We organized a
grassroots group to establish a local community oriented UHF
television station in Eastern area of Toronto called Star Ray TV.
The station would have featured predominately local programming
with 80% Canadian content overall and a 100% Canadian prime time.
2200 comparable stations are on the air in the U.S., thousands
worldwide, and a 1000 are on the air in Russia, yes Russia! It is
ironic that Russian regulators are more progressive and liberal
than the CRTC!
Originally in 1997
we had applied for a 3 year technical and marketing trial to run
a station We were turned down because "under certain
circumstances (such an operation), it may have an impact on the
ability of existing licensees to fulfill their regulatory
requirements." We actually believed that the
Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) would
allow technical and marketing trials based on a published
CRTC policy. We now know more about how
the CRTC operates and how the big corporate broadcasters have
captured and corrupted the CRTC.
In late 1998 we
applied for a UHF license for Toronto. We are of modest means
here in east Toronto but we have collected broadcast equipment
over the years from generous donors and have a completely
functional TV station and studios. Jan Pachul personally has a
lot of U.S. TV broadcast experience and is very skilled
technically. Finally after much lobbying we got a hearing from
the CRTC in December 1999. We received 100% support from the
viewing public with only opposition from the Canadian corporate
broadcasting cartel: Chum City, CTV, Rogers Cable, CAB, and CCTV.
None of the cartel members came up with legitimate arguments but
that doesn't matter to the CRTC commissioners which cater to this
cartel.
Well guess what?
After an excessive eight months of waiting our application has
been denied. Truthfully, we did not expect a favourable decision
from the CRTC with our big time opposition. According to an
article in National Post, the source of the CRTC corruption in
our case is the former chair Francoise Bertrand and commissioners
known to be co-opted by the corporate broadcaster cartel. The
Chair has the power to appoint the panelists hearing a given
licence application. Where there is cartel opposition the Chair
stacks the deck by appointing majority panels that are corrupted
by the cartel. Can you believe that these people are being
compromised by some lavish wining and dining and by promises
future employment for maybe $120K a year? The last time I looked
breech of trust is an indictable offense but nobody has really
succeeded in prosecuting any of these shysters.
The corruption is
obvious when reading our CRTC decision . The majority decision
ignores the Broadcasting Act and cites bogus reasons for
denying the application. They refused to give us cable and
questioned our viability as a UHF only service. The business risk
is ours and not the CRTC's. The CRTC now licenced several hundred
digital stations where most will never make any money.
In the CRTC's view
of things, there is no place for the Star Ray TV's of Canada even
though broadcasting frequencies are owned by the people. The
"captured" Commissioners don't care what the public
wants, only that big corporate job matters after a commissioner's
term is up. Mathew Fraser
of the
National Post said that "if Ms. Bertrand can't get her term
as CRTC chair extended, she will almost certainly be looking for
a senior position in the industry she now regulates." Sure
enough, she now has a job in the industry, Ms. Bertrand is to be a
partner in Secor. Marcel Cote, Secor's President says the firm's Canadian
clients have included Astral, Telemedia and TVA (before Quebecor bought
parent Videotron).Denial of due process is the regular method that the CRTC
uses in dealing with non cartel applications.
In fairness to the
CRTC there are some Commissioners that are honest and do a
fantastic job in the face of massive coruption. We applaud the
bravery of Mr. David McKendry and Ms. Barbra Cram , Commissioners
writing dissenting opinions in favour of Star Ray TV. We have
seen the dissenting opinions of Mr. Stuart Langford, the man who
"won't do lunch."
We have filed an
appeal with the Governor-in-Council, with more legal actions
to follow. We have recieved the following response from the
Privy Council Office:
"On behalf of Mr. Mel Cappe, Clerk of the Privy Council
Office, I am writing in response to your letter of October 3,
2000, and enclosure regarding the Canadian Radio-Television
and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) Decision 2000-340 of
August 21, 2000.
Section 28 of the
Broadcasting Act (Act) provides a ninety day appeal period in
cases where the CRTC makes a decision to issue, amend, or renew
license. However a decision to deny an application for a
broadcasting license, as is the case in CRTC Decision 2000-340,
is not a decision to issue, amend, or renew license. Therefore, I
regret to inform you that the Governor in Council does not have
the power under the Act to set aside Decision 2000-340 or to
refer it back to the Commission for reconsideration and
hearing."
Our interpretation
of Section 28 is that the Commission did make a decision to issue
a license. It made a decision to deny the issue of a license.The
Privy Council is saying that the CRTC could deny you a license
forever and there is nothing that they will do about it! We've
been trying to get a license from the CRTC since 1994, we get the
general idea. Based on our experiences in trying to do some good
for the country and start up community broadcasting, we find the
CRTC is a totalitarian dictatorship. We actually thought Canada
was a democractic country!
|
