Canadian Heritage Committee on Oct. 20th, 2016

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

We got elected. We want to institute it democratically. We want to institute a comprehensive review. I would have thought that perhaps some respect would be shown to that wish.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you. Your time's up.

I wonder if I could ask Mr. Blais if he would stay an extra two minutes.

Okay? Thank you, Mr. Blais.

We will go to Mr. Maguire for the Conservatives.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Thanks, Madam Chair. That shortens things up considerably.

Thank you, Mr. Blais, for being here today.

You made a comment that digital platforms offer quick and easy communication. With people not even signing up for cable or that sort of thing anymore, how do you intend to regulate the digital industry?

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

It's a complicated answer to what seems to be an easy question.

On telecommunications, the access to broadband networks is a form of regulation we do, and for which we have a proceeding pending. I'll give you a short answer—it's called “Let's #TalkBroadband Internet”. That's pending. We haven't decided anything yet. One of the issues there is to ensure that all Canadians wherever they live have access to decent connectivity, because we know and we have stated that broadband is vital to all aspects of life.

On the broadcasting side, the act says that if we think that a particular broadcasting activity can not necessarily contribute directly to the objectives of the Broadcasting Act that Parliament, which you represent, has said is our marching orders, we have a duty under the act—subsection 9(4), I think—to exempt it. That's what we've done in adopting digital media exemption order for a number of years. We've reviewed it on a number of occasions. That's why, despite the fact that something like illico.tv or Tou.tv is clearly broadcasting, we've said that they do not have to hold a broadcasting licence like traditional broadcasters.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

How do you see the future of the CRTC under that new realm? People aren't signing up for TV stations, cable, and that sort of thing. Is it as necessary as it used to be? You made the comment that kids aren't talking on phones anymore. They're texting. They're getting the news through other means. I know that they may not have the expertise in those areas, but how does that impact us?

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

I realize that a lot of people equate the CRTC with broadcasting. Our mandate is actually a lot more complicated than that. Of the $63 billion generated by the communication industry, two-thirds relates to telecommunications, and broadcasting is a small part of that. We're still quite active in making sure that we have more connectivity and fair prices for Canadians on the telecommunications side. That includes the wireless side, not just the landline side.

We're very active as well on radio, because there are still frequencies. There are limited spectrums. Sometimes we have to decide whether to grant licences to one group or another. There's a role to play there.

We also have a growing role in what we call the protect pillar. Unsolicited communications can be annoying and sometimes quite damaging, whether it's people phoning you while you're having dinner to sell you something when you're on the do-not-call list or unsolicited spam that often contains malware. We're involved in that.

Of course, as every member of Parliament knows, we now are also responsible in the Elections Act for robocalling during electoral periods under the voter contact registry.

Under our mandate, there's plenty of work to do. We're certainly not twiddling our thumbs as the industry changes. In fact, there's more work for us because we're dealing with that change.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Vandal, for the Liberals, you have three minutes, please.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good morning, Mr. Blais.

I believe one of the great success stories of Canadian broadcasting in the last 15 years is indigenous broadcasting, APTN. Maybe it's because I'm based in Winnipeg. They offer close to 100 indigenous independent producers in three different streams, including in the remote north. They are linked up with the world indigenous broadcasting network. They are a great benefactor of paragraph 9(1)(h), which has been supportive of many excellent public broadcasters, but the reality is, according to a report I have or some notes I have, paragraph 9(1)(h) is a fee on BDUs. Close to 200,000 Canadians have cancelled their television, cable, or satellite service since 2015, which will greatly impact the revenues of a network like APTN and many more. It will impact local access, in some cases, to indigenous language broadcasting.

I'm wondering if CRTC has given some thought to that. Will you assure Canadians that valuable indigenous programming and indigenous language programming will remain viable and well funded into the future?

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

Thank you for that excellent question.

I feel a bit of paternity for APTN because I was general counsel at the CRTC when I came up with the idea that we could use paragraph 9(1)(h) to give birth to APTN, because before then paragraph 9(1)(h) was not being used. It was just an article in the statute, which then allowed the financing that created APTN and others that don't normally make it as well because they are more niche but are still important to citizenship in this country, like people with other kinds of disabilities—hearing and so forth.

With respect to APTN, I'm tremendously proud that I was part of its creation from a regulatory perspective.

You're correct. As people completely disconnect from cable or satellite, there is a revenue threat potentially to APTN, but as you know, when we defined the entry-level basic package, it was a compulsory part of the basic service, so even though some may go to the “skinny basic” package, they will still be contributing to APTN. Maybe somebody who is slimming their cable package can make that decision because it makes sense for their particular household. They will continue to contribute to the great programming APTN has, including some really high-quality investigative journalism that very few other news outlets have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much. That's very well done, Mr. Nantel and Mr. Blais.

Monsieur Breton, you have three minutes, please.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

Good morning, Mr. Blais. Thank you for being here today.

I am going to start with my questions directly, because we do not have much time.

Next November 22, you will be starting your licence renewal hearings for the major English-language and French-language concerns. I will not name them; we all know who they are. I have two questions about that.

First, in your opinion, how important in the long term is local news production for the survival of the telecommunications industry?

Second, what does the CRTC intend to do to remind those large concerns about their responsibilities in local broadcasting?

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

Okay, I will give you very quick answers.

The process that leads up to the consultations in November has already started. It starts in written form. We develop a file for the public and people can comment, including the members of your committee. If you want to take part in one of our public hearings, you are welcome. A number of your colleagues have already done so, on the future of Internet connectivity.

We have decided on a public policy framework, which I summarized in my opening presentation. We are going to have a conversation with each of the licence holders to verify what they are going to do in the light of that framework. As I said right at the beginning, I have a duty of deference. So I cannot talk to you in detail about the final decision or the nature of our discussions. However, the matter you raise will be dealt with during the part of the public hearings set aside for oral presentations.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

That's fine.

Regarding the local and community television policy, you mentioned that you are going to do more monitoring of community channels to ensure that they comply with regulatory requirements.

What form will this monitoring take? Can you explain it in more detail?

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

We do a cyclical audit, with a risk analysis, somewhat as we do for all of the licensees who have obligations. We check to see whether they are compliant with the regulations.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

So the community channels do not submit any reports.

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

They have to submit a financial report on their expenses, because they have obligations.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

You say that you do an audit. Do you perform random checks on just some of them, or do you check all of them?

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

I'll give you an example. All of the cable distributors have to allocate a certain percentage of their gross revenue to local content. We verify whether they have really allocated the required amount. It's a financial issue.

Of course, we can always receive complaints. We receive some from third parties, for instance from members of the community, and we process them. In such cases, we investigate.

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you, Mr. Blais.

Mr. Nantel is next.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Blais, if the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage had done a study in which consumers had said that they had had more than enough of paying too much for cable, they would have been happy to know that the previous Conservative government had taken note of their complaints and included in its last throne speech a commitment to a basic package. That is how the demand was addressed and that is how the government responded to it.

We are the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. It is not our role to speak on behalf of consumers; our mandate is rather to discuss culture and Canadian heritage.

With that in mind, we have heard representations from local media who told us that things no longer made any sense, that their backs were against the wall, that the system is deficient, and that something had to be done.

If television producers came to the committee to tell us that Canadian content on Netflix is minimal—and we can see that—they too would ask us to do something.

So, how do you perceive the government's intent to modernize a law you have been managing for 25 years, a law that goes back to 1991? What is your perception of what the population is asking the government to do?

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

The Broadcasting Act is under your purview. I understand that the government is going to have to launch a process. I am not aware of the minister's intentions. We are still holding consultations to hear what Canadians have to say.

For our part, we have launched a process on the reform of the television system. I announced it in Banff in 2013, long before the throne speech you referred to. To be clear, the former government was talking about consumers. I am not only talking about consumers; I am also talking about Canadians, because sometimes they are citizens, sometimes they are consumers, and sometimes they are creators. So what I am talking about is more nuanced. In my opinion, when it comes to local news, citizens are king.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

You are right.

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

I have always spoken about local news from the perspective of citizens. We have to ensure that Canadian citizens are well informed about what is happening in their neighbourhood, their province, their country and the world. I approach the matter from that angle.

However, your committee could perhaps make some recommendations. At the CRTC, our role is to achieve the policy objectives and decisions established in the Broadcasting Act, the Telecommunications Act, Canada's Anti-Spam Legislation, the Canada Elections Act, and the Bell Canada Act. There are several of them.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you.