Canadian Heritage Committee on May 17th, 2021

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

Thank you very much.

I only have a minute left. I will go back to Janet Yale, please.

There's been some conversation about how much consultation went into preparing for this bill. Could you just quickly talk about the number of consultations and the stakeholders you spoke with in preparing your report, which formed the backdrop to preparing Bill C-10?

[Janet Yale]

Thank you for that question.

In fact, we went to great lengths to go coast to coast to coast to meet with people. We reached out proactively. We made it clear that we were ready, willing and able to meet with anyone, with any stakeholders—minority language groups, indigenous communities and all the different stakeholders—from all sides of the debate. We spent about six months just doing consultations to make sure we heard how the organizations, how the stakeholders and how the consumer groups were feeling challenged about the current environment and that we heard their recommendations for how we should go forward.

We didn't start deliberating until after written and oral consultations that took us from, I would say, August until January of 2018 through to early 2019, when we began our deliberations in earnest.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Ms. Yale.

Mr. Champoux, you have six minutes.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank the witnesses for being with us today. Their visit was highly anticipated. I'm grateful to them, and I thank them for their availability.

I'll start with Mr. Trudel.

Mr. Trudel, a few moments ago, you talked about the fact that, as things stand, we are still much less protected. Privacy, freedom of expression and, at the very least, freedom of choice of content are less protected. Bill C-10 has no intention of infringing on this.

Do you think the bill will improve things or will the status quo be maintained?

[Pierre Trudel]

I believe that Bill C-10, which seeks to amend the Broadcasting Act, will ensure that the resulting legislation will better protect the rights of Canadian citizens and consumers. As for the possibility of allowing the CRTC to take a look at algorithmic processes, it's always important to remember that it's not a body that censors content behind closed doors. It's a body that regulates certain activities through a public process to which everyone is invited.

During these processes, the CRTC could invite the major platforms to explain how the algorithms and other processes they use to administer the flow of various content work. It could ask them to explain how these are compatible with Canadian values and how they are not likely to be subservient to undeclared commercial interests. It could also ask them to explain how consistent they are with Canadian values, which are different from American values. I"m thinking of equality and diversity, among other things. Most importantly, it could ask them to explain to what extent algorithms provide real proposals to Canadians and how they can be organized in such a way that they reflect the values found in the Broadcasting Act.

For example, they could give visibility to cultural productions from minority groups, as well as the rich production of Canada's indigenous peoples or racialized people. In short, with an amendment to the Broadcasting Act, such as the one proposed here, the act would promote freedom of expression rather than censorship. In a sense, it would encourage companies to promote Canadian creativity, while leaving consumers free to consume what they want.

Online, no one thinks for a second that you can force someone to watch what they don't want to watch. This issue has long been settled. However, what is often hard to find on platforms is cultural products that reflect Canadian creativity or the productions of creators from Canada's linguistic or cultural minorities. That is what is currently missing on the platforms. That's why Canada has managed to set up an audiovisual or media system that is very open to the world and that has never practised censorship, as some seem to claim.

On the contrary, not only do we have access to everything in the world, but we also have access to the productions of our creators. That's the difference. That's why I think it's an act that increases our fundamental rights—

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Trudel, I'm going to interrupt you because I want to bring you back to the issue you just raised, which is censorship.

Basically, the purpose of all of you being here today is to try to sweep this issue under the rug so that we can continue to do important work on this bill. I completely agree with you that it is absolutely necessary to protect culture. However, the fact that section 4.1 is no longer being created has raised concerns among some people and groups. Other amendments are coming, including section 2.1, which does not seem to be enough to convince people. Generally speaking, when you talk to us about Bill C-10, you see absolutely no risk to freedom of expression. However, let's suppose that, in an extrapolated scenario, the CRTC ends up making decisions that go against freedom of expression.

First, could such a scenario occur, and in what context? Second, what would be the remedies for it?

I think there are defence mechanisms, in all of this.

[Pierre Trudel]

Absolutely.

If the CRTC made such a decision, it would be done through a public process. There would be a call for public comment. It would invite all Canadians to come and give their views on the action it was considering. Then it would take those actions. It would issue an order or a regulation. This regulation or order could be challenged under the provisions that are already in the Broadcasting Act.

One of the first challenges that would come to mind is that the CRTC would have interpreted the act in a way that contradicts freedom of expression. This seems to me to be a particularly remote or unthinkable hypothesis, since, for this to happen, the CRTC would have to have ignored all of these provisions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Trudel. We'll come back to this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

You have no idea how much I truly appreciate your enthusiasm after being on this committee for a long time, but I have to leave it at that, as we also have to follow the clock here.

We now go to Ms. McPherson.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Chair, I would like to raise a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

One moment. Ms. Harder has a point of order.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, I'm just looking for clarification. I understand that you've given the Green Party member some time to ask questions. It's my understanding that this is permitted only if another member who is a permanent member on this committee agrees to share their time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Actually, Ms. Harder, under normal circumstances I've done that, yes, but I've also seen precedents in which we've allowed discretion for other members to be involved. I have not given Mr. Manly any time thus far in the Bill C-10 deliberations. However, he's been very active in proposing amendments, and I thought it would be at the chair's discretion to say, “Yes, go ahead.”

He's only getting the one question—certainly no more than five minutes—and there are precedents for that, Ms. Harder.

Thank you very much.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Ms. McPherson, you have six minutes, please.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank all of the witnesses for joining us today.

Obviously our goal here is to create broadcasting legislation that protects Canadians' freedom of expression and also levels the playing field and makes the web giants contribute to our broadcasting landscape. I appreciate that you've all come here to share your expertise, because I think we're all trying to get to a place where we can work collaboratively, hear from experts, get the best information possible and create the best legislation going forward.

I know we all recognize that the legislation before us needs some work and needs some attention, so I thank you for being with us here today and helping make this bill or future legislation as good as it possibly can be for our broadcasters and for our artists and our creative sector.

I'm going to start by asking a few questions of Mr. Cash.

Mr. Cash, you spoke about the impact and the importance of the independent music industry for our local culture and our economic development. Could you speak a little bit more about that, please?

[Andrew Cash]

Thank you so much for the question.

You know, roughly 80% of all the players in the music scene, in the music sector writ large in Canada, are solo self-employed or solo operators. They are running, in a sense, small businesses. There are some larger entities, of course, but that's the reality. Their combined efforts and their combined risk....

By the way, there is a lot of risk, not just on one's financial resources but also on one's physical and mental health, in being in this business. There is a real need for people like you to really understand what we're doing and how we do it. People don't really know how the music they're listening to in their earbuds got there. They don't how it was made and who made it. That is one of the reasons that a bill like Bill C-10 is so important.

As I said in my opening remarks, COVID really has laid bare the vulnerabilities in the system. It would be one thing if this were pre-Internet, but the fact of the matter is that these massive companies are interacting with our arts and culture sector. They essentially need the content, and not just Canadian content but the content of all creators around the world. They need it in order to make their platforms roll. Too often it is especially the artists and the small independent Canadian-owned companies that get swept under.

There's one other thing that's important to note here when you're asking about the Canadian independent music scene. We're talking about Canadian-owned companies. We're not talking about multinational entities. We're talking about people who live and work in your communities, people who are developing intellectual property and many times are successfully exporting that to markets beyond our borders and bringing that revenue back to Canada.

We look at Bill C-10 as a way of really improving that and adding to that.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you. That's wonderful.

One concern that's come up as we talk about Bill C-10, of course, is the need for freedom of expression to be protected. Of course, this is something for which, as you will know, the NDP has pushed for a very long time. I think artists probably more than any other group of people would defend freedom of expression. It's at the heart of their reason for being.

Could you tell us more about the economic reality for artists in your industry and why they want web giants to pay their fair share while fully, of course, respecting the freedom of expression and the ability of people to publish content of their choice on the Internet?

[Andrew Cash]

Right now, the way the Internet sector is working for music is that few companies, few artists, have any leverage in negotiating with YouTube. The music's generally up already. The choice is between licensing and getting a lousy return on that licensing or getting no money at all. That is really a stark choice for entrepreneurs, absolutely, but for the artists themselves, it presents a huge problem.

I'm not going to say that it's all terrible news for artists. As I said right off the top, these platforms represent enormous opportunity, but we have to get it right. Part of getting it right is bringing these massive companies, the biggest companies in the history of time, under some kind of regulatory system whereby they can be accountable to the people of Canada.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

And contributing to our artistic sector, of course.

[Andrew Cash]

Yes—100%.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

You probably know this, but Edmonton Strathcona has an enormous number of artists. I can't wait until we can have live shows again and we can see some of our artists.

Thank you very much for what you've done to encourage artists. Thank you for your testimony today.

Mr. Chair, I believe that is my time. Is that correct?

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

It's close enough. You have just enough time to say “hello.”

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Hello.