Bill C-18

Online News Act

An Act respecting online communications platforms that make news content available to persons in Canada

This enactment regulates digital news intermediaries to enhance fairness in the Canadian digital news marketplace and contribute to its sustainability. It establishes a framework through which digital news intermediary operators and news businesses may enter into agreements respecting news content that is made available by digital news intermediaries. The framework takes into account principles of freedom of expression and journalistic independence.
The enactment, among other things,
(a) applies in respect of a digital news intermediary if, having regard to specific factors, there is a significant bargaining power imbalance between its operator and news businesses;
(b) authorizes the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting those factors;
(c) specifies that the enactment does not apply in respect of “broadcasting” by digital news intermediaries that are “broadcasting undertakings” as those terms are defined in the Broadcasting Act or in respect of telecommunications service providers as defined in the Telecommunications Act ;
(d) requires the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (the “Commission”) to maintain a list of digital news intermediaries in respect of which the enactment applies;
(e) requires the Commission to exempt a digital news intermediary from the application of the enactment if its operator has entered into agreements with news businesses and the Commission is of the opinion that the agreements satisfy certain criteria;
(f) authorizes the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting how the Commission is to interpret those criteria and setting out additional conditions with respect to the eligibility of a digital news intermediary for an exemption;
(g) establishes a bargaining process in respect of matters related to the making available of certain news content by digital news intermediaries;
(h) establishes eligibility criteria and a designation process for news businesses that wish to participate in the bargaining process;
(i) requires the Commission to establish a code of conduct respecting bargaining in relation to news content;
(j) prohibits digital news intermediary operators from acting, in the course of making available certain news content, in ways that discriminate unjustly, that give undue or unreasonable preference or that subject certain news businesses to an undue or unreasonable disadvantage;
(k) allows certain news businesses to make complaints to the Commission in relation to that prohibition;
(l) authorizes the Commission to require the provision of information for the purpose of exercising its powers and performing its duties and functions under the enactment;
(m) requires the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation to provide the Commission with an annual report if the Corporation is a party to an agreement with an operator;
(n) establishes a framework respecting the provision of information to the responsible Minister, the Chief Statistician of Canada and the Commissioner of Competition, while permitting an individual or entity to designate certain information that they submit to the Commission as confidential;
(o) authorizes the Commission to impose, for contraventions of the enactment, administrative monetary penalties on certain individuals and entities and conditions on the participation of news businesses in the bargaining process;
(p) establishes a mechanism for the recovery, from digital news intermediary operators, of certain costs related to the administration of the enactment; and
(q) requires the Commission to have an independent auditor prepare a report annually in respect of the impact of the enactment on the Canadian digital news marketplace.
Finally, the enactment makes related amendments to other Acts.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Sure, if you feel that I need to read it into the record. It is that Bill C-18 in clause 27 be amended by adding after line 20 on page 10 the following:

(3.1) Despite subsection (1), a news business might not be designated as eligible if

(a) the news business is the subject of sanctions under the United Nations Act, the Special Economic Measures Act or the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law), or is owned or controlled by an individual or entity that is the subject of such sanctions; or

(b) the news business has its headquarters in a foreign state, as defined in section 2 of the Special Economic Measures Act, that is the subject of measures under an Act referred to in paragraph (a).

Then subclause (3.2) would be after that, which says:

(3.2) If a news business described in paragraph (3.1)(a) or (b) was previously designated as eligible, the Commission must, by order, revoke the order designating the business as eligible.

Madam Chair, I will just explain it.

I think the previous Conservative amendment had some very good ideas, but I just didn't agree with the whole motion. I do believe that if you have an American owner of a small Canadian newspaper with four journalists and they're covering local Canadian news, I don't see why it would be excluded. Even if The Wall Street Journal has a Canadian bureau, why would it be excluded for the purposes of the cost of the Canadian bureau?

However, we don't want Iranian, Russian or Chinese.... To me, if there's a country that is sanctioned or if there are people who are sanctioned, then I think they should not be eligible. I tried to draft it that way using existing federal legislation that specifies people, countries, actors and organizations.

I'm happy to entertain amendments if people can improve it, but that's sort of how I was looking at it. It's to get rid of the bad actors, but not to get rid of potentially eligible or fairly eligible news businesses.

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

Always, Madam Chair. It's a pleasure, though I will be brief.

We've spoken to this issue, and I think the committee a number of times has intervened to improve Bill C-18 through these amendments. We have intervened to provide supports for indigenous news outlets. This is another amendment in that sense. It would ensure that indigenous news outlets are eligible for the purposes of being designated as a news business under the act if they operate in Canada and produce news content of general interest.

News content would include the requirement that the content report on, investigate or explain current issues or events of public interest. This language includes greater specificity in relation to the coverage of rights of self-government and treaty rights, which are particularly relevant, as you know, Madam Chair, to indigenous communities.

This language mirrors the language regarding the coverage of democratic institutions and processes for the purposes of recognizing non-indigenous news businesses. What NDP-18 serves to do is to incorporate that amendment into page 10, saying the following:

operates an Indigenous news outlet in Canada and produces news content that includes matters of general interest, including coverage of matters relating to the rights of Indigenous peoples, including the right of self-government and treaty rights.

I move that amendment.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'm very pleased to see you take over the chairmanship.

I know that Mr. Champoux's amendment is extremely important. Just before we adjourned the last meeting, I tabled a subamendment, and I hope it will have the support of the committee. It seeks to add the following paragraph:

(1.1) The code of ethics referred to in subparagraph (1)(b)(iv) [this is the one proposed by Mr. Champoux] must include measures for ensuring that no news content that promotes hatred or misinformation against any identifiable group is produced or made available and that errors of fact are corrected promptly and in a transparent manner.

This would, through the code of ethics in the excellent Bloc Québécois amendment, reduce the hatred and misinformation we see in society.

Mr. Chair, as you know very well we have unfortunately been witnessing an increase in incitement to hate-based violence for several years. It's disturbing to see this across Canada. It is therefore important that the journalistic content that is supported by Bill C‑18 be subject to this code of ethics so that hate and misinformation are not part of it.

We've seen a disturbing rise in hate, a disturbing rise in racism and misogyny, a disturbing rise in anti-Semitism and Islamophobia, and a disturbing rise in homophobia and transphobia. This is something we have to take action on. Journalism plays a key role in that. We've already talked about Bill C-18 playing a role in encouraging local journalism in a way that counters that hate and disinformation.

The reality is that what is foreseen in the Bloc Québécois amendment on a code of ethics is a code of ethics that must necessarily take into consideration hatred and misinformation against any identifiable group. This is something that I feel keenly is an important improvement to BQ-4, which is an excellent amendment that I'm prepared to support. This would ensure that the journalism supported by Bill C-18 is subject to that code of ethics that counters hatred and disinformation.

We have to take a stand. It's important. Bill C-18 provides a lot more community support. The improvements that we've provided to Bill C-18 provide for a lot more community journalism. It's important that this community journalism be subject to a code of ethics. It's important that this code of ethics includes measures that ensure that journalists at the community level and across the country are in no way promoting hatred or disinformation.

On that note, I will move the subamendment.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

I'm going to call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 59 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.

I would like to acknowledge that this meeting is taking place on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

Pursuant to the order of reference adopted by the House on Tuesday, May 31, 2022, the committee is resuming clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-18, an act respecting online communications platforms that make news content available to persons in Canada.

I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses and members. I know you're all familiar with this, but please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mike, and please mute yourself when you are not speaking. With regard to interpretation for those on Zoom, you have the choice, at the bottom of your screen, of floor, English or French. Those in the room have the earpiece and self-desired channels. I will remind you that all comments should be addressed through the chair, if you don't mind, this morning.

In accordance with the routine motion, I am informing the committee that all witnesses are present, except Mr. Ripley. Therefore, no connection tests in advance of the meeting were required. I don't think Mr. Ripley is on Zoom. He is coming a little later.

I now would like to welcome the witnesses from the Department of Canadian Heritage who are present to answer any of our questions about about Bill C-18.

Welcome again to Michel Sabbagh, director general, broadcasting, copyright and creative marketplace branch. We also have Joelle Paré, acting director, marketplace and legislative policy; and Pierre-Marc Lauzon, manager, legislative and parliamentary issues. We'll wait for Mr. Ripley when he decides to come.

Again, we have votes later in the hour, but we are resuming consideration of clause 27, amendment BQ-4, and consideration of Mr. Julian's subamendment.

(On clause 27)

Mr. Julian.

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

I'm moving it. We have another minute, so I'm going to move that it be added as a subamendment.

It would add a new subclause 27(1.1) to Bill C‑18, which reads as follows:The code of ethics referred to in subparagraph (1)(b)(iv) must include measures for ensuring that no news content that promotes hatred or misinformation against any identifiable group is produced or made available and that any errors of fact are corrected promptly and in a transparent manner.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Chair, it's a wise decision on the part of my colleague Mr. Julian. I thank him for it and salute him.

BQ‑4 is near and dear to me because it adds journalistic rigour to Bill C‑18.

In preparation for the committee's work, I had the opportunity to speak with various journalism associations, including the Quebec Press Council, the Fédération professionnelle des journalistes du Québec and other stakeholders.

I was wondering how we could incorporate the basic principles of journalism, which are rigour, independence and fairness, into Bill C‑18. We have racked our brains to try to find the best possible wording—I know others have tried—but simplicity is always the most effective solution.

Therefore, through this amendment, I propose to add the following subparagraph to paragraph 27(1)(b) to require the following from an eligible news business:(iv) is a member of a recognized journalistic association, follows the code of ethics of a recognized journalistic association or has its own code of ethics whose standards of professional conduct require adherence to the recognized processes and principles of the journalism profession, including fairness, independence and rigour in reporting news and handling sources.

In my opinion, it makes perfect sense to ask businesses that will benefit from the framework put in place by Bill C‑18 to adhere to these ethical principles. If they are not members of a recognized journalistic organization or association, they must at least adhere to a code of ethics that meets those criteria if they do not have one. This amendment is quite permissive and quite broad. We're not requiring companies to be members of an organization or an association, but we're asking them to adhere to these principles and to commit to them.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Housefather's proposal still allows for foreign news entities to receive funding by entering into negotiations protected by Bill C-18. We're just not able to support that, because of course outlets have asked that this not be the case, so no.

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

Okay.

It seems to me that Mr. Housefather's amendment would be worth considering. As Mr. Champoux pointed out, the Conservative Party's amendment CPC‑21 was intended to make an acceptable, if not desirable, change to Bill C‑18, but I too think Mr. Housefather's amendment is clearer, although I have some questions about that.

I'd just like to know when we can consider Mr. Housefather's amendment. It seems relevant to me, given that we're already debating these amendments.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair. I will speak to this amendment.

CPC-21 is meant to make sure that this legislation carries out its stated intent, which is to support.... Actually, I think we're not unfortunately going to end up supporting the little guys with this. The stated intent, at least, was to support local newspaper outlets. Then of course it got expanded to broadcasters.

The point here is that funding would not be going to entities that are foreign in nature, from a foreign state. Those entities, those news businesses, would not be supported or able to bargain within the framework of this legislation, Bill C-18. That is the intention behind CPC-21.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

I might need some help from Mrs. Thomas, who's on the floor. That's where I would like to add it. I'm just trying to find where we could add that, because there are flaws, as we've heard from Mr. Ripley and department officials, and to strengthen Bill C-18, we would like to add that. I would just like to add the subamendment that one journalist would qualify.

Rachael, can you help me out? You're on the floor, and you have people around you there. Is there any way that we can work this subamendment in?

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

I want to thank Mr. Ripley for clearly identifying a flaw in Bill C-18.

Madam Chair, I would like to have a subamendment to add “one journalist”.

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

I thought it was a rhetorical question, Madam Chair, but I am pleased to respond to the Conservatives' incomprehensible strategy on Bill C-18.

I am stunned by the whiplash we get from them not supporting it all, trying to stop it, trying to block it completely, and then all of a sudden saying they're in favour of it, but now they're saying they're opposed. I mean, they're doing this sometimes on the same amendment, being both opposed and in favour of Bill C-18. It's just mind-blowing.

I don't where they're going on this. All the witnesses they lined up were folks they wanted to get to say they opposed Bill C-18. It has been incomprehensible to determine where Conservatives are going on this bill.

The reality is that when the Conservatives were in power in that dismal decade we lived through under Harper, these news businesses were collapsing because the Conservative government refused to make sure we were putting in place protections against big tech, so big tech, big banks, big oil and gas had a field day, and regular people really suffered.

I hope this means the Conservatives will support NDP-16. We now know the vast majority of news businesses will benefit from this. This essentially ensures that many news businesses will benefit. The independent online news publishers of Canada strongly support this idea. I hope Conservatives will get with the program; however, I'm mystified by where they are on this. Either they don't understand the bill or.... I don't know what. The confusion around where the Conservatives stand on Bill C-18 has been mystifying.

I hope they will vote and support NDP-16. There's a wide variety of media calling for it.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

This is my last intervention.

I'm really disappointed, Mr. Ripley. We have a chance to perfect Bill C-18. We're passing a bad bill. Is that better than not passing this bill at all?

You have just admitted there will be organizations that do not meet the criteria of Bill C-18. We have a chance right now, all parties around this table, to correct this. You have heard from many stakeholders that they need one journalist—not two; one. You cited the Canadian Periodical Fund and the local journalism fund. You've also said there is shrinkage. We all know around this table that there has been a lot of shrinkage. I can bring a newspaper from my province that sold for $1.

Would Mr. Julian accept an amendment to make Bill C-18 even better for all Canadians by having one journalist instead of two? Would Mr. Julian agree to that to make this bill what it should be, a good bill for all Canadians, instead of leaving out many rural Canadians in Bill C-18?

Would you amend the bill to accept all Canadians and businesses trying to make a living in this country, Mr. Julian?

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

Thank you, Chair.

I'm glad to hear Mr. Ripley tell us that if Bill C-18 doesn't go forward, there are other forms of help that are already in place. I think it bears repeating that Facebook and Google are on the public record saying that they would be willing to donate funds that could go into a fund that would be managed by representation from the different provincial, indigenous and territorial small media outlets across the country. That would avoid all of the government bureaucracy and the tendency to interfere with the freedom of the media.

That said, we had some examples that Mr. Ripley cited of organizations that have fewer than two journalists that would be excluded and impacted.

Mr. Ripley, do you have a number of how many organizations in Canada would meet the other criteria, like being journalists or news organizations as part of the Income Tax Act or being licensees with the CRTC?

How many organizations would have fewer than two journalists and be impacted?

[Thomas Owen Ripley]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you for the question, MP Julian.

What I can share with you is what has been shared with the department by certain news associations. Representations have been made here by a number of folks.

One is the National Ethnic Press and Media Council of Canada, which is an association of smaller news outlets with membership in the hundreds. They have been concerned by the criterion of having two regularly employed journalists.

The amendment you're moving, Mr. Julian, would certainly help a proportion of their membership. It will not help their entire membership. They have indicated that having the amendment specifically with respect to the arm's-length nature of the relationship, as well as including the owner and publisher, is a meaningful change.

News Media Canada has indicated—they have membership in the hundreds as well—that currently about a hundred of their members would face a hurdle when it comes to the two-journalist criterion. Again, the change that you are moving is a meaningful one, recognizing that the owner or publisher can be included in that two-journalist criterion.

Finally, we have certainly heard from online news publications. Again, they have flagged that the two-journalist criterion is a barrier. They have advocated that it be reduced to one, as well as recognizing that news publishers and owners should be considered as part of that criterion.

From the government's perspective, I would simply underscore that if Bill C-18 passes, it's an important intervention, but it's not the only intervention that the government does in this space. There are several departmental programs that are specifically designed to support news outlets.

For example, the Canada periodical fund supports approximately 750 periodicals on an annual basis, including 385 print magazines, 291 print community newspapers, 65 digital magazines and 14 digital community newspapers.

Over the last several years we have also had the special measures for journalism component, which has expanded the eligibility to include free publications. That has supported an additional 792 recipients, which include free digital and small circulation periodicals, and has had an important impact in western Canada, where the free subscription model is more prevalent than perhaps in Ontario, Quebec or some of the other provinces.

The final piece I would highlight is the local journalism initiative, which has supported the hiring of 435 journalists in 2020-21. Again, that's a program specifically designed to help scale up news businesses to hire additional journalists in underserved areas.

From the government's perspective, we recognize the challenges faced by smaller outlets. The two-journalist criterion currently in the bill—I certainly recognize that it's being debated right now—was fundamentally about recognizing that the goal is to support news businesses, just as the labour tax credit is, and that you have to find a way to make that distinction between an individual citizen journalist, a blogger, and individuals who are really committed to growing a news business.

Mr. Julian, on your second question, I would simply highlight that news businesses continue to see shrinkage in the news sector in this country. While we have seen news outlets open—particularly in the digital space—we're still seeing overall shrinkage. Bill C-18 is fundamentally about supporting the sustainability of the sector as these news businesses adapt to a digital news model.