Evidence of meeting #102 for Canadian Heritage in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was media.
A video is available from Parliament.
10:10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Yes. Mr. Shields is finding the same thing.
It has been corrected, but, Peter, you're well over time.
10:10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
I know I am. I'm just trying to get people.... I know you have to leave, and I'm trying to get everybody to have an opportunity to question the officials. Thank you.
Go ahead, Mr. Shields.
10:10 a.m.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
Thank you, Madam Chair.
You asked a question that I had asked earlier, and I think it's really a critical piece to understanding the agreement.
I have this from The Globe and Mail: that under the deal, Google will be able to factor in the value of “training”. We have a legacy journalist who's made a mistake. Is that what you're saying? We shouldn't believe everything that's in the media...?
10:10 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
No, I mean, it's still not.... The information is available because it's in the regulations. I think people are probably trying to make some deductions from what they heard yesterday. What I will say is that the $100 million cash is $100 million cash. Everything else that Google negotiates with the platforms is on top of the $100 million amount of cash. It's on top of it.
10:10 a.m.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
I think it's good to clarify that, and I think you should make sure you clarify that with the media, because that could be a very large number in the sense of what they say they're supplying out of that $100 million.
10:10 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
Absolutely. That's a very good point, and we'll make sure we take that on board—absolutely.
10:10 a.m.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
Thank you.
The other one that is concerning me is that the media is reporting that there are about 15,000 journalists in Canada, and they break this down to about $6,000 per journalist, in the sense that it could be derived from that. I'm thinking that if one-third of that goes to the CBC—because it was mentioned by the minister this morning that one-third of the journalists are at CBC in this country—that's about $30 million for the CBC, which will be part of this collective.
Go ahead.
10:10 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
I think what the minister is saying is exactly what you say—one-third of journalists are at the CBC—but what she also said is that she has heard the comments about the fact that there are concerns about CBC taking that amount. She has heard concerns from everybody and she is going to take that into account in the regulations.
10:10 a.m.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
That means the government is looking at a ratio by which.... I have 13 weekly papers in my riding and they may have one journalist—the owner-journalist—or whatever else you want under the criteria that we've argued about for what seems like years. Does that mean the government is going to determine a ratio to set up a formula?
10:10 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
I don't want to get too much ahead of the regulations, but what was announced yesterday is that the definition will be per journalist. It will be based on the number of journalists. As for more details, I'm not able to tell you more at the moment, but it will be in the regulations that will be published before the act comes into force.
10:10 a.m.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
You understand how concerning that is to me. I represent my constituents, and I believe what I say, because I spend over $40,000 a year in my weekly newspapers for advertising. I spend and I believe that's what I should do to support them.
Do you understand why I'm very leery about whether they're going to get anything?
10:10 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
I don't think you should be worried, because one of the requirements under the act is that local newspapers be included in the collective. As such, all the newspapers that have journalists will be able to raise their hands and be part of the collective, if they meet the definition in the act.
10:10 a.m.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
One of the things we've heard is that, when I bring up the amount of money that is spent on big tech.... Could you provide us with the number your department spends with the social media platforms, the big techs like Google and Facebook?
10:10 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
I can provide you with the number, but I can tell you that Canadian Heritage is almost not advertising at all. We do most of the things on all social media. I can provide you the number, but it's normally a very small number, because we don't do a lot of advertising. We do a bit for Winterlude and Canada Day, and that's about it.
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
10:15 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
Absolutely. It would be my pleasure.
10:15 a.m.
Conservative
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
Lisa Hepfner Liberal Hamilton Mountain, ON
Thank you, Chair.
Thanks to all of you for being here. I think I've mentioned that already.
One thing I've heard since the announcement about the Google agreement yesterday is that people on social media are saying that this is the government supporting and paying money for journalism, but in fact, what I understand is that it's a direct deal between the news organizations and the Internet service.
Can you clarify that for people? Really, the government is not involved other than to set up the framework. Is that right?
10:15 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
That's correct. The $100 million indexed in cash is going to come directly from Google to the media, and they will negotiate with the collective. The government has nothing to do with that. In fact, it's going to be way more transparent than what's happening today, because what's happening today is that Google has deals with newspapers and none of us knows which newspapers or for how much.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
Lisa Hepfner Liberal Hamilton Mountain, ON
Thank you for mentioning that as well, because we keep hearing that our framework is more transparent than the Australian version. Can you describe more for us why that is the case?
10:15 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
I want to first commend Australia, because they were the first mover, and kudos to them for doing that. Obviously we are all learning from each other, so what you have created here in this committee and in Parliament is a bill that provides more transparency.
How does it do that? You know already the amount that is going to be on the table and the criteria with respect to which newspapers will be included, because you adopted those criteria. That's not something that was happening in Australia, because most of the deal happened without engaging the act, so that's the big difference.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
Lisa Hepfner Liberal Hamilton Mountain, ON
I'll pass the rest of my time over to my colleague Mr. Noormohamed.
10:15 a.m.
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
Thank you to my colleague.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to go back to a conversation about the value of these deals, because obviously, as Mr. Shields has pointed out, it's very important for us to clarify that it's 100 million in cash. I look forward to Mr. Shields' also helping to ensure that people understand that it's $100 million in cash.
If you were the Germans, how would you be looking at this deal right now? How did the German deal with Google work out for them? I understand they ended up getting under $5 million, because they didn't have the structure that we do in this deal.
Can you talk about the unfortunate circumstance of that deal and why this deal is so much better in terms of setting a standard not just for Canada but also for others?
