Yes, Ms. Thomas.
Evidence of meeting #93 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 cbc.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #93 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 cbc.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Thank you.
Based on that point of order, then, I would just ask if the clerk could confirm for us the reason for Ms. Tait coming on November 2.
12:30 p.m.
The Clerk
The committee adopted a motion to invite Ms. Tait regarding her reappointment, for one hour. I reached out to ask for her availability, and her office came back and gave November 2.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you.
Ms. Thomas, would you continue speaking to the subamendment?
Thank you.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Thank you.
Further to the point of order, I wonder if the clerk would then clarify as to whether the reason we are asking for Ms. Tait to come is based on the subamendment.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
I think it's pretty clear in the subamendment, Ms. Thomas, that Mr. Waugh put forward. It's pretty clear.
If I go back and read it, it was clear in the original amendment that Mr. Julian made, and then Mr. Waugh clarified that a little bit by adding that “and summon the president of the CBC, Catherine Tait, to appear for two hours by herself within seven days of the motion being adopted”.
That is pretty clear on what Mr. Waugh was saying.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Thank you.
I just want to clarify, then, that my understanding.... I'm speaking to the subamendment now. The subamendment reads that we would be asking Ms. Tait to come to this committee to answer questions specific to the CBC's coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict—
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
—and the misinformation that has been spread there. That is the phrase that is used within the now subamended and amended motion.
I want to be clear, then, that it is a very different purpose than appearing at this committee regarding her reappointment for an additional 18 months.
I agree with Mr. Julian that this is important, and I look forward to having Ms. Tait here and having the opportunity to ask her questions with regard to her general mandate as the head of the CBC, certainly, but the subamendment, which I have been given the opportunity to speak to, has to do with Ms. Tait's coming and answering questions specific to the CBC's coverage of what's going on in Gaza and Hamas' attack against Israel.
Having clarified that and hopefully bringing some understanding there, I would just state this: It is important to hear her on this issue because, as we are all more than keenly aware, it is taking centre stage—rightly so—across the world. It is a matter that it is so important for us to get right as Canadians.
When the public broadcaster is supported by Canadians, they need to see themselves reflected in that space, and I think that the Jewish population within Canada would be hard-pressed to feel advocated for or even accurately represented by the CBC. I think it is extremely sad when the CBC, a public broadcaster, has made the determination to put out false information and to release stories with great speed but lacking accuracy, as my colleague Mr. Waugh so aptly explained.
Ms. Tait has a lot to answer for. The reason it's so important for her to be the one is that she's the one getting paid the big bucks. She's the one who has been put in that seat. She's the one who has been entrusted with being the lead of that organization, the public broadcaster.
If we were to omit that, as Mr. Julian's amendment tried to prescribe, this committee would not be doing its work. It would not be doing the work that it is intended to do. It would not be holding her to account or giving her the opportunity to—
12:35 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Yes. Can you clarify again, Madame Chair, that Ms. Tait is coming next Thursday?
I find the debating point that somehow she is not coming to committee or that we're not able to her ask questions is a bit disingenuous.
Can you confirm that she is coming next Thursday?
12:35 p.m.
The Clerk
That's correct, yes.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
She's coming. I have confirmed that. Thank you, Mr. Julian.
It's very clear that Ms. Tait is coming, and she's coming to answer questions from this committee. When someone comes to answer questions of the committee, the committee is free to ask them whatever questions they choose with regard to their job description.
Ms. Thomas, you still have the floor.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Yes, as I mentioned, Ms. Tait is coming to this committee on November 2 for one hour. That is correct. She is coming to speak to us with regard to her general overall mandate.
The subamendment that has been moved, as the chair has asked me to stay focused on, has to do with Ms. Tait coming specifically with regard to the CBC's coverage of the conflict taking place in Gaza. That is the purpose of the subamendment that has been put forward.
It also asks that Ms. Tait come for two hours, which would give us, hopefully, enough time to ask very important questions on behalf of Canadians—in particular, very important questions on behalf of the Jewish community in Canada, which has very much been underserved by the CBC.
With that being the case and with that being the subamendment that my colleague Mr. Waugh has moved, it is very important to note that this is distinctly different from the motion that was previously moved at this committee quite some time ago to bring in Ms. Tait with regard to her general mandate.
No doubt, I think, we look forward to having her here on November 2. Mr. Julian, of course, has indicated that he wishes to praise her for the type of coverage that the CBC has been providing. Of course, my Conservative colleagues and I have indicated that we have some tougher questions to ask her. We're looking for clarification on behalf of the Canadian public. We believe in the role of the official opposition and the accountability mechanism that is in place there, because that is what sustains a strong democracy.
Speaking of which, in the article she wrote as a guest columnist for the Toronto Star, Ms. Catherine Tait actually wrote about what democracy requires. Interestingly enough—the committee might desire to know this—she said, “It's essential that all news organizations tackle these challenges together.” She's talking about the challenges of being truthful and being credible. She's talking about the challenges of gaining trust.
She goes on to say, “We need to make sure that Canadians know where they can access verified, reliable news and information about their neighbourhoods, their communities, and their country.”
I would agree with Ms. Tait on that statement. There's no doubt that we do need to know where we can go for verified, reliable news and information. Given that the CBC has misreported numerous times over the last number of weeks, and given that the CBC is outright refusing to call Hamas a terrorist organization, I do have to wonder if she would count herself into the classification of “verified, reliable news and information”.
I think Canadians deserve to know what her thought process is in that regard and what she is hoping to convey through her news coverage, which is currently lacking.
We were talking about democracy and, of course, the role that the official opposition plays in that. She goes on to say, “It's what Canadians deserve—and it's what our democracy requires.”
Again I would agree with her. I would say that she is absolutely correct that Canadians do deserve verified and reliable news and information and that Canadians do, in fact, require this in order for our democracy to thrive. Those things are true.
Further to that, in this article, she outlines the importance of building trust. I would agree with that as well. I would say that there is an opportunity for our news sources across the nation to restore trust with the Canadian public.
Where she and I might deviate is that my perception is that in order to restore trust, you have to tell the truth. She would probably argue that actually you can do your best to restore trust by just retelling or remaking the truth. I would disagree.
With that said, there is an opportunity to hear directly from her, to understand the intent that she functions with and to understand the intent that the others within the CBC function with.
Whether that's the ombudsman or Mr. Achi, who is responsible for journalistic standards, there is an opportunity for all three of them to come to this committee, be asked good questions, and be given the opportunity to express to us the strategy they employ within our public broadcasting system.
Further to that, there's an opportunity for them to tell us how they intend to use that strategy to best serve Canadians and restore the trust that Ms. Tait discusses in this article and outlines as being incredibly important as we continue to function in a democratic system and want to protect it.
This is why it is so important that Mr. Waugh moved this subamendment and that it not be disregarded.
I know that Mr. Julian tried to take the CBC, and Ms. Tait in particular, out of the original motion. I recognize that he for some reason doesn't wish for her—
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
On a point of order, Madam Chair, yet again, can I ask you to confirm that Ms. Tait is coming before the committee next week?
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
This is not a point of order, and if you are not consistent, I will make this hell.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
On a point of order, Madam Chair, a point of order—
12:45 p.m.
Liberal