Canadian Heritage Committee on March 21st, 2011

[Royal Galipeau, Conservative, Ottawa—Orléans, ON]

We have not cut the CBC's budget and we have no intention of doing that.

[Jean-Claude Carrière]

Thank you.

[Royal Galipeau, Conservative, Ottawa—Orléans, ON]

Now, the CBC, with the budget it has, which is really quite substantial, will have to manage to notice that the 7,500 francophones who live in your region are just as important as the 7,500 francophones who live in Plateau Mont-Royal.

Thank you.

[Jean-Claude Carrière]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Galipeau.

We are going to stop there. Thank you for your testimony.

[Jean-Claude Carrière]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

We are going to suspend for five minutes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Welcome to the continuation of the 47th meeting of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. We're here to study the mandate and funding of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation under Standing Order 108(2).

In front of us today, on our second panel, we have Mr. Ian Morrison, spokesperson for the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting.

You may begin with an opening statement.

[Ian Morrison, Spokesperson, Friends of Canadian Broadcasting]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

The last time I was at a parliamentary committee it was your committee. It was just another committee.

Mr. Chair and members of the Committee, thanks for inviting Friends of Canadian Broadcasting to appear today.

Friends of Canadian Broadcasting is an independent watchdog for Canadian programming on radio, television, and new media. We're supported by 150,000 Canadians. Friends is not affiliated with any broadcaster or political party.

You are studying the mandate and funding of the CBC, a subject dear to Canadians' hearts. Since early in the 1990s, Friends has periodically commissioned public opinion research on broadcasting issues. You can find it in the resources section of our website, friends.ca.

I want to take a moment to summarize a recent survey we commissioned from Pollara on Canadian attitudes and expectations towards public broadcasting: 88% of Canadians believe that as Canada's economic ties with the U.S. increase, it's becoming more important to strengthen Canadian culture and identity; 78% tune in to some form of CBC programming each week; 81% believe that the CBC is one of the things that helps distinguish Canada from the United States; and 74% would like to see CBC strengthened in their part of Canada.

Finally, here is a question that might interest a group of parliamentarians: “Assume for a moment that your federal MP asked for your advice about an upcoming vote in the House of Commons on what to do about CBC funding. Which of the following three options would you advise him or her to vote for? Decrease funding, maintain funding at current levels, increase funding?” The data were: 9%, decrease; 31%, maintain; and 47%, increase. There's a message here: CBC is popular with Canadians of all political persuasions.

Friends has appeared before this committee on several occasions to underline our strong support for the CBC's mandate, as expressed in section 3 of the Broadcasting Act. In our view, a key point is the large gap between Parliament's intentions and what CBC actually delivers daily to Canadians, particularly the mandate to reflect Canada and its regions to national and regional audiences, while serving the special needs of those regions. Also making up this gap is the English television network's failure to be predominantly and distinctively Canadian, especially in prime time.

This committee has been a source of valuable and comprehensive information about public broadcasting. For example, there is the graphic on page 178 of the Lincoln report comparing public investment in public broadcasting in western democracies as a share of GDP. These data show that CBC funding is near the basement, like the Ottawa Senators, with only Portugal, Poland, New Zealand, and the United States investing less than Canada in public broadcasting. So there's a disconnect between public sentiment and government investment, and this disconnect has become more severe in recent years.

Friends routinely tracks CBC's parliamentary grant, factored for inflation, in order to identify changes in CBC's purchasing power. On friends.ca, we have graphed these data over the past 21 years. Under each of the Mulroney, Chrétien, Martin, and Harper governments, CBC has lost financial capacity. Canadians can hear and see this gap every day. Regional programming is weaker and its reach is declining. More foreign content is televised in prime time, and repetition of programs is increasing. Ten years ago in prime time, CBC's English television network broadcast 27 hours of Canadian programs and only one hour of foreign programs each week. Last year, seven hours of foreign programs appeared in prime time, 25% of CBC's prime time schedule. I want to explain: that's seven to 11, times seven days a week. This comes after a recommendation from your committee that CBC television should be 100% Canadian in prime time. Each of you will probably have your own anecdotes on the results of underfunding.

Earlier this year, New Brunswick residents learned that CBC proposed to end over-the-air television transmission in Moncton and Saint John next September, leading to a storm of protest at the CRTC.

A few years ago, residents of the Comox Valley lost their over-the-air CBC television signal after an antenna fire, and it has not been replaced.

CBC seems to be backing out of affiliate agreements in several communities, including Peterborough and Kingston. Examples abound of parts of the country that are denied CBC services, all because of the shortage of money.

Friends welcomes this committee's recent recommendation that “CBC/Radio-Canada's core funding be increased to an amount equivalent to at least $40 per capita.” This would be a good first step in addressing the funding gap, raising Canada's per capita support for its national public broadcaster to half the OECD average.

Your recommendation is popular with Canadians. Pollara found that 54% of Canadians support this committee's recommendation that CBC funding be raised to $40 per Canadian; 20% of Canadians believe that your $40 recommendation is too low; and the balance, 26% of Canadians, believe that your recommendation is too high.

In our watchdog role, we keep close track of politicians' statements about broadcasting and cultural sovereignty. Our website is full of examples from years gone by—Liberal years—but today I want to focus on the current government.

Prime Minister Harper came up strongly on our radar when, as opposition leader in May 2004, he said, and I'm quoting literally:

I've suggested that government subsidies in support of CBC's services should be to those things that...do not have commercial alternatives.

He then added:

...when you look at things like main English-language television and probably to a lesser degree Radio Two, you could look there at putting those on a commercial basis.

In seeming contradiction, a few months later Harper said:

...we would seek to reduce the CBC's dependence on advertising revenue and its competition with the private sector for these valuable dollars, especially for non-sports programming.

In office, the Prime Minister has gone silent on this file, at least in public.

But troubling signs have emerged from Conservative Party fundraising letters, where public broadcasting has been featured. For example in September 2008, on the eve of the general election, Doug Finley, writing as the campaign director of the Conservative Party, sent donors a 2008 national critical issues survey, and promised, “I will personally share the overall results and any comments with the Prime Minister.”

Question 5 read: “The CBC costs taxpayers over $1.1 billion per year. Do you think this is: a good use of taxpayer dollars; a bad use of taxpayer dollars”.

This context might help you understand our concern when we read the transcript of your November 23 meeting, with the following question from Mr. Del Mastro to a Corus executive, and I'm quoting from a part of the question. The question is about 300 words long.

...maybe it's time we get out of the broadcasting business and get into investing more money in content?

And:

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. The $1.1 billion, plus a whole bunch of other stuff that we're investing into the public broadcaster: should we look at reorganizing that in some fashion so we could put more money into content?

Getting out of the broadcasting business—do you want me to stop, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

No, I'm just giving you a signal to wind up.

[Ian Morrison]

I have about one and a half minutes to go. Will you let me do it?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Make it shorter than that.

[Ian Morrison]

Okay. I'm going to have to cut a quote from the late Dalton Camp.

Getting out of the broadcasting business sounds a lot like killing CBC Radio, CBC Television, CBC News Network, cbc.ca, and their French language counterparts. This disturbing comment was coming from the mouth of a parliamentary secretary who has a seat at the table beside the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

We also noted that twice in question period Minister Moore was invited to dissociate himself from Mr. Del Mastro's comments and he failed to do so.

As you know, last month.... I'll forget about Jason Kenney saying what he said.

Eighty years ago, a Conservative Prime Minister introduced public broadcasting to Canada. I would like to conclude by quoting another prominent Conservative, the late Dalton Camp:

Owning one national communication facility, such as the CBC, which owes nothing to Mitsubishi or General Dynamics or Krupp, is surely worth keeping. What we know about the CBC, in a world in which economics is power and so much power is out of our hands, is that the CBC would never wilfully betray our national interest or sell off our Canadian heritage. And we are its only shareholders.

When you hear people talk about reducing the role of the CBC, or selling off its assets, look closely at who's talking—it won't be a voice speaking for the people of Canada, but for the shareholders of another kind of corporation.

Merci, monsieur le président.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you very much, Mr. Morrison.

We'll have about 40 minutes of questions and comments, beginning with Mr. Rodriguez.

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

Thank you, Chair.

First of all, thank you for being here, Mr. Morrison.

You quoted many documents. Can you table those documents for all members of the committee?

[Ian Morrison]

It will be necessary for the clerk to have them translated.

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

They will translate them, and we will get them eventually.

What's the biggest threat to CBC/Radio-Canada now or in the near future?

[Ian Morrison]

We think there are two really big problems. One of them I had time to refer to in my brief remarks, and that is the gap between its mandate and its resources. The evidence of CBC dealing with that gap is visible for all to see.

But I'll take a moment to refer to the other problem with the CBC, and that is a problem that goes back to the beginning. The president and the board of directors of the CBC are appointed by political patronage. This has yielded some good and some bad appointments. The problem is that on average, the person who is in charge of the CBC is not a person who is experienced in broadcasting.

The current president, for example, is, as you know--he's been here--a very affable and professional person with legal experience in mergers and acquisitions law. He's never run a company. He's never run a broadcasting company. He has no experience with radio or television, marketing, production, or anything else.

We think the board of directors of the CBC--and by the way, this has been covered in past reports of this committee--should be chosen from among the best and brightest Canadians, and we believe that the board of directors should have the power to hire and fire the president. We believe this accountability is lacking right now, effectively.

I remember when Mr. Angus asked Mr. Rabinovitch once, when he was here, who Mr. Rabinovitch considered to be his boss. It took Mr. Rabinovitch a few seconds before he said that it was the people of Canada and this committee. To my amusement, Mr. Angus said, “You mean I'm your boss.”

The CBC president is not accountable to anyone.

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

Okay, and thank you, Mr. Morrison.

I agree with the fact that we should get the best people on the board. But I have to say that I've been working with Mr. Lacroix for a while now, and I think he's doing a very good job, personally.

That being said,

the government often says that it is investing more than ever in the CBC/Radio-Canada. You have heard a little about that. From what I understand from your presentation, that is simply not the case. In fact, in real dollars, there has been a decline in the budget actually available to the CBC for programming, for content and production. It is receiving less today than it received...

[Ian Morrison]

As you know, Mr. Rodriguez, when you measure dollars over time, you have to factor in inflation. In the case of Canada, it is the consumer price index. You can get it from the Bank of Canada website. When you want to compare the main estimates, tabled a couple of weeks ago, of $1.074 billion, with the main estimates of 10 years ago or 20 years ago, you have to factor in the value of inflation. Essentially, the purchasing power of the federal grant to the CBC since the 1990s has gone down something in the range of 50%.

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

So the CBC is less rich today than it was one or two years ago and we could go back in time.

[Ian Morrison]

As I said in my remarks, that applies to the Mulroney years, the Chrétien years, the Martin years, and the--

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

Today, the CBC/Radio-Canada has less money. So it is not true to say that it has more. In real dollars, it has less money.

I think another important aspect is to make sure that the CBC also has predictable, long-term funding. One of the difficulties we have often discussed with people from the CBC is the problem of being able to predict how things are going to go, when they don't know whether they will have the same budget or they will have $60 million more for programming. They have to reserve studios, sign contracts, and so on.

What we believe in and what we want to offer the CBC is stable, long-term funding, which should help in the planning process.

Do you think the $60 million that is renewed every year, and we are still waiting for the government's answer, should be included in the main estimates?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Rodriguez.

Mr. Morrison, go ahead.

[Ian Morrison]

How about a one-word answer: yes.