Canadian Heritage Committee on Sept. 23rd, 2024

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

It's pretty clear that some of our colleagues don't want to give our officials a chance to respond to any of these issues that many Canadians are concerned about. We have a broad piece of legislation in front of us that's being amended by this bill, and I think all of these issues are relevant to the purpose of the department and could be uniquely answered by the officials we have in front of us.

I would just like to give them a chance to respond.

I'll pause on asking additional questions.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Thank you.

Mr. Ripley or Mr. Lorrain, do you have any comments to make?

[Thomas Owen Ripley]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, MP Jivani, for the questions.

Bill C-354 amends the CRTC Act, as the chair set out in the beginning. That's the piece of legislation that creates and sets out the powers and structure of the CRTC.

Mr. Chair, as you know, when officials are invited to clause-by-clause we fulfill a particular purpose in terms of supporting the members in considering that legislation and answering technical questions or potential amendments they may have about the bill. While I certainly respect Mr. Jivani's desire to get answers to these questions, it is outside the scope of why we are here today.

Departmental officials would be pleased to pick up those questions in a more suitable forum, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Thank you, Mr. Ripley.

We'll move on.

Ms. Gainey, did you have any comments to make? Your hand is still up.

I have John here, but Mr. Champoux and Mr. Noormohamed, then you, Ms. Gainey, are on the speaking list right now.

[Anna Gainey, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Perfect.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Thank you.

We're dealing with Ms. Thomas's amendment that Bill C-354 in clause 1 be amended

(a) by replacing line 8 on page 1 with the following:

(1.01) The Commission shall hold public consultations with the Govern‐

(b) by adding after line 15 on page 1 the following:

(1.02) The Commission shall publish on its website a report on the results of the consultations held under subsection (1.01).

(1.03) Before participating in the consultations under subsection (1.01), the Government of Quebec and the governments of other provinces shall consult with audiences in the French-language markets in their respective provinces.

We're dealing with CPC-1.

Mr. Jivani, you still have the floor. I would like you to comment on the first one. We have a short...as duly noted here, CPC-1.

Mr. Jivani, could you please deal with CPC-1?

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Amendment CPC-1 is a very logical addition to the legislation in that it requires some communication with the public. We are talking about consultation with audiences in French-language markets, not just in Quebec but all across the country. If this legislation is meant to serve those communities, then consultation with those communities seems entirely logical to me.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Thank you.

Mr. Champoux, go ahead.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I rather like the Conservatives' proposed amendment. I would also like to point out that they were very vocal when the Government of Quebec sent a letter to the government, just as Bill C‑11 was about to be passed in the Senate.

The letter from the Government of Quebec contained important recommendations on measures that should have been taken earlier in the process. The Conservatives were vocal in promoting those recommendations. In the letter, there is a recommendation that we wanted to put into legislation; the result of which is Bill C‑354. I find it interesting to see a willingness to collaborate to improve this clause. However, although I agree with the Conservatives' proposed amendment, there is one thing that bothers me a bit, and that is the first sentence. I would therefore like to propose a subamendment to the Conservatives' proposed amendment.

I simply propose removing the part that states that “The Commission shall hold public consultations with the Government of Quebec” and going back to the original version contained in Bill C‑354, i.e., “the Commission shall consult with the Government of Quebec”. So I would just propose that we remove the first part of the Conservative amendment and go back to the original wording.

Holding public consultations is a cumbersome process. In my opinion, if we want to make things simple and respond effectively to Quebec's request, there should simply be a consultation between the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission and the Government of Quebec.

That is what I am proposing as a subamendment. I propose that we go back to the original wording for the first sentence.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Thank you.

Is there any discussion on this subamendment?

Mr. Noormohamed, go ahead.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First, I think whether we're talking about the amendment or the subamendment, the important thing is consultation. We have Mr. Ripley here.

One of the things I might ask, given that we are quite removed, in terms of time, from when we first had these conversations and witnesses on this bill, Mr. Ripley, is that you just remind everybody or just walk everybody through what is actually required of the CRTC when they are doing the work they do? Are they not already doing consultations at scale in the field when it comes to ensuring that stakeholders are listened to?

[Thomas Owen Ripley]

With the way the Broadcasting Act is currently structured, as some members at the table will know well, the policy objectives are set out at the beginning of the legislation and then the CRTC has the responsibility to give effect and put into operation those policy objectives through its regulatory decisions. When the CRTC seeks to make a decision, it typically does a public process. Those public processes are open, including for provincial governments to participate and make their views known.

It's already incumbent on the CRTC to generate a public record. Again, those processes are open to all stakeholders and all governments to participate in, for them to put their views on the public record. Then it's incumbent on the CRTC to make its decision based on the public record before it.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Mr. Chair, can I keep going, or am I done?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

You have the floor.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Thank you.

In that context, right now how much consultation or input or how many representations do you see? How often do you see representations from the Province of Quebec to the CRTC on these matters? I would assume the need for this legislation or this bill or amendment or subamendment would arise as a result of the fact that Quebec does not have an opportunity or that many people may not know that Quebec already has the opportunity to engage and participate in these consultations. Can you give us some colour as to how often the CRTC has representation from the Government of Quebec on behalf of French language speakers in that province?

[Thomas Owen Ripley]

We have seen provincial governments participating in CRTC processes from time to time. It is precisely because sometimes a decision that the CRTC is making can impact a provincial agency, or something like that.

MP Champoux mentioned the coming into force of Bill C-11, the Online Streaming Act. One step that we took at the department was supporting the minister at the time to send a letter to all of his provincial counterparts, including in Quebec, inviting them to participate in both the consultation on the policy direction and the consultations that the CRTC would then subsequently launch on the Online Streaming Act.

The desire was to make sure those consultations were on the radar of provincial counterparts and territorial counterparts, and make it known that, indeed, there's an opportunity for those provincial or territorial governments to participate in those proceedings, should they wish.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Is there anything else, Mr. Noormohamed?

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Yes, I have one more thing.

What I'm hearing is that there is already an expectation and requirement for the CRTC to conduct consultations. Under Bill C-11, that was further encouraged. Is there any impediment that you can see for the Province of Quebec to be engaged in consultations under the current regime? With the CRTC Act the way it is, is there anything in there that would somehow preclude or prevent the Province of Quebec, or any other province, from providing feedback to the CRTC?

[Thomas Owen Ripley]

No, there is no impediment to Quebec, or any other province or territory, in participating in CRTC processes. The way it works is that the CRTC will usually put up a notice of consultation, which basically sets out the questions on which it's consulting. It's open to any interested stakeholder or any territorial or provincial government that wishes to participate. They are more than welcome to do so.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

That's it for me.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Thank you.

We'll now go to Ms. Lattanzio, and then Mr. Coteau.

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Thank you.

I wanted to ask before for a copy of the subamendment to be sent by the clerk to our email addresses. I didn't want to interrupt my colleague.

I'm sorry, but I keep hearing an echo. Are there sound issues?

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

Actually, I have two points.

First, Ms. Lattanzio seems to be connected to two—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Yes, we are having some issues.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Second, I don't know if it's entirely necessary to ask for a copy of the subamendment, as the subamendment simply seeks to replace the first sentence with the original wording. So it's very simple, but again, if Ms. Lattanzio would like to have the subamendment in writing, that's her right. We'll take the time to do it.