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.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Thank you.
I'm sorry. I was just curious. He just used the term “conservative infrastructure”. Now, I'm familiar with infrastructure being used by Beijing, the Communist Party, in order to interfere on social media. I'm curious—
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
—as to whether he is then calling the Conservative Party of Canada—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
That's debate. It's not a point of order. I'm sorry.
Does everyone have Peter Julian's amendment in writing, as Mr. Shields had asked?
Okay. Thanks.
Are you finished, Peter?
NDP
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Thank you.
On a point of order, I'm just hoping that the member can clarify what he means by “conservative”.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
A point of clarification is what you're asking for. It's not a point of order.
Mr. Julian, go ahead. You have the floor.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Yes.
This Egyptian troll farm, heavily financed by the United States—rampant foreign interference—says that they have catered to “an audience of Canadian conservatives”, and that they know that their “audience were the conservatives in Canada”.
I'm just re-citing this Egyptian troll farm that has provided appalling levels of disinformation to the Canadian public. I raise concerns, of course, about to what extent it's being amplified here in Canada.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you.
If you have finished, I have a list for the amendment.
Go ahead, Ms. Gladu.
Conservative
Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
Thank you, Chair.
First, let me start off by saying how continually offensive it is to me that Mr. Julian is always trying to spread disinformation and to slander the Conservative Party. I for one have never heard of the magazine he's talking about. I just wish he would stick to the motion.
I agree that his amendment is probably not what we need. We already have a study on big tech that will have Facebook and those folks come before us. Ms. Curran has been in front of committee before.
I'm glad to hear that Catherine Tait is coming. She did publish an opinion piece in the Toronto Star on how to rebuild trust in the news. Certainly she's recognizing that there's been an erosion of trust, with 40% of Canadians not trusting the media. I think we asked for her for two hours and she's coming for only one. We might be able to do something about that.
I do think we don't want to get too broad in this study. The whole idea was that there was this timely issue of one of the directors at CBC instructing the journalists on how they were to refer to Hamas. They were not to call them terrorists. We've seen the BBC come out since and say clearly that they're terrorists. They do come back to a position where they're going to report—
October 24th, 2023 / 11:15 a.m.
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
On a point of order, Madam Chair, Ms. Gladu mentioned that Catherine Tait was coming for only one hour. If I'm correct, the motion only asked for her for one hour. Mr. Shields' motion was to ask for one hour.
I just wanted to confirm that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
I would have clarified that when Ms. Gladu finished. If the committee would like her to come for two, we could ask her, but at the moment, I'm letting Ms. Gladu finish her thoughts.
Conservative
Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
To be clear, the amendment of Mr. Julian was to eliminate her altogether. The original motion that the amendment was made to called for her for two hours.
The other thing is just to make sure that we focus on trying to make sure we have free and independent journalism and not to extend the study so broadly. We do have our safe sport study. There is some urgency to getting back to that.
I don't like Mr. Julian's amendment, for sure, but those would be my points.
Thank you, Chair.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you, Ms. Gladu.
Again, I will go back to the point that the original motion to ask Ms. Tait to come was for one hour only. If the committee feels it would like to expand that to two hours, I would instruct the clerk to do that.
Very quickly, how does the committee feel about that?
No? There's a shaking of heads. Okay. We will leave it at one hour.
Go ahead, Mrs. Thomas.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I am curious. The motion that was put forward and then the amendment that Mr. Julian has offered.... The amendment does change it quite substantially. The point of the motion is with regard to the CBC and holding it to account as a public broadcaster.
Peter Julian has offered an amendment to hold Meta and Google accountable, which is very different. I would ask the chair to confer with the clerk to determine whether or not this amendment is in order, based on the original intent of the motion.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
I will ask the clerk, but I think the amendment is in order. It says that your motion is not expanded enough and that Mr. Julian would like to expand this to other forms of misinformation, disinformation, etc.
Madam Clerk, his amendment is in order, yes?
The Clerk of the Committee Ms. Geneviève Desjardins
It's your ruling, so it depends. As you said, it expands the subject.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
On a point of order, Madam Chair, I'd be interested in the clerk's answer. We saw you confer with her, but we didn't hear her answer as to whether Mr. Julian's amendment was admissible. I would like to know the outcome of that consultation, please.