Official Languages Committee on Feb. 28th, 2013

[Pierre Dionne Labelle, NDP, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Is the study available?

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

Yes.

[Pierre Dionne Labelle, NDP, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Very well.

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

Less than 2% of those living in minority language communities were receiving off-air service. Actually, I believe the figure was somewhere around 2% or 3%.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Dionne Labelle.

Mr. Chisu, go ahead.

[Corneliu Chisu, Conservative, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for appearing in front of the committee.

I have a question from your presentation. You stated:

The CRTC is an administrative tribunal that regulates and supervises the Canadian broadcasting and telecommunications systems. The CRTC therefore has obligations under the Broadcasting Act and the Telecommunications Act.

I'm a professional engineer and know that professional engineers are administering the Professional Engineers Act . When you refer to the CRTC regulating and supervising and having obligations, can you clarify what you are administering? It is a very important distinction. When you state that you have obligations, it doesn't mean that you are administering that act.

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

Those words are directly out of the Broadcasting Act. Our mandate given to us by Parliament is specifically to supervise and regulate the broadcasting system. The Broadcasting Act actually has a very long policy objective in section 3 that defines what in the end Parliament has decided the broadcasting system should achieve. When we issue policies, when we issue distribution orders, when we license by condition, and renew licences, and approve transfers of controls, all those activities have the objective of implementing the policy objectives of the Canadian broadcasting system from section 3 of the act and the regulatory policy in section 5.2 of the act. Our obligation is to implement the act.

[Corneliu Chisu, Conservative, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

When you speak about supervising, is that a different issue from regulating?

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

In a way it is, but those are exactly the words in the act.

[Corneliu Chisu, Conservative, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

I am not looking at the words, I'm sorry—

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

Right.

[Corneliu Chisu, Conservative, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

—but at when you are making decisions. You have an application process in place—

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

Yes.

[Corneliu Chisu, Conservative, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

—and you made the decision based on the Broadcasting Act and the Telecommunications Act, and there is also the Official Languages Act, which is important.

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

We actually monitor what's happening. We have a research group that tracks how much money is being spent on Canadian.... The supervisory role is broader like that. Moreover, when you issue a licence, you impose a conditional licence, and you have to check whether somebody is meeting that conditional licence. So from time to time, we'll ask for the tapes of a radio station to make sure that they're actually playing the kind of music they are obliged to play.

So that's part of our supervisory role.

[Corneliu Chisu, Conservative, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

So basically, you also have conditions for issuing a licence—

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

Yes.

[Corneliu Chisu, Conservative, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

—that are translated in administering some parts of the act. Right?

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

That's correct.

[Corneliu Chisu, Conservative, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

So can you tell me how long your process takes from the application to the issuing of a licence? And what are the main issues they are looking for?

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

The length of time will depend on whether it's radio or specialty television or conventional television, and also whether it's in a market that others might be interested in entering, because then we would do a competitive call, especially if there's only one frequency available or only enough economic room for one player. So throughout the process, we receive an application, we consider whether or not it should be opened up to others, and then we publish all applications for new licences through a process. Scott will tell you exactly what the timeframes and standards are, but I'll just explain to you in broad strokes how this works. The public will express their views. Competitors in the marketplace will express their views. Oftentimes we have representatives of official minority communities or the other linguistic third language communities who come to the process, either in writing.... Often but not always we will have an oral hearing, but most of our applications are done on paper now, and then the commissioners deliberate based on the recommendations by staff.

As I mentioned earlier to your colleagues across the way, we put an official language lens on everything we do, so that part of the recommendation that staff bring to the commission's decision meetings includes a review of what it means for official language communities.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you very much.

We'll now go to Madame Michaud.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses for being here.

I want to pick up on the issue that my colleague Mr. Dionne Labelle raised, the study of the impact on official language minority communities of decisions like the elimination of analog transmitters. Under paragraph 41, anytime a decision or a measure to implement something is at issue, the impact on the communities has to be taken into account. As regards the elimination of the LPIF and of analog transmitters, the impact was addressed during the CBC/Radio-Canada hearings.

Can you please explain why it was done that way, and why impact studies specific to those decisions were not done?

[Jean-Pierre Blais]

I'm not sure why you think the impact studies were done as part of the CBC/Radio-Canada process. The impact of the elimination of analog services was studied by the CRTC, with significant cooperation from other departments, Heritage Canada and Industry Canada. Hearings were held, and they were very public. It was the same for the LPIF. And people from the communities contributed to our hearings.

If you're looking for an impact study similar to those done by the departments, you're misguided. That is not how we work. We are an administrative tribunal. We do preliminary work, but our public file comes from the public's participation. Those people were at the table. The outcome is ultimately the commission's decision.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

If I understand correctly, then, your assessment of the impact is based solely on the input people provide. Do I understand that correctly?