Skip to content
TRCM - Standing Committee

Transport and Communications


Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Transport and Communications

Issue 12 - Evidence, December 3, 2014

OTTAWA, Wednesday, December 3, 2014

The Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications met this day at 6:45 p.m. to continue its study into the challenges faced by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in relation to the changing environment of broadcasting and communications.

Senator Dennis Dawson (Chair) in the chair.


The Chair: I call this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications to order. Today, we are continuing our study into the challenges faced by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in relation to the changing environment of broadcasting and communications.

Our witnesses today are from the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada. We have with us Suzanne Bossé, Director General, and Serge Quinty, Director of Communications.

I have already advised the witnesses that we have a small administrative matter to deal with before they begin their presentations.


As chair of the committee, it is my duty to preside over the election of a new deputy chair. I am ready to receive a motion to nominate a deputy chair. Are there any nominations?

Senator Housakos: I nominate Senator Don Plett.

Senator Eggleton: I'll second that motion.

The Chair: Senator Plett, if you are asked to serve, would you accept?

Senator Plett: I would be happy and proud to serve. Thank you.

The Chair: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

Hon. Senators: Agreed.

The Chair: I declare the motion carried.


The Chair: Ms. Bossé, Mr. Quinty, the floor is yours.

Suzanne Bossé, Director General, Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada: Honourable senators, first of all, let me thank you for having us here today. My name is Suzanne Bossé and I am director general of the FCFA. I am accompanied by our director of communications, Serge Quinty.

The Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada has been in existence since 1975. It is the main voice of the 2.6 million Canadians who speak French in nine provinces and three territories from coast to coast to coast. The federation is made up of 21 members: 12 provincial and territorial francophone associations and nine national organizations representing various areas of activity and various client groups.

Last month, you had the opportunity to hear from three of our member organizations during your visit to Halifax. Before your study ends, I hope you will have the opportunity to hear a range of evidence from francophone organizations in other parts of the country, as well as from representatives of the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française. They too have a very interesting position to share.

The comments you heard in Halifax spoke harshly of Radio-Canada, and with justification. The corporation's national programs and news broadcasts too often present what your former colleague, Senator de Bané, used to call "a Quebec view of the world." We saw it last June, during the terrible events in Moncton. We saw it again last month, during the municipal elections in Ontario.

If we are harsh, it is because the public broadcaster is so necessary for our communities. We francophones get up each day determined to live our lives in French; it is precisely our ability to do so that is at play when we are talking about Radio-Canada's future. In that regard, your colleagues on the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages have made a number of recommendations to CBC/Radio-Canada and we look forward to the public broadcaster's response to those recommendations.

Even before the successive rounds of budget cuts began in 2009, Radio-Canada's regional services were already suffering from a lack of resources in comparison to the main network. Yet regional stations still found the means to participate actively in events in our communities. Now, those events are very frequently no longer covered. This is either because they take place outside the city where Radio-Canada has its offices, or because they take place on weekends and there is no longer any money to pay overtime for the reporters. As you heard in Halifax, there are whole communities in the regions that Radio-Canada is no longer able to cover.

With each wave of cuts, we lose a little more of our local French-language programming. With the one exception of the Télé Inter-Rives group in the north of New Brunswick, Radio-Canada is the only broadcaster to offer such programming in French outside Quebec. In a number of places where community radio does not exist, Radio-Canada's Première Chaîne is the only French-language radio anywhere close.

If the public broadcaster were to disappear, there would simply be no local television programming in French for the vast majority of our communities. Let me be perfectly clear: the FCFA and its members cannot express strongly enough their recognition of how important it is for CBC/Radio-Canada to remain relevant at this time of profound transformations in technology and in the way media are consumed.

But that is not the issue. We are in a world where content is no longer tied to one platform. But technology does not produce content. People do. Radio-Canada has fewer and fewer people to tell our stories and to talk about our realities.

Transforming the public broadcaster at a time of technological change is therefore a legitimate exercise. But lobotomizing the public broadcaster, eliminating the talent that produces the content and tells Canadians' stories, is not.

That is why, last September, the FCFA made a recommendation to the CRTC that a new fund be created to support local programming; we were not alone in doing so. Many now recognize that this type of programming is an endangered species, in French and in English.

That is also why, on November 22, the members of the FCFA board of directors passed a resolution on the future of CBC/Radio-Canada. The resolution contains specific recommendations prepared in a spirit of constructive cooperation in the debate on the challenges faced by the public broadcaster.

First, we are of the opinion that there should be an immediate moratorium placed on the implementation of CBC/ Radio-Canada's 2015-20 strategy and the transformations it proposes. The corporation is moving quite quickly to dismantle entire departments. People will say that great transformations occur in periods of crisis, but this is not a company like BlackBerry or Apple. This is Canada's public broadcaster. We are looking at a major reduction in the public broadcaster's size and presence, without Canadians being asked for their opinion.

That leads me to our second recommendation. In our opinion, an independent commission should be established to examine CBC/Radio-Canada's present and future situation from top to bottom. Canadians must be given the opportunity to express their views on the relevance of the public broadcaster in the 21st century. It is important to determine whether the public broadcaster is genuinely fulfilling the mission with which it has been entrusted. If not, it is important to determine which corrections need to be made. The commission could also come to grips with the issue of resources and could determine whether the public broadcaster has the means it needs to accomplish its mission.

After five years of cuts in the shadow of a five-year strategy that claims to be visionary but that gives too much of an impression that the exercise is about saving the furniture while the house is burning, we feel that the time for pause and collective reflection we are proposing is no luxury.

Thank you. We are ready to answer your questions.

The Chair: Would you like to add a comment, Mr. Quinty? Okay.


Senator Plett: Thank you, chair, and thank you, witnesses, for being here.

I'm not as familiar with the French-language services of CBC/Radio-Canada as I am possibly with the other side. Although being from Winnipeg, I live in the electoral riding of St. Boniface now, and, of course, we have Radio-Canada there.

I know that my colleagues from Quebec have said many times that Radio-Canada — at least, in Quebec — is quite popular. Their ratings are high.

My questions may be in an area you may or may not want to comment on, but clearly, their ratings in the English-language services are low: 5 per cent of people watch CBC; in the province of Alberta, 2 per cent watch CBC.

How should ratings play into some of the decisions that CBC/Radio-Canada have to make? Clearly, yes, there are budget cuts, but everybody needs to live within their means and so does the CBC. How do you believe ratings should play into the decisions they should make?


Ms. Bossé: Your question is very interesting. I feel that it is a question that an independent commission could examine. If you look at the public broadcaster's objectives, should audience ratings determine whether we as Canadians can continue to benefit from the service of our national broadcaster? Is it a question of access to a public broadcaster that will reflect our realities, in Ontario, in the Yukon, in Alberta, and so on? It is also about coverage. Last September, the Canadian Museum for Human Rights opened its doors in Manitoba. Were Canadians able to see coverage of that important event? No, because CBC/Radio-Canada did not have the resources to send a truck to the location. So whether a public broadcaster should exist or what it should do should not be determined by ratings, but by the institutional vitality of our communities. We can add other comments of a technical nature.

Serge Quinty, Director of Communications, Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada: Senator, in terms of ratings, the challenge is that, in minority situations, it is very difficult, if not impossible, for BBM Numeris to provide ratings because of the way in which it analyzes the statistics. Our community radio stations also had to deal with that challenge. In minority situations, it is difficult to collect the information. Perhaps you remember the labour dispute between the Canadian Media Guild and CBC/Radio-Canada that took place towards the end of 2005. All of a sudden, there was no longer any regional news outside Quebec. It was back to school time. There were a lot of messages from people saying, "It is back to school time and I no longer have any information about what is happening at the school or in the community." People were no longer getting regional information from Radio-Canada. They told us that there had been repercussions.


Senator Plett: Thank you. I don't entirely disagree, and I guess maybe I don't entirely agree with what the impact of ratings should be. Of course, the ratings I was talking about were in areas where there are not minorities. When I talk about Alberta and I talk about CBC, the majority of Albertans speak English and the broadcast there is in English. Two per cent of people there are watching CBC English. I guess I'm not talking about minority groups.

However, since you do raise that point, I asked some questions when we were in Halifax. And I took it from your opening comments that you had at least paid attention to our meetings in Halifax. I asked a question there when we had two witnesses who were promoting, supporting or working with the French-language issues. They, of course, wanted to continue to have their services and rightfully so. The term they used I believe was a "significant" number, "significant" population.

I asked the question to both of them: What do you consider a significant population? I got two answers. One of them I tended to agree with. The witness said a significant population in her opinion was if there was a school in the area. If it was significant enough to warrant a school, maybe it was significant enough to warrant the services in French.

The second answer, unfortunately, I didn't like quite as much when the answer was if there is more than one person. I wouldn't quite consider that a significant population.

Can you maybe comment on what you consider is a significant population where CBC/Radio-Canada should continue to provide French-language services?


Ms. Bossé: I will go back to the position taken by the FCFA and by all the communities. We are not talking about a major or significant demand, we are talking about Part IV of the Official Languages Act where we need a certain number to be able to have access to services in the official language of our choice. When we talk about the public broadcaster, we are also talking about Part VII of the act, which is the one that talks about enhancing the vitality of communities. In that sense, the issue is clearly about access and coverage.

In terms of access, our position is that every Canadian citizen, regardless of where he lives and regardless of the language he speaks, should be able to receive CBC and Radio-Canada signals. This is not a question of "significant demand." In terms of coverage, as the Fédération acadienne de la Nouvelle-Écosse mentioned, in fact, at the meeting in Halifax, there were no longer any reporters to cover every region, with the exception of Halifax, Nova Scotia.

I believe we should also ask ourselves if, for example, when we consider the anglophone minority in Quebec, we would want to know the number of anglophones who live in Quebec. What would be considered a sufficient number for anglophones to have access to CBC?

Our position is that this is a matter of a public broadcaster and that every Canadian, no matter his language or place of residence should have access to its programming.


Senator Plett: If I could make one comment on that about the English-speaking people in Quebec. Of course we did ask that question of them when we were in Montreal, so I think we played that fairly.


Mr. Quinty: I would like to talk more specifically about the definition of a community. At the FCFA, we favour a position that considers the number, the situation and the institutional vitality. We agree that, where there is community infrastructure, such as a school or a community centre, it is because there is a significant group of francophones.

But we must still consider the fact that, in some places, there may be small groups of francophones with great vitality or who have developed institutions, or who simply live in places where the population is very small. I am thinking of Hay River, in the Northwest Territories, or Terrace, British Columbia, where there are only 150 francophones, but they still have an elementary school.


Senator Eggleton: I noted your comment that ratings aren't everything, something I agree with, but I hasten to point out that the ratings aren't as bad as some people might indicate they are. When one considers that the private networks have some 91 total channels and the CBC only has three — the main network, the CBC News Network and documentary — in the English language, because I think it usually gets formed around that particular aspect of their service, the English language, in terms of ratings, but they have fewer channels, and if they had anything like the channels that the private networks had, I think they would be easily ahead of them.

By the way, they are only second in national news coverage, close second behind CTV, and I understand they're doing quite well on the online news world,, that they're actually leading the private networks on this.

Is there a French service also on the website, on the online service? Do you get that?


Ms. Bossé: Yes, yes. Of course.


Senator Eggleton: You do?


Ms. Bossé: Of course, yes.


Senator Eggleton: I want to ask you about the cuts. My colleagues like to point out when the Liberals were in there were cuts. Yes, there were, and now there are Conservatives and there are more cuts. My concern is it's like a pile-on. It's like in football when somebody brings a player down and then a bunch of people pile on. This is a pile-on situation here. We have cut after cut after cut and it seems to be getting to the point where it's just choking.

Do you agree with that? Where do you see the biggest impact in terms of those cuts right now in terms of the service that your stations provide?


Ms. Bossé: At the moment, the major impact really is the coverage because of the number of reporters that have been cut, because of the trucks that can no longer come to our community events, such as our festivals, for example, that no longer get coverage. There is also the matter of Radio-Canada's support of our events as a sponsor.

We no longer hear about our communities; they are no longer reflected, nor does anyone across this country hear about us anymore.

Then, Radio-Canada, which says it engages in regular consultation with communities, now focuses on finding out things like, for example, what is the last thing it can keep, what can it continue to provide in our communities, what are our final few little priorities. Do we want to keep a cultural program? As for news, we already know that the time spent on them has been reduced.

The impacts are major and we find that out every day. This is very important. When we are talking about Canadian identity, when we are talking about seeing ourselves reflected across the country, across both communities, these cuts are major ones.

Mr. Quinty: I can give you some concrete examples. About a month ago, Radio-Canada held a consultation session in Sudbury for the Franco-Ontarian community. If you know Sudbury, you know that there a lot of small communities around it. A man from Noëlville, where there are a lot of francophones, said that he had not seen a single Radio-Canada reporter set foot in Noëlville to cover what was happening there for two or three months. That is one thing.

Unlike CBC, Radio-Canada gave up on having a reporter on the party leaders' buses during the Ontario provincial election. For the municipal elections, in Toronto and Ottawa, there was no live coverage by Radio-Canada this time.

All they did was mention them at the start of the news and say that there would be a special broadcast at 11 p.m. by which time, unfortunately, most francophones had already gone to bed or already knew the results of the election. All these things are impacts.

I would also add that Hubert Lacroix, the President and CEO of CBC/Radio-Canada himself confirmed, when he appeared at the House Committee on Official Languages that, after the elimination of the local programming improvement fund, all non-news broadcasts produced in French outside Quebec were cancelled because Radio-Canada no longer had the means to do them.


Senator Eggleton: Then where does your news come from? Where does it originate from? The news on the local channels from across the country, does it all come from one place or do you get a more regional thing? Even in Sudbury, or if some don't have local broadcasts, where do you get the broadcasts from?


Ms. Bossé: The news broadcasts come from Radio-Canada. It depends on the various kinds of news broadcasts; there is international and national news. At local and regional levels, of course, we have community radio stations.


Senator Eggleton: Just the radio? And not television?


Ms. Bossé: On television, no.


Senator Eggleton: So the television news comes from Montreal?


Ms. Bossé: The national and international news comes from Montreal.


Senator Eggleton: There are no local provisions on those broadcasts?


Mr. Quinty: For each province and the maritime provinces, there is a regional newscast. But we have been told that, in a number of places, the length of the newscast will go from 60 minutes to 30 minutes.


Senator Eggleton: Does your organization have any thoughts about the structure or the organization of the CBC? We have heard comments about the board and how it's elected. We've heard comments that the structure should perhaps be more independent of government. Do you have any thoughts about that?


Ms. Bossé: Let us say that we have not gone down that road. We focus more on access to coverage and on the overview. An independent commission could very easily examine that question.


Senator Unger: Thank you, Ms. Bossé and Mr. Quinty. I'd like to ask for your comments regarding Professor Marie-Linda Lord, from the University of Moncton. She argued that network headquarters for Radio-Canada should be moved from Montreal to somewhere outside Quebec, somewhere in the Canadian Francophonie. Would you comment? Other than moving its headquarters, what measures could be used to reduce any Montreal-bias at Radio-Canada?


Ms. Bossé: Thank you for the question. One option is to move the headquarters out of Montreal. Is it the only option? Of course not. I would say that the most important thing is to change the organizational culture of CBC/ Radio-Canada, wherever it is physically located.

Mr. Quinty: What Ms. Lord said when she appeared before the committee is true. In fact, the station in Montreal has never considered itself to be a regional station. Yes, indeed, we tend to agree with that comment. Would things be different if the station were moved elsewhere?

The Acadians in Nova Scotia and the people from Newfoundland and Labrador have told you that there is some tendency for Moncton to consider itself the head of the network too. But it is true that moving the headquarters somewhere else would bring about a change of culture.


Senator Unger: Thank you. I have another question.

Madam, you referenced November 24 as being a day, I think, where the Governments of Quebec and Ontario issued a joint declaration on the importance of the Francophonie. I wanted to read that, but it wasn't available in English. I wonder if you would comment because both governments are asking the federal government to deal quickly to provide Radio-Canada with the support it needs to fulfill its mandate across the country and to deal quickly with Francophonie immigration to maintain the level of the population and communities. Would you explain that a bit? As I said, I wanted to read it in English, but it wasn't available.


Ms. Bossé: Are you referring to the statement from the Governments of Quebec and Ontario, or to ours?


Senator Unger: Yours.


Ms. Bossé: Unfortunately, the FCFA does not have sufficient resources to translate all the statements we publish. Tomorrow, you will see the English version of what we published today.

Yes, the Governments of Ontario and Quebec have come together to support the same positions. Yes, those two governments do want the Government of Canada to become involved in order to ensure that CBC/Radio-Canada has the ability to fulfill its mandate for francophone and Acadian communities.

The second part, about immigration, deals with a whole different issue, and the two governments have expressed their opinion on both. When we were talking about francophone communities just now, and about knowing which institutions they should have access to, were we talking about a school, a community centre?

Today, immigration has a significant impact all over the country. For example, in Saskatchewan and Alberta, a francophone community can spring up all of a sudden, because X number of French-speaking workers have come and settled in a community. Unfortunately, the community does not yet have a school and a community centre, but those immigrants still speak French.

So when we talk about the importance of having access to the signal everywhere in the country, we are also talking about that. I do not know if that answers your question.


Senator Unger: Well, it does in a way. The immigration part concerns me a bit. In Alberta, we certainly do have francophone communities, which have schools and they're well built-up and well established. I've lived in Alberta all my life and I've never heard of any issue from the community because, of course, they're mostly bilingual. I haven't heard of any issues, but I would look forward to being able to read this because it has significance. It means that you would like to see a lot of immigration come from other countries — it doesn't matter from where — and be settled across Canada. Therefore, these future communities would need CBC French services and they would need to be funded.

Ms. Bossé: Exactly.

Senator Unger: As an Albertan, it's kind of an odd situation for me to understand.


Ms. Bossé: Just yesterday, the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages published a study on francophone immigration in our communities with a whole series of very interesting recommendations. Of course, the report is available in both official languages. We would be happy to discuss those recommendations with you or the realities of francophone immigration in Alberta.


Senator Unger: I have one last quick question, if I may. As I said, the issue of immigration concerns me because Alberta's immigration is controlled by the federal government, whereas Quebec's is controlled by Quebec. What happens now is we will have people moving to Alberta who originally immigrated to Quebec, if you will. Then they come to Alberta because of jobs and the economy. There is an issue there.


Ms. Bossé: Immigrants do not go to Quebec first and then move to settle in the communities. A large number of French-speaking immigrants settle in our communities, in all provinces and territories, from the outset. Provincial and territorial governments also have the right to play a role in the selection of the immigrants, and of certain categories of immigrants, who will settle in their provinces. There is the provincial nominees program, for example. Provincial and territorial governments do have a role to play there, just as Quebec does. Of course, there is a specific agreement between Canada and Quebec.


The Chair: I will be glad to try to help you get the English version of the CBC-related part of the communiqué. I'm sure the Government of Ontario has an English version.

As far as the immigration, I sort of agree with Senator Eggleton. We do sometimes leave — Senator Greene seems to agree — the main subject that is CBC, but on the CBC-related part of it, which was issued by the Governments of Ontario and Quebec, we will try to find you an English version of the communiqué.

Senator Unger: Thank you, chair. They're separate.

Senator MacDonald: Thank you both for being here this evening.

We were in Toronto about a month and a half ago and had a chance to speak to Michel Cormier. Michel has been appointed the new executive director of news and current affairs. Of course, he's a Maritimer, and as a Maritimer myself, I was very pleased to see him there and I was chatting with him for a few minutes.

Earlier in the year when Mr. Lacroix was in, he mentioned that Mr. Cormier was appointed to the position and that he thought his presence, for one, would make it easier to meet the needs of the Acadian community.

I'm just curious: Do you think that's an accurate assessment? In your reflection of those comments, is it really applicable?


Ms. Bossé: I come from New Brunswick, so yes, absolutely. We had the opportunity to meet Mr. Cormier when he began his mandate. At that time, he explained his vision to us, a vision that would reflect each of the communities across the country, and, as part of his strategy to use different platforms, would reflect how Radio-Canada's mandate would be fulfilled. Unfortunately, with the cuts and the elimination of the local programming improvement fund, CBC/Radio-Canada has not been able to reach its objectives, in our opinion.

Mr. Quinty: Yes, we appreciate the fact that a member of our community heads the information division. However, CBC/Radio-Canada is a big machine, with a set organizational culture. Mr. Cormier is just one person. We need something bigger. As I was saying when I answered Senator Eggleton's question, what happened during the municipal and provincial elections in Ontario, and during the tragic events in Moncton, makes it clear to us that choices are made for an audience that it is mainly Quebec-based.


Senator MacDonald: Let's go back to the question in regard to what can be done. The former head of the CRTC said a couple years ago that Internet and wireless technology, as discerned by federal regulators, are the weapons to protect cultural identity. I'd like you to respond to that assessment in terms of Cape Breton as one of the significant Acadian communities, as well as Cheticamp.

I'm just curious: How much do you think these small communities are affected by technological change? In terms of it being a leveler that causes problems, is there any way that we can flip this around and use technology to strike?


Mr. Quinty: I appreciate your question. That is an issue I very much like dealing with. There are bandwidth problems in francophone and Acadian communities. Radio-Canada has begun to hold consultations with the communities. The first one was out West, in Edmonton, and other communities in the West could access it online. A number of comments came from northern Alberta and the Northwest Territories to the effect that people could not see the online broadcast, because they did not have the bandwidth to do so. In the Northwest Territories, that service is expensive.

A few months ago, our colleague from the Fédération des francophones de Terre-Neuve et du Labrador told us that, when he goes to the Port au Port Peninsula on the west coast, if he does not turn off his cellphone, it goes dead in an hour because it keeps searching for a network until the battery runs out. There are cases like that.

When bandwidth and high speed are available, there is the issue of the minimum speed. The standard set out in the Industry Canada strategy and by the CRTC is five megabits. This speed is sufficient for now, but will it be in a few years? We shall see. We are still far from what South Korea and other countries are capable of getting. We are talking about speeds of 64 megabits per second in some places.

When we combine broadband access with the programming content in French, this issue is a source of concern for us because there is a gap, especially in the small communities.


Senator MacDonald: So as a rule of thumb, a little more money in technology and less money, maybe, in bricks and mortar for Radio-Canada in terms of serving rural communities like this?


Ms. Bossé: This matter does not fall within my area of expertise. Perhaps Mr. Quinty would have something to add from a more technical perspective.

Mr. Quinty: The technological issue may not fall under Radio-Canada when we are talking about broadband access. Providers in rural areas quite often do not necessarily have the incentive to serve those communities. Naturally, it is less profitable, which the CRTC acknowledged a few years ago. The CRTC had done a study on the state of television, radio and Internet services in official language minority communities, and the government recommended increasing access to broadband in the communities. If we want francophone communities to get more content from the web and streaming, we will have to start with that.


The Chair: That's the technological challenge of CBC looking towards the future.

Senator Plett: One last question. We have talked many times about CBC's mandate, and you have talked about CBC's mandate. Part of their mandate, of course, is to promote Canadian culture. We have heard some witnesses tell us that certainly with English CBC that some people have the idea that they're not doing what they're mandated to do.

On the French side, does Radio-Canada properly promote Canadian culture?


Ms. Bossé: Most certainly. At the regional level, there was more coverage of events, such as festivals. However, that coverage, like any other, is being drastically cut. I invite the members of the committee to hear what the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française has to say about that. It would be in a very good position to provide you with those details. We are certainly seeing that the CBC is not doing enough to promote linguistic duality. We certainly do not often hear about francophone communities, and I will come back to the idea I mentioned today of creating an independent commission that could look at all these aspects.

Mr. Quinty: If I may add a comment, when we appear before the CRTC or before parliamentary committees to talk about the situation of francophone and Acadian communities and Radio-Canada, what we often say is that the regional stations are doing an excellent job; the network is another matter. The head of the network is focused on Quebec, but if we were to find ourselves in a situation where the network was more concerned about the regional stations, that would be very good for Canadian culture and the Canadian share in Radio-Canada.


Senator Plett: There are some of us who think that maybe CBC English should get out of Toronto and try to promote the rest of the country — I know that certainly some of our colleagues wouldn't agree with that, but nevertheless — and there have been those who have said they should get out of Montreal as well and move to Quebec.

Any comment on that?


Ms. Bossé: I think it is more a matter of corporate culture. I do not think the address will be the trigger that will change anything.


The Chair: Thank you, colleagues. Honourable senators, we will not have any meetings next Tuesday. We will be meeting next Wednesday night with the Chairman of the Board of CBC, Mr. Rémi Racine.


Ms. Bossé and Mr. Quinty, thank you very much for your presentation. I hope you will be able to follow us in the coming weeks and months. We greatly appreciated your presentation.

See you next week.

(The committee adjourned.)

Back to top