Fair enough.
I want to ask one question on the Quebecor issue. My colleagues have raised it. Certainly we know it's been a bit of a blood feud. You guys fight like dogs for the Quebec market, but hey, that's competition. I think that's great.
I don't really have.... You know, they run almost every newspaper in the country now. As A. J. Liebling said, “Freedom of the press belongs to those rich enough to own one”, and Mr. Péladeau is certainly rich enough to own as many presses as he wants.
My concern is that when I pick up my little local paper, in which we used to have editorialists and we used to have a lot of local content, it's all gone now. We get the same three voices. We have Peter Worthington ranting on about the threat from the Middle East, and a couple of old dinosaurs like that. No offence to Mr. Worthington, but I read him every day, in all the same papers.
But now I'm reading from these little small-town newspapers that the best thing we can do is get rid of the CBC, and I'm thinking, “Why would a small-town paper editorial be writing about getting rid of the CBC? Don't people watch it? Wouldn't you want the content?”
I'm concerned that we have someone who's very hostile to the CBC in terms of Quebecor. Mr. Péladeau has made it clear again and again, and yet he's now in a position where he's got the papers. Quebecor runs the pipes. They want your market.
Do we need some clear ground rules just so that we can set aside personal political agendas from the public interest and make sure that for viewers like me, back home, I will be able to watch my content or read my newspaper and know that it's not being fingerprinted from up high?