Canadian Heritage Committee on May 11th, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Angus. Then Mr. Scarpaleggia.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I do believe we are moving towards something here. I understand the government has an ambitious agenda, but it is incumbent upon us in this committee to be ambitious as well. I will not sit in this committee and lock down the clock because we are saving people money. We have an obligation to set our own agenda here and get something done.

Mr. Abbott, I completely agree. In terms of going to Banff, it was suggested last year and we went to Banff. At the time it was like, well, it would be wonderful to go to Banff, and yes, we'd all learn something. But what would we really accomplish?

We need to be looking at Banff in terms of what you call the context. The context is that decisions are being made in terms of the future of broadcast policy, and as a committee we have an obligation to look at this. Broadcast is very much tied into the future of where we're going with television, how we're dealing with television policy, and how we're dealing with the CBC. We could look at every line item of the $4 billion, or however much, worth of spending and accomplish nothing. I'm suggesting let's stay focused for a period of time and do something.

Going to Banff will allow us to meet with key people, and we can set up meetings. Of course, it only allows us two meetings afterwards. What I think can come out of this is that we went to stage one—we can't do much more. Let's take our final two meetings, wrap up, and then say, now we're going to have the summer and the beginning of the fall to start planning out where we need to go. It will give our committee the time. We can come forward with recommendations about where we need to go. I think we can use those final two days after Banff to reconvene and ask, is there a problem? Are there issues we need to deal with? Or are we going to be able to settle this in three, five, or fifteen sessions?

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Scarpaleggia.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I agree with Mr. Abbott that there needs to be context, otherwise the value of such an outing would go up in smoke. I think the elephant in the room here—and I think Mr. Angus is slowly rearing that elephant out into the open—is that there are many members of this committee who are very excited about the prospect of dealing with some important and timely issues in the realm of broadcasting. We're at a critical juncture in this policy area.

If I'm not mistaken, we believe we shouldn't be working on some kind of study or project relating to that, in which case a trip to Banff would be an opportunity to hold hearings and be sensitized to some of the issues we have to deal with from the myriad of interests and players assembled there. I think that's the issue, if I may.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Okay. We've had quite a discussion. I think everyone's had the opportunity to air their side, and then some. So again, I will put to a vote the proposal that we ask our clerk to proceed to set up a budget for this committee to attend the Banff film festival. When that is completed, we'll bring it back to this committee. I will then proceed to the Liaison Committee with the request, and then we'll seek House permission. That is the suggestion.

(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

We will ask the clerk to prepare a budget for working meetings to be held in Banff.

Is there any other business at this particular time?

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

In addition to that, for the sake of clarity, here we are moving a motion that they look at the budget for this, so we should probably accompany it with a reason as to why we're doing this. That should probably precede the budget issue. I'm assuming, at this point, from the consensus that we're going to study the television and broadcasting industry. Accompany that with looking into how much it would cost the budget.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Yes, Mr. Abbott.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

I want to do everything I can to stay away from anything that would break the collegiality that we have here. I don't like the word “consensus”, because I think the Conservative members were not in favour of this. We're not going to make a big deal of it at all, but I just wanted it to be on the record that this is the decision of the majority of the committee, which is fine--we absolutely accept that. But at the risk of speaking for my colleagues, I'll say I think we have some concerns about it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

I used the wrong word. It wasn't consensus, but a majority ruled in this committee today.

So we will add that this committee will be taking on a study of the TV and broadcasting industry. Am I correct? We're preparing a proposal for the study of TV and broadcasting, a budget to go to Banff....

[Some hon. members]

No.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

That's a whole different debate.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Would someone write out the proposal that you would like.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

I think what we want to do here is prepare a budget for a possible trip to Banff as part of a possible study of the broadcasting industry, but we need to create a mandate before we know where we're going.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I think the language should read that it's part of a proposed study of television and broadcasting “policy”. I think it's the “broadcasting policy” that has to be in there, not just “broadcasting”. We're not just going to be talking to CAB and radio. We're looking at broadcast policy--and where we're going in terms of that--and television together.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Chairman, I'm having a little difficulty here. What was the red brick all about? I mean, that was the status of broadcasting in Canada as of three years ago. I know there have been some changes, but we went through a long process to come up with the terms of reference of that particular study, and to be just doing a kind of chewing gum and baling wire thing here on the back of an envelope, saying, well, I think we can call it this, that, or the next thing.... I think we have to be a little bit more careful than that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you.

I agree that what was done on the Lincoln report laid out most of the ground rules, and it was reintroduced in the 38th Parliament. I was actually going to suggest we reintroduce it in the 39th Parliament at one of our next meetings so we can use that as a guide, because it did lay out groundwork.

What's being discussed here, and what has been discussed, is that there are a number of issues affecting broadcast policy right now. There is the CRTC review of television, and that's going to include where we're standing in terms of domestic content. There are the GATS negotiations that are ongoing, the audiovisual service request in terms of drama, domestic content, tax policies. That's happening right now. We need to look in terms of changes to that.

As well, the government has mandated a review of the CBC, and we've had unanswered questions from the last session in terms of regional programming mandate and drama for Radio-Canada. We can look at what was done in the Lincoln report, but our study is going to be asking, what are the problems we're facing now, what are the policy changes that can affect the future of broadcast policy in Canada, first of all, but also what has affected the present health of broadcast policy in Canada?

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Something to the effect that in view of the fact that the government is intending to initiate a review of Canadian television and broadcasting policy as well as the mandate of the CBC-Société Radio-Canada, the heritage committee travel to the Banff television festival--television and film festival, I think--in order to meet with the participants of the festival in preparation of these reviews. That's the purpose.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

We'll take that from the blues. That's what we will vote on. Can we vote on that right now? We did already? Then that's fine.

Does that satisfy you, Mr. Simms?

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Completely.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Is there any other business?

[Maka Kotto, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I want to reiterate what I said at the beginning of the meeting, which is that we should make available to all committee members, and especially to the new ones, the papers, reports, copies and documents, as well as the motions on the referral of the Lincoln report to the House, for a response from the government, and motions concerning the reference of the Catterall report on Canada's film industry. This is a priority.

At the last meeting, we talked about discussing subjects today which might be a priority for the committee. I don't know where we stand as far as that is concerned.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Chairman, I have no doubt that the motions were tabled with the clerk on Tuesday. However, I did not receive them before coming to this meeting. I also asked my staff about the motions, but they said that they did not receive them. So this is the first time I see them. I realize that the problem is perhaps on our side. If that's the case, it's my problem and I will address it.

Have others received these notices of motion?

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

No, the clerk didn't give it out. It hasn't had 48 hours. We will bring it at next meeting.