Let's keep going.
Evidence of meeting #35 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 amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #35 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 amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Hopefully, this will be a simple non-controversial one. Again, the original language that we used in Bill C-10 was “original French language programs”.
For some reason, the terminology was changed in Bill C‑11. It's very important to ensure that we are talking about truly original French-language programs, not programs dubbed in French or translated into French. All the various francophone groups that have appeared before us requested it.
I have therefore prepared this amendment, as well as several others to come, to change the terminology so that it's correct in English and in French.
The amendment would say “original French language programs” in English, as opposed to the production and broadcasting of “original programs in French”.
In the French version, it would be “émissions de langue originale française”.
I feel it's pretty straightforward, but if you have any questions, I can answer them.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
It's basically replacing line 42 on page 4 with “original French language programs”.
In the French version, this amendment would replace line 47 on page 4 with “d'émissions de langue originale française”.
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
This will come as no big surprise, Madam Chair, given that Mr. Housefather and I moved very similar amendments. This change in the wording was one of the first things brought to light when Bill C‑11was introduced. I believe it was an honest mistake when the bill was drafted.
Of course, I think this is easy to decide on, but I'd like to ask Mr. Méla for clarification. Because the wording comes up fairly regularly in the bill, we have several amendments with exactly the same intent. I want to make sure that if we vote for this amendment here, the outcome of the vote will apply to all other amendments that seek to correct the French wording with respect to original French-language content.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
If anyone wishes to speak to this amendment, I want to note that if this amendment from Mr. Housefather, LIB-2, is adopted, BQ-4, which Mr. Champoux was just referring to, becomes moot since they are identical.
If LIB-2 is defeated, BQ-4, for the same reason, will be defeated.
Mr. Champoux.
5:15 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Madam Chair, through you, I was asking Mr. Méla if he could clarify something for me. We have a number of similar amendments that would replace the wording with what this amendment proposes, that is, “émissions de langue originale française”. It comes up quite often. Should we vote on each of these amendments or can we apply the outcome of the vote on this one to similar amendments?
5:15 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you for your question, Mr. Champoux.
We will have to vote on each amendment separately. Given that we're working on a really tight deadline, I haven't had time to take note of all the consequential amendments.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Mr. Méla, I'm not quite sure whether BQ-4 carries automatically. Do we have to do an individual vote on each report?
5:15 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
Madam Chair, BQ-4 becomes moot, because it's the same as the one just adopted—LIB-2. There's nothing to do.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Okay, that's good. That's what I thought, but maybe I wasn't catching the drift of what people were saying. I thought you said we had to vote on them individually. Thank you very much.
Let me check the time. We still have a few minutes.
I will move to LIB-3.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I believe this was carried by consequence when the definition was carried. I think this one was already dealt with.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Yes, I think you're absolutely right. It was dealt with. Thank you.
Now we have LIB-3.1. I think this was also carried.
Am I right, Mr. Méla? Was LIB-3.1 also carried?
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Lisa Hepfner Liberal Hamilton Mountain, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I will read out the text of my amendment, which moves that Bill C-11, in clause 3, be amended by replacing lines 7 to 12 on page 5 with the following:
served, including with respect to the languages in use within those communities and to their ethnocultural and Indigenous composition, and the high engagement and involvement in community broadcasting by members of those communities, including with respect to matters of public concern,
This is an amendment that gives greater prominence to the role of community media. It's an important way to amplify diverse voices on diverse issues. We know we want a strong community broadcasting system that keeps Canadians engaged. It doesn't change the scope of the bill and it's something I heard from several stakeholders, including CACTUS, the Community Radio Fund, the National Campus and Community Radio Association, and Association des radiodiffuseurs communautaires du Québec.
I hope everyone will support this.
Thanks.
