| |
Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2006-613
|
| |
Ottawa, 31 October 2006 |
| |
Videotron Ltd.
Montréal, Quebec
CF Cable TV Inc.
Montréal and Terrebonne, Quebec |
| |
Applications 2005-1314-4, 2005-1332-6
and 2005-1329-3
Broadcasting Public Notice CRTC 2006-64
23 May 2006 |
|
Cable distribution undertakings in Montréal and Terrebonne –
Licence renewals
|
| |
The Commission renews the
broadcasting licences for the Class 1 cable broadcasting distribution
undertakings held by Videotron Ltd. and its subsidiary CF Cable TV Inc.
serving Montréal, Quebec, and Montréal and Terrebonne, Quebec,
respectively, from 1 January 2007 to 31 August 2013. |
|
The applications
|
|
1. |
The Commission received applications from
Videotron Ltd. and its subsidiary CF Cable TV Inc. (collectively
referred to as "Videotron," or "the licensee") to renew the broadcasting
licences of the Class 1 cable broadcasting distribution undertakings (BDUs)
serving Montréal, Quebec, and Montréal and Terrebonne, Quebec,
respectively. |
|
2. |
In its applications for renewal, the
licensee requested relief from the condition of licence requiring it to
submit an audited annual report listing expenditures associated with the
operation of the community channel imposed at the time of the last
licence renewal in 2003 for the broadcast years ending 31 August 2004
and 2005. |
|
3. |
Videotron was of the view that the
requirement to submit this report is too onerous and that its submission
should no longer be necessary. It contended that the Commission is able
to verify compliance with its condition of licence through the annual
reports submitted by its BDUs without the above-mentioned special
report. It added that no other BDU is required to submit this type of
special report and that the Commission had requested these reports in
order to determine whether the licensee had made certain adjustments to
its expenditures. Videotron concluded that the report no longer has a
purpose since it has made the necessary adjustments. |
|
4. |
Videotron further requested that its
commitment regarding the percentage of expenditures on service programs,
that is, programs produced by the licensee itself, be amended. |
|
5. |
At the time of the last licence renewals
for Videotron, the Commission accepted the licensee’s commitment to
limit expenditures on service programs to 30% of its total direct
expenditure budget for programming produced by not-for-profit community
television corporations (TV corporations) present and future in the
greater Montréal area. Videotron requested that the Commission accept a
commitment by the licensee to reduce expenditures on service programs to
25%. According to Videotron, the greater emphasis that it has placed on
programming from TV corporations and the increase in the number of
access projects it has developed with people in the Montréal community
have enabled it to limit to approximately 20% the proportion of its
expenditures on service programs. Videotron explained that the 5%
difference between the level that it had proposed and the level that it
had achieved would provide it with some leeway. |
|
6. |
The licensee also requested a redefinition
of its authorized service areas. |
| |
Interventions
|
|
7. |
The Commission received interventions in
support of the renewal of these licences, although interveners expressed
concerns about the community channel. The three organizations that made
comments regarding the community channel in their interventions were the
Fédération des télévisions communautaires autonomes du Québec (FTCAQ),
the Corporation de Télédiffusion du Grand Châteauguay inc. (CTGC) and
Télévision Rive-Sud & Télévision communautaire de la Vallée-du-Richelieu
(TVRS & TVR9). The CTGC and TVRS & TVR9 are local TV corporations. The
intervention from TVRS & TVR9 pertained only to the application for
renewal of Videotron Ltd.’s licence for Montréal. |
|
8. |
Generally, the comments pertained to the
seven service zones in greater Montréal served by the licensee,
promotion of the community channel, access to the community channel by
independent TV corporations, service programs, the scheduling of access
programs, the audited annual reports on contributions and expenses
associated with operation of the community channel, financial support
for community programming, and digital cable distribution of the
community channel. |
|
9. |
The FTCAQ submitted that the seven service
zones must be maintained, including the six separate local zones coordinated
by independent TV corporations, as established in Licence renewal
of cable distribution undertakings serving part of Montréal and Terrebonne,
Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2003-523,
24 October 2003 (Decision 2003-523).
According to the FTCAQ, the creation of these zones has contributed
to a resurgence of TV corporations and the distribution of their local
access programming in greater Montréal. |
|
10. |
The FTCAQ also stated that Videotron must
ensure that its efforts to promote the community channel mesh more
completely with the promotional campaigns already being undertaken by
the TV corporations, given that a lack of coordination could be
counterproductive and problematic. It added that, in greater Montréal,
the licensee must continue to increase its efforts to schedule access
programming produced by independent TV corporations during prime time in
those zones. On the subject of service programs, the FTCAQ submitted
that the licensee could maintain its proportion of such programs at 20%
in terms of air time and allocated resources, contrary to what Videotron
proposed in its application, that is, to reduce direct expenditures
associated with this type of programming from 30% to 25%. |
|
11. |
The FTCAQ also expected Videotron to make a
more tangible commitment to local community programming and to TV
corporations. It submitted that the licensee must continue to strive for
a balance between the amount allocated to TV corporations and the amount
available for programming produced by Videotron studios. It added that
Videotron should provide TV corporations with clearer information on the
way it allocates its contribution to local expression in the various
budget items and that funds should be allocated among the various
production studios in a given service zone using an egalitarian
approach. The FTCAQ added that it is counting on the Commission to
determine whether Videotron is actually allocating its expenses as it
claims. It requested that the condition of licence requiring the
licensee to submit an audited annual report on the operating expenses of
the community channel be retained, if it is the best way for the
Commission to make that determination. |
|
12. |
Lastly, the FTCAQ asked that the licensee
make a formal commitment to broadcast the community channel in all
service zones and all separate local zones in greater Montréal on
digital cable beginning in September 2006. |
|
13. |
The intervention from the CTGC expressed
the same concerns raised by the FTCAQ. Among other things, the CTGC
broached the subjects of service zones, financial assistance, access
programming and its place in schedules, promotion and advertising of TV
corporations and their programming, and digital cable distribution of
the community channel. |
|
14. |
The CTGC expected that Videotron meet the
funding targets it set out in its application and hoped to see its
cooperation with the licensee broadened so that its programming is
better positioned in the schedule during peak viewing hours and during
its community’s "target" hours. The CTGC also called for better
advertising of TV corporations and their programming and requested that
the licensee inform the Commission and TV corporations in service zones
in greater Montréal of its strategy regarding distribution of the
community channel on the digital cable service. |
|
15. |
TVRS & TVR9 supported the renewal of
Videotron’s licences in Montréal, but proposed that the percentage
allocated to service programs be reduced to 20% in order to foster
access programming. They added that they objected to the eventual
creation of an English-language community channel in Montréal as
proposed by the licensee in its response to the Commission’s
supplementary questions of 27 February 2006. TVRS & TVR9 would rather
keep the development of programming aimed at Anglophones and other
minorities on the current community channel in order to preserve access
to their nearby community media. |
| |
Licensee’s response
|
|
16. |
Videotron responded to all of the
interventions submitted regarding its licence renewal applications, and
in particular to the questions related to the community channel.
However, it did not submit any comments on the intervention from TVRS &
TVR9, which expressed concern about the possible future development of
an English-language community channel. |
|
17. |
Regarding the interveners’ concern about
the seven service zones in greater Montréal, the licensee undertook to
maintain the current separate zones and stated that the infrastructure
now in place would remain and be upgraded. Regarding digital
distribution of the community channel, Videotron stated that the service
would be phased in over the summer of 2006 and would be completed before
the end of September 2006, which would resolve the problem completely.
|
|
18. |
Regarding the concerns about the promotion
and advertising of and access to the community channel, Videotron agreed
to tie its promotional activities in with those of the TV corporations,
but added that, as long as it is responsible for the community channel,
it intends to handle promotion of the community channel and of its
objectives. |
|
19. |
Regarding financial assistance for TV
corporations, the licensee stated that it had exceeded its commitments
in this area in recent years and that its commitment to production
support, as described in its application, is firm. Regarding the
disclosure of information on expenses allocated to the community
channel, Videotron submitted that the mechanisms prescribed by the
Commission are sufficient to reassure all interveners as to its
compliance with the regulatory framework. Moreover, Videotron stated
that, despite the fact it had been able to limit its expenditures for
service programs to 20% of total expenditures in the past, it would
prefer to limit its expenditures to 25% for the next licence term in
order to afford itself some leeway. |
|
20. |
Regarding the positioning of access
programming in the prime-time schedule, Videotron reported that almost
40% of prime-time hours would be accessible to participating TV
corporations by the fall of 2006, which would constitute a substantial
increase over previous seasons. |
|
21. |
Regarding the requirement to submit an
audited annual report on operating expenses associated with the
community channel, Videotron pointed out that it has made the
adjustments prescribed at the time of the last licence renewal and was
of the view that these reports no longer serve a purpose. |
| |
Commission’s analysis and determinations
|
|
22. |
In its review of these applications, the
Commission has carefully noted the comments and concerns submitted
by the FTCAQ, the CTGC and TVRS & TVR9 regarding the community
channel. The Commission notes that the interveners support the renewal
of Videotron’s licences but are of the view that certain conditions
and expectations related to the community channel should be maintained
or amended. In Decision 2003-523,
the Commission noted that the licensee had agreed that the conditions
of licence and other provisions relating to the community channel
contained in the decision should ultimately apply to the main Videotron
licence for the greater Montréal area, when the licence is renewed.
The Commission had examined the applicant’s plans and commitments
in detail in the light of the following aspects of the community media
policy set out in Policy framework for community-based media,
Public Notice CRTC 2002-61,
10 October 2002 (Public Notice 2002-61): |
| |
reflection and representation of different community groups;
financial support for TV corporations;
local community television programming;
other sources of community channel programming;
access to the community channel programming schedule;
advertising and sponsorship;
promotion of access and training for, and of participation by,
volunteers;
reflection of the ethnic and Aboriginal composition of the
community, as well as of both official language groups; and
services for persons with a visual or hearing impairment.
|
|
23. |
In the current licence renewal
applications, the Commission notes that the licensee has addressed all
aspects related to the community channel. Based on its review, the
Commission finds that Videotron has met the conditions and expectations
related to the community channel during the current licence term. |
| |
Reflection and representation of different community groups
|
|
24. |
In Decision 2003-523,
the Commission decided to accept, by means of a condition of licence,
the service zone arrangement proposed by the applicant, provided that
a seventh zone was created consisting of the Laval Island. In accordance
with that condition of the licence, the applicant created seven service
zones that are now in operation. The Commission requires, as a condition
of licence, that Videotron maintain the seven service zones in
greater Montréal. This condition of licence is set out in the appendix
to this decision. |
| |
Financial support for TV corporations
|
|
25. |
At the time of the last renewal of
Videotron’s licence, the Commission expected the licensee to achieve a
better balance between the funding allocated to TV corporations for
access programming and the funding allocated to programming produced by
the applicant and broadcast on Canal Vox. As observed by the licensee in
is renewal application, there was an imbalance in 2003 between the time
allocated to TV corporations in the Montréal area to broadcast their
programs and the amounts that they were paid. Videotron stated that,
during the next licence term, it would continue its efforts to attain a
better balance between the time and money allocated to the TV
corporations and the time and money allocated to the programming it
produces. |
|
26. |
In Decision 2003-523,
the Commission required, as a condition of licence, that the licensee
file an audited annual report for the broadcast years ending 31 August
2004 and 31 August 2005 on contributions and expenditures associated
with the operation of the community channel because of the existing
imbalance between TV corporations and Canal Vox in terms of the time
and cost of community channel programming and in order to monitor
the applicant’s performance with respect to local expression more
closely on an annual basis. This report provides a level of detail
not provided by the regular annual report required from BDUs. |
|
27. |
Regarding the interveners’ request to
maintain the condition of licence requiring the licensee to submit
audited annual reports on the operating expenses of the community
channel for the next licence term, the Commission acknowledges that the
preparation of these reports places an administrative burden on the
licensee and is of the view that the changes made by the licensee
reflect a change in the situation. The Commission therefore considers
that the submission of such reports is no longer necessary. |
|
28. |
The Commission, however, remains sensitive
to the concerns raised by the interveners and therefore expects the
licensee to make a commitment to continue to strive for a balance
between the funding allocated to TV corporations for access programming
and the funding allocated to programming produced by the licensee, as
presented in previous reports and proposed in the current applications
for licence renewal. The Commission reminds interested parties that they
can report a problem to the Commission at any time. |
| |
Local community television programming
|
|
29. |
In its licence renewal applications,
Videotron stated that it devoted at least 60% of the programming
broadcast on the community channel in each broadcast week to local
programming, as required by subsection 27.1(1) of the Broadcasting
Distribution Regulations (the Regulations). The Commission considers
that the licensee has met the requirements of the Regulations and notes
its intention to continue to comply with the Regulations in this regard
during the next licence term. |
| |
Service programs
|
|
30. |
During the last licence term, Videotron was
required to limit its expenditures associated with service programs to
30% of direct expenditures in the total programming budget for all TV
corporations. The licensee has demonstrated that it has met that
commitment, having indicated that the expenditures, in fact, represented
less than 20% of direct expenditures for 2003-2004. Further, the
licensee made a commitment, set out in its renewal applications, to
comply with a limit of 25% for the next licence term. |
|
31. |
As stated earlier, in its response to the
interventions, Videotron proposed to the Commission that the limit be
decreased from 30% to 25% in order to give the licensee some leeway in
the years ahead. It added that it would prefer to limit such
expenditures to 25% for the next licence term because it is dependent on
the quality of the access projects submitted to it and the amount of
programming that each TV corporation could produce. |
|
32. |
In light of the interveners’ comments and
Videotron’s response, the Commission accepts the licensee’s commitment
to limit expenditures associated with service programs to 25% of direct
expenditures in the total programming budget for all TV corporations,
present and future, in greater Montréal. The Commission encourages the
licensee to reduce those expenditures to less than 25% in order to
maximize the number of access programs broadcast on the community
channel. |
| |
Access to the community channel programming schedule
|
|
33. |
At the time of Videotron’s last licence
renewal, the Commission indicated that it planned to pay special
attention to the equitable treatment of access programming produced by
TV corporations at the next licence renewal. To that end, the Commission
imposed a condition of licence regarding access to the community channel
programming schedule for independent TV corporations. The condition
read: |
| |
Through its programming, the licensee shall reflect the greater
Montréal community in its entirety. Moreover, it shall be responsible
for all programming distributed on the community channel, including
programming produced by the TV corporations for distribution in the
individual service zones during breakaway segments.
|
|
34. |
Moreover, based on the licensee’s
commitment at the time of the last licence renewal to comply with the
community policy regarding access to community programming, the
Commission made the following points: |
| |
- the technical quality of the applicant’s access programming must
conform to minimum broadcast standards. The Commission expects these
minimum technical standards to be objective and clearly understood by
the TV corporations and the individuals or groups producing access
programming;
|
| |
- the applicant had made a commitment to include an equitable place
for access programming produced by the TV corporations on the
community channel (Canal Vox, in the greater Montréal area), with
respect to the placement of such programming in the schedule, as well
as the number of hours of original and repeat programming that is
distributed.
|
|
35. |
In connection with the current renewal applications,
some interveners criticized the fact that access programming produced
by independent TV corporations did not always get the best possible
position in Canal Vox’s schedule. According to Public Notice 2002-61,
access programming should be scheduled in a reasonable manner throughout
the broadcast day, including the peak viewing period (7:00 p.m. to
11:00 p.m.), and the ratio of original to repeat programs should generally
be the same for access programs as it is for the rest of the community
programming. |
|
36. |
The Commission has noted the commitments
made by Videotron in its renewal applications regarding the scheduling
of access programs. The Commission further notes that the licensee has
also indicated in its applications that it is committed to continue to
comply with the condition of licence and the other commitments referred
to above regarding this type of programming. |
|
37. |
The Commission therefore maintains the
condition of licence regarding access to the programming schedule
set out in the appendix to this decision. The Commission encourages the
licensee to continue to increase its efforts to enable more programs
produced by independent TV corporations to be broadcast not only during
peak viewing hours, but also during the "target" hours of the community
being served. |
| |
Advertising and sponsorship
|
|
38. |
As stated in the community policy set out
in Public Notice 2002-61,
the Commission considers that the public service orientation of the
community channel can be best achieved through stable funding provided
by cable licensees, with limited reliance on advertising revenues.
As stated in the Regulations, community channels continue to be limited
to sponsorships and contra advertising. |
|
39. |
With regard to advertising the community
channel, the Commission is satisfied with Videotron’s activities but
encourages the licensee to do more to publicize and identify programs
produced by independent TV corporations by adding more information about
productions in its inserts and programming schedule, such as contact
information for the TV corporation that produced the program. |
|
Promotion of access and training for, and of participation by,
volunteers
|
|
40. |
As indicated in the licensee’s brief and
its answers to the Commission’s supplementary questions, initiatives
related to promotion of access and training for and participation by
Videotron volunteers will continue during the next licence term. The
Commission has noted the licensee’s efforts and is satisfied with the
measures taken in this regard. |
|
Reflection of the ethnic and Aboriginal composition of the
community, as well as both official language groups
|
|
41. |
The Commission considers that Videotron is
meeting the objectives of the community policy regarding official
languages and the multi-ethnic character of greater Montréal. However,
the Commission expects the licensee to be sensitive to the Aboriginal
population in the vast region it serves, particularly the urban
Aboriginal population, and encourages Vidéotron to continue its efforts
to attract proposals from Aboriginal communities. |
| |
Services for persons with a visual or hearing impairment
|
|
42. |
The Commission stated in the community policy
that licensees that elect to distribute community programming should
endeavour to meet the needs of persons with a visual or hearing impairment.
The licensee made a commitment to continue its captioning projects
as described in Decision 2003-523
and its narrative brief, that is, to provide closed captioning for
at least 10% of its programming beginning in 2002-2003 and gradually
increase that percentage to 50% of original programs by the 2012-2013
broadcast year. The Commission expects the licensee to meet those
commitments and encourages it to increase the percentage of captioned
programs. |
|
43. |
With regard to video description, Videotron
indicated that the programming broadcast on the community channel did
not lend itself to the process. The Commission strongly urges licensees
to adapt their programming to include audio description or to provide a
verbal description of visual information wherever possible, and to take
measures to ensure that customer services meet the needs of visually
impaired persons. |
| |
Other concerns
|
| |
Digital cable distribution of the community channel
|
|
44. |
In their interventions, the FTCAQ and the
CTGC expressed concerns about the distribution of the community channel
on Videotron’s digital cable service. The Commission notes that the
licensee addressed this issue in its response to the interventions by
stating that it had found a solution that will make it possible to
provide programming specific to its service zone to subscribers with a
digital terminal. Videotron added that the service will be phased in
during the summer of 2006. According to the licensee, the task should be
completed by the end of September 2006. |
|
45. |
The Commission is satisfied with the
measures taken by Videotron regarding digital cable distribution of the
local community channel in each service zone. |
| |
Conclusion
|
|
46. |
The Commission renews the
broadcasting licences for the Class 1 cable broadcasting distribution
undertakings held by Videotron Ltd. serving Montréal, and its subsidiary
CF Cable TV Inc. serving Montréal and Terrebonne, from 1 January 20071
to 31 August 2013. |
|
47. |
The operation of these undertakings will be
regulated in accordance with the Broadcasting Distribution
Regulations, and the licences will be subject to the conditions
set out therein and the conditions set out in the appendix to
this decision. |
|
48. |
The Commission approves the
licensee’s requests to redefine its authorized service areas. |
| |
Employment equity
|
|
49. |
Because the licensee is governed by the
Employment Equity Act and submits reports to the Department of Human
Resources and Skills Development, the Commission does not evaluate its
employment equity practices. |
| |
Secretary General |
| |
This decision is to be appended to the
licences. It is available in alternative format upon request and may
also be examined in PDF or HTML format
at the following Internet site: http://www.crtc.gc.ca.
|
| |
Appendix to Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2006-613
|
| |
Conditions of licence for the three (3) undertakings
|
| |
1. For the purposes of the community channel, the licensed area
shall consist of:
|
| |
a) A single service area currently encompassing those served
under three existing licences (Videotron Ltd. Montréal and CF
Cable TV Inc. Montréal and Terrebonne);
|
| |
b) Seven (7) service zones, including six (6) local service zones,
within which local community programming is coordinated by not-for-profit
local community television corporations (TV corporations), as defined
in Policy framework for community-based media, Public Notice
CRTC 2002-61, 10 October
2002 (Public Notice 2002-61), in accordance with terms and conditions
as agreed between Videotron and the TV corporations, on condition
of compliance with the community policy and applicable regulations.
The seven service zones are:
|
| |
Zone 1: Montréal Island;
Zone 2: Laval Island;
Zone 3: Saint-Jérôme, Prévost, Sainte-Thérèse;
Zone 4 : Terrebonne, Repentigny, L’Assomption, Joliette;
Zone 5 : Longueuil, Boucherville, Beloeil, Varennes, Saint-Bruno,
La Prairie;
Zone 6 : Saint-Jean, Chambly;
Zone 7 : Châteauguay, Mercier, Saint-Constant, Delson,
Sainte-Catherine.
|
| |
2. Through its programming, the licensee shall reflect the greater
Montréal community in its entirety. Moreover, it shall be responsible
for all programming distributed on the community channel, including
programming produced by the TV corporations for distribution in the
individual service zones during breakaway segments.
|
| |
3. The licensee is relieved of the requirement under section 17(1)(c)
of the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations that it distribute
the programming services of the local television station CHLT-TV (TVA)
Sherbrooke. The Commission notes that the licensee is distributing
CFTM-TV (TVA) Montréal off-air as a replacement as part of the basic
service.
|
| |
4. The licensee is relieved of the requirement under section 17(2)
of the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations that it distribute
the programming services of the priority television stations CFTU-TV (IND)
(Canal Savoir), CJNT-TV (IND) Montréal and CJOH-TV-8 (CTV) Cornwall on
the basic band. The licensee is nevertheless required to continue
distributing these stations as part of the basic service.
|
| |
5. The licensee is authorized to distribute, at its option, on a
discretionary digital basis, the programming services of the distant
Canadian stations CKXT-TV (Sun TV) Toronto and CFMT-TV (OMNI.1)
Toronto for the Videotron Ltd. undertakings serving Montréal and CF
Cable TV Inc. serving Montréal.
|
| |
6. The licensee is authorized to distribute, at its option, the two
PBS network stations WETK-TV Burlington, Vermont, and WCFE-TV
Plattsburgh, New York. The Commission notes that the licensee receives
these signals off-air.
|
| |
7. The licensee is authorized to distribute WFFF-TV (FOX)
Burlington, Vermont, on a discretionary tier of its undertaking. The
licensee is also authorized to distribute, at its option, WWBI-TV
(Warner Brothers) Burlington-Plattsburgh, New York. The Commission
notes that the licensee receives these signals off-air.
|
| |
8. The licensee is authorized to distribute the following signals
on a discretionary digital basis:
|
| |
- a second set of signals that provides the programming of the
four U.S. commercial networks (CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX) and the
non-commercial PBS network (hereafter referred
to as the U.S. 4+1 signals).
|
| |
The distribution on a discretionary basis on the licensee’s digital
service of a second set U.S. 4+1 signals is
subject to the provision that, with respect to such signals, the
licensee adhere to the requirements regarding non-simultaneous program
deletion set out in section 43 of the Broadcasting Distribution
Regulations. The Commission may suspend the application of
this provision, with respect to the signals to be distributed, upon
its approval of an executed agreement between the licensee and
broadcasters. Such an agreement must deal with issues related to the
protection of program rights arising in connection with the
discretionary carriage of a second set of U.S. 4+1 signals solely on
the licensee’s digital service.
|
| |
The Commission reminds the licensee that the requirements set out
in section 30 of the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations
regarding simultaneous substitution apply also in the case of U.S. 4 +
1 signals.
|
| |
9. The licensee is authorized to distribute the following signals
on a digital discretionary basis:
|
| |
- any of the distant Canadian television signals set out in the
List of Part 3 Eligible Satellite Services; and
|
| |
- a third set of signals that provides the programming of the four
U.S. commercial networks (CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX) (hereafter referred to
as the U.S. commercial network signals).
|
| |
The distribution on a discretionary basis on the licensee’s digital
service of a third set of U.S. commercial network signals and distant
Canadian signals is subject to the provision that, with respect to
such signals, the licensee adhere to the requirements regarding
non-simultaneous program deletion set out in section 43 of the
Broadcasting Distribution Regulations. The
Commission may suspend the application of this provision, with respect
to the signals to be distributed, upon its approval of an executed
agreement between the licensee and broadcasters. Such an agreement
must deal with issues related to the protection of program rights
arising in connection with the discretionary carriage of a third set
of U.S. commercial network signals and distant Canadian signals solely
on the licensee’s digital service.
|
| |
The Commission reminds the licensee that the requirements set out
in section 30 of the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations
regarding simultaneous substitution apply also in the case of U.S.
commercial network signals and distant Canadian signals.
|
| |
10. The licensee shall not distribute to its subscribers more than
two sets of U.S. commercial network signals.
|
| |
11. The licensee is authorized to continue to distribute, at its
option, as part of its HD digital service the signals of the
transitional digital television undertakings CFTO-DT Toronto and
CIII-DT-41 Toronto until Montréal digital television undertakings that
provide CTV and Global programming in HD begin broadcasting.
Specifically, the authorization to distribute CFTO-DT Toronto will
lapse once a Montréal digital television undertaking that provides CTV
programming in HD begins broadcasting, and the authorization to
distribute CIII-DT-41 Toronto will lapse once a Montréal digital
television undertaking that provides Global programming in HD begins
broadcasting.
|
| |
The Commission reminds the licensee that the requirements set out
in section 30 of the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations
and paragraph 99 of Public Notice 2002-61
regarding simultaneous substitution apply to transitional digital
television undertakings.
|
| |
12. The licensee is authorized to offer, on a discretionary basis,
a video game service as a speciality programming service under the
conditions set out in Licence amendment concerning the distribution
of a video games service, Decision CRTC 95-591,
24 August 1995.
|
| |
13. The licensee is relieved of the requirement under section 22 of
the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations to distribute CKOD-FM
Valleyfield and CFLG-FM Cornwall.
|
| |
14. The licensee is authorized to distribute, on a discretionary
basis, the programming service of the distant Canadian station CITY-TV
(IND) Toronto.
|
| |
15. The licensee is relieved of the requirement under section 7 of
the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations that, except as
provided by a condition of licence, it not alter or delete the
programming services of Consumer News and Business Channel (CNBC), The
Movie Network 3, CMT and Viewers Choice 2, in the course of their
distribution. This condition of licence will permit the licensee to
alter or curtail these services for the purpose of sharing a channel,
in accordance with the licensee’s agreements with the operators of
these programming services. The other provisions of section 7 of the
Regulations shall continue to apply.
|
| |
16. The licensee may, at its option, insert promotional material as
a substitute for the "local availabilities" (i.e., non-Canadian
advertising material) of non-Canadian satellite services. At least 75%
of these local availabilities must be made available for use by
licensed Canadian programming services for the promotion of their
respective services, for the promotion of the community channel and
for unpaid Canadian public service announcements. A maximum of 25% of
the local availabilities may be made available to provide subscribers
with information about customer service and channel realignments or to
promote discretionary programming services and packages, cable FM
service, additional cable outlets, and non-programming services such
as Internet and telephone service.
|
| |
Footnote:
|
Date Modified: 2006-10-31 |
