Evidence of meeting #69 for Official Languages in the 41st Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was crtc.
A video is available from Parliament.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
That would be quite unusual. I don't know if you remember this, but right at the very beginning of radio in Canada, there was an attempt by Radio-Canada to establish a bilingual channel, but it did not work. People were unhappy because they did not have access to the programming they wanted.
At the commission, we generally try to offer a lot, but in English and French.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
But our country has evolved. In the years to come, there could be some appetite for what you have just described. It could let Canadians have wider access to both official languages. We could, for example, have the same program for youth that could be broadcast both by English-language and French-language stations. That would allow young anglophones to access a part of the program in French and young francophones to access a part of the program in English. Would it be possible for the CRTC to approve that kind of programming?
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
To my knowledge, few people have asked us for that kind of service. If they did, we could consider it. Often youth programs, for example, produced either in French or English, receive support from various other programs so that they can be dubbed or subtitled and made available in the other language. The services can be connected, just like Teletoon French and Teletoon English. There are varieties of programming in both languages.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
I am talking about the type of program in which one person would speak in English and another would reply in French, as we are doing here. We often speak to each other in both French and English. Has there never been a request for that?
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
There have been some cases where that has happened. We are not opposed to it. It is just that people have not proposed that model to us.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
Thank you very much.
You said that you have taken steps to support the vitality of official language minority communities. What are those steps?
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
There are several. Leaving aside the radio and television programming, the way in which people access those services, especially in the case of television, is often through distribution systems such as cable or satellite. We have done a lot there. In my presentation, I mentioned the one-for-ten rule for services. That ensures that the possibility of access exists in all the systems, even in a minority situation. We also require that the corporation’s local and regional services, in both English and French, be part of the basic cable packages.
Additionally, under paragraph 9(1)(h) of the Broadcasting Act, in minority situations, we have allowed services like RDI to be distributed at a reduced cost in anglophone markets to make sure that francophones in those markets have access to them.
So it is a combination of steps. We have to make sure that a lot of services are available and that those services are available to Canadians who want access to them.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
I have one last question for you.
Some TV programs are broadcast on the radio too. Tout le monde en parle, for example, is broadcast live on Radio-Canada's radio and television on Sunday evenings. It is very practical for those who cannot watch the program on television because they are on the road.
Does that require special permission from the CRTC, or is it an internal decision?
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
I think it is an internal decision. We have rules for the networks, but they do not apply in that case.
Conservative
Conservative
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for being here, Mr. Blais and Mr. Hutton. I want to ask my first question as a regular Canadian.
The figures you are giving us are very interesting, but how come they do not reflect the reality?
For example, after a long day, you go back to your hotel, you call your wife and she suggests you watch TV in order to relax. You turn on the TV and you look at the never-ending list of programs available. They are in all kinds of languages, but only Radio-Canada broadcasts in French. You cannot even get RDS to watch a hockey game or RDI to watch the news.
How is that possible? So you complain to the hotel and threaten never to go back there. I did that here in Ottawa, in a hotel that shall remain nameless. I told them that, if they did not get RDS before the playoffs, I would not go back to their hotel. They were scared because it was me, but if I had just been your average Joe, I doubt if they would have budged.
How can we have come to that point? What is going on?
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
The first problem is that you were dealing with a hotel. If you were staying, not in a hotel, but in the community, the services available would be a little different. Hotels get an exemption from the CRTC, given that a great majority of Canadians are not in them, just the ones who travel.
In Mississauga, for example, if you subscribe to Rogers—let me do a quick calculation—you can get over 35 channels, depending on what you want to pay. There is a lot available in Canadian homes.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
I suggest that you look into that because I have friends who live on this side of the Ottawa River and they cannot watch hockey in French. They can watch golf in English, but not hockey in French. They are not at a hotel. They are at home.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
I am not sure what services they are subscribed to, but…
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
You told me that it was because of the hotel and now you are saying that it is because of the service.
February 28th, 2013 / 3:50 p.m.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
It depends. People can make choices. You are absolutely right in saying that hockey in French is no longer available the way it used to be, free on Radio-Canada. However, it is available on specialty sports channels to which people can subscribe, be it the Réseau des sports or another network.
Did they choose not to subscribe to it? Possibly, and all sorts of reasons are possible, but the fact remains that the service is available.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
I don’t want to dwell on the issue too much, but the exemption for hotels does not seem to make any sense. Canadians travel and they need to be able to feel at home when they travel. When they stay at a hotel, they should not feel like they are in a foreign country. I don’t see why hotels would be exempted.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
This policy has been in effect since the 1990s at least.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
This committee is suggesting that it be changed.
My next question has to do with the local programming improvement fund.
I heard your answer to my colleague’s question. When a fund is eliminated, we can expect people to express their dissatisfaction. This fund has been rather important and general in scope, going beyond the communities. Mr. Lacroix appeared before this committee and said that Radio-Canada would have a lot more trouble assuming its responsibilities once the fund is scrapped.
You are saying that the fund has achieved its objectives and that you have studies showing that.
Pardon my ignorance. I was not a member of the committee at the time, but I would like to know if those studies were made public and if everyone had access to them.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
All our processes are fully public. We have hearings in which all Canadians have a right to participate and our decisions are published. The decision is in our report and it is significant.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Mr. Blais, the overwhelming majority of people who came to testify before you asked that the fund be kept. There were no requests that it be scrapped. Your decision to end it was based on studies. Are those studies public?
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
The study came from our public hearing. Given the comments of Canadians, our interpretation of the obligations under the act, our knowledge—we are a specialized tribunal after all—and the considerable and ever-increasing costs for cable and satellite services, subscribers were faced with additional costs. In light of the affordability issues and other possible ways to achieve the objectives you are talking about, the commission concluded that it was not beneficial to keep the fund. Not every commissioner was in favour of that decision, but the majority won.
Liberal
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
So it is a question of saving money, not of studies showing that the objectives were achieved and that we no longer need the program. You had to make a choice because of a limited amount of money.
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Mr. Dion, the LPIF decision is 29 pages long, single spaced, in just the one language. That's the study, the report. It does not even include the days of public hearing and the whole transcript. We are all about making everything public. The decision was not made by cabinet, for instance, and submitted in secret. We are very transparent in our work.
