Canadian Heritage Committee on May 30th, 2006

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Chair, I'm not totally insensitive to the argument that Mr. Abbott has made in terms of discussing negotiating mandates in public. I can understand there would be some concerns. Perhaps we can accommodate that if the will of the committee is to hold such a meeting in camera. I think it's a legitimate point.

The other concern I have would be to express a preference to my colleague, Mr. Angus. In the last bullet it says, “we request the presence of senior members of the negotiating team and senior heritage and industry officials”. I would prefer that we start with senior heritage and industry officials, on the premise that senior members of the negotiating team may be involved in negotiations, and bringing them in from wherever the negotiations are currently going on is perhaps a disruptive matter. For the time being, I would be prepared to start with the senior officials from both the industry and heritage departments in order for them to explain to us the negotiating mandate that's been given to the negotiating team.

I don't know if my colleague would be amenable to that, and that we do it in camera, if that is the desire of the committee, in order to protect...and for obvious reasons.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

We're going to have two questions here. We're got five minutes left. Mr. Kotto first, and then Mr. Angus.

[Maka Kotto, Bloc, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Chairman, given that Canada has worked very hard to gain adoption of this agreement on cultural diversity at UNESCO and given that Canada is one of only two countries in the world to have ratified this agreement, I fail to see why we would wish to debate this issue behind closed doors.

I believe that we should show transparency, given that this debate does not simply revolve around numbers. It is a debate on our society, on our values. This is why I support the idea of discussing this openly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I appreciate this.

Yes, Doha is grinding down and there are two schools of thought. One is that they're going to declare victory and walk away from whatever little they get. The other is there is going to be a greater impetus to try to cobble something together. But regardless, GATS goes on. GATS is a separate round. And it is an important issue. I don't think it is the issue of airing our dirty laundry, because having been on the agriculture file, the agriculture sector continually asks the questions: where are we going at Doha and where is our position? And we got very clear responses from the present government in terms of supply management. We will defend supply management. We will defend these rights internationally. Those commitments came because questions were asked and it gave people confidence.

I'm open to the suggestion that we begin with officials at the level of Heritage and Industry, because traditionally there has been a divide between Heritage and Industry on a lot of these issues, and we know that. Will the Heritage officials come forward and say, do not worry, we know where we stand in terms of cultural product? That could end the discussion right then and there.

My concern is that we know that Canada is a requester nation at the GATS right now on the telecom, and telecom has been an Industry file, but because of convergence and because of the implications for broadcast, what steps has the ministry taken? What steps are they looking to take to ensure that our broadcast policies are still intact if GATS goes ahead? As well, we are on the receiving end of the GATS request on audiovisual, and those raise all the fundamental issues. Whether it's the Lincoln report, the film industry--anything we've talked about around this table is being discussed at Geneva.

I think it would be incumbent upon us to hear from those officials. I don't believe we need to hear from those officials in camera. I think if there is something that is raised that they want to give us a further briefing on, or a separate briefing, and we would go in camera, I'm fine about it. But I think an initial briefing is to get a sense of where we're going. I would defer on the issue of the negotiators at this point if we can hear from ministry officials.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Mr. Fast, as the last speaker.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm prepared to support the motion if it is in camera, and I think it would be helpful for it to be a unanimous vote of this committee. My fear is that if we don't go in camera, we won't be getting any information, if not an outright refusal to appear. And if they can't refuse to appear, they'll simply show up and say, “I'm sorry, these are confidential negotiations and we're not going to give you any information”. I want to have them here and I want to be able to discuss this pretty frankly with them, get as much as possible, so that we understand at least somewhat the direction that the negotiations are going in. I'm supportive of dealing with this, but it had better be in camera.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Can I put forward, then, as a friendly--

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Yes, you can.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

As an initial briefing--because again this might lead to a whole series of questions further down the road--I'm more than willing to do it in camera. If it means that's our first step, we can see whether or not we're all satisfied or as a committee we have to follow up with further questions down the road with other officials.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

So if we do it in camera...?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

That we request the presence of Heritage and Industry officials to face questions at an in camera session.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Schellenberger]

Does everyone understand that? All those in favour?

(Motion agreed to)

It's 5:30. We've run out of time. Thank you, everyone, for your cooperation today. We got some business done. Thank you.

The meeting is adjourned to the call of the chair.