Canadian Heritage Committee on May 31st, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Mr. Nantel, I'm sorry. Your time is up.

Now we go to Ms. Dabrusin for the Liberals for seven minutes.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Buongiorno. Mio marito è italiano.

Since my husband is Italian, I know the Italian community is very important. I recognize that.

As you can guess, at our meals, our holiday meals, we have a lot of languages around the table and we go back and forth, so I recognize also the importance of having those languages represented and accessible in our media for the various communities.

I want to thank you because you gave a great overview of the contributions of the Italian community in Canada. We've had a chance to speak to members of the Punjabi press, the Ukrainian press, and ethnic media, and some of the themes that were coming out were about the fact that different ethnic communities were not having their stories well represented in mainstream media. I was wondering, from your perspective of looking at the Italian community, how well Italian-Canadian stories are being represented in mainstream media. Do you have any examples of the types of stories that perhaps mainstream media are missing? Why is it important to have an Italian voice?

[Joseph Volpe]

Thank you very much.

First of all, it's important for one very essential reason, and that is that the Government of Canada is actually playing in the market. It takes money and it distributes money. It conducts programs, whatever the government program, and it informs its citizenry about their efficacy. What happens is that they nurture community and involvement by redistributing some of those taxes in that environment.

Many of us, including us in particular, are excluded from that story. We can't participate in the developing of the story except through an electoral process, but then we can't participate in having any elements of our community represented in the way some of the decisions are made and how they're affected.

For example, you mentioned your husband and the family, which are great elements not just of an Italian community but of a community that's integrated into the Canadian environment and is infusing it with a different character, a diversity—a common term that people use today—that's making up the Canadian home. I just happened to meet one of my former students—I used to be a teacher at one time—and he survived my process and he's now the president of OMERS. That is one of the biggest, most significant investors in Canadian infrastructure anywhere, but the biggest impacts on his life are like those dinners that you talked about and the experiences that are brought into those dinners.

I don't want to make it schmaltzy and diminished, but the man's a genius. He's absorbed all that is Canada and he has his own imprint. That's a story that very few people are telling. We'd like to tell it. He's just one of many, whether he's Italian or from anywhere else. If you come from the GTHA, chances are 53% that you weren't born here, but these are all Canadians whose stories have to be put into the telling of the story of what Canada is, what it represents, and where it's going.

From an economic point of view and a trade point of view, the governments of Canada, irrespective of their stripe, are reaching out all over the world trying to make the Canadian presence felt and to get revenue from a trade that sells the “Made in Canada” product. Well, we're a made-in-Canada product. We tell the stories, the single elements, of that jigsaw puzzle that is Canada. We just want the Government of Canada to recognize that we're there. It's a small contribution.

You've heard the other, bigger players. They say that you're not spending money, and what little you are spending is giving off a message. The message is “Don't advertise in the Canadian market. Advertise with somebody else.”

I notice that Monsieur Nantel mentioned l'affichage. You know, you get the big signs. Where do they put their signs? They go and put them on an American network. They go and do it with an American or a multinational company. They don't do it with a Canadian company. Sooner or later, that Canadian community, small or large, is going to be diminished in its ability to be able to tell the Canadian story.

We're an example. I could give you a litany of achievements of Canadians of Italian background here in all aspects of research, whether it's medical science or technology or whatever, but that's why we exist. It's because people want to hear that story.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

It's interesting, because I have heard it come up time and time again about government ad purchases and how ad purchases have changed or moved around. When we're looking at that, really what we're looking at is different forms of media requiring other supports or finding new funding sources.

When we're talking about government ad buys, I wonder if we're actually having a different conversation about what subsidies are available and if we have to be looking at new kinds of subsidies. Advertising choices are based on advertising. It's a business decision of a sort, perhaps. Is it more that we need to be finding new ways to support communities, not necessarily talking strictly only about ads?

[Joseph Volpe]

The advertising has a consequence of essentially helping the economic viability of the entity that receives the advertising, but government advertising is different from private industry advertising because there isn't a return on investment component associated with government advertising. The return on investment is the information that is disseminated to the public and the absorption of that. It's a different calculus.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Part of the reason I'm asking the question is that I'm wondering when I hear about that—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

You have 30 seconds.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

My question seems to be more.... Is it not that what we need to do is find other ways to provide supports to media and different ways to disseminate our government messages and that focusing on the government ad pie alone might be taking us down the wrong path? That is my concern.

[Joseph Volpe]

I gave four separate indications in my presentation about where the government can be involved. The ad buy is one. It makes a big difference to us. It doesn't make very much difference to some of the big companies, quite frankly. You had one here, and I know the president well, Paul Godfrey. He said he had a $690 million debt. Getting $450,000 or $1 million in government ad revenue isn't going to make a big dent in his debt, but it will make a big difference to organizations like our own, a huge difference.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I will leave you with that thought.

I think we could try to squeeze in two three-minute rounds in the second round.

I will start with Mr. Waugh for the Conservatives, and then I'll go Mr. O'Regan, but I'm going to be really rigid about your three minutes.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

Yes, we'll be quick.

I want to congratulate you, Mr. Audet. This has been a doom and gloom committee the last three months, but I'm looking at how you've embraced change, and that's what has kept your company above everyone else. I want to talk about that, because in media there have always been changes for the last 100 years. Around the table, some of them don't want to change, but I want to say you have changed.

[Louis Audet]

Well, it's not always easy.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

No, it's not. I agree.

[Louis Audet]

Yes, we embrace change, because we believe that if you don't embrace it, then it will short-circuit you and you will disappear.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

Yes.

[Louis Audet]

As soon as new technologies were available, we tried to harness them for the health of the company and for our customers, and we've had some luck along the way. We can't discard that either. It's clear that for more traditional media right now, it's really tough.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

I quickly want to say—because as Madam Chair said, we've only a couple of minutes—that we don't need a big staff in North Bay. You can do it with four or five people. You can that in Prince Albert or do it in Yorkton, and we have never talked about that. In the community television that you brought to North Bay when CTV left, you don't have to up-staff it. You only needed to provide a reasonable service, if I can say that.

[Louis Audet]

That's correct. It can be done inexpensively and with a level of quality that is satisfactory to the community.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

How many would you employ in North Bay, four or five?

[Louis Audet]

I don't even know—myself, and three or four, probably.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

Yes. I think that model across this country works. Unfortunately, big is not necessarily the best for the industry, you might say.

[Louis Audet]

We've been operators of local TV stations. A full-fledged station, as small as it may be, is a heavy operation. It employs at least 25 people, sometimes up to 50, so it's a very expensive undertaking if the advertising is not there, but if it's a three- or four-person affair, then the basic information service can be provided, and we do it through the funds that are earmarked by CRTC for community involvement.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

I would say those communities appreciate that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Well done, Mr. Waugh. That was extremely well done. Thank you.

Now we have Mr. O'Regan.

[Seamus O'Regan, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I just have a small correction on Mr. Volpe's presentation. Giovanni Caboto actually landed in Newfoundland, not in Canada, in the home of the Beothuk people. It doesn't really matter, because Canada had the good fortune of joining Newfoundland back in 1949. You are all very welcome.

I want to get to the point of federal advertising. The federal government follows the people, and one of the things I found in my campaign was the number of people who are on Facebook, who are online, and that is where we want to follow people.

The fastest-growing online market is in seniors. For instance, of those 75 and over, 5% were online in 2000, but 27% were online in 2012. Half of them are on Facebook, which is not a surprise to me, and over a third of them are on every day. On an interesting note, there are more people 75 and up doing online gaming, at about 36%; it's 27% for baby boomers. It is a huge online presence, just among seniors. That is just Facebook alone, when you look at it.

On that note—and considering that the federal government is going to follow where the people are when it comes to its advertising—what is your online presence, and what sort of growth have you seen there?