Canadian Heritage Committee on Sept. 23rd, 2024

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

I call this meeting to order.

Good morning, everyone. Welcome to meeting number 128 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.

Today's meeting, of course, is taking place in a hybrid format. We would like to remind participants of the following points.

Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. For members participating in person or via Zoom, please raise your hand if you wish to speak. The committee clerk and I will do the best we can to maintain the consolidated speaking order.

I will remind you that all comments should be addressed through the chair.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, February 28, 2024, the committee will commence clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-354, an act to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act with regard to Quebec’s cultural distinctiveness and French-speaking communities.

I would like to provide members of the committee with a few comments on how the committee will proceed with the clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-354.

As the name indicates, this is an explanation of all the clauses in the order in which they appear in the bill. I will call each clause successively, and each clause is subject to debate and a vote.

If there is an amendment to a clause in question, I will recognize the member proposing it, who may explain it.

In addition to being properly drafted in a legal sense, amendments must also be procedurally admissible. The chair may be called upon to rule amendments inadmissible if they go against the principle or beyond the scope of the bill—both of which were adopted by the House of Commons when it agreed to the bill at second reading—or if they offend the financial prerogative of the Crown.

Amendments have been given a number in the top right corner to indicate which party submitted them. There is no need for a seconder to move the amendment. Once an amendment has been moved, you will need unanimous consent to withdraw it.

During the debate on the amendment, members are permitted to move subamendments. Approval from the mover of the amendment is not required. Subamendments must be provided in writing. Only one subamendment may be considered at a time, and that subamendment cannot be amended.

When a subamendment is moved to an amendment, it is voted on first, and then another subamendment may be moved, or the committee may consider the main amendment and vote on that.

Once every clause has been voted on, the committee will vote on the title and the bill itself. An order to reprint the bill may be required if amendments are adopted, so that the House has a proper copy for use at report stage.

The committee will have to order the chair to report the bill to the House. That report contains only the text of any adopted amendments, as well as any indication of the deleted clauses.

Finally, if members have any questions regarding the procedural admissibility of amendments, the legislative clerks to my right are here to assist the committee. However, as you know, they are not legal drafters. Should members require assistance with drafting an amendment or a subamendment, they must contact the legislative counsel.

I thank members for their attention, and wish everyone a productive clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-354.

I would like to welcome two officials from the Department of Canadian Heritage, who are available this morning to answer any technical questions related to the bill.

We welcome Thomas Owen Ripley, the associate assistant deputy minister of Canadian Heritage, and Mathieu Lorrain, the acting manager of broadcasting.

Before we get to Bill C-354, I see a hand up.

We'll go to Ms. Ashton.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I have a motion to present, which you received notice about earlier this summer.

As Canadians we are all incredibly proud of the achievements of Canadian athletes during the Paris Olympics—27 medals, including nine gold, and memories to last a lifetime. We know of Summer McIntosh, who won four medals, including three gold; Ethan Katzberg and Camryn Rogers, hammer toss; and the many successes in our many team sports in the Olympics this year.

We also know of the heroic work of the brave women of our Canadian soccer team, who fought and clawed their way up but, unfortunately, came up short—no less heroic. However, with all these fundamentally Canadian examples of hard work, honour and commitment to sport, there are also the fundamentally un-Canadian actions that we saw from officials linked to our women's soccer team and Soccer Canada. While it shouldn't take away from the incredible accomplishments of our athletes—both our Canadian soccer players and the members of the Canadian Olympic team—we cannot deny that it was a massive distraction for them, particularly for the women of our soccer team, and it certainly harmed Canada's reputation on the world stage in the sporting world. The use of drones to spy on other teams, followed by statements downplaying that activity and even suggesting that “everyone cheats”, is unacceptable.

We as parliamentarians have a responsibility to help get to the bottom of this and, more importantly, make sure it never happens again, particularly as we're set to co-host the 2026 World Cup, which is the largest world sporting event. That's why I table the following motion:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study of no less than six hours to study the role of officials associated to the Canadian women's soccer team and Canada Soccer in the use of drones for spying during the Paris Olympics or in previous competitions, which has damaged Canada's reputation and punished the players for something they had no part in, and that the committee summon, pursuant to Standing Order 108(1)(a), Bev Priestman, Jasmine Mander, Joseph Lombardi and John Herdman to appear before committee for no less than two hours and before September 27, 2024, in addition to the chief executive officer and representatives of Soccer Canada and representatives of FIFA, and past or present Team Canada soccer players; and that the committee report its findings and recommendations to the House; and that pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee request that the government table a comprehensive response to the report.

I note that some dates require changes. Of course, as the mover of this motion I'm unable to change them, but I certainly welcome any amendments from colleagues to do so.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Thank you, Ms. Ashton.

We go to debate.

Go ahead, Mr. Coteau.

[Michael Coteau, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Can I request that we take a five-minute recess?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

We can do that. We suspend, then, for five minutes.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

All right. Thank you, Ms. Ashton.

We move to Mr. Champoux.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We spoke with Ms. Ashton about this motion, which proposes to conduct a study on what happened at the Olympics and on what is happening in general at Soccer Canada. This is a motion that the Bloc Québécois considers important.

However, the committee is in the final stage of its consideration of Bill C‑354, which has been pushed back time and time again. We started studying this bill in the spring and we should have wrapped things up before the summer break. Now, my NDP colleague is moving a motion that we could much more easily and freely debate during the second hour of the meeting. We agree with Ms. Ashton's motion and we will seek to improve it with an amendment a little later, but for the time being, I really want to get back to Bill C‑354, so I ask that we adjourn debate on the motion.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

You're looking to adjourn debate on this motion, so we go to a vote, then.

Danielle, can you proceed with that?

[The Clerk of the Committee, Ms. Danielle Widmer]

The motion is that the debate be adjourned.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 4)

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Seeing that, then, we will move on. We will not deal with the motion by Ms. Ashton at this time.

Thank you very much, everyone.

We'll move on to what we started to do at 11:07, which is pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, February 28, Bill C-354, an act to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act in regard to Quebec’s cultural distinctiveness and French-speaking communities.

(On clause 1)

We will call for clause 1. Clause 1 is CPC-1. We'll ask if a member would like to move it.

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

I so move.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

We'll start a speaking order.

Mr. Jivani, I guess you will lead us off, if you don't mind.

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As you know Bill C-354 makes changes to the CRTC Act, which is a massive piece of legislation that addresses telecommunications and broadcasting and effectively governs parts of Canada's cultural communities. The Department of Heritage mandate does as well. I have a few questions, which Canadians are looking for answers to, for Mr. Lorrain, one of our witnesses today.

My first question is this: Do you agree with the CBC's paying out $18 million in bonuses this past year?

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, the scope of the inquiry is in respect of this particular piece of legislation with respect to the CRTC. The CRTC does not have jurisdiction in regard to the bonuses of Crown corporations.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Ms. Gainey, is your hand up also on this? No.

Okay. Go ahead, Mr. Jivani. That's duly noted.

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Okay. I guess you don't want to answer that

[Thomas Owen Ripley, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage]

Chair, I would humbly submit that our role as officials here today is to support the committee in clause-by-clause review of Bill C-354 and to answer your technical questions on that piece of legislation or on the CRTC Act. I would be happy to do that.

I am not able to express an opinion on the question put by the member.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Go ahead, Mr. Jivani.

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Okay. Let's talk about something that is not an opinion, just a factual question.

Did you have any discussions or briefings with the minister concerning signing off on a bonus for Catherine Tait?

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Mr. Champoux.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Chair, with all due respect, I understand that this is the Conservatives' hot-button topic right now, but we are at the clause-by-clause stage in our study of the bill. The bill has only one clause. We are considering an amendment proposed by the Conservatives. It would be nice if my colleague focused on the task at hand today, which is to discuss Bill C‑354. The bill makes no mention of CBC/Radio-Canada bonuses; rather, it seeks to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act to require that consultations with the Government of Quebec be held automatically when it comes to matters relating to culture, communications and French in Quebec and in Canada.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Thank you, Mr. Champoux.

Mr. Jivani, go ahead.

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Would you like to answer that?

I know you didn't want to answer the other one, because it was about an opinion.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, my previous point of order called on you to take action, to call our colleague to order, so that he could get back to the matter at hand, which is Bill C‑354.