Evidence of meeting #83 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 money.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
Yes, it won't be long. There are still a few small steps to complete, but it won't take long. Mr. Champoux will be pleased.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
I want to talk a bit about arts programs right across the country.
When we look at the estimates, we see a decrease of $24.8 million for the Canada arts presentation fund and a decrease of $7.7 million for the building communities through arts and heritage program. We see a decrease of $6.9 million for the Canada cultural spaces fund. Generally, decreases mean that the regions, including mine in British Columbia, thousands of kilometres from the major arts centre in eastern Canada, tend to suffer when there are cuts.
How do you justify the cuts in all those programs at a time when, as you mentioned in your initial presentation, Mr. Minister, we need arts and culture to unite us more than ever?
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
I agree. Some of the cuts were not cuts but were related—and we had that discussion before—to the end of some of the pandemic programs. We knew ahead of time—and we said it before—that it had an end, and it ended at that moment, so that had an impact, but some of the programs were renewed. For example, there's the $7 million a year—or $14 million for two years—for the small festivals. There's money going to tourism that will include the big festivals and events.
I agree with you that the support of the government is fundamental for those organizations.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
Thank you, Minister. Thank you, Mr. Julian.
Ms. Gladu, you have five minutes.
Conservative
Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Minister, you said that faith-based communities were not in your mandate letter. I'm looking at the December 16, 2021, mandate letter that is out on the web for the Minister of Heritage, and it says:
As Minister, I expect you to include and collaborate with various communities, and actively seek out and incorporate in your work, the diverse views of Canadians. This includes women, Indigenous Peoples, Black and racialized Canadians, newcomers, faith-based communities, persons with disabilities, LGBTQ2 Canadians, and, in both official languages.
If you weren't aware that was in there, what I would say is that we've had 68 Christian churches burnt to the ground and multiple attacks on synagogues and places of worship. I would ask that your government take some action.
I'll turn over the rest of the questioning to my colleague Martin.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
The way I understood it is that you were talking specifically about whether we had a program for what happened to the churches, which is totally unacceptable.
However, I'll bring it to another level. This is why we need a bill such as the one that's coming, the online safety bill. Not everything, but a lot of things, start on the web. A lot of these people organize on the web. A lot of people start their actions by organizing on the web, and that should not be there. People obviously have to be protected, 100%, when they go and practise their faith. We have a role to play, and I think the online safety bill is going to play an important role too.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
You made a comment earlier, Minister, and I really appreciate having you here in person, because being face to face is critical. You and I may have a difference of opinion, but I will fight to the death for you to have your opinion, although I may disagree with it—
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
I do appreciate your being here in person, because we've missed that, so thank you for being here.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
The Parliamentary Budget Officer, going back to a previous question I asked, said with regard to Bill C-18 that the majority of the revenues have already been accounted for in deals made with the CBC, Rogers and Bell. It was the PBO who said that.
Now, I know your staff is saying that the CRTC is going to take a look and see if that's representative, but do you understand that the PBO has said that deals with CBC, Rogers and Bell have already been made for the majority of the money?
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
No, but I understand where the confusion comes from. There are some bills in place for some of the big players, but there are none, or very few, with the small players. Now, for the big tech giants to be exempted from the bill, they will have to have deals—
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
No, I'm saying that the big media companies in Canada already have the deals made.
Conservative
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
First, Bill C-18 is not in place, so it's going to be a game-changer. Second—
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
I got that. They've made the deals knowing that it's coming.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
Some of them have, absolutely. We know that. That's perfect. Do you know why some of those deals were made? It was because they knew that Bill C-18 was coming.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
Right. Just so we understand that deals have already been done for the majority of the money—
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
No, no. They have to have deals with the ecosystem. You cannot have, let's say, Google arrive and say, “Okay, we'll have a deal with the Toronto Star”—
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
No, it doesn't work like that, because you need to have those in every province with big players, small players, rural communities and cities. If you don't have those, you're not exempted.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
And then there will be a few cents left on the table. That's what I'm saying.