Vertical integration did not cause but can solve these problems, partly because production and distribution companies are merging and partly because these mergers create benefits for Canadian broadcasting.
As you may know, the CRTC requires benefits from ownership changes. Tables 3 and 4 show that since 2000 these benefits have generated $878 million in new programs and R and D, of which less than 1% went to accessibility initiatives. This is because today's Broadcasting Act makes accessibility sound optional. It says that broadcasting should be accessible, but only as resources are available for that purpose.
For Access 2020 Coalition and the courts, though, accessibility is a legal right. We therefore have five recommendations. Our first involves standards. Convergence allows content to be shared across distribution platforms, but accessibility requires harmonized technical standards across platforms. The CRTC asked broadcasters for new standards on captioning and described program listings, but has not asked for described video production or presentation standards. It has declined invitations to the only group that is focused on those standards--launched, incidentally, by volunteers from the accessibility community. The CRTC's approach has created silos where Canada needs convergence and has shifted the cost of developing described video standards to the disability community. This is like asking people in wheelchairs to pay for designing wheelchair accessible buildings.
Access 2020 therefore recommends that your study tell the CRTC to empower our coalition to develop the harmonized, bilingual, and digital standards that we need in consultation with producers, broadcast engineers, researchers, and distributors.
Second, broadcasters need targets to give direction and to reduce their costs. As table 5 shows, when the CRTC finally required 100% captioning in 2007, its costs fell. The CRTC will be renewing most TV licences next year. Access 2020 asks your study to tell the CRTC to set 100% accessibility as a clear target in next year's renewals by requiring all TV content to be captured and described with low error rates within ten years.
Third, we need to measure progress. The CRTC now relies on complaints to identify accessibility problems, but this shifts responsibility for enforcement to blind and deaf Canadians, where our real goal should be measurable progress to 100% access. Access 2020 asks that your study tell the CRTC that the quantity and the quality of accessible broadcast content must be monitored systemically every year.
Fourth, we need enforcement. When broadcasters don't meet accessibility requirements, the CRTC sympathizes with the broadcasters and does little else. Access 2020 therefore recommends that you tell the CRTC to enforce accessibility requirements with regulations, not easily changed conditions of licence.
Our last recommendation explains how to fund these goals. Access 2020 asks that your study recommend to the CRTC that it direct 1% of the value of TV ownership transactions for the next five years to system-wide initiatives led by the 2020 coalition in consultation with broadcasters: 1% of a transaction's value to achieve 100% accessibility by 2020.
To conclude, with your guidance, vertical integration can benefit Canadians by making TV fully accessible, and the CRTC can work with, not against, the organizations that represent millions of Canadians with disabilities.
Our coalition thanks you for your important study and your questions.