Evidence of meeting #33 for Canadian Heritage in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was fund.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
So, here is my question: shouldn't we be asking whether, with regard to funds provided to CBC/Radio-Canada, the government is providing this crown corporation with adequate funding?
9:35 a.m.
Chair of the Board, Canadian Television Fund
I do not understand the question.
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
I am asking you whether there isn't good cause to ask the following question: if the government provided substantial support to Radio-Canada/CBC, would that not be a step toward resolving the current conflict?
9:35 a.m.
Chair of the Board, Canadian Television Fund
Our obligation to support productions being licensed by CBC/SRC comes from the Department of Canadian Heritage. People at Canadian Heritage are making these decisions. It is not up to us to say whether direct subsidies would be a solution to this problem. The only thing I want to say is that when CBC/SRC does business with us, the regulations applying to the entire industry, to the CBC/SRC and all commercial broadcasters, licence fees and the requirement to ensure production across Canada are the same. The obligation to produce shows in all genres is also the same.
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
I am well aware of that but the conflict, based on information we have, stems from the fact that some cable distribution companies do not agree to fund a competitor, for example. Do you have any comments on this? Is this a legitimate dispute or not? This goes beyond contempt for the conditions of the licence, which is being violated at present, but setting that aside, is this criticism not legitimate?
9:35 a.m.
Chair of the Board, Canadian Television Fund
The funding board has never discussed legitimacy, nor even the legitimacy of providing support to francophones outside Quebec, or support for production in aboriginal languages.
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
I will ask my question differently. What problem do Shaw and Videotron have with you?
9:35 a.m.
Chair of the Board, Canadian Television Fund
What is their problem with us?
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
Yes. What issues are they raising with you, the issues that led to this crisis.
9:35 a.m.
Chair of the Board, Canadian Television Fund
The reasons why they don't want to support the CBC/SRC?
9:35 a.m.
Chair of the Board, Canadian Television Fund
I have heard no criticism. They have their reasons.
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
I'm sorry, but I have very little time. That is why I want specific answers in order to understand it for myself. Shaw and Videotron sent you letters criticizing the representativeness with regard to the fund structure and governance.
Could you tell us about the issues they raised with you?
9:35 a.m.
Chair of the Board, Canadian Television Fund
In their letters, they only said that support for the CBC/SRC was inadequate and that they were not satisfied with the governance of the fund. Their specific reasons are not clear to us. They simply said that support for the CBC/SRC was not adequate in their opinion. When a fund grants 37% of its budget to a single organization, it is not surprising that another organization would want to have more money. They want the CBC/SRC to be funded by other means.
9:35 a.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
The unilateral decision to stop contributing to the fund is, in light of the Heritage Minister's behaviour, a legitimate position, as she did not publicly criticize it. She is washing her hands of it like Pontius Pilate, as she is sending the ball back to the CRTC.
Are you hopeful that the CRTC will find a way to ensure the survival of the fund?
9:40 a.m.
Bloc
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
You'll have to be very short, Mr. Kotto; your time is up.
9:40 a.m.
Bloc
Maka Kotto Bloc Saint-Lambert, QC
I will ask you a short supplementary question in addition to the one I just asked you.
9:40 a.m.
Chair of the Board, Canadian Television Fund
The enforcement of the regulation and the strengthening of the CRTC regulations. That is all.
9:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
We have to cut the questioning off right now. We've gone over the time.
Go ahead, Mr. Angus.
9:40 a.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Thank you very much.
Thank you for coming in this morning.
Like many people who are watching this industry closely, I'm very confused as to the status of this fund, because I've heard very mixed messages in the media. I haven't heard any clear indications from our minister of how this crisis is going to be alleviated, but we heard from Shaw, following the meeting with the minister, that they told industry this fund is now dead, done, gone. Is that the case?
9:40 a.m.
Chair of the Board, Canadian Television Fund
I certainly don't believe so. Obviously those comments by Shaw are upsetting to us and certainly destabilizing for the whole industry.
We think this is an excellent public policy instrument. I make no bones about it: we're not embarrassed about the work of the fund; we think the track record of the fund is solid, substantial, and sustained. We think this is a genuinely innovative thing that Canada has managed to put together. It's genuinely Canadian. It has successfully mediated the interests of all the stakeholder groups for a decade. It is done in a private-public partnership. It's an excellent model.
There has been no hint of financial or fiduciary issues over the entire period. It has met all the standards of management and public stewardship that one would expect of a public entity. It is easy to sit on the sidelines and take potshots, but the evidence is that this institution is doing a good job; it's sourced from the public interest, and it should be able to continue to do a good job.
9:40 a.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
I'll get back to the issue of whether this fund is now dead. We have two major players acting in defiance of their licence. We've been trying to get a clear picture from government as to what steps will be taken to ensure they comply with their licence. Yesterday in the House the minister spoke of CRTC obligations and basically seemed to be passing the buck over to the CRTC, yet my understanding of the CTF is that policy supervision is under the Department of Canadian Heritage. Whose job is it to ensure that Shaw and Vidéotron live up to their terms?