Canadian Heritage Committee on May 19th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

I'm sorry, Ms. Harder. I didn't say you were or weren't. I just don't want to brood on it. It's just a reminder. Thank you.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

I'm happy to pass off the floor. I'm certainly not trying to waste time, but I would ask my colleagues to respect the fact that this is a very complex bill before us. As a legislator, it is my responsibility to have a keen understanding before I vote.

Thank you, Mr. Champoux.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Ms. Harder. I appreciate that and I appreciate the comments. You are exactly right.

Mr. Champoux, you have the floor.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I want to reassure my colleague that I fully agree. I think that, over the past few weeks, we've shown a great deal of respect for the process, for everyone's needs and for everyone's right to fully understand our debates. However, we want to talk about a number of things today.

I wanted to address some points. My colleague Mr. Rayes told me earlier that it wasn't only Conservative Party colleagues who had concerns, but also many Canadians. I would add that the Conservative Party colleagues have voiced the concerns of a number of Canadians.

With regard to the proposed subamendment to the amendment, in my opinion, it isn't actually necessary, but it serves to reassure people. As Mr. Rayes said, you can't be too careful. This subamendment adds a layer of safety. It won't hurt to further reassure people by adding, where possible, references to the fact that freedom of expression is paramount and that we want to preserve it in every decision made.

At the start of her remarks, Ms. Harder referred to the passage in the English version that says “freedom of expression enjoyed by users of social media.” In the French version, the passage that says “la liberté d'expression dont jouissent les utilisateurs” doesn't seem to have exactly the same meaning. Our English-speaking colleagues will certainly be able to make a judgment. The word “enjoyed” refers to taking pleasure in doing something or benefiting from something in a playful way. However, the corresponding passage in the French version doesn't convey the same meaning as the English version and doesn't invoke the playful meaning of the word. It actually refers to a right held by users of social media services. I thought that perhaps a nuance was lost in translation. I wanted to make sure that it was clear.

If we want to continue the discussions and vote on amendment G-11.1, I move that we vote on the proposed subamendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Mr. Manly.

[Paul Manly, Green, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to clarify some things for Ms. Harder about what “Canadian production” means. You can find this on the CRTC site:

The CRTC only certifies Canadian film or television productions that meet the following criteria:

The producer must be a Canadian and must act as the central decision-maker from the development stage until the production is ready for commercial exploitation.

The production must earn a minimum number of points based on the key creative functions that are performed by Canadians [director, screenwriter, actors, etc.]. Usually, a minimum of 6 out of 10.

At least 75% of the production’s services costs must be paid to Canadians and at least 75% of the production’s post-production and laboratory costs must be paid for services provided in Canada by Canadians or Canadian companies.

The production must qualify for certification—

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

There is a point of order.

I'm sorry, Mr. Manly, one second.

Mr. Champoux, go ahead.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Chair, we're totally outside the scope of the proposed subamendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Mr. Champoux, I appreciate your comments. What he's doing is, obviously, replying to some of the comments that were made by Ms. Harder.

Mr. Manly, I'm going to let you have the floor again, if you could pare down your statements and your question to the point of the subamendment. Thank you.

[Paul Manly, Green, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

I'm just relating this to discoverability and the fact that we have a process in place for discoverability. All of those YouTube programmers who were mentioned before would actually benefit from discoverability.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Thank you, Mr. Manly.

Seeing no further discussion on the subamendment by Mr. Champoux, we now proceed to a vote.

(Subamendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

We now go back to the main amendment, which is G-11.1. If you're following along at home, G signifies that it is an amendment put forward by the government, moved by Ms. Dabrusin. This is G-11.1 as amended.

Mr. Rayes, you have the floor.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Chair, if my colleagues have no further comments, I would like to move to a vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Seeing no hands, I'll say yes, we can proceed to the vote.

The vote is on amendment G-11.1 as amended by Mr. Champoux, if you recall that.

(Amendment as amended agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Monsieur Rayes, you have the floor.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First, I want to thank everyone. Even though we voted against this amendment, we learned a great deal in this discussion.

The people who tuned in to our meeting today must have seen the importance of our discussions and the expertise of the people working with us. I want to emphasize this.

As I said at the start of the meeting, I want to move an amendment, which we sent to the clerk. I don't know whether she was able to send it to all the committee members. With your permission, Mr. Chair, I'll read it while we wait for the clerk to send it to everyone in both official languages.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Just one second, I think the clerk would like to intervene.

Madam Clerk.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Ms. Aimée Belmore]

I'm sorry, but could you clarify which amendment this is?

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

It's dated May 11, 2021. I can't tell you the exact number, but it's the one that calls for clause 7 of Bill C-10 to be amended by adding after line 19 on page 8—

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

One moment, please. I did not hear any translation.

Did everybody hear translation on that one? I don't think I heard it.

Madam Clerk, I'm assuming you're going to distribute it. Is that possible?

[The Clerk]

Yes, sir, I will, once I clarify exactly which amendment to send.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Oh yes, of course—my apologies.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Chair, would you like me to read it, in the meantime?

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Yes, now that I'm hearing interpretation.... Can I get a thumbs-up from everyone who is on English interpretation, if they heard that?

Very well, then.

Mr. Rayes, you have the floor as we distribute the motion.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The amendment moves that clause 7 of Bill C-10 be amended by adding after line 19 on page 8 the following:

9.2 This Act does not apply in respect of

(a) programs that are uploaded to an online undertaking that provides a social media service by a user of the service—who is not the provider of the service or the provider's affiliate, or the agent or mandatary of either of them—for transmission or retransmission over the Internet and reception by other users of the service; and

(b) online undertakings whose broadcasting consists only of such programs.

This amendment is being introduced in an effort to work with everyone, given what happened after the removal of proposed section 4.1.

My colleague, Mr. Champoux, has asked this question several times. The minister even told us that the committee was responsible for these decisions. We would like to address the situation and dispel all lingering concerns by proposing this amendment, which applies to the place in the bill that we're studying today.

We've heard from several experts. For the past three weeks, our work has been stalled because of the unwillingness of the two ministers. Actually, I shouldn't say that. Rather, the government members on the committee didn't want the ministers to appear from the beginning. In the end, everything worked out over time. I want to acknowledge that and thank everyone.

I want to propose this amendment so that we can break the deadlock in relation to the issue of freedom of expression and the protection of content. That's why this amendment is so important today.

I hope that all my colleagues will see the value in this. I'll end on that note and let them discuss the matter. When I spoke earlier about the second subamendment proposed by Mr. Champoux, I said that, as the saying goes, you can't be too careful. I think that it would be in our interest to pass the amendment. This would show the government's willingness to protect freedom of expression and to address the current concerns of a number of people across the country.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Before we get into a debate on this issue, as you may have guessed, this requires some discussion, given its complexity. I'm going to turn to our clerk Aimée to intervene first.