Canadian Heritage committee  Because they are “carriers”. They do not create content. Content is created by the companies with websites. We're not talking about Rogers or Quebecor.

Canadian Heritage committee  The courts have accepted that.

Canadian Heritage committee  If you change the Broadcast Act, we may be able to do something. However, under the Broadcast Act as it currently exists, the courts have explicitly stated that we cannot do that.

Canadian Heritage committee  If the Act were amended, I'm not sure what we would do to influence Internet service providers. In France, for example, they wanted them to pay a tax. The purpose of the tax was to fund national broadcasting. There are no ads on national radio, but there is an Internet bit tax.

Canadian Heritage committee  Well, talk to me next fall! I am concerned. I have announced hearings. We want to understand the current phenomenon. We want to know where all of this is leading. After that and after holding consultations, we will have a clear idea, and at that point we will be making suggestio

Canadian Heritage committee  Yes--

Canadian Heritage committee  Our job is not to regulate content. Programmers decide on content.

Canadian Heritage committee  The Internet service provider, the ISP, falls under our jurisdiction. Therefore, we can have a role as an intervenor in terms of what they do. For instance, Internet service A is a common carrier. They have to carry everything and can't discriminate based on content. For instan

Canadian Heritage committee  You're absolutely right. It's not only us. The whole world is that way. Traditionally, you regulated through access. You wouldn't give somebody a licence to broadcast or a licence to distribute or whatever. Through that gatekeeping, you could control what actually goes into the p

Canadian Heritage committee  I don't think you can do that. You know, this is not China, and even China doesn't manage to screen incoming content. This is a free society. The content will come in and out. We can't.... Your kids would get very upset if they found out that they can watch this thing over the iP

Canadian Heritage committee  Also, up to now most of the content actually started with either film or broadcasting and then was repurposed for the Internet. To the extent that happens, you have control at the production phase. But if it's a production that's purely geared to the Internet, funding or incentiv

Canadian Heritage committee  Hearings are public. We had a hearing in Gatineau yesterday, and your colleague, Ms. Lavallée, was in attendance. There was a theme. A notice was published indicating that we would be talking about vertical integration and its potential effects, with a view to determining whether

Canadian Heritage committee  We did the same thing four years ago, when CTV bought Shaw and, after that, when Canwest bought Alliance Atlantis. We saw that there were broadcaster mergers occurring. What were the implications of that for the diversity of voices? Did we have rules in place? Were they adequate?

Canadian Heritage committee  No, we want there to be different types of programming, but we want to avoid there being a single voice because there is a single owner. Generally, we hope that journalists will be independent and express their views and opinions, and so on. But they can be invited as guests or t

Canadian Heritage committee  First I'll say that the diversity of voices is meant to make sure there are no restrictions...you're looking at the other end now, in terms of fostering, and that doesn't really fall under diversity of voices. But we do have a multilingual policy to foster broadcasting in certain