A decision by the Federal Court of Appeal on fee-for-carriage is still months, perhaps years away, yet the debate continues over the implications for consumers who may be hit with additional fees on their monthly cable bills. That’s if the court rules in favor of the CRTC’s recent decision, which clears the way for private broadcasters to seek compensation for their on-air signals from cable and satellite distributors.

Heritage Minister James Moore reiterated that the federal government is looking at options to protect consumers from fee hikes, as he weighed in on the decision at a recent appearance in Toronto for the launch of the Canada Media Fund. Playback caught up with the minister.

What’s your position on the CRTC’s decision on value for signal?

Our first interest is the interest of consumers and it will continue to be. This is now before the courts so I have to be cautious what I say, but I think it will be a healthy debate. We want to make sure there’s a strong, vibrant broadcasting industry, that content is protected. There’s more than just the idea of value for signal. There are also some ideas about the same consumer protection rules put in place for telephone companies that have to be extended to broadcasting. This debate is far from over.

Does cabinet have the ability to revisit this decision, much like Globalive?

It depends on how the court rules on this and what it may or may not mean. We have to wait for that process to be completed.

If the court approves fee-for-carriage, can you overturn the decision if you deem it a negative for consumers?

It depends on what the court says exactly. It’s a lot more technical than what is appreciated at first blush.

Would you support the CRTC’s recommendation that a consumer complaints agency be formed to deal with consumer grievances about television services, such as fee-for-carriage?

That’s one option. Rather than setting up a process we’re interested in [addressing] consumers’ grievances [first]. One thing that we are worried about is that consumers might face higher fees. In the second report from CRTC, it was pretty clear that this will have an impact [on] lower-income Canadians, and that there will be a consequence depending on where [the] fees may or may not end up.

We’re against the idea of a new tax on iPhones and BlackBerrys that the NDP wants to put forward. And we’re just very cautious and leery about new taxes or levies being put on consumers and what the impact of that may be. Sometimes short-term victories may turn out to have long-term consequences that are not intended.

What about mandating a skinny basic package or re-regulating that basic rate for consumers?

We’ve talked about non-monetary options for the consumer. In a second CRTC report they did talk about how there was great consumer interest in having some kind of a skinny basic package. But that’s a decision for the CRTC.