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

Results 1-15 of 71
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Canadian Heritage committee  I'd prefer not to discuss it because it is before the courts, and there are probably any number of hypotheticals that would lead to other kinds of discussions. So if you don't mind....

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen

Canadian Heritage committee  Who could possibly be against calm, informative consultations? I obviously encourage you to engage in such consultations. As I said in my presentation, I believe we should be proud, both in Parliament and in Canada as a whole, of having passed legislation that didn't force us to

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen

Canadian Heritage committee  It's not a question of authority. We try not to interfere. Their responsibility is to manage their own programming, and so it is up to them to make those decisions. We try to encourage them to offer certain types of programming, such as dramas and local news, but beyond those cat

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen

Canadian Heritage committee  It's hard to talk briefly about it.

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen

Canadian Heritage committee  If you saw our release about 10 days ago, the approval of a new owner who will carry on the operation of that station has been granted. The jobs and service to the public will be maintained. But the original licensee will no longer be the licensee.

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen

Canadian Heritage committee  I think providing that line was part of what went into it. The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council had not once or twice, but to my knowledge at least three times, seizure of complaints and answered the complaints. The broadcaster didn't respond appropriately to those complain

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen

Canadian Heritage committee  Diane, did you think you were going to get away without answering?

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen

Canadian Heritage committee  We're obliged to collect the part II fees under the act. We have been in litigation on that, so it's before the courts.

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen

Canadian Heritage committee  Well, ultimately, it would probably come before the courts, although I do believe it is an extremely rare occurrence.

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen

Canadian Heritage committee  Yes, it is. Thank you. I understand what you are saying; you have made your position quite clear. I have nothing to add.

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you very much.

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen

Canadian Heritage committee  We try not to engage in micromanagement. When a station applies for a licence renewal or a new licence, we look at the programming plans submitted by the licence holder. Basically, we accept what we hear and make suggestions. For example, if a station wants to have open-line show

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen

Canadian Heritage committee  No, not to my knowledge.

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen

Canadian Heritage committee  Just to step back for one second on the premises, we are bound by law--I think it's section 47 of the Telecommunications Act--to give effect to policy directives of the government on matters of broad policy concern. That's very clear. We have not yet received such a directive, pe

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen

Canadian Heritage committee  It would have a legal impact. I hate to give you a legal opinion here. I'm checking back with my own legal adviser. I think the correct answer is that it says it would be binding. These objectives are ones that were meant to regulate and give effect to, and we do.

October 30th, 2006Committee meeting

Charles Dalfen