Canadian Heritage Committee on Oct. 21st, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I didn't either.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

What I was going to say was that if it was so important for her, she would have listened to the witnesses instead of filibustering.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Minister, the money was given under the heritage department. You're the minister—

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I have a point of order, Madam Chair.

Does Ms. Thomas have a lot of minutes left? I've lost track of the discussion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Ms. Thomas has 23 seconds left—

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

—but it is up to Ms. Thomas how she uses her time. If she chooses to use her time to interrupt, then that time counts. Thank you. There are 23 seconds remaining.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Minister, I wonder if you would see value in our hearing from other witnesses with regard to Bill C-18. For example, we haven't heard from copyright experts. We haven't heard from Facebook. We haven't heard from Twitter. We haven't heard from international trade experts, and the U.S. has expressed concern. I'm just curious whether you feel that perhaps it would be beneficial to hear from experts before continuing to move forward to clause-by-clause consideration.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

It's up to you guys to decide, but my advice to you is that if you stop filibustering, then you get more for your buck.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Minister, I was just asking if it was a good idea to bring witnesses—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Ms. Thomas, I'm sorry, but your time is up.

Now we will go to Mr. Coteau for six minutes.

Go ahead, please.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for joining us today. This is a very important file. Given the numbers you gave us at the beginning when talking about the media outlets that have collapsed over the last decade plus in this county, there's no question we need to do something different. I'm very thankful that you have taken a leadership role to bring something forward to better protect a service that many of the witnesses have called a public good. Thank you so much for being here.

There was a recent article in which the Conservative leader was asked his position on Bill C-18. The article states, “[Mr.] Poilievre said he has no problem with a model that allows media to be compensated by these massive companies.”

What is your reaction to that statement, Minister?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

I'm very happy to know that Mr. Poilievre agrees with this model, which is only normal, because he ran on this in the last election. Mrs. Thomas and all the Conservatives did, because it was in the platform. They said they needed something like this, based on the Australian model.

Now, this is exactly the Australian model. We only added a few elements on transparency, to the point where even the Australians are now looking at us and saying, “Wow, that's good. Let's see if we can do the same thing.”

Things should be clear. There's nothing controversial about the bill. Our friends the Conservatives ran on it. The Bloc Québécois supports it. We support it, of course. I think the NDP supports it too—everyone.

Why is that? We said it, and you said it, Mr. Coteau: because the press is disappearing. Four hundred and sixty-eight media outlets closed their doors. That's huge.

Is our democracy becoming stronger or weaker? I would say weaker. I'm happy the Conservative leaders agree on this and I'm happy the Conservatives have this on page 155 in their platform. Let's do this together.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Thank you so much.

You brought up the Australian model. I want to talk a bit about that and get some of your feedback on it.

We've heard from many of the deputants that it is a successful model for both big and small media outlets. We know the Australian model was the first model to come into existence, and there's been a revitalization of media in Australia because of it. It has benefited small entities.

However, there have to be differences—things we have learned from the Australian model, stark differences between the two countries.

As the minister, what have you learned from that model? What has your department learned from that model? What will we do a bit differently in our approach to looking for ways to build a model that works for Canadians?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Coteau. That's a very important question.

We learned that the model works. That's probably the most important thing. It works, and it benefited the small local media. That's exactly what we want for our bill.

We thought we needed to make a few improvements and make things a bit more transparent. For example, in Australia, the minister can decide which platforms are included. We don't want that. We want to put independent criteria in there. We want to create criteria for the platforms to get exemptions. They are public. We want to make sure people know what these criteria are.

If you don't mind, I will mention these quickly: maintaining the independence of the press; money has to be reinvested to support the production of local news content; fair compensation to the news businesses; local independent news get to have deals, not just the big guys; investing in indigenous, minority languages and a broader diversity of news organizations; and supporting the long-term sustainability of news in Canada.

Those are very precise criteria that have to be respected.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Thank you for that answer.

I'm of Caribbean heritage. When you go grocery shopping in the Caribbean stores in Toronto—in Etobicoke, North York and Scarborough—you will see that newspaper stands in all these stores have The Caribbean Camera, Share and Pride magazines. These are great small publications that people in my community and across the GTA and the country look to for their source of news, both international and Canadian.

For me, it's important that small entities are included in this, especially when it comes to the thousands of ethnic media sources present in this country.

Minister, perhaps you can tell me this: Is there an approach to working with these smaller entities, which are usually ethnic media that speak to Canadians from all different backgrounds?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Absolutely, Mr. Coteau. We share your concern and your sense of the importance of small and ethnic media. This bill is good for big and small.

We put collective bargaining in the bill. This is super-important, because it allows small media to make agreements together. Instead of having one very small media entity negotiating with the big tech giants, they can get together as a group and negotiate, which gives them more strength and power.

For us, absolutely. It's written there in black and white that this bill has to support local, regional, small and medium-sized media, because we rely on them. We rely on them to get our information in different regions and in different languages. That's why the bill was drafted that way.

In Australia also, Mr. Coteau, their bill really benefited small media too.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

All right.

Chair, am I done?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you, Mr. Coteau.

Can people shut off the mikes in the room, please?

Thank you, Michael. Your time is up.

Now I'm going to Mr. Champoux. Martin, you have six minutes.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Minister, thank you for being with us today. The topic I'm going to address now is similar to the one I discussed earlier with Mr. Scott, from the CRTC, and that's the quality that would be required of news businesses for eligibility under this bill.

For example, under the present criteria, clause 27, which concerns the eligibility of news businesses, suggests that foreign-owned news businesses might be eligible. Don't you think that paves the way to potential abuses?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Thank you for your question, Mr. Champoux.

A series of criteria will determine media eligibility. I believe those criteria will limit the access of certain media businesses to that funding. Would you please clarify your question?

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I actually put this question to the CRTC earlier, and I was told it obviously wasn't up to the CRTC to establish the criteria used to define a good journalism organization, that is to say a business that performs its work in a disciplined and serious manner. So that's a concern for me.

The criteria currently considered are used to determine whether a business is a “qualified Canadian journalism organization”. I don't think we have any criteria that can be used to determine the discipline and seriousness of journalism businesses. As we all know, anyone can claim to operate an Internet journalism business and become eligible if he or she meets the present criteria.

Shouldn't those additional criteria be included in the bill? I don't mean strict criteria, but we should at least ensure that journalism work is done with a certain discipline.

The established major media have a code of journalism conduct. CBC/Radio-Canada, for example, applies journalism standards and practices, and the newspapers generally have similar standards as well.

Shouldn't we draw on those journalism codes and best practices and incorporate certain criteria in this bill? Wouldn't that simplify the work of the CRTC or the organization that'll have to determine who is and isn't eligible?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

You said the bill already contained specific eligibility criteria limiting the number of eligible businesses. You also said the various provinces had organizations that monitor journalists' work. I consider their work very important.

In future, the CRTC may conduct consultations on the possibility of going further. We'll see what's suggested once those consultations are complete.

As I told Ms. Thomas earlier, I'm always ready to listen to any suggestions you have to make.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

That's exactly what I asked the CRTC representatives, who answered that their agency would be the one establishing the criteria. Consequently, perhaps it's up to us members of the committee to incorporate them in the bill. I understand that you'll be receptive to those types of amendments.

Earlier you said you were receptive to and interested in foreign legislation. I don't know whether you're aware of this, Minister, but I attended a world conference on culture in Mexico not long ago.

I spoke with representatives of other countries that are monitoring what we're doing with bills C‑11 and C‑18. I mention those countries because, in many instances, they're small countries that likely aren't being as strong as we are compared to the web giants and that therefore have decided to see how the biggest countries legislate in this area. Then they'll feel they have allies when they have to implement their own regulations.

That's mainly why I'd like us to have sound criteria for the quality of businesses that want to be recognized as eligible. The Internet is global, and information circulates across borders. Those same rules will therefore be much easier to enforce in countries that are in a slightly weaker position relative to the web giants.

We have to set an example, hence my concern. We need to apply extremely strict criteria to prevent foreign disinformation and propaganda media from infiltrating our journalism world. That's what I'm referring to.

In view of that, don't you think we should be stricter and more rigorous and demanding of the businesses we recognize?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

It isn't up to me to decide on the mission of a business, Mr. Champoux. Surely you realize that the purpose of this bill is, as far as possible, to prevent any interference and to allow free negotiating between the platforms and media.

I'd like to go back to what you just said because it's very important. Canada is currently a leader. The platforms are resisting for a reason. They think that, if something happens in Canada, it can happen elsewhere.

I was with you in Mexico, Mr. Champoux, and had the same conversations. Before that, I attended the G7 in Germany. Canada's Bill C‑18 was discussed by all the other countries, and they want to see what we do before they determine whether they can introduce the same model.

As you know, Mr. Champoux, media and press freedom and independence have disappeared everywhere. Their disappearance is a threat to democracy both in Canada and elsewhere in the world.