Canadian Heritage Committee on May 31st, 2022

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Let me jump in. You're talking about Patrick Watson, who is one of my favourite artists. He's my idol. By the way, he's an anglophone artist. He has produced some French content, but it's not the bulk of his work.

Where I differ with you is that good content, if not available, is hard to find. Artists like you who produce good quality content sometimes need support to get it out there. In your case, you are not alone, but others may be a little less fortunate than you. Don't you think the possibility of financial support or better exposure could be beneficial?

I don't know what your basis is for saying that you would be penalized by that, because history shows that, on the contrary, these elements of discoverability have allowed artists to be discovered and to enjoy greater visibility.

[Oorbee Roy]

I say that from experience. I'm saying it because it's happened to me over and over again. I've been written out of the story, and it happens. As a person of colour, I'm telling you that it happens to me and it still happens today. I don't trust that the CRTC is going to have my best interests at heart, and that's it.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Yet—

[Oorbee Roy]

I want to be explicitly protected in the legislation as the minister says I am.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

That's contradictory, Ms. Roy. What you are saying is that you have been excluded. What we are proposing is that you be given more visibility, that you be seen by more people, but you obviously do not agree with that.

Thank you. At least I tried.

[Oorbee Roy]

I don't qualify for CanCon, as it stands.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

It's not just the Canadian content regulations that allow you to get visibility. In fact, I was talking to you about better adapted regulations that would allow you to take advantage of the visibility and possibly the funding that would come with it. In that sense, it seems to me that it would only be positive, wouldn't it?

[Oorbee Roy]

I think if we had more people at the table, like digital content creators or people of colour, people who could better represent our needs, then maybe I would feel more confident about that. As it stands right now, I just don't have the confidence. If we can make those additions bring more people like me out there, then yes.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

We agree on that.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you, Mr. Champoux.

I'm going to go to Peter Julian for two and a half minutes.

Go ahead, please, Peter.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I would like to come back to Ms. Roy.

I found your testimony very interesting, because we've had, of course, a significant number of witnesses stepping up and very positively talking about Bill C-11. We've had a number of witnesses talking about amendments. We had some people who are opposed to C-11, but at the same time there seem to be very compelling arguments for it.

I want to come back to the issue of TV, and I would like you to respond to it. You mentioned earlier that it is curated, the streaming service. That's fair enough, but is that exclusion, that discrimination, something you feel we should be concerned about?

[Oorbee Roy]

Of course there is a concern about being excluded. I completely agree that should be addressed, but I think that's in curated content. We're talking about user-generated content and that's not restricted, so I'm not sure I understand the question.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

No, I think you responded. You said it's not okay. We've had some other witnesses who say that's fine and I deeply disagree with that.

You're saying it's not okay. You've had undoubted success. I gather from your testimony and your responses to questions that you see a role for Bill C-11, but what you're concerned about more is getting improvements within the bill.

In the discussions we've had today and the questions that you've had, are there areas specifically where you think Bill C-11 can be improved? You certainly talked about the CRTC and I understand that. Are there other areas where you think Bill C-11 can be improved so that it is a benefit, from your perspective?

As I mentioned, many of our witnesses have been strong advocates for Bill C-11.

[Oorbee Roy]

I have no opinion on how it should be improved, other than to say I should be explicitly protected in the legislation, as the minister says I am.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much.

You have seven seconds, Peter, to make your statement.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I think we've had some interesting testimony. I certainly appreciate Ms. Roy's contribution.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much.

I want to thank the witnesses for their time this morning and the excellent controversy, which is always good. It makes for an interesting meeting.

I would like to suspend now until the witnesses leave and we can begin our business meeting.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you, everyone.

This is not going to be terribly long. We're trying to find out a couple of things from you for moving forward. One of them is what an appropriate deadline would be. It would have to be at the end of this week, for us to set a date for sending in amendments.

Please, I will entertain someone making suggestions from the floor.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

From the opposition's standpoint, we're not prepared to set a date yet for the deadline for amendments. We haven't heard from our witnesses yet. Until we've heard from all the witnesses, I don't think we're in a position to set a deadline. I respectfully argue that this is a conversation that should happen next week, after we've had the witnesses.

In terms of the second thing we have to decide—the approval of the budget—I'm happy to move approval on the budget, so that the clerk can have direction on that.

I move that we approve the committee budget for the study.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

All right. Is there any opposition to that?

(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

The budget is approved. Thank you very much.

[The Clerk]

Is that in opposition, sir?

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

This is not to object, but simply to come back to the issue of the amendments.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Before I ask again for a deadline for amendments, we do not just have a deadline and the amendments suddenly appear. People have to prepare for them. Everyone knows that, after we've had our public meetings of witnesses, we are going to be moving to amendments. I am once again asking because we need to give the clerks, including the legislative clerk and analysts, the time to do that.

We had agreed on a 20-hour meeting schedule. We will have finished that on Thursday, June 2. We need to know to be able to start the following week on Monday with amendments, so I am once again entertaining a suggestion from someone from the floor to set such a deadline.

Mr. Bittle.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

We would propose Friday at 4 p.m. as a good time to have amendments submitted. We will have exhausted our witnesses by the end of Thursday. Most of our witnesses will be done by the end of today, which will give time for members to prepare amendments from many of the witnesses we've heard from. I think that's a reasonable period of time for a deadline.