Evidence of meeting #9 for Official Languages in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was radio-canada.
Executive Vice-President, French Services, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
I can assure you that I take these criticisms and questions you've raised very seriously. Indeed, when people criticize a public service, I realize that it's because they like it and want more of it. and of course, I can't be against that. In any case, I am very aware of the fact that part of our responsibility is to hear these concerns, because our mission is to serve the public.
Thank you for raising them with us.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Just to show you how reasonable I am, I won't ask any more questions. I will give my remaining time to this gentleman over here.
Liberal
Raymond Simard Liberal Saint Boniface, MB
In Manitoba, it was decided to cancel the television sportscasts. But the fact is that there are francophones there that like sports, just like other people do. Now they have to watch English channels. Is that something you will look at as part of your repositioning, Mr. Lalande?
General Manager for the Regions, French Services, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
Yes. We are in the process of reorganizing everything related to sports. I find that very positive. Indeed, at Sylvain's instigation, we have decided to restore the sports service and to use it to redefine Radio-Canada's sports mission as a whole. As Sylvain likes to say, we are going to develop a sports strategy that will ensure that everyone can talk about sport, because it's important for Canadians. We have just announced that. I very much hope that there will be improvements.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Guy Lauzon
Thank you very much, Mr. Lalande, Mr. Lafrance and Ms. Leblanc, for those very interesting answers to our questions.
And I want to thank Committee members for asking such interesting questions.
We will take a two-minute break.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Guy Lauzon
We are ready to resume.
Mr. Rodriguez would like to table a notice of motion.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This motion relates to our meeting last week, when we were very pleased to meet with the representatives of minority community radio stations. They clearly explained that they are operating with very little funding, and often, despite their lack of funding. Nothing currently requires or encourages the Government of Canada to place ads on community radio stations. It does so from time to time, but it can also decide not to do that. There is no minimum or rule in place in that regard.
And that situation applies not only to minority community radio stations, but to non-profit radio stations as well. These stations really need support. They are doing exceptional work, often with little or no resources, thanks to dedicated volunteers. These media organizations play a very important role in terms of extending the influence of French outside Quebec.
I believe it is important to support them. I asked them whether this motion could be helpful to them, and they said that it most certainly would.
I believe the Bloc Québécois would like to amend the motion, and I fully understand why. The Bloc Québécois would like the government to set aside this amount of money every year, starting this year.
Liberal
Bloc
Vivian Barbot Bloc Papineau, QC
I can read the motion. It is to insert, after the words “reserve”...
Conservative
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
I will read the motion without the amendment. Mr. Chairman, the motion reads as follows:
That the Standing Committee on Official Languages recommend to the government that it immediately reserve a minimum of 5.4 per cent of its media buy for non-profit, community-based official language minority media.
Conservative
Bloc
Vivian Barbot Bloc Papineau, QC
I suggest that the motion be amended by replacing the word “immediately” with the words “on an annual basis, starting immediately”.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Guy Lauzon
Let's open this up for debate. Are there any comments or questions?
Mr. Harvey.
Conservative
Luc Harvey Conservative Louis-Hébert, QC
I have already discussed this with Mr. Rodriguez. When the Committee met, they spent an hour and a half explaining that they wanted $500,000. However, the motion refers to a percentage--specifically, 5.4 per cent. I understand the principle, but they also explained that of the $71 million set aside for advertising, only $34 million had been spent. So, is that percentage based on $34 million or $71 million? I don't want to make things unnecessarily complicated. I told Mr. Rodriguez that we agree on the principle. I understand that they want to move quickly on this and do the right thing, but will we really be doing the right thing by moving on this quickly? That's my question.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
There are two parts to your intervention. First of all, you're wondering whether it's preferable to talk about 5.4 per cent or whether we should mention the amount of $500,000 they were asking for initially. My answer would be that a percentage is preferable, because when they were here, I told them that it would difficult to get agreement on this because it's a random amount. There is no way of justifying why it should be $500,000 as opposed to $300,000 or $600,000. They replied that that was quite true. They are every bit in favour of talking about 5.4 per cent, which corresponds to the percentage of Canadians living in a minority situation in Canada. That is basically it.
As for media placements, $70 million was expected to be spent in that area. We hope the federal government will spend what it intended to. We feel it is fair to set aside a percentage of the money allocated, regardless of what is spent on non-profit media.
Conservative
Luc Harvey Conservative Louis-Hébert, QC
But what would happen if they got the 5.4 per cent and the government only spent 10 per cent of its expected budget? The situation would be no different from the one we're dealing with now. On the other hand, if they got a set amount, as they requested, they would have the full amount. The government is under no obligation to spend all that money. It is rare for the government not to spend all of it, but it has happened before. It should be noted that 50 per cent of that expenditure is roughly equivalent to $500,000. In my opinion, when they talked about $500,000, that amount was equivalent to the amount of the total budget that would be spent.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
No, there was nothing scientific about it. I met with them afterwards and asked them why the amount had been set at half a million dollars, and they told me that they thought it was the right amount.
There could have been 8 or 12 departments at $50,000 each, but they calculated that 10 departments would invest $50,000 each. But it could just as well have been 8, 10 or 16 departments. So, I suggested that the distribution be less random and that the amount be calculated based on the spending.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Guy Lauzon
If 5.4 per cent is the equivalent of $3 million and there is no need for that amount of advertising, what will happen?
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
They will use that amount. The 5.4 per cent figure would have represented $500,000 or $600,000 last year. The amount would be distributed to all radio stations, which would mean $30,000 each. That's not much, but if it were $60,000, it would be very helpful.
Conservative
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
It doesn't give money away, but it places 5.4 per cent of its ads in community media. It's neither a gift nor a subsidy; it's a media buy.