Evidence of meeting #19 for Canadian Heritage in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was broadcasters.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Associate Executive Director, Broadcasting, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
We can provide you with that at the same time.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
My other question, I gather, has been pretty well answered.
Mr. von Finckenstein, I was going through your remarks, and at one point you say that you believe this present system “does provide an effective means to achieve the desired purpose”. And yet a little further on you say you think the penalty side has to be improved.
So it's not that effective.
Chair, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
If and when we have a hard case, we really have no means of dealing with it. Fortunately, so far the system has worked very well. Broadcasters are very responsible and responsive, and when these things have come up, they have dealt with them.
However, as you are probably aware, we have had cases in radio and so on where we found that the lack of intermediate penalties, or however you may call them, is really quite hampering. That's why I'm mentioning it here. If violence is a big issue, and it may become a bigger issue, having AMPs would be very desirable.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Mr. Chair, I have a final question.
Has the CRTC, to your knowledge, asked for such provisions to be enacted?
Chair, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Yes. As I say, we have some on the telecom side already. This is with regard to the do not call list. And there was also a bill, which was enacted last year, that provides them in respect of other issues in telecom.
Has it been done before on the broadcasting side? I honestly don't know the answer. Scott?
Associate Executive Director, Broadcasting, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
I must say I don't know that answer either. We have not asked for them recently.
Bloc
Luc Malo Bloc Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. von Finckenstein, for being here with us this afternoon to discuss Bill C-327 and its consequences. In your opening statement, you said that the code adopted by broadcasters had been vetted and approved by your organization. You also indicated that the code contained a provision against the broadcasting of scenes of violence intended for a mature audience before 9 p.m.
When you receive a complaint concerning that specific aspect of the code, how do you determine whether a show contains scenes of violence intended for a mature audience? Are there regulations concerning that definition per se?
Chair, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
I will ask Mr. Hutton to reply.
Associate Executive Director, Broadcasting, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
At the CRTC, we apply the code when we receive a complaint. The code contains indications specifically regarding children's programming, and about eight factors are taken into consideration. Our staff views the film and ensures that it complies with the regulatory components, which include those eight factors. We determine whether the film contains violence, whether it was broadcast before the prescribed hour, whether there are many or few exceptions, and whether we found this to be an exception. We then make a finding. If indeed there were instances of violence, we make a note of them and notify the broadcaster.
Bloc
Luc Malo Bloc Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC
In your statement, you also said that you would like to have a greater range of penalties. You even talked about fines high enough to deter broadcasters from presenting programming with violent scenes at times that are in violation of the code.
How high a fine would it have to be, in your opinion, to deter broadcasters from doing this?
Chair, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
There is a whole range of fines. It depends, of course, on the seriousness of the offence. Under the Telecommunications Act, the fines range from $1,050 to $15,000. We have to determine what constitutes an appropriate fine. The idea is not to harm or financially ruin broadcasters, but rather to give them a financial reason for complying with the act and the CRTC code.
Bloc
Luc Malo Bloc Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC
Is the range you mention the one you would advocate in this specific case?
Chair, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
No, I think that would be a little high. As I said, we can provide you with a draft of the provisions on fines and an appropriate range of fines. In order to do this, we have to check on the fines in place in other industries for activities that are more or less similar. I do not want to pick a figure out of the air.
Bloc
Luc Malo Bloc Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC
Has the CRTC seen an increase in violence on television before 9 p.m.? Do you have any way of assessing that?
Chair, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
I do not have any information of that type.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
I have to speed this along because very shortly the bells are going to ring. We have a bit of other business to take care of, so we'll move over to Mr. Chong.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My question is for any of the three witnesses. It has to do with the basis of the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council's violence code, or the CRTC's code, when it comes to public or educational broadcasters. Over the last number of decades, the jurisprudence in Canada with respect to materials containing sexual or violent elements has evolved from a focus on community standards to a focus on harm. Under the harm test, materials can be censored only if they are shown to be harmful to society or to others in society. With respect to the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council, or the CRTC, what empirical evidence is out there to support the present codes?
Chair, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
I will go at the question differently. The bill before us suggests a review of the code and the standards. It was adopted in 1996, and community standards have changed the way we look at these things. It may very well be appropriate to review it. Whatever studies we have, we have to follow the code as adopted at that time. So I don't think we could answer your question.
These things are not cast in stone. They reflect the standards of the community and they have to be looked at periodically and recalibrated. That's why I said in my opening remarks that the review the bill suggests, if the bill is adopted, would be very popular.
Conservative
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
It's not short.
Mr. Abbott, I think you have a point of order.
Conservative
Jim Abbott Conservative Kootenay—Columbia, BC
I have a quick matter to deal with, which I've asked the chair under a point of order. I had told the committee I was going to be getting back with the response from the department with respect to the guidelines in Bill C-10. This is the response I got. The guidelines do not exist, cannot exist, before Bill C-10 is passed. There are simply no guidelines to provide the committee. When Bill C-10 is passed, we'll be holding consultations on the guidelines.
With respect to the department official who was quoted on Thursday, he simply misspoke when he implied that there were guidelines in existence that the department was working on. There are no guidelines; he misspoke. After Bill C-10 is passed, once the legislation is passed, the minister will direct the department to begin consultations with industry officials and stakeholders, after consultation guidelines have been discussed.
Thank you.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger
Okay. Thank you for bringing that up.
One quick question, Mr. Bélanger.
