Bill C-11

Online Streaming Act

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) specify that the Act does not apply in respect of programs uploaded to an online undertaking that provides a social media service by a user of the service, unless the programs are prescribed by regulation;
(c) update the broadcasting policy for Canada set out in section 3 of the Act by, among other things, providing that the Canadian broadcasting system should
(i) serve the needs and interests of all Canadians, including Canadians from Black or other racialized communities and Canadians of diverse ethnocultural backgrounds, socio-economic statuses, abilities and disabilities, sexual orientations, gender identities and expressions, and ages, and
(ii) provide opportunities to Indigenous persons, programming that reflects Indigenous cultures and that is in Indigenous languages, and programming that is accessible without barriers to persons with disabilities;
(d) enhance the vitality of official language minority communities in Canada and foster the full recognition and use of both English and French in Canadian society, including by supporting the production and broadcasting of original programs in both languages;
(e) 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 English, French and Indigenous language broadcasting and the different conditions under which broadcasting undertakings that provide English, French or Indigenous language programming operate,
(ii) takes into account, among other things, the nature and diversity of the services provided by broadcasting undertakings,
(iii) ensures that any broadcasting undertaking that cannot make maximum or predominant use of Canadian creative and other human resources in the creation, production and presentation of programming contributes to those Canadian resources in an equitable manner,
(iv) promotes innovation and is readily adaptable toscientific and technological change,
(v) facilitates the provision to Canadians of Canadian programs in both official languages, including those created and produced by official language minority communities in Canada, as well as Canadian programs in Indigenous languages,
(vi) facilitates the provision of programs that are accessible without barriers to persons with disabilities,
(vii) facilitates the provision to Canadians of programs created and produced by members of Black or other racialized communities,
(viii) protects the privacy of individuals who aremembers of the audience of programs broadcast, and
(ix) takes into account the variety of broadcasting undertakings to which the Act applies and avoids imposing obligations on any class of broadcasting undertakings if that imposition will not contribute in a material manner to the implementation of the broadcasting policy;
(f) amend the procedure relating to the issuance by the Governor in Council of policy directions to the Commission;
(g) 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;
(h) provide the Commission with the power to require that persons carrying on broadcasting undertakings make expenditures to support the Canadian broadcasting system;
(i) 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;
(j) 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;
(k) 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;
(l) 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
(m) 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.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Today, as during all discussions regarding bills C‑11 and C‑18, we have often heard disinformation from large technology companies, who want nothing to do with these bills.

In the coming months, with the implementation of bills C‑11 and C‑18, it will be even more important for Canadians to know exactly what's in these bills.

What are you going to do, Minister, to counter this disinformation often promoted by interests with enormous resources?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Ms. Lantsman, if something is not true, it's very possible that I would say it's not true and that they would say it's not true because it's not a fact. I think one of the problems around the debate on Bill C-11 is that there are a lot of things that are not facts and have nothing to do with the bill, zero.

Freedom of expression has nothing to do with Bill C-11. It is a parallel discussion that some people wanted to initiate, and so they would not discuss the bill. The bill is simply asking the streamers to contribute to Canadian culture.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Okay. I'll tell you why I'm asking.

Recently the CRTC published a web page. It was called “Myths and Facts”. I'm sure you've seen it. It has probably come up in your media monitoring, since you made it better after the Laith Marouf case.

On this page, the CRTC characterizes concerns held by the opposition—and frankly, content creators, academics and everybody we heard who talked about Bill C-11—as myths. It only takes a little bit of critical thinking to see that the facts espoused by the CRTC on that website are directly parroting the talking points that you have used as a minister on Bill C-11.

I want to know whether there was any formal instruction to the CRTC on any of this.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

They are consulting on Bill C-11. However, on the general aspect of the transformation, there's already a lot of stuff that we know. We know that we're modernizing a lot that should have been modernized a long time ago. They're looking at that, and then they are going to receive the policy direction and they're going to adapt it to that.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

It has nothing to do with it. I don't know what else I can say. There's absolutely no link between Bill C‑11 and the decisions of the CRTC or their consultations on this. It's zero.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

I would like to take us back a bit, to the Bill C‑11 debate.

It's almost, at times, as if we're having this parallel discussion. There's what's happening in reality, what's actually in the bill and what we hear in the House of Commons, especially from the Conservative Party. We even heard a bit of that today, when there was a suggestion that the CRTC, which is independent, is looking into Fox News. It's interesting that Conservatives are standing up for Fox News. It was suggested that it was related to Bill C‑11, even though it was an independent complaint made by Égale Canada with respect to the treatment of the LGBTQ2+ community. The CRTC is independently investigating that, and the suggestion that this is censorship via Bill C‑11....

I wonder whether you could comment on this parallel debate leading into misinformation on Bill C‑11.

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you.

One thing I took out of it was that there are larger organizations and then there are smaller organizations, lots of self-employed and small companies, theatre companies, that all need support at the same time. I was very happy to hear that discussion happening at all levels.

We faced challenges to overcome the pandemic in a culture that asks to bring people together, and all of a sudden we were unable to do that. Those were the challenges we had to overcome, but there are also some potential gains we can make moving forward. I think legislation like Bill C-11 and Bill C-18 will be very important to modernize how we support our cultural sector, so I do appreciate that.

We talked about Bill C-18 and supporting papers, so I wonder if you could expand on that, because in my riding of Kitchener—Conestoga we have those small weekly papers, and they are feeling the lack of advertising revenue and are having trouble keeping people on staff and staying afloat. Can you expand on how those small papers are going to be supported by Bill C-18? Maybe use Australia as an example of how legislation similar to this has worked in other countries.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

There's one other thing that I want to know.

When we had Meta and Google here, talking about they would react if Bill C-11 in its current form passed, they indicated they would likely block the ability to stream news.

I know that Australia had discussions with them when they were going through their legislation. Have you had similar discussions to come to some resolution so that Canadians don't lose their access through Meta and Google?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Part of the answer is in the hands of our friends at the Conservative Party, because it depends on what they do. Last time they took a lot of time. They wanted to really reflect on Bill C-11. I think they did that. Now they want to really reflect on Bill C-18.

In a way, Bill C-18 is a game-changer for our independent media and newsrooms. As I've said before, please keep reflecting on the importance of an independent press, a free press, a non-partisan press, in all different forms, for fighting disinformation, informing Canadians and searching for the truth.

These people are professionals who have devoted all their lives to this, but now the money has now gone to the big techs, and we have to find something that is fairer for the system.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

That's a big question. I'm not sure any of us has the full answer to that. We understand there are many challenges.

One of the things we got out of that summit.... It was a huge success, by the way. We had 400 people from all over the country, and hundreds of people were on the screen. A big topic of discussion and debate was the fragility of many of our workers. The arts and culture sector was one of the hardest hit during the pandemic, especially the live arts.

If you think about it, you had venues and maybe you had a gig where you would play the guitar. Let's say Mr. Louis had a gig, and he was playing at a certain venue. The venue would say, “No, sorry; there are COVID rules. You're not playing.” The COVID rules then changed, and then it was, “Oh, by the way, yes, you can play next week.” The rules kept changing. We lost many people because these people who had contracts here and there were also parents. They also had to pay the mortgage or the rent, put food on the table, clothe their kids and all of that. Because of that instability, we lost many people.

We have to look at ways to offer more stability to that sector. Can we do stuff, for example, through EI? How can we also help the venues to encourage people to come back? We've put in place some of those programs. For a while, people were still concerned about COVID and going into a room full of people. People are a bit more reassured now, but not fully. It brings supplementary challenges, so you discuss live events and the future of television and movies at the same time. The way to approach this is to have an inclusive approach.

We have programs with the live sector. We have Bill C-11 for our culture sector. We have Bill C-18 for media and newsrooms. The most important thing is to listen and to learn from the people on the ground. I'm only the minister, right? We have some tools as a department, and some money, and definitely goodwill to change and help, but the people who know are the people doing the stuff on the ground.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Absolutely. We do it in different ways.

For example, for indigenous people, one of the things I'm most proud of is that when I was heritage minister the first time, we put in place Bill C-91 on indigenous languages. That passed and became reality. Now the office is in place and we are supporting it, and we now have bills with the three NIOs, the national indigenous organizations for the Métis, the first nations and the Inuit, to support them in their efforts, in some cases simply to have their language survive.

This will help us not only to teach the language but also to have more music, more television and more films for indigenous people. This will help young indigenous people to be prouder of who they are, because they will see themselves in all of those productions. It is the same for racialized people. Bill C-11, for example, is asking for some of the contribution, the money we're getting, to go to racialized, indigenous and different under-represented groups. Why? It's because it's the right thing to do.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

You claim that the user content on these outlets somehow won't be impacted by Bill C-11. That's the claim you're making. How do you square that circle?

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Thank you.

Thanks to our witnesses for coming, and welcome, Minister.

I want to go back to what my colleague was talking about on Bill C-11, and particularly with regard to the CRTC consultation. It says that they are going to consult on what constitutes a “social media service”. Can you define what constitutes a social media service?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Yes, there's always work to do, but I think I had the opportunity to respond to these concerns throughout the debate, just like you and everyone else who supported the bill, as well as the entire cultural sector. The Canadian cultural sector, whether it be music, film or television, supported and continues to support Bill C‑11.

I've said it, but I'll be even more clear about my directive. The CRTC was very clear on the fact that it's not at all interested in content. Even if some claimed it was going to look at content published online by Canadians, Mr. Champoux, how many millions of videos are posted every day? Even if the CRTC were interested in doing so, it would never be able to look at them all. In any case, it's not interested in doing that.

All we want to know is how much money these platforms get, so we can make sure they invest part of it in creating Canadian content.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Big festivals are indeed relatively happy. It's the smaller festivals, the local festivals, that are suffering the most. They're going to reach out to you, because I told him to call you directly. You're certainly going to hear from them.

We talked about Bill C‑11 and Bill C‑18, which were both very important to me. I think we share the same vision of them, but I was still concerned throughout study of the bills, especially in the case of Bill C‑11, by worries among those who still consider it a censorship bill. You and I both know that's absolutely not the case, but maybe it wasn't well explained. And maybe it was somewhat misused by some of our colleagues, who took advantage of the fear about a possible infringement on freedom of expression.

Now that Bill C‑11 has passed and the CRTC will be looking into it, do you intend to respond to these people, to show more caution in order to reassure them about it? There's still work to do on that front, isn't there?