Evidence of meeting #24 for Canadian Heritage in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
I'd like to go to whoever from the department is able to answer the question.
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I'm sorry, sir, this ain't Jeopardy. I have to figure out who you want to talk to first.
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
I think the department would be the one to let us know who would be—
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Sorry, I was taking about Mr. Aitchison. Do you want to go to Mr. Aitchison or the department?
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
I was not asking anything of Mr. Aitchison. I was asking the department whether Mr. Aitchison's proposal that he previously made would resolve the issue that they had raised with respect to removing the word “online”. I didn't ask anything of Mr. Aitchison.
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Of course you didn't.
We'll go to the department. Go ahead, Mr. Ripley.
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
On a point of order, there's nothing on the floor for him to ask an opinion about. There's nothing that has been proposed.
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
Unless Mr. Aitchison proposes that, it can't be looking for clarification for something that hasn't been proposed.
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Okay. I think what's happening here is this: I understand the way the question started to Mr. Aitchison about the situation that he brought up earlier. However, Mr. Housefather then went on to ask the department about the presence of “broadcast undertakings” as a question. Therefore, I think that's quite legitimate, given the main amendment on the floor.
Am I going to Mr. Ripley?
Carry on, sir.
2:40 p.m.
Director General, Broadcasting, Copyright and Creative Marketplace, Department of Canadian Heritage
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
What I would point out to the committee is that the term “undertaking” isn't defined. Indeed, “broadcasting undertaking” is a defined term in the act, and that captures distribution undertakings like cable and satellite companies and online undertakings pursuant to Bill C-10, and programming undertakings, which are how we think of TV channels.
Again, here the concern is, as Mr. Olsen outlined, that right now the way the system works is that the CRTC can authorize cable and satellite companies like Rogers, Bell or Videotron to carry services that aren't Canadian—CNN, Fox, and so on—and they're part of your cable or satellite lineup.
The concern is that if the focus is only on online undertakings, there is a risk that there might be a suggestion that Parliament is trying to indicate to the CRTC that it should no longer authorize the distribution of undertakings except for online undertakings. That's the potential mischief we see here.
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Mr. Chairman, I would like to move to amend paragraph (a) of BQ-4 by replacing the word “online” with “broadcasting”.
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Just to repeat, regarding paragraph (a), what Mr. Housefather is proposing as a subamendment is “the Canadian broadcasting system shall be effectively owned and controlled by Canadians, and foreign broadcasting undertakings may also provide programming to Canadians”.
That is the subamendment we are discussing right now. Is there further discussion? I see only Mr. Housefather's hand up at this point.
Go ahead, Mr. Housefather.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Just to be very quick, Mr. Chair, I think we would be remiss not to take into account what the department just said and the availability of channels like CNN and the potential misunderstanding of this amendment. It would be simplified by simply replacing “online” with “broadcasting” to make it a defined term under the bill, and broader so I would hope my colleagues will listen to that and consider this amendment.
Thanks.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Just as a reminder, everybody, this is a subamendment proposed by Mr. Housefather regarding BQ-4. I think everybody is of the understanding now as to what he is proposing as a subamendment.
I see no discussion taking place or requested. Therefore, I'm going to have to call for the vote.
Shall the subamendment from Mr. Housefather carry?
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I hear a “no”.
Clerk, do a recorded vote, please.
(Subamendment agreed to: yeas 10; nays 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We now return to the main amendment as amended by Mr. Housefather. It is BQ-4 as amended.
I'm sure you now have an understanding of the amendment and the effect of it. Now we go back to the main one, as amended.
Mr. Champoux, go ahead.
2:45 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
I want to make sure I'm clear on the wording of the amendment as it's been amended, Mr. Chair. Could the clerk read it to us?
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I think I know what it is, but just to back me up, I'm going to call on either the clerk or a legislative clerk to read it back.
I will go to the legislative clerk, Philippe, to read back to amendment as subamended.
2:45 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Champoux, you would like me to read you the French version. Is that correct?
2:45 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
As amended, the amendment reads as follows in French:
a) le système canadien de radiodiffusion doit être, effectivement, la propriété des Canadiens et sous leur contrôle, et des entreprises de radiodiffusion étrangères peuvent également fournir de la programmation aux Canadiens;
a.1) chaque entreprise de radiodiffusion est tenue de
