Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 436-450 of 589
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Canadian Heritage committee  I have been saying this consistently. We have these two regimes: the telecom and the broadcasting. The telecom, as I say, is essentially market-oriented, where we step in for market failure, and it's an ex post sector regime. On the cultural side, you will always have some sort of regulation because you are trying to achieve a cultural-social role.

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein

Canadian Heritage committee  Mrs. Fry, that is the challenge of the day for me. Trust me, we are working on it, but it's not an easy problem to resolve.

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein

Canadian Heritage committee  There is a hearing coming up, as you well know. There's an application by Ramstar to acquire the licence of TQS. They have it now on a temporary basis so that TQS didn't go off the air. They're operating it under a temporary list. We're going to have hearings in both Montreal and Quebec City in order to get the view from as many participants and as many people in the province of Quebec as possible, and then we're going to make a judgment in accordance with the Broadcasting Act.

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein

Canadian Heritage committee  No. I was referring to the original YouTube, which was a portal leading to a site showing amateur videos. If a broadcaster or a private company used YouTube as a means of distributing its professional content, obviously that would concern us.

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein

Canadian Heritage committee  I do not have a better word to describe it. We will have to define what constitutes private, amateur, etc. activities. This is not a broadcasting matter. I use the word “professional” to describe broadcasting activities, but obviously this is something that should be clarified.

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein

Canadian Heritage committee  Any decision that we make, you can take to the Federal Court of Appeal for judicial review.

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein

Canadian Heritage committee  This is something we will have to define in our future hearings. We are responsible for the broadcasting system and the act governing it. Obviously this act is concerned with professional broadcasting, and not programs produced by individuals who wish to share them with their friends, or other such things.

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein

Canadian Heritage committee  I couldn't agree with you more. We see a technological convergence. The technology of broadcasting and telecom has merged, and so has the industry. Is Rogers a broadcaster or a telecom enterprise? You can look at it either way. When you watch a movie over a portable device, are you in broadcasting or are you in telecommunications?

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein

Canadian Heritage committee  Mr. Siksay, I think just having the power would be a great constraint. You don't necessarily have to use it, but the mere effect of people knowing that at the end of the day we might use the AMP power will induce them to comply with our orders.

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein

Canadian Heritage committee  No, not at all. I'm a firm believer in the voluntary codes and Canadian broadcast standards that you're talking about. If it works, that's wonderful. The industry itself administers their standards, and we have approved them. We know that if the administrative party comes into place and somebody either refuses to become a member of this voluntary association and therefore we have to deal with them, or deliberately flouts it or goes against the grain, we would have to make an example.

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein

Canadian Heritage committee  It's definitely not compensating, it's really to induce compliance, in effect as a reminder: there is a system here; there is a rule, and you haven't abided by it. Please abide in future, and because you did not, here—and essentially this is why it's called an administrative monetary penalty—you're being penalized for non-compliance.

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein

Canadian Heritage committee  No, partially because it is a very full timetable as it is. As well, I think it's more response to demands rather than planning ahead on this one.

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein

Canadian Heritage committee  I'd be surprised. I think this is a relatively narrowly framed issue. It will give you some indication, but I don't think it will be a definitive statement on that neutrality.

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein

Canadian Heritage committee  Oh, undoubtedly; Net neutrality is the issue of the day in telecom. We will be forced to develop a more fulsome position on it.

May 13th, 2008Committee meeting

Konrad W. von Finckenstein