Canadian Heritage Committee on Dec. 9th, 2022

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

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

This is an amendment that was suggested by APTN and Dadan Sivunivut. This is part of the series of amendments that we have adopted so far that include, within Bill C-18, a very strong proponent in support of indigenous people and indigenous journalists.

This amendment would ensure that the roster of qualified arbitrators also includes indigenous persons.

I move amendment NDP-23.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Is there any discussion on NDP-23?

(Amendment agreed to on division [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 33 as amended agreed to on division)

(Clauses 34 and 35 agreed to on division)

(On clause 36)

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

We're going to clause 36 now, with amendment NDP-24.

Go ahead, Peter.

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

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

This would seek to ensure, again, in terms of a level playing field, that panels including arbitrators would have access to information so they could better determine what is in the best interests of the negotiations. This issue of transparency is something we've seen reflected and improved in other parts of the bill.

For this particular part of the bill, this suggestion comes from Unifor, Canada's largest private sector union, which represents many journalists across the country. This would provide that information to arbitrators so that the panel could actually take that into consideration when there is a decision, and in that way they could make sure there is a balanced and informed decision-making process. The bargaining process would be more transparent as a result.

I believe Mr. Bittle may have a subamendment, but I move NDP-24.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

You move NDP-24.

Mr. Bittle, where are you?

[The Clerk]

Ms. Gladu's hand is actually up, Dr. Fry.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Go ahead, Ms. Gladu.

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

I want to raise a concern about this amendment, because the commission would be bound by certain confidentiality constraints that the panel might not be bound by, so I would be concerned about releasing confidential information to the panel.

I will oppose this amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you, Ms. Gladu.

Mr. Bittle, do you have a subamendment?

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

I do not necessarily.

I'd like to throw it over to Mr. Ripley, if I could, to ask him what risks are associated with Mr. Julian's amendment, if any.

[Thomas Owen Ripley]

Thank you.

As MP Gladu noted, right now, at clause 55, there are provisions in place to ensure the protection of confidential information in the possession of the regulator, the CRTC. If this amendment were to pass as is, there would be no protection for that confidential information once it was put in the hands of the arbitration panel. One option would be to consider an amendment at clause 55 to that effect.

Having said that, I would acknowledge, right now, that the intention is that the arbitration panel's decision be public. If you provide them with confidential information and they use it in their decision-making process, issues then arise around transparency and the publication of those decisions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Is there any further discussion in the room?

[The Clerk]

I think Mr. Bittle would like to ask a follow-up question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Yes, Mr. Bittle.

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

Thank you so much.

I will move a subamendment.

After “that, in the Commission's opinion, is necessary for a balanced and informed decision-making process”, we would add “on the condition that the Commission ensures that the arbitration panel or each individual arbitrator that presides over the final offer arbitration, do not further disclose any such confidential information and under any further terms that the Commission considers necessary.”

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you, Mr. Bittle.

Is there any discussion on that subamendment?

[The Clerk]

There is discussion, but I believe Mr. Méla has a question as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Mr. Méla, go ahead.

[Philippe Méla, Legislative Clerk]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Would it be possible to have it in writing, by any chance?

Thank you.

[The Clerk]

On the floor, after Mr. Méla, are Mrs. Thomas and Mr. Julian.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Is there a problem, Mr. Méla?

[Philippe Méla]

No, Madam Chair. Mr. Bittle just sent the amendment, so I have it in writing. That was all.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Oh, you just wanted it in writing. Thank you.

Mrs. Thomas, go ahead.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you, Dr. Fry.

I'll speak to the subamendment, and once that's done, I will speak to the amendment as a whole.

My question is for Mr. Ripley. What would the phrase “do not further disclose” mean?

[Thomas Owen Ripley]

My understanding of the subamendment is that if they were provided confidential information, they could use it only for the purpose of the activity of arbitration and, practically speaking, there would have to be some mechanism limiting their further disclosure. I suspect that would be something like a non-disclosure agreement signed between the CRTC, for example, and those arbitration panel members, but they would be bound not to further disclose or use that information in any other context.