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This page has been archived on the Web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.



                       SUBJECT / SUJET:


HELD AT:                               TENUE À:

Place du Portage                       Place du Portage
Conference Centre                      Centre de conférences
Outaouais Room                         Salle Outaouais
Hull, Quebec                           Hull (Québec)

December 7, 1998                       Le 7 décembre 1998

                          Volume 11
tel: 613-521-0703         StenoTran         fax: 613-521-7668



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.

tel: 613-521-0703         StenoTran         fax: 613-521-7668

                 Canadian Radio-television and
                 Telecommunications Commission

              Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des
                télécommunications canadiennes

                  Transcript / Transcription

              Public Hearing / Audience publique

                  New Media / Nouveaux médias


David Colville                         Chairperson / Président
                                       Telecommunications /
Françoise Bertrand                     Chairperson of the
                                       Commission / Présidente du
Martha Wilson                          Commissioner / Conseillère
Cindy Grauer                           Commissioner / Conseillère
Joan Pennefather                       Commissioner / Conseillère
David McKendry                         Commissioner / Conseiller


Carolyn Pinsky /                       Commission Counsel /
Karen Moore                            Avocates du Conseil
Ted Woodhead                           Hearing Manager / Gérant de
Daphne Fry                             Manager of Convergence
                                       Policy / Responsable de la
                                       politique sur la
Diane Santerre /                       Secretaries / Secrétaires
Carol Bénard

HELD AT:                               TENUE À:

Place du Portage                       Place du Portage
Conference Centre                      Centre de conférences
Outaouais Room                         Salle Outaouais
Hull, Quebec                           Hull (Québec)

December 7, 1998                       Le 7 décembre 1998

                          Volume 11
tel: 613-521-0703         StenoTran         fax: 613-521-7668



Presentation by / Présentation par:

Canadian Chamber of Commerce                              2852

Telecommunities Canada                                    2873

Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere                 2902

Cultural Human Resources Council /                        2924
Le Conseil des resources humaines du 
secteur culturel

Greg Pillon                                               2959

tel: 613-521-0703         StenoTran         fax: 613-521-7668


 1                                Hull, Quebec / Hull (Québec)
 2     --- Upon resuming on Monday, December 7, 1998
 3         at 0910 / L'audience reprend le lundi
 4         7 décembre 1998, à 0910
 5  12400                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Good morning,
 6     ladies and gentlemen.  Welcome back to our proceeding.
 7  12401                As I think most of you know, we will
 8     finish today, probably fairly early.  We will see where
 9     we are as we get close to the lunch break, and we will
10     decide then whether we take a break for lunch or not.
11  12402                For those of you who have been
12     following the proceedings, you will notice that the
13     Panel is somewhat reduced here today.  Chair Françoise
14     Bertrand and Commissioner Joan Pennefather are in
15     Montreal right now, as we speak, with a hearing
16     respecting new French-language specialty channels for
17     delivery on cable.
18  12403                When we had originally scheduled this
19     proceeding, we didn't think it was going to run quite
20     this long, and we had already scheduled the other
21     proceeding.
22  12404                But as I noted at the outset of this
23     proceeding, all of the Commissioners will be involved
24     with the ultimate policy decision with respect to this
25     issue and will be briefed on all of the issues.  Of


 1     course, the transcript will be available to them as
 2     well.
 3  12405                With that, we will turn to our
 4     proceeding, Madam Secretary, and call the first party.
 5  12406                MS BÉNARD:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
 6  12407                The first presentation will be made
 7     by the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, Mr. Robert Keyes.
 9  12408                MR. KEYES:  My name is Robert Keyes. 
10     I am the Senior Vice-President, International, for the
11     Canadian Chamber of Commerce.
12  12409                If you are not familiar with the
13     Canadian Chamber, we are the largest and most
14     representative business organization in Canada.  Our
15     membership, either directly or through our affiliates,
16     and through more than 500 local Chambers of Commerce
17     across the country and 170,000 businesses, covers all
18     sectors of the Canadian business scene.
19  12410                These hearings which you are holding
20     on the scope of new media are very timely.  Your focus
21     in these hearings is primarily to look at the Internet
22     from a broadcasting perspective, but the explosion in
23     the way Canadians are using the Internet for so many
24     purposes, be it communication, commerce, information,
25     entertainment, raises many issues and questions.


 1  12411                Your look at the Internet and new
 2     media is but one of its many applications.
 3  12412                We don't feel that your focus can be
 4     dealt with in isolation from other initiatives and
 5     actions being taken elsewhere in the government.  The
 6     broadcast implications for Internet use must clearly be
 7     kept in mind as you examine this rapidly changing
 8     scenario.  The goal has to be one of balance,
 9     encouraging the growth and use of the Internet while
10     addressing areas of legitimate concern.
11  12413                Mr. Chair, we are not experts on the
12     Internet, its technologies or specific applications. 
13     So while we leave the technical material to others, our
14     central message is that we have to get the overall
15     framework and principles right.  The primary concern of
16     our submission and for our appearance here today is the
17     business impact and the policy implications for
18     Canada's community of rules, regulations and
19     procedures.
20  12414                The Canadian Chamber has been
21     involved in formulation of policy on the growth of
22     electronic commerce.  Through our strategic alliance
23     with the Canadian Council for International Business,
24     we were deeply involved with various international
25     organizations in preparation for the recent OECD


 1     meetings on electronic commerce held in Ottawa last
 2     October.  For many of our members, the promise held by
 3     electronic commerce is challenging but exciting.
 4  12415                A number of our corporate members
 5     from across the country have either written to the CRTC
 6     or asked to appear before this Panel.  For many
 7     companies integration of Internet applications and
 8     capabilities are becoming a key part of their strategic
 9     business plans.
10  12416                Clearly the Canadian business
11     community has concerns about how the outcome of these
12     hearings will fit into the more general framework of
13     Canada's approach to maximizing our Internet advantage.
14  12417                The Internet does not fit neatly
15     within current Canadian regulatory regimes.  Moreover,
16     the Internet is a truly international phenomena that
17     does not fit neatly within the borders of any
18     international jurisdiction.  This is why international
19     cooperation on the various aspects of Internet use for
20     electronic commerce has taken on international
21     dimensions and why the recent OECD Ministerial on
22     electronic commerce was so important.
23  12418                At that time, international
24     representatives in attendance and the media commented
25     that there were conflicting messages from the


 1     Government of Canada.  While Industry Canada chaired
 2     the OECD meeting and set out a far-sighted agenda to
 3     enhance the use of electronic commerce within Canada
 4     and across international borders, Canadians were also
 5     preparing responses to your call for comments on
 6     potential Internet regulation of the new media.
 7  12419                Every passing day illustrates that
 8     the Internet is a multi-dimensional creature and one
 9     where new applications are being created constantly. 
10     The Internet is much more than just assessing content
11     on the web, however.  As a means to link computing
12     devices, the Internet is a critical business tool,
13     essential for our competitiveness, productivity and
14     growth.
15  12420                The background paper makes it clear
16     that the CRTC is aware of the argument, that approaches
17     which have proven successful in the past with respect
18     to convectional broadcasting may not be directly
19     applicable to the Internet.
20  12421                In our view, the Broadcasting Act and
21     the Telecommunications Act should not be used to
22     regulate the Internet, because the Internet is not
23     primarily a broadcasting tool, even though certain
24     websites may offer material which some may characterize
25     like broadcasting.


 1  12422                We understand that one approach
 2     before you is to bring the Internet under the current
 3     broadcast or telecommunications regulatory framework by
 4     creating a broad definition of new media.  If this
 5     approach is used, the definition used will be critical. 
 6     It could encompass content on all networks, including
 7     Intranets and corporate LANS, and clearly this would be
 8     inappropriate.
 9  12423                We appreciate the concerns you are
10     trying to address through these hearings.  For example,
11     questions raised by the transmission of audio signals
12     over the Internet on such sites is virtually Canadian,
13     because users can tune in to signals posted on this
14     site.
15  12424                How does this differ from traditional
16     broadcasting?
17  12425                We don't have any quick answer to
18     these concerns; but we do say that if there are
19     concerns, let the solutions be narrow and specific, not
20     broad and general.  We have to guard against using
21     blunt instruments to achieve narrow purposes and
22     creating possibly unintended consequences.
23  12426                Let me address one specific concern
24     which has given rise to comment from the business
25     community.


 1  12427                If the Internet is considered to be a
 2     "broadcast medium", who is the broadcaster?  Is it the
 3     Internet service provider, or is it the particular
 4     website?
 5  12428                Under the Broadcasting Act, one
 6     interpretation is that ISPs could be obliged to pay up
 7     to a 5 percent levy on gross revenues to fund Canadian
 8     content, not unlike television broadcasters.  Such
 9     levies would only diminish Canada's attractiveness as
10     the premier country in which to locate electronic
11     services and to conduct electronic commerce.  Moreover,
12     it might just do nothing more than drive ISPs outside
13     the country.
14  12429                This would not help to provide the
15     environment of encouragement and support, which is a
16     key message which the Federal Government has been
17     trying to establish in other fora.
18  12430                Government and business must work
19     together to ensure that the Internet is secure and
20     efficient, but we must refrain from reacting too
21     quickly with the application of old rules and concepts
22     to the new technology.  The business community is
23     showing that it has viable solutions to the many
24     challenges presented by electronic commerce.
25  12431                The recent OECD Ministerial


 1     demonstrated industry created solutions to issues like
 2     privacy, security and other measures to improve
 3     consumer confidence.  It also underlined the need to
 4     ensure that governments do not create an uncoordinated
 5     patchwork of regulatory structures.
 6  12432                In a borderless world of the
 7     Internet, global industry self-regulation and
 8     international cooperation across governments on
 9     appropriate legal frameworks will help to maximize the
10     benefits of this technology to everyone.
11  12433                And at the end of the day, maximizing
12     the benefits is the goal.
13  12434                On electronic commerce, the current
14     approach is for governments to work hand-in-hand with
15     industry and with other interested parties to develop
16     solutions to identified problems and challenges, be it
17     in the form of self-regulation or legislation.  These
18     are encouraging signals to which the private sector
19     will respond, and maybe the same approach is
20     appropriate on the specific issues which you are trying
21     to address.
22  12435                We support a cooperative environment
23     to create a proactive environment where private sector
24     solutions can be implemented.
25  12436                The issue of Canadian content has


 1     also been raised in these hearings.  There are some who
 2     think that Canadians must be shielded from outside
 3     forces or who think that Canadian content must be given
 4     special treatment or financial assistance.
 5  12437                Given its worldwide nature, the
 6     Internet and the web should be vehicles through which
 7     we can tell and show the world our best.  Moreover,
 8     Canadians are putting significant amounts of Canadian
 9     content on the Internet of their own accord, and ISPs
10     are supporting this desire because it makes good
11     business sense to give customers what they want.
12  12438                I would draw your attention to one
13     final item which was not in our submission.
14  12439                At the Canadian Chamber's annual
15     meeting in September, delegates passed a resolution
16     submitted by the Perth Chamber of Commerce which
17     supported the need for Canadians in rural and remote
18     areas to have affordable and equitable access to high
19     bandwidth services.  This resolution, and the
20     discussion which it prompted at our AGM, was a clear
21     statement that the Internet is seen as an important
22     competitive tool for all Canadians.
23  12440                Development of the next generation of
24     Internet infrastructure, for example, CANET-3 is
25     exciting.  However, it will be important that it is


 1     accessible to all Canadians regardless of where they
 2     live.
 3  12441                Mr. Chairman and Panel, let me
 4     conclude with five thoughts which underscore our
 5     central message.
 6  12442                One:  The Internet is a vital tool
 7     allowing Canadian business to work around the world, to
 8     be productive and to be competitive.  Let's not create
 9     cost or administrative hurdles which encumber our
10     opportunities or abilities.
11  12443                Two:  If specific problems or
12     legitimate issues require attention, deal with the
13     specifics.  Broad-based blunt instruments may have
14     unintended negative impacts.
15  12444                Three:  The government has expressed
16     a desire to brand Canada as a leading edge and premier
17     place for information technology in electronic
18     commerce.  To do so requires a supportive and
19     encouraging environment.  Canadians have a presence on
20     the Internet that far outstrips our population.  We
21     should focus on maximizing our strengths and
22     advantages.
23  12445                Four:  Other parts of the Canadian
24     government are taking a light-handed flexible and
25     cooperative approach to helping Canadians and Canadian


 1     business maximize Internet opportunities.  The private
 2     sector wants to work closely with governments and other
 3     stakeholders to provide solutions to concerns.  We
 4     encourage the CRTC to adopt a consistent stance.
 5  12446                Five:  If Internet use and
 6     opportunities are to be maximized, and if Canada is to
 7     be at the leading edge, we need certainty about the
 8     legal and regulatory framework.  Uncertainty about how
 9     Canadian authorities might intervene will only drive
10     rapidly developing opportunities offshore.
11  12447                Mr. Chair and Panel, I hope these
12     comments have been helpful.  Thank you.
13  12448                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr.
14     Keyes.
15  12449                To discuss your views, I will turn
16     the microphone over to Commissioner McKendry.
17  12450                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Thank you,
18     Mr. Chair.
19  12451                Good morning, Mr. Keyes, and thank
20     you for your comments this morning.
21  12452                Just help me understand a little bit
22     about the Chamber.
23  12453                I notice here the Canadian Chamber of
24     Commerce.  I assume there are Chambers in other
25     countries as well, particularly the United States?


 1  12454                MR. KEYES:  Yes, there are.
 2  12455                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Do the
 3     Chambers coordinate at all with respect to this
 4     Internet and electronic commerce issue?
 5  12456                MR. KEYES:  We do.  We have been
 6     involved with a variety of international business
 7     organizations in the electronic area, the international
 8     organizations under the United Nations, under the OECD,
 9     as well as the business groups in other countries,
10     which are often either within a specific country or
11     organized internationally.
12  12457                We have worked very closely, for
13     example, on the OECD meetings with the U.S. Council for
14     International Business.  That is a parallel
15     organization to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and it
16     directly relates to the OECD and its mandate through
17     another group called the Business Industry Advisory
18     Council to the OECD, which was the primary forum for
19     input into the group.
20  12458                There is a very complicated web of
21     international organizations.  The bottom line is we are
22     well plugged into them.
23  12459                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  On an
24     international level, and maybe in particular in the
25     North American context, what are the key things you are


 1     hearing with respect to electronic commerce in terms of
 2     problems that need to be addressed on an international
 3     or global basis?
 4  12460                MR. KEYES:  The four major themes
 5     that were on the OECD agenda were:  taxation
 6     encryption, digital signature, privacy and security
 7     concerns.  They are the major ones that we hear about.
 8  12461                The issue of convergence was not on
 9     the OECD agenda, although it was raised from the floor
10     at times in the discussions, and is recognized as
11     something coming down the pipe that we have to deal
12     with.
13  12462                The approach to these -- I think the
14     business community internationally recognizes that
15     there are legitimate issues and concerns that have to
16     be addressed.  At the same time, the approach which has
17     been encouraged is very much one of governments and
18     business and consumers and other groups who are
19     interested in these issues to work hand in glove on
20     solutions that transcend international boundaries.
21  12463                In large measure this will depend on
22     industry self-regulation, and the OECD conference was a
23     chance for many of the companies involved in this
24     technology to demonstrate the solutions that they have.
25  12464                The OECD conference was also a first


 1     in the sense that it involved non-government
 2     organizations in a major way.  There were strong
 3     expressions of views by consumer groups, by labour
 4     groups, of some of the issues that they are dealing
 5     with as the global digital revolution continues.
 6  12465                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Of the four
 7     items you mentioned, I wasn't sure whether privacy was
 8     one of them.  We have heard in this proceeding that
 9     privacy is an issue with respect to the Internet and
10     particularly with respect to electronic commerce.
11  12466                MR. KEYES:  Yes.
12  12467                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  As I am sure
13     you are aware, the European unions put in place certain
14     restrictions with respect to the export of personal
15     data to jurisdictions that don't have adequate privacy
16     protection.
17  12468                I am wondering if the business
18     community has any thoughts about that as it relates to
19     Canada.
20  12469                MR. KEYES:  I can't talk specifically
21     about what the EU may have.  Business recognizes that
22     people have to have trust in the medium and that if
23     they are going to be successful and use it, you have to
24     be sure that the information that you are putting out
25     there is going to be used in a proper way; or, to take


 1     it the other way, is not going to be misused.
 2  12470                At a meeting I was at in Kingston two
 3     weekends ago, somebody mentioned that there had been a
 4     survey done.  And when people were asked "what do you
 5     trust the most in terms of getting payment and
 6     information", the cheque in the mail was number one,
 7     which seemed rather strange; and credit cards were
 8     number two.
 9  12471                If information is misused, the
10     marketplace, first of all, will make a judgment and you
11     will not get the business.  But governments, too, will
12     intervene.
13  12472                I think that the private sector wants
14     to demonstrate that there is security there; that
15     information will be protected.
16  12473                I think everybody recognizes in the
17     business community that this is a number one issue.
18  12474                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Thank you.
19  12475                In your oral comments you mentioned
20     high-speed broadband access to remote areas, and that
21     at your Annual Meeting they passed a resolution to
22     encourage that to happen.
23  12476                Do your organization have any
24     suggestions with respect to initiatives that the CRTC
25     or other government bodies could be taking to


 1     facilitate the roll-out of high-speed access?
 2  12477                MR. KEYES:  I don't have any specific
 3     solutions.  I might just repeat that the concern -- and
 4     I will be happy to give you a copy of that resolution.
 5  12478                The issue was not only the physical
 6     infrastructure, but it was also the cost.  The feeling
 7     by some of the rural Canadians who were involved in
 8     putting some of these ideas forward was that they were,
 9     in a sense, in second place to urban areas in terms of
10     access.  But even if they have the access, the costs
11     that they faced were considerably higher.
12  12479                Where you have a large number of
13     emerging small and medium-sized enterprises who are not
14     necessarily located in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver,
15     the major urban centres, if the Canadian private sector
16     and some of these smaller companies are going to
17     capitalize on the opportunities that are there and that
18     they perceive, both in Canada and beyond Canada's
19     borders, they have to have what they call universal
20     access.
21  12480                They saw this as highly important to
22     their future.
23  12481                This resolution was sponsored by the
24     Perth Chamber, but it had its origins in a group out in
25     Lanark County, in some small communities in the far-


 1     flung parts of Lanark County who were having real
 2     problems with dependability of service.  They had
 3     business opportunities that were being constrained by
 4     their lack of access.
 5  12482                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Perth is the
 6     municipality that is close to Ottawa.  It is about 50
 7     miles away.
 8  12483                MR. KEYES:  Yes.
 9  12484                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  I am a bit
10     surprised that they don't have access that they
11     consider adequate.
12  12485                MR. KEYES:  This was their view.
13  12486                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Perth must be
14     doing something right.  This is the second time that
15     Perth has come up in this proceeding.  The other time
16     it was in the context of their Humane Society, though.
17  12487                We have heard in the proceeding that
18     Canada lags behind the U.S. in terms of electronic
19     commerce.  I am wondering, first, if that is your view,
20     if you agree with that view; and secondly, if you do,
21     what you think the reasons for that might be.
22  12488                MR. KEYES:  I think Canadian business
23     is --
24  12489                What measure you use to measure lag,
25     I am not sure.


 1  12490                It is a comment that has been often
 2     voiced of Canadian business generally, that we are not
 3     as adventuresome; we are not as driven to try various
 4     solutions.
 5  12491                In my business life in various
 6     incarnations, this is something which has come up over
 7     and over; that Canadian businesses are not always there
 8     on the leading edge.
 9  12492                I think in the electronic commerce
10     area there are a lot of Canadian firms who are very
11     much on that edge and doing inventive things.
12  12493                I guess there is also an issue as to
13     what electronic commerce is.  I think there are two
14     components.  There is the business-to-business part and
15     then there is business-to-consumers.  Some of the
16     issues and questions involved in those are quite
17     different.
18  12494                Canada has a very rapidly growing
19     service sector.  The service sector should be ideally
20     suited to offer services over the Internet, where you
21     are not dependent on the physical movement of goods
22     across borders; where you can send things down the
23     line.
24  12495                We are not very good at measuring the
25     service sector in Canada or anywhere.  I think perhaps


 1     we don't have a good enough appreciation as to just how
 2     rapidly this is growing.
 3  12496                I think the U.S. is always trotted
 4     out because of the very large presence that a number of
 5     large firms have as always being there, the flag-
 6     bearing and leading the charge.  Canadian firms may be
 7     smaller and less obtrusive, but that does not
 8     necessarily mean they are less successful or inventive.
 9  12497                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  In your oral
10     comments, I think you referred to the fact that there
11     was uncertainty about whether or not some, or all, of
12     the activities on the Internet may or may not fall
13     under the legislation that the Commission administers,
14     and that that situation was creating uncertainty.
15  12498                Do you have any examples for us of
16     where the uncertainty created by this has led to, for
17     example, a reduction in investments that might have
18     been made otherwise?
19  12499                Can you give us any examples to
20     support the view that there is uncertainty out there
21     that might be detrimental to e-commerce or related
22     activities in Canada?
23  12500                MR. KEYES:  I haven't got a specific
24     example to say that because of A, the causal effect of
25     B happened; but there is concern.


 1  12501                Perhaps it is a fear of the unknown
 2     and the uncertainty that we have a very rapidly
 3     changing technological environment with opportunities
 4     which appear and disappear very quickly, and
 5     uncertainty as to where you may come out at the end of
 6     these hearings, and the kinds of things that you may
 7     recommend.  Perhaps it is a fear of the unknown.
 8  12502                On the other hand, business wants
 9     certainty.  You have to know what the rules of the game
10     are going to be.
11  12503                It can be very difficult to say that
12     an investment or a particular thing did not happen in
13     Canada.  I an not close enough to the specifics of that
14     business.  I can only repeat what I have heard from
15     people sitting around our board table, and others who
16     say that we want to know what the rules are; we want to
17     know what they are soon so that we can make our
18     business decisions and get on with life.
19  12504                In a previous position, I was in the
20     mining industry and we were dealing for many years with
21     a lot of regulatory uncertainties and things changing
22     very quickly.  It was that fear of uncertainty and not
23     knowing where things were going to come out at the end
24     of the day that was as dampening to business
25     opportunities, and people looked elsewhere.


 1  12505                That was a physical operation.  Here,
 2     where you have a virtual operation, and it is so easy
 3     to establish things somewhere else, it is very hard to
 4     know and see -- in part, perhaps, because there have
 5     not been rules.
 6  12506                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Let me finish
 7     up by asking you about the conclusion that was in your
 8     oral comments in the first round, where you urged us to
 9     focus on Canada's strengths.
10  12507                I wonder if you could set out for us,
11     from the perspective of the Chamber and your members,
12     what Canada's strengths are in this area that we should
13     make sure we are aware of.
14  12508                MR. KEYES:  One of the key things is
15     that if you look at numbers that are cited by a variety
16     of people specializing in this business, our presence
17     on the Internet far outstrips the size of our
18     population.  Canada has established that presence, and
19     let's make sure that we maintain that.
20  12509                We are establishing an electronic
21     infrastructure through our high-speed lines, through
22     the companies, through their inventive capability, that
23     Canadians are a force on the world scene.
24  12510                I have just come back from Asia, and
25     certainly Canadians there and Canadian companies are


 1     seen as people to look to for solutions and
 2     applications.  I think we have those recognized
 3     strengths.
 4  12511                The companies that we have in the
 5     telecommunications business which are the basis for
 6     this industry have been growing by leaps and bounds. 
 7     Let's make sure that that continues to happen.
 8  12512                Finally, there are the people who are
 9     in the service business.  And as I say, it can be
10     difficult to measure that contribution.  There are a
11     lot of Canadians in this field.
12  12513                They are here, in part, because of
13     the very supportive environment and encouragement which
14     they have been getting from our government.  We don't
15     want to compromise that.  We have a good thing going,
16     and let's make sure that we don't put things in the way
17     that are going to block that.
18  12514                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Thank you
19     very much for answering my questions.
20  12515                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you,
21     Commissioner McKendry.
22  12516                Thank you very much, Mr. Keyes.  We
23     appreciate your presentation here today.
24  12517                MR. KEYES:  Thank you.
25  12518                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Madam Secretary,


 1     please.
 2  12519                MS BÉNARD:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
 3  12520                The next presentation will be by
 4     Telecommunities Canada.
 5  12521                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Good morning. 
 6     Please proceed when you are ready.
 8  12522                MR. GRAHAM:  Good morning.  My name
 9     is Garth Graham.  Beside me is Marita Moll and Chris
10     Cope.  All three of us are elected members of the Board
11     of Directors of Telecommunities Canada, which is a
12     national voice for community-based efforts to apply the
13     Internet to community development.
14  12523                Marita is also Head of Research and
15     Technology for the Canadian Teachers Federation, and
16     she has been an active moderator of online dialogue
17     about universal access issues and communications
18     policy.
19  12524                I know some of you in the CRTC are
20     familiar with her in that capacity.
21  12525                Chris Cope is the Executive Director
22     of National Capital Freenet, a more than fulltime job. 
23     I would like to announce that it was recently written
24     up in the international edition of Newsweek's Online
25     Manifestation as an example worldwide of who is doing


 1     it right in community networking.
 2  12526                I have been actively involved in the
 3     community network movement.  I would call it that since
 4     it emerged in 1991, and I am a consultant in electronic
 5     community networking.
 6  12527                So we are experts in the Internet in
 7     a particular way.
 8  12528                I, too, would like to make reference
 9     to a quote that emerged from a CRTC Commissioner, Mr.
10     Colville, when you referred to new media as "this
11     stuff", and to talk about really what distinguishes
12     "this stuff" from broadcasting and telecommunications.
13  12529                I would like to note right from the
14     beginning that when you begin thinking about this as a
15     problem of "stuff", you are already into conceptual
16     difficulties.  And it will become clearer where I am
17     headed with that notion as I get further and further
18     into my own difficulties.
19  12530                Not the least of the problem with
20     defining it as "stuff", or with that definition, is
21     that it forces you to the conclusion that you are only
22     talking about a new media industry, about some sort of
23     delivery system for new commodities.  Whereas, from our
24     experience, the impact of digital communication
25     networks on socio-economic and political processes is


 1     far, far broader than that.
 2  12531                I want to present a few ideas this
 3     morning, saying our formal written presentation in kind
 4     of a different way, to broaden the definition, to begin
 5     to see the problem in a different way.
 6  12532                I am going to describe a simple model
 7     of how a network or knowledge society actually works,
 8     based on the experience of community networks.  I am
 9     going to talk about the implications of that model for
10     a natural strategy and universal access.
11  12533                In that context, I would like to
12     mention that Telecommunities Canada has been an active
13     participant in the sorts of universal access strategy
14     development exercise that Andrew Clement, of the
15     University of Toronto, presented to you.  We fully
16     support the directions that he took and the things that
17     he said.
18  12534                Then I am going to present a
19     definition of community network, also in the context of
20     that model, and then draw a couple of conclusions from
21     it.
22  12535                Just to give you some idea of a
23     summary conclusion, we see the gap between the old
24     models and definitions and the new models and
25     definitions is very large and in many respects, in our


 1     experience, has been so difficult as to be almost
 2     impossible to bridge.
 3  12536                Doing the stuff in community
 4     networking is very exciting.  Talking about it is often
 5     not.  However, I shall continue to talk.
 6  12537                Chris is going to help me with three
 7     slides that I am going to use.  They will show up, I am
 8     told, on the monitor.
 9  12538                These are three key factors that we
10     see as driving a knowledge society.  "Technology, the
11     way we do things" is a quote from Dr. Ursula Franklin.
12  12539                It is important from our point of
13     view to put technology in its proper context, because
14     we are not interested in a technological imperative. 
15     We don't see that the change is driven by the
16     technology or that you can understand the technology,
17     except in the context of its use.
18  12540                This definition of technology is a
19     very practical one, because it does not say that
20     technology is about things; it does not say that it is
21     about objects.  It says it is a process, a way of
22     seeing, a way of doing.
23  12541                The second statement again comes out
24     of that wish that we be in charge of what emerges.  It
25     is the community that is the network, not the


 1     technology.
 2  12542                The purpose of using the Internet at
 3     the community level, at the local level, in terms of
 4     issue of social inclusion, in terms of the economic
 5     development of the community, is a community matter. 
 6     It is people in the community that are involved in
 7     that.  Networks are always social networks, even though
 8     the process of connection within them may in fact be
 9     mediated in many respects by communications technology.
10  12543                However, the third factor, then,
11     completes the model and drives it.  Now we "make our
12     networks and our networks make us".
13  12544                This, in fact, is a quote from a
14     Professor of Architecture at MIT, who was expressing
15     how virtual spaces begin to affect our sense of who we
16     are and where we are, and redefine us.  But I think it
17     is broadly useful and reiterates what Dr. Franklin was
18     saying about technology being the way that we do
19     things.
20  12545                There is, of course, an inter-
21     relationship between technological change and how we
22     see the world around us.  In this case, our social
23     networks are connectivity with each other, our
24     relationships, are being mediated, moderated, connected
25     by communications technology, and that affects the way


 1     in which we see things.
 2  12546                So, we become different in that
 3     process.
 4  12547                One of the conclusions that comes out
 5     of this model of a knowledge society is in fact that
 6     the technology, then, is not the cause of the change. 
 7     The technology is a symptom of a change that has
 8     already occurred.
 9  12548                We have managed to imagine a
10     different way of relating to each other in our social
11     networks, because we began to see things differently.
12     That expressed itself through technology, which we then
13     applied to ourselves, which then affects our view.
14  12549                That is the model.
15  12550                Chris, the next one.
16  12551                We have been participants in national
17     discussions of universal access on many, many levels. 
18     What we found when we were addressing that question is
19     something that looks like the difference between the
20     square and the circle.
21  12552                The Canadian Federal Government
22     approache to universal access begins with the idea of
23     an Information Highway -- although that vocabulary is
24     changing.  Then they have imagined the small electronic
25     public space that would occur within the framework of


 1     that if in fact the market failed.  If all this was,
 2     was industry or services, or electronic goods and
 3     services, or if all that mattered was the price at a
 4     certain point, then perhaps the price would be a
 5     barrier to access for certain types of people.
 6  12553                The example you had previously was
 7     rural Canada or people who were disadvantaged, perhaps. 
 8     So the government's role, then, in the development of
 9     policy for universal access is to keep an eye on price
10     and, if the market fails, to intervene.
11  12554                Canadian business and industry has
12     said that the take-up rate of the Internet has been
13     more rapid than anything else we have ever seen, so
14     obviously there is no price problem; so obviously there
15     is no need for intervention; so obviously there is no
16     government role.
17  12555                Our position in these discussions has
18     always been that we are looking at something that is so
19     broadly based in the way in which we relate to each
20     other that it affects all aspects of life.  It affects
21     our politics, it affects our social connections.  It is
22     the community that is the network, not the technology.
23  12556                We make our networks and our networks
24     make us.  Therefore, we are applying a social policy
25     model to discussions of universal access.  And what


 1     access really becomes in that sense is your ability to
 2     be a participant in that society in all aspects of that
 3     society, and that is a far broader question.
 4  12557                Obviously within that social network
 5     model part of the daily transactions of life are
 6     commercial, so there is an Information Highway.  But it
 7     is a section of electronic public space and not all of
 8     it.
 9  12558                I would like to say that we have made
10     progress with stating the problem in this way, but the
11     reality is that we have not.  We still see that the
12     market model dominates perceptions of what universal
13     access is all about.
14  12559                Chris, the third slide, please.
15  12560                Just to sort of round out this
16     picture of a knowledge society and community
17     networking's role in it, this is in fact the way in
18     which for several years now we have been defining
19     community networking.
20  12561                Community networks turn the
21     experience of being social and economic in electronic
22     public space -- which, as I have indicated, is
23     virtually most aspects of our daily living, or will
24     become so -- into practices that serve community needs.
25  12562                This goes back and reiterates Ursula


 1     Franklin's comment that technology is the way we do
 2     things.  This is not a definition of community networks
 3     as a service, something about the delivery of
 4     electronic goods and services for marginalized people,
 5     for example.  This defines community networks as a
 6     community's capacity to learn from what is happening to
 7     itself as it faces these changes.
 8  12563                Typically, when you use the phrase
 9     "new media", you are thinking about the delivery of
10     something.  That is why when we define community
11     networking in this way, we are conscious of avoiding
12     that as a kind of a trap because it is not about the
13     delivery of something.  It is about exchange in the
14     broadest sense of the word.
15  12564                There are two conclusions I would
16     like to note in rounding this picture of what is
17     different about "the stuff" from broadcast and
18     telecommunications.
19  12565                The first conclusion comes out of our
20     experience of participating in national universal
21     access policy discussions on a whole bunch of different
22     levels, particularly through Andrew Clement's national
23     workshops on this over many months.  The question arose
24     of how we would structure some sort of advisory council
25     if in fact the Federal Government advanced a national


 1     strategy for universal access.
 2  12566                The Federal Government has decided
 3     not to do that in umbrella fashion but to do that,
 4     piecemeal, on a broad-based front.
 5  12567                However, we rapidly came to the
 6     conclusion that there was no point in structuring a
 7     council to advise on the implementation of universal
 8     access policies in Canada, because there was no place
 9     to advise.  There was in fact no focal point within the
10     Federal Government that could encompass the breadth of
11     issues that the Internet, that this definition of
12     community networking raises.
13  12568                There was an enormous range of
14     federal agencies intervening electronically and in
15     support of community access and many different uses of
16     the Internet, but all on their own and directly within
17     their own mandates.  There is nothing horizontal at all
18     that acts as a focal point in the Federal Government
19     for dealing with these issues.
20  12569                This way of doing things affects all
21     aspects of governance, and the Government of Canada has
22     not yet figured out how to cope with that reality.
23  12570                The second conclusion that we have
24     reluctantly come to is the hands-on experience of
25     social change that thousands of Canadians are beginning


 1     to have because they are picking up the Internet and
 2     using it for community-development processes.  They are
 3     self-organizing online communities.  That rich
 4     experience is in many ways being ignored by public
 5     policy which is still driven by that market model and
 6     which is still driven with so much of a top-down
 7     approach.
 8  12571                The Internet is not the opposite of a
 9     top-down approach; it is not bottom-up.  Yes, community
10     networks are grassroots organizations; but the Internet
11     is any-to-any or many-to-many.  It is something
12     completely other than that.
13  12572                That experience of applying that
14     directly in daily life, which is occurring in the
15     context of community networking, is not yet being
16     reflected in public policy.
17  12573                In effect, what people actually do
18     with new media, in understanding how they use it -- and
19     they are using it -- and how that affects them, the way
20     that they do things, is what we should be paying more
21     attention to.
22  12574                Just to finish my presentation -- and
23     Marita is going to say something about universal access
24     if I have not preempted that.
25  12575                Have I?


 1  12576                MS MOLL:  No.
 2  12577                MR. GRAHAM:  I would like to refer to
 3     our formal written submission, because Mr. Colville not
 4     only talked about "the stuff", he also asked for
 5     criteria that would govern action.
 6  12578                At the conclusion of our formal
 7     presentation, we had suggested several ways in which
 8     the CRTC should act.  I will briefly refer to them.
 9  12579                Because of that total lack of focal
10     point within the Federal Government, we would like to
11     encourage you to continuously address issues of
12     convergence that do transcend the limitations of the
13     two acts.  It is hard to find forums like this that can
14     deal with issues in a broad-based way.
15  12580                The Internet is an open system. 
16     People organize their social networks within it, their
17     exchanges within it, through self-organization.  We
18     would like you to ensure that there are no regulatory
19     interventions for narrowly-defined content purposes or
20     "stuff" purposes that strangle the nature of the
21     Internet as an open system.
22  12581                We believe very strongly that
23     Internet governance, if it is approached, must be
24     approached in a manner that asserts the public interest
25     in an electronic public space in that broad way in


 1     which we defined it.  Public policy and public interest
 2     has always acknowledged a role for government in the
 3     regulation of what is public space.  We say it is all
 4     public space.
 5  12582                Then we would like, of course, that
 6     there be an acknowledgement of the role of community
 7     networks in providing a means for community control of
 8     community life online, the defence of citizen
 9     participation in the design of electronic public space,
10     and community networks as essential components of
11     affordable access to the means of universal
12     participation in the knowledge society, in the entire
13     society.
14  12583                Thank you.
15  12584                Marita, I think, is going to be a bit
16     more specific about universal access issues.
17  12585                MS MOLL:  Thank you, Garth.
18  12586                This morning I am just going to
19     emphasize a few points that Garth made, to the extent
20     that a winter cold will allow me to do that.
21  12587                I want to say, again, that we deeply
22     believe that electronic space or the electronic
23     commons, as it has been called, includes both public
24     and private space, but that it begins as public space.
25  12588                A mechanism for encouraging its use


 1     and determining the conditions of its private use, a
 2     mechanism which relies heavily on public input, is long
 3     overdue.
 4  12589                Telecommunities Canada, as Garth has
 5     said, has participated fully and supports fully the
 6     public interest proposal presented to you by Andrew
 7     Clement or National Access Strategy.
 8  12590                The work of this National Access
 9     Strategy project is very rich in new ideas for the
10     definition and the management of new media in the
11     public interest.
12  12591                We would like to draw your attention
13     particularly to the Access Rainbow, which I have shown
14     on this pamphlet here.  I would like to leave you with
15     copies of these, if I may.
16  12592                We urge the Commissioners to study
17     carefully these proposals for the National Access
18     Strategy, the National Access Fund and the broadly
19     representative overseeing body, with particular
20     emphasis on representation from grassroots community-
21     based organizations.
22  12593                Our submissions to these hearings
23     points out that electronic community networking
24     associations act as a vital part of the community-based
25     component of universal access to new media serving,


 1     among others, the second level of access in the Access
 2     Rainbow, the social participation level currently
 3     absent from the federal Information Highway policy.
 4  12594                Unfortunately, as Garth has noted,
 5     their experience, the experience of thousands of
 6     Canadians who have participated in community
 7     networking, is consistently undervalued in federal
 8     policymaking, although it has shown up in international
 9     news reports.
10  12595                It is time, ladies and gentlemen, I
11     think, to close that communication gap and to bring
12     Canadians online in a way that reflects our national
13     values: diversity, inclusiveness, participation,
14     universality, equity and opportunity.  It is time to
15     bring the federal government policies and programs
16     together with the experience of thousands of Canadians.
17  12596                Thank you.
18  12597                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Does that conclude
19     your presentation?
20  12598                MR. GRAHAM:  Yes.
21  12599                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you very much
22     for the stuff of your presentation.
23  12600                There is a line, with all due respect
24     to my engineering colleagues, that "I always wanted to
25     be an engineer and now I are one".


 1  12601                Well, "I are one".  We may not be
 2     well-known for the use of appropriate terms in the
 3     English language.  "Stuff" was what seemed best
 4     appropriate to me, given the difficulty in defining a
 5     lot of this stuff.
 6  12602                I appreciate the humour in your
 7     presentation at the outset in that respect.
 8  12603                To discuss your views, I will turn
 9     the questioning to Commissioner McKendry.
10  12604                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Thank you,
11     Mr. Chair.
12  12605                Good morning.  I want to start by
13     getting a better understanding of how you are using the
14     word "community".
15  12606                I am assuming you are not referring
16     to terrestrial communities; you are referring to
17     communities that exist in cyberspace and might be
18     global communities, in effect.
19  12607                Is that right?
20  12608                MR. GRAHAM:  Yes, that is so.  That
21     definition makes no reference to locality or
22     communities of interest or activity.  If a social
23     network identifies itself as a community, it is.
24  12609                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Following
25     along that thought for a moment -- because it has come


 1     up in our proceeding -- in that kind of cyberspace
 2     community how do you see the members of the community
 3     in effect monitoring the community's behaviour?
 4  12610                There have been suggestions that the
 5     Commission and government should concern itself about
 6     pornography and hate, and things like this that are
 7     available on the Internet.
 8  12611                In the concept of community and
 9     cyberspace, what is your view about how the members of
10     the community should discipline themselves?
11  12612                MR. GRAHAM:  In terms of formal
12     community networking associations, this is of course a
13     very serious issue.  You have people engaging
14     voluntarily in public life and yet being challenged
15     with potential regulatory regimes or legal consequences
16     as an action of doing that.
17  12613                So at the level of the elected boards
18     of community networking associations, there is a great
19     deal of concern for the question that you raise.
20  12614                In our written presentation, there
21     are several paragraphs that address what occurs as a
22     consequence of that in community networking.
23  12615                When you yourselves when online with
24     discussion of the new media issue, you published an
25     acceptable use policy.  There are no community networks


 1     without that.  They all have acceptable use policies. 
 2     In fact, they then have far more than that.
 3  12616                It is not like many ISPs, where you
 4     simply sign a form that says I will abide by the rules. 
 5     Community networks have active mechanisms, committees,
 6     and people involved in administering acceptable use
 7     policies.  As a consequence, they have a rich and deep
 8     experience of how you deal with this in a specific and
 9     practical way, on a daily basis.
10  12617                To the best of my knowledge, there
11     has never been any synthesis of that experience.  We
12     have not been able to achieve that.
13  12618                I just asked Chris if he wanted to
14     comment on this.  He lives this reality on a daily
15     basis in the administration of acceptable use, and so
16     can be highly specific and anecdotal about it.
17  12619                There are processes in place.  There
18     is experience.  I think it could benefit in being
19     tapped, because I think there are answers within it.
20  12620                But the summary comment that I would
21     make about those answers is that this is just folks
22     getting by.  So a lot of what goes into the
23     administration of that acceptable use is confrontation,
24     because some tension has occurred as a consequence of
25     someone having viewed something as inappropriate use.


 1  12621                In the majority of cases, as we do
 2     within a family, as we do within a community, that
 3     resolves itself before it gets to the level of
 4     statutory instruments.
 5  12622                I guess what I am saying here is that
 6     you don't need a sledgehammer, in 98 percent of the
 7     circumstances where serious issues arise about
 8     accessible use, to resolve them.
 9  12623                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  In your oral
10     comments I think you referred to the need for a focal
11     point.  I was not quite sure what you mean by that.
12  12624                I think you meant a focal point
13     government.
14  12625                It struck me when you said it that
15     there might have been an assumption on your part that
16     government can manage this process; that it can
17     determine what goes on in the Internet, what is public
18     space, what is not public space, whether the
19     Information Highway will take precedence over public
20     space, and so on.
21  12626                My question to you is:  Is that what
22     you meant by a focal point?  A controlling body or
23     agency that would somehow shape the development of the
24     Internet into a dominant public space?
25  12627                MR. GRAHAM:  I shudder with the same


 1     horror I sense in your question.  I am glad you asked
 2     that, because if I left that impression -- basically
 3     no.
 4  12628                I am observing that there is no focal
 5     point for these issues.  My own guess, as a knowledge
 6     society or a network society evolves, is that the need
 7     that we all have for these centralizing focal points
 8     gets less and less and less; and that the net carries
 9     the capacity for us to get together with each other
10     when we need to and not get together with each other
11     when we don't need to.
12  12629                I would view the emergence of a focal
13     point within the Federal Government, given the limited
14     sense of the socio-economic impact of the Internet that
15     is there now, as creating more difficulties than it
16     resolved.
17  12630                Having said there is no focal point
18     in the Federal Government and having said that there is
19     a rich experience, a hands-on experience among Canadian
20     citizens at the community level in what is going on
21     here, I would also observe that in the long run, the
22     way in which communities self-organize on the Internet
23     is growing in its strength and is involving itself in
24     people's daily lives willy-nilly, and that that won't
25     stop, regardless of whether the Federal Government


 1     regulates or does not regulate and regardless of
 2     whether that experience is acknowledged or not
 3     acknowledged.
 4  12631                I have been frustrated in my ability
 5     to express what I see as significant social change.  I
 6     remain completely optimistic in what I see as the
 7     opportunity for community to emerge online and in the
 8     power that I see for people getting on with their daily
 9     lives as that occurs.
10  12632                I don't think that a network society
11     has any focal points, except when it has needs.
12  12633                MS MOLL:  That is not to say, of
13     course -- and I am sure Garth does not mean there
14     doesn't need to be a focal point for a universal access
15     strategy and there doesn't need to be a focal point to
16     make sure that people will all be able to participate
17     in this in an equitable fashion.
18  12634                That is what the universal access
19     strategy tries to provide for.
20  12635                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  In terms of
21     the access strategy, is that primarily a consideration
22     of cost, to make sure that access is affordable?
23  12636                MS MOLL:  As we have shown here in
24     the Access Rainbow, there are seven different levels of
25     access, that range from carriage facilities to


 1     governance.  They include literacy and social
 2     facilitation and content services.
 3  12637                This media differs from telephone in
 4     that it is more than just wires strung across.  There
 5     are a lot more needs there.  It is not just a question
 6     of costs.  It is a question of learning and using the
 7     tool in a participatory fashion.
 8  12638                We think a lot more needs to be done
 9     in order to facilitate that for all Canadians.
10  12639                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  In your
11     comments and in your paper I sense that you perceive a
12     tension, or even a conflict, between electronic
13     commerce and the community development social change
14     role of the Internet, and I sense that you are
15     concerned that electronic commerce will somehow sweep
16     over the ability of the Internet to be an instrument of
17     social change and community development.
18  12640                Have I interpreted correctly what you
19     are saying?
20  12641                MR. GRAHAM:  In a sense, there is a
21     triangle here that is formed between the social sector,
22     the business sector and the government sector.  I am
23     uncomfortable with all three of those terms, but it is
24     the simplest way of getting at it.
25  12642                I think that commerce and community


 1     are inextricably linked.  I think that the focus on the
 2     globalization of infrastructure that is occurring
 3     misses something very powerful; and that is that in
 4     this restructuring of the society or the world in which
 5     we live that is going on, the role disintermediation
 6     plays to take away the middle of things increases the
 7     power of the local at exactly the same rate as it
 8     increases the power of the global.
 9  12643                I think the perception that as the
10     global becomes important and grows in power, the local
11     becomes important and grows in power is what is missing
12     from public policy.
13  12644                I have another slide in here.  I have
14     a bunch of slides in here, which my colleagues were
15     hoping I would not refer to.
16  12645                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  This is the
17     good stuff, is it?
18  12646                MR. GRAHAM:  Perhaps.  If you take a
19     look at some of the initiatives that are occurring
20     between local governments and local businesses, that
21     comes under the heading of "smart" communities.
22  12647                And as I think some of you recognize,
23     that is one of the six pillars of the Connected Canada
24     initiative right now:  some kind of an alliance with
25     "smart" communities that has yet to be expressed.


 1  12648                In Europe, that alliance between
 2     local governments and business is often referred to as
 3     telecities.
 4  12649                There is a fundamental difference
 5     between what we are talking about in terms of social
 6     networks, community networks, social inclusion and the
 7     issues of full participation in a knowledge society
 8     that Marita has emphasized several times.
 9  12650                The alliance of business and
10     government so far is talking about public
11     administration, and the agenda in a market sense or a
12     services sense is really about the outsourcing of
13     government services, primarily to the exclusion of
14     almost any other question.
15  12651                The governance questions, the social
16     contract questions that the Internet raises for us are
17     about participation and they are about open systems. 
18     The governance issues that are debated at the "smart"
19     community level are still assuming that representative
20     democracy can be protected in some sense, although as
21     soon as you raise the issue of protection, you already
22     know you are in trouble.
23  12652                What we would see, on the other hand,
24     as a truly "smart" community looks a bit different from
25     that checklist on the left.


 1  12653                Chris, could you put the other slide
 2     on?
 3  12654                This is another way of defining that
 4     capacity that a community might have to learn.  A
 5     community should be conscious of a need to defend
 6     electronic public space.
 7  12655                A universal access strategy, as
 8     Marita has indicated, has to have some window or avenue
 9     or mechanism where what is going on at the grassroots
10     level, what is going on at the community level, can be
11     expressed in some fashion.  That is what she meant by a
12     focal point.
13  12656                Beyond access to goods and services,
14     there is inclusiveness and there is the right of me to
15     define who I am, which is a broad way of saying rights.
16  12657                We see that community networks that
17     are effective, such as the Lanark community network
18     that you just heard reference to a few minutes ago, are
19     beginning to say:  "Just a minute.  Because we know
20     what this is, we know that bandwidth costs are going
21     down.  Why can't our bandwidth costs go down faster?"
22  12658                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Just let me
23     interrupt you for one second.
24  12659                Earlier I asked you how you used the
25     word "community".  Are you using it here in the


 1     terrestrial sense, or are you using it in the
 2     cyberspace sense of global community?
 3  12660                MR. GRAHAM:  I think that is a good
 4     question.  I recognize that when I did this slide for
 5     another presentation, I was thinking of it in the
 6     terrestrial sense.
 7  12661                I am just asking myself:  Does it
 8     work for the broader definition?  I think it does.
 9  12662                Do you see where it does not?
10  12663                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  I don't see
11     one way or the other.  I just want to make sure I
12     understood what you were referring to when you used the
13     word "community" here.  You started to talk about
14     Lanark, which is a terrestrial community.
15  12664                MR. GRAHAM:  Yes, I see what you
16     mean.
17  12665                I recognize that when I prepared that
18     slide -- as I say, I am pulling this out of my bag of
19     tricks -- I had assumed the terrestrial.  I was talking
20     about the telecity smart communities initiatives, which
21     are locally based.
22  12666                But, no, I think this checklist
23     applies.
24  12667                The final thing about it -- I have
25     noticed that the appearance of government, whether


 1     provincial or local public administration of federal,
 2     at the community level almost always advances the
 3     electronic commerce agenda as, first of all, jobs; but
 4     secondly, jobs whereby you sit in your community but
 5     you take yourself outside of your community to make
 6     money.
 7  12668                I don't have a problem with that. 
 8     Certainly, you can do that.
 9  12669                But the important factor for us in
10     this is that exchange that occurs within the community
11     about who we are, what we want to do, how we want to do
12     it, what we know and where we are going with this.
13  12670                MS MOLL:  To go back to your original
14     question about do you sense a tension, yes, you do
15     sense a tension.  I don't think there has to be a
16     tension.
17  12671                The tension is because the other half
18     of the equation does not appear to be being addressed. 
19     There doesn't appear to be any route for us to get a
20     discussion of universal access and public policies into
21     that discussion.
22  12672                Electronic commerce is definitely
23     there.  It is being dealt with.  It is being addressed
24     on a large level.
25  12673                The other things are not being


 1     addressed, and that is where the tension is, in my
 2     opinion.
 3  12674                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  The other
 4     thing, the social aspect of it, the public space aspect
 5     of it, won't take care of itself, is what I think you
 6     are saying.  There needs to be a role for government.
 7  12675                MS MOLL:  You said yourselves in the
 8     Convergence Hearings that there has to be a role.
 9  12676                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  In terms of
10     the proceeding that is under way here, do you have any
11     suggestions for the CRTC, taking into account our
12     mandate and our responsibilities as to what we could
13     do, in your view, to further the objectives that you
14     would like to see pursued?
15  12677                MR. GRAHAM:  In fact, that is what I
16     had meant to address in referring to the final part of
17     our written submission.  There were the five points.
18  12678                The first one was that in effect you
19     may feel some pain in this hearing in trying to reach
20     more broadly than the two Acts allow you; but we would
21     like to encourage you to continue to do that.  We see
22     that as the emergence of a forum, potentially the
23     emergence of a forum, which allows the concept of
24     electronic public space as public space, and therefore
25     in the public interest to regulate in some fashion, as


 1     a necessary role.
 2  12679                That might be an avenue where that
 3     finally began to emerge.
 4  12680                Our intention in both presentations
 5     that we have made is to indicate that the Internet is a
 6     symptom of a new way of seeing things that is broadly
 7     influential of all aspects of our daily life, and that
 8     a key characteristic of that is something that you have
 9     referred to, as well, in your setting up of these
10     hearings; and that is, open systems.
11  12681                You meant that in a technical sense,
12     and we don't mean that in a technical sense.  That is
13     part of the different way of seeing how we can relate
14     to each other that the Internet as a tool expresses.
15  12682                We want to make some progress in
16     broadening public policy beyond simple issues of a new
17     industry for new media products, electronic goods and
18     services, beyond a market definition of the role of
19     public policy.
20  12683                There have not been that many
21     national forums in which we could come to the table and
22     talk about what we see happening at the community level
23     in this manner.  So, we appreciate the existence of
24     this one.
25  12684                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Thank you


 1     very much for answering my questions.
 2  12685                You mentioned that there was a recent
 3     Newsweek article about the Ottawa freenet that you felt
 4     was useful.  If you wanted to file that article, we
 5     would be happy to receive it.
 6  12686                MS MOLL:  I have brought some copies
 7     with me.
 8  12687                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Thank you
 9     very much for a very interesting presentation and a
10     very interesting paper.
11  12688                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you,
12     Commissioner McKendry.
13  12689                And thank you very much for being
14     here today.
15  12690                Perhaps you could file those with Ms
16     Bénard.
17  12691                We will call the next party, please.
18  12692                MS BÉNARD:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
19  12693                The next presentation will be by
20     Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere.
21  12694                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Good morning,
22     gentlemen.
24  12695                MR. FISHER:  Good morning, and thank
25     you for the opportunity to appear.


 1  12696                My name is John Fisher.  I am the
 2     Executive Director of the group EGALE, which stands for
 3     Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere, Égalité pour
 4     les gays et lesbiennes.
 5  12697                I am pleased also to be joined by Mr.
 6     Ron Chaplin, who is an active member of our political
 7     action committee.
 8  12698                EGALE, by way of background, is a
 9     national organization which is committed to advancing
10     equality for lesbians, gays and bisexuals across the
11     country.  We were founded in 1986, and in recent years
12     we have established a membership in every province and
13     territory of the country.
14  12699                We have testified a number of times
15     now before parliamentary committees on a broad range of
16     equality and human rights issues, as well as
17     intervening before the Supreme Court of Canada in some
18     of the key decisions affecting lesbian and gay rights
19     across Canada and also decisions under the Charter of
20     Rights.
21  12700                We were pleased recently to
22     participate in the CRTC hearings on Canadian
23     broadcasting policy.
24  12701                We indicated at that time also that
25     we had an interest in the areas under discussion before


 1     you here, so that is the purpose of our being here.
 2  12702                I will say at the outset that we
 3     don't have specific answers to some of the complex
 4     questions around the interaction between freedom of
 5     expression and protection from harm.  We know that a
 6     concern of our members is where the line is drawn in
 7     relation to regulation of such things as hate speech
 8     and expression of pornography.
 9  12703                Our purpose is to raise and offer
10     some of the feedback we have received from our members
11     on some of those issues, without necessarily purporting
12     to give you the answers in terms of what your role
13     should be or how those issues should ultimately be
14     resolved.  We feel our perspective may be useful to you
15     as you address those questions.
16  12704                When we received an invitation to
17     participate in these hearings, I sent out a request to
18     our members to participate in an e-mail discussion
19     group that we maintain to advise of these hearings and
20     to ask what the general feedback was in terms of how
21     the balancing of those issues should be addressed.
22  12705                The response that I got from the
23     e-mail list was generally one of concern about the
24     prospect of further regulation of the Internet.  I
25     think we found that for our members, lesbians and gays


 1     have often found that they have been denied access to
 2     information; that they found it hard to develop and
 3     build resources which discuss in a frank and open way
 4     lesbian and gay materials, and enable people to
 5     participate in discussions of those matters.
 6  12706                I think there was a concern that
 7     where there has been restriction on publication of
 8     materials in that way, it has often been applied in a
 9     non-equal manner so that lesbian and gay materials have
10     throughout Canadian history been restricted, been
11     censored, in an unequal way when compared with
12     heterosexual based materials.
13  12707                I think people feel that the Internet
14     is a vehicle by which people can explore issues that
15     often have been denied to them, particularly in smaller
16     communities, more rural communities.  Access to e-mail
17     and the Internet can serve as a vehicle for
18     communication where there are no local resources that
19     exist in the terrestrial community, if you like, and
20     where libraries, schools and others may -- in fact,
21     quite deliberately in some cases -- exclude or deny
22     access to some of the materials that are available to
23     people through the Internet.
24  12708                Equally, young people often find that
25     their questions are not answered or that they are not


 1     able to obtain access to information through other
 2     means.
 3  12709                Those were some of the concerns that
 4     our members had.
 5  12710                In relation to things like hate
 6     speech and hate crimes, obviously that is a concern for
 7     members of our communities.  But there was also a
 8     feeling that there are general laws which are currently
 9     applicable and which continue to be applicable
10     notwithstanding that there is a new vehicle for
11     communication through which those are now being
12     expressed.
13  12711                In particular, for example, clearly
14     defamation is still going to be defamation whether or
15     not it is expressed through the means of the Internet
16     or whether it is expressed through publication in a
17     newspaper or other more traditional means of
18     expression.
19  12712                There have been police investigations
20     and I believe prosecutions of the publication of
21     obscene material, and the fact that that can occur
22     through the Internet modernizes the means of
23     communication.  But the substance or the content of the
24     law remains that in the Criminal Code.
25  12713                In relation to hate crimes and hate


 1     speech equally, I think our members would support the
 2     existing laws and would not see the Internet provide an
 3     absolute bar to investigation or regulation.  But there
 4     is a question about whether the general laws are
 5     sufficient and whether there is a need for additional
 6     regulation.
 7  12714                There are some areas I will say where
 8     the existing laws don't equally treat hate crimes
 9     against gays and lesbians in the same manner as hate
10     crimes against other protected minority communities. 
11     In particular, it is a crime to advocate genocide
12     against certain groups on the basis of religion or
13     race, whereas it remains legal to advocate genocide
14     against gays and lesbians.
15  12715                So there is a concern that there are
16     some gaps in protection under existing law.  But that
17     is matched by a concern that perhaps the best means of
18     responding to that is to address the general laws and
19     ensure that the laws which apply to these kinds of
20     expression, regardless of the means of communication,
21     are modernized on a more equal basis.
22  12716                Similarly in relation to hate crimes,
23     we recognize that just as the Internet provides a
24     vehicle for people to have access to information about
25     lesbian and gay issues in a proactive sense, so too it


 1     provides a vehicle for those who would seek to promote
 2     hate to have a much more powerful tool at their
 3     disposal to do that.
 4  12717                Again, there is a difficult question
 5     around where on the spectrum of expression we draw the
 6     line between simply the expression of unpopular views
 7     or attitudes of intolerance and where that becomes a
 8     sufficiently extreme manifestation of hatred that it is
 9     the subject for legal intervention.
10  12718                I think clearly at one end of the
11     spectrum, if it is just about expressing unpopular
12     beliefs, clearly freedom of expression under the
13     Charter of Rights will apply.  At the other end of the
14     spectrum, if that intolerance manifests itself in
15     advocating acts of violence or advocating people to go
16     out and commit acts of violence against unpopular
17     communities, then clearly we are into the realm of hate
18     crimes, which would fall squarely under the Criminal
19     Code.
20  12719                Where it becomes more problematic is
21     where within that spectrum there are grey areas and
22     where that line begins to be crossed.
23  12720                The impression I have had from my
24     members is that where there is doubt, the membership
25     would prefer that we err on the side of freedom of


 1     expression rather than on the side of regulation and
 2     restriction.  As I have said, we have often found that
 3     restrictions tend to backfire and to apply unequally
 4     against our communities.
 5  12721                There is a sense that people like to
 6     know who the enemy is, as it were, and to have some
 7     understanding of what is out there; what are the
 8     attitudes that are being promulgated against our
 9     communities, so that we can better understand and
10     respond to the very serious problems that hate crimes
11     can pose.
12  12722                Ron, you have some examples of those
13     concerns.  Do you want to speak to that?
14  12723                MR. CHAPLIN:  Thank you, John.
15  12724                I am simply reiterating what John
16     said, talking a bit about a different area.  Our
17     fundamental concern is about the right to freedom of
18     expression and to freely distribute information.
19  12725                I would cite the example simply of
20     the problems the gay and lesbian community has had over
21     the last 20 years with Canada's obscenity laws.  I
22     seriously question whether the web cast by those
23     obscenity laws has been cast too wide.
24  12726                With John's permission, I will put on
25     another hat here.  I am a former chair of the AIDS


 1     Committee of Ottawa and the current Vice-Chair of the
 2     Ottawa-Carleton Council on AIDS.
 3  12727                One of the problems we have had in
 4     our AIDS prevention program is the dissemination of
 5     appropriately sexually-explicit material to help stem
 6     the tide of new HIV infections.  I will speak
 7     specifically to testimony that was heard before the
 8     Krever Commission of Inquiry into the tainted blood
 9     scandal.
10  12728                The then Director of the Laboratory
11     Centres for Disease Control, Dr. Alistair Clayton,
12     testified that in the early years of the epidemic here
13     in Canada, that is the years 1982 through 1985, safer
14     sex information coming into this country from the
15     United States was routinely seized at the border and
16     destroyed.  There was at that time, as well, no
17     Canadian federal funding for any Canadian written
18     messages.
19  12729                The reason this material was
20     destroyed is because of a clause in the Customs
21     regulations that defined as obscene any depiction or
22     any description of anal sex.  That regulation was only
23     lifted from the books about five years ago.
24  12730                There is a little personal connection 
25     in here too.  That material was being routinely


 1     destroyed and not being replaced with anything else
 2     during those years, 1982 through 1985.  I became
 3     infected with HIV in 1984, and I would consider this
 4     potentially life-saving information.
 5  12731                As someone who is an activist in the
 6     AIDS community these days, I know for young people in
 7     particular access to sexually explicit AIDS-related
 8     information over the Internet is one of the favoured
 9     means of getting this information.  It allows people to
10     do it in private, without being fearful of revealing
11     their personal identity.  There is a virtual treasure-
12     house of information available through the Internet
13     because of the nature and the evolution of that medium
14     on AIDS and HIV.
15  12732                I just toss a red flag in front of
16     you, both in the terms of hate speech and in terms of
17     sexually-explicit material.  I think we have a common
18     concern that we not be overly restrictive, recognizing
19     that for the gay and lesbian community, information
20     transmitted through the Internet is often one of the
21     most effective means of communicating among ourselves.
22  12733                Thank you.
23  12734                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr.
24     Fisher, Mr. Chaplin.
25  12735                To discuss your views, I will turn to


 1     Commissioner Wilson.
 2  12736                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Good morning,
 3     gentlemen.  It is nice to see you again.  I recall your
 4     presentation from the TV Policy Hearing.
 5  12737                I was interested in the e-mail that
 6     you sent to us, as part of the Phase 2 comments, to see
 7     the level of your activity in terms of expressing the
 8     views of your members and making sure that those issues
 9     are put before public bodies.  It is good to have you
10     here as part of this exploration.
11  12738                Your e-mail was pretty short, and you
12     really did not elaborate on your views.  I prepared
13     some questions generally based on the comments that you
14     made.  In fact, you basically answered my first
15     question, which had to do with where on the spectrum,
16     in terms of freedom of expression, your members would
17     fall.  You basically said that you would err on the
18     side of freedom of expression.
19  12739                We had a number of presenters who
20     appeared before us who talked about this whole notion
21     of the Internet being the ultimate democratic
22     instrument, in terms of everyone being able to be a
23     publisher.
24  12740                The Palestine Heritage appeared and
25     argued that even though there exists material that we


 1     may find offensive, Canadians should have the
 2     opportunity to decide for themselves.  And the fact
 3     that there is such a massive amount of information
 4     available and that there is a very practical and real
 5     opportunity to respond to that information in terms of
 6     becoming a web publisher yourself, putting up a web
 7     page to respond to that kind of stuff, is a very
 8     important point and should not be interfered with.
 9  12741                The B'Nai Brith appeared as well and
10     made the point that while they did not advocate heavy-
11     handed regulation of the Internet, the issue is not
12     freedom of expression above all else but freedom of
13     expression as one value which must be balanced amongst
14     others, which is the way that it is set out in the
15     Charter of Rights in this country.
16  12742                In the U.S., of course, freedom of
17     speech is interpreted very differently, not necessarily
18     as one value that has to be balanced against others. 
19     Canada is a slightly different country in that way.
20  12743                They suggested a number of self-
21     regulating initiatives in terms of how to deal with
22     this whole issue of offensive content on the net.
23  12744                If I could ask you a question:  While
24     you say that you err on the side of freedom of
25     expression, are you in favour of those kinds of self-


 1     regulatory initiatives in terms of dealing with
 2     offensive content and promotion of hate?
 3  12745                MR. FISHER:  I would say to a certain
 4     extent, yes.  We have not take the position that
 5     freedom of expression is an absolute.  We concur with
 6     your view that it has to be matched within the
 7     framework of the Charter of Rights.
 8  12746                In the Keegstra case, the Supreme
 9     Court has held that there is a reason for hate crimes
10     laws, and that those laws, while they do constitute a
11     restriction on freedom of expression, can be upheld and
12     justified under the Charter of Rights because of the
13     damage they do to vulnerable communities.
14  12747                Our concern is that in conducting
15     that balancing act, one does not want to go to
16     extremes.  And the value of the Internet in enabling
17     access to information and enabling people to better
18     understand the needs of our own communities probably
19     encourages us not to seek the regulation of anything
20     but the most extreme expressions of hatred.
21  12748                And particularly where it extends
22     into the spectrum of violence and promotion of
23     violence, clearly that is an area for either regulation
24     or the reach of the criminal law.
25  12749                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  The Criminal


 1     Code.
 2  12750                MR. FISHER:  Yes.
 3  12751                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  I was curious
 4     about the comments you made when you were talking to us
 5     this morning.  You said that generally your members
 6     feel that they have been denied access to information,
 7     and you talked about a restriction on publications and
 8     those restrictions being applied in an unequal way.
 9  12752                I am wondering if you could elaborate
10     a little bit more on that.
11  12753                I don't know if what you were
12     suggesting in those comments related to what Mr.
13     Chaplin elaborated on.  Are there other examples of how
14     those restrictions get applied unequally?
15  12754                MR. FISHER:  Yes.  There is a
16     connection between what I was saying there and the
17     examples used by Mr. Chaplin, but there are other
18     examples as well.
19  12755                There is a recent case from British
20     Columbia called the Little Sisters case, in which a
21     lesbian and gay book store called Little Sisters has
22     had continuing difficulties with Canada Customs, where
23     shipments of books have been held up and in some cases
24     destroyed at the border solely because they are
25     destined for a lesbian and gay book store, when


 1     equivalent materials are freely available in mainstream
 2     book stores and sometimes in public libraries.
 3  12756                Clearly, there has been a perception
 4     that something is more likely to be obscene solely
 5     because of its lesbian and gay content rather than
 6     because of the actual substance of the material.
 7  12757                There was a legal challenge presented
 8     by Little Sisters, arguing both a violation of freedom
 9     of expression and also a violation of the equality
10     rights under the Charter of Rights on the basis that
11     the laws were being applied unequally against the book
12     store because it was a lesbian and gay book store.
13  12758                The court upheld their claim.  It
14     maintained that the laws were valid and would not be
15     struck down, but that the application of the laws was
16     taking place in a discriminatory fashion against
17     lesbian and gay book stores.
18  12759                My understanding is that there
19     continued to be problems that the book store has
20     experienced at the hands of Canada Customs.  It is an
21     experience that has been found by other lesbian and gay
22     book stores as well.  I believe there are other cases
23     involving another lesbian and gay book store in
24     Toronto.
25  12760                In relation to other prosecutions


 1     under the Criminal Code for publishing and selling
 2     obscene material, there have been a number of judgments
 3     in which it has been found that material has been held
 4     to be obscene because of its lesbian and gay content or
 5     because it involves people of the same sex, where
 6     equivalent material involving people of the opposite
 7     sex would not be held obscene.
 8  12761                Clearly that is inconsistent, I
 9     think, with the values that we are now developing as a
10     society, where by all means if an expression extends
11     into violence or other means of exploiting sex in a way
12     that is contrary to the Criminal Code, then because of
13     its content it will be held obscene.  But it should not
14     be held so solely because it is --
15  12762                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Simply on the
16     fact that it is same sex.
17  12763                MR. FISHER:  Yes.  I believe we are
18     seeing now a more tolerant attitude appear in some of
19     the decisions of courts dealing with obscene materials,
20     to the point where I believe that lesbian and gay
21     content, in and of itself, should not render material
22     obscene.
23  12764                The difficulty with the whole area is
24     that what constitutes obscenity is a very subjective
25     determination.  It is difficult for those in the


 1     position of making those determinations not to be
 2     influenced by their own values in deciding if something
 3     crosses that ephemeral line because of your own
 4     perceptions rather than because of the broader values
 5     underpinning the Charter of Rights.
 6  12765                A final example I will give is that
 7     in some of the blocking software that has been
 8     developed to enable parents and others to block off
 9     areas of the Internet on their home computers, there
10     are a number of those software packages that routinely
11     search for and block access to sites that deal with
12     homosexual, lesbian or gay material, regardless of
13     content.  So even a site like EGALE's, which is
14     probably the least titillating site on the net, and
15     deals only with political and legal materials, could be
16     blocked because it contains key words like lesbian, gay
17     and homosexual.
18  12766                The concern that we have there is as
19     I mentioned earlier, for young people particularly in
20     more remote communities for whom the Internet may be
21     their only means of access to basic information about
22     questions they may have about their sexual identity. 
23     That can go beyond unduly restrictive censorship and
24     can deny them access to, as Mr. Chaplin was saying,
25     potentially life-saving information.


 1  12767                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  That, actually,
 2     was the next question that I wanted to ask you about.
 3  12768                You have made the comment about the
 4     software being available to parents and others.  I
 5     don't imagine that you are suggesting that the CRTC
 6     interfere in any sense in the parental relationship.
 7  12769                What do you mean by others?  Or are
 8     you suggesting that we interfere in the parental
 9     relationship?
10  12770                MR. FISHER:  No, we don't have
11     recommendations.  We recognize that it is a difficult
12     thing to control at the best of times.
13  12771                We were raising it as much as an
14     example of the kinds of concerns we have about once
15     there is regulation, once there is a restriction on the
16     kinds of access that people can have to the Internet or
17     the kinds of things that can be put out there,
18     frequently systems designed for a valid purpose are
19     applied in an unequal way to restrict access to
20     information which falls outside of that purpose.
21  12772                For example, my understanding that
22     the main purpose of the software package is to block
23     access to materials that may be obscene or pornographic
24     and felt to be inappropriate for young people.  But in
25     fact the net is often cast considerably broader than


 1     that.
 2  12773                Our concern would be that in other
 3     forms of restriction, similar difficulties might arise.
 4  12774                When we talk about "and others", we
 5     are aware also that Internet access is likely to become
 6     something which is increasingly common in schools, for
 7     example --
 8  12775                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  And libraries
 9     and public spaces.
10  12776                MR. FISHER:  Yes.  And obviously
11     those public or semi-public bodies which maintain
12     access to the net are going to want to ensure that they
13     don't cross any legal lines.  It is difficult to know
14     what considerations they may take into account in
15     seeking to restrict the access that people have through
16     their own systems.
17  12777                Another experience I could raise is
18     the Surrey School Board which recently passed a
19     resolution that there will be no lesbian and gay
20     materials available in the school for the benefit of
21     students, and which made a concrete decision to ban
22     certain books that dealt with lesbian and gay themes. 
23     The books, again, were not sexually explicit books;
24     they were simply books which dealt with the diversity
25     of family forms which acknowledged that there was


 1     diversity within Canadian society.
 2  12778                And there were similar situations
 3     where lesbian and gay materials had been banned in
 4     Alberta.  It is a fairly common experience.
 5  12779                The concern we have is that with this
 6     kind of blocking software and other kinds of regulatory
 7     restrictions that might be considered, those are the
 8     kinds of restrictions we are likely to see rather than
 9     the kinds for which perhaps they were originally set
10     up.
11  12780                MR. CHAPLIN:  Might I add a short
12     point here.
13  12781                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  By all means.
14  12782                MR. CHAPLIN:  It strikes me that the
15     point we are trying to make is that there should be the
16     least amount of censorship necessary on the Internet. 
17     It is not clear yet to many of us just how existing law
18     applies.
19  12783                It is not clear, for instance, the
20     role of the servers.  Are they treated under the law as
21     common carriers or are they treated somehow else?
22  12784                I just mention this in the context,
23     because in your previous comments you talked about
24     self-regulation.  I think we would feel clearly that
25     the person putting forward the information on the


 1     Internet is the person who should be legally
 2     responsible for its content.
 3  12785                There is some concern as well,
 4     because of the experience of our community, about
 5     servers establishing limits on what they will and will
 6     not carry.
 7  12786                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  The ISPs.
 8  12787                MR. CHAPLIN:  Yes.  That need not be
 9     a problem as long as there is a very competitive market
10     among servers.  But again, looking at a regulatory
11     concern, if you are trying to establish some sort of
12     regulatory environment to restrict this, we just toss
13     the red flag.
14  12788                We have had this experience too often
15     of being caught in this web for reasons that we think
16     clearly were not the intent of the legislature.
17  12789                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  ISPs are not
18     considered common carriers.  They are really much more
19     like resellers.
20  12790                They have, as a group, put forward
21     the notion that they are going to have codes of
22     conduct.  They did not talk about the issue of sites
23     that offer information about gay and lesbian
24     lifestyles, but they talked about the propagation of
25     hate particularly.


 1  12791                MR. CHAPLIN:  There have been some
 2     disputes over the lat couple of years regarding some
 3     initiatives by American Online, for instance, and
 4     regarding this sort of censorship by the server.
 5  12792                COMMISSIONER WILSON:  Or content
 6     aggregators, portals, whatever they are called.  There
 7     are a lot of different terms flying around here,
 8     ranging from "this stuff" to various other terms.
 9  12793                The message that we have received
10     from most of the groups who have raised these issues
11     with us is that the most important thing is education
12     and awareness and literacy, and the act of involvement
13     of groups like your own in terms of ensuring that these
14     issues are before the public.
15  12794                I thank you for being here and
16     raising your red flags to us.
17  12795                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you,
18     Commissioner Wilson.
19  12796                Thank you very much, gentlemen.
20  12797                We will take our morning break at
21     this point and reconvene at ten after eleven.
22     --- Short recess at / Courte suspension à 1055
23     --- Upon resuming at / Reprise à 1115
24  12798                THE CHAIRPERSON:  We will return to
25     our proceeding now.


 1  12799                Madam Secretary, would you call the
 2     next party, please.
 3  12800                MS BÉNARD:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
 4  12801                The next presentation will be by the
 5     Cultural Human Resources Council, le Conseil des
 6     resources humaines du secteur culturel.
 7  12802                Mr. Jean-Philippe Tabet.
 8  12803                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Good morning, Mr.
 9     Tabet.
11  12804                MR. TABET:  Hello.  Thank you for
12     hearing me today.
13  12805                I was supposed to come with one of
14     our board members who is a member of the new media
15     industry; but unfortunately, because we had to delay
16     that presentation, he was not available today.
17  12806                I will make my presentation.
18  12807                As you would imagine, the Cultural
19     Human Resources Council is an organization that does
20     not really focus in the one aspect of these hearings: 
21     the broadcasting policy or anything that really focuses
22     on communication and new technology.
23  12808                What we are doing is really trying to
24     raise awareness on issues dealing with human resources
25     development.  To that effect we did a research study,


 1     called The Study of Human Resource Needs in the New
 2     Media Industry.  We took the opportunity to have that
 3     study done in July 1998 to give the CRTC a tool by
 4     which you may want to incorporate in the decision you
 5     are going to take on this issue some of the findings we
 6     have discovered.
 7  12809                This study was done through an
 8     extensive literature review and also on interviews with
 9     40 companies across Canada.  They deal primarily with
10     human resources, as I mentioned to you, but in a
11     context that is very practical.
12  12810                I think in any decision that the
13     Federal Government is taking, whether to regulate, not
14     regulate, deregulate, circumregulate, there might be
15     other ways of looking at bringing Canada to the
16     forefront of this new field.
17  12811                It is not so much the content, but
18     also the ability for us as a country to stay
19     competitive and to be able to produce the best services
20     and products that would be attractive at the
21     international level.
22  12812                This is what I am trying to talk to
23     you about today.
24  12813                First of all, I want to get a glimpse
25     of the new media sector and basically trying to


 1     understand what it is we are talking about.
 2  12814                The first thing is that the industry
 3     is not well documented.
 4  12815                Within StatsCanada, either at the
 5     industry definition or classification of occupation
 6     definition, there still needs to be a bit of work done
 7     at that level.  Because this industry is so new and it
 8     affects really different groups, from audiovisual, film
 9     video, television, to Internet providers, to
10     telecommunication broadcasters, telephone companies, it
11     sort of sets the stage for something that is quite new. 
12     We don't have the tools to deal with it in terms of
13     statistical research.
14  12816                That is something we need to express
15     very clearly; the need for StatsCanada, for example, to
16     come together very quickly on that issue.  And I am
17     sure they can do it.
18  12817                We discovered that there is probably
19     between 500 and 1,000 new media firms in Canada -- and
20     I am using "new media" in the broad definition of that. 
21     As I mentioned earlier, there are some concerns about
22     the way this industry can be defined.
23  12818                I think the principal element of the
24     industry is the fact that it is moving very fast.  And
25     to keep in touch with what this industry is all about


 1     is like herding cats, in a way; trying to put them in
 2     the same direction.  But it doesn't work like that.
 3  12819                It is estimated that more than half
 4     of the new media firms in Canada have ten employees or
 5     less, but at the same time it is true that there are a
 6     small number of firms that have more than 100 or 200
 7     employees.
 8  12820                So there is a major difference in the
 9     way this industry works.
10  12821                Major new media markets include the
11     corporate market, the consumer market, training and
12     other public institutions.
13  12822                The estimation of the contribution of
14     the industry to the gross domestic product was taken
15     from 1994-95, so I don't think it is very accurate
16     today.  We suppose that the contribution is probably
17     $150 million.
18  12823                I am sure it is much higher today,
19     but I don't know how to measure it.  If you can find
20     somebody that came to your hearings that would be
21     helpful in that regard, I would appreciate knowing. 
22     This is something that I have not been able to tackle.
23  12824                What is true is that the new media
24     labour force grew much more than the general labour
25     force, and in my presentation I will try to let you


 1     understand what occupations have grown out of this
 2     industry.
 3  12825                Production costs, again that is a
 4     rough estimate; but probably it is $150,000 to $1
 5     million.  When we are talking about the Internet or
 6     Internet production or development of websites,
 7     basically it is growing and it is very difficult to
 8     know the figures for production in that area.
 9  12826                The new media field is growing into
10     edutainment, which is probably education and
11     entertainment; games; and there are many reference and
12     business applications.
13  12827                What is interesting with the Internet
14     is the role of games in the Internet as well as a
15     marketing tool.  There has already been a transfer of
16     skills from the CD-ROM application to the Internet
17     application in terms of occupation.
18  12828                Again, I will conclude with what I
19     started with:  This industry is not well documented.
20  12829                CHRC is a not-for-profit organization
21     whose aims are to initiate, promote and coordinate
22     research on human resources issues in the cultural
23     sector and to see, for example, the best practices that
24     are happening in Canada in that context.
25  12830                It is a non-governmental agency but


 1     supported by Human Resources Development Canada, and it
 2     has been created by the culture sector, which includes
 3     the writing and publishing fields, the audiovisual and
 4     life performing arts, the heritage sector, the visual
 5     arts and crafts, and music and sound recording.
 6  12831                CHRC has become aware of the new
 7     media area and has developed a specific board-directed
 8     committee on new media.
 9  12832                I am sure when I speak to you today
10     about this you can already see that the new media is
11     really the sort of sector that goes beyond borders.  In
12     the sound recording industry, in the visual arts and
13     crafts, in the audiovisual area, in the writing and
14     publishing, we are seeing new media components. 
15     Workers from those traditional industries are brought
16     into the new media industry, especially if the
17     technology is much stronger.
18  12833                It is the issue of the ability of
19     having a better bandwidth, for example, so that some
20     products will be available through the Internet and
21     more accessible.
22  12834                What were the needs and priorities
23     that this study told us?
24  12835                First of all, there was the issue
25     that those new media firms have difficulty in accessing


 1     funding and capital investment for product research and
 2     development.  That is something you want to take into
 3     consideration when you are licensing some companies.
 4  12836                There are issues about trying to
 5     obtain from banks, for example, an investment to
 6     develop our Canadian companies.
 7  12837                There is also a lack of awareness by
 8     consumers to understand how to use new media products
 9     to their full advantage, and also the question of
10     making the consumer more aware about these products is
11     a concern.
12  12838                The question so much about editing
13     and distribution of those products has been assessed as
14     a need.  By that, I mean that the technology is at the
15     moment limiting.  We will see more distribution of
16     those products, but we must be aware that this does not
17     happen like that.  We need to look at the human
18     resources challenge in that area.
19  12839                Basically, the world of work in this
20     industry has created something that we call a work
21     triumvirate, where the graphic artist, the programmer
22     and the producer work together to create and develop
23     the product of the services.
24  12840                That dialogue in the industry --
25     those people are multi-tasking, as well.  The question


 1     is the growth of the industry will result in more
 2     specialized occupations than there is at the moment.
 3  12841                Finally, one of the characteristics
 4     of that workforce is the fact that they are part of
 5     what we call the evolving workforce, where there is a
 6     lot of contract work, self-employment opportunities and
 7     multiple job holdings.
 8  12842                At the same time, this workforce does
 9     not have the luxury of having access to the traditional
10     safety net that Canada created after the Second World
11     War, which is based on EI, unemployment insurance
12     contributions.
13  12843                Therefore, this is an industry where
14     young people -- because this is a young industry -- are
15     somehow entering without the preconception of the
16     traditional type of workers that we have seen before. 
17     Therefore, there is a lack of awareness about issues
18     related to copyright, protecting your work.  Basically,
19     they are go-getters and the are trying to make the best
20     of it.
21  12844                There is a concern within CHRC, the
22     Cultural Human Resources Council, with the issue of
23     protection of rights here.  I am not so much talking
24     about Canadian content as protecting the right of the
25     workers who are putting their intellectual capital, if


 1     you want, into those industries.
 2  12845                What is the nature of the shortages
 3     that we see at the moment?
 4  12846                The most important thing that we have
 5     seen is that the need for generalist versus specialist
 6     appears to be dependent upon firm size rather than
 7     sectoral or regional differences.  Again, this is an
 8     issue that is not related directly to the industry per
 9     se.  I must say that that is probably because it is a
10     growing industry and a new industry; therefore, there
11     is an imbalance between generalist versus specialist.
12  12847                But basically, interactive designers,
13     artists, business skills and programmers are very much
14     in demand at the moment.
15  12848                Smaller firms are more likely to
16     require workers capable of performing a number of
17     tasks, while larger firms tend to hire specialists who
18     are multi-disciplined.
19  12849                The question in those skill shortages
20     is the issue of technical and creative and artistic
21     skills.  What we have seen is that there are a lot of
22     people who have been trained at the technical level but
23     who are lacking the creative skills that are really
24     driving the success of a product or service.  At the
25     same time, those creative and artistic elements of the


 1     workforce are not really well served in the colleges or
 2     universities or private training education
 3     institutions, because there is not a bridge between
 4     those two types of skills.
 5  12850                If Canada wants to remain competitive
 6     here, we are humbly mentioning that the creative
 7     artistic skills will be the way by which this industry
 8     will be successful.  We need to think about that when
 9     we talk about human resources issues.
10  12851                There is a definite need for
11     apprenticeship and internship.  Basically because this
12     industry is very young, it does not really have access
13     to the traditional way by which other industries have
14     developed.
15  12852                Fourth, there are some educational
16     challenges.  How do you teach such skills in an
17     industry that is so new, where the curriculum is
18     regularly updated in the next six months?  How do we
19     help training institutions to be more competitive in
20     that environment?
21  12853                Frankly, we have not found an answer
22     yet.  Training, colleges, universities are not really
23     sure of how to handle the issue of a curriculum that is
24     moving so fast.  The industry is at the same time in
25     need of skilled people immediately, and requires just


 1     in time training.
 2  12854                So there is a gap here that we need
 3     to address.
 4  12855                With the growth of this industry, it
 5     would be helpful to have some kind of standards in
 6     product and services development.  You mentioned today,
 7     for example, that we don't have a lot of standards in
 8     that area.  Everything is possible.  That is why some
 9     people want regulation; some don't want anything. 
10     There is a kind of free-for-all situation.
11  12856                I would not advocate one or the
12     other.  I would advocate the fact that we should at
13     least help those who are developing those products and
14     services to have tools by which the products and
15     services they are developing are hitting the mark.
16  12857                That is why we are talking about
17     standards for development.
18  12858                Skills upgrading challenges is for
19     those who are already in the workforce and who have
20     been able to develop themselves in this industry for
21     the last ten years, but who have not had access to
22     government-sponsored training opportunity because they
23     are part of that evolving workforce.
24  12859                International competition is quite an
25     obvious challenge, because this new technology,


 1     especially the Internet, does not know borders. 
 2     Basically, those who are able to put on the net the
 3     best product are the ones who are going to be listened
 4     to.
 5  12860                Training challenges involve cost,
 6     time, qualified trainers and relevancy of courses.
 7  12861                I will not elaborate on that.  I
 8     think I have already covered that.
 9  12862                What we are recommending to the CRTC
10     -- and it is really not our mandate to go into very
11     much detail about what the CRTC would do in terms of
12     licensing.
13  12863                But at a policy level, we are
14     thinking that questions should be raised around the
15     issue of the untrained youth through coop and
16     internship development.  The industry, as well as the
17     education community, should find tools to make that
18     happen.
19  12864                For the new media workers, basically
20     the issue of business skills is quite important.  I
21     have read in some submissions that the new technology
22     will not change the way we do business.
23  12865                I don't think so.  I think the new
24     technology, especially the Internet, will change the
25     way that marketing is done, that commerce is done.  At


 1     the same time, I don't think we have trained a lot of
 2     people in that area.
 3  12866                The issue of arts background:  for
 4     those workers who are from a fine arts background, they
 5     do not have yet the technical skills they would need.
 6  12867                And for the technical background, on
 7     the other hand, it is those individuals who are trying
 8     to develop an understanding of the artistic side of the
 9     industry.  Among our respondents during that study, it
10     was felt that interpersonal skills are greatly lacking
11     among those with technical skills.
12  12868                Again, the status of the industry and
13     how that industry could grow and could become much
14     stronger for Canada, would be to understand those human
15     resources aspects.
16  12869                As well, business and project
17     management skills training was also recommended.  We
18     have seen a lot of small businesses that do not have or
19     are lacking those business skills, and that has an
20     impact on our industry.
21  12870                What we are recommending is, for
22     example, that a national website on new media, human
23     resources and training be developed; that partners
24     could include telephone and software companies; and
25     that the CRTC would develop some kind of a niche


 1     criteria for licensing in that area.  That is a key
 2     issue.
 3  12871                I will conclude by saying that the
 4     issue of regulating and deregulating in an area that is
 5     so advancing is difficult to do.  We feel that maybe we
 6     should be more focused on preparing Canada and their
 7     industry, and help them focus on human resources
 8     development.
 9  12872                I will end here.
10  12873                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you for your
11     presentation, Mr. Tabet, for your submission, including
12     the report that your organization has sponsored.
13  12874                Having read through the report and
14     your recommendations, what has happened with the report
15     and the issues that it raised since the time it was
16     completed and you have had it to take a look at and
17     decide what to do about those issues that have been
18     raised in it?
19  12875                MR. TABET:  We have engaged with the
20     Department of Canadian Heritage, Industry Canada and
21     the Department of Human Resources Development Canada to
22     see what kind of recommendations we could implement.
23  12876                At the CHRC level we have focused on
24     a youth internship project on the issue of new media,
25     and we are developing on our website a showcase of best


 1     practices in that area.
 2  12877                For a national forum between
 3     colleges, universities and the training and education
 4     system, we are trying to see if there would be an
 5     interest in early 1999 to have a pan-Canadian forum
 6     which would bring industry and the education community
 7     together to see what kind of issues they would like to
 8     discuss and what kinds of recommendations they may want
 9     to implement.
10  12878                As a sector council, we feel that
11     this facilitation role is important.
12  12879                We have not developed some sort of
13     project targeted to investors in the area of new media. 
14     Industry Canada is looking at it as well.  Certainly
15     there is a lack of access to capital that needs to be
16     triggered.
17  12880                For young people, CRHC has developed
18     an awareness campaign based on the description of
19     occupations in that area to inform young people from
20     grades 10 to 12 across Canada about the reality of the
21     workplace in that new media field.
22  12881                THE CHAIRPERSON:  We heard a lot
23     during the proceeding about the pace of change in this
24     industry and how it has been changing so rapidly.  Even
25     a few months can make a dramatic difference to what is


 1     happening.
 2  12882                There has been some reference to dog
 3     years; that a year in normal life can be seven years.
 4  12883                MR. TABET:  Oh, I thought it was like
 5     a dog's breakfast.
 6  12884                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Well, maybe that
 7     too.
 8  12885                That issue has been noted in the
 9     report about the pace of change.
10  12886                MR. TABET:  Yes.
11  12887                THE CHAIRPERSON:  I noted, for
12     example, at page 30 of the report, near the middle of
13     the page where it is talking about skill shortages, the
14     comment is made:
15                            "However, many respondents felt
16                            that human resources issues will
17                            have changed for the industry in
18                            a few more years."
19  12888                It went on to say that:
20                            "...both the number and quality
21                            of new media graduates has
22                            increased significantly compared
23                            to even just two years ago."
24  12889                Given the pace of change and the fact
25     that a number of the reports that have been referenced


 1     in terms of the literature search that was done with
 2     respect to this study were documents dating from 1995,
 3     1996, 1997, I am wondering what your view is of the
 4     situation today.
 5  12890                Do you think the situation is about
 6     the same as it was, or somewhat better or somewhat
 7     worse?
 8  12891                MR. TABET:  In regard to youth, I
 9     think the situation is evolving quite rapidly in the
10     sense that this industry is attracting more and more
11     young people.
12  12892                In terms of bridging the gap between
13     artistic skills and technical skills, I don't think it
14     has improved very much.  This is one of the issues that
15     we have to face.
16  12893                In terms of skills upgrading of the
17     workers in that industry at the moment, I don't think
18     there has been a lot of initiative, as far as I know,
19     that has made that industry really grow.  People are
20     more in the production mode rather than sitting back
21     and trying to assess where things are at.
22  12894                Where I see a change is the issue of
23     opportunities.  I think there is job growth in that
24     area, and I think more and more people are recognizing
25     that there are many more industries than ever before,


 1     companies than ever before, and that there are new
 2     opportunities that have been created.
 3  12895                In other words -- and to conclude --
 4     I think the pace has speeded up rather than slowed
 5     down.  That is why we are stressing the fact that the
 6     human resources side of things has not really been
 7     dealt with.
 8  12896                THE CHAIRPERSON:  When that comment
 9     is made here that the issues will change in a few more
10     years and that the number of graduates is expected to
11     increase dramatically, is it your view that these
12     issues would resolve themselves in the marketplace?  Or
13     is it going to need some specific government action to
14     deal with it, or industry reaction -- perhaps industry
15     is not the right term.
16  12897                The issue you raised in terms of
17     educational institutions perhaps working more closely,
18     as I think is mentioned in several places in this
19     report; the companies working directly with educational
20     institutions.
21  12898                Are we going to need more of that to
22     solve the problem?
23  12899                MR. TABET:  Yes, I think we are, in
24     the sense that the number of graduates are going to be
25     entering in a working situation where there is not a


 1     lot of models that are available at this time. 
 2     Certainly the fact that this industry works on very
 3     much self-employment and contract work will not help
 4     the fact that this industry may need a new type of
 5     policy development at the government level.
 6  12900                By that, I mean the way that the old
 7     industrial model has worked for Canada in the fifties,
 8     I don't think it is very well adapted to the growth of
 9     this industry.
10  12901                So yes, definitely the sector, the
11     industry itself.  And by saying that, it is not an easy
12     challenge, because we are talking about very different
13     sub-sectors here.  We are talking about the
14     telecommunications industry.  We are talking about the
15     audiovisual industry.  We are talking about the graphic
16     arts industry.  Those are very heterogeneous sub-
17     sectors.
18  12902                What we see is that people they need
19     to grow within in their industry are people that are
20     going to have those types of transferrable skills.  I
21     don't think the industry nor the education community is
22     near to making a transition toward that yet.
23  12903                THE CHAIRPERSON:  You mentioned this
24     morning -- and it is mentioned in a couple of places in
25     the report -- about this issue of access to capita.


 1  12904                MR. TABET:  Yes.
 2  12905                THE CHAIRPERSON:  We have heard a lot
 3     about that in the last two weeks, and also in a number
 4     of the written submissions.  As I say, it is mentioned
 5     throughout your report, but it is summarized in the
 6     Executive Summary, at page viii.
 7  12906                It is captured near the bottom of
 8     that page.  I will just read it.
 9  12907                Relating to this issue, it says:
10                            "- an inability to access
11                            funding and capital investment
12                            for product research and
13                            development;"
14  12908                This was a response from the parties
15     who were surveyed.
16  12909                The second bullet is:
17                            "- a lack of consumer
18                            understanding of how to use new
19                            media products to their full
20                            advantage."
21  12910                And again, I think you mentioned that
22     in your presentation this morning.
23  12911                It went on to say that:
24                            "...this lack of understanding
25                            contributed to the difficulty in


 1                            securing funding..."
 2  12912                So, in fact, the two issues seem to
 3     be linked here, at least by some, if not a number, of
 4     the parties.
 5  12913                I am wondering what your view is on
 6     that in terms of this greater consumer understanding in
 7     terms of how to use new media products overcoming the
 8     issue of access to funding and capital investment; and
 9     whether, given the pace of change in the industry, that
10     problem either soon will be or perhaps in a little more
11     time will be overcome.
12  12914                MR. TABET:  I think with the way this
13     industry is growing, probably this problem will be
14     overcome.  And I agree with that.
15  12915                However, I must say that this
16     industry is so full of possibilities at the moment that
17     consumer awareness is an important issue here.  I don't
18     think there is enough of that given by many producers
19     in that industry.
20  12916                I will just take the example of
21     education products.
22  12917                The way that so-called educations
23     products are produced at the moment -- and I don't know
24     if any one of you have had the experience of looking at
25     it and what it does.  There is a lot of unawareness, I


 1     think, about this.
 2  12918                So many products are not really
 3     marketable, and there is a lot of, as some of our
 4     members would say, bad product out there.
 5  12919                I think the education of the
 6     consumer, in terms of what they are paying for and what
 7     they are getting, needs to be strengthened.
 8  12920                The issue of capital -- it is a very
 9     risky industry.  We have seen lately the rise and fall
10     of the Internet stocks is almost a joke.  I just read
11     in the Globe and Mail an interesting article that says
12     that investing in the Internet stock is like playing
13     fools.  But at the same time, if you have seen how it
14     moves, it is like totally unpredictable and crazy.
15  12921                I think this is a very risk business
16     in a way.  We should bring to the attention of those
17     who are in a situation of investing in that area that
18     we are taking seriously not only the financial
19     situation, but the human resources capital.
20  12922                I think this is what we should stress
21     when we are trying to make sure that investment is done
22     in that area.
23  12923                THE CHAIRPERSON:  When you say there
24     are so many products that are not marketable,
25     particularly in the educational area, what do you mean


 1     by that?
 2  12924                MR. TABET:  Some products that have
 3     been done in a way that they would not be -- because
 4     there are no standards in that area, no production
 5     standards, they have been put together and they do not
 6     have the ability to sustain the experience of time.
 7  12925                If you look, for example, at the
 8     Internet application that we see, there is still very
 9     much research and there is still very much product or
10     services that would not meet some kind of good quality
11     criteria.
12  12926                That is what I was referring to.
13  12927                THE CHAIRPERSON:  When you talk about
14     quality in that sense, are you meaning technical or
15     artistic quality?  Or are you meaning in the sense of
16     educational standards?
17  12928                MR. TABET:  I think I meant at that
18     time educational standards.  Some products are very
19     well driven by artistic elements.  Some are driven by
20     technical capabilities.  But I was particularly
21     referring here to educational products, because it is a
22     big market out there.
23  12929                For example, learning through the
24     Internet has been a big issue; putting a course through
25     the Internet and trying to have access and to deliver a


 1     learning system through the Internet.  This is where we
 2     need research and some kind of a standard as to how we
 3     are doing it; what works and what does not work.  What
 4     is the impact of the training and the delivery
 5     mechanisms that we are putting in place?
 6  12930                Those are the issues that I have
 7     heard through the new media group at CHRC.
 8  12931                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Is that a question
 9     of the content creators working more closely with
10     departments of education and perhaps the university
11     community to better understand pedagogical standards to
12     develop?
13  12932                MR. TABET:  Or it is also the
14     education community being able to change their
15     paradigms about what education is all about. 
16     Basically, this new technology is not only new
17     technology; it is a tool.  But it is a tool that is
18     going at something very new; a relationship between
19     another world and yourself that is changing all
20     perspectives on education.
21  12933                The question is not so much how do
22     you help the industry to be more education-focused, but
23     sometimes how do we help the education community to be
24     in sync with technology that is changing their own
25     practices.


 1  12934                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Picking up on a
 2     couple of other points that you raised here this
 3     morning:  When you mentioned that the industry is not
 4     well documented, and we don't have the appropriate
 5     measures to identify the industry -- and you mentioned
 6     that this would be largely a role for Statistics Canada
 7     -- do you have in mind certain measures that perhaps
 8     Statistics Canada or others should be looking for?
 9  12935                MR. TABET:  The only thing that I can
10     speak of in confidence is the description of skills and
11     occupation in the new media industry.  For example,
12     what is a communications specialist in that industry? 
13     What is a sales representative in that industry?  What
14     is a creator in that industry?  What is an interactive
15     script writer?  What is an outside content specialist? 
16     And so forth.
17  12936                I am just reading the type of
18     occupation titles that have come up.  Basically, there
19     is research to be done, either at the CRTC or with
20     StatsCanada -- certainly CHRC is interested in that --
21     in trying to analyze the occupational profiles and what
22     are the skills that are required to do the job in those
23     areas.  So we will start to see how this industry is
24     moving and help the workforce to move from point A to B
25     to transfer their skills, and to be more adaptable.


 1  12937                In terms of policy, there might be an
 2     issue regarding the status of the artist legislation.
 3  12938                I don't know if the CRTC has an
 4     interest in that.  But the status of the artist
 5     legislation at the federal level is very much unique
 6     among other nations in the world and has been, I would
 7     say, recognized and utilized; but I would say in the
 8     area of new media it should be revised.
 9  12939                There might be new occupations that
10     are part of the status of the artist legislation.  Just
11     to give you an example, when a park, a national park, a
12     federally-regulated park, tries to set up a website or
13     to develop a website which would include, for example,
14     interactive heritage interpretation, the people who are
15     working in the development of that product may be self-
16     employed people.  They may be graphic designers or
17     creators.
18  12940                Do they or could they use the status
19     of the artist legislation as a way to regulate the
20     labour issue in their business?
21  12941                Those have tremendous implications
22     that I would like to see.  There might be an interest
23     between those two agencies to look at it.
24  12942                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Is your
25     organization working with Statistics Canada to better


 1     identify these particular job definitions in terms of
 2     measuring what is happening out in the marketplace?
 3  12943                MR. TABET:  Yes, we have a working
 4     group with Statistics Canada on that issue.  We are
 5     trying to work with Statistics Canada on two fronts. 
 6     One is the definition of occupation:  who is working
 7     there and what are they doing.  And secondly, trying to
 8     define the sector of that industry: whom does that
 9     represent?
10  12944                And I talked about the various sub-
11     sectors.
12  12945                Could we look from there, aggregated
13     or consolidated account or picture about the economic
14     impact, for example, of this industry; the type of
15     sales, the type of export product or market shares they
16     are doing.
17  12946                At the moment, I don't see that there
18     is very much.
19  12947                THE CHAIRPERSON:  You also mention,
20     particularly given the fact that a lot of the people
21     who are working in this business are quite young -- and
22     we have hard a lot about that in the past two weeks --
23     that many of them have a lack of awareness of copyright
24     issues, about ways to protect their intellectual
25     property.


 1  12948                What is the role of your organization
 2     in terms of informing those people about those issues,
 3     I suppose from two points of view:  one, informing them
 4     of the issues; and on the other hand, perhaps
 5     representing them in front of the Copyright Board, or
 6     whoever might be the appropriate body to deal with
 7     those issues?
 8  12949                MR. TABET:  First of all, I must say
 9     that the problem stems from the fact that many artists
10     who are going to work in this industry still do not
11     receive the proper training or education at the
12     education level; for example, at college or university.
13  12950                They may be given technical skills or
14     artistic skills, but they are still lacking an
15     understanding of the reality of the workplace; when you
16     are an artist, for example, and copyright issues.  The
17     education system may produce a lot of graduates that
18     have no idea what copyright laws are and do not have
19     the resources to hire a powerful attorney or lawyer to
20     help them in that regard.
21  12951                So we have done a campaign on this
22     issue.  It is what we called our Career Self-Management
23     Skills Training, by which we are helping those young
24     graduates to understand the elementary basic business
25     skills that are required to thrive in this industry. 


 1     This is not done anywhere else at the moment.
 2  12952                Secondly, we are trying to represent
 3     -- for example, I talked about the status of the artist
 4     legislation, but also at the provincial level the
 5     interest of the people who are working in this
 6     industry, and also to the industry themselves.
 7  12953                Companies may not be aware of this
 8     issue.  Therefore, we need to sensitize them as well
 9     about the consequences of decisions they make take in
10     terms of putting product on the net or developing CD-
11     ROM applications that may have a copyright issue item
12     attached to it.
13  12954                I think this is too new.  I don't
14     think there is a lot of clear understanding about this.
15  12955                At our last discussion forum in
16     September, there was a whole item on the agenda that
17     discussed the issue of copyright in cyberspace. 
18     Although we have not found any solution, the more we
19     talk about it, the more we are able to really try to
20     orient the solution in the best interest of everybody
21     involved.
22  12956                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Your last point
23     that you made in your presentation, in the last bullet
24     on the last slide, was with respect to the CRTC,
25     suggesting that we develop HR development, human


 1     resource development, as a criteria for licensing.
 2  12957                I was curious to know what it is you
 3     had in mind that we would be licensing.
 4  12958                MR. TABET:  Well, I don't know if,
 5     for example, telephone companies may come to the CRTC
 6     to present you with an idea of organizing a particular
 7     service through the net or if the cable companies may
 8     come to you, as well, with an idea of trying to develop
 9     through cable an Internet access.
10  12959                That is what I had in mind.  When
11     such requests are coming to the CRTC, it might be
12     useful for the development of a stronger new media
13     sector in Canada to make sure that industry is very
14     well aware of HR issues in that area and is willing to
15     embrace some kind of new initiatives.
16  12960                Specifically, CHRC is trying to look
17     at a cultural human resources development fund, by
18     which we would be able, as an industry as a whole, to
19     meet our needs.  We are trying to see if there might be
20     some way by which the industry in this field of new
21     media would be moving toward getting some kind of
22     professional development activities going on, for
23     example.
24  12961                THE CHAIRPERSON:  A lot of people
25     have suggested that we should not license or regulate. 


 1     Assuming that we don't, how would you see this issue
 2     being addressed?
 3  12962                Do you think there is a recognition
 4     among a number of the industry players, particularly
 5     some of the larger ones, that this is a problem and
 6     that they would support this kind of initiative through
 7     an industry-led process?
 8  12963                MR. TABET:  I think your last word is
 9     the one that I would agree with.  It is a process of
10     discussion.  The more we discuss about those issues,
11     the more we may be able to see some kind of solution.
12  12964                I don't think there is one particular
13     solution.
14  12965                What I am here really to talk about
15     is the issue of human resources growth and
16     strengthening.  As I said at the beginning, I don't
17     think the issue so much of regulate, or deregulate, or
18     reregulate should focus the debate.  The debate should
19     be, I think, also about how to strengthen the industry
20     as a whole.  And human resources is part of that.
21  12966                THE CHAIRPERSON:  My last question
22     goes to your covering brief.  I would read one sentence
23     out of it.
24  12967                You said:
25                            "We would like to invite you


 1                            (the CRTC) to join us in
 2                            endeavouring to find ways to
 3                            answer the challenges outlined
 4                            in the report's
 5                            recommendations."
 6  12968                I guess recognizing that the report's
 7     recommendations largely deal with education and
 8     training issues, almost all of which is outside the
 9     Commission's jurisdiction -- much of it is even outside
10     the Federal Government's jurisdiction -- I am wondering
11     what role you see for this organization, that being the
12     CRTC, in dealing with the issues that you have brought
13     before us today.
14  12969                MR. TABET:  That is an interesting
15     one, but I am going to respond as much as I can on this
16     issue.  And I don't think a lot of people can.
17  12970                As much as the new media industry is
18     growing, I think it is very clear for everybody that it
19     changes the frontiers.  It sort of moves away from the
20     traditional paradigms that we have in our mind about
21     new technology and a new world is emerging.  We have
22     said that over and over.
23  12971                The same thing is happening in the
24     world of work and the world of education.  The
25     boundaries that were built between those two worlds are


 1     crumbling.  If I may say so, the "Berlin Wall" has
 2     already crumbled between those two fields.  It is
 3     particularly true in the new media industry, because
 4     the education system is not really able to nurture the
 5     development of the industry as it was in previous
 6     years.
 7  12972                The CRTC also has to deal with an
 8     industry that is evolving and that may change its
 9     mandate as well; or at least engaging to renewing or
10     reassessing its own mandate.  This is why we came to
11     the CRTC.
12  12973                We know that in many ways there are
13     issues that are not part of your mandate, but in many
14     ways you are asked to take a position on issues and on
15     areas that require those institutions to change as
16     well.  This is what we are exploring:  how to see where
17     the future is going and trying to develop new ways to
18     deal with it.
19  12974                THE CHAIRPERSON:  I guess we don't
20     create our own mandate.  Our mandate is given to us by
21     Parliament through the legislation that we have to deal
22     with.
23  12975                I am just wondering, again, what you
24     see as our role in dealing with those issues, given
25     that our mandate is fairly well defined for us.


 1  12976                MR. TABET:  Yes.  But it does not --
 2     because you are given a particular mandate, you may
 3     want to also express the fact that the mandate that you
 4     are given may not be totally adequate for the situation
 5     that you are asking to assess and address.
 6  12977                I guess that is the entire purpose of
 7     the new media hearing.  It is something that is totally
 8     new to you in many ways -- and to everyone, by the way,
 9     in many ways.
10  12978                I think it is an opportunity to keep
11     in touch with the evolving Canadian society in terms of
12     this particular field.  And although we are not
13     appearing here today to indicate which direction you
14     should take -- in many ways there is no direction --
15     what we are saying is that there are ways of dealing
16     with industry requests.  At CHRC we are at least
17     focusing on an issue, HR development, that is not a
18     concept that has been promoted very much before.
19  12979                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Just a concluding
20     issue, then:  You mentioned earlier that you had been
21     talking to Industry Canada, Heritage and --
22  12980                MR. TABET:  Human Resources
23     Development Canada.
24  12981                THE CHAIRPERSON:  It would seem that
25     they are the appropriate departments to be dealing


 1     with, at least at the Federal level in dealing with
 2     these issues, and that it may not require a change in
 3     our mandate to deal with that.
 4  12982                I am wondering what your comment
 5     would be on that.
 6  12983                MR. TABET:  I think the issues are so
 7     complex that it is not inappropriate to raise the
 8     awareness of HR development at every level.  After all,
 9     as much as the new media industry dissolves the
10     frontiers between respective jurisdictions, it is
11     important that a dialogue be engaged in between federal
12     departments that are dealing with issues that are
13     parallel.
14  12984                This is why we are here today.
15  12985                It is not an answer to your question,
16     obviously, but it is the best that I can give at this
17     point.
18  12986                THE CHAIRPERSON:  That is fine. 
19     Thank you very much, Mr. Tabet.  I appreciate the work
20     that you and your organization have done in helping us
21     understand these issues.
22  12987                MR. TABET:  Merci beaucoup.  And
23     thank you to the person who turned the pages.
24  12988                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Mr. Woodhead is
25     multi-talented.


 1  12989                We will take a short five-minute
 2     break before we hear from our next and last presenter.
 3     --- Short recess at / Courte suspension à 1215
 4     --- Upon resuming at / Reprise à 1220
 5  12990                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order, please,
 6     ladies and gentlemen.
 7  12991                Madam Secretary.
 8  12992                MS BÉNARD:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 
 9     The next presentation will be by Greg Pillon.
10  12993                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Welcome, Mr.
11     Pillon.  You have the distinction of being the last
12     party to present orally here at this stage of our
13     proceeding.
14  12994                MR. PILLON:  That is quite a
15     distinction.  I hope to be able to take us out with a
16     bang, not a whimper.
18  12995                MR. PILLON:  Good afternoon, Mr.
19     Chairman, ladies and gentlemen of the CRTC.
20  12996                I would like to preface my formal
21     presentation by saying that I have gained a new
22     appreciation for the challenge faced by this body in
23     managing the many diverging interests focused on this
24     debate.  I wish that more members of my industry were
25     here to participate in this forum.  Perhaps some of


 1     their concerns about this initiative might be allayed.
 2  12997                I would ask you to take my
 3     presentation, both in tone and in content, as
 4     representative of those industry concerns.
 5  12998                I am a web producer for Cyberplex
 6     Interactive Media, which is the largest developer of
 7     web-based business solutions in Canada.  I would like
 8     very much to thank you for the opportunity to present
 9     this submission to this public hearing.
10  12999                I am here today because I believe
11     that the best way to ensure access by Canadians to
12     Canadian Internet content is to foster a healthy and
13     successful indigenous production industry.
14  13000                Ladies and gentlemen, as Canadians,
15     we are in a unique position to profit from the so-
16     called new media technologies.  We have a tradition of
17     broad, inexpensive access to telecommunications.  We
18     are creative, educated, computer literate,
19     sophisticated, business-like and aggressive.  We speak
20     English and French.
21  13001                And, after all, Marshall McLuhan was
22     one of us.
23  13002                It should come as no surprise to you
24     that the Canadian new media production and development
25     industry controls virtually 100 percent of the Canadian


 1     market.  My own firm, Cyberplex, this year announced
 2     its first expansion into the United States, with a
 3     sales and development office in Cary, North Carolina.
 4  13003                Cyberplex also has further plans to
 5     expand into other selected U.S. markets in the coming
 6     year.
 7  13004                The expansion by a Canadian web
 8     solutions company into the U.S. market is significant
 9     because of the data transparency of national borders
10     and the competitive advantage of the Canadian dollar. 
11     American branches may sell solutions to American
12     customers, but actual web production can be based in
13     Canada.
14  13005                Production of e-commerce and other
15     professional web solutions is in many ways the ideal
16     manufactured export:  no environmental impact; minimal
17     production overhead; no real worker safety issues --
18     besides carpal tunnel syndrome.  The jobs created by
19     this industry are very skilled; they pay well; they
20     offer pleasant working conditions, opportunities for
21     professional growth; and they are very often fun.
22  13006                I would like to suggest to you that
23     this is an industry which does deserve your support.
24  13007                Over the previous days of these
25     hearings, I expect that you will have heard two


 1     apparently contradictory propositions:  one that the
 2     Canadian Federal Government should not, or cannot,
 3     apply the Broadcasting Act to regulate the web; and
 4     second, that the Federal Government should establish
 5     subsidies for the development of new media.
 6  13008                Ladies and gentlemen, as you digest
 7     the volume of these submissions in the days ahead, I
 8     would ask you to consider the potential impact of your
 9     recommendations on our industry.  I would like you to
10     remember the example of Cyberplex.
11  13009                As I have said, Cyberplex Interactive
12     Media is the largest web-based business solutions
13     developer in Canada.  Although it has extensive
14     experience in all types of web applications, we
15     specialize in large e-commerce and commercial marketing
16     sites.
17  13010                You may not have heard of us, because
18     we have not done a lot of marketing over the last few
19     years; we have been more focused on development.  But
20     you have probably heard about our clients:  The
21     Microsoft Network, Bell Mobility, Labatt, Nabisco,
22     Eatons, The Bank of Montreal, CBC, and most recently
23     the all-Canadian online bookseller
24  13011                Cyberplex is a publicly traded
25     company and is currently on the Alberta Stock Exchange


 1     under the symbol CX.
 2  13012                You will be interested to know that
 3     over 10 percent of equity is held by employees.  We
 4     have over 150 skilled personnel, including designers,
 5     programmer, interface specialists, e-commerce
 6     specialists, producers, account managers and sales
 7     staff.  They are in offices located in Toronto,
 8     Waterloo, Halifax, Montreal and, as I mentioned, Cary,
 9     North Carolina.
10  13013                Cyberplex's growth has been quite
11     remarkable.  Although it is only four years old, it is
12     almost unique amongst new media companies in that it
13     has been profitable in every single year of operation.
14  13014                In 1996, which was our second year of
15     operation, it tripled revenue, to over $1 million.  In
16     1997, it tripled again, to $3 million.  In 1998,
17     Cyberplex has reported that for the first nine months
18     ending September 30th, revenues are up 190 percent over
19     the same period last year, and up 55 percent from the
20     previous quarter.  Our net income for this period is up
21     over 400 percent compared to the same period last year.
22  13015                This is a young, profitable, rapidly
23     expanding world-class Canadian competitor.  It achieved
24     this position of excellence without any government
25     subsidy, assistance or financial support of any kind. 


 1     It grows and it continues to flourish because of the
 2     skills and character of its Canadian employees and
 3     because it is able to operate in its market free from
 4     competitive disadvantages.
 5  13016                In the process, Cyberplex has helped
 6     bring exclusively Canadian Internet content and the
 7     benefits of Canadian e-commerce to Canadians.
 8  13017                If a Canadian Internet development
 9     company can accomplish this in the absence of any
10     Federal regulatory initiatives or subsidies, we have to
11     ask:  What constructive contribution can the Federal
12     Government make at this stage of the game?
13  13018                I would like you to please consider
14     for the moment the effects of Broadcasting Act style
15     obligation-based regulation on the Canadian Internet
16     development industry at this stage.
17  13019                Any regulation, regardless of its
18     intention, which increases the cost of web production
19     in Canada will harm us severely.  I cannot stress
20     enough the speed of change in this industry.
21  13020                Please remember that the Canadian
22     border is transparent to the web.  Just as Cyberplex
23     currently enjoys a competitive advantage in the U.S.
24     because of this transparency, higher Canadian
25     production costs would drive our customers south of the


 1     border into the arms of American developers and ISPs. 
 2     Virtually all Canadian commercial websites could be
 3     ported out of the country, beyond CRTC jurisdiction,
 4     within a couple of days.
 5  13021                Ladies and gentlemen, what do you
 6     think would happen to my jobs and the jobs of my
 7     colleagues in this scenario?
 8  13022                Remember, the Internet development
 9     industry has no capital equipment of any importance. 
10     It has no fixed assets, no production capacity that
11     cannot be moved overnight.  The only asset an Internet
12     developer has is its people.  If our companies follow
13     their customers outside the country, we will have to go
14     with them.
15  13023                In any case, I can assure you that
16     the market for our skills is going to remain and grow
17     outside of this country.  If the work goes south, for
18     the sake of our families, we must go also.  Within six
19     months of a regulatory initiative that increases
20     production costs, virtually the entire web development
21     professional workforce could be employed by Americans
22     in higher paying jobs in places like San Francisco,
23     Boston and Seattle.
24  13024                Thus, paradoxically, a government
25     attempt to intervene in the market to increase Canadian


 1     participation could have the effect of wiping out a
 2     highly competitive, indigenous industry.  With no
 3     significant production capacity of our own, Canadians
 4     will become nothing more than consumers of foreign
 5     Internet content.
 6  13025                You might be forgiven for thinking
 7     that this doomsday prediction is overstated, and that
 8     we can experiment with regulation and perhaps monitor
 9     for a downside, and if there is a negative impact, we
10     can fix it.  But this is a very, very dangerous
11     assumption.
12  13026                Once we lose our market share, it is
13     going to be virtually impossible for us to get it back.
14     And once the brain drain begins and the people have
15     been lost, our industry will be gutted and we are going
16     to be a wild west town after the ore has played out.
17  13027                I think the time has come for
18     Canadians to believe in their ability to compete on a
19     level playing field.  We are already the world's best.
20  13028                The most constructive contribution
21     our Federal Government can make to a strong and
22     successful Canadian Internet development industry is,
23     first, to ensure the widest possible access by
24     Canadians to the Internet; and second, to prevent
25     regulation by any local, Provincial or Federal


 1     government which would add to the cost of production in
 2     Canada.
 3  13029                And please, for my sake, for the sake
 4     of my colleagues, and for the thousands of high-quality
 5     jobs held by canadians in new media production, now and
 6     in the future, we ask you to leave this seed alone and
 7     watch it grow.
 8  13030                Thank you.
 9  13031                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you for your
10     presentation, Mr. Pillon.
11  13032                I will turn the questioning to
12     Commissioner McKendry.
13  13033                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Good
14     afternoon, and thank you for your presentation.
15  13034                Let me ask you a couple of questions
16     about your oral comments.
17  13035                When I first read them, I noticed in
18     the second paragraph you refer to the fact that the
19     best way to ensure access by Canadians to Canadian
20     Internet content is to foster a healthy and successful
21     indigenous production industry.
22  13036                The question that immediately came to
23     mind was:  What are the barriers that we need to deal
24     with in order to make sure that that happens?
25  13037                I take it that your message is that


 1     in fact there are no barriers.  We are a potential
 2     barrier or the government is a potential barrier, and
 3     your word of advice to us is:  Don't create a barrier;
 4     there is none there now.
 5  13038                Is that right?
 6  13039                MR. PILLON:  I think that would be a
 7     fair summary.
 8  13040                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Is there any
 9     role whatsoever for government in the Internet?
10  13041                MR. PILLON:  There may be a role -- I
11     would say the question is maybe rather broadly stated.
12  13042                Obviously, my presentation is from an
13     industry or commercial perspective.  The only kind of
14     work that we do is commercial in nature, e-commerce
15     sites and large sophisticated marketing sites.
16  13043                Obviously, there is a public
17     component.  There is an educational component.  There
18     are very broad opportunities with regard to the
19     Internet.
20  13044                Our concern is exclusively for the
21     commercial side; that we do not increase the costs of
22     production to our customers in any way; that by doing
23     so, we keep the already strong industry in our country
24     and thus provide a real indigenous alternative for our
25     Canadian customers.  That is the best way to ensure


 1     that we make genuine Canadian content available to
 2     Canadian consumers.
 3  13045                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  For example,
 4     with respect to the government's current initiative
 5     with respect to privacy protection, there is
 6     legislation in front of the House to facilitate
 7     consumer confidence in e-commerce by ensuring that
 8     people's privacy is protected, that would not concern
 9     you.
10  13046                You would see that as a facilitating
11     intuitive that presumably would not raise the costs to
12     the industry that you are part of.
13  13047                MR. PILLON:  I would agree with that. 
14     I think probably we would be looking for anything that
15     would increase domestic access, that would strengthen
16     the existing infrastructure.  Clearly, we have
17     bandwidth issues that are limiting us in terms of our
18     ability to deliver more diverse, more effective
19     content.
20  13048                These are large issues that cut
21     across many sectors.  Clearly, there is a role for the
22     Federal Government here.
23  13049                Also, I think the previous gentleman
24     referred to a number of human resources concerns. 
25     Certainly, we experienced these in our attempt to grow


 1     our business.
 2  13050                I think educational initiatives would
 3     be welcome.  Clearly, there are not enough programs
 4     which are focused on the skills that we find we need in
 5     order to be effective in our marketplace.
 6  13051                So, certainly investment in education
 7     would be effective.
 8  13052                I would like to mention that probably
 9     the best example of a program that could be used as a
10     model in this regard is the Cyber Arts Program
11     currently running at Don Mills Secondary in Toronto.
12  13053                We are able to use senior students
13     from this secondary school program as interns in our
14     organization very effectively.  So I would like to see
15     that program cloned, if you will, and in place in other
16     parts of the country.
17  13054                That, I think, is probably the
18     largest limiting factor in our industry at the moment;
19     access to appropriate skills.
20  13055                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  In your oral
21     comments you said "I cannot stress enough the speed of
22     change in this industry".
23  13056                Can you help us get more insight into
24     the speed of change?  Can you talk for a minute about
25     that?


 1  13057                MR. PILLON:  One thought that struck
 2     me, as I was listening to the previous presentation, is
 3     that about a year ago, the model for our industry was a
 4     small decentralized eight-to-ten person firm based on
 5     freelancers and home workers.  That probably was true
 6     for 1994, 1995 and 1996, but it certainly is not true
 7     today -- or at least we are moving rapidly away from
 8     that model.
 9  13058                There is an industry shake-out taking
10     place, as you would expect in any high growth
11     manufacturing sector where a lot of the smaller firms
12     are either going by the wayside or being absorbed into
13     larger companies such as our own.
14  13059                Actually, Cyperplex recently
15     completed an acquisition in 1998 which added a good 40
16     percent to our capacity.  I think that pace of change
17     is perhaps not reflected in some of the public debate.
18  13060                The technologies -- from an
19     individual standpoint, we as workers in this business
20     have to upgrade our skills almost continually, because
21     every two months the technologies which we have
22     available to us, the tools that we have to work with,
23     are changing.  The tools that we used even six months
24     ago are now obsolete.
25  13061                The growth of this market is -- we


 1     are a very rapidly growing company by any standards,
 2     but the growth of the market outstrips our own growth
 3     as a company.  It is a tidal wave that is rising so
 4     rapidly, I would venture to say -- this is a very seat-
 5     of-the-pants estimate -- that within five years this
 6     industry could become larger than the printing
 7     industry; could be as large as the telecommunications
 8     or as the broadcasting industry and motion picture
 9     industry.
10  13062                If we experience a technological
11     breakthrough in network bandwidth, then the sky is the
12     limit.  I don't think you could find anyone, even the
13     most sophisticated plugged-in individuals in our
14     industry, who would be able to predict what would
15     happen if we experienced a ten-fold increase in
16     bandwidth.
17  13063                About all I can say is that it is
18     growing faster than we can keep up, and we are a very
19     fast-moving company.
20  13064                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  That leads me
21     into the next question I wanted to ask you.  It derived
22     from a statement you made in your written submission to
23     us, where you said that broadcasting will remain the
24     only feasible way to distribute entertainment
25     programming.


 1  13065                I wondered if you could talk about
 2     that for a minute.  Does that go to the bandwidth
 3     situation you were discussing just a minute ago?
 4  13066                MR. PILLON:  There is a bandwidth
 5     issue, but I think we are all sophisticated enough to
 6     expect that in the near future those limitations -- for
 7     example, delivery of real-time video over the Internet
 8     -- will be erased.  It is going to happen eventually.
 9  13067                The question is a matter of
10     definition.  If we are delivering prepackaged
11     entertainment, real-time linear entertainment such as
12     we are used to with television, then it seems to me
13     that the delivery system is not the issue.
14  13068                I think that the format of the
15     information is the issue, and this speaks to the
16     business of definitions that I think a number of people
17     have raised:  What constitutes broadcasting?  What
18     constitutes a program?
19  13069                An interactive website is -- I think
20     it is a real stretch to think of it as a program,
21     because it is interactive.  It really more resembles a
22     magazine or a newspaper than it does a television
23     program.
24  13070                A television program is not an
25     interactive experience.  It is a linear experience.  It


 1     does not require any participation by the viewer. 
 2     Essentially, the relationship is a passive one.
 3  13071                I would say that as we look at the
 4     viability of a term like program or broadcasting to the
 5     emerging technologies, we really need to look not at
 6     the technology side of it, not necessarily even at the
 7     content, but the relationship between the information
 8     that is being communicated and the participants, the
 9     viewers, the end-users.
10  13072                I think that is where we will be able
11     to draw reasonable distinctions.
12  13073                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Just to help
13     me understand a little better, you said -- and you have
14     elaborated on this -- that broadcasting will be the
15     only feasible way to distribute entertainment
16     programming.  So as a web producer, you don't see the
17     day when entertainment programming will come to me over
18     the Internet -- entertainment programming in the sense
19     of linear programming that is available on conventional
20     TV today.
21  13074                Is that what you are saying?
22  13075                MR. PILLON:  I don't think it would
23     be fair to say that.  I think there will be a point in
24     the future where we will be able to use our Internet
25     connections in computers to view real time linear-type


 1     entertainment as characterized currently by broadcast
 2     television.  I think that is going to happen once the
 3     bandwidth issues are eliminated.
 4  13076                What I am suggesting is that there is
 5     a big difference between that kind of material and an
 6     e-commerce website, for example, or even a marketing
 7     website.  There is a big difference in terms of how the
 8     viewer interacts with the material that is coming to
 9     them.
10  13077                One of the things that drives the
11     design of a good e-commerce website, for example, is
12     simplicity.  Studies have shown that end-users want
13     really as little in the way of embellishment as
14     possible.  They come to the site with specific ideas
15     about what kinds of information they want, and they
16     want that information as quickly as possible.
17  13078                A lot of the stuff that you tended to
18     see on the Internet in the early days, the elaborate
19     animations and colourful backgrounds and complicated
20     page layouts and designs, have really gone by the
21     wayside.  Viewers don't like that stuff.  It gets in
22     the way.  They come to the online store with a specific
23     idea of what they want, and they want to get it fast.
24  13079                That is an entirely different
25     experience from what we would have, sitting in front of


 1     the television set with the channel changer.  I think
 2     that is the kind of distinction that I am recommending
 3     that we use in determining what could reasonably be
 4     covered by the Broadcasting Act as opposed to what we
 5     would consider to be strictly interactive content.
 6  13080                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  As a web
 7     producer, how have you seen the growth of audio and
 8     video components of website design emerge and where do
 9     you see that going over the next little while?
10  13081                MR. PILLON:  Audio and video -- it is
11     difficult to see how they could be applied in a way
12     that adds value to the viewer's experience of the kind
13     of commercial website that we would build.
14  13082                Again, these things are more in the
15     nature of embellishments or entertainment and so tend
16     to get in the way of the objective of the end-user to
17     the experience of the website.  We try to shy away from
18     bandwidth-intensive content, like full motion video or
19     audio.
20  13083                I think audio is important as a
21     sampler.  Let's say we were shopping an audio CD online
22     store.  In that case, I might want to be able to sample
23     the content of a particular CD.  I might want to listen
24     to the music as a prelude to actually purchasing the
25     disc, much as you would if you walked in to HMV and put


 1     on the headphones to listen to a disc.
 2  13084                That would make sense in that
 3     business case, but only within that business case.  I
 4     would not burden a bookseller's website with video.  I
 5     wouldn't try and put audio, for the sake of audio or
 6     video, on to a marketing site.
 7  13085                We have to use these things very
 8     sparingly, not so much out of bandwidth issues,
 9     although those are definitely a concern; but mainly as
10     a way to maintain viewer interest.
11  13086                There has been a real movement in the
12     last six months -- again, speaking to the issue of the
13     change in the industry.  In terms of sophistication of
14     our viewership, there has been a real movement away
15     from a lot of real-time material to a more essentialist
16     or more sparing presentation.
17  13087                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Let me ask
18     you a question about the definition of new media. 
19     There has been a fair bit of discussion about that in
20     this proceeding.
21  13088                I take it that it is your position
22     that we don't really need to worry about a definition
23     of new media; and in fact if we do worry about it and
24     develop one, you say the consequences could be
25     disastrous, if I am not misinterpreting the point you


 1     make.
 2  13089                Perhaps you could elaborate on that
 3     thought for us.
 4  13090                MR. PILLON:  Thank you.  I think that
 5     is a very important point.
 6  13091                The point that I made in my written
 7     submission was that terms like new media or information
 8     superhighway are journalistic conveniences.  They are
 9     blanket terms that don't really correspond to the
10     reality of the technologies.
11  13092                Multimedia, for example, was a big
12     deal, a very important word a couple of years ago.  But
13     it really turned out to be a buzzword.
14  13093                We used to joke that multimedia was
15     the zero billion dollar a year industry, because as it
16     finally materialized, the idea of delivery of content
17     on CD-ROM never became commercially viable.  And there
18     were a number of really good reasons for this.
19  13094                So to talk about the multimedia
20     industry, for example, is really to talk about
21     something that didn't exist.  To talk about new media,
22     we would have to lump together a wide variety of
23     different initiatives.
24  13095                We would have to talk about CD-ROM
25     development in the same breath as the Internet, with


 1     two entirely difference business models.  We would have
 2     to talk about digital entertainment, for example, or
 3     possibly even digital cell phones.  It is really hard
 4     to pin these things down to a specific business case
 5     when you use a very broad definition.
 6  13096                So I would suggest that the dangers
 7     of using a term like that far outweigh any possible
 8     advantages.  I would rather the term "new media" just
 9     went away and we talked about Internet development, we
10     talked about e-commerce, we talked about CD-ROM, we
11     talked about edutainment.
12  13097                The fact that these things are all
13     based on ones and zeros is really the least important
14     thing about them.  The important thing is:  What is the
15     business case?  Who uses them?  What is the production
16     methodology?  What is the market for these things?  And
17     where are they likely to evolve?
18  13098                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  It was
19     suggested to us that the approach you are recommending
20     we take misses the content dimension of new media,
21     because it is focused on the business case for a
22     particular technology; and from the point of view of
23     the CRTC, we have to keep content in mind, and that is
24     integral to the technologies that we are talking about.
25  13099                Do you have any thoughts about the


 1     weight we should give to content in thinking about new
 2     media?
 3  13100                MR. PILLON:  We have to remember that
 4     the way the people use the Internet -- and of course my
 5     focus is particularly on web development because of my
 6     background.
 7  13101                The way that Canadians use the
 8     Internet is very needs-driven.  If you are on the
 9     Internet, you are looking for something.  You are
10     looking for something that is specific to your
11     profession, to your community, to your hobbies and
12     interests, to your personal situation, perhaps medical
13     issues.  It is not generalized information; it is very
14     focused and very specific.
15  13102                By definition, the things that
16     Canadians want are going to be of Canadian interest and
17     Canadian relevance.
18  13103                I am not going to be interested, for
19     example, in the regulatory framework of the State of
20     Texas unless I actually operate in the State of Texas. 
21     I, as a producer, am going to be interested in the
22     regulatory framework of the Province of Ontario and of
23     Canada as a whole.
24  13104                My interest is, by definition, going
25     to be Canadian content.  Again, it is not


 1     entertainment.
 2  13105                The thing to remember, too, as we
 3     look at these new technologies, is that they really are
 4     extremely accessible.  There are no barriers to access
 5     for Canadians.  It is very inexpensive to produce a
 6     website that deals with very specific Canadian issues. 
 7     The cost of mounting this type of content is very, very
 8     low.
 9  13106                So the kinds of limitations that we
10     see in the broadcasting world, where we have to worry
11     about a limited number of frequencies and very, very
12     high costs of production and high costs of
13     distribution, these things represent very definite
14     barriers to Canadian content.  Whereas in the Internet,
15     there really are no barriers of any significance.
16  13107                It is hard to see what positive
17     contribution one could make, what regulatory initiative
18     one could take that would increase the amount of
19     Canadian content on the web.
20  13108                Having said that, obviously there are
21     organizations which do need support, organizations
22     which are not driven by commercial premise.  Not-for-
23     profit organizations, community-based organizations,
24     cultural organizations certainly are going to benefit
25     from any assistance that they can find to remain


 1     relevant in an increasingly sophisticated web
 2     environment.
 3  13109                That is something to address.  In
 4     other words, it is going to be more expensive to
 5     produce a website that people are actually going to
 6     want to look at.
 7  13110                We can build business models to
 8     support commercial cases, but the not-for-profit
 9     organizations and the cultural organizations may need
10     more assistance in this area.  That is kind of outside
11     the scope of our interest.
12  13111                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  That is
13     helpful; thank you.
14  13112                I would like to come back to
15     electronic commerce for a moment, because I take it
16     that you in particular specialize in producing sites
17     that deal in the electronic commerce area.
18  13113                Where do you see electronic commerce
19     headed on the net?  Will it be primarily business-to-
20     business as some have suggested?  Will it be business-
21     to-consumer?  Will it be both?  Will one area grow
22     faster than the other?
23  13114                MR. PILLON:  To answer your question,
24     I think there is going to be tremendous growth in both
25     areas.  Business-to-business is the case that is


 1     perhaps a little newer to our industry.  We are
 2     starting to see those opportunities evolve.
 3  13115                But the retail case is pretty well
 4     established.
 5  13116       is an excellent
 6     example.  They are actually selling now more books
 7     through the Internet site -- which has only been up,
 8     live, for about a month -- than they are through the
 9     whole bricks and mortar organization.
10  13117                So in a very short period of time,
11     the e-commerce solution has met and begun to exceed the
12     traditional storefront operation.  I can't see that
13     slowing down.  I can only see that increasing.
14  13118                The convenience of online shopping
15     for consumers, especially in a country that is as large
16     and diverse as ours, is very compelling.
17  13119                I can see this going beyond --
18     although, obviously, books are an easy business case to
19     make, we can see this going in the direction of
20     groceries, for example.  Our Eatons site is actually
21     promoting the sale of clothing.  There are plenty of
22     very viable solutions to this kind of trade.
23  13120                I think there is going to be a real
24     revolution in online retailing over the next two years.
25  13121                Having said that, there is another


 1     half of this whole business that is maybe not as
 2     obvious.  I think probably traditional e-commerce where
 3     you are actually conducting an online transaction will
 4     represent about 30 percent to 40 percent of the entire
 5     e-commerce proposition.
 6  13122                The remainder really has more to do
 7     with -- we don't really have a term for this, but it
 8     has become apparent recently that 70 percent of the
 9     people who use the Internet and make major purchases,
10     such as automobiles, for example, will have done
11     sophisticated research online before making their
12     purchase.
13  13123                So there is a very important role for
14     commercial websites to play in driving offline
15     purchases.  And that is growing.
16  13124                I guess that is what you would call a
17     commercial marketing site.  It is part of a sales
18     process that extends outside of cyberspace.  And I see
19     that as expanding as well.
20  13125                Really, the sky is the limit on this
21     stuff.  I think it is a really good thing for this
22     country as a whole, because it will permit economic
23     access to a wider variety of goods and services by
24     Canadians in divergent geographical areas.
25  13126                I see this as a growth area.


 1  13127                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  In producing
 2     websites in Canada, to what extent is it important to
 3     take into account the French language in designing the
 4     websites in Canada?
 5  13128                Is the language of business in Canada
 6     on the Internet English or French, or both?
 7  13129                MR. PILLON:  The language of the
 8     Internet as a whole, I think, is English worldwide.  It
 9     is a very strange cultural phenomenon which I think we
10     are all watching very carefully.  I think that trend is
11     only going to continue.
12  13130                Having said that, the Internet does
13     favour micromarkets and smaller communities.  I think
14     that is one of the reasons that we have elected to
15     expand into the Montreal market and open an office in
16     Montreal recently, to take advantage of a very
17     sophisticated bilingual workforce in Montreal.
18  13131                We are increasingly seeing a
19     requirement for bilingual websites with our large
20     commercial customers, and I think that probably is only
21     going to increase.
22  13132                We have to keep in mind that the
23     current limitation is cost.  We are not exactly
24     duplicating the effort to produce an English website by
25     producing it in both languages.  But we are adding


 1     about 40 percent to 60 percent production cost to the
 2     site when we do that.
 3  13133                We are not actually re-creating the
 4     pages but we do have to double the amount of content. 
 5     It is an issue for us, but I think we are able to
 6     address this.  Certainly, there is a large pool of
 7     talent in the country to cover this requirement.
 8  13134                COMMISSIONER McKENDRY:  Thank you for
 9     answering my questions.
10  13135                You have had, as Commissioner
11     Colville said, the last word in this phase of our
12     proceedings.  We appreciate very much your taking the
13     time to come and talk with us.
14  13136                MR. PILLON:  Thank you very much for
15     the opportunity to speak.
16  13137                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you,
17     Commissioner McKendry.
18  13138                I will actually give you the
19     opportunity to have the last word in addition to
20     anything that you have discussed with Commissioner
21     McKendry, if you wish.
22  13139                Is there anything that you want to
23     leave us with?
24  13140                MR. PILLON:  I would like to
25     reiterate that the Canadian Internet development


 1     industry is going through a period of very rapid
 2     growth.  I think Canadians are uniquely positioned to
 3     take advantage of this opportunity.
 4  13141                I think we will become one of the top
 5     three players in the United States, for example.  I
 6     think we can benefit, as a nation, from this export
 7     opportunity, if we play our cards carefully and support
 8     the development of skills in this country.
 9  13142                Thank you.
10  13143                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you again,
11     Mr. Pillon.  We appreciate your coming here today and
12     your submission.
13  13144                I find this unusual that at almost
14     every hearing I have attended -- I think I have
15     indicated at one time or another during this proceeding
16     that I have been with the Commission for a little over
17     eight years now and sat in on a lot of hearings.
18  13145                And as usually happens, while this
19     room is full of people on Day One of the hearing, it is
20     virtually empty now.  Those of you who may be watching
21     on CPAC may not appreciate that.  But if the camera had
22     panned the room, you would see that almost all of the
23     chairs are empty with the exception of a few people who
24     are on the CRTC staff, Mr. Pillon here, and a
25     representative from Industry Canada who has been here


 1     faithfully almost every day for the two weeks of the
 2     hearing, taking notes.
 3  13146                We have the situation where most of
 4     the parties who have been here are not here now.
 5  13147                Nevertheless, we know that a lot of
 6     people are watching this proceeding on CPAC and have
 7     been following the proceedings.  There is a transcript,
 8     and I understand the transcript has been posted on our
 9     website, when it is available.
10  13148                I know from hearing, either directly
11     or indirectly, from other parties that they have been
12     carefully following the proceeding.
13  13149                So notwithstanding the fact that the
14     room is almost deserted now, we know that a lot of
15     people have been following the hearing.
16  13150                I think it has been a particularly
17     interesting hearing in respect to the coverage that it
18     has had.  Typically what happens at one of these
19     hearings is that the press are here the first day or
20     two and we will see a lot of coverage in the media,
21     depending on the particular issue, for the first day or
22     two.
23  13151                In this particular case, the press
24     people were here almost every day, certainly of the
25     first two weeks, and there has been a lot of media


 1     coverage about this issue and this particular
 2     proceeding, which demonstrates that it is obviously an
 3     issue to a lot of people, both industry players who are
 4     involved in one aspect of the industry or another and
 5     the general public.
 6  13152                This whole issue is obviously one of
 7     concern to many people in Canada.
 8  13153                We have had over the past two weeks
 9     now about 80 oral presentations and have had an
10     excellent discussion, I think, of all of the issues
11     that have come up with the parties who have come here. 
12     I want to particularly thank all of those who have come
13     and expressed their views.
14  13154                I think it is probably fair to say
15     that I can speak for all of my colleagues, those who
16     are here now and who were here, that we have certainly
17     gained a much better understanding of the issues.  We
18     have had an excellent discussion of the issues.  It has
19     been very helpful to us.
20  13155                The Internet has been referred to as
21     a cloud by a number of people earlier in the
22     proceeding, and I think it has helped us -- there has
23     actually been a fog, for those of you who don't live in
24     Ottawa, for the last couple of days; actually
25     physically fog.


 1  13156                I think the hearing has been helpful
 2     in clearing away some of the fog and to get a better
 3     understanding of some of the issues, some of which are
 4     directly related to the Commission's responsibilities
 5     and some of which might be but, as many people have
 6     suggested, should not be; and some that are outside of
 7     the Commission's direct responsibilities.
 8  13157                I want to particularly thank all of
 9     those parties who have come before us over the past two
10     weeks and expressed their views.
11  13158                One of the things it is probably fair
12     to say that there has been an agreement on, as we just
13     discussed with the last presenter, is that we need to
14     deal with this issue in the context of how we can
15     facilitate its growth and a Canadian presence in terms
16     of developing both the infrastructure and the content
17     and to perhaps create a prominence for Canada and its
18     creators in this business.
19  13159                As we noted at the outset of the
20     proceeding, there were three basic themes that we
21     wanted to address with respect to the whole issue of
22     new media -- and I use that term somewhat loosely.  It
23     has been suggested to us how we should or should not
24     define "new media"; and has already been referred to,
25     maybe I can refer to it as "the stuff" of this


 1     business, as we discussed earlier this morning.
 2  13160                I believe those themes have been very
 3     well explored and have been raised by almost all of the
 4     parties who have come before us.  I think we have had a
 5     good exploration of those themes, to the point where,
 6     as I indicated earlier, we certainly have a better
 7     understanding of those issues and a better
 8     understanding of the implications that new media holds
 9     for broadcasting, programming undertakings, producers,
10     telecommunications carriers, access carriers and indeed
11     all Canadians, both as consumers and citizens.
12  13161                I would like to say that without in
13     any way intending to limit the scope of final comment
14     by any of the parties -- and this particular phase we
15     are ending here today is one stage in the process that
16     we are going through to look at these issues -- I would
17     like to note that it would be particularly helpful in
18     our deliberations if those commenting on some issues
19     that are within our jurisdiction could be fairly
20     specific when they address a number of issues that have
21     been raised during this proceeding.
22  13162                Perhaps I could give a few examples
23     of the kind of specificity that might be somewhat
24     helpful.
25  13163                For those parties who will be


 1     commenting on which types of new media services are
 2     within and which are beyond the scope of what the
 3     Broadcasting Act defines as programs or broadcasting,
 4     it would be helpful if you could describe the
 5     characteristics, such as interactivity or customization
 6     that might define those types of services.
 7  13164                Again, for those parties who have
 8     recommended either the licensing or indeed exemption of
 9     new media undertakings under the Broadcasting Act, it
10     would be helpful if you could define the specific
11     classes of undertakings that would be subject to such
12     licensing or exemption.
13  13165                In addition, such parties may wish to
14     specify the parameters of any such licensing or
15     exemption; for example, any conditions or terms that
16     you would propose.  And in particular, parties
17     suggesting an exemption order might suggest whether
18     such an order ought to be time limited.
19  13166                For those parties commenting on the
20     appropriate classification of Internet service
21     providers as broadcasting undertakings,
22     telecommunications service providers or Canadian
23     carriers, what specific activities or characteristics
24     of an Internet service provider would qualify it as
25     either a broadcasting undertaking or a


 1     telecommunications service provider or carrier?
 2  13167                Many parties have expressed support
 3     or indeed opposition to the imposition of measures
 4     requiring operators or portals, content aggregators and
 5     others to provide visibility and prominence to new
 6     Canadian content.  Those parties may wish to address
 7     whether such measures are needed, appropriate,
 8     practically feasible and within the scope of the
 9     Commission's statutory mandates.
10  13168                If in their view it is practically
11     feasible, those parties may wish to provide specific
12     examples of how this could be achieved.
13  13169                Many parties have also suggested that
14     the Commission monitor the status of new media.  We
15     would request that those parties tell us what are the
16     appropriate indicators or benchmarks that should be
17     used to gauge both the growth of the industry and its
18     impact on traditional media undertakings.
19  13170                And finally, for those parties that
20     called for additional proceedings to consider issues
21     relating to access by Internet service providers to the
22     facilities of Canadian carriers, it would be helpful if
23     you would specify the nature and scope of the
24     proceeding required; for example, a public hearing, SIS
25     process or other type of proceeding.


 1  13171                It has been suggested that a number
 2     of these issues may well be resolved by relying on the
 3     marketplace to resolve those issues.
 4  13172                Again, I use those by way of
 5     examples.  A number of parties who have appeared over
 6     the last couple of weeks have suggested that these are
 7     complex issues and in some respects difficult to deal
 8     with.  But as I say, where parties are making
 9     recommendations with respect to certain issues, the
10     more specific you could be in providing comments to us
11     in the next round, it would be particularly helpful.
12  13173                I remind parties that requests to
13     appear at the oral final comment phase must be filed
14     with the Commission no later than January 18th of 1999.
15  13174                Written final comments may be filed
16     with the Commission by February 8th, 1999 and may be
17     orally presented during the week of February 8th to
18     12th.
19  13175                Finally, on behalf of my fellow
20     Commissioners and the Commission, I would like to thank
21     also all of those who have made written submissions to
22     the Commission.  Your comments and submissions will be
23     carefully considered with respect to our deliberations
24     as well.  We certainly appreciate the time and effort
25     of all the parties, whether they provided a written


 1     submission or appeared orally.
 2  13176                As I said earlier, it has certainly
 3     helped us to better understand the issues that are
 4     raised with respect to new media and the Internet.
 5  13177                I would like to thank my colleagues
 6     on the Panel for their participation.
 7  13178                Somebody made a comment at the outset
 8     of the proceeding that they were a little bit nervous
 9     in presenting.  Some parties had not appeared in front
10     of the Commission before.  As I indicated at the
11     outset, there always is a certain amount of nervous
12     tension on both sides of the table in dealing with
13     these issues -- including myself, who has been around
14     here longer than any of the other Commissioners.
15  13179                I would like to thank all the
16     Commissioners for their help and support in conducting
17     this proceeding.
18  13180                I would like to thank our staff: 
19     Commission counsel, Karen Moore and Karen Pinsky; our
20     hearing manager, Ted Woodhead; and all of the staff who
21     have helped us gain a better understanding of the
22     issues.
23  13181                Thank you to our hearing secretaries,
24     Carole Bénard and Diane Santerre, who is not here right
25     now but helped us out certainly in the first part of


 1     the proceeding to conduct our proceeding in a very
 2     efficient and effective manner.
 3  13182                Thanks to our translators and our
 4     court reporters for providing assistance.
 5  13183                Also, thank you to CPAC for carrying
 6     the proceeding.  I understand that you have to be a bit
 7     of a night owl if you want to watch it; but
 8     nonetheless, it is available for viewers to watch what
 9     is going on.
10  13184                With that, we will conclude the
11     proceeding.  I invite you all to enjoy a happy holiday
12     season over the next while.  We will see at least some
13     of you back here in February, when we will conclude the
14     final oral phase of the proceeding.
15  13185                At that point, the Commission will
16     deliberate on all of the material that we have and will
17     convey the outcome of the proceeding in some sort of
18     document, hopefully soon after the February phase of
19     the hearing.
20  13186                Thank you very much to all.  This
21     phase of our hearing is adjourned.
22     --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1300 /
23         L'audience est ajournée à 1300
Date modified: