Thank you.
In our view, the real issue is not the public broadcaster's mandate per se but rather the way in which CBC/Radio-Canada interprets and implements that mandate.
We have seen over the past decade that even though the public broadcaster's mandate has not changed, the interpretation of that mandate by different management regimes has been radically different.
CBC/Radio-Canada is a public broadcaster that in 2006 received a parliamentary appropriation of just over one billion dollars. Clearly, this direct public subsidy conveys a special obligation to CBC/Radio-Canada as a public broadcaster. CBC/Radio-Canada should be expected to use this public subsidy to provide a public service: programming that is distinctive from and complements the programming provided by the private sector, that is of relevance and appeal to Canadian viewers, and that enhances diversity within the broadcasting system. Moreover, CBC/Radio-Canada should be fully accountable for how it uses that subsidy to achieve its public mandate.
It is instructive to examine how public broadcasters in other countries are held accountable for the way in which they carry out their public mandate. We note that throughout this process, the BBC has been identified as a leading model for a public broadcaster, and we also find a lot of value in this example, especially when reviewing how it has defined its role and structured its organization to fit that role. For example, the BBC recognizes the impact that its activities can have on private broadcasters. Because of this, it is governed by a set of fair-trading guidelines that ensure that it does not use its public funds to compete unfairly with commercial companies, and that any commercial activity it undertakes supplements and supports its public purposes.
Equally important, the BBC produces an annual report and account, which provide detailed information, both qualitative and quantitative, on all of its public-purpose and commercial activities. This includes the reporting of extensive programming, audience, and financial information for each of its individual services, which in turn permits assessments that are objective, rigorous, and transparent.
We believe that CBC/Radio-Canada should strive towards a similar level of transparency and accountability, to ensure that it is using the government subsidy in an effective manner to further its public service mandate, but not use those funds to compete unfairly against private sector broadcasters. This is consistent with the recommendation of the Auditor General of Canada, following a 2005 examination of CBC/Radio-Canada, that measures should be adopted to improve accountability and reporting.
As a start, CBC/Radio-Canada should be required to place on the public file detailed financial information relating to each of its services, rather than just the broadly aggregated information that it currently publishes. This would provide an essential tool to enable interested parties to assess the extent to which public funds are being spent on programming that furthers the mandate of CBC/Radio-Canada, rather than being driven by purely commercial considerations.
We want to emphasize that without this level of transparency and accountability, it is virtually impossible to complete a fair and fulsome review of the public broadcaster. There is simply too much of the day-to-day activity of the CBC and Radio-Canada that we cannot speak to because information on that is held in privilege.