TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE

             THE CANADIAN RADIO‑TELEVISION AND

               TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

             TRANSCRIPTION DES AUDIENCES DEVANT

              LE CONSEIL DE LA RADIODIFFUSION

           ET DES TÉLÉCOMMUNICATIONS CANADIENNES

                       SUBJECT/SUJET:

VARIOUS BROADCASTING APPLICATIONS /

PLUSIEURS DEMANDES EN RADIODIFFUSION

HELD AT:                              TENUE À:

Conference Centre                     Centre de conférences

Outaouais Room                        Salle Outaouais

Portage IV                            Portage IV

140 Promenade du Portage              140, promenade du Portage

Gatineau, Quebec                      Gatineau (Québec)

March 27, 2007                        Le 27 mars 2007

Transcripts

In order to meet the requirements of the Official Languages

Act, transcripts of proceedings before the Commission will be

bilingual as to their covers, the listing of the CRTC members

and staff attending the public hearings, and the Table of

Contents.

However, the aforementioned publication is the recorded

verbatim transcript and, as such, is taped and transcribed in

either of the official languages, depending on the language

spoken by the participant at the public hearing.

Transcription

Afin de rencontrer les exigences de la Loi sur les langues

officielles, les procès‑verbaux pour le Conseil seront

bilingues en ce qui a trait à la page couverture, la liste des

membres et du personnel du CRTC participant à l'audience

publique ainsi que la table des matières.

Toutefois, la publication susmentionnée est un compte rendu

textuel des délibérations et, en tant que tel, est enregistrée

et transcrite dans l'une ou l'autre des deux langues

officielles, compte tenu de la langue utilisée par le

participant à l'audience publique.

               Canadian Radio‑television and

               Telecommunications Commission

            Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des

               télécommunications canadiennes

                 Transcript / Transcription

            VARIOUS BROADCASTING APPLICATIONS /

            PLUSIEURS DEMANDES EN RADIODIFFUSION

BEFORE / DEVANT:

Rita Cugini                       Chairperson / Présidente

Michel Arpin                      Commissioner / Conseiller

Richard French                    Commissioner / Conseiller

Barbara Cram                      Commissioner / Conseillère

Helen del Val                     Commissioner / Conseillère

ALSO PRESENT / AUSSI PRÉSENTS:

Jade Roy                          Secretary / Secrétaire

Valérie Dionne                    Legal Counsel /

Conseillère juridique

Joe Aguiar                        Hearing Manager /

Gérant de l'audience

HELD AT:                          TENUE À:

Conference Centre                 Centre de conférences

Outaouais Room                    Salle Outaouais

Portage IV                        Portage IV

140 Promenade du Portage          140, promenade du Portage

Gatineau, Quebec                  Gatineau (Québec)

February 12, 2007                 Le 12 février 2007

           TABLE DES MATIÈRES / TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                 PAGE / PARA

PHASE I

PRESENTATION BY / PRÉSENTATION PAR:

Kenneth R. Schaffer                                 9 /   51

Diversity Television Inc.                          62 /  433

National Broadcast Reading Service (OBCI)         171 / 1246

Avis de recherche inc. and All Points             276 / 1990

  Bulletin Incorporated

Faith and Spirit Media Inc.                       285 / 2032

Pelmorex Communications Inc.                      293 / 2070

CANAL Corporation pour l'avancement de            299 / 2098

  nouvelles applications des langages ltée

PHASE II

INTERVENTION BY / INTERVENTION PAR:

Debwe Communications                              308 / 2137

RJ Deverell Productions                           315 / 2161

Young Diplomats                                   320 / 2182

Gord Hope                                         344 / 2284

Geoff Eden                                        355 / 2331

Charlie Macdonald                                 363 / 2370

Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians          377 / 2444

Penny Leclair                                     386 / 2501

Rogers Communications Inc.                        393 / 2534

Shaw Communications                               411 / 2639

Canadian Cable Systems Alliance                   429 / 2742

Bell Video Group                                  444 / 2820

                  Gatineau Quebec / Gatineau (Québec)

‑‑‑ Upon commencing on Tuesday, March 27, 2007

    at 0930 / L'audience débute le mardi 27 mars 2007

    à 0930

LISTNUM 1 \l 11                THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order, please.  Ladies and gentlemen, order, please.

LISTNUM 1 \l 12                Bonjour, mesdames et messieurs, et bienvenue à cette audience publique.

LISTNUM 1 \l 13                Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to this public hearing.

LISTNUM 1 \l 14                My name is Rita Cugini.  I am the CRTC Regional Commissioner for Ontario, and I will be presiding over this hearing.

LISTNUM 1 \l 15                Joining me on the panel are my colleagues Michel Arpin, Vice‑Chair of Broadcasting; Richard French, Vice‑Chair of Telecommunications; Barbara Cram, Regional Commissioner for Manitoba and Saskatchewan; and Helen del Val, Regional Commissioner for British Columbia and the Yukon.

LISTNUM 1 \l 16                L'équipe du Conseil qui nous assiste se compose, notamment, de Joe Aguiar, gérant de l'audience et gestionnaire de l'Analyse de la radio de langue anglaise; Valérie Dionne, conseillère juridique; et Jade Roy, secrétaire d'audience, auprès de qui vous pouvez vous renseigner sur toute question qui concerne le déroulement de l'audience.

LISTNUM 1 \l 17                At this hearing we will examine applications for new licences to operate specialty programming services with digital basic status, as well as the applications of existing Licensees for digital basic status.

LISTNUM 1 \l 18                This will be followed by applications to provide a new radio service to the Sudbury market.

LISTNUM 1 \l 19                We will then assess an application relating to a transaction that would bring about a change to the effective control of the Canadian Documentary Channel.

LISTNUM 1 \l 110               Finally, we will look at an application to renew the licence of Radio Station CKEY‑FM, Fort Erie and St. Catharines.

LISTNUM 1 \l 111               The panel will begin by studying the applications presented by Kenneth R. Schaffer, Diversity Television Inc., and the National Broadcast Reading Service Inc., for licences to operate a new national specialty programming undertaking with mandatory digital basic carriage.

LISTNUM 1 \l 112               We will then hear a presentation by Avis de Recherche and All Points Bulletin Incorporated, requesting mandatory digital basic carriage for their Category 2 specialty services.

LISTNUM 1 \l 113               This will be followed by presentations by Faith and Spirit Media Inc. and Pelmorex Communications Inc.  These Licensees are applying for mandatory distribution on digital basic for their dual status analog specialty services.

LISTNUM 1 \l 114               Enfin, nous entendrons la présentation de la Corporation pour l'avancement des nouvelles applications des langages limités, ou CANAL, qui demande la distribution obligatoire du Canal Savoir au Québec et sa distribution en mode numérique à l'extérieur du Québec.

LISTNUM 1 \l 115               The panel will assess applications for mandatory digital basic carriage in light of the criteria set out in the Digital Migration Framework, Broadcasting Public Notice CRTC 2006‑23, which was issued in February 2006.

LISTNUM 1 \l 116               These criteria state, among other things, that Applicants must provide evidence demonstrating the exceptional importance of the service to the achievement of the objectives of the Broadcasting Act.

LISTNUM 1 \l 117               The Applicant must also demonstrate that its business plan and the implementation of its specific commitments are dependent on the receipt of broad national distribution on the digital basic service, and that the wholesale rate it is proposing would not make its service unaffordable to consumers.

LISTNUM 1 \l 118               Regarding the three applications for new services, the Exceptional Importance Criterion will be evaluated based on their proposed programming plans and commitments, as well as the unique contribution that would be realized by licensing these services.

LISTNUM 1 \l 119               The Commission invited comments on these applications and on the extent to which they have demonstrated that they meet the criteria set out in the Digital Migration Framework.

LISTNUM 1 \l 120               Information extraneous to the scope of this proceeding will not be considered by the Commission and it will not revisit the Digital Migration Framework as part of this hearing.

LISTNUM 1 \l 121               The Commission will only consider information that is relevant to the merits of the applications before it, using the criteria listed in the Notice of Public Hearing in reference to the Digital Migration Framework.

LISTNUM 1 \l 122               Next we will consider six proposals to operate a new English‑language FM commercial radio station in Sudbury.  We will examine the applications in the order of Items 1 to 6, presented in the Broadcasting Notice of Public Hearing CRTC 2007‑1.

LISTNUM 1 \l 123               Some applications are competing technically for the use of the same frequencies.

LISTNUM 1 \l 124               Nous évaluerons les propositions à la lumière des objectifs culturels, économiques et sociaux énoncés dans la Loi sur la radiodiffusion et les règlements qui en découlent.

LISTNUM 1 \l 125               The panel will base its decision on several criteria, including the state of competition and the diversity of editorial voices in the market, as well as the quality of the applications.

LISTNUM 1 \l 126               It will also look at the ability of the market to support new radio stations, the financial resources of each Applicant, and proposed initiatives for Canadian content development.

LISTNUM 1 \l 127               We will then assess an application by the Canadian Documentary Channel Limited Partnership for authority to effect a change to the effective control of the Canadian Documentary Channel, and for a new licence to continue its operation.

LISTNUM 1 \l 128               The proposed transaction would see the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation increase its partnership interest from 29 to 82 percent, and the effective control change from Corus to the CBC.

LISTNUM 1 \l 129               Finally, we will examine an application to renew the licence of Radio Station CKEY‑FM, Fort Erie, and its transmitter, CKEY‑FM‑1 St. Catharines.

LISTNUM 1 \l 130               In January 2005, the Commission decided to renew CKEY‑FM's licence for a period of a year and a half.  This decision was based on the station's non‑compliance with the Radio Regulations, 1986, and with certain conditions of licence.

LISTNUM 1 \l 131               The Commission was particularly concerned by the insufficient amount of local programming that had been broadcast on CKEY‑FM.

LISTNUM 1 \l 132               After renewing the licence, the Commission monitored the programming broadcast by the station on two separate occasions, which raised serious preoccupations with respect to the amount of local programming.

LISTNUM 1 \l 133               The Commission is concerned that the Licensee may be operating in a continued breach of its condition of licence.  Therefore, as stated in Broadcasting Notice of Public Hearing CRTC 2007‑1, the Licensee is expected to show cause as to why a mandatory order should not be issued requiring it to provide a sufficient level of local programming to be deemed operating in compliance with its condition of licence.

LISTNUM 1 \l 134               I will now invite the Hearing Secretary, Jade Roy, to explain the procedures we will be following.

LISTNUM 1 \l 135               Miss Roy.

LISTNUM 1 \l 136               THE SECRETARY:  Thank you, Madam Chair.

LISTNUM 1 \l 137               Nous aimerions souligner quelques points d'ordre pratique qui contribueront au bon déroulement de cette audience publique.

LISTNUM 1 \l 138               Firstly, the simultaneous interpretation service is available during the hearing. Receivers are available from the Commissionaire outside the Hearing Room.

LISTNUM 1 \l 139               The English interpretation is on Channel 7, and French is on Channel 8.

LISTNUM 1 \l 140               When you are in the Hearing Room, we would ask you to please turn off your cellphones, beepers and Blackberrys, as they are an unwelcome distraction and they cause interference on the internal communications system used by our translators.  We would appreciate your cooperation in this regard throughout the hearing.

LISTNUM 1 \l 141               We expect the hearing to take approximately one week.  We will begin each morning at 8:30 a.m., starting tomorrow, and we will finish each day at approximately 7:00 p.m. or 7:30 p.m.

LISTNUM 1 \l 142               We will take one hour for lunch, and a break in the morning and in the afternoon.

LISTNUM 1 \l 143               We will let you know of any schedule changes that may occur.

LISTNUM 1 \l 144               Pendant toute la durée de l'audience, vous pourrez consulter les documents qui font partie du dossier public pour cette audience dans la salle d'examen qui se trouve dans la salle Papineau, située à l'extérieur de la salle d'audience, à votre droite.  Tel qu'indiqué dans l'ordre du jour, le numéro de téléphone de la salle d'examen est le 819‑953‑3168.

LISTNUM 1 \l 145               Une transcription des comparutions quotidiennes sera affichée sur le site internet du Conseil peu après la fin de l'audience.  Les personnes qui désirent acheter des transcriptions peuvent s'adresser aux sténographes qui se trouvent à la table à ma droite durant la pause ou directement auprès de la compagnie Mediacopy.

LISTNUM 1 \l 146               We will now proceed with the presentations in the order of appearance set out in the agenda.  Each party will be granted a given time to make its presentation.  Questions from the Commission may follow each presentation.

LISTNUM 1 \l 147               Now, Madam Chair, we will proceed with Item 1 on the agenda, which is an application by Kenneth Schaffer, on behalf of a corporation to be incorporated, for a licence to operate a national digital English‑language specialty programming undertaking to be known as Métis Michif Television Network.

LISTNUM 1 \l 148               The proposed service will be devoted to programming exploring the concerns of preserving the culture, language and heritage of the Métis people.

LISTNUM 1 \l 149               Appearing for the Applicant is Mr. Kenneth Schaffer, who will introduce his colleagues.

LISTNUM 1 \l 150               Mr. Schaffer, you will have 20 minutes to make your presentation.

*PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION

LISTNUM 1 \l 151               MR. SCHAFFER:  Hello, bonjour, tanjay.  My name is Ken Schaffer.  Thank you to Madam Chairperson and to the Commission for allowing us to appear today.  It is our pleasure to appear.

LISTNUM 1 \l 152               My name is Ken Schaffer, and I am the founder of the Métis Television Network across Canada.

LISTNUM 1 \l 153               With me are Deb Schaffer and Richard Gustin from SCN, on our panel.

LISTNUM 1 \l 154               I would first state that I would like to apologize to the Commission in advance for any types of deficiencies that we may have run into in our presentation to you, with the exception that I have never been to a hearing, so I wasn't really sure of how this would all valuate and make its way out.

LISTNUM 1 \l 155               The fundamental reasons for us applying are:

LISTNUM 1 \l 156               To establish a Métis Television Network across Canada.

LISTNUM 1 \l 157               The Métis are in the Constitution, and we have fallen short, for some reason, of the complete Broadcasting Act, and I believe that the Broadcasting Act is a Canadian‑‑ it's a gem.  It's a worldwide gem, not just a Canadian gem.

LISTNUM 1 \l 158               The application provides the opportunity for the Métis to showcase our proud history, as well as our culture and heritage.  It provides the opportunity for all Canadians to learn about and understand the contributions, connections and diversity of the Métis and the Aboriginal people that it represents, that is forever part of history in the development of Canada as a nation.

LISTNUM 1 \l 159               The application will ensure the participation of Métis youth, elders, and a chance for the Métis to learn their native tongue, and basically bring back to life the original language of the Métis, which is the Michif language.

LISTNUM 1 \l 160               Within a decade, it is entirely possible that the Métis will be the largest population component within Canada's Aboriginal population.  The reason I say that is because we have to take into account the non‑status representation.  A lot of Métis people are considered to be non‑status Aboriginal or Indian people or Métis people.

LISTNUM 1 \l 161               So there are a lot of people who are not being represented within all of the broadcasting channels that currently exist.

LISTNUM 1 \l 162               MMTN, the Métis Michif Television Network, is an exceptional case.  The Métis of Canada encompass many nations from North America, as well as abroad.  The Métis history here in Canada is documented to have started in the early 1500s.  There is nowhere else in the world that you will find the Métis Michif people.

LISTNUM 1 \l 163               We started our creation here, and only here; not like the First Nations, with their roots that can be traced back to migration from Asian, as well as other European countries, migrating to the North American continent.

LISTNUM 1 \l 164               MMTN can understand that the plan for the network is entrepreneurial, as this is and has been the prominence of the Métis people since their inception as a group of people here in Canada‑‑ since the integral voyage, if you will.

LISTNUM 1 \l 165               With that said, MMTN has signed a memorandum of understanding with the Saskatchewan Communications Network, in which the Saskatchewan Communications Network will play a key role in our launching and our success, to ensure that the mechanisms are in place, especially the technology, and the advice, of course, for us to handle and maintain the traffic reports and other considerations that are necessary to the CRTC.

LISTNUM 1 \l 166               We must point out that when immigrants come into Canada, there are a number of questions that are asked of them before they get their citizenship.  Some of the interventions spoken against the Métis Television Network make reference to this.  What happens is, they don't make the reference to it in a positive way.

LISTNUM 1 \l 167               We are part of section 35 of the Constitution, and there are three peoples listed within the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada.  They are:  the Métis, the Inuit and the First Nations People.

LISTNUM 1 \l 168               What that comprises is a number of countries.  Just like Europe has a number of countries, and there are a number of countries within Asia, Canada has a number of countries within it, which were here before the establishment of Upper and Lower Canada, and, of course, Canada as it is today.

LISTNUM 1 \l 169               The Métis are definitely listed within the Constitution, under section 35(2).  That means that, basically, we are distinctive.  We are not the same as every other group.  We are not White enough, we are not Indian enough to have certain status as quoted by the Canadian government.

LISTNUM 1 \l 170               With all due respect, MMTN needs to have the assurance and safeguards of 9(1)(h), which is the "must carry" designation, in order to successfully launch.

LISTNUM 1 \l 171               I think you are aware that we have already had one decision, which was 2002‑345.  With that decision, we tried ardently, within a number of years, to gain access‑‑ and I must say that I am here, respectfully, to address you, the Commission, about this issue.

LISTNUM 1 \l 172               We have tried ardently to get that carriage, as designated in the original decision, 2002‑345.  What we found was that we were unable to do that because of the gatekeeper‑type mentality of the broadcast distribution undertakings.  This has left us in a situation where we have had no choice but to come to you, respectfully, and ask for the "must carry" designation.

LISTNUM 1 \l 173               I must point out, also, that I have an application in front of me for a Category 1 licence, which I obtained a number of years ago.  I have never actually presented it to the Commission, but it is here, as well.

LISTNUM 1 \l 174               I believe that the framework of our operational plan will answer all of the questions in regard to the Category 1 licence, as well as our Category 2 licence for this undertaking.

LISTNUM 1 \l 175               As I said, MMTN has attempted for many years to gain commitments for carriage in order to be able to launch.  Numerous BDUs in their interventions have suggested that the services can become Category 2's if they desire to access the system.

LISTNUM 1 \l 176               Historically, the unattainable gatekeeper actions of the BDUs, including Rogers and Shaw, have, in many ways, become an architect to our realization that "must carry" is a necessary approach in order to adequately service Canadians.

LISTNUM 1 \l 177               Ironically, prior to our application, they told MMTN that they would adhere, or at least honour the recommendations of the CRTC.

LISTNUM 1 \l 178               In other words, they will give us carriage only upon you making it so.

LISTNUM 1 \l 179               The CRTC made a historic decision with 2002‑345.  I don't think you could have come closer to really filling our Broadcasting Act to completion, when it comes down to allowing that decision to go forward.  That alone made Canada, in my opinion, a whole country.

LISTNUM 1 \l 180               Even though we have never launched the network, and there were unforeseeable problems to actually getting that launch, it must be pointed out that that was, I think, further proof of Canadian sovereignty and the will of the Commission to do the right thing in terms of licensing MMTN and having it launch as a network.

LISTNUM 1 \l 181               The Métis is the only group mentioned in the Canadian Constitution that does not have its own broadcasting and communications vehicles for preserving and protecting the culture and language of the Métis and non‑status people, unlike the French, Inuit and First Nations in the very same Constitution.

LISTNUM 1 \l 182               APTN has stated that they feel there will be a bit of competition, and I really do not believe that to be the case.  I don't think our panel does.  There is a lack of Métis representation on the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network.  I don't know for what reason.  That would have to be answered by APTN.

LISTNUM 1 \l 183               What we are saying is that the Métis Television Network will not be duplicating any services that the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network would be entertaining.

LISTNUM 1 \l 184               APTN and other broadcasters include Métis programming sometimes, but it is not really Métis programming.  What they do is, they will allow anybody to produce on behalf of something they would call Métis‑specific.

LISTNUM 1 \l 185               I am the founder of the first ever Métis‑specific television series in Canadian history, and I started that 10 years ago.  My first licence was given to me through SCN.  So we were basically up and running before APTN was ever involved with us.

LISTNUM 1 \l 186               One thing that we have found for sure is this:  When we have approached any other broadcasters or broadcast distribution undertakings about carriage, they have used APTN as a sword against the Métis people and the non‑status people here in Canada.  Even if you go to another broadcaster with a Métis‑specific television series and say that you want to air it on their network, they use APTN as a scapegoat, as a weapon against the Métis people, by saying:  You have to go to the Indian channel in order to get that program to run.

LISTNUM 1 \l 187               I really don't see the need for that when we have hundreds of broadcast undertakings, and each one of them, according to the Broadcasting Act and its wording‑‑ and we have to point out that the wording is there, and it states that these broadcasters should be taking the time and merit to produce and allow Métis producers access to their networks, but they are not doing it.  It is just not being done.

LISTNUM 1 \l 188               This is, again, further reason why the Métis are searching for their own network.  The thing is, it is for the benefit of everybody, especially the youth.

LISTNUM 1 \l 189               Again, the biggest obstacles for the Métis people seem to be that they are using other networks to stop the actual promotion of Métis‑specific programming.

LISTNUM 1 \l 190               I must point out that we have never done a programming call.  We have never really actually put an ad out, or anything of that nature, asking all Métis and non‑status producers to apply to us for licensing, because we were not going to set it up to fail.  We were not going to set up any of those producers to fail.  We knew that we needed to have the "must carry" designation, or there was no way that we were going to license anybody under the current system.  It would be derogatory, and it certainly wouldn't help anybody.

LISTNUM 1 \l 191               MMTN also would like to point out that, yes, we are in the situation of asking for the "must carry" because we do need those funds from the "must carry" designation to help and license other producers who would like to come forward.

LISTNUM 1 \l 192               Also, I would like to point out that a lot of people of the not‑so‑White‑‑ not‑White‑enough category of the Métis people are out there, and they really don't know how to fit into the current framework in Canada because the door has been shut on them.  They don't even know how to present a proper production to the Canadian framework of production, because they feel that they don't fit within the system, and we would like to make that stop.  We would like it to be a more positive thing, where everybody fits in, and everybody has the chance to speak their mind.

LISTNUM 1 \l 193               What I am talking about is that the Métis people are not just Indian people.  Sure, we are part First Nations, but we are also part French, we are also part English, we are also part Irish, and we are also part Scottish.  A lot of those types of programming do not hit our Canadian airwaves for some reason, yet everybody is supposed to be there to actually identify with that and make that happen.

LISTNUM 1 \l 194               It is a big difference from six years ago, when the Net licence was okayed by the CRTC.  The mainstream media didn't believe that we would last that long and actually make it to the point where we would be standing here before you in a hearing, asking for "must carry".  I don't think they thought this was going to happen.

LISTNUM 1 \l 195               We are trying to do our best, and we will try to make our best efforts to maintain all of the programming we can.

LISTNUM 1 \l 196               I have to apologize, again, to you for my lack of continuance in this‑‑ continuity.

LISTNUM 1 \l 197               I think what I would like to do is just say that we have come all this way, and we submit that our application could not be more applicable to the parameters of the "must carry" designation and what you would call‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 198               How is it worded?  To entertain on an exceptional basis?

LISTNUM 1 \l 199               I believe that MMTN has met all of that criteria.  As Métis people in Canada, we meet it probably more than anybody else in that way.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1100              I really don't want to ramble on.  If I could, I would ask Richard to speak on a few things, because I have gone on and on, and I can't state my case any more than what I have, I don't think, right at this point.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1101              MR. GUSTIN:  Good morning.  I represent SCN, the Saskatchewan Communications Network, Saskatchewan's educational broadcaster.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1102              I am not here to speak to MMTN's business plan or their content.  That is for Ken to answer.  However, I am here to speak to the value of the co‑location agreement that we are discussing with MMTN and what this would do to facilitate their ability to get this service up and running.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1103              As many of you know, SCN has just built a new physical plant.  We have one of the most advanced digital broadcast centres in the country.  It would be very easy for us to add other services to that.  So we would be very pleased to welcome MMTN to SCN.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1104              As well, we have accumulated a great deal of expertise in traffic matters, in working with the CRTC, so I think we have a very robust traffic management system that would certainly bring value to this service, as well as our familiarity with the broadcasting environment.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1105              The other thing, though, that I want to speak to is the issue of diversity.  As many of the Commissioners know, SCN has been a strong proponent of regional voices and diversity in the Canadian broadcasting system, and I would note that, currently, the multiple channels owned by a small number of corporate broadcast groups do not guarantee the diversity of voices.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1106              A quick analogy that I noted in this morning's paper is that there seems to be a great scandal developing in the dog food industry, where we have one company making hundreds of brands of dog food, and all of them have become tainted.  Dog owners are suddenly in a panic, because, although there are all of these brands in the supermarket, they are all from the same people and they are all corrupted.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1107              We have a similar situation in the broadcasting world, where we have dozens and dozens of channels, all of which seem to be focusing on showing "CSI Miami" and "The Simpsons".

LISTNUM 1 \l 1108              SCN is a strong believer that there need to be more voices in the system.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1109              Really, those are the issues that I wanted to bring to the table.  We think that diversity in the system is important, and that there need to be opportunities for voices like what Ken is trying to do for the Métis people and the Michif language, and we strongly support this.  We have worked with a number of Aboriginal and Métis producers over the years, and I must point out that, in SCN's experience, it was very, very difficult to get any kind of Aboriginal programming made prior to APTN coming on the scene, because SCN, as a small broadcaster, could not carry the weight of that responsibility alone.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1110              So getting more participants into the system enables more diverse voices to appear.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1111              We have about two minutes left, Ken.  Do you have anything else to say?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1112              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes, I do, if I could, please.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1113              I would like to point out that we didn't have a lot of positive interventions presented to the Commission on this hearing, and that is basically because we didn't go to get any, because when the original application was sent in, it had, virtually, a number of different positive letters from all over Canada.  There are about 70 different positive interventions directly in the actual application and the business plan, and we would like you to take note of them, because we included them in the actual application, rather than trying to get other interventions at this point.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1114              As I pointed out, we already have received a Category 2 licence, under Decision 2002‑345, so we are trying to further this and make it more positive, where we can actually launch and dedicate the service to the Métis people and people of Canada.  We really want to do this.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1115              That is really all I have to say.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1116              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you very much.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1117              Vice‑Chairman French.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1118              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Welcome, Mr. and Ms Schaffer, and Mr. Gustin.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1119              Mr. Schaffer, in order to do full justice to your application, I would like to ask you some fairly specific questions, the object being to elicit from you some hard information that the Commission requires in order to be able to properly evaluate your proposal.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1120              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes, sir.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1121              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  We will take as read your cultural case.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1122              MR. SCHAFFER:  Okay.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1123              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Let's talk specifically about what you are planning to do on your proposed channel.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1124              How much programming in a week will be, in your mind, in English, French and Michif?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1125              MR. SCHAFFER:  I believe that what we had done there was, we had thought that about 75 to 80 percent of the content would be in the English category, as, really, that is one of the first languages of the Métis.  I guess that French would be one of the other languages, and then, finally, the Aboriginal component, which would be a smaller percentage at this point, and then we would make our best efforts to try to increase that as the years go by.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1126              I must point out that the Michif language is the most tricky out of all of the components to put together, as far as national languages are concerned.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1127              I make reference, for instance, to the State of Hawaii, in which the people of Hawaii will drive around their cities and look at a number of different street signs, like King Kameamea Avenue, Makapuu Bay, and all of these different areas, but they don't talk their own language.  That is really kind of sad.  It is not even taught in their own schools.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1128              In this case, the Michif language is one of those languages that has nearly fallen right off the map.  So we want to dedicate a certain amount of time to try to bring back some of that, as well, and we hope to have as much programming in that area of the French‑English end of it, with subtitling where it is available.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1129              I hope that answers that question.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1130              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Well, you have said that 75 to 80 percent of the programming would be in English, so let's talk about the other 20 percent, just to be clear.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1131              French would be 15 percent?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1132              MR. SCHAFFER:  About that, yes.  Ten to 15 percent, I guess.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1133              I forget what was in the actual application, but‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1134              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  It is not a test relative to what is in the application.  You are here to describe what you are trying to do.  So, please, tell us what you are trying to do as of now.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1135              If there is some flagrant contradiction with what you said before, please explain it, but you are free to tell us what you plan to do.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1136              At the moment, you plan to have 75 to 80 percent English, 10 to 15 percent French, and the balance, say, 5 percent to 10 percent, Michif.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1137              Is that fair?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1138              MR. SCHAFFER:  That's fair, with, of course, our best efforts to increase that to up to about 25 percent Michif.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1139              Eventually, we will probably get into more of a relationship with the French language end of it, as we want to license a lot of French programming on the Métis Television Network, as well.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1140              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Let's talk first about the Michif component, because you want to increase it, and it is part of your cultural mandate, I think.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1141              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1142              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  What percentage of people who self‑identify as Métis speak Michif?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1143              MR. SCHAFFER:  I would have to say, from my previous experience in this, not a lot.  Probably less than 2 percent of the overall population even speaks Michif.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1144              And that is the elder population.  As they are gaining in age, this is slowly falling off the face of the earth.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1145              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Would I be right that we are talking about 30,000 people who self‑identified as Métis, or is that too low?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1146              MR. SCHAFFER:  That is way too low.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1147              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  What would it be?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1148              MR. SCHAFFER:  About 800,000.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1149              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Eight‑hundred thousand?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1150              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1151              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Self‑identified.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1152              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes, according to the Canadian census.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1153              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  And about 2 percent of them speak Michif, as an estimate.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1154              MR. SCHAFFER:  Two to 10 percent.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1155              It just depends on what regional area you are in.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1156              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  When you are broadcasting in English and French, you will be treating themes or content that will be directed specifically at Métis, or, more generally, at urban people of Aboriginal origin?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1157              What would the target audience be for your programming in English?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1158              MR. SCHAFFER:  I believe that the target audience would be all Canadians in English.  Overall, I think, we would be‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1159              I am trying to remember your question, I'm sorry.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1160              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  For your 75 to 80 percent of English programming, what would your target audience be?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1161              MR. SCHAFFER:  I would say that the target audience would be the White‑‑ not the White, but the English‑language component, and youth, and then, of course, getting into that marginalization of the Michif language and trying to pull that more into the forefront, to re‑establish it eventually.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1162              But, yes, the majority would be English.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1163              My first language was English.  My second language was Cantonese, and that was because I was five years old and we had an Asian family living next door, so I learned the language very quickly.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1164              And then, later on, my third language was French.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1165              And I never did learn my own language.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1166              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Mr. Schaffer, when you program in English, you are targeting English‑speaking people.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1167              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1168              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  But that's a very big category.  Help me a bit more.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1169              What kind of programming will this be?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1170              This won't be original programming.  What kind of programming will it be?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1171              MR. SCHAFFER:  No, we plan to do 75 percent or 80 percent original programming, with all of this, if not more.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1172              The point being that we are trying to grab into that area of Canadian broadcasting that is not being serviced right now, and that is a large area, especially within the Métis area.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1173              That's what we want to do.  We want to bring that back to life.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1174              Like I say, the Métis people, a lot of them‑‑ and it depends on what region you are from.  Some may be first‑language French‑speaking.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1175              So that is another situation where‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1176              I know this is frustrating, and I am sorry if I am not answering the question the way you want.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1177              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  It's not a matter of what I want, I am trying to help you, Mr. Schaffer, to explain it to us with some degree of precision.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1178              And, to be honest with you, I am not succeeding at the moment.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1179              MR. SCHAFFER:  Okay.  The Métis Michif Television Network intends to devote 35 hours of each broadcast week to Métis and other Aboriginal programming.  That is really what we intend to do.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1180              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  But 35 hours can't be 75 to 80 percent of original programming, then, can it?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1181              MR. SCHAFFER:  That's English.  We are going to try to do as much‑‑ best efforts to doing that as we can.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1182              Again, it has been a real struggle to even get to this point, so...

LISTNUM 1 \l 1183              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Yes, I am struggling, too, Mr. Schaffer.  I know the feeling.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1184              You plan to do 35 hours of original programming a week in English.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1185              MR. SCHAFFER:  We plan to launch a television network and do as much programming as we can that is Canadian content on a weekly basis‑‑ as much as we can.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1186              We wanted to do a 100 percent Canadian content television network, but, in the eyes of other experts we have talked to, this is very hard to do.  It is hard to sustain 100 percent Canadian content.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1187              That is my answer, I guess.  We are trying to do that.  We have stated within our application process that we want to maintain a minimum of 80 percent Canadian content, and that would include all groups‑‑ the French, the Michif and the English‑speaking.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1188              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  All right.  Of that 80 percent, what kind of programming would it be?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1189              Where would you source it from?  What production houses would you work with?  What kinds of themes would you deal with?  What kinds of audiences would you be targeting?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1190              MR. SCHAFFER:  We are going to try to target the average Canadian audience.  We want to be a part‑‑ we want to participate in the broadcasting of Canada, and we want to contribute that by‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1191              Richard, maybe you could help me with some of this.  You know more about the programming.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1192              If I could let Richard answer some of these questions...

LISTNUM 1 \l 1193              MR. GUSTIN:  This puts me in a difficult position.  I am not really here to speak to the content of the Métis channel.  However, I think what Ken is trying to say is, he is interested in trying to do programming that is targeted to the concerns of the Métis community, obviously.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1194              Are you trying to do youth‑oriented programming in this?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1195              Will there be a youth component, Ken?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1196              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1197              MR. GUSTIN:  Is there going to be public information programming that speaks to the concerns of the Métis community?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1198              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1199              MR. GUSTIN:  Are you intending to do a news service‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1200              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1201              MR. GUSTIN:  ‑‑ or an information component?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1202              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes.  We believe that is truly missing from the Canadian broadcasting environment.  News is definitely a priority, and youth is a priority, in terms of the people that we want to reach out to, as far as producers.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1203              And we want to reach the youth population within Canada to explain who the Métis people are.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1204              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Let's talk about youth, then, Mr. Schaffer.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1205              MR. SCHAFFER:  Sure.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1206              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  How many production houses have you been in touch with or do you know about who would be liable to produce the kind of programming that would address, I guess, Métis youth, if I am understanding this correctly?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1207              Is there a backlog?  Is there an inventory of that kind of programming, or would it all have to be produced originally?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1208              MR. SCHAFFER:  There are a couple of dozen programs that we could probably pull that have been produced by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and other broadcasters.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1209              The majority of it will be new broadcasting and new initiatives, I would suggest.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1210              That is the whole purpose, the whole idea.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1211              Because it isn't being properly serviced at this point, it just isn't.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1212              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  You are the leading Métis production house in the country.  Am I right?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1213              MR. SCHAFFER:  I would think so.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1214              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  How many hours of Métis‑relevant production would you do in a year in your production operation?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1215              MR. SCHAFFER:  Based on the limiting of licensing and the limiting of dollars that are available, we only produce, really, two or three different types of programs per year.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1216              One is a full‑time series, which is the Métis Television series "Metcom", which stands for "The Métis Communications Program", and we have about 70 programs underneath our belt at this point.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1217              We are also reaching out and doing other programs, which are one‑hour documentaries and one‑offs.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1218              Other than that, to say the least‑‑

‑‑‑ Pause

LISTNUM 1 \l 1219              MR. SCHAFFER:  Basically, we are evolving Aboriginal production.  That is what we are doing.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1220              There is a lack of responsibility by the broadcasters to even look at Métis‑specific programming, even though it is in our Broadcasting Act that it should be there.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1221              When we approach the other broadcasters, they are not opening the door.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1222              SCN is one of the rare broadcasters out there that has actually looked at the Broadcasting Act and talks about it when we have discussions.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1223              MR. GUSTIN:  If I could jump in on this for a second; one of the things that has been interesting to SCN over the past several years is the evolution of the Aboriginal and Métis production community that we are seeing, particularly on the Prairies.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1224              We are finding a number of new entrants into the community.  The Aboriginal community has a strong oral tradition, so that young people embrace the nature of television production fitting into the strong oral tradition.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1225              So we see a number of new entrants coming into the field in this area.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1226              Unfortunately, with our limited resources, it is very difficult to support them to the same level as the aspirations of this community.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1227              MR. SCHAFFER:  There is such a limited amount of dollars out there that it is hard to really say how many people are out there.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1228              There are the odd Métis programs, like, "La voix du Michif".  Andrea Menard is doing some of this work in order to, of course, enhance Métis‑specific programming.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1229              Again, the bottom line is, there is a lack of money.  There is a lack of money even in the Canadian Television Fund for us to reach out to.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1230              A good example is, we have not been able to produce the Métis television series for a number of years, and we would like to do it every year, and have 13 to 26 episodes per year done, just on that one episode‑‑ or one show, "Metcom".  But, unfortunately, that doesn't happen.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1231              What happens is, we are forced to apply for a minimal amount of funding for the Aboriginal component.  Then, of course, there is the evaluation process, which evaluates you out of the system, because of the limited amount of dollars.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1232              At that point‑‑ again, I come back to this‑‑ whereas we did start to do a production call and actually ask Métis producers to come forward, we got a number of different applications in for production‑worthy programs that we would be able to air.  The problem is that, again, we were not a "must carry" and we didn't have the budget; therefore, we couldn't commit to any of those funds, and, at the same time, none of those producers could get hold of any of that First Nations money from Canadian Heritage through the Canadian Television Fund.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1233              It has been‑‑ I would tell you that, out of all the things I have ever done in my whole life, Métis television is probably one of the hardest things that I have ever done.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1234              And I am not here to make myself rich.  What it really comes down to is, when I started the Métis television series "Metcom", that was the first ever Métis television series in the world, and when I did it, I was asked specifically by licensors and programmers, like SCN:  What am I doing?  Because nobody else has done this before.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1235              You are not going to have enough money to produce this.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1236              These are questions that are real coming out of licensors, and I had to agree with them.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1237              But I wasn't doing this to get rich, it was because I am an artist.  This is the culture, the history.  This is our people.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1238              One of the basic fundamentals that I ran into is‑‑ I have to tell you that I am the founder, also, of the job shops in this world, and what I have done is, I have found thousands of people who work in this country, and one of the major areas that is missing is Métis‑specific hiring practices in this country.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1239              One of the big holes that I saw was the fact that the Métis are missing from broadcasting.  I wasn't seeing any Métis‑specific television.  Nobody was producing it.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1240              Those are the obstacles that people have to overcome if they are going to be able to produce in this country.  They need funds.  They need licensing money, or it is not going to happen.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1241              Myself‑‑ I have to tell you that I have another 13 shows of "Metcom" coming up again.  I don't know‑‑ if the doors don't open up with other broadcasters, then this show will no longer be around, either.  It just won't.  It can't survive with the limited amount of funds that are available, unless MMTN launches, which would help it.  It would be, of course, a signature series.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1242              But, again, like I say, what is missing on the overall‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1243              I speak on behalf of all of Canada, realistically, because I have the knowledge in a Human Resources background, and there is a very large deficiency in this country when it comes to the Métis people being recognized or being helped to participate and enjoy the benefits of Canada.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1244              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Mr. Schaffer, you have said that you plan to spend $8 million a year on program acquisition.  Could you tell us what proportion of this would be spent on Canadian production and what proportion on foreign production?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1245              MR. SCHAFFER:  According to the application that we have submitted, we have stated that we will try to go with 80 percent‑‑ make best efforts at 80 percent Canadian content.  So the majority of that $8 million will be spent on Canadian content‑‑ 80 percent, and 20 percent would be available for reaching out to other mixed‑blood programs around the world.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1246              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Mr. Schaffer, you have said that you want to operate on an 18‑hour broadcasting day.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1247              Is that correct?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1248              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1249              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Do you intend to broadcast anything between midnight and 8:00 a.m.?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1250              Will you go dark?  What would happen?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1251              MR. SCHAFFER:  I am not really sure.  I don't think that we, at this point‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1252              When we first launch, I don't think we are going to do a lot of broadcasting between those hours because of the lack, right at this point.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1253              We are going to have to build the production library as we go.  Then, as we go, we would be able to look at that further, to fill those hours up.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1254              And we do want to.  We want to operate on a 24‑hour basis, eventually, if at all possible.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1255              I know that most people probably use infomercials during those times.  It is not definitely out of the question, I guess, but it wouldn't be my first preference.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1256              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Let's go back to the need to rapidly build a library, and I have been trying to discuss that with you in a very precise way.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1257              How many hours of relevant production do you expect to have to find in the first year of your operation‑‑ original, Métis‑directed production?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1258              How many hours, or what percentage of your programming, and how much money will that involve?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1259              MR. SCHAFFER:  That would probably involve every bit of the budget that we would be able to grab from the "must carry" designation.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1260              The full budget would be dedicated, primarily, to building that library.  That is really what it would be.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1261              And we can only reach out right now to what is available through‑‑ what the broadcasters have done up to this point.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1262              When we were in Banff last year, I put out 300 different applications to various broadcasters, and I got no replies.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1263              So, from that point of view, yes, it will be a struggle to find that programming, but it's there.  There is some programming that we can reach into.  The rest of it will be Canadian content and new production.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1264              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Could you name some of the production houses and the persons responsible that you would regard as the mostly likely people with whom you would work in order to develop this kind of production?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1265              MR. SCHAFFER:  Well, you know, this comes down to broadcasters, I think, mostly, and the other broadcasters knowing where‑‑ and other people that are Métis around the country, within regions.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1266              I would hope that we could rely on some of what they have to be able to build that library, because, without it, we won't have a very big library.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1267              Other than that, we do have other people, like Delores Smith, who does a series called "Beyond Words".  Andrea Menard does a number of different series.  She is Métis, and very, very talented.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1268              Also, Derek Calderbank, and Professor Raoul McKay will be involved.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1269              There are a number of companies across Canada that want to get involved.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1270              I must say that I have had nothing but positive encouragement, and I have never heard anybody say that we shouldn't have this Métis Television Network.  I have never heard that, except for in the interventions here, which is the first time.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1271              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  You have said that you would be broadcasting 80 percent in English, and at least 5 percent in Michif.  That leaves 10 to 15 percent in the French language.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1272              Is there French‑language production relevant to Métis audiences?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1273              MR. SCHAFFER:  I believe that is a large part of it.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1274              A lot of our history comes from the establishment of Canada, and that's where I come back to the original comments that I made to you.  The Métis people are really the establishment people of Canada, and I think they should be recognized as that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1275              What that means is, we have a large connection to the French.  We have a large connection to the Scottish and the Irish.  And those components are continually left out.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1276              The French people are a definite part of our history.  We wouldn't be in existence, really, if it wasn't for those groups‑‑ the French, the Scottish and the Irish, as well as the English.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1277              Then you have to take in the First Nations.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1278              So, no, we wouldn't be able to survive without French, as a network.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1279              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Mr. Schaffer, can you name me a French‑language production directed at the Métis community?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1280              MR. SCHAFFER:  No, I can't.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1281              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Can you name me a French‑language producer that would like to produce for you in French for the Métis community?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1282              MR. SCHAFFER:  No, actually, I really can't.  I have never put out a call to actually have them do that, because I would never set them up to fail.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1283              Now I would like to do that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1284              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Mr. Schaffer, if you are only going to cover 10 to 15 percent of your broadcast day in French, how is it that the quantum you would expect to gain from a subscriber would be the same in the French language as the English language?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1285              MR. SCHAFFER:  I am not sure that I understand the question.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1286              Do you understand the question?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1287              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  You have asked for 15 cents a month per subscriber, have you not?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1288              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes, we have.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1289              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  That applies indifferently to the Quebec market and the English‑language market, does it not?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1290              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1291              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Do you think it would be reasonable that a French subscriber should pay the same as an English subscriber, when the English subscriber is getting, on your count, five or six times as much programming as the French subscriber?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1292              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes, I do.  I definitely do.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1293              I believe that there are a lot of inequities out there anyway.  Why would we be, really, any different in that sense?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1294              When I look at the French‑English situation in the western part of Canada, I would be hard pressed to go into anybody's home in Saskatchewan and find them looking at CBC‑French, but French CBC is available, and it should be available to everybody across this country, just like the Métis Television Network should be available.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1295              The French‑‑ in other words, what I am trying to say is, if they had to deal with this on a payment basis, if the subscribers in Saskatchewan or Alberta, or whatever, had to pay for that French service, they wouldn't have enough money to operate.  That is really what the bottom line is, because there wouldn't be enough people to back up that part of it.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1296              Then, again, like I say, the French have a right to their culture, their heritage and their language, and they should be able to listen to it across Canada the same as the Métis.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1297              And there are going to be inequities.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1298              I have to tell you that I don't have all of the answers to absolutely everything.  We are a fledgling company, we are trying to launch.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1299              As we go, a lot of these answers will be a lot more apparent, and, hopefully, we will do a lot better job than what we have seen done in the past.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1300              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Mr. Schaffer, you have based your subscriber revenue forecasts on the figure of 10.3 million subscribers, at 15 cents per subscriber per month.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1301              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1302              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Unfortunately, the service for which you are applying is a digital service only, but you have covered both analog and digital subscribers in your business plan.  This means that, at whatever quantum is finally determined, you will have, roughly, half the number of subscribers that are counted on in your business plan, meaning that you would get half the revenue.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1303              Could you explain to us, or clear us up on how you would adjust your business plan in light of the fact that you will only have half the number of subscribers that you have forecasted?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1304              MR. SCHAFFER:  Well, I can only say that we plan to do about 64.16 percent in programming and production.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1305              I really don't have all of the answers that I think you would ask of me all the time, and I do have to honestly apologize.  We are really trying to struggle.  We have been struggling for the last seven years trying to launch this network.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1306              My finance person, Marty Kline, was supposed to be here today, and he would have been able to answer that a little bit better for me.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1307              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  Okay, Mr. Schaffer.  I think we have probably reached the end of the questions that I would have for you.  Thank you very much.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1308              MR. SCHAFFER:  Thank you.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1309              I'm sorry that I couldn't be more specific about certain things.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1310              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Commissioner Cram?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1311              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  Thank you.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1312              Mr. Schaffer, you said to Commissioner French that there were 800,000 Métis.  I am looking at page 7 of your presentation today, which you left us with.  It is entitled "A Profile of Canada's Métis Population".

LISTNUM 1 \l 1313              Do you have that page?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1314              MR. SCHAFFER:  I am trying to find it right now.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1315              Yes, I do.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1316              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  It says, "Métis identity"‑‑ and this is StatsCan in 2001‑‑ "292,000."

LISTNUM 1 \l 1317              Where do you come with the 800,000?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1318              MR. SCHAFFER:  I believe that the new census figures have been released now.  I don't have them with me at present, but I am sure we could get them.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1319              What I am trying to say here is‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1320              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  Mr. Schaffer, I am asking where you are getting the 800,000, because the next page‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1321              MR. SCHAFFER:  Actually, I got it from Debbie.  I thought that she was accurate, so I didn't know.  I'm sorry.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1322              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  The next page shows an increase of 33 percent‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1323              I'm sorry, that's 1996 to 2001.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1324              For now, I guess, we should be considering that there are only 292,000 Métis, subject to the new census?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1325              MR. SCHAFFER:  To the new census.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1326              Also considering, of course, that a lot of people really don't know how to identify with that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1327              You know, I think they would like to‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1328              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  I know, it is based on self‑identification.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1329              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes, and I think that a lot of people really don't know.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1330              Like I say, a lot of them are the French, the Scottish and the Irish, in that end of it, and they identify as being French, Scottish and Irish.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1331              And then, after the establishment people, you have the rest of the immigration to Canada, the river people, and then, finally, the trade establishment, and those figures, obviously, go up.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1332              And you will find, as we launch this network and get going, that those figures will change and Canada will gain a new identity because of that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1333              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  I wanted to talk about launch.  What I am hearing from you is, it will get better as time goes on, and you will know more as time goes on.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1334              What I want to know is, day one, when you launch, do you have any capital in order to pay for those launch costs?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1335              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes, we have actually done that.  We have secured funds through the Indian and Métis Fund in Saskatchewan, as well as Prairie Financial, to help in the actual launching costs.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1336              So they are there, once we‑‑ but we have to, basically, have the 9(1)(h) designation before we can actually get that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1337              I have to be honest about that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1338              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  My final question is, under the policy that we are working on, this migration policy right now, it says that we have to consider affordability.  How should we look at affordability?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1339              I am saying, should we look at it as the StatsCan cut‑off poverty level, and affordability for somebody there?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1340              How do we decide what is affordable and what is not affordable?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1341              MR. SCHAFFER:  I don't want to be ignorant or anything like that, but the word "affordability" is used in what context?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1342              That is what I am missing.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1343              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  Under the policy, we are to consider the exceptional, national importance, et cetera, but we are also supposed to consider affordability in deciding who should have the status to go on digital.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1344              My question is, what frame of reference should we use for deciding affordability?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1345              MR. SCHAFFER:  I think that the best way to look at this would be, if you look at the way the Métis people have been able to participate‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1346              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  Mr. Schaffer?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1347              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1348              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  How do we decide affordability?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1349              Tell us what you think we should say?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1350              Should we be looking at a single woman under the poverty cut‑off level with two children?  Should we be looking at that person and saying, "As a whole, the basic package, right now, is affordable, but one more cent means that it is not affordable"?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1351              What should we be looking at?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1352              Should we be looking at my colleague, who earns a fair bit of money?

‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires

LISTNUM 1 \l 1353              COMMISSIONER FRENCH:  But a lot less than before I took the government service.

‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires

LISTNUM 1 \l 1354              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  How do we determine affordability?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1355              MR. SCHAFFER:  That's a good question.  I think that we can't afford not to have this channel.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1356              I think that, if we were to look at Stats Canada‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1357              Why would we look at Stats Canada?

‑‑‑ Pause

LISTNUM 1 \l 1358              MR. SCHAFFER:  Okay.  So you are looking at Stats Canada to, then, evaluate what income levels?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1359              Is that what you are asking?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1360              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  Yes.  I am saying, how do we decide affordability?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1361              From what perspective do we look at it?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1362              We look all across Canada, and we find out what the basic cost would be for basic digital.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1363              MR. SCHAFFER:  Right, yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1364              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  Should it never go higher than $20?  Is that the level?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1365              Because we have to consider this in the matrix.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1366              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes, I understand that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1367              That's why we have only asked for 15 cents at this point.  We would like to prove ourselves as a network.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1368              And we don't believe that the 15 cents is too much at this point.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1369              Before we could ask for any more, we don't think that‑‑ we don't want to outprice ourselves, and we don't want to be unaffordable.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1370              We are, basically, serving the needs of‑‑ again, like I say, from a Human Resources perspective, a lot of those people are not as wealthy as, for instance, your colleague who is sitting there.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1371              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  So your answer is, it's a cup of coffee, and we will, maybe, "cup of coffee" everybody to death.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1372              Is that really what it comes down to?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1373              MR. SCHAFFER:  I think it is a little bit less than a cup of coffee, but I don't think there is really a dollar‑and‑cents figure.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1374              When you look at the CBC, for instance, coming forward and asking for another dollar on top of the budget they already have, we are not asking for that.  We are asking for a minimal amount, 15 cents.  We don't think that it's a lot of money.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1375              The much bigger question is, of course, if there was any more money involved, it would certainly be‑‑ it is up to the Commission, totally, to decide what people can afford and what they can't.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1376              I am only in a position to say that, for the lack of this type of Canadian programming, and that type of thing, we can't afford to go on without it any longer as a country.  We need to work on that, and 15 cents isn't a lot.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1377              We would have liked to have had a dollar, too, because, of course, with a dollar, we could turn around and do a lot higher production quality and values and things of that nature.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1378              But, again, 15 cents, we thought, was not outrageous.  It was about the same‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1379              We based this on the principle of APTN, when they started.  We would like to prove ourselves.  We feel that the Commission feels that APTN is a success, and we believe that they are a success.  I have no problem with that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1380              APTN is a success.  You have done a great job.  Congratulations on that decision, because it has meant a lot to Canada.  It's missing‑‑ it's a big missing part of it.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1381              And I don't think that 15 cents is going to break the average family.  Even those on welfare would not be hurt by an extra 15 cents at this point.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1382              But, I think, if you are getting into a dollar or more, or whatever, I think that, then, you are taking that cup of coffee, and that's a lot out of some people's pockets.  Other people, no, they can afford it.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1383              COMMISSIONER CRAM:  Thank you.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1384              Thank you, Madam Chair.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1385              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1386              Legal counsel.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1387              MS DIONNE:  Mr. Schaffer, I only have two questions.  You have made a commitment of at least 80 percent Canadian content.  Would you accept this as a condition of licence?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1388              MR. SCHAFFER:  We have done a lot of deliberating about that, and, yes, we would.  We feel that we can do this credibly.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1389              MS DIONNE:  You have made another commitment to broadcast a minimum of 5 percent of your programming in the Michif language.  Would you accept that, also, as a condition of licence?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1390              MS. SCHAFFER:  Not within the first year, but by the end of term we are trying to do that as a best effort.  We want to make that a best effort to do that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1391              MS DIONNE:  You mentioned by the end of term.  When, exactly, in the term do you feel that you would be able to provide 5 percent Michif?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1392              Third year, fourth year?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1393              MR. SCHAFFER:  I think we were looking at the fourth year.  The fourth year and up is what‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1394              MS DIONNE:  Would you accept that as a condition of licence?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1395              MR. SCHAFFER:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1396              MS DIONNE:  Thank you, Madam Chair.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1397              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Mr. Schaffer, I just have one question.  You said that you will target the average Canadian audience.  Can you tell me how this service, as a whole, will reflect and portray the Métis culture, given your statement that you are going to target the average Canadian audience?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1398              MR. SCHAFFER:  I believe that's a blanket statement on my part, to service that need of the average Canadian people.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1399              It is our goal to reach out to people, and have them participate.  That's the most important thing.  We have not been able to participate as Métis people, really, in the broadcasting world here, and we want to see that more.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1400              We want to see that, especially, through the development of reaching out to the establishment people again.  We want to see their connection to it, from the Irish, the Scottish, and the French, and build that component, which is, I think, what will make this network really quite unique.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1401              THE CHAIRPERSON:  But what efforts are you going to make to ensure that Métis people are on‑screen, so that, if I turn to your channel, I know that I am watching a Métis channel that is going to expose me to this culture?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1402              MR. SCHAFFER:  May I answer that in a number of ways?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1403              One thing, for sure, is that, when I talk to the youth Board members‑‑ the youth Métis who are on this Board‑‑ they are very reflective on that question.  One of the things they said to us was:  We are Métis, but we are also Canadian.  We should be able to produce what we want, however we want to produce it.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1404              So I don't know how we could turn around and actually try to mould something, or mould the creative thought of the producers out there.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1405              The youth would like to say that, even though we are Métis, we would like to film, for instance, concerts and things of that nature, from our perspective.  That is really what it comes down to, we want to bring that perspective, and we will as part of the condition of licensing, because we understand that there will be conditions, and we will make our best efforts to make sure that it is Métis‑driven production.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1406              That's what it's all about.  We want to reach out to those people, to have them participate in Canadian broadcasting.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1407              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you very much.  I hope your experience at your first CRTC hearing was a good one.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1408              I will now give you a couple of minutes to wrap‑up and give us your best argument as to why you believe we should license your service.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1409              MR. SCHAFFER:  Respectfully to you, the Commission, I thank you very much for allowing us this opportunity to be here.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1410              The only thing that I can say is that, from my point of view, I want this to happen from a cultural identity of Canada‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1411              I want this to appear to be part of the framework of the Broadcasting Act, that it is completion, that it has met a certain completion, and that the Commission itself has made its best efforts, also, to realize that this Canadian identity is being lost.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1412              What I mean by that is, simply, without you, the Commission, there is no way this could go forward.  I know that.  I have been doing this for a lot of years, and it can be the most futile thing if there aren't those types of protections within our Constitution and within people like you at the Commission who will help us.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1413              We do not want to build a ghetto in Canada, if you will; we want to make it apparent that everybody can participate.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1414              The bottom line really comes down to the Commission's want.  This is really a test, I think, for all of us to be here at this specific point in time, asking for this.  It is one of those things that will determine‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1415              Quite frankly, even myself, I am curious as to what decision you will come up with, because I am struggling with what the Canadian identity really is sometimes, especially as a Métis person; not as a producer, but as a Métis person.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1416              In production, I could produce anything around the world that I want.  I certainly wouldn't have to do Métis production.  But from the point of view of filling that need and that void in Canada, I felt that it was imperative to do it.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1417              Without, again, the support mechanisms of the Commission, it would have to go to the courts, and the courts, then, would have to decide.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1418              Really, does everything in Canada have to go through the courts in order to decide, when we have responsible governments and responsible groups like you and us sitting here today, discussing these values of Canadian identity?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1419              When we look at it, every other country in the world, or every nationality, would like to have a television network, whether it be the Italian people or the Greek people.  It doesn't really matter what part of Europe or what part of the world they come from, they all would like a channel, and they would all like to be represented.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1420              But yet, at the same time, if our Canadian Television Fund and our Canadian money continues to go into, for instance, the Italian people's production or the Greek people's production‑‑ they already have their own countries.  They already have that production.  They already have access to those productions that are done.  Why do they need to use Canada as a launching ground, and our moneys in Canada for that purpose, when we really should be identifying with Canadian culture, Canadian reality, and trying to make thatthe aspiration, I believe, of where the Act is going.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1421              When you look at the Broadcasting Act, and look at the wording specifically, stating that‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1422              And if you look at all of these other networks that are supposed to be‑‑ and when they apply to you, they state to you that they are going to do their best efforts to make sure that Aboriginal programming is accounted for.  It's not there.  It's not apparent.  There is no transparency.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1423              The only thing that I feel is transparent is what I am doing right now.  I am sitting here, right in front of you, asking for transparency,

and to identify what Canadian broadcasting is, because we want to fulfil that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1424              I hope that I have said what you need.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1425              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Mr. Schaffer, Ms Schaffer, Mr. Gustin, thank you very much for being here.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1426              We will now take a 15‑minute break.  We will resume at five minutes to eleven.

‑‑‑ Upon recessing at 1042 / Suspension à 1042

‑‑‑ Upon resuming at 1100 / Reprise à 1100

LISTNUM 1 \l 1427              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order, please.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1428              Madam Secretary?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1429              THE SECRETARY:  We will now proceed with Item 2 on the agenda, which is an application by Diversity Television Inc., on behalf of a corporation to be incorporated, for a licence to operate a Category 1 national digital undertaking to be known as Canada One TV.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1430              The proposed service will be a national, English‑language, digital specialty programming service that will focus on Canada's ethnoculturally diverse, multicultural and multiracial society, with a particular emphasis on popular drama programming.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1431              Appearing for the Applicant is Mr. Paul de Silva, who will introduce his colleagues.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1432              Mr. de Silva, you will have 20 minutes to make your presentation.

*PRESENTATION / PRÉSENTATION

LISTNUM 1 \l 1433              MR. de SILVA:  Good morning, Madam Chair and Commissioners.  I am Paul de Silva.  My colleagues,Amos Adetuyi, to my left, and Alfons Adetuyi, to my right, seated in the first row behind our panel, and I have been working for at least the past five years for this chance to appear before you to start a new television service to be the catalyst for change.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1434              Canada One will be a permanent place for Canadians of all racial and cultural backgrounds.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1435              Before proceeding any further, please let me introduce the rest of our team today.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1436              Beside me is Jim Byrd.  Jim, as you probably know, has vast experience in broadcasting, and was Vice‑President and head of CBC English‑Language Television for five years.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1437              We are delighted that Jim has agreed to assist with the Launch and startup of Canada One TV as Chief Operating Officer, if our application is successful.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1438              Beside Amos is Patricia Scarlett, President of Scarlett Media, a television and film distribution company focused on culturally diverse products.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1439              Going to the other end of this row we have Floyd Kane, Vice‑President of Creative and Business Affairs of DHX Media, a film and television company based on the east coast.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1440              DHX is our enabling investor in this project.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1441              Beside him, from the west coast, is Jennifer Ouano, from Vancouver's Elastic Entertainment.  Jennifer, who was co‑creator and Senior Producer of Zed TV, is heading up our new media plans.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1442              In the second row we have our advisors.  Starting from behind Patricia is Kaan Yigit of Solutions Research Group.  Kaan, as you know, was the Research Director for the CAB's Cultural Diversity Task Force, overseen by the CRTC.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1443              Joel Fortune, from Johnston and Buchan, is beside Kaan.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1444              We have Wayne Albo, Executive Partner of Calcap, our financial advisors; and beside Wayne is Terri Wills from the Nordicity Group.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1445              Last, but not least, is Les Lawrence from DiversiPro, a consultancy specializing in diversity training initiatives.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1446              Quickly, please, allow me to note that we also have here today Michael Donovan, the Chief Executive Officer of DHX Media; Andrew Cardozo‑‑ no stranger to this room‑‑ a member of the Advisory Council of Canada One TV; and Mary Barroll, who is counsel for Diversity Television Inc.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1447              Thank you for the opportunity to appear to present our case for Canada One TV today.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1448              I would like to begin with a quote by the great African‑Canadian singer and activist, and member of the Order of Canada‑‑ and many of you know her music‑‑ Salome Bey.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1449              Salome said:

~                     "Television more than any other medium, holds up the mirror in which Canadian society can see itself reflected.  The television pictures are vital: they are in colour."

LISTNUM 1 \l 1450              I would like to screen our video for you at this point.

‑‑‑ Video presentation / Présentation vidéo

LISTNUM 1 \l 1451              MR. DE SILVA:  Madam Chair and Commissioners, we believe it's time.  It's time to add new voices, consistent diversity, new owners, and more authenticity to the Canadian broadcasting system for the 6 million visibly diverse Canadians‑‑ for everyone.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1452              The reason we are here today is straightforward.  Canadian television, especially Canadian drama, does not adequately reflect all members of our society‑‑ in our view, not by a long shot.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1453              We know there are quite a few ethnic third‑language programming services in Canada.  Local ethnic television stations reach out to specific communities in our larger cities.  But if you look at the lack of mainstream, English, high‑budget, popular drama programs that actually reflect Canadian diversity, it is apparent that multilanguage ethnic stations don't bridge that gap.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1454              Under the Commission's new open entry approach for third‑language services, more third‑language programming, the bulk of it non‑Canadian, is available.  This provides a choice to many, but it doesn't present Canadian society, and it's not multicultural.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1455              Turning to the English‑language broadcast sector, which is the sector we intend to serve, we had Solutions Research Group reprise its 2003 groundbreaking analysis of diversity on Canadian television.  This time SRG focused on drama programming.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1456              We found little improvement in closing the gap in representation of Canadian diversity in drama programming, with the improvement being attributed, by and large, to the broadcast of one‑‑ that's right, one movie during the sample week.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1457              Just as important, we still find that visible minorities and Aboriginal characters are often relegated to secondary or background roles.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1458              Looking more deeply into the Canadian television production industry, the conclusion, once again, was that the industry does not reflect the diversity of Canadian society.  Ekos Research estimates that only 13.4 percent of production industry personnel are from visible minority backgrounds.  This is less than one‑third of the relative population in the largest urban centres, where most of the programming is being produced.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1459              This is a huge gap in the enjoyment of the opportunities made by our broadcasting system.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1460              The industry, therefore, is still not representative of Canadian society.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1461              On TV, we need a choice that will draw viewers from all ethnocultural backgrounds into the shared Canadian experience.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1462              This presents a challenge and an opportunity to be taken.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1463              How are we going to meet this opportunity?  With great, diverse, original programming.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1464              I would ask Amos Adetuyi and Patricia Scarlett now to take you through our programming plan.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1465              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  Our plan is straightforward.  We will show Canadians popular programs, inspired by Canadian society as it really is, and that speaks with an authentic voice.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1466              First, our schedule will feature drama programming‑‑ at least 60 percent.  Why drama?  Dramatic programs, whether whimsical, absurd, heart‑wrenching or hilarious, continue to be the most popular for Canadian audiences.  Dramatic programming presents us an opportunity to tell our collective story as a nation, and to work out who we aspire to be.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1467              Drama programs are at the top of the TV hierarchy.  If people from all cultural backgrounds deserve reflection on TV, and to be in the business of making TV, then they need to be present in the making of drama programs.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1468              Second, we will concentrate on high‑budget and high‑quality programs.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1469              Our focus groups made an obvious point.  If a program isn't high‑quality in production values and content, then Canadians will not watch it.  We need to acknowledge this fact upfront and make the best, not the most we can.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1470              Third, our original programs must meet two out of four diversity content points.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1471              Inspired by the familiar MAPL criteria for music, we have invented a measure for original content to qualify as diversity content.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1472              Two of the four key creative positions of producer, director, writer and lead actor will need to be filled by persons that are self‑identifying members of a visible minority group or an Aboriginal person.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1473              All of our original programming must achieve at least two out of the four points.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1474              Fourth, we will show Canadian drama in prime time.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1475              If we are serious about Canadians watching Canadian shows, then they need to be shown consistently, every night, in prime time.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1476              Commissioners, we estimate that by Year 5 of our licence period, this channel will increase the amount of original Canadian drama by more than 15 percent overall.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1477              Over to you, Patricia.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1478              MS SCARLETT:  Fifth, all of our programming will be multicultural in nature.  All programs, original and acquired, Canadian and non‑Canadian, must be consistent with the multicultural nature of our service.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1479              If a program does not speak significantly to the mandate of Canada One TV, it will not be shown.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1480              In my experience in the international distribution business, I can attest to the fact that there is an untapped supply of English‑language, non‑Canadian programming from other countries that is directly relevant to Canada's multicultural experience.  This includes programs like "Karioki High" from New Zealand.  You saw a brief clip in the video today.  It tells the story of a diverse group of teenagers in a performing arts school, and the personal and academic challenges they face.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1481              Other countries, like Jamaica, a country whose national motto is "Out of many one people", Australia and South Africa have their own experiences in multiculturalism to tell and high‑quality programs to share.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1482              I think that Canadians from all backgrounds will be encouraged to learn that others are grappling with similar issues and to see those stories on TV.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1483              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  Thanks, Patricia.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1484              We will offer international programming, most of it originally in English, and a small amount subtitled, but the heart of the service will be original, new productions.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1485              Let me share with you quickly three ideas for original programs, of the kind that are not found in the system today.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1486              "Chinatown Cops" is a comedy series about Jay Walker and his partner Rick Shaw, two plainclothes veterans of Vancouver's Chinatown beat, and self‑proclaimed super cops.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1487              "Black Code" is a fast‑paced, heart‑stirring, six‑hour drama series that reawakens the adventures of Black Canadians from 1624 to the present day.  This is not the Underground Railroad, and these are untold stories to most Canadians.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1488              "North South" is a gutsy, contemporary, half‑hour drama focusing on the lives of four Halifax families working in the construction industry.  A pilot for this program has already been shot, to positive critical review, but it has not gone into production.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1489              All of these are great ideas.  If Canada One TV existed, they would be in production today and on the air tomorrow.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1490              MR. de SILVA:  Canada One TV will not work in isolation.  We have established a Diversity Advisory Council with a clear mandate.  We are pleased that Deepa Mehta, from Toronto, Karen Lam, from Vancouver, Michelle Williams, from Halifax, Sharam Tabet, from Toronto, Andrew Cardozo in Ottawa, and two new additions, Napoleon Gardiner, from Saskatchewan, a former director of APTN and a strong advocate for Aboriginal peoples, and Fo Niemi, from the Montreal‑based Centre for Action on Race Relations, have all agreed to join our council.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1491              We know that there is goodwill in the industry toward increasing diversity.  This is why we will convene a regular Broadcaster Programming Panel to leverage all available opportunities to advance ethnocultural diversity.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1492              We are very pleased that John Galway, Executive Director of the Harold Greenberg Fund, has agreed to chair this panel to get the work started.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1493              Now, making the kinds of programs that we need, obviously, costs money, so I will turn it over to Jim Byrd to speak about our business plan.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1494              MR. BYRD:  Thank you, Paul.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1495              Commissioners, the key commitment made by Canada One TV is to spend at least 65 percent of our previous year's revenues on Canadian programming.  This is amongst the highest such commitment for Canadian programming expenditures by a specialty service.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1496              It amounts to an average expenditure of $26 million on Canadian programs each year, and $180 million over the licence term.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1497              This will have an immediate impact on the amount of high‑quality, multicultural programming in the system, and especially in the area of drama programs.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1498              To free up maximum expenditures for programming, we had to look carefully at two things:  our overhead costs, and the costs of our non‑Canadian programming.  Both of these have been kept down.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1499              Regarding overhead, it is now possible, through good partnerships and business arrangements, to access the infrastructure required to run a specialty service on a turnkey and relatively low‑cost basis.  It isn't necessary to reinvent the wheel in specialty broadcasting, and we don't intend to do so.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1500              For non‑Canadian programming, we are targeting productions from largely untapped markets.  Broadcasters in Canada and elsewhere overlooked this product, so it is relatively inexpensive.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1501              It is the competition for U.S. commercial series programming that drives non‑Canadian programming costs up.  By avoiding this kind of programming, which is inconsistent with our mandate in any case, we can save much more of our money for Canadian shows.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1502              Of course, to support high‑quality productions we need a secure and consistent source of revenue.  The 50‑cent wholesale fee we have proposed, coupled with wide distribution, perfectly fits the bill.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1503              It will provide a consistent revenue stream that can be directed immediately to Canadian production.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1504              MR. de SILVA:  I would now like to ask Floyd Kane to describe another key part of our application:  training.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1505              MR. KANE:  I have worked in the film and television business in Nova Scotia for nearly 10 years, as a lawyer, writer and producer.  On countless occasions I have been to sets and attended events where I was the only person of colour.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1506              At Canada One TV, the commitment to making opportunities for under‑represented groups in Canada is bred in the bone.  Our focused efforts will be different from past initiatives.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1507              First, we will reach out differently.  Our executives will assume direct responsibility for outreach, and will be accountable.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1508              Second, once we have encouraged people to get excited about our industry, we will keep them excited through a dynamic mentorship strategy that we have developed with DiversiPro, experts in the area.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1509              Third, we will reach out to our colleagues within the industry and our fellow broadcasters to strike strategic partnerships.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1510              Fourth, Canada One has made a multimillion dollar commitment to script and pilot development‑‑ more than $2 million to development initiatives over the licence term, and close to $5 million to pilot programs.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1511              Lastly, and most important, the training supported by Canada One TV will be focused on sustainability.  Single initiatives can be helpful, but without continued support, and real opportunities in the end, many culturally and racially diverse people leave the system.  Canada One TV will address that problem, especially by creating opportunities for challenging dramatic work.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1512              MR. de SILVA:  Thank you, Floyd.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1513              A new media strategy is critical, as we know, for any television service today.  I would ask Jennifer Ouano to take us through our strategy.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1514              MS OUANO:  Canada One TV has the opportunity, from the starting gate, to respond to a new generation of content creators and consumers across all digital media platforms.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1515              Young Canadians, who, on the whole, are more culturally diverse than previous generations, want and expect as much entertainment at their fingertips as possible.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1516              This is a perfect match for Canada One.  These days diversity is just a webcam away.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1517              We will give our audience the abilities to interact through online communities, to help shape our programs, and to upload content so that their stories can be seen and shared.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1518              Canada One will be a place to aggregate user‑generated content, edit it and present it professionally as a mirror to a wide audience.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1519              Much of this user‑generated content will appear on Canada One's flagship TV program, "On The Scene".

LISTNUM 1 \l 1520              It is a multiplying effect.  The TV brand will inspire and encourage the creation of user‑generated content, and the opportunity to create this content will build audience loyalty.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1521              In addition, some of Canada One's programs will have an extended "on demand" life as suitable platforms roll out, letting the audience choose how they want their viewing experience.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1522              Through Canada One, the presentation of diversity in Canada will move together with the consumer trends and shifts in new media.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1523              MR. de SILVA:  In conclusion, Madam Chair and Commissioners, we know that Canada is becoming more culturally and racially diverse every day.  We know that soon, incredibly soon in demographic terms, a majority of the populations of our largest cities will be visible minorities.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1524              We know that, in a few years, it is expected that Canada's population growth will come primarily from immigration, and we know that there is a growing trend for the growth of so‑called "ethnic enclaves" in Canadian cities, as defined by Statistics Canada.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1525              In 1981 there were just six such enclaves in Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal.  In 2001, according to StatsCan, there were 254.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1526              Canada One TV is the proactive response to this ongoing change.  Canada One TV is a bridge between the so‑called "ethnic enclaves" and the broader multicultural Canadian society.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1527              We need to embrace the change we see around us and to lead Canada to what it aspires to be:   inclusive, multicultural and tolerant‑‑ a flourishing cross‑cultural marketplace for the peaceful clash of differences, leading to the emergence of something new and profound.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1528              Clearly, we believe that Canada One TV is an exceptionally important service.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1529              Our service is targeted directly to showing Canada's ethnocultural diversity in all its richness.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1530              We look forward to answering any questions you may have.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1531              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr. de Silva, and your panel members.  Welcome.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1532              Mr. de Silva I will direct my questions to you, and then you may ask other members of your panel to answer.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1533              MR. de SILVA:  Thank you, Madam Chair.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1534              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Firstly, I would like to start with understanding your application correctly.  I really want to get my head around this.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1535              You are applying for a mainstream specialty service that will be primarily in English.  Programming will be drawn from a number of categories, excluding news, reporting and actualities, sports, religion and game shows.  You are going to focus on drama, but your distinguishing feature is the presence and portrayal of cultural diversity, both on the screen and behind the scene.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1536              Have I got that right?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1537              MR. de SILVA:  That's a great summation, I think.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1538              THE CHAIRPERSON:  With your focus on drama, are you asking us to consider this to be a drama channel for the specific reason of defining it as a specialty service?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1539              MR. de SILVA:  I think we are asking you to consider it a multicultural channel, a specialty channel that has a special focus on representing the ethnocultural diversity, and specifically the visible minority presence in Canada, that will also appeal to a wide range of Canadians.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1540              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Are you asking us, then, to classify this service as a diversity service, for the purposes of defining it as a genre?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1541              MR. de SILVA:  My response to that is, if you are asking‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1542              Quite frankly, I wasn't aware that there was a special category called "Diversity Service" in the CRTC's Regulations.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1543              THE CHAIRPERSON:  That's my point, there isn't.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1544              So are you asking us to add a new genre to the definition of specialty services?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1545              MR. de SILVA:  My initial reaction would be that, if it is the Commission's desire to add a new genre to your range of services, as a diversity service, I would be very open to that, but I think I would like to consult with Joel Fortune on this question.  He certainly has a broader range in terms of the regulatory implications of that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1546              THE CHAIRPERSON:  I apologize if I didn't make myself clear.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1547              There isn't a prescribed list of specialty services; it's up to the applicants to come to us and define their service for us.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1548              I want to really get to the heart of the matter right at the beginning.  You are saying that this is not a drama channel, necessarily.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1549              MR. de SILVA:  Primarily drama, yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1550              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Primarily not.  So it is a multicultural, multi‑ethnic diversity channel.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1551              MR. de SILVA:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1552              THE CHAIRPERSON:  And that's how we are to look at this channel.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1553              MR. de SILVA:  I would embrace the term "diversity" in that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1554              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Okay.  Because in various places throughout the application, including your "Nature of Service"‑‑ and we will get into the details of your "Nature of Service" in a bit.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1555              On page 20 of the supplementary brief, you say that "Canada One TV's programming will be popular and mainstream in nature."

LISTNUM 1 \l 1556              That is quoted from your application.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1557              Could you elaborate for us on what you mean by that, bearing in mind that, essentially, that phrase could be used for just about any English‑language service?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1558              MR. de SILVA:  Yes, Madam Chair‑‑ popular and mainstream.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1559              You raise an interesting question, which is terminology.  We really faced this throughout our application.  There are many changing terms, from "ethnocultural" to "diverse" to "visible minority" to "people of colour", et cetera.  So terminology is very, very important for us.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1560              Popular, yes, because we want it to be popular with a broad range of people, but, specifically, this is a specialty application for ethnocultural diversities, as defined by the Equity Act, and specifically visible minority populations.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1561              In terms of the demographics of this, when we say "popular", our first target is the populations we have described.  But we also believe that there is a very important role for sharing and building bridges with other communities, which would, I guess, include what is termed as the "mainstream" population.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1562              Also, to define the word "popular" a little further, we are not talking about fringe programming, we are talking about programming that will be produced with high‑quality production values.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1563              I should say that, as a team of people, Amos and his brother Alfons have recently produced a series called "Josie H" for mainstream television, so we have experience in that area, and we know how to produce popular programming, I would submit.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1564              In terms of mainstream, we believe that the visible minority population, as we have shown, in terms of its growing numbers, will be mainstream; if not now ‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1565              Again, that terminology is evolving in terms of what "mainstream" actually means.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1566              I hope that comes close to answering that question.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1567              THE CHAIRPERSON:  You will have an opportunity to answer a few more in terms of your terminology, because in your "Nature of Service", as I said, in particular, you say that this service will reflect and focus on multicultural and multiracial themes and values, originate from ethnoculturally diverse sources, or be targeted to an ethnoculturally diverse mainstream audience.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1568              Let's take these one‑by‑one.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1569              What are multicultural and multiracial themes and values?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1570              MR. de SILVA:  I think some of the programming that we showed in our video could address that question.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1571              Multicultural values, I think, are ones that have been defined many times in our legislation in Canada, those that reflect the wide diversity of our populations.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1572              Particularly, I think the Equity Act states that anything that is ethnocultural is defined as non‑English and non‑French‑‑ including non‑English, non‑French and Aboriginal communities.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1573              In terms of the Canadian definition of "multicultural", it would include for us all people.  All of us make up Canada‑‑ all influences, in terms of both the founding nations, the Aboriginal people, as well as people coming from new countries.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1574              Canada is multicultural, so those themes and values that we all collectively have built to make Canadian society what it is are multicultural values.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1575              In terms of your question about sources, that is a key part of our application.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1576              In a sense, what we have shown is that the sources for programming‑‑ for instance, the study that we undertook with the Nordicity Group in terms of the key creative inputs for drama produced over a three‑year period through the CTF programming showed that‑‑ I believe it was 4.5 percent‑‑ and I would have to switch from my Word program to Excel in my mind, which sometimes is a little difficult.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1577              I am sure that Terri Wills, from Nordicity, could help us out with exact numbers.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1578              But only 4.5 percent had two out of the four key creative inputs.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1579              So when we talk about sources, we talk about programming that will be made by or made with a primary input‑‑ at least two out of four‑‑ from visible minority sources.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1580              I think that may answer the "sources" question.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1581              THE CHAIRPERSON:  We will talk about programming a bit later on, and your diversity tool, but I want to take you back to "multicultural themes and values."

LISTNUM 1 \l 1582              Based on what you have just said, is there any difference between Canadian themes and values, therefore?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1583              MR. de SILVA:  May I understand this question correctly?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1584              Are you asking if people‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1585              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Aren't multicultural themes and values Canadian themes and values?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1586              MR. de SILVA:  Absolutely.  No question.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1587              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Again, back to your "Nature of Service", what do you mean when you add "or to be targeted to an ethnoculturally diverse mainstream audience"?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1588              That broadens the scope of your "Nature of Service".  Therefore, we can only conclude that you could just about put anything on this television service.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1589              MR. de SILVA:  Yes, I can see that if it is interpreted that way.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1590              Maybe we will refer you back to our schedule, Madam Commissioner, on which we worked very, very hard.  We took a snapshot, essentially, of our second‑year programming.  I refer to our programming grid, and also to some of the samples we tried to show in our video.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1591              The type of programming we are talking about, particularly in prime time, is the kind of programming that you would not normally see on any Canadian service.  There will be some programming, as we have said, because of the supply of Canadian programming that has multicultural themes.  There is not a huge amount in inventory.  There will be some that have been seen, and only chosen because they represent the values that we want to be represented.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1592              But, in our prime time, as Pat Scarlett can elaborate on a little further‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1593              And there is also the availability of these multicultural programs that people don't really know about.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1594              For instance, we all know, when we go to film festivals in Toronto, Vancouver, Halifax, that we will see wonderful programs that only show once and never get a screening again.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1595              There is this incredible wealth of programming that exists from countries that never show up.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1596              The final thing is, our original programming will come from those two out of four original programming, and the acquired programming I would like to pass over to Pat to elaborate on, very quickly.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1597              MS SCARLETT:  For acquired programs, we have, in fact, scoured the country, coast‑to‑coast, looking at what is available that is Canadian content that meets our two out of four criteria.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1598              In fact, there is some programming available, but it is quite limited.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1599              What we have found is that, in fact, many of the rights are not available, because they are tied up with other broadcasters right now.  However, we were able to find some Canadian content that meets our guidelines, and, as such, we are optimistic that we will be able to fill out those slots in the schedule with Canadian content.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1600              But equally important is the fact that there is a significant amount of programming in the international marketplace that is in the English language that reflects multicultural themes and talent on‑screen and behind the scenes, which I think would meet the mandate of Canada One TV.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1601              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1602              I will have more questions about the sources and the diversity tool, but I want to talk first about the presence gap, as you talk about it in your application.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1603              You used terms such as "urgent need within the broadcasting system for the provision of stories for, from and about the people who represent the changing face of Canada."

LISTNUM 1 \l 1604              You say that "visible minorities are virtually invisible on Canadian television."

LISTNUM 1 \l 1605              We do have the task force report.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1606              We do have the commitments from mainstream broadcasters to reflect diversity in their programming.  They must provide to us annual reports.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1607              Just last week I received a copy of the RTNDA Diversity Code.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1608              Your own research shows that the presence gap has, in fact, become more narrow.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1609              Some intervenors maintain that all of the goals you have identified in your application are being met by what they do every day.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1610              Why do you feel that, without Canada One, the Canadian broadcasting system will always have this presence gap?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1611              MR. de SILVA:  Madam Chair, you have raised several questions.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1612              Why is it urgent?  Are we virtually‑‑ and when I say "we", I mean are we visible minorities invisible?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1613              The fact that your own CRTC requirement says‑‑ and it is very applaudable‑‑ that you require the reporting now of that has helped a great deal.  I think it has opened up a lot of possibilities.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1614              And the Diversity Report you mentioned.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1615              Urgent‑‑ again, why do we believe it's urgent?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1616              The fact of the matter is that demographic change is happening so rapidly in Canada, and we have mentioned how important it is for Canadian television to reflect this reality.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1617              Drama, as we know, is the main source of popular entertainment and programming, and information.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1618              Without that, as Serena Voskrishna, our Director, pointed out, if we don't have a chance to tell our stories in prime time quality drama, we don't exist.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1619              Why is that urgent?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1620              I would like to refer to a recent article that was written by Allan Gregg in the "Walrus Magazine", which opened up a lot of our eyes to this.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1621              This issue of ethnic enclaves, and a growing disassociation, particularly by second generation Canadians‑‑ second generation Canadians from multi‑ethnic sources‑‑ is a really serious issue.  It is how young people see themselves in this country, and how they see Canada.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1622              With a growing disassociation by young people, and new immigrants from the mainstream of Canada, this presents, potentially, a very serious social issue.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1623              So we do believe that the issue is urgent.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1624              I could expand on that if you like, but I think I have‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1625              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Essentially, I want to know why you believe that, with the tools in place that we have‑‑ that is, the requirement of the broadcasters to meet their own diversity goals, and with the RTNDA devoted to a Diversity Code‑‑ why you feel that the current broadcasters are not up to the challenge of closing this presence gap.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1626              MR. de SILVA:  I think one of the key words you have used, Madam Commissioner, without criticizing, because I always like to accentuate the positive, is that, yes, those requirements are important, but we have analyzed them, and in looking at them we realized that, while a lot of them are applaudable in terms of what they are attempting to do, they do not end up producing programs.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1627              Many of them are training initiatives.  They are initiatives to reach out to the community.  But the tangible result‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1628              And there is anecdotal evidence and there is statistical evidence, and the statistical evidence is very, very clear.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1629              Terri Wills from the Nordicity Group did a very serious evaluation of that, and I think, to answer your question succinctly, those stats speak volumes.  So I would ask Terri Wills to talk about the actual representation and how that has changed.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1630              MS WILLS:  We conducted a study, where we took a look at some analyses done by the Canada One team, which looked at Canadian television‑funded drama coded into the two out of the four point system.  So we looked at the numbers of actors, producers, directors and writers producing Canadian drama.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1631              We then conducted a series of interviews with film commissioners, and major production houses across the country, to verify those figures, and we found them to be very accurate.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1632              What we found was that there is a higher representation amongst actors, as compared to producers, writers and directors.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1633              We are finding that there isn't necessarily an outlet for that type of talent to produce.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1634              We find that there are many at the junior levels, but because of the dearth of drama in Canada, it typically is very hard for entry level to move up the ranks.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1635              Therefore, we found that, if you were to commission under the two point system, it would increase, potentially, the level of producers and directors involved in production.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1636              MR. de SILVA:  Thank you, Terri.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1637              The presence gap can best be described by the study that Kaan Yigit did, Madam Chair, and I would ask him to elaborate on that, please.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1638              MR. YIGIT:  Thanks, Paul.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1639              Before I actually go there, what I would like to do is take the Commission through the fundamentals of the analysis and the numbers‑‑ the objective numbers that are verifiable in the process.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1640              Before I do that, I feel like I have been making the business case for diversity for a number of years.  In fact, I think the first time that I was involved in a case like this was in 1992.  At that time I wrote a report that analyzed the demographic future of Ottawa, because what is now Omni was extending its signal.  It wanted to rebroadcast in this marketplace.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1641              Afterwards, in the mid‑nineties, I was involved with Milestone Radio, which owns and operates the first Black‑owned and operated station in Toronto, which has now an audience of over half a million people, which is the size of Hamilton, Ontario.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1642              I was there making the case for that station.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1643              With that background, I would like to give you some of the fundamental numbers.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1644              To add to Paul's point, it is really not about the system of failing miserably, it is simply large numbers and speed of change that we are dealing with.  Whatever we have in place is good, but what needs to be there is a little bit more.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1645              Let me give you the fundamentals.  The first number is 1 million.  That is the number of new Canadians that come to this country on an every‑four‑year basis.  That is the population of Calgary every four years.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1646              The second big number is the 4 million new Canadians since the mid‑eighties, basically, in family ages that are now having children.  Some of the children are in their early twenties, as you saw in the video.  Some of them are preschool, some of them are tweens.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1647              All of the population growth for Toronto and Vancouver will be coming from visible minorities, exclusively, in the next 15 years.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1648              If you look at the analysis like I did, you will see that it is absolutely flat in every other group except the visible minority groups.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1649              You know the other numbers, which are well publicized:  51 percent of both Toronto and Vancouver will be made up of visible minorities in 10 years.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1650              And, in that time period, the visible minority population of this country will be bigger than the population of Quebec.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1651              That is the big numbers part.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1652              When we did the 2003 report on diversity in Canadian television, which is some 400 pages‑‑ and you are familiar with it, of course, because the Commission was a participant‑‑ we looked at some 400 hours of programming.  It would have taken us 15 days to watch it, if we had been watching it back‑to‑back.  At the time, we produced a report, and the task force filed that report with the Commission.  That report showed the presence gap.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1653              The numbers were as follows:

LISTNUM 1 \l 1654              In 2003, 13.5 percent of all dramatic roles were filled by visible minorities.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1655              In the primary roles‑‑ these are the money roles, basically, so the lead character roles‑‑ the representation was 10.3 percent.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1656              At that point, 18.5 was the benchmark for English‑speaking Canada.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1657              So the primary role gap was 2:1, more or less.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1658              Let's fast forward to 2006.  We replicated the study under the same fundamental basics‑‑ and, in fact, this is obviously verifiable. Again, it is on the public record, the first and the second study.  And we are doing head counting, so we are not asking questions of people which have subjective responses.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1659              Here is what we found.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1660              The primary character representation in Canadian drama went from 10.3 percent to 12.2 percent.  That is including one movie that happened to appear on CTV during the sample period, which was "Hollywood and Bollywood".  If we had actually taken that out, it would have gone down a bit further.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1661              THE CHAIRPERSON:  What if you add "Little Mosque on the Prairie"?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1662              MR. YIGIT:  That's on the CBC.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1663              As you will remember, Madam Chair, first of all, this was done in May 2006.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1664              Actually, that is a good point, because if we added "Little Mosque on the Prairie", the numbers probably would have gone up a little bit more, if that was available in the private sector.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1665              The issue is:  How sensitive are numbers in which one program could make a substantial difference‑‑ a 10, 15 or 20 percent difference to the overall representation numbers?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1666              The key point that I wanted to make is, what happened in the two years was that the incidental character numbers went from 14.9 percent to 24.4 percent, in that period.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1667              So, basically, what happened was, there were more visible minorities as cab drivers, doormen, waiters and girl Fridays on‑screen in that period.  That's where the change was coming from, but the primary numbers really didn't move all that much, only 2 percent.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1668              If you do a little bit of math‑‑ and I don't want to oversimplify the situation‑‑ to catch up to today's population benchmarks for the whole of English Canada, for primary characters, would take about 10 to 15 years.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1669              If you wanted to catch up to Toronto and Vancouver, it would take some 40 years plus.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1670              Of course, I am using that for effect, but the point is this:  there has been improvement.  All the research we have done, not for this application, but previously, in this report, said the same thing:  people perceive that there has been progress, but that more needs to be done.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1671              Three years later, when we do a very similar kind of research, we find exactly the same thing, where the audience perceives that there is a gap, the content analysis shows that there is a gap, and the numbers show that the trajectory of diversity will be, more or less, in this line, because since 1991 our birth rate has been declining.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1672              That, combined, creates the context for us to say, objectively:  Is this the only answer to fix it?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1673              Probably not.  I don't know.  The point is, the situation has gotten better, but a lot needs to be done, given what we are looking at.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1674              I'm sorry for that very long preamble, but I wanted to get the material on the record.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1675              THE CHAIRPERSON:  No, that was thorough, thank you.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1676              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  Perhaps, Madam Commissioner, I could sum up the way we look at the whole situation.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1677              We appreciate what is happening with the Diversity Report and the Broadcasting Act and the CRTC's sensitivity around diversity issues, and we look at that as a foundation that we can build on.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1678              But here we have the situation of a foundation, and there are 6 million diverse and Aboriginal Canadians standing outside waiting for this house to be built, and we are saying that Canada One TV is prepared and ready to build the ground floor, together with other broadcasters, and to act as an incubator and generate and seed the system to build this house.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1679              That is kind of the way we look at it.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1680              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1681              I would now like to move to the tools that you will use, as you propose in your application, to ensure that your application and all of its programming, Canadian and non‑Canadian, commissioned and acquired, is multicultural in nature, or is relevant to, reflects on‑screen, or includes tangible participation from members of Canada's diverse ethnocultural communities.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1682              I understand your four‑point system, your diversity content tool, and that, to qualify, a program must meet two out of the four points for writer, director, producer or star, or principal speaking role.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1683              Is there a difference in your measurement tool between star and principal speaking role?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1684              If I were to use an ensemble cast as an example, how do you determine who is the star or who occupies the principal speaking role?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1685              MR. de SILVA:  That's a good question, and it is one of the questions that we did not anticipate in all of our rehearsals.

‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires

LISTNUM 1 \l 1686              MR. de SILVA:  I would say that, if it was an ensemble cast, obviously we would have to use different criteria.  But, usually, even though there is an ensemble cast‑‑ let's take a great show, one of my favourite shows on TV‑‑ American, unfortunately‑‑ "Grey's Anatomy" ensemble cast.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1687              In a case like that, I believe that four of the primary characters are of visible minority background.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1688              I would say that we just need one out of the four to quality.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1689              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  If I may add, to be fair to the way we looked at it in our research that Nordicity did‑‑ and that was analyzing three years of Canadian‑funded drama‑‑ when we were looking at those categories of producer, director, writer and actor, we looked at the ensemble in the actor category, and if just one actor was a person of colour, that got a point.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1690              And similar to the other categories, as well, in a whole series, if one of the directors‑‑ let's say there were 13 episodes and 13 directors.  If one was visibly diverse, that got a point.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1691              That's the way we looked at it.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1692              THE CHAIRPERSON:  The whole series got a point?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1693              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  Yes.  In terms of the numbers we presented, that is how broad we tried to define it.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1694              MR. de SILVA:  I should say that we still only came out with 4.5 percent representation, Madam Chair.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1695              THE CHAIRPERSON:  In your oral presentation, you said that this diversity content tool would be used for all original programming.  Does that include non‑Canadian?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1696              In other words, will you use this tool to assess non‑Canadian programming and whether or not it meets your mandate?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1697              MR. de SILVA:  That will be our first filter, to look for that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1698              Let me ask Pat to comment on that, because she has done a very thorough look at the availability of multicultural programming from the sources we mentioned.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1699              MS SCARLETT:  Priority will be given to programs that meet the filter, but in the event that we find content that, for example, may, in fact, support the mandate of Canada One TV, but may not necessarily meet all of the criteria, they will also be considered.  But that's in a secondary and exceptional situation.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1700              THE CHAIRPERSON:  But because the diversity content tool is quite specific‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1701              MS SCARLETT:  It is.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1702              THE CHAIRPERSON:  ‑‑ how will you assess the programming that you just mentioned, that meets the mandate but doesn't necessarily fulfil the requirements of the diversity content tool?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1703              MS SCARLETT:  This is what I am saying.  We will give priority and will always seek to seek programming that fits that particular criteria, but in the event that we come across something‑‑ for example, the actors on‑screen are multicultural and multi‑ethnic and multiracial, but perhaps, on the production side, it was not produced by people of diversity.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1704              That's what I mean.  It will be considered, but that would be a secondary and exceptional situation.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1705              MR. de SILVA:  I would add, Madam Chair, that a key part of it is the thematic of the program‑‑ if the themes fit the themes that we want to portray.

‑‑‑ Pause

LISTNUM 1 \l 1706              MR. de SILVA:  I'm sorry, I am getting a signal from Joel to add to this, if we may.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1707              It's difficult with him being over my left shoulder.

‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires

LISTNUM 1 \l 1708              MR. FORTUNE:  Good morning, Commissioners.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1709              I would like to refer you to something that the Applicant filed.  It was in response to a Commission deficiency question.  The date of our letter is January 9, 2007.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1710              We discussed, basically, how the filter would work and how we would go about evaluating programming to ensure that it met the "Nature of Service".

LISTNUM 1 \l 1711              There were some tools identified in that letter, and there are four of them.  One was the representation‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1712              And this is when programs don't meet the two out of four primary diversity filter for original programs.  This isn't for acquired.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1713              One key matter would be representation in speaking roles.  That's very important.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1714              The second was, as Paul just said, the presentation of programming with themes and issues that are clearly related to multiculturalism and diversity.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1715              The third was, substantial creative input by diverse people into the production.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1716              And the fourth was at the ownership level of the production company.  If there is substantial ownership at the ownership level.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1717              I think, in this response, and also in the supplementary brief, it was outlined that, together with these concrete tools, one of the functions of the Advisory Council is to see how these tools are working and find others to make sure that the service fits within its mandate.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1718              You will see, when you look at this letter, that applying these tools to the universe of Canadian programming that would be suitable for this service‑‑ there is not a great deal.  There is enough to get it going, but when you look at the analysis in light of the programs that were selected, I think you can see where we are going.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1719              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1720              Will you accept as a condition of licence the application of this tool, starting in Year 1?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1721              MR. de SILVA:  I take it, Madam Chair, that you are referring to the two out of four?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1722              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1723              MR. de SILVA:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1724              THE CHAIRPERSON:  You will accept it as a condition of licence.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1725              MR. de SILVA:  Absolutely.

‑‑‑ Pause

LISTNUM 1 \l 1726              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Always look to the lawyer before you answer the "condition of licence" questions.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1727              MR. de SILVA:  Always look to the lawyer.

‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires

LISTNUM 1 \l 1728              MR. de SILVA:  I thought I had that one down, but obviously not.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1729              MR. FORTUNE:  I would just clarify that the commitment is for original productions.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1730              MR. de SILVA:  Oh, yes.  Absolutely.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1731              I wouldn't dream of answering that question‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1732              THE CHAIRPERSON:  So the use of the diversity content tool would be to assess original Canadian programming.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1733              MR. de SILVA:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1734              I think that Pat explained clearly why that may be problematic with acquired programming, but for original programming‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1735              That is the very core of our application.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1736              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Both produced in‑house and acquired.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1737              MR. de SILVA:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1738              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1739              In terms of the details of your programming plans, you would commit to broadcast two hours of Canadian drama between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, on average, each week, starting in Year 5, and three hours between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. by the seventh year.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1740              Is that two hours each night, Monday to Friday, or is it two hours per week?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1741              MR. de SILVA:  Each night.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1742              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Each night.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1743              Does this include repeats?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1744              MR. de SILVA:  I think, in the overall counting of the hours, it would include repeats, yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1745              Unless, of course, you would want to give us a whole lot more money to produce original programs.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1746              THE CHAIRPERSON:  If you give us a whole lot more hours.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1747              MR. de SILVA:  We can talk.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1748              THE CHAIRPERSON:  We are not bartering here.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1749              MR. de SILVA:  Not yet.  Okay.

‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires

LISTNUM 1 \l 1750              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Would you accept as a condition of licence that you will broadcast two hours of Canadian drama each night, Monday to Friday, beginning in Year 5?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1751              MR. de SILVA:  In Year 5, yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1752              THE CHAIRPERSON:  In terms of Years 1 to 4, in response to deficiencies, you said that the number of original Canadian content to be produced will rise from 63.5 hours in the first year to 106 in the fourth year.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1753              You also provided us with a chart, and I see "Original in‑house hours, 23; and Canadian‑acquired, 40.5."

LISTNUM 1 \l 1754              So, in view of the fact that you said that original Canadian content will rise from 63.5, do I take that 40.5 Canadian‑acquired hours to be all original?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1755              MR. de SILVA:  I would ask Amos to respond to that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1756              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  I am trying to understand the question.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1757              Is it the relation between the original and acquired?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1758              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes, because you made the statement that the original Canadian content to be produced will rise from 63.5 hours in the first year‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1759              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  Right.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1760              THE CHAIRPERSON:  ‑‑ to 106 in the fourth year.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1761              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  Right.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1762              THE CHAIRPERSON:  You then provided us with numbers between original in‑house and Canadian‑acquired, to come to the total of 63.5.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1763              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  Original in‑house.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1764              THE CHAIRPERSON:  You had 23 original in‑house hours‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1765              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  Right.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1766              THE CHAIRPERSON:  ‑‑ and 40.5 of Canadian‑acquired.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1767              Does that mean that the 40.5 is all original Canadian‑acquired programming?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1768              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1769              THE CHAIRPERSON:  So you will not be acquiring any existing Canadian programming?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1770              Because I saw "Moccasin Flats" on your video.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1771              MR. de SILVA:  Is the question:  Will we not be acquiring any Canadian previously‑made programming?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1772              THE CHAIRPERSON:  That's right.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1773              MR. de SILVA:  I think the plan is to acquire‑‑ I think the number of hours‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1774              Jim is going to step in.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1775              Go ahead, Jim.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1776              MR. BYRD:  Madam Chair, if I could do it on a dollars' basis, what we have said is, in Year 1, in terms of original Canadian programming from the independent sector, we would spend $9.6 million.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1777              In terms of original Canadian programming in‑house, we would spend $3.5 million, approximately.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1778              And in terms of Canadian‑acquired, we would spend a further $3 million.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1779              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes, I appreciate that, but what I am looking for is the number of hours of never‑before‑seen Canadian programming that will appear on Canada One, which goes, of course, to the issue of diversity of programming on television and how much more diversity of programming you will be bringing to the screen.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1780              MR. de SILVA:  I want to clarify that a number of those hours are our in‑house produced programming‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1781              THE CHAIRPERSON:  That's the 23 hours.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1782              MR. de SILVA:  The 23 hours, yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1783              THE CHAIRPERSON:  So of the 40.5 hours, how many of those will be brand new hours to the Canadian broadcasting system?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1784              MR. de SILVA:  All of those will be original hours.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1785              THE CHAIRPERSON:  But that includes "Moccasin Flats".

LISTNUM 1 \l 1786              MR. de SILVA:  No.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1787              THE CHAIRPERSON:  That doesn't include "Moccasin Flats".

LISTNUM 1 \l 1788              MR. de SILVA:  No.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1789              "Moccasin Flats"‑‑ and there will be other Canadian‑acquired programming that would have been seen previously.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1790              Joel can clarify some of this.

‑‑‑ Pause

LISTNUM 1 \l 1791              MR. de SILVA:  Madam Chair, we are going to walk through the original hours, to make it very, very clear what they are, year‑by‑year.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1792              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Okay.  Thank you.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1793              MR. FORTUNE:  Original hours, totally, are the 63.5 in Year 1, the 79.5 in Year 2, 95 in Year 3, and 106 in Year 4.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1794              Then, we wanted to look at the acquired hours?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1795              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1796              MR. FORTUNE:  Acquired Canadian.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1797              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1798              MR. FORTUNE:  Perhaps I could pass that onto Pat.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1799              MS SCARLETT:  The acquired Canadian content will‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1800              Your question, I think, refers to never‑before‑seen Canadian content programming.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1801              Is that correct?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1802              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes, that is the definition of "original".

LISTNUM 1 \l 1803              MS SCARLETT:  Some of those programs‑‑ in fact, we are in preliminary discussions with independent companies about the possibility of them providing that content for us right now.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1804              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Again, the number of hours that have been seen in the system‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1805              MS SCARLETT:  Right.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1806              THE CHAIRPERSON:  ‑‑ what will that yearly total be on this service?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1807              In other words, how many hours of programs like "Moccasin Flats" or "Josie H" will you be acquiring for broadcast on this service?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1808              MR. de SILVA:  I see where the issue is, Madam Commissioner.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1809              We have not broken down section (d), which is Canadian‑acquired content, in terms of number of hours.  We have a universal figure, an amount of $3 million for that, and that, of course, will depend on many of the deals we can make.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1810              As you know, the volume of what can be acquired depends on the age of the program and what output deals we can make.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1811              So the hours may fluctuate.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1812              That is why we chose an amount of $3 million, as opposed to breaking it down.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1813              But if you want us to come to an approximate number of hours, bearing all of those variables in mind, I am sure we could file that for you.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1814              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  Yes, if we are not talking repeats, we can look at the grid, in terms of the Canadian‑acquired breakdown in hours.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1815              What do we have here‑‑ 49.5 Canadian‑acquired overall.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1816              THE CHAIRPERSON:  That includes repeats.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1817              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1818              MS SCARLETT:  Yes, it does.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1819              MR. de SILVA:  Yes, for sure.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1820              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Is there a different repeat factor between your acquired programming and the original programming?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1821              MR. de SILVA:  That would vary, according to how we schedule that, depending on seasonal fluctuations for repeats.  Obviously there would be less in our prime winter months.  February‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1822              My recollection of the programming schedules, when I did that at Vision TV, was that, obviously, the time of year makes a big difference.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1823              So that number would fluctuate in terms of repeats, but our overall plan would be to have as few repeats as possible.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1824              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Since you do claim that there is this presence gap, that it still does exist, and that visible minorities are virtually invisible, what are your sources for acquiring Canadian programming that will meet the mandate, as you have stated?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1825              MR. de SILVA:  That would be our acquisitions person, and I will hand it over, happily, to Patricia.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1826              MS SCARLETT:  We have, in fact, developed a roster of independent production companies that are owned by people of diversity.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1827              For example, there is Hungry Eyes Production, and there is Shirley Cheechoo's company, Spoken Song.  We have other companies, such as DHX, which is also producing.  Again, they are focused on family and children's programming, but certainly will have some content that would work in our schedule.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1828              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1829              You say that you will solicit productions from independent producers that have evidence of a diverse ownership structure, wherein at least 30 percent of the production company is owned by members of visible minorities or Aboriginals.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1830              How do you define "ownership"?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1831              Is it share structure, voting interests, control?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1832              How do you define that 30 percent ownership in a production company?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1833              On what basis do you determine that they have an ownership interest, in other words?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1834              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  That would be share structure, and, typically, we are thinking a single‑purpose company, set up for the purpose of a production, not so much that it's the parent company.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1835              THE CHAIRPERSON:  And would you accept as a condition of licence that 75 percent of all original Canadian programming will originate from independent sources not affiliated with Diversity Television Incorporated?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1836              MR. de SILVA:  Yes, we will.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1837              MS SCARLETT:  Yes.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1838              THE CHAIRPERSON:  My last set of questions will have to do with your business plan.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1839              You are proposing mandatory carriage on digital basic for a wholesale fee of 50 percent.  What factors did you take into consideration to arrive at that wholesale fee?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1840              MR. de SILVA:  Thank you, Madam Commissioner.  That was one question that we did anticipate and rehearse.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1841              There are a number of factors, including my cable bill, I should say, which is now hovering around $75.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1842              I should say that an earlier reference to the income of Commissioner French and his relative ability to pay high cable bills notwithstanding, I think that mine may not be in that category by any means.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1843              But, in terms of evaluating the affordability, I suppose, and how we arrived at the 50‑cent figure‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1844              First of all, we moved from the process of "What do we need?"  What do we need to make the kind of programming we are talking about?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1845              How do we deal with the presence gap, which we have talked about, and how do we produce high‑quality programming?  What will it cost to do that?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1846              As producers of that kind of programming, we know, obviously, $1 million‑plus for a one‑hour show; $400,000 for a half‑hour show.  Those numbers keep going up.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1847              Mind you, some of them are lower, possibly, by using new technology.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1848              In all of our focus groups that we did‑‑ and Kaan can speak to this‑‑ across the country, in every major city, they told us that the key to our service was quality.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1849              So we started off on that basis:  What do we need in order to provide the kind of financing required for that?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1850              I will pass this to Kaan, who will talk about the actual 50‑cent question which you raised.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1851              MR. YIGIT:  I will address the first part of your question, which is, when you actually talk to people about this kind of channel, initially there is some hesitation in responding:  What is it going to be?  How is it going to be?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1852              There is generally an assumption that if you are going to do Canadian programming of any kind‑‑ and this is an unfortunate public opinion‑‑ the general perception is that Canadian is equal to poor production values and/or low budgets.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1853              What happens when you connect that to diversity is, the response you get is:  If it is going to be parity production values with the kinds of things that I watch, then that's great.  If it is going to be low‑budget, then I am not going to watch it.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1854              That is, I think, what Paul was talking about.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1855              The second part of it is the 50‑cent piece.  We haven't really looked at a price test of any kind, because that is not how people buy cable or services along these lines.  But just looking at where we are with digital cable and DTH, looking at average bills of $60 or $65 a month, half of the population of that DTH/digital cable universe takes premium services and that kind of thing, so 50 cents works out to less than 1 percent of the total cable bill.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1856              The general consumer expectation is somewhere in the neighbourhood of a 2 to 4 percent increase in‑‑ not just cable, in every category that we look at.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1857              We all grumble, but life goes on, and we don't drop services.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1858              That is from the perspective of affordability.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1859              The second point is, the digital cable customer, the DTH customer, isn't exactly‑‑ they are not choosing between food and television.  It is a higher than average income customer.  Is it affordable at the rates that Paul suggested?  More than likely.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1860              Would the cable customer want their bills to go up $3 or $4 a month?  Of course not, but if it is kept, as I said, in the low single digits, on an annual basis, you are not going to see a lot of impact whatsoever.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1861              THE CHAIRPERSON:  But in all of the research that you submitted with this application, you did not specifically ask the question as to whether or not the people that you were surveying would be willing to pay 50 cents a month for this service.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1862              MR. YIGIT:  That's right.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1863              THE CHAIRPERSON:  I would like to know, specifically, why you excluded that question.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1864              MR. YIGIT:  We haven't asked that question for the six or seven years that I have been doing work in this domain, simply because I don't believe it is meaningful.  People don't buy a channel for 50 cents.  They don't really quite have the choice in the way that we kind of understand the sales process to work.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1865              The second part is, there are proxies in our research for a universal estimation.  If you were to go into that idyllic space of "pick and pay", how many people would pay?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1866              If we go to that space, though, we probably should ask the question:  How many people would pay for any of the channels out there?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1867              Let me give you an example.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1868              In the late nighties, early 2000s, I did a "pick and pay" type of simulation.  I included 69 channels in the bundle that I tested.  Twelve channels received 50 percent or more of the votes.  Seven of those 12 were American services.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1869              Most of the channels that you see on your dial today, in basic or in various places, would not really pass the 20 or 30 percent threshold.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1870              The point I am making is, it comforts us when we ask the question, because we know how many people will pay this money, but the reality of it is that, in that sort of very, very liberal universe, most of the channels would not pass the threshold of consumer demand from a majority standpoint.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1871              Nielsen just released statistics, which were in the New York Times on Monday, and I think it would be instructive if I could take the time to work through that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1872              There are over 100 channels available to the typical digital cable/DTH customer.  There are 15 favourites.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1873              Everybody's favourites are different.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1874              Those are the general parameters of the debate for me.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1875              MR. AMOS ADETUYI:  Perhaps I could take it from another angle, as well, in what is driving the 50 cents, because this is the issue of diversity and representation in an equitable way.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1876              We looked at other models in the 30‑cent and 40‑cent range, and it wouldn't make a significant impact on the system, in terms of balancing the inequity that is there.  It would take a huge amount of time to get to that balance of representation at the production levels.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1877              Then, to go on the higher side, above 50 cents, there would be the question of capacity.  That was proved out through the Nordicity study, in terms of producers, directors, writers and actors who are diverse, who can come to the table and produce the content for this network.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1878              So it was a balancing act, and it settled at 50 cents.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1879              THE CHAIRPERSON:  Is 50 cents the minimum that you would have to charge as a wholesale fee in order to make this service viable?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1880              Have you done any modelling to see, if that wholesale fee was lower, what effect that would have on your programming plans?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1881              MR. de SILVA:  Yes.  We have done various looks at it, and we have looked at what that impact would have on our ability to deliver the kind of programming and the quality and the volume that we have proposed.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1882              I should also say that Wayne Albo, and, in fact, Jim, can also add to that, in terms of the modelling that was done on a different fee.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1883              MR. BYRD:  I would start quickly, Commissioner, and say that we did start with what the impact would be on the priorities of this channel, in terms of the programming we would deliver, and then we moved back from there.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1884              Wayne, you could probably talk to the detail.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1885              MR. ALBO:  We ran the model at 40 cents, pushed through the numbers, and basically what happened was, obviously, our revenue would go down $55 million, but the way our structure works, for us to make a profit, our programming expenses expended would have to go down by about $60 million.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1886              Our revenue would go down $55 million, but what we would be producing and spending would have to go down more, because the fixed costs remain fairly constant, and we are not earning the margin.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1887              Really, in our view, because of the nature of the reinvestment of 65 cents on the dollar, the reduction from 50 to 40 would take out such a huge amount of the money spent on programming that it would sort of gut the programs we are looking to produce.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1888              THE CHAIRPERSON:  What year would you be profitable in that modelling scenario?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1889              MR. ALBO:  We would be profitable in Year 3, and the profits that we looked at were about exactly the same as what we had presented at 50 cents, except there is a delay in profitability.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1890              But the level of profitability, overall, would be the same.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1891              What we are trying to do is say:  This is the profit.  What has to give for us to remain‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1892              What really comes out of the system is programming expenses.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1893              MR. de SILVA:  I should add, Madam Commissioner, that we also did a model at $1, but we rejected that pretty quickly.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1894              THE CHAIRPERSON:  You made too much money?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1895              MR. de SILVA:  No, it was‑‑

LISTNUM 1 \l 1896              THE CHAIRPERSON:  I'm kidding.

‑‑‑ Laughter / Rires

LISTNUM 1 \l 1897              MR. de SILVA:  We will leave it at that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1898              THE CHAIRPERSON:  In your financial projections, your advertising revenues make up only 2 percent, increasing to 7 percent of your total revenues.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1899              Quite simply, why so low?

LISTNUM 1 \l 1900              MR. BYRD:  Madam Chair, I think it is fair to say that some would consider our ad sales revenue a conservative estimate.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1901              We did, first and foremost, want to be realistic about what we could present to the Commission, in terms of the programming we could deliver.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1902              That was one factor.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1903              The other factor is‑‑ and I will ask Wayne to talk to some of the specifics‑‑ we are entering the broadcast milieu with a new channel, in a fragmented universe.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1904              We also had to factor in how quickly we thought our own marketing plan for the channel could roll out and have an impact, so that viewers could come to us, and so that advertisers could come to us.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1905              So that was factored into it.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1906              I also would like to point out to the Commission that what we are trying to do with this channel is position it for the long term.  We are not even looking at this seven‑year licence period, we are looking far beyond that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1907              What we are trying to do is build the channel, and build it for future growth.  In the mix of what we have presented to the Commission, you know that there is no return on investment over the early years of this channel.  That is not our intent.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1908              You know that we have also committed that 65 percent of our revenues from prior years will get rolled back into programming, and our intent is to continue doing that through this initial licence period, to build the channel, so that it is ready for the second licence period, and substantial growth, we hope.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1909              I would ask Wayne to talk you through the specifics of that.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1910              MR. ALBO:  How we derived the revenue‑‑ and, you are right, it probably is conservative.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1911              We looked at the ad revenue per subscriber of a number of Category 1 digital services.  The average was approximately 30 cents per subscriber for 2005.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1912              Because Canada One is a startup, we took 50 percent of that number, on a per subscriber basis‑‑ i.e., we have a lot more subscribers, so that increases the dollar amount.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1913              And the 15 cents, again, of the number we looked at, was very consistent with their startup types of revenues per subscriber.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1914              We then grew the revenue at 20 percent a year, and I think, at this point, the numbers are slightly conservative, but, again, given our model, the sensitivity isn't as great as one would expect, because 65 cents of all of the increases go back into programming.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1915              What we were trying to prove out is, at these levels, through conservative revenue projections, can we deliver the programming that is required to make this viable.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1916              We didn't believe that it was in our best interest to overestimate both subscribers and/or revenue and then say:  Here is what we need to deliver the programming we need to make this a success.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1917              So I think that, yes, we probably were conservative throughout those numbers.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1918              THE CHAIRPERSON:  My issue here, of course, is that this creates an absolute dependence on mandatory carriage, on subscriber revenue therefore.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1919              You are presenting us with an idea that is going to deliver high‑quality, compelling programming, which will speak to all Canadians, based on what you have said in your application, and here this morning, which presumably will draw an audience, which presumably will result in advertising revenues.

LISTNUM 1 \l 1920              I just want to be absolutely sure that we have here, before us, a business plan that has taken all of those things into consideration, and its ability to attract advertisers as well as viewers, and perhaps decrease the dependency, therefore, on a high subscriber fee.