CHPC Committee Report

Supplementary Opinion

Bloc Québécois

A “multinational” public broadcaster

Background

          The Bloc Québécois would like to start by thanking all the people and groups from Quebec and Canada who gave evidence before the Committee on the issue of the role of a public broadcaster in the 21st century.

          We reiterate our support for strong and dynamic public television and applaud its considerable contribution to the development of Quebec culture.  However, it would be absurd to claim that the challenges are the same for Société Radio-Canada (SRC) and its English-language counterpart, the CBC.

          While the Bloc Québécois does not disagree with the report, we note that the Committee chose to ignore the fundamental differences between the English and French public television networks, once again turning a blind eye to reality.  The Bloc had proposed from the start that the two networks be studied separately.  This proposal was ignored.

Recognition of the Quebec nation

          By recognizing the Quebec nation with its language and unique culture, as the Prime Minister did on November 22, 2006, the House of Commons implicitly recognized that this language and unique culture have to be protected.  It therefore appears to us essential that all Crown corporations take Quebec’s language and culture into consideration in their mandates.

          It is inconsistent to say that there is a Quebec nation and then not take its existence into account.  It is inconsistent that a motion for which a majority of parliamentarians voted has not resulted in any concrete follow-up.  It is especially inconsistent that this recognition has not been internalized by governmental and Crown corporation administrative structures.

          As soon as the Quebec nation was recognized by the House of Commons, federal entities should have been obliged to treat it differently.  The mandate of CBC/Radio-Canada should have been amended in consequence, as should the Broadcasting Policy for Canada.  The Bloc Québécois submitted two recommendations in this regard, which were rejected:

The Bloc Québécois recommends that the wording of subparagraph 3(1)(m)(i) of the Broadcasting Act be amended to read as follows:  “be distinctively Canadian and, in Quebec, distinctively Québécois”.

The Bloc Québécois recommends that the wording of paragraph 3(1)(m) of the Act be amended to include in the mandate of CBC/Radio-Canada the recognition and promotion, in Quebec, of the Quebec national identity.

          The rejection of these recommendations by the federalist parties shows how little importance they place on recognition of the Quebec nation.  Not so the Bloc Québécois.

The need for separate studies

          From the start of the Committee’s proceedings on the role of a public broadcaster in the 21st century, the Bloc Québécois argued the need to carry out separate studies of the French and English networks, the SRC and the CBC.  CBC Television unfortunately remains a network in “continuing crisis”, where “90 per cent of all the drama that Canadians watch on English-language television is foreign, mostly American.”[1]  But the SRC does not face these challenges.

          The Committee had to concede this, and that is why the report states that “The two services have neither the same strengths nor the same weaknesses.  CBC Television’s problem is that audience ratings are so low that some people may, at a given point, decide it is a marginal network.”[2]

          This profound and significant difference, this reality of dissimilar challenges facing two quite separate networks, does not come through clearly in the Committee’s recommendations.  Faced with CBC Television’s ongoing failure to attract a large audience, the Committee seems to have thrown up its hands, while congratulating itself on the success of the French network.

          By dividing its study on the role of a public broadcaster in the 21st century into two reports, one on the French network and one on the English network, the Committee could have dealt in greater depth with the different problems confronting each of them.

          The truth is that CBC/Radio-Canada’s French-language network is intended essentially for Quebeckers, and tells Quebec stories made by Quebeckers.  Quebeckers’ feeling of belonging to the Quebec nation explains why they are so attached to their own television, whether private or public.

          Issues such as funding for high-cost drama series, residuals, in-house production, funding for public affairs programs, respect for the mandate of Radio Canada International and the SRC’s regional development would have received a great deal more attention if there had been a separate study.  Similarly, the challenges facing the CBC could have been expanded on.

          It is obvious that even when it comes to broadcasting Quebec is a different nation and that the parliamentarians in the three other parties would have been better advised to face facts, which would have enabled the Committee to do a better job.

          They preferred denial and dogmatism to effectiveness.  They preferred to deny the Quebec nation rather than appropriately support a “multinational” public broadcaster.

          Lastly, the Bloc Québécois submitted a series of recommendations to ensure greater transparency in a CBC/Radio-Canada administration subject to the Access to Information Act.  In our opinion, enhanced transparency would help to ensure the best possible governance for this Crown corporation, especially as we have no doubt of its willingness and good faith in this regard.

          The Bloc Québécois believes in a public broadcaster keenly attuned to contemporary realities, dynamic, multifaceted, reflecting Canada to Canadians, Quebec to Quebeckers, and the difference between them to foreign viewers.  The Bloc Québécois will continue to support Radio-Canada and defend it against a government indifferent to cultural development.