Evidence of meeting #32 for Canadian Heritage in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was c-11.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Clerk of the Committee  Ms. Aimée Belmore

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Good morning, everyone.

This is a business meeting, as we well know, but I suppose the same things apply. Remember that, pursuant to the House order of November 25, we are in a hybrid meeting. There are some people remote and some people on the floor. As per the directive of the Board of Internal Economy on March 10, all those attending the meeting in person must wear a mask, except for members who are at their place during the proceedings.

I'd like to make a few comments. We adjourned the last meeting, so this is a business meeting, and, as you can see, the order of notice on the business meeting is to continue on Bill C-11 and to go to clause-by-clause.

The first thing we do is—

I think Mr. Bittle's hand is up.

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON

So is Mr. Uppal's. I think Mr. Uppal's hand was up first.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

I'm sorry, Mr. Bittle.

Mr. Uppal.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC

Madam Chair, Mr. Julian's hand was up first.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Was it before Mr. Uppal's?

Clerk, can you tell me who...? Is it Mr. Uppal, Mr. Julian and then Mr. Bittle? Is that it?

4:35 p.m.

The Clerk of the Committee Ms. Aimée Belmore

The order that I saw, Dr. Fry, is the order in which you saw the hands. I saw Mr. Bittle, Mr. Nater, Ms. Ferreri, Mr. Waugh, Mr. Uppal and Mr. Julian.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

You did not see Mr. Uppal first.

I will go with your list because I saw Mr. Uppal because he was virtual. Please go over that list again.

4:35 p.m.

The Clerk

Absolutely. It's Mr. Bittle, Mr. Nater, Ms. Ferreri, Mr. Waugh, Mr. Uppal and Mr. Julian.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Mr. Bittle, please begin.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON

Thank you so much, Madam Chair.

I guess it's been a little troubling to watch. For those watching at home, we've been in the midst of a filibuster. I expect this will become hour six and hour seven of filibuster through this timeline.

The Conservatives told us at the beginning of this that they wanted 20 hours of study. They said that was a fair and reasonable amount of time to study the bill before it would go to clause-by-clause. We've exceeded that. They filibustered through the CRTC chair. They filibustered through an appearance by the minister—

4:35 p.m.

Conservative

John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON

I have a point of order. There's just a technical issue, Madam Chair.

I continue to hear Kevin Lamoureux in my ear. I have nothing against Mr. Lamoureux, but he's coming in through my ear. I hope I'm not going crazy, but that's a challenge I'm facing right now.

4:35 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

On a point of order, Madam Chair, that is an urgent health and safety issue that we must address immediately. I feel very sorry for Mr. Nater.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

All right. We will suspend while the technical people make sure you don't have your ears inflamed and you're not going crazy, Mr. Nater.

We will check it out, and the clerk will let me know when we think it's resolved.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

I was told it's okay for us to resume, so we will go back to Mr. Bittle, who was speaking before we suspended.

Go ahead, Chris.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON

Thank you so much, Madam Chair.

As I was discussing before we were rudely interrupted by Kevin Lamoureux, unintentionally.... We were discussing how we are well into a filibuster. It's clear we really should move forward on this bill. There's another study. We can quickly deal with Bill C-11, have a proper debate on C-11, and then get to Hockey Canada before the House rises.

It worried me a bit last night that members of this committee were using this case to filibuster. I know—there's intent from all sides—that we want to hear from Hockey Canada, but I think people have gone a bit too far in the filibuster. We should use this time, while we study Bill C-11, to think about the legal aspects of the case, because a lot of things were said that were a little troubling to me. They may lead to the disclosure of names—which I don't think anyone wants—or negative statements about the non-disclosure agreement, which may be protecting the plaintiff in the case. As a civil litigator myself, I think the opposition needs to take some time to look at things like solicitor-client privileges and NDAs, so we can get to this as quickly as possible.

In the meantime, I know everyone likes to say that the House gave us the Hockey Canada study, but it also gave us Bill C-11. I think this is fundamental and important, and it's something we need to see through. The Liberals are ready to work. I've spoken to our Bloc colleagues, and I'm sure Mr. Julian is always ready to work, and perhaps we can find.... We're ready to work extra hours to see Bill C-11 through to the end, but we're also ready to hear from Hockey Canada, as well, and get to the bottom of that.

I think, perhaps, the opposition needs to take some time to speak with the lawyers in the caucus or with counsel at the House of Commons, in order to understand where we're going, because some dangerous things may happen, even though they're well intentioned. I don't think any of us want that.

That's all to preface my motion, which has been handed out in both official languages. I move:

That the committee commence its clause-by-clause study of the Online Streaming Act no later than Monday, June 13 at 3:30 p.m. EDT.

It's quite basic. This gives us lots of time to start next week. In speaking with the Bloc...we should have a discussion about setting a deadline for amendments, perhaps this Friday, so that we can really get things moving. I think that's fair and reasonable, but I wanted to put this on the table. We can vote on this quickly and then talk about the study right away, because this will take a minute or two. There are a couple of people on the list. We can get to talking about Hockey Canada right away. I think that's important.

Thank you so much.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Thank you very much, Mr. Bittle.

I know there was a deadline set for amendments, which we were still debating and had not agreed or voted on. However, I happen to know that the Bloc Québécois, the NDP and the Liberals submitted their amendments to the clerk last week before 4 p.m. on Friday, which was the third. Amendments have already been sent. I want to flag that bit of information for everyone.

Now, we have a motion on the floor. I'm obviously going to have to get a list of people speaking to or against the motion, so I will look at the order of the people I now have and make sure they are speaking to Mr. Bittle's motion one way or the other.

Madam Clerk, can you give me a list of people for the motion?

4:50 p.m.

The Clerk

It's Mr. Nater, Ms. Ferreri, Mr. Lemire, Mr. Julian and Mr. Bittle.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Thank you.

I shall move forward, then.

Go ahead, John.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON

Thank you, Madam Chair.

It's a pleasure to take the floor and say a few words about the motion before us. I'll offer a few observations off the bat.

First of all, obviously we've been looking at Bill C-11 for a period of time. We've heard from some witnesses. I know that our witness list isn't exhausted yet. We have at least 20 people on our list who haven't had the chance to come here yet. We'll put that aside for a second.

I want to talk about the gravity of the situation that is potentially before us, and I do accept Mr. Bittle's comments about certain issues involving the victims. We did have a motion that was passed by this committee earlier this year to look at online harm caused by access, and there was the opportunity there—and that meeting never happened—to hear from organizations that deal with trauma-informed testimony. I think if we go ahead with a study on the events regarding Hockey Canada, it would be important that we have that conversation before we hear from any witnesses.

Obviously, as a committee, we have the opportunity to go in camera for certain testimony, for certain issues, whether it's about identifiable people, whether it's with victims or whether there are issues from a legal perspective. There are always those opportunities.

When it comes to this particular motion at hand, we're talking about a Monday deadline to do this. This is a complex bill, and it will take a significant amount of time to go through clause-by-clause. I'm very concerned that, if we begin clause-by-clause on Monday, June 13 at 3:30, we will not have a chance to take up the House order that was made on June 2 regarding the troubling allegations.

I'd remind the committee that it wasn't a partisan motion to the House. It was a unanimous motion endorsed by all parties and frankly endorsed by the Minister of Sport herself, who made comments about the troubling possibility that public funds may have been used in this case, and I think that should be troubling for anyone and everyone here in Canada.

At the end of the day, we need to be sure that we, as a country, stand up for victims and victims' rights, and I think this is one situation where we need more information. Whether that's done through a committee process.... A forensic audit has been suggested within the organization itself, but there are people who must account for what has happened. There are organizations that must account for the situation that unfolded, so I think that should be the priority of this committee going forward.

That's not to say that Bill C-11 will never pass. I think that Bill C-11 will obviously pass through this committee when the time comes. It will go through clause-by-clause, but I think for now the priority of this committee should be the House order of June 2, 2022.

I would amend the motion by deleting all the words after “act” and inserting, “following the completion of the committee’s study pursuant to House Order made June 2, 2022.”

Just for clarity, the House order of June 2, 2022 is the motion regarding Hockey Canada.

That's the amendment, Madam Chair. I'm happy to reread it if it's needed, but that's my amendment.

4:55 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

I have a point of order, Madam Chair. Through you, I want to ask Mr. Nater if he could read the June 2 motion. He has it in front of him, I believe.

4:55 p.m.

Bloc

Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

If I may, I will read the motion, as it is mine:

That this House call Hockey Canada before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage to shed light on its involvement in a case of alleged sexual assault committed in 2018.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Thank you.

Peter, did that satisfy you? Were you able to hear it fully?

4:55 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Yes. Thank you.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Thank you very much.

Now I'll go to Ms. Ferreri.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Michelle Ferreri Conservative Peterborough—Kawartha, ON

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to the heritage committee for having me sit in here today. It's nice to see everyone.

Definitely two topics that connect for me personally are Bill C-11—very important, as a former journalist and online content creator—and obviously the investigation into Hockey Canada. I was able to take part last week. My colleague Kevin Waugh made some very impactful statements. I want to touch on that, as I also sit on another committee, FEWO, which is status of women. Right now we're tabling a study on intimate partner violence.

As I lean into this role as a member of Parliament, what we do here first, or what our priorities are, speaks to Canadians deeply. Absolutely, I think every member at this committee and also in the House, quite frankly, knows that Bill C-11 is important, but I also think we all know how important it is to change the toxic culture of all institutions, whether it's the Canadian Forces, sports, politics or whatever it may be.

I want to give a bit of a trigger warning. I was thinking about this when I was here on Wednesday, about some of the content that is coming out. I am very aware of how delicate this conversation is for people who may be watching.

Support is available for anyone who has been sexually assaulted. You can access crisis lines and local support services through the Government of Canada website or the Ending Violence Association of Canada's database. If you're in immediate danger or fear for your safety or that of others around you, please call 911.

I actually pulled that trigger warning from an article that was released by CBC on June 5, 2022, where the headline reads, “Former Hedley frontman Jacob Hoggard found guilty of sexually assaulting Ottawa woman”. In a time where we have headline after headline that are really revictimizing victims, I can't stress enough how important it is to prioritize this study into Hockey Canada. I think it really sets a precedent of what we're doing and where we're sitting.

The Supreme Court ruling of extreme intoxication as an excuse for sexual assault crimes is.... I've had countless messages, and people personally in my life who have been revictimized by this. I think there's an opportunity for us here to set the tone of what the priorities are, and because this is imminent, I think it's really important. On what you guys are going to do, I think there is a consensus of what needs to be done here.

I want to talk a little bit about what the Minister of Sport, Madam St-Onge, said in a scrum with reporters before Thursday's question period in Ottawa. She said she wants a forensic audit of the settlement to ensure that Hockey Canada didn't use taxpayer dollars to settle the case. She said, “What I want to know and what I think all Canadians want to know is, was there any public funds used to cover up that horrible story of collective rape?”

This is just so much bigger than this Hockey Canada.... If we're the leaders of this country, what are we saying to victims if we're not prioritizing this? I think there's an opportunity for all parties to work together, because I think everybody wants to solve this. I think every member wants this to end.

I look at things like Indian Horse. I don't know if anyone's familiar with that movie. It was shot in my riding of Peterborough—Kawartha. It's a book that many kids have to read. It's a terrible story of sexual assault and abuse of power.

When you talk to people who work in shelters or who work with victims, they really go in thinking they're going to solve and fix it because they think, “Why is this even still happening? How does this even happen?”

As a parent, you think of this when you're raising your children. You think about what you are teaching your daughters and sons about consent. How do we even get to a point where we're still having this conversation?

As somebody who was raised as a Catholic, the whole Catholic church and Indian Horse coincides with reconciliation and abuse of power. To have this Hockey Canada scandal exposed.... We're not done. We're not done with setting a tone of what we accept. We're not done holding people to account. When you have the #MeToo movement.... What is still happening here that we're still having this conversation? I think it is critical that we have an opportunity and that this is the number one priority that needs to be served and paid attention to imminently.

I also want to talk a little bit about C-11 and the importance of it as well because I have had literally thousands of messages on this bill, both from my social media and the parliamentary email. Here's one email of thousands:

“Dear MP Ferreri, I'm writing to you to express my concerns about Bill C-11, the online streaming act that is currently under review in Canadian Parliament. As it's currently written, Bill C-11 gives the CRTC the authority to regulate user-generated content on open platforms, as it does for television and radio. In its current form, Bill C-11 means Canadians will no longer be in control of their viewing experience and puts creators' livelihoods at risk. The government has repeatedly said it doesn't intend to target user-generated content. If that's the case, why won't they fix Bill C-11 with specific language that excludes user-generated content from CRTC regulation?

“Open platforms remove traditional media gatekeepers, which allows for the democratization of content and provides an opportunity for creators and users from diverse communities, walks of life and passions to express themselves, share their talent and build a business. As one of your constituents, I am counting on you to make my voice heard. Please help protect the digital creators and viewers in your community and tell Minister Rodriguez to remove section 4.2 from C-11 to ensure that the bill does not apply to online content that is uploaded by any individual user.”

I won't share the name because I don't have the permission to do that.

It is absolutely imperative that this committee continue its work on C-11. It is a huge issue across the board, as somebody who worked in traditional media, went on to work in private media and who built a business off of social media as an online creator.

To circle back, when we look at what online content creation is, it is also fascinating when we look at abuse or sexual assault culture. For anybody who's a parent or caregiver, you know that what your kids are consuming has changed the culture of who we were. I was born in 1979 and I'm just so glad I wasn't born in the time of social media. I wouldn't want half of that out in the public; that's for sure.

It's also changed how boys see themselves, how girls see themselves and how people identify in their gender. It does come back to what my colleague Kevin Waugh said. It was extremely powerful and emotional to hear it. When you know something is wrong and you don't do anything.... If not you, then who?

If we are the leaders of the country, if we are the federal body that governs what is accepted, we should be prioritizing this and making a statement that says, “Hey, we've got you. We are studying this. We want to change culture. We want to investigate this.”

What are we saying to every victim out there? Bringing these conversations up over and over again is so revictimizing for so many people, and it is such a challenge.

One of my favourite sayings is from Mr. Rogers, actually, who said that anything mentionable is manageable. If we don't address this, if we are not mentioning it, if we are not addressing that this is still happening, that there is still rape culture in sports and in this institution, that is saying, “Go ahead.”

I would urge this committee, which has a lot of power and a lot of influence, to say to victims watching everywhere that that we do care, we do want to change the narrative, we do want to stand with you, we will do something about it, and we will get to the bottom of this, because without accountability, there is no change. If we just allow people to abuse power because we're afraid, the cycle will continue. The systemic trauma that is in place as a result of these stories is decades and decades long. It is so impossible.... You will be talking about a mental health crisis and a health care crisis and money spent on trauma counselling since this is so systemic. If you don't deal with it, then the victims go on and have their children and they carry their trauma with them and the only way to break the cycle is to address it. Anything mentionable is manageable.

What I would leave this committee with and urge this committee is that your actions speak louder than your words. What you prioritize tells the world what matters to this federal body of people who are here. I think right now between the Supreme Court ruling and the hurt that so many victims are feeling, we have an opportunity to study this now and to show victims that we have their backs, we're going to investigate this and we're going to make sure that we do everything we can to make sure that this never happens again.

Thank you, Madam Chair.