Canadian Heritage Committee on May 18th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Minister Lametti. I'm sorry, but the time dictates I can't give him that time right now.

Mr. Louis, you have five minutes, please.

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair, and I thank Ministers Lametti and Guilbeault for being here. I appreciate that and also I want to thank the representatives from justice and heritage for being here in this important conversation.

We've heard lots of testimony already and numerous arts organizations have come out in support of Bill C-10. Our artists are among the most fierce defenders of free speech in our society. They understand that updating this Broadcasting Act in no way infringes on the freedom of expression nor does it represent any censorship of the Internet.

Minister Lametti, I would like to hear from you. Can you explain the balanced approach that this bill takes in supporting our arts and defending free speech? Specifically, the charter statement says, “In making regulatory decisions, the [CRTC] must proportionately balance the objectives of the act with protection of freedom of expression in light of the facts and circumstances.”

Can you explain exactly what you meant by that? Is it your conclusion that the original import of the charter statement still applies and remains true?

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Thank you for the question. Thank you for regaling us during late night votes with your musical skills and your voice.

Mr. Louis, the charter statement does discuss the regulatory decision-making process of the CRTC and does, as you have said in your question, cite the balance that it has to achieve. I would add, as part of the charter statement—and it's indeed quoted in the charter statement—that the commission is subject to the charter and therefore must exercise its discretionary power in a manner that is consistent with the charter and the act. It therefore provides that the act must be interpreted and applied in a manner consistent with freedom of expression.

That's contained in the charter statement. If you want to delve further, I'm going to give you the same response that I've given to our other colleagues around the table, which is that I will turn the floor over to Minister Guilbeault to give further precision.

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

In that vein, I forgot to mention off the top that I'd like to share my time with Ms. Dabrusin. Maybe she can pick up the conversation from here.

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

Perfect.

I don't know how much time I have, but I would like to be able to give some time to Minister Guilbeault to respond. I know that he has indicated a couple of times he wanted to say things. I think, given that it is so important to move forward to clause-by-clause and we've heard from so many of the people in the creative industries about the importance of this bill and from witnesses yesterday as well, the minister might have something that he would like to add.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and Ms. Dabrusin.

Earlier on in one of her questions, Ms. McPherson said that because the bill had around a hundred amendments, it was a flawed bill. That's a false premise. I know that, just like me, she's a new MP, so we're not used to this. It's not uncommon for bills to have 200 amendments. Going back in the previous Parliament, I can recall Bill C-69, which I followed closely in my previous career, had around 200 amendments. There's nothing extraordinary about that. In fact, a hundred may not be so much after all.

She pointed out that we've heard about experts who have raised concerns. I think just yesterday this committee heard from a number of experts who have actually clearly said that they thought there were no issues regarding freedom of speech. We've heard from a previous director of the CRTC, Janet Yale, and from a law professor from the Université de Montréal, Pierre Trudel.

I could quote this because I don't think it has been done in this committee and I think it is important. It's in French, so I'll switch to French. It's the unanimous resolution from the National Assembly.

The motion recognizes that Bill C-10 “constitutes a significant step in protecting and promoting Quebec culture and..., therefore, [the National Assembly of Quebec] affirms its support for the measures proposed by the bill.”

I think Bill C-10 actually has a lot of support across this country given the benefit it will bring to our artists as well as to the broadcasting ecosystem.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Ms. Dabrusin. You had 24 seconds left.

Mr. Champoux, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I will take two minutes and 54 seconds, then, since Ms. Dabrusin had 24 seconds left in her time. I will gladly use them.

Mr. Guilbeault, you are fully aware of the impasse in which we currently find ourselves and the reasons for this impasse. Whether it is justified or not, I think we are entitled to ask ourselves questions. Yesterday, the committee heard from experts, each saying the opposite of the other.

The committee ended up passing a motion to ask for a new charter statement and for the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Canadian Heritage to appear. We did not get a revised charter statement, but rather an explanation of the charter statement, and, a few days later, we are hearing from the Minister of Justice.

Mr. Guilbeault, do you feel that your caucus is taking this bill as seriously as you are?

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

I thank my colleague for his question.

I think we have done everything the committee has asked of us. Every time the committee has asked me, I have come to testify, even twice in the last two weeks. The committee asked for clarification of the original charter statement; that was submitted last week. My colleague the Minister of Justice is here with me today. We take this bill very seriously, as I think does the entire Quebec and Canadian arts community. You may have seen the petition launched by the Union des artistes and signed by Yvon Deschamps, Claude Legault and Ariane Moffatt, among others. I could talk about the letter published in the Toronto Star last week and signed by the great international artist Loreena McKennitt.

I could also talk about the unions. Again today, the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec issued a press release in support of Bill C-10. There is also the Confederation of National Trade Unions, and even Unifor, the largest union in Canada.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

You don't need to convince me of the relevance and urgency of this bill. I think we are of the same opinion.

My fear is that I sometimes have the impression that you are rowing alone and that your colleagues are not following you.

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

I encourage you to get in the boat with me.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I think we are and we have demonstrated that quite well over the last few months.

Actually, my question was more about—

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

We have Adam van Koeverden in the boat.

[Some hon. members]

Ha, ha!

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you all very much.

Ms. McPherson, go ahead for two and a half minutes, please.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you.

I would like to thank the ministers and their staff for coming again.

Very quickly, I want to point out that while Mr. Guilbeault has said that many organizations have been supportive of this bill, I would also say that I met with hundreds of individuals and organizations, and not a single one said that this bill was strong as it was. Every single organization recognized the urgency, but every single organization also said that this was a flawed bill that needed to be fixed, so I did want to have that on the record.

Minister Lametti, I have a couple more questions for you—

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

Mr. Chair, may I respond to that?

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

No, you may not, actually, because I'm going to ask Mr. Lametti some questions, if you don't mind, with my very short time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

No, Mr. Guilbeault, Ms. McPherson has the floor.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

From the time of the drafting of the bill until now, have you used independent legal analysis of the government to ensure that the bill and the amendments your government has made are consistent with the charter principles?

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

In the justice department, our lawyers provide legal opinions both to me and to other ministers and ministries, and those are used in the drafting of legislation. The contents of those documents are protected by solicitor-client privilege.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

So no independent legal analysis has been obtained?

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Occasionally, there is independent legal analysis obtained for a variety of different purposes. Again, those documents are covered by solicitor-client privilege, as indeed is the fact that we may have asked for advice in the case of any particular bill. That is also covered—the actual asking and the solicitor-client relationship—by solicitor-client privilege, so I wouldn't—

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

So you can't tell us if you have any.