Yes, I can confirm that Cogeco Cable would be obliged to pass on the additional costs, i.e., the fee-for-carriage that would have to be paid to conventional broadcasters, to our customers.
The reason for that is quite simple. We are a public company. We have shareholders. We have to make sure that their interests are also factored into the equation. This is not only about the interests of the broadcasting system, some broadcasters and our consumers, but it's also about the interests of our shareholders.
Coming back to your question, Mr. Rodriguez, let us say that the problem cannot be entirely fixed with a local programming assistance fund. We all agree on that.
Contrary to others, we are for the new fund. It's already much better than the status quo, but it is not a silver bullet, and neither is fee- for-carriage for that matter.
Why is fee-for-carriage not a silver bullet? Because, as I indicated in my opening remarks, it is far too expensive to purchase American programs. That is what we told the CRTC last year.
The figures were in the 2007 report. Canadian private broadcasters spent approximately $722 million on foreign programs, an increase of 4.9% over 2006, whereas spending on Canadian programs decreased by 1.2%, accounting for $616 million.
Those are the CRTC's own figures, Mr. Rodriguez. The figures are slightly different this year. So much the better if Mr. Viner has been able to stem the increase in costs for American programming.
Nevertheless, the fundamental problem is that there are no rules. They can spend whatever they wish on American and Canadian programs.
In support of Mr. Konrad von Finckenstein, I must confirm that I was at the CRTC's public hearing around this time in 2008 and was expecting a clear and specific commitment for a dollar for dollar reinvestment of carriage fees in Canadian programming, and no such commitment was made.
It is all well to say that it was a policy hearing, but the broadcasting policy applies to all components.