Evidence of meeting #7 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was know.
A recording is available from Parliament.
I Love CBC - Peterborough
Yes, it is a legitimate request. Accountability has to be given a context also, and in point of fact, the CBC does have an exemption clause, and that has to be respected.
Conservative
John Carmichael Conservative Don Valley West, ON
Okay, but you talked about an open and transparent environment, as well, and that they should be prepared to provide information.
I Love CBC - Peterborough
Yes, and as I've said, the commission and the courts can give them the protection they need so that no one is put in danger, so that sources are not endangered.
Conservative
John Carmichael Conservative Don Valley West, ON
Just in the interest of time, I'll move on to Mr. Bernstein, if you don't mind. I don't want to rush you.
Conservative
John Carmichael Conservative Don Valley West, ON
You talked in that answer about a web of empires. How does leadership in any organization where you've got this “web of empires” manage the organization?
As an Individual
I just spent some time last week with the former vice-president of English television for CBC. I asked him about the deterioration of the quality of news at CBC. His answer to me was that he couldn't get through to them. He said there was a cabal running the news. He couldn't get by that wall that they set up, so the kind of news he wanted didn't get done. This is the boss who said he couldn't get through it.
NDP
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
My question is for the two witnesses. You know that the Access to Information Act allows exclusions that, as in the case of the CBC, makes it possible to protect certain documents. We can draw a parallel between these exclusions and those that apply to ministers' offices. The Conservative government has even gone so far as the Supreme Court to protect these documents that are excluded under the Access to Information Act.
Do you think that if we open the CBC's books, we'll also have to make available all the government documents in general?
I would like both witnesses to comment on this.
I Love CBC - Peterborough
So that we can take a look at them, you say. Who's “we” in this? The Information Commissioner has that responsibility. We? No. Parliament? No.
The CBC is not private. It is not owned by a corporation or the government. The legislation has been set up for the protection of the CBC and the protection of the Canadian people with the commission of information.
As an Individual
From my point of view, yes, the government should be open to the same standards as the CBC. I believe that openness and transparency are important right across the board. I don't think you can remove the CBC from the conversation, but I also don't think you can remove the government from the conversation either. They should both be dealt with in exactly the same way.
If the impression I'm getting here is that we should trust the Privacy Commissioner to make those decisions, I believe the government should trust the Privacy Commissioner in the same way it is asking the CBC to trust the Privacy Commissioner.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
My second question is still about the exclusions. Do you find it fair that two competitors—the CBC and a private broadcaster like Quebecor, for example—are not subject to the same standards? In fact, the CBC is required to disclose everything, even things that have to do with journalism and programming.
Of course, one broadcaster is private and the other is public. But do you think it's fair that this is how it is?
As an Individual
I believe it's fair. It's the cost of accepting $1 billion from the Canadian taxpayers. If Quebecor, CTV, or TVA got $1 billion from the Canadian taxpayer, we would be asking them to do exactly the same thing.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
Could you please refresh my memory? I think you said that 35% to 50% of private sector programming is funded by the government. I don't know if I fully understood the start of your presentation.
As an Individual
Yes, that is what I said. It's a grey area. It's an area that makes it a little difficult. I should say, to be fair to private broadcasters who get 35% to 50% of their money for programming from government funding, that money is audited. It's always audited. Interestingly enough, the private broadcasters have to actually pay their own auditors to audit for the government.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
Ms. Denton, I have the same question for you. Do you think it's fair that two competitors are not subject to the same standards of information disclosure?
I Love CBC - Peterborough
One does receive significantly more public money, and public money is precious. I'd make that point.
I think it's an unfortunate situation, unfortunate because of what's happening, because the intent of Sun Media and Quebecor seems to be not just to improve its own situation, but to discredit the CBC. It's a waste. We need good programming and good newspapers. To me, it's a waste of energy to spend your time and your money discrediting the competition when they could be going into something creative and positive.
NDP
The Chair NDP Jean Crowder
Thank you, Ms. Denton.
The time is up. We'll now go to Mrs. Davidson for five minutes.
Conservative
Patricia Davidson Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
Thanks very much, Madam Chair.
Thanks very much to our presenters who are here with us this morning. It has been an interesting discussion.
I want to thank you and commend you for staying on the issue of freedom of information; I think that's what we're here about. Some of us, me included, certainly enjoy CBC and listening to it and think they provide a service that is needed in this country.
Also, though, because they are a crown corporation, they fall under the freedom of information act, which, as you so rightly pointed out, they became subject to in 2007. So it's not something that they have been subject to for a long period of time, and it's the same as it was with other government departments when this act was put in: there was a learning curve. I think the CBC has gone through the same learning curve that most of the other departments have. I know that we are seeing an increase in compliance and an increase in the way the freedom of information requests are being answered, so that's encouraging. I think that's very good.
But the thing I find disturbing is the very fact that the person who is responsible for freedom of information, our commissioner, has been deemed by CBC not to be capable of determining whether or not certain things are subject to section 68.1. I think it's encouraging to hear the remarks from Mr. Bernstein in particular here this morning about his feelings on what the commissioner should be capable of doing. In fact, I feel that she's capable of doing that. She wouldn't be in that position if she were not.
I have a couple of questions following up from my colleague's, though, on your comments about the CBC being “a web of internal empires”. I think what you have said is interesting: that perhaps even the people at the very top may not have a good handle on it or may not have a process in place whereby they can get a good handle on what is happening. Do you think anybody does? Or what do you think needs to change in that operation?
As an Individual
I suspect that if I had the specific answer to that, I'd be running the CBC right now.
As an Individual
This is a problem, as I say, that's taken 75 years to get here.
No, I do not believe anyone has a complete handle on how every dollar is spent at the CBC. I do believe that in much better times fiscally the CBC got in the habit of spending a lot of money.
When I first came to the CBC, I was shocked to find.... I was with CTV before that, and in charge of a budget. If I was 10¢ over the budget, I would be in big trouble. But when I came to CBC, I was told that if you're not 15% overbudget, you're not going to get an increase the next year. That was a bit shocking for me, coming from private broadcasting.
I think a lot of the people who are now in charge of some of those empires I talk about came through that system and were informed by that system. They've learned how to work within that system. They've learned how to hide money. They've learned how to hide funding for their own future enterprises.
I don't know how you break that up. I once asked my boss at the CBC how we could fix this. My boss at that time was one of the best empire builders within the CBC. He said the only way to fix the CBC is to blow it up and start all over again. But he also said we can't do that, because if we blow it up, no one will allow us to start it up all over again.
So you have to weigh both sides--the value of the CBC and the problems internally. I believe, and this is what I'm hoping to get across here, that if CBC did open their books, it would actually help them. They might be able to get at some of the problems that exist within the CBC. Possibly it would give them both the impetus and the knowledge to fix those problems.
Conservative
Patricia Davidson Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
I would say that I agree with that sentiment as well. I think the more secrecy that's involved, the more suppositions are out there in the public. It's very easy to keep those types of theories alive when the true facts are not on the table in front of everyone.