Mr. Speaker, no.
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 1993, with 46% of the vote.
Seagram April 28th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, no.
Seagram April 28th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I had absolutely no contact or anything to do with whatever the Seagram corporation wants to do in the United States.
This is of no concern to me. They have proceeded with the appropriate secrecy and the risk taking involved. I only heard the rumour that there might be an acquisition a day or so before the acquisition was announced. It was from the press that I learned of such an acquisition.
Seagram April 28th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I should like to make clear in the House that I never met Mr. Bronfman on the occasion of the visit I paid to Los Angeles.
I learned of the transaction as I was walking from the aircraft. My meeting was an hour or two afterward. It is not unusual, bearing in mind that these transactions are highly secretive because of market conditions.
As to the responsibility for Investment Canada and a declaration on whether a certain company is Canadian or American, this is entirely within the responsibility of the Minister of Industry.
Seagram April 28th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for this opportunity to provide him with answers on issues which seem to concern him a great deal. I certainly did not use a government aircraft. In fact, I always avoid doing so, for financial reasons.
When in Los Angeles, I had no contacts with Canadian private interests trying to conclude a transaction to take over MGM. True, I did go to Universal studios with officials from MGM, Disney, Sony and Motion Picture Association of America, including its president, Jack Valenti. The purpose of my visit was strictly to explore possibilities with the heads of these American majors. Neither the agenda of this meeting, nor the discussions which I had with these American studios had anything to do with a transaction which I did not know about.
Seagram April 28th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's performance is reminiscent of the best horror movies.
What the Minister of Canadian Heritage was doing in Los Angeles was defending and promoting the interests of the film industry in Canada. I have always said that content was important on the information highway, and I am responsible for promoting that content.
In the past few months I conducted extensive consultations with the industries concerned in Canada, and our conclusion was that it was advisable to meet the main competitors and also to look into opportunities for co-operation. That is what I did when I went to Los Angeles.
I may add that I never was in the suite next door to a certain gentleman referred to by the hon. member.
Seagram April 28th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I think we have explained many times why the government decided to table its proposed directives to the CRTC. We are talking about competition, Canadian content, transparency and the structure of the information highway. These are fundamental aspects of policy, and all interests in the information highway applauded this decision. They felt we were being open, frank and transparent, and by putting this before the House, we are giving all members of this august assembly an opportunity to express their views during a forty-day period, when there will be a discussion on DTH satellite services.
Crtc April 26th, 1995
Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, two proposed orders issuing directions to the CRTC respecting the government's proposed policy on direct to home satellite distribution.
The government is confident this process will provide the CRTC with a DTH policy that reflects the interests of Canadians and the integrity of the Canadian broadcasting system.
Communications April 26th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, our colleague is addressing openness and transparency. She has probably read the report of the panel on DTH. That panel suggests the matter be put before the House under section 7 of the Broadcasting Act. This is a very open process, a very transparent process.
Furthermore, the panel recommends the authority for DTH be granted through a licensing process administered by the CRTC. Here again, this is a very open and transparent process.
The member will see in a few minutes what the government intends to do.
Communications April 26th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, much of the content of the question has already been answered this afternoon.
The government will table a document later on which contains the thrust of government policy. I understand that our colleague would like to explore many issues before the document is tabled. She will have time tomorrow and in the ensuing days and weeks to raise all the questions she would like once the policy has been laid down.
Telecommunications April 26th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, we will be tabling a document setting out the government's position this afternoon in the House.
I understand the opposition's impatience, but it will just be a few hours more. Then there will be days and weeks for questions.