Canadian Heritage Committee on Feb. 14th, 2011

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

I agree.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

At this point, the three witnesses we've invited are not-for-profit entities that have an interest in—

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

So tell me who you're inviting again.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

L'Alliance de la francophonie de Timmins, the Francophone Alliance of Timmins, l'Association canadienne-française de l'Ontario, which is the Association of French Canadians of Ontario, and thirdly, Friends of Canadian Broadcasting.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

There are no substitutions on that. That's who's being invited, and if they don't come, they don't come.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

If that's what you tell me, those are the three witnesses I will invite. But I want to forewarn the committee that it might be a couple of weeks before I can fit it in. Friends of Canadian Broadcasting has informed the committee that it is not able to attend until the first week of March at the earliest.

[An hon. member]

So no private sector.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay, I'll take that direction. Thank you very much.

We'll now move on to the second item on orders of the day, which is committee business. We have two motions in front of us. We'll proceed in the order they were given to me.

We have received a notice of motion from Mr. Angus.

Would you care to read and move your motion?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you.

You asked if Madame Lavallée and I could put the motion together, and we're willing to do that. However, by Friday, I think, I had sent in an amendment, which I'd like to be able to read so we could get this all done in one shot.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Please proceed.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I don't have a problem using the language in Madame Lavallée's motion, but my amendment is about the process for choosing, and that's what I thought we needed to hear about.

It is moved that Tom Pentefountas, the new vice-chairman of broadcasting of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, appear before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage to discuss his vision and his thoughts on the following subjects: global, societal, and economic trends in broadcasting; government policies and their relation to the CRTC; the legislative framework and regulations governing the broadcasting and telecommunications industries in Canada and abroad; and the major issues involved in media convergence.

Further, that the committee call witnesses from the Department of Heritage, Privy Council, and the Prime Minister's Office to explain the criteria used in the vetting of applications, the process for approving the list of candidates, and the timelines for interviews that led to the appointment.

Further, that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage request copies of applications submitted to the CRTC for the position of vice-chairman and the short lists that were prepared for that position.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

As a point of information, I've not received any notice of an order in council appointment with respect to this person, so you're asking me to ask the clerk to look for things that we don't know exist. We've not received any notice of an order in council appointment; I don't know if this has been gazetted or if this in fact has taken place. I've read the news, like the rest of the committee, but we haven't received any notice.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I guess we're in an odd position. Normally we'd read an order in council appointment and then we would be invited to submit.... What we read was a press release put out by the minister announcing his position.

It's an odd process to follow. Normally it would be an order in council, but since they did a press release stating this was the case, I feel we need to at least find out about the process.

We know the Privy Council was involved in the appointment, the Heritage department certainly was involved, and we know the Prime Minister's Office was. I'd like to find out what the process was, how it was done, and what the timelines were.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay. We have a motion on the floor, as read by Mr. Angus.

Mr. Del Mastro now has the floor.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

You know, it's funny. I sit as a parliamentary secretary in the department. Mr. Angus keeps using the term “we know”. I actually don't know any of those things he's alleging about the Prime Minister's Office being somehow involved. He knows how many applications there were, apparently, and who the qualified people were and who they weren't. I don't know any of those things, because they're actually protected. We don't put those things out in the public. I suppose it's for personal privacy and for the protection of that privacy.

First of all, I don't think Mr. Pentefountas would be afraid to appear before this committee. I'm not quite sure what role it plays in his appearance here. But if that were the will of the opposition members, I'm pretty sure he would attend.

Now with respect to a broader witch hunt with respect to how various appointments are made, what processes are followed, or why an NDP member didn't get the position, I'm not quite sure it serves a purpose over the longer term. In fact, I think it sullies the entire appointments process. It also makes it very difficult for the government, in the future, to find qualified applicants to actually put their names forward. They know, in putting their names forward, that they could be subject to a kangaroo court before Parliament and find their names in the newspapers in a fashion they never thought they would be.

Some people run for political office and some people do not. Those who do not, many times, don't want to be in a political process. But they could find themselves in that position if all of the appointment processes we start to undertake become a process whereby you need to expect that you're going to be hauled before Parliament and embarrassed.

Please don't cut me off yet at this point, Mr. Chair. I'm just closing off my comments.

Mr. Chairman, for people who aren't aware of the CRTC process, this vice-chair was a vice-chair from Quebec. It had to be. We therefore accepted applications only from Quebec. At the same time, everyone knows, because we've made this commitment, that the next chairperson of the CRTC will be from Quebec. And that is coming up in less than a year.

I would argue that if this becomes a bit of a dog-and-pony show, we could very well hurt our opportunity to attract good applicants from Quebec for that chairperson position if they are afraid that they're going to be subjected to a kangaroo court of Parliament. I'd encourage members to consider that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Del Mastro.

Mr. Angus, before I go to Madame Lavallée, could you just clarify the last part of the motion you appended to the text?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Yes. I'm just going to bring it back up here. I thought I would have had a....

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

The clerk and analysts didn't get a chance to get it down in its entirety.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

It is that the committee request copies of the application submitted to the CRTC for the position of vice-chairman and the short lists that were prepared for that position.

Again, in the interest of privacy, we don't need to see the names. But I think we should know how many applications came and what the short list was. Mr. Del Mastro says he doesn't know. I don't know. I think it would be good if, once we know what the process is, we can get on about our business. This is what I'm asking for.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

We'll go to Madam Lavallée first, and then to Mrs. Crombie.

Note, members, that we have only five minutes left.

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

I just want to point out briefly that the text of my motion is taken directly from the job description. I didn't make anything up. It says that the candidate must have sound knowledge of the issues listed. It also says that the candidate must be a francophone, not someone from Quebec. That's in the job description.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

Next up is Mr. Rodriguez, followed by Mrs. Crombie.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

This is a delicate, albeit important, subject. However, I would not want us to devote a whole series of meetings to this topic. In my opinion—and I have said so publicly—Mr. Pentefountas is not qualified for this position. We will not need to question him for two hours to bring that fact to light. One hour would be sufficient to hear from this individual. Should we decide to proceed with the other line of questioning, to go in that direction, then we might need another hour.

That said, I will be mindful of the privacy considerations mentioned by Mr. Del Mastro, because we need to respect that. On the one hand, we want information, but on the other hand, we want to protect the identity of those involved and not make the process overly personal.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Merci.

Madame Crombie, please be brief. We only have three minutes left, if you want me to call the vote.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

I just want the opportunity to say that this is in no way a witch hunt. I think there are some very serious issues at stake here, with transparency being the key one. This government was elected on a promise to create an appointments commission and never did strike that commission. So I think it's very important for us to learn about the process.

What is the process for the appointment of candidates? It's vital to us to learn what's encompassed there. What qualifications are necessary? Who qualifies and on what basis? I think it's important for us to understand that before we put someone's name forward.

Televised hearings aren't uncommon in the U.S. We're not asking for that. We're asking to better understand this process.

Thank you.