Canadian Heritage Committee on Dec. 2nd, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

All right. Perhaps we can entertain discussion on PV-5.

Are there any hands up in the room?

[The Clerk]

I see Mr. Bittle and then Mr. Julian.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Go ahead, Mr. Bittle, please.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you so much.

Very briefly, Madam Chair, I prefer NDP-16, which gets to the same point. I thank Mr. Morrice for his contribution, but I think Mr. Julian's amendment is a little clearer.

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

Madame Chair, I too would like to thank Mr. Morrice for his advocacy. It is true, and I believe as well, that NDP-16 is clearer and more extensive.

I'd like to thank Mr. Morrice for his contribution to the discussions on this bill.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Is there anybody else with their hand up on the floor, Clerk?

[The Clerk]

No, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

No, and there is no one with a virtual hand up. We will call the question on Mr. Morrice's amendment, since it was not withdrawn.

(Amendment negatived: nays 10; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Now we move to NDP-16.

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

Thank you very much, Madame Chair, and I'm very pleased to move NDP-16.

I think it's important to note that the independent online news publishers of Canada have been the instigators of start-ups right across the country, including two very important publications locally in my community, the Burnaby Beacon and the New West Anchor. They do terrific work. They employ a number of journalists, and they're the ones who have been the standard-bearers looking to have that critical improvement in Bill C-18. Their concern was around journalists who are partners in the business themselves or owners of the business themselves or who don't deal at arm's length with the business. Bill C-18 in its second-reading form excluded them from accessing the funds that are going to be so important for building journalism locally. Of course, the community newspaper associations like Alberta community newspapers and Saskatchewan community newspapers also spoke to this. This is an extremely important improvement.

What it does is it replaces line 9 on page 10 with the following:

Canada, which journalists may include journalists who own or are a partner in the news business and journalists who do not deal at arm's length with the business,

This amendment is a very important and critical one for improving the bill to make sure it's accessible to community newspapers, to online news publishers right across the country, to the media that provide supports in third and fourth languages in this country. We have an ethnic press that is extremely vital and energetic. What this does is provide that ethnic news publications that have owners who are also operators who are also journalists can access this regime. It's extremely important.

I became very confused by the Conservatives in the last discussion around the amendments. They've been opposed to Bill C-18. They've tried to fight Bill C-18. They've tried to delay Bill C-18, and then all of a sudden they spoke in favour of the benefits that come from Bill C-18. This is the litmus test. If they vote for NDP-16, they are showing the importance of improving the bill and making sure that it's accessible to community newspapers and online news publishers right across the country.

With that, Madame Chair, I hope that this passes unanimously. This will be an important improvement to make sure Bill C-18 really does what it needs to do, which is ensure that the big tech giants actually start funding journalism right across the country, including in communities throughout the length and breadth of Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Before we continue discussing this amendment, I want to remind everyone what I had said earlier when we were discussing CPC-19. If NDP-16 is adopted, CPC-20 and G-2 cannot be moved, because of a line conflict. I'm just reminding everyone about that.

Go ahead, Madam Clerk.

[The Clerk]

Just to let you know, I have Monsieur Champoux, Ms. Gladu, and Mrs. Thomas.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Martin, please go ahead.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Subparagraph 27(1)(b)(i) of Bill C‑18 is still useful. It shows the importance of discussing and reflecting, and then speaking with the various stakeholders involved in a bill, as this can produce results.

In this case, I must confess that I was concerned from the outset about the situation of very small regional media, which are no less rigorous because they are small. They are struggling these days, and have been for years now, since the arrival of the web giants.

However, I also have a very serious concern with Bill C‑18, and that is that we need to ensure that the news businesses that will be regulated by this bill are serious and rigorous businesses. We will come back to it with other amendments later.

So I think it's important to set some parameters. Employing two journalists certainly shows that the news business is serious, or so one would hope. If a business hires more than one journalist, it's certain that you're not dealing with a blogger who is merely commenting on the news in their basement. So I think it's important to set some parameters to prevent people from falling through the cracks and taking advantage of Bill C‑18.

A compromise was reached by allowing that one of the two journalists could also be an owner or have an arm's length relationship with the business. This compromise will certainly cover a fair number of small regional media, which are the ones we want to protect with this bill.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Marilyn, please go ahead.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Previously, I did state the point about supporting.... We need to make sure organizations that had the owner or a partner as a journalist were included, so I've already said that.

Mr. Julian continues to try speak on behalf of the Conservatives' intention with respect to this bill, so I want to reiterate that I do not support Bill C-18. If you were to look to the voting record, you would see that clause 3—the clause regarding the purpose of the bill being to help small media organizations—is the only thing I voted for. I do agree that we should do that. I just don't think this bill will achieve it.

Mr. Julian has put it out there that if we vote for his amendment, we're essentially supporting Bill C-18, so naturally I wouldn't be able to support his amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you, Ms. Gladu.

Mrs. Thomas, please go ahead.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I wonder if the officials could maybe answer a question or two.

The amendment before us says that it will support journalists, a minimum of two of them. There have to be two journalists still, because the CPC amendment was shot down, so there still have to be two journalists in order to be considered for this legislation, but those journalists can own or partner in the news business. It goes on to say, “and journalists who do not deal at arm’s length with the business.”

I'm curious about this phrase “do not deal at arm's length.”

[Thomas Owen Ripley]

This is an issue that has come up, particularly from smaller ethnic media news organizations. It's specifically in the context where there may be a family member involved, for example, in the operation of the news business. It's a recognition that typically, in your usual kind of employer-employee relationship, there's an arm's-length nature there. This is clarifying that you can have a journalist who is not at arm's length from the news business.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

I see Mrs. Thomas. Did you still wish to speak?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Yes, thank you.

Perhaps I misunderstood your last statement. The amendment that's been brought forward says, “journalists who do not deal at arm's length with the business”. That would mean, according to this amendment.... Could you put flesh on that in terms of what that means?

Who is not coming under this legislation, then?

[Thomas Owen Ripley]

Thank you, MP Thomas.

Just taking one step back to the starting point for clause 27, eligibility means the QCJO criteria, which we've discussed at length in this committee. In the context of interpretation of QCJO, the question has come up around the arm's-length nature of journalists.

Given that the point of departure is that QCJO status, there were concerns from smaller news businesses where one of the journalists is related to the news business because they're a family member to the publisher or to the owner. The concern was that they would be excluded from the current two-journalist criterion.

This is clarifying that notwithstanding that familial connection, that journalist would count towards the two-journalist criterion.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Does that satisfy you, Mrs. Thomas?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Yes, that's more clear. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. Waugh.