Canadian Heritage Committee on April 27th, 2009

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Pablo Rodriguez]

Ms. Ashton.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

First of all, I would like to thank you, Mr. Lacroix, for agreeing to appear today, as well as for the discussion that we had last week.

I'd like to begin by noting, of course, that it's a pleasure to be able to participate as members of Parliament. I'm sure all of us share that pleasure in being able to discuss such important issues.

One of the issues, that of our public and national broadcaster, the CBC, is of the most fundamental to our hearts, not just as representatives of our residents but also as Canadians. I'm quite concerned by some of the critical comments I've heard. Of course, we understand there's always room for criticism, and of course, in this time it's important to ask questions. Certainly, for my colleagues on the other side and the negative tone that's used about the work CBC is doing, I feel that given this difficult time we need to be engaging in some positive relationships with our public broadcaster, with all our media, but certainly looking to how we're going to make this situation better for the people who are losing their jobs and also for Canadians who are counting on CBC for its important programming.

I appreciate the challenges CBC is facing. As someone who's grown up and come to know her region and also the world through the CBC, I very much appreciate the work it does.

I would like to ask the following, and I know it has come up in numerous manners here today, but particularly focusing on the cuts in my region, specifically the cuts to a station in our region of CBC North Country, based in Thompson, Manitoba. I'd also like to bring attention to the cut of the station in our neighbouring province, Saskatchewan, of CBC Keewatin Country, based in La Ronge.

I know you've noted that stations will not be cut, and I would like to understand that is the intent. However, there seems to have been a disconnect. The day these two stations were said to be cut, they went from stations to bureaus, when in fact both the CRTC licence as well as the CBC website itself notes they are stations.

The comment I do bring forward, and of course, the feedback on behalf of the region I represent and my neighbours to the west, is to ask for reconsideration for these stations. I want to be clear as to what we're talking about here. We're talking about one person in each of these places who provides the voice for a region like mine, which is 11 times the size of England, and similar on the other side of the border. In my region, we're talking about CBC North Country, the work done by one person to transmit our voice to 23 communities, and similarly on the west, the work done in northern Saskatchewan to transmit to 18 communities. It's remarkable work, and work that's not only vitally important to our region but important to our provinces and important to our nation as well.

My question is perhaps more specific, but looking at that ratio of how many people are based in Winnipeg, for example, versus outside the capital, it concerns me that if we are to lose our station, we'll have one person outside of Winnipeg who will not be providing regular programming, but rather would be a reporter to be called on, depending on stories that are taking place. I understand it is a similar situation in Saskatchewan.

Given the emphasis on regional programming that you've pointed out—but certainly that is core to the CBC mandate—I am asking on behalf of the region I represent, and also for my neighbours, that these stations be reinstated, that the programming be seen for what it is, important, and that the work of these two staff people on either side of the border be recognized as being key to realizing the CBC's mandate. Certainly, many discussions will be had about how that can move forward. However, fundamentally, the recognition that programming for the north in the north is core to CBC's key mandate is something I would certainly like to convey on behalf of the people I represent.

That's the comment and question I have. Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Pablo Rodriguez]

If you want to reply, you have 10 seconds.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Hubert T. Lacroix]

I duly noted your comments. As you know, we had this conversation last week. These stations, these two one-person operations are important, as are the other 798 people who were part of the cuts at CBC/Radio-Canada. We're going to look at everything once we understand the impact of some of the programs we have, and we're trying to create some margin of manoeuvre in our regional programming questions.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Pablo Rodriguez]

Ms. Boucher.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Lacroix, for joining us today.

As a francophone in Quebec, I know that in our province we are not facing this problem, given that everyone in Quebec speaks French. On the other hand, I'm a bit alarmed when I'm told that Windsor will be doing away with programs that are intended for francophones in southern Ontario, and that in Thompson, in northern Manitoba, programs primarily for first nations audiences will be cancelled and that probably 336 jobs will be cut within the French-language services.

What do you intend to do to protect the cultural identity of French-speaking communities, both in Quebec and throughout the country?

[Hubert T. Lacroix]

That's a very important question. The model that we want to use in Windsor is the model that we are already using to cover francophone issues in Alberta and in Saskatchewan. According to this concept, teams of three people, for example from Calgary to Edmonton, cover the province of Alberta. We are already using this model in Regina and Saskatoon.

I am completely aware of what is going on in Windsor. We also realize, as a public broadcaster, just how important our services are to some minorities, be it francophones in the places you mentioned or anglophones in Quebec, in particular. We have done all that we could to take that into consideration for the cutbacks that we have done.

We have been talking about costs, and I would like to take the opportunity to touch on one issue, Mr. Chair, since this is the last question or nearly the last one, unless I'm mistaken. Earlier Ms. Glover was talking about the amount of money that police officers earn. I have a great deal of respect for the work they do. I'm sure you realize that the $74,000 or the $75,000 that was mentioned represent the general average, and include all the benefits that we offer at CBC/Radio-Canada. We are not talking about $74,000 or $75,000 plus benefits. Benefits are included in the amount. I would also like to take the opportunity to tell you that at CBC/Radio-Canada, we control costs in the best possible manner and that we are aware of our obligations to French-speaking and English-speaking communities.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

There was another thing that startled me a bit. You said that the American content broadcast in the evenings was a source of income. Does that mean that our Canadian or pan-Canadian programs are less profitable?

[Hubert T. Lacroix]

Madam, it is clearly much more expensive for CBC/Radio-Canada or for any other Canadian broadcaster to create an hour of programming, if it happens to be drama, than to buy an hour of programming from the United States. This is at the root of the problems of the Canadian economic model.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

I'll take the rest of Madame Boucher's time.

I just had a quick question, because a couple of times you've alluded to fee-for-carriage. I noted, just before I came down, that there was an article in The Globe and Mail that said that fee-for-carriage, as requested by the broadcasters, amounts to some $352 million, according to the CRTC, which is an awful lot of money. Of course, my concern is that once you go down the road of having a fee, nothing prevents that fee from being more and more, and these subscribers, who are also taxpayers in Canada, are going to have to pay it.

Without any guarantee that this would go to Canadian content--I understand you are advocating that it would be dedicated by the CRTC to specific outcomes--in other words, if it's just going to the broadcasters, or even if they're able to take that out of money they're currently using, aren't we just going to be taking money from ratepayers or subscribers and funnelling it back to Hollywood in a constant bidding war, like the private...?

You're different. You receive a subsidy from taxpayers to provide your services. They are the same people who would have to pay the fee-for-carriage. My concern is that it starts at $352 million, then maybe in a couple of years it's $700 million. And all we're really doing is shovelling more money south of the border for U.S. programming, because that's where they're making money.

Do you share that concern?

[Hubert T. Lacroix]

I don't, sir, for two reasons. First, you're assuming that the public is going to pick up the tab for fee-for-carriage. This is the conversation that's been in front of you for a number of days now, and you've heard from different broadcasters how they would treat the fee-for-carriage impact. Second, I think that if you absolutely insist that there be a link between the fee-for-carriage money and a commitment to local programming or any other area of programming or interest the CRTC thinks the dollars should be invested in, and you make the broadcasters accountable for that, you will not see those dollars going to Hollywood or simply flowing to the bottom line of the broadcasters.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Pablo Rodriguez]

Merci.

Thank you, Mr. Del Mastro.

Thanks, everybody.

Thank you very much, Mr. Lacroix. This was an important meeting. Of course, the debate surrounding Radio-Canada will continue.

[Hubert T. Lacroix]

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Pablo Rodriguez]

Thanks to all of you, and we'll see each other on Wednesday.

The committee is adjourned.