Evidence of meeting #56 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 exemption.
A recording is available from Parliament.
2:20 p.m.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Before I continue, I just want to make sure that the clerk is up to speed on this. I don't know if we need to suspend for a second.
2:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
We'll suspend for one second in order for Mr. Méla to confer with you on that subamendment.
Mr. Méla, we will ask you to read it out, if you don't mind.
2:20 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
In essence, Mrs. Thomas simply wants to add paragraph (b) in CPC-13.1 after the amendment by Mr. Julian. That's about it.
2:20 p.m.
Conservative
2:20 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Bill C‑18 seeks to address the existing imbalance in the news industry. It's an attempt to keep the web giants from encroaching upon businesses that produce news content. The objective is to save newsrooms. We must keep that in mind in the amendments we vote on today.
There are certain fundamentals in journalism. For a journalist to be recognized as such, he or she must meet certain standards of excellence, including independence, fairness and rigour. If anything should be excluded from the journalism profession, it's opinion and ideology. While these publications must also have their fair share of the pie and the playing field must be relevelled in relation to the web giants, that's not the purpose of Bill C‑18. The bill instead seeks to support news and information itself.
Therefore, I won't support this subamendment because it will just open the door to all kinds of opinion and ideology media. I do not consider that to be journalism. I may be a bit of a purist, but we need to ensure that journalistic standards are upheld. That's what Bill C‑18 needs to protect. That's why I won't support this subamendment.
2:25 p.m.
Conservative
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
I'll be very quick, Mr. Chair, as Monsieur Champoux said it much better than I possibly could have.
My only comment is that it's a little surprising that the Conservatives want to expand the scope of this bill so that the CRTC is in the position to evaluate the ideology of a news organization when granting an exemption order. It seems to go counter to everything we've heard on Bill C-11 and Bill C-18, but here we are.
2:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
I'm just getting a note from the legislative clerk.
Go ahead, Mr. Julian.
2:25 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
I won't be supporting the subamendment. I think it's fair to say that I'm a little surprised too. I was surprised when I saw the amendment from the Conservatives on ideology and opinion, and I'm still quite surprised. It is something that has come up frequently around these bills.
On this bill, it would seem to me that given what the Conservatives have said, this is probably the last area they should be venturing into. Offering it as an amendment contradicts what they've been saying about the bill.
I'll be voting against it. I just find it somewhat surprising. I'm perplexed.
2:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
If the subamendment proposed by Mrs. Thomas is adopted, then NDP-7 cannot be moved due to a line conflict.
To wrap up the conversation on the subamendment by Ms. Thomas, is there any other discussion?
2:25 p.m.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
To be clear, we are asking for the protection of diversity. We are asking for the protection of diverse thought, diverse opinions and diverse ideologies. I would expect the members around the table to protect the essence of what I am saying rather than misconstrue it.
2:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
Thank you, Mrs. Thomas.
I see no other hands in the air, so I will ask for the vote on the subamendment.
(Subamendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 3 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Thank you, Clerk.
We will go back to NDP-5.
Do you have any final thoughts, Mr. Julian, or do you want to head to the vote?
2:25 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think everybody has expressed their opinion eloquently.
2:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
Okay. I will call the vote on NDP-5.
(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
2:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
Thank you.
We will move on to CPC-13.1. If it is adopted, NDP-7 then cannot be moved due to a line conflict.
Mrs. Thomas, go ahead on CPC-13.1, please.
2:30 p.m.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
CPC-13.1 is simply a mechanism for greater inclusion. In the consideration of news sources, different outlets would not be discriminated against based on ideology or opinion. Rather, there would be great freedom granted to these news organizations in that regard.
2:30 p.m.
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Again, I know that with Bill C-11 and Bill C-18 there have been concerns raised that the CRTC is going to regulate content. Nothing in the bills, and no amendments, do that. This is the only amendment we've seen in those two bills that would put the CRTC in a position to regulate content, which is, again, surprising.
We're opposed.
2:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
Are there any further thoughts on CPC-13.1?
Ms. Gladu, go ahead.
2:30 p.m.
Conservative
Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
Thank you, Chair.
I just wanted to say that it's disturbing to me that the government is objecting to having diversity of ideology and opinion put into the list of things that we're including. That's concerning. That's exactly why Canadians are mistrustful of the legislation that's coming forward.
2:30 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Thank you very much.
I think the issue is that the criteria that are set out in clause 6 are objective criteria. An example is language. We know if something is in English or French. We know if something is coming from a racialized group. We know if something is coming from an indigenous community. We know what a local news and business model is.
However, ideology is entirely subjective. The last thing we want the CRTC to be doing is butting in and determining the ideology and opinion of a newspaper. Moreover, as I think Mr. Champoux said before, news is not supposed to be biased. It's not supposed to have ideology or opinion, and we shouldn't care about the editorial content of any newspaper when we are evaluating what their journalism product is, which should be entirely outside of the ideology of the paper. I think that is the major difference.
Thank you to my friend Marilyn for advancing that point, though.
2:30 p.m.
Conservative
Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
Putting “ideology and opinion” in here allows the full range of them. It doesn't exclude anything. You could have opinions on all sides of the fence. That's the whole point.
2:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
Is there any other discussion on CPC-13.1?
Seeing none, I will call for the vote on CPC-13.1
(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 3; [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Thank you.
We'll move on to NDP-6.
Before I give the floor to Mr. Julian, if NDP-6 is adopted, then NDP-7 cannot be moved due to a line conflict.
Mr. Julian, you have the floor.