Sure, if you feel that I need to read it into the record. It is that Bill C-18 in clause 27 be amended by adding after line 20 on page 10 the following:
(3.1) Despite subsection (1), a news business might not be designated as eligible if
(a) the news business is the subject of sanctions under the United Nations Act, the Special Economic Measures Act or the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law), or is owned or controlled by an individual or entity that is the subject of such sanctions; or
(b) the news business has its headquarters in a foreign state, as defined in section 2 of the Special Economic Measures Act, that is the subject of measures under an Act referred to in paragraph (a).
Then subclause (3.2) would be after that, which says:
(3.2) If a news business described in paragraph (3.1)(a) or (b) was previously designated as eligible, the Commission must, by order, revoke the order designating the business as eligible.
Madam Chair, I will just explain it.
I think the previous Conservative amendment had some very good ideas, but I just didn't agree with the whole motion. I do believe that if you have an American owner of a small Canadian newspaper with four journalists and they're covering local Canadian news, I don't see why it would be excluded. Even if The Wall Street Journal has a Canadian bureau, why would it be excluded for the purposes of the cost of the Canadian bureau?
However, we don't want Iranian, Russian or Chinese.... To me, if there's a country that is sanctioned or if there are people who are sanctioned, then I think they should not be eligible. I tried to draft it that way using existing federal legislation that specifies people, countries, actors and organizations.
I'm happy to entertain amendments if people can improve it, but that's sort of how I was looking at it. It's to get rid of the bad actors, but not to get rid of potentially eligible or fairly eligible news businesses.