CHPC Committee Report

During the course of its study, the Committee received some 710 letters and e-mails from Canadians. The vast majority of these were sent as a result of a campaign by the organisation Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, which sent a letter to its supporters urging them to write to the Committee. As well as giving the Committee’s postal address, the letter said that an Internet site had been created that would deliver comments to the Committee. It went on to say this was “an unparalleled chance to speak up for a strong, independent national public broadcaster, to insist that CBC/Radio-Canada have the resources and mandate to program locally in communities across the land, and to reform CBC/Radio-Canada’s management and governance so that only the best and brightest Canadians are appointed to CBC/Radio-Canada’s board — ending patronage appointments of the President and the Board forever!”[320] Indeed, these were recurring themes in the letters and e-mails the Committee received.

Many of those who wrote to the Committee explicitly supported the positions advocated by Friends of Canadian Broadcasting. On the subject of funding, letter writers often expressed fear that CBC/Radio-Canada was being threatened. Specifically, they were concerned about further funding cuts. They called for sufficient funding to ensure that the Corporation has a secure future. Writers said CBC/Radio-Canada required sufficient funding so that it could provide more regional news, more original drama and comedy, and more public affairs programming. Others mentioned the need to develop Canadian talent and promote Canadian entertainers.

More specifically, quite a few letter writers said CBC/Radio-Canada should not rely on advertising revenue. They pointed approvingly to the lack of advertising on CBC/Radio-Canada radio, and some felt there should not be advertising on television, either. Some also called for a ban on partnerships with private broadcasters, while others said they would be willing to pay additional taxes to maintain a reasonable budget for CBC/Radio-Canada.

On the subject of CBC/Radio-Canada’s statutory mandate, many writers said that the Corporation’s Board of Directors should be directed by Parliament to respect the Broadcasting Act’s stipulation that Canada’s national broadcaster should “reflect Canada and its regions to national and regional audiences, while serving the special needs of those regions.”[321]

On the subject of governance, many letters supported the position of Friends of Canadian Broadcasting that the President and CEO should not be appointed by the Prime Minister. They felt this change would make the CBC/Radio-Canada independent from political interference.

In general, the letters were heart-felt tributes to the CBC/Radio-Canada, which numerous writers saw as an integral part of Canadian identity. Writers often told of a lifetime of listening to and/or watching the CBC/Radio-Canada and frequently they said they listened to or watched little else. Frequently, letter writers said they listened to CBC/Radio-Canada radio the whole day.

The letters were from all regions of Canada. Quite a few writers said they had lived in many different parts of the country and that the CBC/Radio-Canada had always been there for them. Writers from rural areas stressed the importance of the CBC/Radio-Canada in providing what was often their only link with the rest of the country. As well, some writers mentioned that they had listened to the CBC/Radio-Canada while travelling or living abroad. Several letter writers said they had arrived in Canada as immigrants, and that the CBC/Radio-Canada had helped them learn about the country.

Many said that having a strong, independent public broadcaster was necessary for the unity of the country. The CBC/Radio-Canada, the letter writers said, provided a voice for all Canadians and they compared it to the railroad as a way of uniting the country.

Writers often highlighted the excellent quality of CBC/Radio-Canada programming, particularly the public affairs programming. This was compared with the programming on private networks, which many writers found to be too concerned with entertainment. Some letter writers remarked on the intelligent discussion that is found on the CBC/Radio-Canada. They also said the CBC/Radio-Canada should not compete with the private networks in terms of programming.

The CBC/Radio-Canada was seen by many as a necessary alternative to ubiquitous American programming. They felt it reflected Canada’s diversity and multicultural identity and provided a Canadian point of view on world events. They also said it was a neutral, unbiased voice, which only a well-funded public broadcaster could provide.

Only a few writers mentioned new media, such as the Internet. Some thought the CBC/Radio-Canada’s use of them needed strengthening, while others felt this should be done only where it helped the CBC/Radio-Canada carry out its mandate more effectively.