Canadian Heritage Committee on March 14th, 2007

[Phillip Djwa]

Net neutrality is very important. I don't think we're suggesting....

My personal opinion is that it would be a mistake to allow the telecommunication providers in Canada to charge a levy and then use that to essentially eliminate Net neutrality. I think there is an opportunity for those to generate a fund and provide grants to content providers, in much the same way as other organizations or bodies do. It could be through a partnership. For instance, if we did do this Internet broadcast licence, it could be a partnership through Telefilm, the Canada Council--the arm's-length organizations that have an understanding and a relationship with the content providers in this country.

In regard to funding, yes, I think there has been chronic underfunding. If you only have a dollar to pay for something, you still only have that dollar. New media, unfortunately, has not been cheap, but then neither has television and neither has radio; it's just a question of what's important. If we believe in having a Canadian citizenry that is aware of and understands the issues and challenges and successes and the diversity of Canada, then we need to have a strong public broadcaster that offers all those opportunities.

We're simply saying that Canadians are still watching television, Canadians are still listening to the radio, but they're also doing this whole other breadth and depth of activity that we need to address. The only issue is the one you've brought up: are we jumping too fast? Well, we're just following where Canadians are going. That's the most important message.

[Bob D'Eith]

It's an excellent question.

On the Internet neutrality issue, I'll defer to the experts on the new media. The Internet is now. If we don't do it, we'll lose out. My kids don't listen to radio. They do everything online now. They spend 90% of their time online. That's the new generation; it's not me. But certainly, if the CBC wants to be relevant, they have to have a presence.

As for the cost, that's a management issue. As far as I'm concerned, you can spend any amount of money developing properties on the web, but do you have to spend that amount of money? No way. It's a question of management. CBC has to look at production costs online and it has to get that in order. It has to be there. It's essential that it be there for music, for every part of it, and for providing great content. Content is king. If we provide world-class content, people will come to the website. There will be eyeballs. You don't have eyeballs without content, and that's what we have to focus on.

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

I have one other question.

Just to understand where you're coming from, that was a great little video, and lots of fun, but I'm just wondering, did you consider its content to be inherently Canadian because the word “Canada” was up there a few times?

[Lynda Brown]

Absolutely. You know, we have this discussion within our community quite often. Digital media is sometimes seen, I think, as maybe a lower form of Canadian cultural content. But everything you saw in that reel was Canadian made, Canadian produced. People were drinking Canadian water and living in Canada when they did it.

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

They were shooting each other a lot.

[Lynda Brown]

That's very limited. I think Canada actually has a huge number--a majority--of game developers who don't focus on violent games. I think that's something to be proud of. There are some of those, but not very many. The majority focus on very redeeming qualities.

So yes, we do think very much that is Canadian, and the marketplace that we play in is global. There is no digital media company in this country that can produce for a domestic market and survive.

So I think that goes back to Bob's point: we are inherently Canadian. I think what's important, and why I wanted to show you that reel, is that the rest of the world sees that as the benchmark. The rest of the world sees what we're doing in that area as something to emulate, and it's Canadian produced. I think that's something we should support and look at growing further.

[Phillip Djwa]

I would add, as a quick comment, that six out of the ten highest-selling video games in 2006 did not involve any kind of violence. There's a whole new area of serious games that have a whole different aspect. So the notion that video games are made up of only violent first-person shooters is not true anymore. The industry has developed. The thing is that Canada has the capacity, as demonstrated by the international success of these video games, to create uniquely Canadian content in a very viable way. We have world-class people here who could work on issues that are relevant and important to Canadians. The most important thing is that they want to. Everyone would like to do this, but again, there isn't the opportunity at this point.

[Denise Savoie, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Don't mistake what I'm saying. I don't think all video games have to be violent. It was more a question about the particular video and your perspective that you showed this morning, and your perspective on what constituted Canadian content. You answered my question.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

I have a couple of comments, and I don't really need answers to them. The WIPO Treaty, I think, was signed back in 1996 or 1997, or around that time. I've been on the heritage committee for four years, and I think about three years ago was the first time since 1996 that copyright was dealt with, under the WIPO Treaty. We did a report at that particular time, and afterwards a bill--Bill C-60, I think--was brought forward that didn't resemble the report that we had sent in at all. We were quite concerned as a committee at that particular time. Bill C-60 died on the order table.

I think something that has been talked about by this committee is that it's one thing to sign a treaty, and it's another thing to ratify it. I think by the time we ever get it ratified, it will have to be revamped again, because new media is moving so quickly, as evidenced by any presentation that I have heard. Hopefully we can come across with a bill that is a living bill, and that can move along, rather than having these great expanses of nothingness that cause us to get so far behind.

Again, I thank you very much for your presentations this morning and for answering the questions, and I wish you all the best.

We will now take a five-minute break before our next presenters. Again, thank you on behalf of our committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

We welcome our last presenters for this morning. As we said earlier, we'll carry on and we'll give everyone a chance here this morning to bring their positions forward.

You're testing me here this morning, as an anglophone who got kicked out of my French class in grade 9, but I am going to try to introduce each group.

First, I'll introduce all the groups. The Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique will be first, then Le Canard Réincarné. The Centre culturel francophone de Vancouver will follow next.

That's my best effort this morning, and I apologize for that. My wife is taking French lessons right now. If I had a little more time, I would also do that.

Welcome this morning—and it is still morning. First of all, the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique, please.

[Yseult Friolet, Executive Director, Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I will be making my presentation in French.

Thank you for this invitation and for the opportunity to share our thoughts on the role of public broadcasters in the 21st century.

As you know, the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique is the advocate for the francophone community in BC. Our role is to promote, represent and defend the interests of francophones as well as protect our community's linguistic and cultural heritage.

Our federation includes 37 members, organizations like the Centre culturel francophone de Vancouver. The centre's representative will be addressing the issue of Radio-Canada's cultural expression mandate. We, for our part, will focus on the way in which it reflects the francophone communities' reality in BC.

There are 64,000 francophone community members in BC. We now have new statistics and by next December, we'll know the actual number of francophones, those that qualify as francophones and those that are francophiles. For the time being, we know that the 2006 figures show our community is growing.

It is also important to add that there are many bilingual people in British Columbia, which broadens the francophone environment in the province. There are over 270,000 who can communicate in French, representing 7 % of the population in BC. That amount is not negligible, especially given the fact that these 270,000 people make up Radio-Canada's listenership.

These days, all broadcasters are in a state of flux. That is what we heard this morning: there is this pressure of new technology being brought to bear on them, forcing them to make technological changes and other more fundamental changes.

Consumers like ourselves are left with no other option but to comply or to change our listening habits. Clearly, the questions you are asking us are of great importance for the entire Canadian public, but they are also of specific concern to francophone-minority communities.

French-language options we have are very limited. The decisions made by broadcasters serving us therefore have an even more direct effect on us. Official language communities depend almost exclusively on Radio-Canada and on the way in which the Crown corporation carries out its mandate.

Our communities need their national broadcaster, perhaps even more so than the majority would. Radio-Canada gives us a chance to hear our own voices. It is the medium which allows us to know ourselves and to be known.

When it comes to providing services, I would like to start by answering this seemingly self-evident question. Radio-Canada radio and television must be available everywhere in Canada even in remote regions. By definition, a national broadcaster does not simply justify its existence based on ratings, and its presence throughout the country is a societal decision. Canada is not the only country to have put forward this basic premise. Moreover, I would add that the people who came here this morning told you the same thing.

The same goes for RDI. Access to this channel ought not to be a costly option for viewers which would be offered by cable distributors who don't see the point in it.

CBC/Radio-Canada's mandate is national, and the Crown corporation must make sure it covers all of the Canadian territory, even where our geography makes its broadcasting somewhat costly at times.

Let's now move to the issue of content. To carry out its mandate and to show the government that it is meeting its responsibilities, the Crown corporation is constantly making adjustments to its website, its program schedules, its broadcasting times, its content and the length of its shows, focusing on the importance of partnerships it is developing with its English-language counterpart and on the structure of its administrative or human resources sections. Everything is in constant flux.

It appears to us that federal budgets are too often the engine behind these frequent upheavals. When the federal budget made deep cuts in 1995, production was centralized in Montreal. Regional productions are increasingly rare, thus reducing regional representation.

In reality, communities like ours, which receive the service, receive very little advance notice and are not consulted. Decision makers simply organize an annual tour to inform the community of upcoming changes. But our community turns to Radio-Canada not only for news, entertainment and general culture, but we also consider it as a transmission, growth and development tool.

The Crown Corporation is one of the pillars of Canada's official language policy. It is the instrument which should allow francophones in nine provinces and three territories to speak with Quebeckers and create a greater degree of solidarity within the Canadian francophonie.

That is why the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique created a media committee in 2002. The committee's mandate was to consult francophones and francophiles in British Columbia to find out what their opinions, perceptions and needs were regarding broadcasting. We also wanted to basically assess how the community was reflected within a larger context.

In 2002, as in 2007, most of the criticism we received was directed at the content of our programs. For instance, francophones don't feel the regional news really addresses their daily lives or concerns. The newscast out of Vancouver swings, with few exceptions, between two very different poles, namely a French version of the CBC newscast with basically the same issues being covered. French regional news looks like a translation of the English news, or sometimes like a diluted version of the national newscast out of Quebec, with too much information about Quebeckers and very little or non at all from other francophone communities.

People have said that the national broadcaster has become “montrealized”. Our communities are not reflected in the programs they watch. They don't relate to the issues because they don't see how national or provincial events affect them, either socially or politically. Things which affect our community are not reported often enough or even identified.

Radio-Canada seemed to have partly understood this when it created shows such as L'Ouest en direct, which allowed us in British Columbia to know when and where to watch TV to find out what was happening in the western francophonie, and not only what was happening in Quebec. Unfortunately, the broadcaster decided to cancel this reliable show. So the program is gone, and our regional news is drowned out by national news. However, some people like this, and the new model lives on. For instance, Ontario does not receive the same regional news as the Outaouais or Ottawa.

I would like to continue this digression with the theme of regionalization. Our communities are never as well served as when they hear their own artists or experts, or local folks speaking about local, national or even international events.

That is why radio programs, especially the three program schedules which are currently broadcast live from Vancouver, are the strands which help weave together our francophone community in British Columbia. These programs allow their hosts to talk about local events or to give a local perspective on national or international events. The programs address issues affecting our community, our school and our community centres. They report on news events which reflect our concerns, and they provide analysis about our reality and its richness. Lastly, they meet the particular needs of our region.

It is obvious that this local programing requires financial resources for every region, for every province or territory that can at times seem excessive.

I come back to our initial assertion, namely that the national broadcaster cannot only be a slave to its ratings. People cannot continue, in the offices of Radio-Canada in Montreal, to repeat that a disproportionate percentage of the Crown corporation's audience lives in Quebec and that therefore we must be realistic. The Crown corporation must reflect the different needs and circumstances of each official language community, including the particular needs and circumstances of English and French linguistic minorities as the Broadcasting Act tells us.

I would like to make a few recommendations. It seems to us that the CBC/Radio-Canada should develop an accountability framework in cooperation with the CRTC that would allow for the definition of both qualitative and quantitative objectives in a better reflection of the regions, whether it concerns the content, the newscasts, drama or variety shows. The appropriations allocated to Radio-Canada by the federal government could be subject to rigorous accountability on the part of the Crown corporation, which would involve the implementation of measures and of producing a better reflection of the regions and of the French linguistic minorities.

In conclusion, I would like to say a few words about technological changes. CBC and Radio-Canada have created an exceptional broadcasting tool for themselves that continues to contribute to the enrichment of the programing and to the broadening of news broadcasting; I am referring here to their website.

On these sites we have unlimited access to what is broadcasted and researched across the country and beyond our borders. It is no longer possible to say that what is said and what happens in Newfoundland is never heard on the West Coast. All one has to do is go find that information.

This tool is of course not used by the entire population for all kinds of reasons, but public broadcasters were quick to see what the benefits would be to the general public, and the investments they make in this would certainly be money well spent, and it contributes to supporting the public broadcaster's mandate.

I thank you for having listened to me and I am ready for your questions, if any.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you very much.

We'll move on now to the next presenter. Please start.

[Réjean Beaulieu, Principal, Le Canard Réincarné]

Is there technical support available? I have a PowerPoint presentation, and I just need it hooked up so I don't have to worry about it.

I would like to welcome all of our visitors.

I am pleased to welcome you in French. Welcome to the fresh Pacific air and welcome to the counter media from homeland of adbusters.org and Greenpeace. Welcome to the Media Carta, the charter of the media, of adbusters.org. Welcome to Tyee.ca, which is the last media to stand up to CanWest, in English. Welcome from the last resisting Gaul who is operating the only new independent media in the entire Canadian West.

Welcome, fellow citizens, francophiles.

Mr. Chairman and honourable members of the committee, I would first of all like to thank you for your willingness to listen to my comments amongst the three other representatives of the organized francophonie.

I prepared an eight-page brief of which you probably have a copy. I will give you an overview of it in the following PowerPoint presentation.

As a new media that is somewhat of a “go-getter”, I will carefully present my credentials. At the outset of the presentation, I will do a preliminary analysis of the media situation: setting the context in a minority situation. The next four components will deal with the main themes of the study, mainly the public mandate of the CBC/SRC, the fiscal situation, the services offered and the emergence of new media.

Let us move now to my credentials. I am a citizen, a professional and a member of this community in western Canada for the last 27 years. I am very much a cross-breed and I married outside my culture. My two children are francophiles. My wife is an anglophone, originally from the West Island of Montreal. I am a tech worker. I work in telecommunications in the private sector, on electronic issues for small and medium-size businesses. I have never worked in French. My training is in engineering and in requirements analysis.

I consider myself to be both a digital migrant and a digital native. I live with two children who are now grown up who truly are digital natives. I would point out to the committee that I do not believe there is a single digital native in this room. That is quite worrisome.

I consider myself to be a digital migrant through my profession. I was of course born with a mechano set in my possession and not with a personal computer, as is the case with the generation of digital natives.

I am a big fan of public radio. I reconnected with my French some years ago. I thank Radio-Canada for having allowed me to keep my French after 27 years.

There is a proverb that saysSpare the rod and spoil the child. Also, I am a fierce critic of the new media, in terms of the services offered here, and this has been the case for several years, as the decision was taken not to regulate in this area. I said that I reconnected with French: I can therefore say that I am an activist. The alternative is to be assimilated. That is what Statistics Canada will reveal next December when they publish their statistics on francophones.

I have been running Le Canada Réincarné for three years now. It attracts between 30 and 40 visitors a day. I have a Google ranking that compares with that of Radio-Canada in the region, that is to say a six. That is comparable to a Tyee, to our friends at the CRTC and to the Association de la presse francophone. My new media is largely a blog. It participates in a forum, and an aggregation of web feeds RSS. I have dabbled in Internet radio and podcasts. I offer a community calendar, polls, manifestos and campaigns.

As you can see, I like to stir things up. I write articles. For example, the brief has now been available for comment for several weeks. I am not operating in a vacuum. I have the support of Impératif français, a Quebec non-governmental organization that is dedicated to the defence of the French language. I'm associated with the Réseau des médias alternatifs du Québec, the RMA. I am also associated with the Express du Pacifique which recognizes the contribution of blogs: how we can now re-engage francophones. I am quite active on the Net, compared to other media, which gives me a Google ranking of six.

The next component deals with preliminary analysis. I believe that several of you have already seen the brief and that several have seen the PowerPoint presentation.

I will not be telling you anything new, after two hours of presentations this morning, in saying that our world is fundamentally a multimedia one. I will probably not be telling you anything new either in saying that there's a greater and greater number of digital migrants and digital natives.

Perhaps I will be teaching something new to those who are listening less attentively this morning as far as Web 2.0 is concerned. I will sum it up as an active and selective commitment to the media. Perhaps I could inform you that we are very far behind as compared to the majority, be they anglophone or francophone, whether we are talking about Quebec or France.

I could count on my fingers the number of francophones who are active on the Web in the entire Canadian West. I can count on my finger tips the number of letters from western readers that are on the pages of our papers. I can tell you that there is absolutely no hot-line in all of the Canadian West to take the pulse of our community. I consider these to be significant delays by comparison with the majority.

I would say now that in a minority context, there are really two groups. There is one group that I think of as the organized francophonie, that lives somewhat in a bubble, in a certain way, and is not assimilated. There is the other group of young people, entrepreneurs, professionals and high-tech workers, who are being assimilated at a worrisome rate. And I believe that the public broadcaster has played a part in the assimilation of francophones from the first group that I described, that is the young professional entrepreneurs and workers from the high-tech sector.

Radio-Canada's dominant position has always been that the Crown corporation has maintained a linguistic connection, but I believe that as far as digital migrants and digital natives are concerned, the linguistic connection has not been maintained. Therefore, if there is a message I would like you to take back to Ottawa, it is that our public broadcaster has to bear some of the responsibility for the assimilation of francophones and the Canadian West.

Let us now talk about the public mandate. I would remind you that the regulatory body, the CRTC, chose some years ago not to regulate new media. I believe it is because they in no way recognize that a minority linguistic situation exists. I am not talking about the regions, I'm not talking about the north shore or the Gaspé; I'm talking about a minority context in which Radio-Canada is our only linguistic and cultural connection.

The CRTC also did not recognize that Web 2.0 really is a means of cultural expression. The new generation of digital natives and even the digital migrants will express themselves in this way.

In the mandate, there is a reference to making services available throughout Canada by the most appropriate means. This of course is decided by Montreal and Ottawa. There really must be some recognition, some new way of proceeding, once it is recognized that a minority context is threatened.

We have a dysfunctional governance structure whereby the people making the decisions largely live in a majority context and understand very little about what happens in a minority context, and undeniably, what happens in the Canadian West.

There is talk of a public mandate that would be strengthened through partnerships with private broadcasters. I would like to tell you that there must first of all be a recognition of a citizen space, a non-governmental organization space perhaps, before talking about the private broadcaster. Before having private broadcasters, there has to be a market.

The second lesson: you cannot put the cart before the horse in a minority situation.

In truth, there is no financial portrait. Perhaps there might have been one had there been regulation a few years ago, in terms of new media and if we had created a market, if we had managed to create a citizen media. We did not do so.

As far as we are concerned, at this point in time, new content is really required in order to interest francophones in a minority situation, that is the digital migrants and, in particular, the digital natives.

I will remind you of the environment now. We know that people see themselves on sites like Wikipedia, Meetup, MySpace and PaceBook. This is becoming somewhat commercial, but there are presently very few spaces where people can meet using these new methods which, of course, will bring about physical encounters. We do not live only in the virtual world.

I will make one comment on the financial portrait. I would like to talk about Web traffic. Web traffic is fundamental. We cannot talk about a financial market if our public broadcaster does not share their Web traffic with us. They do not share their ratings with us very much either. Web traffic, for an entrepreneur, is fundamental. In my small business, I took my Web traffic into account. I think that this should be recognized by our regulatory agency. If we play catch-up to compensate for the fact that there was no regulation earlier on, there may perhaps be a financial portrait.

Regarding the services offered, I will not be telling you anything new by saying that the media that is most often used is accessible in virtual time with a menu of subjects, and a community of interest that is dispersed. Time is a limited resource, in Vancouver as well as in Montreal or in Ottawa. We do not watch the news over a family dinner, if we are able. People who are in their cars, who are mobile, will always have a need of what we call hot media, and that will very likely be traditional radio. Those media will stay.

I may be teaching you something new in telling you that audience commitment to media must be encouraged, to the public broadcaster. With the new media model, the presenter becomes a kind of blogger who puts information into context and seeks commentary from the audience. That truly is a Web 2.0 situation, where interaction is created. The most fundamental change is that the audience determines the programming and the content. That is a good way to appropriately reflect regional diversity.

The fourth lesson: with the new media, it is the audience that leads, even in the minority situation, if we can obtain their commitment.

As far as the emergence of new media is concerned, the problem is not really emergence, but urgency. The regulatory agency is always slow to react to changes in the market. There was no regulation. We must catch up and do so now, we must talk about urgency, transparency and the obligation to base its services on Web 2.0 structure, rather than an extended bureaucracy that is out of touch or a regulatory framework. We must realize that the world is now in a Web 2.0 framework.

The paradigm shift is enormous and the process is slow for organizations like the CRTC. This has brought about the creation of broadcasters, in Quebec, like RadioPirate and XFM. The paradigm shift is also enormous for the public broadcasters and the interest groups. In the past, in terms of the rhythm of the Internet, one year was an eternity. Now, one year is a millennium. We are talking in terms of months today, and the regulatory body is carrying out studies that take an eternity.

The paradigm shift in terms of citizen media and programming is also enormous. Citizens have always been accustomed to listening to what their public broadcaster told them.

On that note, you may believe that there is a great temptation in the Neo-Conservative and Neo-Liberal program to do some clear cutting, to cut everything. The deregulation of new media, where there were never any regulations, has not worked. At this point in time, we must update our linguistic and cultural connection.

In conclusion, even if our public broadcaster is our main lifeline, the majority will have to stop treating us like leopards by continually sending missionaries to our media. Majority must ensure that the public broadcaster recognizes the citizen space, their new media and the potential for renewal for francophones living in a minority situation.

I thank you for having listened to me.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you very much for that.

Our next presenter, please.

[Alexandre Houle, Executive Director, Centre culturel francophone de Vancouver]

Good afternoon. Everyone is hungry and therefore you'll be pleased to hear that my presentation will be brief.

Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen members of the committee, thank you for inviting me here today. It is a great pleasure for me to speak on behalf of the Centre culturel francophone de Vancouver about the role for a public broadcaster in the XXI^st century.

Allow me to begin by briefly describing the organization I represent, the artistic community in British Columbia, and the proportion of francophones and francophiles of metropolitan Vancouver.

Since 1975, the Centre culturel francophone de Vancouver has been programming annual French language cultural activities. These include activities such as the Coup de coeur francophone series, the Nouvelle Scène concerts, an art gallery, library and video library services, educational services and programs, children's day camps, integration and reception services for new arrivals, a community Internet access site, and the list goes on. The Centre culturel francophone de Vancouver therefore provides professionally crafted cultural activities and shows. We give the people of Vancouver access to francophone linguistic or cultural artistic products in the areas of visual arts, media arts and the performing arts.

At 24,100 artists, British Columbia is the province of the highest percentage of its population involved in artistic professions—1.1%. Artists make up 0.08% of the total active population in Canada. Out of all the major Canadian cities, Vancouver has the highest concentration of artists. Seven thousand two hundred and fifty artists live in Vancouver, that is 30% of British Columbia artists.

In the Vancouver region, francophones represent 2% of the population. That population is increasing. The francophone population in metropolitan Vancouver went from 27,245 people in 1996 to 29,795 people in 2001, that is an increase of 10%. That represents 50% of the francophone population in British Columbia. Furthermore, there were 133,525 individuals speaking French in metropolitan Vancouver in 1996, and 147,775 in 2001, that is an increase of 10.5%. That is equivalent to the size of the population in cities such as Abbottsford in British Columbia, Kingston in Ontario or Trois-Rivières in Quebec. The metropolitan Vancouver region therefore contains a sizable poll of francophones and francophiles searching for a cultural life that takes place in French.

For more than 30 years the Centre culturel francophone de Vancouver has been ensuring French language arts and culture broadcasting in its municipality. We are dedicated to the development and vitality of a francophone cultural space in Vancouver. Our initiatives frequently involve close collaboration with CBC/Radio-Canada. We think it is important to share with you our thoughts on how CBC/Radio-Canada fulfills the responsibilities under its legislative mandate, but also on our own involvement.

First, we are of the opinion that CBC/Radio-Canada is principally and typically Canadian by both the proportion of its programs with Canadian content and its ability to provide programing that reflects the interests and values of Canadians.We believe that Radio-Canada reflects Canada inclusively and we must acknowledge that it takes the country regional diversity into account, at both the national and regional level. We acknowledge that it attempts to meet specific regional needs. Including television and radio programs that cover the western regions provides us with an opportunity to appreciate regional diversity. On the other hand, providing greater coverage of the country can make it difficult to ensure listener loyalty and to achieve that critical level of local visibility that is necessary for insuring that local viewers relate to those programs.

I will come back to that aspect of Radio-Canada's mandate during my presentation when I talk about the relevant of regional programing.

We all agree that Radio-Canada actively contributes to cultural expression and exchanges in various ways. There are local programs such as Zigzag, which covers artistic activities in the four western provinces; Ceci est un TEST, which gives a platform to young musicians; ONVIVA, in which youth from western schools talk to us about their culture; the MUZIKLIPS competition, which gives a new artist an opportunity to record a sound tape and to produce a first videoclip; and the Arts et spectacles clips in the Téléjournal/Colombie-Britannique, which provide the Centre culturel francophone de Vancouver with an amount of visibility, which is never enough for a producer, but which is satisfactory.

Radio-Canada provides services in French and in English and we acknowledge that it attempts through these services to reflect the specific situations and needs of both official language communities. One of the immediate consequences of the draconian reduction in its budget in the mid-1990s was its inability to meet the specific needs of the minority francophone communities. Centralizing operations in large urban centres often involves budget cuts that affect its ability to provide adequate coverage to these communities.

We are of the opinion that Radio-Canada holds the same quality standards for its services in French and in English. Radio-Canada contributes to a shared-collective conscience through its historical programs as well as its news coverage in all its shapes. Providing visibility to individuals who embody our hopes, and to events that foster community relations and solidarity can only serve to inspire and stimulate our feeling of national identity.

In order to ensure the survival of minority communities Radio-Canada must maintain its services throughout Canada. That would be difficult if those services were no longer included in its basic services. Through the diversity of its programming, the active involvement of diversified cultural communities in its programming from its design to its broadcasting, Radio-Canada reflects the multicultural and multinational nature of Canada.

In conclusion, I would like to point out to committee members that it should no longer be necessary to prove that regional programming is relevant. It is obvious that ensuring Radio-Canada's active regional presence as well as significant visibility to those individuals contributing to the vitality of these communities can only foster their development.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you very much for your presentation.

I just have to say, Ms. Fry, that the last time you asked about 10 questions in one. Could you shorten them a little? I ask that the responses be directed to the question. That way we can each get a question in, because we only have roughly 20 minutes for questions and answers.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Sometimes when I know I have only one question, I try to get as many as I can into the mix.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

I noticed that.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

I want to ask some very important questions of the francophone community here.

Radio-Canada does represent fairly well what goes on at Centre culturel francophone de Vancouver, but given that the community in British Columbia is very diverse and spread out across the province, do you believe that Radio-Canada is able to do its job in representing the community in Campbell River or the community up north, and is able to represent that community to Vancouver? It represents Vancouver to those communities, but is it able to represent those communities to Vancouver?

Do you believe that francophones across the country, in Ontario and in Quebec, know and understand through Radio-Canada what the situation is here in British Columbia? Do they have a sense and understanding of the diversity of the francophone community here in B.C.? Do you really believe you are reflected to the national medium in the same way as the national medium is reflected to you?

I want to ask that question because I don't get that sense.

[Alexandre Houle]

Are you asking me or the federation?

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

I'm asking anyone.

[Yseult Friolet]

I have been living in Vancouver for approximately 30 years. I arrived there in 1976. I therefore witnessed the development of radio and television in British Columbia. Services are being cut. In 1995, we almost lost our news bulletin, which is 22 to 25 minutes long. It was going to be merged with Regina or Winnipeg's programming to cover Western Canadian news.

Ms. Fry, in these circumstances of attrition, it is questionable how representative events that occur in Campbell River, Prince George or even Maillardville truly are. There are a few cultural shows on television. Alexandre could tell you more. But there is very little in the way of news. I can tell you, as a representative of the francophone community, that the community is still not being represented even though it should be under Radio-Canada's mandate.

My colleagues could tell you that the same is true for the other provinces, except in some areas where there is more broadcasting time, for example, in Moncton. Perhaps there are more resources there. It is my view that Radio-Canada has failed by not allowing that transfer of and access to programs produced in other provinces.

Radio-Canada's programming schedule shows that the Moncton or Ontario news is not necessarily accessible, thereby preventing us from understanding what specifically is happening in those areas. I don't think that Quebeckers, be they from Montreal or Val d'Or, have any more access than they do. Has Radio-Canada contributed to making people more aware of the Canadian francophonie? I think there have been failures in this area. Is that due to editorial choices? I wouldn't want to say.

Regardless, it certainly is linked to technical resources as well as the centralizing of all French programming in Quebec and Montreal. Past cuts are also a very significant factor.

[Alexandre Houle]

The Centre culturel francophone in Vancouver is truly privileged because it has access to Radio-Canada's infrastructure in the province's largest urban centre. Compared to other regions, we indirectly benefit from significant coverage.

Our presentation was only on the interaction between the Centre culturel francophone de Vancouver and Radio-Canada. I cannot speak on behalf of people in the regions. I am not able to do that. However, I can confirm that it is easier for the Centre culturel francophone de Vancouver to disseminate its programs throughout the province than to receive similar information from the other regions.

I can also say that the Centre culturel francophone de Vancouver has no visibility outside British Columbia, let alone Vancouver. We are bombarded with programs from Quebec, which is often much appreciated, but we would like this to be mutual. We have as much to contribute to Quebec's francophone community as they have to us.

[Réjean Beaulieu]

The question as I see it is: Are we reaching the viewers? They don't simply break down according to regions or within Vancouver centre. We're talking about 30,000 compared to 60,000. Generations are also an issue. There are the digital natives and the digital migrants.

The situation is also very different for those who, like those living here, are perfectly bilingual. The media environment has become progressively more competitive. One can choose between Radio-Canada and CBC, but there are also other choices, such as those provided by the web. A perfectly bilingual individual may drift to the English media and I think that is unfortunate.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

Ms. Bourgeois.