INST Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 3rd SESSION

Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Tuesday, May 11, 2004

Á

1110

The Chair (Mr. Brent St. Denis (Algoma—Manitoulin, Lib.))

Mr. David McGrath (General Manager, Fortec Communications Inc.)

Á

1115

The Chair

Mr. Giovanni Rapana (Member of the Italian Community and President of the Committee of Italians Living Abroad, Coalition for Freedom of Choice in Satellite TV)

Á

1120

The Chair

Ms. Sonia Moujaes (Member of the Lebanese Community, Coalition for Freedom of Choice in Satellite TV)

The Chair

Ms. Sonia Moujaes

The Chair

Ms. Christiane Gagnon (Québec, BQ)

The Chair

Ms. Sonia Moujaes

Á

1125

The Chair

Ms. Maria-Terese Calderone (Member of the Venezuelan Community, Responsible for the Development of Terra Terra, Member of the Amis Québec-Vénézuela Association, Coalition for Freedom of Choice in Satellite TV)

Á

1130

The Chair

Mr. Francisco Salvador (Member of the Portuguese Community, As Individual)

Á

1135

Á

1140

The Chair

Mr. James Rajotte (Edmonton Southwest, CPC)

Mr. David McGrath

Mr. James Rajotte

Mr. David McGrath

Mr. James Rajotte

Á

1145

Mr. Giovanni Rapana

Mr. James Rajotte

Mr. Giovanni Rapana

Mr. James Rajotte

Ms. Sonia Moujaes

Mr. James Rajotte

Ms. Sonia Moujaes

Mr. James Rajotte

Ms. Sonia Moujaes

Mr. James Rajotte

Ms. Sonia Moujaes

Mr. James Rajotte

Ms. Sonia Moujaes

Mr. James Rajotte

Ms. Sonia Moujaes

Mr. James Rajotte

Ms. Sonia Moujaes

Mr. James Rajotte

Ms. Sonia Moujaes

Mr. James Rajotte

Ms. Sonia Moujaes

Á

1150

The Chair

Hon. Joe Fontana (London North Centre, Lib.)

Mr. Francisco Salvador

Hon. Joe Fontana

Á

1155

Mr. David McGrath

Hon. Joe Fontana

Mr. David McGrath

Hon. Joe Fontana

Â

1200

Mr. Francisco Salvador

Hon. Joe Fontana

Mr. Francisco Salvador

The Chair

Ms. Christiane Gagnon

Mr. Giovanni Rapana

Ms. Christiane Gagnon

Mr. Giovanni Rapana

Ms. Christiane Gagnon

Â

1205

Mr. Giovanni Rapana

Ms. Christiane Gagnon

Mr. Giovanni Rapana

Ms. Christiane Gagnon

The Chair

Ms. Maria-Terese Calderone

Â

1210

The Chair

Ms. Christiane Gagnon

Mr. Francisco Salvador

The Chair

Mr. Gérard Binet (Frontenac—Mégantic, Lib.)

Mr. Giovanni Rapana

The Chair

Mr. James Rajotte

Â

1215

Mr. Francisco Salvador

Mr. James Rajotte

Ms. Maria-Terese Calderone

Mr. Giovanni Rapana

Mr. David McGrath

Â

1220

Mr. James Rajotte

Mr. David McGrath

The Chair

Ms. Sonia Moujaes

The Chair

Mr. David McGrath

The Chair

Mr. James Rajotte

Mr. Francisco Salvador

Ms. Maria-Terese Calderone

The Chair

Hon. Joe Fontana

Â

1225

The Chair

Hon. Joe Fontana

The Chair

Mr. James Rajotte

The Chair

Ms. Christiane Gagnon

Â

1230

Mr. Giovanni Rapana

The Chair

Ms. Christiane Gagnon

The Chair

Mr. Francisco Salvador

The Chair

---

CANADA

Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology

---

NUMBER 016

l

3rd SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Tuesday, May 11, 2004

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Á  (1110)  

[English]

    The Chair (Mr. Brent St. Denis (Algoma—Manitoulin, Lib.)): Good morning, colleagues, witnesses, and guests.

    I'd like to call to order this Tuesday, May 11, meeting of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology. We're continuing our study of Bill C-2, an act to amend the Radiocommunication Act, more commonly known as an act to deal with the issues of grey and black market satellite signalling.

    We have with us today representatives from the Coalition for Freedom of Choice in Satellite TV, and Fortec Communications Inc. We're going to go in that order. The coalition includes representatives from the Lebanese community, the Italian community, and the Amis Québéc-VénézuelaAssociation.

    Because we have Mr. McGrath's text for the interpreters, we're going to start with David McGrath. By the time we're done with that, we'll have the text of the others for the interpreters.

    Perhaps you could speak for five or six minutes, David, and then we'll go from there.

    Mr. David McGrath (General Manager, Fortec Communications Inc.): Yes.

    I'd like to thank the committee for the invitation to speak on Bill C-2.

    As a representative of Fortec Communications, I bring to the table the perspective of a company that imports satellite equipment. Fortec is a supplier of satellite receivers, dishes, and other consumer satellite equipment, all under the Fortec Star brand name. Our products are marketed and used by Canadians who are interested in viewing satellite television that is offered on a free-to-air basis--FTA, as it's called.

    We understand that it is not the intent of Bill C-2 to include receivers for FTA broadcasts; however, we would like to address the bill and how the implementation could affect this lesser-known segment of the Canadian satellite industry. First, let me be clear in stating that we support the objective of Bill C-2. In our letter dated March 11 to this committee we acknowledge that satellite signal theft is a significant problem; and further, we support the initiatives that take aim at stopping it.

    In principle, we believe the purpose of this bill is to strengthen the law that is already in place through the Radiocommunication Act. This is evident by the proposed increase in penalties for those who break the law. We understand and support the need for those changes. However, it is the introduction of the import certificate requirements that has become the focal point for this bill for our company. By reading the notes from previous committee meetings, we know that there has been little discussion regarding this matter. Perhaps there is a misconception that only Bell ExpressVu, Star Choice, and their agents would need an import certificate.

    I know there has also been a question about snowbirds who want to return to Canada with the Bell ExpressVu system or Star Choice that they took with them to the U.S. The committee should be aware that companies dealing with the growing and evolving FTA satellite market might also be affected by this requirement.

    For those of you who don't know, the FTA channels that are available in Canada are predominantly foreign-language programming. There are few English-language channels and no French-language channels. Generally, these channels cater to a variety of cultural and special interest groups.

    Previous witnesses before this committee testified that Canada's two licensed satellite service providers are not carrying many of the category two ethnic services authorized by the CRTC for distribution. In the United States this problem also exists; however, in the United States broadcasters can choose to distribute their channels through a more independent route. There are companies that lease transponder space on as many as 13 different satellites. The FTA market will continue to expand as the growing number of ethnic and special interest channels use this distribution method.

    Traditionally, FTA satellite programs are offered to viewers free of charge, meaning there is no subscription fee for the channel. The broadcast is not encrypted and the FTA receiver can be used to view these channels. However, there is also an increasing number of broadcasters that use this same method of distribution but offer their channels with a paid subscription. In this scenario, you could subscribe to one channel while still viewing all of the FTA channels that are also available.

    Given that FTA receivers fall outside the scope of Bill C-2, what would be the status of FTA receivers that also have a conditional access technology--in other words, software for decoding signals? According to the wording of the bill, these FTA receivers would require an import certificate. It should be pointed out, however, that the receiver itself could not on its own be used for gaining access to encrypted satellite signals. For the receiver to decode encrypted channels, the provider of the signal needs to allow access through their subscription management system. Otherwise, the receiver functions no differently than any other FTA receiver.

    Importing different types of receivers will now have different customs rules. It will be left to the customs agent to know, understand, and identify the differences between satellite receivers and to enforce the law accordingly. We recognize that this can be done, but we also believe there is a real possibility that our business could be unintentionally disrupted with the enforcement of the import certificate process.

    As encryption technology improves, it could be argued that these import measures are not necessary. Mr. Russell McOrmond also pointed out during his testimony that a technology approach would be more effective in combating satellite piracy. We agree with his viewpoint. Further, he states that the difference between an unauthorized and authorized receiver is the software. Yet this bill emphasizes the hardware and is designed to control its importation.

Á  (1115)  

    Let me emphasize again that we support the intent of Bill C-2 in its effort to combat satellite signal theft. However, when it comes to restricting the importation of satellite receivers, it should be clear by now that Bell ExpressVu and Star Choice are not the only two companies that import satellite equipment. Bill C-2 appears to be written with their concerns in mind. We serve a different satellite market from what they do.

    The FTA market and the independent satellite broadcasters are a small but growing segment of the industry, and we ask for due consideration when reviewing the merits of Bill C-2.

    Thank you for your time. I welcome your questions.

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. McGrath.

    We'll start in order, then.

    Mr. Rapana, representing the Italian community, please go ahead.

[Translation]

    Mr. Giovanni Rapana (Member of the Italian Community and President of the Committee of Italians Living Abroad, Coalition for Freedom of Choice in Satellite TV): Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Good morning, Mr. Chairman.

    My name is Giovanni Rapana and I am the President of the Committee of Italians Living Abroad, which is based in Montreal. I am accompanied by my friends from the Coalition for Freedom of Choice in Satellite TV to tell you that we are against Bill C-2 as presented. Under Bill C-2, the Broadcasting Act would be amended by imposing stronger penalties on people who steal satellite signals.

    Even though we are against such theft, we believe that our ethic communities may bear the brunt of the measures proposed in this bill.

    Take Canada's Italian community, which numbers 1.2 million people. I don't want to give you a history lesson, but I'm sure you know that many members of our community put off learning either of Canada's official languages, English and French, to preserve the Italian language, which came as a result of the spirit of togetherness which underpinned our community years ago. Most Italian seniors—about 90 per cent—in particular, did not learn either official language. Our seniors need to watch good Italian TV, and I would even go so far as to saying they need to watch it 24 hours a day, because they speak neither English nor French. However, our Italian seniors can only have access to Canadian ethnic services, such as Telelatino. That's not enough for the Italian community.

    We don't understand the protectionism which currently characterizes the Canadian broadcasting industry. We believe that economic arguments are the motivation for this protectionism. The reason why competition is not allowed in the current system is because Canadian ethnic services are afraid they will not be able to survive against any new competitor in Canada. However, we say that if these channels do not survive, it is because they do not meet the expectations of ethnic communities, including ours.

    But what is surprising is that Canadians have access to a huge number of American channels. It is our contention that providing access to 75 American channels is much more dangerous to Canada's identity than providing access to 15 foreign-language channels which broadcast in languages other than English.

    Our coalition has discovered that out of 93 foreign channels authorized in Canada, 75 are American. That leaves 18 which broadcast in as many languages, but only 4 are broadcast over Canadian satellite providers, because it would not be profitable to broadcast them all.

    So our community of course turned towards American satellites to gain access to Italian public television, since it is not accessible in Canada. People pay the monthly fee on their credit card to have access to authentic Italian television.

    I believe that several witnesses explained how the grey market works, and I will not hide the fact that this situation applies to Canada's Italian community in particular. It's no secret to us that Canadian authorities, be it the Department of Industry, the Department of Canadian Heritage or the CRTC, want to adopt a strategy based on technology to go after the grey market based on coercion and legislation.

    What Industry Canada representatives said before this committee was worrying. They said they wanted to maintain the imposition of fines of $25,000 for individuals, although they said that these individuals would not be prosecuted.

    Why adopt legislation if you're not going to enforce it? I believe that Canada is a great country and a great democracy which the world respects. Let's be consistent. If we're going to adopt legislation, we also need to enforce it.

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Á  (1120)  

[English]

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Rapana.

    Ms. Sonia Moujaes.

[Translation]

    Ms. Sonia Moujaes (Member of the Lebanese Community, Coalition for Freedom of Choice in Satellite TV): Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, everybody.

    I am a member of the Lebanese community, and, believe me, the entire Lebanese community is against Bill C-2, the objective of which is to counter the theft of satellite signals. I was particularly shocked to read the statements made by the Deputy Minister of Industry. He said that Canada has one of the best broadcasting systems in the world, given the size of our population and the vastness of our territory. When a high-ranking person makes such a statement, it means that the government does not have the will to change its policies. It also means that nothing will change for Canada's ethnic communities.

    Normally, when people are happy with something, they don't want to change it. So the statement was very discouraging for our communities, which do not see the light at the end of the tunnel. When the CRTC representative says that the Broadcasting Act clearly focuses on Canadian content, I feel like responding that the vibrant and wonderful system he is referring to cannot be so good after all, because 600,000 families never watch it.

    And it seems to me that the emphasis which is being put on the development of a broadcasting system with Canadian content is seriously misplaced, and that at the dawn of the XXI^st century we should ask ourselves whether we want to adopt a system which so many Canadians are unhappy with. Rather, should we not ask ourselves how to get the thousands of Canadians who watch programs they get through American satellites to start watching Canadian programming?

[English]

    The Chair: Slow down just a little bit.

    Ms. Sonia Moujaes: I'm sorry.

    The Chair: It's okay.

    Ms. Christiane Gagnon (Québec, BQ): I think it's the same situation when people talk in English. They talk too fast, and it's very, very difficult to understand what they have said, so we have to be careful most of the time, because people speak more English than French here.

    Thank you.

[Translation]

    The Chair: Please continue.

    Ms. Sonia Moujaes: Take it from me: everywhere throughout our ethnic communities people have signed up for programs they get via American satellites.

    Although I can communicate with you today in English and in French, that is not the case for our seniors, who can't speak either of these languages. In the winter of their lives, they need to watch television in their mother tongue.

    My community is impatiently waiting for the CRTC to authorize the broadcasting in Canada of LBC and other Arab television stations. However, my community is under no illusions. Mr. O'Sullivan, who spoke on behalf of the CRTC, said that although the CRTC receives requests for the broadcasting of foreign channels, he first checks to see whether the new channel would compete with an existing ethnic channel broadcasting in Canada. If so, the application is turned down.

    If that's the case, our communities will always be on the losing side. We are comparing things which should not be compared. In our opinion, you cannot compare a Canadian ethnic channel with a similar public television channel. Yet Canada tells its immigrants that they can preserve their language and culture here and that they can be themselves. It's called multiculturalism. You can buy a newspaper in any language, but you can't watch television in your own language.

    I want to say that in our opinion, our community in this country can really only have access to their culture via satellite. There are several Arabic channels. We are waiting for CRTC approval. However, if the CRTC does authorize the broadcasting of these stations, they will only be broadcast over cable in large urban areas. It's no coincidence that, of the 15 applications made to the CRTC in July 2003, many were made by Videotron.

    So what happens to the communities which do not receive service from Videotron? They will have to turn to American satellites. The CRTC's Mr. O'Sullivan even confirmed this: the small market which is Canada becomes even smaller when it comes to broadcasting programs in languages other than French and English.

    However, Mr. Chairman, everyone knows that the government has required satellite operators to broadcast programs in foreign languages, since they will never be profitable. Why doesn't it force Bell ExpressVu to broadcast the 14 foreign-language channels which are currently available? Because the CRTC knows that it is not profitable for Bell ExpressVu and does not want to force it to do so. Poor thing!

    Go and ask the five million Canadians who have not had the honour or the pleasure of being born in Canada whether they find this policy fair and just. It is completely unacceptable that the size of the demand determines access. We know that satellite broadcasting is the most efficient way to reach isolated communities, as well as smaller ethnic communities.

    Mr. Chairman, I ask you and this committee to listen to what ethnic communities have to say and to reject Bill C-2.

Á  (1125)  

[English]

    The Chair: Thank you, Ms. Moujaes.

    Ms. Calderone, please.

[Translation]

    Ms. Maria-Terese Calderone (Member of the Venezuelan Community, Responsible for the Development of Terra Terra, Member of the Amis Québec-Vénézuela Association, Coalition for Freedom of Choice in Satellite TV): Good morning, Mr. Chairman and ladies and gentlemen.

    My name is Maria Teresa Calderone. I am originally from Venezuela and have lived in Canada for nearly 16 years. I am a member of the Association Amitiés Québec-Vénézuela and also sit on the board of directors of the Association des femmes de cinéma et de télévision de nouveaux médias in Montreal. I have worked in the area of television and cable distribution for 20 years. From 1992 to 2001, here in Canada, I represented TV5, the French-language channel, in Latin America.

    I am very familiar with this piracy, because, in fact, when I was in Latin America, I worked very hard to fight it. However, during the years I worked for TV5, I travelled through many countries, from Mexico to Argentina, and through smaller countries such as El Salvador, and I was astounded to see that these countries broadcast channels like Rai International, Deutsche Welle, and TV5, which I represented, as well as Arab channels.

    Every time I came back from these travels, I asked myself why Canada, a large, modern and developed country, did not have a foreign Spanish-language channel. In the countries I mentioned, people had access to the BBC from London and stations from all over the world.

    There is a huge ethnic market in Canada, which includes the Hispanic community I belong to. Today, we number over half a million. Since we don't have an international Spanish-language channel, our community decided to sign up for DISH Network and DIRECTV. Unfortunately, most of the immigrants in this community are not aware that they are not supposed to subscribe to American satellites or stations, that this is illegal in Canada. And although I work in the area of telecommunications in Canada, I did not find out about this until 2002. Indeed, when you read a Spanish newspaper, you see the advertising and assume that it's legal. So you get a subscription and pay for it.

    Canada's industry is the big loser under the current system. In my opinion, it also works against the integration of these communities. Indeed, since they have subscribed to DISH Network and DIRECTV, they are cut off from the Canadian reality. This fact is supported by Terra Terra Communication, which is specialized in the importing of international signals.

    In December of 2002, we approached Videotron to make the company aware of the growing Spanish community and its need for access to international Spanish-language channels. Today, the number of hispanophones is pegged at over half a million and that number continues to grow.

    In February 2003, Videotron asked the CRTC for permission to broadcast eight Spanish-language channels, all of which are very popular and included in the package offered by DISH Network and DIRECTV. Unfortunately, 15 months later, the CRTC still has not responded. In the meantime, American satellite broadcasters are growing to the detriment of Canadians and the Canadian industry.

    I think that the authorities don't understand Canada's new multiethnic reality and the telecommunication needs of this reality. Canada welcomes about 200,000 new immigrants each year. This translates into about 60,000 potential new subscribers for Canadian television services. This represents a business opportunity and a potential market for cable distributors. However, this market may disappear because more and more people are stealing satellite signals.

    Just read the ethnic newspapers of Canada's various multicultural communities and you'll understand the scope of the issue when you see how many ads there are for American satellite broadcast services. Of course, Canadians must be made aware of the problem, but we cannot wait any longer to make the right decisions. We have to stop being spectators and start becoming actors.

    Thank you.

Á  (1130)  

[English]

    The Chair: Thank you, Ms. Calderone.

    Colleagues, it has been brought to my attention that Mr. Salvador is here, representing a Portuguese community association. Is there any disagreement that I allow Mr. Salvador a couple of minutes to make a presentation? Is there any disagreement?

    Mr. Salvador, please come up, sir. No more than five minutes, though, sir. We'll let you introduce yourself and your organization and we'll let you start right away.

    Mr. Francisco Salvador (Member of the Portuguese Community, As Individual): My name is Mr. Francisco Salvador and I was elected by the Portuguese community of Montreal and Ottawa in place of the Portuguese government.

    I have been in Canada since 1963. I am an old Canadian, a Québécois. I speak a little better in English, but I speak in French too.

    I would like to say to you that I am surprised. I came to Canada, running away from Salazar. You all understand what happened during the years of Salazar. The police knock at the door to see if we're listening to shortwave--Radio Moscow, radio-this, radio-that.

    I understand that Bill C-2.... Yes, it's true, and I read the whole thing. If I am connected with a satellite in the States, because I am getting old and feel a little homesick for my country and I want to listen to or see Nelly Furtado and want to see the Euro Cup this summer, and the Canadian services don't offer me that service, I am going to the States. I pay in American dollars through my VISA and it is against the law. I am afraid the RCMP will come. Please, take that into consideration.

[Translation]

    This bill raises a wall around the country which prevents foreign television stations from entering Canada. At night, when I can't sleep, I often listen to the CBC from Germany, the BBC from London, ABC from Australia and Swedish radio. The programs are recorded and transmitted into Canada. All of our country's newspapers can be bought in Montreal and Toronto.

    So why prevent television from entering this country, given today's technology? Oh, it's to protect Canadian identity. I think that's a false argument.

    In our opinion, in the opinion of the Portuguese, it's to help business people make profits on the backs of ethnic communities, simply because they have a business. But these things are not mutually exclusive. Canada can accommodate Portuguese public television and that of other communities.

    Ethnic communities want to be Canadian, but they also want to preserve their language, their culture and their knowledge. Why do we have to turn to the United States? I don't understand. We are split and divided, but that does not give the CRTC or the Canadian government the right to treat us like second-class citizens.

[English]

    There are programs that I would like to listen to in Portuguese from time to time. But more than that, I don't mind paying in Canadian dollars and listening through the Canadian satellite. Why should I listen through Uncle Sam?

[Translation]

    Members of this committee, do not ask me how many people are members of our coalition. We still don't have a legal status, but it won't be long before we do. I have to say that in the last two days, we have received hundreds of calls of support from members of our communities throughout Canada, and even from old-stock Canadians, who have all denounced the lack of choice in programming available in Canada.

[English]

    Last Sunday was Mother's Day dinner. I live in LaSalle. You know who my boss is--Paul Martin. He didn't come to the dinner, but 150 people were there, and they gave me a chance to say we are trying to convince the Government of Canada, through the CRTC, to bring the RTPI, Radio Television Portugal International, and everybody clapped. Everybody said we're going to talk to Paul. We're going to do this, we're going to do that. “Calm,” I said. “I'm going to Ottawa. I represent.” But I hope you'll listen to what I'm saying.

Á  (1135)  

[Translation]

    I am almost finished. I'd like to say one more thing before I end my presentation. We read in the papers that Paul Martin declared that his government had five objectives. The fifth objective was to open Canada's doors to the world. I wonder why—

[English]

    Why, ladies and gentlemen, do you want to close the Canadian doors to the world?

    Thank you.

Á  (1140)  

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Salvador.

    Just before we start questions, it would be fair to say, on behalf of all of us, that we've heard some strong messages from the multicultural community and others. Those are being taken very seriously by this committee. Whatever message goes back from this committee to the government will be one that will want to say that this country, and all of us around the table, want this to be an open society, where cultures are shared and cultures can grow. And whatever reasonable measures can be taken to allow that to be, that's what we'll be wanting the government to do. I believe the government wants to do that too. So you're helping us today.

    With that, I'll ask Mr. Rajotte....

    Mr. James Rajotte (Edmonton Southwest, CPC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for your presentations here today.

    I want to start with Mr. McGrath. Regarding the import certificates, I think I followed most of what you were saying with regard to the FTA receivers requiring an import certificate. Is it your view that we should amend the bill to recognize that distinction, or should we amend the bill to take out the need for import certificates? Or is it your view the preference would be falling along the lines of what Mr. McOrmond says, that basically you let the encryption technology develop and that the bill itself is not necessary?

    Mr. David McGrath: Well, whatever the committee decides in the end, we will certainly follow along. So we're not actually making a recommendation one way or the other, but what we are saying is that although there's been a lot of talk about grey market satellite, we think there is a new grey area that's going to be created by this legislation. For example, when a satellite receiver comes in, everyone is under the impression that satellite receivers coming into the country are for Bell ExpressVu or for Star Choice, and that's not the case. In fact, when we import satellite receivers it will say on the import certificate “satellite receiver”. I'm sure when Bell imports them it says the same thing. I don't know how a customs agent is going to be able to distinguish between a free-to-air satellite receiver and a Bell ExpressVu one. That's my initial concern.

    We're of two minds on this. You could, for example, say that you want all satellite receivers to be covered under this, including free-to-air receivers. And we're okay with that, because in a way it would actually build a barrier that would help our business, because we compete against a lot of fly-by-night dealers who will bring in product from Asia, who may not want to go through the import certificate process because they're doing it as a spot opportunity. In other words, they're not in the business full-time. In that case, it could actually work in our favour.

    The point here is that there needs to be an understanding that there are more than just Bell ExpressVu receivers coming into this country and that not all receivers are the same. The technology on board in these receivers is very different. We, for example, import a number of different types of receivers. Bell ExpressVu just imports one type.

    Mr. James Rajotte: You said that this bill focuses on the hardware and not the software. You mentioned, in fact, that when you actually do the unauthorized decoding, it is actually the software. So is there a practical way for the bill not to focus on the hardware but to focus on the software?

    Mr. David McGrath: I think the issue of technology needs to be looked at very closely here, because there is a big difference between hardware issues and software issues. For example, if you took a look at a Star Choice satellite receiver versus a Bell ExpressVu receiver, you'd see the fundamental difference between the two is the software.

    We've heard testimony in this committee before that Star Choice doesn't have the same problems ExpressVu has. The difference is that Bell ExpressVu uses technology that has actually been around for quite a while; it is built on a European platform that has been around for quite some time. So there's a very large population of the world using that technology, which makes them very susceptible to all the kids out there who write software for these receivers. Star Choice is not in the same boat. They have a very small audience here, so the point here is that the software is what makes the difference.

    Mr. James Rajotte: Thank you very much for that.

    I want to move on to the other four witnesses, and I hope I get to all of you in turn; I have some questions for each.

    I want to say on the record that the Conservative Party does support greater choice for consumers, for multicultural communities to access programming in your own culture and language. We've always stood for that, and we always will stand for that. We hope the government moves to open up the market so you can access more services.

    I just want to touch on some specific issues. I'll start with Mr. Rapana. You talked about the number of authorized U.S. programs and services in Canada compared to those in the U.S., and then you talked about the number of American services we offer. Now, how many Italian programming services are available in the U.S. that are not available in Canada?

Á  (1145)  

[Translation]

    Mr. Giovanni Rapana: In the United States, you can get Italian TV directly via satellite. The same thing should therefore be possible in Canada.

    At the moment, in Canada, the Italian community receives Telelatino, a private television channel, which only broadcasts between four and five hours a day, including advertising. Please understand that this is not good enough for the Italian community. We cannot maintain our relationship with Italy and with our culture by watching made-in-Canada Italian TV. There is no way the Italian community will agree to this solution which the government wants to impose. We want authentic television.

    I believe that Canada and the Department of Canadian Heritage would come out ahead if they authorized the broadcast of foreign television stations, in particular public ones, because of their cultural content. The Italian community does not understand the restrictions the CRTC wants to impose. On August 8, the Italian community presented 106,000 signatures to the CRTC in support of the application for Rai International. On November 21, 3,500 people went to the CRTC demanding that it respond to the application for Rai International.

    We are still waiting for an answer today which, according to certain rumours, will come after the election.

[English]

    Mr. James Rajotte: So you haven't received an answer from the CRTC?

[Translation]

    Mr. Giovanni Rapana: We have not received an answer yet, but only rumours which would seem to indicate that the government will provide an answer after the election.

[English]

    Mr. James Rajotte: Ms. Moujaes, you talked about certain Arabic channels awaiting approval from the CRTC. If you can, identify which ones and how many just to give us a perspective. Second, I believe you said that even if they were approved, they would only be broadcast in large cities or they would be limited in where they would be broadcast. If you could, explain that as well. If you can, talk about the number that are waiting, even how long you've been waiting for these channels, and then why it is they would only be broadcast in certain cities.

    Ms. Sonia Moujaes: We already did the same as the Italian community. We have signed some petitions and we've gone to the CRTC, but until now we haven't had any answers. We have DISH Network, which provides us 12 Arabic language channels and....

    I'm sorry; maybe I missed a part of the question. You asked me how channels we have?

    Mr. James Rajotte: There are 12 Arabic channels in the United States.

    Ms. Sonia Moujaes: Yes.

    Mr. James Rajotte: How many are there currently in Canada?

    Ms. Sonia Moujaes: All of them. They're available through the DISH Network. We pay by credit card at the end of the month. That's the grey market.

    Mr. James Rajotte: How many Arabic channels are provided by the two Canadian providers?

    Ms. Sonia Moujaes: One hour a week is available on the CH channel. That's not enough.

    Mr. James Rajotte: There are 12 full channels in the U.S.

    Ms. Sonia Moujaes: Yes. They are provided by the DISH Network.

    Mr. James Rajotte: How many are awaiting approval from the CRTC?

    Ms. Sonia Moujaes: Since July 2003.

    Mr. James Rajotte: Have all 12 of them applied?

    Ms. Sonia Moujaes: No. We asked for three: Al Jazeera,LBC, and ART.LBC is a Lebanese channel, and ART is an Egyptian channel. Then we have Al Jazeera, Arab CNN.

    Mr. James Rajotte: I believe you said that even if they are approved by the CRTC, there is a problem with them only being distributed by cable companies and not by satellite services. Did I understand you correctly in that distinction?

    Ms. Sonia Moujaes: If we are in Montreal, Vidéotron can provide the service on cable, but Vidéotron doesn't provide service throughout Canada. In Ontario we have Rogers. So we are still having a problem. If it was available by satellite, then no one would have a problem.

    Mr. James Rajotte: The CRTC applications ask for them to be provided by satellite providers.

    Ms. Sonia Moujaes: Yes.

Á  (1150)  

    The Chair: Mr. Rajotte, we'll come back to you.

    Next is Mr. Fontana, followed by Ms. Gagnon.

    Hon. Joe Fontana (London North Centre, Lib.): Mr. Salvador, when they knock, what you're supposed to say is “Who's there?”

    Mr. Francisco Salvador: I might not want to answer, because if I'm guilty, they might take me away. So I'm not answering.

    Hon. Joe Fontana: I like James an awful lot, because he's asked some of my questions. I might want to just follow up, but bem vindo, benvenuti, hóla, salaam alaikum.

    I think James has expressed for his party, the government, and I'm sure all of the parties that one of the greatest strengths of this country is our diversity. We celebrate our diversity in a number of ways, including in our Constitution, which talks about multiculturalism. I know that each and every one of you has spoken with great passion about your pride.

    I too came to this country in 1954.... And Giovanni, you were talking about my mother when you said she can't get any television. In fact, I know between Telelatino and RAI there's been a big brouhaha, and now only about four hours of Italian programming is available to most Italian Canadians. Hopefully that will sort itself out. I know that the RAI application is before the CRTC. It's not the government that has the power to announce that; it's the CRTC. The government may get involved.

    My point is there's great sympathy among the committee members here for celebrating our diversity. We want to give you access to and choice in the programming you want, demand, and require. We have to do it within the legal framework; therefore that's where we want to go. There's no reason why we can't have a win-win situation for the Canadian broadcasting system, for Canadian viewers, regardless of their origin, and the lawful people who want to pay to get access.

    I want to make it clear that Bill C-2 is not about denying television choices. That's the part of the equation the industry committee can't deal with. Perhaps by the end of the meeting we will have a suggestion as to how that can be done.

    We're trying to deal with the illegal.... And all of you talked about piracy. Piracy hurts not only the country, but our communities. Those moneys that don't flow into Canada are flowing into the United States, Mr. Salvador, and are not helping our communities. In fact, we ought to repatriate that money.

    I'm sure we can use our creative minds to find solutions for how we can have the best of both worlds: a lawful regime to make sure the dealers and people are not preying on law-abiding citizens in Canada by providing them with black-market hardware for the grey market. They are the people we want to get to with Bill C-2.

    The other part is the CRTC and Heritage Canada and how we can provide and make sure you get the programming you want. I can tell you that the government and I are determined to do that, and I'm sure we'll get the cooperation of all parties.

    David, if I could just ask you.... And I've got a question to ask each one of you. James asked a question. This is not about free-to-air.... I like the suggestion; I think James proposed it, and you didn't disagree with it. This is all about technology, let's face it. It's moving from hardware and software to free-to-air. This was not meant to cover free-to-air, because there's nothing illegal about it. You're absolutely right. How in fact would anybody...? Because the equipment is the same.

    On my technical question, can the equipment that comes to you be changed from free-to-air hardware to something that will take decoded encrypted signals? Is there something in the hardware or software on that piece of equipment that can be changed that easily? If that's the case, you may be right; we may want to say all free-to-air pieces of equipment need an import certificate of some sort.

Á  (1155)  

    Mr. David McGrath: The microphone isn't picking it up, but I'm nodding at your comments.

    The big different here is in the software between receivers. I look at satellite receivers in more of a generalized and open way. I think Bell ExpressVu has a very specific view. It's looking at satellite receivers for its service, and I've looked at satellite receivers for all other services. There are a lot of services that come into Canada through the United States, and I'm not talking about DIRECTV or DISH Network. There are about 13 other satellites out there that beam signals into Canada. About 190 of those channels are free, and another 200 are encrypted.

    Depending on the software, all of our receivers will give you the free channels, but depending on how they're encrypted, we can provide a receiver that will decode them. The question for us always comes back to whether the provider of that channel will authenticate or authorize the subscription. That's always the issue for us. There are more and more channels now coming out of the United States where they will.

    Hon. Joe Fontana: You have no objection, then, to making sure that Bill C-2, if and when it becomes law, would essentially stop that black market of bringing in equipment in an unlawful way from some fly-by-night operators. Therefore, if an import certificate is a way of being able to control the equipment that comes in, at least to legitimate suppliers like you, you would have absolutely no objection to imposing that kind of regime to stop the equipment, and hopefully...or I guess we'll have to look at the software and at what we can do with that, in terms of making sure that we shut down the black market as much as we possibly can.

    Mr. David McGrath: In terms of the hardware side, I really would not have a problem with saying that all satellite receivers have to have an import certificate. I guess I look at that from two perspectives. First, what is the process now to get satellite receivers into the country? Right now there is no import certificate required, but this doesn't mean that every time I bring in satellite receivers Customs Canada doesn't inspect it. I think probably 100% of our shipments coming into the country are inspected, because there is a heightened sensitivity around satellite equipment. And that's fine. I'm just concerned about the rules and the bureaucracy that get into place and that become unclear.

    Now, if it makes it easier and it simplifies the process by saying that everything must have an import certificate, then in that case I'm all for it.

    Hon. Joe Fontana: On the other side of the equation, something that this committee hopefully will recommend...and it's really on the CRTC side, which we're not dealing with now. I truly understand that, as all of you have indicated, if given access to the programming, if the CRTC were to approve the broadest range of programming available to all of the communities we have--and we're grateful to Canada for it--you therefore would legitimately pay for that service in Canada, and wouldn't have to do an end run in order to get access. Is that the approach?

    I know that all of you have said you're against Bill C-2, but unfortunately, I think you're reading a lot more into Bill C-2 than what's there. Bill C-2 is not going to make it better or make it worse. Other solutions have to be found to make sure that you have access and choice. Bill C-2 is not going to do that, because the present law forbids you to do that now. So we have to be creative in finding those solutions for you to get more choice and more programming availability.

    I'm just wondering whether you can comment on that. Bill C-2 is meant to be punitive for those people in the black market. Even though the grey market, as we understand it, is where you are, and where you're paying, you're not paying to a Canadian company. You're not paying to Canada. You're paying elsewhere. That's where you get into problems, even though I don't think it was the intent of Bill C-2 to go after the individual subscriber as much as it was to go after the individual business dealer and so on in the grey market.

    So I'm just wondering if you can comment on that. Do you think we ought to do Bill C-2? Because you've said that you don't agree with piracy.

  (1200)  

    Mr. Francisco Salvador: Exactly; we are against it. Why should we be illegal and pay for it? It doesn't make sense.

    I can go on the grey market. I can go to Plattsburgh--I lived there, and I know a lot of people there--and put in a name there for a card, paid every month in U.S. dollars. Or I can go to Saint-Laurent in Montreal. I know my way around there, and I can get a bogus card, a black market card, for $10 or $5, depending on the market--or if a guy needs a beer.

    So I pay, I go home, and I watch RTP International from the States. Why should I do that? Why can I have my television with satellite, or Vidéotron if I live in Montreal, and pay...?

    One of the reporters at a press conference the other day asked us if we were willing to pay for that service, because they don't transmit it to your home without paying. My God, do they even have to ask that question? We are paying now to Uncle Sam. Why shouldn't we pay $10 or $15 in Canadian money?

    Hon. Joe Fontana: To Uncle Paul.

    Mr. Francisco Salvador: Exactly, thank you.

    The Chair: Thank you, Joe.

    Christiane Gagnon, please.

[Translation]

    Ms. Christiane Gagnon: Good morning. I'm pleased to be here this morning. I am a member of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage and it would have been a good idea for us to debate this issue on that committee when we reviewed the Broadcasting Act. It would have been interesting to hear from you.

    I know that the CRTC is probably studying a lot of applications right now. I also spoke with the Italian community with regard to obtaining a licence for Rai. A little earlier, Mr. Rapana said that the answer would probably come after the election. I'd like to know why we have to wait until after the election. I know that normally it does not take that long to get an answer from the CRTC. Sure, we have an election, but that's going too far!

    When I asked the question of the minister, she said that the CRTC is an independent organization which makes its own decisions. But now people are saying that it will be “after the election”.

    Why does the election affect the timing of a CRTC decision? It takes a certain amount of time to respond to an application like yours, Mr. Rapana. I would like you to clarify that for me, because the minister did not.

    Mr. Giovanni Rapana: Ms. Gagnon, I can assure you that within the Italian community, nobody—I repeat, nobody—believes that the CRTC is an independent organization. Rather, we believe that it reports directly to the government and its leader. You can say all you want, but for months and years we were told that the CRTC was an independent body and that its commissioners were unapproachable. Surely not!

    On March 20, the National Post reported that the president of the CRTC said that the commissioners regularly had lunch and dinner with representatives of companies who could profit from their dealings with the CRTC. Believe me, this was a like a cold shower for the Italian community, which had always believed those who said that the CRTC was untouchable and that there was nothing we could do. Try explaining that to me.

    Ms. Christiane Gagnon: That's the answer the minister gave me. I had asked her why we had to wait until after the election. Did a member of Parliament or a member of the government try to influence the CRTC by asking it to wait until after the election to make a decision on this matter? What is really at stake here?

    Mr. Giovanni Rapana: These rumours are circulating within the Italian community. This morning, I received confirmation that in other communities, there is also a rumour that the government wants to wait until after the election for the CRTC to respond to the 15 applications.

    I won't even try to guess at the motives. However, these are the rumours. As you know, when a rumour starts, it is difficult to stop it.

    Ms. Christiane Gagnon: I can assure you that the Bloc Québécois is very sensitive to the general request for access which several ethnic communities have made. As well, we are dealing with an extremely important bill on piracy. I'm just wondering how we can reconcile the reality of ethnic communities made up of people who have decided to live in Quebec or in Canada and the fact that satellite signal theft is illegal.

    I think that there are two possibilities. The first is to recommend that the CRTC study all of your applications. Ethnic communities should have access to a certain minimum number of channels compared to the number available via American satellites. I'm familiar with the Broadcasting Act. We travelled across Canada. English Canadians watch many more American programs.

    Is the fact that there are many more licences for American stations in Canada due to some type of mentality or cultural reference which prefers American TV? This is not the case in Quebec, since Quebeckers mostly watch Quebec French-language television programs.

    Should the committee recommend that the CRTC be more respectful of ethnic communities and study your applications as soon as possible?

  (1205)  

    Mr. Giovanni Rapana: Of course. Ms. Gagnon, I would ask you to ask Quebeckers some questions. When they go to Florida, can they watch TVA or TQS? Why are Italians living in Quebec or Canada not allowed to watch television from their homeland?

    Ms. Christiane Gagnon: I understand. However, something just came to mind. A little earlier, you said that 93 per cent of Italian seniors speak neither English nor French. That might also be the case for other ethnic communities which have applied for a licence.

    I'll ask you a very frank question. Is the fact that receiving Italian, Portuguese, Lebanese, Vietnamese or Cambodian TV would allow you to immerse yourself in your language, the reason why you have not been granted a licence or why you have not been given more access? Since American stations broadcast in English, it's not a problem for English Canada. Could it be because it would make ethnic communities harder to "integrate" into Canadian society, or into the English language...?

    Mr. Giovanni Rapana: Ms. Gagnon, allow me to point out that these people arrived here in Canada about 50 or 60 years ago. Most of them came from the Italian countryside. They were not very educated, but they worked hard and did a lot to help build Canada. Now they are old and they want to watch TV in their mother tongue because, as you know, it's very difficult at that age to be at ease in another language. We are asking for a degree of cultural comfort for our seniors. And Canada, which is a country that respects civil rights, which is a great democracy, cannot deny them this.

    Ms. Christiane Gagnon: I understand, I'm trying to see...

    The Chair: I'm sorry.

    Ms. Calderone.

    Ms. Maria-Terese Calderone: I simply wanted to add that DISH Network DIRECTV were launched in the United States in 1999. You could say that from that point on, there was a boom in pirating throughout North America, in Canada. In the past, you couldn't have access to these stations in Canada for technological reasons—those from Latin America, in my case—but technology is improving. Currently, in the United States these satellites offer access to about 30 Spanish-language stations, coming from Spain, Argentina, Mexico and elsewhere. The DISH Network offers three plans, from the least expensive to the most expensive.

    In fact, people from Latin America were used to subscribing to cable distributors at home that offered them an average of 80 stations. As I said earlier, there was Deutsche Welle, Rai, all the American stations, as well as local channels. There is obviously some control. As I said earlier, I worked very hard in order to try to deal with the issue of pirating in Latin America, although the situation is different there. Over there, cable distributors are the ones that are pirating the signals.

    The Spanish-speaking community arrived here more recently. It has developed over the last 20 years. Many of these people speak English or French or both. But since this is the age of globalization and since technology is progressing, why not provide access to services that are offered everywhere? TVChile can be seen in Australia. Today, there is a very large Chilean community in Canada. There are waves of Spanish-speaking immigrants who come to Canada following coups d'État, devaluations, national crises... These are people that, even though...

    I personally feel very well integrated in Canada. I'm married to a Québécois, I have French-speaking children whom I am trying to teach Spanish to, obviously, but I personally like to be in touch with my culture, and be kept abreast of what's happening in my country of origin. There are plenty of Canadians and Quebeckers as well who are interested in being kept up-to-date, given NAFTA, free trade with Mexico and Chile, etc. So, it would be better to be paying for the services in Canada.

    Obviously, once the licences have been granted by the CRTC, each community has to go and knock on Bell ExpressVu's door, etc., to convince them of our existence, to say that we are increasing in number and that we have money to spend here as well.

  (1210)  

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Ms. Gagnon.

    Ms. Christiane Gagnon: You're asking for an exception that would apply to you until you have a licence which could allow you to receive television signals from your country of origin. Is that the amendment that you would like to see to Bill C-2?

    Mr. Francisco Salvador: In countries such as Portugal or Italy, the government has an international television to inform people of what's happening, especially the Portuguese and Italians who have settled abroad. It's good to know what's happening in general. I don't have the problem the seniors have—I'm not old enough—but I also like to know what's going on over there. The issue I really want to raise is why force us to turn to the United States in order to get these services?

    I asked Ms. Carole-Marie Allard if Canadian satellites were already full and whether there was no space for the Portuguese programming. But no, they're empty.

    The Chair: Thank you.

    The floor is yours, Mr. Gérard Binet.

    Mr. Gérard Binet (Frontenac—Mégantic, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    My question is for Mr. Rapana. You referred to Telelatino, which broadcasts in several languages. Is French one of those languages? How many are there?

    Mr. Giovanni Rapana: No. Telelatino is a private station which broadcasts in Italian, Portuguese, Spanish, and I think even in English. So it's a multilingual station, but it doesn't broadcast in French. This is very important, because French Canadians, Quebeckers, are really sick of seeing advertisements from Toronto. There are a whole lot of ads on the price of apples at the corner of such and such a street in Toronto on TV in Montreal. We couldn't care less. They would have us believe that this is Italian television. The government is trying to convince us that it's Italian programming and that that's enough for the Italian community. No, it's not enough.

[English]

    The Chair: Merci.

    James Rajotte, please.

    Mr. James Rajotte: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    I was very pleased with what Mr. Fontana said on behalf of the government about the fact that he likes me, but I was struck by his saying Bill C-2 is not about denying choice. I just have a problem understanding that, because Bill C-2 is about clamping down on the black market.

    There's a basic problem with this bill, and Mr. Salvador, I think you identified it exactly when you gave the example of your using your credit card to pay for a service and having a U.S. address versus walking down the street and giving someone $20 or buying them a beer and your getting a smart card. The problem with this bill is that it doesn't distinguish between the two actions. The bill regards grey market and black market as the same. It regards a multicultural community wanting to access more programming as the same as someone who just wants the service for free or wants to steal it. That's the basic problem with this bill, and that's what has to be remedied in this legislation or else it should not be passed. I think that is the basic problem; I hope you would agree with that.

    Second, I think if we combine Bill C-2 with what you've described here today.... There is foot-dragging on the part of the CRTC, with the CRTC not allowing the channels you want, not making the decisions, denying applications from groups like the cable association to allow HBO and other channels in, or in fact, as they seem to be doing with certain channels, now apparently wanting to even take channels off.

    You have Bill C-2, which is very punitive and does not distinguish between the grey market and the black market; it does not allow you to have your programming in Canada, and then on the other hand it imposes this very punitive system. I think that's the basic problem, and any one of you can comment on that if you want.

  (1215)  

    Mr. Francisco Salvador: I'll just make a little remark about that. That's the point: the worst part of it is that we have no choice. Just give us a little choice, that's all. If I go to the black market, I'll be punished and it's well done, but right now I have no choice. If I have Portuguese programming with RTP in Montreal and I have to pay just the same, why should I go to the black market? Give me the choice.

    Mr. James Rajotte: It seems that what you're all saying to us today is to fix the choice problem to give you greater programming options available in Canada to deal with the grey market problem. That will allow you greater choice, and then we can deal with the punitive side and bring in greater penalties for those who are just stealing services and are not interested, as you are, in actually accessing service.

[Translation]

    Ms. Maria-Terese Calderone: I think that if foreign channels were broadcast here, as we've asked Videotron and others to do, it would contribute to reducing to some extent the “exodus” of people from here searching out American satellite services. There's no guarantee that we will be able to win over those people who are already subscribing to American satellite services. We'll have to go directly into the communities, to tell people that Videotron, in the case of Montreal, is proposing television stations in their language. So there is some marketing work to be done. If the CRTC approves these licences, for Rai and Arab channels, it will demonstrate openness and a desire to help communities, and to ensure that people don't end up turning to the United States to obtain these services.

    Each year, approximately 60,000 new households come to Canada. There are 200,000 immigrants per year coming to Canada, which, according to cable distributors, represents 60,000 subscriber households. That's a lot of money. Even though I don't work for Bell ExpressVu or Star Choice, I can tell you this, because I used to work in the field in Latin America. I know how much money they make. We have to demonstrate to them that we exist.

    I have heard that in Toronto there is no Spanish-speaking community. You only have to take the subway or the bus and go and walk around the ethnic neighbourhoods in order to realize that Canada has changed a great deal over the last 15 years.

    Mr. Giovanni Rapana: I can tell you that Italians who are currently receiving signals from the United States will be very pleased to be able to subscribe to Videotron or Bell ExpressVu here in Canada. They won't have to deal with the problem of having to check their account each month, to see if they were overbilled or not, or have to call a friend or a family member in New York or in Florida to check the contract. I can assure you, it's very expensive. There is a market here, in Canada. If the government gives us the opportunity to have in Canada what we are currently receiving from the United States, there's no reason the grey market has to continue to exist.

[English]

    Mr. David McGrath: If I could just comment about choice and exactly what people are choosing between, are they choosing between being able to legally purchase American programming, or are we talking about more choice in Canadian programming? I think there's a very big distinction here between the two.

    I think it was Jerry Seinfeld who made the comment that people aren't concerned about what's on TV; they want to know what else is on TV. So if you gave them more and more Canadian choice, they're still going to want that one channel that's American that they can't get.

    We talked about Arabic programming. I forget the number you threw out, the number of applications that are before the CRTC, but I can tell you that there are also about 23 other Arabic programming channels that are available today in Canada for free. But it doesn't matter that there are 23 free channels and there are a number of channels already available through Canadian cable and satellite operators; they still want the channels that are available in the U.S.

  (1220)  

    Mr. James Rajotte: Is Al Jazeera available free in Canada?

    Mr. David McGrath: Actually, Al Jazeera is no longer available. One of the pitfalls of free-to-air is that once a channel becomes very popular, it gets an audience and it can be sold. It is now owned by DISH Network.

    The Chair: Ms. Moujaes.

    Ms. Sonia Moujaes: I have been in Canada since 1989, and I've never heard or seen 23 channels on TV in spoken Arabic that were free. All I have seen is only one hour on CH channel per week, which I don't think is enough.

    The Chair: Maybe David has something legal to sell you.

    Mr. David McGrath: If I may just quickly respond to that, I understand your point, but what you're referring to is that one channel or one hour that's available currently either on cable or through the existing licensed service providers in Canada. Very few people know about what is available in terms of free-to-air.

    I'm not trying to sell free-to-air, but my point is that there is more television out there than people think, and these rules are throwing a very big net over everybody. I just want to make sure that people understand that we're not just talking about what channels we can get from Bell ExpressVu and Star Choice.

    The Chair: Thank you.

    James, is that okay?

    Mr. James Rajotte: But I think, then, you make a point that if Al Jazeera is very popular and it's not available in Canada through two of the licensed providers, then people have to step outside the system to access it. I'm one who says that people should be able to access that through one of the licensed providers in Canada, so they can in fact comply with the law and see the programming they want. That is in essence perhaps what is not wrong specifically with the bill exactly, but what is wrong with the government policy at this point.

    On my final question, I just want some specific response from Ms. Calderone, and perhaps from Mr. Salvador as well, because I asked all of your colleagues: Can you identify the number of channels or the programming services that you would like to see added that are currently not available in Canada?

    Mr. Francisco Salvador: In my case, it's just one--RTPI, which is Radio Television PortugueseInternational, which is government-sponsored, culture and science, and so on, what goes on in Portugal and indirectly in the European Union.

    It's funny, Canada wants to expand and is in between the States and the new Europe. Portugal, Spain, Italy, and France are doors to get to that Europe, which Canada--and I'm talking business--can use by going there with the Canadian programs. How can they do that if they close the door to those countries here?

[Translation]

    Ms. Maria-Terese Calderone: Currently, in the United States, there are 20 Spanish-language stations, from Argentina, Chile, Mexico, etc. There's also Discovery Channel in Spanish. The television shows are probably the same ones you get here, but they're dubbed in Spanish, and the same applies for the History Channel, etc.

    With Videotron, the request was for eight channels. When I approached Videotron, their representatives only offered us three or four Spanish-language channels. I told them that they wouldn't be able to counter pirating by offering four channels.

[English]

    The Chair: Thank you, James.

    Joe Fontana, and then Christiane Gagnon.

    Hon. Joe Fontana: First of all, thanks very much for the clarification. At one point, I thought we were talking about the legalization of the grey market in this bill that would essentially allow Canadians to pay American carriers for shows. I'm not sure it's what James talked about, and I'm not sure it's what you're talking about, because there is no way that we're going to legalize the grey market. The Supreme Court has been very clear in terms of the black market and the grey market. In fact, the industry says there is no such thing as a grey market any more, it's all a black market. That's why it's very complicated.

    I think David is absolutely right. When you're talking about choice, is it an unfettered choice for Canadians to get every channel that exists in the world? That's unrealistic too. Let's be clear about that.

    Is it to set in place a legal framework? Bill C-2 is about illegal commercial activity. If we need to find a way of having a choice or access, so Canadians who pay Canadian companies can have access to the channels of choice that groups in Canada want, I'm all in favour of it.

    By the way, the CRTC is independent. Whether or not they knew when the election was going to be before they started these rumours, I don't have the faintest idea. I still don't know when the election is going to be. I can guess, but I still don't know.

    At the end of the day, there have been ministers who have been fired for making representations to the CRTC. Perceptions are one thing. The CRTC is a quasi-judicial body that in fact has these applications and is looking at them. Of course, we want them to make decisions.

    In order for us to do this correctly, I think Bill C-2 is half of the equation. We want to stop piracy and illegal activities; that's what you've all said. The other half of the equation is on how we get more programming available to our communities in Canada. That's what we're all supporting, and it's why we may need some more time to do this thing correctly.

    Obviously, Bill C-2 isn't going to be passed before the election. I am prepared to propose a motion, along with James, who is prepared to support it as a co-sponsor, that the committee look at striking a task group between Industry Canada and Heritage Canada, on Thursday. It would be for the purposes of examining the representations we've heard on how to fix the other half of the equation and on how the government can move fairly quickly to provide a programming policy that you want.

    Therefore, it would make it all legal. And at the same time, Bill C-2 could pass sometime in the fall. In fact, it would stop the illegal dealers, the fly-by-night operators, and the people who would prey on your communities. I don't want to make criminals of Canadians who want programming. It's not the intent of Bill C-2. We are determined to fix it. It may take a little time.

    I think you've all done us a very good service by telling us how passionate you are, how much choice you want, and how much you want it to be legal and to be able to pay for it. It's not a problem. I think we should do that.

    I'm proposing to table a motion, Mr. Chair, for our discussions on Thursday.

  (1225)  

    The Chair: For clarity, could you read your motion into the record?

    Hon. Joe Fontana: Moved by Joe Fontana, seconded by James Rajotte....

    It says that the committee has determined that a two-phased approach is required to address the black market and the grey market that provides for more enforcement along with more choice for consumers. Accordingly, the committee recommends that the Ministers of Industry and Canadian Heritage strike a small review panel for public consultations to research and provide recommendations on how to increase competition and choice in terms of new services while still supporting the fundamental objectives of the Broadcasting Act. Recognizing that some Canadians find it necessary to access programming through the grey market, the panel's recommendations should include ways to ensure that more popular foreign and third-language services are available within the Canadian broadcasting system.

    We are only about talking a number of months in order to solve the total problem, as opposed to half and half.

    The Chair: Are you seconding that, James?

    Mr. James Rajotte: Yes.

    The Chair: Okay. It is seconded by James Rajotte.

    Thank you, Joe.

    The motion is now on the books for consideration on Thursday.

    Christiane Gagnon, s'il vous plaît.

[Translation]

    Ms. Christiane Gagnon: Obviously, it's up to the CRTC to look at your licence application. If the CRTC does nothing and doesn't seem to understand reality, at that point, you'll be in breach of the law, if Bill C-2 is passed without amendments. We are quite conscious of that. I will propose that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage make a recommendation to the CRTC. We can't ask questions in the House, because apparently, the CRTC is an independent agency, even though you don't seem to believe that to be the case.

    Indeed, you seem to believe that there are political issues with respect to Rai. When it comes to other communities, what would be the real reason for the refusal or the lack of any serious consideration by the CRTC? Given the fact that these things are being done in other countries—you've convinced us of this fact this morning— why is it not being done in Canada?

    We're always being told that the Broadcasting Act is well adapted to the needs of Canadians and to reality. We see that this is one of the issues you have to deal with as a Canadian and a Quebecker, and that it seems the CRTC is not open to your demands. Try to give me some arguments that we could use in our submission to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage to get the CRTC moving.

  (1230)  

    Mr. Giovanni Rapana: With respect to Italian radio-television, Rai, Telelatino is putting up a fight; they broadcast a few hours of Italian programming per day and claim that they have certain rights. Before the CRTC, they object to the arrival of Rai Canada, and their pretext is that it's a Canadian company and that they will be suffering losses. That is false. It has been confirmed that Telelatino makes large profits even without broadcasting Rai International programs. One only has to look at the last financial statement to know that since December 24, 2003, Telelatino has not been broadcasting Rai International shows but has maintained its profits. So this is having no effect on its financial situation. We don't want foreign stations competing with Canadian companies.

    I think it's absolutely inappropriate to compare foreign public television and private Canadian television. I understand the objective of defending heritage and Canadian money, but I also believe that the CRTC sometimes mixes business and culture. These are two different things. One is under the purview of Canadian Heritage, and the other under the Department of Finance. These are two different things, Mr. Chairman, and I want to emphasize this.

    We therefore believe that the Government of Canada has to instruct the CRTC to direct companies such as Bell ExpressVu, Star Choice, or other satellite networks to offer more foreign satellite television shows in Canada. This new approach is necessary if we are to prevent the members of our community from seeking out American satellite networks.

    In my opinion, and in that of the Italian community I represent, the government is in a position to ensure that public television networks are not competing with private Canadian television networks, and can do so by passing a private member's bill now, before the elections are called.

    The Chair: Are you finished, Christiane?

    Ms. Christiane Gagnon: That's all. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[English]

    The Chair: I would like to thank our witnesses. Our time is up.

    Thank you very much for coming to Ottawa, all of you, to help us with this. You helped us bring a very important perspective to the matter. As our colleagues on both sides of the table have said, we need to consider very carefully the points you have raised.

    Mr. Francisco Salvador: I want to, on behalf of the group, thank all of you for this opportunity. It's very important for all of us, and thousands and thousands of people around Canada, to be able to listen to our countries. To the sentimental question, I'm not singing the fado today, but I want to thank all of you for this opportunity.

    Merci beaucoup.

    The Chair: You're welcome.

    Thank you all, and we're adjourned until Thursday at 11 o'clock.