I think the point you make is absolutely valid. There are tension points, frankly, in the regulatory model that make the operations of conventional and specialty private broadcasting in Canada more challenging than less challenging. This is simply because many of the policies and regulations were not necessarily conceived for where we are now in terms of our transition as a system that was once totally regulated to one that is regulated in part and unregulated in part, with so many content services and media services gaining access to consumers directly.
Where we see the debate of this committee going is to perhaps bring a frame of reference back to the discussion to the broadcasting system, and it starts with how the public broadcaster is funded. We are not suggesting nor do we have information to support the allegation that they are overfunded or underfunded, in light of the fact that we do not have the detailed information to make the assessment of how the funds are actually used.
The example that I was giving earlier to Mr. Kotto was the example of what the Auditor General found in her 2005 report, where upon doing a more in-depth analysis of the CBC's books she found that there were 8,800 hours of programming on the shelves from the French-language network's perspective, and 5,800 hours on the shelf in the English network's side of the equation.
That leads us to ask this question. How is it that a public broadcaster would need to stockpile so much programming, and is that in fact used? Because that programming was acquired; it did not flow to those shelves without some acquisition and some cost involved. Why would it be useful for that practice, for a public broadcaster, in fulfilling a mandate? Is it because it is driven by advertising revenue strategies? That might be part of the answer. Is it basically to buy up programming so that others cannot have access to it, even if it means putting it on the shelf rather than broadcasting it yourself? We don't know, and the reason we don't know is because the kind of detailed information to which we are referring would provide, if not all of the answers to those questions, at least some of the answers as to why those programming strategies were pursued.
Fundamentally, broadcasting comes down to programming strategies and marketing, and we don't understand, as this example illustrates, how those funds were deployed and what funds were used to make those acquisitions. So we don't want to leave you with the impression that we're saying they're overfunded or underfunded. We're saying before we make that assessment we have to know how the funds are being used, and the only way to do that is by more detailed accountability and transparency in their reporting.