Canadian Heritage Committee on Feb. 5th, 2021

[Solange Drouin]

Thank you for your question.

Of course, the bill is not perfect, but it lays an important foundation for the new regulations that need to be put in place. In the music community and in the cultural community in general, we have been waiting 20 years for this bill, ever since the CRTC chose not to regulate the Internet. In 1999, we thought it was a very bad decision. Since then, Internet development has increased tenfold. Today, cultural consumption is shifting to online music services, such as Spotify, or to Netflix, in the case of television.

The bill is designed to welcome foreign companies into our Canadian system, which was limited to Canadian companies. However, it is important for the system to keep its Canadian character in general. Above all, we must force all companies, even foreign companies that will now be under the CRTC’s authority, to make maximum use of Canadian content. This is stated in paragraph 3(1)(f) of the Broadcasting Act. However, the bill contains a new proposal that we find a little too watered down.

We want the current version of paragraph 3(1)(f) to remain, because it says exactly that all elements of the system must make maximum use of Canadian creative resources. It will be different for Netflix than it is for CBC/Radio-Canada, for TVA or for CTV, but first we have to see what kind of maximum use we must make.

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Thank you, Ms. Drouin.

Mr. Geist, there was a laundry list of things that you told us that you didn't like about the bill, about Bill C-10, including how Canadians would be impacted and the level of secrecy, and all of these different things.

I'm wondering if there's anything you do agree with.

[Dr. Michael Geist]

I think there's value unquestionably in re-examining where the Broadcasting Act is. What this seeks to do—and I think we've seen this even in a couple of comments that my fellow panellists have made—is to claim that this is all one system, that the Internet is the same system as broadcast or television and radio, and that we can have the same rules apply. The problem is that it isn't. The long-standing policies we've had in broadcasting, for the long-standing broadcaster, have been premised on scarcity of spectrum, the privilege of having those licences and the requirement to give back.

The Internet is different. There are not the same kinds of requirements. There is far more expressive potential. There are far more opportunities for creators and for consumers alike. The problem is that when you try to put that square peg in a round hole, you end up with exactly the kinds of things that were mentioned, such as the inability, for example, to require Canadians to be predominantly—

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Dr. Geist. I'm really tight on time.

[Dr. Michael Geist]

I'm sorry, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Let's go to Monsieur Champoux.

I understand you're splitting your time with Madame Desbiens.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Chair, there is a change of plan. For technical reasons, Ms. Desbiens has given me her time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

All right.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Again, thank you very much to all the witnesses for being with us today.

Ms. Ille, time is running out and I will not be able to ask as many questions as I would like. However, I would like to tell you that I have enjoyed the discussions we've had and that we will have more in the future. I assure you once again of my unfailing support.

Now, I would like to have a brief discussion with Ms. Drouin, the ADISQ representative.

We have had discussions on the issue of French and on the way to ensure that the production of original French-language content will be protected at all times in the regulations that will be enacted by the CRTC.

We had this discussion because we don’t really know what form this will have to take. I would like you to give me your opinion on this: how can we ensure that the law will preserve and protect the production of original French-language content?

[Solange Drouin]

Thank you for your question. Thank you also for allowing me to continue on this subject.

I have been with the ADISQ for 30 years. That’s probably as long as Mr. Geist has been at the University of Ottawa. I have been reading Mr. Geist’s writing for 30 years and I have been disagreeing with him for 30 years. That’s okay. It’s common knowledge.

I would like to bring to everyone’s attention the fact that, in our economy or in the world, there is no universe where we are faced with an infinite choice. When we go grocery shopping, we don’t have every single kind of pea on offer. There is no such thing. When we buy a car, we don’t have access to all the cars available on the market. Choices are made that condition the offer in all sectors of the economy.

When it comes to culture, I think there must be a bias in favour of our own culture, which would be quite normal. Contrary to what Mr. Geist says, it is not true that there are no rules or technical means that allow us to achieve the same result in the digital world. The reasons may not be the same. It is true that frequencies are no longer scarce, as they were at the time. However, even if this scarcity no longer exists, this does not mean that there are not other good reasons to do so. You have to stop quibbling about whether or not there is a scarcity. Okay, there is no longer a scarcity, but are there still good reasons to regulate and enhance our national content? The answer is yes, and I would argue that there are even more, because our content is getting more and more drowned out. So why not promote our French-language and Canadian contents on our own territory?

In this time of pandemic, we see how important it is to have our own resources. We see that with respect to the vaccine. When you’re dependent on what’s going on in the world, you may be missing opportunities and you’re not self-sufficient. Here, the tools that transmit culture must first be at the service of our culture. Bill C-10 is beginning to move in that direction, and that is why we welcome it with such interest. This bill must do the same for all French-language arts. As others have said before you, Canadian legislation should be amended to give greater prominence to the protection, promotion and development of French-language content in sections 3, 5 and 9. We will commit all of our proposals to paper, and you can read them quietly. This is essential, and I think that nothing in the Internet universe prohibits this.

Mr. Champoux, I see that you want to ask further questions.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I have another one for you, Ms. Drouin. As you said, your experience of CRTC hearings is very extensive. I think you too could write a few books on the subject.

Do you think it is realistic to give the CRTC nine months to hold hearings and put this bill in place?

[Solange Drouin]

Of course, this time frame is short, but it is highly desirable.

This is a high mountain to climb. We have to start climbing it. Not everything will be built in nine months, of course, but we have to start.

However, there is a need to prioritize. We have to decide which aspects and sectors we want to implement quickly. As for the music community, which Mr. Geist is less familiar with, it’s obvious that if online music services such as Spotify, YouTube and others contributed to the production of content, it would make a really big difference in our industry. There would really be an infusion of new money. We could start with priority services. Not everything will be solved in nine months, but we need to start now.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I have 30 seconds left to ask you a quick question. It is obvious that some will propose deregulating traditional broadcasters rather than regulating online broadcasters.

What would be the impacts on the cultural industry and creators?

[Solange Drouin]

This morning I was in a meeting with our members. We were talking about commercial radio.

Still today, commercial radio plays a major role in the development of artists’ careers. As long as this is the case, the ADISQ will fight to ensure that commercial broadcasters promote our French-language content and contribute to it. The new services, which do not currently do this and which present foreign content, must contribute in the same way.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Ms. Drouin.

Ms. McPherson, go ahead for six minutes, please.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

I would like to thank all of the witnesses. This has been very interesting. I have had the opportunity to speak to many of you outside of committee, so I have the perspectives you have been able to give me. I'm interested in hearing your responses to some of the questions as we go forward.

I'm going to start with Ms. Ille from the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network. You talked about the hole that is in the bill in terms of support for the APTN, and about how you have some proposals you're putting forward for Bill C-10. Could you very quickly walk us through the changes you're proposing and how you feel those changes would fix the hole you identified?

[Monika Ille]

Certainly. I could start by talking about two of the changes that pertain directly to APTN, our own media and indigenous people.

Proposed paragraph 3(1)(o) says that indigenous people could carry on “programming undertakings”, but when you say that, you exclude online activities. We don't understand why that word would be used, which would prevent us from reverting to an online activity, so we definitely would want that to be changed to “broadcasting undertakings”.

This is hopefully an oversight that could be fixed quite easily.

Definitely, within the Broadcasting Act, a definition of the words “indigenous people” should be added. As you know, indigenous is one big word, and it pertains to first nations, Métis and Inuit people. It would be nice just to add this definition to show a recognition and acknowledgement of the different nations.

I could ask Joel to go through more details on the other ones.

[Joel Fortune, Legal Adviser, Aboriginal Peoples Television Network]

Thanks, Monika. I will do it very quickly.

We work very carefully with the structure of the act and what the department proposed for Bill C-10 and how the various powers of the CRTC work. We really focused in on what we thought were the absolutely essential powers that the commission could have in relation to programming services as opposed to Canadian programs.

We proposed changes to the proposed subsection 9.1, which is on the CRTC's ability to make orders that affect online services. We are suggesting that the ability to make programs available should also extend to programming services, to make them available and discoverable. Similarly, there is an issue regarding the current requirement that distribution undertakings make certain programming services available. If you look at the act, a distribution undertaking by definition excludes an online service, so that's just crazy. If you have one type of distribution undertaking using one technology, you can make the service available under certain terms and conditions, but for a service using an Internet technology, you can't do that. That's just crazy, so we're suggesting that section should be changed.

Similarly, the commission's regulatory powers are very important. The underpinning for the whole system is its ability to make regulations, so we have suggested that certain regulatory powers that right now are limited to distribution undertakings specifically excluding online services should have the ability to relate to broadcasting undertakings, which would then include online services.

Those are a couple of little definitional questions, but they are very important.

We have also addressed the way the act works. Right now, you have two major sections. You have policy and you have powers, and you have to have both sections. You have to have a policy that relates to a power and a power that relates to a policy. It's great to have highfalutin policies, but unless there are specific powers that the commission can use, they really don't mean anything and vice versa. We have suggested a specific policy section that would relate to online services when they are distributing other services. It's essentially that they treat other services fairly and make Canadian services visible.

These are just some basic objectives for online distribution of Canadian programming services. Right now the act is completely silent on that point. That's a major flaw.

Finally we suggest a modification of the existing language that deals with Canadian ownership in the system. Essentially, we're suggesting that the act shouldn't just remove it; doing that seems excessive. We should certainly recognize that there's tremendous value in protecting Canadian ownership in our own broadcasting world. I can't believe the act wouldn't have that. In addition, we think it's important to recognize the diversity of voices, and especially of independent voices, in that section.

All of those pieces work together to fill the hole that Monika identified.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Are there maybe examples? When we see this...and we've heard about different countries and what they are doing. Mr. Geist spoke about that. Perhaps you could talk a little bit about any countries that you've seen that are dealing with online distribution that we could use as road maps.

Mr. Fortune, could I pass it back to you again?

[Joel Fortune]

Sure. The United Kingdom is looking squarely at this issue right now. Ofcom in 2019 delivered a report to Parliament, I think, recommending that their legislation be amended to deal with exactly the issues we're identifying here. It was about ensuring suitable prominence and fair treatment for certain U.K. services on global platforms made available in that country. That was in 2019. It went up to the House of Lords. They're not known as the most radical people in the world, but they thought it was a great idea. They recommended that those proposals be adopted.

Right now the U.K. Ofcom is looking at that exact issue. Ongoing consultation was launched in December. People are providing their comments on this issue, that certain key U.K. services, which there are quite a few of—it's a different environment from ours—should be offered on global platforms and should be treated fairly. As well, there should probably be some backstop provisions to ensure fair treatment.

There are policy issues around this, but that's what they're looking at. That's their job. They're the regulator. Our regulator should have the same job. They're certainly no less capable than Ofcom. Our act should let them do it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Mr. Fortune.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you for that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Ms. McPherson.

Folks, that brings this session to an end. We had time for the full first round of six minutes each. I now have to draw this to a close. We have to take a break for our next guests.

Madame Drouin, Dr. Geist, Mr. Fortune and Madam Ille, thank you so much for joining us in this round.

We'll suspend for a few minutes. Please don't turn off or disconnect from this. As you know, technically, once we get our next guests going, we will start right away.

Thank you again to all.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Okay, folks, we are back for our second round. We're studying Bill C-10, of course, in a prestudy of Bill C-10 before it passes the House of Commons, if it does.

I'd like to make a few comments.

Again, screenshots, or taking photos of your screen, are not permitted. That's for our committee members and our guests; please do not take screenshots. Please, before speaking, wait until I recognize you by name. When you are ready to speak, you can click on the microphone icon to activate your mike. For interpretation, you have the choice at the bottom of your screen of whatever is on the floor, or you can switch to either English or French interpretation. Please, when you are not speaking, put your mike on mute.

These are all the universal Zoom rules that we've been under for the past year, or almost a year.

Of course, I want to welcome our guests. We have two participants today. We have two guests we want to hear from, and we want to thank them for joining us here on a Friday afternoon.

We have, from the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, Daniel Bernhard, who is the executive director, and from the Union des Artistes, we have Sophie Prégent, Pascale St-Onge and Julien Laflamme.

We have five minutes each for your remarks. I unfortunately have to be a bit strict on that. I'll let you clew up your thoughts, but you have not much beyond five minutes, if we get there.

We're going to start with Mr. Bernhard from Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, please, for five minutes.