Canadian Heritage Committee on June 8th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you, Ms. Ferreri.

I will go to Mr. Lemire.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank the committee for having me.

I thank all the parliamentarians here who supported the motion I tabled in the House last week.

Like you, I was shocked by this news. We have a duty to shed light on the actions of Hockey Canada following the victim's revelations. Hockey Canada's involvement in this matter is unjustifiable and we must ensure that not one penny of taxpayers' money was used to cover up this story. I also include in that the salaries of the executives who may have committed acts to cover up the allegations.

We need to know what actions Hockey Canada took as a result of these allegations, which occurred four years ago, I remind you. This is 2022, and Hockey Canada needs to answer our questions.

The amendment that Mr. Nater sent to us earlier is an interesting one, in my view. What he suggests could be added to the motion proposed by Mr. Bittle.

For my part, I propose to add this, in relation to the study to be undertaken by the committee:

[...] that, to do so, the committee meet outside its usual time slots to begin this study [...]

I also add the following idea, which I like:

[...] that the committee invite the Minister of Sport to appear for at least one hour; and that the committee invite representatives from Hockey Canada to appear for at least two hours.

Committees determine their priorities. I, for one, am the vice-chair of the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology, and I can tell you that every week for the past two weeks, one of our meetings has been cancelled.

I think we are able to chew gum and walk at the same time. If we could arrange another meeting, for three hours, to have the Minister of Sport as well as representatives from Hockey Canada, I think that would address one of the concerns we have. It would respond to the will of Canadians who are outraged by what happened at Hockey Canada, who are listening to us and who want answers as quickly as possible. There is a way to do this without interfering with the work to pass Bill C‑11, which is also an emergency.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Are you now tabling a subamendment to Mr. Nater's amendment? We are speaking to Mr. Nater's amendment to Mr. Bittle's motion. If you're tabling a subamendment, can that be formally done, please?

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

This does take the form of a subamendment, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Perhaps you could share it with the committee. Do you have it in writing in both languages? If you can please share that with the clerk, she can send it to the committee so that everyone knows exactly what that subamendment is.

I will suspend while you do that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

While we took a fairly long time to suspend the meeting, it turns out that it's not going to be possible to get everything in English and French because of translation issues, etc.

We have a subamendment on the floor from Mr. Lemire. I would ask him to read it in French. The interpreters will be interpreting it, so make sure you have your headsets on for interpretation. Then I will rule whether that subamendment is admissible or not.

Mr. Lemire, could you please—

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to make a recommendation. I would like us to be able to vote on the Conservative amendment. Then, depending on whether it is rejected or not, I can incorporate what my subamendment proposes back into the wording. My proposal would fit well with Mr. Bittle's motion, but it would indeed be more difficult to insert it after the Conservative amendment.

Is it possible to proceed in this way, if all my colleagues agree?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

If you were going to use the subamendment you brought up, it would not be admissible because it expands too much on Mr. Nater's amendment. I would not have been able to rule it admissible.

You're saying that you're withdrawing it.

(Subamendment withdrawn)

Because you withdrew it, I will go to those who wished to speak to Mr. Nater's amendment.

The next person would be Mr. Julian.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

This is speaking to the amendment by Mr. Nater.

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

No. I will offer another amendment, and then I will speak to it after that, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Go ahead.

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

I would take Mr. Nater's motion, which he generously shared with me in his impeccable writing. He must have been a doctor.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

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

I believe the amendment would read as follows: “That the committee commence its clause-by-clause study of the Online Streaming Act at the same time as it undertakes the committee's study”. Mr. Nater has the rest of the wording on the study that was mandated by the House on June 2. I would then add “that the committee hold hearings into the allegations around Hockey Canada on Monday, June 13, and Wednesday, June 15; and that remaining amendments for Bill C-11 be tabled by 12 noon, Friday, June 10.”

I'm very flexible in terms of wording and friendly amendments.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Could someone please read that out for me?

Can you go really slowly? Make sure that you are moving a subamendment to Mr. Nater's amendment.

Let's go slowly here.

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

It reads, “That the committee commence its clause-by-clause study on the Online Streaming Act at the same time as it undertakes”. Then there's Mr. Nater's wording.

If you don't mind helping me, Mr. Nater....

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

It's “the committee's study pursuant to House Order made on June 2, 2022”.

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

Furthermore, it continues, “that the committee hold hearings into the allegations around Hockey Canada on Monday, June 13, and Wednesday, June 15; and that remaining amendments to Bill C-11 be tabled by 12 noon, Friday, June 10.”

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

All right. I presume that the committee has that.

I will have to get a new list of people to speak to—

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

I'd like to speak to it myself, of course.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Yes, of course, but I will move away from the list of who was speaking to Mr. Nater's amendment to those speaking now to the subamendment.

From what you're saying, it seems to be in order, and I would admit it. You spoke to both Mr. Bittle and Mr. Nater, and you're trying to pull them together. You didn't expand it as much as the Bloc's amendment would have.

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

May I speak to the amendment then?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Yes, Peter.

I'm creating a list on this as well for after Peter. By the way, I just want the committee to know that we have a hard stop at 6:34.

Go ahead, Peter.

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

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I think the allegations surrounding Hockey Canada are serious. I think we all share that view, and it is something that we need to respond to and can do as early as next week. I think we all agree that has to be a priority. I think we all agree as well, or most of us agree, that Bill C-11 has to be a priority also.

For the last couple of weeks, we've had some legitimate filibusters around important issues and some that I do not feel have been useful expenditures of the committee's time. Most parties have already filed their amendments with the clerk and are waiting for the improvements that we want to bring to Bill C-11.

We've held far more than the 20 hours of the original hearings, although some of those were disrupted by the filibusters, I would admit. Now is the time for us to actually look at the bill and improve it, and we can do that at the same time as we look into Hockey Canada.

What I'm endeavouring to do is to have Hockey Canada hearings and have the deadline for amendments. As I say, three of the four parties have already submitted, so there's only one party that would need to submit its amendments. Even then, Madam Chair, as we know from the legislative clerk, amendments can be submitted up until the time we actually have consideration of clause-by-clause, and even then it's not a hard stop. However, I think the principle of having all parties submit their amendments so that they can be produced and translated and circulated is important for preparation.

This would allow us to do both important things at the same time, to move them forward at the same time, and I hope that my Conservative colleagues will agree that, given that we're responding as well to an important issue they've raised, we can do both and we should proceed that way.

We've had a couple of weeks in which I don't think our time has served as well as it could have, so now next week let's get to work and fully use the time we have available to us to look into Bill C-11 in terms of clause-by-clause and improvements to the bill and to look at these allegations that surround Hockey Canada, which are disturbing and which I think we would all agree need to be investigated as well.

Thank you, Madam Chair.