GATINEAU – CRTC chair and CEO Ian Scott (above) issued a statement today explaining the funding mechanisms in place for participation in Commission proceedings and announcing they have launched an internal review of the criteria for cost awards in light of recent events, which have called into question the funding awarded to the Community Media Advocacy Centre (CMAC) and its senior consultant Laith Marouf.
Back in August, the federal government cut the funding it awarded to the organization to develop an anti-racism strategy after it was brought to the minister of housing and diversity and inclusion’s attention that Marouf had been posting racist comments on Twitter.
After the funding was revoked, questions arose about the funding CMAC and Marouf have received for their participation in CRTC hearings. There have since been calls for the CRTC to cut ties with CMAC and Marouf and multiple MPs have expressed disappointment that the Commission said it would not ban them from participating in future proceedings.
Scott’s statement today attempts to clarify the CRTC’s position on the matter.
“In light of recent public comments, I would like to clarify how the CRTC manages costs awards, who is eligible to receive them, and our position on the reprehensible statements on social media by Mr. Laith Marouf,” Scott’s statement begins. “To be clear, the comments by Mr. Marouf are deplorable and such hurtful words, coming from a group applying for costs, would never be allowed to stand on the public record.”
Scott makes it clear the CRTC has never hired CMAC or its consultants and does not fund it or any public interest group.
“Costs awards are a tool set up by the CRTC to encourage public participation in our processes, and to provide support for independent research and views,” he explains.
Noting the Commission is a quasi-judicial administrative tribunal, Scott says they hold open, transparent and respectful consultations and encourage broad participation in them. “Any interested party can choose to participate and submit an intervention, but there is no guarantee that they will be eligible to recover some or the entirety of their costs. Moreover, if any intervention contains hateful or inappropriate speech, it will be struck from the public record,” he explains.
Scott notes the Telecommunications Act allows for cost awards for participation in telecommunications proceedings – a process the CRTC oversees. There is no similar provision in the current Broadcasting Act. Costs for participating in broadcasting proceedings may be awarded by the Broadcasting Participation Fund, which an independent board of directors administers.
“For its part, the CRTC assesses applications for costs awards further to a set of criteria, set out in the CRTC Rules of Practice and Procedure,” Scott explains in his statement. “Among those, the first consideration is that the applicant represents a broad group rather than a private interest. A second consideration requires that applicants demonstrate that they have assisted the CRTC in developing a better understanding of the matters being considered.
“The applications for costs are then subject to a further public process, following which the CRTC can approve the application in full or in part, or deny the application. It is important to note that costs are paid by the telecommunications companies that are parties to the proceeding in question. No public funds are used for this purpose,” he says. The BPF has similar criteria but operates independently from the Commission. Its funding comes from contributions from broadcasters.
“In light of the current situation, we have launched an internal review of our criteria for costs awards. Should we determine that changes are needed, we will then hold a public consultation to ensure that interested parties can share their views,” Scott says.
“Finally, we note that Bill C-11, which is currently being studied by Parliament, proposes to give the CRTC the authority to require broadcasters and television service providers to support the participation of individuals and public-interest groups in broadcasting proceedings. Should Bill C-11 receive Royal Assent, we will hold a public consultation on this matter as part of our work to implement the new legislation.”
You can read Scott’s full statement here.
Screenshot of Scott participating in a committee meeting earlier this year.
