Canadian Heritage Committee on Feb. 27th, 2007

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

I'm thinking we're micromanaging, if that's not what the current structure is set up to do. I'm sure there are penalties, but I think we're making this decision completely in the vacuum of actual information.

I don't know what the CRTC usually does when there's non-compliance, when somebody breaks the regulations. If we could get that, it would be beneficial to every committee member so we could better reflect the types of penalties there should be.

I believe there should be penalties, there's no question. I'm just not sure if it's financial or if it should be something more regulatory.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Abbott, and then Mr. Kotto.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Chair, this goes back to the point I made at least half an hour ago, the fact that we received these in good faith, because there was the difficulty for Mr. Angus to be able to write them over the weekend, having only received the report on Friday. I understand all of that, but the fact is, particularly on recommendation 4, we are going to be voting on something about which we're working in an absolute vacuum of information. For example, the broadcasting distribution regulations will be an extension of the Broadcasting Act. That is the legislation that would permit financial penalties. I have absolutely no notion, and I would suspect even our experts have no notion, as to whether the Broadcasting Act would allow that to happen in the first place.

Secondly, if it would be allowed to happen, I don't have any idea what tools there are for them to be able to enforce that either. We're working on this, as with all these recommendations, without having had an opportunity for any of us, individually or collectively, to take advice, to prepare, to go to source, to come forward so that we can be making intelligent decisions in this particular case.

At the very least, recommendation 4 should be tabled. I did not mean to make a tabling motion. I'm not doing that. I'm just saying we really need to set this one aside because we don't know what the facts are, whether in fact this could actually happen under the Broadcasting Act.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Angus.

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

Thank you.

Quite simply on this, Mr. Chair, I would recommend that we refer this to our researchers and have them come back. We can take this up at the end of our next meeting, or whatever, just as we would with a motion. I brought it forward because I wanted to deal with the issue that I think there is a major discrepancy in the powers of the CRTC and what they actually can do. Pulling a licence is certainly something you want to do in the last regard, because it creates ultimate chaos.

So I would suggest we refer this to our researchers. They can come back and say, these are the tools they already have, or there is a vacuum here. We can then decide, out of that, whether or not to move forward with this recommendation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Kotto.

[Maka Kotto, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I can confirm that the CRTC does not have the power to impose fines. The Broadcasting Act would have to be amended for that to be possible, although our researchers can always check that. I have done my own research in that area, and the CRTC does not have that power.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Okay, thank you.

It has been suggested by Mr. Angus that we let the researchers look into recommendation 4 and come back at a later meeting to give us a ruling on that.

Recommendation 5 reads:The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage urges the Minister of Heritage to enact provisions that the government will provide interest-free bridge financing for the CTF if contributors to the fund fail to meet their monthly funding obligations. Repayment of this loan would occur when the delinquent contributor's payments are back up to date. Repayment of this loan will include a reasonable interest rate in the form of the financial penalty set out in Recommendation 4.

Again, should this recommendation be set aside, to follow up after we have a response on recommendation 4?

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

For consideration, I don't really understand the reason for recommendation 5. If Shaw and Vidéotron have decided to recommence their monthly payments and get caught back up to date, I'm at a complete loss to understand why we would need this motion in any event.

The second part is that this interest-free bridge financing is a cost to the government that is under the purview of, obviously, the Treasury Board and the finance minister. Furthermore, any loans that are either made or guaranteed by the government are the same as having been made. As Mr. Scott will know—say, on $100 million, to pick a number—if there was a guarantee or a loan put forward, that would go against the current spending of the government. So it's not just an incidental thing to say, gee, we need some kind of bridge here. It's not an incidental thing at all.

Secondly, I don't understand why we need it when Shaw and Vidéotron have already said they're going to recommence their payments.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr.Scott.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Charlie has already said it has been tabled or attached.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

It will be tabled along with number 4, until the recommendations come back for number 4.

[Marion Ménard]

I have a quote from the Broadcasting Act, subsection 32(1): Every person who, not being exempt from the requirement to hold a licence, carries on a broadcasting undertaking without a licence therefor is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable:

(a) in the case of an individual, to a fine not exceeding twenty thousand dollars for each day that the offence continues; or

(b) in the case of a corporation, to a fine not exceeding two hundred thousand dollars for each day that the offence continues.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Warkentin.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Is that just if they don't carry a licence when they're broadcasting? Did I hear that initial part correctly?

[Matthew Carnaghan, Committee Researcher]

It's broadcasting without or contrary to a licence.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Or contrary to a licence.

[Matthew Carnaghan]

So both apply.

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

In terms of precision, I would suggest that you speak with the CRTC and then bring it back to us. We can then deal with it after having their expertise.

[Marion Ménard]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Recommendation 6 reads:The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage recommends that the CTF maintains the following provisions:

(a) that a minimum of 5% of contributors gross revenues from broadcast operations go to Canadian programming.

(b) that 80% of the required contribution must go to the CTF.

(c) that the CTF must set aside the equivalent of 37% of its total revenues for programs destined for the CBC/SRC.

(d) that the CTF allocates funds exclusively to independent producers.

Mr. Abbott.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

I wonder if Mr. Angus could help me understand paragraph (b), “that 80% of the required contributions must go to the CTF”. Unless I'm mistaken, I believe they presently have to contribute 5%, but it is permitted for up to 2% of the 5% to go to local programming. Are you suggesting that it only be 1% of 5% that goes to local programming?

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

This is the standard as it is now. Again, they can take some of that 5% envelope and put it to local or regional television or other programming, but the issue of pulling all the money out and saying they're going to set up a separate fund is highly problematic. Based on what we've heard on the fundamental funding envelope as it is, if there are questions about governance structures, who sits at the table or how that funding is allocated, I don't really believe those are in our area of expertise. I'm just very concerned about the trial balloons that were floated about cutting the money that CBC is able to allocate.

The final issue, continuing to fund independent production, is a very important element in this piece. I therefore wanted to say that the overall funding envelope, as it stands now, should remain in place.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

We have Mr. Kotto, and then Ms. Fry.

[Maka Kotto, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Chairman, in the same vein, I would propose that paragraph (c) be dropped because we will need to have the findings of our study on the CBC's mandate before making such a suggestion. It's difficult to promote increased in-house productions. That was the point I wanted to make. As long as we haven't studied…