CBC President and Chief Executive Hubert Lacroix announced this week that the public broadcaster would have to cut about 800 full-time positions at CBC/Radio-Canada and sell about $125 million in assets. There will be job losses in New Brunswick (Moncton and Saint John) in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Canadian Broadcasting Company (CBC) is a public broadcaster owned by the Government of Canada. Its mission
is to inform, enlighten and entertain Canadians but more importantly, its purpose is to create a place where Canadians from all regions and all walks of life can tell their stories; a place where Canadians can discover the world, a place where Canadians can interpret the news of the world in terms of its impact on this country Canada. It's not CNN.

The Government of Canada has refused to bridge-finance the CBC's current financial crisis (not of its own making) and forced it to make dramatic cuts in its spending priorities. Last August, the Conservative Government announced a $45 million cut in funding to cultural funding. It cost them the election in Quebec. Mr. Harper said protecting artists and funding arts is a waste of taxpayers' money. It seems clear that by refusing to bridge-finance the CBC, he is reinforcing his view that culture and cultural funding is a low priority for his government.

The resulting circumstance is that public servants will be making decisions about what is important or not important to Canadians. According to Mr. Lacroix cuts will be audience-based, the smaller an audience the more likely a service will be cut. This does note bode well for small communities or more selective audiences. It popularizes reasons for service without regard to cultural or regional consequence.

Technology has fostered a proliferation of broadcasting channels in Canada. In many communities, listeners and viewers enjoy unprecedented choice. That is part of the problem because much of that choice is American programming, not Canadian.

Americans flood the airways and dominate our films. The CBC is the only Canadian broadcaster to serve all regions of Canada in both official languages. We need a place where Canadians can speak to each other, where they can share what makes them the same and what sets them apart from others, where they can tell each other about their differences. We need an institution solid enough to take risks, to transcend obsessions with ratings, to consider factors other than profitability and to provide a place for new voices and the next generation.

Commercial radio, cross-border television and the internet neutralize the voice of Canadians. We need an institution to nurture, produce and disseminate Canadian culture, in the broadest sense of the term. We are not alone. Countries such as France, Germany, Australia and New Zealand share with us this need to ensure that they and we have a place for our own unique expression. All of them spend or invest substantially more currency, per capita in public broadcasting than Canada.

There are programs the private sector would never consider, because their financial viability is too risky or too distant in the future. The private sector might never produce quality programming for children without commercials, nor would it provide French-language radio service to every region of Canada.

The CBC's mission is not to compete in the crowded segment of U.S. conventional television and film. It must offer Canadians something different - something they can identify with. The CBC is a leader in journalism, and I suspect the largest news organization in Canada. They are the only news organization in Canada with a news and programming presence throughout the country.

The independence and research-depth of their news and information service is crucial. The CBC's ability to report on current events and major issues without fear of interference makes a vital contribution to Canadian democracy, even though the dictates of journalistic freedom occasionally generate tension between the government and the broadcaster.

As I understand it, CBC News strategy is based on four principles: provide Canadians with balanced information about region, country and world; present reports and analysis on major issues affecting Canada and Canadians; inform citizens in the regions of Canada about the concerns and opinions of other regions and to foster better mutual understanding of differing views. If we allow the CBC to speak only to its largest audiences, we'll weaken the fabric of this country by ignoring the views of our smaller communities. If we lose the CBC, we end up with Fox News and American Idol.

With all due respect for the current economic crisis, it is my view that the CBC is more important to this country and this region than short term cuts in its government financing.

W.E. (Bill) Belliveau is a Shediac resident and Moncton business consultant. He can be contacted at bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com

A scan of internet blogs commenting on the financial circumstance of General Motors would find a surprising number of people saying "let them go". On Thursday, GM's auditors raised "substantial doubt" about the troubled automaker's ability to continue operations and the company said it may have to seek bankruptcy protection if it can't execute a huge restructuring plan.

Auditors from the accounting firm Deloitte & Touche LLP said in the report that "the corporation's recurring losses from operations, stockholders' deficit and inability to generate sufficient cash flow to meet its obligations and sustain its operations raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern."

A former Prime Minister of Canada once said "living next door to the United States is in some ways, like sleeping with an elephant. No matter how friendly or temperate the beast, one is affected by its every twitch and grunt." Witness our economic recession and the plight of our auto industry.

GM has already received $13.4 billion in U.S. government loans as it tries to survive the worst downturn in auto sales in 27 years. It is seeking a total of $30 billion from the U.S. government. During the past three years it has piled up $82 billion in losses, including $30.9 billion in 2008. In Canada, the company's Canadian subsidiary is seeking up to $7 billion Canadian in aid from the federal and Ontario governments.

Canadians spend a lot of time in cars. In a country as big as Canada, we don't have much choice. Cars have become more than just transportation. They're part of who we are.

Canada has grown steadily to become one of the largest automotive producers in the world. Our industry shipments rose from $47.9 billion in vehicles and $21.1 billion in parts in 1996, to $59.8 billion in vehicles and $28.5 billion in parts in 2006. We have a proven reputation for innovation, research and development, quality and productivity. We have a well-developed dealer network and a world-class aftermarket sales and service sector that supplies replacement parts and accessories.

The automotive industry is Canada's largest manufacturing sector, accounting for 12% of manufacturing GDP and 24 percent of manufacturing trade. It employs (or did until recently) 158,302 people in automotive assembly and component manufacturing and another 336,212 in distribution and aftermarket sales and service.

The auto parts industry has more than
650 suppliers who produce original equipment and aftermarket auto parts, components and systems. Until recently, the industry employed more than 90,000 people and exports about 62 percent of its production value. There are more than 3,000 auto dealers in Canada with retail sales of $70 billion plus before the recession. They represent 25 manufacturers and employ more than 170,000 people. The automobile "aftermarket" employs more than 160,000 people including those in used car sales, parts, accessories, tires and the manufacturing of tools and equipment.

We have too much invested in this industry to let it die but we must also understand that its problems are not rooted solely in the recession. Detroit has taken far too long to bring new and redesigned vehicles to market. Falling sales and falling market share have meant that plants have been operating below capacity. GM's plants were reported to be operating at 85 per cent capacity as far back as November 2005, well below the plants of its Asian competitors.

If General Motors fails, the impact will be felt far and wide - by hundreds of suppliers, rival automakers and ultimately dealers across the nation. Suppliers would be among the first to feel those effects since GM only manufactures the body, the engine and the transmission used in its cars. Suppliers provide everything from steering wheels and seatbelts to brakes and airbags.

American automakers failed to re-invest profits in fuel efficiency and better design. By failing to respond to consumer needs, they abandoned their customers.

It's clear that we can't abandon the auto industry. The economic fall-out would be far too great. Does it make sense to bail out everybody? My answer is no.

Clearly there was overcapacity in the industry before the economic crisis. Restructuring is a term used to describe the partial dismantling or reorganization of a company or an industry for the purpose of making it more profitable. Aid to the industry should be tied to a plan that would see fewer but more competitive auto-makers. Aid should also require the industry to meet new fuel-efficiency standards and produce more advanced vehicles.

A restructured, more competitive North American automobile industry with new products, more efficient plants, fewer employees, renegotiated contracts and multi-billion dollar loans could bring long-term economic sustainability to the industry but we need to be cognizant of Mr. Trudeau's elephant analogy in the process.

W.E. (Bill) Belliveau is a Shediac resident and Moncton business consultant. He can be contacted at bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com