CHPC Committee Report

Supplementary Opinion —
Conservative Party of Canada

The mandate of the CTF review was as follows:

“That, due to the ongoing uncertainty of the future of the Canadian Television Fund as precipitated by recent announcements from Shaw Communications Inc. and Vidéotron Limited that they will no longer live up to the terms of their licence by withholding contributions to the fund, this committee will investigate the impact of the CTF’s potential elimination on the health of Canada’s domestic television production and make recommendations to the House of Commons based on its findings.”

Clearly, the focus of the review was the threat by Shaw Communications Inc. and Videotron to withdraw funding of the CTF and the impending threat to the existence of the CTF. We deplore the fact that the opposition parties have chosen an approach which will only serve to drive the parties further apart on the outstanding issues. In the period of time during which the hearings took place, it should be noted that threat was removed.

The hearings were conducted and the witnesses heard and were giving testimony on the basis of the mandate. It is unfortunate that the opposition, the Liberals and the NDP, chose to make gratuitous political comments because not only are they not reflective of the original mandate of the report but in fact do harm to the process.

The Charlie Angus Recommendations also pre-judge the work undertaken by the CRTC’s Task Force on the CTF. This is essentially “putting the cart before the horse” and involves making recommendations in the absence of the facts which the Task Force is charged with providing.

Recommendation 1 — uses the word “condemns” to characterize the actions of Shaw Communications Inc. and Videotron when all of the evidence before the committee showed that those two parties had stayed completely within the law. Although the CTF Report itself states that Shaw Communications Inc. and Videotron “most certainly violated a well-established convention”, in fact that convention was previously unilaterally imposed on them by the CTF. During the hearings both parties agreed to reinstate their monthly payments and to return to the table in good faith.

Recommendation 2 — is not a recommendation at all. The Chair’s ruling was that it was a “weak” recommendation. Furthermore, it fails to qualify as it does not in any way request action by any party. The effusive praise for the CTF in this recommendation suggests that, with minor exceptions, all is well with the CTF. Such unbalanced commentary towards the concerns raised by Shaw Communications Inc. and Videotron are certain to result in even greater uncertainty for the future of the CTF.

Recommendation 3 — Supported and already included in the original draft of the CTF Report.

Recommendation 4 — deferred. The existing regulations already address the issue of penalties for the breach of the BDU’s licensing or regulatory requirements.

Recommendation 5 — deferred. The suggestion that “bridge financing” be provided to the CTF in the event of any future payment defaults by BDUs is unsound. Not only would bridge financing take pressure off the BDUs to comply, should the BDUs ultimately not make those payments, it is highly unlikely that the federal government would be willing to require repayment of those bridge loans. In other words, it becomes a permanent forward commitment by the Minister to fund the organization at historical levels and particularly bad management from the point of view of planning when the commitment is open-ended. The Minister has already committed $200 million to the CTF over the next 2 years.

Recommendation 6 — Presupposes that there will be no major structural changes to the CTF. It simply restates the status quo, implying that real change and improvement is not an option. The CRTC Chair clearly stated in his testimony that his Task Force would examine all relevant aspects of the CTF in order to come to a resolution of the complaints raised by Shaw Communications Inc., Videotron and others.

Recommendation 7 — This attempt to move the CTF to A-base permanent funding is something the previous Liberal government was never prepared to do itself and is simply an attempt by the opposition parties to “tie the hands” of the Minister. The Minister has clearly demonstrated her commitment to a strong Canadian independent production industry by committing $200 million to the CTF over the next 2 years.

Recommendation 8 — It is not at all uncommon for a Task Force to conduct its investigations in private. Indeed, a Task Force is not, by nature or definition, a “public hearing” but is a process whereby a person or persons embark on a fact-finding mission. The CRTC Chair clearly outlined his reasons for preserving the confidentiality of some of his work i.e. industry are asked to share with him information which is often of a sensitive or proprietary nature. Further, in order to obtain a true picture of the difficulties and challenges facing the broadcasting and production industry, it is essential that those who share information with him can do so without jeopardizing their careers, their business prospects or their working relationships with others in the industry.

CONCLUSION