GATINEAU – Thanks to the recent edict from the federal government telling the CRTC it must hold a public hearing into the fee for carriage issue (even though the Regulator has long had a public process in the works), the Commission is now mulling what it’s going to do with two hearings on the exact same issue now scheduled a month apart.
As readers will have followed, the CRTC scheduled a fall hearing (BNC 2009-411) earlier this year to consider group licensing for broadcasters and fee for carriage for local conventional TV stations. While the hearing was amended from time to time for various reasons, and squabbled about often, it is set to begin on November 16th.
However, thanks to the federal government’s Order In Council, the CRTC has been directed to hold a hearing in order to take into account the consumer’s point of view (this, despite thousands of consumers having participated in the scheduled November 16th hearing) and then file a report with cabinet on the fee-for-carriage issue.
The Commission responded, saying it will do that hearing in December.
Since it would seem absurd to hold two hearings on the same issue within a month of each other, some sort of change in scheduling sure appears likely, but few are speaking just yet. And it’s not an easy decision because while the feds have ordered a consumer review of FFC, there are substantive industry issues to wade through as well.
Some companies have written the Commission, asking for further delay to 2009-411. “Shaw submits that it would be appropriate and significantly more efficient to conduct only one public hearing to consider the implications of the proposed compensation for signal value regime,” says a September 22 letter by Shaw Communications to the Commission.
“(C)onducting overlapping proceedings on signal compensation may increase costs, cause confusion and add uncertainty,” the letter adds.
Shaw wants the Commission to either announce the hearing demanded by the OIC and suspend 2009-411 until the report from the federally-demanded hearing is finished, or incorporate the OIC somehow into 2009-411 and reopen it to an additional round of public comments.
EastLink then sent its own letter to the Commission backing Shaw’s suggestions.
So far, however, while we have heard change is certainly in the air, the Regulator is not yet ready to say what it is going to do.
– Greg O’Brien
