Canadian Heritage Committee on June 5th, 2007

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

He got the bounce from that story.

[Tony Burman]

Yes, but he's still an incredibly valuable reporter for CBC news.

You characterized the challenge accurately. I don't think there's any organization, really, that was as conscious of the BBC scandal as CBC/Radio-Canada was. We really learned from that, both in terms of how the BBC approached the issue and how the government responded, imagining how that same situation could play itself in Canada.

I think there has been, over the years, a dogged determination on the part of the CBC to maintain its independence of government. The tensions between the CBC and the government over a variety of issues, including news and current affairs, are quite well known. It's something that comes with the territory.

I think you're right about the financial instability of the CBC. That's worrisome to everybody, including many of us as Canadians, not only as CBC employees. We try to provide, and I indicated some of them in my opening remarks, through our policy book and through our different kinds of safeguards, enough mechanisms so that at least the Canadian public can be confident they're getting the straight goods from the CBC--flawed on occasion, but the straight goods. Our hope is that we'll be able to maintain and endure any kinds of pressures we get, not only from government but from any side.

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

Do you think if there was a five- or a ten-year mandate with guaranteed funding, the CBC news service would feel more confident? Right now, you are waiting every year to the last minute on that $60 million allocation, which may or may not come, depending on the goodwill of government toward your organization.

[Tony Burman]

I think the answer is yes. I think it's ludicrous using any standard of life that this organization goes from year to year without a real sense of its funding. That has a ripple effect through the organization. Quite frankly, it does affect the news and current affairs part of the CBC, which is so important.

When Alain was asked about the challenges of Radio-Canada, one of the challenges that I think confronts both the CBC and Radio-Canada is the protection of resources. Otherwise, we can't maintain coverage of Afghanistan or Sudan or whatever.

I think some sort of financial stability would have a direct, positive impact on the information dimension of CBC's mandate.

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

I want to ask a question about advertising and the implications that would have on news coverage.

Yesterday on The Current there was a very interesting discussion of CanWest Global going to court to overturn the direct-to-advertiser ban on prescription drugs. They were taking the position that their inability to make money on advertising was a direct violation of their freedom of expression. Yet, on the CBC discussion, they were talking about the massive impact that direct advertising has on drug costs and the health system, comparing the U.S. to Canada and the different positions.

If CanWest was successful in that, that would certainly have implications for news coverage for a whole series of issues relating to health coverage. How would that downward pressure impact CBC? Would you feel that you would need to start to compete for drug advertising? How do you start to make those decisions on advertising that is very much implicated in news coverage?

[Tony Burman]

I don't have enough detailed legal knowledge of the CanWest initiative, but in general terms I think there's been a long-standing determination within CBC/Radio-Canada to create a firewall between its news and current affairs operations and advertising influences.

I think that has been, quite frankly, over the years sometimes difficult to maintain. I think we've maintained it, but I think the financial instability of the CBC sometimes runs counter to that. My confidence would be that we would maintain that distance and that the CBC would never go in a direction where its advertising policies had an impact on editorial choices.

Alain.

[Alain Saulnier]

CBC's advertising code is unique and it is part of a number of instruments which aim to protect and guarantee CBC's independence from the type of pressure you are mentioning.

You also referred to growing concentration seen almost everywhere. One of the best bulwarks against concentration is the CBC because it is in a position to offer cultural and territorial diversity and to welcome all opinions. In another environment, concentration would cause increasing focus on one single viewpoint.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

We'll move now to Mr. Brown.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I'd like to thank our witnesses for coming today.

I'm probably going to stick more to the English side, Mr. Burman; that's one I'm much more familiar with. You've given your presentation, and I think it's an excellent advertisement for why we should watch the CBC and your news programming, but we're here to do a study on the role of the public broadcaster.

I'm going to quote from what you said:

We sometimes hear it said that there's no need for CBC News because the private broadcasters do exactly what we do, and they do it well. We can agree that private broadcasters do some things very well. And we can perhaps debate at some other time whether they do them better than CBC. But there is no debate about the role of CBC News....

Can you tell us why it's uniquely from the public side and why the taxpayers of Canada should support that? What are you giving Canadians that's unique in terms of news programming because it is a public broadcaster? I'd like to hear about that.

[Tony Burman]

I think the answer is in different ways. Again, in reference to our earlier discussion, I think providing a news and current affairs service that's not unduly influenced by commercial and advertising concerns is very important in a democracy. I think there are many instances, both in Canada and the United States, where the commercial advertising influences within the media have had a material impact on the kinds of editorial choices that viewers and listeners are exposed to, and I think that's negative.

Again, as I tried to indicate in my opening remarks, there's a range of programming that the CBC and Radio-Canada provide that, quite frankly, our commercial competitors don't--the breadth of our international coverage, for example. And we do that not because it necessarily will have a direct impact on our “ratings” that night. We do that because we know a lot of Canadians rely on their public broadcaster to understand their connection to the world.

Again, as I indicated in my opening remarks, I think a lot of special events deal with the story of this country historically in terms of anniversaries, in terms of what could be described as mandate programming. We know through the audience response that these are very meaningful things.

So I think there's been on all our networks and our platforms the range of CBC radio programming across the country, the incredible importance of local programming across the country, that's, as I indicated, number one in many markets and number two in many other markets. It's a reflection of the distinctive place of CBC radio in communities from coast to coast to coast.

I think the success and the popularity of our online service is another example of why a lot of people are drawn to CBC, are drawn to Radio-Canada, a lot of younger people, for the kind of online experience and services we provide that, in their view, are far more relevant to their lives than some of the commercial competitors.

So if you collect it all together, a country can make a decision as to whether or not it wants to follow the American model, which is essentially to let the news media survive or not within a commercial environment, or it can do what has happened in Canada, what is happening in Britain, what is happening in every modern democracy in Europe, and that is to try to create a vibrant, unique public broadcaster to exist in a complementary way with its commercial competitors.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville, ON]

We can get into a debate on how important ratings are in the whole process, but you talked about CBC radio being number one in markets. You have a unique model with CBC radio. I know there's heavy listenership, especially...I'm much more familiar with what's going on in eastern Ontario.

On the other hand, specifically talking about Ottawa, your television news I think is a distant third in terms of ratings. Why do you think it's so successful on the radio side and not so successful on the television side?

[Tony Burman]

I think it's so successful on the radio side just because it really speaks to a lot of issues and concerns that are important across the country.

I would challenge, with respect, your characterization of television. Television is not simply the supper hour program at six o'clock; television is The National, television is the fifth estate, television is CBC Newsworld. Television is a whole multitude of programs. I think, again, as I indicated in my opening remarks, that if one looks at audience levels, we're dealing with many television offerings that are more than competitive with our commercial rivals, and in many cases, in audience numbers, exceed them.

In terms of the CBC television experience with regional programming at the supper hour, that has been a challenge for the CBC for many years. I think as this committee realizes, there's an initiative called MyCBC, which is focused around Vancouver, where there's a real effort to build some sort of renewed connection with our audiences at six o'clock through CBC television, and that's something we're working on.

My gentle response would be for us not to focus on one time slot as the sole determinant as to whether CBC television matters to Canadians.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Thank you.

Ms. Marleau.

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

I'm going to start by saying that I believe today as much as any time since the beginning of public broadcasting there's a tremendous need for you. I believe that despite the challenges you've faced, you've done a great job, both on the English side and on the French side.

I represent a riding in northeastern Ontario, as you may well know, the riding of Sudbury. I'm a francophone, so I listen to many programs, both in French and in English. I hope the financial challenges you face will not prevent you from continuing some of the great things you've done.

On the other hand....

I often watch RDI at the same time as CBC Newsworld. I like to watch French television. It is important for me to be able to hear the news, especially in the morning, because you know that as politicians we need to know what is going on. Yet, I don't see myself reflected in the news, I don't see Ontario nor Alberta there. Honestly, the program is mainly focused on Quebec. It is wonderful, but I would like more to be done for francophone communities.

I firmly believe that democracy is ill-served when people cannot be better connected throughout this country. That is essential to me. I know that you are trying, but I would ask you to try a bit harder, if possible. The same applies to radio.

These are criticisms, but they're more demands that you try to do more. I listen to CBC radio; I listen to Radio-Canada. When I drive home from Ottawa there are vast areas of this country that I drive through and the only service that's available on my car radio--and I don't have Sirius--is CBC or Radio-Canada. It's very important for those of us who drive through vast areas. But what happens is any kind of local programming ends at six--and it's not all local programming; it's mostly regional programming.

I'll give you an example. Last year as I was driving home CBC radio reported that they thought there was a fire at a seniors' home in Sudbury. They weren't sure. They couldn't get any facts to back it up. You have to understand that the CBC radio offices in Sudbury are about four blocks away from where this fire was. As we got closer to six o'clock--and this was on the English as well as the French side, nobody could get any information--and I was trying to find out what was happening, at six o'clock they signed off and said, sorry, we weren't able to get any information on this and our programming ends now, so they went to international.

So I ask you, can you somehow bump up some of that regional service? We have no other source of news up there. The other broadcasters don't give us anything. CBC and Radio-Canada are the only things we have. To me, it's wonderful that you do such a great job internationally, but you have to do a better job within the country as well.

[Tony Burman]

I appreciate your point; I accept your point. Actually, the answer to your question is yes, we will be doing that.

I think one of the reflections of today's media environment is the fact that our audiences are everywhere at all times; no longer are they restricted to one time slot or one medium or one platform. I think the 24/7 nature of news--including, dare I say, local and regional news--is something that really absorbs us. One of the determinations of our new regional strategy, which will start in Vancouver and then move across the country, is what we're calling MyCBC. It is a 24/7 increase in regional and local service to our audiences on radio, on television, and online that would include more coverage through the evening, as you put it, on CBC radio and television, for that matter, and certainly more coverage through the weekend. I think we've recognized the problem, and I think you phrased it very well. I assure you that we're doing what we can within the resources that we have to address it.

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

I would now like to hear what you are going to be doing in French. I'm very interested in that.

[Alain Saulnier]

With respect to Réseau de l'information on television or on Première chaîne radio or television , we are very concerned about these matters. I can assure you that we take good note of all the criticism we receive. At the same time, we were the only ones able to cover the Francophone and Acadian Community Summit over the last weekend. These matters do concern us. It is part of our mandate and it is our duty to do this.

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Yes, in fact, I should thank you for that, because it is impressive to see this coverage. But this type of event does not occur often.

[Alain Saulnier]

If you'll allow me, I would like to add something with respect to the news. Where else than on Radio-Canada would you have heard about the greening of Sudbury?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Right.

[Alain Saulnier]

In the same vain, when are you going to hear about forests and lakes in Quebec? Sometimes we get the impression that this territory is only made up of cities, when that is false.

So, we have to report on what is happening almost everywhere on the North Shore of Quebec, on the Lower St. Lawrence, etc. We have to cover the fisheries and the lobster crisis in Shippagan. Of course, we are concerned about these things.

I can also add that it is in this spirit that next fall you will see an Atlantic newscast produced on Saturdays and Sundays. We are starting to do this and we'll be doing more to try and offer as much news as possible not only during the week and until 6:00 p.m., as you pointed out.

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

We must make sure that Radio-Canada and CBC do not become like the others, in other words big city-focused radio or television networks where you will only hear about Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver. That is a concern to us because we are often inexistent in the eyes of the other media. You are our voice and our hope.

I am convinced you will remain. We can work together to ensure that this public service is maintained, because it is vitally important today.

I thank you for your work. I will continue to follow this issue to note your progress.

I'm going to follow your progress and hope you remember that you're not just there for big cities; you're there for small towns, for small cities, for all of the regions. Actually, you're more important in all of those media than you are in the big cities.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

We'll move on now to Madame Bourgeois.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Welcome, gentlemen.

My questions are for Mr. Burman, because my colleague asked questions of Mr. Saulnier regarding the French corporation.

Mr. Burman, we travelled through various Canadian cities and there is an emergence of citizens media or community media wanting to serve local communities.

How significant are these new media to you? Given the fact that you are a journalist, do you forge alliances with these people? What kind of concerns, if any, do you have?

[Tony Burman]

The answer is yes. Again, this is part of our strategy to connect with Canadians in a far deeper way, wherever they happen to be. I think you're right. So many Canadians now across our country--not only in small towns and cities, but certainly there--have created a network of community media that is significant. I think the goal of our expansion of our regional and local connection is to make partners with as many people as we can, because I think in many communities the CBC and Radio-Canada are honest brokers. It's a safe zone; we're people who have interests similar to those of a lot of these groups. I think our goal is to do that.

I think what one notices on both CBC and Radio-Canada is a far greater inclusion of diverse viewpoints through so-called user-generated content; we encourage people to submit their own stories to us in ways that would relate to a wider audience. I think we're quite conscious that we've got to take advantage of the new media in the ways you indicate.