Having listened to the hon. member for Edmonton-Strathcona and discussed this matter with a number of people, I cannot help feeling that, by the inclusion of subclause (h), we are searching for possible conflicts, and then deciding that should conflicts arise a decision must be awarded in favour of the national broadcasting system.
It seems to me that subclause (h) might well be struck out altogether. By its inclusion we are suggesting that there are bound to be conflicts and that a determination must be made in favour of the C.B.C. Of course there will be conflicts; everyone knows that. But I cannot see that matters will be helped by anticipating them in a subclause of the bill. Should the government still feel there is a need for something to be written into the legislation, I suggest words on the following lines: "It shall be deemed that the best interest of the public is served when the objectives of the national broadcasting policy shall prevail." Obviously as the bill now stands the interests of the national broadcasting service must always prevail. If the bill were weighted in favour of the private interests then the private interests would win out. We should remember that a regulatory body is being set up to adjudicate on these questions. Having set forth the objectives of the national service in the bill, as we have done, the regulatory body is bound to take account of those objectives and would be unable to find in favour of the private services. Would it not be possible
Canadian Policy on Broadcasting to get together and decide on a form of words which did not oifend anybody?
Subtopic: IMPLEMENTATION OF CANADIAN POLICY