Madam Speaker, I must return to what I was trying to do a few minutes ago through a point of order concerning the speech by my colleague from Terrebonne. I think there is a connection there with today's debate.
I found that my colleague from Mount Royal took umbrage at my colleague's remarks. When she and I discussed it, we immediately agreed that this colleague was in no way targeted by the remark by my colleague from Terrebonne, who was talking more in terms of something widespread, unfortunately, that perhaps illustrated the lack of understanding there may be regarding the official language in Quebec, which is French. This is an entirely legitimate concern, and in no way does this mean that all members present in the House are not free to express themselves in the official language of their choice. We all agree on that.
To put things in their proper context, however, it is true that for us who are working tooth and nail to defend French, Quebec's only official and common language, it can be troubling at times that members representing majority-francophone ridings are unable to speak French. It kind of shows where things stand with French and underscores the need for us to continue the fight in Quebec.
That being said, I have long admired my colleague from Mount Royal, with whom I sat on the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. Despite our major differences, I have always managed to get along well with him to move forward on the bills we debated. This member does his work admirably in both official languages, and in that sense he does a good job of representing the constituents in his riding.
We are talking today about the Conservatives' umpteenth attempt to discredit our public broadcaster, CBC/Radio‑Canada. We are talking about the issue of having a Canadian production translated into French in a Paris studio. For me and all my colleagues in the Bloc Québécois, and, I dare say, for all the Quebec members of the House and the Quebec cultural industry, this is so ridiculous that we actually thought it was fake news when it was first reported. At first we figured it was a mistake, that it was a podcast that had been produced abroad, translated in Paris and then broadcast on the CBC/Radio‑Canada platforms. That was not at all the case. It is totally appalling.
In this supposedly bilingual country, where we are supposedly concerned about protecting both official languages and the one that is most threatened, specifically French, how can anyone claim to be concerned if they do not even have the presence of mind to have a podcast translated in Quebec? They had something good, a good podcast, something that could be exported around the world, but since Quebeckers have a stupid accent, they would not have it translated in Quebec. Since Quebeckers have a hick accent, listeners would not understand them. They therefore decided to send it to Paris. That is why there are going to be such expressions as “du coup”, “en revanche”, “putain” and “nom de Dieu”. That is international French. It is as if Quebeckers can only have a regional accent.
That stems from a lack of understanding, not only of the reality of French in Quebec and Canada, but also of Quebec's cultural dubbing industry, which is one of the most professional, exacting and best in the world. Quebec's dubbing industry is exceptional. What is even more interesting and ludicrous, is that the CBC did not think it could have the production translated in Quebec.
Quebec can produce works in international French, or in French with the accents of Paris, Lyon, Marseille and even Pas-de-Calais if it wants to. We can produce works in French with a Spanish accent or a British accent. We can do anything in Quebec. Does anyone know why? Because we have been developing our dubbing industry for decades, and we have artists and technicians who are so specialized that major American studios often have their productions translated in Montreal because that is where they can get the best quality. Our artisans are exceptional. One would expect the public broadcaster, which claims to be exacting and an essential vehicle for culture, to be the first to know that.
Moreover, when the podcast was sent to France for translation and then journalists, the Union des artistes and the postproduction and dubbing sector in French got wind of it, they asked the guy at the CBC who had the brilliant idea of sending it to Paris and why he did not consider Quebec. The guy did not even know that is something we do. Well, he did know that is something we do, but he figured that no one would be able to understand the Quebec accent. That is pure ignorance and a grave insult to the exceptional work and the exceptional reputation that Quebec's dubbing industry has built over the decades.
Nobody here remembers the production itself, which is called Alone: A Love Story. The title of the French version is Seule: Une histoire d'amour. It is an English Canadian production, made for a successful podcast platform. It would have been an extraordinary opportunity to show that we are capable of producing things here and doing them in English, in French and, eventually, in the indigenous languages. However, it was a missed opportunity, because people tied themselves in knots, thinking that it was made in English so it needed to be sent to France for the rest and then exported to the rest of the world without even considering our own reality here. It just goes to show how dysfunctional this country is.
It is already completely illogical for any part of a Canadian production paid for through government subsidies, tax credits or tax breaks to be created abroad. When a production receives government funding, financing or support of any kind through a provincial or federal program, there should be a requirement for every stage of production to be done right in that province, or at the very least in Canada. This should be an essential condition. If it had been, the genius who had the idea of sending this production to Paris for translation into French and Spanish would have known from the start that a Canadian production could not be sent overseas. It has to be done here.
A series of events occurred, which were discussed at length by the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. When the current CEO, Catherine Tait, whose term is coming to a close, came to testify about this story, she offered her sincere apologies and said she was determined to ensure that such a thing never happened again. I know that the message went through. Ms. Tait listened to the concerns expressed by the committee and the House and clearly relayed them to all levels of the public broadcaster. I would be awfully surprised if we saw this type of situation crop up again in the foreseeable future. I would be very surprised.
People can criticize a lot of things about Ms. Tait's time as CEO. I would be the first to criticize many of the things she did. However, the Conservatives' relentless attack on her is getting a little out of control and a little unreasonable. She has become the Conservatives' scapegoat for all sorts of reasons and a pawn in their campaign to defund the CBC. That is exactly what this is about. This is yet another opportunity for them to talk about how they believe the CBC is a dysfunctional organization that does not deserve to exist and should be defunded. They are using this report from the Standing Committee on Official Languages, which rightly condemns the decision to have a podcast translated abroad, as a pretext for reiterating that the CBC does not deserve the trust of Canadians and Quebeckers and deserves to have its funding cut.
I would also like to take this opportunity to talk about the importance of having a public broadcaster, especially considering the Conservatives' determination to spread disinformation and half-truths in an effort to discredit our public broadcaster. Contrary to their claims, the CBC delivers rigorous journalism, even though people may not always like it, as well as entertainment programming that is very important to Quebeckers. I do not want to speak for the anglophone side of things and what the CBC produces, because everyone knows that what Radio-Canada and the Crown corporation's francophone services produce clearly appeals more to the public and is much more popular and successful. Still, I do not want to judge the quality of the CBC's English-language programming. I am sure they produce some excellent programming as well. That said, this is yet another opportunity for the Conservatives to discredit a service that we feel is becoming increasingly essential given the present circumstances.
This is a situation where we need journalists and newsrooms governed by a code of ethics and a code of conduct that require them to meet strict standards. We need a vehicle for francophone culture in Quebec and Canada. We need a company that produces high-quality, variety programming and that showcases our stories. That is the mandate of CBC/Radio-Canada. I am associating the two, but what makes it all the more offensive for francophone audiences is the fact that our stories are being translated by foreigners, based on a belief that their accent will be more acceptable to people elsewhere. This means that CBC/Radio-Canada is going to tell our stories using someone else's voice and someone else's accent. Otherwise, so they say, our stories will not be understood by others. My brief detour stops here.
Now, to return to the current, more general debate on the Conservatives' constant attacks on CBC/Radio-Canada, as they try to feed the beast, the monster they are trying to create in order to defund the CBC.
There is a big hoax here, a major flaw in the story and in their reasoning. Even if one were to get university scholars and researchers together to try to explain the Conservatives' logic here, they would not be able to do it. Surveys show that 80% of people support maintaining and protecting a healthy public broadcaster. These surveys are carried out across Canada, not just on Montreal's south shore. Canadians across the country are being asked whether they want a quality public broadcaster and whether they like CBC/Radio-Canada, and 80% of them are saying yes. Some of those people must vote Conservative. I cannot believe otherwise.
Rather than realizing that they might not be on the right track, the Conservatives are assuming that most of that 80% of the people polled are from Quebec or are francophones who want to protect Radio-Canada, and so they are saying that they will make cuts to CBC's funding but save Radio-Canada. They are basically telling us they do not know anything without actually saying they do not know anything. That seems to be it, because CBC and Radio-Canada have been around for 90 years. They have been a two-headed body for 90 years. News production and editorial production are separate, but given the amount of resources that CBC and Radio-Canada share, the two have become inextricably linked. I do not know how many times that has been explained during the five committee meetings that Ms. Tait participated in just this year. The CEO of CBC/Radio-Canada appeared before the committee five times, and every time we asked her that question, she explained how and why Radio-Canada could not be separated from the CBC and how Radio-Canada would suffer enormously if funding cuts are made the the CBC. She explained that over and over in all those meetings. I do not know how many times I personally asked her that question, and every time, the answer was clear, straightforward, well-argued and complete. However, I do not think that anyone was listening. At least in this group, I do not think that anyone was listening because the Conservatives keep saying that we need to defund the CBC and that doing so will not hurt Radio-Canada.
Someone even said they would defund the CBC, but leave Radio-Canada alone. Cleary he was not listening and did not understand, because it had just been made clear that this was impossible to do. The witness just said that CBC and Radio-Canada share buildings just about everywhere in Canada. He said he wanted to cut funding for the CBC. This is one of the fine examples of populism promoted by the Leader of the Opposition, who says they are going to empty the CBC offices across Canada and turn them into social housing. How can they find a simple solution to a problem they do not even understand? That is the long and the short of it. What nonsense.
Again, this is just another reason today for them to go after Catherine Tait, claiming that they are going to go after the CBC and then leading people to believe that the CBC's funding has to be cut but this will have no impact on Radio-Canada. In Quebec, no one is buying it. If the Conservatives are trying to convince Quebeckers, they can keep trying. In Quebec, everyone knows that any cuts made to the CBC's funding will be disastrous for Radio-Canada and therefore disastrous for the main vehicle of francophone culture in Canada and Quebec. This will have tremendous repercussions on the cultural industry, on authors, on artists, on actors, on producers, on musicians, on singers, on everyone. No one in Quebec is buying this message, unless they failed grade two. I do not know many people who did, because we have an excellent education system in Quebec. We can discuss that another time.
Having said that, I find it rather absurd when the Conservatives take isolated incidents and blow them out of proportion to try to illustrate the complete failure of an organization that, on the contrary, should inspire pride—in most cases at least—because of its coverage, its presence and its efforts to reach Quebeckers and Canadians in the most remote regions, despite the constraints involved. We do consider these isolated incidents, which are not trivial, I agree. The issue of bonuses is not trivial. We need to have a conversation about the $18 million in executive bonuses. We can have that conversation. We have actually already had it, but the Conservatives were not listening because the message and the answers were not necessarily what they wanted to hear. Yes, we have had this conversation, and we must continue to have it. CBC/Radio-Canada's compensation model needs to be reviewed to ensure that it is acceptable and understood. Understanding it is another matter, but at the very least, it must be acceptable.
A new mandate is likely going to be proposed by the Minister of Canadian Heritage shortly. The proposed mandate would seek a review of certain parameters that guide the public broadcaster's management and operations. I look forward to seeing it. There will likely be tools in this proposal to review certain frustrating aspects of CBC/Radio-Canada. That would be good. It would not be a bad thing. We need to look at what is happening elsewhere.
People complain that the broadcaster is expensive and is funded by their taxes. It costs about $1.4 billion, then there is approximately $400 million in subscription and advertising revenues. That is what the public broadcaster costs. In reality, the cost per Canadian is about $32 a year. Most people pay $18 or $20 for Netflix, and they probably have other subscriptions here and there. It costs $32 a year for CBC, Radio-Canada and most of the online services they offer. To determine whether that is expensive, compare it to Germany, where its broadcaster costs $140 a year per capita, or Australia, where it costs, I think, about $47. That amount is not going to put many people on the street. Perhaps we would have a more transparent, easier-to-monitor service that is somewhat less susceptible to the populist criticism levelled by politicians like the current Conservatives.
I completely agree that we have to speak out against certain decisions, such as the decision to send a made-in-Canada production elsewhere for translation into French. It would be equally unacceptable for French-language productions made in Quebec or Canada to be translated abroad. We have the resources here. We have very good people here. We have to speak out against that, and that is what we did.
That said, I think it is disingenuous to bring this debate back to the House after a report was released. Once again, this is just an opportunity for the Conservatives to beat up on CBC/Radio-Canada and promote their agenda to defund it, which the public does not support at all. I would remind the House that 80% of Canadians want a quality public broadcaster. They want to protect it. The numbers do not lie. The Conservatives are big on numbers, so maybe they should look at the numbers.
