LANG Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Tuesday, June 11, 2002

¹

1535

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.))

Mr. Pierre Boivin (President, Montreal Canadians Hockey Club Inc.)

¹

1540

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier (President, Réseau des sports inc.)

¹

1545

¹

1550

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau (Repentigny, BQ)

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau

¹

1555

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau

º

1600

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

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

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Mr. Gérard Binet

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Mr. Gérard Binet

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Mr. Gérard Binet

Mr. Pierre Boivin

º

1605

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. John Herron (Fundy—Royal, PC)

Senator Gérald A. Beaudoin (Rigaud, PC)

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

Mr. Pierre Boivin

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

º

1610

Senator Gérald A. Beaudoin

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier (Ontario, Lib.)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Gerry Frappier

º

1615

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Pierre Boivin

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Pierre Boivin

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. John Herron

º

1620

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Mr. John Herron

º

1625

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Mr. John Herron

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Mr. John Herron

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Ms. Sarmite Bulte (Parkdale—High Park, Lib.)

Mr. Pierre Boivin

º

1630

Ms. Sarmite Bulte

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Ms. Sarmite Bulte

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Ms. Sarmite Bulte

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Ms. Sarmite Bulte

Mr. John Herron

Ms. Sarmite Bulte

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Ms. Sarmite Bulte

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Ms. Sarmite Bulte

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Ms. Sarmite Bulte

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau

Mr. Gerry Frappier

º

1635

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau

Mr. Pierre Boivin

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Ms. Yolande Thibeault (Saint-Lambert, Lib.)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Ms. Yolande Thibeault

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Gérald J.Comeau (Nova Scotia, PC)

º

1640

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Viola Léger (New Brunswick, Lib.)

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Senator Viola Léger

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Senator Viola Léger

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Senator Viola Léger

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Viola Léger

º

1645

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Senator Viola Léger

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Senator Viola Léger

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

º

1650

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Pierre Boivin

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Pierre Boivin

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Pierre Boivin

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Pierre Boivin

º

1655

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Pierre Boivin

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. John Herron

Mr. Gerry Frappier

»

1700

Mr. John Herron

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Mr. John Herron

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

»

1705

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

»

1710

Mr. Pierre Boivin

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Pierre Boivin

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Mr. Pierre Boivin

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Gerry Frappier

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Pierre Boivin

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Pierre Boivin

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

---

CANADA

Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages

---

NUMBER 044

l

1st SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Tuesday, June 11, 2002

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

¹  (1535)  

[Translation]

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.)) Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I would like to welcome Mr. Boivin, President of the Montreal Canadians Hockey Club and Mr. Frappier, President of Réseau des sports Inc..

    First of all, let me set the scene, because it's not every day that the Joint Committee on Official Languages meets with the Montreal Canadians Hockey Club and RDS. Last week, we heard from Radio-Canada/CBC and we discussed the issue of French Hockey Night in Canada and the fact that it will no longer be broadcast on CBC's French network. Some people have asked why the Official Languages Committee is getting involved in this issue. I would just like to say that the crux of the issue here is really that if you're an English Canadian, you have access to hockey, our national sport, on public television, throughout Canada, on a free basis. However, if you are a French Canadian, you will have to pay to watch hockey on television. Hockey will no longer be available on public television, in French, from sea to sea. French Canadians will have to have cable, satellite or pay for the privilege of watching French-language hockey.

    Consequently, some members of the committee think that there is a disparity between CBC and Radio-Canada, which is subject to the Official Languages Act as is the CRTC.

    It is against this background that we are trying to understand how we have arrived at this situation. During our meeting with Radio-Canada, we were able to elicit comments and replies to our questions from Mr. Rabinovitch and Ms. Fortin. If I'm not mistaken, you have all received a copy of what we commonly refer to as “the blues”. This is the record of what was said at our meeting. If you look at the blues then you will see that members of this committee were keen to continue the discussion on this issue with a view to clarifying specific statements that were made.

    Consequently, we would like to thank you for having replied to our invitation to appear today so promptly. First of all, we will give you time to make your presentations. Then, we will move on to a question and answer session, as we normally do at our meetings. Does that suit you?

    Who is going to begin? Mr. Boivin, you have the floor.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin (President, Montreal Canadians Hockey Club Inc.): Thank you, Mr. Joint Chair. Honourable Senators and Members of the House of Commons, I would like to thank you for your invitation.

    I can well understand that, in terms of your mandate, the partnership agreement that we reached with the RDS television network might raise some legitimate questions. This is why, by way of introduction, I would like to provide you with some information on the Montreal Canadians Hockey Club and the agreement on the sale of French-language broadcasting rights that our club and the national hockey league reached with the RDS network.

    The world of hockey has changed significantly over the past 20 years. The National Hockey League environment today, with its 30 teams, creates major challenges for most teams. In addition to common challenges, which are faced especially by medium-sized teams, Canadian hockey teams also face more specific challenges, some of which are probably familiar to you.

    These challenges mainly stem from the exchange rate of the Canadian dollar and tax levies and the disparity that they generate between our income in Canadian dollars and players' salaries in American dollars.

    The Montreal Canadians, just like other Canadian professional hockey clubs, is required to develop a competitive team for fans while at the same time ensuring that the team is managed effectively. Our payroll costs fall below the national hockey league average, but cost- increase pressures will remain significant until the current collective agreement expires in 2004.

    As a result, it is against the backdrop of these restrictions and our goal of providing a quality product, and, I have to say it, maximizing income, that we should examine the sale of the broadcasting rights to Montreal Canadians games.

    Historically, the broadcasting rights to Montreal Canadians games on French-language television have been shared between the club and the National Hockey League. Saturday night games and the playoffs have been deemed to be national games and as such, the corresponding broadcasting rights belonged to the league. The rights to other Montreal Canadians games belong to the team.

    Four years ago, we undertook a joint venture with the National Hockey League in terms of negotiating and selling the whole range of broadcasting rights to all Montreal Canadians games to the national French network.

    The agreement which was reached four years ago provided for the shared broadcasting of Montreal Canadians games between Radio-Canada, TQS and the RDS network. Under this agreement, which expired at the end of this current season, Radio-Canada was to broadcast 25 Saturday night games, two all star games and four rounds of the playoffs.

    When it came to negotiating a new agreement, we wanted to reach one with all three networks. We were keen to reach agreement on several points, including the broadcasting of all 82 Montreal Canadians games, maintaining access to Montreal Canadians games for the fans, broadcasting the greatest possible number of Stanley Cup playoffs and maintaining or even increasing our current income.

    As discussions went on, Radio-Canada stated that it wished to significantly reduce the number of broadcast matches and its overall investment in hockey. The schedule for the playoffs also presented major problems in terms of their programming.

    We continued the negotiation process in an attempt to reach the best possible agreement with Radio-Canada which would meet our goals. However, after several months of talks, we came to the conclusion that it would be quite impossible to meet these goals if we were to enter into an agreement with all three networks.

    Therefore, as the discussions went on, we gradually came to the conclusion that we would offer all the rights as a comprehensive package. Consequently, we talked to RDS about the possibility of negotiating an agreement for the rights to all the Montreal Canadians matches, the four rounds of the Stanley Cup playoffs and the National Hockey League all-stars games.

    A study of the penetration of cable and satellite television in Quebec and in Canada as a whole, coupled with the availability of RDS and a strict negotiation process, enabled us to set out the parameters of an agreement which met the objectives of our joint venture. Under the agreement signed with RDS, the network becomes the French-language broadcaster for French-language Montreal Canadians games and the Stanley Cup playoffs. RDS will cover the French-language broadcasting of the 82 Montreal Canadians games, the 40 Stanley Cup playoff games, all-star games and the all-stars skills tests.

¹  (1540)  

    The agreement runs for five years, between 2002 and 2007. This agreement is a good deal for our fans, for our business partners and for the club in general. RDI is now the leading television sports network in Quebec and is a natural partner for the Montreal Canadians, on a national basis.

    The partnership that we have developed with RDS will enable us to focus and to invest the talent and the resources of both our organizations to provide a revamped and improved television product which will meet the expectations of television viewers and our business partners. Under this agreement, each game will be an exciting production and a captivating hockey experience. This agreement also maintains the traditional Saturday night game, which is much loved by fans.

    This agreement generates major revenue for the club which will enable us to continue to enhance our team. All Montreal Canadians games will be accessible to people living in those regions covered by Montreal Canadian-owned rights and also to all those fans living in areas of the country which receive RDS via satellite or cable.

    We are well aware that this agreement brings to an end the Saturday night hockey game on Radio-Canada. This change will inconvenience some of our fans, and we regret that fact, but, we believe that we have made the best choice, and we intend to do everything in our power to minimize any inconvenience caused. Indeed, we have discussed this issue at great length with RDS and we are very grateful for the proposal that they put forward to Radio-Canada, under which Saturday night Montreal Canadians games would go out simultaneously on both networks. Unfortunately, Radio-Canada didn't see fit to accept this offer, and we respect their decision.

    Over the next few months, we will be working closely with RDS in preparation for the upcoming season. We're going to work closely with them to make this agreement a winning partnership for our own fans and for French-speaking hockey lovers from Quebec and throughout Canada.

    The Montreal Canadians are one of the best known and best loved teams in Canada, even in the entire world. We intend to do our utmost to maintain this position and we would like to thank you for your support.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you, Mr. Boivin.

    Mr. Frappier.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier (President, Réseau des sports inc.): Madam Joint Chair, Mr. Joint Chair, Honourable Senators and Members of Parliament, it is both a pleasure and a privilege to have been invited by this committee to speak to this particular topic and to set out the main features of the new agreement which provides for the broadcasting of hockey games in French throughout Canada.

    My presentation this afternoon will deal with various points in terms of the recent announcements stating that the Réseau des sports, based on an agreement struck with the Montreal Canadians Hockey Club and the National Hockey League, is to become the Canada-wide French language broadcaster of the 124 professional hockey games, mainly those of the Montreal Canadians, over the next five years.

    Starting next year, our network will broadcast the 82 Montreal Canadians regular season games, 40 Stanley Cup playoff games, the all-star games and the skills challenge. RDS is proud of this new agreement, which is a significant addition to our already impressive programming line-up. In our opinion, this is a new very significant stage in the development of the Réseau des sports network. This network will now be in a position to provide higher quality and enhanced sporting events programming for francophones sports fans in Quebec and throughout Canada.

    Currently, RDS is the French-language television broadcaster which covers all major sporting events, including Formula 1 and CART racing, tennis championships, over 150 golf tournaments, the Alouettes football games, the Grey Cup and the Super Bowl, not to mention the Olympics and the World Soccer Cup. We are the only network with the necessary expertise and capacity to provide this type of coverage to francophones throughout Canada.

    If it were not for RDS, francophone Canadians would not be able to enjoy most major sporting events in their own language.

    A partnership with a sporting organization, which is as famous and which has such a rich history as the Montreal Canadians Hockey Club, is a dream for any sports television network. RDS is firmly committed to continuing to enhance an already well established and family-oriented tradition. We intend to work to make it an integral part of the social fabric of Quebeckers and francophones throughout Canada.

¹  (1545)  

     I think that millions of French-speaking Canadians would like to join me in paying tribute to Radio-Canada, which can be proud of broadcasting hockey games for the past 50 years.

    In the past, we have had the opportunity to work together with Radio-Canada on several sporting events, such as the Olympics and Formula 1 racing. The agreement between RDS, the Montreal Canadians Hockey Club and the National Hockey League has led to some concern that some French-speaking Canadians would no longer have access to French Hockey night in Canada on Saturdays.

    As a result, RDS made a proposal to Radio-Canada, whereby both networks would broadcast the entire game simultaneously. This would have made hockey games available to francophones throughout Canada. However, Radio-Canada turned down this proposal. This then is the backdrop against which RDS is now making preparations for the upcoming season in an attempt to take on the challenges which it faces. The Montreal Canadians Hockey Club and the National Hockey League have also committed to this new approach.

    This new approach by the Montreal Canadians can largely be explained by the scale of change that has occurred in the television industry over the past three years. The advent of specialty channels has forced traditional-type television networks to review their approach, and their programming policy. The development and rapid penetration of satellite and cable television services to all regions of Canada has considerably enhanced the range of programming available to consumers. French-speaking Canadians as a whole are now able to access RDS programming via cable or satellite networks.

    We should also point out that changes have occurred in relation to sports event broadcasting over the past few years. Indeed, the Montreal Canadians and RDS are now part of a well-established trend whereby many sporting events, such as Canadian Football League games, Formula 1 racing, here in Canada, or golf and professional basketball in the United States, are broadcast by either one or several specialty channels. The new agreement is quite simply a part of a market-driven trend, which in many ways has become crucial.

    Specialty television remains one of the most diversified and affordable types of entertainment in Canada. This new agreement will enable us to considerably enhance the quality of services that we already provide to television viewers. Indeed, of course, we are slightly biased, but we have found that no other sports lovers are as sophisticated, informed and demanding as Montreal Canadians fans. This leads me into the crux of the issue.

    Our agreement with the Montreal Canadians is a mutual commitment to provide an unequalled product. I don't think that I need remind members of the committee of the fierce competition within the professional leagues and the additional challenges facing Canadian sports corporations, both on a national and international level. Our involvement in this undertaking can be summarized in one word: commitment. RDS is in a position to solidify the partnership with the Montreal Canadians and also to ensure that hockey game coverage is as attractive as possible. It is in a position to ensure that this undertaking becomes an increasingly prosperous one.

    RDS has committed to make substantial financial investments to ensure that this agreement is both viable and productive. However, the investment that we are making goes well beyond a purely financial commitment. We intend to provide both innovation and imaginative investment. RDS is already one of the most experienced and best-informed sports commentators. That special RDS touch makes for exceptional, exciting and captivating sports event coverage.

    We also have cutting-edge technology available to us. This puts us in a position to provide relevant comments and play-by-play analyses.

¹  (1550)  

    Nevertheless, I continue to think that this partnership marks the beginning of new era in media coverage of one of the most famous professional sports teams in the world. It is no exaggeration to say that the Montreal Canadians are an important part of Quebec and Canadian culture, and we will be vigilant to ensure that this precious part of our heritage continues to grow.

    We are aware of the weighty responsibility placed on the Réseau des sports as a result of this agreement, but I am sure that we will be equal to the challenge. We will continue to build on the first-class specialty services we are already offering francophone sports fans.

    In conclusion, I would like to thank you once again for giving me an opportunity to speak to you today. We are now available to answer your questions. Thank you.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you, Mr. Frappier.

    You have seven minutes, Mr. Sauvageau.

    Mr. Benoît Sauvageau (Repentigny, BQ): I want to start by saying that I am pleased to see you here, Mr. Frappier and Mr. Boivin, but on the other hand, the reason you are here is that we have a problem. I would have preferred to meet you in different circumstances.

    If I may, before I ask a question about broadcasting La Soirée du hockey, I would like to ask Mr. Boivin a question about sponsorship. As you know, that is something that is also in the news around here. Since 1999, $5.5 million have been spent on sponsorships. I would like to know whether this is done with the government, or in the traditional way, and whether you can tell us more about this.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Boivin, you were invited to appear before this committee to talk about La Soirée du hockey and the negotiations surrounding this matter. You are in no way required to answer this question. Moreover, I would suggest that you not answer it, because it has nothing to do with the reason for which you were invited here today, and my colleague is well aware of that.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: Mr. Chairman, it is not that I do not want to answer the question, but I do think we are here to discuss a different matter. In any case, I do not have the information required to answer the question.

    Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: If you could submit it to the committee, that would be most interesting.

    Gentlemen, as you know, the big losers in this new business deal are the 20% or 25% of Quebeckers who have neither cable nor satellite television service. In addition, a large majority of francophone minority communities will not have access to La Soirée du hockey either, on Saturday evening or at other times.

    Mr. Rabinovitch told us last week that Radio-Canada was prepared to continue negotiations with you, but that the negotiations had broken off. For your part, you said that you were prepared to continue negotiating with Radio-Canada, but that the negotiations had broken off.

    Is there any possibility of continuing negotiations? Are you offering to broadcast in full the Saturday night hockey games from RDS to Radio-Canada, while at the same time depriving the latter of its prime time advertising revenue? Is that how the negotiations ended?

¹  (1555)  

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: I will try to answer your questions in the order in which you asked them. Your first was whether there is still room for negotiation. That was your first question.

    There are no negotiations as such. The negotiations took place between the broadcasters and the hockey rights holders, namely the Montreal Canadians and the National Hockey League. The negotiations are now over. The agreement reached is an exclusive contract between RDS, the Canadians Hockey Club and the National Hockey League.

    We are very much aware of the concerns of the French-speaking public, and that is why we made an offer to Radio-Canada, Mr. Sauvageau. In our opinion, this offer did exactly what it was supposed to do: namely, make the Saturday night hockey game accessible to all francophones. That is what our offer did; they chose not to accept it.

    As far as advertising time goes, which was your second question, you are correct, except that there was no cost attached to the agreement for Radio-Canada. I believe Mr. Rabinovitch said clearly last week that hockey produced a deficit for the SRC, but that it was profitable for the CBC. So a difference existed at the outset for the corporation. I do not have access to their books, but I do not think the offer we made was to their financial disadvantage. Nevertheless, we did offer them something which would have achieved the desired results, and they turned us down.

    Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Thank you.

    Mr. Boivin, for many of the last 50 years, the Canadians Hockey Club has been popular. They had good ratings and won the Stanley Cup more regularly than they have in recent years, although things seem to be going better at the moment. However, the crown corporation was broadcasting sports on the public television network, and we, as parliamentarians, had to defend this practice when people complained that there should have been more cultural and other programming.

    Over these last 50 years, on a number of occasions, the Société Radio-Canada has helped the Canadians Hockey Club to make sure the games were broadcast. In your negotiations with RDS, was consideration given to these 50 years of history, and this financial support, or did you simply make a business decision, and forget about the support provided by the crown corporation over the past 50 years?

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: What I can tell you is that a decision of this type is not taken lightly. It is not easy to break with a 50-year-old tradition, or to break off a very close relationship and partnership. Thus, we had to ensure that this was the best decision in all respects. So I would not describe this decision as easy. Everything was taken into account, particularly the very close partnership.

    However, I can tell you that since the beginning, and even before we began our discussions, we were told very clearly that SRC wanted to reduce significantly its investment in time and money in the Montreal Canadians Hockey Club product and in the play-offs, which may involve other teams. They had their reasons for this, which they set out for us very clearly, and I almost understand their point. But this is perhaps where there started to be a different strategy and approach, which ultimately led us to enter into an agreement with RDS, whose sole function is to broadcast sports, particularly hockey.

    Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: I see. While I do not wish to be a prophet of doom, Mr. Frappier, when you were saying that there is a growing trend in North America to have sports such as golf, basketball, and so on, on sports specialty channels, were you telling other Canadian teams that hockey games in English on CBC would soon be disappearing as well? Is that what we are to take from your message?

º  (1600)  

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: I do not have a crystal ball. There is no doubt, Mr. Sauvageau, that the English-language Canadian market is bigger. So there may be more room there for economies of scale. It is somewhat more difficult in a smaller market. Differences of this type have existed for a very long time, Mr. Sauvageau. The Grey Cup game which is the most important game of a significant, 100% Canadian sports product, has been broadcast on RDS for 10 years and is still on CBC. This is also true for Formula 1 races. There are many sports events that moved to RDS a number of years ago, and this is good for RDS viewers, who after all, do represent 2.5 million people.

    It remains to be seen what the future holds for us, but I think we do have a mission and we are carrying it out very well. Otherwise, many sports events would no longer be broadcast in French for the pleasure of French-language viewers.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you. We will come back to this.

    Mr. Binet.

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

    Good afternoon, Mr. Boivin and Mr. Frappier. There is no doubt that your appearance before the Official Languages Committee today highlights the issue that hockey will still be broadcast on the English network, while it will no longer be broadcast on the French network. However, you have explained the reasons for this very well.

    When we met with Radio-Canada last week, we never heard that Mr. Gillette had met with the corporation. I do not want to be critical of you, Mr. Boivin, but did Mr. Gillette, the owner, meet personally with the management of Radio-Canada and become aware of this 50-year-old hockey tradition and our attachment to this program?

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: I can tell you that before and during the negotiations, Mr. Gillette had many meetings with representatives from SRC, RDS and TQS, which is another network associated with the Montreal Canadians. He was not present all the time, but he was certainly involved at various stages in the process. I can assure you that as regards Radio-Canada, at no time, whether in person or by telephone, did I have any contacts with Mr. Rabinovitch, Ms. Fortin or even Daniel Gourd.

    If we take into account the commitment required to understand the scope of the issues and reach the best possible decision in this very complex matter, I can tell you that for our part, we made every possible effort. I would say that the same goes for the National Hockey League, which was represented at each meeting by its Executive Vice-President and its Chief of Operations, who were in constant contact with the Commissioner of the League so that he could follow the process on a weekly basis.

    Mr. Gérard Binet: In closing, I would like to ask you whether the Canadian government was an essential partner for the Montreal Canadians Hockey Club. We know that this was not always easy.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: Could you repeat the question, please?

    Mr. Gérard Binet: Has the Canadian government been an essential partner for the Canadians Hockey Club? We know that hockey is in a rather difficult situation in Canada.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: I apologize, but I did not understand the last part of your question.

    You asked whether the Canadian government had been an essential partner, but I did not understand the rest of what you said.

    Mr. Gérard Binet: It is well known that hockey in Canada is in a rather difficult situation. Is the Canadian government an essential partner?

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: I am not sure the word “partner” is the right one, because in the area of professional sport, the government is not a partner, either for the Montreal Canadians or for other teams. As a Canadian team in the North American professional sports context, we face significant challenges. One significant factor is our Canadian dollar. I can say that for a few weeks now, things have been better, and we hope that trend continues, because working with a dollar worth 62¢, 63¢ or 64¢ is very difficult.

    However, all sorts of commissions have been established over the years. I think the government has always listened to us carefully. I also know that over the years, there have been a number of exchanges between the league, represented by Mr. Bettman, and the Prime Minister.

    In my view, the league is aware of the government's interest in hockey and it is also aware that hockey is Canada's national sport. In this regard, we can say that the government has been a good partner.

º  (1605)  

[English]

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Herron.

    Mr. John Herron (Fundy—Royal, PC): I'm going to defer to Senator Beaudoin.

[Translation]

    Senator Gérald A. Beaudoin (Rigaud, PC): I take as a given that hockey is our national sport, that Radio-Canada comes under federal jurisdiction and the Canadians Hockey Club, of course, belongs to the private sector.

    In my opinion, we have a duty to maintain some equality between the English and French networks. I think that is only right. If there is no legislation or agreement that would enable us to maintain equality between was is done in English and what is done in French, at some point, our national sport is in danger of no longer being our national sport. That is the crux of the matter in my opinion.

    Mr. Rabinovitch says that the problem has to do with the sale of rights and that they can do nothing about that. Since I heard that answer, I have been thinking that we may have to pass legislation, either on broadcasting or the equality of our two languages.

    I do not think this is necessarily a matter of negotiation, but it is one involving legislation. There must some equality. Is it absolutely impossible for the French network to be more or less equal to the English network? That is what I am concerned about.

    My question is to both of you.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: For my part, I can give you a partial answer. Your question is very valid, but unfortunately, no one here can answer it. However, I can tell you that I noticed a significant difference in terms of structure and strategic alignment between Radio-Canada and the French market and CBC in the English market. If we compare the amount of sports coverage on CBC to that on SRC, we see significant differences. I am not saying that one network is right and the other wrong, but the amount of coverage is simply not the same.

    Similarly, the economic model of the CBC and that of SRC are very different as regards broadcasting hockey games. I also think that the objectives of the SRC at the beginning of the negotiations to renew the rights were very different. We know that, because we are partners with the league and the league was involved in both negotiations. So the same men took part in both sets of negotiations with the same corporation. However, CBC and SRC were represented by different individuals with, quite obviously, different objectives and budgets. In order to understand why we are here today, you should perhaps take a look at CBC and SRC. The results are very different, but the economic commitments with respect to the former agreements were very different as well.

    Senator Gérald Beaudoin: Are you saying that in practice it is absolutely impossible to achieve equality between the two networks as regards language?

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: No, I think that theoretically, this is possible. However, in practice, the two networks must have the same strategy, and the same budgets, at least proportionally.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Is everything all right?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: I would like to go back to the example I gave to Mr. Sauvageau: the CBC presents a great many Canadian Football League games even though this is all broadcast on the Réseau des sports. So we see that this type of thing is already done. However, in this case, the stakes and the pressure are increasing, because we are talking about a sport with a much broader public appeal. This is understandable, but we should not fall into the trap of an emotional response.

    In addition, Senator, I would like to emphasize that it would be advisable not to underestimate RDS. We have a very fine network that serves 2.5 million people and we are very proud of it. We are still growing, and we provide very good service to our francophone viewers. I can brag and tell you that there is no sports network in the world that offers as varied and rich a programming as that provided by RDS for francophones in Canada. There is not a single network that matches what we do, and we are very proud of that.

º  (1610)  

    Senator Gérald A. Beaudoin: I was not attacking you at all.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: No, but I... It should not be forgotten that we are accessible to everyone. There is no one in Canada who cannot get RDS. I agree that it is not free, but it is universally accessible.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): I would certainly not want you to feel under attack, Mr. Frappier.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: Not at all.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): You are the president of a company and your job is to develop it in the interest of your shareholders and your financial supporters. No one questions that. That is not the intention of the senator or of any other member of the committee. You are simply doing what you have to do, and we are doing the same.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: That is understandable. I respect that.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): And we hope that at some point, there will be a convergence between our objectives.

    Senator Gauthier, followed by Ms. Thibeault.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier (Ontario, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    I am going to take a different approach to this matter. I am hard of hearing, and I have a screen here to read what is going on, because I cannot hear. There are three million people like me in Canada. As far as I know, RDS does not do any closed captioning of its programs. Are you a large broadcaster, a medium-sized broadcaster or a small broadcaster, according to the CRTC's definition?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: We are subject to our own licence conditions as determined by the Commission. Consequently, our network's category depends on the policies and conditions imposed on us, Senator.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I do not want to embarrass you, Mr. Frappier, but it depends on revenue. If you have an annual revenue over $10 million, you are a large broadcaster. If you have an annual revenue of between $5 million and $10 million, you are a medium-sized broadcaster. If you are below that, you are a small broadcaster. The reason I asked the question is that the CRTC requires large broadcasters to provide real-time captioning. If you were a medium-sized broadcaster, with revenue of between $5 million and $10 million, they would expect you to provide closed captioning. Broadcasters with revenues under $5 million are encouraged to provide closed captioning for people like myself. And there are three million of us in this country.

    We can manage to follow the game in the case of some sports, such as hockey, for example. If a person is somewhat familiar with hockey and the cameraman is fairly skilled, it is possible for us to follow the game. But it is very frustrating for the deaf to try to watch a football game. Do you know why? Because the camera follows the darn ball. So we cannot follow the game. I played football in my youth, and what interests me is the defensive game. There is no way to follow that on television. We can see what is happening in races: we are not crazy, but people do rely on great deal on the expert commentary.

    From what I hear, you have a good team at RDS. Some people have even told me that you were the best in the league. I answered that you were not very good at closed captioning. Do you intend to provide this service for us? Is that part of your plan?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: I will answer the question, even though it is not specifically related to the issue we are discussing. I would just like to say that we comply with 100% of our licence requirements and conditions. The CRTC acknowledges that real-time closed captioning for a sports event presents the greatest technological challenge, Senator.

    For live programs—whether we are talking about a Radio-Canada newscast or a football game on RDS—we all face the same problem. We may not be the best, but we are no worse than the others. Of course we are involved in all the committees and all the efforts being made in the industry to try to find an acceptable, economic solution for everyone.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I can tell you that the system on the English network is much more advanced as regards closed captioning than the system on the French network. That is understandable, because there are no training programs available in Canada at the moment.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: Do you know why, Senator? It is because current software has tremendous difficulty decoding French so as to reinterpret it, using technology, into text. That is why all French-language broadcasters have the same problem with live broadcast.

º  (1615)  

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: People in Afghanistan have little machines that translate from English into the local language.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): I think we should try to get back to La Soirée du hockey.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: My question is to Mr. Boivin.

    Mr. Boivin, when Mr. Rabinovitch was here last week, he said that he had a verbal agreement with you or with the Montreal Canadians Hockey Club, and that he was surprised to hear that you had changed your mind. Why did you change your mind?

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: Firstly, we did not change our minds because there was no verbal agreement. I think what happened was that within Radio-Canada, some events were misinterpreted. Myself, I never spoke with Mr. Rabinovitch or with Ms. Fortin. The talks that I had were with Mr. Daniel Asselin. I have read the “blues”, and there quite simply was no definitive verbal agreement. There was a lot of discussion however, but no definitive agreement.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you.

    Is that all Senator Gauthier?

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Is there a difference, then, between a verbal and a definitive agreement?

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: No, I am simply saying that there was neither a definitive nor a verbal one. To put the record straight, in fact, throughout the process—and all the various broadcasters are aware of this—our goal was to strike all three agreements simultaneously and not one after the other. We had a situation where there were three networks and there were a number of games to farm out. At the outset, our intention was to distribute the 82 games on the three networks. Consequently, our goal was to meet our expectations.

    From the time when Radio-Canada no longer wanted to broadcast play-off games, if the Montreal Canadians were not included, which is quite impossible and an unacceptable condition... The National Hockey League cannot agree to sell a particular right on the condition that a particular team participates in the play-offs. There is no guarantee that the Montreal Canadians—and we greatly hope that they will get there—will make the play-offs every year. Consequently, we cannot sell the rights to games with this type of string attached. Consequently, when Radio-Canada made their conditions known to us, we had to farm out their share. This changed things radically. Consequently, any talks with Radio-Canada were always on the condition that the three agreements could be reached simultaneously.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you.

    Mr. Herron.

[English]

    Mr. John Herron: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I'd like to contribute to the debate itself and admit my prejudices in advance by saying I'm starting my discussions as a Leaf fan. However, sir, one of the more interesting events that I've ever attended was the last game at the old Montreal Forum. As a diehard Leaf fan, going into that institution was a daunting experience on its own.

    The Forum, that institution, that building, and the institution of the Montreal Canadiens themselves are larger than just the hockey team. Particularly in rural Quebec, rural Canada, and francophone Canada, for that matter, the Montreal Canadiens have really been something that has united communities in a common cause on one night, on one evening, during the week. It has arguably been one of the most successful franchises for that loyalty, for that institution, for that great history, and it has always been attached to the CBC in both languages.

    I've just done a little quick research here in my own riding in New Brunswick. I come from what people used to deem an anglophone riding, but 14,000 people speak both languages in Fundy—Royal. I checked with my local cable provider just now, and they don't offer RDS, so those people will have no access. Francophone communities outside of Quebec, as well as a plethora of other communities, will not have access to RDS, which really has done a very good job at providing a myriad of sporting activities beyond just hockey.

    RDS is a quality product on its own and I'm giving it no disrespect in that regard, but a solution really has to be found by the parties here at this table and at the CBC to ensure that we have free access to hockey on Saturday night for the francophone population. Obviously, this is a tough act to follow.

    If an offer has been made by RDS to the CBC so that they can provide hockey free of charge to individuals through the francophone media, why is it such a stickler for them not to be able to provide their own folks to give the play-by-play? Why is that such a stumbling block?

º  (1620)  

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: We negotiated directly with the team for a five- or six-month period of time, and we arrived at a very complex deal. That was certainly not what we expected when we started the negotiation process, nor was it the team's expectation or the league's. But that's where we ended up.

    It is a very complex deal that goes far beyond simply cash value for rights. Without getting into the details, because it is a confidential deal—which I hope you can appreciate—we have to now respect the integrity of the business transaction that we have entered into with the team and the league. We have to protect the business side of it.

    From that, we became extremely aware that there could be a problem. Certainly, there was a conscientiousness on our part to recognize that this would have an impact on a certain amount of francophone viewers in the country, and that is why we made that offer. In making that offer—and again, we're not trying to pat ourselves on the back—we recognized that if Radio-Canada had accepted it, the audience levels on our own network would have gone down quite a bit because we would be sharing. We were accepting the idea of taking a big back seat on Saturday night in order to allow that old tradition to carry on. They chose not to do it.

    Please recognize that they have chosen to do it in the past. With Formula 1, for example, they do in fact do so. When we do the Montreal Grand Prix race, Formula 1 gets an audience larger than a typical Saturday night game. So they accept it for a car race—which is also the biggest event in a single weekend in Montreal in the year, and which generates significant audiences—but they didn't accept it for the Saturday nights.

    I have to respect the business transaction for the good of my company and for the benefit of my viewers. I also have to respect the francophone population and viewers. I believe what we offered them did all of the above, but they turned it down. From there, we have to get on with life and not be apologetic or defensive vis-à-vis what we can provide to viewers.

    My last comment is that I hope people are going to give us a chance to show them what we can do. A ton of people are waiting to see what that will be.

    Mr. John Herron: I'm not doubting that RDS can deliver a very high-quality product, and I think their viewers will be impressed by it. But again, we're going to the tradition of Saturday night hockey in the francophone medium. A myriad of communities won't have access to that product. That's the challenge before us. You've offered a solution.

    My next question would be particularly to Mr. Boivin.

    In my view, that storied history that we have with the Montreal Canadiens is entrenched in the history of the attachment to how that product was delivered, whether it was across the radio airwaves or through the traditional medium of television on the CBC itself. Given that the negotiations broke down or negotiations are not ongoing, can you give some comfort to the members of the committee who would be concerned about that? Does someone in the Montreal Canadiens' organization right now have cartage of this file, and are they able to say you still have to continue to work on this? Or have you said it's water under the bridge, you've moved on, and you're not going to go back?

    Are you amendable to going back and pushing this issue? Is someone going to continue to pursue the aspect of providing access to hockey in French?

º  (1625)  

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: The answer to that question has a couple of parts. First, throughout this process, what was more dangerous than not being on over-the-air was not having all the games televised. That was a very real, prospective, and potential outcome, and that was as a direct result of the decision by the over-the-air networks to reduce their number of games and reduce their investment in the sport. That is their strategic decision, but it's one we unfortunately had to struggle with throughout the process.

    At this point, the transaction is concluded with RDS. RDS owns 100% of the rights to the Montreal Canadiens' games, as well as the NHL playoff games. Therefore, while many people in our organization are still very much involved with the broadcast file, we are now turning forward to next fall and are looking at how we can work closely with RDS to improve the product and give more to our fans and to RDS subscribers. So it is not in the Montreal Canadiens' hands anymore to decide whether there's another alternative. This deal is a done deal with RDS as we speak.

    Mr. John Herron: In your view, then, this is a fait accompli. There will not be free access to hockey in French next season, period.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: Again, I don't want to rewrite the history of the last two or three weeks, but some very clear offers were made to SRC and they were declined on two occasions. They were even declined before this committee when SRC appeared last week. At this point, then, in the interest of the game and our fans, RDS and the Montreal Canadiens need to move forward and start to plan out next year. And that is upon us. That is tomorrow.

    Mr. John Herron: My very last comment, Mr. Chair, is just that....

    My apologies for pushing this issue as hard as I have. I understand that you both operate a business and have to make a profit. That's a strong component of it. But this is something that I know is going to resonate through francophone communities throughout the country, and not only in the province of Quebec. I hope there can somehow be a corporate answer to remedying this situation in some way. I still believe it has to be an objective that we should pursue.

    Thank you, sir.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Madam Bulte.

    Ms. Sarmite Bulte (Parkdale—High Park, Lib.): Thank you both for coming. I want to follow up on Mr. Herron's questioning. Actually, these questions are very similar.

    Unlike Mr. Herron, even though I now live in Toronto and represent a Toronto riding, having been born and raised in Hamilton, I was always a Canadiens fan and still remain one today. I'd just like to put that on the record. Not everyone who lives in Toronto is necessarily a fan of the Maple Leafs. Having said that, I'm also a Hamilton Tiger-Cats fan, so there you go.

    Let me go back to Mr. Herron's last question, Mr. Boivin. I know Mr. Herron asked if this was a done deal. Let me just go back to my eighteen years of legal training and legal practice. What you have is a contract with RDS. Essentially, that is not a matter of a done deal. A contract is a contract is a contract. By re-entering negotiations, you would be breaching the contract that you have, is that correct?

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: That is absolutely correct.

    Again, I don't want to belabour the point, but we began informal discussions with the networks in the fall, and we opened up the formal process in early January. This was not something done overnight. This process has been going on for five or six months. There were at least ten meetings with SRC in person or in other discussions. It's not as though they weren't given every opportunity to step up to the plate, as one would say in another sport.

    We ended up in a situation in which the inventory was not being placed and revenues were not being optimized. Ultimately, our fans were going to be deprived of a certain number of games. That's why we ended up where we ended up. But you're quite right, it would be a breach of contract to reopen the process at this point.

º  (1630)  

    Ms. Sarmite Bulte: Mr. Frappier, I'd like a clarification to see if I understood you correctly. You used car racing as an example and said SRC actually has used your feed, used your commentary, and used your people in the past. Am I correct in saying that?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: They take our integral feed.

    Ms. Sarmite Bulte: They take your “integral feed”. Those are the proper broadcasting words.

    When Robert Rabinovitch appeared before us, he seemed to imply—and I may be wrong without going back to the transcript—that being able to use their own people was unprecedented. In using your feed, does SRC still get to use its own people when you televise the car racing? How does that work?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: If you're talking about the on-air people, the on-air talent, and the whole of the graphics packaging, they are totally the feed delivered from RDS to Radio-Canada. That is correct.

    Ms. Sarmite Bulte: Again using the car racing as an example, does Radio-Canada in any way add anything at all to your original feed when they use it?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: I'm not sure I understand your question.

    Ms. Sarmite Bulte: I guess I'm trying to find this out: When Mr. Rabinovitch came before us, he seemed to say it wouldn't be right for SRC to use somebody else's people and somebody else's feed—

    Mr. John Herron: —to provide commentary.

    Ms. Sarmite Bulte: Yes, to provide commentary. For the car racing, does SRC provide its own commentators?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: No, they do not.

    Ms. Sarmite Bulte: That's what I'm trying to get at.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: The Montreal Grand Prix was this past Sunday. Whether you were watching it on SRC or on RDS, you were watching exactly the same thing, including the commercial structure and everything else.

    Ms. Sarmite Bulte: Again, that's what I'm trying to get at. There is a precedent of SRC using somebody's feed fully, without adding anything to it whatsoever.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: Correct.

    Ms. Sarmite Bulte: Thank you.

[Translation]

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Sauvageau.

    Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Just to follow on from what Ms. Bulte asked, one of our members said to Ms. Fortin that they hoped that Radio-Canada would not take such a long time to react and in so doing shoot down any hope of hockey games being broadcast on Radio-Canada next year. She answered as follows.

    

I think that RDS must make an acceptable proposal. If RDS fails to do so, then the answer is an unqualified no.

    The proposal remains the same.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: Perhaps we do not quite agree on the definition of the word “acceptable”, but for us, our proposal was more than acceptable, in terms of addressing the issue that we are discussing here today.

    Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: In Quebec, approximately 75% to 80% of the population have cable or satellite television. RDS is available to approximately 75% or 80% of Quebec households. Could you tell us if you have similar statistics on Canadian households outside Quebec?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: We do not have that specific information. However, I can tell you that according to Statistics Canada, there are perhaps a million or so francophones outside Quebec. We have approximately 460,000 households subscribing to RDS outside Quebec. Therefore, we are not a traditional type of network. I do not claim that RDS is available to all households in Canada. We do not have the same penetration as Radio-Canada or TVA for example.

    Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: I just wanted to get an idea of the order of scale that we are talking about here.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: Well, it is really much like the figures that I have just given you.

    Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: In your opinion, approximately 40% of minority francophone communities are in a position to—

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: No, I am talking about households.

    Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Yes, indeed, households.

    What would have to happen for RDS and Radio-Canada to resume discussions to ensure that Saturday night hockey continues next year? Would Radio-Canada have to agree, as it did in the case of the Grand Prix, to broadcast games in their raw state, or would different types of talks have to take place?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: That's a difficult one to answer. Firstly, you have to understand that the Saturday night hockey match tradition will continue, but on a different network. Consequently, the tradition continues. I heard Radio-Canada express their refusal loud and clear. I even saw it in black and white in the wake of last week's meeting here. Their refusal seems to me to be quite categorical. It's difficult for us, but we have to turn the page now.

º  (1635)  

    Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: I have one last question. I know that it will be out of order. You are not required to reply, but I would like it to be put on the record, however. If indeed you want to answer, you could do so in writing. If not, you will not be able to answer. I would like to know, Mr. Boivin, how sponsorships for the Montreal Canadians Hockey Club are negotiated with the federal government. You can always provide an answer in writing if you are not in a position to answer right now. Sponsorship for the Montreal Canadian stood at approximately $5.5 million for the past three years.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: If you'll tell me to whom I have to address my answer, I will ask those people in charge of these files to provide an answer. That's no problem at all. Just tell us who we have to reply to.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Please forward your answer to the committee clerk.

    A voice: Perfect. Thank you.

    Ms. Yolande Thibeault (Saint-Lambert, Lib.): Mr. Joint Chair, gentlemen, we have established that in Quebec, approximately 20% of households do not have access to RDS because it is not a free service.

    I do not think that I am mistaken when I say that those households which do not have access to RDS are mainly seniors. These are people with fewer financial resources, but who have supported the Montreal Canadians for more than 50 years, let's say. Low-income families of course don't have access to RDS. They don't have the money to go to see a hockey game at the Molson Centre. Then there are students, who represent tomorrow's market for you. These people are going to miss the Saturday night hockey game. I find that very sad.

    This is the Official Languages Committee. I find this situation even more dramatic for those French-speaking communities outside Quebec. According to what you have said, there are some 20% to 30% of people in francophone communities outside Quebec which will not be able to pick up your feed. These are communities for which French Hockey night in Canada is perhaps one of their only links with the French-speaking world. Consequently, could you comment on that. However, I would just like to say that I don't think this is good enough.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: I think that French speakers outside Quebec will continue to be connected to the French-speaking world. Radio-Canada will perhaps not indeed be broadcasting Montreal Canadians games on a Saturday evening, but they will continue to provide French-language programming 24 hours a day. Then there is TVA, which is also a national network. Therefore, I don't believe that we are depriving French speakers living outside Quebec of access to their culture.

    We are not insensitive to the hockey issue. We are not insensitive to this issue at all. I believe that we have tried, in terms of the proposal we put forward and which was turned down, to address this issue. Once RDS enters into a commercial agreement, Ms. Thibeault, as head of the corporation, it is my duty to see that agreement through.

    I also believe that my corporation—and I'm not only referring to RDS here, but also RDS's parent company—does have a social conscience and responsibility. This is why we put forward the proposal that we did.

    You have to understand that the proposal we made to Radio-Canada was quite disadvantageous for RDS. However, we took this initiative for reasons which went far beyond mere business-related interests. However, this proposal was turned down. Consequently, from that point on, it was difficult for us to come up with something new to propose to them. We had to turn the page.

    And if you don't mind me bragging slightly, RDS, as a specialty television network, is very affordable entertainment, compared to many other types. If you were to go to see a film, or a show or even go out to dinner and have to pay a babysitter, all that costs much more than it used to. Relatively speaking, specialty television remains very affordable, despite the fact that we're very well aware that not everybody can afford it.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Is that all?

    Ms. Yolande Thibeault: That is all for now, thank you.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you.

    Senator Comeau.

    Senator Gérald J.Comeau (Nova Scotia, PC): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    I have not followed the development of this file and in the end I regret that, because I am very frustrated to hear the comments I am hearing this afternoon. We have heard that 75% of Quebec households subscribe to RDS and that almost all viewers from francophone communities living in a minority situation will no longer have access to La Soirée du hockey, unless they subscribe to RDS. I have nothing negative to say about RDS, but many communities living in a minority situation in Canada... We are not called francophones living outside of Quebec; we are Canadians living in provinces with a strong anglophone majority. I am very frustrated to hear comments to the effect that the negotiations are over, that it is a closed book. If francophones living a minority situation want to watch the French version of Hockey Night in Canada, it is over. Period. As someone said at one point: “Pouf! It is over for those francophones outside Quebec”.

    I cannot accept that, Mr. Chairman. I do not want to attack these individuals. They are businessmen who have to answer to their investors, but these investors are not interested in Canadian francophonie.

    I come from a community where the cable company refused to offer the services of RDI in French. They refused. Now, are we to tell these people that they have to subscribe to Bell or that they have to have satellite television? That it will not cost them that much? That they only need to cut back on their outings, to go out one less time per week? This is not the case. Many of these people, in these communities, cannot afford satellite television.

    Therefore, what you are saying is that this is another group, another service that will be taken away from francophones living outside Quebec. It is over: we are abandoning these people.

    I say no, Mr. Chairman. I do not wish to attack these people, but I am very frustrated to hear Mr. Rabinovitch and these others who are here tell us that it is over, it is a closed book. It's a done deal. I think someone said it earlier on: business is business. It is over.

    I cannot say much more, Mr. Chairman, but it is not a closed book. That much I promise you.

    That is all I have to say.

º  (1640)  

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you, Mr. Comeau.

    Do you wish to react to that, gentlemen?

    Senator Léger.

    Senator Viola Léger (New Brunswick, Lib.): I am perhaps not following in the same vein, but I know that you will let me know. Mr. Rabinovitch said something that I understood, but that you had not mentioned. He said that the owners are Americans. So you made a deal with someone who has an objective and that is why you had to do so. I understand this reason. I am on your side.

    Now, I am going to move on to something that may not be connected to this. What can the government and the committee do to ensure that RDS becomes a station included in the basic package. Can we go and speak to Rogers tomorrow? Is that difficult? In order to not close the book on this, we could work towards ensuring that RDS be in the basic package. We have television and—

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): We have made that request or we are talking about making that request.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: In baseball jargon, we call that a curve; that is a big curve ball that has just been thrown.

    Senator Viola Léger: Yes, that is right.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: It is an intriguing, thought-provoking question. We have just had our licence renewed for the next seven years. We have a licence for a specialty sports service, i.e. one which is available on cable and by satellite. We would have to completely rethink, not only the existing conditions for the network licence, but our whole method of redistributing our signal throughout Canada. In all honesty, the question is too rhetorical and too complex for me to be able to respond intelligently off the top of my head.

    Senator Viola Léger: Can we study this?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: We can certainly think about it. I am trying to think. I put myself in the shoes of the cable operator or a provider. Specialized service providers have put together all of their packages according to RDS and several other channels, including public channels. Therefore, that is a big curve ball, madam.

    Senator Viola Léger: Well, we are discussing sports.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): If you would like to share your thoughts with us, please do not be shy. You may send them to the clerk who will distribute them to the members of the committee.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: All right.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Senator Léger.

    Senator Viola Léger: I am well aware of the fact that I do not know enough about this. I am not so naive as to not realize that to get into the big channels, there has to be a different structure and all, but this may help us to find a solution for francophones who will not get sports because they cannot afford to pay the extra amount . You are part of the package, not the basic package, because you have a lot of projects, but RDS comes in...

º  (1645)  

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: We are in the first tier, in fact.

    Senator Viola Léger: You are in the first tier.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: Yes. We spoke about this earlier: between 80% and 82% of people subscribe to that level.

    Senator Viola Léger: All right. That is all. Thank you.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): If I may, I would like to ask a few questions.

[English]

    Mr. Herron, you'll come next. I won't steal your thunder. Fear not.

[Translation]

    Last week, Mr. Rabinovitch let us know that there was a clause in the agreement between RDS, the Canadians Hockey Club, the National Hockey League and Société Radio-Canada that would allow Radio-Canada, if there was a bilateral agreement between RDS and la Société Radio-Canada, to continue to broadcast the 25 Saturday night games for the duration of this bilateral agreement.

    Are we correct in this assumption?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: That there is a clause in the contract that RDS has with the league that would allow them to keep Saturday night?

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): That there is a clause that would allow RDS to sign a contract with Radio-Canada allowing them, in one form or another, to continue broadcasting La Soirée du hockey on Radio-Canada. Is that the case?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: It is not specifically for Radio-Canada. I cannot go into the details of the agreement, but there is a clause in the contract that gives the Réseau des sports some flexibility regarding the distribution of certain games.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): The last question I asked Mr. Rabinovitch, I believe—and my colleague Mr. Herron will come back to this later on—was to find out if Radio-Canada was open to a co-production? They answered yes. I will come back to that.

    There is something else I would like to understand. If I understood correctly, RDS, at this point in time, has no intention of making any offers to Radio-Canada.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: That is correct.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Is RDS open to offers from Radio-Canada?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: At this stage, we can no longer do so. I have chosen to be frank with you. You have to understand that we began a process that lasted six months. Under this process, we reached an exclusive agreement which must be respected now. I think that what Radio-Canada is asking us to do now is to show concern for issues other than the public interest.

    I believe our common responsibility is to try to do the best we can to serve the French-speaking public. That is the issue. It is not a question of egos or of determining who is in control and who is not, who sells advertising time and who does not. That is not what is at stake. Both RDS and Radio-Canada must set aside all these emotional considerations and get back to the real problem which was the universal availability of the program for all francophone television viewers. The offer we made went 150% of the way toward meeting this requirement.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): But that does not meet our concern, Mr. Frappier.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: With all due respect to Radio-Canada, that concern is not my problem.

º  (1650)  

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Let me continue.

    You spoke about a licence earlier. You have certain licence conditions, as does Radio-Canada. I have referred to them twice. Radio-Canada made a commitment to rebroadcast the National Hockey League games for cultural and social reasons.

    In your view, should the CRTC get involved to ensure that Radio-Canada respects these licence conditions?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: Are you asking me that question?

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Yes.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: I do not think a licence condition can specifically require that a hockey game must be broadcast 25 times a year on a particular evening. There are over 8,000 hours of programming in the year, Mr. Chairman. We are talking about a total of 75 hours here. So I do not think that a licence condition could be so specific.

    I would like to make one final philosophical comment. I would not want to find myself in Mr. Boivin's shoes if he knew, when he started a negotiation process, that one of the broadcasters has at all times a priority right to part of the package. How can he get the value his product deserves if he knows at the outset that because of a legislative provision or something else, one of his partners will always get something; he is dead in the water.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): I have one final question for you, Mr. Frappier. You said that Radio-Canada turned down your offer. Right. We were told that Radio-Canada made an offer for $2 million and that you had also turned that down. Is that correct?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: Yes, that is correct.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Boivin, can you tell us why the Montreal Canadians negotiate separately from other National Hockey League teams? That is what we were told.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: You have to be careful here. As I explained in my opening remarks, there are two types of game products. There are the games that belong to the club and those that belong to the league, that is to all 30 teams. The unique thing about the Montreal Canadians is the joint venture that was established about five years ago with the National Hockey League for marketing French-language rights. Thus, the games that belong to the league are the playoffs and the Saturday night games, and our games are the other games played during the week throughout the regular season. In an effort to work together to optimize the value of these rights, because the French-language market is much more smaller in terms of television viewers and economic impact than the Canadian or North-American market, for example with reference to American rights, we established an arrangement that is unique among Canadian teams. We have this joint venture with the league, because we are operating in a unique market, namely the francophone market.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): You may not be able to answer my question, but if the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation—and I am not referring to either French television or English television, but to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation—said that it wanted to negotiate with the National Hockey League for both the English and the French networks together, rather than doing so separately, how would the Canadians Hockey Club react?

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: That is not being done. Actually, I am not sure I understand why that has not been done in the past. It was not done this year. I don't think that would necessarily cause a problem. We would have had to speed up the renegotiation of the francophone rights, which did not necessarily have the same timetable as the anglophone rights, but the Saturday night hockey games for the anglophone and francophone markets have always been negotiated separately. That was true again this time.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): You would have no objection to having the corporation negotiate that as part of an overall agreement. We were told that the league was opposed to this idea.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: No, I do not think that is the case. As far as I know, this question was never raised.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you.

    I have two more questions to ask. I am going to quote what Mr. Rabinovitch said. I'm sure you read his comments last week. He said, and I quote:

[English]

But I would not underestimate the problem. The problem is that by a business decision made by non-Canadians who owned the Montreal Canadiens, they have started down the route that destroyed the Montreal Expos, which I was very involved with and had to sell. It is only a matter of time in my opinion that, if we continue down this slippery slope, the Montreal Canadiens will not be in Montreal. This would be a horrible thing to happen. I'm speaking as a Montrealer.

[Translation]

    I would like to hear your comments on this and on something else Mr. Rabinovitch said:

[English]

I think it's a big mistake by them in the long run for the team, and I think it's a big mistake for Canadians, francophones in particular, that this is not going to be available to everybody. But we don't control the rights. They chose who they would sell it to, and it wasn't a question of price.

[Translation]

    I would like to hear what you think about these two quotations from Mr. Rabinovitch, please.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: First of all, I will not comment on Mr. Rabinovitch's remarks. He's entitled to his impressions and his opinions. What I can say is that it is true that since last summer the Montreal Canadians have had a majority American owner, from the Gillette family. However, the ownership is shared with Molson, which was the owner for 30 or 35 years. I can tell you that there was a firm and full commitment made in all regards, not just to keep the club in Montreal, but to ensure that it can perform and meet the fans' requirements by bringing back a winning tradition. I think that this year's results show the owners' commitment to the franchise.

    I think those were false comments that have nothing whatever to do with the situation we are discussing here. I can assure you that the club's owners and administration do not share that concern.

º  (1655)  

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): You do not agree with the following comment:

[English]

“it wasn't a question of price”.

[Translation]

    You do not agree with that either?

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: I do not agree at all. I said at the outset that at the beginning of the negotiations, we were told that Radio-Canada wanted to reduce considerably the number of games, that it wanted to get out of the playoffs, unless the Canadians were playing. So that is a flat refusal. It is a demand we cannot meet. We will not reveal what was said during the negotiations or the amounts that were discussed, but the initial offers we got made for an extremely difficult negotiating context. Radio-Canada wanted to reduce considerably the amount of hockey presented.

[English]

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Herron

    Mr. John Herron: Just for my own purposes as a loyal Bell satellite customer, I'd like to start with this partnership issue. I understand that you folks have to move on it and do your thing as well, but eventually you'll be raising the profile of your own brand, your own product, at RDS. I think that's going to probably be a good thing for your company, and also a good thing for hockey. It's an exciting opportunity.

    Let's look at the American example in football. I follow American football quite closely, and my favourite pre-game show is NFL GameDay...actually, now it's Sunday NFL Countdown. It's hosted by Chris Berman, and ESPN does a crack-up job on that pre-game show. ESPN even carries a Sunday night game as well.

    ESPN has formed a very direct partnership with a network, with ABC, on Monday Night Football. ESPN really goes out of its way to promote the network game at ABC. On that network game on Monday evening, Chris Berman, from ESPN, will even do a joint production, with lead-in commentary for the game and maybe some stuff at halftime as well. It's clearly a hybrid production by a network and a full-time sports network teamed together on a joint-production basis. That model has proven to be immensely successful at raising the profile of Monday Night Football on ABC, but also at raising the profile of the ESPN team on their pre-game aspect.

    I don't think it's too much of a stretch to be able to envision that as your brand continues to grow at RDS, the institutional history—à la Monday Night Football—that we have at Radio-Canada with French hockey on Saturday night would be a natural hybrid that could replicate this particular success that they've had in the U.S. Maybe there could be joint commentary of some form. It's not that much of a stretch to say you could even see the CBC advertising that game and that some RDS branding would be attached to it as well. As opposed to a confrontational perspective, we could have a win-win aspect.

    The chair has always been a facilitator of bringing folks together. I think that's why he asked that question of CBC just last week. If they're amenable to that ABC–ESPN hybrid, it sounds like a very reasonable solution that would not only fill the needs of both those networks, but would provide French hockey and enhance the institutional historical brand of Hockey Night in Canada, in French, with the new brand of RDS.

    Could you comment on that concept?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: Certainly.

    In reference to the specific example that Mr. Herron is giving from football, those types of partnerships are a little more easily arrived at when they're under one and the same holding company. ESPN and ABC have the same parent company, so it's probably a lot easier for them to be able to do those types of cross-promotion and cross-pollination that they're doing.

    Putting that example aside for a moment, we already do those types of arrangements with other broadcasters, and particularly Radio-Canada. In the Olympic coverage that we did, if you watched at all the Olympics from Sydney in 2000 or from Salt Lake this winter, those types of co-productions were regular. Some of our people were on their network and some of their people were on our network, depending on where the expertise was in terms of the on-air talent's ability to call a hockey game or whatever the sport might have been. There was also cross-promotion back and forth.

    If a business deal is inspired or developed along that line, then those things happen. They are already happening today between Radio-Canada and RDS. But this was a very different set of negotiations. Three bidders were trying to do the best they possibly could. As we all know, we arrived at an exclusive arrangement from there through this outcome.

    I don't mean to repeat myself, but I'm always thinking of the end game, and I believe you are, too, Mr. Herron. The end game is obtaining a solution that is right for all the parties involved, and particularly the viewers. I really believe we put the right solution on the table, and it was turned down.

»  (1700)  

    Mr. John Herron: As a marketing person in my own right, I still think you could enhance your newer, increasing brand by building on an institution. You can't buy fifty years of history, because it already exists. It's something that' is organic and has been grown. I see an immense opportunity for RDS to attach itself to something that it can't grow on its own that quickly without having that history. I think there could be a complementary reason to do it.

    I think your point is extremely salient with respect to it being easy for ABC and ESPN to do, but the model works. It really does drive both that Sunday night broadcast and that Monday night broadcast. And there are still different commentators on the main play-by-play. They're distinctly different products.

    If SRC is amenable to a co-production, if there is a business opportunity there, and if it's a good deal, I think it's worth having that conversation. If it's a good deal, go forward. If it's not what you had in mind, walk away from the table again. But I think it's worth putting the energy into it.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: That's certainly food for thought, but it's very difficult for us. We must now live with the realities and complexities of our agreement. I am as preoccupied as all of you with what the impact could be for some francophone viewers, whether they're in Quebec or outside of Quebec. But I sleep very well at night knowing I made an offer that answered that question head-on—and again, I say this with all due respect—and was going to have a material impact on my ratings, and therefore impact on the intrinsic value of my network.

    I was harming the results that I could have otherwise expected. If I was just looking at this as a businessman, we were harming those results. The offer we made accepted that we were doing so for a greater good, but at what point does our responsibility start and stop? At what point do SRC's responsibilities start and stop?

    Mr. John Herron: Thank you very much for being here.

[Translation]

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Senator Gauthier.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I've two or three little questions.

    I did not understand what was said earlier very well. Are you a large broadcaster, a medium-sized broadcaster or a small broadcaster according to the CRTC definition, Mr. Frappier?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: We are a large broadcaster.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: So closed captioning is required, but you do not provide it. Since 1995, all the licences granted by the CRTC included a requirement for real time closed captioning. I have still not been able to get this service on your channel.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: We fully comply with the conditions of our licence, senator.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I would submit that if you do not have closed captioning...

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: No small, medium-size or large broadcaster has ever managed to do real time closed captioning in French, regardless of the definition used or the size of the broadcaster. The problem is universal; it affects all real time broadcasters.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: It's coming. We are going to be working on that, and the CRTC will as well. Get ready.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: I know. We are well aware of that.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: When you negotiate for a television program, say a hockey game, do you negotiate for the video or the audio feed, or both, with the video being the pictures of the game and the audio...?

»  (1705)  

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: Both.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Mr. Boivin, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation signed a five-year agreement with the National Hockey League for the English network. Is that correct?

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: Yes.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: In the case of the French network, they failed. If Radio-Canada would decide to take the video feed from the hockey game it is broadcasting in English and add an audio feed in French... That can be done using the technology available in all television sets. There is a chip whereby users can have access to what is known as the second audio program, the SAP. It is possible to change from French to English, if that is available, of course. Why could Radio-Canada not use the same video feed of the hockey game that it purchased and have a French audio feed as an option?

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: We must understand that the games CBC bought do not include the Canadians games. There would be a few. Every year, there may be five or six broadcast on the English network in the rest of the country, but for the most part, the two Saturday night games are between other Canadian teams against other teams in the league. So it is not the same.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I see.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: The rights are not the same either. The rights they acquired from those teams do not allow them to broadcast in the French-language market. They purchased English-language rights; that must be understood. Thus, even though the technology exists to do what you suggest, CBC would not be allowed to do so because of the rights they purchased.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: [Editor's Note: Inaudible] and the francophone market.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: Yes. These are two sets of rights which are sold separately.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: So they cannot use the video feed and have the audio feed in a different language.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: We have the technology to do that, but it would be impossible because of the rights.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: So legally it could not be done.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: Legally, it could not be done.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I'm going to speak some of my “northern creole”, Mr. Frappier. That is an expression used by Franco-Ontarians. When I was young, we played hockey with pucks, not rondelles, and we shot the puck into the goals. We did not have the right words in French for these expressions. Do you understand what I mean? Sometimes we missed, but sometimes we scored and there too we used the English word rather than the French word. Do you understand what I mean? That was the way we spoke.

    I often watched hockey games from when I was very young with the proper commentary, and the people's French has improved a great deal thanks to sports in Quebec in general and in French Canada. I know whereof I speak. It is rather difficult for us. You will understand the comments made earlier by Ms. Léger, Mr. Comeau and others.

    Minority francophone communities have trouble accepting the fact that the big guys have decided that there will no longer be a Saturday night hockey game. They will have to go to the local tavern if they want to watch the hockey game. If they're lucky, the tavern will have a dish. I think RDS also broadcasts via satellite, does it not?

    Twenty per cent of Quebeckers and thirty percent of Montrealers do not have the service. That is quite a few people. What would the percentage be among francophones outside Quebec? I do not know that, but I am told that the cable company in New Brunswick, Rogers, serves the majority of the Acadian population. But they will not have the hockey game in French starting next fall.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: There are a number of francophones in New Brunswick who subscribe to RDS. It is one of the best developed markets outside Quebec for us.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you, Senator. Your time is up. You have one last question?

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Yes.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Fine. Ask your final question.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: That is all right.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Frappier or Mr. Boivin, could you tell me who owns the French-language rights of the other Canadian hockey teams? I'm not talking about the Montreal Canadians.

»  (1710)  

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: They own them, if it is for local games.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Were they purchased by some broadcaster?

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: No.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): No?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: That is a good question.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): We could ask Radio-Canada why it did not purchase them or why it does not want to purchase them. I imagine they are for sale.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: Yes.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): And RDS did not buy them?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: No, not yet.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): I wanted to ask you the following question, Mr. Boivin: would you as a representative of the Canadians Hockey Club, or Mr. Frappier, object to Radio-Canada doing somewhat as Senator Gauthier suggested, namely broadcasting in French on La Soirée du hockey the games played by the teams with which CBC has an agreement? Would you have any objection to that?

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: I need to understand this better. Perhaps, Pierre, if I might...

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: Unfortunately, I do not have the precise answer to that. I would have to speak to the league officials, because there is a concept regarding games in English and in French that I do not understand. If I may, I would like to get back to you on that so as not to mislead you. The question about broadcasting rights is rather technical, so I want to be sure that I do not mislead you.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): We can invite you back, Mr. Boivin.

    I am beginning to wonder whether we should not invite the CBC again, and perhaps the league as well, but it will be up to my colleagues and myself to decide this together.

    Senator Gauthier, did you raise your hand to put another question?

    Go ahead.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: It is the same question that you developed. I do not understand this very well.

    How do you define the francophone market and the anglophone market? I know how the CRTC defines them, but how do you define them? You spoke of a francophone market and of an anglophone market.

    Mr. Gerry Frappier: Do you mean this in terms of rights?

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Mr. Boivin made this comment.

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: In business operations, this is largely defined by the broadcasters' antenna and programming. With a broadcaster, there is no market. Or rather, there is a market, but it is not being served.

    As far as we are concerned, once again, to be sure that we do not mislead you, I would have to verify the way in which the National League technically and legally separates anglophone rights from francophone rights for national games.

    Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Could you send us the answer, please?

    Mr. Pierre Boivin: Yes, certainly.

    The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Since no one else is requesting the floor, please let me conclude this debate.

    Mr. Boivin, you just mentioned that the CBC is more involved in sports than Radio-Canada. I think I saw figures to this effect: 3.8% for the CBC as compared to 2.2% for Radio-Canada, SRC. We should check into this, but only for the benefit of our audience and the people here. I mention this as a point of information.

    When its licence was renewed, the CBC perhaps spoke of reducing its sports broadcasts, whereas this was not the case for Radio-Canada, and in Radio-Canada's licence conditions, sports are mentioned.

    I think that you have seen that there is a will to be fair with regard to official languages. This is our role as a committee. Basically, English Canadians in this country can watch their national sport for free on public television, whereas this is no longer true for the French Canadians in Canada. This is a concern of ours. Maybe not all of them but 70% or 80% of them may have to pay for watching hockey, depending on where they live. This is the reality.

    Congratulations, Mr. Frappier. You represented your company well, but our problem still persists. In the light of what we learned today, we may look further into the matter, because there seems to be discrepancies between what we heard last week and what we are hearing today. Then we will see. It will be up to my colleagues to decide this matter.

    Now let me thank you for your very quick response to our invitation, we appreciated it very much, and I hope that the fine tradition of the Montreal Canadians can remain on the public network.

    The meeting is adjourned.