Evidence of meeting #50 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 facebook.
A recording is available from Parliament.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
To Mr. Hatfield, I was looking at your website, and it said that 50% of your revenue comes from grassroots donations. Are there tech giants that contribute to your organization as well, such as Google?
2:45 p.m.
Campaigns Director, OpenMedia
Yes. It's a minimum of 50% that comes from small grassroots donations. Google was a donor in our last financial year. They aren't in this one, but they have been before. We don't take more than 15% from anyone.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Thank you so much.
Mr. Chan, I'd like to dig in a little bit. You said earlier in your testimony that the deals you have made aren't commercial agreements but are deals to develop new innovative models with publishers. Is that correct?
2:45 p.m.
Global Policy Director, Meta Platforms Inc.
What I said was that the commercial arrangements that we have established with various publishers were to incentivize new behaviour that would spur digital innovation.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
It was interesting. When it was put to you as a commercial agreement earlier, you denied that they were commercial agreements, but when Mr. Housefather asked for deals, they became commercial agreements so that you wouldn't have to—
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Again, Mr. Chan, don't talk over me. It's not good for the translators. Please wait until I finish.
I know you have contempt for what we're doing here, and you and I have been through this before on different legislation, and history is repeating itself.
If it is...whatever it is in terms of a deal to—
2:45 p.m.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Thank you, Chair.
Chair, Mr. Bittle is choosing to speak directly to the witness and again is badgering him and assuming intent. It's super inappropriate to speak directly to him rather than to you, Chair, and, second, it's inappropriate to assume intent. It's badgering the witness.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you very much for that point, Mrs. Thomas.
I also note that there have been a couple of witnesses who do not speak to me and speak directly to the questioner. I made it clear that one should speak through the chair. I think we have a bunch of people going against the rules a little bit, and I've allowed it to happen in the interest of getting the questions and answers through.
2:45 p.m.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
I'm not talking with regard to the conduct of the witness. We understand that they're here for a short duration of time, so they may not understand the full rules.
Mr. Bittle has been here for quite some time and as a former lawyer he understands the importance of following rules.
Madam Chair, perhaps you could offer some direction there.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you very much, Mrs. Thomas.
If I think that Mr. Bittle is in any way, shape or form disrespectful, I will tell him so.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Bittle, continue.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
I think Mrs. Thomas watches too much Law & Order. I don't know where badgering the witness is in the Standing Orders, though it is good of the Conservatives to stand up to defend Facebook whenever possible during this. We're not getting a lot of answers if it's not a softball question from the Conservative Party.
Back to my original point, sometimes during your testimony it's a deal to innovate, sometimes it's commercial—
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Mrs. Thomas, we have very little time, and I would really like this questioner to be able to ask questions of the witnesses and have the witnesses answer.
Is it a totally new point of order? We are, in fact, carrying out the orders of the day. If it's not a point of order, what is it? Is it a point of information or a point of privilege? What is it, Mrs. Thomas?
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Thank you.
Madam Chair, you are operating in a rather discriminatory manner. There are times when you have gone after me for the exact same behaviour that Mr. Bittle is engaging in right now. In fact, I am not nearly as vile as he is, so I would ask you to be fair in your ruling, Madam Chair.
Thank you.
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you, Mrs. Thomas.
I will be fair in my ruling.
Mr. Bittle, please continue your question.
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I would like to point out in a point of order that I show more respect. I was called “vile”. I guess that's the way the Conservatives are going to operate.
To get back to my original point, Mr. Chan, in your testimony sometimes it's a deal to innovate, sometimes it's a commercial agreement, and if the government is doing it, it's a tax. How can you explain the difference between those two things, or three things? Your testimony changes from point to point depending on who is asking you a question.
2:50 p.m.
Global Policy Director, Meta Platforms Inc.
I'd like to see the transcript. I don't think I've ever used the word “tax”. First of all, that has to be clear.
Second—I'm sorry I have to point this out, but the logic escapes me, so I have to say this—the best commercial deals, I hope, are always going to lead to innovative outcomes.
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Thank you very much. I believe you said “taxes are leaky” as your exact statement. I think you just said that a couple of seconds ago—
2:50 p.m.
Global Policy Director, Meta Platforms Inc.
It was a general point. You know this—
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Mr. Chan, you've been before committee enough that you know not to speak over members of Parliament. I know you claim to have respect for this process, but this happened in PROC when you appeared before us and were trying to speak over me and trying to shout me down. Your company's robber baron tactics are on display. At least we can show a little bit of respect to each other in this process, and you can go out and have your joint press conference with the Conservatives afterwards.
Mr. Dinsdale, do you know if the company is planning to threaten the Government of the United States of America, because I know there is similar legislation before the United States Congress?
2:50 p.m.
Head, Media Partnerships, Canada, Meta Platforms Inc.
Sir, again, I think we're here today to try to responsibly share at the committee our concerns about the bill. We're focused on—