Canadian Heritage Committee on May 29th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you for that. I appreciate your remarks this morning and the candid answers you've given to the questions.

Right now we'll recess for a few minutes. Again, thank you very much for being here.

[Timothy Wilson Casgrain]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

We'll get back to business.

I would like to go forward and see if I can seek a mover to move:

That the Committee present a report to the House, that it has examined the qualifications and competence of Timothy Wilson Casgrain to the position of Chairperson of the Board of Directors of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and finds him competent to perform the duties of the position that he has been appointed.

Do I have a mover for that motion? It is moved by Mr. Fast. Do we have any comments or discussion?

All in favour of the motion? Against?

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

I think the next motion has been distributed to everyone. This motion was submitted by Mr. Charlie Angus, MP, on Thursday, May 24, regarding the meeting with the BBC and others in London. The motion reads as follows:

That 6 members of this Committee travel to London, England during the second week of September in order to meet with the Management of the BBC, the members of the British Parliamentary Committee that recently conducted the review of the BBC mandate, and the UK Film Council in order to gather information with respect to its current study on the role of a public broadcaster in the 21st century.

Would you like to speak to the motion, Mr. Angus?

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

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.

I brought this motion forward because I feel that a number of themes have emerged in our study. I think we are moving towards being able to put forward a study with recommendations that will actually address some of the things that haven't been addressed in previous studies, in particular the issue of new media and how we start to deal with that.

The BBC has been cited again and again as a model, as being out front in a number of areas. I feel we have focused on the study up to June to get as much of the work done as possible, and I think we're pretty much there in terms of any of the hearings, the witnesses we could ask. I don't think there's much more work to be done there, but I do believe that in order to make this study as valuable as it can be, we do need to, in the fall, look at certain areas, just to hone in.

I think we'll have some preliminary recommendations ready, but we do need to take the time. It's incumbent upon us to just make sure that we've done this right. We have everything we need, and this issue of the BBC has been outstanding.

I recognize that we might be in a situation in the next week or two weeks where the House might be prorogued, and the second week of September might not be possible. I'm not so much interested in the date, but I believe that in the fall this is something we should look at as a committee, even as we're getting on to other business.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Okay, thanks.

Would anyone else like to speak to it?

Mr. Scott.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Well, I think the test of reasonableness for a committee in these kinds of things—and I can tell you that in 14 years I've never left the country with a committee, so it's not as if this is any desire to travel—is two things: is the work that we're doing important enough to warrant it, and is the information that we will gather of sufficient value to that work? By interventions from practically everybody who has appeared, I think this clearly meets that test, so I would encourage members to support it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

Mr. Fast.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Well, Mr. Chair, I'm strongly in favour of hearing from the BBC, as well as from PBS, and perhaps the Australian public broadcasting system. I do have concerns, personally, about having six members of this committee, together with all the accompanying staff, which typically exceeds the number of members of this committee when we're travelling....

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Just to explain that, there would be three staff.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Three staff?

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Yes, because there are no public hearings.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

All right. So there is a total of nine individuals travelling. Quite frankly, we're also going to be, hopefully, bringing representatives of PBS and the Australian broadcasting association to Canada. It seems to me that the appropriate thing is to also bring representatives of the BBC to Canada, rather than doing the reverse. I'll be voting against this. And I will ask for a recorded vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Okay.

Anyone else?

Well, we'll call for the vote, and it's going to be a recorded vote on the motion:

That 6 members of this Committee travel to London, England during the second week of September in order to meet with the Management of the BBC, the members of the British Parliamentary Committee that recently conducted the review of the BBC mandate, and the UK Film Council in order to gather information with respect to its current study on the role of a public broadcaster in the 21st Century.

So, we will....

Yes?

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

Mr. Chair, I have a question to Mr. Lahaie before we vote. If the House is prorogued until October 15 or something, does the wording of the motion mean that this travel is off, or do we have the flexibility to have this travel in the fall?

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

It has to pass the Liaison Committee, number one. We have to be specific. If we say the second week in September that we're going to England, that's where we're going and it's in the second week; it can't be the second week in October.

We tried to do that through some of this other travelling, and we got in a little bit of a conflict when we tried to change some of that. So what we're going to be talking about here is, again, that it has to be okayed by the Liaison Committee, but it would be the second week in September. And for how many days--those things would be worked out. But we have to be specific when we go to the Liaison Committee.

Mr. Lahaie.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Jacques Lahaie]

If the House were to prorogue before the trip, we cannot leave Ottawa, but if the House were to prorogue after the trip, the trip would then take place in September. It depends on the date the House prorogues. If the House does not prorogue before then, we'd go as planned.

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

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

It's why I have a clerk. He explains it far better than I can.

We'll have a recorded vote on the motion.

(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

If you then look at the next page, we need to have a mover that the proposed travel budget in the amount of $63,356 for the committee's trip to London, England, in relation to its current study on the role of the public broadcaster in the 21st century, be adopted.

Could I have a mover for that motion?

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

I so move.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Angus has so moved.

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

The meeting is adjourned.