In the years since its founding in 1936, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC/Radio-Canada), has become as symbolically Canadian as ice hockey, maple syrup, and poutine. The CBC has entered our homes and joined us as we celebrated national victories and sat with us as we grieved national losses. Indeed, it would likely be difficult to find a Canadian who has never consumed the CBC’s Canadian-focused programming. Despite its seeming ever-presence in the lives of Canadians, the CBC has, unfortunately, become the object of right-wing criticism, with some even calling for its demise. The logic informing these criticisms, however, immediately collapses under scrutiny.

            At a recent political rally in Hamilton, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre excitedly told attendees about his intention, if elected, to sell off “six thousand federal buildings and thousands of acres of federal land”. He continued, smiling, saying that it “warms [his] heart” to think of the day when a U-Haul truck cruises down Front Street in downtown Toronto “with a wonderful family in it, to move into their wonderful new home in the former headquarters of the CBC.” At another campaign event in Montreal, Poilievre told reporters, “We’re going to defund the CBC and let Canadians enjoy it as a non-profit, self-funded organization…while protecting services at Radio-Canada because without Radio-Canada…the francophones across the country would not have access to that information.”

            Before dissecting the impracticality of Poilievre’s pledge to maim our national broadcaster, we need to understand why the CBC exists and the legislative arrangements structuring how it operates. First, there is the Official Languages Act, which requires federal institutions, including crown corporations, to provide services equally in French and English. The CBC/Radio-Canada, as a crown corporation serving as the national public broadcaster, must comply with the Official Languages Act. Accordingly, Radio-Canada serves as the French-language arm of the CBC, which operates in English. CBC and Radio-Canada are, therefore, two arms of the same organization. Further, the purpose and obligations of CBC/Radio-Canada are also spelled out in the Broadcasting Act. The Broadcasting Act is a robust piece of legislation that sets out national broadcasting policy in Canada, with specific provisions and responsibilities carved out for the CBC/Radio-Canada. Section 3(1)(l) of the Act explains that CBC/Radio-Canada “should provide broadcasting services incorporating a wide range of programming that informs, enlightens and entertains”. In its pursuit of these objectives, CBC/Radio-Canada’s programming should, as explained in s. 3(1)(m):

(i) be predominantly and distinctively Canadian,

(ii) reflect Canada and its regions to national and regional audiences, while serving the special needs of those regions,

(iii) actively contribute to the flow and exchange of cultural expression,

(iv) be in English and in French, reflecting the different needs and circumstances of each official language community, including the specific needs and interests of official language minority communities,

(v) strive to be of equivalent quality in English and in French,

(vi) contribute to shared national consciousness and identity,

(vii) be made available throughout Canada by the most appropriate and efficient means and as resources become available for the purpose, and

(viii) reflect the multicultural and multiracial nature of Canada…

            I am aware that these legislative arrangements can, of course, be changed. Parliament could, for example, perform the sort of institutional amputation called for by Poilievre. It could protect Radio-Canada’s status as a crown corporation, while casting the CBC out into the cold, forcing it to fend for itself as some sort of vaguely defined private entity. Doing this, however, only makes sense to those already interested in slashing government spending. Otherwise, there are a number of good reasons to interrogate Poilievre’s political rhetoric.

            First, this would require significant amendments to the Broadcasting Act, rendering much of the existing legislation useless. Keeping Radio-Canada while excising the CBC could also create potential conflicts with the Official Languages Act by elevating the French language to a position above English, thereby undermining the equality and balance sought by the Act. These concerns, too, say nothing of what would surely be a slew of constitutional challenges that any proposed amendments or new legislation would face. In sum, Poilievre’s proposition is at best legally messy, and at worst, possibly unconstitutional.

            Second, CBC/Radio-Canada is a crown corporation. According to a 2025 report published by the CBC, its annual budget is about $1.9 billion dollars, with about $1.4 billion (nearly 75%) coming from government funding. The report calculates that this subsidization costs each Canadian about $32.00 per year. While this current budget is split between French and English language programming, it is unclear what this state funding would look like following Poilievre’s proposed defunding/severing of CBC and Radio-Canada. It is also unclear how Canadians in predominantly English-speaking provinces would respond to significant state funding to an institution whose programming can only be enjoyed by 30% of Canadians. However, given the longstanding gripes in the resource-rich prairie provinces surrounding the equalization program, we can speculate that a federal proposal to fund the French Radio-Canada while kicking the English CBC out into the cold could possibly be interpreted as a form of ‘special treatment’ to Quebec in an attempt to appease the concentration of French-speaking voters there. It would, in other words, probably be highly unpopular in Western Canada.

            Third, I wonder if it is a good political strategy to advocate for the demise of an institution designed to promote “shared national consciousness and identity” while Canada faces existential threats from its erratic southern neighbour and its President’s calls for our country’s annexation. Instead of criticizing the CBC as the “biased propaganda arm of the Liberal Party,” it might be a better strategy to discuss how his government intends to fix these (very likely fictitious) problems and bring the CBC back to a state where it can actually fulfill its mandate as a truly national broadcaster, benefiting Canadians of all political stripes.

            The importance of the upcoming federal election weighs more and more each day on Canadians’ shoulders. Given that a national poll conducted last fall by researchers at McGill University found 78% of respondents want the CBC to continue, with 57% opting to either maintain or increase its governmental funding, the Conservative Party rhetoric concerning the dismantling or defunding of the CBC is unhelpful, distracting, and potentially costly. As a final word, it also serves as evidence of the need for Canadians’ continued skepticism of politicians’ claims because sometimes these claims just don’t make sense.