Canadian Heritage Committee on Jan. 29th, 2021

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madame Laurendeau, could you clarify too, in terms of your conclusions from that, whether you have advised the staff to not share these sorts of postings in the future?

[Hélène Laurendeau]

My conclusion was that sharing publicly available information is not a reprehensible act. While I had a conversation with staff, there was nothing that needed to be addressed specifically with respect to that information.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Not reprehensible, but perhaps not advisable, I would argue.

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

She just told you that it doesn't violate any code of ethics or best practices from the government, so I think that from that you can't say, well, it may not be advisable. Does that violate any code of ethics—

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I think you could—

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

—or code of conduct? The answer is no. How many times did it happen in the last year? Once, that particular instance.

I take issue with the fact that we would question the ethical value of our civil service in Canada based on something that's simply not there and that we would—

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

With due respect, Minister, it is there. That's why we're having this meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Minister and Ms. McPherson, I apologize, I'm going to have to stop right there. I've been somewhat lenient.

For the benefit of our colleagues, we're going to go through a complete second round. We are going to surpass our scheduled time by five to 10 minutes, but given our late start I thought that would be the equitable thing to do.

Now, we go to Mr. Waugh for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Minister, and department heads.

I just wanted to pick up on the conversation here of Mr. Kevin Chan and his email to Owen Ripley, a high-up official in the minister's office.

Minister, with all due respect, your introduction today talked about what you're going to do with BillC-10, hate speech and media. Directly, when you look at it, Facebook is involved in this. There are major potential implementations to Facebook in the work of your department.

That's why I think we brought it up today—we just flagged it for you and I have the conflict of interest framework in front of me—and that's all we're asking. The values and ethics code applies to all staff, regardless of level, and most of the provisions, as you know, are based on the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat.

We're not questioning anybody civil service-wise. We're trying to, in this case...“report in writing to their deputy head any conflict of interest resulting from firm offers of employment and other activities related to their duties”. It's in here.

That's what we were just talking about. You're dealing with Facebook more than anybody in the government and we're concerned when we see a personal email from Kevin Chan to one of your employees in the department. This is too cozy.

As opposition members we're concerned with this. I would like you to comment on that. I know you've only been a minister for a year or so, but this does not look good. If you don't mind me saying, it smells when Facebook, which you will have a major implementation with in the coming months, is sending personal emails to your staff.

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

Of course, we in the department talk with Facebook on these issues, but we also speak with the National Council of Canadian Muslims, the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, la Fédération des femmes du Québec, the World Sikh Organization, the Chinese national council for social justice, Amnesty International and the Anti-Hate Network. When drawing up legislation, we try to gather as diverse as possible points of view and opinions on an issue so that we can better inform the legislation that we will do.

I am a strong believer in the benefits of technologies, but we also have to recognize that many technologies have a perverse impact. We've seen that throughout the years. I think our role as legislators is to maximize the benefits to society of these technologies while trying to minimize those perverse impacts. I am on record saying that when Facebook threatened Australia with cutting ties with the Australian public on Facebook because of what Australia was trying to do in terms of legislation, it was no less than bullying. In fact, we have an upcoming meeting with France, Australia and Germany to see how we can work together on issues relating to GAFA.

Yes, we meet with these companies, but we meet with a whole range of different intervenors on these issues. What we're working on with the department is what will be in the best interest of Canadians, regardless of what the social media platforms, Facebook or others, think about it.

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

I think the issue here was that Facebook went through your office looking for recommendations from your office, Canadian Heritage, saying that they had a job opening and could you recommend anyone. That's the issue that I think the NDP member from Edmonton brought up here. That's what we're talking about here today, or a bit of it, and the media picked up on it. You know and I know that the Toronto Star and The Globe and Mail had articles on this.

Facebook is a big multi-platform in the world. You've pointed that out. At the same time, we're wondering how cozy Facebook is with you when they do a personal email to a member in your office asking if you have any recommendations for a position that is opening in Canada Facebook.

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

I can tell you there is no coziness, plain and simple.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

I'm sorry, Minister. I have to leave it at that. We have to move on.

We'll go to Ms. Dabrusin for five minutes, please.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, we have crossed a year, at this point, since the pandemic hit Canada. Over the pandemic we have seen our public service rise to the challenge when we have talked about emergency funding and making sure that we deliver to and support Canadians through this pandemic. In addition to dealing with the emergency, we have also seen work being done and continuing on such legislation as Bill C-10 and the truth and reconciliation day. A lot of work has been happening alongside it. It has been really quite impressive, considering we've been working under these conditions.

I would note, on the motion that we're here about today, that with this motion the member from the New Democratic Party has chosen to actually challenge the credibility and the professionalism of our public service. Given everything we've seen in the States and in other countries, how do you feel about that chipping away at the credibility of our institutions, at the fundamental trust in Canada's public service, and at the institutions that support the very important work that is being done in our country?

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

I agree. I said it earlier: I think Canada has a world-renowned public service, and it's integral that we not attack them to try to score political points. We saw on January 6 where that can lead, just south of the border.

It's interesting that many of us would condemn the fact that social platforms were instrumental over the past few years in the escalation that led to what we saw on January 6. We would condemn those media platforms for sowing doubt in the population in regard to public institutions among our neighbours to the south.

I hope no one is under the false impression that we're somehow shielded from that result in Canada and that what we saw there couldn't happen here.

I think everybody in this country has a responsibility, a duty, and especially elected officials, to ensure that we protect our institutions. The last thing we should try to do is to somehow diminish them in the hope that we could score points. There are other ways we can score political points. Of course we're political adversaries—I understand that—but certainly not at the expense of our institutions.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Thank you, Minister, for that answer. I think that distinction between the institutions and the public service and the political realm is important.

I wonder whether you might also share, as far as policy decisions are concerned, what we will do by way of legislation—what forms legislation on online harms, for example, would take.

Who ultimately makes those decisions? Who is ultimately responsible for putting forward those policy decisions?

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

Obviously we are as legislators, under the advice of our civil service.

Bill C-10 is a very good example. I will be the first to admit that the bill can be improved. The team and I are looking forward, to the proposed changes we will hear about starting next week on Bill C-10.

When I look, however, at the way the bill was received by the vast majority of people in the sector, I see that it was widely well received. Some talked about a historic day; others talked about a significant step forward. It was from coast to coast to coast, or as some of my indigenous friends say, from sea to sea to sea.

I would like to tell you that it was all due to the amazing work of my political team and me, but it wasn't. I would hope to think that we worked well at the political level, but we would not have been able to do any of this if not for the amazing work and input from our civil service.

You spoke earlier about the pandemic. I hope there's no illusion around this virtual meeting that we could have done CERB, helping more than nine million people, without the help of our civil servants in Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Minister. We appreciate that.

Mr. Champoux, you have two and a half minutes.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll keep it brief.

Mr. Minister, you were talking about Bill C-10, and I see that it doesn't appear on the projected order of parliamentary business. According to your government, this bill is close to your heart and needs to be passed quickly, but I don't see it on the projected order business for the next two weeks.

Knowing that the preliminary study won't be proof of anything, when will we be able to vote on this bill?

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

That's an excellent question. In fact, most of us would agree that the bill could be sent to committee. Some hon. members still want to speak in the House.

Procedurally, a number of bills are unavoidable. The bill on the economic statement is absolutely necessary. Otherwise, it will be very bad for the country. So some priorities are higher than others, and can't be sidestepped. However, I am hopeful that we will have a moment in the House to quickly conclude debate on Bill C-10 so that it can be referred to committee.

Thank you for doing a preliminary study even if the bill isn't yet before you. This will allow us to speed things up. Once again, thank you.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I heard you talking about the situation regarding the email exchange between an official from the Department of Canadian Heritage and Mr. Chan from Facebook. You didn't seem to think it was a big deal. Don't you find this situation worrisome?

In a CBC article this morning, journalist Elizabeth Thompson talks about Facebook, which is calling on the government to regulate hate content on the networks. I view this with a bit of doubt and cynicism.

What is your impression of this and how do you think it's perceived?

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

Earlier, I told your colleague that I made a quick inquiry with the deputy minister to find out whether this action violated a code of conduct or a code of ethics and whether it had ever happened before. This was not the case for either the first or the second question.

Are we losing employees from the Department of Canadian Heritage who were recruited by these platforms? This isn't the case either. Perhaps Ms. Laurendeau can tell you more about this.

Facebook is calling on governments to regulate the issue of online hate. If this is the case for all platforms, between you and me, not to mention everyone listening to us, it's perhaps to share a little bit of the pressure that these companies are under because of everything that's going on. The more governments intervene, the more this pressure will be shared between them and us.

This appeal to the government to intervene is not completely disinterested.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you very much.

Ms. McPherson, you have two and a half minutes, please.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a few questions. First of all, I take deep offence to the idea that I am in fact trying to score points. I'd like to point out that as a member of the opposition, my goal in my role and my job is actually to hold the government to account and to ensure that there are no unfortunate or inappropriate relationships. That's my job. I'm not scoring political points. Considering the work that this committee will be doing and considering the close relationship with Facebook, it is vital that I actually do take that on.

I want to just be very clear. This is a question for the minister. I would prefer if he answered.

Has your political staff ever circulated a job offer from Facebook, Amazon, Netflix or Google since you took office as the Minister of Heritage?

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

Not to my knowledge.