LANG Committee Meeting

STANDING JOINT COMMITTEE ON OFFICIAL LANGUAGES

COMITÉ MIXTE PERMANENT DES LANGUES OFFICIELLES

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Tuesday, June 9, 1998

• 1542

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone (Mount Royal, Lib.)): I call to order the meeting of the joint standing committee of the House and Senate. It is our pleasure to hear today from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Radio-Canada, on the implementation of section 41 of the Official Languages Act,

[Translation]

on the implementation of section 41 of the Official Languages Act.

[English]

On behalf of the members of the committee I'm very pleased to welcome members. I know who the porte-parole is. Then you will please introduce yourselves to us.

[Translation]

Who will speak on behalf of Radio-Canada?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt (General Manager, Regional Television and Corporate Affairs, Radio-Canada): My name is Micheline Vaillancourt and I am General Manager of Regional Television and Corporate Affairs for Radio-Canada. With me today are my colleagues Mr. Renaud Gilbert, Executive Director of the Réseau de l'information; Mr. Yvan Asselin, Director General of Programming for French Radio; Ms. Patricia Pleszczynska, Director of English radio services; and Mr. David Knapp, Director of CBMT, English television services in Montreal.

The Joint Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): Thank you.

[English]

I bring to your attention that your brief arrived only this morning, which has not given our committee the kind of time it really needs for such an important institution in Canada. I'd like to register our lack of appreciation for the late arrival of this brief. You have had ample notice. And in the future I would appreciate, in the name of this committee, a more timely deposition of your brief so we will have time to study it properly and fulfil our task as parliamentarians in a more effective way. Thank you.

[Translation]

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: Thank you, Madam Senator. We have noted your comment.

The Joint Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): The senator is over there. I am just a member of Parliament.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest (Stadacona, PC): There are some vacant positions in the Senate, Madam Chair.

The Joint Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): Perhaps, but I am very happy where I am.

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool (Tracadie, Lib.)): She says she is much too young. That's her opinion.

The Joint Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): Please.

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: Honourable senators, members of Parliament, my colleagues and I greatly appreciate this opportunity to talk to you about a very important aspect of our role as public broadcaster, namely a regional presence on our airwaves and more specifically that of minority official language communities.

• 1545

Before telling you about our vision and our activities, I would first like to give you the context that has prevailed at Radio-Canada over the past few years. As you know, there were budget cuts of over $ 400 million, which is the third of its budget. It goes without saying that we had to thoroughly review our operations, the organization of our work, use new technologies and create new synergies between the network and the regions and between the regions themselves. This restructuring period is now behind us, I hope, and now we are focusing on our operations and our future.

However, I must point out that the end of the cuts does not mean the end of changes. The multiplication of channels, fragmenting of markets, new media, deregulation, technological advances and changes to traditional media are all major factors that have forced the entire Canadian broadcasting system to change.

We are ready to meet these challenges and to continue making Radio-Canada/CBC a development tool for all Canadians throughout the country. In our view, it is a huge privilege and responsibility to maintain the dialogue throughout the country with minority groups and to have their experiences and concerns reflected on our airwaves, both regional and national, while at the same time helping them flourish.

It is important to bear in mind that in many cases, Radio-Canada/CBC is the only link between those communities. Our main raison d'être is, of course, to produce and broadcast high-quality programs for our listeners and viewers throughout Canada, but what about regional programming?

Every year, we produce over 1,500 hours of programming for public broadcasting on French regional television. Of those hours, approximately 250 are broadcast on the national network. That does not take into account the parts of programs or reports produced in regions and broadcast nationally on the headlines and on the major news programs. Another 2,000 hours must be added to that figure to reflect the yearly programming by the regions for RDI.

Our regional strategy is mostly to meet the expectations of communities where we often are the only broadcaster. To this end, we have developed, and continue to develop, local shows. We have also increased our partnerships with the community and with the private production sector throughout the country. Bear in mind that we operate 6 francophone stations and 12 offices in minority areas.

• 1550

As for French radio, we produce over 30,000 hours of regional programs during prime time. Also, 20% of national hours broadcast on Radio-Canada come from regional stations. It is important to note that our radio section operates 11 francophone production centres outside Quebec. The regions are also present on the French radio network, but the regions are mostly linked with one another through Radio 16, a news and press review service that now broadcasts for over 2,000 hours a year. Five stations in minority areas regularly produce material for that service. French radio has just entered into an agreement to provide its news items to Alliance des radios communautaires, as well as a national headline service.

[English]

In Quebec, CBC Radio One produces every year more than 4,000 hours of programming of which 385 hours are broadcast on the network. CBC Radio Two produces nearly 1,500 hours every year. Most of this production is broadcast nationally. The Quebec community networks allow anglophones from the four corners of the province to hear about each other and to share their concerns. This has always played a major role for our listeners outside of Montreal who have no other English media covering their issues every day. CBC Radio plays a role in making sure that people in Montreal know what is going on with anglophones elsewhere and that off-island Quebeckers are in touch with the reality in the Montreal area. In addition to this, stories, people, cultural activities, and talent from Quebec are featured nationally to audiences in the rest of the country.

English television in Quebec produces for the region, for other regions, for the network, and for Newsworld more than 12,000 items for programs, newscasts or reporting. For example, this afternoon an explosion in Montreal has been broadcast regionally on Newsworld, and in addition our pictures have already been sent to other broadcasters outside Canada and around the world.

In Quebec we produce 7.5 hours of news and current affairs programming each week. Our news bureau in Montreal and Quebec work hand in hand with our radio colleagues as well as French television.

[Translation]

In order to better serve our communities and to meet their needs and expectations, the corporation must constantly be aware of what is going on. A number of contacts are maintained, either through meetings between our vice-presidents and representatives of associations or our regional directors with their communities, or having performers attend activities and demonstrations occurring throughout the country. Last year, over 1,000 official and informal consultations were held with minority communities.

Another facet of our mandate is to ensure transcultural openness. In order to do so, radio and television crews from CBC and Radio-Canada together design projects that reflect the daily life of the people or they undertake major projects such as the production of the documentary series entitled A people's history of Canada.

• 1555

Last weekend, French and English radio stations celebrated the 30th anniversary of Michel Tremblay's work through a public presentation of Saint-Carmen de la Main, which was a joint radio production in both official languages.

Our support to minority communities goes beyond our borders through agreements such as intersection twinning, staff exchanges and broadcasting of programs from other countries. Of course, our Internet sites, where we play a leading role both in French and in English, are another innovative way to increase our presence in all our regions on the international front.

We firmly believe that we have fulfilled our mandate as public broadcaster in minority communities throughout the country and, as you can tell by this presentation and in the documents we gave you, we intend to continue playing our role as an organization that joins people together.

Thank you for your attention. We can now answer any questions you may have.

The Joint Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): Thank you, Ms. Vaillancourt. Your presentation was most interesting, especially since you focused on regional and transcanadian ties. I think that everyone appreciates that clarification.

Madam Clerk, you will keep me on course. We will start with the Reform Party.

[English]

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz (Yellowhead, Ref.): Madam Chair, I thank representatives of the CBC for appearing before this committee.

I find it interesting that you talk about lots of programming hours and programs, but you don't mention the numbers of viewers watching, for example, English television in Quebec or French television in other parts of the country. There are some pretty interesting statistics regarding that from the Bureau of Broadcast Measurement. For example, CBC French TV has about 1,000 prime time viewers in Toronto, which Stats Canada says has a population of about 50,000 or so francophones. The same thing goes for Regina and Edmonton. In fact, the numbers are even worse. A report by the same bureau found the audience for CBC French TV was so low in Regina and in Edmonton that it didn't even show up in the measurements or in the surveys. It wouldn't register. In fact, for Edmonton it was about 300 viewers during prime time and in Regina fewer than 100 watch during peak hours.

How can it possibly be justified spending that kind of money? In Edmonton it would be $ 3 million or $ 4 million, when the huge majority of francophones aren't watching French TV or listening to French radio.

[Translation]

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: I would like to say that we would like to have a huge number of viewers, but you know what the situation is like in minority constituencies, especially in western Canada. But I would like to add to the figures you are referring to, the BBM.

• 1600

In those provinces, it is difficult to get an exact figure because no special attention is paid to the francophone presence. The diaries are sent in once in a while, and since the population is very scattered around and quite low, the figures we get are not always reliable.

We also conduct regular surveys of francophones. As you may have noticed in the small document that we tabled, la Télévision régionale française de la Société Radio-Canada, the weekly scope of our programs is most important. So you will find the figures in this little booklet.

The Joint Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): You have it with you?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: Yes. The book is in a document we will make available to you at the end of the meeting. You will find figures on Francophones in each major region of the country, as well as the scope of news programs.

I would also like to add that the mandate of Radio-Canada makes us a national broadcaster and it is important for Francophones throughout Canada to be seen on the entire Radio-Canada network, even if they're aren't many of them. I can assure you that we are truly trying to maximize our return on investment, be it at RDI, on our national stations or at the interregional level. I can assure you that we really try to stretch our dollars.

My colleague from the radio sector may like to add a few words since radio is also present throughout the country.

Mr. Yvan Asselin (Director General of Programming, French Radio, Radio-Canada): As Micheline Vaillancourt said, the BBM figures must be taken as guidelines. Once you get to each of the markets, it is difficult to have a clear idea of the number of listeners. However, as far as French radio is concerned, we have a very eloquent statistic. It is estimated that the listening volume is a million hours per week. Francophones outside Quebec spend a million hours per week listening to Radio-Canada radio.

I would also like to emphasize that besides the listening data, there have been regular testimonies regarding the importance of French radio in all francophone areas, especially for events such as the floods in Manitoba. All of a sudden, we knew that Francophones in Manitoba were listening to the Winnipeg French radio station, that they were constantly listening to us during that time.

There was also another event, a positive one this time, that recently occurred in Manitoba, in Bonnyville. Francophones set up their own antenna in their community because they really felt the lack of a French station in their area. So, you have both listeners statistics and demonstrations, especially in smaller communities, that prove how important our radio service is in those areas.

Look at the number of people working for our stations in those areas. Just a small number of people manage to produce 35 to 40 hours of relevant programs every week for those people. That is important as it reflects how vital we are for the two communities.

[English]

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: There certainly is one way you could determine viewership or how determined people would be to view, and that is for these stations to rely independently, instead of at taxpayer expense, on whether they will stay on the waves or not. If people are willing to advertise, why should the Canadian taxpayer pay for this kind of service?

• 1605

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon (Richelieu, BQ): I just have a short question because I know that it was mostly the representatives of francophone communities who requested this, and that they have a lot of questions on the shows produced by Radio-Canada for them. I will give them a lot of leeway. I just want a small detail.

Your radio forged a new type of partnership with the University of Montreal for broadcasting university courses. I would like to have more information on that. That is all.

Mr. Yvan Asselin: It is the only one of its kind in the world. It is a first. There is a cultural station, a series called Université@radio.net. It is both a radio program and a series of courses available on the Net. People can register for radio and the Net. They are credited courses. It's the first time a link has been established directly between people from far away and professors. The assignments are corrected, and there is a direct relationship between the professor, who is also the host of the series, and the Net.

We are currently doing the third serial drama. Beginning in September, we will be broadcasting the third serial drama on the "Chaîne culturelle". The first radio broadcast reached about 25,000 listeners per 15 minutes, which on the Cultural channel is quite a feat, if you take into account the people that could have also been reached within post-secondary institutions or otherwise for the dissemination of knowledge. That is rather extraordinary. We are currently working with the Université du Québec à Montréal, the UQAM, and we are thinking about linking up with the Université de Montréal and eventually with the other francophone universities in the country.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Thank you.

The Co-Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): Are you through? Mr. Coderre?

Mr. Denis Coderre (Bourassa, Lib.): First, welcome to this committee. Obviously, when dealing with Radio-Canada or the corporation as such, English or French, we can talk about many issues because it involves so many things.

Mr. Breitkreuz is expressing a point of view which is probably shared by very few people across Canada. I don't think the important role played by the corporation should be questionned because every English or French speaking Canadian in this country should be able to access radio and television services in his or her own language. It is important because Canada is a bilingual country. I think we should respect that as well as your mandate.

I have a few questions regarding your priorities. Obviously, as a Montrealer, I do not necessarily know everything that is going on in Saint-Boniface or Regina, but I've been hearing some rumours. So I would like to ask you a few questions. I would also like to talk a bit about the philosophy, the role that Radio-Canada must play regarding the choices they make, in terms of programming and also in terms of some administrative choices which have, in my view, a direct impact on programming per se or on the dissemination of the message.

According to some rumours, on the production level—which is what we were discussing last time, Madam Chair—, they want to build some structure in Regina so as to increase the French production. Is that true? Where are we on that issue?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: As I was reminding you, due to budgetary cuts, we focused on the protection of the French presence in the news sector since Radio-Canada is the only French language radio broadcaster with anchor points all across the country. So we have given this presence in news reporting maximum protection as well as to our presence on RDI.

Secondly, we figured that, given the scarcity of resources in the regions, we wanted to use the resources, the crafts people, the material and the equipment to produce television programs which would meet the expectations and the needs of our minority communities.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Do you in Regina...

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: I'll give you an example.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Madam Chair, excuse me. We have limited time, and I just want to know if, yes or no, they decided to invest in studios in Regina to increase French-language production in the region. Just answer yes or no.

• 1610

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: No. We are using what we have to produce children programs such as Clan destin as well as programs with the independent sector. We want to develop production in partnership with the independent sector.

The Co-Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): Excuse me. Did you previously have production space in western Canada for the French-language sector? What happened with these French production studios? Have they closed what used to belong to Radio-Canada?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: No. We are using the existing infrastructures. In western Canada, we are so to speak the guests of our colleagues from the English-language network. The infrastructures belong to our colleagues of the English-language network. We have certainly modified the infrastructures which were devoted to French-language programming because we changed the production format of our news programs but with no injection of new resources. We transformed the existing means since we are now producing from our own newsroom in interaction with reporters. Nothing was added to those production infrastructures.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Mrs. Vaillancourt, budget cuts have first and foremost had an impact on regional policy, especially on programming for francophones outside Quebec. In the name of costs control, are you telling us again today that you cannot guarantee that there will be more programming for francophone outside Quebec, or are you telling us today that, now that budget cuts are a thing of the past, you will invest more in programming instead of spending millions of dollars to get the right to broadcast the Olympic Games and to play the game of private television stations? In my mind, you should play more of a cultural role and invest more so that we can see what francophones outside Quebec are doing.

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: You asked me if the cuts are now over. I told you in my presentation that I believe that these budget cuts are now over. As to new investments, this is a decision for the heads at CBC, but I can assure you that we're already increasing as much as possible our production work in the regions by working with associations and communities and by successfully developing the independent production sector. Four projects have been carried out in partnership with the independent sector in the western regions. A year ago, there were no projects in the pipeline. So we are very concerned with the development of this industry, with helping it mature. That is one way of investing new funds in production.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Mrs. Vaillancourt, you are very eloquent but your answers are very long. My question is simple. Are you ready to tell this committee today that the CBC will invest additional funds to ensure the survival of programs produced for francophones outside Quebec? Will you be putting in new money? I'm a Montrealer; it's easy for me because I live in a province where 80% of the population is French speaking, but that is not the case for Saint-Boniface or Regina. I want to make sure that, in Saint-Boniface where there are more than 100,000 francophones, there are investments in culture, in quality programming for this region so that we can get to know them and that they can send their own message. Since budget cuts are now a thing of the past, are you ready to make that commitment today, that you will invest more to ensure the survival of this French-speaking population through your programs?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: Sir, I can make that commitment for the budgets for which I'm responsible. I am responsible for the regional budgets. I can tell you that I will take that into account when I decide how to spend the money which is mine to spend.

As to additional investments, that's a question for the executive.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Did you ask for increased budgets?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: We do that regularly, my dear sir. You can be sure of that.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Madam Chair, since you asked for some clarification, could I get one more question?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: I will ask Mr. Asselin to answer your question for the radio side.

Mr. Yvan Asselin: Mr. Coderre, in the last year we have reallocated funds to give Toronto, Winnipeg and Moncton national time slots. Moreover, we just opened in eastern New Brunswick a cultural channel station which has doubled the potential of listeners in New Brunswick.

• 1615

Mr. Denis Coderre: This is probably just a question of perception, but there seems to be more of a regional policy for radio than for television. There's a program on Radio called Tournée d'Amérique. I often listen to programs from Moncton. It seems to work better for the radio.

The Joint Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): Could you ask your question later, please?

Mr. Denis Coderre: Mr. Gilbert, perhaps the future is with a national television, but then, we would not have to have RDI and Newsworld since, increasingly, we are aiming at a partnership with independent broadcasters, wouldn't you say? Do you think that in the future, to ensure the survival of this message within all communities, we should rather focus on RDI at large and Newsworld?

Mr. Renaud Gilbert (Executive Director, Réseau de l'information, Société Radio-Canada): I would certainly not tell you that Radio-Canada should be disbanded. What I can tell you though, is that when we appeared before the CRTC, we committed ourselves to make sure that one third of our original production would be produced regionally and that one quarter of our production would originate outside Quebec, and that is precisely what we have done. That I can tell you.

We have no intention whatsoever of reducing this proportion. I could even tell you that, because of the way our specialty channels production has evolved, and because of the fact that Radio-Canada has set up satellite trucks both in Moncton and in Ottawa, we do much more direct broadcasting from both regions, not only from cities but also from rural areas. We go everywhere there is an activity which seems important to us.

The Joint Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): Thank you very much. Senator Comeau, please.

Senator Gérald J. Comeau (Nova Scotia, PC): You have told us, Ms. Vaillancourt, that you were in a position to meet the needs of Canadians in a minority situation everywhere in Canada. I am from a region called Baie Sainte-Marie, in Nova Scotia. There are other regions such as Île Madame, Chéticamp, etc., but I will focus on Baie Sainte-Marie. In Baie Sainte-Marie there is the largest number of francophones in Nova Scotia, however we have yet to be covered by RDI. I believe RDI broadcasts almost everywhere in Canada, except in Nova Scotia and if I remember well, Île Madame is not covered either.

I would like to give you an example of something that happened a few years ago. In Nova Scotia, we are used to receiving almost all our communications in English. Of course, these are American signals. A few years ago, we started to receive Radio-Canada programs in French, but those programs were mainly for Quebeckers, and thus did not really interest us. Consequently, we got used in Nova Scotia to an almost exclusively English media communication.

I would like to give you the example of a community radio station which was set up with a minimal budget and a very limited personnel. However, this station has the highest rating in the most francophone area in Nova Scotia. Why is that so? Because broadcasters speak the local language. The station started broadcasting Acadian music, local Acadian music, instead of western music. You won't believe me, but we were kind of used to listening to western music in English and, all of a sudden, we started getting western music in French, which is by far preferred by local people. However, we still do not get our communications in French, except for Radio-Canada's station which doesn't interest francophone Nova Scotians anyway.

For quite a few years now, we have been asking our cable company to broadcast RDI in the region, but they adamantly refused and I'm going to name names. It's Mr. Joe Shannon, the owner of the company. He has the same attitude as Reform, he'd rather have a francophone Quebec and an anglophone Canada.

• 1620

The Reform party would really love to have a completely francophone Quebec. The anglo-Quebeckers would be forgotten, they would leave the province and the rest of Canada would become an English Canada within an American system.

Ms. Vaillancourt, the regions that need this service must not be abandoned, because if the people in these francophone regions, who are a minority, think that they have been forgotten, as is currently the case in some regions like ours, the Reform Party ideas will become reality. That is not what we want for Canada.

If the people from these francophone regions in Nova Scotia knew that there were francophones in Alberta, in British Columbia, in Saskatchewan and in Manitoba, they would realize that there are not only Reformers in the West. They would see that there are francophones in the other provinces, but for that to happen, they have to know about it. One of the ways of showing them that is by giving them access to RDI.

I am not asking you for excuses. What on earth can we do with Mr. Joe Shannon?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: Your question is two-fold. You raised the issue of local TV by saying that community radio offer programs that are very much in tune with the community's interests. Bear in mind that Radio-Canada television is a national network. So it clearly cannot have as much local flavour as you would like. However, we have emphasized this type of local TV.

You're interested in knowing what is going on in the Atlantic region. In my little brochure, I have listed the titles of the programs we are producing with the community for the Atlantic region. There is Trajectoires, a cultural program, as well as Temps d'affaires, which are programs that are produced with the independent sector. There is a culture and variety program. We know how important artists and writers are. So we have a program entitled Double étoile. We are also working with schools, because we know that in a minority region, young people are important. So we are producing a program with the francophone schools in the Atlantic provinces entitled Musikotrip. Moreover, it won an award. We also occasionally produce all kinds of regional shows that are broadcast nationally.

With respect to the broadcasting of francophone channels, you know that it is sometimes even difficult to broadcast the première chaîne. Some small cable companies are not obliged to broadcast the national network. So we have to struggle and bring pressure to bear so that French CBC is broadcast.

With respect to RDI, Renaud Gilbert will undoubtedly be able to tell you about his dealings with the cable companies to get RDI distributed, especially in the case that you have just mentioned. Renaud.

Mr. Renaud Gilbert: I would like to start by thanking Senator Comeau for having taken the time to write a letter of support for RDI's approach to convince the cable company in la Baie to distribute RDI. I must point out that it was not a one-paragraph letter simply saying: "We support you. Don't give up." On the contrary, it was a very structured an heartfelt letter. It said: "Look, I live in a community that needs service in French. For pity's sake, provide the service to the community."

That letter was sent in April 1995, and I thank you for it. I have a copy with me. Senator Comeau also took the initiative of sending a letter to our CEO, and I also have that letter here. I must say that after having received the letter that the senator sent in April 1995, we went out the following summer to try and convince Mr. Shannon or Rush Communications, which is responsible for distribution in Baie Sainte-Marie, to broadcast RDI but we were unsuccessful. That was in the summer of 1995. Since that time, we have intervened at least five or six times during phone conversations, through cable-company meetings and through the community that requested this service.

• 1625

On January 1, 1995, RDI was available in roughly 5 million homes. I must point out that there are 1.8 million homes that are identified as being part of the Francophone market. That means that as early as January 1, 1995, RDI was distributed to 3.2 million homes that were part of the Anglophone markets. By the end of 1995, the numbers were up to 5.8 millions. The following year, it reached 6.6 millions and today, RDI is available in roughly 7 million homes.

RDI is currently distributed to roughly 80 per cent of all Francophone subscribers. Let me put that in context. Newsworld, for my Anglophone colleagues, is distributed to roughly 90 per cent of all cable subscribers in the country. So that means that Newsworld is not distributed throughout the country either. So basically, we are at about 8 or 9 per cent of Newsworld distribution.

After three and a half years, after significant efforts and perseverance and with the support of many Francophone communities in the country, we have succeeded in distributing RDI to 7 million homes. We got some help from the CEO of the CRTC who, at the time, was Mr. Spicer. Some cable companies behaved admirably. I am referring namely to Rogers, Shaw and Fundy who helped out so that other cable companies would join the movement, but unfortunately, three years later, I must admit that there are still some very uncompromising people.

So it would be difficult for us to go from 80 to 90 per cent. I would not say that we are going around in circles, but it has become extremely difficult. So in some ways, to go farther, we would have to rely on time, but look at how Newsworld has progressed over the passed five years. It has not evolved much either, for a host of reasons. In some ways, if we want to go farther, there will have to be coercion. But that is not something we can do ourselves.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Just a moment, please. With your support, Senator Comeau, the Committee could send a letter. We could take joint action to point out our disagreement with the intransigence of this cable company that the CRTC was unable to... I'm surprised, especially since Keith Spicer was there at the time. I cannot assure you that we will succeed, but at least they will know that the English Canadian community is watching them and that we are really disgusted with the situation.

Senator Gérald Comeau: The Nova Scotia Acadian community would be very grateful.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Does the committee agree that a letter...

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I have to leave, but with the consent of the committee, I would simply like to express my support for the proposal that you have made. I agree with it. So if you agree, I vote in favour of the proposal.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you, Senator Comeau. We will get back to you in the second round. It is now Ms. Vautour's turn.

Ms. Angela Vautour (Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, NDP): Thank you for your presentation. I must say that personally speaking, Radio-Canada and CBC Television and Radio have certainly served me well over the past three or four years. I had the opportunity to meet with many journalists during the various interviews that I gave.

• 1630

I would like to ask you some questions with respect to the huge cuts that you have faced. I am an Acadian from New Brunswick. Would you agree with this statement that there are probably fewer journalists and fewer programs for francophones since the most recent cuts were made? What impact have these cuts had?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: Fewer journalists? No. During our budget cuts, the priority was to protect the news sector as much as possible. So we protected news services and journalists as much as we could, especially in the Atlantic provinces where there is an important contribution to all of the networks programs. There were cuts in terms of journalists in our Western Canadian stations. Our initial plan was to produce a Ce soir program for the four Western provinces and to produce a one-hour version of Ce soir instead of the four half hour programs as was the case. In light of how significant the cuts were, they represented one third of our budget, we had little flexibility for producing Ce soir.

As you know, there was a huge public outcry. We had gone out to consult the communities, and people everywhere told us that they wanted to keep their Ce soir because that was their link to the community. So we revised our positions, realigned our plan and presented a new plan to the board, which accepted it.

Obviously, that resulted in job losses. We were forced to cut positions, but we had reorganized in order to give ourselves more leeway, using new production methods and our new work organization as well as our new collective agreements. I can assure you that our station manager in the West, Mr. Bonneville, has just completed a series of consultations with the people who have said that they are highly satisfied with the new formula for Ce soir. I also met with him last Fall, when we had just started. The new Ce soir had only been on the air for a few months, and people were already showing their interest in it.

So, for Ce soir, its presence in terms of hours was not reduced. Gradually, as I mentioned earlier, we have developed local programs. I would say that there are even more than before, because we are working more and more in partnership. We are working with the community, the associations and the independent sector. By using the production funds, whether it be the Téléfilm or the cable production fund, we have been able to produce more. The production is still not very widespread. Obviously, the communities would like more. We will try to produce more. But this is already an increase in comparison with what we were doing in the past, and we plan to continue this way.

Last year, additional funds were injected in the Atlantic provinces. Thanks to funding that was allocated by Ottawa, we were able to inject money to protect the mobile unit in Moncton and the entire team that covers the Atlantic provinces. We also injected resources in the stations in the West after the budget cuts. I would like to be able to say that I'm going to add more, but the decisions are made in Ottawa.

Ms. Angela Vautour: You said that SRC was national. Yes, it is national, but national for whom? You know that we have a radio station back home, Radio Beauséjour, whose ratings are really high, because they talk about people back home and what is happening there. Whether you'd like it or not, that is the station people listen to.

• 1635

SRC must also be aware that when it produces shows back home, it really needs to attract people's attention. People must be in a position to identify with it. There is a show called L'Atlantique en direct on RDI at 11:30. There are complaints to the effect that the reports come from outside the Atlantic region. Attempts should be made to keep the reports regional during that time. We often get news from Quebec, when we want as much air time as possible for the Atlantic region.

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: Of course, we always try to ensure that television is as local as possible. The case of Moncton that produces the Ce soir for the Atlantic provinces is an excellent example. Despite the increase in a number of channels and Francophone signals, we have noted that the Ce soir in Moncton is constantly growing. On Radio-Canada there are four hours of prime time viewing. That is not much time for broadcasting all programs, whether they be serial dramas, other series, movies or sports. So there is a bottleneck.

RDI is a specialty channel and gives more time to the regions. Radio-Canada will apply for new channels to get more involved, to step up its presence, because we are really experiencing the industry development. There is more and more fragmentation and more and more channels, and the national Radio-Canada must be amongst these channels.

Renaud could undoubtedly add some additional information to what you said about the nature of certain programs that are perhaps a bit too Francophone,...

Ms. Angela Vautour: Montreal, Montreal and Quebec.

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: ...or at least too québécois.

Mr. Renaud Gilbert: We have decided to take steps to systematically recognize what is happening everywhere in the country. We are talking about news. There were two complaints levelled at Radio-Canada before RDI came into existence. The first was that we did not know what was happening outside Quebec. The second complaint was that we did not know what was happening inside Quebec. So the coverage was both too focused on Montreal and too québécois: Quebec, Quebec, Parliament Hill, et cetera.

So we have systematically attempted to give air time to regional stations so that they can cover what is happening in those regions. I think that we currently devote considerable air time on a daily basis to what is happening outside Quebec.

Moreover, we sometimes need to make some adjustments. For example, you mentioned the time at which some programs are broadcast. Three months ago, I was in Moncton. I went out to listen to people from the community who told me: "We do not like having our program cut off; in the morning, we do not like to continually hear about accidents that are happening on the corner of Ste-Catherine." So we made some adjustments and I will give you some examples.

Before interrupting programs from the Atlantic region or from stations in Ottawa and Winnipeg, we talk to the people. If they feel the topic is important and that it is necessary to listen to the guests, we try to avoid cutting them off.

Systematically, during the morning program, news from the Atlantic region is introduced between 7:30 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. Obviously, if we talk about what is happening in the Atlantic region early in the morning, the same news will be repeated over the course of the day, because people tend to carry news over from one newscast to the other.

On the weekend, it was the first anniversary of the crossing of the Confederation bridge on foot. We were there Saturday afternoon, then we rebroadcast the program on Sunday afternoon. Our team in Moncton invested in the Réseau de l'information by saying:"We own that too, and there are programs we can do outside the 11 to 12 o'clock slot." If important things happen at 3:00 p.m., why wouldn't we talk about it? That is what we try to do systematically for everything that happens in the country.

• 1640

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you.

[Translation]

I know that you have to leave.

Ms. Angela Vautour: I can stay until 5 o'clock.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Senator, you have the floor.

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): Thank you for your last comment. It was part of my question. I am happy to learn that you are systematically attempting to transmit a more national image.

Someone told me that RDI and SRC were almost factors for assimilation. People said that they were so tired of hearing solely about what was happening on the Montreal bridges and convenience stores that they would go to an English station to get more news that was national in scope.

I would like to ask a question. I do not know how useful this will be for the committee, but it will undoubtedly satisfy my curiosity. I often wonder about it when I watch the Téléjournal. Does the anchor man or woman who is reading the Téléjournal have the green light with respect to what he or she will read in the news and especially with respect to the priority of the news items? More specifically, does news concerning the Premier of Quebec take precedence over news concerning the Prime Minister of Canada? News about the latter often comes second. Who is responsible for those decisions?

I do not know which one of you will answer. Ms. Vaillancourt, you are assigned to the budgets.

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: To programming. I worked on the Téléjournal, in the past. I started my career at Radio-Canada with the Téléjournal.

Editorial decisions are a complex process, and the person reading the news is not the one who makes those decisions. First of all, in the morning, there is a dispatcher who chooses news items from the information available throughout the country. Then the news-desk officer prepares what we call the lineup, or the news in the order in which it will presented. So it is really the news-desk officer who has the final say over the presentation of the news reports. The news reader respects that order, in accordance with the decisions that have been made.

Renaud, who experiences that on a daily basis at RDI, can tell you about it in more detail. Renaud.

The Joint Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): Are the decisions made at the national level, the Quebec level, the New Brunswick level or the Ontario level? Is there a news-desk officer? Do the news-desk officers in other provinces have a say? We would like to know.

Mr. Renaud Gilbert: The process for Radio-Canada and RDI are similar but different, because of the mandates that are given to the programs.

I'm going to give you an example. Who will determine whether we will broadcast a news item or not? The first selection criteria is public interest. Is the story in the public's interest? First of all, is it important enough for us to draw everyone's attention to it? Normally, that is how things work, which is why we often start the Téléjournal with international news and sometimes a news item that comes from a region because it is of national scope.

How do we maintain our credibility as an institution? I will refer to RDI. Our journalistic activity is based on three fundamental principles.

• 1645

First of all, there is accuracy. We try to ensure that what we are saying on the air corresponds to the facts.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Excuse me, Mr. Gilbert. Are you telling me that the virtue is that you report the news, you don't try to make the news? Is that what you just said?

[Translation]

Mr. Renaud Gilbert: I will give you a very simple example. I analyzed one day of news items broadcast on RDI. On a normal day at RDI, we broadcast roughly 125 news items. On the Téléjournal, we are doing well if we broadcast 15 news items. In a normal day at RDI, we broadcast 75 reports. In a normal day on the Téléjournal, we broadcast seven or eight reports.

You asked:

[English]

are you reporting the news or making the news?

[Translation]

Well, when you are at the Téléjournal, you might well be making the news in some ways, because you are choosing news items. The selection is much more strict. At RDI, I broadcast 75 reports over the course of a normal day. At the Téléjournal, there are only seven or eight. So inevitably, you are making choices and the choices are much more difficult.

What I was trying to say earlier is that we try to conform to reality as much as possible. Secondly, we try to ensure that what we are doing is fair and respectful of both the people and the news itself.

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): What do you mean by respectful of the people? To what extent can the news-desk officer control the gratuitous comments made by certain journalists? I cannot give you any examples here, but if you want some, I will sit down some day and write them down.

Mr. Renaud Gilbert: When you look at the most recent report by the Commissioner of Official Languages, which is here, and you try to summarize it in eight lines, obviously you end up making choices. You try not to distort reality. You conduct an interview with the Commissioner of Official Languages that lasts two minutes and 30 seconds and you only broadcast eight seconds. Are those the right eight seconds? It's not easy. There is a certain degree of complexity in the operation.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Indeed, choices must be made.

Mr. Renaud Gilbert: Exactly.

Mr. Renaud Gilbert: I bet you a coffee that this evening, the lead story on the Téléjournal will be the explosion at the Accueil Bonneau.

Mr. Renaud Gilbert: Very likely.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Did I guess it?

Mr. Renaud Gilbert: It is very likely.

Mr. Denis Coderre: There was an explosion at Accueil Bonneau. What is it? You see, she is from New Brunswick. The Accueil Bonneau... Watch Radio-Canada and you will understand.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: If you watched Radio-Canada, you would know.

Mr. Denis Coderre: I understand that and I accept it because it is clear. Thirty people were injured. You did a special program. Moreover, you even made a choice. You preempted L'Ouest en direct to talk about the Accueil Bonneau.

In a national context, is it right to run the tragedy at the Accueil Bonneau as the lead-news item? You only have 23 minutes on the Téléjournal. Is it normal in that case... I am not making a value judgement because I clearly understand where you are going, but in the national context, instead of talking like last time about the houses that are falling apart in Vancouver, when something else was perhaps happening at the same time, for example the election of Bill Van der Zalm to the head of the Reform Party... When you choose this so-called national news, should you not ensure that there is at least a regional quota instead of saying that, since 84% of francophones are in Quebec, the national news for RDI or for the Téléjournal in French is what is happening in Quebec? I am not passing judgement, but simply making a comment.

Mr. Renaud Gilbert: To counter the problem you have mentioned, at RDI—and I am sort of answering Ms. Losier-Cool's question—we associate the regions with the broadcasting of a certain number of news items. For example, the Atlantic region prepares its program and chooses the elements that are broadcast as part of the program. On our side, all we do is coordinate the various programs to avoid repetition, and so that people don't go elsewhere. But they are the ones who make the choices. When you watch the Atlantic edition at 11:30 p.m., it isn't made in Montreal. It's produced in the region.

Mr. Denis Coderre: I'm talking about the Téléjournal. I'm talking about national politics. Between you and me, if Lucien Bouchard had not attended the meeting of the premiers of eastern Canada and the governors, it would not have been the lead story. It would have made L'Atlantique en direct because it took place there. Basically, that's what they are trying to say, and I understand them.

• 1650

In reality, the Téléjournal covers news items that are mainly from Quebec. When there are things that are out of the ordinary, a few of them are perhaps added, but that is not the priority.

Mr. Renaud Gilbert: I'm going to tell you about a systematic analysis that was conducted. There are comparisons between the various news broadcasts, like the news broadcasts on TVA, The National and the Radio-Canada news broadcast...

Mr. Denis Coderre: TVA is a private station.

Mr. Renaud Gilbert: That takes us back to Mr. Breitkreuz' question about the extent to which Parliament should be prepared to subsidize television that is not watched.

When I analyze a newscast by TVA and the one prepared by Radio-Canada at 10 p.m., I realize that Quebec is very present in the TVA newscast. By chance, it is not quite as present in the Radio-Canada newscast. There are reasons for that.

The Joint Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): Excuse me. I think we've gotten off track. Mr. Jaffer, you have the floor.

[English]

Mr. Rahim Jaffer (Edmonton—Strathcona, Ref.): I'm wondering if I could get the opinions of Mr. Knapp and Ms. Pleszczynska. We know regional programming has been affected by cuts—there is no doubt about that. I'm wondering in your opinions whether the CBC has considered new ways of providing services in light of that.

For instance, if there are different areas that could be privatized, would that help the services? Some of the CBC's activities such as marketing, distribution, and aspects of production could be looked at. We need funds to maintain those things. If they're not being provided through the public sector, can there be some other options? Can there be any advantages by privatizing those? What sorts of other ideas do you have on that?

Ms. Patricia Pleszczynska (Director, English Radio Services in Quebec, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation): Speaking specifically about radio, radio is non-commercial and so the issue of privatization is a non-issue for us at this point. Our licence is based on the fact that we are non-commercial.

We do explore on a regular basis partnerships and sponsorships, particularly in the area of cultural activity. We have partnerships with Saturday Night magazine. We have in the past had partnerships with Tilden and other private companies whenever we tried to mount very large and expensive cultural events. We have partnerships with the Stratford festival. Those are areas in which we do seek private additional funding for the activity. But for the day-to-day broadcasting on both Radio One and Radio Two as a non-commercial enterprise, and that is the basis of our licence, privatization is a non-issue for us.

You're right that the cuts have affected regional programming. They have affected national programming as well. We've had cuts of 30% in English radio as well as in other sectors of the corporation. However, through those cuts CBC radio, as part of its priorities and its setting of priorities, maintained the proportion of national to regional programming. We tried and were able to maintain the previous balance, the prior-to-the-cuts balance of national programming versus regional programming. In radio, prime time is regional or local. The morning show, the noon show, the drive-home show—those are prime times in radio and they are local. They are regional in essence and in programming.

One of the things we have done also in order to ensure that we've managed to maximize our resources across the country is emphasized and restructured a syndication system for programming that allows packaged reports, taped material from across the country, to be rebroadcast on programs in different centres and across the country again.

For instance, an interview or a speech by Mr. Manning in Quebec City would have been rebroadcast. An excerpt of it would have been made available to stations across the country and rebroadcast on other programs across the country as well.

• 1655

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Do you charge for it so that the copyright fee is covered?

Ms. Patricia Pleszczynska: We don't charge for our radio stations.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): If you're distributing Mr. Manning's speech, you've got copyright freedom?

Ms. Patricia Pleszczynska: It's a public recording of his presentation. This would be a public event that we would record, and it's only in that respect that we would use it. If there are copyright fees you can be sure that we do pay them. We have a section of the corporation that will look after that.

Mr. Rahim Jaffer: However, if you can collect money on behalf of Mr. Manning's speech, we'd love to have it.

Ms. Patricia Pleszczynska: Thank you very much.

I just want to add one more thing in terms of how we have tried to make sure that the regional money goes a little further. In the past year we have made sure that all our hourly newscasts are regionally lined up. So with regard to the question being raised about where the decision-making process is, in terms of news in the regional stations it resides with the assignment editor in each regional newsroom. Except for the very large national radio newscasts in the morning, World Report and World at Six, the regional newscasts on the hour and on the half hour are lined up regionally and with regional priorities, as well as with the awareness of national and international news.

Mr. David Knapp (Director, English Television Services in Quebec, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation): On the television side, with respect to distribution, we are actually looking at new ways to distribute the signal of CBMT within Quebec and in terms of the station IDs you would see at the top of the hour or between programs, and through the use of computers linking our stations in Ontario, because we're in the same time zone for distribution of programs.

The budget cuts affected us and all our regions across the country. Decisions were taken at the senior management level to maintain supper hour programming and regional programming in each of the regions. As of April 1 we lost 17 people as part of our last cut in Montreal. What we've done to maintain the service is change the focus of the program to more in-studio current affairs material rather than news reports of varying lengths across the province.

We don't get out as much across the province as we would like to because we have fewer people to do this. That's not to say we don't cover the issues in various communities. We try to bring our program outside of the studio when we can. We can go back to the ice storm in January where we covered almost every community live. It was not seen by too many people in the Montreal area but certainly by those of you who watched Newsworld, who picked up our program at 6 o'clock every evening, and by our Montreal audience, which purchased a video we produced at the end of the ice storm. The funds raised through that went to the Red Cross relief, and it was a huge success in itself.

The cuts do limit the number of times one can do a foray into the country. We are planning, for example, to move the program later this summer to the eastern townships where we'll do a focus on issues involving the anglophone audience.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): I just wondered when you were going to remember we were a minority in Canada, in Quebec.

Mr. Rahim Jaffer: That's it for me. Did you have anything else?

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Did you cover the electoral issues on Sunday?

Mr. David Knapp: I think we had a certain co-chair on our air yesterday.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you very much for carrying my picture and my interview, if you did. I was elsewhere and didn't see it.

I'm curious. What did you do off-island where it is absolutely vital?

Mr. David Knapp: We have been covering the story in detail in terms of the mechanism to inform the audience how it can get on the voters list.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Did you find a way? I'm still not on.

Mr. David Knapp: As I said, we did cover your particular case.

• 1700

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): This may be tongue in cheek. As we're on the English sector, I was curious how you went about...when Mr. Jaffer was asking you about the English language services. How are you pursuing without proper stringers the English services outside of Quebec City, in the Outaouais, in Estrie, Chicoutimi, Lac St-Jean, dans la Gaspésie?

Mr. David Knapp: Let me defray to my radio colleague, who has more bureaus throughout Quebec than on television. We do work side by side in the Montreal newsroom and with our French colleagues in SRC and in RDI. We have the same computer base so we know what issues they are covering. We also deal with the English stringers throughout the province. We still have the stringers. We still have the researchers.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): So if you wanted to have television coverage of a particular issue in the Gaspé—

Mr. David Knapp: We would take the decision to go from Montreal or Quebec City.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): That's what I want to know. Can you send a team from Radio-Canada to do an English section?

Mr. David Knapp: If there is a team available we would send a team from Quebec City, if you're talking about the Gaspé, which is the closest.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Who would have decided that the priority needed to have that English sector coverage and that you needed to have a camera and the camera needed to come from the Quebec City area PDQ? Who decides that? Mr. Gilbert's shop or your shop?

Mr. David Knapp: Our shop. If it's an English interview and it's something we want to do, the producers of the program would make that decision and then go about finding the means to make it happen. If the means are that we can borrow a crew from our French colleagues in Quebec City or in one of their bureaus in northern Quebec, then we would operate that way.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Do they charge you?

Mr. David Knapp: We have a good working relationship with them, which I would not want to change.

[Translation]

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: Francophones outside Quebec are concerned with radio and television. They perceive, and they are undoubtedly right, television at Radio-Canada as being very Montreal focused, very focused on Quebec, while the other regions in Quebec say that it is very focused on Montreal. It is all very relative. I am very happy that you are aware of that, and I think that you made that point very well. I won't go any further, contrary to some of my colleagues who want to talk about quotas or I don't know what else. We need to have confidence in journalists and their sense of professionalism. I think that at Radio-Canada...

If we take it a step further, we end up with the type of very sympathetic concern expressed by my colleague Ms. Losier-Cool who said, "Why do wee see Lucien Bouchard in the Maritimes?" I know her, and I know that she would not have made the same remark if Jean Charest had been the premier of Quebec. If that were the case, she would not have noticed, by chance. It is because she does not like seeing Lucien Bouchard.

The Joint Chair (senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): No, that is not what I said, not at all. I asked if we saw the premier of a province before the prime minister of Canada.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: You cannot ask Radio-Canada reporters to determine if the Quebec premier pleases part of the public opinion or not. In the news report or information-based programs on RDI, in quantitative and qualitative terms, efforts must continue to be made to give a real presence to francophonie outside Quebec. I think that you have understood that well and that you are working along these lines.

There is undoubtedly room for improvement, but it gets more complicated because there is not only the news. How can you respond to the same concerns from francophone communities outside Quebec when it comes to dramas or variety shows, for example? I'm talking about large scale network-wide programs, not programs that can be produced by... In serial dramas, which have a very large viewing audience, and which are preferred by the public, Quebec values and the Quebec reality are still omnipresent. I won't go as far as to put forth any figures, but in La petite vie, I have never heard anyone say that Pôpa and Môman had an Acadian cousin. So you see what I mean.

• 1705

So it gets very complicated, because you get into the directors' decision making process or into creation. To what extent can Radio-Canada decide that such and such a novel that is purely québécois won't be adapted, but that perhaps an Acadian novel or a novel from a francophone community in another region of Canada will perhaps be adapted? There are some that are undoubtedly very good. That is something I've been wondering about.

Let's look for example at talk shows, variety shows and serial dramas, and the francophone reality outside Quebec. At any rate, I do not recall having seen any. And I'm speaking quite frankly.

Mr. Renaud Gilbert: La côte de sable, in 1959.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: I was too young.

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: You are absolutely right. It is extremely difficult to be present outside Quebec. Since I do a considerable amount of work with francophone communities outside Quebec, I often make a comparison with movies that are not filmed everywhere in the United States, but mainly in Hollywood. The issue of decentralizing cultural production is something that we are very concerned about at Radio-Canada.

Our strategy—I do not know if it will be successful—involves very interesting means. We start by trying to produce programs for regional audiences. For example, in Acadia, we are currently producing a series entitled Double étoile with francophone artists from the Atlantic provinces as well as the other provinces. We are producing inter-regionally. We also try to do things ourselves. If these programs are of high calibre, we will obviously then broadcast them on the network. But we start working that way because those programs meet the needs of the community. We are aware that cultural life is flourishing in Acadia and in the Atlantic provinces, and that is why we are undertaking these projects.

The same thing is happening here, in Ontario and the Outaouais region, where we have a series of programs that we produce first and foremost for regional audiences and that we subsequently rebroadcast on the network. This summer, two series that have been produced here in the region will be broadcast on the network: Vie de chalet and Chez nous.

In the West, we would obviously need a critical mass to produce programs like La petite vie or big serial dramas. We need workshops, sets, costumes, etc. So we cannot produce everywhere. In the West, we have specialized in documentaries and have already produced four that will be broadcast this year and next year.

In Ontario, we are currently adapting a novel that is well known in Ontario, La vengeance de l'orignal, that is studied in all of the schools. The project is in the development phase and we are examining the possibility of producing a serial drama.

But obviously, we then need to get into the mechanics of broadcasting on the network, where there is roughly two and a half hours of programming during prime time and where everything converges. It is the same thing as the Téléjournal that you mentioned earlier Renaud. Several hundred news items are broadcast, but they're only about a dozen that are broadcast on the Téléjournal. The same thing occurs during prime time. Cultural experiments are very difficult.

The Joint Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): That is all very well, but I think we should give the floor to Senator Rivest so that he can ask another question.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: Ms. Vaillancourt can continue.

The Joint Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): Okay, but let's let her catch her breath first.

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: So that is what presence is all about. Yvan wants to add something.

Mr. Yvan Asselin: If I may, I will only take a few seconds to say that things must also be looked at in terms of how well they complement each other. Since there is television and radio, with the Première Chaîne and the Chaîne Culturelle, we try to build and stimulate creation so that authors may eventually produce for larger venues more systematically. I know you expressed some reluctance with respect to quotas, but allow me to give you the example of dramas for the Chaîne Culturelle, where a decision was made to obtain 40% of the scripts from outside Montreal. They are now systematically obtained from the Atlantic region and French Ontario. We also promote a news competition in the West. It all fits together.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): In other words, you're just starting to think about the whole great country of Canada. If you're just starting to do all this, thank God your family got there. But you're just getting there. Is that it? You're building a national view.

[Translation]

It's fine in French.

Mr. Yvan Asselin: I am not talking about recent events, Mrs. Finestone. I am just reminding you that by ordering scripts from authors throughout Canada, we are helping these authors to grow and giving them the opportunity to produce work for the media, which will eventually broaden their potential pool for submitting works that may perhaps be broadcast on TV and elsewhere.

• 1710

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: Since my friend Coderre invited me to criticize the CBC, I will make the following remark. What you have just said about the Chaîne Culturelle is all fine and well, but the Chaîne Culturelle is moving towards téléuniversity. As a music lover, I often listen to the English network, which I find better. And when I am not satisfied with the English network, I tune into Burlington. I have my three favourite stations. The French CBC network seems to like calling upon university professors. The program that explained the colour of pharaohs as part of a series on Egypt was a lot like téléuniversity. I must admit that it was very interesting. When a classical music concert is presented on the English radio network—I will give you the advantage—the music is explained in two phases. On the Chaîne Culturelle, a cegep professor from somewhere shows up to explain how Mozart felt on the morning that he... It is correct, it is probably accurate and it is always very interesting, but it gets on my nerves. Do you see what I mean?

An Hon. Member: You're not curious enough.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: Having gotten my message across, let's go back to minorities. I am perhaps a member of a minority. So let's congratulate the English network at CBC. As far as radio goes, you have really got it. It works well.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): That's very good.

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): Can I continue the discussion on the radio?

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: Did my message get through?

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): It's soon your turn.

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): I too would like to get my message across. I agree with you on English radio; we like the music. Earlier on, what I was really asking was if a news item on a provincial premier took precedence over a news item on the prime minister of the country.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: If Jean Charest had been the Premier of Quebec, you would have found him quite pleasant.

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): No, at any rate, that is not what I said. I prefer radio over television, which I watch very little. I really like radio and I'm very happy to learn that we can tune into the FM-radio station in the North East, in Bas-Caraquet. That is something I requested of Louise Imbeault 10 years ago during a meeting like this one. She said at the time that there wasn't enough demand. People were encouraged to request it and they have finally agreed to it after 10 years.

I heard some comments the other day on the frequency, and perhaps some technicians will have to confirm them for me. I travel a lot by car, and I would like to know if one day I will be able to leave Toronto and go to Baie Sainte-Marie listening to English radio and tune to the same frequency, 103.3 FM, throughout the trip.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): With digital, why not?

[Translation]

Mr. Yvan Asselin: I am going to skate on thin ice, because technically speaking, you would lose me quickly. This technology exists in Europe for FM radio, but we do not use it here. It will come with digital frequencies. It will enable the radio to search for the frequency itself as you travel along.

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): We will be able to travel from end of the country to the other tuned to the same frequency?

Mr. Yvan Asselin: That is one of the things that is under consideration.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): But why aren't we doing that? I want you to know that when I first arrived here in 1984, that's the first question I asked the CBC: why can't I find you wherever I am? Why can't you stay on the same number? Why can't you be at 940 everywhere in Canada on AM and 103.1 everywhere in Canada on FM?

[Translation]

Mr. Yvan Asselin: Unfortunately...

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Because your rebroads aren't strong enough?

[Translation]

Mr. Yvan Asselin: I will take your question under consideration and I will give you an answer. I, too, would like this technology to be available to us since it already exists. Perhaps it is a question of proximity. As you know, in January we will start digital production in large markets and that will come automatically with digitization. It would perhaps be costly to implement this technology on the FM bandwidth when plans are already in place to go digital.

The Joint Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): Are you taking charge of finding an answer?

Mr. Yvan Asselin: Yes, and at the very least provide you with a specific answer.

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): Thank you.

The Joint Chair (The Hon. Sheila Finestone): Madame Vautour.

• 1715

Ms. Angela Vautour: I will only make a few comments because I have to leave shortly. I'd like to go back to the programs. I think there are several factors, and unless you disagree with me, I think that what is happening on the Atlantic side must also be considered, because whether we like it or not, cuts are being made everywhere. There is talent in the Atlantic region, but we need resources to develop it. The lack of resources is always a serious problem for people back home. Acadians have tried to market their talents, and I am sure that it is very difficult for the network to try to deal with all of that. I hope that some day culture will become somewhat of a priority.

I must admit that at the local level, Ce soir is excellent. Its team is always there to bring us the news and it's the same thing on CBC. Although there are always minor complaints, I am personally satisfied with the way we have been treated until now. In conclusion, I would like to make a comment

[English]

to let CBC know that at the federal election there is only one TV station that got live coverage from me when I found out I had won the election. It was CBC that came to my house. Every other journalist was at the opposition. Locally it was a big thing.

Mr. David Knapp: Let's hope we did our research properly.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): They determine the winners early.

Ms. Angela Vautour: I guess their calculation was right on, on that one.

I have to go because I have something else in about five minutes. I want to thank you again.

[Translation]

Thank you very much. Continue to improve the stations for minority groups.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Did you look at that budget? I know it's not part of this thing.

Ms. Angela Vautour: Yes, I'm fine with the budget also.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you.

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: Angela, it's reassuring to know that the CBC turned up at your victory party. That's great.

Ms. Angela Vautour: Yes. It covered the important part of it.

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: Senator Comeau, you made reference to francophones in western Canada. It may surprise you that most western francophones supported the party I represent. That's quite understandable, because francophones in western Canada are as concerned as Canadians everywhere about where their tax dollars are going. They realize the federal language laws are basically futile and useless, as has been mentioned around here in so far as the whole broadcast industry is concerned. The member for Montreal seems to fail to realize that CBC has no money other than taxpayer money. That's where the money is coming from. So of course there is control in Ottawa, because that's where the purse strings are.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Is that your dinosaur syndrome again?

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: Oh, Dennis the Menace. That's where the purse strings are and that's who calls the shots, just like the Prime Minister telling my colleague, Dennis the Menace, how to vote in the House of Commons.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): And yours doesn't, of course.

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: Not as often.

But my God, it's even worse than I thought, because your own document shows that it is worse than even the statistics from before. It isn't 2.3% of the Canadian population; it's 2.3% of the francophone population.

I guess what viewers are doing, what Canadian people are doing.... They should be sending you a message that I suppose they don't like what they're seeing on television; hence they turn it off. I hear, and of course it's the same on the English networks, that during prime time there's a lot of garbage on CBC television. It certainly isn't fit for children viewing it. It's basically adult stuff.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): It's pretty good. Do you ever watch any of it?

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: No.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): That's your problem. You're speaking with no knowledge.

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: Yes, pretty good adult stuff. If you say it's good, you must like porn and that kind of smut.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): You've got the wrong station. Why don't you turn something on called English Canada?

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: You can understand why the ratings are way down, the numbers just aren't there. Where is the accountability? What do you expect if nobody is watching or listening? That's the reality.

• 1720

[Translation]

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: I cannot emphasize enough, sir, that we were given a mandate as a national broadcaster and that our job is to talk about the Canadian reality for the benefit of the country, for the benefit of francophones but also francophiles. We consider that our mandate and we are going to continue to do so. I reiterate that this compatibility is highly questionable, and my radio colleague shared the same conclusions with you.

With respect to programming in the evening, I would like to point out that we comply with all of the public broadcasters' codes and underscore the fact that at CBC, we have even stricter requirements with respect to violence and the representation of stereotypes among other things. Our policy is strict and we apply it strictly.

A significant part of CBC funding comes from advertising revenues, which represent more than $ 110 million for the French network. It is clear that this data also has an impact on the choice of programs and on our programming.

Renaud Gilbert would like to add some comments.

Mr. Renaud Gilbert: I would simply like to point out that RDI's budget is roughly $ 30 million and that 85% comes from subscribers, i.e. subscription rate, and 15% from advertising revenues. No government subsidies are invested in RDI.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you very much.

I wonder, going to the next round, if you could perhaps inform us about the relationship, if there is one, with TV5 and if TV5 carries any of the very fine quality cultural products of Radio-Canada or CBC, which would include the music and the concerts and the ballet, etc., that CBC carries. What is the relationship and does their budget touch yours in any way?

[Translation]

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: I am on the board of directors for TV5 Quebec Canada, and we regularly offer French CBC material and moreover, when the occasion arises, material produced by our CBC colleagues. In the documents that we have provided, we indicate some of the productions that are broadcast by TV5 here in Canada.

TV5 programming is between 10 to 15% Canadian. You know that the main purpose of TV5 is to offer high quality programs from the francophonie. So we have programs that come from all French-speaking countries in Europe, and 10 to 15% of the programming in Canada comes from Radio-Canada and the other francophone broadcasters that also sit on the board of directors.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): What percentage is paid by France?

[Translation]

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: France pays for six ninths or 66% of the cost of TV5; Quebec and Canada, Belgium and Switzerland each contribute 11% or one ninth of the cost. In France, the schedule is different. Radio-Canada broadcasts roughly 70% of the material from Canada on the TV5 Europe-Asia-Africa network. Our news is broadcast everyday and we prepare a weekly edited version of Enjeux and Le Point. Our big news magazines are also broadcast throughout Europe.

The Joint Chair (the Hon. Sheila Finestone): In Africa too? Yes?

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest:

[Editor's note: Inaudible].

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: Madam Chair, TV5 releases and pays the fees when there are for example music licence fees or artist fees that must be paid. Serial dramas are also broadcast. TV5 pays the fees, and not Radio-Canada.

• 1725

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Are TV Ontario and Radio-Québec competitors of yours?

[Translation]

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: We sit on the same board of directors, like my colleague from Télé-Québec, Jacques Bensimon, and TVA, since TV5 Quebec Canada is a consortium of francophone broadcasters. Our affiliate stations, two representatives from the federal government and two representatives from the Quebec government also sit on the board. The potential programs are put on the table and the people who do the scheduling choose the programs for TV5 Quebec Canada. The same is done in France for TV5 Europe.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Thank you.

Mr. Gilbert, would you please table the letter from Mr. Comeau. Thank you.

[Translation]

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: You know, there are so few francophone stations available to communities outside Quebec that we cannot disagree with an increase in the number of offerings and of francophone channels.

With respect to our position, the CRTC asked us to submit our comments and our position by June 25. We are currently preparing our position and will appear before the CRTC in July.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Is any work being done in conjunction with a French broadcaster in the United States, in Maine for example, in Vermont or in New Hampshire,

[English]

where there is a large French-speaking community, and if not why not? What steps have you taken to ensure the presence of a French language network in the northeast United States?

[Translation]

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: As you know, TV5 is currently in the United States, and our presence on the TV5 schedule in the United States represents about one third of the programming offered—not only CBC programming, but programming from all broadcasters. TV5 USA launched its operations at the start of the year in the United States. We are picked up by some cable companies, including the ones in Florida. That causes a lot of problems, because the FCC regularly takes us to task because we obviously do not have broadcast rights for the United States. We have worked mainly with TVA and Télé-Québec with a view to offering a francophone television service in Florida. I must say that this is highly complex.

As regards New England states, our signal is picked up there, because the Act allows the signal to be broadcast up to 100 miles, and we regularly appear before the FCC to obtain royalties. But with respect to concerted action, it is very difficult and very costly to broadcast in the American market.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Free trade is very difficult, especially in the cultural sector.

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: Indeed.

Senator Gérald Comeau: In conclusion, I would like to thank you for the support you give our community. I am reiterating that because it is very important for us. I plan to report back to the community leaders in my region, including the ones in Richelieu.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone):

[Editor's note: Inaudible]

Senator Gérald Comeau: I greatly appreciated the answers we received from our witnesses. I hear people in my region speak very highly of you. I greatly appreciate how sympathetic you have been to our community.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Mr. Coderre.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Dennis the Menace. He may have confused this with Bleu nuit, but that's a different station. I'll explain later. Don't worry.

I would like to start by saying that I have confidence in RDI. As you know, I am working on the Louis Riel file, among others. I was in a position to note to what extent there can be symbiosis between L'Ouest en direct and Le Québec en direct, even at the national level.

You say that when you are in the field, an item can be treated nationally, but always with a local flavour, because that is what interests certain sectors. I saw that for myself. I think that we have you to thank, because it is true that it was done objectively and that the logistics, at least, were there. There were even people from Saint-Boniface who called me to see how satisfied they were with the way the matter was dealt with. You must be congratulated for that.

• 1730

Ms. Vaillancourt, did you say that Radio-Canada was going to apply for more stations? Don't you have enough?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: When you look at the evolution of television, you can see that we are moving more and more towards clusters. Audience fragmentation is such that people are watching more and more specialized channels. We see this fragmentation with our anglophone colleagues, who started before we did, and we are also experiencing it. Some television stations that did not even exist only 10 years ago will sometimes obtain between 15 and 20% of the market.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Can you give some examples?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: As you know, Radio-Canada decided to get involved with RDI in setting up a channel. Alone or in partnership with others, we applied for other specialized channels, namely a cultural channel, an arts network in partnership with the French channel ARTE, which as an investing partner will provide money and programs. We have also applied for a classical station in conjunction with the TVA network.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Just music?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: A classical station in a nostalgic sense, if I can put it that way. We will use old TV series as well as audiovisual heritage.

An Hon. Member: Bleu nuit.

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: We have also proposed a history channel with another partner. We consider that these offshoots of Radio-Canada's main role—if there are to be any—will be in the news and cultural areas, with an arts and citizenship network, including history, economics, and consumer affairs.

Mr. Denis Coderre: You have just mentioned the three major areas: history, culture and news. Instead of having a big corporation like CBC that costs a billion dollars and requires a horrendous amount of logistics, could we not in the future—this could be the subject of another debate, but it won't be now—have a number of specialty channels, that would be broadcast nationally for anglophones and francophones everywhere? Wouldn't this be preferable for taxpayers? Shouldn't we be putting more emphasis and more money on RDI, your cultural channel and your history channel, and shouldn't we do the same thing with radio instead of getting bogged down with a very large structure, a huge corporation where a cat could lose its kittens? Wouldn't this make it possible to solve the problem with respect to administering public funds on the one hand and helping improve significantly your efficiency on the other? The impact RDI has had on the news, including at the francophonie level, is very clear.

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: I would need two days to answer that question, but I will get back to it and I will answer you.

The fact remains, however, that in the short term, and all experts and analysts in radio agree, most industrialized countries will always have one or two general TV systems. I think that in a country, we need television that can fring us together. Don't forget that during prime time Radio-Canada has up to 30% of the market. RDI, which is a phenomenal success, brings in about 2% of the market. So you can see that the stakes are not the same. Sorry, Renaud. Perhaps I should have said 6% or sometimes even 7% of the market. I would not want to underestimate your market share.

I have done a lot of work on the arts' network project. These projects are very dear to me, but I think that a general national broadcaster will probably still have a raison d'être for the next 10, 15 or 20 years. We do not know what the future holds. We may all become specialized channels, but I think that these broadcasters will continue to have a raison d'être for at least the next decade.

Mr. Denis Coderre: If that's the case, then wouldn't it be preferable to better manage the budgets of the current stations and comply to a larger extent with section 41 of the Official Languages Act? You know that the commissioner has issued some complaints. Shouldn't we settle that instead of investing more money in specialized channels?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: We are not investing money from Radio-Canada. As Renaud mentioned earlier, RDI is funded through cable subscription revenues and to some extent through advertising revenues. It would be exactly the same thing for the channels we are proposing.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): So the final result on this is that there are no additional moneys being requested for these budgets, for these new programs.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: I have a quick question.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Yes, but we have to pass the two resolutions here.

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: Thanks, Madam Chair.

• 1735

About this extension into the United States and the difficulty you're having and so on, who would fund that? Where would the money come from, or is it requested there and paid for down there?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: We ask for $ 10 per month.

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz: Is that from cable?

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: Yes, cable and satellite. It's direct satellite and cable distribution in the States. Customers, subscribers, have to pay for that service.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): What I find quite regrettable is it's quite all right for the Americans to drown out our airwaves and to fill the visual and film studios and our screens in our theatres, but it's not okay for us to at least allow our French Canadians who do use Florida as a winter residence access to their TV stations. I think it's just a disgrace.

Ladies and gentlemen, first of all, thank you very much. We will move forward on the Nova Scotia and New Brunswick issue as raised by our colleague, Senator Comeau. You certainly have answered a lot of innuendo and questions in a very efficient way with respect to regional broadcasting. There has been a great deal of discomfort about the supposed lack of stringers, the supposed lack of representation and fair distribution other than French Quebec on the French networks across Canada. I can just suggest that your description is lovely, and the members, I'm sure, are going to tune in as they travel. Hopefully they will all be satisfied with this lovely picture you have presented.

So on behalf of the members I thank you very much for your time, your energy, your patience, and your new information. Good luck, my favourite station.

[Translation]

Ms. Micheline Vaillancourt: Thank you for your support and for listening to us.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): You'll forgive us if we move to the business of the day.

You have the budget in front of you and you also have a copy of the fifth report.

All right. You do the subcommittee one, please. You were here, I wasn't.

A voice: Yes, you were.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): I was?

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): It is the fifth report.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Excuse me, I was here.

You have the fifth report in front of you in which your subcommittee reports on its meeting of Tuesday, June 2, 1998, and agreed to recommend that the reception for Commissioner Victor Goldbloom, Commissioner of Official Languages, be held on Thursday, October 1, 1998; that the Honourable Diane Marleau appear before the committee in the fall; that the Consortium francophone de l'éducation appear before the committee in the fall; that the committee travel to francophone and anglophone minority communities in all 10 provinces during the month of October to discuss the application of part 7 of the Official Languages Act.

Is the matter accepted?

[Translation]

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: The cost is $ 200,000?

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): I haven't got to that page yet. Would you mind starting on the page we're on. It's just a report.

I would like to explain that the directions given by the subcommittee on agenda to the clerk were very floues, just that we were to go to all 10 provinces and that we should have a presence where the major minority communities are. First of all, we have to get the money and then we'll decide where we want to go. But in order to do this we took one city in each province. For the west we took one city in each province.

I just want to explain how we arrived at this. To get a general overall view of the cost of this, the major cost is the travel. The travel per person comes to between $ 7,500 and $ 8,000 per person, and we don't have a choice with that.

• 1740

You're going from Vancouver to each of these cities all the way across the country. You're going in a period of three or four weeks. It's not as if you're going non-stop. In fact, it's about $ 86,000. You have 9 people going from the committee. This committee has 27 people. Staff and translation have to go. The total budget comes to $ 214,582.40. This is to travel across the country. That's the cost estimate.

[Translation]

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: Will we go to all 10 provinces?

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Yes, and not only to the big cities.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: Although I was under the impression that some members suggested visiting the 10 provinces, I think we should make four or five trips, to visit Quebec, Ontario, the Maritimes and the West.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): That's all there is.

[Translation]

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: By visiting the 10 provinces, there might well be some repetition. It would be tourism. It would take us to a festival in one place and to other similar events; that's all we would do. If we go to all 10 provinces, we will increase the costs considerably and excessively. I agree with our visiting all regions, but not the 10 provinces.

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): I agree with identifying regions. Moreover, like the special joint committee on custody and access presided over by Ms. Pearson, we could also travel by train from time to time. For example, to travel from Toronto to Montreal or from Ottawa to Montreal. That would enable us to limit our expenses and reduce our budget which is already at $ 214,000.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: I see. Our colleague Ms. Vautour had requested that we go almost everywhere in the Maritimes. In my opinion, visiting each province will require spending an incredible amount of money. Our mandate is not to be tourists or to go on site to encourage cultural expression. The official languages committee has a very specific mandate. I agree with our going, but it seems to me that it would be enough to visit the regions, even if it means identifying five. We won't spend much time in Quebec, because that is not where the bulk of the problem with the Official Languages Act is. So we will move through Quebec quickly.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): En tant que francophone, how do you know that?

[Translation]

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: We agree with stopping in Montreal, but we should spend more time in the Maritimes than in the West, and perhaps in Vancouver. Let's not go to all 10 provinces, but five places at most: Quebec, Ontario, the West, perhaps British Columbia or the Northwest Territories and the Maritimes. That's it, not to each province.

Perhaps the other members of the committee would like to express their views.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): I will ask you the following question: what provinces and what places in the Maritimes do you want to visit?

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: I don't know. Let's ask our colleagues from the Maritimes.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Senator Rivest, during the meeting of the sub-committee, which was attended by Mr. Coderre—

Mr. Denis Coderre: Yes, I was there.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): —she only asked that we visit three place in New Brunswick.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: I know, but we would be like tourists.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): I am telling you what she requested. We are trying to accommodate her by agreeing to go at least to Moncton, but she insisted that we go to Caraquet and to Bay something or other.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: Saint-Mathieu.

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): Saint-Sauveur.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: Saint-Sauveur.

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): Saint-Sauveur, but not in the Laurentians.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): No, not in the Laurentians.

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): No, no, in Acadia, in Bathurst.

[English]

Mr. Rahim Jaffer: I know this is an important thing to do. I'm curious if there was any other research done to cover more ground and not travel? Would there be any merit to looking into the option of doing some sort of teleconference in different regions like this? We could all be here together and set it up wherever we want to be; for instance, where the main francophone areas are. We can select those and make sure we do it in some sort of technological way, which I think could end up being much cheaper as well and not displacing us. I don't know if that's an option we can look at. I know it's been done. We've done it in Alberta on a couple of issues through teleconferencing.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): I'm very interested to hear what you're saying. I'd like to know what your experience has been. Our experience was terrible. That was a year and a half ago. You're just very distant from the people.

• 1745

The purpose of our wanting to see whether section 7 of the Official Languages Act is effective is to meet the people face to face and have them know that this wasn't passed lightly and that we want to make sure that either it's working or we don't need it. You can't really do that in the coldness of a distance. At least that was the view before, but it may be something we have to do.

I have absolutely no idea. This is not a lot of money. It sounds incredible to me, but it's not a lot of money for a committee that's looking at a new section of a major act that is a defining value of Canada, which is its bilingual nature. Notwithstanding that, there may well be good ways to do it that would not cost so much money.

[Translation]

Mr. Denis Coderre: Look, of course we can start comparing ourselves to other committees that do whirlwind tours of various countries in Europe. It is normal for the members of the Joint Committee on Official Languages to have an opportunity to go into the field. If it's just that, all parliamentary committees should be told to do videoconferences to hear from people.

I think that the Joint Committee on Official Languages must also go out into the field, leave these cold buildings to go and see how people are living and what exactly they are experiencing. Our mandate also involves understanding the environment and soaking it up to get a sense of what is happening.

I too found the $ 214,000 amount very high. It is clear that some choices will have to be made and that we do not necessarily need to go to all 10 provinces. But there are some places we cannot miss. If we go to the West, it will be important and relevant to visit Saint-Boniface and Vancouver, for example. Instead of going to the four Maritime provinces, we could choose two, limit our travelling and show the people that the principle is essential, but that out of concern for sound management and managing perceptions, we are not simply being tourists.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: If we were to go to two places,...

Mr. Denis Coderre: What if we were to go to two places per region?

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: We could travel between two destinations by bus.

Mr. Denis Coderre: We could organize something. Madam Chair, I would also like to have access to a breakdown of the budget that indicates precisely what the money will be spent on. I would be prepared to vote, but I would like the motion to indicate, for example, that trips are planned to one city in each of the regions of Canada. Secondly, we would need to see the costs for translation and other specific activities so that the motion can be as accurate as possible and so that we can justify the large amount of money requested.

Of course if all 16 members of the committee need to participate, we will have to stop revising the budget downwards. We need to go out into the field and talk to Canadians to understand them. We have to experience what they are experiencing. I think that this way, we will solve all of the problems.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): I regret that we didn't give you a full outline budget.

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): The Joint Committee on Official Languages should perhaps consult the region offices, which would assist it in making choices.

The first request for a hearing that I received came from the person in charge of the Atlantic office in Moncton. The person suggested visiting one of the branches in Charlottetown or Halifax and told me that they could invite representatives of the French communities to come and meet us.

Mr. Denis Coderre: One visit per place is already a lot.

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): Yes, it is a lot. We could do the same thing in the West and limit the number of trips. We could hold the meetings through these people.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: Ms. Vautour has perhaps broadened the number of consultations out of enthusiasm.

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): Yes, yes, yes.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): We could do the following. I really need your cooperation on this. To be frank with you, I'm not really anxious to travel this whole country—I've done it just a few thousand times—but I do believe we have to do something.

• 1750

Do you want to amend this action here to suggest, on the fourth line, that the necessary staff travel to five regions, the maritimes, Quebec, Ontario, the central provinces, and British Columbia? When you're going to British Columbia you could maybe go to Whitehorse or something, or when you're going to Quebec and so on, but say five regions and have the staff redo the budget. It has to come out to a figure that's lower than it presently is, for sure.

We don't have to accept this in the end, but I have to be able to at least plan it to get an approval for budget. If they're not going to give me any money to travel, then we're not going to do it, that's it. It will have to wait for another year and another sitting of the House or something.

Mr. Rahim Jaffer: Then any final decision will be presented to this committee so we can go ahead and decide.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Absolutely.

Mr. Denis Coderre: I think we can agree on the principle. They'll come back with the budget. But we agree that we have to travel in five regions with the staff.

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Is that okay? The budget figure will reflect the change, and we have directed the clerk to make that change.

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool): Will the next meeting be held on Thursday? Will the revised budget be ready then?

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mrs. Sheila Finestone): Yes, Thursday. That will be the only item on the agenda. We have no meeting. We all have to be here for votes anyway.

I'm going to go with the figures to the budget subcommittee and I will give you the response it gives us. Thank you very much.

The meeting is adjourned.