Mr. Warkentin, do you have a question?
Evidence of meeting #5 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 cbc.
Evidence of meeting #5 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 cbc.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
Well, I think Mr. Abbott covered a number of the issues that I had, but I certainly believe it's important for us not to get ourselves into a situation that we don't want to get ourselves into. We shouldn't involve ourselves in a crown corporation's activities, because I'm concerned that if we do it this time, are we going to do it every week? Do we do it every time someone is being fired or being laid off? It's just a concern I have, and I go back to say that it's important that we, as private members, do support these types of things and get involved in these types of things, but I'm just not sure that it's the committee's responsibility to speak on behalf of an official committee, or that we ask the minister to supplement our views.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
I feel we should put it to a vote, but I would just like to clarify what the role of this committee is: the role of this committee is to examine how broadcasting works. That's one of our mandates. So when the CBC cut regional funding across this country, I'm glad that private members stood up, but we had an obligation as a committee to ask questions. Is that intervening? Yes, it is; that's our job.
When the lockout happened and seven weeks of service was cut off to Canadians, our committee wanted representation from management to explain why that was done. That was an internal management decision, but we took a stand.
So at this point, I think we know where our philosophical differences are; I would just like to know if it's a yea or nay. It's simple. I'm perfectly satisfied if Mr. Abbott and Mr. Warkentin say no. That is their view. That's what we're here for, but I don't think talking about it much more is going to get us anywhere. Let's just put it to a vote.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
What I had written, Mr. Chairman, at your suggestion, is “that the committee recommend that the Minister of Heritage share with CBC/SRC management its concerns vis-à-vis significant structural changes before the proposed CBC/SRC mandate review is completed.” That's the essence of what it is.
If I may say so, although it may not be necessary, I have a couple of disagreements with some of the comments Mr. Abbott was making. I don't have a problem, whether we ask the minister or not. She may or may not wish to, but if she doesn't, then we can express it ourselves.
It isn't the government, necessarily, that sets the mandate. Parliament will set mandates quite often, by legislation, as is the case with CBC. So we have to be careful here. And Parliament has a role in reviewing mandates and in criticizing government actions in reviewing mandates. So it's not just government, with all due respect.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Jim Abbott Conservative Kootenay—Columbia, BC
Mr. Chair, can I just have 30 seconds, please?
I'd like to point out the fact that the government establishes the president and the board of directors of the CBC. This particular decision, as regrettable as it may be to some people in this room and others who are involved with it, was referred to the board of directors, who on behalf of the CBC management made this decision. It was not just a management decision; it was a decision by the directors of the CBC.
So they have followed all of the order right through, and I'm asking again that we seriously consider...that we have to make sure we are maintaining order in what we're doing with respect to this committee. Otherwise, quite frankly, we will really create a situation of having people legitimately asking whether we have the competence as a committee to consider an awful lot of these matters.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Chair, what we're doing here is stepping on that very slippery slope. In fact, we're starting to slide. What this motion effectively will do is send a message to CBC—if in fact the minister passes on that message, which I expect she would not, but if in fact she does—that until the next mandate review, really nothing of significance is going to happen within CBC: no layoffs, no hires, no significant contracts to be signed. Quite frankly, I don't recall government ever acting in that way.
Until the review is completed, you allow the crown corporation to carry on business in the usual course. We can't support this. We cannot support a motion like this, and quite frankly, Mr. Chair, if Mr. Bélanger were on this side of the table, my guess is he wouldn't be putting forward this motion.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
I think we've debated this enough. It has gone back and forth and back and forth. Let's bring it to a vote.
5:10 p.m.
An hon. member
Can we have a recorded vote?
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
We can have a recorded vote, yes.
(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 4)
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
Okay, there's something we have to do. We've dealt with a lot of motions; we've spent a lot of time debating motions. One thing we have to do is think of our staff and how we're going to work till the end of this session.
We have a proposed committee schedule in front of us. Was this circulated? Everyone should have it.
We also have a request to appear, from Canadians Against Propaganda. It's a motion on the application to the CRTC by nine Chinese state-run television services to enter the Canadian broadcasting system. This is something that was brought to my attention and has been brought to the attention of the committee. These people would like to appear before this committee.
Mr. Angus.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
My thing is that we want to make sure we get something here, because we have to have witnesses come. Of the proposals that have been made here, some have been requests, and we want to make sure we can line up witnesses to go forward and that we have productive meetings.
On Tuesday, June 6, it has been suggested that the committee review the Canada travelling exhibitions. We can have departmental officials here to go over that particular issue.
On Thursday, June 8, it would be meetings on GATS negotiations. That would be an in camera session, as requested. I think the minister answered that question today. We could have that, then, for June 8.
On Tuesday, June 13, we can either have reports of the Auditor General of Canada or CBC/Radio-Canada. Maybe having the Auditor General's report first might help us when we meet with CBC. If we have that on Tuesday, June 13, then hopefully on June 15 we could have the CBC here.
Those things could happen. Again, if there were some way we could put in this request that has been made of us, I would suggest that maybe....
I'm just going to ask one question. Our funding was not available for Banff, but I understand some of our members may be going to Banff anyway. Would you be back for June 13?
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
Okay, that's why it's a good time to have the Auditor General here, I guess, for that meeting. If we do that, could we make some time some place along the line to work in this request about the decision before the CRTC?
Mr. Angus is first.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Thank you.
Because it usually takes us about an hour to figure out the order of the table we're going to sit at each day, I would say I'm very pleased. I think we have something that will get us through.
I'd like to make just a couple of suggestions. If we're going to meet CBC, I'd like a full two hours. If we're going to meet the Auditor General, I'd like the full two hours, or as much of it as we can get.
We have requested that the minister come back. I think it would be really important. I don't think we got to hear very much today, and there are a lot of issues, and it would help us. So let's bring the minister back.
I have a question on Canadians Against Propaganda. I wrote a letter to the CRTC opposing—or raising questions about—Chinese communist state television coming into Canada. But I would respectfully submit that I would be very wary about just having a group come before us until we know who this group is.
We have to be very careful about the platform. We normally choose who the witnesses are going to be, and if there are going to be discussions about bringing the Chinese licence forward, then I would ask that we put our researchers to this, as opposed to just saying that Joe Blow group coming off the street wants to have an hour to have a mandate.
I say this with no disrespect to whatever this group is, but I would like to know who they are, what they've done. Otherwise, our credibility would be very much on the line.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
I think we should put as a priority the one you've suggested for June 6 in the order of reference.
Concerning the meeting on GATS, we've already agreed. There's no problem there.
Yes, I'd suggest the Auditor General before CBC, and also the fact that even though this committee as a group may not be going to Banff, the entire industry, including the CBC, will be in Banff. So perhaps that week might even be difficult for the CBC management.
I may add a suggestion that we indeed invite the minister to come back, but also we may want to add Madame Verner to our list of guests, because even Madame Oda today was making such suggestions, that we need to ask questions of Madame Verner vis-à-vis the francophone secretariat in the department.
Finally, there may be a need to add a meeting on Thursday, June 22.
As far as the request to appear is concerned, I would certainly discourage this committee from accepting that request. My information is that this application is still before the CRTC, that the CRTC has not made a decision. For us to step into a process that is arm's length, quasi-judicial....
I suppose most of us have been approached by representatives of these groups to meet with them. I think we cannot entertain that here until and unless a decision by the CRTC has been made--which can be appealed to the cabinet, incidentally. So until that process ends, we have to be very careful about entertaining witnesses on a matter that is currently before the CRTC.