Canadian Heritage Committee on Feb. 26th, 2021

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Chair, can I just clarify that this is the last time that I'll be asking questions? Is that correct?

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Yes.

This should take you past 2:55 eastern, which means I don't even have enough time for a first question on the second round.

Again, given that we lost 10 minutes for technical reasons, I'm going to seek a second-round solution—I'll discuss it during subcommittee—so that other people can get to ask questions in the second hour. I'm only seeking fairness. I'm not seeking anything that's biased in any way. I'll get back to you on that, because I feel your pain on this, given the virtual situation we are in.

That being said, Ms. McPherson, you have six minutes.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for trying to give us as much time as you can with the witnesses.

I'd like to thank the witnesses for being here. This is very interesting. This is a very complex bill, and to have the different perspectives in the room is very important.

I'd like to start with Ms. Wheeler. You were interrupted earlier during your testimony because of time constraints. I'm wondering if you'd like to finish that thought before I ask you a follow-up question.

[Susan Wheeler]

Thank you for that.

I think I captured most of my initial concern about the short-term implications of the bill. We know that it's taken 30 years for us to look at this piece of legislation. Right now, with the provisions that are in the proposed bill, our concern is that this type of structural disadvantage or asymmetry will be enshrined for many years to come and not allow Canadian media companies to evolve their business and effectively compete with the increasing amount of foreign competition that is now in our markets.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

We certainly see that. We see the need for this bill to be not only the bill we need right now, or the bill we needed 10 years ago, but rather the bill we'll need in 10 years. I appreciate that.

Obviously, we'll be going through it clause-by-clause and submitting amendments, but as it stands right now in its current formation, from your perspective, would it be better that it go forward or not go forward? Does it need to have those amendments added?

[Susan Wheeler]

We believe the time is now to get it right. The proposed amendments that we put forward should be considered and should be part of a future passage of the bill.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

There is one thing that I asked in the last panel and I will ask with all of the panellists today, as well. Going forward, knowing that we have an awful lot of diverse opinions coming at this committee, if you could identify only one amendment that you would like to make sure makes it into this bill—into our recommendations for this bill—what would that one be?

[Susan Wheeler]

It would be the issues of asymmetrical application of the rules and regulations on Canadian companies, which would amount to more onerous obligations than those that are imposed on the U.S. tech giants. That is the core of our concern in this bill.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Perhaps I'll ask Ms. Hinse, as well.

I know that you spoke about the lack of acknowledgement of your portion of the sector. How do you see the current state of the bill? Would you like it to go forward? What is the one amendment that you would like to see included as we consider the bill in this committee?

[Amélie Hinse]

In its current form, the bill is far from ideal because we are still being ignored. This has a considerable impact on us and more particularly on local news production, an area that is already in crisis. The act needs to be modernized. Things must move quickly; we have been talking about it this for a really long time.

The one amendment I would like to see is to better define the community aspect and its role. That reflects what we have been saying since we started. It has impacts on funding and on our ability to be seen and heard on a number of platforms. Recognition like that would allow us to play a role in potential service agreements to be signed with the new online players.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you.

We'll go from local to the very much not local, Mr. Cardin.

[Stéphane Cardin]

Along with the other members of the Motion Picture Association–Canada, we've proposed amendments to subsection 5(2), in Bill C-10, essentially to ensure that the CRTC considers competition, innovation and affordability in its broadcasting decisions, and that regulation should be efficient and proportionate to its purpose.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you.

That takes me to about a minute left in my time. I would like to take a moment, Mr. Chair, if I could, to bring forward the two motions that I had tabled previously.

I would thank the witnesses for their contributions and would do that step next.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

You have about two and a half minutes left. Would you like to go ahead with your motions?

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Yes, please.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Go ahead.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I would like to bring forward the two motions that I have tabled to this committee. The first motion is:

That the committee call on the Minister of Canadian Heritage to provide the committee with the policy direction order intended for the Governor in Council, or any other documents pertaining to the regulation of online broadcasting undertakings, in relation to the C-10 Bill.

My understanding is that there is an amendment that will be proposed for that, which I am completely amenable to. I know that the clerk and the chair have also received a revised motion that was jointly created by Mr. Housefather and me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Ms. McPherson, can we deal with the first motion first?

Given the fact that we're dealing with two motions, may I be so bold as to thank our guests for being here today? It looks like we're going over time.

I want to thank Amélie Hinse from the Fédération des télévisions communautaires autonomes du Québec. I also want to thank Pam Dinsmore and Susan Wheeler from Rogers Communications. Also, from Netflix, I want to thank Stéphane Cardin. Good luck on Sunday on the awards show; apparently you're going to do well, according to rumour, so all the best.

Thank you to our guests for providing their input, amendment suggestions and so on.

Ms. McPherson, can we start with the first one you mentioned, the Governor in Council motion?

Is there any debate on that?

Ms. Dabrusin, go ahead.

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

I am going to propose an amendment. I have put it forward to Ms. McPherson before, so I don't believe it is contentious. It is just that the policy directive is in fact a draft policy directive. There is no finalized policy directive, so the amendment would be just to add the word “draft” before “policy directive”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Do you mean “policy direction”?

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

Sorry, it's “direction”, yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

It would say, “That the committee call on the Minister of Canadian Heritage to provide the committee with the policy direction draft”—

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

I was going to say “draft policy direction”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

So it's “with the draft policy direction”, and the rest remains the same.

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

Yes, Mr. Chair.