House committee hearings on future of broadcasting to begin in September

Senior political forces within the federal government have decided to rely on MPs, rather than Senators or political appointees, to head a broad review that could lead to changes in how broadcasting is regulated in Canada. The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage unveiled plans May 10 for an 18-month study to assess whether the 1991 Broadcasting Act remains relevant in an era of increased media concentration and globalization. Earlier this year, the federal government considered appointing a panel of industry experts to carry out a related review which, among other things, would have looked at restructuring the CRTC, and possibly even the Copyright Board and the Competition Bureau (CCR, Feb. 28/01). A Senate subcommittee had planned to carry out a similar review, but was disbanded last fall when the federal election was called (CCR, Feb. 28/01). Both groups could still be called upon to undertake a review. Now, the Heritage committee will take on the difficult task of producing a study that touches on everything from cross-ownership, media concentration, globalization, public broadcasting, the CRTC and the Internet. The committee has identified six themes that it plans to explore in-depth: context, cultural diversity, broadcasting policy, ownership, the private-public sector mix, and production and distribution. It’s expected to finalize its report and recommendations by December 2002. Committee chair Clifford Lincoln says it makes sense to have MPs reviewing these issues since any outcome would likely require legislative amendments. "The committee’s involvement is logical considering whatever happens has got to happen through legislation," he told CCR. He added, "What we can do is make policy recommendations to make sure that the act gets changed." The impetus for the review, he says, stems from a sense the Broadcasting Act has failed to keep up with the times. That view isn’t shared by a professor at the University of Montreal’s Department of Communications. Marc Raboy says the legislation could easily stand as it is, perhaps with the addition of a paragraph or two to deal with more recent developments. He notes that the act was worded in such a way as to be technology-neutral and adaptable to change. He says the law doesn’t have to mention the Internet by name for it to fall under its jurisdiction. "I think that the act is fine. A huge amount of work went into defining the fundamental principles and objectives of Canadian broadcasting policy. I don’t think that much has changed, and it really was a fairly exhaustive process (leading to the 1991 amendments)...", he notes. Rather than amend the legislation, Raboy says there’s a need for greater harmonization between the broadcasting and telecommunications acts since companies now own properties that fall under both. "I think something that needs to be done is a putting together of those two acts, because increasingly you have companies that fall under both. So it’s a complicated jurisdictional situation, where the CRTC were to act under one, a company could say but we’re covered by the other," he points out. He adds, "The other problems don’t really have to do with legislation as such, but more with policy and the functioning of the CRTC." The standing committee consultation may be beneficial, according to Raboy, because it may enable the government to set out broadcast strategies and policies, but need not necessarily result in legislative changes. "The consultations will allow the committee to find out what people really want and expect from the broadcasting system, ...and also for figuring out ways to strengthen Canada’s capacity to keep as much control as possible over its broadcasting system, given both globalization and (new) technology," he says. Questions that the commission has posed include: "Should the convergence of broadcasting and telecommunications lead to a revamped CRTC or to a new and different type of regulator?" and "How does the split supervision of broadcasting activities by the Departments of Canadian Heritage and Industry affect issues covered by the Broadcasting Act and other cultural policies and programs?" "We are going to look at the CRTC’s role in relation to the Broadcasting Act," says Lincoln. "The act devotes a huge portion of its content to the CRTC, because under the act, the CRTC has the power to issue licences. So in a sense we can’t study possible amendments without studying the role of the CRTC. Is it relevant in today’s context? Are its powers adequate and appropriate?" asks Lincoln. "But we don’t have a mandate to study the structure and raison d’être of the CRTC. We’re not going to look at how many commissioners it should have, for example." Interested parties have until Sept. 17 to submit written submissions and apply to appear before the committee. The committee will then hold public hearings across Canada on the various issues.

House committee hearings on future of broadcasting to begin in September

Broadcast | May 24, 2001

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

House committee hearings on future of broadcasting to begin in September

Broadcast | May 24, 2001

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

‘Culture is not on the table’ in trade talks amid film tariff threats & domestic digital policy uncertainty, says Guilbeault

CRTC looking into fixing broadcasting accessibility barriers for people with disabilities

Regulatory certainty, funding stability key focuses for new CMPA board

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us