:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for inviting me to appear today to talk about the upcoming Vancouver Olympics.
As you know, with me today is Mr. Sylvain Lafrance, Executive Vice-President, French Services, for Radio-Canada.
As you also know, CBC/Radio-Canada has been the official Canadian broadcaster of the Olympic Games for the past seven Olympics. Olympic coverage for us has been the culmination of our ongoing commitment to showcasing Canadian amateur athletes, and we are very proud of the calibre of coverage we have provided to Canadians.
In 2005, we submitted a bid to the International Olympic Committee to try and secure the broadcast rights for the 2010 Vancouver and 2012 London Olympics. That bid proposed a partnership between CBC/Radio-Canada, CanWest Global Communications Corporation, The Score specialty sports channel, La Presse and Telus.
We offered the IOC $93 million US, which was $25 million more than what we had bid for the rights to the Turin and Beijing Olympics. Unfortunately, the IOC rejected our bid and accepted a bid of $153 million US, submitted by what was then known as Bell Globemedia.
We were disappointed, of course, that our bid to broadcast the Olympics was rejected, but we were particularly surprised when, immediately after winning the broadcast rights in Lausanne on February 11, 2005, Bell Globemedia announced that it would solve its problem of providing service to Francophones by having Radio-Canada carry its signal. The fact is, however, that BellGlobemedia had never discussed that with us.
As my predecessor, Robert Rabinovitch, explained at the time, CBC/Radio-Canada has specific obligations to Francophones and Anglophones in Canada under the Broadcasting Act. We simply cannot allow another broadcaster to replace our programming with their own to fix deficiencies in their coverage. That fact has not changed.
We are aware of the Committee's concerns about Olympic coverage reaching Francophones who do not subscribe to cable or satellite. In fact, it was Mr. Lafrance who told the Senate Official Languages Committee, back in December of 2006, that we would be open to being part of the solution, provided that any arrangement met four key conditions.
First of all, that we produce and broadcast our own programming for television, radio and the Internet, or be involved in some co-production and co-broadcasting partnership. Second, we want the specific programming needs of Francophone and Anglophone audiences to be met through two independent program offerings. Third, we would like our broadcast to treat all Francophone audiences in Canada equally. And, fourth, we want to be compensated for the costs associated with becoming an Olympic partner.
In December of 2007, we discussed the situation with RDS, but there was no interest on their part.
Similar conversations also took place in May of 2008, and I repeated at the time that we would be prepared to negotiate a partnership agreement with CTV, provided that the four conditions outlined by Sylvain Lafrance were met. However, CTV was still not interested.
[English]
Then earlier this year, the CRTC chairman wrote to me requesting that CBC/Radio-Canada look again into the possibility of offering its assistance to CTV in order to provide greater broadcast coverage of the games. In my February 3 response—which you have in front of you under tab 4—we told CTV that consistent with the chairman's suggestions, we would consider broadcasting the international television signal pool feed of a few key events from the Vancouver Olympics across our network. This is the unedited feed, the signal without commentary that is made available to all international broadcasters.
In this correspondence, we stated that we would not seek compensation from CTV for providing this service, but we would offset our costs of providing this service to Canadians through the sale of commercials on our own broadcast. Again, CTV replied that it had no need for our assistance.
Then, out of the blue, Rick Brace announced to this committee that CTV was now prepared to provide us with the feeds, but they would keep all of the advertising revenue. Frankly, I'm surprised by this announcement, because they didn't even inform us of the offer. I still have not heard directly from CTV.
However, yesterday, we went after the information. So Sylvain Lafrance contacted the head of RDS, and he was told that CTV had several conditions on their offer, some of which were not mentioned to you by Mr. Brace on Tuesday. For example, we must give up our advertising space and carry their advertising as is, we must shut off the broadcast to francophones living in Quebec, no CBC/Radio-Canada personnel are to be allowed on the premises of the Olympics that we are supposed to cover, we cannot shoot any of our own material, and we must pay for all of the costs associated with the broadcast.
Now I'll leave you to decide if you think their offer is indeed generous and to wonder why these conditions were not shared with you on Tuesday.
[Translation]
You know what our current financial situation is. We have had to cut $171 million from our budget this year and eliminate 800 jobs. Also, we have just found out that we will be subject to the government's Strategic Review Initiative, which will target an additional 5% of our appropriation.
I can tell you right now that CBC/Radio-Canada is not prepared to defray any costs to provide a service that CTV undertook to deliver when it paid $163 million to secure the broadcasting rights, as that would be tantamount to allowing CTV to generate a profit for its own shareholders at a time when we are being forced to lay off our employees. That kind of bailout for CTV is completely irresponsible, and we will not be part of it.
In order for CBC/Radio-Canada to be involved in these Olympics, we must be appropriately compensated, either directly by CTV, or by selling advertising on our own airwaves during the Olympics, and CTV must obviously lift its ridiculous conditions.
However, I would ask Committee members to think about all of this for a moment. A private broadcaster secures the broadcast rights to the Olympics by bidding $60 million US more than we did, and when it is unable to provide the level of service it committed to, the public broadcaster is expected to come to its rescue and assume the costs of a bailout. Is this really a wise use of public resources?
For our part, we remain committed to amateur sports and to the Olympics, and will continue bidding for the Canadian broadcast rights to future Olympic Games at the appropriate time.
I hope that commitment will receive the support it deserves from your Committee, but it is important for you to know that we will not do that at any cost—not in the future, not now.
We would now be pleased to take your questions.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First, one of the two people representing the CRTC told us that they could cover all of Canada. After that, we were told that they could not cover all of Canada. We pointed out to them that if even 2.5% of the Canadian market is not covered, that is the equivalent of New Brunswick or Saskatchewan. When people say that is fine, because it is still 98%, they are being irresponsible. That essentially means taking away the right of Francophones—in Quebec or elsewhere—to see the Games. I am from Gatineau. We do not have access to the Radio-Canada signal. I am in Gatineau, just on the other side of the river. If people do not have cable, they do not receive Radio-Canada. But it is not as though we are light-years away; we are right next door.
I hope the government intends to respect Canadian federalism. But I am not sure, because it is not showing us that it will in this case. I hope it will ensure that all Canadians, Quebeckers, Acadians, French-speakers in the North and others in remote areas, in every province, have access to Olympic television coverage in French, wherever they live, whether they happen to be at home or visiting someone else. We will see what its real commitment is in that respect.
If CTV or the consortium are able to look beyond their profits and show some respect for Canadian taxpayers, our Olympians and the athletes in Vancouver, if they are anxious for everyone to see the Games and if they agree to make a deal with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, will you have time to set everything up and ensure that coverage is excellent? I would not like to see something just cobbled together, with people being left out.
:
If the consortium gives us access to the site, and a business plan is put in place that makes sense and reflects the conditions set previously, the answer would be that time is of the essence. As a general rule, it takes two years to plan coverage of the Olympic Games, and there is the whole matter of preparation.
Having said that, I want to make one very important point. CBC/Radio-Canada will have a very strong presence in Vancouver, in any case, because it is the public broadcaster and what happens in Vancouver next winter will be huge. We have lined up a whole range of programming, within the limits of what we are able to do, given that we do not own the rights. On radio, for example, you can actually do a lot of things without owning the rights, because you don't have to buy pictures. So, we will be carrying all the results from Vancouver on radio. We will also be providing significant daily television coverage from Vancouver, with programs that discuss the cultural life and everything associated with the Games. We will broadcast any pictures we are entitled to carry, and there will be some interviews. There are certain things we are entitled to do.
So, in any case, we will have a very strong presence in Vancouver. It will be a Vancouver winter—there is no doubt about that. Of course, we cannot carry the competitions; that's the reason you buy the rights. I understand that this is a problem. However, to answer your question, if we enter into an agreement whereby our employees can be there, and a proper business model can be negotiated by the two corporations, it would likely be possible, because we have the necessary sports crews and skills and a lot of people who could organize quickly to provide Olympic coverage.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want you to know how much I appreciate all the efforts you have made over the years. In the past, I have benefited from the coverage you have provided of previous Olympic Games. I am a Francophone and I live in a minority community in Ontario. I receive your radio and television programming, although I must admit that I have watched less television in recent years. However, I listen to the radio all the time. I owe a great deal to Radio-Canada, which allows me to preserve my language.
In the past, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation would come and ask me for my opinion, sometimes as a participant in a focus group, and other times as a commentator on programs dealing with Ontario. However, since I was elected to the House of Commons, it has not been as easy to have that contact. I met with Mr. Rabinovitch. We talked about a number of issues relating to the services you provide to Francophones who form a minority in their region. He strongly encouraged me to get in touch with you. I sent you e-mails and left you phone messages, but they never elicited any response. I find this whole situation rather complicated. I was elected by the people, but I am unable to access the senior management of Radio-Canada, even though I was able to do that when I was an ordinary citizen.
As regards the situation we are dealing with today, I was sitting at this table when representatives of the CRTC and CTV appeared before the Committee. In my opinion, what you are describing today does not reflect the tone of those meetings.
I remember another dispute relating to coverage of hockey games which was resolved through this Committee. I am wondering whether there is any way we could set aside our false pride in order to arrive at a solution that would mean that no one would either lose money or lose face. We would focus on the service to be given Francophones who are part of a minority community.
The government says that you have social responsibilities. That means that it, too, has a role to play in terms of our public television broadcaster. It should invite all of us to sit down together to find some answers, because this public television broadcaster, which belongs to Canadians, to taxpayers, has social responsibilities. If there are costs to be incurred, they should not have to be borne by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, whose funding has been cut. The station in Windsor has lost six journalists, and is almost on the verge of closing. In Moncton, we have also lost six journalists and we will again be losing services.
In addition, even though you have social responsibilities, you are being asked to cooperate with CTV, a private broadcaster, and give it what revenues you still have, which would only dig you in deeper. One of these fine days, we will lose our public broadcaster. That worries me.
First of all, does the government have a role to play in this situation? Second, could you forward to the Committee that section of the contract which stipulates that there is a responsibility to provide coverage in both languages? Does that exist?
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, members of the Official Languages Committee, thank you for your invitation and for allowing the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique to contribute to this important discussion on coverage in French of the Vancouver-Whistler 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games. My name is Yves Trudel and I am the Executive Director of the FFCB.
I have to say, right from the outset, that our community was surprised, and even concerned, when it found out, at the same time as all other Canadians, that coverage of the Games had been awarded to the Bell Globemedia consortium, which includes RDS, a pay service, and TQS, which does not broadcast over-the-air outside of Quebec.
In our opinion, the decision of the International Olympic Committee not to award the contract for Olympic coverage to a national broadcaster was not a pragmatic one. We believe that any event of national or international scope should necessarily be broadcast over a national network, or one which, at the very least, is available to everyone at no additional cost.
Having said that, based on the content of a Canadian Press article that appeared on January 8, the CRTC report tabled on March 30 and information provided by Ms. Mounier, the Assistant Deputy Minister of International and Intergovernmental Affairs and Sport, at hearings held by the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages on April 27, the consortium has negotiated free access to those channels broadcasting the Games in French with cable and satellite operators. So, we now know that not only will Télévision Quatre-Saisons and the Réseau des Sports be used, but also the Réseau Info-Sports and the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network, or APTN. Therefore, part of the programming is in French. Based on this recent information, the consortium now believes that more than 95% of Canadians will have access to Olympic coverage.
The fact remains, however, that TQS is not available in every region of the country. The TQS network currently has only one antenna outside of Quebec. Although the consortium did indicate that it will broadcast all competitions live on its Web site, in addition to providing VSD content in both languages over the Internet, some members of our communities will not have access to Olympic coverage in their own language—including people who subscribe to certain analog services, people who are not subscribers of any broadcasting distribution undertaking, or BDU, and people who do not have access to broadband Internet service.
It is very unfortunate that CBC/Radio-Canada and the consortium were not able to negotiate an agreement whereby coverage would be provided to Francophones outside of Quebec, particularly those who are not BDU subscribers.
Furthermore, a number of questions are still unanswered, in our opinion.
Will RDS and TQS be in a position to propose programming that is comparable to what CTV and TSN have offered in the past? Can all our communities expect to receive the same number of hours of programming as their Anglophone neighbours? Can Francophone television viewers expect to receive coverage of events prior to the opening of the Games?
According to the latest CRTC report, the consortium expects that Canadians will have access to 1,100 hours of coverage in English but only 800 hours in French. Why that difference?
It should be noted that the consortium has confirmed that signals will be available at no charge for a three-month period, including the two-week period that precedes the opening of the Games. That is an interesting premise, but in no way does it meet all of our expectations.
For example, many artists and creators from our communities will be participating in activities during the pre-Olympic period, such as the Torch Relays and the Cultural Olympiad. We were very much expecting to give them the visibility they deserve at the provincial level, and, of course, at the national level.
I would like to give you a very practical example. Several months ago, we found out that RDS has installed in the Vancouver region--
:
In fact, that program is broadcast by TQS and is already on the air. What is interesting is that the program that aired on January 19 was about the Francophone community in Maillardville, an historic community in our province which is celebrating its 100th anniversary this year. Unfortunately, most of us and most listeners or viewers who would like to receive TQS in Western Canada are unable to do so.
Finally, I want to share with you another of our concerns with respect to television coverage. Will the Games be broadcast in public places, hotels and other sites known as live sites? What can we do so that visitors are not deprived of this service? We know that people will be attending the actual competitions, but others will be out and about in Whistler and Vancouver, or could be at sites where they could access a television screen.
There is no doubt that progress has been made in terms of television coverage. The situation is less critical now than it was previously for Francophones in our different areas, and we do want to commend the consortium for all its efforts. However, we also expect the consortium to fill in the current gaps and we are still hoping that Radio-Canada will have lots of coverage of all the cultural and political events that will be taking place around the 2010 Games.
We would also like to congratulate the consortium for broadcasting the Paralympic Games in a way that has never been done before. We believe that is important.
As regards the print media, the Federation is pleased to hear that VANOC has negotiated an agreement with the Gesca group newspapers. However, we also think it would be a good idea for there to be an agreement with the Association de la presse francophone, in order to include all the minority Francophone newspapers. That is an oversight, as we see it.
It is our sense that coverage of the preparation of the Olympic Games is not as extensive in the Francophone newspapers. The best example would be the coverage and promotion of the Olympic Torch Relay. According to recent data, Quebec is the province where the least number of people have signed up to carry the torch. Here in British Columbia, our Federation as well as the Canadian Foundation for Cross-Cultural Dialogue have been working together, produced a poster, issued a press release and successfully promoted this event in all the other provinces where Francophones live.
We also want to be sure there will be Francophone representation during the celebrations at every torch relay stop. Francophones need to be identified who can join the working groups that will be struck in each of the cities. We were happy to see that the eligibility criteria recently announced by Canadian Heritage in order to receive funding do refer to linguistic duality. However, it remains to be seen how that will actually work.
We want to state unequivocally that, in the course of the last year, VANOC has made a tremendous amount of progress. However, as has already been pointed out by the VANOC Official Languages Advisory Committee—recently constituted and of which we are members—there is still work to be done, and we intend to do it.
Finally, in partnership with VANOC and the Foundation, we will continue to take a keen interest in everything relating to linguistic duality and services in French at the Games, including services for athletes, their families, visitors, volunteers and anyone and everyone connected to the Games.
Signage and communications by third parties, such as municipalities, the province, sponsors and celebration sites are of critical importance at this stage, because we are not yet convinced they have the same commitment to linguistic duality. It would be unfortunate if the use of French were to be limited to competition sites alone.
In closing, I would just like to add that we still have cultural concerns. You may recall the show that was presented for the countdown, on February 12, and some of the activities organized on that occasion. There were some disappointments.
We continue to work with VANOC and the Foundation, as well as with the relevant government authorities, to ensure that such cases do not occur again in this final year of preparation.
Expectations are high, but that is perfectly normal, in our view, and we are delighted that it is the case.
Once again, I would like to thank you for giving me this opportunity to share our concerns, as well as testify to the fact that progress has been made.
As I mentioned previously, VANOC is doing a considerable amount of work behind the scenes. We see that as an encouraging sign in terms of what will be happening directly on the Olympic sites. However, as you can well imagine, everybody coming to see the Olympics from somewhere else will not necessarily be spending all their time at the competition sites. They will need to get to the competition sites, and therefore will be coming through airports, walking or driving in the streets of Vancouver and Whistler, as well as on the roads linking the different sites.
They will also require tourist and travel information during their stay in our province. If visitors, athletes and delegations accompanying the athletes are going to be coming to Canada, Canada and British Columbia will certainly want to enjoy the economic spinoffs associated with the Games.
We know that there will be at least as many Francophone countries, if not more, as there are Commonwealth countries sending athletes to the 2010 Olympic Winter Games. There is significant potential there, in our opinion. We are already educating VANOC and have begun to do the same with outside partners. However, it is my sense that these people are not feeling enough pressure. VANOC and the Government of Canada are not sending them clear, direct messages regarding their common responsibility to reflect our linguistic duality.
For example, the Tourism BC site still needs to be adjusted—in other words, the French version of the site has yet to be developed. The initial work done on it is not encouraging. The provincial government recently told us that this would be quickly corrected. We will let you know as soon as that is done.
:
In terms of our contact with the provincial government, we have set up a coordinating committee which includes one of our member organizations, the Société de développement économique, or SDE, which has long been one of the partners of the province of British Columbia when it comes to providing tourist information in French.
Very early on in the process, several months ago, the SDE got in touch with Tourism BC to propose its assistance with the French material and to suggest that, until it is ready, there at least be links provided to SDE sites in order to provide partial tourist information to visitors. That had not yet been done. So, that is something that was done by one of our members.
We also have had direct contact with the provincial government, as has the SDE, of course. The provincial government was made aware of your comments, Mr. Godin, and I want to thank you for them. I still find it quite unfortunate that someone at the opposite end of the country has to intervene in order for a local government, which already has links to the Francophone community, to do the work it is supposed to do.
That is unfortunate. It simply reflects the fact that all of this work does not depend only on regulations, agreements, understandings and protocols; it also depends on the good will of staff and decision-makers. Sometimes, that good will has to be supported, encouraged and even given a good nudge from time to time, to ensure that important issues, such as linguistic duality at the Olympic Games, are dealt with appropriately.
:
Thank you, Mr. D'Amours.
Mr. Trudel, it is now time for me to thank you for appearing before the Committee. I invite you to call on us if you need the Committee's assistance with that process. We will be right here in the coming weeks and months. It is always better to take action as soon as possible.
If this could in any way reassure you, I want you to know that I have applied in Levis, right across from Quebec City, to carry the Olympic Torch.
Mr. Yves Trudel: Thank you for your work. Goodbye.
The Chair: Thank you very much and we look forward to hearing from you again--
We have Committee business. I don't know whether we actually have to continue the in camera session. Perhaps we could adjourn the in camera session and immediately address our Committee business, if I have the members' unanimous consent to do that.
Is there unanimous consent to adjourn the in camera meeting? We could then move directly to Committee business without any further ado, and without any requirement for an in camera session.
We are going to distribute the schedule for the next few meetings.
But, first of all, Mr. Lemieux had suggested at a previous meeting that there be an additional witness.
Ms. Glover, did you wish to comment?