Evidence of meeting #21 for Canadian Heritage in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was broadcasting.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Marci Ien Liberal Toronto Centre, ON
Thank you so much, Mr. Scott.
I have another question for you. I believe it was in response to my colleague, Monsieur Champoux, that you said French content will remain a priority. Through that lens, with that in mind, how likely is it that there will be no French obligations on, say, Netflix?
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Let me answer that in two ways.
First, I can assure you that there will be no less focus on the production of original French-language content. It forms a critical and important part of our broadcasting system and will continue to do so in the future.
To go back to my answer—and I apologize if it's tiresome—I'm not going to try to predict what it would be, but there will be a number of approaches one could take. As I just mentioned, in certain instances it might be that if you can't produce a particular kind of content, then we're going to take money and give it to someone who can produce that content.
There are a number of ways to attain the end objective, but I'd like to reiterate that the end objective will not change and will not be undermined in terms of a future CRTC regulatory model. Original French-language production will hold pride of place in the system.
Liberal
Marci Ien Liberal Toronto Centre, ON
Bearing in mind that you are a regulator, you've spoken a lot about diversity and the need for diversity in Canadian content. We have heard from several organizations from the community broadcaster base. They are very concerned that they have been left out of this bill. How important is that in your opinion, that community piece? Also, I should say that the community piece often represents the diverse aspects of this country.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
It can and does in many cases, and official language minority communities are an important part. We have a good system in terms of the official language minority community. We meet with them regularly, but that's not really the root of your question.
As to the place in the act, again I'll go back to the act needing to set out the policy objective, and with respect, it should be best left to us to deliver the regulatory regime and to act on the policy direction that will ensure that the system reflects Canada's ethnic diversity and other forms of diversity.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you, Mr. Scott. I'm sorry; I have to cut it there. We are really short on time.
Mr. Champoux, the floor is yours for two and a half minutes.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This will be quick.
Mr. Scott, the call for comments that the CRTC issued on the commercial radio policy framework ends on Monday. But this committee is in the process of conducting a review of the Broadcasting Act.
Is it not your impression that the CRTC's study on commercial radio practices is a little premature and, before beginning such a study, you should have waited until after the parliamentary process with Bill C-10?
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
It's really up to you, members of Parliament, to answer this question, not us.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Still, you have your work plan to manage and quite a few files in progress. How is it that this has priority right now? Couldn't you postpone it until later?
Chief of Consumer, Research and Communications, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
If I may, Mr. Scott, I'd like to make a comment.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Go ahead.
Chief of Consumer, Research and Communications, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Mr. Champoux, these are questions we are constantly asking ourselves. I think the message our chair is trying to send you is that we are lagging behind legislative changes that may occur.
The radio and music industry in Canada, be it English or French, is in trouble. We've decided to proceed with our study, as we have with many of our other key issues. The day before yesterday, we published a notice of consultation on indigenous broadcasting. We're also looking at the renewal of CBC/Radio–Canada's licences, but we can't really talk about that. These are all important issues that we need to continue to work on.
We need to make sure that the framework we're working on right now respects the boundaries we have now. It's clear that your decisions related to the legislative changes proposed in Bill C-10 are going to have a great deal of influence on the next steps in our work. However, we owe it to ourselves to move forward and modernize these environments by making structural changes. When we saw the effects of the pandemic, it was impossible to ignore them. Our work plan had to move forward.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I have a note, Ms. McPherson, that you are graciously handing your time to Mr. Manly. Is that correct?
Liberal
Green
Paul Manly Green Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC
Thank you very much.
I'd like to thank the honourable member for Edmonton Strathcona as well, for sharing her time with me to ask questions.
My questions are around the “CanCon”, or Canadian content, rules. They haven't changed in decades, and we see a different paradigm now, with people producing for these larger platforms.
As we're looking at regulating these platforms, I'm wondering whether the CRTC is examining how we can change CanCon rules and also access to the Canadian media fund and the tangible benefits policy. What are the things the CRTC is examining in terms of these producers, who don't fit the typical broadcast model, working with a traditional broadcast?
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
There are a couple of elements there, but I'll try to answer them in turn quickly.
With the new legislation, if passed by Parliament, we will potentially have to develop or amend the current definitions of Canadian content, and we would look at that. That's separate from, for example, Canadian content for the purposes of CAVCO, like funding issues. Those are different things and not subject to our regulation.
We're responsible for broadcasters, but clearly we need to develop a regulatory definition of Canadian content if we are to require new players and existing licensees to produce something that fits that standard.
Scott Shortliffe Executive Director, Broadcasting, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
May I add something?
Executive Director, Broadcasting, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
The CMF is independent. It has its own board of directors. It has a contribution agreement with the Department of Canadian Heritage.
We say money can be directed to the CMF. We could also direct money to other funds that were created. We do not tell the CMF how it should spend its money, though we are, of course, in touch.
Tangible benefits are very much related to acquisitions and mergers, which in the broadcast field is happening less and less because it has become such a vertically integrated field. Both the CMF and tangible benefits, then, would fall under us, looking at a broader content policy and then going back to the question of how we best achieve our objectives and what that means for how we direct money in the system.
Is there a definitive plan to look at those issues at the moment? No. Are they contextual for how we will achieve our broader policy objectives as we move forward? Absolutely.
Green
Paul Manly Green Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC
I have another quick question. We've seen a real erosion in the funding and access for community television and community radio, and particularly community television, with the cable companies moving their money into programming. They're vertically integrated, so that is perfect for them. They are padding a fund that works for them.
Is there any plan to solidify this community element to ensure we get community voices and diversity of voices in our communities? That part of the broadcast system is so important for local communities.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Understood, and maybe at the root of the question is the decision that was made by the commission some years ago. It allowed cable operators—broadcast distribution undertakings—to divert part of the funding, if they wished, from community programming to local news. It wasn't, as you put it, to their direct benefit. It was to produce local news.
As regulators we have to make difficult choices sometimes, and that was one, between news and community programming.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Thank you, Mr. Scott. We have to end it there.
I want to thank our guests from the CRTC for graciously coming: Mr. Scott, Mr. Hutton, Mr. Shortliffe, Madame Frenette, we thank you for your time.
We're going to try to turn this around quickly, folks, for our next guests, because we have business at the end.
We will suspend for a few minutes.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Welcome back, everyone, to the second part of our witness testimony today. As someone pointed out in the interregnum, we now are embarking on our final witnesses before we commence clause-by-clause.
I want to welcome, from the Canadian Association of Community Television Users and Stations, someone who is no stranger to this committee, Catherine Edwards, executive director. With her is her special guest, the executive director of the Community Radio Fund of Canada, Alex Freedman.
As our second witness, from the Professional Music Publishers' Associations, we have Jérôme Payette, executive director as well.
Both groups get up to five minutes for introductory remarks.
Ms. Edwards, we are going to start with you, for five minutes, please.
