Bill C-10 (Historical)

An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts

This enactment amends the Broadcasting Act to, among other things,
(a) add online undertakings — undertakings for the transmission or retransmission of programs over the Internet — as a distinct class of broadcasting undertakings;
(b) update the broadcasting policy for Canada set out in section 3 of that Act by, among other things, providing that the Canadian broadcasting system should serve the needs and interests of all Canadians — including Canadians from racialized communities and Canadians of diverse ethnocultural backgrounds — and should provide opportunities for Indigenous persons, programming that reflects Indigenous cultures and that is in Indigenous languages, and programming that is accessible without barriers to persons with disabilities;
(c) specify that the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (the “Commission”) must regulate and supervise the Canadian broadcasting system in a manner that
(i) takes into account the different characteristics of Indigenous language broadcasting and the different conditions under which broadcasting undertakings that provide Indigenous language programming operate,
(ii) is fair and equitable as between broadcasting undertakings providing similar services,
(iii) facilitates the provision of programs that are accessible without barriers to persons with disabilities, and
(iv) takes into account the variety of broadcasting undertakings to which that Act applies and avoids imposing obligations on a class of broadcasting undertakings if doing so will not contribute in a material manner to the implementation of the broadcasting policy;
(d) amend the procedure relating to the issuance by the Governor in Council of policy directions to the Commission;
(e) replace the Commission’s power to impose conditions on a licence with a power to make orders imposing conditions on the carrying on of broadcasting undertakings;
(f) provide the Commission with the power to require that persons carrying on broadcasting undertakings make expenditures to support the Canadian broadcasting system;
(g) authorize the Commission to provide information to the Minister responsible for that Act, the Chief Statistician of Canada and the Commissioner of Competition, and set out in that Act a process by which a person who submits certain types of information to the Commission may designate the information as confidential;
(h) amend the procedure by which the Governor in Council may, under section 28 of that Act, set aside a decision of the Commission to issue, amend or renew a licence or refer such a decision back to the Commission for reconsideration and hearing;
(i) specify that a person shall not carry on a broadcasting undertaking, other than an online undertaking, unless they do so in accordance with a licence or they are exempt from the requirement to hold a licence;
(j) harmonize the punishments for offences under Part II of that Act and clarify that a due diligence defence applies to the existing offences set out in that Act; and
(k) allow for the imposition of administrative monetary penalties for violations of certain provisions of that Act or of the Accessible Canada Act.
The enactment also makes related and consequential amendments to other Acts.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Could I be allowed just to finish my answer on the charter statement? You have a charter statement in front of you. You've heard Deputy Minister Drouin explain very clearly that Bill C-10 respects the Charter of Rights and Freedoms,. Not only that, but there are mechanisms in place for the CRTC to ensure that it does that. It has discretionary powers, but these powers are not absolute. They have to be exercised in light of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

I'd like to say one more thing.

The Minister of Canadian Heritage is not on the committee. In addition, we are a minority government. The committee can decide to propose amendments to Bill C-10. It is true that the bill has already undergone a hundred or so amendments, which, by the way, is not unusual for a bill. As lawmakers, I think we can always do better; a bill can always be improved.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Thank you for your question.

It requires a multipart answer.

First, as repeatedly stated, Bill C-10 will not apply to individuals. You are right to say that new subsection 2(3) of the act refers to undertakings, not individuals, because the act will apply to undertakings, not individuals.

You no doubt heard the deputy minister, Ms. Drouin, very clearly say that the Department of Justice issued a statement indicating that Bill C-10, as amended, respects the charter, on one hand. On the other hand, as she just explained, the CRTC also has an obligation to respect the charter in exercising its authority. Mechanisms are in place to ensure that happens.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Yes. I think we still have a long way to go. There's still a lot of work to do, but Bill C-10 will enable us, as I said in my remarks initially, and will mean that around $830 million in additional money is added for the cultural sector and certainly for BIPOC communities and under-represented groups in our arts and culture sector.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

It's interesting, because I had the opportunity to meet with them. I'm a backbencher, and they made time for me.

I found it interesting that you didn't take the time to reach out to them, because I think they would have been more than happy to give you some time.

What they have to say about the bill is this. “The arrogance of taking this huge vehicle of expression, commerce and learning—in other words the Internet—and stuffing it into an act that was designed to regulate a technology that is now more than century old is an offence to reason.”

Minister, they have huge issues with Bill C-10, and they've asked you to scrap it. I would request the same.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

I would be happy to provide the committee with the list of all Canadian experts and organizations that have been consulted for the preparation of the Bill C-10.

I'll also remind the members and the committee that, prior to Bill C-10 being tabled, there was an almost two-year consultation leading up to the Yale report that was done, and close to 2,000 papers were presented.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

Mr. Philip Palmer and Mr. Len St-Aubin were both at the table when the Broadcasting Act was originally put together. They're now available and able to offer their expertise on this subject matter. Did you consult them when creating Bill C-10?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Okay.

Will the CRTC then be given the responsibility under Bill C-10, the power to regulate the algorithms used by social media platforms to decide what type of content that people can and cannot see on their Facebook feeds or the information that appears on Google or YouTube?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

I would beg to differ with the premise of your question.

Many experts have come out in Quebec and in English Canada saying that Bill C-10 was not an infringement on freedom of speech or an attack on the charter. In fact, we now have a statement by the independent civil servants of the Department of Justice saying exactly that.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

We've just heard you mention your list of organizations that support Bill C-10. Obviously, everyone on this committee has met with organizations that have expressed their concern about this legislation and their support for having good legislation. We all understand that this legislation is not as strong as it needs to be. This is why there are 120 amendments to the bill that the committee is trying to get through.

In your recent interviews on Bill C-10, Minister, you seem to want to go after experts who want to protect one of the most important rights in our democracy, and that is the freedom of expression. The experts who are working on this issue and have been working on it for a very long time have expressed concerns. They have expressed the view that there are problems within the legislation.

What is the goal of attacking them, when we should be working with them to find a solution? It feels to me very much as though we have you saying, “Don't worry, it's not a problem” and the Conservatives saying, “Let's not do anything at all; let's not provide legislation for our broadcasters.” Even the cultural sector doesn't obviously want to regulate user-generated content.

It feels very much as though you're trying to divide Canadians on this issue and not to work collectively to find a solution. I am wondering why that is.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

I think we have a charter statement that is pretty clear about Bill C-10's respecting section 2 of the charter. We've also heard from deputy minister Drouin, who has been very clear on that as well.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Bill C-10 is not about content moderation. The CRTC, in its last 50 years of existence, has never done content moderation, and Bill C-10 doesn't give the CRTC the ability to do content moderation.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

I won't go through it, but you've probably heard that there is a long list of organizations in Quebec and in English Canada, a list many pages long, that have all come out in the last few weeks in support of Bill C-10, ranging from musicians to independent producers to writers and so on. I have spoken over the course of the last year to thousands of people in the culture sector, and they agree with what we're trying to do with Bill C-10.

Again, earlier in my speech I quoted polling results that were released recently showing that 78% of Canadians—

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

This is a question based on a series of assumptions, and any answer from me would be highly hypothetical.

As we have seen over the past few weeks, there are clearly Canadians who believe that the Internet should not be subject to any form of regulation, whether it be on the cultural issue, hate speech, or media compensation. Some of these critics began their action at the same time the Yale report came out. I recall that the former leader of the official opposition had said that he would not even read the Yale report and would throw it in the trash.

Honestly, beyond all the debate surrounding proposed section 4.1, I think there is one political party that has decided to highlight this issue as if the entire bill C-10 revolves around a single section, which it obviously does not...

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Minister, we have very little time, so I want to get more specific answers than that.

I have told you that I am confident that all parties would give their consent to reopening the debate on section 3 of the bill to amend proposed section 4.1 and continue the work afterwards. Everyone would be satisfied.

You know we sometimes have discussions behind the scenes and then it is possible to propose something in committee, knowing that we will have the assent of just about everybody. Yet, this was not even raised or considered.

After wasting four meetings dithering, we still find ourselves today in the situation where a certain portion of the requests that the committee had made, among others the invitation extended also to the Minister of Justice, have not been met.

If we had reopened debate on this section right after the first meeting where this issue was raised, perhaps we would be working through the sections of the bill today and perhaps we would have an opportunity to finish up the work and pass Bill C-10.

In hindsight, do you think this would have been a good solution?