My difficulty with this is that we're prejudging the work of the task force. We have a status quo that exists. Mr. von Finckenstein has agreed to start a task force to look into the very issues this recommendation seems to be pointed at.
Both 6(c) and 6(d) are issues that Shaw and Vidéotron raised. Paragraph 6(c) is the funding of CBC up to 37%. Both Shaw and Vidéotron have taken issue with that. Whether their concerns and complaints are justified is quite another matter. That's up to the task force to address. I assume Mr. von Finckenstein will eventually come back to us and submit his task force report. At that time we'll probably decide whether we want to hold further public hearings on it.
The same holds for paragraph 6(d), that the CTF allocates funds exclusively to independent producers. As you know, Vidéotron has asked to be given permission to do it in-house. All of us may disagree with that position, but it's an issue that the task force is now going to dig into. They're going to have broad consultations on the issue and bring it back to this table, and then we can decide whether we accept it or not.
But to now say we want to maintain the existing provisions is essentially a statement that we prefer the status quo to anything the task force is going to come up with, and that's unfair. There is a status quo already. There's no suggestion we're changing it until the task force has completed its work. But this statement is clearly prejudging what Mr. von Finckenstein is purportedly charged with doing.