Evidence of meeting #8 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 pandemic.
A video is available from Parliament.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thanks, Tim.
I am now going to Mr. Champoux.
Martin, you have the floor for six minutes.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I must admit that I am happy to see my colleagues in person again. It has been a while since we have seen each other. However, I will miss Mr. Louis' sound tests during hybrid sittings, when he would practise his French and update us on his progress.
Speaking of Mr. Louis, I will dig deeper on the question that he asked, Minister. You were talking about the resilience fund that you announced, which is open for funding applications until the end of the week, as you said. I was a bit critical of this fund when I noted that the $60 million would help artists but that a call for projects had also been launched using the same fund.
What was the rationale behind this idea?
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
According to the description of criteria, organizations can also propose projects, which would be funded by this fund.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
Well, that is the main objective, because the fund is not for organizations. It's more or less the same principle as the one behind the Union des Artistes, which you may know better than I do. We are doing it more broadly, across the entire country. Organizations submit proposals to us, they tell us what they want to do for their clientele, and we transfer them the funding. Then, the organizations submit their applications.
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
The projects are used basically to signal how the organizations will proceed.
Is that right?
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Okay.
Thank you for that information. That clears things up a bit.
As you know, we have met with a number of stakeholders from the cultural sector during our study of the pandemic's impact on the cultural sector. One of the comments that we hear frequently is that the cultural sector doesn't have enough predictability. Predictability is often mentioned; it's a very trendy word right now.
People are happy with the assistance being provided and the programs being implemented, but they know that the recovery will take much longer for the cultural sector than for other sectors of the economy, as Mr. Louis said.
Would you be able to offer the cultural sector the immediate assurance that the programs put in place will remain in place as long as they are needed? This would allow stakeholders in the sector to plan over the longer term and alleviate their situation.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
You raise a very good point, because, as someone said earlier, too many people in this sector unfortunately have neither a social safety net nor any protection. Their situation is more precarious than that of any other sector. Some people have even had to withdraw money from their registered retirement savings plan. We have seen this type of situation all too often.
We decided to be there from the very beginning. We have repeated over and over that we would focus on speed, not on perfection, and that we would adjust course as needed along the way. That's what we have done, and I think that it was the right approach.
We are continuing to put in place programs like the new one that we just discussed. Other programs will soon be implemented. We will continue to monitor the situation and talk to people in the sector. We speak with them often, and when programs are needed, we design them with their help.
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Earlier, I spoke about people we have met with, particularly organizers of large festivals. Festival season is just around the corner, and if there ever was a sector that requires a lot of time for planning, it's that one.
Under various programs, they were promised funding to help them organize festivals. That's great, but the last we heard, the organizers still hadn't received anything last month.
Do you know the status of this funding? Do you know whether the organizers will be able to count on the funding that was promised them last year, when these programs were introduced?
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
One thing is certain: the money is available.
Concerning the details, I will have to provide a response at a later date. I will ask my team where we're at with the project analysis. However, I can guarantee that any funding that was committed has been budgeted for and will be made available.
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
There are good festivals in Drummondville, including the Drummondville poutine festival. I can assure you that the Drummondville poutine has nothing to do with that Russian guy we keep hearing about in the news.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Minister, I want to revisit the issue of media and the much talked-about legislation meant to strike a balance in the industry.
In October, Australian economist Jim Stanford released a report entitled “The Future of Work in Journalism”.
In the wake of the agreements reached with the web giants, it became clear that the smaller players were in an unfair situation. They didn't have the same power to negotiate or clout as Google or Facebook.
In the report, the author calls for the agreements between the digital giants and media outlets to be made public. It would then be possible to see how inequities could be remedied.
The bill still hasn't been brought forward in the House, but you are planning to introduce it soon. In light of this information and the things Australia has observed, don't you think Canada should add measures to ensure small players aren't penalized when negotiating with the digital giants?
A recommendation was put forward for a hybrid model, and it's gaining some popularity, according to various stakeholders. The model would still be based on negotiations between the parties, but it would also provide for a royalty fund. The digital giants would pay royalties, which would then be distributed according to needs. That model would help protect journalism and regional media coverage, which is the most affected by the gaps in question.
What do you think of the idea?
4 p.m.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
You are right to say that small regional media are probably the most affected in this situation.
In Canada, we have lost 450 news media organizations in the past decade, including 64 since the beginning of the pandemic. To my mind, that's a crisis.
We have been keeping a very close eye on the Australian model for a while now. It serves as a guide, not an absolute. What we really like about the model is the fact that the market-based mechanisms keep the government from getting involved. Freedom of the press is fundamental.
We want more transparency. Australia's finance minister has a say in identifying platforms that are in a near-monopoly position. That won't be the case here. The rules will be very clear. If you meet the conditions, great, but no minister will be involved.
I don't want to get into the details of the bill—after all, I don't want to lose my job this afternoon—but I will say that we share your concerns, Mr. Champoux.
We want to make sure small media organizations are included. In order for a platform to be excluded from the final negotiations, it has to have contributed to the news ecosystem. It's not just about signing an agreement with La Presse, the Toronto Star or the Vancouver Sun. The agreements have to be not only with the big players, but also with the small ones. When those conditions are met, the platform will be exempted.
The agreements can't just be with the big players. It doesn't work that way. We have provided for that. We have also provided for collective negotiations, which suits everyone, including the small players.
4 p.m.
An hon. member
Oh, oh!
4 p.m.
Liberal
4 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
If you want to finish the thought, I think we all want to hear what you have to say. We want the answer.
Go ahead.