OTTAWA – Who’s minding the store? That’s the question New Democrats are asking after learning the startling fact that the CRTC has no research on the impact of foreign ownership in Canada’s broadcast and telecom industries. New Democrat Culture Critic Charlie Angus says the Harper government’s decision to open the doors to foreign buy-outs was taken without any data or research from the country’s regulator.

“Stephen Harper has put a for sale sign on Canada’s telecom and broadcast sector for ideological reasons. Now we find out that the CRTC doesn’t even have data to either challenge or support this ideological sell-off. Who is protecting the public interest?”

In remarks to the House Industry Committee on April 13, 2010, CRTC Chair Konrad von Finckenstein recommended that foreign ownership levels in both telecommunications and broadcasting be raised. Angus then filed the Access to Information request for copies of any research, reports or studies in the CRTC’s possession that assess the impact of foreign ownership. The CRTC responded that they didn’t have any documents or research.

“You’ve got to wonder about the basis of the CRTC Chairman’s recommendation for more foreign ownership,” said Angus. “If the CRTC isn’t researching an issue as vital as foreign ownership, just what is it doing with its resources?”

Angus says a series of Access to Information requests on key CRTC files reveals a virtual black hole at the public regulator. Angus is calling for the CRTC to invest in research to back up its work.

“The CRTC says it has no data on foreign ownership. They have no data on the impact of concentrated media ownership. They can’t tell us how many jobs have been lost because of media buyouts. Heck, they can’t even tell us what is happening with Canadian content on the air. Where is the accountability?”
When he was appointed in 2007, von Finckenstein promised to make the CRTC more accountable and transparent. Angus says the inability of the CRTC to produce data to back up its decisions will leave Canadians even more vulnerable to ideologically-driven moves by the Conservative government.