Evidence of meeting #7 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was know.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Andrews Liberal Avalon, NL
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Mr. Bernstein, a few minutes ago you said that this was Sun corporation's way of discrediting the CBC, that this was a direct attack from Sun and Quebecor. Do you want to just elaborate on that? Why do you think they're doing this?
10 a.m.
As an Individual
Well, again, it's strictly supposition. I don't know specifically why they're doing it.
I would say it's partially politically motivated, based on the content in their newspapers and on their television channel. It seems to me they have a specific political bent, which is quite clear. I think that's part of the reason.
I think the rest of the reason is for a competitive advantage, in two ways. One competitive advantage is being able to come up with this information on the air or in their newspapers, which sells newspapers and gets more viewers. The other competitive advantage is that I would think that the more money CBC gets, they believe, the better CBC will be at getting viewers, so if CBC gets fewer viewers, maybe some of those viewers will migrate over to their channel.
That's all I can think of.
10 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Andrews Liberal Avalon, NL
So with this political bent, wouldn't you also agree, then, that in the Conservative Party's attempt at bringing this before committee, we are playing right into the hands of Sun corporation in discrediting the CBC by even continuing this discussion rather than letting the Information Commissioner and the courts solve the problem?
10 a.m.
As an Individual
I'm not going to come out and say that for a fact, but I will say that is my fear.
10 a.m.
As an Individual
No, I have not. It's only what's been in the newspapers; I haven't checked in any detail.
10 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Andrews Liberal Avalon, NL
Okay.
Ms. Denton, I would ask you the same question. Have you been following the court case and what stage the court case is at?
October 6th, 2011 / 10 a.m.
Conservative
Earl Dreeshen Conservative Red Deer, AB
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And to our witnesses, thank you very much for coming here today.
I too am a supporter. I have listened to CBC since we got our first television. The old radio was something I've listened to a lot as I travel around. I've seen good programs over the years. However, I am starting to feel as though it has deteriorated. I am concerned about that, because we know a base amount of funding is going there. Therefore, I am interested in making sure there is some accountability there.
When we look at section 68.1 of the Access to Information Act, we talk about journalistic programming and creative activities. We are concerned about whether or not the Information Commissioner is able to look at what is involved there. I'm afraid the CBC has taken the stance that this commissioner has no credibility. Perhaps that is a little too harsh. However, I am curious as to what types of advice you might give to the Information Commissioner to state what is creative, what is programming, and what is journalistic, so that she, with her group of people, could take a look at information requests and make wise decisions.
10:05 a.m.
As an Individual
I would suggest things like future plans and future shows that are on the books that they might want to put into production. That's no one's business, and frankly there is not a lot of money being spent on that. No one has to know about things the CBC is going to look into journalistically until it's done and the money is spent.
I don't understand, because that seems to me to be so obvious that I can't imagine anyone not understanding. I don't think you have to be a Privacy Commissioner to figure that out. That's one of the reasons why I don't believe that's what the CBC is all about.
Everyone within broadcasting believes, including me, that it doesn't work the same as other businesses. Sometimes it is very hard for others to understand. If I were with the CBC, I would say I was going to open this up to you, but I'd need time to explain these things to you. As long as the time to explain is given, I don't see what the problem is.
10:05 a.m.
Conservative
Earl Dreeshen Conservative Red Deer, AB
The second point you mentioned were the empires you saw growing. My concern is that as one empire grows, you starve other parts of the operation. If we take a look at the type of viewership we have and see that it's dropping drastically, obviously what they are doing right now is not working.
When you put that kind of pressure on--
10:05 a.m.
NDP
10:05 a.m.
Conservative
Earl Dreeshen Conservative Red Deer, AB
Okay. I'm sorry, Madam Chair.
When I see the concept of the empires, and therefore wanting to know what that information is going to be, and when people are asking about why the money is put into certain sectors and not into others, maybe there is an opportunity for them to be looking at some of these minor empires, or perhaps where there aren't any empires, and find people who are saying they care enough about their job that they're going to try to improve it so the CBC can do something about increasing the viewership.
10:05 a.m.
As an Individual
I have no disagreement. I think that is the case.
Having met with the former head of CBC English last week, one of the things he pointed out was the empire of the national news, which since 1985 has done its darndest to take money away from local news. Local news has suffered to the point.... You know, in 1985 CBC had more viewers of local news coast-to-coast than it had for the national news. Today the numbers for local news are almost non-existent. Very few people at CBC watch local news. The money for local news disappeared, and the national news took all that.
Those are the kinds of things that happen. What you are describing, yes, it does happen.
10:05 a.m.
NDP
Tyrone Benskin NDP Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Mr. Bernstein, you were saying that you believe any organization within the government should be subject to access to information and should trust the Information Commissioner to judge whether or not certain things are examined.
Are you aware that there are court cases pending where the government is challenging the Information Commissioner?
