SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 147

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
December 13, 2022 10:00AM
  • Dec/13/22 10:03:14 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(a), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to seven petitions. These returns will be tabled in an electronic format.
35 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 10:24:20 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to share a few thoughts and ask a question of the member. We have members on all sides of the House who are very strong and powerful advocates for issues related to human rights. It is interesting that the member has chosen to have that discussion. In doing very quick research, as the member was speaking, former prime minister Stephen Harper, according to Hansard, never once spoke about Tibet while he was prime minister. In opposition, he mentioned it four or maybe five times, according to my research, but never in government. I wonder if the member could provide his thoughts in regard to this. Canada does play a very important leadership role on the international scene regarding human rights. I believe that the Government of Canada has been there on human rights around the world, not only through this administration but also through the Harper administration in certain ways. I wonder if the member could provide any update on whether he believes that Stephen Harper made any sort of statement in regard to Tibet.
181 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 10:28:43 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, the member made one reference saying that Stephen Harper actually met with or had conversations with the Dalai Lama. There have been communications between the current Prime Minister and the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lama at one point recognized Pierre Elliott Trudeau and commented in regard to the refugees who have come from Tibet. Canada can play a leadership role, and there are many members of the House on both sides who understand the human rights violations and are strong advocates for those rights. The government has been and continues to be a strong advocate for human rights around the world. I am wondering if the member could provide any other additional thoughts in regard to the importance of Canada demonstrating that leadership, as our current Prime Minister has, and also the previous prime minister, on this particular issue the member made reference to with the Dalai Lama.
150 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 11:21:19 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, to pick up on my colleague's last comments in regard to human rights' advocates and the questions I asked earlier. There are very strong advocates on all sides of the House on the issue of human rights. I think of individuals like Irwin Cotler, who has been a powerful advocate not only within Canada but internationally. Could she provide her thoughts with respect to the strong leadership role that the House of Commons can play in the world today? That is one of the reasons why we should try to depoliticize the issue of human rights as much as possible.
103 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 11:44:44 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate some of the remarks the member put on the record, and in part I agree with him. When we look at the many different political issues that we face as a House, the issues related to foreign affairs should, as much as possible, be depoliticized. I like the characterization the member has referenced. I have had the opportunity in the past, at both the provincial and federal levels, to sit on committees that are far less partisan. I found that the most effective non-partisan discussions take place when there is a consensus versus a hard vote. The moment we start putting in hard votes, especially if it is done to make one MP look worse than another, partisanship often kicks in. I am interested in knowing the member's thoughts on whether the foreign affairs committee should be striving to base its decisions on a consensus as opposed to a hard vote. Does the member have some opinions on that?
165 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 11:56:13 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent for the following motion. I move: 1. That, in relation to its study of the situation at the Russia-Ukraine border and implications for peace and security, seven members of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development be authorized to travel to Brussels, Belgium; Helsinki, Finland; Stockholm, Sweden, and Warsaw, Poland, in the Winter of 2023, during an adjournment period, and that the necessary staff accompany the Committee. 2. That, in relation to its study of Arctic sovereignty, security and emergency preparedness of Indigenous Peoples, seven members of the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs be authorized to travel to Yellowknife, Northwest Territories; Kugluktuk, Nunavut, and Cambridge Bay, Nunavut, in the Winter of 2023, during an adjournment period, and that the necessary staff accompany the Committee. 3. That, in relation to its study of large port infrastructure expansion projects in Canada, seven members of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities be authorized to travel to St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador; Halifax, Nova Scotia; Montréal, Québec; Toronto, Ontario; Hamilton-Niagara region, Ontario; Vancouver, British Columbia, and Prince Rupert, British Columbia, in the Winter of 2023, during an adjournment period, and that the necessary staff accompany the Committee.
227 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 12:01:23 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 926, 927, 929, 930, 935 and 940.
17 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 12:01:54 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, furthermore, if the government's responses to Questions Nos. 918 to 925, 928, 931 to 934, 936 to 939 and 941 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled immediately.
35 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 12:02:07 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand at this time.
16 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 12:36:46 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-18 
Mr. Speaker, first, if I may, I would like to speak about the passing of Jim Carr, a dear friend and someone I have known for a number of years. I would like to extend my condolences, prayers, love and best wishes to his family and friends. I had the opportunity in 1988 to be elected at the same time as Jim Carr. He was appointed as the deputy leader of the Liberal Party of Manitoba. I was the deputy party whip. From virtually day one to what we witnessed just a few days ago in the House, he served as an inspiration to me personally. I genuinely believe that, no matter where Jim went or what he went through in his life, he left a large footprint. He has deep respect in all corners. I do want to make quick reference to what he said in his last speech in the House, because I think it embodies many of the wonderful attributes Jim brought not only to the chamber but beyond. He stated: Madam Speaker, I want to start by expressing some deeply held emotion. I love this country, every square metre of it, in English, in French, in indigenous languages and in the languages of the newly arrived. He went on to say: In wrapping up this debate, I want to thank the people of Winnipeg South Centre, without whose confidence this would never have been possible. He concluded his remarks by saying: It is with gratitude, thanks and a deep respect for this institution that I humbly present this bill to my colleagues in Parliament. I am very grateful for the fact that the building a green prairie economy act passed. It was something I know Jim spoke at great length about both inside and outside the chamber. It was one of a number of visions he carried, one of a number of ideas that he shared with so many Canadians in many different ways. I appreciate the opportunity to share those few thoughts. With respect to Bill C-18, the online news act, this legislation is an absolute must. The minister made reference to Bill C-11 to amend the Broadcasting Act and now Bill C-18, the online news act. These would assist us in modernizing our systems. So much has changed in regard to Internet accessibility, from what it was to what it is today. The Internet is an absolutely essential service today. It continues to grow as an essential service, and we need to overcome some challenges that are there. As we look to the weeks, months and years ahead, in terms of conquering some of those challenges, one of the biggest ones is getting that fast, reliable Internet service into our rural communities. We have made significant progress over the last number of years, ensuring that it is taking place. I believe we are on the right track and are aggressively pursuing better interconnectivity for all Canadians. It is absolutely essential. The act itself is something absolutely essential. I am pleased to see it is at the third reading stage. I was listening to what the minister was talking about. One can sense the passion and urgency just by listening to the minister. When we think about Canada and our democracy, one of the fundamental pillars of democracy is to have a free, independent media. I recall sitting in the Manitoba legislature and seeing at least 10 or 12 members of the media in the gallery. There were representatives from all the major networks and local community newspapers. There might even have been a few others. When I left the Manitoba legislature back in 2010, I might have seen one or two reporters in the media gallery. When we look at what has happened to our media and our news sources over the last 10 years or so, we have seen a mass reduction in the number of professional journalists. We have seen literally hundreds of news outlets in one form or another close. I do not believe for a moment, and I do not think anyone would even attempt to suggest, that it is nothing more than what we have been witnessing taking place on the Internet. We have seen a tremendous rise in things such as fake news. The minister made reference to the war in Ukraine, and we talk about what happened during the pandemic. Canadians and people around the world, but particularly here in Canada, are very dependent on that essential service and ensuring what we see and read is factual. One of the ways we can ensure that is by going to the mainstream media. One of my colleagues made reference to that fact that we have a wonderful ethnic media. I often look at the Pilipino Express, CKJS and numerous Indo-Canadian newspapers. There is the Portuguese community, the francophone community, the indigenous community and all of those different independent news outlets. For our community newspapers, whether rural or urban, there are things we can do to ensure they continue to be independent and continue to be supported, rightfully so, because of the Internet. These are some tangible examples. Google and its search engines have benefited from mainstream media and from our media outlets. All the work has been done at one level, which is the creativity and reporting, and Google has directly benefited from that. There is advertising on YouTube, and in social media there are things like Facebook. The amount of advertising done through Facebook has been estimated to be, in terms of the advertising dollars going into media, as high as 80% in those giant companies. This legislation would ensure, by utilizing the CRTC, that we can level the playing field. We could ensure that, for the information being conveyed by these giants like Google, Facebook and YouTube, they are paying their fair share. There would be an obligation in the legislation. By doing that, there would be better, more appropriate and more fair compensation for those media outlets. It would ultimately ensure that we have a healthier and stronger independent media. That is good for Canada and good for our democracy. It is the type of legislation that is necessary to get us back on track with regard to what we have been witnessing over the last number of years with the reduction of news media.
1064 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 12:48:08 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-18 
Mr. Speaker, what is taking place in the legislation is a form of potential arbitration that will ensure a more level playing field, with the social media giants and the large search engines, which benefit from the local news outlets, sharing advertising dollars, as an example. On the issue of fake news, Canadians want a high level of comfort regarding certain traditional news outlets that have a history of reporting and have built that confidence. If we look at the pandemic, there was fairly clear evidence that getting the vaccine was safe. However, there were some within the industry who were propagating or promoting that it was a terrible thing. At the end of the day, I see the legislation as ensuring that those agencies, like CTV or radio stations, have fair compensation that they are not getting today, yet their material is being utilized.
145 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 12:50:40 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-18 
Mr. Speaker, something that the legislation would actually do is require that the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, or CRTC, to publish a list of digital news intermediaries and news businesses that are eligible under the online news act. Throughout the legislation, it talks about the CRTC's role with the overall principle and objective of ensuring that we have a higher sense of fairness in regard to revenue and how that revenue could be distributed. Hopefully, the industry is able to do it in a consensual manner. If not, there are ways we can ensure it does.
99 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 12:52:21 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-18 
Madam Speaker, I would recognize that we have seen a dramatic decrease. Some have estimated it as being as high as the mid-40% of journalists losing their jobs in a relatively short period of time. The government is very much aware of it and it is one of the reasons we brought forward the legislation. I do believe that, if not directly then indirectly, it would continue to support a critically important industry in Canada.
76 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 1:18:11 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-18 
Mr. Speaker, I suspect there is widespread support in recognizing that tech giants, whether it is Google, YouTube or Facebook, which really dominates the social media industry, get billions of dollars in revenue every year, and a lot of their sourcing comes from news agencies that are finding things difficult. There is a sense of unfairness there. This legislation would ensure there is a higher sense of fairness. The creators and news agencies are reporting on the news, and their content is being utilized by these giants, which are not paying anything for it. Do the member and the Conservative Party believe that Google, Facebook and other giant conglomerates have a responsibility to pay for some of the creative journalism we are seeing in our communities?
126 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 1:43:59 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-18 
Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of the member's speech, he member made reference to Jim Carr. It did mean a great deal to Jim when the member and one of his colleagues walked over to shake his hand afterward, which I thought was a classy thing to do. I wonder if the member could provide some additional thoughts on this. Many different other types of media outlets do not get the same sort of reference to which the member mentioned, magazines and so forth. They could be automotive industry or sport magazines. There are a number of them. The CRTC would be given a fairly significant responsibility. The ultimate goal is to ensure that we have an independent and free media that is far-reaching. Could the member provide further thoughts on that?
134 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 3:24:22 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-18 
Madam Speaker, I appreciated the comments prior to question period that were made by the New Democratic House leader. With respect to the Facebook, YouTube and Google search engines, they have been a major benefactor of journalism here in Canada, yet the creators, the journalists and so forth of a lot of the things that appear in social media do not get the credit and, in particular, the compensation. What this bill would do, in good part, is ensure through the CRTC that there would be an appropriate compensation of sorts. I am a bit surprised that the Conservative Party would not support that and I do not quite understand why. I wonder if the member has some thoughts in regard to the importance of passing this particular piece of legislation and if he wants to provide commentary as to why the Conservatives would not support this.
147 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 3:43:04 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-18 
Madam Speaker, to add to your comment, I congratulate the member on her marriage. I wish her many years of wonderfulness. The issue before us today is about the reality that the Conservatives do not believe, as they are showing in their actions, that the tech giants, from Google and search engines to social media giants like Facebook, should have to pay into any sort of pool that would enable fairer compensation for creators here in Canada. This issue is having a devastating impact on journalism, and the member even made reference to it closing down. Does the Conservative Party not recognize that the message it is sending to these giants is that they do not need to make changes? The Conservatives might say there is a need for changes, but when it comes down to voting, they are going to be voting against this legislation. They might have some issues with it, but at least it would enable a fairer playing field for our journalists.
166 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 3:58:22 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-18 
Madam Speaker, listening to the member or, in particular, the Conservative member who spoke prior to him, one gets the impression that the Conservatives have an answer. Instead of voting in favour of the legislation or instead of recognizing that the CRTC has an incredible history of serving Canadians and ensuring there is Canadian content and a much higher sense of fairness overall, the Conservative Party's approach seems to be not to worry. We should have trust and confidence in Facebook and in Google search, and they will come up with agreements with the different community media outlets. I do not have that trust and confidence that the member seems to have or the Conservative Party seems to have. Does the member not recognize that it is only the Conservative Party inside this chamber that seems to have that trust? Could it be that its trust might be misplaced?
150 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Dec/13/22 4:54:29 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-18 
Madam Speaker, I find the Conservative Party interesting. I understand the Conservatives actually had an election platform issue on which all the Conservative candidates were saying they supported what is taking place in Australia and the Australians' approach to dealing with it. That is the approach this bill is a reflection of. Therefore, it seems to me that the members of the Conservative Party are saying, once again, that even though they would have made the commitment to do something, they obviously met with someone. Something has caused them to change their minds. Now they do not believe government should play a role in Google search engines or Facebook. They are saying we should just have trust in Google and Facebook, because they will work it out with all the other media outlets. Why did the Conservative Party once again abandon an election platform? Is it the change in leadership? Is it the so-called new direction that the Conservatives are taking? Why did they abandon that policy commitment to Canadians?
171 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Madam Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties, and if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent to adopt the following motion. I move: That, notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practices of the House: (a) Bill C-278, An Act to prevent the imposition by the federal government of vaccination mandates for employment and travel, standing on the Order Paper in the name of the member for Carleton, shall now stand in the name of the member for Niagara West and be placed in the order of precedence at the same place and stage as Bill C-285, An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Canada Labour Code and the Employment Insurance Act, and be deemed to have been reported to the house pursuant to Standing Order 91.1 recommending it not be designated non-votable, and the order for the second reading of Bill C-285 shall be discharged and the bill withdrawn; (b) Bill S-202, An Act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act (Parliamentary Visual Artist Laureate), standing in the name of the member for Bow River, shall now stand in the name of the member for Cloverdale—Langley City; and (c) Bill S-4, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Identification of Criminals Act and to make related amendments to other Acts (COVID-19 response and other measures), be deemed adopted at report stage on division and be deemed adopted at the third reading stage on division.
256 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border