ARCHIVED - Transcript
This page has been archived on the Web
Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.
Providing Content in Canada's Official Languages
Please note that the Official Languages Act requires that government publications be available in both official languages.
In order to meet some of the requirements under this Act, the Commission's transcripts will therefore be bilingual as to their covers, the listing of CRTC members and staff attending the hearings, and the table of contents.
However, the aforementioned publication is the recorded verbatim transcript and, as such, is transcribed in either of the official languages, depending on the language spoken by the participant at the hearing.
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS FOR THE CANADIAN RADIO-TELEVISION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION TRANSCRIPTION DES AUDIENCES DU CONSEIL DE LA RADIODIFFUSION ET DES TÉLÉCOMMUNICATIONS CANADIENNES SUBJECT / SUJET: CANADIAN TELEVISION POLICY REVIEW / EXAMEN DES POLITIQUES DU CONSEIL RELATIVES À LA TÉLÉVISION CANADIENNE HELD AT: TENUE À: Conference Centre Centre des conférences Outaouais Room Salle Outaouais Place du Portage Place du Portage Phase IV Phase IV Hull, Quebec Hull (Québec) October 8, 1998 8 octobre 1998 Volume 12 tel: 613-521-0703 StenoTran fax: 613-521-7668 Transcripts Transcription Afin de rencontrer les exigences de la Loi sur les langues officielles, les procès-verbaux pour le Conseil seront bilingues en ce qui a trait à la page couverture, la liste des membres et du personnel du CRTC participant à l'audience publique ainsi que la table des matières. Toutefois, la publication susmentionnée est un compte rendu textuel des délibérations et, en tant que tel, est enregistrée et transcrite dans l'une ou l'autre des deux langues officielles, compte tenu de la langue utilisée par le participant à l'audience publique. StenoTran Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des télécommunications canadiennes Transcript / Transcription Public Hearing / Audience publique Canadian Television Policy Review / Examen des politiques du Conseil relatives à la télévision canadienne BEFORE / DEVANT: Andrée Wylie Chairperson / Présidente Vice-Chairperson, Radio- television / Vice- présidente, Radiodiffusion Joan Pennefather Commissioner / Conseillère Andrew Cardozo Commissioner / Conseiller Martha Wilson Commissioner / Conseillère David McKendry Commissioner / Conseiller ALSO PRESENT / AUSSI PRÉSENTS: Jean-Pierre Blais Commission Counsel / Avocat du Conseil Margot Patterson Articling Student / Stagiaire Carole Bénard / Secretaries/Secrétaires Diane Santerre Nick Ketchum Hearing Manager / Gérant de l'audience HELD AT: TENUE À: Conference Centre Centre des conférences Outaouais Room Salle Outaouais Place du Portage Place du Portage Phase IV Phase IV Hull, Quebec Hull (Québec) October 8, 1998 8 octobre 1998 Volume 12 StenoTran TABLE OF CONTENTS / TABLE DES MATIÈRES PAGE Presentation by / Présentation par: Union des artistes 3528 Impératif français 3559 Horizon Interfaith Council 3589 Canada Family Action Coalition 3612 Canadian Diversity Network 3636 CHRC, Cultural Human Resources Council / CRHSC, Conseil des ressources humaines du secteur culturel 3685 The War Amputations of Canada / Les amputés de guerre du Canada 3724 StenoTran 3527 1 Hull, Quebec / Hull (Québec) 2 --- Upon resuming on Thursday, October 8, 1998 3 at 0905 / L'audience reprend le jeudi 4 8 octobre 1998 à 0905 5 16665 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good morning. 6 16666 Madam Secretary, would you invite the 7 next participant, please. 8 16667 Mme SANTERRE: Madame la Présidente, 9 est-ce que vous me donnez quelques minutes? Je viens 10 de me rendre compte que je n'ai pas d'interprètes dans 11 la cabine. 12 16668 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Ça va. Nous 13 attendons. 14 --- Courte pause / Short pause 15 16669 Mme SANTERRE: Je m'excuse du 16 contretemps. 17 16670 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Allez-y, Madame la 18 Secrétaire, s'il vous plaît. 19 16671 Mme SANTERRE: Merci, Madame la 20 Présidente. 21 16672 Alors ce matin je voudrais inviter 22 l'Union des artistes à faire la présentation de leurs 23 commentaires pour l'audience. 24 16673 Allez-y, Monsieur Curzi. 25 PRÉSENTATION / PRESENTATION StenoTran 3528 1 16674 M. CURZI: Bonjour, Madame la 2 Présidente, Mesdames et Messieurs les Commissaires. 3 Merci de nous recevoir de si bon matin pour entendre 4 notre mémoire et la réponse à votre avis des politiques 5 du Conseil relatives à la télévision canadienne. 6 16675 Je ne doute pas que vous avez lu et 7 pris connaissance de notre mémoire. Je vais essayer de 8 résumer assez brièvement le contenu de ce mémoire-là en 9 tenant compte du fait que votre avis posait à la fois 10 des questions extrêmement larges et des questions 11 extrêmement pointues. C'est dans le même esprit que 12 nous avons essayé de répondre à cet avis, à ces 13 demandes, en essayant de dégager quelle était notre 14 opinion plus large et aussi en apportant certaines 15 réponses pointues dans les cas qui nous touchaient plus 16 directement ou au sujet desquels nous étions le mieux 17 informés. 18 16676 Pour l'essentiel, l'opinion de 19 l'Union des artistes au sujet de la télévision... 20 évidemment, cette télévision-là, celle qui nous touche, 21 est surtout d'expression francophone puisque notre 22 juridiction s'applique aux produits et à la télévision 23 francophone. 24 16677 Notre impression, c'est que nous 25 vivons actuellement dans un équilibre extrêmement StenoTran 3529 1 fragile, extrêmement précaire, et que cet équilibre est 2 basé sur deux principes: sur la nécessité pour 3 l'ensemble du public francophone d'avoir accès à une 4 télévision publique de qualité qui lui assure un 5 contenu culturel, un contenu de divertissement et un 6 contenu d'information de qualité... en ce sens, une de 7 nos recommandations, ou un de nos souhaits les plus 8 fondamentaux, c'est que la télévision publique soit et 9 demeure forte, qu'elle soit bien financée et qu'elle 10 assure à tous les Canadiens une présence de qualité. 11 16678 On ne peut pas contrer ce qui se 12 passe à l'intérieur du monde des communications. Il y 13 a eu, et il y a encore, l'existence, la naissance et la 14 multiplication de nombreux canaux spécialisés. Nous 15 croyons que le CRTC doit être extrêmement prudent dans 16 le fait d'accorder de nouvelles licences à des canaux 17 spécialisés; non pas que nous soyons opposés à 18 l'existence de tels canaux, mais nous pensons que le 19 principe que le CRTC doit respecter, c'est celui de cet 20 équilibre général et plus largement aussi celui de 21 pouvoir offrir des canaux qui répondent ou qui contrent 22 l'offre qui peut arriver du côté de d'autres canaux 23 spécialisés anglophones. 24 16679 J'essaie d'être le plus clair 25 possible: Nous ne croyons pas qu'on puisse aller aussi StenoTran 3530 1 loin que d'autres pays où les spectateurs sont beaucoup 2 plus nombreux et où on peut spécialiser à l'extrême 3 l'offre de canaux spécialisés. Nous croyons que dans 4 notre marché il faut absolument maintenir un équilibre, 5 fragile je le répète, qui permette à tout le monde à la 6 fois de conserver l'audience, donc d'offrir 7 suffisamment pour que tout le monde trouve matière à 8 manger, à consommer, mais en même temps ne pas sur- 9 spécialiser tellement que l'on fractionne l'auditoire, 10 que l'on fractionne les revenus, que l'on fractionne 11 les moyens de production. Ça, ça nous apparaît 12 extraordinairement important pour que l'ensemble de ce 13 marché télévisuel francophone continue à respirer. 14 16680 Je me fais le porte-parole d'une 15 inquiétude profonde que nous ressentons, nous, quant au 16 danger que pourrait apporter ce fractionnement-là quant 17 aux moyens de production. On sait très bien que la 18 masse des gens n'est pas infinie, surtout du côté 19 francophone. Nous savons que nous sommes dans une 20 relation de compétition avec un marché anglophone 21 extrêmement puissant. Donc nous sommes limités dans 22 nos moyens, dans nos ressources, et pour nous assurer 23 qu'il y ait les moyens suffisants pour faire un produit 24 canadien de qualité, nous devons faire attention. 25 16681 En ce sens, l'autre menace qui nous StenoTran 3531 1 semble être extrêmement importante... et là, ça devient 2 une fonction vitale, je pense, du CRTC. Nous demandons 3 que le CRTC soit très vigilant quant à l'utilisation de 4 la publicité sur les ondes en général. 5 16682 Il apparaît actuellement des formes 6 de messages publicitaires où l'on tente de lier la 7 publicité au contenu des émissions par des sortes de 8 publicités subliminales, par des formes de publicité 9 qui envahissent littéralement l'écran. En ce sens-là, 10 nous avons une profonde inquiétude. 11 16683 S'il fallait qu'une telle tendance se 12 poursuive, nous croyons qu'il y a là un danger de 13 maladie extraordinaire, une espèce de cancer du contenu 14 même des émissions canadiennes. Ça, c'est une menace 15 énorme. 16 16684 Il y a des recommandations plus 17 spécifiques, mais je pense que vous avez déjà des 18 questions assez précises. J'ajouterais que, pour le 19 moment, nous nous réservons à la fois deux occasions, 20 celle de pouvoir apporter des recommandations peut-être 21 plus précises à la fin de ces audiences-ci, mais 22 surtout celle de pouvoir intervenir dans des cas précis 23 de renouvellement des licences, dans les cas précis où 24 les audiences du CRTC nous permettront d'être plus 25 directement pointus sur les questions posées. StenoTran 3532 1 16685 Voilà, je serai aussi bref que ça, 2 vous ayant fait part de mes principales préoccupations. 3 16686 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Je vous remercie. 4 16687 La conseillère Pennefather, s'il vous 5 plaît. 6 16688 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Bonjour. 7 16689 M. CURZI: Bonjour. 8 16690 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: En effet, 9 j'ai quelques questions de clarification, et peut-être 10 qu'un peu plus de discussion nous aidera à comprendre 11 vos préoccupations. 12 16691 M. CURZI: Oui. 13 16692 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: En premier 14 lieu, vous proposez au début de votre mémoire que le 15 cadre de réglementation de la télévision canadienne 16 doit demeurer. 17 16693 M. CURZI: Oui. 18 16694 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: En même 19 temps vous parlez, comme beaucoup d'intervenants, de la 20 distinction du marché francophone. 21 16695 Est-ce que dans votre mémoire, en 22 disant que le cadre de la réglementation de la 23 télévision canadienne doit demeurer, vous parlez de la 24 totalité de la télévision canadienne, anglaise et 25 française, ou seulement du marché francophone? StenoTran 3533 1 16696 M. CURZI: Nous croyons que le cadre 2 devrait demeurer pour l'ensemble de la télévision. 3 16697 Ce à quoi nous faisions référence, 4 c'est évidemment, par exemple, que du côté de la 5 télévision francophone le respect du contenu canadien 6 ne pose à peu près pas de problèmes, sauf peut-être en 7 dans ce qui a trait aux canaux spécialisés, où le 8 contenu canadien a des exigences beaucoup moindres. En 9 ce sens, s'il y avait une recommandation ou un souhait 10 que nous ferions, ce serait de graduellement augmenter 11 le pourcentage de contenu canadien qui sera demandé et 12 exigé des canaux spécialisés. 13 16698 Mais comme c'est une préoccupation, 14 le contenu canadien, qui n'est pas la nôtre -- je pense 15 que la Société Radio-Canada se vante cette année 16 d'avoir une diffusion 100 pour cent canadienne -- le 17 seul objet précis de notre préoccupation dans ce cadre- 18 là, ce serait une recommandation précise que les heures 19 de grande écoute passent de 17 h 00 (sic) à 18 h 00, et 20 donc que la période couverte soit de 6 h 00 à 11 h 00 21 le soir, de 18 h 00 à 23 h 00. 22 16699 Pour le reste, l'ensemble des 23 réglementations du CRTC nous convient... que ça passe 24 de 18 h 00 à 23 h 00 et non 19 h 00 à 23 h 00, qu'on 25 augmente d'une heure. StenoTran 3534 1 16700 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Qu'on 2 augmente d'une heure. 3 16701 M. CURZI: Oui, qu'on augmente d'une 4 heure. 5 16702 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Vous savez 6 qu'il y a des intervenants qui parlaient du marché 7 francophone qui en effet ont proposé des nouvelles 8 approches. À titre d'exemple,l'APFTQ a parlé d'une 9 allocation de crédits supplémentaires pour les 10 catégories sous-représentées pour les productions du 11 secteur indépendant seulement; ça veut dire un 12 pourcentage de 150 pour cent pour les dramatiques 13 lourdes, documentaires, émissions pour enfants et 14 coproductions majoritaires, et 125 pour cent pour les 15 téléromans. 16 16703 Qu'est-ce que vous pensez de cette 17 approche, qui est un effort de vraiment travailler 18 d'une façon plus réglementée dans le marché francophone 19 qu'aujourd'hui? 20 16704 M. CURZI: Je vais demander à 21 Mme Beauchemin de vous répondre. 22 16705 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: Bonjour, madame. 23 16706 Si je peux me permettre de juste 24 revenir un peu en arrière, le message fondamental de 25 l'Union des artistes, c'est que les deux marchés, StenoTran 3535 1 francophone et anglophone, ayant leurs spécificités, il 2 est nécessaire que la réglementation reflète ces 3 spécificités-là. Notamment, les habitudes d'écoute ne 4 sont pas nécessairement les mêmes dans les deux 5 marchés, les habitudes d'écoute des francophones étant 6 telles que l'écoute de grande écoute commence plus tôt. 7 Donc il serait nécessaire qu'on tienne compte de cette 8 réalité-là. 9 16707 Pour revenir à votre question plus 10 spécifique de la recommandation de l'APFTQ, il va sans 11 dire que nous sommes d'accord pour qu'il y ait une 12 attention additionnelle apportée aux secteurs qui sont 13 sous-représentés et que l'APFTQ a mentionnés dans son 14 mémoire. Les modalités que retiendrait le CRTC pour 15 arriver à cette fin-là, nous ne nous prononçons pas là- 16 dessus. Nous laissons la liberté au CRTC, qui a toute 17 l'information nécessaire, d'arriver à définir les 18 modalités. 19 16708 Ce qui nous semble important, par 20 ailleurs -- et là, je me réfère au mémoire de 21 l'ADISQ -- c'est qu'il est important qu'en parlant de 22 catégories sous-représentées on fasse bien attention de 23 bien définir les termes, de bien reconnaître la 24 situation particulière par exemple de la chanson, qui 25 est à la fois sous-financée et sous-représentée... StenoTran 3536 1 sous-financée pour ce qui est de la production 2 d'émissions et sous-représentée par la même occasion au 3 niveau de la diffusion. Pour nous, ça, c'est très 4 important. 5 16709 Mais les modalités précises que vous 6 propose l'APFTQ, nous ne sommes ni pour, ni contre; 7 nous vous laissons la liberté de les évaluer à leur 8 mérite. 9 16710 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Mais, en 10 principe, vous voyez la possibilité d'aller un peu plus 11 loin pour supporter la production du secteur 12 indépendant du côté francophone. 13 16711 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: Très certainement, 14 oui. 15 16712 M. CURZI: Ah, oui. 16 16713 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Dans ce 17 sens-là aussi on a des propos pour et contre le fait 18 que les télédiffuseurs aient accès au Fonds de 19 production de Téléfilm en plus de ce qu'ils ont déjà. 20 Qu'est-ce que vous pensez de cette proposition, étant 21 donné le besoin de plus en plus de ressources pour la 22 production? 23 16714 M. CURZI: À tout le moins on 24 considère que l'accès à ces fonds-là ne devrait pas 25 être comptabilisé comme étant une partie de leurs StenoTran 3537 1 dépenses de programmation. 2 16715 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Oui, j'ai 3 vu ça. 4 16716 M. CURZI: Ça, ça me semble être 5 une... 6 16717 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Alors vous 7 n'êtes pas d'accord qu'ils aient accès à ce fonds, 8 qu'il devrait rester seulement disponible au secteur 9 indépendant de production? 10 16718 M. CURZI: Pas forcément. J'avoue 11 que, là encore, jusqu'à un certain point, le 12 financement des émissions... la seule chose qu'on peut 13 dire là-dessus, c'est qu'il nous semble qu'il serait 14 préférable que l'accès à ces fonds-là, s'il y en a un, 15 ne soit pas comptabilisé et ne serve pas jusqu'à un 16 certain point à augmenter une image de profit et 17 diminue les investissements, donc l'injection d'argent 18 frais dans la production de la part des télédiffuseurs. 19 Ça, ça nous semble être le minimum qu'on peut demander. 20 16719 Quant à la structure de financement 21 elle-même, à l'extrême, nous préférons être prudents 22 pourvu qu'on soit certains qu'elle augmente. 23 Généralement, c'est notre seul souhait étant donné que, 24 dans l'intérêt de nos membres, qu'elle soit répartie 25 d'une façon ou d'une autre, pour nous, elle a StenoTran 3538 1 sensiblement les mêmes effets si l'on excepte le fait 2 que la télévision généraliste nous semble encore être 3 le moyen de dégager des consensus sociaux et que, tant 4 qu'on n'aura pas fait la preuve qu'on puisse avoir et 5 obtenir à l'intérieur d'une diffusion... de diffuseurs 6 des consensus aussi larges que nous assure la 7 télévision généraliste, ce serait extrêmement dommage 8 de prendre la proie pour l'ombre. 9 16720 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Oui. En 10 effet, vous avez mentionné deux choses qu'il est 11 important pour nous de comprendre. J'aimerais que vous 12 élaboriez davantage sur la participation des 13 radiodiffuseurs francophones privés. Votre position 14 sur la SRC est claire, mais du côté privé, quelles sont 15 les priorités pour vous? 16 16721 M. CURZI: Du côté de la télévision 17 privée c'est bien clair qu'actuellement il y a, je 18 dirais, une domination du télédiffuseur privé, qui est 19 TVA dans ce cas-là, qui est assez importante au niveau 20 du marché. L'argumentation de la Société Radio-Canada 21 veut que la Société elle-même soit le concurrent et 22 qu'elle empêche une sorte de situation de monopole de 23 la télévision privée. 24 16722 C'est le raisonnement, et j'ai 25 quelque malaise à épouser ce raisonnement-là dans la StenoTran 3539 1 mesure où ce serait une manière de se départir de ce 2 qui est lourd et coûteux pour une télévision telle que 3 la Société Radio-Canada. Que les producteurs privés 4 cherchent à se multiplier et à augmenter leur marge de 5 profit, à être compétitifs dans un marché qui l'est, 6 c'est difficile de s'opposer à ça; ça me semble être 7 une force économique qu'on ne peut pas contrer. La 8 seule chose qu'on puisse exiger, c'est qu'ils aient des 9 pratiques cohérentes et qu'il n'y ait pas d'esquive de 10 la part du télédiffuseur qui se décharge de ses 11 responsabilités de producteur. 12 16723 En ce sens-là, la seule chose que je 13 pourrais dire, c'est de l'ordre de la vertu ou de 14 l'ordre des principes: Il me semble que le fait 15 d'accorder des licences à des privés, des licences 16 d'exploitation des zones publiques, implique un certain 17 nombre de responsabilités et de devoirs dans certaines 18 pratiques commerciales actuelles. Je ne voudrais pas 19 me mêler de ce qui ne me regarde pas, mais dans 20 certaines pratiques il me semble qu'il y a un risque de 21 glissement des télédiffuseurs privés vers un dégagement 22 de leurs responsabilités au sujet du contenu et de la 23 qualité du contenu. 24 16724 C'est tout, je pense, ce que je puis 25 dire maintenant. StenoTran 3540 1 16725 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Je pense 2 que TVA a fait le point qu'ils ont un pourcentage de 3 contenu canadien assez haut. 4 16726 M. CURZI: Incontestablement. En ce 5 sens-là, nous sommes d'accord; nous revenons à ce qu'il 6 y a de spécifique avec la télévision francophone, et 7 c'est que les contenus canadiens sont largement 8 assurés. L'audience est très fidèle, l'audience 9 consomme d'une manière privilégiée des produits qui 10 originent de chez nous. Donc, s'il y a des efforts à 11 faire, c'est au niveau de maintenir la qualité et le 12 niveau de production des émissions canadiennes chez 13 nous. 14 16727 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: En effet, 15 vous avez parlé, à la page 4 de votre mémoire, de la 16 dégradation de la qualité. Qu'est-ce que vous voulez 17 dire par ça? 18 16728 M. CURZI: Ce que je veux dire -- et 19 nous en sommes particulièrement affectés 20 quotidiennement -- c'est que le développement de la 21 télévision canadienne s'est fait de telle sorte que 22 nous avons encouragé le développement d'une structure 23 industrielle et nous en étions tous conscients. 24 L'actuelle prolifération de producteurs, l'actuelle 25 prolifération de canaux spécialisés, le morcellement, StenoTran 3541 1 la multiplication des structures industrielles sont une 2 menace puisque chacun doit gérer maintenant une somme 3 qui, semble-t-il, n'a pas augmenté énormément. 4 Autrement dit, c'est comme si on avait le même gâteau 5 mais que le nombre d'intervenants se partageait de plus 6 en plus. 7 16729 En ce sens-là, les budgets de 8 production ont tendance à plafonner et ça, c'est 9 extrêmement inquiétant parce que, quand il y a un 10 plafonnement au niveau des budgets de production, c'est 11 évident que ce sont les travailleurs et ceux de 12 première ligne qui voient leurs conditions de travail 13 se dégrader. Cette menace-là, elle est permanente, 14 constante, et c'est notre combat quotidien pour essayer 15 de maintenir des conditions de travail. Que ce soit 16 dans le temps, dans la durée, dans les conditions 17 physiques de travail, dans les cachets qui sont versés 18 aux artistes-interprètes, on doit dire que depuis 19 quelques années on n'assiste pas du tout à une 20 augmentation ou à une bonification de nos conditions de 21 production, c'est plutôt le contraire. 22 16730 Donc, en ce sens-là, il faut qu'il y 23 ait une sorte de corset, et le CRTC doit absolument 24 maintenir une sorte de réglementation qui établisse 25 clairement les règles du jeu. StenoTran 3542 1 16731 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: Si je peux me 2 permettre d'ajouter, ce que M. Curzi décrit a des 3 conséquences directes sur la programmation puisque, les 4 cadences augmentant, il y a de plus en plus une 5 tendance dans les productions à dire que, là où il y 6 avait peut-être une période de répétitions plus longue, 7 on écourte; là où il y avait possibilité de faire 8 plusieurs prises, il n'y en a plus qu'une, et ainsi de 9 suite. 10 16732 Ceci fait que, pour les artistes- 11 interprètes eux-mêmes, au niveau de la qualité de leur 12 travail et de leur professionnalisme, ils se retrouvent 13 souvent dans des situations extrêmement difficiles où 14 ils savent qu'ils n'ont pas pu donner le meilleur 15 d'eux-mêmes et que le public n'obtiendra pas le 16 meilleur produit qu'il pourrait obtenir à cause des 17 circonstances qui font que les cadences sont 18 augmentées, les budgets sont plafonnés et qu'il y a une 19 prolifération de maisons de production, chacune 20 travaillant évidemment en concurrence avec sa voisine 21 et chacune essayant de livrer le produit, mais dans le 22 sens le moins noble du terme, le plus rapidement 23 possible pour remplir un espace et que ça s'appelle une 24 émission. 25 16733 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Je StenoTran 3543 1 comprends. Vous cherchez un équilibre dans tout ce 2 secteur-là... 3 16734 M. CURZI: Oui. 4 16735 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: ... et je 5 comprends que vous parlez de certaines conditions de 6 travail. Mais en même temps il faut aller chercher les 7 moyens pour supporter de plus en plus de productions 8 francophones, non pas pour survivre en termes des 9 francophones au Canada mais aussi dans un monde de plus 10 en plus envahi par les productions qui viennent de 11 partout. Alors c'est une balance importante à trouver. 12 16736 M. CURZI: Excusez-moi, on pense 13 qu'une des manières en tout cas d'assurer qu'il y ait 14 un équilibre, c'est que les groupes de créateurs soient 15 présents dans l'ensemble des organismes, à l'intérieur 16 des organismes qui gèrent des fonds publics. On pense 17 que c'est encore un des moyens très forts pour les 18 créateurs de s'assurer d'une qualité du contenu, d'une 19 qualité du travail. 20 16737 Si on peut être toujours les 21 gardiens -- les gardiens, oui -- de ce que l'ensemble 22 du peuple consacre à sa représentation culturelle, je 23 pense que ça devient la seule façon qu'on a pour nous 24 de ne pas nécessairement adopter un modèle mondial... 25 je pense qu'il y a cette aberration que nous sommes de StenoTran 3544 1 plus en plus confrontés, obligés d'adopter un modèle 2 qui ne nous convient pas nécessairement. Si l'État, si 3 les organismes publics, si les fonds publics ne servent 4 pas à préserver un modèle de société qui n'est pas 5 nécessairement le même que celui qui nous entoure, 6 alors, vraiment, là, on est dans la panade. 7 16738 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: On parle 8 souvent dans nos audiences de la diversité en effet de 9 la programmation, et ce mot peut vraiment souligner 10 beaucoup de questions qui sont importantes. 11 16739 Avant qu'on revienne à ce point-là, 12 une question peut-être un peu plus spécifique. Au 13 paragraphe 18 vous parlez des canaux spécialisés, des 14 services spécialisés; vous l'avez mentionné aujourd'hui 15 aussi. 16 16740 Est-ce que vous avez quelque chose à 17 nous recommander qui est plus spécifique vis-à-vis les 18 recommandations pour un accroissement graduel du 19 pourcentage de contenu canadien à leur antenne? Est-ce 20 que vous avez une recommandation spécifique vis-à-vis 21 le pourcentage et cet accroissement graduel? 22 16741 M. CURZI: Un des moyens pour obtenir 23 l'accroissement du contenu canadien dans le cas des 24 canaux spécialisés nous apparaît être peut-être la 25 possibilité de fractionner le contenu canadien en StenoTran 3545 1 émissions produites et en émissions de langue étrangère 2 produites ailleurs et diffusées sur les ondes, et 3 doublées ici, évidemment. 4 16742 Si on augmentait ou si on avait les 5 mêmes exigences de contenu canadien face aux émissions 6 doublées, et que ce soit graduel, sur un certain nombre 7 d'années, ce serait exiger des canaux spécialisés, qui 8 consomment beaucoup de productions en langue étrangère 9 doublées un peu partout... ce serait leur demander à 10 eux de faire un effort supplémentaire pour que les 11 émissions qu'ils achètent qui sont en langue étrangère 12 soient doublées chez nous et soient donc accessibles au 13 contenu canadien, qui est défini, je pense, à 50 pour 14 cent d'une émission produite. Ce serait une manière 15 douce et pas trop coûteuse d'augmenter les demandes 16 pour que le contenu canadien soit respecté dans le cas 17 des canaux spécialisés. 18 16743 Il y a, plus largement, à l'intérieur 19 de ces canaux-là, évidemment la production d'émissions 20 dont le contenu est canadien. Encore là, dans le cas 21 du marché francophone, on pourrait je pense avoir des 22 exigences raisonnables face aux canaux spécialisés 23 puisque là encore la loi de la consommation de ses 24 propres produits devrait jouer en faveur de ce contenu 25 canadien. StenoTran 3546 1 16744 Ça pourrait être une des manières, en 2 tout cas, qui apporterait aussi du travail, un travail 3 important dans un secteur très pointu du marché 4 francophone, qui est le secteur du doublage, où on mène 5 des combats féroces pour développer cette industrie et 6 la rendre autant que possible concurrentielle et 7 éventuellement exportable, parce qu'on croit qu'il y a 8 là un créneau où nous sommes très bien situés, entre 9 l'Amérique et l'Europe, qui nous permettrait de 10 développer une expertise qui soit exportable. 11 16745 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: Si je peux me 12 permettre, je m'excuse, d'ajouter... 13 16746 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Pas du 14 tout. On prend le temps nécessaire. 15 16747 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: D'accord. 16 16748 C'est simplement pour vous dire qu'il 17 y a deux aspects qui, pour nous, travaillent ensemble. 18 D'une part, lorsqu'on dit: "S'il vous plaît, soyez 19 extrêmement vigilants quand il s'agit d'accorder de 20 nouvelles licences pour des canaux spécialisés", on 21 n'est pas en train de dire qu'il ne doit pas y en avoir 22 d'autres mais qu'il faut effectivement faire bien 23 attention parce que la capacité de produire de la 24 programmation n'est pas illimitée et qu'il y a un 25 problème à un moment donné à ce qu'il y ait une StenoTran 3547 1 saturation, une répétition trop grande des mêmes 2 émissions, ce qui fait que les gens se désintéressent 3 de toute façon. 4 16749 Alors, d'un côté, on dit: Si on peut 5 être vigilants au niveau du nombre de canaux 6 spécialisés qui sont présents, on peut ensuite regarder 7 au niveau de la programmation elle-même de quelle façon 8 peut-on travailler pour en arriver à un contenu 9 canadien plus élevé. Et c'est là, comme l'explique 10 M. Curzi, qu'il y a deux voies; il y a effectivement la 11 voie du contenu pour ce qui est de la production au 12 Canada, et d'ouvrir la possibilité d'accorder des 13 crédits pour le doublage au Canada d'émission produites 14 ailleurs, ce qui aiderait à accroître ce pourcentage de 15 contenu canadien. 16 16750 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Merci, 17 madame. 18 16751 M. CURZI: C'est plus clair quand 19 vous le dites. 20 16752 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Maintenant, 21 un autre point très important dans votre mémoire est 22 l'autonomie des stations régionales. 23 16753 M. CURZI: Oui. 24 16754 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Vous 25 proposez que le Conseil "établisse des quotas StenoTran 3548 1 d'émissions locales pour assurer une plus grande 2 diversité de la production et un meilleur reflet des 3 réalités régionales." Je cite. 4 16755 Pourriez-vous définir la production 5 locale et régionale et ensuite nous dire quels sont ces 6 quotas que vous recommandez? Qu'est-ce que vous voulez 7 dire? 8 16756 M. CURZI: Ce qu'on veut dire, c'est 9 que le problème que nous avons, c'est évidemment que, 10 de plus en plus, les stations mères constituent 11 l'ensemble de la programmation. Il y a un besoin 12 patent pour que les productions régionales aient accès 13 au réseau national. Pour qu'elles aient accès au 14 réseau national, les télédiffuseurs, à même une part de 15 leur budget qui est consacrée aux productions 16 indépendantes, doivent en dépenser une partie dans des 17 productions régionales de telle sorte que l'on 18 maintienne en vie et que l'on bonifie ces productions- 19 là pour qu'elles aient une chance d'accès au réseau 20 national. 21 16757 Est-ce que je suis clair? 22 16758 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Pas tout à 23 fait. 24 16759 M. CURZI: Pas tout à fait. 25 16760 Je pense qu'à l'intérieur des StenoTran 3549 1 licences qui sont accordées par le CRTC il y a une part 2 du budget qui doit être consacrée aux productions 3 indépendantes. Ce qu'on recommande, ce qu'on souhaite, 4 c'est qu'une partie de ce budget consacré aux 5 productions indépendantes soit réservée... 6 16761 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Qui est 7 géré par le Fonds de production, pas le CRTC. 8 16762 Vous parlez du Fonds de production de 9 télévision canadienne, le fonds de Téléfilm? 10 16763 M. CURZI: Oui. 11 16764 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Vous parlez 12 de ce fonds-là? 13 16765 M. CURZI: C'est de ce fonds-là dont 14 on parle. 15 16766 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Il y a déjà 16 une portion pour la production régionale. 17 16767 M. CURZI: Il y a déjà une portion? 18 16768 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Oui. 19 16769 Est-ce que vous recommandez qu'on 20 l'accroisse? 21 16770 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: En fait, prenons un 22 exemple concret: la région de Québec. 23 16771 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Oui. C'est 24 ça que je voulais. 25 16772 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: Alors arrivons-y StenoTran 3550 1 immédiatement. 2 16773 Dans la situation actuelle -- et nous 3 pourrons y revenir plus en détail au moment des 4 renouvellements de licences pour cette région-là -- 5 essentiellement, ce qu'on veut dire, c'est qu'en ce 6 moment, la façon dont les choses fonctionnent, c'est 7 que pour rencontrer leurs obligations de licence, la 8 plupart du temps le contenu régional se limite à un 9 bulletin de nouvelles ou à quelque chose de cet ordre- 10 là, et qu'une fois que cet élément-là a été ajouté à la 11 programmation ou remplace le bulletin de nouvelles 12 venant de Montréal; les gens ont un peu l'impression 13 que, bon, ça y est, notre mandat a été réalisé et tout 14 est beau. 15 16774 Nous, nous constatons, d'une part, 16 qu'il y a au niveau de la ville de Québec un bassin 17 important de comédiens, de réalisateurs. Il y a une 18 vie culturelle très intense, il y a une vie théâtrale 19 intense, il y a là un bassin de gens qui peuvent 20 travailler à des émissions d'une autre nature que le 21 simple bulletin de nouvelles régional pour offrir une 22 programmation plus proche des intérêts de cette région- 23 là, produire un produit de qualité, et que ce produit 24 de qualité là, s'il y a un intérêt plus large, puisse 25 évidemment être repris par la station, par la chaîne StenoTran 3551 1 nationale, mais qu'il y ait un plus fort pourcentage de 2 programmation de la région elle-même. 3 16775 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Dans un 4 marché restreint, par contre, le marché francophone, si 5 on met plus d'emphase sur la production régionale du 6 type que vous avez décrit, quel sera l'impact sur les 7 autres types d'émissions? 8 16776 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: Madame, prenons un 9 exemple d'un autre secteur, qui est la radio. 10 Évidemment, on n'est pas ici pour discuter de la radio, 11 mais prenons cet exemple-là. 12 16777 Il y a quelques années, alors qu'il 13 n'y avait pas le phénomène de concentration au niveau 14 des grandes chaînes, on pouvait se retrouver dans une 15 situation où un talent dans une région pouvait se faire 16 entendre sur la radio de sa région, et éventuellement 17 ça venait à l'oreille d'un public plus large, et ainsi 18 de suite. Ceci n'est plus le cas, mais ça, c'est une 19 autre histoire. 20 16778 On a un peu le même problème du côté 21 des bassins de talents au niveau des régions, où il n'y 22 a qu'une solution qui s'offre aux gens; c'est de s'en 23 aller à Montréal pour essayer de faire carrière là 24 parce qu'il n'y a pas de débouchés autres que le 25 théâtre, qui, comme tout le monde sait, ne nourrit pas StenoTran 3552 1 son homme. 2 16779 Il y a là, il nous semble, une 3 possibilité pour la télévision régionale, dans sa 4 mission justement, d'avoir aussi ce mandat-là, qui est 5 d'offrir une fenêtre aux talents de cette région-là. 6 16780 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Maintenant, 7 madame, messieurs, est-ce qu'on peut se tourner vers la 8 menace de la publicité... 9 16781 M. CURZI: Ah, oui. 10 16782 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: ... et le 11 cancer de contenu que vous avez décrit ce matin. En 12 effet, vous en parlez dans votre mémoire, et je voulais 13 avoir une clarification là-dessus. 14 16783 Au paragraphe 25 vous parlez de ces 15 nouvelles formes de publicité... 16 16784 M. CURZI: Oui. 17 16785 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: ... ce 18 qu'on appelle en anglais "infomercials". C'est un peu 19 ça ou si c'est d'autres types... 20 16786 M. CURZI: Non, ce n'est pas 21 tellement celles-là. 22 16787 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: C'est plus 23 subtil que ça? 24 16788 M. CURZI: Ce dont on parle 25 nommément -- et je peux vous donner des exemples; il y StenoTran 3553 1 a des exemples assez patents -- c'est du lien qui est 2 en train de se faire entre la publicité et le contenu 3 même des émissions. Ça, ça nous apparaît épouvantable. 4 Je vous donne un exemple. 5 16789 Il y a une série d'émissions qui 6 s'appelle "Watatatow", je crois, où l'Agence spatiale 7 canadienne est commanditaire, mais elle l'est à 8 l'origine, et le résultat de ce financement-là, c'est 9 qu'à l'intérieur même de l'émission un des personnages 10 veut devenir astronaute. C'est un but louable en soi, 11 mais le fait d'intervenir au moment de la conception 12 même d'une émission et que ce soit donc une publicité 13 subliminale nous apparaît être à abolir et à éliminer 14 complètement. C'est une forme. 15 16790 D'autres formes. Par exemple, nous 16 sommes dans une série dramatique lourde, importante, 17 une scène entre deux personnages; je vous donne un 18 exemple qui n'est pas tout à fait fictif mais que je ne 19 veux pas nommer. Tout à coup vous voyez une petite 20 vache qui se met à se promener autour de votre écran. 21 Il y a un problème, là. Il y a un problème parce que 22 nous avons un placement de produit qui est plutôt indu. 23 Ou alors nous sommes dans une série où le personnage 24 central est alcoolique et, dans une scène, il se 25 convertit et il devient un buveur de lait. C'est, en StenoTran 3554 1 soi, excellent, nous préférons que tous les alcooliques 2 se mettent au lait, mais est-ce que c'est bien le cas 3 et le moyen pour intervenir? 4 16791 Ce type de publicité là est, pour 5 nous, à proscrire. 6 16792 En plus, je pense que le nombre de 7 minutes consacrées à la publicité à l'intérieur d'une 8 heure de diffusion doit rester ce qu'il est et il ne 9 doit pas augmenter. Ce type de publicité là, je ne 10 suis pas convaincu qu'elle soit comptabilisée ou 11 comptabilisable, et il me semble que là, on verse dans 12 un trop plein de publicité dont les effets sont très 13 clairs: il va y avoir une désaffection du public, une 14 saturation des gens, ce qui a tendance à multiplier le 15 désir des canaux spécialisés, mais c'est en soi une 16 pratique incorrecte, je pense, de la place nécessaire 17 de la publicité et de la commandite à l'intérieur de la 18 structure de production. 19 16793 Il y a donc des formes vicieuses de 20 publicité qui sont en train de s'instaurer. 21 16794 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Je pense 22 que je comprends et je peux saisir votre point de vue 23 vis-à-vis l'effet de ça sur le travail des artistes- 24 interprètes, mais une autre question peut être mise sur 25 la table, et c'est: Dans une ère où on cherche de plus StenoTran 3555 1 en plus de ressources pour la production, pour la 2 programmation en soi, pour que les auditoires 3 francophones aient accès à une programmation 4 diversifiée, vous trouvez toujours... parce que vous 5 nous laissez avec une question ici. Il faut voir à 6 cette question-là mais, si vous pouvez nous guider un 7 peu, entre avoir plus de ressources pour la protection 8 de la programmation et restreindre cette implication 9 disons des commanditaires dans la production, vous vous 10 trouvez où? 11 16795 M. CURZI: Il ne s'agit pas 12 d'empêcher, au contraire. Nous ne sommes nullement 13 opposés aux commandites, aux commanditaires et à la 14 publicité; ce n'est pas là le but. Il y a certaines 15 formes, celle qui lie la publicité au contenu même des 16 émissions, ça, ça nous semble à proscrire. Pour le 17 reste, nous sommes ouverts à toute forme de publicité 18 et de commandite. 19 16796 C'est sûr qu'il y a des fonds 20 importants qui sont là. Ce qu'on dit, cependant, c'est 21 qu'il faudra que les gens de cet univers-là s'assoient 22 et qu'il n'y ait pas aussi des effets pervers sur le 23 marché publicitaire lui-même, c'est-à-dire que si la 24 publicité emprunte le canal des télédiffuseurs et saute 25 par-dessus le marché, le lieu de production de la StenoTran 3556 1 publicité, alors là, on met en péril un univers qui 2 fonctionne très bien et qui est, pour mes membres en 3 tout cas, une source de revenus importante. 4 16797 Donc, tout ce qu'on souhaite, c'est 5 que certaines choses ne soient pas faites, qu'il n'y 6 ait pas trop d'abus. En quelque sorte, ce qu'on 7 demande, c'est que le CRTC s'assure que, dans ses 8 réglementations, il n'y ait pas de portes ouvertes à 9 trop de laxisme. Pour le reste, c'est un travail 10 auquel nous nous attablons actuellement, qui est 11 d'avoir des conversations avec l'ensemble du milieu sur 12 comment gérer les différentes formes de publicité à 13 l'intérieur des émissions pour qu'elles respectent le 14 marché publicitaire et ceux qui le supportent, c'est-à- 15 dire les créateurs, qui en sont les véhicules. 16 16798 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: C'est ça, 17 parce que j'essayais de faire le lien entre vos 18 commentaires et ceux de l'ACTRA... et je fais une 19 traduction: "Vous devriez prendre des actions pour 20 encourager la production de la publicité canadienne et 21 l'achat d'air time pour cette publicité dans les 22 entertainment programs scheduled in peak time." 23 16799 Est-ce que vous êtes d'accord avec 24 cette position d'ACTRA? 25 16800 M. CURZI: Mon Dieu, je la découvre StenoTran 3557 1 ce matin, cette position-là. Je ne peux pas répondre à 2 ça, je ne sais pas. 3 16801 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: C'est juste 4 pour essayer de comprendre. Les milieux sont 5 différents, mais c'est un point important. 6 16802 Mme BEAUCHEMIN: Je pense que, au 7 risque de me répéter et de paraître très lourde et 8 didactique, l'essentiel du message de l'Union des 9 artistes, c'est qu'effectivement nous ne sommes 10 aucunement opposés à la publicité, nous reconnaissons 11 la publicité comme faisant partie de notre société; ça, 12 la question ne se pose pas. 13 16803 On ne peut certainement pas être en 14 désaccord avec nos camarades de l'ACTRA lorsqu'ils 15 souhaitent qu'il y ait davantage de publicité produite 16 au Canada; ça, c'est évident qu'on ne s'y oppose 17 d'aucune manière. 18 16804 Il y a deux messages. L'un est celui 19 que M. Curzi vient de vous expliquer de façon très 20 éloquente; l'autre, qui est la question que vous posez, 21 est la question de fond: Où se trouve l'argent pour 22 une production de qualité. 23 16805 Là-dessus, je reviens encore sur 24 cette notion que M. Curzi a développé à plusieurs 25 reprises: Nous savons que les fonds sont limités. StenoTran 3558 1 Dans une situation où les fonds sont limités, est-il 2 raisonnable de multiplier les canaux et les diffuseurs 3 sans égard, justement, à cette limitation des 4 ressources? N'est-il pas préférable, justement, de 5 s'assurer que ce qui existe a les moyens de fournir une 6 programmation de qualité? 7 16806 C'est un peu ça, notre inquiétude. 8 C'est qu'on a l'impression qu'on essaie de faire tout 9 en même temps. On essaie de développer une 10 programmation de qualité -- et ça, nous en sommes -- et 11 en même temps il semble y avoir une tendance à se dire: 12 Mais, parce qu'il y a multiplication de canaux 13 ailleurs, il faut absolument suivre le même modèle. 14 16807 CONSEILLÈRE PENNEFATHER: Merci. 15 Merci beaucoup. 16 16808 C'est la fin de mes questions, Madame 17 la Présidente. 18 16809 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Merci beaucoup, 19 Monsieur Curzi, Madame Beauchemin et... c'est 20 Monsieur Choquette, je crois? 21 16810 M. CHOQUETTE: Oui. 22 16811 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Nous vous remercions 23 de votre participation. 24 16812 M. CURZI: Merci, madame, pour la 25 qualité de vos questions. StenoTran 3559 1 16813 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Nous vous souhaitons 2 un bon voyage de retour. Vous rentrez à Montréal, je 3 suppose? 4 16814 M. CURZI: Oui. 5 16815 LA PRÉSIDENTE: À la pluie. 6 16816 Madame la Secrétaire, voulez-vous 7 inviter le prochain participant, s'il vous plaît. 8 16817 Mme SANTERRE: Merci, Madame la 9 Présidente. 10 16818 La prochaine présentation sera faite 11 par Impératif français. 12 16819 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Bonjour, messieurs 13 dames. Allez-y quand vous êtes prêts. 14 PRÉSENTATION / PRESENTATION 15 16820 M. PERREAULT: Dans un premier temps, 16 nous tenons à vous remercier pour bien avoir accepté de 17 nous recevoir aujourd'hui et nous profiterons de 18 l'occasion pour vous faire part de recommandations, de 19 suggestions ou de commentaires, nous le souhaitons, 20 susceptibles d'améliorer la qualité de la télévision 21 canadienne. Mais, avant de débuter la présentation, 22 j'aimerais vous présenter les membres de la table: 23 tout d'abord ici, en arrière, M. Léo Labrie, membre 24 d'Impératif français; Mme Lucie Carrière, adjointe 25 administrative; M. Raynald Charest, conseiller aux StenoTran 3560 1 questions ontariennes; et Mme Nathalie Mathieu, vice- 2 présidente d'Impératif français. 3 16821 Nous avons avec nous un document que 4 nous avons prélevé du site Internet du CRTC. Il a pour 5 titre: "Ici le CRTC". Je vais vous lire quelques 6 extraits de ce document-là. 7 16822 En premier il est dit ici: 8 "Partout où se trouve une radio, 9 un téléviseur ou un téléphone, 10 nous veillons au maintien des 11 caractéristiques qui font la 12 spécificité des Canadiens et du 13 Canada. Nous veillons également 14 à assurer aux Canadiens l'accès 15 aux meilleurs services 16 possibles." (Tel que lu) 17 16823 Il est dit plus loin: 18 "Le CRTC a pour rôle d'assurer 19 une programmation diverse et de 20 qualité, satisfaisant les 21 intérêts les plus variés, de 22 favoriser la production et la 23 diffusion d'émissions 24 canadiennes et de veiller à ce 25 que la programmation respecte StenoTran 3561 1 les normes canadiennes." (Tel 2 que lu) 3 16824 Également, un peu plus loin, il est 4 également dit: 5 "Le Canada d'abord. 6 Tout en permettant aux abonnés 7 du câble d'avoir accès aux 8 services étrangers les plus 9 populaires, le CRTC veille à ce 10 que la majorité des canaux 11 soient réservés aux services 12 canadiens. Cela a pour but de 13 promouvoir l'essor et la variété 14 des services canadiens de 15 programmation." (Tel que lu) 16 16825 À cet égard, nous formulerons 17 aujourd'hui certaines recommandations et nous demandons 18 au CRTC: 19 16826 - De modifier ou d'adopter des 20 règlements et les politiques nécessaires pour que les 21 Canadiens aient accès à un plus grand nombre de 22 stations publiques et privées de télévision canadienne. 23 Vous n'êtes pas sans savoir, comme nous le savons, 24 qu'un grand nombre de câblodistributeurs vont favoriser 25 la diffusion de stations américaines avant les stations StenoTran 3562 1 canadiennes lorsque la réglementation canadienne ne 2 l'exige pas. 3 16827 - D'adopter ou de modifier les 4 règlements et les politiques nécessaires pour que les 5 Canadiens du Canada hors Québec aient accès à un plus 6 grand nombre de stations publiques et privées de 7 télévision canadienne de langue française. Compte tenu 8 de leur fort contenu canadien, les stations de langue 9 française devraient, à notre avis, bénéficier d'une 10 priorité plus élevée en câblodistribution. 11 16828 À notre avis également le CRTC 12 devrait envisager: 13 16829 - D'imposer la présence de sept ou 14 huit stations de langue française partout au Canada. 15 16830 - D'adopter des règlements, ou de 16 les modifier, pour que dans la capitale canadienne, 17 Ottawa, la capitale des deux langues officielles, les 18 citoyens canadiens aient accès en priorité aux signaux 19 des stations de télévision canadienne. Encore là, nous 20 ne sommes pas sans savoir que des stations canadiennes 21 à fort contenu canadien se voient refuser par le 22 câblodistributeur d'Ottawa la diffusion auprès de la 23 population de la région. Tout de même, lorsque nous 24 regardons la grille de ce câblodistributeur, nous 25 constatons que nous y trouvons dans bien des cas des StenoTran 3563 1 stations américaines. À notre avis, cela est 2 doublement étonnant, puisqu'il s'agit de la capitale du 3 Canada. 4 16831 - D'adopter les mesures nécessaires 5 pour que la politique et les règlements du CRTC 6 relatifs à l'attribution de licences aux réémetteurs 7 n'ait pas pour effet de priver les Canadiens de 8 stations de télévision à plus fort contenu canadien. 9 En effet, le câblodistributeur est tenu d'offrir les 10 réémetteurs en commençant par la bande de base du 11 service de base, privant ainsi, certaines fois, ses 12 abonnés et la région de la réception de signaux de 13 stations de télévision canadiennes à plus fort contenu 14 canadien. Dans cette région-ci, il y a cinq stations 15 réémettrices. 16 16832 Dans bien des cas le 17 câblodistributeur invoquera la raison de cette 18 obligation de diffuser ces signaux en provenance des 19 réémetteurs pour justifier le fait qu'il ne peut pas, 20 il n'a plus d'espace de libre dans sa grille pour 21 diffuser des stations canadiennes à plus fort contenu 22 canadien, et également pour justifier qu'une station 23 éducative aussi importante que Télé-Québec soit 24 déplacée au signal 70, que certains câblosélecteurs ne 25 peuvent capter. StenoTran 3564 1 16833 Il faut également savoir que ces 2 réémetteurs ont une production locale ou régionale 3 minime ou inexistante. En grande partie, la 4 programmation est celle de la station mère 5 indépendante, et le plus souvent à fort pourcentage 6 d'émissions américaines. Il faut également savoir que 7 ces stations réémettrices ont accès à l'assiette 8 publicitaire bien qu'il soit spécifié dans certains cas 9 qu'elles ne peuvent avoir accès à l'assiette 10 publicitaire locale et régionale; néanmoins, elles ont 11 accès à l'assiette publicitaire nationale, ce qui 12 occasionne sûrement des pertes de revenus aux stations 13 régionales et locales qui, elles, le plus souvent, ont 14 une programmation locale et régionale et également à 15 fort contenu canadien. 16 16834 Le CRTC devrait exiger une teneur 17 canadienne plus élevée de la part des demandeurs de 18 licences pour réémetteurs ou refuser carrément 19 l'émission de nouvelles licences si cela a comme 20 conséquence d'empêcher la diffusion de stations 21 canadiennes à plus fort contenu canadien. 22 16835 Nous demandons également au CRTC de 23 modifier ou d'adopter des règlements pour que les 24 câblodistributeurs canadiens réservent les meilleurs 25 signaux aux stations de télévision canadiennes ayant le StenoTran 3565 1 plus fort contenu canadien dans l'ensemble de leur 2 programmation et aux heures de grande écoute. Il est 3 troublant de constater que, dans bien des cas, les 4 câblodistributeurs offrent dans leur service de base 5 l'accès à des stations américaines alors que nous 6 savons pertinemment bien que dans certains cas des 7 stations canadiennes à fort contenu canadien se voient 8 refuser l'accès au service de base et même aux signaux 9 de l'ensemble de la grille de certains 10 câblodistributeurs. 11 16836 Nous demandons également au CRTC: 12 16837 - D'adopter des règlements ou de les 13 modifier pour que les Canadiens aient accès à un plus 14 grand nombre d'émissions canadiennes produites et 15 diffusées par les stations de télévision canadiennes. 16 Nous savons, et vous le savez, qu'il y a des stations 17 canadiennes de langue anglaise qui ne respectent pas 18 les quotas minimums imposés par le CRTC de 60 pour cent 19 pour l'ensemble de la programmation et de 50 pour cent 20 pour les heures de grande écoute. Ce phénomène n'est 21 pas sans avoir d'effet sur l'érosion culturelle, dit 22 différemment l'américanisation culturelle des ondes, et 23 par conséquent le nivellement culturel de l'ensemble de 24 la société canadienne. 25 16838 - D'adopter ou de modifier des StenoTran 3566 1 règlements pour que le gouvernement canadien, 2 l'industrie de la télévision et l'industrie de la 3 câblodistribution consacrent plus de ressources à la 4 production et à la diffusion d'émissions canadiennes en 5 s'assurant qu'un financement adéquat est par conséquent 6 disponible. 7 16839 Il y a des stations de télévision, 8 des chaînes, qui font un excellent travail en termes de 9 contenu canadien, et les programmes d'accès devraient, 10 à notre avis, favoriser les stations qui font bien ou 11 qui font mieux. Il devrait y avoir une possibilité pour 12 elles d'avoir un accès élargi à l'ensemble des 13 ressources sans néanmoins se soustraire à l'obligation 14 faite à d'autres stations de bien vouloir respecter les 15 quotas minimums imposés. Il devrait y avoir un 16 incitatif à la canadianisation des ondes. 17 16840 - D'adopter ou de modifier des 18 règlements pour que les téléspectateurs bénéficient 19 d'une plus grande production locale, régionale et 20 communautaire. 21 16841 Encore une fois, j'aimerais vous lire 22 un extrait du document qui a été retiré du site 23 Internet du CRTC, "Le Canada au premier plan". 24 "Conformément au mandat que nous 25 a confié le Parlement, nous StenoTran 3567 1 insistons pour que les 2 radiodiffuseurs accordent une 3 place dominante à la dimension 4 canadienne, en particulier à la 5 programmation qui porte sur les 6 activités et les dossiers 7 d'intérêt local ou 8 communautaire." (Tel que lu) 9 16842 Alors nous demandons au CRTC de 10 modifier ou d'adopter des règlements de telle sorte que 11 le citoyen canadien ait accès à une plus grande 12 production locale, régionale et communautaire en 13 s'assurant que les stations locales et régionales 14 consacrent plus de temps dans leur programmation aux 15 productions locales et régionales. Et là, ça soulève 16 encore une fois toute la question des réémetteurs, qui 17 n'ont aucune obligation de programmation locale ou 18 régionale et qui ont quand même priorité d'accès sur 19 les signaux auprès des câblodistributeurs et qui ne 20 sont pas sans avoir d'effet également sur l'effritement 21 ou la fragmentation, si vous voulez, de l'assiette 22 publicitaire et la fragmentation et l'effritement des 23 auditoires en région. 24 16843 Il serait peut-être également 25 souhaitable de rétablir l'obligation aux StenoTran 3568 1 câblodistributeurs de fournir une programmation 2 communautaire à la région qu'ils desservent, ayant été 3 informés que cette obligation-là avait disparu des 4 règlements du CRTC. 5 16844 Nous sommes disponibles pour répondre 6 à diverses questions si toutefois il y en avait. 7 16845 Merci. 8 16846 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Oui, Monsieur 9 Perreault. Bonjour. 10 16847 M. PERREAULT: Bonjour. 11 16848 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Votre présentation, 12 votre soumission écrite et le nom de votre groupe, qui 13 est Impératif français, semblent viser surtout les 14 problèmes d'accès à la programmation en français, mais 15 je crois ce matin que vous allez plus loin que ça; vous 16 parlez de l'américanisation de certains marchés et là, 17 vous vous adressez aussi aux effets pour le marché 18 anglophone de cette américanisation-là. Je comprends 19 bien? 20 16849 M. PERREAULT: Oui. Bien, vous 21 savez, l'ensemble du monde télévisuel, c'est quand même 22 un ensemble, et les parties ont des effets entre elles. 23 Si le câblodistributeur choisit de donner priorité à 24 une station de télévision canadienne à faible contenu 25 canadien, ou si vous voulez à fort contenu américain, StenoTran 3569 1 au détriment de la diffusion d'un signal d'une station 2 de télévision canadienne à fort contenu canadien, 3 notamment les stations de langue française, vous 4 comprendrez avec nous que nous devrons à ce moment-là 5 parler carrément, d'un côté, d'américanisation des 6 ondes et, de l'autre, pour les francophones, 7 d'américanisation des ondes et d'anglicisation des 8 ondes. 9 16850 Finalement, le consommateur de 10 télévision ayant accès à l'ensemble de ces signaux- 11 là... et encore une fois, et vu dans une perspective 12 encore plus globale et en regardant en particulier la 13 situation des Canadiens français, des francophones hors 14 Québec, dans certains cas ils n'ont accès qu'à une 15 station de langue française, et nous savons que les 16 câblodistributeurs vont diffuser une quantité inouïe de 17 signaux de stations américaines, privant donc les 18 Canadiens de ces régions-là de l'accès à des stations 19 canadiennes à fort contenu d'émissions canadiennes. 20 16851 Nous demandons au CRTC, de par son 21 mandat, de réfléchir aux règlements existants pour que 22 des situations comme celles-ci n'existent pas dans la 23 capitale canadienne, Ottawa. 24 16852 C'est troublant d'apprendre que les 25 Canadiens de la capitale canadienne vont avoir accès à StenoTran 3570 1 des stations américaines en toute priorité alors qu'on 2 leur refuse l'accès à des stations canadiennes à fort 3 contenu canadien. Je sais qu'hier on annonçait que le 4 câblodistributeur de la région d'Ottawa-Carleton 5 inclurait dorénavant, à la prochaine révision de sa 6 grille, la diffusion du Canal D en français, mais vous 7 conviendrez avec nous que c'est très peu et très 8 insuffisant et qu'à notre avis la capital canadienne, 9 la capitale des deux langues officielles, devrait être 10 l'exemple sur lequel le CRTC et l'ensemble de la 11 population pourraient s'appuyer pour y retrouver un 12 modèle pour l'ensemble canadien. 13 16853 Je ne comprends pas, et nous ne 14 comprenons pas, qu'il y a certaines régions du Canada 15 où des Canadiens qui devraient être des Canadiens à 16 part entière n'ont pas accès à la télévision canadienne 17 dans leur langue et des régions où ils n'ont accès qu'à 18 une ou deux stations de langue française. Je pense que 19 le CRTC pourrait exiger des câblodistributeurs 20 l'obligation de diffuser un certain nombre de stations 21 canadiennes de langue française partout au Canada, et 22 je pense que ça va de soi selon le mandat du CRTC. 23 16854 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Je comprends très 24 bien le chevauchement des deux inquiétudes, le contenu 25 canadien et aussi le contenu francophone, mais c'est StenoTran 3571 1 surtout une préoccupation dans certaines régions, comme 2 celle de la capitale nationale, où il y a beaucoup de 3 francophones qui voudraient une panoplie plus large de 4 services et où justement il y a plusieurs réémetteurs, 5 plusieurs stations accessibles sur les ondes et qui 6 exigent l'accès à un canal. Donc les canaux deviennent 7 assez limités. 8 16855 Maintenant, si je comprends bien, 9 vous voudriez une comptabilisation qui mettrait les 10 services qui ont un plus grand contenu canadien en 11 priorité et vous inséreriez dans cette comptabilisation 12 les services francophones dans tous les marchés ou 13 seulement dans les marchés où il y a une forte 14 proportion de francophones? Évidemment, les Canadiens 15 en général dans tous les marchés où il y a une forte 16 proportion d'anglophones s'attendent aux mêmes services 17 qu'on reçoit dans les autres régions; alors là, il y a 18 un problème. 19 16856 Moi, je crois vous entendre dire que 20 le Conseil devrait comptabiliser le contenu canadien et 21 donner priorité, mais à ce moment-là vous voulez aussi 22 insérer dans la comptabilisation les services 23 francophones. Comment est-ce que vous marieriez les 24 deux dans les endroits où la population est en grande 25 majorité anglophone et qui, eux, évidemment, auraient StenoTran 3572 1 moins de services anglophones, incluant des services 2 populaires américains qui sont reçus dans d'autres 3 secteurs? 4 16857 M. PERREAULT: Là-dessus, je dois 5 vous dire qu'une bonne partie de notre raisonnement 6 repose sur le contenu canadien des stations de 7 télévision canadiennes au Canada indistinctement, pour 8 cette partie-ci du propos pour le moins, de la langue. 9 À notre avis, le CRTC devrait adopter les mesures 10 nécessaires de telle sorte que les Canadiens d'un océan 11 à l'autre aient accès en priorité, en toute priorité, à 12 l'ensemble des signaux, avec priorité accordée dans le 13 choix des meilleurs signaux offerts par les 14 câblodistributeurs aux stations à plus fort contenu 15 canadien, ce qui serait à mon avis un incitatif 16 important de la part des stations à canadianiser 17 davantage leur programmation, leur contenu émissions. 18 16858 Quant à la situation de la capitale 19 canadienne, Ottawa, je vais laisser à mon collègue, 20 M. Charest, le soin de commenter. 21 16859 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Monsieur Charest. 22 16860 M. CHAREST: Oui. Je suis un 23 résident de la région d'Ottawa et, dans ma région, le 24 câblodistributeur a décidé en 1997... il y avait quatre 25 nouveaux canaux canadiens de langue française dont le StenoTran 3573 1 contenu canadien est assez fort, et le 2 câblodistributeur a décidé de ne pas nous les offrir. 3 Je vois, par exemple, des Space Channels ou du golf ou 4 des choses comme de la course automobile, de la course 5 nautique, offerts comme services. Je vois aussi des 6 choses comme... il y a trois canaux américains de 7 nouvelles continues qui me sont offerts alors qu'on ne 8 m'offre pas Le Canal Nouvelles de TVA, qui est un canal 9 canadien. 10 16861 Alors il y a des canaux spécialisés, 11 des chaînes spécialisées canadiennes de langue 12 française qui, à mon avis, dans la capitale du Canada, 13 auraient dû avoir une priorité plus élevée que des 14 chaînes américaines ou même des chaînes qui ont un 15 contenu élevé américain. C'est ça qui est, à mon avis, 16 le problème dans le région de la capitale nationale. 17 16862 Il y a quand même une population 18 francophone assez forte, et j'arrive mal à expliquer 19 qu'on ait oublié le fait qu'on est dans la capitale 20 nationale, qu'il y a une population francophone assez 21 forte. 22 16863 On peut même penser aussi à Cornwall 23 ou au nord de l'Ontario, et on se retrouve avec des 24 problèmes semblables. Des chaînes américaines vont 25 passer avant des chaînes canadiennes de langue StenoTran 3574 1 française spécialisées. 2 16864 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Vous visez donc une 3 réorganisation de la réglementation, parce qu'en ce 4 moment, comme vous savez, il faut qu'il y ait une 5 prépondérance de signaux canadiens, si on parle au 6 départ de signaux canadiens... et j'habite à Ottawa 7 aussi et je comprends la frustration au niveau de 8 l'accès aux services francophones. Alors à ce moment- 9 là vous voudriez qu'on change, que ce ne soit plus une 10 prépondérance seulement de canaux canadiens et ensuite, 11 dans les étages, la capacité d'offrir un à un, un 12 service étranger et un service canadien, au lieu de ça 13 vous voudriez, je crois que je vous ai entendu dire, 14 Monsieur Perreault, sept ou huit services francophones 15 partout et ensuite des services américains s'il y a des 16 canaux disponibles. Alors ce serait tous les services. 17 16865 Et à Ottawa, je suis d'accord avec 18 vous, il y a des réémettrices de services qui 19 proviennent de Toronto, il y en a qui sont accessibles 20 à Hamilton, et il y a aussi le service multilingue. 21 16866 Vous avez dit cinq. Quels sont les 22 deux autres? Il y a CFMT multilingue... 23 16867 M. CHAREST: Attendez... Global. 24 16868 LA PRÉSIDENTE: ... Hamilton, Citytv. 25 16869 M. CHAREST: Global est pratiquement StenoTran 3575 1 un réémetteur. 2 16870 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Oui, mais Global... 3 16871 M. CHAREST: J'ai appelé Global... 4 16872 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Non. Global, c'est 5 un service ontarien. 6 16873 M. CHAREST: C'est un service 7 ontarien... 8 16874 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Quel serait le 9 cinquième? 10 16875 M. PERREAULT: Ici, on a CHRO 11 Pembroke, CFMT, Citytv, CHCH Hamilton... 12 16876 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Hamilton, oui. 13 16877 M. PERREAULT: ... et nous avons 14 inclus Global parce qu'il a très peu de production; on 15 a dit "inexistante ou minime". Alors c'est vraiment un 16 réémetteur. 17 16878 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Il faudrait vraiment 18 revoir à votre avis la réglementation parce que, comme 19 c'est là, quand on est sur les ondes, que ce soit Radio 20 Nord... il y a beaucoup de services sur les ondes à 21 Ottawa, alors à ce moment-là ils ont priorité. Pour 22 offrir tous les canaux canadiens, il faudrait éliminer 23 évidemment des canaux américains qui sont accessibles 24 ailleurs. 25 16879 M. PERREAULT: Il y a de fait, StenoTran 3576 1 madame, même sur la bande du service de base des 2 câblodistributeurs, des stations américaines alors 3 qu'on refuse... on dira peut-être que le signal est 4 impur, mais néanmoins... 5 16880 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Oui. Ce sont souvent 6 des canaux... il y en a un service en particulier qui 7 est un canal limité mais le service américain a accepté 8 d'être sur un canal limité. Je suppose que si les 9 services canadiens étaient prêts à faire la même chose, 10 ce serait une possibilité. 11 16881 Maintenant, comment définissez-vous 12 une région bilingue? Et est-ce qu'à votre avis une 13 région bilingue -- vous parlez de région bilingue dans 14 votre soumission écrite -- devrait être traitée 15 différemment des autres régions du Canada? C'est pour 16 ça que j'essayais d'avoir vos positions sur comment le 17 Conseil devrait exiger plus de services francophones. 18 Maintenant, passons de canadien à canadien de langue 19 française au Canada. 20 16882 Comme vous savez, nous nous sommes 21 penchés assez récemment sur cette question avec la 22 demande de TVA, dont nous ne pouvons pas parler puisque 23 la décision n'est pas émise, mais il y a eu beaucoup de 24 discussion sur est-ce qu'on l'exige partout, est-ce 25 qu'on le fait là où il y a une proportion quelconque de StenoTran 3577 1 francophones selon Statistiques Canada, est-ce qu'on 2 définit des régions bilingues et on les traite 3 différemment, ou est-ce que vous suggérez que partout 4 au Canada, quelle que soit la population, on exige je 5 crois que vous avez dit sept ou huit services de langue 6 française, autres que Radio-Canada évidemment, quelle 7 que soit la composition de la population? 8 16883 M. PERREAULT: Il faut tout de suite 9 faire une distinction, je pense, entre les régions où 10 la minorité a déjà accès à plus de services dans sa 11 langue que le groupe majoritaire. Je pense que, dans 12 des régions comme Montréal et dans des régions comme 13 l'Outaouais, le nombre de stations de télévision de 14 langue anglaise, canadiennes et américaines, 15 accessibles par les abonnés est supérieur à ce à quoi 16 les francophones peuvent avoir accès, ce qui m'amène au 17 point de départ. 18 16884 À notre avis, et quitte à ce que nous 19 ayons à le répéter et à le répéter... à notre avis, 20 partout au Canada les câblodistributeurs devraient être 21 tenus, dans l'allocation ou la distribution des 22 signaux, d'accorder priorité aux stations canadiennes 23 ayant le plus fort contenu canadien; et ça va bien avec 24 le mandat du CRTC. Sur la base de cet argument-là, 25 nous savons pertinemment bien que nous retrouverons, StenoTran 3578 1 d'un océan à l'autre, une très grande quantité de 2 stations de télévision canadiennes de langue française 3 dans la bande de base et le service de base des 4 câblodistributeurs. 5 16885 Ça, à notre avis, nous y tenons, 6 parce que le produit est également canadien et, étant 7 un produit canadien, en toute équité, et selon le 8 mandat du CRTC en plus, on devrait le retrouver dans la 9 bande de base des services de base des 10 câblodistributeurs, à moins qu'il y ait deux poids, 11 deux mesures, et j'ose espérer qu'il n'est pas question 12 de ça ici ou ailleurs pour le moins. 13 16886 Quant aux régions à l'extérieur du 14 Québec... parce qu'à l'intérieur du Québec, comme je 15 vous le disais, dans bien des cas l'accès aux stations 16 en langue anglaise est souvent plus large que celui de 17 l'accès aux stations de langue française; on parle des 18 grands bassins comme l'Outaouais et le bassin de 19 Montréal. Dans le cas des régions du Canada hors 20 Québec, à notre avis, si on parle de sept ou huit 21 stations pour l'ensemble canadien, la réglementation 22 pourrait permettre, pour le moins en tous les cas pour 23 la région de la capitale fédérale, de la capitale 24 canadienne, un accès encore plus large à un plus grand 25 nombre de stations de langue française. StenoTran 3579 1 16887 Je reviens au cas de la capitale 2 canadienne. C'est troublant, comme Canadien, comme 3 francophone, comme anglophone, de constater que dans la 4 capitale canadienne des stations canadiennes se font 5 refuser l'accès aux signaux du câblodistributeur pour 6 privilégier des stations canadiennes à plus faible 7 contenu canadien, donc à plus fort contenu américain, 8 et de retrouver chez le même câblodistributeur des 9 stations de télévision américaines. Là, on dit: Un 10 instant. Quel est le profil de la capitale canadienne? 11 Quel profil veut-on donner, ou présente la capitale 12 canadienne? Quel profil présente le Canada lorsqu'il 13 n'exige pas des câblodistributeurs, dans leur service 14 de base, en priorité la diffusion des stations 15 canadiennes, ce qui est carrément dans le mandat du 16 CRTC? 17 16888 Les réémetteurs, c'est un problème 18 également. Je pense que le CRTC aura à réfléchir à 19 toute la question. Réémetteurs dans les régions mal 20 desservies, soit; réémetteurs dans le cas des 21 télévisions éducatives, soit; dans le cas des 22 télévisions d'État, soit, ça va. Mais si le réémetteur 23 a comme effet, dans des régions bien desservies, de 24 priver les Canadiens de stations canadiennes à plus 25 fort contenu canadien, nous disons là-dessus: Un StenoTran 3580 1 instant. Il faudrait peut-être regarder les politiques 2 et les règlements pour éviter que des situations comme 3 celle-là se produisent. Et ce qui est doublement 4 gênant et embêtant, c'est que ça se produit dans la 5 capitale canadienne. 6 16889 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Quand vous proposez 7 qu'il y ait sept ou huit stations, sept ou huit 8 services de langue française qui soient accessibles 9 partout au Canada, comment est-ce que vous établiriez 10 la priorité des services francophones qui devraient 11 être offerts, par exemple, à Calgary, à Winnipeg, à 12 Vancouver? Parce que dans ces cas-là, si on y allait 13 selon le contenu canadien, c'est évident que la plupart 14 des services et des signaux francophones seraient 15 accessibles si la technologie le permet et si les coûts 16 le permettaient dans des villes comme Calgary, Winnipeg 17 ou... mais disons à Calgary, si on essayait de 18 s'assurer qu'il y ait sept ou huit services de langue 19 française, comment établiriez-vous les priorités des 20 services qui devraient y être accessibles, des services 21 de langue française? Est-ce que ce serait un service 22 généraliste, un service spécialisé... sans parler de 23 TVA, puisque la situation est devant nous. 24 16890 Est-ce que ce serait la société 25 d'État, par exemple, RDI? Qu'est-ce que vous StenoTran 3581 1 entrevoyez comme étant une réglementation raisonnable 2 lorsqu'il s'agirait d'imposer aux câblodistributeurs, 3 dans les régions où il y a peu de francophones, sept ou 4 huit services de langue française? 5 16891 M. PERREAULT: Il faut tout de suite 6 savoir qu'il y a peut-être des gens qui peuvent réagir 7 fortement à la demande de sept ou huit signaux de 8 langue française distribués au minimum par l'ensemble 9 des câblodistributeurs canadiens, sauf qu'il faut 10 savoir qu'il restera quand même approximativement au- 11 delà de 70 signaux en langue anglaise dans les régions 12 majoritairement anglophones. Donc ça n'enlève rien à 13 la quantité de services en langue anglaise que d'exiger 14 des câblodistributeurs de favoriser des stations 15 canadiennes à fort contenu canadien. 16 16892 Maintenant, quant à savoir lesquels 17 devraient faire partie des sept ou des huit, écoutez, 18 sans trop vouloir nous aventurer dans cette voie-là, 19 vous laissant davantage le soin de réfléchir à ce qui 20 devrait faire partie des services de base des 21 câblodistributeurs dans l'optique de cette obligation 22 de diffuser sept ou huit signaux de stations publiques 23 et privées de langue française, je pense qu'évidemment 24 les services de télévision d'État, la télévision d'État 25 devrait avoir priorité, et après -- et après -- celles StenoTran 3582 1 à plus fort contenu canadien. 2 16893 Je pense que c'est le but du CRTC et 3 je pense que c'est le choix de la société canadienne de 4 vouloir canadianiser son mode de vie entre autres par 5 l'intermédiaire de la radio et de la télévision, en 6 contrôlant l'offre de produits et en ne laissant pas la 7 demande entièrement diriger le marché. Ce choix a été 8 fait par le gouvernement canadien, par le Parlement, et 9 par conséquent par la population. 10 16894 Mais quant à vous dire précisément... 11 vous comprendrez avec nous que nous n'osons pas rentrer 12 là-dedans, vous laissant le soin de penser davantage à 13 ce qui devrait faire partie des sept ou des huit, mais 14 nous sommes heureux d'entendre que tout de même, 15 puisque vous posez la question sur les sept ou les 16 huit, ça laisse entendre que l'idée est reçue. 17 16895 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Quand vous dites, si 18 le Conseil établissait une règle d'ajouter sept ou huit 19 canaux, que la population anglophone ne perdrait pas de 20 services, de fait, ils en perdraient parce que, jusqu'à 21 l'implantation de la numérisation, c'est évident qu'il 22 n'y a pas beaucoup de canaux analogues en ce moment 23 dans plusieurs marchés d'accessibles. Mais là, 24 M. Charest me dirait: "Enlevez le golf, enlevez le 25 Speed Vision et mettez-y des"... alors c'est une StenoTran 3583 1 question de philosophie. Mais il y aurait des marchés 2 où il y aurait des services qui sont maintenant 3 accessibles qui ne le seraient plus. 4 16896 Si vous vous indignez des décisions 5 que le Conseil a prises par le passé, ça, c'est autre 6 chose. Ce sont des situations qui ont été permises et 7 que vous critiquez aujourd'hui, mais il y aurait un 8 réajustement nécessaire jusqu'à ce qu'on ait un 9 déploiement de la numérisation qui permette que plus de 10 canaux soient accessible. En ce moment, ce que nous 11 avons, c'est une réglementation dont tous les 12 câblodistributeurs peuvent bénéficier; donc ils peuvent 13 ajouter des canaux américains pour chaque canal 14 spécialisé canadien. 15 16897 Je comprends vos propos, mais comment 16 les mettre en oeuvre, évidemment, il y a toujours des 17 problèmes selon les attitudes des gens. Vous savez 18 comme nous que nous avons entendu TVA dernièrement qui 19 voulait la distribution partout, et ce ne sont pas tous 20 les Canadiens qui sont d'accord avec cette approche-là. 21 C'est une question d'essayer de trouver un équilibre. 22 16898 Vous voulez dire autre chose, 23 Monsieur Perreault? 24 16899 M. PERREAULT: Oui. D'abord, je 25 pense également qu'hier nous écoutions la télévision de StenoTran 3584 1 Radio-Canada, et RDI, dans la région d'Alfred... c'est 2 bizarre que dans une région comme ici nous apprenions 3 hier que la population canadienne de la région d'Alfred 4 n'a pas accès au Réseau de l'information de l'État 5 canadien. J'ai trouvé ça troublant de voir qu'une 6 réalité comme celle-là pouvait exister. 7 16900 Je veux revenir sur la notion de 8 perte. Vous dites que les anglophones perdraient s'il 9 y avait un plus grand nombre de stations de langue 10 française. Là-dessus, j'aimerais faire le commentaire 11 suivant. 12 16901 C'est toujours dérangeant d'entendre 13 que des Canadiens perdraient parce que le contenu 14 serait davantage canadien. 15 16902 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Monsieur Perreault, 16 je ne pense pas que... 17 16903 M. PERREAULT: Je veux juste vous 18 mentionner autre chose. Je veux juste vous mentionner 19 également que si c'est perdre que d'avoir la diffusion 20 de sept ou huit canaux de langue française, imaginez- 21 vous, sur la base strictement linguistique, ça fait 22 combien de temps est-ce qu'il y a des Canadiens qui 23 perdent parce qu'ils n'ont pas accès à une quantité 24 jugée minimale de stations canadiennes de langue 25 française. StenoTran 3585 1 16904 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Monsieur Perreault, 2 vos propos ne sont pas tout à fait justes. Je n'ai pas 3 dit qu'ils perdraient sans ajouter le qualificatif 4 qu'ils perdraient des services anglophones. Ce n'est 5 pas juste de dire que j'ai dit qu'ils perdraient; ils 6 perdraient quelque chose, qui est autre chose. Vous 7 êtes d'accord avec moi? 8 16905 M. PERREAULT: Je pense que nous nous 9 comprenons. 10 16906 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Oui, d'accord. 11 16907 Maintenant, vous parlez du problème 12 de la programmation locale, je crois, la disparition 13 dans plusieurs cas au Canada... je crois que vous vous 14 êtes adressé à ce problème... 15 16908 M. PERREAULT: Oui. 16 16909 LA PRÉSIDENTE: ... qui est 17 évidemment un problème, je suppose, au Canada français 18 aussi bien qu'au Canada anglais, à votre avis, où il y 19 a une certaine diminution de l'aspect local de la 20 programmation. 21 16910 Nous avons eu à travers le Canada 22 anglais, et au Canada français aussi... je suis allée, 23 par exemple, à Chicoutimi en juin; nous avons eu des 24 réunions avec le public qui font partie du procès- 25 verbal de cette audience et nous avons eu plusieurs StenoTran 3586 1 représentations de la part du public à ce effet-là. 2 16911 Est-ce que vous êtes d'avis que c'est 3 un problème au Canada français aussi? 4 16912 M. CHAREST: Là-dessus, ce qu'on a 5 soumis cette semaine ne porte pas sur la production 6 régionale comme telle au Canada français. On n'a pas 7 une opinion très, très forte là-dessus. 8 16913 Tout ce qu'on peut dire, c'est que 9 c'est vrai qu'on constate que la production régionale a 10 diminué, mais le contenu canadien est quand même assez 11 fort dans la télévision francophone canadienne; il est 12 demeuré fort. Même si on produit moins d'émissions à 13 Québec localement ou à Chicoutimi ou à Rimouski, il est 14 quand même fort. Le contenu canadien demeure fort. 15 16914 LA PRÉSIDENTE: C'est une 16 revendication des producteurs des régions, qui trouvent 17 qu'ils n'ont pas autant de possibilités de produire de 18 la programmation localement ou régionalement, que la 19 programmation est produite surtout à Montréal et est 20 une programmation genre réseau. 21 16915 Monsieur Perreault...? 22 16916 M. PERREAULT: Il faut quand même 23 comprendre que, dans la situation économique actuelle, 24 l'assiette publicitaire dans laquelle pigent la plupart 25 des stations de télévision est réduite, pour ne pas StenoTran 3587 1 dire faible. Alors si, d'une certaine façon, on a 2 probablement un courant de centralisation pour réduire 3 les coûts, aidé par le fait qu'il y a des réémetteurs 4 qui bénéficient des mêmes avantages sans aucune 5 obligation de production locale ou régionale, quel est 6 l'incitatif pour les stations de télévision locales ou 7 régionales quand ils pourraient importer de leur 8 station mère toute leur programmation comme les 9 réémetteurs le font? 10 16917 Alors il y a une concurrence; on 11 demande donc aux stations locales et régionales de 12 supporter des coûts d'exploitation additionnels que les 13 réémetteurs n'ont pas. 14 16918 Dans la révision, dans ce que nous 15 vous demandons lors du réexamen, si toutefois il y en 16 avait un, du comportement du CRTC dans l'émission des 17 licences pour réémetteurs, s'il n'y a pas obligation de 18 production locale et régionale, pour le moins il 19 faudrait peut-être imposer à la station mère 20 indépendante un plus fort contenu canadien pour 21 compenser le fait que, lorsqu'elles arrivent dans les 22 régions, elles viennent livrer une concurrence 23 d'auditoires et de marchés de publicité aux stations 24 locales et régionales. 25 16919 La prolifération du nombre de canaux, StenoTran 3588 1 du nombre de stations, l'assiette publicitaire qui 2 n'est probablement pas grandement... qui en tout cas 3 n'est sûrement pas proportionnellement croissante ne 4 sont sûrement pas sans avoir d'effet sur le contrôle 5 des coûts, la rationalisation de la programmation, et 6 fort probablement une perte de production locale ou 7 régionale. C'est peut-être celle-là que pourraient 8 être souvent tentées de faire disparaître en premier 9 les stations. 10 16920 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Vous souvenez-vous, 11 Monsieur Perreault, si vous vous êtes présenté devant 12 le Conseil, ou Monsieur Charest, lors de l'audience qui 13 a justement permis à CHCH et à City d'installer un 14 réémetteur à Ottawa? 15 16921 M. CHAREST: Je ne suis pas venu, 16 non, et je l'ai appris par les nouvelles; je pense que 17 c'était dans les journaux. C'est comme ça que je l'ai 18 appris. Je l'ai appris, je pense, dans le Globe and 19 Mail, qu'il y avait les réémetteurs ici, à Ottawa. 20 16922 LA PRÉSIDENTE: CFMT, c'est quelque 21 chose de différent, je suppose, parce que c'est une 22 station multilingue. 23 16923 Évidemment, la philosophie est un peu 24 l'espoir que ça localiserait les stations vraiment 25 locales en les incitant à garder leur programmation StenoTran 3589 1 locale pour être plus près de leur marché et aussi 2 parce qu'ils ont accès à la publicité locale. Mais il 3 semblerait, selon les plaintes que nous avons, les 4 représentations qu'on nous faites, que ça ne semble pas 5 nécessairement le cas. 6 16924 Alors je vous remercie, 7 Monsieur Perreault, Monsieur Charest, mesdames, 8 monsieur, et continuez à venir nous voir aussi souvent 9 que possible. 10 16925 M. PERREAULT: Nous vous remercions 11 infiniment. 12 16926 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Au revoir. 13 16927 Nous allons maintenant prendre une 14 pause de 15 minutes. We will take a 15-minute break 15 and be back at a quarter to eleven. 16 --- Short recess at / Courte suspension à 1028 17 --- Upon resuming at / Reprise à 1050 18 16928 Mme SANTERRE: Messieurs, mesdames, 19 Madame la Présidente, the next group will be Horizon 20 Interfaith Council. You may start now. 21 PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION 22 16929 MR. GILLANI: Good morning, Madam 23 Chair and the Commissioners. 24 16930 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good morning. 25 16931 MR. GILLANI: I believe we meet the StenoTran 3590 1 second time. Were you in Vancouver sitting as well? 2 16932 THE CHAIRPERSON: I have been to many 3 places. 4 16933 MR. GILLANI: So many places. My 5 name is Amir Gillani and I am from the American 6 Institute of Islamic Studies. I currently am the 7 President with the Horizon Interfaith Council. I take 8 pleasure in introducing my colleagues here. 9 16934 On my right is John Sullivan from the 10 United Church of Canada. On my left is Earl Smith from 11 the Church of Scientology. On my further left is Gil 12 Gillespie from the Unitarian Church of Ontario. 13 16935 The Horizon Interfaith Council was 14 formed 20 years ago to help faith groups make 15 television programming for Toronto community channels. 16 We organize resources for them and allocate broadcast 17 time. 18 16936 The arrangement has worked very well, 19 both for our members. We have 28 groups current in our 20 council and have assisted 70 faith groups that have 21 passed through our council. 22 16937 Our group has functioned with a great 23 spirit of harmony and communication for a very long 24 time. 25 16938 We want to talk to you today about a StenoTran 3591 1 reflection of local communities in the television 2 system. Like many others that have appeared to you, we 3 are concerned that our cities and our neighbourhoods 4 are disappearing from our television screens and we 5 think this a real loss to Canadians and that something 6 must be done about it. 7 16939 At the end of our presentation, we 8 would like to suggest a new approach, one that relies 9 on a group that up to now has taken a very minor role 10 in the television system. This is the voluntary 11 sector. 12 16940 Many people have in this hearing 13 expressed the concern that the local broadcasters were 14 reducing the hours they devote to local affairs. 15 16941 Horizon's, OUR, principal concern, of 16 course, is with the cable community channel. 17 16942 As we said in our written brief, Shaw 18 Cable seems to be turning their community channel into 19 a local news operation. This may fit the definition of 20 a community channel in the regulations, but it 21 certainly reduces community access to the channel. 22 Rogers have reduced resources to the point where 23 community access is disappearing. Horizon is the last 24 group that we know of which has access to Rogers' 25 studios in Toronto, and the staff there has been StenoTran 3592 1 sharply reduced. 2 16943 MR. SULLIVAN: Some people may tell 3 you that this is an inevitable result of the logic of 4 marketing. If reflection of the local community is 5 less profitable than other uses of broadcast time, then 6 it will disappear. But before that happens, we believe 7 that we should think hard about it, and think about how 8 television affects communities -- both for good and for 9 evil. 10 16944 If there were no television - if the 11 average person did not spend 22 hours every week 12 watching television, then our communities would be 13 quite different places. We would probably do many of 14 the things that our grandparents did. We would meet 15 our neighbours. We would play our own music. We would 16 go to community meetings. We would attend churches in 17 greater numbers. In short, we would spend a great deal 18 more of our time in actual contact with other people. 19 16945 As it stands, though, much of our 20 contact with society is through the media, not face to 21 face. In many ways, that has its benefits. We 22 probably know more about the rest of the world than our 23 grandparents did, and it is possible we know more about 24 our own nation. But we certainly know less, and care 25 less, about our neighbourhoods and our towns than we StenoTran 3593 1 did, because we do not simply see them on our 2 television screens. We may think less about God as 3 well, because God - unless represented by a television 4 evangelist - also gets little attention in the world of 5 TV. 6 16946 This problem is even greater in a 7 city like Toronto, where the changing cultural and 8 religious character of the city has made it imperative 9 that we take the time to get to know each other if we 10 are to live successfully in harmony. 11 16947 In short, every hour we spend 12 watching rich young people on the beach in California, 13 or watching the police deal with criminals in New York, 14 is an hour we do not spend forming the real bonds that 15 tie us together as families, neighbourhoods, 16 congregations and cities. The natural ties of social 17 human beings - the ties that give us joy in good times 18 and sustain us in crisis - these ties have been eroded 19 by the dominating presence of 22 hours of television a 20 week in our lives. 21 16948 Well, we cannot turn the clock back 22 but what can we do, in our real situation, to restore 23 the ties of community and the ties of spiritual life? 24 16949 MR. SMITH: Our response at Horizon, 25 like many other groups across the country, has been to StenoTran 3594 1 try to redress the balance within the world of 2 television. We use television to show our neighbours 3 who we are - in our case we make programs that explain 4 and explore faith. We help each faith group that comes 5 to us to tell its story to whoever is watching in the 6 metro area and we hope that the people watching will 7 learn something that may contribute to their own faith. 8 Frankly, we hope that some of our programs will get 9 them to turn their TV off and join a congregation, or 10 at least take whatever part they can in the life of 11 their chosen faith. 12 16950 The kind of programming that we do 13 will never be a big part of the system - we know that. 14 No one will ever make any money from it, and no one 15 will ever want to put much money into it. It is run by 16 volunteers - people who do it because they are willing. 17 16951 In fact, we believe that community 18 programming, programming that is about and for the 19 community, should always be made primarily by 20 volunteers. That way we know it will have only one 21 purpose, to communicate, to create community, not to 22 sell products or fulfil a corporate agenda. Of course, 23 the volunteers need help, because television is 24 complicated, and professional advice is really useful. 25 We are very grateful for all the technical assistance StenoTran 3595 1 that Rogers has freely given to members over the years. 2 But the content should be in the hands of volunteers, 3 and their access to a channel should be guaranteed. 4 16952 In short, we believe that the 5 television system is not just public and private. As 6 the Broadcasting Act says, it comprises "public, 7 private and community elements." We believe that it is 8 time that the community elements took a larger place in 9 order to perform a role that public and private are 10 increasingly abandoning. 11 16953 MR. GILLESPIE: But how do we make 12 this happen? How do we ensure that there is 13 programming that reflects the community? How do we 14 ensure that it has the resources it needs to be 15 successful? 16 16954 We think that there is a good model 17 for television in the community radio movement. Why 18 not license voluntary, non-profit groups that represent 19 a broad range of interests in a community to run a 20 channel themselves? 21 16955 We don't mean to show disrespect for 22 those cable companies who are still providing a good 23 access channel for their communities. If the old 24 arrangements work and people want them to continue, we 25 would not interfere with them. But in those places StenoTran 3596 1 where the old arrangements are breaking down, we think 2 that a community-owned model is a better alternative. 3 16956 Of course, the first question will 4 be, how can the operation survive financially? Will it 5 be re-imposed as a burden on the cable companies? Or 6 must the community group seek donations? 7 16957 We don't think that either of these 8 options is fair or workable. To seek donations would 9 not be practical and not a stable source of income. 10 16958 To put the burden back on the cable 11 companies when they have been the only support for 12 community access for a long time also seems to be 13 unfair. 14 16959 Our view is that all of those in the 15 system who benefit financially from serving a community 16 should share in the responsibility to make community 17 access television possible. If the resources needed - 18 which are not large to begin with - are spread among 19 many players, then the burden will be very small on 20 each of them. If local broadcasters, cable companies 21 and the new competitive distributors all share in the 22 support of the community-owned access channel, we 23 believe that it would not interfere with their ability 24 to discharge their obligations or with their 25 profitability, particularly in a television market as StenoTran 3597 1 rich as Toronto. 2 16960 After all, though we are not 3 professional broadcasters, many of us run our own 4 businesses, and we understand how difficult it can be. 5 16961 In addition, it may be possible for 6 some local players to provide resources in different 7 kind. Or they may find it easier and more convenient 8 to provide money so the community group can purchase 9 its own resources. 10 16962 MR. SULLIVAN: At this point, our 11 idea is no more than that - an idea. We know it is not 12 possible for the Commission to fully evaluate it in the 13 middle of such a complex hearing as this, with so many 14 issues of national reflection to evaluate. 15 16963 We would suggest that the Commission 16 consider a separate proceeding to look a local 17 programming and local reflection. We are not the only 18 ones to raise the local issue, and community access 19 programming is not the only kind of local programming 20 that needs attention. 21 16964 So we suggest that the Commission 22 issue a new call for comments on local programming 23 policy. We would like to see such a call address the 24 issues of, first, a local access channel. Secondly, 25 the idea of licensing community groups to run such a StenoTran 3598 1 channel. And, finally, the best way to financially 2 support such a channel. 3 1100 4 16965 In addition, since the Commission has 5 initiated a new practice of making research available 6 to the parties in a proceeding, we would like to see 7 research done that would tell us how much money is now 8 being derived from broadcasting activities in each 9 major community across the country and how much of it 10 goes back into local reflection. 11 16966 MR. GILLANI: Our interest in this 12 study should be very clear. We want to know how big a 13 burden our idea would present to the broadcasting 14 operations in each community and we would like to work 15 from a common set of figures so we can discuss the 16 principles, rather than argue on figures and numbers. 17 16967 The Broadcasting Act says that, I 18 quote, "programming provided by the Canadian 19 broadcasting system should ... include education and 20 community programs." We think that the community 21 programs are at a risk in the system we see unfolding. 22 We also think these programs are very important to the 23 life of communities and to the life of the spirit 24 within those communities, even though they won't many 25 anyone a millionaire. StenoTran 3599 1 16968 We hope you share our concern and we 2 thank you very much for your kind willingness to hear 3 our proposal. We would be happy to answer questions. 4 16969 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr. 5 Gillani and gentlemen. 6 16970 Commissioner Cardozo? 7 16971 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Thank you, 8 Madam Chair. 9 16972 Thank you for that presentation and 10 all the thought you have put into this because I think 11 it's nice to see people who, after a number of years at 12 working at what you have been doing, have put together 13 a rather creative proposal. I also want to 14 particularly thank Mr. Sullivan for noting that we 15 can't evaluate this proposal in the throes of this 16 complicated hearing, but it's certainly a time to start 17 thinking about it. 18 16973 The one thing, as you probably know, 19 the broadcast distribution regulations which came into 20 effect about a year ago will be up for re-evaluation 21 the end of next year or early the year after that and 22 that would be a time when we would be looking at local 23 -- not to say I am rejecting out of hand what you are 24 suggesting here, but just to let you know that that's 25 our plan at this point as to where we will be looking StenoTran 3600 1 at how local programming has been going over this 2 period of two years since the regulations were changed. 3 We change the regulations, but what happens very often 4 when we change regulations, we keep an eye on what 5 happens and decide where to go and evaluate the 6 situation. So, there is a plan to do that. 7 16974 Because of that, I won't get into a 8 detailed discussion about local programming, but I 9 would like some of your feedback and your thoughts on 10 it. What are your feelings about what is missing about 11 the kinds of things that are missing in local 12 programming currently? I am thinking both of what you 13 see on the community channel, as well as on the regular 14 stations that broadcast channels. What is the essence 15 of what you are missing currently? 16 16975 MR. SMITH: I think that one of the 17 things that has happened over the years is the lack of 18 resources that has been devoted to community 19 programming. For instance, in the metro Toronto area 20 we can go back even the 20 years that most of us have 21 been there. You have seen the resource gradually erode 22 from something like 50, 60 community programmers down 23 to right now only three. That's just within the Rogers 24 system. When we started, of course, many, many years 25 ago, there were six or seven different cable companies. StenoTran 3601 1 We are down to two, I think, now. 2 16976 Aside from that, also the lack of 3 time that has been allocated, in our case in 4 particular, has dropped from four hours when we first 5 started 20 years ago to now two hours. Even the time 6 that we have been given; we were once on prime time 7 through the week, Monday to Friday, except on 8 Wednesdays, and now we are back in sort of a 9 morning/early afternoon slot on Sundays from 11:00 to 10 1:00. 11 16977 But I think in the last two years in 12 particular also was, of course, the sharpest cut with 13 the lack of -- there the community programs and 14 resources have dropped from about 50 or so community 15 programs down to three. So, there has been a very, 16 very sharp reduction and we are really not allowed much 17 other than a talking format, with very little or almost 18 no editing allowed at all. So, our ability to create 19 programs has been hampered. 20 16978 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: When you say 21 "not allowed to do editing", that is because there 22 aren't the personnel to help you with that? 23 16979 MR. SMITH: Exactly. There is no 24 resource for people for us to have that sort of 25 resource. StenoTran 3602 1 16980 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: And what are 2 the genres of programming that you are missing? Is it 3 talking heads programming? I don't mean to put that in 4 a negative way, but is it people talking about issues, 5 is it entertainment, is it news? 6 16981 MR. SMITH: Mostly it's, I would 7 suppose, people talking about issues. Sometimes some 8 of the groups provide entertainment or spiritual songs 9 and that sort of thing, but that has been sharply 10 curtailed because there are not the studios to do that 11 in, they don't have the resources to set that up. It 12 has to be very limited now to -- currently, it's 13 talking heads. 14 16982 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: And there 15 isn't much or was there room for coverage of community 16 events in the past? 17 16983 MR. SMITH: There was a minor amount. 18 It's non-existent at this point. There was on 19 occasion -- 20 16984 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Do you want to 21 add something, Mr. Gillani? 22 16985 MR. GILLANI: There were two special 23 distinct formats that we were on the air over the past 24 20 years. We had the faith group talking to their 25 congregation on the air and then we had specials where StenoTran 3603 1 a few groups would come by to deal with issues that 2 were in the community, alcohol, drugs, abuse. Now it 3 happens that with the meagre resources that are cut 4 down, as Earl has mentioned, we have lesser and lesser 5 availability of the studio time for production and it 6 turns back to even airing times have been reduced. 7 16986 At this time I must emphasize that we 8 are deeply grateful to Rogers Cable with the meagre 9 resources that we have. They have been very nice to us 10 to stretch as much as they can, but it doesn't justify, 11 it does not give us a feeling of satisfaction. 12 16987 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: How about the 13 other faith programming that there is? I am thinking 14 of Vision TV and now the licensing of "Crossroads". 15 16988 MR. SULLIVAN: I think this has to do 16 with the community because Vision is very much national 17 coast to coast. So, the kind of thing we have been 18 doing relates very much just to the local community, 19 even though that's a huge one, metro Toronto. So, it's 20 that aspect that Vision will never really meet the 21 needs of and we feel there are needs there. 22 16989 Your last question raised an answer 23 in my mind, which may not have been what you are 24 thinking, but it seems to me that not just the talking 25 heads, but there is an increasing -- how shall I say it StenoTran 3604 1 -- realization that within our communities are people 2 the world should meet sort of thing. I am thinking of 3 a lady 89 years old. Nobody knew that she was a 4 talented artist. She chose to keep that to herself and 5 through a media process we were able to acquaint a 6 whole community with what she was able to do. 7 16990 It occurs to us that there are many 8 of these people that it is very good for the community 9 to know of them. We would like to share that and, of 10 course, there has been no way in which that can be done 11 at the present time. 12 16991 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Let me come to 13 the centre of your brief, the culmination of your whole 14 exposé this morning, which was your idea for a 15 community channel. In your written brief you talked 16 about a community channel that would air on all 17 systems, so it would be on cable, as well as the 18 satellite systems. I would like you to give me some 19 sense of how it would be set up and how it would be 20 run. I note you say today: 21 "If the resources are needed --" 22 16992 I don't think there is an "if" there, 23 they are needed: 24 "-- which are not large to begin 25 with -- are spread among many StenoTran 3605 1 players then the burden will be 2 very small on each of them. If 3 local broadcasters, cable 4 companies and the new 5 competitive distributors share 6 [in the programming]..." 7 16993 Is that how you see the thing being 8 financed? 9 16994 MR. SULLIVAN: I think we have to add 10 my line -- I think I was the one who read it -- it's an 11 idea, only an idea. But in partial answer to your 12 questions -- and I know the others have thoughts here, 13 too -- we would see a sharing amongst community groups 14 which would reach beyond faith groups. We have reason 15 to believe that that's not an impossible thing to hope 16 for. I recall the Vision people at the outset saying, 17 "Can we get people to work together", and, of course, 18 they have been able to do that. 19 16995 In the project that we have we think 20 20 years of up to a total of 70 groups working together 21 shows that that working together can come. I think we 22 see as a real challenge the business of getting various 23 groups working together and we think that that can be 24 done. Details on the ideas, no, not yet. 25 1110 StenoTran 3606 1 16996 MR. GILLANI: I would like to inject 2 one more very definite issue, there, that we are 3 looking towards the Commission to create a situation 4 where a study can be taken to look at the three 5 different facets of the whole question that you have 6 got. The resources, and we mentioned in our brief 7 getting those resources from the cable and the local 8 broadcasters, we do not have a definite solution or a 9 definite formula. We feel that if the Commission gave 10 an opportunity where a study was be put to place, there 11 would be some substantial information that we could 12 get. 13 16997 And number three, I am just re- 14 emphasizing John's issue, there, where we would be able 15 to go to local issues that are now disappearing from 16 the television screens. 17 16998 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Okay, don't 18 count on us to do a study that would make your 19 application, because we can't do that. We might 20 industry- or city- or region-wide study, and indeed, a 21 lot of figures are available from which you can glean 22 the information that you need. And I see that is how I 23 think you formulated it in your -- 24 16999 MR. SULLIVAN: I think our thought 25 may have been to -- would the Commission be able in StenoTran 3607 1 some way to create a foundation, a framework within 2 which a study could be initiated maybe by others. But 3 that foundational support would be what we were 4 wondering about. 5 17000 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: What are your 6 thoughts about who else would be part of this? The 7 Horizon Interface Council, the material you sent in had 8 a long list of faith organisations, churches, temples, 9 et cetera. 10 17001 What are your thoughts about who else 11 would be part of it? Because we have heard from 12 various people. We had round tables across the country 13 in the month of June, and we heard from people from 14 Vancouver to Chicoutimi about people from various types 15 of community groups who felt they weren't being heard 16 on the community channel. 17 17002 So my question is, what are your 18 thoughts on who else would be part of it? Would you 19 have sports groups and, say, parents' groups and anti- 20 violence groups and so forth who could be part of this, 21 or are you looking at primarily an inter-faith channel? 22 17003 MR. SULLIVAN: I would like to 23 respond to that beginning with a short quote, and this 24 is from John P. Roache, professor of political science 25 at Harvard University, who said some years ago that: StenoTran 3608 1 "In a healthy democracy the 2 majority and the non-conformist 3 depend upon each other, and each 4 supplies a vital component to 5 the whole. Stability is 6 provided by the majority, while 7 vitality flows from the non- 8 conformist. Consequently, the 9 democrat protects the rights of 10 the non-conformist, not merely 11 as an act of decency, but more 12 significantly as an imperative 13 for him or herself and the whole 14 society." 15 17004 And so currently, for example, in the 16 greater metro area, we are getting substantial coverage 17 of amateur sports or sports that are not covered by the 18 major broadcasters. That doesn't seem to be a problem. 19 But the kind of voices that are suggested here might be 20 shut down, or have been shut down. The smaller voices 21 who have this vitality, who have something to say. 22 17005 And we talked already of a special 23 that we would do, for example, where the co-ministers 24 from my particular congregation have just returned from 25 six months' sabbatical which took them through Nepal, StenoTran 3609 1 India, and Greece, Turkey, Romania, up into Germany, 2 Switzerland, so forth, where they were into the museums 3 along the way and studying the culture. And doing a 4 comparison as well with the other experience that we 5 are having now in helping -- and this would be 6 interfaith -- people build schools down in Guatemala, 7 and their discovery of the lack of that kind of 8 cooperation, sometimes, in the jurisdictions in which 9 they were travelling in. And so here is that kind of 10 small voice but important voice that we can express 11 through community television. 12 17006 So it ranges all across political 13 jurisdictions, or political voices, if you will, and 14 the various ethnic groups who have an important 15 message, sometimes, that informs us as to their 16 identity and their activities within the community, and 17 their ambitions for becoming more participatory in the 18 Canadian scene. 19 17007 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Okay. Just to 20 be a bit more specific, then, you are going beyond a -- 21 I am not saying it should be one way or the other, I am 22 just trying to understand. You are going beyond a 23 religious faith-oriented station to one that would deal 24 with other things, like, for example, the Canadian 25 Labour congress was here a few days ago, and we talked StenoTran 3610 1 about the lack of labour programming, sports, and stuff 2 like that. Would you see all those being accommodated? 3 17008 MR. GILLANI: In our presentation, we 4 have mentioned that we would be willing to combine with 5 other community groups and prepare a project where 6 everybody is involved, although our prime concern at 7 this time is our own faith group. 8 17009 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Okay. One of 9 the questions, short of the community programming, what 10 are your thoughts about what you see in the broadcast 11 channels, for those of you from Toronto, whether it is 12 Citytv or the local CBC, CTV affiliate, CFTO -- what 13 are your thoughts about what you are seeing there in 14 terms of the local community being reflected both in 15 news and entertainment? 16 17010 MR. GILLANI: We have emphasized in 17 our verbal presentation today that more and more 18 community, local diversity, everything is disappearing. 19 17011 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Do you want us 20 to do something about that part? 21 17012 MR. GILLANI: Definitely -- 22 17013 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Or do you 23 think the solution lies only in the community 24 programming? 25 17014 MR. GILLANI: The point is, the whole StenoTran 3611 1 submission is that -- the prime reason for the 2 submission is just that those issues are now 3 disappearing from the screen. We were a very vital 4 part of that ongoing activity, and we would like them 5 to be put in place the way the Broadcasting Act says. 6 17015 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Okay. Well, 7 thanks very much. It is an interesting proposal that 8 you are working on. I appreciate your recognising that 9 we can't license ideas, that our system requires stuff 10 to be more thorough, and indeed, you are not there yet. 11 You want to be more thorough, so we appreciate that. 12 17016 I am particularly taken by your note 13 -- I was just looking for the quote, I couldn't find it 14 -- but you talked about the number of people who did 15 belong to religious affiliations, and that in a city 16 like Toronto it is useful, important, essential to find 17 means through television to be able to share those 18 values and create understanding. So thanks very much 19 for that presentation. 20 17017 That covers my questions, Madam 21 Chair. 22 17018 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr. 23 Gillani and your colleagues. 24 17019 MR. GILLANI: Thank you very much. 25 17020 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you for your StenoTran 3612 1 presentation. 2 17021 THE CHAIRPERSON: Madam Secretary. 3 17022 MS SANTERRE: Thank you, Madam Chair. 4 The next presentation will be done by Canada Family 5 Action Coalition, with Peter Stock. 6 PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION 7 17023 THE CHAIRPERSON: Good morning, Mr. 8 Stock. 9 17024 MR. STOCK: Thank you. Good morning, 10 Commission. We would first of all like to thank you 11 for the opportunity to appear here this morning, and I 12 look forward to a good discussion. We appreciate the 13 opportunity, too, the CRTC has presented to Canadians 14 to discuss the quality of television broadcasting in 15 this country, and where we might go in the future. 16 17025 So for us, a pop tune from the 70s 17 sums it up quite well when it says, "57 channels and 18 there is nothing on." Indeed, Canadians are becoming 19 increasingly disturbed by the violence and pornography 20 they are seeing on many, many more channels nowadays, 21 and many of them have decided just to switch off. 22 17026 Recent surveys have shown, on the 23 other hand, that a smaller and infrequent television 24 viewership has led to book sales increasing, magazine 25 sales increasing. People are reading more. Maybe that StenoTran 3613 1 is not such a bad thing. 2 1120 3 17027 That sort of activity, reading, 4 socializing, other forms of entertainment, are probably 5 more beneficial for society as a whole than plain 6 television watching. Certainly, Robertson Davies is 7 infinitely more important to Canadians than Jerry 8 Springer. However, it's also clear that television 9 does have the potential to serve the common good, and 10 we have seen that. 11 17028 For example, I would point to the 12 recent licensing of the History Channel as an excellent 13 example of the direction the Commission has taken 14 television and a very positive one. That channel in 15 particular served as a powerful tool in reminding 16 Canadians of their origin, culture and identity. So, 17 it's exactly this point that we would like to 18 emphasize, that Canadian television can be encouraging, 19 a unifying force and positive in serving the common 20 good. 21 17029 We have a few simple suggestions to 22 make on how to improve the situation over the longer 23 term. First, we would ask the Commission to reconsider 24 the licensing of the Playboy Channel. Anti-women 25 programming such as Playboy is not particularly StenoTran 3614 1 Canadian and there is nothing Canadian, of course, 2 about displaying women as furry, naked creatures who 3 exist simply for the pleasure of men. So, I would 4 recommend that you re-address that question. That's 5 the type of antiquated bigotry that belongs alongside 6 holocaust deniers and the Klu Klux Klan. It's part of 7 the past, it's not part of our future as a country. I 8 believe the CRTC can do better in this regard. 9 17030 Next, let's consider developing a 10 standard for decency that no programming may fall 11 below. We may not all agree on where the line should 12 be drawn, but it's clear that an effort should be made 13 to deal with the worst obscenity and graphic violence 14 that is increasingly filling the TV Guide today. No 15 standard at all means anything goes and lately this has 16 meant even the real-time acting out of an incest scene 17 between mother and son, full nudity, on a major 18 Canadian network. We have also had -- and I am sure 19 you are aware of this -- many complaints about the 20 Showcase channel in recent days and months. Citytv is 21 moving in this direction, too. We are extremely 22 concerned about this. 23 17031 It is relatively easy, though, to 24 just say, "Ban the bad stuff." That's a cry we have 25 heard in the past. We believe it's important to offer StenoTran 3615 1 constructive alternatives as well. Perhaps the most 2 important change to be made towards improving the 3 quality of programming would be to encourage more faith 4 or principles-based Canadian programming. It's our 5 belief that if Canadians are given a real alternative 6 to the murder-a-minute cop shows and lewd, adolescent 7 sitcoms, the quality programming will start to raise 8 the overall standard of the programming menu. 9 17032 This proposal doesn't have to cost 10 taxpayers a cent. Many private groups are ready to 11 finance and produce quality faith and principles-based 12 programming and the job created and the export earnings 13 potential will be of net benefit to the Canadian 14 economy. The only barrier holding these entrepreneurs 15 back so far has been licensure by the CRTC. The 1991 16 Census indicated that 87 per cent of Canadians self- 17 identify with a particular world religion. It 18 logically follows that some portion of our population 19 has an interest in television that reflects their 20 mostly deeply held convictions. 21 17033 Faith broadcasting has mostly been 22 denied to Canadians for the past 65 years. Take, for 23 example, last summer the recent refusal by the CRTC to 24 license EWTN, the world's largest religious or 25 Catholic, I should say, TV channel. Forty-six per cent StenoTran 3616 1 of Canadians consider themselves Catholic, according to 2 that 1991 Census. 3 17034 Now here is something you may not 4 know. EWTN is broadcasting legally in every single 5 country in the western hemisphere, with the exception 6 of communist Cuba and Canada. Now, the difference 7 between Cuba and Canada is that Cuba doesn't license 8 the Playboy Channel, either. So, it's time for our 9 broadcasting policy in this regard to catch up with the 10 rest of the world. 11 17035 However, to the Commission's credit, 12 this year a licence has been granted in Hamilton, 13 Ontario to a station that is now carrying a majority of 14 single-faith programming. That's in fact a historical 15 precedent. It's the first major market licence that 16 has been granted in this area. So, congratulations. 17 However, serious problems still remain, in our opinion. 18 17036 Two things that we point out with 19 regard to that licence and those that may come along 20 like it are arbitrary requirements that require that 21 station and others like it to broadcast incompatible 22 viewpoints of other faiths on their channel, the 23 balance requirement, and also the imposition of a 24 speech code. I call these arbitrary because they don't 25 apply to all broadcasters. If we applied the same StenoTran 3617 1 standards to MuchMusic and others, then we would have 2 something to talk about, that minimum standard again. 3 17037 Then, of course, there is the 4 question of where the Catholic channel is now. We have 5 a protestant channel, that's great. Where is the 6 Catholic channel? Perhaps that's down the road and I 7 would ask the Commission to consider that. I don't 8 think I will get into that right now. 9 17038 Parliament is starting to take some 10 notice of where the Commission has been going in recent 11 years. I think there is a great deal of satisfaction 12 with some of the recent moves, the licensing of 13 "Crossroads" and so on, but parliamentarians are 14 increasingly concerned about where television is going 15 to. We have heard from them about this and they are 16 expressing this in the House in increasing numbers. In 17 fact 10 per cent of parliamentarians now have presented 18 a petition. Ten per cent of parliamentarians 19 representing 10 per cent of the ridings or 10 per cent 20 of the population coast to coast presented a petition 21 decrying the licensure of Playboy and the denial of 22 religious broadcasting licences. 23 17039 So, I will leave my presentation at 24 that point and perhaps answer any questions you might 25 have. StenoTran 3618 1 17040 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr. 2 Stock. 3 17041 Commissioner McKendry? 4 17042 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you, 5 Madam Chair. 6 17043 Good morning, Mr. Stock. 7 17044 MR. STOCK: Good morning. 8 17045 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: I must admit 9 I have never seen the Playboy Channel, but your 10 submission is attracting my interest when you described 11 the women on the channel as furry. It conjures up in 12 my mind sort of a "Planet of the Apes" channel with 13 women. Am I missing something here? Why are the women 14 on this channel furry? 15 17046 MR. STOCK: I haven't seen the 16 channel except in passing on satellite TV at one point 17 in time several years ago, but the fact is it has been 18 licensed and I think people are aware of the image that 19 the Hugh Hefner crew placed on women, the 20 objectification of women, dressing them up in bunny 21 suits. This is nothing new. 22 17047 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: This is a 23 subscription channel, so I take it that one wouldn't 24 watch it unless one made a decision that that's what 25 one wanted to see and was prepared to pay for it. StenoTran 3619 1 17048 MR. STOCK: That's correct, but that 2 doesn't justify licensing it. The CRTC has discretion 3 to say yes or no to these channels and it's a question 4 of community standards. The Canadian community that we 5 talk to says that this falls below that standard. 6 17049 So, once again I would refer back to 7 my earlier point that what we need to perhaps develop 8 and the Commission should consider developing is a 9 minimum standard for decency, a minimum standard when 10 it comes to a speech code that applies equally to all 11 broadcasters. If the Commission wants to say, "Yes, 12 the Playboy Channel is fine", then why wouldn't we say, 13 yes, it's fine to have a Catholic channel, too? What's 14 so offensive about EWTN and Mother Angelica? 15 17050 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: In any event, 16 I think you would agree with me a member of the general 17 community who doesn't want to watch the Playboy Channel 18 doesn't have to watch it? 19 17051 MR. STOCK: I could say the same 20 thing about any of the other channels that are on TV 21 and, as I stated at the beginning of my presentation, 22 increasingly Canadians are turning off, but I don't 23 think that's the solution. I think the solution is to 24 look to the future and say: What kind of TV do we want 25 to have? It's not all going to be the same, but StenoTran 3620 1 certainly we can meet a minimum standard, certainly we 2 can strive towards better quality programming, and 3 certainly the licensing of Playboy goes in the opposite 4 direction. 5 17052 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: This is a 6 technical point, but the Playboy Channel in fact isn't 7 licensed by us, it's authorized for distribution in 8 Canada. I suspect that point does detract from the 9 point you want to make with us that it's available. 10 17053 MR. STOCK: Yes. 11 17054 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thanks. 12 17055 Let me ask you about what I detect 13 are two options that flow out of what you have 14 presented to us. If I have those options wrong, please 15 let me know. The first option, I take it, is the one 16 that's set out about halfway down the first page of 17 your written submission where you suggest or ask us to, 18 and I quote, "develop a standard for decency that no 19 programming may fall below." That would be one option. 20 We would have a standard and programming that was 21 unacceptable for the reasons you set out here just 22 wouldn't be on the screen. 23 17056 MR. STOCK: That's right. 24 17057 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: The other 25 option, I take it, is more diversity. You would like StenoTran 3621 1 to see more programming that's consistent with the 2 values and so on that you set out here. Have I got 3 that right, that you see two options in front of us? 4 17058 MR. STOCK: I see those working 5 concurrently. Certainly if somebody wants to pursue 6 the golf channel or pursue the sailing channel or 7 pursue faith-based programming, they should be free to 8 do that. However, all those channels should meet a 9 minimum standard. 10 17059 I would refer to the speech code that 11 the CRTC imposes on faith-based programmers. No 12 intolerance, basically, is the motive there. Perhaps 13 that's a very reasonable statement to make, but that's 14 not applied to other channels like MuchMusic. Some 15 might argue that the Playboy Channel, as it objectifies 16 women, is intolerant towards women. So, certainly 17 there needs to be a debate about what is and what isn't 18 acceptable. 19 17060 What we are saying is apply the same 20 standard across the board. Don't have special rules 21 for this area of broadcasting and that area of -- or 22 this type of programming and that type of programming. 23 If somebody wants to do a faith-based channel, they 24 have to meet the same standard that somebody doing 25 MuchMusic or a sports channel does. StenoTran 3622 1 17061 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Your ultimate 2 goal is a standard and anything that falls below the 3 standard wouldn't be on our screens. That is the 4 standard for decency. 5 17062 MR. STOCK: That is correct. 6 17063 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Just to 7 understand where the standard or the line should be 8 drawn, let me ask you about another statement that you 9 make later on in the first page. You refer to lewd and 10 adolescent sitcoms. Can you just give me a couple of 11 examples of what you consider to be lewd and adolescent 12 sitcoms that are available today? 13 17064 MR. STOCK: I think most of them are 14 nowadays, but "South Park" would be a good example. 15 1130 16 17065 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Do you have 17 any others? 18 17066 MR. STOCK: "Seinfeld" has been from 19 time to time quite adolescent, quite lewd. 20 17067 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: So once we 21 set the standard that you are suggesting we should, 22 "Seinfeld" wouldn't be on our screens and "South Park" 23 wouldn't be on our screens? 24 17068 MR. STOCK: That might a possibility 25 in some cases, yes. Depending where we set that StenoTran 3623 1 standard, it is quite possible that many "South Park" 2 episodes would not be acceptable to the Commission and 3 to the Canadian public. I think you would find that is 4 the case already, based on the number of complaints 5 that you may have received about some of those 6 episodes. 7 17069 "Seinfeld," it might only be the 8 occasional episode where either a word is deleted in 9 the course of conversation, which does happen, quite 10 frankly, already in the States, or, it might be that 11 entire episode is considered unacceptable. 12 17070 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Who would the 13 individual be that would decide that an episode of 14 "Seinfeld" isn't acceptable? 15 17071 MR. STOCK: Well, there are a number 16 of ways to go about regulation. There is self 17 regulation that once a standard is set, it depends what 18 the censure is going to be if one violates that. If a 19 station believes that they are going to go beyond the 20 limits the Commission has set, then maybe they won't 21 want to risk their licence. So we don't necessarily 22 need a strict censor board. We may need just a 23 standard set that the Commission sets and licences are 24 either granted or denied or renewed on the basis of 25 whether or not they have been adhered to. Or a licence StenoTran 3624 1 could be pulled, if it has been grossly violated. 2 17072 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Just so I 3 understand again where the line should be drawn, what 4 about "Frasier," would there be some episodes of 5 "Frasier," which I think is going into the schedule at 6 the same time. "Seinfeld" used to be in the schedule. 7 Are there some episodes of "Frasier" that would fall 8 below the line? 9 17073 MR. STOCK: I can't say that I have 10 watched that show quite as much but I suspect that from 11 time to time there may be comments made that are 12 considered abusive, intolerant, obscene and, as a 13 result, might be deleted or entire episodes may not be 14 shown. That is a decision that, as I say, once we draw 15 that line, we will have a better sense of how to deal 16 with it. 17 17074 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Down at the 18 bottom of page one, you point out that 87 per cent of 19 Canadians self identify with a particular world 20 religion, and I think you use the statistic to 21 reinforce your submission to us. Now I would 22 anticipate or expect that many of those 87 per cent 23 Canadians watch "Frasier" or "Seinfeld," do you see any 24 conflict there with your position that we should take 25 into account the fact that 87 per cent of Canadians StenoTran 3625 1 self identify with a particular world religion, we 2 should draw a line that certain episodes of "Seinfeld," 3 "Frasier," "South Park" wouldn't show up on our 4 screens, yet many of these people are watching these 5 episodes. 6 17075 MR. STOCK: It is quite possible that 7 many people are watching them. It is also a fact that 8 many people are writing complaints to the CRTC on the 9 basis of some of the activities or comments that are 10 made in episodes of shows like "Frasier." I am not 11 aware if you have complaints about "Frasier" itself but 12 I am certain you have them about shows like "South 13 Park" and others. 14 17076 Now the point there about 87 per cent 15 of Canadians self identifying as being religious, this 16 comes from StatsCan's '91 census. This is how people 17 have identified themselves to the Government of Canada. 18 Our point here isn't that 87 per cent of Canadians want 19 to watch faith-based programming or faith-based 20 programming exclusively. What we are suggesting is 21 that many of them want and that many of them might 22 enjoy that alternative and would have an interest in 23 television that reflects their most deeply held views. 24 They might also at the same time choose to watch 25 "Frasier" but we think they should be granted that StenoTran 3626 1 choice. They don't currently have that, in our 2 opinion. 3 17077 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: In your 4 written submission, you noted at the end of the 5 submission that you would or your organization would be 6 consulting with Canadians over the summer on this issue 7 and would be presenting us with some findings as a 8 result of this consultation at the hearing. Did you 9 have an opportunity to carry out those consultations? 10 17078 MR. STOCK: Indeed, we did. I guess 11 I would say two things that is really to re-emphasize a 12 number of the things that we have outlined in here, 13 three points perhaps. 14 17079 First of all, they are happy to see 15 stations like Crossroads get licences. Obviously, it 16 has only been a few days that particular station has 17 been on the air but people are excited by that. We 18 have heard a great deal of feedback saying, yes, we are 19 glad to finally see this on TV. Where has it been all 20 these years? That is the statement. So, 21 congratulations to the Commission on that point. 22 17080 The second point would be that of the 23 worsening of some channels on TV in terms of their 24 obscenity. "Showcase" is one that I have heard 25 numerous complaints about. Why is that filth on my StenoTran 3627 1 television set? People are looking for a movie to 2 watch late at night and they had never heard of this 3 movie and it turns to be literally hard core 4 pornography. They are upset by that. 5 17081 Citytv as well has been moving down 6 this road. I believe it is a week away we are supposed 7 to see "Sex in the City" is the name of the show, full 8 hard core pornography on Citytv, again. So there have 9 been, in our estimation, a rise in complaints, a rise 10 in the number of concerned people who are worried about 11 what is, in fact, being shown on television. 12 17082 Then the third point is the one I 13 mentioned. The question that is asked of us is why 14 isn't there a standard? How can they be allowed to get 15 away with this? Where is the standard? So we ask that 16 question of the Commission. Where is the standard? 17 How low will we go? 18 17083 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Let me just 19 come back now to the beginning of your presentation 20 where you note that television viewership may be 21 declining and the book sales are rising and so on. 22 When I was having a chat in the cab recently with the 23 cab driver who had asked me what I did for a living and 24 I told him what we were doing right now and he had an 25 interesting comment because he said, well, that seems StenoTran 3628 1 like a pretty big proceeding you are having and so on. 2 He said it is just television. I guess I take it that 3 is your point, too. 4 17084 There are other alternatives 5 available to people. Television is only, first of all, 6 one dimension in their lives. They have a family life. 7 They have their spiritual life. They have their 8 community life. And they have many options available 9 to them with respect to entertainment and information, 10 such as books. 11 17085 So I take it that is the point you 12 want to make to us is that people have options. To the 13 extent they move away from television to exercise those 14 options, the television industry may adjust the nature 15 of its programming on its own initiative. 16 17086 MR. STOCK: Yes, there is certainly 17 some truth to that. Of course, because of regulation 18 in this country and because of the failure up to this 19 point up until very recently, in fact, to license, for 20 instance, faith-based programming on the public 21 airwaves in this country, people have sought other 22 alternatives. Yes, it might be books. 23 17087 It might also be satellite TV. The 24 pizza dish has made the reception of foreign signals or 25 signals from satellites much cheaper, as you are well StenoTran 3629 1 aware, and has put it in the range of affordability for 2 most middle class families. So if a Catholic person in 3 this country wishes to receive Mother Angelica on EWTN, 4 they might buy a pizza dish for 500 bucks. 5 17088 What that means to me is that cable 6 companies and Canadian television production suffer as 7 a result because those dollars are flowing out of the 8 country and in a very literal sense. I think that is 9 something that the CRTC needs to be concerned about. 10 If we are losing market share, whatever market it is - 11 distribution, production, to foreigners because of a 12 failure to provide the services here at home, then I 13 think that is a serious problem that we need to 14 consider. I mean the job is going south of the border, 15 literally. 16 17089 COMMISSIONER McKENDRY: Thank you 17 very much, Mr. Stock. Those are the questions I have 18 for you. Thank you, Madam Chair. 19 17090 THE CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner 20 Cardozo. 21 17091 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Thanks, Madam 22 Chair. Thanks, Mr. Stock. It is nice to see you 23 again. The last time we met, it was at the hearing 24 that eventually licensed Crossroads and I am hoping 25 that your opinion of us has changed since then or StenoTran 3630 1 improved since then, as you have mentioned, and I 2 appreciate the feedback you brought us on Crossroads. 3 17092 In terms of the programming that you 4 find objectionable, I am wondering if you have ever 5 looked at the issue of community evaluation. And I ask 6 this in light of the position we find ourselves in 7 quite frequently when people object to this or that 8 type of programming. We consequently get thrown the 9 argument of freedom of expression, freedom of speech. 10 Our role is not to censor, et cetera, et cetera. 11 17093 I think at various times the 12 programming, and perhaps we have seen this more in the 13 States, where community groups have gotten together and 14 either evaluated a number of shows or particular shows 15 and tried to exert consumer viewer pressure on stations 16 and stuff like that. Have you approached it from that 17 perspective? 18 17094 MR. STOCK: Well, I think the problem 19 that we face in this country is with respect to 20 censorship versus a freedom of expression is probably 21 best summed up in the Butler decision of the Supreme 22 Court back in '92 when they addressed the issue of hard 23 core pornography being sold out of a video store in 24 Manitoba and it worked its way through the courts over 25 several years and the justices decided that they would StenoTran 3631 1 apply something called "community standard of tolerance 2 test." And that did not mean what you or I would 3 tolerate in our own home or being sold to our front 4 door but rather what we would tolerate our neighbour 5 watching, listening to, reading, et cetera. 6 17095 The Supreme Court, in fact, gave a 7 minimum standard for what was obscene. They said if it 8 involves criminal activity of some sort in connection 9 with the portrayal of sexuality or nudity, that that 10 activity would be considered criminal. It does not 11 mean that it would necessarily, if it is not criminal, 12 it isn't also obscene or pornographic. And so I would 13 suggest that the problem we face is one of where has 14 the court drawn the line on a number of these issues. 15 17096 The Playboy Channel may be legal in 16 the sense of whether or not it meets the community 17 standard of tolerance test. But that doesn't 18 necessarily mean that it is moral and it does not 19 necessarily mean that the community accepts it or wants 20 to see it on TV. In fact, Commissioner McKendry was 21 quite correct, the average Canadian isn't going to see 22 it on TV unless they pay for it. 23 17097 But the fact of the matter is that 24 Canadians may not tolerate, and it is quite clear from 25 the complaints we have had and that Parliament has had, StenoTran 3632 1 and I believe the Commission has had, that the Canadian 2 public isn't interested in tolerating that for their 3 neighbours either, and so perhaps that type of 4 programming does not meet the community standard of 5 tolerance test. 6 17098 As to who should make the final 7 decision, well, I would submit that many times these 8 decisions have to end up in a place like the CRTC or in 9 the courts and work their way up to the Supreme Court 10 level and be decided, hopefully not on a case-by-case 11 basis, because you can imagine that would clog the 12 courts pretty badly. But certainly the Commission has 13 the power through licensure to say yes or no to a 14 certain standard. 15 17099 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: You are aware 16 of the CBSC, the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council 17 and have you used it? 18 17100 MR. STOCK: Yes, I guess we find that 19 it doesn't do the job, and I will give you an example 20 why. A complaint just last year where a housewife 21 complained to the CBSC about a show called "Fashion 22 File," CBC-TV, Newsworld, and the fact that full 23 frontal nudity was displayed at the dinnertime hour and 24 that her child saw this and she was extremely offended. 25 The Broadcast Standards Council said, well, that's StenoTran 3633 1 fine, you know, we don't have a problem with that. I 2 don't know what their exact wording was. I don't have 3 it in front of me but that -- 4 17101 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: I am not 5 familiar with that particular decision. Just for your 6 information, that is one of the things that is up for 7 review, perhaps early next year. So keep in touch with 8 us on that. 9 17102 MR. STOCK: Okay, we appreciate that. 10 17103 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: On local 11 programming, what were your thoughts? Were you here 12 during the previous presentation by Horizon? 13 17104 MR. STOCK: Yes, I was. 14 17105 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: What are your 15 thoughts on that? I mean what these folks were asking 16 for was a community-based interfaith channel that also 17 dealt with other local community level stuff. What are 18 your thoughts about that type of programming? 19 17106 MR. STOCK: Yes, I think that is 20 excellent. It shows, as they described, volunteers 21 taking initiative, wanting to support the community, 22 their own personal communities, and I think that's a 23 very Canadian thing. We should give serious 24 consideration to that proposal. It sounds, from what 25 they were presenting, that they weren't looking for a StenoTran 3634 1 handout from the government. They were looking to 2 produce this very low budgets and at a volunteer level 3 and I think that is the kind of thing that benefits the 4 community as a whole. I don't see how we could 5 possibly oppose that type of initiative. 6 17107 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: But does it go 7 some way to serving the kind of needs you say aren't 8 being met? 9 17108 MR. STOCK: I believe that certainly 10 does, yes. 11 17109 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Lastly, Mr. 12 Thiessen from Trinity was here last week. You are 13 familiar with Trinity? 14 17110 MR. STOCK: Yes. 15 17111 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: One of the 16 points he was making in relation to Canadian content, 17 which is one of the core issues of this hearing, was 18 that he wanted protections to continue in terms of the 19 amount of Canadian programming because it also helped 20 religious programming, a lot of Canadian-based and 21 Canadian-made religious programming. Is that a view 22 you share? 23 17112 MR. STOCK: Not necessarily because 24 we don't view religious programming as Canadian, 25 American, whatever. It is international in its scope StenoTran 3635 1 because religions are international in their scope. If 2 there is any type of programming that shouldn't have 3 those types of restrictions attached to it, it is 4 probably religious programming, for those very reasons. 5 17113 Yes, people are catholic in a 6 particular country, for example, but you cannot draw a 7 line between Canadian catholics and American catholics 8 and say their culture is different in terms of their 9 religion because it certainly isn't. They attend the 10 same services. They pray the same prayers and they 11 speak the same words. If they are going to broadcast 12 that, they are going to communicate that. They are not 13 communicating a Canadian or American perspective. They 14 are communicating a religious perspective, which 15 transcends international boundaries. 16 17114 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Interesting. 17 Thanks very much. Those are my questions, Madam Chair. 18 17115 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr. 19 Stock. 20 17116 MR. STOCK: Thank you, Madam Chair. 21 17117 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you for 22 appearing. 23 17118 Madam Secretary, would you call the 24 next participant? 25 17119 MS SANTERRE: The next presentation StenoTran 3636 1 will be done by the Canadian Diversity Network. 2 1150 3 PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION 4 17120 MS CLARKE: Thank you. Good morning 5 and again, thank you very much for giving us the 6 opportunity to appear before the Commission today. 7 17121 By way of introductions, my name is 8 Anne Clarke, I am executive director of the Pearson- 9 Shoyama Institute. I am also a community development 10 worker within the immigrant and visible minority 11 community, and former president of the first black 12 women's network focused on black women. 13 17122 Some of the network members with us 14 today are Professor Lionel Lumb, who has got a 15 background in journalism and mass communications, and 16 he has been a television producer. 17 17123 We have Dr. Karim, on my far right, 18 who is also with the school of journalism at Carleton 19 University. 20 17124 Amos and Alfons Adetuyi in the back, 21 who are both with Inner City Films and producers. 22 17125 Jennifer David of Television Northern 23 Canada, and Rubin Friedman with the National Capital 24 Alliance on Race Relations, and one other coalition 25 group member who is not with us today. StenoTran 3637 1 17126 A little bit of background about the 2 group. The network was formed as a result of a round 3 table in June dealing with diversity in broadcast 4 media, hosted by the Pearson-Shoyama Institute in our 5 role as a national public policy think tank. 6 17127 Our institute is geared towards 7 ensuring that a wider cross-section of Canadians have a 8 say in the development of private and public sector 9 policy. Participants at the round table felt that the 10 network was necessary in order to continue the dialogue 11 and have direct input into Canada's communications 12 policy, which in many ways projects Canada's eyes on 13 the world, not just through language, but also imagery. 14 17128 The network is a loosely-knit group 15 and organisations. Their main purpose is to deal with 16 issues of culture, race, religion, and linguistic 17 diversity that affects the Canadian communication 18 system. 19 17129 This will be done through exchanges 20 of information with other individuals and organisations 21 across Canada, through research. And certainly the 22 network would like to work very closely with your 23 Commission, industry, labour, and other people to 24 ensure that communications policy reflects the 25 multiracial and multicultural mosaic of Canada. StenoTran 3638 1 17130 And I will pass you on to Professor 2 Lumb, who will do a presentation for us. 3 17131 MR. LUMB: Good morning, and Madam 4 Chairperson, Commissioners, we are obviously very glad 5 to have this chance. 6 17132 We would like to present some 7 thoughts, concerns, and possible solutions on Canadian 8 broadcasting and diversity. And by diversity, of 9 course, we do not mean variety of programming. Our 10 concern is to achieve a more faithful reflection of the 11 wonderful diversity of Canadians' experiences, 12 aspirations, and cultural history. 13 17133 We are not seeking something 14 extraordinary. We only ask that which is already 15 required of television networks and channels in the 16 Broadcasting Act of 1991, to reflect "the multicultural 17 and multiracial nature of Canadian society," and to 18 reflect Aboriginal cultures to the rest of the country. 19 17134 We know it is within your power to 20 make this happen, and we urge you to take action on 21 five points: the first of these, to ensure that 22 broadcasters develop a pool of writers, producers, 23 performers and managers drawn from right across the 24 Canadian cultural spectrum so that viewers find a fresh 25 and balanced array of programs. StenoTran 3639 1 17135 Two, to develop a research framework 2 that monitors the reflection of Canadian minorities in 3 broadcasting. 4 17136 Three, to develop a framework to 5 monitor, measure and evaluate the progress of 6 broadcasters in this regard. 7 17137 Four, to ensure that broadcasters 8 understand that their performance and their progress in 9 meeting this section of Broadcasting Act will face 10 review at the time of licence renewal. 11 17138 And five, to ensure that broadcasters 12 will be required as part of the license process to 13 conduct an assessment of the diversity needs of their 14 market at the time of licence application, licence 15 renewal, or change of ownership -- and that, I think, 16 is becoming a more important part of the game -- and to 17 couple this with a promise of performance that will be 18 measured and evaluated as a licence condition during 19 subsequent reviews. 20 17139 So why do we think these measures are 21 necessary? And the answer lies in Canadian 22 television's response, or apparent lack of it, in many 23 cases, to section 3 of the Act. 24 17140 Since you began this policy review, 25 many broadcasters and producers appearing here before StenoTran 3640 1 your have voiced variations on a nice-sounding theme, 2 and that is, we reflect, or want to reflect, Canadians 3 to Canadians. 4 17141 The simple fact is that some 5 Canadians are being reflected a lot, but others hardly 6 at all. Millions of adults and children will go to bed 7 most nights without seeing their lives, their hopes, 8 and their experiences properly reflected. 9 17142 Now we are not here to complain and 10 whine about this, we are here to say, what a waste. 11 What a terrible waste of a glorious opportunity. The 12 richness and the promise of Canada's diversity is 13 surely not something to ignore, but to celebrate. Our 14 industries know how to mine the wonderful resources of 15 the land, but broadcasters barely scrape at the richest 16 resource of all: the diversity of its people. It is 17 not just wrong, but also sad that many great Canadian 18 stories go untold. 19 17143 When visible minority groups make up 20 30 per cent or more of the population of Canada's major 21 cities, how can public and private broadcasters get 22 away with this? 23 17144 Certainly, the situation has improved 24 from previous decades, when visible minorities were 25 invisible on television screens, and a diversity of StenoTran 3641 1 accents was absent on the airwaves. But Canadians can 2 still watch in vain most night a week for a drama in 3 which a Canadian Aboriginal or a South Asian or a 4 Chinese Canadian plays a major role. When minority 5 actors do appear, they are usually in marginal roles. 6 17145 Greater gains have been made in news 7 programming, in which it is no longer remarkable to 8 find reporters and anchors of various backgrounds. It 9 is time the entertainment industry caught up, which 10 leads us to point number one, the diversity talent 11 pool. 12 17146 Borrowing on a line from a famous 13 baseball story -- "if you build it, they will come" -- 14 we suggest Canada's broadcasters should apply this to 15 programs -- "if you make them, they will watch." Large 16 numbers of Canadians have watched "Anne of Green 17 Gables." 18 17147 More recently, "Due South" and 19 "Traders" have their loyal audiences, despite terrific 20 competition from American programming. In music, 21 literature, and film Canadians are soaring to new 22 heights. Why not Canadian television? Sure the talent 23 must exist there too, but it needs nurturing. 24 17148 It may take a while, but if good 25 Canadian programming is out there, audiences will grow. StenoTran 3642 1 And perhaps the fastest increase would come from 2 reaching out to the 30 per cent of Canadians for whom 3 there is now little or no programming -- a reaching out 4 not only to viewers, but also to writers and performers 5 to ensure that they enter the mainstream. 6 17149 In Britain, the BBC created a special 7 diversity programming unit based in Birmingham, centre 8 of many cultural and many minority communities, to fill 9 gaps in its drama and comedy production. 10 17150 Gaps, we say? Well, it is safe to 11 say that Canadians who watch British dramas and 12 comedies on TV or on PBS are likely to see more Asian 13 and black actors in major roles than they ever will by 14 watching the CBC or Canada's private networks. 15 17151 And that is another missed 16 opportunity. If Canadian broadcasters tapped into our 17 rich vein of diversity, they too could increase their 18 export markets to countries with similar populations. 19 A talent pool that builds on the work done by ACTRA to 20 promote minority writers and performers will boost both 21 our domestic and our export markets. 22 17152 Point number two: Diversity and a 23 research framework. To expand on what we mean by 24 "research," let us look at the news business. There is 25 industry research in this area. StenoTran 3643 1 17153 In 1995, a report prepared by 2 Goldfarb Consultants for the Canadian Daily Newspaper 3 Association, as it was then called, found that 57 per 4 cent of participants in focus groups said daily 5 newspapers helped to reinforce the feeling that visible 6 minorities are not part of mainstream Canada. Yet, 7 Goldfarb also found visible minorities are avid 8 readers, and form a growing potential market at a time 9 when daily newspaper readership is declining. 10 17154 The strong message -- grasp this 11 opportunity, serve all of your potential readership, 12 increase your market, and, of course, earn more 13 advertising dollars. It is a prescription for better 14 and more balanced reporting, and that becomes a 15 prescription for success. 16 17155 An example of a newspaper that heeded 17 the word and reaches out far better than before to its 18 potential readership is the Montreal "Gazette," which 19 worked very hard at introducing and sustaining greater 20 coverage of diversity. 21 17156 Among television stations, the 22 outstanding example is Citytv, possibly unmatched in 23 its range of on-air personalities drawn from many of 24 Toronto's cultural minorities. One of its 25 personalities, the music video presenter Monika Deol, StenoTran 3644 1 can say with fire and conviction, Wake up -- I am the 2 mainstream. Citytv's viewers can see many role models 3 to emulate any day of the week. 4 17157 This kind of forward thinking earlier 5 caused the advertising industry to improve its 6 reflection of diversity driven by market surveys. 7 Diversity is good business. 8 17158 But the research data that exists in 9 the area of diversity and broadcasting is incomplete 10 and out of date. We would ask that the CRTC develop a 11 research and evaluation framework that monitors the 12 reflection of Canadian society in Canadian 13 broadcasting. 14 17159 Point number three: monitoring 15 diversity. Also worrisome is that no framework exists 16 to monitor, measure, and evaluate the progress of 17 Canadian broadcasters in implementing the Broadcasting 18 Act's expectations on diversity. We urge the CRTC to 19 develop such a framework. 20 17160 Point number four: diversity and 21 licence renewal. With little or no progress on 22 diversity in broadcasting since the Act came into power 23 seven years ago, we urge the CRTC to exercise its 24 authority in this regard. Broadcasters must be made to 25 realise that licence renewal will depend on how they StenoTran 3645 1 have met the requirements of the Act. 2 17161 And finally point five: diversity 3 needs of markets. Not all markets are the same. One 4 shakes one's head in disbelief when drama and 5 entertainment programs fail to reflect the rich 6 diversity of a market such as Vancouver's. And do 7 producers ever venture out onto the streets, visit 8 schools, shopping malls, restaurants? 9 17162 That is why we urge the CRTC at the 10 time of licence application, licence renewal, or change 11 of ownership, to do two things. First, conduct an 12 assessment of the diversity needs of their market; and 13 two, couple this with a promise of performance that 14 will be measured and evaluated as a licence condition 15 during subsequent reviews. 16 17163 We conclude with this oral 17 presentation by asking you, Madam Chairperson and 18 commissioners, to support the obligations enshrined in 19 the Broadcasting Act. Armed with research and 20 information about the progress of diversity in both 21 programming and the hiring of talent, we urge the CRTC 22 to take the next and logical step. Every broadcaster 23 who comes before you at the time of licence renewal, 24 change of ownership, or with an application for a new 25 licence must know that the Commission has before it StenoTran 3646 1 data on that organisation's progress in the field of 2 diversity. Every broadcaster must know that the 3 commitment to reflect aboriginal cultures to the rest 4 of Canada and to reflect the multicultural and 5 multiracial nature of Canadian society has indeed been 6 monitored, measured and evaluated. 7 17164 The Canadian reality embraces a 8 gloriously simple message: there are unheard voices 9 well worth hearing, and there are untold stories well 10 worth telling. Thank you. 11 17165 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms 12 Clarke, Mr. Lumb. Commissioner Pennefather. 13 17166 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Good 14 morning. 15 17167 MR. LUMB: Good morning. 16 17168 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you 17 for that very informative presentation. You have 18 actually taken a number of ideas from the written 19 submission forward quite a bit, and I have a number of 20 questions which you may have already answered, but I 21 would like to go back over them. 22 17169 But my first question is, you have 23 changed your name to Communications and Diversity 24 Network, correct? Why? What is the name change about? 25 17170 MS CLARKE: It is clearer, and as I StenoTran 3647 1 said earlier, it is a new network and it is continually 2 evolving and growing. As you see, we have Inner City 3 Films from Toronto who are interested in the work of 4 the network and would like to get involved and are here 5 with us today. And it was the decision of the group of 6 people that communications, which is what we are doing, 7 makes it certainly more relevant and clearer. 8 17171 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Well, I 9 wondering because before I saw that I had written down 10 a quote from page two of your written submission: 11 "The network agrees with the 12 Commission that the Canadian 13 broadcasting system is currently 14 reaching a very strategic point 15 in our history because of 16 globalization and unprecedented 17 technological progress." 18 And perhaps what the name change is about as well, is 19 what this means for the diversity in Canadian 20 programming, a diversity which you have said is not 21 variety of programming. But you do say later viewers 22 find a fresh and balanced array of programs as a result 23 of diversity. 24 17172 So I know what you mean, but one does 25 not exclude the other. In fact, the variety of StenoTran 3648 1 programming in your thesis is only going to happen with 2 fresh views. 3 17173 But if we could just start with this 4 broader picture, what does globalization and 5 technological progress mean for diversity in Canadian 6 television? 7 17174 DR. KARIM: If I may answer the 8 question, or at least try to discuss it in a broader 9 way. One of the earlier presentations alluded to the 10 fact that religious programming of all sorts can now 11 come into Canada via digital broadcasting systems. 12 This also has opened up a broad variety of programming 13 for ethno-cultural minorities in Canada. 14 17175 Of course, we have our own digital 15 broadcasting programming as well, Asian television 16 network, Telelatino and French on television. 17 17176 The transglobalization, deregulation, 18 liberalisation are going to make this more intense. 19 17177 Already, south of the border, 20 minority broadcasters have been increasing their 21 programming on digital broadcasting satellites. I 22 don't know how possible it is for Canadians to receive 23 that kind of programming, but I am sure that they will 24 try because their needs are not being met at the moment 25 in Canada. StenoTran 3649 1 17178 The challenge for us, I guess, is to 2 look at the market as Mr. Lumb pointed out, assess what 3 the needs are, and see how the Canadian broadcasting 4 system can meet this need. Otherwise, you will have 5 more and more pizza dishes cropping up on top of roofs 6 or on the sides of walls, with Canadians basically 7 looking at more and more American programming or even 8 programming coming out from other parts of the world 9 via satellite. 10 17179 Just to give you an example of what 11 is happening overseas, at one point the French 12 government tried to discourage Arabic language 13 broadcasting in France, despite its large minorities 14 who are Arabic-speaking. Again, they did not provide 15 for much local Arabic programming, either. The answer 16 of the Arab communities there was to put up pizza 17 dishes, and point them southwards towards northern 18 Africa, towards their countries of origin, from which 19 they began to receive programming almost 24 hours a 20 day. 21 17180 So this is a choice that faces us. 22 Yes, globalization is going to make borders less 23 significant, as far as broadcasting goes. We do have a 24 fairly large talent pool, as Professor Lumb pointed 25 out, in Canada, a very diverse talent pool. But they StenoTran 3650 1 have very few opportunity to perform in front of a 2 camera. It is this kind of absence on the broadcasting 3 network that may create a situation in which more and 4 more people may turn southwards. 5 17181 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Thank you. 6 I just wanted to table that there is a broad 7 discussion, here, which was are not ignoring as we look 8 at more specific points that you raise, and I would 9 like to turn to a few of those now, although I am sure, 10 we will have to take a little more time to look at the 11 proposed framework that you have sketched out here for 12 us. 13 17182 But in terms of this talent pool, 14 could you summarise for us what you recommend in terms 15 of taking to the airwaves the existing talent pool, 16 which is an important point, and to continue the 17 development of the talent pool. What are the steps 18 that you recommend we take to do that? 19 17183 DR. KARIM: I will start off and then 20 hopefully some of my colleagues who are producers of 21 programming may want to add in as well. 22 17184 First of all, there are resources 23 available to producers who seriously want to reflect 24 all Canadians to all Canadians. ACTRA comes out with a 25 regular publication called "Into the Mainstream." It StenoTran 3651 1 is a book that contains the pictures as well as lists 2 the kind of experience of a range of minority 3 performers. So this resources already exists for 4 producers. 5 17185 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I believe 6 that the rationale behind such a resource is to avoid 7 the common comments that, I am sorry, no such talent is 8 available. 9 17186 DR. KARIM: Exactly, yes. And you 10 often hear that. Secondly, there is almost a knee-jerk 11 response to diversity. Producers generally have become 12 aware of the lobbying by minorities for greater 13 inclusion over the last ten to 15 years. 14 17187 But the response tends to be knee- 15 jerk in the sense that there is an anecdote about a 16 director on a set producing -- creating a commercial. 17 And then realises that none of the performers in the ad 18 are non-white. So the first thing that comes out of 19 his mouth is, quick, get me someone black or oriental 20 so we can basically have a token kind of a portrayal of 21 visible minorities. 22 17188 This is a very creative business, and 23 yet you have such a lack of creativity when it comes to 24 portraying diversity. Not only are people of non-white 25 backgrounds, Aboriginal people, put in minor roles in StenoTran 3652 1 most dramatic programming, but there is no attempt to 2 think creatively as to how their stories, how their 3 aspirations can be integrated into mainstream 4 programming or their stories told. There is a wealth 5 of stories that remain to be told, but you rarely see 6 these during one of the screens or in the media. 7 17189 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Well, we 8 had Linda Schuyler here last week or the week before, I 9 believe, and certainly she commented that there is no 10 question in her mind that in producing a program like 11 "Riverdale," she would have a great diversity of 12 actors. 13 17190 And so, as you say in your notes in 14 your papers, there certainly is some progress because 15 people are realising what will work with an audience 16 has to have some reflection. 17 17191 Well, if that is the truth, why are 18 we still here talking about the need to move forward? 19 What is the blockage constantly coming back to us? 20 17192 I am talking about a framework. And 21 without reading, I am assuming your framework includes 22 the development of talent, research, and action. 23 17193 Let us get to the action part. When 24 you talk to producers about this issue, when you talk 25 to ACTRA -- who in their recommendations yes, talk StenoTran 3653 1 about a talent pool through ACTRA Works -- but is that 2 talent pool really accepting and helping actors and 3 directors of diversity? Why isn't it mentioned here? 4 1215 5 17194 So, are you dealing in a very 6 concrete and productive way with producer groups, with 7 the actor groups, with others, to say, "Let's find some 8 solutions." 9 17195 DR. KARIM: I think I will defer to 10 my colleagues who have actually worked in this field. 11 17196 MR. ALFONS ADETUYI: I will attempt 12 to answer that. My name is Alfons Adetuyi. I am a 13 producer with Inner City Films. Maybe I should just 14 move over so I can see you. 15 17197 I think what we tried to do -- I have 16 been in the business for about 15 years. We started 17 out producing industrials and in 1992 we produced a 18 one-hour drama. That was the first drama that was 19 produced, written and directed by people of colour, 20 broadcast in prime time, at least the NFB tell me so as 21 they were doing a study on this. In 1996/97 we 22 produced 13 one-hour dramas for CBC on prime time. The 23 series was called "Ekhaya: A Family Chronicle". It 24 was the first Canada-South Africa international co- 25 production. StenoTran 3654 1 17198 When I first came into the business 2 in the early 1980s, we went to a lot of seminars and 3 studies and a lot of discussions that sounded similar 4 to this, about where to move and how we would get 5 minorities on the screen. I remember at one of those 6 particular discussions -- Lincoln Alexander was the 7 Governor-General at the time in Ontario and he said, 8 "What we need now is just leadership and movement", and 9 I think it's a lot of what you are saying. So, I think 10 certainly at Inner City Films what we took that to mean 11 is we just have to do it. 12 17199 One of the things that we did when we 13 made this drama, the first one hour that we did, is I 14 hired a production manager and said, "I would like 15 maybe 50 per cent of the crew to be minorities." The 16 look was, "Does that exist, 50 per cent of a crew? 17 Where are you going to get that?" At least because of 18 the nature of the show, it had about 17, 18 actors, and 19 16 or 17 actors were people of colour. That was a lot 20 of people to come together and to be on a prime time 21 one-hour drama at once, but the idea was to find these 22 crew members. 23 17200 When I realized what he needed was a 24 prod, "You must get 50 per cent", what he started to do 25 was look at where are these people, look at Ryerson, StenoTran 3655 1 maybe we will have a trainee, but what we discovered 2 was we not only had people that were possible trainees, 3 we had people that were available to do the job. 4 Because of the nature of our business, which is I 5 wouldn't say incestuous, but it's who you know and it's 6 a small business and a small group and usually you hire 7 your friends or people that you have worked with and 8 vice versa, I think it's a natural way for businesses 9 to grow. It just grows among people who are working 10 together. 11 17201 Within that, there were not people of 12 colour within that circle, so you have to pull them 13 into that circle and you have to make an effort. 14 Someone had to lay down the rule. I was a producer at 15 the time and I said, "We must have 50 per cent." So, 16 there was a mandate set and we did end up with that. 17 It was great because it was very empowering for those 18 people and they were good people and we made an award- 19 winning program. It won a few awards across Canada, 20 including The Golden Sheaf Award. 21 17202 I guess why I am saying that is in 22 order to bring these people into the production does 23 not mean you are giving up anything. It enhanced this 24 production and it went on to win awards because of 25 these people and their involvement. We did the same StenoTran 3656 1 thing with our drama series. We had the same mandate. 2 It was bigger, of course, with 13 one-hour prime time 3 dramas, but it was still the same mandate. I think 4 what we need are more companies that will take that 5 responsibility, having that desire to reach out and 6 involve the wider spectrum of our society in producing 7 these images. 8 17203 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I think 9 you have also put it in your paper that diversity is 10 good business and I gathered one of the themes you are 11 developing is it makes perfect sense and logical 12 business sense to reach to an audience which will 13 respond to a product as opposed to just an approach 14 that says a certain quota system or certain regulations 15 are important. 16 17204 MR. ALFONS ADETUYI: Definitely. 17 What is amazing -- I did a documentary, I guess maybe 18 it was 1994 or 1995 called "Visible Minorities in the 19 Media". "Where is the Colour? Racial Minorities in 20 the Media" was its full title. A lot of the studies 21 that have been done since the 1980s were quoted here 22 that indicated that, yes, the U.S. was moving on and 23 realizing the economic benefit of reaching the minority 24 market. But in Canada for some reason we weren't doing 25 this and I kept trying to understand: All these facts StenoTran 3657 1 are here, it makes economic sense for these advertisers 2 to reach these people and to reach us, so what is the 3 problem? 4 17205 Off the record I was asking one of 5 the people, one of the advertising executives, "It's a 6 puzzle. I am going around in circles in these 7 documentaries. You have to tell me the answer as to 8 why you are not catering to something that is 9 economically viable for your clients and yourselves." 10 His simple answer was, "Old habits die hard." 11 17206 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: I'm sorry, 12 I missed that. 13 17207 MR. ALFONS ADETUYI: He said, "Old 14 habits die hard." These are money-losing habits that 15 we have. Yes, these people are losing money. They are 16 losing all kinds of things, but it's just an old habit. 17 That's the hardest thing to fight. 18 17208 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Yes, it 19 sounds like familiar territory, but it doesn't mean 20 that we haven't made progress. I appreciate the story 21 that you are telling. It helps us understand what in 22 the day to day is being done in terms of efforts to 23 educate, to position people in those positions where 24 there is a door open, where the choices and decisions 25 are being made, which is part and parcel of an StenoTran 3658 1 employment equity, which I have read through your 2 papers here. 3 17209 But I want to get to the component of 4 your framework, which is regulation. I believe, Dr. 5 Karim, you mentioned an era in which deregulation is 6 constantly coming forward. In the environment of this 7 review, we have also had various players coming to tell 8 us to let market drive the system and yet you say to us 9 that it's important that we, in the end -- and tell me 10 if I am wrong -- regulate the system so that a licence 11 condition at the time of licence renewal be applied in 12 terms of a promise of performance regarding the 13 assessment of diversity needs. 14 17210 Could you be a little more specific 15 about what you mean by a licence condition, 16 particularly in the environment that we find ourselves 17 in now? How will that be received and how will that be 18 managed? 19 17211 DR. KARIM: I will start off and I 20 imagine Professor Lumb might want to say something 21 about this as well. 22 17212 I would like to put this within the 23 framework of public service broadcasting. There are 24 certain values that the Canadian broadcasting system 25 has held as being fundamental to our approach to StenoTran 3659 1 broadcasting. Whether they be Canadian content or 2 developing the Canadian talent pool, et cetera, et 3 cetera, there has to be a certain strength, certain 4 pillars that give the system strength that it continues 5 to exist. 6 17213 With the changing population of the 7 country and the lack of reflection of this population, 8 the terrain has shifted, but what we are asking, 9 basically, is that these changes be incorporated into 10 the strengths of Canadian broadcasting, of Canadian 11 public service broadcasting, as well as the private 12 sector broadcasting. We have certain criteria in terms 13 of Canadian content, French language content rules, et 14 cetera, et cetera, and we see the whole issue of 15 diversity as having been resolved at the time when the 16 Broadcasting Act was revised in the late 1980s and when 17 it was established in 1991. 18 17214 However, we don't seem to have moved 19 on since then. Section 3 states that the Canadian 20 broadcasting system should reflect the multicultural 21 and multiracial diversity of Canada. However, there is 22 no monitoring of that evaluation, nothing that the 23 broadcasters seem to be bound to show that this is 24 something that should be a facet of Canadian 25 broadcasting as the law of Canada sees it. StenoTran 3660 1 17215 Now, if we would ask for or the CRTC 2 would ask for some kind of evidence that broadcasters 3 are attempting to adhere to the stipulation, I don't 4 think that it's a particularly onerous kind of 5 regulation. It fits very much within the basic 6 regulatory framework of the Canadian broadcasting 7 system. In fact, as I said before, it's one of the 8 strengths of our system. 9 17216 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Would this 10 be over and above, however, the Employment Equity Act 11 of Canada, which is, of course, for large broadcasters 12 over 60,000, not employees not in our purview at the 13 moment? Are you talking about a system which would be 14 over and above that in terms of what we directly 15 regulate? 16 17217 DR. KARIM: I see them as parallel 17 aspects. Yes, there is the requirement to show 18 employment equity. On the other hand, our approach to 19 this is also to look at the kind of portrayal that 20 takes place. A broadcaster may be hiring all kinds of 21 people in front of the camera or behind the camera or 22 in very menial positions, as office cleaners, whatever, 23 and be able to show that they are hiring people of all 24 backgrounds. 25 17218 The issue here also is: Are these StenoTran 3661 1 people, first of all, being portrayed at all? 2 Secondly, how are they being portrayed? So, this would 3 be parallel to the employment equity regulations. 4 17219 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: On the 5 portrayal -- and I think in your written submission you 6 propose a task force and other intervenors have also 7 come forward to propose a task force on visible 8 minorities, not only representation in the industry, 9 but portrayal. What is your comment on the self- 10 regulation process, which is now in place in terms of 11 compliance to stereotyping, et cetera? 12 17220 DR. KARIM: I was at a conference 13 yesterday, which is part of the OECD hearings on the e- 14 commerce, and the whole issue of self-regulation in 15 that industry came up to do with new media. There were 16 people basically from community organizations. NGOs 17 were present at that conference. 18 17221 The consensus largely was that self- 19 regulation largely allows, whether it's the 20 broadcasting industry or the new media industry, to do 21 the minimum possible, if that. When there isn't an 22 outside body monitoring what is happening with the 23 self-regulation, if the industry is actually carrying 24 out what it is supposed to and if there are no, for 25 lack of a better term, penalties, then there is very StenoTran 3662 1 little compliance or progress in that area. 2 17222 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Does your 3 framework include the other side of the picture; 4 namely, incentives? You are aware of a number of the 5 proposals that have come forward at this hearing 6 regarding Canadian content, increasing amounts of 7 Canadian content, expenditures on Canadian content, in 8 addition credits for Canadian content in prime time. 9 Do any of these approaches figure into your framework 10 for increased cultural diversity? 11 17223 DR. KARIM: I would like to pass this 12 on to Professor Lumb. 13 17224 MR. LUMB: What we have seen in the 14 past, but particularly in the news side of 15 broadcasting, is because of regulations, because of 16 perceived needs and because of market surveys and 17 research, we have seen that people have reacted 18 properly and we have seen a change. As a former CBC 19 executive producer, it was part of my task to bring in 20 people from various ethnic backgrounds, and I did that. 21 I brought them in because they were good. They are 22 successful. Many have passed on to higher ranking 23 jobs, not the top jobs but higher ranking. 24 17225 I think we can agree that this works. 25 What I think we don't have, going back to the framework StenoTran 3663 1 idea, what we do not have as yet in the entertainment 2 side of the television business, we do not yet have a 3 willingness to appreciate the fact that a sufficient 4 number of programs simply are not being made. These 5 programs are simply not being made. Certainly 6 "Riverdale" is new, but it's replacing perhaps 7 "Degrassi". In that sense, it's just an exchange. 8 17226 You can't point to a whole wide 9 variety of programs coming onstream. If you look at 10 the British experience -- and I know you have mentioned 11 that you are looking at that quite intensively -- there 12 is a maturity there. Because they have built up over 13 the years, over two or three decades, a large variety 14 of programming, they can actually do programs in which 15 they can do in-your-face stereotype programming. They 16 can actually make fun -- communities can actually now 17 make fun of themselves. They can make comedies, they 18 can make satires. 19 17227 They can take it because they have 20 entered the mainstream and this is what we are trying 21 to say has to happen. We have about 30 per cent of 22 Canadians, 35 per cent of Canadians who simply do not 23 get reflected. The image of them usually belongs on 24 the dark side of the news instead of under the bright 25 lights of drama and comedy and entertainment and music. StenoTran 3664 1 This is where we think that there has to be kind of a 2 quantum leap. It will only be brought about by 3 regulation, we think. 4 17228 MR. FRIEDMAN: Could I just add -- 5 17229 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: Only by 6 regulation? 7 17230 MR. FRIEDMAN: Could I just add 8 something to that in terms of depiction and 9 stereotyping? The problem from the point of view of 10 entertainment is partially absence, people not being 11 depicted at all. The problem in terms of news coverage 12 and public information programming is stereotyping. 13 People use quick shots, they use shorthand to 14 communicate a message. When they do that, they tend to 15 appeal to the lowest common denominator understanding 16 of someone's picture of a group. 17 17231 I was watching "CTV News" today and 18 they were talking about -- they had a shot of Lucienne 19 Robillard talking about immigration to Canada and how 20 it was going to be lower this year. Immediately they 21 went to a street scene. We don't know what city this 22 was. It could have been Hong Kong. You saw a lot of 23 oriental people walking, crossing streets. We don't 24 know what city this was in. It could have been 25 Vancouver, but we have no idea where it was. StenoTran 3665 1 17232 If it was Vancouver, how many of the 2 people on the screen were actually born in Canada? 3 Many of them were probably Canadians and yet they were 4 presented as immigrants. That's our image of the 5 immigrant, that somebody who looks oriental is an 6 immigrant. That's the kind of thing that we do all the 7 time. 8 17233 It's very hard in terms of setting up 9 an individual complaints mechanism for every such 10 incident you are going to say. I think really 11 egregious incidents can be handled by a complaints 12 mechanism, but with things like that, it's too onerous 13 to go through a whole complaint just to make this kind 14 of a point. You can write a letter to the network and 15 then you will get a nice polite response, but we need 16 something more. 17 17234 We need some kind of overall 18 assessment over a period of time to understand what's 19 going on here and we need to give that feedback to the 20 networks themselves. That has to be done through some 21 kind of formal process. Regulation is one of the ways 22 to do it. 23 17235 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: One of the 24 ways, because many of you, if not all of you at the 25 table there who have been or still are in production StenoTran 3666 1 itself, in the business of creativity and, as my 2 colleague Commissioner Cardozo said in earlier 3 discussion, what inevitably will come up is freedom of 4 expression, as we realistically do something as regards 5 the points you have raised. The process of changing 6 systemic opinion, if I can put it that way, or systemic 7 systems is a long one and part and parcel of it has to 8 do with dealing with the creative community. 9 17236 So, I raise the issue of incentives 10 in that regard, that in the creative community and in a 11 creative fashion how do you change those opinions? How 12 do you open up, as we used to say in terms of women's 13 production, the other eye of perspective? 14 17237 MR. FRIEDMAN: B'Nai Brith Canada 15 operates the Media Human Rights Awards giving 16 recognition to people in broadcasting and hard media 17 for their achievements in the covering of human rights 18 and diversity issues. So, people get awards. Is there 19 something that the CRTC can do in terms of giving extra 20 points to people and isn't that some kind of 21 regulation? It's not a punitive regulation, but it's 22 still a regulation. 23 1225 24 17238 COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: No, I take 25 your presentation in that regard. We do have to look StenoTran 3667 1 at specifically what we are doing, but I appreciate a 2 discussion which assures that that is done in an 3 overall context that is appropriate to other steps that 4 are being taken. Because, as I said earlier, it is of 5 concern that these issues still come forward. I think 6 you have made that very clear. Others have as well. 7 17239 I believe that Joan Grant-Cummings 8 from NAC took us into a discussion of the culture of 9 equality when my colleague, Mr. McKendry, raised the 10 word "culture" as a component of the objectives of the 11 Broadcast Act. And that discussion of equality really 12 was about point of view about different experiences and 13 it is, I hope, part of your framework that when it 14 comes down to it that creativity itself will advance 15 the issue. The creators themselves will have a chance 16 to change things. 17 17240 That completes my questions, Madam 18 Chair. 19 17241 THE CHAIRPERSON: Commissioner 20 Cardozo. 21 17242 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Thanks, Madam 22 Chair. 23 17243 I was watching TV last night, the new 24 show called "Da Vinci's Inquest," which is on CBC, and 25 I watched it closely to look for diversity of people StenoTran 3668 1 there and there was a reference to an Aboriginal 2 person, you will be interested to know. The fact that 3 the Aboriginal person referred to was a prostitute on 4 drugs, and I am not kidding, I think goes to what you 5 are talking about. So that is some of our new 6 programming, which some people are very proud about. 7 17244 I was struck by one of the comments 8 you made in your opening comments, Professor Lumb, 9 where you said: 10 "It is safe to say that 11 Canadians who watch British 12 dramas and comedies on TVO and 13 PBS are likely to see Asian and 14 Black actors in major roles than 15 they ever will by watching the 16 CBC or Canada's private 17 networks." 18 17245 I guess I hear the comment that Mr. 19 Adetuyi made with regards to old habits die hard and 20 also a comment about BBC having a diversity programming 21 unit. But I am wondering if you have any other 22 thoughts or whether that sums it up as to why there is 23 this reluctance, seemingly, to reflect diversity, both 24 the cultural and racial diversity, and the Aboriginal 25 diversity in Canadian programming. StenoTran 3669 1 17246 MR. LUMB: Perhaps I can begin and 2 then I turn it over to Alfons. 3 17247 I think, Commissioner Pennefather, 4 you put your fingers on it, creativity. People have 5 it. People want to exercise it. They yearn to 6 exercise it. And then they don't get an opportunity to 7 do so. Not because their proposal, their project, 8 their stage play, their television production is not a 9 good idea, necessarily, but because it simply doesn't 10 fit somebody's idea of what the Canadian public, 11 whoever that is, wants to see. 12 17248 I am a little bit more comfortable in 13 the news area because I know it well and we have had 14 lots of examples of that. The story selection process 15 is something that frustrates a lot of younger 16 journalists, for instance, because they go into 17 newsrooms run by managers -- gatekeepers, we call them 18 in the news business -- with very set viewpoints and it 19 is very difficult to get those ideas to change. 20 17249 It takes a rare and courageous 21 journalist to challenge the system, to continue to 22 produce ideas that are so very good that they cannot be 23 turned down and rejected. So, inch by inch, little 24 progress is made. 25 17250 I know the same thing happens in the StenoTran 3670 1 documentary world. I am sure the same thing must be 2 occurring in the entertainment business. And what I 3 see as the only possibility for change, and it runs 4 parallel to the news business where news media have, 5 for instance -- this is the result of a workshop which 6 the news media themselves got together with a few 7 helpers from the academic side or former journalists 8 like myself, and they have come up with a checklist 9 which approaches the whole question of diversity from 10 three viewpoints. 11 17251 One is for beat and general 12 reporters. One is for producers and desk and 13 assignment editors, the gatekeepers. And the other one 14 is for senior management. Because, actually, the 15 process has to stop there. The process has to stop 16 with senior management. You have to start with the 17 will to get this underway. Once you have got that, 18 once people have the message at the middle management 19 level that the guys upstairs, and I say "the guys 20 upstairs," because it usually is the guys upstairs, 21 once the guys upstairs have decided that this is good 22 and this is what we should try, or go for this year, 23 even if it is only the flavour of the year, then that 24 trickles down to middle management. Middle management 25 suddenly gives a larger licence, if you like, to those StenoTran 3671 1 reporters who want to do something different and it 2 happens to work. 3 17252 Of course, sustaining it is very 4 tough. This is a framework that exists for the news 5 business drawn up by news media people themselves which 6 has these areas, including a system for how to sustain 7 it. I will make these, of course, available to the 8 Commission. 9 17253 It occurs to me that why can't the 10 entertainment industry do something similar. If a 11 decision is taken either with or with help, a nudge and 12 a prod and a tiny bit of legislation, possibly, or some 13 licence concerns imposed by the CRTC. 14 17254 I well remember what happened a few 15 years ago when the CTV licence came up for renewal 16 about Canadian content and when they realized that the 17 licence renewal was a little on the shaky side, 18 overnight there was a great plan. Overnight there was 19 a great plan to have a whole lot of new Canadian drama 20 introduced. This happened. It's well documented. 21 17255 So regulation and a CRTC spur can 22 actually work. And I am suggesting that in the 23 entertainment industry today, if there is sufficient 24 awareness on the part of senior management where it all 25 starts, that this is good business. StenoTran 3672 1 17256 Let's unlock a whole new range of 2 creative minds in this area. Let's see what else we 3 can do other than the predicted, the tried or the true 4 and if we just put it on the air, if we give it half a 5 chance, maybe it will stick. Maybe it is like a 6 vaccination. It will actually pop and bulge out and be 7 there and it will work. It will take, in other words. 8 And I am hoping that that is the kind of thing. Are 9 you able to deliver that kind of inoculation or 10 vaccination to the industry? That is what we are 11 asking for. 12 17257 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: We only do 13 painless things. 14 17258 MR. LUMB: It doesn't have to hurt. 15 It is just a scratch. 16 17259 MS. CLARKE: Actually, I can just add 17 to that. There was an article recently in MacLean's, 18 20th of September, that said that even though Canadian 19 television is changing, the content is still very 20 narrowly based demographically and that is all white 21 and female. 22 17260 Certainly there is nothing wrong with 23 the fact that there are more females participating in 24 the acting profession, and that is good from a feminist 25 point of view, but within a multicultural, multiracial StenoTran 3673 1 society, according to the article, it is not a good 2 thing. And this was by Josh Chidli (ph.), the tube's 3 cult of youth. 4 17261 And my daughter spends a lot of time 5 watching television. She is 15. She will be in the 6 arts and she doesn't see herself reflected at all in 7 the shows that she watches. 8 17262 DR. KARIM: We have attempted to 9 address the issue of freedom of expression and 10 creativity within the proposed framework to monitor and 11 measure and evaluate the cultural diversity clause of 12 the Broadcasting Act. 13 17263 Basically, we would like to bring 14 attention to the fact that most of the producers and 15 the decision-makers are in their 50s, 40s, 30s and grew 16 up in an environment largely where broadcasting 17 textbooks tended to edit out minorities, even 18 Aboriginal people. 19 17264 Perhaps the socialization that takes 20 place at that time -- Well, we know that childhood 21 socialization is important. Perhaps these people just 22 don't see the changes in society, the need to reflect 23 everyone. 24 17265 And this kind of self-censoring, 25 perhaps if you can call it that, is a greater barrier StenoTran 3674 1 to the freedom, personal freedom of expression and 2 creativity than a mild sort of approach, whether it is 3 regulatory or whatever, that encourages these same 4 producers to be inclusive of all people. 5 17266 This is perhaps something to keep in 6 mind as to how we ourselves have what Walter Lippman 7 50, 60 years ago called "the pictures in our minds" 8 which don't allow us to see our society as it really 9 is. 10 17267 ALFONS ADETUYI: I just wanted to add 11 to that. Your question of why we are not there. 12 17268 On a practical side, we formed an 13 organization called the Black Front Video Network, by 14 the way. For your information, it has about 250 15 members of racial minorities that are working in the 16 film and television business. 17 17269 I remember leaving one of the 18 meetings and going to CanPro, where the Association of 19 Canadian Broadcasters get together and when I got 20 there, there was a room of, I don't know, a few hundred 21 people. There were no minorities represented there, 22 except for one person, one other producer that I saw 23 way down at the end of the hall that I made a good 24 friend with for a number of years who was Southeast 25 Asian. StenoTran 3675 1 17270 I remember going there being fired up 2 from this meeting of the fact that we can make an 3 impact and the minorities and trying to talk to 4 broadcasters about programming possibilities. 5 17271 What I realized is that we are not 6 even an issue. I thought there would be some interest. 7 We are not an issue at all. It was very sobering to 8 realize the running of the Canadian -- You know, it's a 9 multi-billion dollar production business that was 10 rolling along there and that's a good place to actually 11 witness and see the decision-makers that are involved 12 in the running of the Canadian television and to 13 realize, yes, of course, they don't represent at all 14 any of the minorities in this group. 15 17272 How do I expect them to be sensitive 16 to these issues? So I think that was one thing. To 17 realize that to a large extent we are a non-issue. 18 Maybe we will become an issue. 19 17273 The only time we will actually become 20 an issue, I believe, is if some of these regulations 21 and if some of these recommendations follow through. 22 Then we become an issue quickly. But I don't believe 23 we will become an issue. 24 1245 25 17274 The other thing I wanted to mention StenoTran 3676 1 is another reason I think that we are not there is 2 because of misinformation. I mean, the broadcasters, 3 the producers, the showmakers want public opinion, they 4 want to reach an audience, and they research. But a 5 lot of the research, methods of gathering research, the 6 structure of research, has not really involved an 7 understanding of racial minorities. And in order to do 8 that in a lot of these research and test markets, one 9 has to piggyback a study like this, as to how do we 10 reach minorities, or what is the impact of this group. 11 And that costs money. 12 17275 And during certainly the last few 13 years, and certainly during the recession years there 14 was no room for that extra expenditure to try to 15 understand that market. 16 17276 And now there is still fiscal 17 restraint going on in many corporations and downsizing 18 or companies coming together to truly survive in this, 19 you know, multichannel market. And to ask them to 20 voluntarily, you know, add something else onto their 21 marketing and study research -- where is that money 22 coming from? Where is that effort coming from? They 23 are not going to pay for this, you know. And I think 24 if they don't have to do it they won't do it. 25 17277 I will just cut it there. I think StenoTran 3677 1 there are ways it could move ahead, but just to answer 2 your question two ways, I think that we weren't there, 3 you know, I think those are two ways, definitely. 4 17278 What I am getting at is, when we 5 produce 13 one-hour dramas on prime time on CBC -- so 6 when they ask, well, how did you get there? How did we 7 get 13 dramas produced, written, and directed by 8 African-Canadians pretty well -- one of them lives in 9 South Africa now. He is a Canadian and is a graduate 10 of Ryerson, the writer of all 13 of our dramas. 11 17279 So I will let you know how we did it 12 with CBC, because this is the first time in the history 13 of broadcasting it has been done, the first time that a 14 black actor was nominated as a best leading actor in a 15 dramatic series -- not a supporting actor, but best 16 leading actor. Maybe we got that because the Mountie 17 wasn't there that year, it was his last year. So we 18 took his place with our best leading actor. 19 17280 And how we got there, is went to CBC 20 with 13 scripts written, that they did not put any 21 development money into. And those of you that are 22 familiar with production and how that is done. We 23 realised that the chances were slim of this kind of 24 development going on, so we developed it ourselves. 25 17281 And then it was still just StenoTran 3678 1 overwhelming to think of giving us Thursday night at 8 2 o'clock to these new producers, 13 one-hour dramas. I 3 think it was too hard to swallow, so there was still 4 talk of this development approach. 5 17282 So we went to South Africa, and we 6 got 60 per cent of the money to do this show, which is 7 a Canadian show as far as, you know, an international 8 co-production. 9 17283 So in essence what had happened is 10 South Africa paid 60 per cent of the money for CBC's 11 first minority-produced prime time drama series. And 12 it is kind of sad in one way. Sixty per cent of the 13 money for that came from South Africa. 14 17284 Mind you, it was money well-spent in 15 South Africa, because it was the top-rated series in 16 their country. They have a population very similar to 17 ours, almost 40 million. It is a little more. And it 18 became number one, receiving about 3 million viewers, 19 and it was watched all over that country. 20 17285 I mean, we did okay here, as far as 21 critical acclaim, and we have, for what they paid for, 22 a pretty good audience for CBC. But I am just making 23 that point from, you know, being in the trenches, that 24 is how you get those things on the screen. 25 17286 I guess I benefitted from the StenoTran 3679 1 leverage that all Canadian productions have because of 2 the rules that are placed now to have Canadian content. 3 What I am saying is I still had to bring 60 per cent of 4 the money from outside this country to get something 5 on, and I think, I don't know, there are other Canadian 6 shows that didn't have to do that that got onto our 7 market. 8 17287 So I think that we have to look at a 9 way of encouraging this kind of programming to get done 10 without going to that extent of bringing in 60 per cent 11 from another country. 12 17288 MS. CLARKE: I suppose the question 13 for us is how can we sell our products as we expand our 14 global market -- and that is Canada's plan -- and are 15 we showing the true culture of the society? And that 16 is something that everyone has to think about very 17 seriously. It certainly has to be the political will 18 to do that. 19 17289 And one slight anecdote, last year I 20 had an opportunity to attend a pre-screening of "L.A. 21 Confidential," I went to this fabulous reception. As I 22 was entering the door they wondered what I was doing 23 there. I did get in -- we had an invitation -- and I 24 took my sister-in-law. And we were the only people -- 25 visible minorities in the reception. StenoTran 3680 1 17290 One of the other things, of course, 2 was the minorities that were there were those that were 3 serving, the caterers. They may not necessarily have 4 been the chefs, but certainly they were part of that 5 team. 6 17291 And that's a sad reminder that Canada 7 has all sorts of different talents from all different 8 backgrounds going back in our history of Aboriginal 9 people. 10 17292 MR. AMOS ADETUYI: To go to Mr. 11 Cardozo's question about why the reluctance. We are on 12 the front lines as producers, and so we are in the 13 boardrooms of the different broadcasters and the 14 different production companies and distribution 15 companies. 16 17293 And to go back to the series "Ekhaya" 17 that we did, that wasn't just presented to CBC, it was 18 presented to CTV as well, to the head programmer at the 19 time. 20 17294 And I can recall the letter that came 21 back quite vividly. He said it was a wonderful 22 project, wonderful proposal, "I think it is a great 23 program, but I don't think it is for our audience." 24 That is the way he worded it. And so that is something 25 that has always stuck with me, because I don't StenoTran 3681 1 understand what he figured his audience was then, if a 2 show portrayed people from a visible minority wasn't 3 part of it. He loved the drama, he loved the script, 4 so. 5 17295 I think it is -- when we go to these 6 boardrooms, we are the only people of colour in there. 7 Obviously, that happens all the time. And to reinforce 8 what Anne is saying, sure, the receptionist will be a 9 person of colour, a lot of the security guards people 10 of colour, and on and on. But not the decision-makers. 11 And that is where the key problem lies. 12 17296 How do you change that without 13 putting any teeth into the Broadcasting Act and 14 enforcing it? I don't know how that happens. I think 15 it just carries forward and the status quo sits the way 16 it sits. 17 17297 It was funny reading the CBC's 18 licence agreement with the CRTC -- their old one. Of 19 course, the new one is coming up, which should be 20 interesting. 21 17298 But the old one talks about them 22 fulfilling this part of the Broadcast Act's mandate and 23 their mandate, and in fact they feel that they exceeded 24 portraying visible minorities -- and it was something, 25 seven or eight per cent. At the time there was only StenoTran 3682 1 about six per cent minorities. 2 17299 And the CRTC, in fact, in response to 3 that said, that is great. They responded as saying the 4 CBC is doing very well in that area. But you turn on 5 the television, and it is obvious that's not the fact, 6 unless they are considering the people in the 7 background as the camera pans through that have been 8 placed there as secondary actors. 9 17300 So there is a reluctance there, 10 because there just are no decision-makers in those 11 positions, or that surround them and raise the 12 questions when decision are being made, when the 13 pictures and the creator is coming down that, well, let 14 us have this storyline in this particular series, or, 15 let us look at this series that has storylines with 16 different cultural kind of points of view, world views. 17 If nobody is saying, yes, I think that is interesting. 18 If those people aren't in those decision-making places, 19 it is not going to come up unless the CRTC says that it 20 should come up. And if it doesn't come up, well then, 21 there will be some ramifications to that. Yes, I guess 22 that is my point. 23 17301 THE CHAIRPERSON: Does anyone have 24 any other comments to make? 25 17302 MS DAVID: I just wanted to point out StenoTran 3683 1 that TVNC we know for a fact from the Aboriginal 2 programming that we put on, especially for young 3 people, Aboriginal programming aimed at youth and young 4 people where they see themselves reflected increases 5 the amount of people that you are going to end up 6 seeing in the industry. Because children who see 7 themselves on television, who see their culture 8 reflected back to them, they say, well, maybe 9 television is for me. I could be an actor, I could be 10 a producer. 11 17303 But watching mainstream television 12 now, as a child, as a youth, really as anyone, if you 13 don't see yourself reflected, you don't think that is a 14 viable option for you. I don't see myself there. I 15 don't see why I should pursue that as an option. So it 16 kind of goes in a circle. If we get visible minorities 17 and Aboriginal people reflected in mainstream 18 television, then we will get more talent, we will get 19 more people interested in the industry. 20 17304 THE CHAIRPERSON: Counsel. 21 17305 MS. PATTERSON: Thank you, Madam 22 Chair. I had a question about your methodology for 23 your framework to monitor diversity. The scoring 24 system appears to be focused on dramatic programming. 25 My question is, is it your intention to focus on drama StenoTran 3684 1 alone, or would it be appropriate to extend your 2 framework to other genres of programming? 3 17306 MR. LUMB: I will answer that. This 4 was just given as examples, these various points. We 5 would hope that the scoring system would be extended to 6 news, to drama, to documentaries, et cetera, the whole 7 range of programming. Not just entertainment. 8 17307 MS PATTERSON: Okay, thank you. 9 Thank you, Madam Chair. 10 17308 MR LUMB: If I may -- sorry, if I may 11 just add, if by drama you also mean comedy, music 12 programs, entertainment programs, children's 13 programming, all of those, okay? 14 17309 MS PATTERSON: Okay, yes, that 15 answers my question, thank you. 16 17310 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr. 17 Lumb, ladies and gentlemen. 18 17311 We will resume at 2:30. Nous 19 reprendrons à 2 h 30. 20 --- Short recess at / Courte pause à 1257 21 --- Upon resuming at / Reprise à 1432 22 17312 THE CHAIRPERSON: Madam Secretary. 23 17313 MS SANTERRE: Thank you, Madam Chair. 24 The presentation will be done by the Cultural Human 25 Resources Council/Conseil des ressources humaines du StenoTran 3685 1 secteur culturel. 2 PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION 3 17314 MR. TABET: Hello. Thank you for 4 having us today. My name is Jean-Philippe Tabet. I am 5 the Executive Director of the Cultural Human Resources 6 Council and here with me is Sandy Crawley. Sandy 7 Crawley is the Chair of the Audio-Visual Committee of 8 the Cultural Human Resources Council and also the 9 Executive Director of the Canadian Screen Training 10 Centre. 11 17315 Thank you for providing us with the 12 opportunity to present our comments regarding the 13 Canadian Television Policy Review. We would like to 14 start briefly with a presentation on where we are at 15 and what is the cultural sector definition, if you 16 want, and then go into what kind of recommendation we 17 could provide you with, this issue that is at stake 18 today. So, I am going to go over there to make the 19 presentation. 20 17316 Bonjour, et merci de nous recevoir 21 aujourd'hui. When we are talking about the cultural 22 sector in Canada, we are talking about 670,000 23 Canadians working in our cultural sector. This sector 24 contributes $30 billion to the gross domestic product, 25 but the most striking thing is the fact that this StenoTran 3686 1 sector has grown much faster and much bigger than any 2 other sector in Canada. In fact the latest statistics 3 show that between 1993 and 1996 the cultural sector 4 workforce has grown by 12 per cent. 5 17317 Fifty thousand Canadians work in the 6 television and production industry and each Canadian 7 spends nearly 25 hours per week viewing television 8 programming. This is something that we need to remind 9 ourselves of before we are sort of looking at the 10 global picture about television programming and 11 Canadian content. 12 17318 CHRC, the Cultural Human Resources 13 Council, is a not for profit organization, non- 14 governmental. We were created by the cultural sector 15 and Human Resources Development Canada to sort of 16 promote, initiate and develop strategy direction for 17 human resources development in the cultural sector. 18 Hence, the content of our brief was about the idea of 19 how to strengthen the human resources development in 20 the area of television, especially in the context of 21 digitalization. We represent employers and employees, 22 self-employed, educators and training providers and our 23 membership is 220 organizations, associations and 24 individuals across Canada. 25 17319 I will now just mention to you the StenoTran 3687 1 core of our presentation is the needs and priorities 2 because of the arrival of digital television and the HR 3 issues in that regard. For producers and cultural 4 workers there will be a need for new techniques in 5 lighting, set design, construction, make-up/costumes; 6 digital television will be wide-screen, meaning that 7 the coordination and complexities of composition and 8 staging must be re-learned; and digital television will 9 use multi-channel stereo sound, which will require new 10 skills. So, that will have a direct impact and has 11 already a direct impact within our industry. What do 12 we do about it? 13 17320 Producers and cultural workers will 14 not only be affected, broadcasters will also be 15 affected. There was a presentation in that regard made 16 by the different associations. Digital television 17 permits additional data to be transmitted, which will 18 require additional technical, as well as sales and 19 management skills; digital television allows more than 20 one program to be transmitted by a single broadcaster 21 at a single time, which requires new coordination and 22 presentation skills; and digital television requires 23 different editing and other skills in order to prepare 24 programs for broadcast. So, as you can see, there is a 25 need to think about all of this when we prepare some StenoTran 3688 1 kind of strategy for meeting that challenge. 2 17321 So, for distributors there will be 3 some issues. Digital television will provide many more 4 optional extra charge services, for example, requiring 5 different marketing and technical management skills of 6 the distribution network and also again different 7 control and management techniques to ensure quality 8 control and viewer satisfaction. So, there is going to 9 be something we call a "digital pipeline to the home" 10 and the convergence will have impact on all those three 11 major contributors to television programming. 12 17322 There will be a cost to all of that 13 and it has been sort of assessed around $500 million. 14 There is already a Canadian digital television 15 organization that has been formed to research, test and 16 liaise with all interested parties in that regard. 17 Increasing Canadian viewership for us means to develop 18 a better skilled workforce to meet emerging needs of 19 programming and invest through partnership between 20 broadcasters, producers and workers in skills 21 development activities. 22 17323 So, it leads to some kind of 23 recommendation that our Council has put together that 24 all federal cultural policies, programs and substantive 25 projects require human resources impact statements StenoTran 3689 1 identifying contributions to strengthening the cultural 2 workforce. I hope in the deliberations that you are 3 going to take that will be a criteria that you may want 4 to assess. 5 17324 Secondly, we hope that you will be 6 able to support some kind of a cultural human resources 7 development fund which could include youth internship 8 programs, for example, or another option would be as a 9 condition of licence some kind of revenue may be put 10 into upgrading human resources in that area. Another 11 option will be trying to develop some kind of a 12 registered training plan policy to help the self- 13 employed in our industry. 14 17325 I thank you for this quick 15 presentation and I will be open to respond to your 16 questions. I am sure you have read our brief. I will 17 pass on the microphone to my colleague, Sandy Crawley. 18 17326 MR. CRAWLEY: Thank you, Jean- 19 Philippe. 20 17327 I wanted to open up by just 21 suggesting or reminding you that you already have some 22 considerable expertise at the Commission in human 23 resource issues. I have noticed over the years when I 24 have come here wearing various hats that I have 25 sometimes raised subjects that people have said -- or StenoTran 3690 1 the Commission seemed to feel, "That's not our job", 2 but that seems to be changing with the next panel 3 that's coming up on new media. 4 17328 I just wanted to suggest that the 5 work, I think the very valuable work, the Commission 6 has done over the years in cultural diversity and 7 gender equity issues, which are obviously because of 8 the public nature of the work that your licensees do, 9 the sector that you are regulating, are key and I 10 believe that in human resources development in terms of 11 information, training and professional development that 12 you can also play a similar salutary role as you 13 develop the expertise of the Commission and take into 14 consideration some of the questions Jean-Philippe has 15 raised. 16 17329 Just a few points to share with you 17 so that when you are thinking about human resource 18 development in the broadcasting sector and in 19 television you keep these in mind as landmarks. One of 20 the features, of course -- and we have had some 21 difficulty convincing some of the social scientists 22 that we have worked with in terms of labour market 23 issues -- is that in the creative fields in television 24 broadcasting an over-supply of labour is natural and in 25 fact to be desired. It's only by an over-supply of StenoTran 3691 1 labour of creative people that you create the real 2 excellence that eventually gives you a strong industry. 3 17330 Innovation is extremely important, 4 but it requires risk. The producers and artists are 5 more likely to take risks than broadcasters, even 6 though they do operate on tighter margins, particularly 7 artists but producers as well. So, therefore, we 8 support the position that suggests that it's not 9 appropriate to open up the various production funds or 10 the big fund to the broadcasters at this time because 11 we don't believe that they will in fact take the risks 12 that are required to build a strong sector. 13 17331 The other kind of historical context 14 that we have been playing with at our Council is that 15 we recognize -- it's generally recognized by our 16 particular constituency -- that in the earlier 17 development of broadcasting in Canada there was a 18 perhaps appropriate emphasis on building out the 19 distribution system to the detriment perhaps of the 20 production sector. We realize now that the Commission 21 -- and we have all grown up enough to recognize that 22 production is very key and very important and a lot of 23 emphasis has been put on the necessity of getting 24 resources directed into production and we like to see 25 that happening. It's a very good thing. StenoTran 3692 1 17332 We are afraid that in a sense human 2 resources development and training are under that 3 somewhere and that we are left for table scraps when 4 the great new wonderful initiatives that are started 5 sometimes get started. So, we are just here to urge 6 you to consider that the grand dreams of some of your 7 licensees and future licensees are based on the 8 creative talents being made available to them and that 9 a certain investment has to be made in developing that 10 talent. 11 17333 The point that I would like to bring 12 -- I always learn something when I come to the 13 Commission and this morning I was here to hear Union 14 des artistes and they jogged my memory that the issue 15 of regional development is extremely key and I hope 16 it's key in your deliberations over this process. I 17 think the point that Union des artistes was making this 18 morning was that regional production plays an 19 indispensable role in building viewership for Canadian 20 content. 21 17334 It also has always played a 22 tremendously indispensable role in developing talent 23 and that all our sort of national talents and household 24 names and so on one way or another started in the 25 region somewhere and we shouldn't forget that. We StenoTran 3693 1 should try to encourage the growth of production 2 facilities and training facilities in the regions. 3 17335 I think that's about it. We know 4 that we have wandered into perhaps some areas that 5 aren't directly in your purview, but again we find that 6 sometimes if we drop a stone at the Commission some 7 ripples will go through. We know that there are very 8 committed and talented public servants at Patrimoine 9 Canada at Human Resources Development Canada and 10 Industry Canada and sometimes we have the perception 11 that the political leadership have all too narrow a 12 view of how we might build this industry. So, I just 13 wanted to put that on the public record. 14 17336 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr. 15 Crawley, Mr. Tabet. 16 17337 Commissioner Cardozo? 17 17338 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Thank you, Mr. 18 Tabet, Mr. Crawley. 19 17339 Mr. Crawley, I note you said that 20 whenever you come to the Commission you learn something 21 and then followed it up by the example was that you 22 learned from somebody other than the Commission. I 23 just observe that. 24 17340 Can I just ask a little bit about the 25 Council? Especially on the first page of your slides StenoTran 3694 1 today where you talked about the cultural sector, who 2 would you include in that? What are the industries 3 that employ the 670,000 you are talking about? 4 17341 MR. TABET: The definition of 5 "cultural sector" was a key element that led to the 6 creation of the Cultural Human Resources Council. 7 Basically, we consider that we have six sub-sectors, if 8 you want. One is writing and publishing, the other one 9 is visual arts and crafts, the third one -- and it's 10 not by order of priority -- audio-visual and live 11 performing arts, heritage, new media and music and 12 sound recording. 13 17342 What we tried to do when we sort of 14 looked at the cultural sector in Canada was to find a 15 way by which we could easily comprehend what is a 16 cultural sector in Canada and you have basically one 17 way of doing it. There are many ways of doing it, but 18 one way was to look at the occupational classification 19 of occupations, especially group 51 and 52 which talks 20 about mainly the workers involved in the production of 21 works of art. That can be done very easily. 22 17343 In fact we are, with Stats Canada and 23 Industry Canada and HRDC and the Department of Canadian 24 Heritage and we hope with the CRTC, trying to develop 25 some kind of ideas around those numbers as well because StenoTran 3695 1 the Census is now more available and because we are 2 trying to sort of use the work that has been done over 3 the last five years to define the cultural sector in 4 order to represent it clearly in the statistics. The 5 problem we have is we do not yet a clear Stats Canada 6 definition of the cultural sector and we are trying to 7 work on it with them. 8 17344 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: And this 51 9 and 52 are Stats Can numbers? 10 1450 11 17345 MR. TABET: Yes, they are the 12 classification of occupation. But, unfortunately, 13 those numbers are not enough to define the cultural 14 sector. 15 17346 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: I am just glad 16 that they are not our numbers because 7, 8 and 9 is as 17 far as we go in numbers. I thought maybe there was 18 something I didn't know about it. 19 17347 Now you talked about your fund. How 20 does that differ from ACTRA works? Because ACTRA made 21 a presentation a few days ago and they suggested a 22 similar kind of contribution suggestion towards ACTRA 23 Works? 24 17348 MR. CRAWLEY: ACTRA Works actually 25 was seeded by a program that was begun by the Cultural StenoTran 3696 1 Human Resources Council and that is how it got going 2 and the Cultural Human Resources Council is not a self 3 sustaining mechanism in the sense that if someone else 4 can do the job better than the council, more power to 5 them. We are trying to stimulate and be catalytic in 6 that way. 7 17349 I think ACTRA is the first of the 8 talent guilds in our industry, in the broadcasting and 9 film industry that has actually put a component in its 10 collective agreement, its scale agreement whereby the 11 producer and the artist who is being engaged make a 12 small contribution towards a fund which sustains 13 training activity. So it is a model that we think can 14 work and, quite clearly, they are arguing in favour of 15 the same model. 16 17350 There are many different ways that 17 you can go at this and, obviously, the different talent 18 guilds will do it in different ways, but I think it is 19 certainly something you should be aware of as an 20 approach so that the industry itself takes on the 21 responsibility. We have not always got our hands out 22 to the public purse. 23 17351 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: So the 24 impression I get from your material is that the CHRC 25 fund, development fund hasn't begun as yet and that it StenoTran 3697 1 is at the proposal stage? 2 17352 MR. CRAWLEY: That is correct. The 3 political context, of course, is that there was a 4 decision made to devolve labour market training to the 5 provinces. That decision is far from implemented and we 6 have been doing some work in the cultural sector, 7 including this one, which showed remarkable results. 8 But, unfortunately, those programs have come to a close 9 because, supposedly, it is provincial responsibility 10 but the provincial governments don't have the ears to 11 hear yet. So we are in a rather difficult period of 12 transition in that regard. 13 17353 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: And your both 14 talent development and technical development, is it 15 fair to say that ACTRA is probably more talent 16 development based? 17 17354 MR. CRAWLEY: In terms of the 18 individual guilds, like ACTRA, the Writer's Guild, the 19 Director's Guild, et cetera, obviously they concentrate 20 on the skills that are required for their specific 21 craft. 22 17355 What CHRC has been taking a 23 leadership role has been in trying to develop some 24 curricula and so on that are appropriate across the 25 sector in things like career management because the StenoTran 3698 1 level of self employment in our particular sector, in 2 fact, in film and television, I think it's even higher 3 than in some of the other cultural sectors, sub- 4 sectors. 5 17356 It is over 50 per cent of the people 6 are essentially freelancers and some of those people 7 need guidelines and some thinking about how to manage 8 their business affairs, their tax business, the various 9 aspects that go into building a career without any 10 organization to support you. So that is one of the 11 areas that we are trying to make some progress in. 12 17357 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: So, currently, 13 do you have programs running that are dealing with 14 training? Are you developing them? 15 17358 MR. TABET: Well, the answer is, yes, 16 we do have some programs that are actually operating, 17 one in particular which is a youth internship program 18 in science and technology. And that science and 19 technology youth internship program is based on a 20 partnership with the industry. The employer invests 21 and the young person gets a first work opportunity. 22 17359 Prior to that, we had an experimental 23 program called the training initiatives program which 24 was of a much wider scope and that is a program that 25 was the initiator for the ACTRA Works program, but that StenoTran 3699 1 program has been discontinued since the devolution of 2 training to the provinces has been enacted in effect in 3 many provinces in Canada. Except Ontario where there 4 is no agreement between the federal government and the 5 provincial government at the moment. Therefore, there 6 is a sort of void that has been created which presents 7 a number of dangers for our industry because many 8 cultural workers and cultural training was happening in 9 Ontario and is happening in Ontario. 10 17360 So we do have a sort of an urgency 11 here in trying to promote a cultural human resources 12 development fund. 13 17361 But going back to your question in 14 how it relates to what is the issue today, which is the 15 review on the Canadian television policy, what we feel 16 is that there must be an emphasis on human resources 17 development in any decision that you are going to make, 18 because if we want to have in Canada a competitive edge 19 in programming, we need to have people who are able to 20 really be on the cutting edge of creating that cutting 21 edge programming, and we feel that we need to put an 22 emphasis on this issue. 23 17362 MR. CRAWLEY: Can I try to answer 24 your question, too, Mr. Cardozo? 25 17363 In the area of film and television, StenoTran 3700 1 there is a recognition of this. I mean this is not an 2 original idea. And there is a certain amount of 3 expenditure on human resource development and training. 4 There are some programs that provide some funds. 5 17364 They are a little disparate right now 6 and they are spread around. We have in one province we 7 have the Film Commission itself offering training. We 8 have four federally funded institutions of which the 9 one that I am just the new head of is one, The Canadian 10 Screening Training Centre, the Canadian Film Centre, 11 l'INICE (ph.) in Montreal, National Screening Institute 12 on the Prairies. 13 17365 There is some good work that has been 14 happening, but there is not a coordinated strategy and 15 we are going to work towards that. But I think it is 16 important for the Commission to know that, at least 17 from my point of view. And if someone comes forward to 18 contradict me, then I would be happy to find out there 19 is a coordinated strategy. 20 17366 But in the same way that 21 commissioners played such a key role in taking the 22 various people who were willing to contribute to 23 funding production at an arm's length by setting up the 24 various funds that have happened, I believe something 25 similar could happen in the training area so there StenoTran 3701 1 would be some rationale. We wouldn't be competing with 2 each other in markets that are overcrowded, speaking of 3 markets for training, and ignoring certain markets that 4 are crying out for training. 5 17367 So I think there is a policy 6 development exercise to go through there. I certainly 7 intend to participate in one through the telephone 8 mechanism but I think you should know about it as well. 9 17368 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: I am just 10 trying to clarify in my mind the role of the council. 11 You are not necessarily concerned with giving the 12 courses, but you are interested in seeing the courses 13 happen and some sort of coordination across the board. 14 17369 MR. TABET: We are very much 15 interested in providing a career and framework for 16 better human resources development strategy in the 17 cultural sector. This is really what it is all about 18 and we test some case, pilot testing in certain areas, 19 yes. 20 17370 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: In your three 21 recommendations in the last slide, I believe it is, 22 could you just explain that first one a little more? 23 You are saying all federal cultural policies, programs, 24 et cetera should require human resource impact 25 statements identifying contributions, strengthening the StenoTran 3702 1 cultural work force. What are you looking for in an 2 impact statement? 3 17371 MR. TABET: It is an analysis about 4 the needs in human resources development in that area. 5 This is quite important because I think there have been 6 a number of decisions that have been taken from a 7 government perspective and they do not really take into 8 account what are the emerging needs and contribution to 9 human resources development in that area. 10 17372 As I said, in the television 11 industry, for example, we need to assess what would be 12 the sort of cutting edge element in human resources 13 need. For example, we took the issue of digital 14 television and for us there is repercussion and impact 15 in the way we are going to do television in this 16 country, but have we assessed the impact in terms of 17 strengthening our work force? And that has, according 18 to me, not yet been done. 19 17373 It is beginning. We have done at the 20 Banff Centre in June a one-day workshop on that 21 particular issue, but there is not yet a sort of 22 coherent strategy for the Canadian film, television 23 industry in that regard. 24 17374 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: In terms of 25 digital training, okay. With regards to local StenoTran 3703 1 programming, Mr. Crawley, you mentioned the Union des 2 artistes recommendation today. What you would like to 3 see there is local training programs? 4 17375 MR. CRAWLEY: It was a general point 5 that it is rather a broad brush stroke that I used 6 before in supporting the position that broadcasters 7 should never have access to production funds. So I was 8 trying to temper that a little bit with the suggestion 9 and I would put specialties potentially, specialty 10 licensees in the same category. That there is a very 11 specific role that they can play in human resource 12 development as well as developing their businesses, 13 which they obviously have to do. 14 17376 And there is all kinds of ways that 15 people can kind of mask things to look like they are 16 regional and they are really just padding their bottom 17 line. So it is a tricky area, but the Commission is 18 well versed with tricky areas. 19 17377 I would suggest that perhaps if 20 someone imaginatively came forward with a plan that 21 would put more resources in the hands of local 22 production for local distribution, then I personally, 23 and I am just speaking for myself, I haven't consulted 24 with the Council on this, but my perception would be 25 that people might be open to that idea because it would StenoTran 3704 1 stimulate that grass roots talent development, as it 2 has done in the music industry. 3 17378 As UDA was pointing out with the 4 certain pressures that were put on the radio 5 broadcasting industry by the Commission, we have 6 developed a tremendous musical talent in this country. 7 I think we can do the same thing in television, but we 8 do have to recognize that it is not all going to happen 9 in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver. 10 1500 11 17379 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: What is your 12 sense of the role that community programming plays in 13 training? Because there is a lot of volunteers -- 14 17380 MR. CRAWLEY: Yes, it is quite 15 considerable, and to a certain extent, I think that the 16 cable companies have been fairly responsible. 17 Recently, in fact, the Canadian Screen Training Centre 18 did a course of training for one of the major cable 19 casters in the country. And there are obviously many, 20 many people who come into the industry as a result of 21 their initial experience working in television at the 22 community cable channels. I think it is quite a useful 23 contribution. 24 17381 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: You mentioned, 25 I think, what amounted to sensitivity training around StenoTran 3705 1 issues of gender equity and cultural diversity. Any 2 thoughts about what that would involve and who would 3 hire -- 4 17382 MR. CRAWLEY: You know, it is 5 interesting. I mean, I have been working with the 6 talent guilds for a lot of my life and so on, and some 7 of the unions and so on. And I think that many of them 8 are really sensitized to these issues. I think some of 9 the work that the Commission did really was with the 10 major employers in terms of broadcasters both what was 11 showing up on the screen, and what was happening inside 12 their shops. 13 17383 And I really was just alluding to 14 that as a way of reinforcing that human resources 15 issues are not foreign to the Commission, and that you 16 have every right to look into them, and we would 17 encourage you to do so. 18 17384 I wasn't suggesting that we had a 19 particular role to play in gender and cultural 20 diversity equity. I think most of the organisations 21 that I am thinking of that are constituents are well 22 ahead in that regard, in fact. 23 17385 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Now, in terms 24 of digital, can you tell us a little bit about the 25 workshop you mentioned in Banff and the kinds of ideas StenoTran 3706 1 you obtained as the kinds of things that have to 2 happen? We have been hearing quite a bit about the 3 costs of digital, generally a sense that the 4 broadcasting sector has to move there sometime in the 5 next few years. What is the portion of the human 6 resources development part that has to take place 7 there? 8 17386 MR. CRAWLEY: I think we have been 9 quite brilliant in this country, actually, the 10 formation of this consortium. If you compare it to 11 what is happening south of the border where they are, 12 you know, trying for outright competition with each 13 other, and everybody wants to sell their own model and 14 beat everyone else to the punch. The sort of pre- 15 competitive investments that the consortium are 16 prepared to make, I think, is a very good stroke of 17 good thinking on our part. 18 17387 What we did in Banff was an initial 19 discussion with some of the major players from the US, 20 and some of the major players here, and people who had 21 some experience and training for digital -- was to try 22 and figure out where there was a potential problem and 23 where there wasn't. And in fact, I don't think it is 24 going to be that difficult to adjust to digital 25 television. StenoTran 3707 1 17388 I think, though, that this consortium 2 can play a key role in perhaps providing some hardware 3 to help train people on these new techniques, and so 4 on. In terms of the lighting design and aspect ratio 5 and all that stuff, it is essentially copying film, 6 rather wisely. 7 17389 So I think people who have film 8 training are going to adapt very easily. People who 9 are trained only in television will have a harder time 10 adjusting to digital television. 11 17390 But I understand that the consortium 12 has formed a relationship with the Centre of Excellence 13 in the country here, and I think that is going to be 14 very good for their primary sort of high-end training. 15 I think, though, again, in the regions there is work to 16 be done, and from what I understand, and we have been 17 hearing for decades about the low-cost and wonderful 18 efficiency of these new technologies, that it seems to 19 me that some of the technology providers who have a 20 vested interest should be providing some of that for us 21 to disseminate for them and help to train people on 22 their use. It is obviously going to help their 23 business, anyway. 24 17391 So I think it is a question of 25 coordinating, identifying those business opportunities StenoTran 3708 1 to people that can also serve human resource 2 development. 3 17392 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: In the high- 4 tech sector, places like Nortel and Newbridge, they are 5 always talking about a real lack of potential 6 employees. And you often hear them saying, If I could 7 find 100 trained people, I would hire them tomorrow. 8 Do you see the same thing happening with digital 9 television? 10 17393 MR. CRAWLEY: To a certain extent, I 11 think because it is conceived, and it is really going 12 to go this time, it looks like. It really is conceived 13 as an upgrade of conventional broadcasting. So I don't 14 think it is going to be quite as daunting a human 15 resource challenge as some of these, you know, magical, 16 new properties that Newbridge is playing with and so 17 on. I think it is a kind of technical skill. 18 17394 I don't think the technical 19 readjustment for digital television is going to be as 20 great, depending on how many licensees there are. They 21 probably need some pretty clever engineers. But I 22 think they are going to be able to find them. I don't 23 know, because a needs assessment hasn't been done, as 24 Jean-Philippe has said, and I think that is something 25 we have to get on with. I am sure the consortium will StenoTran 3709 1 want to do that, and I think the Cultural Human 2 Resources Council will try to help with that as we can. 3 17395 Well, maybe we should save this -- I 4 don't know if you are on the new media panel that is 5 coming up, but I think that we are really going to get 6 into these issues in the new media area, and it will be 7 quite interesting. 8 17396 Digital TV will, in fact -- you might 9 argue that it is new media if they really use the full 10 capacity of the technology to get interactive and mix 11 different forms of media in the actual creation of 12 programming and advertising and so on, so there is a 13 new media aspect to it. 14 17397 But I conceive of it as really an 15 upgrade of conventional broadcasting, as opposed to 16 some of the -- 17 17398 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: So you see it 18 more a matter of training the current workforce in the 19 broadcasting industry, as opposed to training people 20 coming out of school or moving from other areas? 21 17399 MR. CRAWLEY: No, I wouldn't say 22 that. I think it would be brilliant of us to train 23 people in advance of their requirements, for a change, 24 instead of always playing catch-up. This is why it 25 seems to me an appropriate thing to encourage would be StenoTran 3710 1 to get some of the vested interest in technology to 2 provide some of those technologies so that we can start 3 to train people for their use before their hit the job 4 market. 5 17400 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Okay. One of 6 the issues we have been talking about, as you know, one 7 of the central issues is Canadian content, and this 8 discussion about what is Canadian content. 9 17401 Is it identifiably Canadian in terms 10 of scenes and locales, or is Canadian content about who 11 does it and the people involved. 12 17402 If I would venture a guess, you don't 13 really care what the themes and locales are, you are 14 concerned about the people. 15 17403 MR. CRAWLEY: I think that would be 16 fair, from the Council's point of view, with this 17 particular hat on. I think trying to legislate 18 aesthetics is pretty dangerous. 19 17404 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Trying to? 20 17405 MR. CRAWLEY: Legislate aesthetics is 21 pretty dangerous. I heard of recent case, just by 22 example, a friend of mine has an extraordinary 23 opportunity to produce a documentary in South Africa 24 with a leading political figure there, with whom he has 25 long-term relationship personally. And he has been StenoTran 3711 1 offered an opportunity to explore all the family 2 records, all the old film. They have everything from 3 this particular very high-profile politician in South 4 Africa. 5 17406 And he is having trouble getting 6 access to the production fund, because, of course, he 7 has to be working with an executive producer with a 8 track record, which he doesn't have, particularly in 9 that genre. And his executive producer is coming back 10 to him, saying, well, you know, I can't find a 11 broadcaster. Maybe if we could put you on the camera 12 and you could be talking to the person so that it would 13 be Canadian and, you know, you are the Canadian. That 14 seems silly to me. 15 17407 If a Canadian has an opportunity like 16 that, it is something, obviously, that is going to be 17 of interest to Canadians as well as South Africans or 18 elsewhere. That seems like silly criteria. Now, that 19 is just anecdotal. But if that is the kind of thinking 20 that we have set up, then I think it is a bit 21 dangerous. 22 17408 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: What are your 23 thoughts about counting commercials, advertising, and 24 infomercials as Canadian content? 25 17409 MR. CRAWLEY: Well, I think that if StenoTran 3712 1 we could guarantee that they are produced here, I am in 2 favour of exploring that idea, personally. 3 17410 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Exploring it, 4 but -- 5 17411 MR. CRAWLEY: Well -- 6 17412 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: This isn't the 7 time for exploring -- 8 17413 MR. CRAWLEY: -- we are wearing other 9 hats, here. I have suggested for a long time that we 10 should have Canadian content regulations for 11 commercials because they are great training ground, to 12 keep it in this context, but they also, you know, make 13 it possible for people to have a life and to make a 14 little bit of money. And so they are very important 15 that way. 16 17414 I am not pushing any particular model 17 when I said "exploring," because I didn't come here 18 prepared to argue for a particular model. But I am 19 glad you are talking about it. 20 17415 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Lastly, let me 21 come back to your last slide, and just talk about what 22 you are recommending we should do. In terms of the 23 second bullet you have got, with regards to the 24 Cultural Human Resources Development Fund -- this has 25 yet to be set up, okay? StenoTran 3713 1 17416 MR. CRAWLEY: Yes. 2 17417 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: So the third 3 recommendation is that: "the CRTC as a condition of 4 licence require that a contribution of a percentage of 5 the gross revenues be made to the Canadian Human 6 Resources Development Fund." That would happen once 7 such a fund was set up, and I suppose you would expect 8 us to in some way bless it, or endorse it, or have some 9 input as to what it would be doing, and that kind of 10 stuff. 11 17418 And the last point on there, "a 12 registered training plan policy be developed to help 13 the self-employed." That would come under the Fund? 14 17419 MR. TABET: It could very well be 15 coming under the fund, yes. 16 17420 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: Okay. Now, 17 how about if we went a different route, which was to 18 say that a percentage of gross revenues be put towards 19 human resources development, where we would not specify 20 the fund, so that it would open it to ACTRA Works, 21 this, or any other fund? 22 17421 MR. TABET: That is obviously a very 23 important proposal. The question for us, and it goes 24 back to what we said, we need a coherent policy here. 25 The idea of a fund is that it is based on a coherent StenoTran 3714 1 policy. 2 17422 The type of people of initiative that 3 we are envisaging are any Canadian initiatives, 4 basically, that will allow a better cultural workforce 5 to be developed. 6 17423 But the idea that there is a coherent 7 policy that forms the basis of the fund is essential. 8 It is not just an issue of putting money towards 9 something. It is really trying to build a coherency 10 around all of this. 11 17424 For example, we know very well that 12 the government of Canada is supporting some training 13 school through Telefilm. But that support has been 14 fought for for a year and half, and it was through that 15 fight that we believe that there is still a need for 16 coherency policy for human resources development. And 17 the more we are able to attract CRTC to voice that 18 concern, I think the more it will be helpful for our 19 sector to grow. 20 17425 Going back to digital, it is again an 21 issue. Digitalization has changed the way the many 22 visual artists are working. 23 17426 You talked about the new media. We 24 all feel that because there are already some of these 25 techniques that are already operational in the StenoTran 3715 1 audiovisual field, that we believe that the transition 2 will be minimal. And I agree with that. 3 17427 However, we may have some surprises. 4 Nobody can predict the future. And what we are trying 5 to see is to increase the way that Canadians are 6 relating to television and to their own television. 7 And maybe there are forward-thinking strategies that 8 need to be brought to that aspect. 9 17428 MR. CRAWLEY: Can I just add 10 something? On the fund, I think the reason we are 11 recommending the creation of a fund alludes to my 12 earlier remark about the political pressures of 13 devolving labour market training to the provinces. 14 17429 I think it is generally accepted, 15 even by people who are kind of regional boosters, that 16 you can't build an industry like television, for one, 17 or film in one province in a silo, even if it is 18 Ontario and thinks that the rest of Canada really 19 should follow. 20 17430 You really have to have mobility. We 21 are too small a market. You have got to be able to do 22 something coherently, strategically, for a market of 30 23 million people. You have got to be able to move people 24 around, move the information around, the knowledge. 25 17431 So the concept of the cultural StenoTran 3716 1 development fund is really to try to get the federal 2 spending power back in our court so that we could do 3 something that is useful. Because unfortunately, I 4 think the ball has been dropped a little bit there. 5 17432 COMMISSIONER CARDOZO: That paints a 6 complicated field for us, but nevertheless clarifies 7 the issues. Thanks very much, that covers my 8 questions. 9 17433 THE CHAIRPERSON: How do you explain 10 the growth of the cultural labour force twice as much 11 from '81 to '93 as the general labour force, if that is 12 how I am to read your slide and the schematics that you 13 have attached at three? 14 17434 And secondly, doesn't that work 15 against your desire to have special funds and special 16 efforts for training the cultural labour force? If it 17 is growing already twice as fast as the ordinary labour 18 force, that is what I would like you to tell me, why 19 this is occurring. 20 17435 Is it because other things are being 21 done that is making it happen, and that perhaps this 22 slide makes you wonder why this particular area needs 23 more attention at the level of labour and training. 24 17436 MR. TABET: Growth -- I think it 25 could be easily explained by demographics, and the fact StenoTran 3717 1 that a lot of people are requiring more entertainment 2 value for their time. 3 17437 Also, the fact that the older 4 generation, which has grown old over the years, is 5 probably more attuned to be more at ease with cultural 6 products. 7 17438 And thirdly, the value of our 8 cultural product in Canada is probably of a very high 9 quality. 10 17439 Now, that is the first question. 11 17440 The second question is, Why do we 12 need some kind of attention to human resources in an 13 area where there is a growth? Well, I think -- and I 14 will go back to that again -- it is a fact that there 15 are emerging and strategic needs that needs to be 16 addressed. It is not enough to just see a growth, but 17 trying to assess where this is going to go in the next 18 century. 19 17441 And we have seen, for example, that 20 new technology has changed the condition of work of 70 21 per cent of cultural workers in Canada, but only 30 per 22 cent of them have been able to really get the training 23 they need. 24 17442 So why is that? It is because very 25 often they are self-employed. Their condition of work StenoTran 3718 1 does not allow them to upgrade their skills on an easy 2 basis. When you are an employee, you have the 3 opportunity to have either your employer to pay for 4 your skills upgrading, or to have the Employment 5 Insurance Act to be able to give you some training and 6 skills upgrading opportunities. 7 17443 But when you are not an employee, 8 when you are self-employed, therefore it becomes very 9 difficult for you to access those types of upgradings. 10 17444 So we are seeing that more works and 11 works is created and needed. 12 17445 And in the film industry it is very 13 true, for example, in Nova Scotia, the growth of the 14 film industry has been obvious, and at the same time it 15 has been obvious that the technical skills as well as 16 creative skills needed to be upgraded. As a matter of 17 fact, ACTRA Works deliver workshops in Nova Scotia. 18 17446 So always we have to take into 19 consideration that growth, but we need to help to shape 20 that growth in order to respond to the emerging need. 21 And this is what is showing more and more. 22 1520 23 17447 MR. CRAWLEY: I would just like to 24 give sort of a personal response to that very good 25 question. I think part of that growth is that through StenoTran 3719 1 that period that is measured in the slide, it became 2 barely possible to actually make a living as an artist 3 in this country, so more people were attracted to do 4 it. 5 17448 As someone who has worked that way 6 all my life until just recently, it really is a 7 question of -- if you look at the economics of it, 8 artists in this country have always subsidized the 9 industries in which they work. They work for very 10 little money. So, it's just enough to live. It's a 11 delightful way to live, to live a creative life, if you 12 can take the risks. So, I think you saw the growth 13 because we reached a certain point. 14 17449 Analog might be the television 15 production industry in this country, which is doing 16 quite well, thank you very much, but then people who 17 are interested in public policy or just taxpayers say, 18 "Why do we need to help them any more?" I think you 19 know quite well the fragility that exists there. You 20 build a structure out, but it's dependent on certain 21 ongoing factors and if you don't have them, you know, 22 the whole thing can collapse. So, it is great to see 23 the growth, but it doesn't mean that we don't need to 24 do some wise spending to see the growth continue. 25 17450 THE CHAIRPERSON: In constructing StenoTran 3720 1 your graph at page 3 of your slides, what did you put 2 in the artistic, literary and recreation or when you 3 talk about a 32 per cent growth between 1981 and 1993 4 in the cultural labour force -- just very briefly, 5 would you put in there the engineers that look at 6 developing greater capacity? Whether it be HDTV or 7 digital radio, would you put the engineers in there or 8 just those who create content, so to speak, rather than 9 the means of distributing the content? 10 17451 M. TABET: Je serais très content de 11 vous donner le détail de ces études... et on est en 12 train de les mettre à jour, mais votre question me fait 13 revenir à ce que je disais au début: Ce sont les 14 groupes occupationnels 51 et 52 de la classification 15 des occupations dans leur ancienne version, car ça a 16 été changé en 1990. Alors ça n'incluait pas les 17 ingénieurs... 18 17452 LA PRÉSIDENTE: C'était Statistiques 19 Canada? 20 17453 M. TABET: Oui, de Développement des 21 ressources humaines Canada, d'Emploi et Immigration. 22 Ça n'incluait pas les ingénieurs mais ça incluait les 23 producteurs, les techniciens dans le domaine du film, 24 et je pense aussi dans le domaine des 25 télécommunications, je crois. Il faudrait que je StenoTran 3721 1 vérifie et je serais content de vous donner le détail. 2 Mais ça n'incluait pas les ingénieurs, non. 3 17454 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Mais si ça incluait 4 les gens dans les télécommunications, ça incluait des 5 gens qui n'avaient rien à faire avec la création de 6 contenu mais qui étaient surtout occupés à la 7 distribution? 8 17455 M. TABET: Je pense que ça impliquait 9 les producteurs. 10 17456 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Ah, oui. Alors au 11 moins on essayait de regrouper le domaine vraiment 12 culturel... 13 17457 M. TABET: C'est ça. 14 17458 LA PRÉSIDENTE: ... et de ne pas 15 inclure ceux qui... mais évidemment ça inclut des gens 16 qui sont à la périphérie du contenu mais qui sont quand 17 même... 18 17459 M. TABET: À ma connaissance. 19 17460 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Oui, les techniciens 20 sont quand même impliqués de très près dans la... ça va 21 être une question assez importante, je suppose, quand 22 on regardera les nouveaux médias parce qu'à ce moment- 23 là il y a une grande proportion qui est plutôt des 24 communications personnalisées plutôt que qui visent à 25 véhiculer un produit culturel. StenoTran 3722 1 17461 M. TABET: Ce que je puis dire, c'est 2 que, d'après les études qu'on a faites sur les besoins 3 dans les nouveaux médias, l'industrie des nouveaux 4 médias nous dit qu'elle a besoin de talents créatifs, 5 et c'est quelque chose qui est extrêmement important 6 pour la croissance de cette industrie et pour notre 7 pays aussi. 8 17462 Dans la mesure où le Canada va se 9 numériser et l'industrie de la télévision va se 10 numériser, quelle va être la part de ces créateurs dans 11 cet environnement? Et c'est une des questions que nous 12 posons dans notre mémoire et c'est une des raisons 13 aussi pour laquelle on insiste pour que la notion de 14 développement des ressources humaines, d'accroissement 15 des compétences, pas seulement, M. Cardozo, pour ceux 16 qui sont dans l'industrie déjà présentement mais aussi 17 pour des jeunes, qui constituent une grosse portion de 18 ceux qui travaillent dans les nouveaux médias, puissent 19 être intégrés aussi au secteur de la télévision. 20 17463 Ça, c'est quelque chose qu'on devrait 21 vérifier, qu'on devrait tester, et c'est pour ça qu'on 22 pense qu'il devrait y avoir une stratégie cohérente où 23 producteurs, câblodistributeurs, travailleurs 24 pourraient participer. 25 17464 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Ce serait tous ces StenoTran 3723 1 jeunes qui vont créer des produits pour nous, les 2 vieillards, qui consommons beaucoup de produits 3 culturels. 4 17465 M. TABET: Je crois qu'ils en 5 consomment aussi beaucoup pour eux, et ça, c'est 6 quelque chose dont on n'a pas assez parlé pour le 7 développement de la télévision canadienne. 8 17466 Les jeunes regardent de moins en 9 moins la télévision et de moins en moins la télévision 10 canadienne. Je pense que si on essayait de se pencher 11 sur la manière dont on peut intéresser le fabricant de 12 contenu et l'intégrer dans la programmation, ça devient 13 quelque chose qui permet peut-être de redonner une 14 chance à la télévision canadienne de rejoindre un 15 public qu'elle a un petit peu aliéné, on pourrait dire. 16 17467 LA PRÉSIDENTE: Merci. 17 17468 Conseiller juridique. 18 17469 MS PATTERSON: Thank you, Madam 19 Chair, but my questions have been answered. 20 17470 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very 21 much; merci beaucoup. 22 17471 Nous allons prendre une pause de cinq 23 minutes en changeant de panel. 24 --- Short recess at / Courte pause à 1526 25 --- Upon resuming at / Reprise à 1530 StenoTran 3724 1 17472 THE CHAIRPERSON: We are back. 2 17473 Madam Secretary, please. 3 17474 MS SANTERRE: Thank you, Madam Chair. 4 17475 I would like now to invite the next 5 participant, the War Amputations of Canada/Les amputés 6 de guerre du Canada. You may commence now. 7 PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION 8 17476 MR. CHADDERTON: Madam Chair, ladies 9 and gentlemen, as everyone says, it is a great 10 privilege. This is my third appearance before the CRTC 11 and I always find them just fascinating. 12 17477 My name is Cliff Chadderton, the 13 Chief Executive Officer of the War Amputations of 14 Canada. I would ask my associates to introduce 15 themselves and explain a little about what they do. 16 17478 Raquel? 17 17479 MS CHISHOLM: Good afternoon. My 18 name is Raquel Chisholm. My title is Director of 19 Electronic Media Relations with the War Amputations of 20 Canada, and the key word is "Relations". It's my job 21 and my staff's job to build relationships with the 22 broadcast industry throughout Canada and, in doing so, 23 we have met personally with probably 100 community 24 programmers, the program directors of community 25 channels. StenoTran 3725 1 17480 We meet with the promotions people in 2 television stations to discuss our public service 3 announcements, we meet with specialty channels and try 4 to learn as much as we can about them and how we can 5 promote our video material to them. We have also 6 discussed our video promotions with educational 7 networks and so on. So, we deal with basically the 8 broadcast industry right across the country. 9 17481 MR. CHADDERTON: Isabelle? 10 17482 Mme DUGRÉ: Bonjour, mon nom est 11 Isabelle Dugré. Je suis directrice de la Division des 12 relations avec les médias électroniques pour le Québec; 13 donc j'ai sensiblement la même position que Raquel 14 mais, moi, pour le Québec. Ma tâche aussi consiste à 15 rencontrer personnellement les responsables de la 16 programmation des télévisions communautaires et aussi 17 des stations de télévision en vue, évidemment, de 18 promouvoir les vidéos que nous produisons. 19 17483 Moi, ça fait cinq ans que je suis 20 pour l'Association et donc, moi aussi, j'ai visité 21 plusieurs stations à travers le Québec, comme Raquel. 22 17484 MR. CHADDERTON: Thank you. I think, 23 as you can see, although I do some of the work, I have 24 brought with me the people who are really in the 25 trenches. I think that the work they had done in StenoTran 3726 1 recent years in developing relations with community 2 channels would be of interest to the CRTC. 3 17485 I did prepare a brief and I will make 4 some comments from it, but, firstly, I think it would 5 be easier if I just, off the cuff, spoke a bit about 6 what the War Amps do and just how important community 7 channels and television generally is to the work that 8 we do. I think in a sense we are probably unique in 9 looking at the people and organizations which have 10 appeared before you. We certainly are producers and we 11 certainly represent some constituencies I would like to 12 talk about. 13 17486 We have, in the past 15 to 20 years, 14 been able to develop within our own organization what I 15 consider to be quite a respectable production house. 16 That gives us an opportunity to produce videos which, 17 in turn, are really the basic ingredients of some of 18 the programs which the War Amputations of Canada 19 handles, one of them, for example, being our Champ 20 Program for child amputees and tied in with that is the 21 Playsafe Program, a safety program. Another program is 22 Never Again, which really translated means no more war, 23 and with that, of course, we develop videos which deal 24 with our military heritage. 25 17487 I would mention that we have had StenoTran 3727 1 experts come into our edit suites. We have two avid 2 edit suites now. We have two first-class editors and I 3 think the material we are able to produce is certainly 4 of broadcast standard, if not perhaps a little better. 5 17488 On the area of financing, we require 6 no financing whatsoever from any source. We have had 7 it offered to us, we don't take it. All of the 8 productions that we handle are all financed by 9 corporate donors and I want to speak a little bit about 10 that later because I realize that many of the people 11 appearing here are speaking about financial assistance 12 from government or financial assistance from the 13 industry or from other sources. 14 17489 We have found that if you have the 15 right idea and you can go to the corporate sector, it 16 is really not too difficult to get them to put up the 17 kind of money that we need. I must say also that 18 because we are a registered charity, we cannot spend 19 and do not spend funds that are donated to our 20 organization through our key tag service and that type 21 of thing. So, I think that's rather interesting to 22 bring that out. 23 17490 With regard to the communities, 24 basically we deal with community channels, although we 25 do deal with some regular television channels, but we StenoTran 3728 1 have had no difficulty in speaking with the community 2 channels and having them accept two of our 3 constituencies as being part of the community. I know 4 the general feeling is a community channel talks about, 5 for example, the Ottawa Lynx baseball coverage or the 6 Ottawa City Council or metro council, that type of 7 thing, but if you look at, for example, our military 8 heritage, in my mind it would be very difficult for a 9 programmer working with a community channel to develop 10 a very accurate, if you like, portrayal of our military 11 heritage. It's a very tricky area and I will explain a 12 little bit about that later. 13 17491 The second constituency we have is 14 the disabled, particularly one group of disabled -- 15 that is amputees, child amputees in particular -- and 16 here again it takes a certain amount of expertise. 17 Therefore, we have in production right now, for 18 example, a film called "In Flanders Fields". It will 19 be based on the 80th anniversary of the end of World 20 War I. I would really defy anybody to write the script 21 and do the narrative for one hour of what really 22 happened in World War I unless they have a lot of 23 knowledge on that subject. 24 17492 That's why I think the community 25 channels have said yes, "If it comes down the pike from StenoTran 3729 1 the War Amps, we know that the integrity of the film is 2 there." Exactly the same thing happens, ladies and 3 gentlemen, with regard to the portrayal of the 4 disabled. It's a field that is fraught with danger. 5 For example, how do you ask a young girl -- and I might 6 mention that both of these young ladies with me today 7 are both graduates from our Champ Program. They are 8 both amputees. 9 17493 I wouldn't even dare to suggest how a 10 programmer, without some knowledge, would get into 11 asking intricate questions of either of these young 12 ladies about how their lives are lived without having 13 some basic knowledge. That's why I believe that the 14 productions, which the War Amputations of Canada, 15 particularly through our Champ Program, have been able 16 to do, have been acceptable to this disabled community. 17 Then, of course, we have tied it in, as I said earlier, 18 to our Playsafe Program. 19 17494 I will mention very quickly something 20 about PSAs in a minute, but if you see a public service 21 announcement on television -- and we have just finished 22 one now, which will be on Grey Cup day, of a young lad 23 tossing around a football with the Regina Roughriders. 24 If you see that, I think you have to understand that in 25 order to produce that, there were discussions with the StenoTran 3730 1 youngster, discussions with the youngster's 2 counsellors, discussions with the family, and it all 3 ties together. Then you get to the Regina Roughriders 4 and you say, "This is how we are going to present 5 this." 6 17495 I think you fully understand that 7 there are so many potholes that you can step in in 8 doing just one 30 second commercial, but we have been 9 able to do it and I think with sort of some success. 10 1540 11 17496 I might also add that the War 12 Amputations of Canada, we do produce in-house our 30- 13 second spots, and we have them on television but we do 14 not produce spots which are asking for money, never. 15 17497 Those spots are all part of our 16 program. It talks about Play Safe or it talks about 17 Never Again or it talks about the 80th Anniversary of 18 the end of World War I, that type of thing. 19 17498 Those are our programs, and I think 20 we have been very successful in producing the kind of 21 television PSAs and spots which do in fact get on the 22 air and you get considerable exposure, if you like. 23 17499 On the question of how do you judge 24 whether the productions that we produce are any good. 25 Well, firstly, we get a lot of feedback. We have four StenoTran 3731 1 1-800 lines and if people don't like them, they soon 2 tell you. 3 17500 We get feedback from the industry. 4 17501 Another way is we have distributed 5 these and I will just quickly mention them. One of 6 them is the list of awards from various international 7 film festivals going back probably no more than -- 8 Let's see, we started with John McDermott. That would 9 be in about a year. And those are the awards that we 10 have won in the English festivals. And we have also 11 been rather successful, all international awards, world 12 fests, Charleston. QUESTA awards, New York. These are 13 productions done in the French language. 14 17502 And we are also very proud of the 15 fact that everything we do, as much as we can, is done 16 in both official languages. 17 17503 What we are expressing to the CRTC 18 today might be said as a fear. We are just a little 19 bit afraid that regulations are not tight enough and/or 20 more regulations could come down the pike which would 21 free, for example, community channels from having to 22 put too much on the air by way of public service, 23 whether it is public service announcements, but I am 24 talking more about the kind of films we can do. 25 17504 So we will be asking you to take a StenoTran 3732 1 look at whether by regulation you could produce a 2 guideline which would really give some protection to 3 organizations such as ours. 4 17505 Now we all know about multiple 5 channels. I, for example, subscribed when I was in the 6 States last winter to Direct TV and I just shook my 7 head. 8 17506 But then I found that of the 262 9 channels, or whatever I could get on Direct TV, there 10 weren't very many of them that would ever show War Amps 11 films. They are very selective about television 12 movies, women's programs, golf or what have you. I 13 didn't see anything in there that would be particularly 14 adaptable to the kind of message, if you like, that we 15 feel that we have to get across in regard to our 16 constituencies. And I will just repeat them again - 17 military heritage and, of course, the disabled. 18 17507 With regard to the films that we do 19 produce, the blue guide, and you have a copy of that, 20 that lists the productions over the years. And I must 21 say I was surprised. We keep putting this together and 22 we keep updating it, but I was surprised that we have 23 done almost 50 productions in perhaps the last 15 or 20 24 years. 25 17508 And we have covered areas that StenoTran 3733 1 Canadians would never say anything about it. For 2 example, Korea. Who knows anything about the war in 3 Korea? But we did a film about it. We did a film 4 about the Battle of the Shell (ph.). These kinds of 5 little known things but we are just doing one right now 6 about the war in Italy. 7 17509 The red brochure, that is the French 8 version of the films that we do. And this brochure, 9 this lists 21 films that we have done on military 10 heritage. 11 17510 Perhaps it is time to tell you a bit 12 of a story which I think would interest you. When 13 Steven Spielberg's film came out on "Saving Private 14 Ryan," we had to put extra people answering our 1-800 15 telephones to answer complaints from veterans and from 16 children of veterans saying, "My God, 'Saving Private 17 Ryan,' it tells a story of what the US forces did. 18 Where were the Canadians?" 19 17511 And because we have the footage and 20 because we have the capability, there were two films 21 not listed here. One of them is called "D-Day, The 22 Canadian Assault Forces," and the other one is called 23 "Operation Charmwood," which was about the capture of 24 Cannes. How successful were they? 25 17512 Raquel's organization, in her office, StenoTran 3734 1 she puts out an information sheet to community 2 channels. She says this is the film. This is what it 3 is about. If you would like a copy to put on the air, 4 let us know. 5 17513 I think at last count there were more 6 than, I think 105 or 106 community channels had asked 7 for and presumably had shown on the air the first film, 8 which was a kind of a response or a rebuttal to this 9 "Saving Private Ryan." 10 17514 Then the phones didn't stop because 11 there is a -- I don't know if you have seen "Private 12 Ryan," but there is a crack in there that bothers all 13 Canadian veterans. Tom Hanks is talking to Ted Danson 14 and it comes out this way. "Well, where is 15 Montgomery?" And the answer is, "Well, he is dragging 16 his heels." Well, of course, any military historian, 17 let alone any veteran who was there, like I was, that 18 gets the dander up. 19 17515 So we did another film saying this is 20 what Montgomery was doing. While they were saving 21 Private Ryan, we were trying to take Cannes. And we 22 did a one-hour film on that and, again, we have had 23 something like 65 or 70 community channels have asked 24 for that. 25 17516 So I think that, Madam Chair and StenoTran 3735 1 Commissioners, I think that there is a need out there 2 for the kind of thing that we can do. 3 17517 Just referring very quickly to one or 4 two of the points in my written brief, I think I have 5 covered most of them. I think our main, if you like, 6 submission or what is behind what we are trying to say 7 is that there is no point in getting corporations to 8 put up the money and spending time and energy to do 9 these films unless we can get some access. 10 17518 We have been, I thought, very 11 successful, I still think, very successful in getting 12 access, mostly through, well, Alberta government -- 13 What do they call the system again? 14 17519 MS. CHISHOLM: Access. 15 17520 MR. CHADDERTON: Access in Alberta 16 have been very good, but it's mostly access through 17 community channels, but we are beginning to see, 18 particularly through Shaw, an idea that, no, they don't 19 have to do this any more. They can go use the time that 20 they were using to put our films on, and films like 21 ours, they can use that as a marketing tool. 22 17521 And I am wondering if on a regulatory 23 basis there isn't something that the CRTC could do 24 about that. 25 17522 What I call the gap between the so- StenoTran 3736 1 called free broadcasters and those that are supported 2 by advertisers seems to be closing in. 3 17523 There was a time when we could pretty 4 well guarantee that if we did a pretty decent film, 5 whether it was, say, on Play Safe, a Play Safe film, 6 pretty well guarantee that it was going to get used. 7 Right now, we are not too sure. 8 17524 So far as the regular channels are 9 concerned, I must get something off my chest. They 10 love to take our footage when they are doing a news 11 broadcast and they will use it. 12 1550 13 17525 They won't give us any credit -- we 14 don't care about that. But to go to the regular TV 15 channels and say, Look, this is the story which 16 involves the Regina Rifles on D-Day, and go to a 17 television station in Regina -- forget about it. I 18 mean, they are not interested. They don't have the 19 time. 20 17526 If you take it to, let us say -- and 21 I have had this experience, so I can talk about it -- 22 take it to CTV, and they say, well, we would have to 23 sell the advertising first, Cliff. And so we sit there 24 and we say, well, I mean, we want to get this filmed, 25 but what do we mean to sell the advertising? Well, you StenoTran 3737 1 and I know what we mean. It is a commercial venture, 2 and I guess our films are really not suitable. They 3 don't think they can sell the advertising on them. 4 17527 So there is this gap that is closing 5 in. But we really have to depend on what we call the 6 free broadcasters. 7 17528 I think finally we are looking for -- 8 and I did hear the presentation from Rogers -- we are 9 looking for a definition of community. And I heard 10 some of the commissioners asking for that same 11 definition. And it runs all the way from, yes, we 12 cover the municipal council. We know that is 13 community. 14 17529 But there is this wider community of 15 veterans, or community of the disabled, and in what way 16 can they possibly be served? 17 17530 I think they can be served by 18 organisations such as ours which are prepared, free of 19 charge, Canadian content, broadcast quality or better 20 -- we are prepared to do those and get them out there. 21 17531 But if the answer is, well, we don't 22 have time to put those on, then I think there must be 23 something wrong. And the reason I would say that is 24 that we read a lot about the kind of -- I will call it 25 junk, and some people might not like it, but the kind StenoTran 3738 1 of programming that is there. 2 17532 Then we take a look at the kind of 3 programming we do. And if we hadn't won a lot of 4 awards, if we hadn't gone to the length of hiring first 5 class editors and that type of thing, then I would say 6 we have no place before this hearing. But we do that. 7 We have produced very good material. 8 17533 And you just have to look at the 9 public interest today, for example -- and I don't want 10 to be pegged as a dinosaur -- take the public today in 11 connection with the merchant seamen. I don't know if 12 you read last night's paper. I don't know if you read 13 the "Sun" this morning, but that is a big public issue. 14 And we have already done a program indicating what 15 benefits were available to the merchant seamen. And I 16 would say to Madam Chair and to you commissioners, who 17 else can do that? Who else can do a story of the 18 veterans' charter showing what the veterans got from 19 World War II and what the merchant seamen didn't get? 20 And that is in the public domain today. That is a big 21 issue. 22 17534 I wrote a letter to the prime 23 minister yesterday. He may or may not read it, but 24 some people in his office will. And these issues, such 25 as Hong Kong veterans, they are public issues. And who StenoTran 3739 1 else can produce the information on them, except those 2 of us who work in this field? 3 17535 So I think that the type of thing we 4 are doing is very much in the public interest, and I 5 think we have to have a way to get that out. 6 17536 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Chadderton, it 7 has been indicated to me that you have gone over your 8 presentation limit -- 9 17537 MR. CHADDERTON: I am sorry. 10 17538 THE CHAIRPERSON: -- but you may have 11 a conclusion you want to -- 12 17539 MR. CHADDERTON: Oh, thank you very 13 much. 14 17540 THE CHAIRPERSON: -- get on the 15 record before we pass to questions. 16 17541 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes, thank you, yes. 17 I was just getting to the question of just generally 18 saying, Madam Chair, that you might wonder why we are 19 here. It is a question of without some guideline, we 20 are just afraid that more community channels -- and I 21 am not going to gild the lily here -- that more 22 community channels are going to go the way we see Shaw 23 going. And if that happens, then the public of Canada 24 are going to have a source drying up. It will no longer 25 be available to them, that they can see programs such StenoTran 3740 1 as the type that we can produce for the community we 2 serve. Thank you. 3 17542 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr. 4 Chadderton. Commissioner Wilson. 5 17543 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Good afternoon, 6 Mr. Chadderton and good afternoon to your colleagues. 7 I would like to ask you just a few very quick questions 8 of clarification about your written submission, and 9 then maybe we can deal in a little more detail with the 10 main thrust of your presentation, which really is 11 access to Canadian airwaves for the videos that you 12 produce. 13 17544 On page one of your submission, you 14 state that you have been producing videos and 15 documentaries for the past 20 years on an in-house 16 basis, and I notice, actually, in your news release you 17 do the same thing. The phrase "in-house" is in 18 quotation marks, and I am just wondering why is it in 19 quotation marks? Is it in-house, or is it not? 20 17545 MR. CHADDERTON: No, thank you very 21 much for the question. It is very definitely in-house. 22 Our audiovisual department -- the director of the 23 audiovisual department was a producer with CBC for a 24 number of years. She runs the shop. She has two or 25 three different assistants, researchers, that type of StenoTran 3741 1 thing. We do everything within the organization except 2 camera work. We hire outside camera people, but other 3 than that, when it comes back in we do the off-line 4 edit, and then we go from there. We do all the 5 research, and we do all the final edit. The only thing 6 we do not do, of course, is the dubs. 7 17546 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Right. 8 17547 MR. CHADDERTON: And once we have 9 finished it, it is over to the dubbing house. 10 17548 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Yes. 11 17549 MR. CHADDERTON: And it is available, 12 yes. 13 17550 COMMISSIONER WILSON: What would be 14 the average cost of one of your productions, just out 15 of curiosity? 16 17551 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes, we did -- the 17 most expensive one that we have done in the last few 18 years was called "From Juno Beach to Cannes," which was 19 a two-hour production, and that came in at about 20 $65,000. 21 17552 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Okay. In the 22 second paragraph of your submission, and I may know the 23 answer to this, just from the comments that you have 24 made today, because you have expanded a bit on your 25 written submission by being here today. StenoTran 3742 1 17553 You refrain from going into detail on 2 your 20 years of experience, but you use the phrase 3 "your current standing with the television industry." 4 And I am just wondering if this refers to the fact that 5 your videos are not typically broadcast on commercial 6 television stations? Is that what you are sort of 7 referring to -- 8 17554 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes, it does in 9 part. I don't know how you establish a standing within 10 the industry. Certainly, I think, we have done very 11 well -- 12 17555 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Oh, so you are 13 using "standing" the same way that you said you wanted 14 to request standing before the hearing. 15 17556 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes, correct, yes. 16 17557 COMMISSIONER WILSON: That is kind of 17 a military term, isn't it? 18 17558 MR. CHADDERTON: Well, okay, let me 19 put it another way. 20 17559 COMMISSIONER WILSON: We are not a 21 military tribunal. 22 17560 MR. CHADDERTON: How do they -- I was 23 -- but that was 50 years ago. 24 17561 COMMISSIONER WILSON: My dad too. 25 17562 MR. CHADDERTON: No, how are we StenoTran 3743 1 regarded in the industry? This is the way I am looking 2 at it. 3 17563 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Your 4 reputation. 5 17564 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes. Certainly, you 6 can go to, and you can win, and do well in film 7 festivals. That is one way. 8 17565 Secondly, with regard to community 9 channels, they have no problem in telling my 10 associates, here, that our productions are of broadcast 11 quality or higher. 12 17566 With regard to regular television, I 13 don't think that our productions are being turned down 14 for airing because of the quality. They are being 15 turned down simply because there isn't room. It 16 doesn't come within their television programming 17 schedule. 18 17567 COMMISSIONER WILSON: You said that 19 you have had a fairly good relationship with community 20 channels over the years. 21 17568 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes. 22 17569 COMMISSIONER WILSON: And you have 23 been able to get many of your videos aired on the 24 community channels, but that has been decreasing. 25 17570 MR. CHADDERTON: Uh-huh. I wonder if StenoTran 3744 1 I could ask Raquel Chisholm to answer that, because, as 2 I said earlier, she is in the trenches. She talks to 3 these people every day. 4 17571 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Yes. 5 17572 MS CHISHOLM: About five and a half 6 years ago I was hired on at the War Amps as a summer 7 position. 8 17573 Cliff and his staff were making 9 videos and sending them out to community channels, 10 crossing their fingers and hoping that they would get 11 aired. And I was brought on, just as a summer job, to 12 kind of check out how the community channels operated 13 and see if we could improve our relations. 14 17574 Well, five and a half years later, 15 here I am with two assistants. 16 17575 And our relationship with them is 17 phenomenal. And I will give you an example of how, 18 though, a bit of it has deteriorated, is that my 19 assistant was in Alberta this past summer, and we visit 20 them, as I say, go right into their stations and visit 21 them personally. And she met with someone at Shaw in 22 Edmonton who said they played our stuff all the time; 23 they loved our materials. There are times, actually, 24 when stations will call us and say, I just put 25 something on the machine and something is not working StenoTran 3745 1 because -- and they hadn't even looked at our material, 2 because they would just assume it is okay. They know 3 it comes from us, and immediately put it on the air. 4 17576 And this woman in Edmonton said, you 5 know, but I am so sorry, in a couple of months our 6 whole community channel is changing, That has come 7 down from the top. We have no say. We would love to 8 play your films -- we can't after such and such a time. 9 17577 So in Alberta, for example, we have 10 lost the community channel, and in Calgary we have lost 11 the community channel, and in Edmonton. We are going 12 to be losing it in a few other places. We have lost it 13 in certain places in Ontario as well. 14 17578 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Are some of the 15 smaller ones still running your material, though? 16 17579 MS CHISHOLM: Many of the smaller 17 ones are, and for example, Rogers, right across the 18 country, is still playing our materials, even in the 19 bigger centres, Vancouver, and Toronto and so on. So 20 it is just some of the stations. 21 17580 But our relationships are -- like, we 22 get phone calls, and they know our name personally. We 23 know, you know, 180 or so community channels. We know 24 what they want, what they don't want. We can remember 25 how messy their desks were when we walked in the StenoTran 3746 1 office. I mean, we know these people. And a lot of 2 the times if they can't play our stuff, a lot of the 3 times it is not their choice. 4 17581 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Okay. 5 17582 MR. CHADDERTON: May I ask Isabelle 6 Dugré to tell you of the situation in the French 7 language stations with whom she deals too, because -- 8 well, go ahead. 9 17583 Mme DUGRÉ: Oui. Moi aussi, ça fait 10 cinq ans que je fais un petit peu le tour des 11 télévisions communautaires à travers le Québec. Les 12 premières années, ça allait vraiment bien au niveau de 13 la distribution de nos films, au niveau de la qualité. 14 17584 Évidemment, il faut dire qu'on fait 15 ces visites-là pour établir un contact personnel, 16 évidemment, avec les responsables de la programmation, 17 parce qu'on se dit que peut-être qu'en ayant ce 18 contact-là on va avoir plus de diffusion, et aussi 19 évidemment pour connaître le genre de productions 20 qu'ils désirent, si nos standards sont vraiment ce 21 qu'ils recherchent, et caetera. Ça, c'est une première 22 chose. 23 1600 24 17585 Donc nos visites nous ont permis de 25 savoir que nos productions correspondent vraiment à StenoTran 3747 1 leurs besoins, à ce qu'ils recherchent. 2 17586 Donc, pour les promouvoir, les 3 relations sont vraiment excellentes, ça, on n'a pas de 4 problèmes, sauf que ces derniers temps, évidemment, 5 vous savez que les réglementations concernant les 6 câblodistributeurs... ils ne sont plus tenus d'avoir 7 les canaux communautaires. Ça, évidemment, ça nous 8 affecte indirectement dans le sens que, en tout cas 9 moi, de mes stations que j'avais déjà dans ma liste, il 10 y en a déjà qui ont fermé. Donc ça, ce sont des 11 régions dont d'autres stations vont s'occuper, mais 12 quand même, ce sont des téléspectateurs qu'on ne 13 rejoindra plus directement. 14 17587 Aussi, compte tenu que les 15 télévisions communautaires -- certaines d'entre elles; 16 je ne dis pas majoritairement -- reçoivent moins 17 d'argent du câblodistributeur, il doivent couper dans 18 les heures de leur programmation parce qu'ils n'ont 19 plus autant d'effectifs qu'ils avaient. Donc, au lieu 20 de, par exemple, mettre un film d'une heure, vu qu'ils 21 vont avoir moins de place dans leur programmation, ils 22 vont peut-être préférer mettre, par exemple, une demi- 23 heure de quelque chose qu'eux ont tourné. 24 17588 Donc ça, on commence à voir ça 25 tranquillement, pas vite. Ça a commencé surtout cette StenoTran 3748 1 année parce que ça a été mis en branle... c'est une 2 nouvelle réglementation cette année. 3 17589 Nous, l'Association, nous sommes 4 membres associés de l'APTQ, l'Association des 5 programmateurs de la télédistribution du Québec, et 6 moi, j'ai la chance justement d'assister à leur 7 congrès. Ce que je peux voir qui peut-être s'en vient, 8 c'est qu'on peut peut-être s'attendre à voir d'autres 9 fermetures et à voir que d'autres télévisions 10 communautaires vont peut-être être restreintes dans les 11 heures de programmation et on va voir nos moments de 12 diffusion tout simplement éliminés. 13 17590 COMMISSIONER WILSON: I actually 14 would have thought that the fact that you are providing 15 a completed video to the channels is an advantage in 16 terms of keeping your product on the air because it 17 means that you are just delivering a tape to them and 18 all they have to do is play it. So, I am interested to 19 hear you say that the cutbacks have negatively affected 20 you as well. 21 17591 Mme DUGRÉ: Oui. De ce point de vue 22 là, oui, vous avez raison que c'était un avantage parce 23 que dans les visites que moi, j'ai faites au Québec -- 24 je ne sais pas pour Raquel ce qu'il en est -- les 25 directeurs et directrices étaient très surpris qu'un StenoTran 3749 1 organisme tel que le nôtre puisse se déplacer et aller 2 les rencontrer personnellement, établir des contacts, 3 qu'on puisse leur laisser des copies. 4 17592 Généralement, si on prend d'autres 5 organismes qui mettent à la disposition des télévisions 6 communautaires leur production, ils doivent par exemple 7 laisser une copie, la station en fait une copie, puis 8 après ça la cassette se passe dans toutes les stations. 9 Nous, on a l'avantage, comme M. Chadderton le disait, 10 grâce aux dons corporatifs, que nous pouvons laisser 11 une cassette du format requis à la station. 12 17593 Donc, oui, dans ce sens-là, c'est un 13 avantage dans le sens que, s'ils veulent mettre... 14 admettons qu'il y a un 30 minutes d'une émission qu'ils 15 n'ont pas, ils prennent notre cassette et ils peuvent 16 la mettre. 17 17594 L'avantage, c'est que, oui, ils ont 18 une copie de notre cassette et ils ont une copie de 19 qualité, ce n'est pas une copie d'une copie. Ce qu'ils 20 ont, c'est une copie, si je peux dire, du master; donc, 21 au point de vue qualité, oui, sauf que même si parfois 22 ils ont nos cassettes en stock -- ça, il n'y a pas de 23 problème -- comme je disais, à cause des limites, des 24 restrictions budgétaires et du temps peut-être de la 25 programmation, les heures de programmation qui sont StenoTran 3750 1 peut-être un peu plus limitées -- et je pense peut-être 2 que ça va aller en diminuant -- même s'il sont la 3 cassette en stock, ils ne pourront peut-être pas mettre 4 autant que, par exemple, quand ils avaient peut-être 5 des plus gros budgets ou quand les stations étaient 6 ouvertes. 7 17595 Donc, oui, il y a un avantage là- 8 dessus par rapport aux autres -- ça, je me le suis fait 9 dire -- mais avec ce qui arrive, à cause de la nouvelle 10 réglementation, ça affecte même s'ils les ont en stock. 11 17596 COMMISSIONER WILSON: No, absolutely. 12 If they are reducing the hours on air, then I can see 13 how that would have an effect. 14 17597 MS CHISHOLM: If I could actually add 15 to that, sometimes it's not just budget cuts. For 16 example, Rogers continues to have high quality 17 community channels and so on and have made a strong 18 commitment to them from what I gather sort of just 19 walking around their studios, but the culture has 20 changed within community channels. 21 17598 So, for example, it used to be we 22 were told that, "We love having your programming 23 because it's half an hour and if city council goes 24 short, we will throw one of your tapes in and it fills 25 that time up until our bingo game starts", or whatever. StenoTran 3751 1 So, we were used a lot as fill material and they found 2 that very, very useful. 3 17599 A lot of the culture has changed, 4 however. Now it has become very regimented. Community 5 channels have very strict half-hour, hour long shows. 6 It's not the sort of happy-go-lucky kind of thing as it 7 used to be, which in certain cases I am sure is fine, 8 but that's where we have been cut out slightly, to the 9 extent that we had to go into our editing suites and 10 edit all of our productions for Rogers in order to make 11 them their standards, 27 minute/30 second or 57 12 minute/30 second films. 13 17600 COMMISSIONER WILSON: I think what 14 they said when they appeared on Saturday was that they 15 feel with the proliferation of channels out there they 16 have to sort of carve out a niche audience for 17 themselves and people are accustomed to watching 18 programming in half-hour or one-hour blocks. 19 17601 MS CHISHOLM: But that cultural 20 change has again affected us, which doesn't necessarily 21 have anything to do with CRTC regulations or anything, 22 other than an involvement, and the whole Shaw cable 23 channel, of course, has changed. I mean that's the 24 biggest cultural change of all. 25 17602 COMMISSIONER WILSON: I was actually StenoTran 3752 1 interested in the submission when you suggested that 2 you might want to widen the definition of "community" 3 as it applies to community channels, because some 4 people would argue that the community channels have 5 taken it upon themselves to widen their definition 6 themselves by creating or turning into quasi-local news 7 channels. So, I am glad you made the distinction today 8 when you made your oral presentation that you are not 9 referring to that, you are referring to the notion of 10 just being more encompassing of all the different 11 groups within your community. 12 17603 MR. CHADDERTON: If I could just add 13 a little further to that, we haven't pushed the panic 14 button yet. I could honestly say to you, because we 15 have people who report back to us all the time, that 16 our video productions continue to be used, but what we 17 see down the pike is probably a narrowing of maybe the 18 definition of "community" or a narrowing of access. 19 17604 We don't know, but it may be well be 20 within the purview of the CRTC to take a look at this 21 and say, "Now, just a minute, if there are 22 organizations which are representing national 23 communities or constituencies, yes, we believe that 24 community channels should save some time for that kind 25 of programming." I think that's our main pitch. StenoTran 3753 1 17605 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Let me address 2 that just a little bit later. 3 17606 On page 3 you make a distinction 4 between commercial broadcasters and so called free 5 distribution channels, the educational and community 6 channels. So, we have talked a bit about the community 7 channels. Have your videos been broadcast on any of 8 the educational networks across the country, TVO or 9 Access or Télé-Québec? 10 17607 MR. CHADDERTON: I think probably my 11 two associates would answer that. 12 17608 MS CHISHOLM: Yes, in the past we 13 have been on educational networks and in fact for 14 whatever reason the relationship between us and the 15 various educational networks has sort of lapsed in the 16 last few years sometimes having to do with the fact 17 that there has been changes, for example, with Access. 18 In Alberta they have gone through a lot of change. So, 19 that has recently been brought back into one of our 20 priorities. 21 17609 In this past year I have met 22 personally with the people at the Knowledge Network in 23 B.C., with the person at Access. We have actually had 24 a really good relationship the last couple of years 25 with SCN in Saskatchewan and I have just started StenoTran 3754 1 talking again with the people at TVO. Unfortunately, 2 the whole country doesn't have -- every province 3 doesn't have an educational network, but where they do 4 exist, we are trying to and are providing them with 5 videos. 6 17610 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Have you ever 7 had any of your videos broadcast on commercial 8 television? 9 17611 MR. CHADDERTON: Oh, yes. In the 10 earlier days -- 11 17612 COMMISSIONER WILSON: How early are 12 we talking about? 13 17613 MR. CHADDERTON: We are talking now 14 -- when did I make my presentation to the CRTC -- 10 15 years. Ten years ago when there were stations, for 16 example, in Windsor and whatnot, quite often what they 17 -- I think the term they used was local managers 18 programming options. Yes, they used our films very, 19 very much. As a matter of fact, I think we were a bit 20 prophetic in saying that once they closed those 21 channels down, we were going to suffer, but certainly 22 the community channels picked up the slack. 23 17614 COMMISSIONER WILSON: How long has it 24 been, do you think, since the commercial broadcasters 25 have been showing your videos? StenoTran 3755 1 17615 MR. CHADDERTON: Well, ATV uses our 2 materials quite often. 3 17616 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Still? 4 17617 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes. Yes, quite 5 often. Global uses them. 6 17618 COMMISSIONER WILSON: How would 7 Global use them? At what time of day would they play 8 them? 9 17619 MS CHISHOLM: For example, the films 10 that Mr. Chadderton was talking about earlier, the D- 11 day film and "Operation Charmwood", the response to 12 "Saving Private Ryan", they were promoted to television 13 stations across the country, the regular broadcasters, 14 and they were picked up by five of those broadcasters 15 across the country. The way it works is they order our 16 video and they say, "Thank you very much", and then we 17 don't know when they air them. Sometimes they will 18 write a little note in a fax that they send us, "We are 19 going to be saving this for Remembrance Day", or what 20 have you. Often Remembrance Day is a big time for our 21 longer productions to be shown. 22 17620 Another thing that we have done 23 recently through my and Isabelle's relationship with 24 the television people is they have told us, for 25 example, they need sort of two-minute things, that they StenoTran 3756 1 have played the Heritage Moment so many times now that 2 they want something new or whatever. So, we have 3 started making shorter productions, filler productions 4 that are shown on regular broadcasters, but our longer 5 documentaries, our Playsafe films and so on, really 6 don't get shown that often. I think the "Saving 7 Private Ryan" thing was especially pertinent to people 8 and so on, so five out of -- how many -- 40 regular 9 broadcasters ordered them. 10 17621 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Aside from the 11 commercial considerations that you mentioned earlier 12 today, where they say that they are not sure they can 13 sell ad spots in your programming, why do you think 14 they are reluctant to play those videos? Could it have 15 anything to do with the fact that maybe they don't 16 really see you as an independent producer? 17 17622 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes, I believe 18 that's true. I know that people have -- I have met 19 regular, if you could call it that, producers at film 20 festivals and they say, "What are you doing here?" I 21 say, "We came down for a gold." They say, "How do you 22 do that?" So, I just explain that the judges thought 23 it was good. 24 17623 There is a certain amount of 25 jealousy. I am not going again to guild the lily. StenoTran 3757 1 There is a certain amount of jealousy and I think it's 2 understandable. The regular broadcasters have their 3 staff and whatnot and they produce some of their own. 4 Then, of course, there are a myriad of private 5 producers out there who go in, sell an idea to a 6 network and then they produce a very good program. In 7 this sense, we are in competition with them because 8 there is only so much television time. 9 17624 I think the prime example would be a 10 program or a film I did last year with John McDermott, 11 the well known singer. We took a lot of our archival 12 film footage and put it to his songs. We took it to 13 the CBC, we spoke to -- I had a meeting with a Mr. 14 George Anthony who some of you may know, a respectable 15 gentleman. We went all through the thing. They got it 16 to the very point where they were going to put it on 17 and then they called me and they said, "We have some 18 internal problems." They would not tell me what it 19 was, but I have to say that Pamela Wallin came to our 20 rescue and she said, "We will put it on." She had some 21 control. 22 17625 I can only say from my experience 23 that it's understandable. The War Amps is a charity, 24 they deal with young kids, they deal with our military 25 heritage, et cetera, et cetera, but what right do they StenoTran 3758 1 have -- 2 17626 COMMISSIONER WILSON: So, they might 3 see you as a special interest group? 4 17627 MR. CHADDERTON: A special interest 5 group, yes, but I think it's more that they don't 6 recognize the quality of the work, and that may be fair 7 ball. I don't know how we judge quality, but, as I 8 say, we do well in the film festivals and we certainly 9 get a lot of comment from the public with regard to the 10 productions that we do. Most of that comment is good, 11 some of it isn't, but I guess most of it -- almost all 12 of it is good. 13 17628 COMMISSIONER WILSON: One of the 14 solutions that you suggested for dealing with your 15 issue is that you said it may be entirely possible to 16 establish rules which would provide more so called free 17 channels. You and I both know that nothing is really 18 free. 19 17629 MR. CHADDERTON: No, that's true. 20 17630 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Of course, you 21 recognize that by calling them the so called free 22 channels. 23 17631 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes. 24 17632 COMMISSIONER WILSON: So, who would 25 pay for these free channels? StenoTran 3759 1 17633 MR. CHADDERTON: Well, what I am 2 thinking about is in licensing. If, for example, the 3 CRTC licensed the History Channel, maybe you look at 4 Canadian content. I watch the History Channel very 5 closely and I am absolutely certain that some of the 6 productions that we have done on our military heritage 7 are good enough to be on that channel, but they don't 8 get there. I don't know whether the CRTC has the power 9 to say to the specialty -- 10 17634 COMMISSIONER WILSON: "Play that 11 video." 12 17635 MR. CHADDERTON: Pardon? 13 17636 COMMISSIONER WILSON: "Play that 14 video." 15 17637 MR. CHADDERTON: No, I wouldn't say 16 that. I wouldn't want to be that specific. I would 17 say that -- 18 17638 COMMISSIONER WILSON: I am sure that 19 we wouldn't, either. 20 17639 MR. CHADDERTON: No. I would rather 21 think, though, that a broad guideline might be that 22 there is programming out there which is not done by the 23 regular channels, which is not done by independent 24 producers who get their funds from Telefilm or what 25 have you, but they are interesting. What they might StenoTran 3760 1 lose in quality, they make up in integrity because they 2 are done by people who know what they are talking about 3 and that's sort of a suggestion there. 4 17640 But I think I probably misled you 5 when I am talking about the free channels. I am really 6 talking about my fear that the avenue that has been 7 most effective in carrying these messages -- 8 17641 COMMISSIONER WILSON: The community 9 channels. 10 17642 MR. CHADDERTON: -- has been the 11 community channels. I am told that they really don't 12 have a guideline. 13 17643 You are in the trenches. 14 1615 15 17644 MS. CHISHOLM: I have met with, I 16 would say, about a hundred community programmers across 17 the country and I have a questionnaire that I ask 18 everybody the same thing and the first question is: 19 How do you define community programming and where do we 20 fit in? 21 17645 And I have had about a hundred 22 different answers. Nobody says the same thing. And 23 whenever I tell them that, they just kind of chuckle 24 and say, oh, of course. But no one has ever -- and 25 Isabelle probably gets the same thing. StenoTran 3761 1 17646 Everyone has a slightly different 2 look on community programming. Sometimes they will 3 say, well, you fit a certain community within our 4 community, so we can play your programming. 5 17647 Or they will say, well, no, we can't 6 play your stuff because it wasn't made by the community 7 but we like it anyway, so we will put it on there. I 8 mean like we have never gotten a single solitary answer 9 about what is community programming. 10 17648 COMMISSIONER WILSON: In reference to 11 the comment that you just made, Mr. Chadderton, about 12 sort of advising the channels about productions being 13 available from different sources, the Commission has 14 never required broadcasters to acquire programming from 15 a particular producer. 16 17649 We have made regulations about the 17 quantity of Canadian content that they carry or how 18 much money they should be spending on that. But we 19 have never required them to acquire programming from a 20 particular source. 21 17650 Why do you think it would be 22 appropriate for us to change this policy in order to 23 satisfy your desire to have your -- and I guess I am 24 asking this because I guess as I am sitting here 25 listening to you and I am very familiar with your StenoTran 3762 1 organization, and I am familiar with the videos that 2 you make. 3 17651 But I am wondering, too, as we are 4 looking for a solution to this issue that I am 5 wondering if part of the solution isn't also up to you 6 in terms of maybe making a choice to do co-productions 7 with independent producers as a way of trying to 8 increase the outlets for your videos. I don't know. 9 17652 MR. CHADDERTON: I wouldn't think 10 that that would be a solution. If the channels were 11 faulting our productions because of quality, that may 12 be true. But I don't think that's what it is. 13 17653 I think what the access situation is, 14 and let's just keep to community channels, the access 15 situation is that the community channels like what we 16 do. They like the integrity of it. When you talk about 17 special interests, I don't think they consider us as a 18 special interest. 19 17654 COMMISSIONER WILSON: No, in fact, 20 that comment really didn't have to do with the 21 community channels because I think we are dealing with 22 two very different things. If you are talking about 23 the community channels, that is one approach. But if 24 you are talking about trying to get commercial 25 broadcasters to air your programming. Is that a part StenoTran 3763 1 of your strategy? 2 17655 MR. CHADDERTON: Well, yes, we made 3 an award-winning film with a producer by the name of 4 John Zareski on the thalidomide children of Canada and, 5 boy, the response we got back from the CBC on that 6 program was just terrific. And we have gone that route 7 in co-productions occasionally. 8 17656 But I really feel that's not our 9 forté. That independent producers get ideas and they 10 want to produce them and whatnot. Let them go ahead. 11 We have our own niche, as we call it. 12 17657 I hope I haven't totally misled you 13 but I am really talking about the fact that my fear is 14 that there is a definition out there of community 15 channels which seems nobody has pinned it down, and it 16 seems to me that if we could, by regulation or 17 something, or a guideline, something could be said to 18 community channels that their community is wider than 19 city hall, then I think that would sort of satisfy us. 20 I think that's it. 21 17658 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Okay. I am 22 glad you were so direct because I think I was going off 23 on a slightly different track. 24 17659 MR. CHADDERTON: If I can just add, 25 there is no way that I was suggesting that CRTC should StenoTran 3764 1 tell the History Channel to put our programs on. 2 17660 COMMISSIONER WILSON: I was going to 3 say that would be quite a bold suggestion. 4 17661 MR. CHADDERTON: No, I was just 5 giving you that as an example of the problems that we 6 have in trying to get them on regular channels and, 7 therefore, that leaves open just the community 8 channels, except for a few educational channels. 9 17662 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Let me just ask 10 you one final question and this is really just out of 11 curiosity for myself. Do you make your videos 12 available through libraries or video stores as well? 13 17663 MR. CHADDERTON: Yes, not video 14 stores. 15 17664 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Not video 16 stores. 17 17665 MR. CHADDERTON: Libraries, yes, free 18 of charge. School boards. We distributed last year 19 around November the 11th, I think something in the 20 neighbourhood of 1400 free videos dealing with our 21 military heritage to school boards right across Canada. 22 17666 COMMISSIONER WILSON: How many 23 libraries would you be in? 24 17667 MR. CHADDERTON: The success rate of 25 putting them in the libraries hasn't been too great. StenoTran 3765 1 We put them in any library. We write out to them and 2 say would you like to have this. Maybe 10 per cent of 3 them write back and say yes. 4 17668 Then we follow it up and we say, 5 well, you know, you must have records. How many times 6 have they been logged out? And it hasn't been too 7 successful but it does help. It is part of getting the 8 message out there. 9 17669 But I guess to be almost crude about 10 it, if you don't get it on the "boob tube," it is not 11 going to register. 12 17670 COMMISSIONER WILSON: I can't believe 13 you said that. And you said it right on, too. 14 17671 MR. CHADDERTON: That is what my 15 friends and some of them are, you know, well spoken; 16 that is what they call it. I think what I am really 17 talking about is that if you can't get it on television 18 through community channels or something like that, it 19 really isn't worth production funds that you would put 20 if you were depending on distribution through 21 libraries. 22 17672 Now free distribution through 23 schools, that is different. But then there is a limit. 24 I mean when you put out 1400 dubs, that is a lot of 25 money. StenoTran 3766 1 17673 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Yes, that is. 2 17674 MR. CHADDERTON: So we run out of it, 3 yes. 4 17675 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Considering 5 there are 16,000 schools across the country. 6 17676 MR. CHADDERTON: That is true, yes. 7 17677 COMMISSIONER WILSON: Thank you very 8 much. Those are all my questions. 9 17678 MR. CHADDERTON: Thank you. 10 17679 THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms 11 Dugré, Ms Chisholm, Mr. Chadderton. Thank you for your 12 presentation. 13 17680 This will end today's work and we 14 will resume at 9:00 o'clock on Tuesday morning. 15 17681 Nous reprendrons à 9 h 00 mardi 16 matin, et bon weekend à tout le monde. 17 --- L'audience est ajournée à 1625, pour reprendre 18 le mardi 13 octobre 1998, à 0900 / Whereupon the 19 hearing adjourned at 1625, to resume on Tuesday, 20 October 13, 1998, at 0900 21 22 23 24 25 StenoTran
- Date modified: