Evidence of meeting #20 for Canadian Heritage in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cbc.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Sylvin Lacroix  Executive Director, Alliance de la francophonie de Timmins
Caroll Jacques  Director General, Kirkland Lake, Alliance de la francophonie de Timmins
Michael Lithgow  Research Associate, Campaign for Democratic Media
Ian Morrison  Spokesperson, Friends of Canadian Broadcasting
Tara Walker  Executive Director, On Screen Manitoba Inc.
Kim Todd  Chairperson, On Screen Manitoba Inc.
Tom Perlmutter  Government Film Commissioner, National Film Board of Canada
Alex Levasseur  President, Syndicat des communications de Radio-Canada
Chantal Larouche  President, Fédération nationale des communications
Peter Murdoch  Vice-President, Media, Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada
Lise Lareau  National President, Canadian Media Guild
Marc-Philippe Laurin  President, CBC Branch, Canadian Media Guild
Monica Auer  Consultant, Interconnected, Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

Mr. Del Mastro, please.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

To our witnesses, thank you for appearing before us today.

For the benefit of my colleagues here, there were a couple of good things that came out in the releases today. Of course, one thing is that 5% of the CBC's budget is now $56 million, which demonstrates evidence, frankly, Mr. Chair, that the total budget is over $1.1 billion, and I'm glad it's officially out on the record. That's of course what we've been saying for some time.

Secondly, with respect to strategic review, Mr. Chair, I just point out to the entire committee that strategic review is a process undertaken by all departments in all parts of the government. Of course, the strategic review purpose is to indicate those processes, those operations of the department that are the 5% least efficient. It is not about cuts, and any reference to that is completely false. It's about value for taxpayers and it's about being effective in spending taxpayers' money.

Now, perhaps people on that side of the table aren't concerned with that, Mr. Chair. I can assure you people on the government side, people on this side of the table, are very concerned in being effective and efficient with taxpayers' dollars. That's what strategic review is about.

There is no inconsistency in what the minister said. He has promised more than $1.1 billion in funding for the CBC, and that's what they will get.

Now, with that clear, Mr. Chair, I'd like to move on to Mr. Lithgow.

I thought you made a couple of very good suggestions, Mr. Lithgow. First of all, you said our broadcasting system is one of the least diverse in the world. You talked about revenue streams at local television stations depending on national advertisements. I'm not sure if you saw them, but we had the Jim Pattison Group giving a presentation here. We had Corus giving a presentation on local television stations that are truly local, that are actually running advertising campaigns in their local areas. They're not being fed very expensive national programming and so forth, and they're actually doing pretty well. We have also seen a couple of stations that apparently can't work being picked up by a company that, frankly, would have no interest in picking up losing affiliates.

I'm interested in asking you this. You said the affiliated system is failing, not local television, and we've had a couple of witnesses from Corus and Pattison Group come in and indicate just that. They actually feel that local television does work. Can you clarify that for us a little bit? What do you mean by affiliated television and local television, and what is the difference between them?

4:35 p.m.

Research Associate, Campaign for Democratic Media

Michael Lithgow

Our sense is that there's a disconnect regarding the concerns and priorities between a media organization, a small broadcaster that is actually locally owned, that exists primarily to provide information services in a local context, and an affiliated station that is caught up in a web of complicated financial arrangements that really have nothing to do with the local markets.

It's nice to hear that there are people focusing on local advertising markets. I think that's a step in the right direction, but generally speaking, the local modus operandi really has to do with connecting national advertisers with eyeballs rather than with a priority of servicing communities. I think one of the key pieces here is the idea of an L3C. It functions as a self-sustaining economic organization that provides local programming, but it doesn't have the kinds of shareholder or debt demands that you find in a purely private sector. There isn't a multiple bottom line. So it just gives them more freedom to work in a smaller market and to sustain for a longer period.

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON

Thank you.

Mr. Morrison, you spent the majority of your presentation talking about people receiving over-the-air broadcasting. I have some interest in that. Now, on the numbers that you've given, are those just the numbers of people who aren't subscribing to cable or satellite? Or are those actual, confirmed numbers of people who are watching television over the air?

4:40 p.m.

Spokesperson, Friends of Canadian Broadcasting

Ian Morrison

It is the latter, and the survey by Canadian Media Research was based on a sample of 1,500 Canadians drawn from those who did not have satellite or cable service. As you may know, Mr. Del Mastro, those people constitute about 9% to 10% of the population.

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON

You're right. We are aware that 9% of households don't subscribe either to satellite or to cable TV. We just don't know if they're watching television or not, largely.

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

Okay, your time is up. Your five minutes are up.

We now go to Ms. Fry, please.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Hedy Fry Liberal Vancouver Centre, BC

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I just want to go back to what this is all about. It's about the evolution of the television industry in Canada and its impact on local communities. I think the big question here is, and has always been, that local communities are no longer having access to programming. I don't know if Mr. Morrison remembers that I did ask the minister that the last time, using Kamloops as an example, which is not a tiny community at all. I think the minister basically didn't answer my question. I think he just flubbed it off, saying that if Kamloops cannot get broadcasting, Kamloops has a problem, and that's the end of it.

The question here about local communities, which was well said, is that local communities need to get local news. However, when we talk about CBC in this issue, CBC has a direct mandate to be able to represent regions of Canada to each other. The mandate of CBC to get into small communities is also as pertinent as small local programming, local television stations, radio stations. So we agree that CBC has a huge role to play in meeting the needs of local communities.

Now, we've also heard from everyone that CBC is in dire need of funding because its transmitters are going down, its ability to broadcast in small communities is being affected. Therefore, as you well know—and I think I definitely remember Mr. Morrison being at our CBC review—when we were looking at CBC, we spent a long time, and we came up with a very good report that suggested CBC was in need of more funding, as Mr. Morrison said.

The bottom line here is this. If CBC is in need of more—not less, not status quo—funding, and if CBC doesn't get that funding, does any one of you have an idea what will happen with regard to local programming that comes from a national level, that represents region to region, so that small regions can understand each other? Can anybody tell me what would happen if we leave CBC at the status quo?

4:40 p.m.

Executive Director, Alliance de la francophonie de Timmins

Sylvin Lacroix

A round of cuts was made last month—not to Toronto, Vancouver or Montreal, but to northern Ontario and the regions. In northern Ontario, the English staff was decimated this year and the French staff was decimated last year. It is obvious that if funds are not redistributed and that if, in terms of policy, priority is not given to local media, that whole aspect will disappear. Under those conditions, the CBC will no longer be able to fulfill its role of talking to the people who live from one end of the country to the other. It is becoming increasingly difficult. In northern Ontario, we are beginning to wonder if we want to have a role with respect to the CBC.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

Hedy Fry Liberal Vancouver Centre, BC

Mr. Morrison, do you have any comment to add?

4:40 p.m.

Spokesperson, Friends of Canadian Broadcasting

Ian Morrison

Of course the management of the CBC needs to be at arm's length from government decision-making; otherwise it would be a state broadcaster. But that doesn't mean we cannot criticize some of their decisions, and faced with the regrettable situation of the cuts that were made a month ago, one of their managers said that what they would do is identify the cost to reach a given individual, and where those costs were higher, they would make more cuts. If you think about that for a minute, it means wherever you have a huge community like Toronto, you have a huge denominator, and therefore the cost per individual is going to be lower. So whoever made that decision inside the CBC was automatically discriminating against Timmins, James Bay, Kamloops, and Newfoundland.

So that is not something that should have happened, but I think you have to look at it in the context that, as your committee established a year ago through careful study, the corporation needs more money to do its job. I have submitted to you today that public opinion is supportive of that—not just supportive, but very supportive: 26% of Canadians were opposed to your recommendation, 20% thought your recommendation was too low, and 54% supported it. That's pretty strong.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Hedy Fry Liberal Vancouver Centre, BC

Thank you very much.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

We're going to move on to Ms. Lavallée, please.

4:45 p.m.

Bloc

Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC

Thank you very much.

Mr. Lacroix, earlier you said that the Canadian government could help broadcasters purchase advertising. Are you not afraid that this could backfire? The former government bought advertising, allegedly to help out certain festivals. As you know, it turned into propaganda and the sponsorship scandal ensued.

I am not prepared to support such a measure. Although the Canadian government is helping GM by providing subsidies, lines of credit and tax measures, it does not intend to purchase its automobiles. If it wants to help broadcasters and the CBC, would it not be better to provide direct assistance rather than spreading propaganda in all television media?

4:45 p.m.

Executive Director, Alliance de la francophonie de Timmins

Sylvin Lacroix

We made two recommendations: with one—and we are somewhat more generous than the committee was last year—we would like the per capita contribution to the CBC to be set at $50 rather than $40.

We know that millions and millions of dollars are spent on advertising by the federal government for all sorts of good and not so good reasons. I think we all agree on that. In our opinion, without creating a new program, there should be a means of ensuring that this money is distributed equally to large and small markets. That is the thrust of the recommendation.

4:45 p.m.

Bloc

Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC

It is true that hundreds of millions of dollars are spent on advertising by the Canadian government. And yet, do you not believe that the officials who manage these promotional campaigns do so based on their needs? If we insisted that they purchase television advertising would this not create, once again, a situation such as the one that resulted in the sponsorship scandal?

4:45 p.m.

Executive Director, Alliance de la francophonie de Timmins

Sylvin Lacroix

What I am saying is that, one way or the other, when money is spent, it could always result in a sponsorship scandal or a scandal of one sort or another. We know that. However, we are saying that the large sums of money currently being spent could be better spent.

4:45 p.m.

Bloc

Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC

At present, GM is on the verge of bankruptcy and all the ministers drive around in Toyotas.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON

On a point of order, could we please have anything to do with facts at this committee? That is factually incorrect.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

I know it is, and I was going to correct it. I would think that you should check a little more closely, Ms. Lavallée.

Carry on, please, and be factual.

4:45 p.m.

Bloc

Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC

I will prove my claim and submit the list of automobiles.

That was not the point I was arguing. It was more of a joke. But since they are taking it the wrong way—

I am shaking my head, I have lost my train of thought.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

You have one minute left. It took some time.

4:45 p.m.

Bloc

Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC

Mr. Morrison, you have a fairly broad perspective of broadcasting in Canada. Have you noted that there are two types of problems, with respect to Quebec and the rest of Canada, and that this requires two types of solutions?

May 11th, 2009 / 4:50 p.m.

Spokesperson, Friends of Canadian Broadcasting

Ian Morrison

The English and the French audiovisual systems are very different. As you know, the popularity of programs in the French language, and particularly inside Quebec, is immense. It's quite possible to get a substantial portion of the population of Quebec watching one signal at one time. That does not usually exist in English-speaking Canada, except for the most popular Hollywood programs. So the two are very different.

I think the broadcasting policy has recognized that over the years. The CRTC is exceptionally sensitive towards the needs of the francophone community, and as you know, the budgets of organizations like SRC and CBC are not chopped on a population basis but in order to provide some equilibrium. So Canada has been a flexible country in the last 50 to 60 years with respect to the differing needs of the two systems.

The group I represent is preoccupied with the English-language side, which of course is continually washed with satellite rain from the United States of America.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Gary Schellenberger

Okay, thank you.