44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 8, 2023 02:00PM
Mr. Speaker, I would like to add a few comments on Hon. Marc Garneau's retirement.
I was fortunate to serve as his parliamentary secretary when he was the minister of transport. It is funny, when I was appointed someone came to me and said, “Hey, you know, there are a pile of schools in this country already named after Marc Garneau.” It is unusual in this place to meet someone with such incredible history, such incredible service, who has already had schools named after him and had already been appointed to the Order of Canada before coming to this place. He engaged in a lifetime of service through the navy, as an astronaut through the Canadian Space Agency and in this place for 14 years. As was mentioned by many speakers, his absence will be felt significantly.
However, we are here today for Bill C-11, and this bill has had a long journey. In one form or another, we have been debating this bill since the fall of 2020. We have kept working hard and we never give up, because we know how important this legislation is.
Our goal has never changed. From the start, it has always been about making sure Canadian stories and music are available to Canadians. It is as simple as that. The stories and music are the beating heart of our culture, a culture we have always supported and promoted. We are not reinventing the wheel here. We would only be updating our laws to clarify that digital services and platforms have obligations to support our cultural sector.
It is kind of amazing that we would look to Canadian companies like Bell or Rogers and say that of course they have to support Canadian culture. However, some in this place would say that foreign tech giants have no such obligations.
We had an opportunity during the committee meeting to hear from Gord Sinclair of The Tragically Hip. He talked about how the Broadcasting Act helped his band, The Tragically Hip, which comes from a small town in eastern Ontario, to become well known and respected across the country. He spoke in support of the legislation so that there could be more Tragically Hips in the future.
The Broadcasting Act has helped Canadian culture to flourish and grow for more than 50 years. I mentioned The Tragically Hip, but we can think of all the bands and musicians we love, as well as the Canadian TV shows and films that have entertained us and found audiences all over the world, thanks, in part, to the Broadcasting Act. We want to ensure that the success continues to serve Canadians well, now and into the future.
So much about how we produce, engage with and access digital content has changed with the increasing dominance of digital broadcasting. We must act to ensure that Canadian artists, storytellers and Canadian culture do not get left behind. We must act to ensure that all voices have a chance to be heard and to ensure that Canadian culture reflects the realities of our diversity.
We know how important it is to get this right. That is why, from the start, our efforts to modernize the Broadcasting Act have been a collaborative effort. We have worked with and heard from Canadians to find the right solutions. We have held public consultations; heard from key stakeholders in the industry; listened to the ideas and concerns of artists, content creators and everyday Canadians; and worked across the aisle with members of all parties to help shape this bill.
Now, as we know, only one party in Parliament has decided that it knows better than Canadian artists, creators, producers and all the workers in our cultural sector. Conservatives, unfortunately, really went out of their way to protect the interests of web giants, just like they did during the committee study of Bill C-18. When Facebook came to testify, we saw Conservatives stand and act as the PR reps for the tech giants. They did not need to hire lobbyists, since they had, for free, Conservatives standing up and supporting them. I have to tip my hat because the Conservatives were pretty good at it.
They spent hours filibustering. The Conservatives filibustered when the minister was supposed to appear at committee. They filibustered when the CRTC commissioner was supposed to appear at committee after having demanded that the CRTC commissioner appear. They filibustered during clause by clause. They even filibustered their own motions. These committees do not need lobbyists representing them. As I said, they have the Conservative Party of Canada lobbying for them.
I hear an hon. member on the other side heckling because I know he is so upset at his party for acting for companies like Meta and Google. It is the only conservative party in the world that stands with tech giant. The Republicans in the United States and conservatives in Australia or Europe do not. In those countries, political parties are united for their citizens against tech giants.
It is unfortunate that Conservatives here cannot see past partisanship and that they stand with Facebook, Google and TikTok. Shockingly enough, time after time at committee, we heard Conservative members stand and defend TikTok, defend their lobbyists, and stand with and deliver their talking points as if they were coming straight from lobbyists from TikTok. These companies do not need lobbyists; they have the Conservative Party.
I want to take a moment to acknowledge a collaborative effort by the New Democratic Party and the Bloc Québécois. I want to thank everyone who made a contribution to the long development of Bill C-11. They have helped make this bill stronger and better, and they have done a great service for Canadians. I particularly want to thank our colleagues in the other place for their careful study of Bill C-11 and the amendments they proposed for consideration.
I am pleased to say that the government is fully supporting 18 of the 26 amendments brought about in the clause-by-clause study of Bill C-11. We are also accepting another two amendments with modifications. This is another testament to the truly collaborative work that has gone on.
I think it is important to highlight many of the things we can all agree on when it comes to Bill C-11 and the many ways we have all worked together to make it a better bill. In the spirit of collaboration, we should make it easier to support this motion.
I would like to turn to addressing the proposed amendments. As I said, the government has agreed to adopt 18 of them. There are only eight amendments the government respectfully disagrees with or proposes changes to. Let me take some time to explain the government's position on each of these amendments.
To begin with, the government respectfully disagrees with the proposed amendment to the definition of a “community element”. This amendment does not refer to the broadcasting undertakings that make up the broadcasting system, and may cause interpretive issues in the application of the act.
The government also respectfully disagrees with the proposed amendments to compel online undertakings to implement methods, such as age verification, to prevent children from accessing explicit sexual material.
While we understand the importance of this issue and have forthcoming legislation on it, which I hope will address it, we oppose this amendment for the simple reason that it seeks to legislate matters in the broadcasting system that are beyond the policy intent of the bill.
To reiterate what I said from the start, our purpose with Bill C-11 is to include online services and platforms, and broadcasting systems. This amendment falls outside the scope of the bill.
Next, the government respectfully disagrees with the proposed amendment to clause 4 limiting regulation to sound recordings uploaded by music labels for artists. We disagree here because this would affect the Governor in Council's ability to publicly consult on and issue a policy direction to the CRTC to appropriately scope the regulation of social media services with respect to the distribution of commercial programs.
We need the flexibility to make sure that, whenever an online streamer acts as a broadcaster, they do their part to support Canada's cultural sector. That is really what this bill comes down to. It would also prevent the broadcasting system from adapting to technological changes over time, which ultimately is the very matter we are trying to address with the bill.
The fourth is that the government respectfully disagrees with amendment 6 because of concerns that it could limit the CRTC's ability to impose conditions respecting the proportion of programs to be broadcast that are devoted to specific genres, both for online undertakings and traditional broadcasters.
This could have the impact of reducing the diversity of programming on traditional airwaves, an outcome which goes against one of the primary policy objectives of this bill.
Regarding amendment 7, we are proposing that a change of wording be made to subsection 7(a) in order to better underscore the importance of supporting creators and to sustain and build on Canada's creative sectors.
The government also respectfully disagrees with subsection 7(b) which proposes that no factor is determinative in establishing Canadian content rules. The proposed amendment would impact the flexibility of the CRTC to determine the appropriate definition for Canadian content. Our position on this is simple; we agree with the fundamental principle that Canadian content is first and foremost made by Canadians.
Another change we are proposing is to amendment 9(b) concerning public hearings. Here the government suggests the deletion of subsection 2.1, which calls for a public hearing to be held after a proposed regulation or order is published. The CRTC consults interested parties before a regulation is developed, not afterwards. Requiring a second public hearing after decisions are taken by the CRTC during regulatory proceedings would entail unnecessary delays in the administration of the act.
Finally, the government respectfully disagrees with amendment 11, which seeks to prohibit the CBC from broadcasting an advertisement or announcement on behalf of an advertiser that is designed to resemble journalistic programming. Here, again, our reasons for disagreement go back to the core objectives of the bill. The issue addressed by the amendment falls outside the scope of Bill C-11 and its policy intent, including online undertakings in the broadcasting system.
I have outlined the government's position with respect to the excellent and thorough work completed by our esteemed colleagues in the other place. We have agreed to the majority of the proposed amendments, and we disagree on just eight points. Overall, I see the collaborative efforts that have brought us here, and they were of great success.
We have arrived at this point, just shy of the finish line, thanks to the contributions and hard work of parliamentarians, public servants, industry experts, content creators and Canadians. Now is not the time to abandon the commitment to collaboration. We will continue to listen.
Should this bill receive royal assent, the Governor in Council would issue a policy direction to the CRTC on how the new legislative framework should be applied. This would require a notice period of at least 30 days, during which stakeholders and other interested persons may provide comments, concerns and recommendations regarding policy direction.
The CRTC would hold its own public processes prior to implementing the new broadcasting regulatory framework. This would provide a further opportunity for all stakeholders, including radio broadcasters, online streamers, distributors, artists, producers and industry groups to provide input.
As members can see, we will now continue to move forward together. We will ensure Canadian artists and storytellers thrive and prosper well into the digital age and that the beat of Canada's diverse culture is heard loud and clear, everywhere for everyone.
1989 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, digital creators are creators. They are artists. This is at the heart of what we are doing.
It is a bit unfortunate that this entire debate seems to suggest that these people are excluded from who the government wants to see succeed. We want everyone to succeed. We want all artists to succeed.
We are just asking some of the largest companies in the world, which the hon. member mentioned are YouTube and TikTok, to contribute to Canadian culture. We would ask the same of any large Canadian company. Would we not ask the same of one of the largest companies from the United States or a major company from China? We would not ask them to contribute to Canadian culture?
It is truly shocking that we have gone through this debate and that the hon. member and the Conservatives would just highlight the talking points from the web giants.
152 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like to also thank the hon. member for his work on this file.
We heard from many witnesses across the board, from Quebec and the rest of Canada, about how important this legislation is, with the vast majority of them telling us how important it is to expedite this bill and get it through.
We will work with provinces, including the Province of Quebec. I know the minister understands the issue and, as always, he will work with the Government of Quebec and with other provincial leaders. It is something that he regularly does and will continue to do going forward.
105 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I share the hon. member's concern about what Google is doing. It is taking a page out of Facebook's playbook when Australia attempted to provide regulation in the digital sphere. It thought that it could intimidate Australians to back down, but they did not.
Unfortunately, the difference between here and Australia is that political parties were united. It has been wonderful to work with the Bloc and the NDP on this. However, it is disappointing, because the Conservatives in Australia fought for Australians, and the Conservatives here are fighting for the tech giants.
97 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am not sure what went through during the clause-by-clause debate on those particular amendments.
We are not saying they are bad ideas. They are just outside the scope of this particular legislation. The minister has said that we have, for example, online safety legislation forthcoming. Perhaps some of these proposals could be put forward in that legislation in a comprehensive way, through the appropriate scope and the appropriate legislation, but they are well outside the scope of this particular bill.
85 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, The hon. member for Lethbridge talks about the success stories of digital creators, and there are many, but we heard through evidence that the vast majority of Canadians make nothing, despite the fact that they have enough followers to monetized on these sites. We just want there to be greater success for these stories. We want Canadians to have that opportunity. We want a level playing field in these discussions.
It would be shocking, if the hon. members from the Conservative Party rose and said Bell Media should have no obligations to Canada or Rogers Communications should have no obligations to Canada. However, when it comes to a foreign company, like TikTok or Google, the Conservatives say those companies do not have to have anything, even though billions of dollars are being made on Canadians.
It is truly unfortunate. We have seen, in Australia, in Europe and in the United States, bipartisan and multipartisan efforts. It is disappointing that we do not have the Conservative Party onside here.
170 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is clear the hon. member did not pay any attention to what went on during the debate. We had numerous experts, and the vast majority of them were in favour of this bill. The Conservatives cannot call one expert and one former CRTC commissioner and say everyone is against the bill by hearing from those two people. There were dozens of witnesses who were in support of this: creators and artists.
It is unfortunate the Conservatives will just parrot the talking points of Facebook and Google.
89 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/8/23 7:05:06 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I request a recorded division.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
