenir cette information dans un autre format, veuillez communiquer avec nous.
Offrir un contenu dans les deux langues officielles
Prière de noter que la Loi sur les langues officielles exige que toutes publications gouvernementales soient disponibles dans les deux langues officielles.
Afin de rencontrer certaines des exigences de cette loi, les procès-verbaux du Conseil seront dorénavant bilingues en ce qui a trait à la page couverture, la liste des membres et du personnel du CRTC participant à l'audience et la table des matières.
Toutefois, la publication susmentionnée est un compte rendu textuel des délibérations et, en tant que tel, est transcrite dans l'une ou l'autre des deux langues officielles, compte tenu de la langue utilisée par le participant à l'audience.
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE
THE CANADIAN RADIO‑TELEVISION AND
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
TRANSCRIPTION DES AUDIENCES DEVANT
LE CONSEIL DE LA RADIODIFFUSION
ET DES TÉLÉCOMMUNICATIONS CANADIENNES
SUBJECT:
Review of the
Commercial Radio Policy /
Examen de la
Politique sur la radio commerciale
HELD
AT:
TENUE À:
Conference
Centre
Centre de conférences
Outaouais Room
Salle Outaouais
140
Promenade du Portage
140, Promenade du Portage
Gatineau,
Quebec
Gatineau (Québec)
May 18, 2006
Le 18 mai 2006
Transcripts
In order to meet
the requirements of the Official Languages
Act, transcripts of
proceedings before the Commission will be
bilingual as to
their covers, the listing of the CRTC members
and staff attending
the public hearings, and the Table of
Contents.
However, the
aforementioned publication is the recorded
verbatim transcript
and, as such, is taped and transcribed in
either of the
official languages, depending on the language
spoken by the
participant at the public hearing.
Transcription
Afin de rencontrer
les exigences de la Loi sur les langues
officielles, les
procès‑verbaux pour le Conseil seront
bilingues en ce qui
a trait à la page couverture, la liste des
membres et du
personnel du CRTC participant à l'audience
publique ainsi que
la table des matières.
Toutefois, la
publication susmentionnée est un compte rendu
textuel des
délibérations et, en tant que tel, est enregistrée
et transcrite dans
l'une ou l'autre des deux langues
officielles, compte
tenu de la langue utilisée par le
participant à
l'audience publique.
Canadian Radio‑television and
Telecommunications Commission
Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des
télécommunications canadiennes
Transcript / Transcription
Review of the
Commercial Radio Policy /
Examen de la
Politique sur la radio commerciale
BEFORE /
DEVANT:
Charles Dalfen
Chairperson / Président
Michel Arpin
Commissioner / Conseiller
Rita Cugini
Commissioner / Conseillère
Andrée Noël
Commissioner / Conseillère
Joan
Pennefather
Commissioner / Conseillère
ALSO PRESENT /
AUSSI PRÉSENTS:
Chantal
Boulet
Secretary / Secrétaire
Peter Foster
Hearing Manager /
Gérant de
l'audience
Bernard
Montigny
General Counsel,
Broadcasting /
Avocat
général,
Radiodiffusion
Anne-Marie
Murphy
Legal Counsel /
Conseillère
juridique
Robert Ramsey
Senior Director, Radio
Policy and
Applications /
Directeur
principal,
Politiques et
demandes
relatives à la
radio
HELD AT:
TENUE À:
Conference
Centre
Centre de conférences
Outaouais Room
Salle Outaouais
140 Promenade du
Portage
140, Promenade du Portage
Gatineau,
Quebec
Gatineau (Québec)
May 18, 2006
Le 18 mai 2006
TABLE DES MATIÈRES / TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE /
PARA
PRESENTATION BY /
PRÉSENTATION PAR:
FACTOR
1433 /
8193
Radio Starmaker
Fund
1466 /
8439
ANR Lounge
1504 /
8666
Canadian Satellite
Radio
1515 /
8747
Impératif
français
1532 /
8825
Canadian Conference
of the Arts
1557 /
8937
Evanov Radio Group
Inc.
1584 /
9110
Coalition of Nine
Provincial/Territorial Music 1602
/ 9229
Industry in Process
Association
Michael
Fockler
1623 /
9345
Canadian Music
Centre
1640 /
9474
Fondation Radio
Enfants
1656 /
9591
Wayne V.
Plunkett
1681 /
9741
CPSC
1698 /
9837
Magda de la
Torre
1728 / 10021
Gatineau Quebec / Gatineau (Québec)
‑‑‑ Upon commencing
on Thursday, May 18, 2006
at 0904 / L'audience débute
le jeudi
18 mai 2006 à
0904
8186
THE CHAIRPERSON: Order,
please. À l'ordre, s'il vous
plaît.
8187
Good morning, everyone.
Bonjour, tout le monde.
8188
Madam la Secrétaire.
8189
LA SECRÉTAIRE: Merci,
monsieur le Président.
8190
We will now call the first participant for this morning, which is
FACTOR.
8191
Mr. Jim West and Ms Heather Ostertag will be appearing for
FACTOR.
8192
You will have ten minutes for your presentation. Please go ahead.
PRESENTATION /
PRÉSENTATION
8193
MR. WEST: Thank you, Mr.
Dalfen and Commissioners, for granting FACTOR this opportunity to appear
today.
8194
My name is Jim West and I am the Chair of FACTOR.
8195
Joining me today, beside me, is FACTOR's President, Heather
Ostertag.
8196
FACTOR is a non‑political, non‑aligned organization and it was not our
initial intention to appear at these hearings. However, given the nature of the issues
and the responses and positions put forward, it is apparent that there is
confusion surrounding the important work done by FACTOR.
8197
It is our goal to support this process by ensuring that the facts on
FACTOR are placed on the record.
8198
Throughout these hearings there have been many acknowledgements on the
importance of FACTOR continuing its good work. In hearing of the concerns expressed
around a need for a greater transparency of how the foundation operates and
where its funding is disbursed, I would like to suggest that all interested
parties meet to discuss our common objective of supporting the development of
Canadian artists.
8199
We advocate that we explore the possibility of a common administration
for the various funding programs.
We would also like to see that these discussions include the possibility
of redefining and reconstituting FACTOR to enable it to be the conduit for
supporting the visions of the various boards of directors of these
organizations.
8200
I will now turn the presentation over to Heather.
8201
MS OSTERTAG: Thank you,
Jim.
8202
FACTOR is a successful private/public partnership that has produced some
very significant results.
8203
Currently, FACTOR provides funding to assist with all stages of the
development of the career of an artist, from demos on through to the support of
commercially released recordings.
Support is also provided to assist with the marketing and promotion of
these recordings, both nationally and internationally.
8204
A significant benefit for Canadian artists from this partnership is
FACTOR's ability to blend the public and private funds. Treasury Board rules do not allow for a
carryover of commitments. The
carryover that occurs at FACTOR can only happen because of the blended
private/public funding, which provides the artist the ability to complete
projects, allowing complete freedom within the creative
process.
8205
Some FACTOR results include:
8206
Since April 1999, 43 FACTOR‑supported artists have received 89
certifications and over 221 various domestic awards ranging from Juno Awards to
the Urban Awards to the Country Music Awards.
8207
From April 1, 1999 to March 31, 2006, FACTOR has disbursed final payments
on completed projects totalling $55 million. This funding has been matched by the
industry's own investment of just over $114 million.
8208
While FACTOR requires applications to put up minimally 50 percent of the
budget, the industry has actually absorbed 68 percent of the
costs.
8209
A national network of music industry associations that is supporting the
growth and development of Canadian grassroots artists coast to coast to
coast. Through FACTOR's National
Advisory Board there are two face‑to‑face meetings per year to discuss industry
challenges and issues.
8210
It has also afforded provincial music industry associations the
opportunity to network with each other as well as with other key industry
people. The exchange/access to
information has supported the growth of the industry at the grassroots
level.
8211
Canada has become the number three exporter of music in the world. FACTOR‑supported artists such as
Nickelback, Alanis Morrisette, k.d. lang and Sarah McLachlan, are among
those that have put Canada into such a significant place in the global
market.
8212
All of those artists have been supported by FACTOR.
8213
The Nickelback story, for example:
They made a CD, took it to radio and before radio could play it, they
asked them to re‑mix. The band was
out of money and unknown. FACTOR
loaned them $5,000, and in the words of Chad Kroeger, lead singer of Nickelback,
"the rest is history".
8214
Since inception FACTOR‑supported sound recordings have sold over 30.2
million copies worldwide with a retail value in excess of
$680 million.
8215
FACTOR's future plans:
Following FACTOR securing a five‑year commitment from Canadian Heritage
in 2005, the board of directors had a full review of the foundation
undertaken.
8216
Surveys were sent to over 4,600 potential respondents and approximately
1,000 stakeholders took the time to provide feedback through interviews and
on‑line surveys.
8217
The following groups were included in the surveys: the Department of Canadian Heritage;
broadcasting sponsors; music industry associations; applicants (both successful
and unsuccessful); jurors; the board of directors and staff of
FACTOR.
8218
This review is enabling FACTOR to re‑invent itself and revamp its
programs in very significant ways.
However, with the business changing radically and FACTOR's desire to be
sensitive to the need for change, we will continue to consult with the industry
to ensure the programs remain responsive.
8219
We are also aware of the importance of recognizing the need for change
and that it needs to be effectively implemented.
8220
We are currently developing a new website that will be even more
interactive and will be available for use by the visually
impaired.
8221
Programs are being overhauled and new ways of interacting with the
artists and applicants are being developed. We are targeted to roll out the newly
renovated FACTOR on July 1, 2006.
8222
We will, of course, continue to consult with the industry to ensure the
programs and funding we provide continue to be responsive to the rapidly
changing environment.
8223
FACTOR's challenges are:
8224
(1) the high level of applications not successful in securing
funding;
8225
(2) the limited financial resources currently available to FACTOR making
it impossible to meet full artists' needs;
8226
(3) how to effect change that results in a positive, constructive
difference, not a change for the sake of change or, even worse, change that
results in a negative outcome.
8227
Why a common administration?
8228
With a common administration, there are the economies of scale to be
enjoyed; as well, the benefit of ensuring that the programs provided operate at
a high level of complementing other initiatives while preventing double funding
of the same projects.
8229
It would ensure the funds are spread out in the most equitable
fashion.
8230
Why FACTOR?
8231
FACTOR has a proven track record of 24 years of supporting Canadian
independent artists.
8232
We have a solid working relationship that has had the broadcasting and
music industries working together for what is best for the
artists.
8233
We have a successful track record of managing significant amounts of both
public and private funds.
8234
We have a trained, experienced staff.
8235
FACTOR has participated in a minimum of five federal audits, the most
recent having been concluded in October 2003.
8236
A copy of this report can be found on the website for Canadian
Heritage.
8237
Some highlights of the audit include:
"The
objective of this audit was to provide senior management with assurance on the
soundness of processes and to determine where the organization is most exposed
to risk and to identify which remedial actions are available and
appropriate."
8238
In general, the audit team found that:
"(1) the
management control framework is appropriate to ensure compliance, effectiveness
and financial integrity;
(2)
information used for decision‑making and reporting is timely, relevant and
reliable;
(3) risk
management strategies and practices are suitable to deliver the intended results
and the program design and implementation reflects the objectives of
PCH"
8239
FACTOR's response to submissions.
8240
There have been a number of comments made in submissions to this hearing
that beg our response, including those of the CAB/PriceWaterhouseCooper Report,
Canadian Music Centre, Canadian Association of Ethnic Broadcasters and Canadian
Independent Recording Artists Association.
8241
However, due to the time constraints of this hearing process, we will
only be briefly speaking to the CAB submission and specifically to their
PriceWaterhouseCooper Report.
8242
We would like to thank Glenn O'Farrell and the Canadian Association of
Broadcasters for including the comment in their submission acknowledging that,
quote:
"FACTOR
may have certain reservations regarding the manner in which the data is compiled
and/or presented."
8243
This is correct.
8244
However, due to the limited time available, we are unable to cite all the
errors in this report. In the
meantime, it is our view that the PWC Report does not represent an acceptably
accurate assessment of FACTOR's performance in the execution of its
mandate.
8245
Should the Commission so direct, we are prepared to undertake the
preparation of a full report identifying all the discrepancies in the PWC
document. We would however
appreciate being given several days to prepare this
report.
8246
We direct you to the additional comments on the other submissions
contained in the annex.
8247
Thank you and we welcome any questions you may have for
us.
8248
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you
very much.
8249
Commissioner Arpin.
8250
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank
you, Mr. Chair.
8251
Regarding the comments that you were contemplating for the CAB
PriceWaterhouse Report, as you probably know, we stated at the beginning of this
hearing that we were allowing up to June 12th for interested parties to file
comments in response to the various
submissions.
8252
MS OSTERTAG: I wasn't, but I
will; thank you.
8253
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So you
have up to June 12th.
8254
If you want to make further comments also on other submissions ‑‑ I
just notice that you have comments on other submissions as an appendix, but if
you have attended the hearing or read the transcript and think that other
comments have to be brought to the attention of the Commission, you have up to
that very date.
8255
If we were to ask you for some more detail, you will only have until May
29th to do so. But replies will be
allowed until June 12th.
8256
MS OSTERTAG: We will take
the June 12th date and file; thank you.
8257
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Based on
your oral presentation this morning, you mention you have twice a year meetings
with various parties of the industry, which include provincial music industry
associations.
8258
Are the broadcasters attending these meetings?
8259
MS OSTERTAG: No. They are ‑‑
8260
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So they
are music related only.
8261
MS OSTERTAG: It is music
related.
8262
It is the challenges facing the development of FACTOR's programs and what
have you.
8263
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So the
meeting of the minds between the broadcasters and the music industry is either
at a CRTC hearing or at the Canadian Music Week annual gathering, I
suspect.
8264
MS OSTERTAG: No. We actually have a representative, the
Chair of our National Advisory Board.
Whatever recommendations come out from the meetings are actually minuted,
documented and provided to the board of directors where all the directors meet
for two days. And we have found
that our board of directors, which is a volunteer board, doesn't have the time
to be able to sit for those two days and work through a lot of this
stuff.
8265
Some of it is just them sharing information on how they were successful
in approaching this sponsor or that sponsor for funding.
8266
It is at a very basic working level, not high end
stuff.
8267
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I
see.
8268
So it is almost an introductory course to the music industry, what you
are describing here.
8269
MS OSTERTAG: It's a little
more than an introductory level kind of conversations that are going on because
what they do, one of the main purposes of the board of directors ‑‑ and for
the record, we have five broadcasters sitting on our board and six music
industry representatives.
8270
They are there for the main purpose of having disseminated information
and gathered it up from their communities and the artists that are members of
their organizations on the things they would like to see FACTOR address in terms
of program development, all of which gets distilled, once they have discussed it
as a group.
8271
Sometimes one province or territory can have an idea about something, but
there could be an adverse effect if that change were to be
implemented.
8272
So it is allowing that program development type of discussion to take
place.
8273
Aside from that, they take a bit of time to discuss their other
challenges, not FACTOR‑related.
8274
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: If I
heard you well, you have 11 members on your board.
8275
MS OSTERTAG: That's
correct.
8276
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Five
broadcasters and six coming from the music industry.
8277
MS OSTERTAG: Yes. We also have two observers. We have a representative from the
Canadian Association of Broadcasters, Pierre‑Louis Smith and Jean‑François
Bernier on behalf of Canadian Heritage are at the table
also.
8278
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: But they
are not directors.
8279
MS OSTERTAG: They don't
vote, but they are there.
8280
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: They
don't vote. So they are not part of
the decision‑making process.
8281
MS OSTERTAG:
No.
8282
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Is the
board of directors only making policy decisions or are they making financial
decisions, allowing money to ‑‑
8283
MS OSTERTAG: They make
both.
8284
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: They
make both.
8285
MS OSTERTAG: The board of
directors ‑‑ we have a process by which there is a creative decision made,
and the board of directors of FACTOR never gets involved in making creative
decisions. That is such a
subjective process.
8286
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: That is
left to the juries.
8287
MS OSTERTAG: That's
correct.
8288
And if you are successful in getting through a jury on the sound
recording programs that are juried, the board would give you funding. They are just going to look at the
financial commitment.
8289
But it is the board of directors that makes all the funding decisions on
all of the programs.
8290
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: How are
the members of the board chosen?
8291
MS OSTERTAG: The
broadcasters have founder seats, and with all five seats that the broadcasters
have on our board ‑‑ for example, with Rogers, Rogers will choose who they
want to serve on the board.
8292
We have a six‑year rotation policy and it is really up to them who they
appoint on their behalf.
8293
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So
Rogers always has a seat on the board?
8294
MS OSTERTAG: Yes. You have Rogers, Standard, CHUM ‑‑
I'm sorry, Corus and Global.
8295
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: And
Global. So those five broadcasters
are the only ones who can appoint directors to the FACTOR
Board?
8296
MS OSTERTAG: They actually
have it amongst themselves, because at the time FACTOR was formulated we had a
set of by‑laws which are also going to be revamped in June to expand it
further.
8297
But the broadcasters discuss amongst themselves who they thing should
be ‑‑ talk to each other and talk to each other corporately and they come
up with their own game plan and we just accept who
they recommend.
8298
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Are the
appointees of the broadcasters attending the meetings?
8299
MS OSTERTAG: Yes. They are attending as many as
others.
8300
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So to
some extent you are more successful than Musicaction, because Musicaction's
problem is that the broadcasters don't go to the meeting.
8301
MS OSTERTAG: No, We are fortunate that they show up. You get the odd one where it is
challenging for our board, because it is a minimum of 12 meetings a year
and then you have your approvals meetings and stuff. So it can get a bit
challenging.
8302
Actually, recently with the change of a couple of the directors on the
board, it is really exciting with the new blood that has come in, and I know
that their commitment and passion to supporting music I consider and say that I
know because of them and their specific knowledge and expertise they brought to
the table it has affected positively some artists and the funding they have
gotten.
8303
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: How are
the music members picked up?
8304
MS OSTERTAG: The music
industry, we have six seats there.
Four of them have criteria attached to them. Two are appointed by CIRPA, the Canadian
Independent Record Production Association; one is appointed by the CMPA. In the same way that the broadcasters
decide CIRPA decides from its board how that works, CMPA from
theirs.
8305
We also, with the merger of FACTOR and the Canadian Talent Library back
in 1985 for FACTOR to acquire the assets of the Canadian Talent Library, whose
assets were owned by the American Federation of Musicians, they actually allowed
the assets to be transferred on the condition that there was a member of the
AFofM that was a fully paid dues member in good standing. So one of them has to be
that.
8306
The other two are voted on by the board at large. We try to take into
consideration ‑‑ in fact, we want an artist on the board, we want regional
representation and we try to spread it as far as we can to encompass as many
sectors of the industry as possible with the seats we have
available.
8307
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I may
have misunderstood you, but I'm now up to eight members of the music
industry. You said there were four
coming from CIRPA, one from CMPA ‑‑
8308
MS OSTERTAG: No, two from
CIRPA.
8309
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Two from
CIRPA, okay. We are back to
six.
8310
MS OSTERTAG: Sorry. Yes.
8311
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I
apologize.
8312
Heritage Canada just implemented the MEC
program.
8313
MS OSTERTAG: That's
correct.
8314
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: What
kind of impact will that have on FACTOR?
8315
MS OSTERTAG: We had actually
hoped in some respect, because we are so challenged financially ‑‑ I know
one of the criticisms that FACTOR gets is our low approval rate, but it is
directly attributed to the fact that we have been successful in getting the word
out there about the program.
8316
The MEC program, when it was talked about in theory, thought it was going
to free up funds at FACTOR, but in actual fact there are only six companies in
English Canada that were dealing with FACTOR, so it is still not enough of a
relief. There is still more money
needed for us to be able to respond to the other artists.
8317
I think there is a lot of confusion surrounding the program right now,
and once people understand it I think things will settle
down.
8318
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I'm
giving you an opportunity to explain what that program is, because we don't
have, at least for the record, enough information about
it.
8319
MS OSTERTAG: All
right.
8320
The MEC program ‑‑ and I'm not working for the
department.
8321
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: No,
no.
8322
MS OSTERTAG: But from my
understanding, is the ‑‑
8323
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: But they
are not appearing here.
8324
MS OSTERTAG:
Yes.
8325
My understanding is that it is there to help build the infrastructure of
the larger Canadian‑owned independent record labels and they are being given
envelopes of money with which they can do what they need to do to operate their
businesses successfully.
8326
My understanding is there is also going to be an assessment process and a
criteria to ensure that they can stay in the program. No company can get more than
$650,000.
8327
I know there was talk that it would be a minimum of $200,000, but in
rolling the program out I know there is several that are getting significantly
less than that money.
8328
So as a program, it is yet another one that is being launched under
financed and, like everything in the music industry, we just aren't getting
access to enough funds to effectively meet the needs.
8329
Because the concept of a MEC program ‑‑ from my understanding, and
this goes back a number of years ‑‑ was pitched by the Canadian Music
Industry to Heritage, but it was requesting $100 million. When the program finally was announced
they said $10 million, and then all of a sudden it became $8.5 million
because $1 million was being set aside for publishers and another half a
million for administrative costs in the
department.
8330
So all of a sudden it is weaning down and it can, in actual fact, be
quite scary for those companies that are in there, because as more companies
rise up and are able to go into that program the pie is going to get even
smaller?
8331
So when it started out with a tenth of what was needed, I think that
there is a lot of expectation it is going to free up a lot of money, but
realistically it is not enough of a change.
8332
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: The
Heritage Department commitment towards the MEC goes up to the year
2010.
8333
MS OSTERTAG:
Yes.
8334
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I think
it is the fiscal year ending on March 31, 2010.
8335
That is correct?
8336
MS OSTERTAG: That's
correct.
8337
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: The
funding to FACTOR, has it been already set up to the same
date?
8338
MS OSTERTAG:
Yes.
8339
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Or is it
a yearly commitment?
8340
MS OSTERTAG: No. We were suffering through that and it
has caused a lot of challenges for us, but at the present time we have an
agreement, a fully executed document.
8341
However, it has the proviso, as I think it is with all government
documents, that it can be cancelled at any time for any reason with no
repercussions on our part.
8342
So how good is the ‑‑
8343
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Your
contract with the Department of Heritage, does it stipulate that you will need
to have broadcasters' commitment to it, or direct funding from the
broadcasters?
8344
MS OSTERTAG: We are
committing that we have that. Not
that we will get it or maintain, but that we have to have it,
yes.
8345
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So at
the time of signing the agreement obviously the broadcasters
were ‑‑
8346
MS OSTERTAG: We were
completely unaware that there was the possibility of other things in the
works.
8347
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So the
submission that the CAB makes of a Super Starmaker Fund ‑‑ obviously there
have been a variety of views expressed throughout this hearing and when you read
the filing of the CAB you come to the conclusion that there will be no more
money going to FACTOR. We have
commitments from the CAB and the major players know that the Starmaker will
provide the funding to FACTOR rather than the money coming directly from the
broadcaster.
8348
If that was the scenario, the money was channelled through Starmaker to
FACTOR, will that impair your ability to getting the money from
Heritage?
8349
MS OSTERTAG: I can't speak
to that. I just know that Canadian
Heritage has gone on record as saying that in the event that the broadcaster
money is no longer being provided to FACTOR they are rethinking what they are
doing with FACTOR.
8350
I have actually asked them ‑‑ it's kind of a scary place to be when
you hear something like that ‑‑ here are a lot of artists out there with a
huge expectation what we do ‑‑ and I said, "Is this a poker game?" and they
said, "We don't play games." So I
think it is a very real threat.
8351
The idea that FACTOR would, after 24 years of service, be in the
position ‑‑ and it's unknown because it is not clear at this point in time,
how the CAB would actually funnel this money. How do you develop programs and plan
things if you are at the mercy yet again ‑‑ you need some
stability.
8352
We have just come through a very unstable time with the department in
having one‑year contracts and the impact to the industry is very clear, it has
us behind in program development.
Because if you are not sure you are going to be around in 12 months
you go, "Well, what is the point in doing it all?" It's difficult to do it when you don't
know what your money is going to be.
8353
If FACTOR is going to continue to be effective it needs to be
in control of its own destiny.
8354
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I know
that Musicaction is not appearing at this hearing, it hasn't filed anything, but
to your knowledge is Musicaction in the same situation?
8355
MS OSTERTAG: I don't believe
so, because at Musicaction they have been recognized as the agency and are
currently operating with two respective Boards of Directors with two different
mandates. They are managing the
funds for both, so they know what is going on.
8356
COMMISSIONER ARPIN:
Yes.
8357
MS OSTERTAG: It is the
complete opposite for us.
8358
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: But my
question relies more on the commitment made by Heritage to
Musicaction.
8359
Or is there a commitment by Heritage, to your knowledge? If you don't know, you don't
know.
8360
MS OSTERTAG: It would be the
same as ours.
8361
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I guess
it will be the same as yours.
8362
MS OSTERTAG:
Yes.
8363
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: All
right.
8364
When we look at your annual report one of the complaints that we are
hearing is that you are only reporting top‑of‑the‑line information. You don't give that many breakdowns or
information on who get's what and how much or whatever.
8365
Is there a reason?
8366
MS OSTERTAG: There was a
reason, but also it is the first time ‑‑ we have actually very recently
heard about the complaint so we are actually disclosing all of those
numbers.
8367
One of the reasons we didn't is because there is an assumption when
people attach a number to a project that that is what the project costs, when in
actual fact our contribution to it may only be 10 or 12 percent of the cost and
it can result in there being a negative thing, "Oh, well they made that record
for so little it can't be very good", and it could have hurt
people.
8368
In our desire to try to not let any of the information be prejudicial to
a project, to allow it to stand in the marketplace on its own, we perhaps come
up against some criticism, but it is our intention that our annual report that
will be released at the end of June for the fiscal ending March 31st will
include those numbers.
8369
They have been available. We
were never asked for them before and understand the desire, so we are prepared
to give it.
8370
COMMISSIONER ARPIN:
Mr. Chairman, I think those were my questions.
8371
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
8372
Commissioner Cugini...?
8373
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Good
morning.
8374
MS OSTERTAG: Good
morning.
8375
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Just
relating back to your Nickelback example that you mentioned in your oral
presentation this morning, I'm assuming at that time that Nickelback received
the $5,000 from FACTOR you considered them to be an emerging artist, at that
point?
8376
MS OSTERTAG: An
unknown.
8377
COMMISSIONER CUGINI:
Right.
8378
MS OSTERTAG: They are not
even emerging.
8379
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: All
right.
8380
Do you, as FACTOR, have a definition of "emerging
artist"?
8381
MS OSTERTAG: You know, it's
an excellent question and I have heard the question has been asked in this forum
a number of times.
8382
It would take probably greater minds than mine to actually come up with a
definitive because you can say it is the number of releases they have had, it
could be airplay potential that is achieved, it could be based on number of
years in the business, it could be that they are profitable. There are many, many
things.
8383
But what I can do is, I can give you a real example of an artist that I
think is an emerging artist to try to illustrate a bit the complexity of trying
to come up with that definitive definition.
8384
I was having lunch this week with a young country artist by the name of
Erin Pritchard. He is out of
British Columbia. He has been in
the business quite a number of years, 10, 12 years. A number of years ago he competed in a
FACTOR and Corus jointly funded initiative called Project Discovery. He was actually the winner of the
competition.
8385
He has gone on, he released his first album, he got some success at radio
airplay. He has released his second
album and his first single from that album went No. 3 on the Canadian
charts. He is just releasing his
second one.
8386
He went into a Tim Hortons to buy a coffee and there was a fan there
working behind the counter, "Oh my God, it's Erin Pritchard", you know, and all
excited and everything. And he is
kind of cute, so it didn't hurt.
8387
Anyway, he was standing there and he was absolutely embarrassed, because
he was paying for the coffee with his debit card and he didn't know if he had
enough money and the card wouldn't let him pay the $1.40 for his
coffee.
8388
So it's like ‑‑ it's all over the map in trying to really nail it
down because to me he is emerging still because he is not able to financially
sustain himself and every penny he has is being reinvested back into his
career. There isn't anything left
over to be able to accumulate anything.
8389
All of it and then some, because he is still having to knock on our door
to get the support. So in my mind
he is still emerging, yet at radio I'm sure they would say, "No, he is
established now because he has had three hits on radio."
8390
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: So in
applying for FACTOR funding there isn't a box where someone would check
"emerging" and that would put them into one category or another to receive
funding?
8391
MS OSTERTAG: You do that
through the programs we have where you have those artists who are applying to,
say for example, our Independent Recording Loan Program. That is a program for artists who have
absolutely no distribution and they are at the very, very beginning, in many
cases making their first CD.
8392
So we will give them up to $20,000 to get started and we give them
matching production funds. They are
emerging.
8393
But also you have them where some of them have distribution and they are
still emerging.
8394
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: So
Nickelback doesn't qualify any more for FACTOR funding?
8395
MS OSTERTAG: No, they are
not emerging any more.
No.
8396
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Or for
any FACTOR funding?
8397
MS OSTERTAG: I
honestly ‑‑
8398
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Do they
still qualify or would they be eligible?
8399
MS OSTERTAG: I doubt that
they would, because the only program probably left that they would be eligible
for would be touring, and on a tour you only actually receive funding from
FACTOR if you are losing money. If
they are losing money on a tour, then they so need a new team working for
them.
8400
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Thank
you.
8401
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
8402
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
8403
Commissioner Pennefather.
8404
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
8405
Good morning.
8406
MS OSTERTAG: Good
morning.
8407
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Mr. West, in your remarks you said:
"We
advocate ‑‑ we explore the possibility of a common administration for the
various funding programs."
(As read)
8408
Could you expand for us, please?
8409
MR WEST: You know, FACTOR
has worked extremely well for 24 years and there has been a lot of talk
lately about transparency of the programs and we feel we are extremely
transparent in that any information requested from us is certainly available to
anybody at any time.
8410
You know, when you look at people applying for money right now, the way
it is applied for, it could be an organization or a label or it could be the
artist directly, if you are applying to FACTOR and you receive your funding then
you go on to the next level of funding, which is
Starmaker.
8411
They are housed in two complete different places, two complete different
administrations. The dialogue has
to be very close between the organizations in order to make sure there are no
what people perceive to be as double dipping, you know, marketing funds that are
expended. You have to be very
careful.
8412
FACTOR offers marketing money as well and some of that marketing money to
get to the next level is offered by Starmaker. we want to make sure that money is not
received twice, by mistake or whatever process, but it would really, really help
the process if it was under one common administration.
8413
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So
similar to the Musicaction, La Fond Radiostar?
8414
MR WEST: That is a perfect
scenario, and that is what we would have liked to have
happened.
8415
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
That's what you have in mind discussing over the next
while?
8416
MR WEST: Absolutely, with
all the stakeholders. Sit down at a
table and say, "Let's formulate something here and make it
work."
8417
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Thank you.
8418
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
8419
Commissioner Arpin...?
8420
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Mr.
West, you just referred to one of the goals of having a common administration
for the two funds is to make sure that there is no overlap or no double
dipping.
8421
Has there been any double dipping in the recent past? Because Starmaker has only existed for
three or four years now.
8422
MR WEST: I will have to
defer to Heather for that answer.
8423
MS OSTERTAG: I wouldn't say
that it has happened intentionally, but yes, it does happen. Currently there is a representative from
Starmaker who shares information with one of my staff to
compare things, but it is doubling up on the paperwork and
everything.
8424
Something I would like to add to Jim's comment, there is an ease for the
industry if they know where to go and it is all laid out in one place, the
one‑stop shopping. It is a very
complicated thing in understanding where it is that you should be going and for
what and to be able to actually have it that you could say, "Okay, with the
FACTOR funding it goes to here" and then "With the Starmaker money it goes to
here" and then this would go to here.
8425
There is a huge logic to it and I think that the success that is
happening at Musicaction really speaks to why we should be doing that and we
should be taking a page from their book.
8426
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank
you.
8427
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you
very much. Those are our
questions.
8428
MS OSTERTAG: I had a
report. I understand yesterday you
were asking for the amounts of money radio has given to FACTOR. You were asking one of the
broadcasters.
8429
I have had the report emailed to me and I printed out a copy if you want
it. It records the funding since
our inception ‑‑
8430
THE CHAIRPERSON:
Okay.
8431
MS OSTERTAG: ‑‑ on what each broadcaster ‑‑ just to assist
you.
8432
THE CHAIRPERSON: If you hand
it to Madam Secretary ‑‑
8433
MS OSTERTAG:
Okay.
8434
THE CHAIRPERSON: ‑‑ we will have it on the record. Thank you.
8435
Madam Secretary, would you call the next item,
please.
8436
THE SECRETARY: Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
8437
I would now invite Radio Starmaker Fund, Mr. Chuck McCoy, to come forward
for his presentation.
‑‑‑ Pause /
Pause
8438
THE CHAIRPERSON: Whenever
you are ready, Mr. McCoy.
PRESENTATION /
PRÉSENTATION
8439
MR. McCOY: Good morning,
Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. I had the pleasure of being up before
you yesterday in my role as a programming executive for Rogers but today I am
here as the Chairman of the Radio Starmaker Fund.
8440
I would like to start by thanking the Commission for the opportunity to
appear and take part in this proceeding.
8441
Before I begin, I would like to introduce the members of our panel and we
are fortunate to have both of our independent Board members with us
today.
8442
To my far right is Andy McLean and he is the founder and the Managing
Director of the North by Northeast Festival in Toronto which opens next
week ‑‑ a little plug‑in there for Andy ‑‑ one of Canada's most
important events for discovering new music. Andy is also an artist manager and an
accomplished musician.
8443
Beside him, to my immediate right, is musician/writer/producer Jian
Ghomeshi. Many of you may know Jian
from his musical career as a lead singer and songwriter in the platinum‑selling
Canadian band Moxy Fruvous and more recently you probably know him from his work
as a national host on CBC Television Newsworld and CBC Radio
One.
8444
To my far left is Rachel Oldfield who has been the Finance and
Administration Manager of the Starmaker Fund from its inception. She is the keeper of all the statistics
and financial information.
8445
And next to me is our current Executive Director Mr. Chip Sutherland who,
in addition to fulfilling the role of Executive Director is also the original
architect of the Starmaker Fund. In
May of 2001, Chip was hired by the first Board of Directors to design the fund
and he has been involved in its evolution and operations ever since that
time. He is a well‑known
entertainment lawyer who has been involved in the music business in many
different capacities for the past 15 years.
8446
Now, you have our submission, our written submission, and I thought we
would simply highlight a few points.
I will do some and then I will ask Jian and Chip to say a few
words.
8447
As Chair of the fund for almost four years now, I think I am first and
foremost the most impressed with the mandate of the fund and how well it has
worked in practice. In some ways, I
think the Radio Starmaker Fund established the concept of truly artist‑centred
funding.
8448
The fund's primary objective is to support artists with established track
records regardless of their industry structure or
affiliation.
8449
The secondary objective is to recognize the role of the independent
record industry and how we can help preserve all forms of independent recording
in Canada.
8450
When we look at the proposed funding, the first question is always how
will this benefit the artist and the second question is are there any
adjustments or accommodations that need to be made to ensure that this policy is
fair to the independent sector.
This is how we define the artist‑centred approach.
8451
Now, the interesting part of this for me is that these are all just ideas
until they are actually put into practice and in practice these broad guidelines
have proven to hold true to achieving our goals.
8452
Here, I would like to point out some of the statistics in relation to the
fund.
8453
Major labels receive 20 per cent of our funding; CIRPA‑independent
companies receive 35 per cent; non‑CIRPA‑independent companies receive 35 per
cent; and quasi‑indies ‑‑ those would be artists who own their own records
but license them to majors ‑‑ they receive approximately 5 per
cent.
8454
Part of this is explained by the fact that we have built in accommodation
for the indies that allow them to access 2:1 funding for dollars invested,
whereas major labels are only able to access 1:1
funding.
8455
As for the artists, as an example, I noticed this week that Black Crows
were here in Ottawa and they were supported by Matt Mays as an opening act. We are happy and proud to say that we
provided the funding for Matt Mays to make that possible.
8456
As a broadcaster, it was also particularly important to me to see that
the fund is able to foster the careers of artists that we can play on the
radio. This represents the true
nature of the partnership between music and radio.
8457
To do that, we knew we needed to spread the funding across a broad
spectrum of artists and that had to include many genres. The result is 83 per cent of
Starmaker‑funded artists received significant airplay in this
country.
8458
Finally, I would like to say a word about our administration. I don't think I truly appreciated the
full value of our website. It is
truly an amazing administrative tool and it has been invaluable to us in
managing the fund and allowing us to easily adapt program and criteria for the
website.
8459
Now at this point, I would like to ask Jian Ghomeshi to give you some of
his thoughts from an independent perspective.
8460
MR. GHOMESHI: Thanks,
Chuck. And thank you, if you will
forgive me, I will make my comments somewhat informally or
anecdotally.
8461
I have been on the Board for two years and I have been directly involved
in the music business for about 15 years.
I am quite proud to be part of the Radio Starmaker Fund
experience.
8462
I think these are great days for Canadian music, for Canadian
artists. I have said that a few
times as a broadcaster. I really
think, and the results are there, we are doing disproportionately great work,
not just domestically but internationally ‑‑ Canadian artists are ‑‑
and I am so proud of that and I think Radio Starmaker has been a big part of
that in the last two, three, four years especially,
obviously.
8463
The bottom line for me is that Radio Starmaker Fund works. It is lean, it is supportive, it is
effective, it is not bogged down in administration. It is artist‑centric, and really the
artists that we look at and support and fund are quite a diverse lot, you know,
both in terms of the genres and whether they are signed to major labels or
independent labels or major indies, et cetera.
8464
I don't think it is comprehensive.
I think that there are artists out there that don't meet the criteria to
apply for this fund. But in terms
of the mandate of this fund and the artists who are at a level to be taken to
the next level and become stars, whether it is on radio, sales, et cetera, I
think this fund has done its job and done its job very, very
effectively.
8465
I will just say, as an artist, after spending many years in a band and
selling half a million records and touring and doing that, to me, it comes down
to ‑‑ and being a producer and manager ‑‑ it comes down to a couple of
nutshell elements of what it takes to get somewhere as an artist in this country
and to carry music abroad.
8466
On the one hand, you have to create the content to make a record, et
cetera. On the other hand, you have
to get it out there.
8467
In terms of creating the content, the world has changed and we know
that. You can now make a
world‑class quality record out of your basement because of new technology that
you wouldn't have been able to in the past.
8468
In terms of getting it out there, we still ‑‑ it still takes
resources, it still takes support, it still takes funding, marketing, promotion
and touring, and that is where Starmaker has come in.
8469
Chuck mentioned matinees.
8470
We could look at an artist like Joel Plaskett on the east coast who is
touring with Ottawa's Kathleen Edwards right now in the States with Starmaker
support.
8471
We could look at a band like Metric who is an underground critically
acclaimed band from Toronto that, with the support of Starmaker, has gone on to
open for the Rolling Stones at Madison Square Garden and do effective
things.
8472
So in a nutshell, I think from an artist perspective, I am proud to see
what this fund is doing in carrying artists at a certain level to the next
level.
8473
MR. McCOY: Thank you,
Jian.
8474
Andy would be, I know, happy to answer any questions you might
have.
8475
Before we get to those questions though, I am going to ask Chip
Sutherland to say a few words and just clarify a few points for
us.
8476
MR. SUTHERLAND: Thank you,
Chuck.
8477
I have been listening this week and I thought it would be helpful, since
I am sort of the mechanic of the fund, to just address a couple of issues to
clarify. I have got five of
them.
8478
The first one is the commercial fund. Everyone has been throwing the phrase
around "commercial fund" but what does that
mean?
8479
There is sort of a presumption that it means big established pop rock
artists like Avril Lavigne and Nickelback.
8480
But "commercial" for our purposes means "where the artist intersects with
people paying for their music." So
we have people like Jane Bunnett, Alpha Yaya Diallo, Montreal Jubilation Gospel
Choir, Daniel Taylor and Taima, to just name a few.
8481
Our written submission includes in Appendix 1 a breakdown of all of our
funding to date by genre. You will
see that pop rock artists make up only 50 per cent of our funding. The other 50 per cent are niche genres
in some of these lower levels.
8482
Also, our sales levels for being approved for the fund. If you are a jazz artist, you only have
to sell 2,500 records to get onto our fund. If you are an independent artist in pop
rock, it is 10,000. If you are a
major label artist, it is 15,000.
8483
So we don't have one threshold.
We adjust the thresholds for the genres.
8484
The amount of funding. There
definitely was confusing, I think, about this and for good reason. It is very complicated. I see Lynn Buffoni sitting here today
and if it wasn't for her, I would still be trying to figure out these
numbers.
8485
I have provided a chart of the CAB contributions to date. We have turned that into a three‑year
rolling capital funding model and that is how we rationalize our funding because
we only have one source of funding.
8486
You can see on this chart if you turn to it ‑‑ it is a lovely hot
pink graph ‑‑ it goes from 1999 to 2010 and you can see that there is a
very precipitous drop‑off at the end and this is because of how the transactions
are paid. So we will ‑‑
obviously, in the next two or three years our funding drops right off. I can talk about that more in question
and answer if you would like.
8487
Artist‑centring. Chuck gave
you some examples of artist‑centring.
I just want to clarify this doesn't mean artist payment. It doesn't always mean the payment goes
into their bank account. Sometimes
the labels who are driving marketing, they are the best people to administer
that money.
8488
But it does give us the flexibility. For example, Jimmy Rankin has his own
record label song, Dog Music. We
pay him directly. It is irrelevant
to us. We are based on sales
criteria for the artist. So it
doesn't matter how their industry is
structured.
8489
It also allows us to pay artists direct touring subsidies. In many international countries, the
artists don't have a record label and therefore by paying artists directly we
are able to infuse that, as Jian was addressing.
8490
Emerging artists. I know
this is a big issue. There are lots
of questions and, of course, we don't have any position regarding the CanCon
issues there. But I would like to
point out that 52 per cent of the artists that we fund, we are funding on their
first or second record.
8491
The concept of Starmaker was to grab artists as they are starting to take
off and provide incremental investment right at that point where they need it to
shoot off into the next level and that is what we are trying to
do.
8492
The control of the fund.
Just a couple of references.
Honestly, I think because the name is Radio Starmaker Fund, I think
people think it is radio's fund.
But there are only four out of 10 radio Board members on our
Board.
8493
We have by‑laws that we spent quite a bit of time revising the first year
of the fund, that were unanimously adopted by the Board, that have very detailed
criteria about how decisions are made.
8494
So just to be clear, we are very serious about governance and how the
Board operates with a strict set of by‑laws and radio has four out of 10 seats
on the Board.
8495
So those are my comments.
8496
MR. McCOY: That really
completes our oral presentation and we are here to answer any questions that you
might have.
8497
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
8498
Commissioner Pennefather.
8499
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
8500
Good morning, everyone, and thank you for the presentation. It is very helpful, indeed, filling in
some of the blanks but I have got a few more.
8501
Let us start with the governance question first, and kicking off from Mr.
Sutherland's comments about the composition of the Board, how is the Board
chosen?
8502
MR. McCOY: Well, there
are ‑‑ each body ‑‑ for instance, the four broadcasters ‑‑ the
CAB appoints the representatives they want to have on that Board and it is done
via the four major broadcasters: Rogers, CHUM, Corus and Standard. They make the decision as to who is
going to represent them.
8503
The same is the case for CIRPA.
Their board appoints members to be part of our Board, as does CRIA. And the two independent members are
selected by the Board itself.
8504
I am not sure ‑‑ Chip, have you anything to add to
that?
8505
MR. SUTHERLAND: No, thank
you.
8506
MR. McCOY:
Okay.
8507
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Should the CAB proposal, which, simply put, would redirect all funding
through the Starmaker Fund, would the composition of the Board or its selection
process change?
8508
MR. McCOY: Thank you, Madam
Commissioner. I don't like to duck
a question but I think that Radio Starmaker Fund was formed five years ago on
the basis of some governing principles and guidelines from the Commission and
some money from the broadcasters and we are prepared to respond in the same way
should those change, either the governing principles or the amount of
money.
8509
I don't think that I am in a position or my Board members here are in a
position to discuss what we might or might not be able to do, certainly not
without discussing it with our own Board.
8510
But I guess to say we have been given some principles and some money
before and we made it work and we would do the same with whatever decision you
make.
8511
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
One of the principles is the breakdown with major labels, indie
funds. That was part of the, going
in, principles and premises and I just wanted to clarify.
8512
On page 3 of the presentation this morning, the percentages add up to 95
per cent, first point; and second point, the annual report that I have in front
of me here of 2004‑2005 has a significant difference in the percentages to each
of the groups. So perhaps you could
just explain that to us.
8513
MR. McCOY: Yes, and if you
are getting into the mechanics and numbers, I am going to ask our Executive
Director Chip Sullivan to follow up on that one.
8514
MR. SULLIVAN: Thank
you.
8515
The other 5 per cent is music associations. We do sponsor the East Coast Music
Association and the WCMAs. We give
them travel grants for artists to get to their conferences. We do the same thing with the
Junos. It is one of our ways to
trying to provide some regional outreach.
8516
When the Junos started travelling, one of the problems they have is there
are many artists that are independent being nominated for Junos and they live in
Edmonton and they are a classical violinist and they don't have a label paying
for them to go to the Junos in Halifax.
So we provide grants for Juno nominees. So that is the other 5 per
cent.
8517
As for the difference in the financial ‑‑
Rachel.
8518
MS OLDFIELD: The difference
between the annual report and the written submission in March to the CRTC is the
annual reports track the funding by artist. If you are a major label artist, the
money was 100 per cent major label.
8519
In our submission in March, the money was tracked by company, which is a
more detailed breakdown where if that major label artist was to receive touring
money, the touring money was paid directly to the artist company and the label
initiatives would have been paid to the major label.
8520
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So
today when you say CIRPA‑independent companies receive 35 per cent, and I am
looking at the annual report, it says indie labels 69.9, it is not the
same?
8521
MS OLDFIELD: Yes, it is not
broken down by ‑‑ it is just simply indie artists as opposed to indie
companies and the breakdown of the companies.
8522
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Okay.
8523
MR. SUTHERLAND: And if I can
just say, Madam Commissioner, why would we break it down that way, and the point
is that there are all kinds of levels of the independent music industry and we
are just trying to reflect that there are different aspects to that
infrastructure and we are aware of it, that's all.
8524
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Okay, that is helpful. I
guess perhaps if there is follow‑up, you might want to give us a little bit more
of that because I think that ‑‑ as I said, it is one of the principles
going in and as we look at the future it is important to understand, not
necessarily drill down to the point where we are right in there ‑‑ we
shouldn't be ‑‑ but just to get a better sense of it.
8525
You heard Vice‑Chair Arpin ask FACTOR about the MEC. Could you also give us your perspective
on, for example, the difference between the Starmaker Fund and the Heritage MEC
program and how you understand that program to be
functioning?
8526
MR. SUTHERLAND: Well again,
we don't. They are just rolling it
out. We have only
had preliminary discussions in the fall when Heritage was kind enough to
inform us what they were planning so that we could start predicting it as
we rolled out our programs.
8527
What we understand to date is that it is business plan funding for the
bigger independent companies that provides them with significant funding on a
business plan model as a per‑project‑based model.
8528
Since the program is brand new, we haven't determined yet ‑‑ our
board hasn't yet decided how will we manage funding MEC companies. That is something the Board has yet to
look at because we haven't had them apply yet as MEC
companies.
8529
But the basic premise, as we understand it, is Heritage is putting
additional money into the music industry.
They are putting money targeted specifically at independent
infrastructure, the bigger independents, based on their performance I believe is
how they are doing it. So it is
basically additional funding in the ‑‑ I believe you have heard the word
"ecosystem" a few times this week, so there is more fish food in the fish tank I
would say.
8530
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: It
usually brings more fish, too.
8531
MR. SUTHERLAND: Well,
hopefully some more varied colourful fish.
8532
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
The demand is always there.
8533
But so I understand, then, a company accessing money through the MEC
program could also access money through Starmaker for marketing and
promotion?
8534
MR. SUTHERLAND: We haven't
discussed that at the board level because we didn't
know ‑‑
8535
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Potentially?
8536
MR. SUTHERLAND: Potentially,
absolutely. We have made no
decisions on that.
8537
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Then again concerning the chart that you have given us I did have a
questions on the financials. You
have also laid that out in your written intervention.
8538
In the written intervention you also make the point that you will have
stable funding in the next three years.
8539
I was reading from that, that next three years is the CAB proposal
three‑year transition period.
8540
Did I read that correctly?
8541
MR. SUTHERLAND: You are very
close. Three years starts for us
2006. So it is actually the first
two years of the CAB. So we have
stable funding right now because of our capital funding
model.
8542
If you look at this little ski hill, what the board did in 2005 is we
rationalized the funding and spread it out on a balance basis so that we
wouldn't end up with programs that we couldn't fund over the next three
years. So
'06‑'07.
8543
Our fiscal is September to September like the broadcast year, so '06‑'07,
'07‑'08, '08‑'09 are the three stable years.
8544
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
The $3 million approximately is the demand number that we saw in the
CAB proposal based on historic demand on the Starmaker Fund, and that would be
secured and guaranteed?
8545
MR. SUTHERLAND: Yes. What we have in our budget, the capital
fund model is $3.2 million a year.
It is $800,000 per quarter for our grant program; it's $300,000 a year in
the association funding that I referred to earlier. We are running at roughly $450,000 in
administration. So about
$4 million is the real ‑‑ that is what our capital fund model allows
for right now.
8546
The only thing I would add to the CAB model is that our international
touring program is very popular and it is broad. It has only been in place for
18 months and in terms of an arc of funding I suspect the demand will go up
for that.
8547
So there is likely ‑‑ if I was truly giving a picture of the true
demand today, it is probably more in the $4.5 million
range.
8548
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So
am I looking at demand here on this, or contribution?
8549
MR. SUTHERLAND: No, this is
the painful chart of taking the transactions from the MLO approvals that you
have. We went to the CAB. The very first thing I did was say
to them, "How much money are we going to have and how do we get it and how
do I know?" We agreed with the
broadcaster ‑‑ they were very cooperative ‑‑ to say we will stagger
our payments in equal instalments over seven years and guarantee you those
instalments, and they have lived up to that
promise.
8550
So this is if you took all the multiple licence transactions, divided
them up by the time of when they occurred and how the money is collected over a
7‑year period, as you would all know from being involved in it ‑‑ there was
a big spike in these transactions, that's why you see the spike in the funding,
and then it trails off now that the transactions have trailed
off.
8551
So this is literally ‑‑ this is drawn right out of our capital
fund model. This is how we
budget ourselves. These are the
numbers we expect to receive.
8552
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Receive, all right.
8553
MR. SUTHERLAND: That's
right.
8554
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
All right. That's
helpful.
8555
Which connects a little more to the annual report in terms of the
contributions line and then the expenses line.
8556
MR. SUTHERLAND: If I could
just one issue on the annual report, we are very strict about GAAP accounting
rules on fund accounting and it is a little bit different.
8557
The CAB collects for us because it is an efficient thing to do, they are
already in touch with all the transactions and tracking it. When we receive the money we have to
report it.
8558
So I think somebody suggested in one of our years there was
$5 million, but that is just a cashflow issue. It is really irrelevant. We don't model on cash or we would run
out of money and would not be able to fund programs. We model on this contributions chart and
then we just manage our cashflow appropriately from there.
8559
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
The drop off, again to be clear, this is based on tangible benefits
contribution only?
8560
MR. SUTHERLAND: The lexicon,
I call it MLO money because I just made that up, but it's the multiple licence
ownership transaction.
8561
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: We
mean the same thing.
8562
MR. SUTHERLAND: If that's
tangible benefits, then that's what it is.
8563
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
All right.
8564
Technically CTD contributions can also come via other contributions, as
in the 3 percent in the CAB plan.
8565
Is that a quantifiable number and is that include in this amount or is
this just the tangible benefits?
8566
MR. SUTHERLAND: This is just
tangible benefits.
8567
We do receive from time to time, not very often, a few small CTD
amounts. There are some new license
commitments we have received recently.
8568
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Yes.
8569
MR. SUTHERLAND: Newcap has
been very supportive of us. So
there will be a few of those, but they are so new that they haven't hit this
model yet.
8570
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
The reason I'm asking I guess is obvious: Would that waylay, would that change the
drop? If this is related just to
tangible benefits, if there were other contributions through other doors would
that change the drop off?
8571
In other words, do you have another plan, another backup plan to
take care of this drop off?
8572
MR. SUTHERLAND: We have no
backup plan. The Starmaker funds,
as Chuck mentioned, the mandate was:
There are going to be these multiple license transactions. We think this would be a good use of
this money to put it into a star system so please build it. We have known from the beginning that it
had this arc and we have built it that way, stabilized in the last three
years.
8573
One of the things about our capital fund model ‑‑ and it is one
of the advantages of not being in a government model where you have to
answer every March 31st for the money I suppose ‑‑ is we can model it like
a business over three years and provide ‑‑
8574
To answer your question, if somebody showed up tomorrow and said,
"Here is $2 million", we don't just spend it that month, we build it into
our three‑year ‑‑ it's a three‑year rolling capital fund
model.
8575
Because one of the problems with building your programs is, you can
either build 15 programs and then not be able to fund any of them because
you have too much demand for too many programs.
8576
One of the real challenges when we first started with this was to say,
"Well, what can we afford to do, because we have a finite amount of money and it
is for a specific purpose."
8577
For instance, we didn't do international touring at first because we
didn't feel we had enough money for it, and then once the transactions increased
we said, "Well, now we do have enough budget" so we added international
touring.
8578
I hope, to answer you question, there is no plan. As money comes in we will adjust
the capital funding model, and it comes in generally in these spaced
out increments so we just adjust as we go along.
8579
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
One of the comments that I read in one submission ‑‑ and you
have mentioned it yourself ‑‑ is that Starmaker Fund
is funding ‑‑ I think you used ‑‑ no that's the airplay,
88 percent, or a similar amount, of response to the
demand.
8580
MR. SUTHERLAND:
Yes.
8581
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Am
I more or less correct on that, that you are responding to the demand at that
level?
8582
MR. McCOY: Yes. Ninety‑one percent of all the qualifying
applications are approved, and they are approved to, I believe, just over
80 percent of the total funding.
8583
MR. SUTHERLAND: Yes. We measured two things. One is the number. You get 30 applications, of those
30 generally 27 of them will be approved.
Of the 27 that are approved, they generally get about 83 percent of
them ‑‑ which I think is the number you are talking
about ‑‑
8584
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Yes.
8585
MR. SUTHERLAND: ‑‑ of the money they ask for. Now, that is because we are able to set
very specific criteria around what it is you are qualified ‑‑ our website
is very detailed in terms of what you can get from us so it helps to steer that
funding and make it more certain for everyone.
8586
MR. GHOMESHI: Which is, I
might add, one of the things I like, which is that it is not whimsical or
subjection on behalf of the board in terms of where the money is going, it is if
you meet the criteria and you have sold some records, you will probably get the
funding.
8587
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
speaking of that, one of the main components of the programs is the
direct board approval segment. That
would appear to cover a large part of the grants.
8588
Is that correct?
8589
MR. SUTHERLAND: Direct board
approval is FACTOR's process.
8590
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
All right.
8591
MR. SUTHERLAND: We don't
have a direct board approval because everything is sales‑based criteria. An artist could show up tomorrow that
has no track record, that is not on a label of any kind that anyone has ever
heard of but, as Jian can talk to, can be the next big thing and if they hit
that 10,000 unit level, they stick an application in, they get
money.
8592
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
The question I asked earlier I wondered if you would comment on, Mr.
McCoy, the possibility of a common administration of the funds in the context as
described by FACTOR.
8593
Do you have any comment on that?
8594
MR. McCOY: Well, I'm going
to duck the question again a bit, because I really don't think that I can
comment on what changes we might make to Radio Starmaker fund, what might work
better for all the funds that are out there, including Radio Starmaker and
FACTOR.
8595
I think I would only say that ‑‑ as I say, first of all, we haven't
discussed that with the board an in terms of governance we wouldn't make a
public statement on that.
8596
But I guess I would say and reiterate that what we have been doing for
four years has been working and we are comfortable in continuing with the way it
has been going.
8597
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
But the concept of a common administration is a little different, like
let's say the way that Musicaction, Fond Radiostar are currently administered
together. This is what I believe
has been put on the table as potential going
forward.
8598
It's a little different than all the funds going through
Radiostar.
8599
Is that something that could be contemplated or is it again something
that you would want to discuss?
8600
MR. McCOY: You know, Madam
Commissioner, going back to what we were saying in our oral presentation, in
reality we are a very independent fund.
We have a board that is comprised of people from all segments of the
industry, both music and radio. As
Chip said, five years ago this Commission provided us with some governing
principles and the broadcasters supplied some money and we built a fund. That included administration. We are really willing and able to take
direction again and whatever funding is provided, including administration or
however you see fit to construct it.
8601
MR. SUTHERLAND: If I could
just add, just on the administration because it sounds like just a vague word,
we have two and a half employees and we have a website. That is the extent of our
administration. It is not exactly a
cumbersome ‑‑ I think Jian described it as
lean.
8602
But the one advantage of having put such an investment in our website is
that we are a 100 percent paperless web‑based application. It is a fairly slim
operation.
8603
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Thank you. Very
helpful. Thank you very
much.
8604
THE CHAIRPERSON: Vice‑Chair
Arpin.
8605
COMMISSIONER ARPIN:
Obviously in this graph you are making the assumption that there will be
no more transactions.
8606
Why are you making that assumption?
8607
MR. McCOY: I will answer
that ‑‑
8608
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Because
you are living in the real world or you are living on
the ‑‑
8609
MR. McCOY: Well,
Commissioner Arpin, I will answer that and then I will ask Chip to follow
up.
8610
Preparing the capital funding model we never want to or we are not able
to anticipate funding that might or might not be coming. So we are really preparing our funding
model based on the certainties that we have. Again, that may change and there may be
funding from other places and that would change the capital funding
model.
8611
Chip, if there is ‑‑
8612
MR. SUTHERLAND: I think the
other thing, what you don't see here, I was being very specific about the
existing contributions, but we have a three‑year rolling model. So if next month in your wisdom ‑‑
or somebody else's wisdom I suppose if they want to buy somebody ‑‑ we find
out there is another million dollars, we know it is being paid the seven years,
we can easily adapt for new changes.
8613
But really we do not have another source of money and so we really can't
say to the public, "Oh yes, we probably will have money", so we have to budget
accordingly.
8614
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: When in
1988 the CRTC allowed the creation of the Starmaker fund it was based on an
assumption ‑‑ and the CAB created the Starmaker on the assumption that it
will have a life of about seven to nine years. I can see from your graph that what you
are showing here is that you will have had a real life of about 10 years. Well, you are showing 12, but in year 1
and year 12 you don't have any significant impact, particularly in the year
12.
8615
Wasn't the goal attained?
8616
MR. SUTHERLAND: I think the
goal was attained. That's an
excellent point.
8617
I think I said this earlier, this fund was brought about because of a
specific circumstance in the marketplace that radio thought this would be
effective. They gave us a few
principles and some money and we turned it into the fund and it worked for what
it was supposed to do.
8618
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So why
expand the lifespan of the fund?
8619
MR. SUTHERLAND: We are
not. We are not expanding the
lifespan of the fund. This is the
fund is what it is for today.
8620
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: No,
no. I think the question should
have been asked to the CAB and they could address it on June
12th.
8621
There are CAB representatives in the room.
‑‑‑ Laughter /
Rires
8622
MR. SUTHERLAND: I think what
Chuck is saying is that we are all set up, we have the website, we have the
administration. The concept of
artists entering seems to be working well and if there is more work to be done
we are happy to take it on, but at present we are happy that we have done
exactly what I feel we were asked to do.
8623
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: And with
success. I think your annual report
shows that the money has allowed Canadian artists to further develop and to
become known at the international level.
8624
MR. GHOMESHI: I would say
that we continue to be effective and that we are, as you say, living in the real
world in terms of the mandate that has been dealt to us, but that we continue to
be effective and make a difference in the lives and careers of artists and were
that to continue I would consider that a good thing.
8625
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: With the
previous intervenor we discussed the possibility of double dipping problems
between FACTOR and Starmaker. I
know that Ms Ostertag said that you had put in place some mechanisms which, from
her own end, is a paper burden.
8626
Do you have any comments?
8627
MR. McCOY: Yes, Commissioner
Arpin. Obviously this is something
that we are as concerned about as the people from FACTOR
are.
8628
We have had many conversations with FACTOR and Rachel has been to the
FACTOR office and we have looked and we examine all of the funding, and I am
going to just ask Chip to give you maybe a bit of a rundown in terms of what the
results were, because we did a fairly exhaustive examination of that
possibility.
8629
MR. SUTHERLAND: Well, there
are two things.
8630
When we built the fund we built it around FACTOR of course, because
FACTOR had been around for 20 years when we started and we were well aware
of the good work that FACTOR was doing so we weren't going to stumble all over
what they were doing.
8631
They are obviously putting a lot of money into creating product, records
and videos. We don't do that. So right away a huge chunk of their
funding and none of ours is directed in an area where we don't
go.
8632
They don't fund any major label artists. Well, they do in some small segments of
their program but they don't have that and we do. Twenty percent of our money goes there,
so 20 percent of our money generally is fine. So it was designed to get around
that.
8633
Now, where we had a problem or a perceived problem was we had
independent, the bigger independent companies who are making lots of investments
and artists and they have successful artists so they are applying to both
because they don't know whether they are going to get money from one or the
other, so we have made it clear that they have to disclose if they are applying
for FACTOR, then we exchange all of this information.
8634
In the first round of funding we might have had three because nobody knew
the rules. We caught all of
them. I think the five
years ‑‑ Rachel, you can correct me ‑‑ I think we have had seven
instances of double dipping.
8635
I think we have caught all of them.
I think maybe four of them
were from one company because they didn't understand a rule on how the invoices
could be submitted, and therefore out of the whole fund I think maybe it was
$30,000 total that we had overlap.
8636
Do you want to just take that?
8637
MS OLDFIELD: Yes, I think
probably today there have been 250 fully reconciled files, and I think the
instances are less than ten. And as
Chip has alluded to, it was one individual larger indie company who was
responsible for ‑‑ I think it was six of those double‑dipping
instances.
8638
We do have a mechanism in place where I am in contact with FACTOR and
they are in contact with me. I send
every single Radio Starmaker Fund fully reconciled independent label account
statement to FACTOR, and they have it on file.
8639
That is every single one, whether they indicated they applied to FACTOR
or not.
8640
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: On
another area, one of the record companies, Fading Ways, just to name them, is
saying that no CTD funds should be given via FACTOR or Starmaker, or any other
similar programs, for project artists who no longer control their intellectual
property or that the company is not 100 percent Canadian
owned.
8641
Do you have any views on that?
8642
MR. McCOY: Well, again, we
are not a centered fund. Our
funding is based on the artist. We
are here to develop Canadian talent and the artist is at the centre of
it.
8643
We don't believe ‑‑ and this is how we operate the Radio Starmaker
Fund ‑‑ that the funding should be dependent on the business arrangement
that the artist has made.
8644
We have particular guidelines in terms of we predominantly fund
independent artists but it is not our role to play in determining what business
deal an artist makes.
8645
If they are Canadian, they are Canadian. And if they meet the other criteria,
then we will review them for funding.
8646
I'm not sure, Andy or Jian, perhaps you have a comment to make on
that.
8647
MR. McLEAN: Yes. I just wanted to say that in about three
weeks about 450 new bands will be coming to Toronto to play at the festival that
I and my partners organize. This is
our 12th year of running it.
8648
The theme this year is "DIY", Do It Yourself. Now, a lot of artists are really making
their own business decisions to be an independently run artist business in the
same way as you would start any other little business; in fact, a very viable
way for artists to try and make a living.
8649
The traditional model is either starving artist or superstar. I think it is much better to see it in
terms of trying to create a middle ground where the new Canadian artists are
self‑supporting; that they are taking control of their own business and they can
access funds and manage it in a way that any other small start‑up business would
be perceived.
8650
So that is the kind of information that we are giving to artists who are
developing and just encouraging them to run it. Even though it is the music business, it
just like any other independent business.
And it should really be run under the same kind of
guidelines.
8651
If you have a good product, which is great songs you can play, then you
will reach your market at some point.
8652
And you should certainly keep control of owning this intellectual
property. As Jian says, you can
record in a basement. There is no
real reason not to hang on to the masters of your
recording.
8653
Traditionally in this business the sad thing is that many artists will
never own the songs that they have created. They are owned by
labels.
8654
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank
you very much, Mr. Chair. Those are
my questions.
8655
MR. SUTHERLAND: If I can
just add for a second, because the quote you gave was effective ‑‑ giving
up control of their masters and Andy was talking about
ownership.
8656
The effective control sounds like an easy test, but it is not really an
easy test. If
the ‑‑
8657
THE CHAIRPERSON: Tell us
about it.
‑‑‑ Laughter /
Rires
8658
MR. SUTHERLAND: Well, the
idea that the artist makes the record and then decides who is going to help me
in my whole economy, not just the record business. Of course it is important, but it is
only one part of the music business.
Right?
8659
The music business is touring and merchandising and song writing. For an artist, there is a whole economy
out there and we are focused on improving all of that.
8660
The effective control isssue is well, you make your record and whether
you choose on a business deal, because of the investment levels, to give up
ownership or you don't, we have faith that the artist makes good decisions about
their own business decisions and why would we tell them how to structure their
business.
8661
We don't judge them by their business structure. We judge them by being a Canadian
artist.
8662
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you
very much.
8663
Madam Secretary, the next item, please.
8664
THE SECRETARY: Thank you,
Mr. Chair.
8665
We would now invite the next participant, ANR Lounge, Ms Anna Maria
Russo, if she could come forward for her presentation.
‑‑‑
Pause
PRESENTATION /
PRÉSENTATION
8666
MS RUSSO: Sorry, it's just
booting up right now.
8667
THE CHAIRPERSON: Are you
using dial‑up?
8668
MS RUSSO: Sorry, Dell
computers.
‑‑‑
Pause
8669
THE CHAIRPERSON: Is your
entire presentation video?
8670
MS RUSSO: Pardon
me?
8671
THE CHAIRPERSON: Is your
entire presentation video?
8672
MS RUSSO: It's going to
exemplify everything that I mention.
8673
I am just going to introduce myself while I fold this over so that you
can see it.
8674
THE CHAIRPERSON: All
right.
8675
MS RUSSO: Good morning. Sorry about the
wait.
8676
My name is Anna Maria Russo.
I am the manager of the ANR Lounge website.
8677
Here with me today, and running the AV, is Sam Baardman, Executive
Director of the Manitoba Audio Recording Industry Association, also known as
MARIA.
8678
MARIA is one of the 15 music industry associations in the ANR
Lounge. We would like to thank the
CRTC for allowing us the opportunity to speak about the ANR Lounge as a vital
internet tool for the Canadian music industry, and more specifically for
emerging artists.
8679
I will be conducting a visual presentation to better describe our
services. By employing real‑life
scenarios artists commonly encounter, I will show you how the ANR Lounge helps
get their music out there and be heard.
8680
Before I start, I wish to clarify that we are here as a non‑partisan,
independent group committed to developing talent in this
country.
8681
We also want to show how ANR Lounge is a perfect example of how Canadian
Talent Development funds are efficiently used to help create the stars of
tomorrow.
8682
The discovery and development of emerging artists is vital as they are
among Canada's most valued cultural resources. The ANR Lounge recognizes the need to
nurture this resource because without new music there would be nothing to fuel
the Canadian music industry.
8683
Through the website, located at www.anrlounge.com, up‑and‑coming artists
like Luke Doucet, The Perms, Damhnait Doyle, BrassMunk and Doc Walker are able
to promote their music to radio stations across Canada for
free.
8684
But that is not all we do.
8685
We provide targeted information to help artists acquire the knowledge and
help they need to develop their craft.
8686
As the saying goes, no person is an island and this is true for any
artist trying to make it in the music business, particularly with the culture of
connectedness the internet affords.
Artists need the infrastructure provided by managers, record labels,
promoters, etc., to help get their career to the next
level.
8687
Therefore, in addition to our radio promotion service, we provide what is
arguably the most comprehensive database of information containing Canadian
sources that will help artists build the necessary network in order to get their
music heard.
8688
I will now ask you to pay attention to the screens in front of you as I
will demonstrate our claims.
8689
Let us take, for example, a new rock group that has just finished a
release and are looking for ways to promote it. Naturally, the first question that is
asked by artists is how can they get their music played on the
radio.
8690
Through their free ANR Lounge account the rock group has access to the
Music and New Releases section. In
this section artist members can create a profile that includes their biography,
sound clips, and album artwork among other information, which resembles an
electronic press kit.
8691
When completed and reviewed by one of our 13 regional administrators
across the country, their profile is posted in the Music and New Releases
section.
8692
Each week we send out a notice to over 600 radio stations, which includes
commercial, campus and community, setting out what new releases have just been
uploaded. This gives artists an
incredible advantage because they are saving thousands of dollars because there
is no need to pay out the money it would take to mail out packages, nor does it
cost them any money to upload the release to our website.
8693
Therefore, without having to spend a dime, they increase their chances of
being heard by key radio station personnel and being considered for
airplay.
8694
Since the launch of this service, artists listed on the ANR Lounge have
appeared over 300 times on campus radio charts and added 515 times to commercial
radio. Currently a radio station
can access 1,300 releases containing over 10,000 songs found in the Music and
New Releases section.
8695
Other ways to augment the promotion of a release is by sending a press
release out to major media, hiring a radio promoter or planning a tour of live
performances.
8696
The Listings section of the website can help the group initiate any of
these activities by providing them with up‑to‑date contacts in the music
industry. In our searchable
database of 16,000 contacts we provide contact information for 1,275 media
outlets, including print, television and radio; 115 publicists; and over 1,400
venues across the country.
8697
These listings can be narrowed down by genre, province, city and
sub‑categories. For example, you
can limit your venue search to a range of different sizes from coffee houses to
stadiums.
8698
If I may digress for a moment, going back to the idea mentioned earlier
about building a support network, the listings also provide contact information
for 418 management companies, 325 record labels and 219 promoters. Artists can peruse their search results
to target who they want to contact to potentially build a working
relationship.
8699
As you can see, the listings provide one‑stop targeted searching in over
40 different music‑related categories in Canada.
8700
As with the Music and New Release section, the listings save time spent
on searching for the right contacts and again help bring their music closer to
the masses.
8701
Networking is a very important part of being in the music industry and on
many occasions it can be equally as beneficial to know and to have the right
contacts as it is to have a good release.
8702
Our listings provide key music industry contacts. However, our events calendar will
indicate where the key contacts will most likely convene. The events calendar lists conferences,
award shows, educational seminars and trade shows.
8703
Revisiting our rock group looking to promote their release, if they
decide to plan a tour and book some dates, they can list their tour dates
here.
8704
Let us take a few steps back, before our imaginary rock group went into
the studio with a fist‑full of songs to record. The principal question in the mind of
the artist is: How are we going to
pay for this?
8705
Fortunately, there are over 200 funding programs in Canada that provide
grants to finance artists' endeavours, such as a recording
project.
8706
The ANR Lounge's Funding MatchMaker helps organize the overwhelming
number of programs by employing an interactive filter process to narrow down the
list to a select few that are relevant to the needs of the
artist.
8707
Many members have benefited from this service, including Troy Neilson of
New Brunswick, who successfully received $5,000 in grants from the New Brunswick
sound initiative, and Arnold van Labalgen of Saskatchewan who received funds
through a touring grant.
8708
Through these four services I outlined today, the ANR Lounge provides a
broad range of functionalities suited to increase business opportunities for
artists.
8709
The tangible benefits to the industry are profound, as demonstrated by
the latest web traffic statistics.
To date, the website receives an average of 387,000 hits per month, which
amounts to 30,000 unique users during the same period.
8710
While the majority of our visitors come from Canada, 43 percent of our
users come from outside the country, many from the United States, Europe and
Australia. This proves that by
using this service, our artists have the potential to reach beyond the borders
of our country.
8711
The ANR Lounge did not achieve success on its own. The creation of the website forged an
unprecedented collaboration among 15 music industry associations, including all
provincial and regional associations and four national ones. They are now linked in a unique way,
working closer together ‑‑ perhaps in a way that has never been done before
in Canada's music history.
8712
The initiative allowed the opportunity for the associations to exchange
policies and ideas. I would even go
ahead and say that the ANR Lounge is partly responsible for the formation of the
Coalition of Nine Provincial/Territorial Music Industry Associations that will
be speaking to you later today.
8713
This proves that working together is a more powerful way to a common
goal: to build the Canadian music industry and sustain its economic and cultural
health.
8714
The music industry would lose a valuable resource if the ANR Lounge were
discontinued due to lack of funding.
Currently the ANR Lounge is financially supported by the Foundation
Assisting Canadian Talent on Recordings ‑‑ also known as FACTOR ‑‑
exclusively through the Radio Marketing Fund.
8715
We express our gratitude to the broadcasters and FACTOR for the
opportunity to create the ANR Lounge.
The initiative has entered the last year of a five‑year funding
commitment with no guarantee of renewal.
Many individuals and companies have benefited from the resources provided
by this important database and many more stand to benefit in the
future.
8716
The ANR Lounge provides valuable services at no cost to its users because
of the generosity of the Canadian broadcasters and their commitment to
developing talent in this country.
8717
Once again, the ANR Lounge is a perfect example of how Canadian Talent
Development funds are officially used to help create the stars of
tomorrow.
8718
The ANR Lounge would be able to further contribute to developing Canadian
talent if we secure long‑term sustained funding for this project. Sustained funding could be attained by
renewing support through FACTOR or securing monies directly from the Canadian
Talent Development Fund.
8719
We thank you for your time and we welcome your
questions.
8720
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
8721
Commissioner Pennefather.
8722
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
8723
Thank you for the demo. I
did go to the site but this allowed me to go a little further in because I could
only get to the first front pages where we talked about the collaboration
amongst the music associations.
8724
So perhaps later we will talk to Maria about that.
8725
MS RUSSO:
Sure.
8726
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Just one quick question.
8727
When you mention the 30,000 unique users and the hits, who are the
users? Is it the artists? Is it the companies? Is it the
broadcaster?
8728
MS RUSSO: It's a combination
of all three.
8729
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Do
you have some follow‑up, some way to evaluate that?
8730
MS RUSSO: Well, I can give
you an example of what happened two days ago.
8731
We actually are constantly improving the website to fulfil the needs of
our users. Of course, one of our
users are radio station personnel.
8732
So what we have done is we streamlined the way the notification works for
radio. So we sent out a notice
about that and within the hour, within one hour, 40 radio stations had already
gone and revamped their accounts.
So that is one example.
8733
Also with artists, artists are constantly going up on the website. I think they would ‑‑ the spike
would be for broadcasters because every Wednesday they get the notification for
new releases.
8734
So the spike would be mostly broadcasters on Wednesday, music industry on
Tuesday as we post our news every Tuesday called the WhistleBlower, and then I
guess a general spraying of artists coming in at anytime of the day every
day.
8735
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
You say you send a notice to over 600 radio stations, commercial, campus
and community.
8736
MS ROUSSEAU:
Mm‑hmm.
8737
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
What about the CBC?
8738
MS ROUSSEAU: Yes, CBC is
included.
8739
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Okay.
8740
MS ROUSSEAU: I am
sorry.
8741
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Thank you.
8742
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
8743
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you
very much.
8744
We will break now and resume in 15 minutes. Nous reprendrons dans 15 minutes, at
10:55.
‑‑‑ Upon recessing
at 1040 / Suspension à 1040
‑‑‑ Upon resuming
at 1101 / Reprise à 1101
8745
LA SECRÉTAIRE: Monsieur le
président, I will introduce the next participant, the Canadian Satellite Radio
and Mr. Steven Tapp will introduce his colleague, after which you will have ten
minutes for your presentation.
8746
Thank you.
PRESENTATION /
PRÉSENTATION
8747
MR. TAPP: Thank you very
much. Good morning, Mr. Chairman,
members of the Commission, Commission staff.
8748
I'm Steven Tapp and I'm the President and Chief Operating Officer of
Canadian Satellite Radio, licensee of Satellite Subscription Radio Service XM
Canada.
8749
First and foremost, I want to tell you what an honour it is to be here
today and to thank the Commission for giving us the opportunity through this
licence to provide our service to the Canadian public.
8750
We think this is a great decision for Canadian Consumers and a wonderful
decision for Canadian artists and we're very proud to be here
today.
8751
With me here today on my left is Stewart Lyons, the longest standing
member of the XM CSR team. I think
is going on like five years now, right Stewart? Stewart Lyons is our Executive Vice
President.
8752
Beside Stewart is André DiCesare who is our Directeur,
responsable de la programmation francophone. And beside André is Daren Kirkwood who
is our in‑house Legal Counsel.
8753
On my right we have Ross Davies who is our Vice President of programming,
no stranger to the Commission and the radio industry here in
Canada.
8754
Beside Ross is Cam Carpenter, the hardest working man in showbiz, the guy
who is responsible for all of our Canadian talent development, Cam
Carpenter. And that is our small
team here today, as I've said, we're very happy.
8755
As the Commission is aware, we were licensed about 12 months ago to
operate one of Canada's two competitive satellite radio services and that
decision back on June 16, 2005 flowed from an extremely thorough competitive
licensing hearing which obviously took place in this hearing room back in
November of 2004.
8756
At that hearing the Commission had an opportunity to review with the
applicants and with many of the same parties who are participating in this
review this week, a broad range of policy issues that relate specifically to the
role of subscription satellite radio services in the Canadian broadcasting
system.
8757
Our XM Canada service, the first of its kind launched in Canada ‑‑
we were the number one to the launch pad ‑‑ went on the air on November
22nd 2005, signing up our first subscriber and allowing XM Canada to provide one
of the hottest‑selling holiday gifts for last year's holiday gift giving season,
the most important selling season for satellite
radio.
8758
We have now been broadcasting in Canada for nearly six months, it's about
170 days so far, we have already implemented one set of significant amendments
to our conditions of licence. And
the last half year has been both challenging and very exciting for us at XM
Canada. It is a very competitive
business and we're happy Canadians have choice in their satellite radio
services.
8759
As we anticipated, XM Canada launched its service into a Canadian market
that had a considerable pent‑up consumer demand already for a non‑grey market,
legitimate, Canadian‑owned, Canadian‑delivered satellite subscription radio
service.
8760
Also as we expected, we have been face with very strong competition in
the market place from our competitor, SIRIUS Canada ‑‑ I think that's good
for Canadian Consumers ‑‑ but we are proud to report that XM Canada has
made great progress to date, both in programming and marketing our
service.
8761
We've put in place an ambitious Canadian talent development program, one
that focuses on initiatives to support both anglophone and francophone new and
emerging Canadian artists. We are
convinced that our XM Canada service is and will be a great success and will
make very significant contributions to strengthening the Canadian Broadcasting
system and we're proud to be part of that community.
8762
Through our appearance this morning we would like to provide the
Commission with a status report on the satellite radio industry in Canada and to
outline what we have done in particular to showcase on a North American delivery
platform, the new and emerging Canadian music and comedic talent. We would also like to review some of our
major Canadian talent development initiatives to date.
8763
Although for competitive reasons as a public company I am not able to
provide the Commission today with precise subscriber numbers to date, we are
obviously obliged to report on a quarterly basis as a publicly traded
company.
8764
I can confirm that we are ahead of our projected sub‑numbers that were
contained in the business plan that we filed with our licence
application.
8765
We are currently programming ten Canadian‑produced channels out of
Montreal and Toronto and we provide XM Canada subscribers with a choice of up to
100 diverse radio programming channels, spanning a wide range of choice in news,
entertainment, sports and, of course, music.
8766
We have implemented all of our conditions of licence, including those
contained in broadcasting decision CRTC 2006‑37 of the 10th of February
2006.
8767
CSR's English and French music channels play virtually 100 per cent
Canadian content music, a very high proportion of that music is new Canadian
artists. We are extremely proud of
the fact that XM Canada has, as we promised at the 2004 licence hearing,
provided access for new and emerging Canadian performing artists, both
anglophone and francophone. And we
are broadcasting their unique talents over six million listeners throughout the
XM platform across North America.
8768
Young Canadian bands such as Geneviève Bilodeau, Jets Overhead, The Most
Serene Republic, they're all examples of new and emerging Canadian artists who
receive airplay not only on XM Canada‑produced channels such as The Verge and
Air Music, but also on U.S. based XM music channels such as XMU, The loft, XM
Café, just to name a few.
8769
Mr. Chairman, I'd like the Commission to hear from those directly
responsible for making this magic come to life, our program executives and
talent development ambassadors. I
would like to ask Ross Davies, André and Cam to briefly outline for you some of
the notable programming success that XM Canada has experienced to
date.
8770
MR. DAVIES: Thank you
Steve. Mr. Chairman, members
of the Commission, Steve has already identified a few of the new young Canadian
bands that are receiving airplay and North American exposure on both U.S. and
Canadian XM music programming channels.
8771
I could add to that list the names of emerging Canadian musical artists
such as Jason Collett, Luke Doucet, Octoberman, Quinzy, Elliott Brood, Small
Sins, Hey Rosetta!, Moufette and on and on.
8772
As well, more established Canadian musical artists such as Ron Sexsmith,
Bruce Cockburn, Blue Rodeo, The Tragically Hip are all receiving regular airplay
and exposure in the United States and Canada on XM's other commercial‑free music
channels.
8773
A good part of our success in ensuring that Canadian musical artists get
airplay on the various U.S. program XM channels is a result of our Canadian
Music Ambassador program which is headed by Cameron Carpenter and Cam will speak
with you about that in a moment.
8774
But our XM Canada satellite radio service is not all about music. We also program from our XM Canada
studios in Toronto and in conjunction with Mark Breson of Yuk‑Yuks an English
language comedy channel called "Laugh Attack". That channel, not surprisingly has
proven to be very popular with XM radio listeners in the U.S.A. as well as in
Canada.
8775
In addition, we provide our subscribers, including the large number of XM
Canada subscribers who are snowbirds with both English and French language 24/7
Canadian news and cultural information channels.
8776
I would ask now my colleague André to outline what XM Canada has done
since launch in respect of our French language program.
8777
MR. DiCESARE: Thank you, Ross.
8778
Monsieur le président, mesdames, messieurs; dès le début du projet de
l'implantation de la radio satellite XM au Canada j'avais personnellement un
objectif bien précis en n'impliquant dans cette
aventure.
8779
C'était d'obtenir le meilleur positionnement possible pour les artistes
francophones du Canada dans cette nouvelle technologie. Je souhaitais entendre la musique
francophone d'ici partout en Amérique.
Je croyais fermement qu'on ne pouvait pas se permettre de manque notre
rendez‑vous avec cette technologie de communication de l'an
2000.
8780
À titre de responsable du développement des stations francophones
canadiennes, je souhaitais que nos deux chaînes musicales, Air Musique et Sur la
Route aient un contenu francophone à 100 pour cent.
8781
De plus, je tenais à ce que nous fassions entendre partout en Amérique la
musique de nos artistes établis, mais également celle du plus grand nombre
d'artistes émergents que l'on entend pas sur les ondes des radios
traditionnelles. Après six mois
d'opérations, je suis fier d'annoncer : mission accomplie.
8782
Déjà, nous avons fait plus de 50 portraits radio d'artistes de la relève
et d'artistes plus connus. Nous
avons le plaisir également de présenter des performances exclusives et des
entrevues que nous enregistrons et diffusons sur nos
ondes.
8783
À ce jour, nous avons reçu dans nos studios Catherine Durand, Christian
Legault, Jamil, Geneviève Bilodeau, Gilles Valiquette, Jim Corcoran, Véronique
Dicaire, Dan Bigras, Edgar Bori, Patrick Normand, Karin Clerc, Zone Urbaine,
Senaya, Chris Stills et Camaro et d'autres.
8784
Par ailleurs, nous avons des
discussions constantes avec les associations professionnelles de l'industrie
musicale pour développer des collaborations qui profiteront aux artistes
d'ici.
8785
Par exemple; nous étions en avril aux rencontres de l'ADISQ. Nous sommes partenaires des MINI,
Montreal Independent Music Initiatives, que nous avons enregistré hier leur
premier concert qui seront en ondes dans quelques semaines chez nous et nous
seront également présents au Festival de Jazz à Montréal.
8786
Enfin, nous avons eu le grand plaisir de distribuer nos premières bourses
de 50 000,00 $ chacune à deux artistes pour les soutenir dans leur conquête du
marché européen. L'annonce publique
de notre soutien financier dans les carrières de Steffy Shock et du Groupe Les
Trois Accords nous a permis d'avoir un impact considérable auprès du milieu
artistique.
8787
Suite à cette annonce, nombreux sont ceux et celles qui ont voulu en
savoir plus sur la radio satellite XM, son implication dans l'industrie musicale
canadienne et ses engagements futurs pour contribuer financièrement à son
essor.
8788
Nos chaînes de radio ont à peine six mois d'existence et déjà nous avons
acquis une solide et bonne réputation dans le milieu de l'industrie musicale
canadienne et nous en sommes fiers.
8789
Je vais passer la parole à Cam.
8790
MR. CARPENTER: Thank you, André. Thank you. It's nice to be here today. Since the day XM launched last November
we have made a point of reaching out to the Canadian music industry to lend our
support to a number of music events across the country.
8791
XM Canada has worked with and provided financial support to the East
Coast Music Awards, New Music West, Canadian Music Week and Juno Fest. and
Halifax on Parade, as part of this year's Junos.
8792
At this year's Junos, in conjunction with Halifax on Parade we produced a
free concert for 16,000 people featuring local Maritime acts such as Jimmy
Rankin, Bat Mays, Julia Plasket, Garrett Masson and The
Trues.
8793
We are continually looking for new emerging Canadian talent and we are
pleased to tell you that so far we have programmed dozens of previously
unclaimed Canadian bands. These
artists were not being played on conventional radio, but have found a home on
XM. Brand new artists such as the
Museum Pieces from Halifax and 16 million metres from Vancouver have contacted
us directly stating that they have been receiving CD artists from across North
America due to their play on The Verge, our English music Canadian
station.
8794
Many bands have also commented and how many comments and friends'
requests they have been receiving on my space because of their exposure on The
Verge.
8795
An example of what we can do would be a band called Murder City Sparrows
who are from Edmonton. I met them
recently at Canadian Music Week in the lobby of the hotel, they played me their
video and gave me their independent CD.
I gave it to our program director at The Verge, and he immediately liked
it and added it to the air.
8796
We sponsored new music class this year in Vancouver and the Murder City
Sparrows were voted next big thing at that conference. We interviewed the band while we were
there and then, we have since done a special on our station from New Music West
highlighting the independent bands.
8797
They will now be coming to Toronto for North by North East in the next
couple weeks and we'll have them in our Toronto studios to record live
there. Hopefully, the next step
will be to prove to the American stations the success that the bands had on our
station and get them added on their play list as well.
8798
We have been recording bands for the last ten weeks and have done 40
already at our studios in Toronto and Montreal as well as we have arranged
recordings in our Washington offices for such bands as Stars and New
Pornographers and Blue Rodeo as they tour across America.
8799
It's these rare exclusive performances that we will turn through our U.S.
stations. Also for airplay we had a
band in this week's Small Sins who recorded in our studio that XMU will also be
programming on their schedule in the States.
8800
Ron Sexsmith and Jason Collett recently gave two remarkable enthusiastic
performances are regularly heard on The Loft, one of our popular U.S.
channels.
8801
This is just a few examples of how we are spreading the word about
Canadian music across North America.
8802
MR. TAPP: Mr. Chairman and
members of the Commission, that completes our brief progress report of XM Canada
on the status of our business and we would be pleased to respond to any
questions that you have. Thank
you.
8803
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you
very much. We appreciate this
update. I just have a few
questions.
8804
Mr. Carpenter, I don't know whether you were here for the AVR
presentation around 3:00 A.M. last night, I think it was?
Laughter /
Rires
8805
MR. CARPENTER: No,
sir.
8806
THE CHAIRPERSON: You
weren't. Well, I guess you
mentioned that you are still offering performances and promoting groups. Do you promote any aboriginal groups in
that context?
8807
MR. TAPP: We haven't as of
yet.
8808
THE CHAIRPERSON: You
haven't. Have you got any plans to
carry aboriginal music as an example of spreading the word about Canadian music
across North America?
8809
MR. DAVIES: Mr. Chair, if I
may, our plans for that studio are to cover all genres of music. We are now as Stewart said, I think 170
days into this. We have been
primarily bringing bands in that are comparable to our channel specific right
now, The Verge, that Cam mentioned.
8810
However, I think it was just yesterday, we had Haydn Neil in there who...
from Jacksoul who has recorded I think five songs. He probably ‑‑ well, he won't get
played on The Verge channel per se, but we are going to take that record and get
it ‑‑ that recording and send it down to the studio down in
Washington.
8811
And so that is aboriginal will absolutely be part of that and we are just
in the early days just still trying to reach out to the artist community with
that in mind.
8812
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you. I don't know again yesterday
whether you heard the National Campus and Community Radio Association
presentation alluding to commitments that the satellite applicants had made at
the '04 hearings and they didn't name names, but they implied that one of the
groups hadn't returned the phone calls and so on. Have you had dealings with them and have
you got anything to report on your relations with Campus and Community Radio
Station?
8813
MR. DAVIES: Mr. Chair, I
hope they weren't referring to me because I always make a point of returning my
phone calls and e‑mails. I can tell
you, I did not hear the submission by the Campus people last night, but I was
made aware of it.
8814
I can tell you that in that particular instance, we have had
communication with them and I would like to believe that we are still in
communication and they submitted a proposal to XM radio about maybe, I guess
maybe a month ago.
8815
Now, it did take me a few days to get back to them, but it basically gave
us a proposal for two full‑on channels, one music channel and one spoken word
channel and we simply can't afford that band with right now and I informed them
of that in the reply and, however, said, you know, we still need to talk about
this and see what ways we can, you know, work together on this, but their
proposal as they sent to us, wasn't ‑‑ couldn't work at this
time.
8816
I can also tell you that we have had communication with CKUA and Mr.
Regan, he and I have exchanged e‑mails over the last few months and although we
had spent the last couple of months, we haven't been in touch with each other,
but I think the ball is in Mr. Regan's court about he was going to have his
people submit a three‑hour demo of a proposed CKUA show that we are going to
broadcast on the XM platform. So
that conversation is still taking place.
8817
THE CHAIRPERSON: He also
wants you to heavily contribute to a CTD fund, I don't know whether you have any
reaction to that.
8818
MR. DAVIES: I'm going to let
Stewart Lyons answer that, Mr. Chairman.
8819
MR. LYONS: Yes. In our CTD plan as submitted, we
actually have amounts allocated to NCRA.
We haven't had a chance to distribute those amounts yet because they're
based on our fiscal year revenues which have not been built up because we have
only been in business as Ross pointed out for 170 days, but as we get up there,
definitely they have been part of the plan approved by the Commission. So, they are on our list and we plan to
commit to them for sure.
8820
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you. Those are our questions. Thank you very much. Madam Secretary?
8821
LA SECRÉTAIRE: Merci,
monsieur le président.
8822
I would now invite the next participant.
8823
J'inviterais
maintenant le prochain participant à l'ordre du jour, monsieur Jean‑Paul
Perreault d'Impératif français s'il voudrait se présenter pour sa présentation,
s'il vous plaît.
8824
Après que vous nous aurez présenté vos collègues, vous aurez dix minutes
pour votre présentation.
PRÉSENTATION /
PRESENTATION
8825
M. PERREAULT: Alors,
j'aimerais d'abord vous présenter les personnes qui m'accompagnent. Madame Armelle Vallée, chargée de projet
Impératif Français, madame Claude‑Annick Samson également chargée de projet au
sein de notre organisme et monsieur Paul Simard, membre du conseil
d'administration.
8826
Écoutez, dans un premier temps, je tiens à remercier le CRTC pour
l'invitation qu'il nous a lancée afin de vous faire connaître notre point de vue
concernant la radio commerciale et de ce pas, j'emboîte
immédiatement.
8827
Nous nous sommes présentés à plus d'une reprise devant le CRTC depuis
1998 et en 2002 nous avons aussi partagé nos réflexions avec le Comité permanent du Patrimoine
canadien.
8828
D'où vient notre intérêt pour la radiodiffusion, c'est que nous sommes
d'avis que le développement de la Francophonie en Amérique du Nord, son
avancement, son rayonnement dépendent en grande partie des médias visibles
accessibles et soucieux de diffuser nos artistes
francophones.
8829
Comme vous le savez, plus de la moitié des québécois demeurent dans le
sud du Québec, soit en Estrie, dans la région de Montréal et en Outaouais et
sont donc bombardés par des médias états‑uniens ou Canadians anglophones à
contenus états‑uniens élevés. On ne
parle ici que de la radio et de la télévision classique.
8830
En p lus de la radiodiffusion terrestre traditionnelle à laquelle la
majorité des québécois et autres francophones du pays ont accès, il y a la
télévision et la radio distribuées sur câble et par satellite qui nous inondent
de centaines de choix provenant du continent.
8831
Parlant de radio, seulement à Montréal, outre trois signaux sur bande AM
en provenance de Plattsburg, Champlain et Burlington, on peut entendre
clairement la radio états‑unienne sur les fréquences FM 92,9, 94,7, 99,9 et
107,9.
8832
Une des stations au format rock hip‑hop, laquelle cible un jeune public
de 15 à 25 ans avec un studio à Chateauguay, ville pas très éloignée de l'État
de New‑York et émetteur situé dans l'État de New‑York, la station WYUL va même
jusqu'à prétendre maintenant être une station de Montreal and Northern New
York.
8833
Elle a mis sur pied en mars 2006, vous le savez, un site web complètement
bilingue et lorsque je dis *bilingue+, je
parle d'un site en anglais et en français conçu expressément pour charger le
jeune auditoire québécois.
8834
Je ne suis pas contre le contenu en français du site web, cela va de soi,
d'une station de radio états‑unienne, mais il s'agit ici d'une station qui ne
fait qu'exporter vers le Québec du matériel non soumis aux objectifs de la Loi
canadienne sur la radiodiffusion puisque sa licence lui a été émise par le
Federal Communication Commission des États‑Unis.
8835
Sans la radio francophone commerciale, communautaire et publique, nos
artistes n'auraient pas accès à leur public. Sans une radio forte et sans ses
artistes, la population francophone aurait accès à quoi? Au matériel culturel que le reste de
l'Amérique du Nord consomme et lui offre gratuitement en grande
quantité.
8836
Il est donc essentiel que la radio et la télévision francophone soient
bien distribuées par câble et par satellite et qu'elle soit visible et facile
d'accès. Il y a va de la
rentabilité de ces médias et du développement de la francophonie sur ce
continent.
8837
En ce sens, l'Impératif français se rallie aux objectifs énoncés au
paragraphe 8 de l'Avis Public, certaines suggestions du CRTC sont
intéressantes. Par contre, le CRTC
aura‑t‑il le courage d'imposer quelques nouvelles règles qui sont conséquentes à
la Loi sur la radiodiffusion.
8838
Le premier objectif parle d'une radio commerciale dynamique et bien
financée dans les deux langues officielles de la Fédération canadienne est
capable de contribuer à la réalisation des objectifs de la politique énoncée
dans la Loi.
8839
Les données publiées dans l'Avis d'audiences publiques aux paragraphes 26
et 27 sonnent l'alarme sur la rentabilité des stations de langue française
indépendante par rapport à la moyenne canadienne. Il y a des mesures que le CRTC devrait
prendre pour aider la radio de langue
française.
8840
Pour assurer la notoriété des stations commerciales de langue française,
le CRTC devrait appuyer davantage la distribution des stations de radio de
langue française par les entreprises de distribution par satellite. Voici quelques
observations.
8841
Bell ExpressVu ne diffuse pas CKOI, pourtant la station FM la plus
importante en terme de cote d'écoute dans le marché de
Montréal.
8842
Sur 19 stations de radio publique et commerciale, ExpressVu n'en diffuse
que quatre en français dont seulement deux sont des radios
commerciales.
8843
Aucune entreprise de distribution par satellite n'offre une gamme de
stations de radios commerciales de langue française en provenance de l'extérieur
de Montréal. Depuis 1998 Star
Choice diffuse des stations de radio de SpokeCan et Seattle, État de Washington
dans le renouvellement de licence, décision de radiodiffusion CRTC
2004‑84.
8844
Le CRTC renouvelle la licence de Star Choice avec les stations FM
suivantes dont la liste... et là, je ne vous passerai pas la liste, il s'agit de
stations en provenance des États‑Unis.
8845
Le CRTC a accepté ce renouvellement de licence par cette entreprise de
distribution par satellite qui ne trouve de la place que pour seulement sept
stations de langue française dont uniquement cinq stations commerciales sur un
total de 65.
8846
Les chiffres mêmes du CRTC indiquent qu'une rentabilité plus solide des
stations de radio appartenant à des groupes de propriétés. Il aurait donc été logique pour le CRTC
d'accepter des demandes de licence de propriétés de groupes, par exemple, lors
de l'attribution de licence en 2005 pour le marché de Gatineau et
Ottawa.
8847
Impératif Français ne comprend donc pas le refus du CRTC énoncé dans sa
décision de radiodiffusion 2005‑257 à Corus Entertainment pour une station de
radio commerciale. Il y avait
pourtant de la place pour au moins une autre station de langue française dans la
région.
8848
Il faut se rappeler qu'en 2001 aussi sur quatre nouvelles stations, il
n'y avait qu'une seule nouvelle station de langue française. Le déséquilibre s'est élargi en quelques
années, ce qui a encouragé le glissement de l'auditoire vers les stations
anglophones.
8849
Il est question de transfert d'auditoire vers les stations de radio
anglaise dans le mémoire du Ministère de la culture et des communications du
Québec, paragraphes 19 à 25. Ces
transferts sont dus en grande partie au manque de choix radiophonique en
français. Une meilleure gamme de
services radiophoniques en français réduirait l'effet de transfert de
l'auditoire francophone vers les stations anglophones.
8850
Impératif français fait état de la situation dans les régions de Gatineau
et Ottawa dans un article qui a été publié en 2005 dans les principaux
médias.
8851
Impératif français a d'ailleurs dénoncé la proportion trop peu élevée de
nouvelles licences de radiodiffusion en Outaouais. Le deuxième objectif cible porte sur la
promotion des artistes canadiens et québécois.
8852
Je peux vous assurer que non seulement Impératif Français appuie
l'exigence de 65 pour cent de contenu vocal francophone de catégorie 2 formulé
par le CRTC pour favoriser le rayonnement de la langue et de la culture
d'expression française, mais il souhaite que ce seuil soit porté à 75 pour
cent. L'exigence d'au moins 55 pour
cent de pièces vocales de langue française du lundi au vendredi et durant les
heures de grande écoute est une politique louable.
Ce minimum devrait
être haussé à 60 pour cent devrait être haussé à 60 pour cent et devrait aussi
s'appliquer aux heures de grande écoute pendant les
week‑ends.
8853
Le CRTC doit s'assurer qu'il s'est doté des outils de surveillance du
contenu canadien et de langue française pour s'assurer qu'il n'y a pas de
délit.
8854
Alors que les stations de radios de langue française sont soumises à une
double obligation en matière de musique vocale, soit le contenu canadien et le
contenu francophone minimal, les stations de langue anglaise ne sont tenues
qu'au contenu canadien.
8855
Alors que le premier objectif de la politique de 1998 vise une
programmation canadienne et qu'une autre porte sur la dualité linguistique, le
fardeau de ses obligations devrait être mieux partagé, sinon il est trop facile
pour un radiodiffuseur anglophone d'implanter une station de langue anglaise où
que l'on soit au Québec.
8856
D'aucuns essaieront. Par
exemple, le 20 mars dernier Standard Radio se présentait devant le CRTC à Québec
pour y exposer un projet de radio commerciale de langue anglaise de musique
rock.
8857
Pourtant, selon le recensement de 2001, la région métropolitaine de
recensement de Québec compte 9 845 personnes dont la langue maternelle est
l'anglais, sur ses 673 100 habitants, soit 1,46. C'est évident dans ce cas‑ci que c'est
le jeune auditoire francophone que cette station
vise.
8858
Globalement, Impératif Français suggère que le CRTC exige des stations à
contenu musical élevé de langue anglaise au Canada, que celles‑ci fassent leur
part pour la diffusion de musique vocale de langue française et ainsi contribuer
à l'atteinte des objectifs de la Loi.
8859
En outre, entre autres, Impératif français suggère que les stations de
musique de langue anglaise diffusent au moins 10 pour cent de leur musique
vocale d'artistes francophones dont au moins les trois quarts d'artistes
francophones canadiens et québécois et ce, sept jours sur sept et autant aux
heures de grande écoute de 6 h 00 à 18 h 00 que durant les heures de moins
grande écoute.
8860
Impératif Français suggère que le CRTC exige des stations à contenu
musical élevé de langue anglaise opérant au Québec que celles‑ci diffusent au
moins 20 pour cent de leur musique vocale d'artistes francophones dont au moins
80 pour cent d'artistes canadiens et québécois et ce, sept jours sur sept autant
durant les heures de grande écoute, 6 h 00 à 18 h 00 que durant les heures de
moins grande écoute.
8861
Impératif Français suggère que dans le cas des studios de stations
anglophones situées près du territoire québécois et dont le périmètre de
rayonnement est situé en grande partie en sol québécois ou dont l'antenne
émettrice est située au Québec, par exemple, les stations radiophoniques FM
d'Ottawa diffusant ici à partir de Camp Fortune, que le contenu musical exigé de
langue française se situe au même niveau que dans le cas des stations
anglophones du Québec.
8862
La règle voulant que les pièces musicales de langue française soient
diffusées intégralement doit être maintenu. Tournons‑nous vers l'objectif portant
sur la variété plus large de genres musicaux et d'enregistrement d'artistes
canadiens.
8863
D'après les études du CRTC de 1997 et de 2005 sur les artistes dits de la
relève, il est évident que les stations de radios commerciales de langue
française font quelques efforts pour encourager les artistes de la relève, les
nouveaux talents, du moins, si on les compare aux stations
anglophones.
8864
Impératif Français se réjouit du progrès observé en 2005, 16,4 pour cent
pour les stations de langue française et suggère qu'un seuil minimal, il est
bien minimal de 15 pour cent soit maintenant exigé.
8865
Lors de l'attribution d'une...
8866
LA SECRÉTAIRE: Excusez‑moi,
monsieur Perreault. Votre temps
s'est écoulé. J'aimerais peut‑être
vous demander de conclure vos remarques, s'il vous plaît.
8867
M. PERREAULT: Oui, alors,
merci, je vais aller immédiatement aux recommandations.
8868
Alors, à la lumière de notre présentation et du document que vous avez en
main, le CRTC doit agir... doit par contre agir en conséquence de ses propres
objectifs et devrait notamment imposer la distribution des stations radios
commerciales francophones par satellite.
8869
Encourager les artistes canadiens en exigeant des stations anglophones du
Canada et des stations anglophones du Québec des seuils minimaux de diffusion de
musique vocale francophone d'artistes canadiens et
québécois.
8870
Encourager les artistes canadiens francophones en augmentant les minimums
requis de contenu vocal de langue française diffusé par les stations de langue
française.
8871
Encourager l'émergence de nouveaux talents en imposant un seuil minimal,
encourager la programmation locale et canadienne, aider financièrement certaines
stations, surtout les stations indépendantes qui doivent investir dans le
passage à la technologie numérique.
8872
C'est avec plaisir que nous répondrons à vos
questions.
8873
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci. Madame la conseillère
Noël.
8874
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Bonjour
mesdames, messieurs, monsieur Perreault.
8875
Monsieur Perreault, d'abord une question sur votre commentaire écrit au
paragraphe 5, vous parlez de données inquiétantes et vous faites référence aux
recettes brutes des stations de langue française qui ne représenteraient que 17
à 18 pour cent de l'ensemble des stations AM‑FM commerciales au
Canada.
8876
Pouvez‑vous nous dire en quoi... comment vous en êtes arrivé à nous dire
que c'était inquiétant? Est‑ce
que... j'aimerais comprendre.
8877
M. PERREAULT: Eh bien!
écoutez; seulement 17, 18 pour cent de l'ensemble des recettes brutes alors que
la proportion francophone au Canada est d'à peu près 25 pour cent, vous
conviendrez avec nous qu'on pourrait s'imaginer et croire qu'il serait à peu
près sensé, normal que ces recettes brutes aillent aussi chercher à peu près 25
pour cent de l'ensemble du total des recettes.
8878
Vous avez là un écart en proportion.
8879
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Est‑ce que
vous avez des statistiques à l'effet qu'il y aurait 25 pour cent de francophones
à l'heure actuelle au Canada?
8880
M. PERREAULT: Bien, c'est
des statistiques publiées par Statistique Canada, recensement 2001, 25 pour cent
de francophones et les québécois représentent aussi 25 pour cent de la
population. C'est des statistiques
officielles, ça, publiées...
8881
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: J'avais
l'impression que les taux avaient un peu baissé étant donné le peu de
progression démographique notamment au Québec par rapport à certaines autres
provinces comme l'Ontario, l'Alberta ou la
Colombie‑Britannique.
8882
M. PERREAULT: Vingt‑cinq
pour cent, madame, à plus ou moins un pour cent, je peux vous l'assurer, étant
branché à l'année longue sur les statistiques officielles du dernier
recensement, je peux vous garantir que c'est dans des proportions de facilement
un sur quatre, 25 pour cent, et si les recettes brutes des stations de radios de
langue française ne représentent que 17, 18 pour cent, vous conviendrez avec
nous qu'il y a un écart qui joue en faveur des stations de radios de langue
anglaise et, évidemment, il est important pour un organisme comme le nôtre de
vous permettre de le constater.
8883
Il y a un écart qui doit être comblé par des mesures qui pourraient aider
à corriger cette situation.
8884
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Pour ce
qui est de la diffusion de musique populaire vocale de langue française, vous
souhaitez... vous souhaitez que le Conseil hausse la norme à 75 pour cent en
période de grande écoute, 75 pour cent et que le montant passe de 55 à 60 pour
cent aux heures de grande écoute, avez‑vous pu mesurer l'impact d'une telle
augmentation, compte tenu de ce qu'on a entendu cette semaine, qu'une telle
augmentation pourrait avoir sur les radiodiffuseurs francophones qui se trouvent
déjà pénalisés, d'après ce qu'ils nous disent, par le double critère, par
rapport aux stations anglophones?
8885
M. PERREAULT: D'abord, je ne
vois pas en quoi elles sont pénalisées selon un des communiqués émis par le CRTC
sur la santé financière des stations de radios.
8886
De 2004 à 2005 globalement, les profits de l'ensemble des stations de
radios canadiennes qu'elles soient de langue française ou de langue anglaise ont
augmenté les bénéfices avant impôt et intérêt ont augmenté de 24 pour
cent.
8887
En ce qui concerne les radios FM de langue anglaise, les bénéfices avant
impôt et intérêts ont augmenté de 2004 à 2005 de 20,9 pour cent et pour les
stations de langue française de 8,2 pour cent.
8888
Vous conviendrez avec nous que la situation, si le 65 pour cent et le 55
pour cent avaient été à ce point dramatique, nous ne parlerions pas d'une
augmentation des bénéfices comme de celles de je viens de vous faire part et ça,
à partir d'un communiqué émis le 4 mai 2006 par le CRTC dont j'ai une copie
devant moi.
8889
Néanmoins, je pense que... néanmoins, je pense qu'il est tout à fait
normal de demander aux stations de radios de langue française d'être de langue
française et d'augmenter le contenu de pièces vocales de langue française
diffusées. De demander de passer de
65 à 75 pour cent, c'est tout simplement de demander une mesure de correction,
de telle sorte que les stations de langue française soient davantage de langue
française, qu'elles soient davantage axées sur la mission qui est la leur, la
diffusion de la langue de la francophonie et de la culture d'expression
française.
8890
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Les
radiodiffuseurs nous ont expliqué cette semaine que le nombre de pièces
musicales nouvelles ne leur permettaient pas d'en ajouter autant que vous
souhaitez et que ce qui arrivait, c'est qu'on avait un phénomène où on brûlait
les artistes émergents.
8891
Pouvez‑vous me faire vos commentaires là‑dessus, en imposant un montant
trop élevé de nouvelles pièces?
8892
M. PERREAULT: Je suis
particulièrement étonné de ce commentaire puisque, selon une étude réalisée par
le Ministère de la culture et des communications du Québec, un très grand nombre
de pièces, je pense, dans les 25 pièces vocales les plus importantes, elles vont
chercher 50 pour cent du temps de diffusion.
8893
Je pense que... et c'est aussi une autre de nos recommandations, il
faudrait qu'on accorde plus de temps de diffusion aux nouveaux talents, aux
artistes de la relève.
8894
Vous savez, je pense que s'il y a une chose de certaine, c'est qu'il y a
au Québec une culture très riche, très créative qui demande d'avoir accès aux
ondes des stations de radios.
Malheureusement, les stations de radios diffusent très souvent les mêmes
pièces vocales d'une station à l'autre, répètent très souvent les mêmes pièces,
ce qui fait que les nouveaux talents et c'est un des soucis important des
objectifs de l'Avis 2006, et il est important à mon avis.
8895
Et vous savez, quand les stations de langue anglaise d'ailleurs qui
disent manquer de contenu canadien pour respecter ‑‑ je parle des stations
de langue anglaise ‑‑ qui manquent de contenu canadien pour respecter le 30
pour cent, eh! bien il faudrait peut‑être qu'elles
apprennent...
8896
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: C'est
35.
8897
M. PERREAULT: Il faudrait
peut‑être qu'elles apprennent la réalité québécoise et francophone parce que
jusqu'à preuve du contraire, ce qui se produit au Québec et ce qui se produit au
sein de la francophonie canadienne est aussi canadien.
8898
Et s'ils manquent de pièces vocales pour respecter le 30 pour cent, eh!
bien il y a un bassin très productif de chansons.
8899
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Monsieur
Perreault, depuis 1998, c'est 35 et non pas 30.
8900
M. PERREAULT: Merci
beaucoup, mais ils ont de la difficulté avec le 35, alors on est prêt à les
aider en vous demandant...
8901
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL:
Maintenant, vous suggérez que les stations anglophones au Québec et les
stations anglophones hors Québec soient tenues à des niveaux de musique de
langue... à diffuser des niveaux de musique de langue française, 20 pour cent si
elles sont au Québec ou si leur antenne est au Québec ou si elles sont captées
au Québec et de 10 pour cent dans tous les autres cas.
8902
Pour ce qui est du Québec, est‑ce que ça ne vous inquiète pas une
proposition comme ça? Est‑ce qu'il
n'y aurait pas un glissement encore plus grand de l'écoute francophone vers les
stations anglophones, et une réduction en conséquence des recettes publicitaires
qui sont basées sur les sons BBM pour les stations
francophones?
8903
M. PERREAULT: Je n'aurai
véritablement aucune inquiétude vous savez parce que, déjà les stations de
langue française diffusent à peu près 35 pour cent de pièces vocales en langue
anglaise.
8904
Je pense que la contrepartie... vous savez, quand on connaît la situation
asymétrique des cultures en Amérique du Nord et des langues, je pense que les
mesures à adopter sont différentes d'une réalité à
l'autre.
8905
D'imposer un minimum de musique vocale de langue française de 75 pour
cent et de 60 pour cent aux heures de grande écoute, ça c'est une mesure
responsable, compte tenu de la situation de la langue de la francophonie et de
la culture d'expression française et de la présence massive de la culture
anglophone et américaine, surtout américaine autour.
8906
De demander, d'imposer un seuil minimum de 10 pour cent et de 20 pour
cent aux stations de langue anglaise, ça je pense que c'est une autre mesure
responsable, mais différente, qui tient compte de la situation asymétrique pour
les obliger à reconnaître qu'il y a une autre réalité, la réalité francophone du
Québec, la réalité francophone de la Francophonie canadienne et de leur donner
une place importante, d'autant plus qu'elles se plaignent de manquer de contenu
canadien.
8907
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Monsieur
le président, ce sont là mes questions.
8908
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci. Monsieur le vice‑président
Arpin.
8909
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Je vous ai
vu pour la première fois aujourd'hui, donc je présume que vous n'avez pas
assisté aux audiences au cours des jours
précédents?
8910
M. PERREAULT: Grâce à la
technologie moderne, j'ai pu écouter à partir d'internet. On vous en remercie
d'ailleurs.
8911
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Donc,
bienvenue. Quand le groupe Standard
Radio a comparu, la question de la musique francophone sur les stations de
langue anglaise particulièrement celles de Montréal a été soulevée et monsieur
Braide qui est le directeur général des stations de Montréal a fait
l'observation suivante : il a dit :
vous devriez plutôt poser la question aux radiodiffuseurs francophones, il me
semble qu'ils ne veulent pas.
8912
Et la raison, il ne l'a pas donnée, mais elle nous est connue au Conseil,
c'est de connaissance du Conseil, ça remonte dans le temps. C'est que ça favorise le glissement des
auditoires francophones vers les stations de langue
anglaise.
8913
L'expérience a été tentée par la station CHOM pendant plusieurs années et
à tel point qu'un jour le Conseil a été obligé de demander à CHOM d'arrêter de
diffuser de la musique de langue française. À ce moment‑là, CHOM diffusait cinq pour
cent de musique vocale de langue française et la majeure partie de son auditoire
était essentiellement des francophones.
8914
Le Conseil d'ailleurs a noté dans sa question autant à l'ACR qu'à Astral
Radio, Cogeco et à Standard que l'auditoire des jeunes francophones de Montréal,
68,4 pour cent des auditoires des trois stations FM de Montréal étaient
essentiellement constituées de francophones.
8915
Avez‑vous... pouvez‑vous peut‑être nous dire pourquoi ce phénomène‑là,
qu'est‑ce qui attire les francophones vers ces stations de langue anglaise et
qu'est‑ce qui attire aussi les francophones à la station WYUL que vous avez
mentionnée?
8916
M. PERREAULT: C'est le degré
d'anglicisation des francophones qui et en cause. C,est un problème qui excède de beaucoup
la discussion ici aujourd'hui, bien qu'elle en fasse
partie.
8917
Vous savez, 91 pour cent des anglophones au Canada sont unilingues
anglais, donc vous avez plus de neuf canadiens anglais sur dix qui ignorent, qui
ne sont pas capables d'accéder à notre réalité. Le taux de connaissance de l'anglais
chez les francophones est au‑delà de 40 pour cent. Si vous enlevez les enfants qui,
évidemment, n'ont pas appris l'anglais, vous constaterez que c'est souvent dans
des proportions de un francophone... six francophones sur dix qui connaissent
l'anglais.
8918
Cette anglicisation par la bilinguisation des francophones les amène,
leur donne la possibilité d'écouter et d'accéder à l'autre culture. Cet isolement du Canada anglais par son
unilinguisme à quelque part, je pense que le Canada une responsabilité à
laquelle peut contribuer le CRTC, mais je pense que l'unilinguisme anglais
défavorise les stations de langue française et le bilinguisme des francophones,
l'anglicisation des francophones avantage les stations de langue anglaise; je
m'excuse.
8919
Et à cet égard, je pense que vous me demandiez une explication, je pense
que l'essentiel de l'explication est là.
L'unilinguisme très répandu au sein du Canada anglais versus la
connaissance très avancée de l'anglais au sein de la francophonie, ce qui crée,
évidemment, une érosion de l'auditoire en faveur des stations de langue
anglaise, mais au détriment des stations de langue
française.
8920
Quand vous me dites que le temps d'écoute chez les jeunes de 12 à 17 ans,
et c'est mentionné dans le mémoire du Ministère de la culture et des
communications du Québec que 33 pour cent du temps d'écoute est consacré aux
stations de langue anglaise, vous conviendrez avec nous que si les stations de
langue anglaise ne diffusent aucun contenu canadien et pourtant canadien et
elles se plaignent de manquer de contenu canadien, ne diffusent aucun contenu
canadien de langue française, je pense que, là, il y a un phénomène d'érosion
assez évident et l'érosion est double parce que même au sein des stations de
langue anglaise, ils n'ont pas accès aux artistes de la
francophonie.
8921
Je peux comprendre le côté délicate de la recommandation que nous
faisons, je pense qu'à cet égard il y aurait lieu, à mon avis de bien y
réfléchir, mais néanmoins, il va falloir briser ce cercle qui va en s'accentuant
de l'anglicisation et de l'érosion des auditoires à la faveur des stations de
langue anglaise.
8922
Il va falloir trouver une façon de briser ça. et ça, là‑dessus, jusqu'à
preuve du contraire, la bilinguisation des anglophones n'a pas donné de résultat
extraordinaire, ce qui fait qu'ils consomment très peu nos produits de langue
française qui, pourtant, sont d'excellents produits puisqu'ils sont reconnus et
nos artistes aussi, internationalement, mais ils ne peuvent pas les découvrir,
ils n'ont pas accès à la...
8923
Ils n'ont pas de connaissance par la langue et les stations de radios ne
les aident pas à leur donner le coup d'y accéder, ils ne diffusent aucun artiste
de langue française.
8924
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Monsieur
Perreault, ça va être ma dernière question. Vous vous présentez devant le Conseil
pour faire des recommandations.
Vous avez dit que vous avez comparu devant le Comité du Patrimoine
probablement avec les mêmes préoccupations.
8925
Est‑ce que vous avez déjà pris l'initiative de rencontrer des
radiodiffuseurs eux‑mêmes, soit individuellement, soit par l'entremise...
l'intermédiaire de leurs associations?
8926
M. PERREAULT: Un très grand
nombre de nos interventions se font justement par média interposé, par
interventions publiques.
8927
Vous savez, c'est ici même, je pense qu'Impératif Français vous avait
sensibilisé à l'exclusion dont nous sommes victimes dans cette région‑ci par
Bell ExpressVu dans le domaine de la télédiffusion. Bell ExpressVu refuse toujours de
diffuser entièrement la station Radio‑Canada régionale de langue française,
alors que Bell ExpressVu diffuse la station régionale de langue anglaise,
CBOT.
8928
Nous avons fait plusieurs interventions et même notre organisme a remis à
plusieurs reprises un prix citron à Bell ExpressVu pour ses pratiques
d'exclusion et pourtant dénonçait et plus d'une fois par notre organisme, mais
par d'autres également. J'ai lu des
éditoriaux dans le journal Le Droit, et pourtant ces pratiques d'exclusions
continuent.
8929
Il y a eu des rencontres... il y a des rencontres chaque fois que nos
intervenants... il y a des
rencontres par l'intermédiaire des médias.
Quand nous exposons des situations aussi inacceptables que celles qui ont
une forte odeur de discrimination par la non‑diffusion de l'antenne régionale de
Radio‑Canada, et je parle de la télé ici, vous conviendrez avec nous que...
rencontres... s'ils souhaitent nous rencontrer à partir des déclarations que
nous faisons, c'est avec plaisir que nous répéterons ce que nous avons dit
publiquement et que nous vous répétons encore aujourd'hui et que nous vous avons
dit à une des rencontres que nous avons eues ici concernant justement le cas de
la radio publique.
8930
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Je vous
remercie, monsieur Perreault. Je
n'ai plus d'autres questions.
8931
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci beaucoup
messieurs, madame et mesdames.
8932
Madame la secrétaire, le prochain item, s'il vous
plaît.
8933
M. PERREAULT: On vous
remercie infiniment. Au
plaisir.
8934
LA SECRÉTAIRE: Merci,
monsieur le président.
8935
I would now invite the next participant, the Canadian Conference of the
Arts, monsieur Alain Pineau, if you could come forward for your
presentation.
8936
Mr. Pineau, when you are ready,
you have ten minutes for your presentation.
PRÉSENTATION /
PRESENTATION
8937
M. PINEAU: Merci. Monsieur le président, mesdames et
messieurs les commissaires.
8938
Depuis novembre dernier, j'ai l'honneur d'être le directeur général de la
Conférence canadienne des arts.
8939
The Canadian Conference of the arts is a unique national organization
with a long and proud tradition of service to the community and to a succession
of Canadian governments and public agencies.
8940
For more than 60 years the CCA has represented the interests and been the
national voice of Canada's arts and cultural communities from north to south,
east to west, English and French.
8941
Artists, cultural producers and their associations from every medium and
every part of the artistic continuum, creators, producers, distributors,
exhibitors and the Heritage Institutions are under the CCA
umbrella.
8942
Many are individuals CCA members, tens of thousands more are connected to
us through professional cultural organizations in every arts discipline and
trade association in all cultural industries.
8943
Il me fait grand plaisir de vous présenter aujourd'hui le point de vue de
la CCA dans le cadre de cette audience dont l'importance ne fait aucun
doute. Il y a plusieurs années que
la CCA n'avait pas comparu devant le CRTC.
8944
Quant à moi, ma dernière intervention remonte à 1995 quand je présidais
la délégation de Radio‑Canada requérant une licence de services audios
payants. Mes neuf dernières années
à Radio‑Canada ont été consacrées au lancement et à la gestion de Galaxie, le
service commercial de musique continue de Radio‑Canada actuellement encore le
service dominant du genre au pays.
8945
À ce titre, j'ai acquis une certaine familiarité avec les questions de
quotas contenus canadiens, de contributions financières au développement du
talent de chez nous
8946
There is no doubt, this is a time of significant transition for Canadian
radio broadcasters and for the music industry with which they have a long
standing symbiotic relationship.
8947
Audiences particularly younger Canadians are increasingly using new
distribution technologies to receive music, news and
information.
Web casting,
broadcasting, downloading and all the other buzz words are having a real
insignificant impact on both sectors.
8948
Young people are as passionate about music as ever, but they are moving
away from radio. There are many
reasons for this, but as was mentioned in this hearing, commercial radio is
largely responsible for that reality.
8949
Over the life of the policy you are going to establish radio broadcasters
will indeed be facing increased competition from streamed audio that can
originate anywhere in the world to the recently licensed satellite radio
subscription services.
8950
Pourquoi la CCA se préoccupe‑t‑elle de la santé de l'industrie de la
musique et des finances de la radio
commerciale?
8951
À cause du contenu culturel dont elles sont responsables, les musiciens,
les compositeurs, les interprètes et les producteurs contribuent de façon
significatives à la définition de ce que nous sommes et de ce que nous avons à
contribuer au dialogue mondial.
8952
Les succès actuels de notre musique sont biens connus. Il ne fait pas oublier que cette
activité culturelle était pratiquement inexistante avant la réglementation
actuelle.
8953
We must build on
this success and continue to provide Canadians and the world with a rich
diversity of Canadian music in every imaginable genres as well as Canadian
perspective in news, sports and other information programming, that is local,
regional and national.
8954
History shows that where we regulate, the Canadian presence is much
stronger than where we don't regulate.
We need only look at Canadian television and movies for proof. For television? There are public funding programs,
Broadcasting Act provision, CRTC rules and regulations, Content rules and
licence requirements. For movies,
there is only ‑‑ limited primarily to
funding.
8955
The significant missing piece is Canadian content rules in movie theatres
which have not been introduced for a variety of reasons and what has been the
outcome? After 50 years, we have a
generally effective television system.
8956
Many believe that the recent problems concerning English language
television drama have a lot to do with regulatory changes that CRTC made in
1999.
8957
In cinema, we continue to struggle to achieve even a two per cent market
share in English Canada. Yet, the
talent pool of the two industries is more or less the same. So, the primary differences are
regulations and control of distribution systems, two issues that are very close
to the heart of the CCA.
8958
Notre intervention
insiste sur la nécessité non seulement de consolider la réglementation pour la
radio commerciale, mais de l'étendre à toutes les plate‑formes de
distribution. Avec respect, nous
nous demandons où en est la révision de l'exemption de 1999 promise pour
2004.
8959
La CCA croit qu'il est critique d'assurer une offre substantielle de
contenu canadien sur les services de musique offerts sur internet par abonnement
ou autrement et de revoir la décision aberrante et potentiellement pernicieuse
de contenu canadien sur la radio satellite.
8960
CCA believes internet
and DAB if it ever comes to pass, broadcasters can and should be regulated to
ensure that they provide an appropriate supply of Canadian materials in their
public offerings.
8961
These regulations probably cannot be Canadian content rules as they exist
in the traditional media since the material is not necessarily scheduled and
broadcast the same way. But the
present situation seems untenable to us.
8962
We all want Canada's broadcasters to take full advantage of the new
technologies offered by internet or DAB, but when they do so, they are no longer
regulated and they can effectively be in competition with their own regulated
offerings.
8963
Internet service provider should also be asked as distribution undertakings to provide access to
Canadian sites and content and to make a financial contribution to arms‑length
funding agencies that can be used to develop new Canadian content for the
internet and other media.
8964
In CCA's views, if such regulations are not introduced soon, we will see
precipitous declines in the production of Canadian content materials of all
kinds and our cultural industries will either become marginalized or merely
browns plant producers.
8965
Pour en revenir à
la radio commerciale, nous croyons qu'il est tout à fait approprié et réaliste
d'augmenter le contenu canadian pour la musique de catégorie 2 à 40 pour cent ou
plus, d'avantage si on songe à instaurer un système incitatif dans lequel cas il
faut établir au moins un plancher de 35 pour cent.
8966
Dans le cas de la musique classique, mon expérience comme responsable des
cinq chaînes classiques de Galaxie me convient de la faisabilité de porter le
contenu canadien à au moins 25 pour cent et pour le jazz à au moins 20 pour
cent.
8967
Dans tous les cas, ces proportions devraient être mesurées sur une base
de trois heures de diffusion, de façon à mettre définitivement fin à toute
tentation de *gettoïser+ la
musique canadienne aux heures de faible écoute.
8968
Encore une fois mon expérience à Galaxie m'a démontré de façon très
claire que la musique canadienne particulièrement les nouveautés ne font pas
fuir l'auditoire si la programmation est faite de façon
compétente.
8969
Côté francophone, nous appuyons les représentations faites par nos
collègues et membres de maintenir la politique actuelle.
8970
The commercial
radio system is financially sound and there is a good reason to expect that it
will continue to be so for the next five to ten years. Radio is a useful vehicle for
advertisers because the medium is local, targeted and easily
measurable.
8971
CCA believes it's appropriate for the Canadian talent development
contributions made by commercial radio broadcasters to increase dramatically to
levels at least to return it to the 1995 ball park.
8972
We also believe strongly that new media, internet, satellite radio
notably, be asked to contribute significantly more to Canadian talent
development, this contribution being inversely proportional to the Canadian
content that they offer.
8973
Let me finish by making a few comments about the debate on how these
Canadian talent development funds should be disbursed. CCA believes that Factor, Music Action,
should continue to play the lead role in the system. They presently operate about 20
different programs across a broad spectrum.
8974
There may be a role for the more targeted program offered by the Radio
Star Maker Fund, Fonds Radio Star, which assist artists who have already
achieved a certain level of success.
8975
There may also be a role for the provincial music industry associations
who have a better handle of local needs than anyone else.
8976
But there must continue to be a place for Factor Musique Action, and
arms‑length agencies that receive public funds and thus, adhere to strict
operating and accountability standards.
8977
In closing, if I may add, I think quite frankly that broadcasters'
contributions for the next few years are probably more reliable than federal
funding, at least until proven wrong.
8978
Il me fera plaisir
de répondre à vos questions si vous en avez.
8979
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci,
monsieur Pineau. Commissioner
Cugini.
8980
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Good
morning, Mr. Pineau.
8981
M. PINEAU: Good
morning.
8982
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Your
oral presentation today was pretty true to your written submission, so I only
have a couple of questions that are perhaps a bit more philosophical than they
are detail‑oriented with regards to your
submissions.
8983
You do advocate varying levels of Canadian content for different genres
of music and as you've said today, popular music at 40, classical at 25 and jazz
to at least 20.
8984
Based on what you've heard this week, I am wondering if you could for us
assess what you think the impact would be of Canadian content at one level for
all genres of music?
8985
M. PINEAU: Quite frankly, I
don't think that's realistic. I
mean, we don't have... we don't provide the same... I mean, for example, there
is currently no or hardly any hip‑hop music being produced here. I mean, when services like Galaxie offer
a hip‑hop channel, it offers a platform.
Regulation and distribution provide an opportunity for music to
develop. I think you have to
realize that.
8986
There was a long discussion internally and we consulted our membership
because our membership covers a number of organizations who were here
before and they are all over the map in terms of
that.
8987
We try to strike something that is reasonable, achievable. There were arguments, for example, that
jazz could be more than 20 percent.
I think if it is so it should be gradual, because when we started with
CanCon regulations there was hardly anything to speak of, so there is a first
period where production comes but there are lots of weeds and everything gets
played and eventually natural selection leads to the best to survive. The more there is outlet, the more
production there is.
8988
So I think you could look at raising the level progressively over various
genres, but you have to take into account the reality of life, which is that
these things will evolve over time.
So there could be step‑up procedures. You are looking at five years so I don't
think it is material. If you were
looking at 10 years I think you should really look at graduating steps in
various genres.
8989
By they way, if I may use this platform to say why we think that the
Canadian content regulation for satellite radio is a burden, is that you
don't create audiences by putting a big dustbin in the middle of the room where
all genres confused are thrown in.
8990
This is not the way people listen to music. They don't listen to Canadian
content. People don't say, "Oh God,
yes, I got the satellite service here.
I'm going to check what Canadian content is like today." They want to hear, jazz, they want to
hear rock 'n roll, they want to hear progressive, they want to hear
ambient. That is the way people use
radio.
8991
What is important is that the Canadian content be weaved competently
throughout the programming.
8992
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: As you
know, just about every broadcaster who has appeared before us this week has said
if you raise Canadian content levels you will simply drive radio listeners to
internet radio, to satellite radio.
8993
You obviously don't agree with that.
8994
MR. PINEAU: No, I don't
agree with that. I think if they do
their job properly they will find the right music and they will be able to put
it into the programming the way that it fits. I know that because they all use the
same software that we use at Galaxie to do programming.
8995
It is all a matter of choosing the music and establishing the proper
rules and you push the button and out it comes. You check to make sure that the outcome
is what you wanted, because no software system is perfect, but that is the way
you do programming and that is the way you introduce talent. And you do that no by hiring hackers who
just plunk whatever comes in and say okay, I have my Canadian quota in
today.
8996
I don't want to sound disparaging to the radio industry, that is not
the point, but there are ways of doing it that will not drive people away
at all.
8997
In nine years at Galaxie ‑‑ and we had Canadian content,
38 percent spread over 45 channels. That means that some channels had to
be ‑‑ 1950s, you don't have much Canadian content to put there, so you have
to make up at the other end by putting more Canadian
content.
8998
We had lots of Canadian content on the classical channels because there
is lots of material. Quite frankly,
users of services like Galaxie or commercial radio don't really give a damn
whether it is this conductor that conductor, as long as it is the piece that
they like, because they are all competently recorded.
8999
THE CHAIRPERSON: You haven't
checked your audio files recently, have you?
9000
MR. PINEAU:
Sorry?
9001
THE CHAIRPERSON: Those are
fighting words.
‑‑‑ Laughter /
Rires
9002
MR. PINEAU:
Sorry?
9003
THE CHAIRPERSON: Choice of
conductors is extremely important for many.
9004
MR. PINEAU: Oh, it is,
sir. That is why I have a record
collection at home. But when I'm
listening to Galaxie I am quite happy to listen to Beethoven's Fifth or
Schubert's Eighth by a Canadian orchestra.
9005
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Just
one final question.
9006
In your written submission you say:
"A
judicious reinterpretation of the definition of a Canadian
recording..."
9007
And you note that artists such as Diana Krall may not qualify as
Canadian.
9008
MR. PINEAU:
Yes.
9009
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Are you
suggesting a retooling of the MAPL system?
9010
MR. PINEAU: Well, we didn't
delve into that question and I will just answer on a
personal level.
9011
When I was responsible for Galaxie I had a problem with the fact that she
wouldn't qualify, quite frankly, as I have a problem with the fact that if it is
Léopold Simoneau, or if it's Jon Vickers, this is not Canadian content? I have a problem with
that.
9012
I would not pose as an expert to say ‑‑ because there are many
considerations to this, but I can only state that yes, we do have a
problem.
9013
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Thank
you, Mr. Pineau.
9014
Those are all my questions, Mr. Chairman.
9015
THE CHAIRPERSON: Just to
follow up on that, when you refer to your own experience which I'm interested in
here when you were in charge of classical for Galaxie, when you say you think,
as you put it here:
"...me
convaincre de la faisabilité de porter le contenu canadien au moins à 25 pour
cent."
9016
(Tel que lu)
9017
You are saying that
was content level achieved at Galaxie for classical?
9018
MR. PINEAU: Actually it was
higher than that.
9019
THE CHAIRPERSON: What was
it?
9020
MR. PINEAU: It was only for
compensation in other sectors and there is also lots of material available. It depends. We had five classical channels at
Galaxie. Opera was not very
high. There is not many
opera ‑‑ quite frankly, I was very tempted to count as Canadian content an
opera that had Jon Vickers in it even though it wasn't
MAPL.
9021
Chamber music there are abundant recordings. You don't have all the important stuff,
but you have a lot of it.
9022
The pop classic, which is mostly what off‑air radio broadcasters are
offering, there is ample choice.
9023
Where there are holes is somewhere in symphonic music and concertos,
classical concertos, the most popular ones, but even those are coming
available.
9024
And there are other ways of doing that, too. I mean, it's possible to purchase rights
to recorded concerts or things like that.
I mean, when you want to there are ways of doing
it.
9025
I am a steady listener of the classical radio stations, it is my passion,
and the kind of stuff that I hear there, they should have no problem meeting 25
per cent at all. Quite frankly, I
think it is a modest target.
9026
THE CHAIRPERSON: Under the
MAPL rules?
9027
MR. PINEAU: Yes. Of course it will lead to a lot of
royalties flowing into TEFL musique and l'Orchestre symphonique de Montréal,
amongst others, to the CBC also, but ATNA and ELECTA, Marquis ‑‑ the
gentleman was here earlier this week.
This was all material that we used extensively.
9028
So there is more of a debate about the quality of Canadian recordings
fitting MAPL for jazz, so we took a sort of compromise position
there.
9029
THE CHAIRPERSON: Right. Okay. Thank you very
much.
9030
MR. PINEAU: You are most
welcome.
9031
LE PRÉSIDENT : Monsieur Arpin...?
9032
CONSEILLER ARPIN :
Vous parlez avec abondance de la musique classique. Une audience qu'on a eu récemment, dont
le Conseil n'a pas encore pris de décision, mais le requérant, qui était
monsieur Collier, nous a dit qu'il était capable de supporter 40 pour cent de
musique classique canadienne.
9033
Est‑ce que vous trouvez, basé sur votre expérience, que c'est une
proposition réaliste?
9034
M. PINEAU : Moi, je vais vous dire franchement, j'ai programmé
personnellement la chaîne des Grands classiques, et j'ai programmé
personnellement la chaîne Baroque, et un niveau de 50 pour cent est facile
à atteindre quand vous comptez la rotation.
9035
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui, évidemment.
Oui, oui. Je suis sûr qu'il
comptait la rotation, puis il avait suffisamment d'expérience pour répondre à la
question.
9036
M. PINEAU : Quarante pour cent, je... puis, d'ailleurs, monsieur Collier
sait de quoi il parle là.
9037
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui.
9038
M. PINEAU : Je le respecte beaucoup à ce chapitre‑là. C'est un grand amateur de musique
classique, puis il connaît ses enregistrements.
9039
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Et, donc, il y a suffisamment... parce que vous avez
mentionné Jon Vickers et quelques autres qui ont enregistré sur des labels
étrangers, et je pense à monsieur Hamelin, je pense à Alain Trudel. Je sais qu'il y a beaucoup
d'enregistrements qui sont faits en Europe. Mais c'est encore le même problème que
vous avez mentionné avec Diana Krall.
9040
M. PINEAU : Oui. Oui. Mais malgré ça, même en disant que ces
gens‑là ne compteraient pas comme contenu canadien ‑‑ et, encore une fois,
j'ai un problème à ce chapitre‑là ‑‑ je pense que le contenu... MAPL
devrait peut‑être être un peu modulé en fonction des genres
musicaux.
9041
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Bon, d'accord.
9042
Il y a d'autres intervenants qui ont soumis au Conseil, encore dans le
secteur de la musique classique, que le Conseil devrait penser à une
réglementation qui favoriserait les compositeurs canadiens. Un groupe a mentionné 3 pour cent, et un
autre groupe a mentionné 5 pour cent.
9043
Croyez‑vous que ce sont des demandes qui sont réalistes? Je parle bien de compositeurs
canadiens. Donc, c'est de la
musique beaucoup plus contemporaine.
Est‑ce qu'il y en a suffisamment, basé sur votre expérience sur disque et
puis...
9044
M. PINEAU : Il y en a suffisamment, je le crois. Oui, il y en a une bonne
quantité.
9045
Mais là, vous avez mis le doigt sur quelque chose qui est extrêmement
difficile à discuter. J'étais
toujours dans une position très difficile à Galaxie quand j'allais devant le
Conseil québécois de la musique pour donner des bourses à des artistes, où on se
faisait interpeller, justement, sur le fait que sur 45 scènes, il n'y en a pas
une qui soit consacrée à la musique
contemporaine.
9046
Vous avez le même débat qui est soulevé chaque fois que Radio‑Canada
apparaît devant vous. Il y a un
problème là, puis moi, je dois dire que de ce côté‑là... le côté commercial chez
moi l'emporte sur le côté nationaliste.
C'est qu'il faut être réaliste aussi.
9047
Est‑ce que... il faut que cette musique‑là soit diffusée, mais ce n'est
peut‑être pas dans le broadcasting que ça se fait. Les nouvelles technologies permettent
d'offrir ce genre de musique‑là.
Cette musique‑là, le public doit y être introduit par le biais des
concerts et tout.
9048
Il y a toute une infrastructure derrière ça. Demander à des gens qui doivent vivre de
revenus commerciaux puis attirer du monde, de jouer de la musique qui est
tellement marginale, je regrette de le dire là, je vais peut‑être me faire tuer
par les membres que je représente, mais personnellement, ma sympathie est
partagée.
9049
CONSEILLER ARPIN : On risque de l'entendre à 6 h 00 le matin ou à 11 h 00
le soir?
9050
M. PINEAU : Oui, probablement, un peu comme c'était à Radio‑Canada,
d'ailleurs, où ça passait à 11 h 00 le soir les fins de
semaine.
9051
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Je vous réfère à votre page 6... et là, la question,
je vais vous la poser en anglais.
Vous pouvez y répondre selon votre choix. Effectivement, c'est dans votre dernier
paragraphe en anglais de la page 6.
9052
Ma question, c'est : Do you have
substantive proof to sustain that if internet rules are not shortly introduced
production of Canadian content will decline?
9053
M. PINEAU : Je m'excuse, je cherche...
9054
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Parce que vous dites :
"If such
regulations are not introduced soon, we will see precipitous declines of the
production of Canadian content materials of all kinds." (As read)
9055
M. PINEAU :
Oui.
9056
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Est‑ce que vous avez... pouvez‑vous documenter cette
affirmation‑là?
9057
M. PINEAU : Non, pas au sens statistique du mot. Puis ça serait difficile de le faire,
d'ailleurs, parce que c'est une prédiction.
9058
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui.
9059
M. PINEAU : Maintenant, precipitous, on peut argumenter sur qu'est‑ce qui
est precipitous là, est‑ce que c'est cinq ans ou est‑ce que c'est 10
ans.
9060
Ça pris 30 ans pour construire l'industrie de la musique qu'on a
actuellement, qui réussit à travers le monde.
9061
Ça peut prendre beaucoup moins de temps pour la démanteler parce que...
je vais prendre l'exemple qui était... les gens qui me précédaient ici tout à
l'heure.
9062
On le sait que ça prend une seule génération pour effacer un groupe
linguistique. Je connais plein de
gens dont les noms sont tout à fait francophones et dont les parents parlaient
français et qui ne comprennent pas aujourd'hui.
9063
Bien, c'est un peu la même chose aussi. Avec l'explosion des moyens de
distribution qu'on a maintenant... et toutes ces questions‑là sont
interreliées. Ce n'est pas pour
rien qu'on mentionne ici la question de la propriété étrangère, qui va
certainement faire l'objet d'un débat politique...
9064
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui.
9065
M. PINEAU : ...très actif chez vous et ailleurs, et on y
sera.
9066
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Je suis sûr.
Sûr, sûr, sûr.
9067
M. PINEAU : Absolument.
9068
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Donc, si je vous comprends bien, c'est que vous nous
invitez à la vigilance et non nécessairement à introduire une instance
réglementaire dès la semaine prochaine?
9069
M. PINEAU : Non, mais je vous dirais que le mois prochain serait déjà pas
trop tard.
9070
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Ah! bon.
9071
M. PINEAU : Et si je peux me permettre, on aura peut‑être des suggestions
à faire qui pourraient être constructives à ce chapitre‑là, parce que je
comprends les réalités commerciales de la radio satellite, qui était ici plus
tôt.
9072
Quand les chaînes viennent des États‑Unis, ça va prendre du temps avant
que le contenu canadien soit très élevé là‑dessus. Mais il y a d'autres façons, puis
j'écoutais avec intérêt comment est‑ce qu'ils contribuent au
développement.
9073
Bien, s'ils ne sont pas capables de contribuer au développement en
exposant puis en donnant des tribunes, parce que ce n'est pas deux chaînes
francophones qui vont donner beaucoup, beaucoup d'exposure. Ce n'est pas rien que de mettre ça en
l'air, c'est de voir qui l'écoute.
9074
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui.
9075
M. PINEAU : Demandez‑leur quand ils reviendront chez vous quelles
statistiques ils ont sur l'écoute qu'il y a de ces chaînes‑là
spécifiquement. Ils sont assez
riches pour se payer cette recherche‑là, je pense, avec les backers qu'ils
ont.
9076
CONSEILLER ARPIN : On s'est fait dire à l'audience par les gens du groupe
Jim Pattison ‑‑ évidemment, ils ne nous ont pas donné des données sur
l'écoute francophone, mais ils nous ont donné des données globales ‑‑ que
la part de marché de la radio par satellite, selon BBM du printemps 2006, dans
le marché de Kamloops, c'était 9 parts de marché.
9077
M. PINEAU : Oui. Mais ce qui
est important de regarder là‑dedans pour ceux qui viennent dire, on fait du
contenu canadien, holà, holà, c'est qui l'écoute.
9078
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui, oui.
9079
M. PINEAU : Ce n'est pas rien que d'en mettre sur une tablette. Si c'est là, puis que personne n'y
touche, puis que c'est couvert de poussière...
9080
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Et je comprends que c'est 9 parts consolidés des 200
canaux qui sont là, parce qu'il y a deux entreprises,
hein.
9081
M. PINEAU : Je reconnais, cependant, qu'ils font une contribution, puis
j'étais très intéressé de les entendre parler de ce qu'ils font en terme
d'exposure, puis en terme d'entrevue, puis en terme de publicité, puis en terme
d'argent surtout, parce que s'ils ne sont pas capables de donner une tablette ou
un débouché que le monde va écouter pour vraie là, bien, qu'ils compensent en
donnant plus d'argent.
9082
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui.
9083
M. PINEAU : C'est ça, puis c'est la même chose pour internet. Puis vous allez nous revoir réintervenir
sur une autre demande qui est devant vous concernant la distribution de ces
signaux‑là sur le câble, parce que ça, c'est the thin edge of the wedge
là.
9084
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Oui.
Écoutez, on se reverra à ce moment‑là. Je vous remercie, Monsieur
Pineau.
9085
M. PINEAU : Je ne pense pas qu'il y aura d'audience publique, mais vous
allez me lire.
‑‑‑ Rires /
Laughter
9086
THE
CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Pineau, when you
were programming the classical stations for Galaxie, did you ever track record
sales?
9087
One of the arguments that we have heard is that record sales of Canadian
recordings appear to be at the 16 percent level overall. I don't think it was broken down by
category.
9088
Do you have any idea of classic record sales percent Canadian of the
classical record sales?
9089
MR. PINEAU: No, I'm sorry, I
don't have that information.
9090
THE CHAIRPERSON: You have
never tracked that?
9091
MR. PINEAU: No, I'm sorry, I
don't have that information.
9092
THE CHAIRPERSON: Do you
think it is a pertinent consideration in establishing
content quotas?
9093
MR. PINEAU: I don't think
so, quite frankly.
9094
THE CHAIRPERSON: Why is
that?
9095
MR. PINEAU: As long as a
recording is available it can be played there. It generates royalties, it is another
way of feeding the system, it is another way of exposing our artists. Record sales is one way, royalties on
services like this.
9096
By the way, when I suggest that regulation and contributions be
proportionate, you have the precedent in Galaxie for example. Galaxie was asked to provide 4 percent
of its gross revenue for talent development. That is not what radio is
providing.
9097
So you can modulate, and you can modulate with commercial radio, you can
have a different level much higher because they don't contribute in other ways
with satellite radio or with internet providers like Rogers or like anyone else,
Sympatico who offers only MSN music.
How much Canadian content is there?
9098
I am wired at home. I can
listen to MSN channel anywhere in the home. It comes from my computer. This is direct competition with
everything else that has to do with Canadian content, let alone commercial
radio. I think you have to bear
that in mind.
9099
One of my concerns, quite frankly, coming here ‑‑ and I'm glad to
see that the debate is not that way and you seem to be open to the concept
also ‑‑ we cannot look at any of these components separate from the big
picture.
9100
THE CHAIRPERSON: I certainly
think there is general consensus on that.
9101
Thank you very much, Mr. Pineau, for appearing
today.
9102
M. PINEAU: Merci
beaucoup.
9103
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci
beaucoup.
9104
Madam Secretary.
9105
THE SECRETARY: Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
9106
Before going to the next participant I would just like to indicate for
the record there are three participants who have advised us that they will not
be appearing.
9107
One is No. 44 on the Agenda, Monsieur Jean‑Robert Bisaillon, Société pour
la promotion de la relève musicale de l'espace francophone; No. 51, La
Fédération nationale des communications; et également le numéro 50,
Mr. John Stevenson.
9108
I would now call on the next participant, who was expected to appear
yesterday but due to a serious consideration he was asked to participate
today.
9109
I am calling Evanov Radio Group Inc., if you would come forward for your
presentation.
‑‑‑
Pause
PRESENTATION /
PRÉSENTATION
9110
MR. B. EVANOV: Before we
begin, thank you for considering our problem of yesterday.
9111
We have appeared before everyone on the Panel, I believe, in previous
hearings but this is the first time before one of the Commissioners. So we would like to say
bonjourno.
9112
Bonjour and good morning, Mr. Chairman, Monsieur Vice‑Chair,
Commissioners and Commission staff.
9113
My name is Bill Evanov. I am
here today with my team to present comments that are in addition to those we
filed in these proceedings.
9114
With me today, and seated at my right, is Carmela Laurignano,
Vice‑President of our Radio group; and to my left is Paul Evanov, Vice‑President
of Programming.
9115
Carmela will summarize the comments we submitted in the written phase of
this process.
9116
MS LAURIGNANO: We think
competition is vital to the long‑term health of any industry. Given the recently published revenue
figures for the industry, it is undeniable that the 1998 decision by the
Commission to change the ownership rules has made the radio industry more
profitable.
9117
However, we would believe it has not necessarily served to strengthen
it. Fewer companies control more of
the radio spectrum and tuning among key demographics has
declined.
9118
We feel that it is the independent radio operators ‑‑ unfettered by
public offerings and unable to amortize the cost of operations across stations
in profitable markets ‑‑ that are really responding to consumer needs. Beyond just our own group we can point
to many other small operators across this country who have taken risks with
formats, found underserved demos and created truly local initiatives in both
programming and CTD.
9119
And most importantly these operators have found success, in hours tuned
and in advertiser support.
9120
Smaller operators may not report the same high level of earnings as the
larger companies, but this should not be the test of their success or
contribution. It goes without
saying that we are not adverse to profits, but it is clear that the larger
operators have consistently chosen to serve markets and audiences that are most
advertiser friendly.
9121
In the Canadian broadcast system it is the smaller operators by and large
who are filling in the gaps in service, making sure that ethnic groups, youth,
smaller communities and niche markets are served.
9122
Their collective contribution is also sharply demonstrated in the
innovative contributions to Canadian Talent Development that are evident at most
licence hearings. After we reviewed
several applications spanning multiple markets and proceedings, we were left to
conclude that it is generally the smaller operators that bring forward the truly
local initiatives for developing talent.
9123
Much has been said about the role of FACTOR and StarMaker in these
proceedings. There has even been a
position put forward that 80 percent of all monies should be split between these
two groups in English Canada.
9124
However, we think this position completely undermines the very goal of
funding Canadian Talent Development.
9125
Music, like art, is a matter of taste. So, too, then is the decision of who
gets funding and how much. And
while we do not presume that our assessments are superior to that of either of
these funding organizations, we do recognize they are different. And in that difference there is
value.
9126
We think the more people engaged in the decision of who gets funding in
this country, the better off we all will be. This includes artists, consumers,
broadcasters and regulators.
9127
We feel that broadcasters should not only be encouraged but also rewarded
for their innovative local initiatives that expand the opportunities for talent
from all over this country to access funds and develop their
craft.
9128
We noted in our filing that when we write a cheque to FACTOR we have no
really idea where the money goes.
Thanks to the audited report by PWC that was filed by the CAB, we now
do.
9129
And while we do not question the very real talent of the recipients, we
note with dismay that several recipients of funding have successful careers,
receive radio airplay and are Canadian success stories in their own
right.
9130
This sadly explains to us why so many young and aspiring artists find
their way to our door complaining that they need help.
9131
If you limit the monies that radio operators can direct to these artists
by forcing the funding to two national organizations with mandates that include
funding established and successful acts, you will do so at the detriment to
community based initiatives.
9132
Artists are not born ready to record, and if we do not fund the artists
who are in their pre‑recording phase, who will?
9133
Concentrating funding will serve the interests of the recording industry
and certainly make it much easier to pull together an application. But it really does not serve the intent
of the Canadian Talent Development, nor we believe the needs of the artistic
community.
9134
MR. P. EVANOV: One of the
areas of concern that we would like to touch on is Canadian Content. I would like to address this by
responding to the comment filed on the levels of CanCon.
9135
We do not think that the level of Canadian Content should go above the
current 35 percent. We say this
although we, too, have committed at hearings to play at least 40 percent in some
of our most recent applications.
9136
Some formats, including the two we have pioneered, can easily handle this
commitment because the supply of artists and the genres of music being played is
sufficient. For other genres,
however, this is not the case and increased requirements will result in higher
repetition of a few artists.
9137
Gold formats, for example, are unable to include new and emerging artists
at a level that truly promotes Canadian talent.
9138
The predominance of Gold based formats contributes the consumer
perception that a lot of radio sounds the same because the same artists are
played frequently and everywhere.
This does no one any favours.
As a programmer, I am very sensitive to issue of listener fatigue and
artist or title burn‑out.
9139
When an artist is burned out in programming terms, it means that
listeners actually tune out when they are played, and from a business
perspective this makes no sense. We
lose listeners and for the artist there will be fewer CD sales and lower
attendance at live performances.
9140
We support a Smart 35 that encourages broadcasters to play more Canadian
selections by rewarding then through reducing the overall percentage
requirement. This means that broadcasters will be better positioned to meet the
consumer need for diversity and variety in music ‑‑ a recurring theme in
all of the programming research we look at.
9141
MR. B. EVANOV: Digital
radio. Over the years the
Commission has encouraged the industry to invest in digital. At licence applications and renewals the
broadcast industry has been directed to adopt and adapt the L‑Band digital
technology. Broadcasters have
incurred considerable capital and ongoing carrying costs with no results. The L‑Band digital experiment has thus
far failed.
9142
When Canada adopted L‑Band digital, or Eureka, the United States, for
reasons we will never know, rejected its use. That message did not reach Ford and
General Motors in Canada, which more than three years ago announced that digital
radio would be in their cars and would be rolled out in numerous
models.
9143
This is what Canadian broadcasters needed for the experiment to
succeed. They could now launch a
campaign promoting both in‑car use and portable use of digital
radio.
9144
Then out of the blue ‑‑ for reasons we will also never know ‑‑
the two major car manufacturers did an about‑face, a 180‑degree turnaround, and
announced that they would not put digital in their cars. Later they announced they would carry
satellite radio.
9145
The selling thrust of digital radio was based on state of the art sound
quality. Therein lies the mistake
and the failure of the digital experiment in
Canada.
9146
If we had created unique programming that appealed to niche markets, a
demand for the digital frequency would have been established. In Toronto alone we would have served
more than 20 distinct niche markets.
When you serve 20 niche markets, they each create passion and enthusiasm
for that particular service, which collectively with the total 20 could have
convinced other car manufacturers to include digital.
9147
Even Ford and GM, for a few pennies more, could have added digital in the
car as well as a satellite band.
9148
But our focus was on digital sound clarity, and the automobile roll‑out
would have made it very, very easy.
Yet the emphasis should have been on programming, and 14 hours alone does
not create niche programming appeal.
9149
Without the automobile, it is redundant to carry mainstream programming
on both FM and digital channels simultaneously.
9150
The options are clear.
9151
We keep doing what we are doing ‑‑ broadcasting to no one ‑‑
while waiting to see what happens with new technology, as the CAB has
suggested.
9152
Or we shut down the digital transmitter sites and cease
broadcasting.
9153
Or we are proposing, for a five‑year experimental period, totally
deregulate digital radio and allow broadcasters to program a unique service to
underserved segment of the population.
This niche broadcasting will create a demand for digital radio. Eventually that demand will convince car
manufacturers to include L‑Band.
9154
Give us free rein to create the content, address niche markets and we
will create a demand for digital receivers. If we do not have the latitude in a
highly competitive multimedia to create offerings that distinguish the value of
the digital platform, all of our investments to date will have been
lost.
9155
MR. P. EVANOV: In summary,
we strongly urge the Commission to implement any changes to policy only after
the impact on the independent broadcasters has been thoroughly considered. Any change that strengthens their
position or expands their role would be a direct contribution to the goals of
the Broadcasting Act.
9156
We thank you for inviting us to appear and for us to present our
case.
9157
We will be happy to answer any questions you might
have.
9158
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you
very much.
9159
I am going to lead off and my colleagues will pick up other questions
possibly.
9160
I appreciate the situation you are in, Mr. Evanov, in regard to the
L‑Band and your sense of the stranded investment and so
on.
9161
I am wondering about some of the assumptions,
though.
9162
Your assumption is that with niche broadcasting, essentially allowing you
to find formats without regulatory constraints, I assume is what you are saying,
you believe that you can create enough demand to convince the car manufacturers
to install in‑car receivers that will then provide you with the critical mass
you need.
9163
I am wondering about those assumptions, given the size of the Toronto
market, the Canadian market, how you believe that this will actually
occur.
9164
MR. B. EVANOV: First, I
believe we have to do something. We
can't just let this channel sit there.
9165
We could hold it for future use, but we can do that anyway while we
experiment.
9166
I guess what we are saying is what we are experimenting with now is
really going nowhere. There is no
one listening to digital radio.
Unlike the Vice‑Chair, I don't even own a digital
radio.
9167
I guess what turned everyone off is when the car manufacturers said they
were not going to put it in there.
9168
We have had a good track record of creating niche programming, and very
successful niche programming: with
an ethnic station that had a poor signal in the Toronto‑Brampton area; with even
Z103 in the early days, which is CIDC‑FM, which doesn't cover the whole CMA;
with FOXY, which has a poor signal.
9169
But with all these we more or less went after niche
programming.
9170
Initially on CIDC‑FM we created the dance music format. Then we
had ‑‑
9171
THE CHAIRPERSON: If you
could just bear with me on the question.
9172
MR. B. EVANOV: I'm
sorry.
9173
THE CHAIRPERSON: I am
questioning your assumption that even if you did that, you would be able to
somehow convince the car manufacturers.
9174
MR. B. EVANOV: Let me jump
forward.
9175
It is not based on any research with the car companies, but I know that
if you create a market of 20 specialty channels in Toronto and call them
digital, and those channels have a following, then you have a collective total
of those. I think you have a very
good case to make with the car manufacturers.
9176
I think Duff Roman mentioned ‑‑ and I'm not sure if it was in the
hearing or outside the hearing ‑‑ that to add L‑Band to the receiver is not
a major problem. It's a matter of
one or two chips and it's not a costly factor. The car radios can carry L‑Band. They can
carry ‑‑
9177
THE CHAIRPERSON: Your
statement that even Ford and GM for a few pennies could add digital, are you
basing it on your conversation with Duff Roman ‑‑
9178
MR. B. EVANOV: With other
broadcasters and people we have talked to.
9179
THE CHAIRPERSON: ‑‑ or any knowledge that you actually have as to
the costs?
9180
MR. B. EVANOV: Okay. I haven't assessed the costs but I've
talked to various engineers. I've talked to people that I've dealt with, people
in Europe, that have basically conveyed to me ‑‑ and pennies may be not the
right word, but you are not looking at an astronomical cost to include various
bands on a digital radio.
9181
We think it would happen if there was ‑‑ if there were 20 channels
operating or 25 channels operating in Toronto, as the specialty channels do, I
think that someone is going to look at this and say there is a real market
here. And if I put them in my cars,
these people will want to have them.
9182
THE CHAIRPERSON: You are
saying, given the other alternatives, as desperate as that one is, it is
probably no worse than just abandoning the channel or going
forward.
9183
I don't see the economic argument making much sense,
frankly.
9184
I see that you are in a desperate situation or you feel that you are, and
you want to try and figure out something.
9185
MR. B. EVANOV: I am not
coming to you with any great research on this.
9186
THE CHAIRPERSON:
Yes.
9187
MR. B. EVANOV: I guess I am
coming to you with years of broadcast experience in terms of niche
marketing. I know what we can
do.
9188
I think it could be a successful venture in the Greater Toronto Area, for
example.
9189
THE CHAIRPERSON: Have you
talked to other broadcasters about this proposal?
9190
You are assuming 20 other broadcasters or 20 other stations will set up
and use their L‑Band frequencies to do the same.
9191
MS LAURIGNANO: If I could
just add to that, yes, we have spoken with other broadcasters when we cry the
blues together about the annual renewals for the transmitter and the cost, and
at meetings.
9192
THE CHAIRPERSON:
Sure.
9193
MS LAURIGNANO: I can also
speak, for example, of the CAEB, the ethnic broadcasters, that we are on the
same page in terms of we need to do something, especially in the larger areas,
larger markets such as Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, Calgary, and so on, where
the space on the dial is so limited and the demand, as you know, is so great for
some services, be they ethnic or specialty or other niche kind of
formats.
9194
We do believe that there is room for some service to be accomplished
through digital. If the service is
unique and you can't it anywhere else, it will drive people to buy a digital
radio receiver. And eventually, if
the demand is there, it just makes economic sense for the car manufacturers and
other people eventually to get on board.
9195
It is not unlike the SCMO type of scenario where people went out and
bought the receivers. We certainly
think that digital has a better chance than the SCMO in terms of equipment and
sound, and that kind of thing.
9196
THE CHAIRPERSON: General
Sarnoff's philosophy was the opposite.
He handed out radios free so that there would be
listeners ‑‑
9197
MS LAURIGNANO: That's
right.
9198
THE CHAIRPERSON: ‑‑ be able to
broadcast ‑‑
9199
MS LAURIGNANO:
Right.
9200
THE CHAIRPERSON: Coming at
it the other way.
9201
MS LAURIGNANO: But we can't
do that unless we can offer the programming. If the programming is good and great and
it is niche and it is not available anywhere else, then we the broadcasters
would be happy to go get the radios and give it the
people.
9202
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
9203
Monsieur Arpin.
9204
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Only for
the record, because it is not a question but I think it has to be said at some
point in time.
9205
There are reasons why the manufacturers like GM and Ford did quit. They felt that the broadcasters were not
investing enough into the technology.
They didn't develop the Windsor‑Quebec City corridor fast
enough.
9206
They are not interested in Toronto.
They are not interested in Montreal, because obviously people commute
between localities and they were looking at the long haul, particularly GM with
their service ‑‑ I forget the name.
9207
MS LAURIGNANO:
OnStar.
9208
COMMISSIONER ARPIN:
OnStar. They were seeing
that DAB was a very good way to introduce OnStar in cars, and obviously they
were looking for the highways. They
were looking for the Trans‑Canada Highway.
9209
How long will it take us to develop from St. John's to
Victoria?
9210
They felt that the plan that the broadcaster had, which was voluntary
based on the various participants, some interested, some not interested, some
looking towards IBOC rather than DAB.
So they made their decision.
9211
As Duff Roman stated, it cost $13 million to GM to
quit.
9212
And that, I think for the record, has to be said.
9213
A multiplex receiver is coming.
Only a week ago, RadioScape, which is a receiver manufacturer based in
the U.K., announced that they were coming out with a new receiver that
integrates AM, DAB, FM, DRM. And
obviously they will be capable also over a short period of time to have
satellite services.
9214
So it is coming. But I
understand what you said. You said
it may be worth trying other alternatives.
9215
But as long as we don't develop the corridors, the car manufacturers
won't be there.
9216
MS LAURIGNANO: Well, it's
good that the digital receivers are coming. We think under the current conditions,
where we are practically simulcasting on both bands, with only 14 hours, that
too will not drive the roll‑out or the sales of the
radios.
9217
If people have it over the air and it is already so much more portable
and convenient, they will not go out and invest in that.
9218
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank
you.
9219
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you
very much for appearing before us.
9220
MS LAURIGNANO: Thank
you.
9221
THE CHAIRPERSON: I think we
will break now for lunch and resume at 2:00 p.m.
9222
Nous reprendons à 14 h 00.
‑‑‑ Upon recessing
at 1240 / Suspension à 1240
‑‑‑ Upon resuming
at 1407 / Reprise à 1407
9223
THE CHAIRPERSON: Order,
please. À l'ordre, s'il vous
plaît.
9224
Madam Secretary, would you call the next item.
9225
THE SECRETARY: Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
9226
I would now invite the Coalition of Nine Provincial/Territorial Music
Industry in Process Association to make their presentation. Mr. Sam Baardman will be appearing for
this participant.
9227
Mr. Baardman, you have 10 minutes for your
presentation.
9228
MR. BAARDMAN: Thank
you.
PRESENTATION /
PRÉSENTATION
9229
MR. BAARDMAN: Good
afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the
Commission.
9230
My name is Sam Baardman and I am Executive Director of the Manitoba
Recording Industry Association and Chair of FACTOR's National Advisory
Board.
9231
I am pleased to be speaking today on behalf of a coalition of nine
provincial and territorial music industry associations representing the regional
interests of the Canadian music industry outside of
Quebec.
9232
As we noted in our submission, we are new to the ongoing dialogue between
the music industry, broadcasters and the CRTC, and we sincerely appreciate the
opportunity to participate in this important national
conversation.
9233
Our intent here today is to respond to two key issues that have been
raised in this review to date.
9234
First, to CanCon. As you
recall, in our original submission we asked that the Commission consider
strengthening Canadian content regulations across five different dimensions but
the aspect of CanCon that seems to be garnering the most attention is the issue
of emerging artists and how to define them for the purpose of
broadcast.
9235
The most reasonable definition offered from the intervenors, in our
opinion, is the plan in which artists are defined as emerging for a period of 12
months after reaching the Top 40 or after reaching 50,000 units in certified
sales.
9236
We believe, however, that sales levels should be irrelevant to the
definition. The concept of emerging
artist should relate to the emergence of an artist from obscurity into the radio
marketplace and, in our view, no logical connection to sales can be drawn from
this definition.
9237
We would also suggest that 18 months rather than 12 is a more appropriate
time frame for artists trying to establish themselves in the radio
marketplace.
9238
Regarding chart placement, we would prefer that the cutoff be set at
achieving the Top 20 rather than the Top 40. We know that there are various
suggestions regarding chart placement and we would encourage the Commission to
test out a variety of models before making a decision.
9239
Finally, we believe that a bonus system will incentivize the process and
we would support this as long as incentives do not allow CanCon levels to fall
below 35 per cent overall.
9240
Regarding the issue of CanCon, the learning curve for us has been steep,
and since the March deadline we have been reading the submissions of other
intervenors with great interest.
9241
We have great respect for the complexity of radio programming and we
appreciate the challenges and risks inherent in playing new and unfamiliar
music.
9242
But despite this, we would like to reiterate what the CAB itself pointed
out to the Commission on Monday morning when it noted
that:
"The
future success of radio will rest on its ability to localize and editorialize to
assist their listeners in navigating the growing array of choices present in the
music marketplace and to point them towards new and exciting
music."
(As
read)
9243
We would encourage broadcasters to begin to initiate that relationship
with their listeners now, thus making room for new Canadian artists in the
process.
9244
I would like to turn to the matter of Canadian talent
development.
9245
We would like to express our sincere appreciation for the CTD
contributions that have been made in the past by broadcasters, especially those
who have supported some of our associations directly and also for the support
offered by radio through its participation in FACTOR.
9246
As we have said before, nothing could be more important to our artists
and other constituents than sustaining and increasing the CTD contributions made
by broadcasters.
9247
In our submission, we made specific suggestions regarding increased level
of CTD funding and we welcome questions from commissioners regarding those
suggestions.
9248
However, I would like to comment today on the proposal by the CAB to
consolidate its CTD contributions entirely within the two Starmaker funds,
effectively eliminating all CTD contributions to FACTOR and
Musicaction.
9249
We find the CAB's proposal to be nothing short of alarming and we believe
its implementation would be disastrous for the industry.
9250
It is clear to us that the loss of CTD contributions to FACTOR would
result in a drastic reduction in the funds that FACTOR has available to
distribute through its programs.
9251
What alarms us even more is that the Department of Canadian Heritage has
stated that if private broadcaster contributions were withdrawn from FACTOR,
their own contributions to FACTOR would be reconsidered and possibly withdrawn,
resulting in a complete collapse of the organization.
9252
What would the downsizing or even the loss of FACTOR mean to us and to
our constituents?
9253
In our written submission, we described our work in providing development
initiatives to grassroots artists and other members of the Canadian music
industry in every region of this country.
We are here to tell you today that our effectiveness is in large part
directly attributable to the support that we have received from
FACTOR.
9254
Our involvement with FACTOR began several years ago when, in an effort to
increase its responsiveness to the needs of the independent music industry
outside of central Canada, FACTOR instituted its National Advisory Board made up
of representatives from our associations from coast to coast to
coast.
9255
Through the NAB we were not only able to advise FACTOR on the
effectiveness of its programs but we were also generously given time in our
twice yearly meetings to work with one another to share insights on how to best
serve and support music industry professionals who are geographically isolated
from the centres of the Canadian music industry.
9256
Eventually, with FACTOR's help, we began to develop programs
collaboratively, contributing jointly to the development of some initiatives and
sharing resources whenever possible.
The results, as we have outlined in our written submission, have been
remarkable and we are only beginning to realize our
potential.
9257
The thousands of artists and service providers across the country who
participate in our own development programs therefore owe much to FACTOR. Add to these the huge number of artists
and businesses who are direct beneficiaries of FACTOR funding programs and the
impact of FACTOR on the independent music industry begins to become
clear.
9258
This remarkable organization reaches into every corner of the country,
across every genre of music, and serves artists and industry service providers
alike.
9259
Each of our organizations receives support from FACTOR to assist us with
our training and marketing initiatives and to assist us in developing the ANR
Lounge and we also receive some small support in return for our service as
regional affiliates of FACTOR. Such
a partnership is critical to our own work in the grassroots development of the
industry.
9260
Let me give you an example of the kind of grassroots development that we
are talking about.
9261
Two years ago, my own organization launched the country's very first
Aboriginal music program and hired a full‑time Aboriginal music program
coordinator.
9262
The program engages in significant outreach, liaising with Aboriginal
artists, promoting their work, connecting them to key players in the mainstream
industry and assisting in the development of the niche market for Aboriginal
music.
9263
We engage in constant one‑on‑one consultation with Aboriginal artists,
developing training seminars, national and international showcases, marketing
material and we offer travel support.
9264
We are proud to note that one month ago we launched aboriginalmusic.ca, a
full service website that showcases Aboriginal artists from
Manitoba.
9265
The program also included a week‑long national Aboriginal music retreat
with artists participating from nearly every region of the
country.
9266
Not only did FACTOR support aspects of this work financially but FACTOR's
continued sponsorship of our network of associations allows us to share
information about this work with each other in a remarkably efficient
way.
9267
As a result, provincial and territorial music industry associations will
be promoting this year's upcoming national Aboriginal music retreat in their own
regions. In doing so, they will
strengthen their own outreach to Aboriginal artists.
9268
In every way measurable, this program has been a success. The artists who participate learn much
about marketing, recording, touring, funding, performance skills and
songwriting, and many have begun to achieve significant airplay on NCI Radio and
other Aboriginal radio networks.
9269
Examples of this kind of imaginative programming abound in all of our
associations but while we have achieved much in terms of grassroots development,
our real goals are still far off.
9270
We have been working towards a fully integrated network of provincial and
territorial association which can delivery a complete slate of services,
providing information, communication, education, business development, market
development, market access and industry outreach in each of our
regions.
9271
At a time when our industry is experiencing tremendous pressure and
radical change, those artists struggling to develop their careers beyond their
respective regions require just this kind of intelligent
support.
9272
It is clear to us that our goals are considerably tied to the ongoing
support of FACTOR. To put it
bluntly, FACTOR gets it and is doing everything it can to help. But we also know that under the current
funding regime, FACTOR does not have the financial resources even to meet the
basic needs of artists and industry professionals in our
regions.
9273
Make no mistake, we constantly challenge FACTOR. We constantly challenge FACTOR to
increase its funding to grassroots development in our regions through its
current programs dedicated to this purpose but we also understand FACTOR's
dilemma, which is that its mandate is tremendously broad in
scope.
9274
Through its 20 or more programs, FACTOR's financial support is felt by
thousands of members of the Canadian independent music community, if not through
direct project funding, then through its support of industry events, training
programs, award shows, festivals, business development programs and on and
on.
9275
The demands are tremendous and the money currently available is
scarce. And with every success
FACTOR achieves, the demand for more resources increases
significantly.
9276
Our own success as music industry development organizations is a case in
point. FACTOR helped us develop
opportunities but those opportunities need to be supported in a real and
meaningful way.
9277
It is for these reasons that we implore the Commission to continue with
the current funding regime in Canada and not to jeopardize what FACTOR has
achieved.
9278
What we need desperately is more money, more resources, not a rethinking
of the model but a recognition that adequate funding is what will make the
current model work exactly the way it is supposed to.
9279
I want to thank you so much for your time and I look forward to your
questions.
9280
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you,
Mr. Baardman.
9281
Commissioner Pennefather.
9282
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
9283
Good afternoon. I wanted
just to start ‑‑ now, you have actually added more information this
afternoon. It is very helpful to us
to understand the role of the various provincial associations, which you
say: "Our real goals are still far
off."
9284
MR. BAARDMAN:
Yes.
9285
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
This very good example you gave us of one of your programs, the
Aboriginal music and all its aspects, can you give us an example, since you are
here on behalf of the Coalition, of other programs, what kind of programs the
provincial associations provide?
9286
MR. BAARDMAN: Sure. I think probably ‑‑ four years ago,
the very first Music Industry Resource Centre was opened in our province ‑‑
now, there are four ‑‑ and the functions of the resource centre are
probably quite present in virtually every
association.
9287
Our resource centre has full‑time staff. We have a ‑‑ since its inception,
we have had more than 5,000 visits from independent artists and people working
at the grassroots level. We provide
several different modes of training and professional development through the
resource centre in terms of workshop series, seminars, short
courses.
9288
One‑on‑one consultation is a really, really huge, huge part of what we
do. It is everything from what do I
put in my media kit to I just made a record or I am thinking of making a record
and I don't know what to do next, right up to some very sophisticated questions
that come from people who have been at this for quite some
time.
9289
One of the things that we strive to do is to make sure that there is
adequate information within the resource centres for people to be able to access
either virtually or in person.
9290
We have just set up a partners corner where we have partnered with 20
organizations regionally and nationally, the CMPA, the Music Managers Forum, the
Songwriters Association of Canada, CIRPA, all the rest of it, where there is a
conduit for their information to be made present in all of our associations, and
all the associations are going to start to be establishing not just a kind of
working relationship but also a constant information flow.
9291
So there is that kind of activity.
9292
In terms of the marketing activity, many of us now make it a regular part
of our job to host showcases of our regional artists at national and
international events and we support those showcases with marketing materials
that we develop. Some of us are
lucky enough to have small funds where we can provide travel support, but
our biggest job is to integrate all of this kind
of support.
9293
Just to give you an example, several years ago we noted that none of our
local labels, small, tiny, little local labels had any international presence
and none of them were in a position to be able to access international markets,
so we sourced funding to assist them in getting to MIDEM.
9294
But just getting these labels to MIDEM wouldn't have been enough for us,
so what we did was we brought officials from the Canada Stand into Manitoba to
talk with the people who were identified as ready to go to that event. We also brought in another pre‑event to
help those particular labels understand what they were going to do, and develop
marketing materials for themselves.
9295
Then, once the event was over, we hosted another kind of post‑MIDEM event
so that they could consolidate what they had learned, share what they learned
with everybody and what kind of business they had done, and we continued to
support those same companies in addition to others over a period of ‑‑ we
just finished our fourth year.
9296
The thing is, that kind of integrate support ‑‑ you are not just
giving them a travel fund and saying "Go to MIDEM. Tell us how it was when you get back",
but providing them with real solid information and giving them a forum and an
opportunity to not only work individually but to work together and to work with
us has been a really powerful model.
9297
I would just like to add another piece to that, and that is that when
those companies hit that event they hit the ground running. They were really on fire and some of
them made some amazing things happen.
9298
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Thank you very much. That is
very helpful.
9299
Your funding, you have made it clear, comes from FACTOR to some
extent. We will get back to that in
a moment.
9300
Do you also get funding from broadcasters directly through local
initiatives or other benefits or other types of CTD
funding?
9301
MR. BAARDMAN: I think three
of our nine associations access direct contributions who have established
relationships with their local broadcasters and some of them wouldn't be able to
survive without that contribution.
It is tremendously appreciated.
9302
We basically try to access funding.
Most of us get a small operating grant from our local provincial
governments through our departments of culture, or whatever it happens to
be. In our case, we get a single
operating grant of $50,000. Upon
that operating grant rests hundreds of thousands of dollars of programming,
depending on any given year what programs we are able to
access.
9303
We try to access money across different levels of government and across
different departments, from Industry, from Education and Training ‑‑ so
from Industry Development, from Education and Training, from the Department of
Canadian Heritage, from Culture, wherever we can find it, wherever it makes
sense.
9304
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
You say in your written intervention that
you:
"...
would like to see a dedicated contribution of $2 million annually targeted
specifically to provincial, territorial music industry associations." (As read)
9305
MR. BAARDMAN:
Yes.
9306
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I
assumed that $2 million would be from FACTOR, but is it $2 million
from all these sources and is it $2 million to each
association?
9307
I wasn't clear.
9308
MR. BAARDMAN: Oh, no,
no.
9309
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Could you explain that to me?
9310
MR. BAARDMAN: Sure. Absolutely.
9311
I think we had to pick a number and I think we were content to be
generous. We value the work we do
of course.
9312
What we wanted to make sure was we are happy to have those funds
administrated by FACTOR. We have a
great relationship with FACTOR and we know that there is kind of a really
responsible relationship going in both
directions.
9313
We know that any fund that is established has to serve every corner of
the country. We also know that once
this network finally becomes completely established there will be a Music
Industry Association in Ontario which is going to need tremendous resources to
serve the grassroots industry.
9314
That is currently the biggest hole in the network. There is no local provincial Music
Industry Association that exists in Ontario, serving Ontario grassroots artists
and others that exists.
9315
We also know that there is a new association coming online in Prince
Edward Island. There is even a new
Music Industry Association coming online in the Northwest Territories called
RAANT, which is the Recording Artists Association of the Northwest
Territories. Those people are
already in discussion with a very mature and sophisticated Music Industry
Association that operates out of the Yukon. Obviously we have a strong collaborative
relationship with those folks and we are always excited about what is going on
out there.
9316
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
RAANT.
9317
MR. BAARDMAN: RAANT,
absolutely.
9318
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
You expressed your concern in your paper this afternoon regarding the CAB
proposal, which you say would eliminate effectively CTD contributions to FACTOR
and Musicaction.
9319
Have you been following the hearing this
week?
9320
MR. BAARDMAN: I followed the
hearing on Monday and today, I
wasn't able to on Tuesday and Wednesday, so I'm assuming there have been some
developments?
9321
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I
think there was certainly a commitment or a proposal from, for example, Rogers
and Standard in terms of a guarantee, while the funds would all come from
Starmaker Fund there is a proposal to guarantee a certain amount of funding,
$1.8 million in fact, which is, as you know, under the policy, the CAB plan, to
FACTOR/Musicaction.
9322
Do you want to comment on that?
9323
MR. BAARDMAN: Sure. I have a couple of
comments.
9324
One is, that is significantly less money than needed. I will just leave it as bluntly
as that.
9325
The second comment that I have to make is that in our original proposal
we made a really strong statement about who we believe should be in
control of CTD contributions. We
believe that it represents a transfer of capital from industry
to another.
9326
We are not experts in broadcasting, but what we are experts in is in
music industry development. I can
say that is my occupation, that's my job, that's what I really do well. I think that another point that we made
is that ‑‑ and the other thing that I have a concern of is that the Radio
Starmaker Fund's mandate is extremely narrow in comparison to the kind of work
that we know needs to be done to develop the music industry, especially across
the regions, especially in the grassroots areas. It is extremely
narrow.
9327
Because its purpose is primarily to develop music for radio, we know that
is an effect of the work that we do in the long run, but it can't be the central
concern of what we do.
9328
Ultimately what we believe is that Canadian radio needs a healthy
Canadian music industry, but the Canadian music industry can't be healthy if it
only served the interests of Canadian radio.
9329
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
You mentioned grassroots quite a bit this afternoon. I take it you feel that is very much in
your mandate.
9330
MR. BAARDMAN: Yes, it
is.
9331
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Is
that the same for the other associations across the
provinces?
9332
MR. BAARDMAN: I think
clearly. It doesn't mean that none
of the people that we serve operate outside of the grassroots of the industry,
but it does mean that is primarily what we do.
9333
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
That leads to my question.
9334
You do mention in your written intervention that the introduction of the
department's music entrepreneur component is having an effect on
FACTOR.
9335
What is the connection between the MEC and the provincial
associations? Is there any impact
there?
9336
Will there be a connection between what you do and the support given to
artists through the MEC?
9337
MR. BAARDMAN: I think the
answer is relatively little. The
MEC serves kind of mid to high‑level independent labels. Some of them do exist in the regions of
Canada, but much of the work that we do lies outside of the day‑to‑day
operations of those labels and the MEC's support of those labels really
doesn't ‑‑ although we celebrate it, doesn't affect the day‑to‑day work
that we do.
9338
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Thank you very much.
9339
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
9340
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you
very much.
9341
MR. BAARDMAN: Thank
you.
9342
THE CHAIRPERSON: Madam
Secretary...?
9343
THE SECRETARY: I would now
call on the next participant to make his presentation, Mr. Michael Fockler,
if you would come forward?
‑‑‑
Pause
9344
THE SECRETARY: Whenever you
are ready, you will have 10 minutes for your presentation.
PRESENTATION /
PRÉSENTATION
9345
MR. FOCKLER: Thank you,
Madam Secretary.
9346
Good morning, good afternoon or good evening, depending on what your own
personal clock says. You have all
been working very hard this week and from this side of the table we appreciate
that. So thank
you.
9347
In this case, good afternoon, Mr. Commissioner and Members of the
Commission. Thank you for the
opportunity to allow me to appear at this
proceeding.
9348
My presentation today will cover three main areas, the regulatory
process; small independent broadcast operations, and the necessity of localism
in radio broadcastings.
9349
But in order to lay the groundwork for my comments, I would like to first
briefly highlight my background.
9350
I am a second generation radio broadcaster, virtually growing up in small
town radio. I remember listening to
my family's radio stations constantly, swap shops, birthday trains, open
microphone programs and junior hockey broadcasts.
9351
I know now that that wasn't always the greatest sounding radio, but it
was sure great local radio.
9352
Those experiences taught me that when used properly radio is a powerful
medium to connect and inform communities.
Now, with my involvement in radio programming and regulatory affairs, I
am an able to apply my experience to help small independent owners and operators
create new radio stations and further develop their existing
services.
9353
This is the basis for my presentation today. I feel strongly that small independent
radio operators are the cornerstone of this industry and, by necessity, have a
direct connection with the communities they serve.
9354
Since there has been so much discussion already regarding Canadian
content and Canadian talent development, I will only touch briefly on these
points.
9355
First, Canadian Content.
9356
There certainly has to be provision made for including new and emerging
artists in any new CanCon policy,
but regardless of the outcome any new formula must be concise and user
friendly. Radio programmers are
notoriously poor mathematicians.
9357
Canadian Talent Development.
National music funds such as FACTOR provide an invaluable resource for
new and emerging artists on a national level, but before artists can achieve
national recognition, even before artists can qualify for national funding, they
have to start somewhere. Renting a
4‑track, cutting a demo, finding a performance venue and garnering radio
airplay, this is where all musicians start.
9358
CTD expenditures directed locally and managed by the broadcaster are
often the only source of support for these local garage bands. In other words, there is a funding
vacuum between aspiring artists playing music in a basement and becoming
established enough to utilize national services.
9359
Broadcasters, in addition to supporting these national organizations,
should be encouraged to allow a portion of CTD dollars to be directed to the
local level.
9360
In my experience, there is deep concern among existing broadcasters that
new entrants once on the air and after receiving their licence are not
fulfilling the promises made during the public hearing and regulatory
process.
9361
The Commission goes to great lengths to analyze applications, including
format news and spoken word, to ensure the proposal will provide the best fit
for the area served. However, in
some cases once a licence is granted all bets are off, as they say. Formats go from Easy Listening to
Hip‑Hop, news drops from 20 hours per week to 10, relevant spoken word
disappears. In other words, the
on‑air product bears little resemblance to the original
application.
9362
Reinstating a Promise of Performance model from years past would
improve the quality of applications submitted, ensure applicants are proposing
realistic and achievable objectives, and provide a level of comfort for the
incumbent operators in that market.
9363
The Commission need not extensively monitor these Promises of
Performance themselves. Existing
broadcasters rabidly scrutinize the competition on a regular basis,
particularly with new stations. Any
breach of licence would be quickly noted.
9364
Thus, the Commission would only act on well‑documented complaints made by
broadcasters. Any substantial
deviation from the Promise of Performance would have the same gravity as low
CanCons levels for example and the licensee held
accountable.
9365
With respect to independent broadcasters, amongst the reams of paper
submitted by many diverse groups in this proceeding, one sentence stood out
above all others, and I quote:
"Our
system can't continue to cling to the romantic notion of the small mom and pop
radio station."
(As read)
9366
I was deeply shaken by that.
One of our country's largest broadcasters was making this assertion. Does Canada really want the equivalent
of a U.S. style Clear Channel dominating the
industry?
9367
My experience in research shows the opposite. Using BBM fall 2005 figures I quickly
uncovered eight markets with populations of over 50,000 in which a small
independent commercial broadcaster led the market in audience share between 3
and 11 percentage points over a station belonging to the top 10 national
operators. Several other markets
had the small broadcaster in a close second place.
9368
This finding to me was not surprising. According to the CRTC Monitoring Report
2005, the top 10 national operators have been losing audience share to the tune
of 3 percent between 2002 and 2004, while at the same time Canadian commercial
radio as a whole only declined by 1 percent over the same time
period.
9369
Commissioners, I believe the reason for the smaller decline in
audience tuning to independent stations is because small operators
can only survive by aggressively supporting their community. They cannot depend on national economies
of scale, trickle‑down revenue and deep discount national
buys.
9370
This is not to say that the top 10 operators fail to provide
localism ‑‑ some do it quite well and on a regular basis ‑‑ but
listeners can recognize when a broadcaster is effectively serving its audience
with news and information and when a radio station is simply an automated
jukebox.
9371
As stated in the Broadcast Act, the airwaves are owned and controlled by
the Canadian public. That ideal
remains and thus the onus is upon the CRTC and the broadcast industry to examine
how radio is to reflect the best interests of listeners, over and above last
night with Jay Leno segments and Hot 40 music lists.
9372
Is it in the public interest for radio to be a music jukebox? A recent Globe and Mail article extolled
the virtues of one station's no DJ policy.
Certainly in large markets with a highly evolved diversity of local media
to choose from, one station's novelty is of little impact, but in markets with
only one or two licensees, programming stations using large market theories and
formulae is doing an immense disservice to the audiences these stations purport
to serve.
9373
Independent surveys conducted for new licence applications consistently
show that local news, community information and surveillance are the key
determinants for audiences selecting radio stations. Excuse me, they are amongst the key
determinants for selecting a radio station.
9374
However, it has become well‑known that some radio stations are completely
automated in the evenings, or from Friday night to Monday morning. Many people I speak to across the
country can point to instances of local emergencies going unreported on local
radio for this very reason.
9375
Frankly, I don't have the answer to this lack of relevant local
programming. Some operators do have
a genuine need to reduce local news services and to voicetrack as a cost‑saving
environment requirement, but there must be consideration given to including
live‑to‑air content as an element of the local programming policy to
ensure that radio continues to serve its audience in the most effective manner
possible.
9376
Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, by shifting the focus back to localism in
radio the industry will ultimately be in a better position to combat the threat
of new and emerging technologies that we have heard so much about this
week.
9377
Localism is the key to the success of radio. It is also the cornerstone of the
Broadcast Act.
9378
I respectfully submit that the Commission recognize the benefits that
small and independent broadcast operators provide to the communities they
serve:
9379
allow the regulatory process, including competitive licensing, to include
localism as a determinant factor;
9380
find ways to encourage local spoken word and live‑to‑air
programming;
9381
make provision for locally directed and administered CTD initiatives as a
complement to national funds;
9382
reinstate a Promise of Performance policy for new licensees and changes
of ownership; and
9383
continue to demand integrity, parity and programming of the highest
quality from all in the Canadian broadcast industry.
9384
Thank you very much for your time and attention. I look forward to any questions you may
have.
9385
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
9386
Commissioner Cugini.
9387
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Good
afternoon, Mr. Fockler.
9388
You have a very clear presentation for us to consider this
afternoon.
9389
I just wanted to ask you what you feel the role of competition and choice
in a market has when deciding how relative a radio station is to its
community.
9390
In other words, as a radio listener, we all have the choice to either
tune into one radio station or another, and if that radio station is not meeting
my needs as a listener, it is very easy for me to switch to another
one.
9391
So what responsibility does the radio station have to continue to be
relevant to its community?
9392
MR. FOCKLER: Thank you,
Commissioner.
9393
If as a radio listener the stations in your market are not meeting your
needs ‑‑ for example, you cannot find a station that plays the songs that
you like to hear ‑‑ you now have an innumerable number of
options.
9394
And that's what we have heard so much about, from satellite to ‑‑ we
don't need to go through them all again.
9395
What we need to do is shift the focus to what should these radio stations
be providing to hold the listeners.
9396
My feeling is that it must focus on localism. It must talk about what the Junior A
hockey scores were last night and where the storm is coming from and is there a
blizzard next week, or what happened at Town Council.
9397
Those are the things that connect your community and hold it
together.
9398
If all you are looking for from a radio station is a constant stream of
music punctuated by the odd DJ banter, if you will, you have so many other
options to choose from that you will be turned off of radio
anyway.
9399
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Are you
suggesting that the Commission be responsible for going out and finding out what
the local needs are ‑‑
9400
MR. FOCKLER: No, certainly
not.
9401
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: ‑‑ of those communities and issuing calls for
those particular types of radio stations?
9402
MR. FOCKLER: No, certainly
not.
9403
What I am saying here is that local, small independent broadcasters that
live in the communities they are serving already know this and are already
providing it, to the best of their ability.
9404
COMMISSIONER CUGINI: Thank
you, Mr. Fockler.
9405
Those are my questions,
Mr. Chairman.
9406
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
9407
Commissioner Pennefather.
9408
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
9409
Good afternoon. Thank you
for bringing your thoughts to us.
9410
I just wanted to go back to your CTD.
9411
You make provision for locally directed administered CTD initiatives as a
complement to national funds. That
is the concept.
9412
In your written comments you talk about a formula, and I assume that
formula is the balance of national to local.
9413
Could you just expand on that?
9414
MR. FOCKLER: I was frankly
trying to get away from formulas.
There have been so many thrown around that just adding another would
complicate the mix.
9415
However, with regard to CTD, there is already a formula in place for
changes of ownership.
9416
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Right.
9417
MR. FOCKLER: That is the 3,
2, 1.
9418
It would just seem logical to me that there would be the similar formula
for new applications as well as ‑‑
9419
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Renewals.
9420
MR. FOCKLER: ‑‑ application renewals.
9421
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So
somewhat the same. The 1 percent
would be for the local ‑‑
9422
MR. FOCKLER: In your wisdom
however you would choose to separate it, yes. But certainly localism must be a part of
it, I believe.
9423
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I
see. Thank you very
much.
9424
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
9425
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
9426
Commissioner Arpin.
9427
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank
you, Mr. Chairman.
9428
You are stressing the localism factor and I don't know what is the
current state of the assessment of applications in the U.S. but at some point in
time, four or five years ago, or maybe more, localism was a very high
priority. The FCC was requiring
broadcasters who were applying to file a survey of local issues, and then the
applicant had to address the conclusions of those
surveys.
9429
Are you suggesting a similar approach?
9430
MR. FOCKLER: I am not
entirely familiar with the American surveys from a few years
ago.
9431
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I'm not
either. I know that they had to do
an in‑depth review of local issues and how they were dealt
with.
9432
MR. FOCKLER:
Yes.
9433
COMMISSIONER ARPIN:
Obviously in most of the market there was already incumbent
players.
9434
MR. FOCKLER:
Yes.
9435
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So they
had to take into consideration what the incumbents were
doing.
9436
MR. FOCKLER: I understand
your question, sir.
9437
In every new licence application that I have been involved with ‑‑
and I think it is becoming a standard requirement from the Commission for all
new licence applications that there be market researched done, independent
market research done, prior to the application being
submitted.
9438
It is clear to me in the independent surveys that I have read that
consistently local information, local news, sports, weather surveillance, ranks
near the top of the information pile.
9439
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Yes,
that's true maybe in the survey, but it is not always addressed in the
supplementary brief.
9440
My question is: Should the
Commission make it a requirement that those issues be addressed in the
supplementary brief?
9441
MR. FOCKLER: I believe
absolutely.
9442
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: They
sometimes are addressed with a very large perspective.
9443
MR. FOCKLER: I
understand. And I believe
absolutely, Mr. Commissioner, that ‑‑
9444
The one word that I have been trying to avoid using through this whole
thing is regulation. I don't want
to see, I don't want the people that I work with to have to say: Oh, God, not another
number ‑‑
9445
COMMISSIONER ARPIN:
Layer.
9446
MR. FOCKLER: ‑‑ layer of regulation.
9447
But at the same time, I also see so many broadcasters starting to take
away, slowly take away from this localism concept, because either it is not
affordable, it is not cost‑effective, or that is not how they do it in Toronto
or that is not how they do it in Calgary.
So we will apply the Calgary principles to Brandon, Manitoba or Kingston,
Ontario.
9448
As I say, that is not doing a service to the people in those
markets.
9449
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: You
introduced yourself as having been a consultant for new applicants but also for
existing broadcasters.
9450
Over the last couple of days there has been some discussion about digital
radio, including IBOC.
9451
Are your clients talking to you about IBOC or about any digital
technology? What are their
views?
9452
MR. FOCKLER: They are
speaking of digital. But in the
markets that my clients operate in, it is not an effective medium for them to
choose, simply because the markets themselves are not sophisticated to that
level.
9453
I don't want to make this sound derogatory to the market, but it is not
certainly at a level of technological knowledge that a Toronto or a Vancouver
may be at.
9454
So the people in those markets are quite happy with the products that
they are receiving over their AM and FM and thus digital would have a novelty
effect at best.
9455
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: But
obviously they are ready to wait for others to develop the market before they
themselves make the investment.
9456
MR. FOCKLER: Yes. As someone earlier today said regarding
Canada versus the United States, Canada will be a
follower.
9457
These small markets will also be a follower of the large
markets.
9458
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Of the
larger markets.
9459
MR. FOCKLER:
Yes.
9460
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: In your
oral presentation ‑‑ and I am addressing myself to your paragraph
17 ‑‑ you say that your own experience and research shows that in some
markets the local operator is faring much better.
9461
Could you provide us with the list of those
markets?
9462
I don't need to have it today, but could you provide that list to the
Commission for May 29th?
9463
MR. FOCKLER: Certainly. I have it available
today.
9464
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank
you.
9465
Those were my questions.
9466
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you
very much, Mr. Fockler.
9467
MR. FOCKLER: Thank you very
much.
9468
THE CHAIRPERSON: Madam
Secretary.
9469
THE SECRETARY: Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
9470
I would now call on the Canadian Music Centre to come forward for their
presentation.
9471
Mrs. Elisabeth Bihl is representing the centre.
9472
You will have ten minutes for your presentation after introduction of
your colleague.
9473
Thank you.
PRESENTATION /
PRÉSENTATION
9474
MS BIHL: Good
afternoon. I am the Executive
Director of the Canadian Music Centre.
9475
I have with me James Rolfe, composer and also an associate of the
Canadian Music Centre, as well as an executive board member of the Canadian
League of Composers.
9476
I will begin my presentation.
9477
First of all, the Canadian Music Centre very much appreciates the
opportunity to comment on the matters raised to
day.
9478
The Canadian Music Centre is a not‑for‑profit registered national arts
service organization and is an essential foundation for developing and
maintaining professional Canadian composers' music.
9479
We have five centres across the country. We are fully bilingual. Our centre is in Montreal and another
one in Sackville, New Brunswick, Toronto, Calgary as well as
Vancouver.
9480
These centres have full music lending libraries open to the public and to
performers to get their sheet music.
9481
We have an office in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Five months ago we opened it to
capitalize on the growing interest of Canadian composers' music, a networking
centre to facilitate international musicians to perform Canadian classical
music.
9482
We have already had the chance to facilitate a good dozen groups to now
perform Canadian music.
9483
Currently the Canadian Music Centre has 647 active classical, jazz and
electroacoustics composers by making the music available for sale in Canada and
worldwide.
9484
I am going to use the term classical music from now on as a
collective.
9485
We hold some 18,000 works from these composers in our archives, all
available for sale through our on‑demand publishing
division.
9486
The Music Centre's clients are conductors, orchestras, performers,
broadcasters, educators, researchers, students and those who listen to
music.
9487
And important for this hearing is that the CMC also produces, distributes
and sells CDs featuring the works of strictly Canadian composers and holds
currently 1,000 titles ‑‑ in other words, some 7,000 works ‑‑ all
readily available for airplay. We
add each year some 90 to 100 more to this.
9488
Our contemporary classical music composers have a vital stake in Canada's
cultural future and benefit professionally when their works are heard. We believe it is essential that works of
these Canadian classical music composers be present and can be heard on
commercial classical stations.
9489
The Broadcasting Act has established that Canadian radio broadcasters are
obliged to provide programming which is predominantly Canadian and is varied and
comprehensive. Therefore, we
believe the absence of contemporary classical music from our airwaves means that
we are not achieving the objective.
9490
Historically, the careers of Canadian classical composers have depended,
in part, on their music being broadcast on the CBC Radio Two or
Radio‑Canada.
9491
We are concerned, however, that in the future CBC's commitment to
broadcast Canadian classical music may erode
significantly.
9492
We are looking to you today to introduce perhaps regulation and to
correct the problem, beginning with the current process concerning commercial
radio policy, but also continuing when CBC appears before you to renew their
licences.
9493
At this time there are only two commercial radio stations in
Canada ‑‑ Toronto and Montreal ‑‑ which feature classical music as
their main programming mandate.
Unfortunately, these broadcasters rarely, if ever, include contemporary
Canadian classical music.
9494
We understand that when applying the MAPL system, one is able to satisfy
a Canadian selection by fulfilling at least two of the conditions. It is therefore possible to entirely
circumvent the Canadian composer or lyricist and still qualify as having met
Canadian content requirements.
9495
My example is the Toronto Symphony performs in their concert hall in
Toronto Beethoven. It still is
Canadian content.
9496
The Canadian Music Centre urges the CRTC to introduce a requirement that
no less than 6 percent of the music programmed by commercial radio stations
be either:
9497
a) composed entirely by a Canadian and after 1945 ‑‑ so the younger
ones;
9498
b) if vocal, then the music be composed by composers and lyricists
written entirely by one or more Canadian, also after 1945.
9499
This 6 percent requirement would need to apply to the 6:00 a.m. to 6:00
p.m. major periods and ensure that a variety of composers, rather than just one
or two popular ones, be broadcast.
9500
With respect to the minimum Canadian content level for contemporary
classical music ‑‑ it is currently set at 15 percent, I believe ‑‑ CMC
proposes that it be established at the same level as for popular
music.
9501
A minimal presence may be required for special interest music. However, CMC does not believe there is
any further such requirement for Canadian classical
music.
9502
We can assure the CRTC that there is sufficient supply of high quality
Canadian works to support a minimum content level substantially higher than the
current level of the 15 percent.
9503
Perhaps I should point out the difference between popular music, where a
constant supply of new materials is required, and classical or jazz music which
has a much longer shelf life, and the overall inventory then becomes
significant.
9504
We very much believe this inventory is adequate to satisfy the needs of
existing radio broadcasters.
9505
To support this recommendation, CMC would like to reiterate that it has
over 7,000 works readily available for airplay, but we don't have anyone to play
it.
9506
On the subject of talent development, we note with regret that the
contemporary Canadian classical composers have no access to the CTD funds
distributed by either Radio Starmaker Fund or
FACTOR/MusicAction.
9507
CMC has a Centrediscs label that is celebrating its 25th
anniversary. It's a not‑for‑profit
label.
9508
When we learned about the Starmaker Fund two years ago, we did make
inquiries on several occasions but learned that the CMC Centrediscs label does
not meet the funding conditions and acceptance criteria. They are much too high for us. We never produce 2,500 units. It is more in the 1,000
range.
9509
Similarly, our artists who apply to FACTOR are mostly turned down. It really appears that these
organizations are set up to serve primarily the pop industry. The qualification requirements are
structured in such a way that effectively precludes classical music
composers.
9510
We believe that it is inappropriate given that the above commercial radio
stations licensed to broadcast classical music and are making contributions to
one or the other should not be coming to the classical musical
composers.
9511
At present the only public support for recording specialized music in
this case comes from an extremely small budget at the Canada Council, and
classical music production falls in that category.
9512
So how do we develop new stars?
How can we establish a Canadian classical composer
industry?
9513
Our audience is not as large because we insist on saying that it is
marginalized music, but it is only so because we have not sufficient access to
airplay and development funds.
9514
We urge the CRTC either to direct that the CTD be also directed to the
Canadian Music Centre for use in our talent development program, or that
amendments are made for classical music in either one of these existing talent
funds.
9515
Finally, many of our contemporary music composers are recognized and
regularly broadcast on the airwaves internationally. There are equally many award‑winning
composers who are celebrities abroad.
James Rolfe is definitely one of them. He has just returned from a celebrated
concert in New York at Carnegie Hall and he can tell you more about
that.
9516
I have attached in fact a list of a commercial radio that has featured
Canadian music from our centre.
Consistently, every day for the last two months it is
attached.
9517
Similarly, there are radio stations all over Europe. We had seven hours in the Concert Centre
in the Netherlands, and so on.
9518
In other words, we do have content that is much appreciated outside
Canada.
9519
This concludes my presentation.
Thank you very much
9520
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you
very much.
9521
Vice Chair Arpin?
9522
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank
you, Mr. Chairman.
9523
The list that you have attached, that is not a Canadian radio station, is
it?
9524
MS BIHL: No, it is an
American commercial radio.
9525
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: It is an
American commercial radio station.
So it is not part of NPR, it is very similar to the station in Montréal
and in Toronto?
9526
MS BIHL: Similar to that,
yes.
9527
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I
noticed that obviously you are saying "rarely", but surely the Montréal stations
play quite often some André Mathieu music, particularly "le Concerto de Québec"
recorded by Alain Lefèvre with the Montréal Metropolitan Orchestra. As a matter of fact, that record has
been quite successful. I think they
have sold more than 10,000 copies of that recording.
9528
André Mathieu was born before 1945, but died after 1945 because he was
still living in the early '60s.
9529
MS BIHL: Yes, I am aware of
that. The Montréal station does a
little more than the Toronto station.
It is lamentable that there are only two classical
stations.
9530
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: There is
a third one here in Ottawa.
Couleur FM, CHLX‑FM, is a mixture of jazz during certain hours of the day
and classical music in other hours of the day. So it is a hybrid format I will say, but
they play a lot of classical music.
9531
MS BIHL: Including
contemporary classical composers.
9532
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I didn't
say that. I'm saying for the record
that there is not only two classical radio stations, two full classical radio
stations, but there is a third one which is a hybrid of some kind with jazz
during a certain part of the day and classical music.
9533
The jazz component is the portion that is the shortest of the two. So they are much more classical music
than they are jazz‑driven.
9534
My first question is that you are recommending a 6 percent Canadian
composer component. Where did you
take that 6 per cent number?
9535
We also heard other intervenors during this process who suggested three,
another was five and you are six.
9536
So how did you arrive at six?
9537
MS BIHL: I really can't go
into details, but it was a discussion between our members at the CCA, Conference
for the Arts, and we arrived that this would be a suitable start at least for
the number of works we have available.
As you also know, it is not identified content‑wise what the content
should be, except that it should be, if at all possible, equal to that of the
popular music side, because we do have enough music.
9538
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: So it is
only an educated guess that you are making? You said that you had discussions with
your members, but you finally all agreed based on the goodwill of everybody, "We
will ask for six and we will maybe come out of there with
five"?
9539
MS BIHL: Very much,
yes.
9540
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Very
much that way?
9541
MS BIHL:
Yes.
9542
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I
see.
9543
Just for the record, because you have been saying that the current
regulation makes the Canadian content for classical music 15. It is
10.
9544
But you are recommending that we increase that number. To how much? You didn't say.
9545
MS BIHL: I deliberately
didn't want to say, sir, because ‑‑ well, first of all, I read in 2001 when
the last licence was extended that it was moved to 15 percent. However, we did not give a content
because we do not know at this stage how high or what the percentage will be of
the popular music side, but we would like to be treated
equally.
9546
That is more the thinking behind it.
9547
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Alain
Pineau from the Canadian Conference of the Arts, were you here when he appeared
this morning?
9548
MS BIHL: Yes, I was. Yes.
9549
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: He
suggested 25.
9550
MS BIHL: We have a lot more
music than that, but ‑‑
9551
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: He was
suggesting 25 per cent Canadian content.
9552
MS BIHL:
Yes.
9553
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: But he
also wasn't committal regarding Canadian
composers.
9554
MS BIHL: Well, let's put it
this way, we would like it to be higher because the music is available,
definitely available. We have very
active and very established composers, the music has been recorded, it is a
matter of actually getting it on the air. And how does one build a Canadian
composer industry without hearing it?
9555
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: You gave
us a list of composers and their titles that have been recorded, but have they
been recorded by ‑‑ we don't know who, by major
labels.
9556
MS BIHL: The Canadian Music
Centre has another arm and it's called the Distribution Services arm and it
distributes Indies in the specialized music section. It is true that we have the 1,000
titles.
9557
All of these are medium, small independent recording artists and it goes
through a jury at the CMC literally before they are accepted for
distribution. So they are
established, they are highly professional recordings.
9558
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: If the
Commission was to agree to your request of 6 percent, do you have any idea
how much money will flow through SOCAN to the composers?
9559
Have you made some kind of estimate, financial
estimate?
9560
MS BIHL: I can do that, but
it certainly would help.
9561
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Anything
will help, it's clear, but you haven't figured it out by
yourself?
9562
MS BIHL: No. I don't dare yet.
9563
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: You
mentioned that your members try to apply to Starmaker Fund and the
experience was shown to be negative because obviously you didn't get the
appropriate number of records produced to meet the floor of the Starmaker
program.
9564
Do you have recommendations to make regarding classical
music?
9565
MS BIHL: Yes, I would,
please, and that is if indeed a section could be set up within Starmaker or
FACTOR, either one, that would be sensitive to the needs and requirements of
classical music, contemporary classical music composition, and the recordings
that come out, because indeed it would take us 2, 3 years to sell 1,000. So it is a different
environment.
9566
Also, the recordings are not as expensive. You can record something for $15,000,
$20,000 and you have a higher quality recording. So it is a different environment all
around and it would need to take that sensitivity
into ‑‑
9567
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Into
account.
‑‑‑
Pause
9568
COMMISSIONER ARPIN:
Obviously FACTOR is helping in the production of classical music. They have classical music programs
because they are classical music producers, Marquis being one and Electa and
Atma being two others that I could think of who have done certainly a good
number of productions over the years.
9569
But that is financial help for production.
9570
MS BIHL:
Yes.
9571
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: What you
are saying here today is that you also need financial support for
touring.
9572
MS BIHL:
Promotion.
9573
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: For
promotion and marketing.
9574
MS BIHL:
Yes.
9575
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: How is
the CMC financed?
9576
MS BIHL: Two sources. One is the Canada Council right now and
SOCAN Foundation and the rest, we have a $2.2 million organization across the
country. In the west we fund
raise.
9577
So only about 27 percent comes from the government so to speak and
SOCAN. The rest is literally what I
call "dialling for dollars".
9578
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: With
that financial capacity you are capable of maintaining five centres in Canada
and one in the Netherlands?
9579
MS BIHL: The Netherlands at
the moment is free of charge, but yes.
9580
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Oh, I
see.
9581
Are you getting support from External Affairs for the Netherlands one,
because I know that they have programs of that nature.
9582
MS BIHL: We are in
discussion right now. It is a
brand new contact to have a centre abroad, but we are in discussion,
yes.
9583
COMMISSIONER ARPIN:
Mr. Chairman, those were my questions.
9584
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you
very much.
9585
Madam Secretary...?
9586
LA SECRÉTAIRE :
Merci, Monsieur le Président.
9587
J'inviterais maintenant la Fondation Radio Enfant à se présenter pour
faire leur présentation.
9588
LE PRÉSIDENT : Bonjour, et merci d'être venu aujourd'hui. Vous étiez sur l'agenda pour demain, et
on vous remercie d'avoir avancé votre présentation.
9589
M. DELORME : Ça nous a vraiment surpris et bousculé complètement notre
présentation. On avait une
délégation importante du milieu culturel qui était censé venir avec nous, le
Conseil des écoles et tout, qui n'ont pas pu venir, évidemment, avec cet avis à
courte durée. Ça fait que là, on
est complètement chamboulé, mais on va, j'espère, vous susciter beaucoup de
questions, parce qu'on veut discuter de cette question des enfants et des
services de radio au Canada.
9590
LE PRÉSIDENT : Allez‑y.
Merci.
PRÉSENTATION /
PRESENTATION
9591
Mme BERNARD : Alors, bonjour.
Natalie Bernard. Je suis
coordonnatrice à la Radio Enfant/Ado.
Alors, voici la petite intervention qui a été
écrite.
9592
Alors, merci à vous également de bien nous avoir reçu aujourd'hui à cette
audience qui porte sur la révision de la politique de la radio
commerciale.
9593
Nous sommes ici aujourd'hui pour une seule raison : d'abord, offrir à nos
enfants une place sur les ondes de la Radio Enfant au Canada. Nous sommes persuadés que la radio est
un excellent média pour développer leur créativité et de mieux intégrer les
enfants à la société. Les enfants
et le public en général profiteraient beaucoup d'entendre ce qu'ils ont à
dire.
9594
La Loi canadienne de la radiodiffusion est bien claire sur ce point. Les enfants doivent avoir des services
de radio qui répondent à leurs besoins et aspirations. Or, au Canada, les enfants forment le
public le plus négligé en la matière.
9595
En 2003, le Conseil accordait une licence de diffusion radio AM
commerciale à la Fondation Radio Enfant.
Cette licence commerciale, attribuée à un projet de nature éducative sans
but lucratif qui vise à utiliser la radio dans un cadre scolaire, ne convient
pas à la mission de la Radio Enfant.
Cette licence constitue plutôt une barrière et pose beaucoup d'obstacles
à l'essor de la radio pour les enfants.
9596
Le CRTC a refusé d'accorder aux enfants une fréquence FM. Il a, par la suite, refusé de
reconnaître la dimension communautaire de la démarche des parents et des
institutions, et, enfin, il a nié que cette activité de la radio en milieu
scolaire constitue du développement de talents.
9597
Visiblement, le Conseil n'a pas tenu compte des besoins et aspirations
des enfants, de la Loi de la radiodiffusion et des droits des enfants reconnus
par le Canada dans la Charte des droits des enfants. Plutôt que d'encourager la création de
radio dédiée aux enfants, il a posé une série de limites qui, aujourd'hui, met
en péril cette initiative.
9598
À l'occasion de la révision de la politique de la radio commerciale, nous
demandons au Conseil et au gouvernement canadien d'établir un cadre qui
favorisera la création de radio spécifiquement dédiée aux enfants de 4 à 18 ans,
que ces services soient de nature éducative, non commercial et communautaire,
dont une importante dimension sera d'être un outil pédagogique en milieu
scolaire.
9599
La radio dédiée aux enfants doit être le résultat d'une contribution
communautaire visant à laisser une place aux enfants sur nos ondes. La radio dédiée aux enfants ne peut être
une activité commerciale. Elle est
un outil d'éducation.
9600
Il est interdit de diffuser de la publicité aux enfants. Alors, comment pouvez‑vous accorder une
licence commerciale à une radio éducative pour les
enfants?
9601
La licence commerciale a exclu le projet de l'aide gouvernementale dédiée
à la radio communautaire. Il
complique la recherche de financement en raison du créneau spécifique de la
Radio Enfant, soit une radio éducative et des lois sur la protection de
l'enfance.
9602
Nous demandons au Conseil d'établir un cadre plus conforme à la nature de
la radio dédiée aux enfants. Le
type de licence de radio dédiée aux enfants devrait constituer une autre
variante de licence communautaire, comme les radios étudiantes autochtones,
francophones le sont. La Radio
Enfant forme, avec les autres catégories de radio, un ensemble de services
communautaires.
9603
La Radio Enfant est de nature éducative et vise à créer un outil
pédagogique utilisé dans un cadre scolaire. Nous demandons au Conseil de reconnaître
que cette pratique constitue du développement de talents, et, à ce titre, doit
être éligible aux contributions de la radio commerciale et les entreprises de
diffusion directe au foyer accordées pour le développement des
talents.
9604
La radio a une fonction éducative importante qui doit être reconnue et
soutenue. Cette contribution du
secteur privé à la création d'une radio éducative dédiée aux enfants serait
distribuée par un mécanisme semblable à ceux créés pour distribuer l'aide aux
artistes, c'est‑à‑dire via un fonds indépendant de la radio pour les
enfants.
9605
C'est là notre seconde demande, celle de créer un fonds de la radio
dédiée aux enfants. Le financement
de ce fonds proviendrait de trois sources : le secteur privé de la
radiodiffusion, le gouvernement fédéral et les fondations privées. Ces ressources financières serviraient
au développement de services de radio de nature éducative dédiée aux 4 à 18 ans
au Canada, sans restriction de langue ni de région.
9606
La radio dédiée aux enfants pourrait, si le Conseil établit une politique
qui encourage cette pratique, devenir une nouvelle génération de média, un mode
de communication globale et de convergence.
9607
Le défi que nous vous lançons consiste à reconnaître que les enfants
constituent un investissement, un potentiel, et que vous devez vous employer à
traduire cette réalité en mesures concrètes. Pour relever ce défi, la contribution de
la radio commerciale est essentielle, et même très
essentielle.
9608
Dans le cadre de cette révision de la politique de la radio commerciale,
nous invitons les radiodiffuseurs privés à tenir compte des besoins des enfants
et à volontairement contribuer à cette initiative.
9609
Je cède maintenant la parole à monsieur Michel Delorme, le directeur de
Radio Enfant.
9610
M. DELORME: Donc, je ne
lirai pas les autres présentations que mes collègues avaient prévu vous faire
comme communication parce que ce sont des textes qui vont être remis dans le...
comme l'audience aujourd'hui.
9611
J'aimerais plutôt qu'on aborde tout de suite la question par un échange
avec les commissaires, répondre à vos questions sur toute cette question des
enfants, des services aux enfants, des services de radio aux
enfants.
9612
C'est pour ça qu'on vient ici ce matin, c'est notre contribution à cette
réflexion sur la révision de la politique de la radio, mais comme vous nous avez
donné une licence commerciale, bien on vient aujourd'hui, par ce biais‑là, vous
parler de radio au service des enfants.
9613
Merci.
9614
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci. Monsieur
Arpin.
9615
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Merci,
monsieur le président.
9616
Mais si je vous ai bien compris ‑‑ parce que je ne veux pas refaire
l'audience où vous avez obtenu votre permis ‑‑ mais si je vous ai bien
compris, monsieur Delorme, dans votre bref exposé, et madame, vous avez quand
même clairement laissé entendre que, finalement, ce n'est pas de la radio
commerciale puis que ça pourrait peut‑être être
l'opportunité.
9617
Votre présentation aujourd'hui c'est peut‑être de créer l'opportunité
pour que le Conseil crée une nouvelle catégorie de station de radio plutôt que
de... comme il a créé la radio communautaire, la radio de campus, la radio
que... la Loi a créé trois catégories : le public, le privé et le communautaire,
mais le Conseil a quand même créé d'autres catégories : la radio ethnique,
la radio...
9618
M. DELORME:
Autochtone.
9619
CONSEILLER ARPIN: ...
autochtone, la radio de campus, donc, et la radio éducative également. Donc, il n'y a pas juste la Loi qui crée
et qui a créé. Donc, si j'ai bien
compris votre cri du coeur, c'est : libérez‑nous du carcan de la nature
commerciale. Ce n'est pas ça un peu
aussi?
9620
M. DELORME: Exact. Ça, c'est une grosse embûche, c'est une
des barrières qui a été posée.
C'est de nous avoir attribué une licence commerciale alors que ça n'avait
aucun sens une licence commerciale parce que... même quand on a rencontré les
gens de l'ARC, puis, là, je pointe des gens de l'Association, ils ont dit :
bien, vous n'êtes pas commercial, c'est évident. Et c'est quoi une radio
commerciale?
9621
Une radio commerciale, c'est de la radio qui vit de publicité puis, nous,
on vit de quoi? On ne vit pas de
publicité.
9622
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Et comme
vous le dites...
9623
M. DELORME: Donc, ça, ça a
été la première embûche. La
deuxième embûche, c'est que ça nous a coupés carrément du financement de
l'État.
9624
Quand on a été au Patrimoine canadien, ils ont un programme d'aide aux
radios communautaires en milieu francophone Ontario... on travaille beaucoup
avec l'Ontario. Ils ont dit : non,
vous n'êtes pas une radio communautaire.
On ne finance pas une radio à licence
commerciale.
9625
La même chose, on a été au Gouvernement du Québec, la Ministre est venue
ici dans la région nous le dire : on ne peut pas vous aider tant que vous avez
une licence commerciale, ça n'a pas de sens, on n'aide pas les radios
commerciales, nous.
9626
Même si on leur disait : regardez tout le restant, vous voyez tout ce
qu'ils disent. Mais non. Donc, cette idée‑là, ça nous a fait
perdre sur trois ans à peu près 150 000,00 $. On a été exclus pendant trois ans de
l'aide financière. Ça, c'est une
perte nette que de nous avoir attribué cette licence
commerciale.
9627
CONSEILLER ARPIN: C'est 150
000,00 $ par année ou 150 000,00 $ sur trois ans?
9628
M. DELORME: Non. C'est par année, 50 000,00 $, 60
000,00 $ qu'on aurait pu s'attendre de l'aide de Québec et d'Ottawa pour nous
aider à développer et puis 50 000,00 $ à peu près par année qu'on évalue puis
pendant trois ans, 150 000,00 $ qu'on n'a pas obtenu, on n'avait pas droit à
l'accès, parce qu'on avait cette licence commerciale.
9629
Ça, c'est le premier point.
9630
Le deuxième point, c'est d'avoir dit que les enfants, ce qu'ils font, ce
n'est pas du développement.
9631
Quand on a dit c'est du développement, de ce fait, ils devraient avoir
accès aux contributions du secteur privé qui donne de l'aide au développement de
talent canadien. Puis, là, les gens
du CRTC nous ont dit : non, ce n'est pas du développement ce que vous
faites.
9632
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Non; c'est
de l'initiation, c'est de l'éducation.
9633
M. DELORME: C'est de
l'éducation, c'est de prise de pouvoir des enfants, c'est l'accès aux médias
puis c'est purement éducatif.
9634
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Vous avez,
dans votre présentation orale, je regarde votre cinquième paragraphe et vous
dites : le CRTC a refusé d'accorder aux enfants une fréquence
FM.
9635
Généralement, CRTC ne refuse pas.
Il a attribué les fréquences à d'autres. Ce n'est pas... vous, vous en déduisez
que c'est un refus.
9636
M. DELORME: Bien, on a eu un
refus carrément parce qu'ils nous ont dit : non, la demande que vous venez de
présenter, elle est refusée.
9637
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Oui, mais
pas pour les motifs que... ça, les motifs que vous nous donnez ici, c'est ceux
que vous vous imaginez, mais la réalité, c'est que les fréquences ont été
attribuées à d'autres titulaires, à d'autres
requérants.
9638
M. DELORME: Absolument,
puis... oui. Puis, ils nous ont dit
les fonctionnaires, si vous voulez avoir une licence, allez du côté AM, ça, ça
va passer puis ça a passé comme du beurre dans la poêle comme on dit. Vous étiez à Québec, on ne s'est même
pas rendu à Québec puis la licence nous a été attribuée, mais oup! surprise,
tout le monde a été vraiment surpris, étonné, licence commerciale. Oup! puis ils disent : non, ce n'est pas
du développement ce que vous faites et puis vous devez être considérés comme les
autres radios commerciales. Mon
Dieu!
9639
Je veux dire, c'est parce que... je ne sais pas si vous avez écouté la
Radio Enfant, ce qu'on fait, on diffuse actuellement ici dans la Capitale, on
est sur internet, ça fait trois ans avec des licences de courte durée et puis on
a travaillé à peu près avec 300,, 400 écoles à travers le
Canada.
9640
Sur nos ondes ont passé tout près de 100 000, 110 000, 150 000 enfants
qui sont venus faire de la radio et puis c'est ça qu'on fait et puis les gens,
tout le monde du milieu de l'éducation ont dit : mon Dieu, quel bel outil puis,
là, on s'est rendu compte de l'expérience que les enfants y avaient d'abord
droit.
9641
Dans la Loi, je ne sais pas si on se trompe, si on la lit la même Loi,
mais dans la Loi, les enfants ont droit d'avoir des services de radiodiffusion
qui répondent à leurs besoins, aspirations et tous les logos et tout ça, comme
les hommes et les femmes. Les
enfants ont des droits.
9642
On s'est dit : est‑ce que les enfants au Canada ils ont des services de
radiodiffusion qui répondent à leurs besoins, à leurs goûts, à leurs
aspirations? Non. Parce que c'est quoi le besoin des
enfants? C'est de s'exprimer. Ils veulent faire de la
radio.
9643
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Et au
moment où on se parle, la Radio Enfant se finance comment?
9644
M. DELORME: Très peu. Je veux dire, ça... vraiment on
est...
9645
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Ça marche
avec de *l'huile
à bras+?
9646
M. DELORME: Exact;
c'est‑à‑dire qui paie l'Hydro?
9647
M. DELORME: Exact. C'est toutes
ces...
9648
Mme BERNARD: Là, c'est
monsieur le maire.
9649
CONSEILLER ARPIN:
Pardon?
9650
M. DELORME: Non. Monsieur le maire a payé le loyer. Monsieur le maire a payé le loyer. Moi, j'ai payé personnellement les
comptes de téléphone, mais on n'a pas de sou, on n'a pas eu de subvention de
personne pour faire ça. Puis, là,
cette année, conséquence du boycott, il y a eu très très peu d'écoles au Québec
qui ont fait de la Radio Enfant, à cause du boycott d'activités
parascolaires.
9651
Du côté Ontario, les gens ont dit : on voudrait bien en faire, mais votre
puissance de 18 watts, il n'y a pas une école qui reçoit notre signal parce
qu'avec 18 watts, si on avait une radio, je vous dirais : mettez‑vous à 101,9,
vous ne pourriez pas l'entendre.
9652
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Ça, 101,9,
c'est quand même une fréquence FM.
9653
M. DELORME: FM, faible
durée, 50 watts, 18 watts, ça fait qu'à tous les mois, 28 jours, on fait une
autre demande à Industries Canada, qu'on envoie à monsieur Ricky Burton à
Sault‑Sainte‑Marie qui, lui, nous accepte pour un autre 28
jours.
9654
Cette année, ce mois‑ci, ça va être le Conseil des écoles publiques. Avant ça, c'était le Club
Optimiste. Avant ça, c'était
l'Association d'ados. Avant ça...
et caetera, de mois en moi.
9655
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Puis,
est‑ce que vous signifiez ça au Conseil?
9656
M. DELORME: Ça, le Conseil
est... bien oui, on vous a rencontré et vous le savez.
9657
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Bien oui,
mais je veux dire...
9658
M. DELORME: Et puis on a
rencontré les fonctionnaires et tout le monde puis tout le monde l'école, tout
le monde le sait qu'on est en onde finalement. Je veux dire, on est en onde et puis...
mais tout ça, à la base, tous ces gens‑là autour sont bien conciliants
pourquoi? Parce que les enfants,
là, ils veulent faire de la
radio.
9659
Si vous disiez demain : aie! on coupe ça, là, bien il y a six, sept
écoles qui s'en viennent au mois de juin du côté de l'Ontario qui vont être...
tout le monde va être en maudit.
Ils vont dire : c'est quoi, ça cette histoire‑là?
9660
La semaine prochaine, on fait le Festival des secondaires en spectacle,
toute une programmation. On a fait
la semaine passée Quinze jours de voix d'enfants avec les Choralies, trois soirs
de suite on a diffusé les Choralies.
Puis pendant 15 jours, 80 pour cent de notre programmation c'était des
enfants qui chantaient.
9661
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Y compris
la chorale de l'École Lasalle?
9662
M. DELORME:
Oui.
9663
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Au moins
je suis ce qui se passe dans la région.
9664
M. DELORME: C'est ça,
exact. Donc, 15 jours. C'est la première fois qu'au Canada il y
avait pendant 15 jours de temps à la radio une programmation donc 80 pour cent
du contenu musical, c'était des enfants qui chantaient puis il y a du contenu
inimaginable au Canada.
9665
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Vous nous
demandez...
9666
M. DELORME: De laisser
place, dites oui à la Radio Enfant.
C'est ça qu'on vous demande.
9667
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Oui. Mais vous nous demandez aussi de
regarder l'accès au programme de développement de talent
canadien.
9668
M. DELORME:
C'est‑à‑dire...
9669
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Dans votre
présentation orale, vous n'avez pas indiqué de somme
qui...
9670
M. DELORME: On a évalué la
somme. On a évalué la
somme.
9671
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Mais je
dirais que dans votre présentation écrite, vous l'avez mise, donc c'est ma
question.
9672
M. DELORME:
Oui.
9673
CONSEILLER ARPIN:
Effectivement, vous avez identifié vos besoins comme étant de l'ordre de
500 000,00 $.
9674
M. DELORME: Pour la
Francophonie canadienne. Avec 500
000,00 $, on peut faire un an mur à mur de radio au Canada, de local à mis sur
un réseau, soit sur satellite, soit sur internet, soit sur le câble par
ExpressVu et tout ça, à travers le Canada, diffusé avec 500 000,00 $, 600 000,00
$, on fait une programmation d'un an avec 365 écoles différentes branchées et
puis tout ça et puis on ira chercher d'autres contributions du secteur privé
puis tout ça pour faire...
9675
Puis si on ajoute les anglophones, on multiplie par deux, dont un million
et demi, on aurait possibilité... ça, c'est notre
hypothèse.
9676
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Cinq cent
fois deux, ça fait un million et demi...
9677
M. DELORME: Oui, mais ça...
non, mais c'est‑à‑dire, c'est un million pour les anglophones puis 500 000,00 $
pour les francophones, pour les deux tiers en terme de
proportion.
9678
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Un tiers,
deux tiers.
9679
M. DELORME: Un tiers, deux
tiers. Donc, avec un million et
demi, deux millions, on pourrait mettre, c'est notre hypothèse avec notre
expérience depuis 10 ans, on pourrait mettre un service continu d'accès, de
production de radio au service des enfants à travers le Canada. Ça, c'est notre
hypothèse.
9680
Ça fait que nous, on a présenté au Patrimoine canadien une hypothèse, on
a dit : laissez‑nous réaliser un projet expérimental un an, 365 jours de 365
communautés, écoles, groupes différents, à chaque jour il y a un groupe
d'enfants différents qui fait une journée radio, avec un budget autour de ça et
puis qui serait géré.
9681
Puis pendant cette année‑là d'expérimentation, projet pilote, vous
mesurez, vous regardez ça, vous dites : regardez comment ça... est‑ce que ce
sont des bons résultats? L'impact
est‑il intéressant, pour les enfants, pour la communauté, la société, comment ça
se passe, le financement, comment pourrait‑il venir puis tout
ça.
9682
Nous autres, c'est toutes des hypothèses qu'on lance en fonction de notre
expérience, ça fait dix ans qu'on fait ça.
9683
CONSEILLER ARPIN:
Maintenant, ça, c'est votre projet.
Maintenant, moi, ce qui m'intéresse pour les fins de cette audience‑ci
là, c'est la gouvernance de ce fonds‑là
9684
M. DELORME:
Oui.
9685
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Si je
comprends bien de votre présentation d'aujourd'hui, les fonds proviendraient de
trois sources : les radiodiffuseurs, le gouvernement fédéral, ce qui m'étonne
parce que l'éducation relève des provinces.
9686
M. DELORME: Non, ce n'est
pas... on parle de radiodiffusion.
On ne parle pas d'éducation‑là.
On parle d'accès des enfants à la radiodiffusion. On ne parle pas
d'éducation.
9687
CONSEILLER ARPIN: D'accord,
d'accord. Et de fondations
privées.
9688
M. DELORME:
Oui.
9689
CONSEILLER ARPIN:
Maintenant, les fondations privées, vous pouvez... vous connaissez la
réponse du gouvernement, pour l'instant, vous ne vous qualifiez pas pour avoir
accès au fonds de la radiodiffusion.
Est‑ce que vous avez commencé à frapper aux portes des fondations
privées?
9690
M. DELORME: Oui, c'est sûr,
les fondations privées, par exemple, le Club Optimiste était avec nous autres,
il aurait été là hier. Ils sont
prêts à ajouter du gros financement pour installer
l'antenne.
9691
La Fondation McConnell a déjà donné du financement. Il y a d'autres partenaires qui sont
prêts, mais tout ce monde‑là, quand nous on leur présente notre hypothèse, ils
disent : aie! ça prend quand même des indications, comme vous dites, ça, c'est
un terme que vous utilisez souvent, des indications du Conseil et du Patrimoine
canadien comme quoi la radio au service des enfants c'est considéré comme
important, ça fait que va les convaincre, tu sais.
9692
Là, le Patrimoine a été sensibilisé
9693
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Vous êtes
convaincant, monsieur Delorme, ça fait des années... ça fait dix ans que vous le
dites.
9694
M. DELORME: Ça, c'est
toujours... exactement puis ça, ça c'est toujours la même chose que vous nous
dites, toujours la même.
9695
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Et vous
survivez.
9696
M. DELORME: Bien, je survis,
mais je suis en train de crever.
9697
Non, mais finalement, c'est un peu la limite; c'est‑à‑dire
qu'aujourd'hui, là, si vous dites non, là à ça, ça fait que nous autres on va
fermer. Moi, personnellement, je
vais fermer boutique, je vais dire, je vais aller faire d'autres
choses.
9698
Mais toute l'expérience qu'on a vécue pendant les dix dernières années,
vous devriez au contraire dire : aie! on va utiliser ça pour faire quelque chose
au service des enfants, au service des enfants, c'est juste notre
hypothèse.
9699
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Qui serait
responsable de...
9700
M. DELORME: Le fonds, vous
avez parlé de la gouvernance.
9701
CONSEILLER ARPIN: La
gouvernance du fonds?
9702
M. DELORME: Oui, c'est
ça. D'abord, disons qu'on ne veut
pas compliquer rien; utilisons le modèle en place. Vous avez inventé, vous avez mis en
place des modèles de gérance de fonds qui sont peut‑être Musique Action ou les
autres, à peu près le même type de structure mais, là, qui viendrait, un, du
milieu de l'éducation, milieu scolaire qui sont partenaires là‑dedans, au niveau
de la gérance, de la distribution de ce fonds‑là.
9703
Deux, le milieu associatif; toutes les organisations qui se dévouent pour
les enfants.
9704
Trois, les jeunes qui seraient là.
9705
Donc, imaginons une dizaine de personnes qui viennent de ces trois
sources‑là puis qu'eux autres sont là pour dire : on a 500 000,00 $, on a un
million à redistribuer, mais d'une façon tellement simple. C'est une école, puis c'est toujours
redistribué à des écoles ou à des organismes, pas à des radios, qui diraient,
nous autres on veut faire une activité radio, une semaine, une journée, deux
jours, on fait... les applications se font là puis il y a un financement qui
couvre à peu près le tiers de l'activité.
9706
Parce que, en gros, faire une journée, deux jours, c'est 2 000,00 $, 2
500,00 $ tout compris, bénévolat et tout ça, les audiences, les techniques, tout
ça, 2 000.00 $. Vous donnez
1 000,00 $ à ce groupe‑là, le restant ils vont se le chercher, ça fait
que ça, c'est le genre d'entente que, nous, on pourrait... qu'on a fait comme
expérience et puis qu'on pourrait mettre en... on est sûr qu'on pourrait mettre
en application.
9707
Au début, francophone, tout de suite, dans un an, deux ans, les
anglophones vont dire : aie! nous autres aussi on a le droit. Parfait. Deux ans, on établit ça, anglophone,
francophone à travers le Canada, mécanisme très simple qui vise que l'accès des
enfants à la radiodiffusion et qui prend une proportion assez rapide multimédia
aussi avec l'internet, parce que c'est ça qui est en arrière de la
radio.
9708
Puis, ça, c'est le plus bel outil, plus que la télévision, plus que
l'écrit. C'est la radio pour les
enfants.
9709
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Monsieur
le président, ça complète mes questions.
9710
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci. Merci beaucoup.
9711
M. DELORME: Je ne sais pas
si vous terminez comme ça l'expérience, mais madame Pennefather qui a
expérimenté... qui est venue nous voir à quelques reprises peut peut‑être
exprimer des questions ou poser puis voir un peu qu'est‑ce que c'est qu'elle a
vu, tu sais, quand elle est venue voir la radio des
enfants.
9712
Elle est venue à quelques reprises et puis on n'a pas eu beaucoup de
visite, mais on a eu une visite et puis qu'est‑ce que c'est que ça vous dit
cette question‑là des droits?
Est‑ce que vous avez l'impression que les enfants ont ce qu'ils méritent
en terme de services de radio au Canada?
9713
LE PRÉSIDENT: Bien, je
comprends votre question, mais je pense que ce n'est pas le forum pour en
discuter.
9714
M. DELORME: Mon Dieu, si ce
n'est pas ici dans le cadre de la révision de la
politique...
9715
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Mais oui,
c'est parce que ça c'est... ça c'est... on essaie de comprendre votre problème,
mais je pense que le fait qu'on a octroyé une licence en 2003 a démontré qu'on
est sensible et qu'on supporte la conception.
9716
Évidemment, il y en a des problèmes d'appellation, de libellé et puis on
va essayer de faire une étude plus approfondie de votre problème pour qu'on
puisse avoir... pour qu'on puisse acheminer votre but c'est d'établir une telle
station. Mais je pense que le
Conseil a démontré sa bonne foie et son support pour une telle
conception.
9717
Le problème, il me semble de ce que je lis dans votre intervention et de
ce que j'entends de votre représentation est une question de fait, d'essayer de
vous placer dans notre cadre réglementaire dans une manière appropriée pour
votre succès et jusqu'à maintenant, je comprends qu'on n'a pas bien réussi
ensemble.
9718
M. DELORME: Pas du
tout. Ça a été même des barrières;
le contraire. Ça a été des embûches
qui ont été mises à l'initiative.
9719
LE PRÉSIDENT: Non, mais je
ne pense pas que c'était le but. Le
but était... le but était de vous appuyer et de vous octroyer une licence et si,
normalement, dans une telle situation ou un requérant réussit enfin d'avoir une
licence du Conseil et s'il y a des problèmes, il essaie de les résoudre avec le
personnel après le fait.
9720
On est maintenant à presque trois ans après le fait, l'octroi de votre
licence et vous venez nous voir aujourd'hui dans un forum public et c'est votre
droit de participer à notre politique, mais ce n'est pas au sujet étroit de
votre licence.
9721
M. DELORME: Mais ce n'est
pas de ça qu'on est venu ici, ce n'est pas du tout du tout de voir la question
de notre licence. C'est la question
de l'accès des droits des enfants à l'accès de la
radiodiffusion.
9722
LE PRÉSIDENT: Non, mais ce
que je dis, monsieur, puis on a déjà... on a déjà répondu en vous octroyant une
licence. Il y a un problème avec
cette licence‑là, mais pas avec le principe d'une station où la cible est les
enfants et la jeunesse.
9723
On a bien approuvé une requête par votre fondation pour une licence de
radio. Ça, ça établit notre
décision sur le principe.
9724
M. DELORME:
Oui.
9725
LE PRÉSIDENT: Mais il y a
des problèmes d'implémentation et ça, il faut résoudre avec, essayer de trouver
un moyen où vous pouvez réussir dans votre but et, apparemment, dans notre but,
en vous octroyant une licence.
9726
Mais ce n'est pas le forum pour en discuter parce que ça soulève des
questions plus techniques, plus juridiques et tout ça. Et je vous conseille de faire une
réunion avec notre personnel pour qu'on puisse vous aider.
9727
M. DELORME: Exactement, ce
n'est pas le forum parce que, nous, d'ailleurs, on va se présenter sous
peu. On a notre site d'installation
de l'antenne puis on va représenter au CRTC une demande puis, là, on va
demander une modification de
licence du commercial au communautaire.
9728
Ça, ça va se faire, mais notre propos aujourd'hui, c'est surtout pas
ça. Il ne faut pas confondre puis
de dire : ils sont venus nous parler de leur licence, pas du
tout.
9729
On est venu vous dire, un, le cadre réglementaire que vous avez prévu, ce
n'est pas adéquat, donc, changez‑le.
9730
Deux, dites que c'est... ce que la radio peut être utile aux enfants,
c'est un outil de développement pour les enfants, donc c'est du développement
éducatif et tout ça, qu'on fait avec ça.
9731
LE PRÉSIDENT : J'ai déjà entendu ça, la première, la deuxième et la
troisième fois.
9732
M. DELORME : Exact.
Merci.
9733
LE PRÉSIDENT : Merci beaucoup.
9734
M. DELORME : Merci.
9735
LE PRÉSIDENT : O.K.
9736
M. DELORME : J'espère qu'on est entendu et clairement entendu. Merci.
‑‑‑ Rires /
Laughter
9737
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci.
9738
Madame la Secrétaire.
9739
LA SECRÉTAIRE : Merci, Monsieur le Président.
9740
I would now call on the next participant, Mr. Wayne Plunkett. If you would come forward to make your
presentation, please.
PRESENTATION /
PRÉSENTATION
9741
MR. PLUNKETT: Good
afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice‑Chair and Members of the
Commission.
9742
I thought I was going to be dead last on this hearing and that's why I
said thanks for leaving the best for the last, but I'm not quite at that
point.
9743
I have been a consultant in Toronto for new applicants and smaller
broadcasting companies for the last several years after a long run in the senior
financial end of the broadcasting and advertising
business.
9744
Therefore, it may be a little surprising that my tact on making comments
on this radio review policy is in the technical area, but that is also an area
that I have a great deal of interest in, hopefully a little bit of expertise in,
although I'm certainly not a consulting engineer by any
means.
9745
My main thrust is to do with the FM second adjacent considerations, as I
call it and this is as it particularly affects the most densely populated
regions in the country, the three obvious ones: Southern Ontario, Montreal and the
Eastern Townships, and Vancouver and the lower B.C. Mainland and over on
Vancouver Island.
9746
A shortage of ‑‑ a situation of a shortage of FM frequencies in
these three markets has existed and has been recognized for a long time, back to
at least the mid‑1970s. I do
remember the radio situation back then when I was directly involved with a major
company.
9747
And this was largely precipitated by the much more rapid growth of FM
broadcasting in the U.S. than in Canada from the period from post‑World War II
up to, I would say, about 1980.
9748
Just as a for instance, there has not been a new commercial FM station
take the air in the stagnant Buffalo market for literally 40 years, but up to
about 20 years ago the Western New York FMs certainly had the jump as a whole on
the Toronto FM stations and total number of commercial
stations.
9749
However, since that time period of about 1986 to now, there have been
five new commercial stations licensed in Toronto. Each time ‑‑ I've been at all those
hearings, each time utilizing the so‑called "last available frequency in the
market", quote unquote.
9750
In chronological order I list the stations served: CJEZ, CJAQ ‑‑ Jack‑FM today ‑‑
CFXJ, FLOW 93.5 and CJSA, Canadian multicultural radio.
9751
I even forgot that CFMX when they established in Toronto started off in
Mississauga and got moved to Toronto and also would fall into that
category.
9752
And the move of CBC Radio 1 to 99.1 in 1998 also meant the utilization of
another scarce FM frequency in Toronto.
9753
So, by the late 1990s it was obvious that no more stations could be
accommodated on the FM band without changes being made to the existing
protection rules and that's when the amendments to the third adjacent rules came
into effect.
9754
I was involved with the WAVE 94.7 in Hamilton with Doug Kirk when it
first was being applied for and started and that's been on the air for ‑‑
since September, 2000, licensed on May the 5th, 2000.
9755
There are quite a few more examples follow, some of which are the new
stations in Toronto that I've already mentioned and this trend has obviously
spread to all the major markets across the country.
9756
So, now we are faced with the question: Is this the end of the line for any new
commercial or, for that matter any type of FM stations in the future in
particularly the three ‑‑ the border markets and the three I mentioned
where the band is saturated with a combination of Canadian and U.S. stations, or
is there a possible answer to this dilemma?
9757
In my opinion, yes, there is an answer to be had and that is loosening
the present hard and fast rule that to locate a second new station on a second
adjacent frequency to that of a present station in any given market you need the
permission or sign‑off of the latter station.
9758
My experience has been that generally speaking it's next to impossible to
obtain such a sign‑off and I really feel why primarily, not because there is
necessarily a high degree of likelihood of interference caused by the proposed
new station but, no, the real underlying reason is, to be honest, simply to hide
behind the present second adjacent rules to stifle competition of new stations
in the marketplace wherever that's possible.
9759
The CBC is also involved in this.
As I have been following the new licence that was granted to Fitzroy Gordon who I was the consultant
for in his first go‑around and so I'm glad that he's got a licence now and the
problem is getting a spot on the dial.
9760
And I mentioned the CBC's at the present time unwillingness to sign off
on what would be the best frequency in the opinion of a number of
people.
9761
I also mentioned four other examples which I will not read verbatim in
the interest of time, but they're all I think of an interesting nature and I'll
just categorize them.
9762
The first one is to do with three stations that CORUS Entertainment own
in sort of a triangle between Toronto and Burlington and Cambridge and I had no
quarrel with them trying to change the frequency of their Cambridge station to a
new frequency, and since they were able to sign‑off on their own two other
stations, it became effective and, in fact, there's a new power increase before
the Commission at this point for the Cambridge station, a considerable power
increase.
9763
And there's also the situation in Toronto which is interesting ‑‑
and I've also followed over the years ‑‑ where there's a mutual cooperation
between Martin Rosenthal of CFMX, Classical 96, and Mr. Kirk of Durham Radio and
there are a couple of times their respective stations have been able to increase
their power and be able to better penetrate the buildings in Toronto and, in
Classical 96's case, get a better signal into the Niagara Region because of
first adjacent interference to a Buffalo station.
9764
Not so long ago in 2003 ‑‑ I'm going to read this verbatim ‑‑
in Montreal both the CBC and CHCR Limited, Canadian Hellenic Cable Radio, were
licensed simultaneously on July 2nd, 2003 for new
transmitters.
9765
One was a relay of Radio 1 in Montreal to correct some signal problems
and the other was a new ethnic station, CKDG‑105.1.
9766
As the two decisions pointed out, although they may not have want to
cooperate with each other at the beginning, by at the time the hearing rolled
around the two parties cooperated and encouraged the Commission to license both
stations and thus overcame the usual rule that would have prohibited such
licensing as occurred.
9767
And I got to mention, since I remember clearly, even 30 years ago in the
mid‑70s when the station on 97.7 in St. Catharines increased their power from
250 to 50,000 watts, I recall that this was only possible with a sign‑off being
obtained from Rogers Broadcasting to do with CHFI and
98.1.
9768
And at that time I was comptroller of the Rogers group of radio stations
in Southern Ontario and that's why it has always stuck in my
mind.
9769
My point then really boils down to strongly encouraging the BTIC
Committee, representatives from the Commission and the Department of Industry
and consulting engineers to give top priority to paving the way for a change to
the BPR rule to allow second adjacent stations to operate successfully in the
same market.
9770
Sorry I'm using a hackneyed phrase here that I've heard many times at
this hearing, a hearing on the audio in Toronto, the playing field needs to be
levelled so that favouritism is not allowed where a broadcaster will rightly
sign‑off for a co‑owned station but plays the trump card to block another party
obtaining technical approval for the same type of a second adjacent
situation.
9771
My personal perspective in this matter is that over the last couple of
years, particularly a number of prospective worthy applicants have talked to me
about applying in Toronto and really have been dismayed to find that there are
no more frequencies available on the FM band that don't need the cooperation of
mostly main line major, major company stations.
9772
The years you'll add to the incumbents is, you know, what's in it for us
if we sign off.
9773
My final point on this matter is to observe that here's a case where
Canada can lead the way technically in my mind as compared to the situation in
the U.S., rather than the other way around.
9774
And I note that in an article in the February, 2006 issue of Popular
Communications ‑‑ probably the world's largest selling communications
magazine ‑‑ on low power FM in the U.S., out of 640 recently licensed new
low power stations pursuant to new FCC rules of a few years ago, there's exactly
one in the top 25 U.S. markets, happens to be in Atlanta, and only a dozen or so
in the overall top 100 markets.
9775
Why is this? As I understand
it, because the FCC backed off from their initial plan to allow these stations
with a maximum of 100 watts to be slotted in the jam‑packed band in the major
markets as second adjacent to existing stations but rather, after lobbying by
the National Association of Broadcasters, changed their rule‑making procedure
that the new low power stations, community Fms must provide third adjacent
protection and ‑‑
9776
THE SECRETARY: Excuse me,
Mr. Plunkett, your time has expired.
If you would like to conclude, please.
9777
MR. PLUNKETT: Okay. My other point was about IBOC and that's
been talked about many, many times at this hearing and I simply raise the
concern and I hope I might be questioned on this to give a few examples of the
yet unproven interference‑free situation of IBOC digital broadcasting but on the
AM band, particularly at night, but I also have experienced the situation during
the daytime even since I wrote these notes a few days ago.
9778
So, I shall conclude with that and look forward to any questions you
might have.
9779
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you,
Mr. Plunkett.
9780
Commissioner Arpin.
9781
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: Thank
you very much.
9782
Mr. Plunkett, thank you for your submission and my questions will, as you
say yourself, the second adjacent issues are more a matter for Industry Canada
than for the CRTC, but it is good for us to understand the issues and I thank
you.
9783
MR. PLUNKETT: It's difficult
for me, not being a consulting engineer, to really get
my ‑‑
9784
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: No,
but ‑‑
9785
MR. PLUNKETT: ‑‑ two cents' in worth, since we're speaking of
Industry Canada, so...
9786
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I think
you probably were capable to explain it in more layman's terms, so that we have
more sense than we understand than some of the professional engineers who come
with their own language and only their peers could really understand what they
say. So, I appreciate what you have
done.
9787
My questions will be directed towards IBOC. I don't know if you heard or if you had
a chance to listen through the Internet to these proceedings, but we surely had
two significant interveners who made comments on IBOC. It was a representative of iBiquity
and ‑‑
9788
MR. PLUNKETT: I did hear
that.
9789
MR. ARPIN: And also the CBC
on Wednesday morning.
9790
MR. PLUNKETT: Because the
order got changed which I wasn't aware of, I did not hear that, but I've read
their written comments.
9791
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: And you
have read their written comments.
9792
MR. PLUNKETT:
Yes.
9793
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: But they
did emphasize on ‑‑ in using the testimony of
Mr. Shortlenner.
9794
Do you have any other comments to make, because we heard most of the
broadcasting group there ‑‑ except a few ‑‑ what they have been saying
to the Commission, you should allow us to experiment with each and every
technology that is available for a certain time so that we could make the
determination of which technology most suits best with
us.
9795
Some others came and said, well, IBOC is the North American standard and
we cannot, particularly those who are operating radio stations north of the
border, we cannot be ‑‑ if our competitors on the U.S. side are IBOC and we
are not, then we are at a disadvantage because our own listeners will end up
with having IBOC receivers and so they will stop listening to their Canadian
service.
9796
MR. PLUNKETT: No, I
understand that fully and I support those kind of comments, the general posture
that the IBOC system needs to be, you know, thoroughly considered for
Canada.
9797
Of course, when I wrote my original submission two months ago I was not
really aware of how many other people were going to comment on IBOC to get to
the hearing here.
9798
If I may, I'm a great believer in not just using generalizations, but
maybe a couple of specific examples to do with IBOC and, you know, the concerns
that other people besides myself are expressing about the AM IBOC side of
things.
9799
And although my written comments are to do with IBOC at night, I do want
to relay last Sunday I happened to be out in the Durham Region north of Oshawa
and Whitby and one of the major stations in New York State is WHAM in Rochester
on 1180, which is one of the old clear channel stations and it's owned today by
Clear Channel Communications which obviously is part of the Equity ‑‑ part
of iBiquity.
9800
I was really shocked I must say that even during the day the amount of
interference ‑‑ jamming, jamming to use my phrase ‑‑ on the adjacent
channels 1170, 1190 was fierce, to use a word.
9801
And so I am somewhat even more concerned now even to do with the daytime
situation let alone the night time skyway situation.
9802
And, as I say, I certainly look forward to testing that will go on, I'm
sure, in Canada and maybe even be able to play some small role in
that.
9803
And another situation I want to refer to, a friend of mine is one of the
engineers at WSM‑TV in Nashville.
Although he's on the TV side he has a great interest in the broadcasting,
the radio side too and so he's recently relayed a comment to me which also was a
bit shocking that a station only 20 miles away from Nashville ‑‑ a small
station, I will name it, to be CKD‑1490 in Lebanon, Tennessee ‑‑ so, not
just the first adjacent, but a second adjacent from one of the big power houses
in Nashville, WLAC‑1510 is experiencing daytime interference on IBOC, such that
when you drive from Nashville to Lebanon you cannot properly hear this Lebanon
in its own area until you're practically within the city limits of the
community, as I say, within about 20 miles away from
Nashville.
9804
So, I think that that is an example I just wanted to put on the record
for people to be aware of. I'm sure
there are others, but that one I think is a bit telling.
9805
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: In your
oral presentation that you had to skip over, but you are referring to some FM
also concerns that you have, particularly with the frequency 88.1 and channel 6
and 107.9 and obviously with NAFCON.
9806
MR. PLUNKETT: These things
just occurred to me, but I mean it's one thing the FM band itself but we're
always contending with channel 6 below the band and the aeronautical services
above and I simply am raising the question, without knowing really the answer,
has this been properly looked at or will be properly looked
at.
9807
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: But if I
understood you well, you are supporting that at least we do this thing here in
this country.
9808
I know the CBC in their oral presentation on Wednesday they will be
testing IBOC in Toronto over the summer.
9809
MR. PLUNKETT: Okay. I will be anxious to read the transcript
to see all what they said and that doesn't surprise me, I mean, but I'm
interested to hear those exact words.
9810
COMMISSIONER ARPIN:
Okay. Mr. Chairman, those
were my questions. Thank you very
much for coming.
9811
MR. PLUNKETT: Okay, thank
you.
9812
COMMISSIONER ARPIN: I
appreciate it.
9813
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you,
Mr. Plunkett.
9814
Just on your oral presentation, your reference to the article in Popular
Communications, I am not ‑‑ I am trying to make sure I have your
point.
9815
You say of 640 recent licensed stations there is only one in the top 25
U.S. markets and a dozen in the 100, why, because the FCC backed off from their
initial plans to allow these stations maximum 100 watts to be slotted in the
jam‑packed FM band in the major markets in second adjacent existing
stations.
9816
I am not sure whether you think that is a good thing or a bad
thing.
9817
MR. PLUNKETT: Well, maybe I
didn't quite explain the full point I was making there, so I will
now.
9818
It's a bit ironic to me anyways that compared to the Canadian situation
where we have a variety of community ‑‑ we have community stations that
have a variety of sized markets of all sizes, whereas the U.S. because of the
FCC rule‑making, the way I look at it anyways, the community stations that the
low power FM rules in the U.S. were designed to help are helping in the smaller
markets but precluding being able to get into the bigger U.S. markets and
particularly in the top 10, 100 markets because they have to provide third
adjacent protection rather than second.
9819
THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. But would it be that much of a help to
them to get into what you refer to as jam‑packed FM markets as distinct from
those other communities? I guess
that was the question.
9820
You are thinking it would have been better from their point of view if
they could have been ‑‑ jam‑packed though they
are ‑‑
9821
MR. PLUNKETT:
Yeah.
9822
THE CHAIRPERSON: ‑‑ allowed into those
markets.
9823
MR. PLUNKETT: Yeah. Well, I mean, my feeling would be they
should have stuck to allowing the second adjacent, then the number of ‑‑
the new stations that would have been licensed to this point would have been a
much more nice variety of community stations in all the various sizes of U.S.
markets rather than being concentrated in just the smaller
ones.
9824
THE CHAIRPERSON:
Right.
9825
MR. PLUNKETT: But
I ‑‑
9826
THE CHAIRPERSON: You think
this was the result of NAB lobbying to avoid competition to those
stations...
9827
MR. PLUNKETT: That's ‑‑
I'm repeating what I have read.
9828
THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Thank you very much for coming before
us, Mr. Plunkett.
9829
MR. PLUNKETT: You're
welcome.
9830
THE CHAIRPERSON: We'll now
take a 15‑minute break and resume at 4:15.
‑‑‑ Upon recessing
at 1602 / Suspension à 1602
‑‑‑ Upon resuming
at 1622 / Reprise à 1622
9831
THE CHAIRPERSON: Order,
please. À l'ordre, s'il vous
plaît.
9832
Madame la Secrétaire.
9833
LA SECRÉTAIRE : Merci, Monsieur le Président.
9834
J'inviterais maintenant le Conseil provincial du secteur des
communications et le Syndicat canadien de la fonction publique à nous faire leur
présentation.
9835
Vous pouvez peut‑être introduire vos collègues, et vous aurez 10 minutes
pour votre présentation.
Merci.
9836
M. PARÉ : Merci.
PRÉSENTATION /
PRESENTATION
9837
M. PARÉ : Bonjour, Monsieur le Président. Mesdames, messieurs les conseillers,
bonjour.
9838
Je m'appelle Stéphane Paré.
Je suis Vice‑Président Radio‑Télévision du Conseil provincial du secteur
des communications (CPSC) du Syndicat canadien de la fonction
publique.
9839
Le CPSC représente 7 000 travailleuses et travailleurs dans le
secteur du domaine des communications, dont la radio.
9840
Permettez‑moi de vous présenter les personnes qui m'accompagnent :
Bruno Perron, journaliste à la radio CHRC Info 800 à Québec, et Lisa
Djevahirdjian, responsable de recherche au
CPSC.
9841
Nous sommes heureux de participer à ces audiences sur l'avenir de la
radio commerciale en un moment charnière de son évolution.
9842
La progression fulgurante de la technologie influence, certes, notre
façon de consommer l'information, mais la radio continue de jouer un rôle
essentiel, un rôle inscrit dans la Loi sur la radiodiffusion et maintes fois
reconnu par le CRTC.
9843
Toutefois, il faut s'assurer que l'information soit accessible et qu'elle
soit de qualité. Le réglementation
demeure un principal moyen d'atteindre cet objectif.
9844
Il est clair que l'évolution de la technologie a créé, avec les nouvelles
plates‑formes de distribution, un contexte plus concurrentiel, mais la radio, en
tant que média de communication de masse, demeure puissante en raison de son
ubiquité et sa gratuité.
9845
L'Association canadienne des radiodiffuseurs dessine un portrait plutôt
menaçant de cette nouvelle technologie.
Pourtant, ces nouvelles plates‑formes peuvent être considérées comme une
occasion en or pour ses créateurs de contenu
vocal.
9846
La radio analogique joue toujours un rôle déterminant pour l'identité
nationale et la souveraineté culturelle.
Elle demeure un bien public et un outil incontournable pour
l'épanouissement de la démocratie et des collectivités.
9847
Cependant, l'information et les nouvelles sont devenues les parents
pauvres de la radio, qui a sabordé sa mission
d'information.
9848
Nous restons, toutefois, confiant que le Conseil verra le mérite et la
nécessité de redresser la situation et pourra s'inspirer de ses propres succès
réglementaires pour le faire.
9849
Passons à l'engouement actuel pour la musique québécoise, qui n'aurait
pas pu se produire s'il n'était des politiques culturelles régissant la
production canadienne de musique.
9850
Depuis 1993, il n'y a pas d'exigence concernant les quotas de nouvelles,
mais seulement des exigences de production locale. Cette approche n'a pas été concluante,
et les Québécois, du moins, affichent un déficit quant à l'accès des émissions
d'information et une information de qualité à la radio. Cet avis résonne dans toute instance qui
se penche sur la question.
9851
L'an passé, le gouvernement affirmait que le maintien de la diversité des
voix, aux niveaux local et régional, dans un contexte de communication changeant
révèle une question pressante.
9852
Dans le même document, on cite un sondage, datant de février 2005,
affirmant que 60 pour cent des Canadiens sont tout à fait d'accord avec la
déclaration que la radio et la télévision locales devraient jouer un rôle actif
pour que les collectivités reçoivent une information locale de grande
qualité.
9853
Bruno.
9854
M. PERRON : Donc, avoir des bulletins de nouvelles à la radio ne suffit
pas. Encore, faut‑il qu'il y ait du
contenu local et régional avec un tant soit peu de qualité et de
recherche.
9855
Quand on fixe la durée totale d'un bulletin de nouvelles à 90 secondes,
météo et sports compris, il y a très certainement lieu de se
questionner.
9856
Un journaliste n'est pas un lecteur de nouvelles qui pige son information
de sources facilement accessibles, mais un professionnel payé pour cueillir,
vérifier, traiter, analyser et diffuser de l'information. L'objectif est, entre autres, d'éviter
de reproduire la tendance actuelle qui consiste à présenter une opinion comme
une information.
9857
On assiste depuis quelques années à la multiplication d'émissions dites
* talk
+, où
l'animateur émet toute une série de commentaires et d'opinions. Est‑ce là un service
d'information?
9858
Quand il n'y a pas de travail journalistique à la base pour bien établir
les limites d'un débat, on se retrouve trop souvent avec des opinions émises à
tort et à travers, et l'auditeur se fait berner.
9859
Il serait grand temps que quelqu'un prête oreille, prête attention à
cette dérive désolante. Il ne faut
pas pointer du doigt les artisans de la radio. Les conditions dans lesquelles ils
exercent leur métier sont devenues tellement précaires qu'ils n'ont pas d'autre
choix.
9860
Il faut exiger de tout radiodiffuseur des services d'information
crédibles, avec plus d'heures de nouvelles et une attitude responsable, sans
faux‑fuyant et sans recours à des artifices tels les bulletins de nouvelles
pré‑enregistrés longtemps à l'avance.
9861
On nous a rapporté des situations aussi irresponsables que des bulletins
de nouvelles pré‑enregistrés le vendredi pour diffusion le dimanche, histoire
d'accumuler des heures de diffusion de nouvelles pour bien paraître aux yeux du
Conseil.
9862
Nous demandons au Conseil d'agir pour fixer des limites raisonnables à
ces pratiques et mettre fin aux abus.
9863
Par ailleurs, il ne faut pas oublier que c'est la radio qui s'adapte le
mieux aux situations de crises.
N'importe quel citoyen qui a vécu la crise du verglas au Québec peut
témoigner de la grande valeur du médium et de son efficacité en situation
d'urgence.
9864
Dans les régions plus éloignées des grands centres, chaque station de
radio, autrefois, desservait sa population avec des journalistes dignes de ce
nom, qui produisaient leurs nouvelles et informait leur communauté
adéquatement.
9865
Les radios privées ont presque éliminé les outils de communication
régionale capables de produire une qualité et une quantité décente de nouvelles
locales. À notre avis, les ondes
constituent un bien public qui doit, d'abord et avant tout, desservir le public
de la région qui fait vivre la station.
9866
Dans son avis pour cette audience, le Conseil insiste sur l'importance du
rôle des stations de radio pour la diffusion des nouvelles et de l'information
locale et a fait valoir que la couverture de nouvelles locales avait chutée au
Québec à la suite de la consolidation de propriétés qui a précédé la révision de
la politique de 1998.
9867
Que l'on s'y mette. Lors de
la vente du réseau Radiomédia à Corus, le Conseil a pu constater la vive
réaction d'un grand nombre de communautés à travers la province. Ces gens réclamaient à haut cri que
cesse la montréalisation des ondes.
9868
Les stations pigent souvent leur information là où elles le peuvent, dans
les communiqués, les fils de presse, les sites web souvent basés à et centrés
sur Montréal. La vérification
d'information devient quasi‑inexistante, et le degré de pertinence pour les
citoyens en région par rapport à Montréal est dangereusement
diminué.
9869
Dans sa décision sur l'échange d'actifs entre Astral et Corus au Québec,
il est noté que le Conseil partage les préoccupations soulevées par certains
intervenants, à savoir si les effectifs journalistiques prévus pour les stations
en région sont suffisants pour assumer une information d'intérêt local de
qualité.
9870
Les intervenants soulignent l'importance d'avoir un nombre suffisant de
journalistes locaux pour en assurer la cueillette, le traitement et la
diffusion. À défaut, le rôle du
journaliste en ondes pourrait être restreint à la lecture de l'information
provenant de diverses sources externes, ce qui aurait pour effet d'homogénéiser
les ondes et les voix en région.
Aussi bien dire adieu à la diversification des
voix.
9871
Aux audiences publiques précédant la décision que je viens de mentionner,
le Conseil a demandé et obtenu un plan décrivant le nombre d'effectifs
journalistiques que les deux réseaux devaient avoir une fois la transaction
complétée.
9872
Le Conseil est forcé de constater qu'il y a, aujourd'hui, plus de
lecteurs de nouvelles que de journalistes desservant nos communautés. Personne ne cueille sur le terrain
l'information, personne ne la traite, et, en gros, les radios diffusent toute la
même chose.
9873
Il est urgent que le CRTC impose des conditions de licence aux
propriétaires radiophoniques. Non
seulement le CRTC doit imposer aux radiodiffuseurs un minimum d'émissions de
nouvelles et d'information locale, mais il doit aussi imposer par condition de
licence un minimum d'heures de production de
nouvelles.
9874
Il y a maintenant toute une nouvelle génération de journalistes à la
radio qui ne se sont à peu près jamais déplacés pour couvrir un événement ou qui
ont presque jamais réalisés d'entrevue avec les acteurs de l'actualité
régionale. Cette situation n'est
pas due à un manque de talent, mais plutôt aux conditions actuelles qui forcent
les journalistes à agir de la sorte.
9875
Nous savons que nos demandes ont un certain prix, mais, après tout, il
faut garder en tête que l'utilisation des ondes publiques et un privilège qui
n'est pas gratuit.
9876
Heureusement, les radio commerciales connaissent une situation financière
saine. Le communiqué du CRTC du 4
mai 2006 vient confirmer que les revenus et les bénéfices de la radio
commerciale canadienne sont à la hausse.
9877
Pour faire face au défi, la nouvelle technologie doit être vue comme une
nouvelle source de revenu pour les diffuseurs. Ils doivent miser sur l'exploitation de
leur contenu sur plusieurs plates‑formes afin de palier à l'érosion de
l'audience radiophonique. La
ballade haut diffusion pourrait, par exemple, offrir une valeur ajoutée aux
émissions de nouvelles.
9878
Ces nouvelles technologies présentent d'excellents débouchés permettant à
la radio traditionnelle d'information de rejoindre de nouveaux publics ou de
récupérer une partie des recettes publicitaires perdues par l'effet de la
fragmentation des marchés.
9879
En conclusion, nous croyons que si le Conseil mettait autant d'effort à
baliser l'exercice du volet information de la radio que celui du volet musical,
les conditions de redressement de la situation seraient grandement
favorisées.
9880
Nous demandons au CRTC de donner le coups de barre qui
s'impose.
9881
Merci.
9882
LE PRÉSIDENT : Merci beaucoup.
9883
Monsieur le Vice‑Président.
9884
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Merci.
9885
Je présume, Monsieur Perron, que vous êtes celui qui fait les bulletins
de nouvelles en 90 secondes, parce qu'à la vitesse où vous avez
lu...
‑‑‑ Rires /
Laughter
9886
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : ...votre mémoire, je ne suis pas sûr que les
interprètes ont été capable de vous suivre.
‑‑‑ Rires /
Laughter
9887
M. PERRON : Nous leur avons mis... vous voyez, c'est ça la mauvaise
habitude de la radio en 90 secondes.
Mais non, je dois vous dire que chez nous, on peut prendre plus que le
temps qu'il faut, mais vous savez, mon collègue a grugé dans le timing pas
mal.
‑‑‑ Rires /
Laughter
9888
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Vous parlez de la précarité... des conditions
précaires du métier de journaliste, ou des artisans de la radio, parce que je
comprends bien que le SCFP, vous ne représentez pas que des journalistes, vous
représentez l'ensemble des artisans qui sont dans certaines des stations qui
sont affiliées?
9889
M. PARÉ : Oui, c'est ça. Il
y a plusieurs facteurs. Dans le
domaine des communications, on représente en télévision. On peut représenter aussi dans d'autres
secteurs comme les travaux publics et tout ça. Les journalistes et tout ce qui englobe
la communication, le SCFP a beaucoup de sections locales dans ce
domaine.
9890
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Oui.
Mais spécifiquement dans des stations de radio, vous ne représentez pas
que les journalistes?
9891
M. PARÉ : Non.
9892
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Vous devez représentez les animateurs, les
techniciens, le personnel de soutien...
9893
M. PARÉ : Oui.
9894
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Bon.
9895
M. PARÉ : On peut représenter tous les...
9896
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Parce que le mémoire qu'on a devant nous, et surtout
la présentation orale est très centrée sur les besoins spécifiques de
l'information et des nouvelles.
9897
Mais est‑ce que les préoccupations générales au niveau des grands
principes généraux comme, notamment, la précarité de l'emploi, les conditions
spécifiques, ça s'applique uniquement aux gens de l'information, ou si ça
s'applique à l'ensemble des employés que vous représentez?
9898
M. PERRON : Ça se vit davantage au point de vue information et
nouvelles. Le volet musical de la
radio s'est développé de façon assez phénoménale au cours des dernières années,
de sorte que nous avons choisi de toucher un volet qui ne semblait pas beaucoup
être abordé dans le cadre de ces audiences sur l'avenir de la radio
commerciale.
9899
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Cependant, il y avait quand même... un des objectifs
de la revue de la radio, c'est la production d'émissions
locales...
9900
M. PERRON : Mm‑hmm.
9901
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : ...et l'information était évidemment spécifique, sauf
chez les réseaux, les têtes de réseau, l'information est pour consommation
locale...
9902
M. PERRON : Mm‑hmm.
9903
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : ...et aussi de production locale. Vous avez dit
que...
9904
M. PERRON : Oui.
9905
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : ...c'est surtout des lecteurs qu'on retrouve plutôt
que des...
9906
M. PERRON : Bien, on a...
9907
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Mais pouvez‑vous être plus
spécifique?
9908
M. PERRON : Oui. Je pense
que... oui.
9909
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Je comprends que vous, Monsieur Perron, vous êtes
dans une station qui fait beaucoup d'information...
9910
M. PERRON : Oui.
9911
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : ...mais dans l'ensemble de votre membership, vous
représentez de très petites stations puis de plus importantes. J'essaie de faire un peu l'état de la
situation de l'information, pas uniquement à CHRC. D'ailleurs, vous l'avez même dit que
vous étiez un peu privilégié par rapport à d'autres.
9912
Mais est‑ce qu'on pourrait avoir un espèce de...
9913
M. PERRON : Oui.
9914
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : ...vue plus large?
9915
M. PERRON : Oui. Écoutez un
peu, il suffit de se reporter à il y a quelques années. Un peu partout dans toutes les stations
de radio au Québec, il y avait des salles de nouvelles d'une certaine
importance, où, à tout le moins, on avait, règle générale, un chef de pupitre le
matin, un chef de pupitre l'après‑midi, puis un ou deux
reporters.
9916
Mais si je me reporte dans les années 80, on était à Québec, il y avait
des salles de nouvelles. Il y avait
CJRP, il y avait CKCV, il y avait CHRC ‑‑ je vous donne cet exemple‑là,
mais on pourra l'appliquer à d'autres endroits également en région ‑‑ où il
y avait des salles de nouvelles de 10 à 12 journalistes, facile. Aujourd'hui, on ne retrouve plus ça dans
aucune des stations de radio dans le marché de
Québec.
9917
Et ailleurs, prenez la même... le même phénomène s'est produit ailleurs à
travers la province au complet, de sorte que, sur la route, parlez à n'importe
journaliste de l'écrit et de la télé, ils vont vous dire, un journaliste de
radio, de la radio privée au Québec, on ne voit jamais ça sur le terrain, nous
autres, ou à peu près pas.
9918
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Mais ils font la cueillette de l'information de
quelle façon?
9919
M. PERRON : Bien, ils peuvent en prendre par téléphone, mais le problème,
c'est que ça l'a une limite.
Souvent, ils vont prendre ça des sites internet. Ils risquent de piller l'information à
un autre média tout simplement pour réussir à arriver à faire un bulletin de
nouvelles.
9920
Je vais vous donner juste un exemple. Pas plus tard que cette semaine, au
début de la semaine, je suis au Palais de Justice de Québec, je couvre un
procès. À la suite du procès, je
fais une clip avec la procureure de la Couronne, qui émet son commentaire sur la
cause en question.
9921
Un de mes collègues de l'écrit entend à la radio la clip en question de
la procureure de la Couronne. Il
dit : Travailles‑tu pour cette station‑là, toi? Je dis : Non. Qu'est‑ce que ça veut dire qu'ils
l'ont? Il dit : Il n'était pas
ici? Je dis : Non. D'où elle vient? Je ne le sais pas, mais il y a un
problème.
9922
Des exemples comme ça... régulièrement, les journalistes se plaignent de
ce phénomène du plagia.
9923
Pour bien vous expliquer, parce que je sais, Monsieur Arpin, que vous
avez déjà vu ça, la radio, vous.
‑‑‑ Rires /
Laughter
9924
M. PERRON : Pour vous expliquer, la progression de l'information a
toujours fonctionné un peu selon le principe suivant. C'est comme si on se faisait un party à
soir, puis on dit tout le monde apporte quelque chose.
9925
De tout temps, la radio a piqué une nouvelle dans les journaux, le
journal écoutait la radio dans la journée s'il y avait un développement pour
pouvoir alimenter sa propre recherche, la télé aussi. Tout le monde apportait de
quoi.
9926
Mais là, la radio devient de moins en moins contributive. Dans la diversité des voix, elle devient
pas mal plus freeloader qu'autre chose.
9927
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : C'est un phénomène que vous observez au Québec? Parce que je sais
que...
9928
M. PERRON : Oui.
9929
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : ...le SCFP, vous êtes CUPE, donc, vous êtes associé
au Conseil du travail du Canada.
9930
Est‑ce que c'est un phénomène que vous constatez dans d'autres
provinces?
9931
Mme DJEVAHIRDJIAN : Le SCFP a seulement des membres en communication au
Québec.
9932
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN : Donc, CUPE n'a pas de membres en communication
ailleurs qu'au Québec?
9933
Mme DJEVAHIRDJIAN:
Exactement.
9934
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Et vous
n'avez jamais fait d'étude comparative avec d'autres
provinces?
9935
Mme DJEVAHIRDJIAN: Nous
avons concentré nos efforts pour des études pour cette révision sur le
Québec.
9936
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Bien,
c'est parce que c'est un sujet qui vous préoccupe depuis plusieurs années parce
qu'il y a eu beaucoup d'audiences et, d'ailleurs, monsieur... vous en avez
fait... monsieur Peron en a fait allusion.
9937
Vous avez comparu à diverses occasions, ça fait que c'est pour ça que je
vous posais la question si vous aviez regardé des comparatifs avec d'autres... à
savoir d'essayer de déterminer si la préoccupation est très localisée ou bien si
la préoccupation que vous auriez serait à l'étendue du système et votre réponse,
vous me l'avez donnée.
9938
M. PERON: C'est très
certainement répandu au Québec.
Ailleurs, malheureusement là, je ne pourrais pas vous le dire. D'ailleurs, je pense que d'autres vous
l'ont souligné dans des mémoires également pour cette
audience‑ci.
9939
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Vous avez
aussi dans votre mémoire principal, vous avez aussi parlé de programmation
locale et vous avez d'ailleurs fait état vous‑même dans la présentation orale de
la décision du Conseil concernant l'acquisition des stations AM par Corus, des
inquiétudes qui s'étaient manifestées par rapport à la programmation
locale.
9940
Avez‑vous établi des objectifs minimum pour...
9941
M. PERON: Vous voulez dire
des quotas, là, des...
9942
CONSEILLER ARPIN:
Oui.
9943
M. PERON: Écoutez, on en a
discuté, sauf qu'on voulait d'abord et avant tout attirer l'attention du Conseil
sur la nécessité d'encadrer, mais on n'a pas voulu nécessairement se rendre dans
le détail du cadre nécessaire ou d'entreprendre une espèce de négociation
d'heure et de...
9944
Mais, ce qu'on veut vous dire, finalement, c'est regardez ça, analysez
ça, peut‑être y aller de façon progressive, mais il faudrait revenir à des
quotas minimum de nouvelles et encadrer ça mieux que ça ne l'est actuellement,
pour s'assurer ce que les gens ont demandé.
9945
Vous vous souvenez des audiences sur la vente à Corus un peu partout au
Québec, le Ministère des communications dans son... culturelles des
communications du Québec dans son mémoire en fait état. Les gens veulent avoir une garantie
d'avoir des services de nouvelles de qualité et du temps d'antenne
raisonnable.
9946
Maintenant c'est quoi, ça, exactement, raisonnable? Je pense que le Conseil pourrait
s'asseoir avec les gens de l'industrie et pourrait s'asseoir avec d'autres
personnes pour le regarder.
9947
CONSEILLER ARPIN: C'est ça
qu'on fait là. Cette semaine, c'est
ça qu'on a fait. On était assis
puis je peux vous dire qu'on a été assis pendant plusieurs
heures.
9948
M. PERON:
Oui?
9949
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Puis on a
écouté.
9950
M. PERON: Oui, oui, mais
c'est bien simple. Écoutez, on en
fait état un peu. Quand on parle de
bulletin de nouvelles de 90 secondes là, à peu près comme j'ai lu le mémoire
tantôt, c'est ça qu'on veut essayer d'éviter qu'on dise, bien on veut écouter un
peu, vous avez des bulletins de nouvelles, mais que la durée minimale soit de
quatre minutes, de cinq minutes, qu'il y ait des rendez‑vous dans la journée où
les gens pourront avoir l'information de façon autrement que très résumée à la
radio.
9951
C'est ce type d'abus‑là qu'on veut éviter puis qu'on veut redonner une
certaine place à l'information locale et régionale à la radio, avec des équipes
de journalistes dans les régions capables de faire une job un tant soit peu
décente sur le terrain.
9952
Et dans le mémoire, en tout cas, on va plus loin un peu et, ça, je dois
vous dire que c'est particulièrement le syndicat chez nous qui adopte cette
position‑là, si on réussissait à créer des pools de journalistes radio, quitte à
ce qu'ils alimentent différentes antennes dans le milieu, mais qu'on redonne les
lettres de noblesse à l'information radiophonique, quitte à en partager la
facture et la facture à travers différentes stations de radio, différentes
plate‑formes de nouvelles technologies.
9953
Mais *bonyenne+ qu'on
ait des... au moins être capable d'envoyer des journalistes sur une base
régulière sur le terrain couvrir les événements.
9954
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Cependant,
vous préconisez la diversité des voix.
Si on a un centre de collègues de l'information puis diffusion de
l'information, on vient de limiter les voix.
9955
M. PERON: Oui, mais ça je
comprends ce que vous dites là, mais multipliez les muets, ça ne sert pas
davantage.
9956
CONSEILLER ARPIN:
Maintenant, chaque station, cependant, a sa propre mission. Par exemple, prenez chez vous, vous avez
la mission générale de l'information continue dans certains blocs horaires. D'autres stations sont plutôt des
stations de divertissements puis ils vont avoir un minimum d'information parce
que ce n'est pas l'objectif de la station et ce n'est pas ce que les auditeurs
de ces stations‑là recherchent, du moins c'est ce que l'on se fait
dire.
9957
M. PERON: Oui, mais ça, je
comprends ce que vous dites. Mais
entre 90 secondes puis un bulletin de quatre minutes là, peut‑on avoir un espace
pour ceux qui...
9958
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Il y a
deux minutes et demi.
9959
M. PERON: Oui, c'est ça,
mais en deux minutes et demie on a peut‑être le temps d'avoir quelqu'un qui
passe un reportage sur un sujet avec le lead et tout ça, et qui fait une minute
au total, ce qu'il est impossible à faire dans 90
secondes.
9960
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Dans son
mémoire, le Ministère de la culture et des communications du Québec propose la
mise en place d'un fonds à la production de nouvelles et d'information qui
serait au bénéfice des stations de radios communautaires et des stations de
radios commerciales, un fonds qui... puis un fonds destiné à l'information
locale et ils proposent...
9961
Est‑ce que vous avez une opinion sur cette
proposition‑là?
9962
M. PERON: Oui. Nous, on ne l'a pas... écoutez un peu,
c'est leur suggestion, mais on estime que les radiodiffuseurs devraient être
suffisamment responsable pour faire la job là. Je pense qu'il n'est pas nécessaire de
créer un fonds.
9963
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Un fonds
supplémentaire parce qu'il y en a de...
9964
M. PERON: Bien là, écoutez
un peu, il nous semble que ces gens‑là utilisent les ondes publiques et doivent
retourner au public un certain nombre de services, autrement que de prendre
leurs oreilles pour vendre de la publicité, là.
9965
Il y avait... c'est un simple retour des choses. Un jour un ancien président du Conseil
de l'alimentation du Québec me disait : écoutez un peu, il y a des compagnies
qui vendent... qui détiennent le marché de la soupe au Québec et qui n'achètent
pas un pois vert pour mettre dans la soupe.
9966
Il dit : nous, on fait des pressions. Il dit : ce n'est pas du... il dit c'est
une simple justice économique à un moment donné.
9967
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Le Conseil
de presse nous a aussi déposé un mémoire dans lequel il demande que les
radiodiffuseurs... aux radios diffuseurs de se conformer au Guide des droits et
responsabilités de la presse, que le Conseil a évidemment
publié.
9968
Avez‑vous des commentaires sur est‑ce que les radiodiffuseurs devraient
adhérer au Guide des droits et responsabilités de la
presse?
9969
M. PERON: Oui, bien
certainement. Vous savez qu'il y a
plusieurs guides, il y a plusieurs codes d'étique et tout
ça.
9970
CONSEILLER ARPIN:
Oui.
9971
M. PERON: À un moment donné,
il va peut‑être falloir faire le...
9972
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Est‑ce que
votre groupe a son propre code de déontologie?
9973
M. PERON: Vous voulez
dire?
9974
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Corus...
Corus a un guide... un Code de déontologie journalistique.
9975
M. PERON: Oui. Bien là, qui doit être fourni bientôt et
tout ça, là, oui. Mais c'est sûr
que tout le monde a ses règles qui vont à peu près toujours dans le même
sens. Il y a des règles de base en
matière journalistique. Il y a des
règles d'étique là que l'on retrouve un peu partout, mais c'est bien sûr que
tout le monde a un peu son code.
9976
Ce serait peut‑être l'occasion pour le Conseil d'uniformiser en quelque
sorte ces codes d'étique‑là.
9977
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Vous avez
aussi dans votre présentation orale et dans votre mémoire abordé la question des
technologies et puis notamment, au premier paragraphe de la page 2 vous dites...
vous parlez des nouvelles plate‑formes et vous dites :
*Pourtant, ces
nouvelles plate‑formes peuvent être considérées comme une occasion en or pour
ses créateurs de contenu vocal.+
9978
Ces créateurs, quand vous parlez des créateurs, vous parlez des
radiodiffuseurs ici?
9979
M. PERON:
Oui.
9980
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Bon, c'est
à eux que vous faites allusion.
9981
M. PERON: Oui, oui. Autrement dit, c'est parce que la radio,
à un moment donné, ont une crainte justifiée que l'auditoire... qu'il y ait une
érosion de l'auditoire par ces nouvelles technologies, mais je pense que c'est à
eux de saisir l'opportunité aussi dans une certaine mesure, pour pouvoir aller
récupérer ce qu'ils perdent d'un côté.
9982
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Plusieurs
des grands joueurs qui sont venus ici nous ont dit qu'ils cherchaient ces
opportunités‑là et donc, qu'ils investissaient dans de multiples
plate‑formes.
9983
M. PERON: Mais le problème,
c'est la multiplication des plate‑formes possibles. On est rendu avec la diffusion par le
téléphone cellulaire, la diffusion satellite, la balado‑diffusion, le YFI, la
radio numérique... à un moment donné c'est sûr que ça devient un problème là,
mais quand on verra clair dans ce qui va se dessiner comme main stream de ces
technologies‑là, ça sera peut‑être.
9984
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Est‑ce que
vous dites, on devrait attendre de voir clair ou bien... parce que le jour où on
verra clair, peut‑être qu'on ne sera plus là parce qu'on aura trop
attendu?
9985
M. PERON: C'est pour ça
qu'on vous dit dans notre mémoire que, pour l'instant, on ne recommande pas au
Conseil d'intervenir rapidement, mais ça se développe tellement è un rythme
effarant que je suis bien embêté de vous dire que l'an prochain ou dans deux ans
je vais vous dire la même chose.
9986
Si on apprend, par exemple, que tout à coup, il y a toute une forme de
radio qui se développe d'ici à un an et qui accapare des parts de marché
importantes par le biais du téléphone cellulaire, bien là, c'est sûr que, à un
moment donné, je vais changer d'idée.
9987
Mais c'est parce qu'intervenir trop rapidement au moment où ces
technologies‑là se développent, ça peut peut‑être freiner justement le
développement et le positionnement des radiodiffuseurs traditionnels dans ces
technologies‑là.
9988
Sauf que je suis un peu d'accord avec ceux qui disent : il faut
*monétariser+ ça et
puis s'assurer de ne pas être justement trop tard lorsque... pour
intervenir.
9989
CONSEILLER ARPIN: Monsieur
le président, ça complète mes questions.
9990
LE PRÉSIDENT: Conseiller
juridique.
9991
Mme MURPHY: Merci, monsieur
le président.
9992
La définition de programmation locale, c'est une définition qui date d'un
Avis Public en 1993 et a été réitérée lors de la revue de la politique sur la
radio commerciale en 1998.
9993
Tout récemment, dans la décision de Corus Astral, le Conseil a amené une
certaine importance sur la programmation locale en utilisant cette
définition.
9994
À votre avis, est‑ce que cette définition demeure
adéquate?
9995
M. PERON: Bien, écoutez, je
ne l'ai pas en tête exactement, mais là, ce qu'il faut bien se comprendre, moi,
ce dont on parle, à un moment donné, c'est faire de la programmation locale,
faire des émissions, à un moment donné de blabla, de *placotages+ qui
peuvent en elles‑mêmes être très bien.
9996
Mais si on fait toujours ça et qu'il n'y a jamais de radio alimentée à
base journalistique de quelqu'un qui va rechercher, va sur le terrain et fait
une recherche, en fait part aux auditeurs pour alimenter une discussion, à un
moment donné ça donne lieu à de la radio ou des débats publics qui sont un peu
stériles parce qu'ils reposent parfois sur pas
grand‑chose.
9997
Je donne souvent l'exemple à cet effet‑là, à un moment donné il y avait
un animateur de radio dans une station où je travaillais, le fil ET venait de
sortir à l'époque, l'animateur faisait une émission sur le film ET. Lui, ne l'avait pas vu. L'auditeur à qui il parlait ne l'avais
pas vu.
9998
À un moment donné, ils ont un argument ensemble et c'est l'auditeur qui a
gagné parce qu'il a dit que sa belle‑soeur l'avait vu.
9999
Alors, ce que je veux dire par là, c'est que, à un moment donné, il faut
amener... il faut amener quelque chose au débat public et il faut peut‑être en
terme de nouvelles préciser le contenu justement de ces productions‑là pour au
moins s'assurer que dans la portion de production locale qu'on ait des
journalistes sur le terrain couvrant l'actualité et pouvant apporter quelque
chose qui va contribuer sur le fonds au débat public dans différentes régions
sur différents sujets.
10000
M. MONTIGNY: Vous avez tout
à l'heure dit qu'il y avait une nécessité d'uniformiser les codes d'étique. Pourriez‑vous élaborer
davantage?
10001
M. PERON: Bien, écoutez un
peu, il y a des codes d'étique de la Fédération professionnelle des
journalistes, du Conseil de presse, des normes des radiodiffuseurs, des normes
des télédiffuseurs, différentes associations, à un moment donné... on voit bien
que tout se rejoint un peu en quelque sorte là.
10002
Si on veut faire quelque chose pour parler tout le monde le même langage,
bien ce serait peut‑être bien que, à un moment donné, ces organismes‑là se
regroupent et qu'on puisse avoir un code pratiquement unique, avoir un code qui
se répand un peu partout à travers la profession.
10003
Mais remarques bien que je ne pense pas que ce soit une urgence nationale
parce que l'ensemble des codes souvent font référence exactement au mêmes
principes de justice, d'équité, et caetera, font références au mêmes
principes. La formulation est
parfois différentes, des choses comme ça, mais c'est sûr que, à un moment donné,
plutôt que d'en avoir dix ou vingt, il faudrait ou ce serait bien d'en avoir un
sur lequel on pourrait se coller et se comprendre tout le monde lorsqu'on parle
ce langage‑là.
10004
Mme MURPHY: Pour terminer ma
question, je vous demanderais si vous avez des propositions quant à la
programmation locale ou des suggestions, de bien nous les faire parvenir pour le
29 mai.
10005
M. PERON: Le 29
mai?
10006
Mme MURPHY: Oui. Toutes les parties ont la chance de
faire des soumissions finales le 12 juin, plus que 20 pages, et
avec...
10007
M. PERON: Alors, vous
aimeriez qu'on réponde davantage aux quotas ou aux choses comme ça et au
contenu.
10008
Mme MURPHY: Si vous avez des
propositions additionnelles, si vous voulez en réponse à ma question
programmation locale, vous pouvez nous remettre ça le 29 mai. À ce moment‑là, les parties ont toutes
la chance de voir vos propositions pour préparer leur position finale qui est
due le 12 juin.
10009
M. PERON: Ça
va.
10010
Mme DJEVAHIRDJIAN: Avec
plaisir.
10011
Mme MURPHY:
Merci.
10012
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci beaucoup
d'être venu et aussi d'avoir avancé votre position. J'imagine que ce n'était pas tout à fait
facile.
10013
M. PERON: Bien, je l'ai
devancée, c'est pour ça que j'allais si vite.
(rires)
10014
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL: Vous êtes
parti tôt de Québec ce matin?
10015
M. PERON: Non. Moi, j'étais ici, mais c'est mes
collègues. Mon collègue de Montréal
est arrivé à...
10016
M. PARÉ: Je suis arrivé
juste pour l'audience.
10017
M. PERON: Il n'avait même
pas eu le temps presque de lire le document parce qu'on voulait profiter de
l'après‑midi pour peaufiner puis finaliser notre présentation orale. Alors, on y est allé comme on
pouvait.
10018
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci
bien. Madame la
secrétaire.
10019
LA SECRÉTAIRE: Merci,
monsieur le président.
10020
I would now call on our last appearing participant at this hearing, Mrs
Magda De la Torre. If you would
like to come forward for your presentation. You will have ten minutes for your
presentation. Thank
you.
PRESENTATION /
PRÉSENTATION
10021
MS DE LA TORRE: Thank
you. Good evening. I'm the last one finally. After sitting here for the last four
days and hearing the different verbal presentations and comments, the above is
the only title for a presentation in front of the CRTC, the only one that can
help us. The title is: "Help, I'm
independent, Help, Help, Help, I'm diverse too".
10022
First, I would like to thank the CRTC for allowing me to speak in this
important procedure and also for giving me the last position so I was able to
hear and learn from the previous presentations. I have changed our presentation on a
daily basis.
10023
My name is Magda De la Torre and I am a double immigrant and a citizen of
Canada and proud to be part of the diverse Canada.
10024
In Canada, I have learned the meaning of giving to the community on an
none for profit basis and for the last four years a group of us that want
changes are working very hard with Super Latin World Arts Festival Inc., using
music and arts to reach and foster our communities.
10025
On multicultural day together with the City of Toronto under the
initiative "City Clean City Beautiful" we are promoting the Jane & French
Walk of Fame where in those corners we will highlight the good people in Jane
& French and, believe me, we have a lot of
those.
10026
Closer to our routes is the initiative we launched to protect, foster and
promote our diverse independent latin artists that need our help and for sure
the help of the CRTC.
10027
The Fear Factor. We diverse
citizens are very familiar with this feeling as we have to face them on a daily
basis when we leave our countries and comfortable lives to experience the
unknown in new and not familiar surroundings.
10028
These four days have helped us experience here and almost touch the fear
factor in all the presentations when referring to
diversity.
10029
I will address three issues that bring about those feelings: Statistic and industry institutions,
listeners and revenues.
10030
Enclosed for your peruse copies four pages of the paperwork between
members of the hispanic community and Stats Canada and the changes in the count
of hispanic residents in Canada registered in the 2001
census.
10031
Members of our community very aggressively requested a revision and the
numbers jumped from 200,000 plus to 520,260, more than
double.
10032
From Stats Canada we were also enclosing pages with graphs including the
Top Languages in Canada and the four languages with more youth, 12 to
34.
10033
As you can see the largest is the Spanish, followed by a combination of
Chinese Cantonese and Chinese Mandarin, and finally Portuguese. Combined, the total is 589,445 diverse
possible listeners.
10034
Maybe CAB members are not reaching to all persons 12‑plus or teens
12‑to‑17, or do not know these figures, do not know how to reach them, or are
simply scared of a Pandora box.
10035
Based on the numbers of our consulates and the amount of Hispanics
waiting for their resident papers or simply illegals, we truly believe we are
around a million.
10036
Similar situations are happening with other
communities.
10037
CRTC: Back in 1999 after
longer than planned hearings ‑‑ it happens every time ‑‑ the
Commission heard our voices and amended some of the policy requirements to the
benefit of our diverse Canadian world.
10038
Today, six years later, in the review of the commercial radio policy, you
are still addressing our diversity in a very loud and clear
way.
10039
Including these issues within the commercial radio policy will allow us
to be an integral part of the Canadian mainstream communications and music
mosaic.
10040
Many second and third generation residents do not hear ethnic stations
unless those stations openly are catering to their unique demos, with host DJs,
music, et cetera.
10041
BBM: Contrary to a common
belief, BBM is capable of researching diversity, if paid.
10042
I personally received copies in 1997 when Energy 108 paid them to do the
research and check our ratings.
Then Shaw arrived.
10043
By the way, in 1997, counting all hours, as per BBM, 98.1 FM was the
station with more Hispanic listeners.
10044
SOCAN: We mentioned it in
our written comments. They collect
royalties from radio stations and they distribute payments to artists performing
third language music, but they do not produce statistics of the diversity of the
artist.
10045
CIRPA: They are always very
helpful, helping out. And they take
to their trips around the world third language artists. I personally went to one in
PopCom.
10046
But their mandate is ‑‑ and I quote Cori
Ferguson:
"CIRPA
is the national trade association representing the interests of the
English‑language, Canadian‑owned companies in the sound recording
sector."
10047
CAB: Tremendous and
commendable effort. Our comment:
been there done that.
10048
I saw it coming when about three months ago CHUM started a diversity
website for ethnic resources to assist us in reaching companies that can
help.
10049
They know this policy review could change their status quo and the fear
factor is working. Better to
anticipate and promise changes than ignore and let the CRTC act on its
own.
10050
With more time we will gladly analyze and respond to each and every one
of their suggestions and propose better and more reliable changes. Like we always say, it is better late
than never, especially when the CRTC will see the other side of the spectrum and
be able to rule with a better market knowledge.
10051
CRIA: They do have a very
effective mechanism of measuring data and could be an enormous help regarding
accountability, transparency and monitoring.
10052
We were amazed at the fact that they did not mention the word diversity
when at times they have done wonders for all of us. Maybe it is because the ethnics,
especially Hispanics and Asians, are the ones that are experts in pirating
CDs.
10053
This is another issue that has to be addressed to protect the industry
and diversity.
10054
FACTOR and Radio Starmaker Funds:
I am skipping the first paragraph.
10055
Looking at the their submissions and records, it is minimal what they
allot to diversity. In the case of
the Hispanics, it is sad to see how big bulks of funds are given to a selected
few when the budget could be divided into several, creating a better image in
the industry and helping more than a few.
10056
We were happy to see the approval of the proposed application by A.
Fitzroy Gordon for an English‑language FM radio station in Toronto catering to
the Caribbean and African communities.
10057
Their CTD budget is planned in a way that will enhance the exposure of
the station while maintaining the diversity of the
audience.
10058
With better accountability and guidance, both funds should work
separately and avoid any type of monopoly that does not bring a prosperous
future. They need to compete to better their way of releasing
funds.
10059
American Federation of Musicians:
Not a word about diversity.
It seems that in both Canada and the United States, the only two
languages spoken are English and French.
10060
All of the above‑mentioned entities and commercial radio stations will
reflect their changes based on the decision that the CRTC will assume after
these hearings.
10061
Yes, we are putting a heavy load on your shoulders and your
decisions. Please do remember that
we need help, help, help.
10062
Listeners: Instead of real
world samples, we will use real Canadian samples.
10063
Spanglish Radio Show: In
these hearings we learned that the radio stations live or die by attracting
listeners. Well, we have good
news. In Spanglish, the music in
Spanish and the spoken word in English, on a Sunday night, 8:00 to 10:00 p.m.,
via BBM, we found out that we had become the number one station above 98.1 FM in
the elusive 12‑to‑34 demographic.
10064
Also, we had an event spin‑off that was bringing 100,000 listeners to the
four‑day event.
10065
Even though we were much alive, Shaw killed us. But today I can safely say that
diversity brings listeners, and it was BBM that certified
it.
10066
Please note that at the same time Shaw (Corus) cancelled our program on
Energy 108, they were investing in Telelatino, first with a 50.1 percent and
later 100 percent.
10067
Hey, the same listeners!
10068
Macarena: I bet you've all
heard Macarena, or even danced to it, but I also bet you did not know it was a
CanCon product.
10069
Thanks to the vision and the ability to take risks at Z103.5 FM ‑‑
that's Bill Evanov. He was the one
that went to Mexico; I just heard about it ‑‑ a song written in Spain and
heard by one of its executives ‑‑ Bill ‑‑ in Mexico, Canada became a
CanCon leader with a Spanish song.
10070
THE SECRETARY: Excuse me,
Mrs. de la Torre, you have about 20 seconds to conclude your
presentation.
10071
Thank you.
10072
MS de la TORRE:
Okay.
10073
Maplethnic: On March 17,
2006 an article was published in the Toronto Star "Diversity in Canada". I think we should all read
it.
10074
We are very close to the initial stages of Maplethnic.com, as at that
time we were producing the Spanish program at CHIN Radio.
10075
When I initially looked at www.maplethnic.ca ‑‑ I'm sorry, I put
"com" on the top ‑‑ I had a very positive reaction as it's a good looking
site; very complete and handy, as it is able to provide the expected purposes as
stated in the ethnic policy.
10076
The mechanism is able to do it but the contents, I'm sorry to say, are
completely obsolete.
10077
Enclosed is a study of the contents for your
perusal.
10078
The participating radio stations are not listed correctly as they differ
from what appears in Mr. Lombardi's presentation. We do not understand why all ethnic
radio stations are not included. To
work it properly, it should be mandatory.
10079
The site promises "maintains and updates". The site does not
deliver.
10080
THE SECRETARY: Mrs. de la
Torre, I believe your time has expired.
Thank you.
10081
MS de la TORRE: You have it
in front of you. You read it. We all want to go
home.
‑‑‑ Laughter /
Rires
10082
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
10083
We may have some questions for you, though.
10084
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: We
do.
10085
MS de la TORRE: Go
ahead.
10086
THE CHAIRPERSON:
Commissioner Pennefather.
10087
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Thank you very much.
10088
We have your presentation and thank you for the new information which you
have attached, because you left me wanting a little bit more from
you.
10089
MS de la TORRE: You got it
and you are going to get more before the 29th.
10090
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Exactly.
10091
What I wanted to comment on is you have made comments on various
organizations. I grant you there is
a spin‑off but we would have to focus on the organizations and the specifics of
this hearing in commercial radio.
10092
MS de la TORRE:
Yes.
10093
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
This bring me to the area that you say that you would comment on, and
that is the CAB best practices proposal.
10094
I assume you have had a chance to look at it.
10095
MS de la TORRE: Yes. But it is too, too much for me to be
able to do it, sitting down here, and then working at
night.
10096
But I will have time before May 29th.
10097
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
That was what I was hoping, but you have until June
12th.
10098
MS de la TORRE: Oh, thank
you.
10099
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Better?
10100
MS de la TORRE: That's
sweet; thank you.
10101
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: In
any case, if you would focus on that because, as you know, there are a number of
best practices dealing with private commercial radio.
10102
MS de la TORRE:
Yes.
10103
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Both in terms of employment and in terms of
programming.
10104
MS de la TORRE:
M'hmm.
10105
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So
I think it would be important also to get your comments on that in a practical
sense and obviously, too, the CTD and Canadian
content.
10106
MS de la TORRE:
Right.
10107
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Just to let you know, we are aware of the "Diversity" article and the
study, and we will be looking at that as well in reference
to ‑‑
10108
MS de la TORRE: Me too. I haven't read it.
10109
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I
will leave you with one general question.
10110
In talking about diversity, as you know, the CAB task force on diversity
in television completed its report pursuant to our policy. That report has come in with results to
date.
10111
In the television world, that's the approach we took: research, task
force, from the industry itself and then going forward looking at diversity
plans that come to us within licence renewals, for example, or licence
requests.
10112
When you look at radio, if you had to focus on a priority for radio and
diversity, what would it be?
10113
MS de la TORRE: The 15
percent. Make it
mandatory.
10114
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Fifty percent?
10115
MS de la TORRE:
Fifteen.
10116
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Fifteen.
10117
MS de la TORRE: You have 15
that they can exercise on it without calling you, and then you go until 40 that
they have to get in touch with you.
10118
That's what I think I read.
Maybe I'm wrong.
10119
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I
am not sure what you are referring to.
10120
MS de la TORRE: There is a
clause, I think, in ‑‑
10121
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Are you talking about ethnic radio music?
10122
MS de la TORRE:
No.
10123
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Or
are you talking about ‑‑
10124
MS de la TORRE: The
mainstream, yes.
10125
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
The mainstream.
10126
MS de la TORRE: That they
are allowed to put diversity 15 percent without asking permission from the
CRTC.
10127
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Oh, I think you are talking about the ethnic radio policy in terms of
languages and what you are allowed to do at some point in time. Okay.
10128
MS de la TORRE: It's not
commercial radio?
10129
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
No. It's in the ethnic
policy governing, and it's also related to commercial radio in the sense of what
commercial radio is allowed to carry in terms of third
language.
10130
MS de la TORRE:
Okay.
10131
If you look at all the TV, they have done it TV. They give the Saturdays or the Sundays,
that people are sort of relaxing, and they give it to
ethnics.
10132
They give it and they make money.
But it also gives the ability to contact the consumer, the Canadian
consumer.
10133
We are not here to promote ourselves with our own peers. We were born there. We were raised there. We speak the language. We eat the food. We dance the music. But we want to talk to the Canadian
consumers, to Canadians.
10134
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: So
you are looking at focus on not just ethnic stations but mainstream
radio.
10135
MS de la TORRE:
Definitely.
10136
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Thank you.
10137
We will look forward to your further comments in
June.
10138
MS de la TORRE: Thank
you. You gave me
time.
10139
MS MURPHY: Just a reminder
that for the final submissions, there is a limit of 20 pages and at a font of 12
or more.
10140
MS de la TORRE: So it has to
be 12 or more.
10141
MS MURPHY:
Yes.
10142
MS de la TORRE: But less
than 20.
10143
MS MURPHY: Twenty pages is
the maximum number of pages and the font is 12 or more.
10144
MS de la TORRE:
Okay.
10145
MS MURPHY: The size of the
letters.
10146
MS de la TORRE: Okay. I usually use it. I need glasses.
10147
COMMISSIONER NOEL: We
understand.
‑‑‑ Laughter /
Rires
10148
MS MURPHY: Thank
you.
10149
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you
very much, Mrs. de la Torre.
10150
Are you both Hungarian and Spanish
origin?
10151
MS de la TORRE: No, but my
mother took the name from Hungary.
10152
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
10153
MS de la TORRE: Thank
you. Have a nice
weekend.
10154
THE CHAIRPERSON: This brings
the hearing to an end.
10155
I want to thank the parties who appeared before us. I want to thank our hard‑working staff
for all the work they did to prepare the documentation; the interpreters for
their hard work; the stenographer for her patience; and of course my fellow
Commissioners for sitting here with me to take all your presentations and
prepare all the questioning.
10156
This concludes the oral part of this hearing.
10157
There are follow‑up documents that have been requested that are due by
May 29th, and then the second round of written comments by no later than June
12th ‑‑ in 12‑point font, no smaller, 20 pages, no
more.
‑‑‑ Laughter /
Rires
10158
THE CHAIRPERSON: We are
adjourned.
‑‑‑ Whereupon the
hearing concluded at 1715 /
L'audience se termine à
1715
REPORTERS
_____________________
_____________________
Lynda
Johansson
Fiona Potvin
_____________________
_____________________
Jean
Desaulniers
Madeleine Matte
_____________________
Monique
Mahoney