Canadian Heritage Committee on June 16th, 2025

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I have two more here as part of the routine motions: delegation of authority to whips and then SMEM.

I do wish to move a motion, if I may.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

We're in committee business.

Please go ahead.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I move:

That, given that committee members, staff, the clerk, analysts and witnesses worked hard to produce the report entitled “The Holding of a National Forum on the Media” during the first session of the 44th Parliament, and given that the government did not table a response because of the prorogation of Parliament, the committee deem that it has undertaken and completed a study on “The Holding of a National Forum on the Media” pursuant to Standing Order 108, and that it adopt that report as a report from this committee; pursuant to Standing Order 109, that the committee request the government to table a comprehensive response to the report; that supplementary or dissenting reports that accompanied the report in the previous session of Parliament be tabled with the main report; and that the Chair present the report to the House.

For those who are maybe new to the committee, I'll put that in layman's terms, if I may. Basically, in the last Parliament, there was a study done with regards to the national media. A report was drafted. Dissenting reports were drafted. It was ready to be tabled in the House of Commons, but unfortunately, the tabling didn't transpire because Parliament prorogued. There was no other reason for it not to happen. I'm seeking the consent of this committee to take that report and make sure that it is, in fact, tabled so that work is actually on the record rather than in the trash can.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Since we didn't have any advance notice of this motion, I'm going to suspend for a moment so each party can discuss amongst themselves.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

We are back in session.

Does anybody have anything to say about the motion that Mrs. Thomas has brought forward?

[David Myles, Liberal, Fredericton—Oromocto, NB]

As you can tell, I'm new here, as are the three of us, actually. The challenge for us is that we don't know anything about this report. We are looking for a little more time or a summary of the report, understanding that this is a continuation of another committee but there are new members here. I'm not trying to be a pain. I'm just trying to know what I'm voting for. That's all.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

You're allowed to talk. We don't consider you a pain.

Monsieur Champoux is next.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Chair, I was a brand new member in 2019, as Mr. Myles is now. I had a lot less grey hair and fewer wrinkles, but back then, a very important report entitled “Shifting Paradigms” had been under consideration during the previous Parliament, but had not been adopted because of the dissolution of the House. When the committee began sitting again, a Conservative member, Mr. Blaney, asked that the report be brought back, and he was amenable to my request for a bit of time to read the report given how important it was. I was very appreciative of that.

For that reason, I agree with Mrs. Thomas's motion pertaining to a study we did together. We heard differing opinions, and everyone worked hard on the study and the report that came out of it. I also agree that new members of the committee should have the time they need to become familiar with what we are about to vote on. That is a perfectly reasonable request and in no way diminishes my support for the motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Do we have unanimous consent to come back to this later?

Monsieur Généreux, please go ahead.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata, QC]

I agree with the member who moved the motion, of course, and with Mr. Champoux, but I think we should set a deadline so this doesn't get forgotten. I suggest we revisit the motion in two weeks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

We won't be here then. We won't be back until October.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata, QC]

We will be back in September, actually.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Is everyone fine with coming back to the motion when we return in September?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I don't have a problem with coming back to it in September. I just would ask that my colleagues function in an honourable manner and give me the opportunity to bring it back in September.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Go ahead, Mr. Champoux.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Seldom am I the most demanding or strict, but I would go even further. Let's come back to it at the next committee meeting. Obviously, that won't be this week, but between now and then, everyone should have more than enough time to read and understand the report, and even the dissenting reports, if necessary.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

I can add it to the agenda for the next meeting, whether it's this week or when we come back in September.

[Bienvenu-Olivier Ntumba, Liberal, Mont-Saint-Bruno—L’Acadie, QC]

Mr. Champoux, I appreciate what you said, but I would prefer a specific date, as opposed to the next meeting. It would be a lot more precise to set a date in September.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

We don't have a date yet, because the committee has to be convened first.

Go ahead, Mrs. Thomas.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

I do have another motion that I wish to move. I suspect that there will be a similar outcome.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata, QC]

I have a question, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

The floor is yours, Mr. Généreux.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata, QC]

I want to make sure I understand how the mikes are managed. Instead of turning on your mike, you turned it off, and then, you turned it on again. That means two mikes were on at the same time. You were talking to the clerk, and the interpreters must have heard what you said, brief as it may have been.

Is someone in charge of turning the mikes on and off, or is that our responsibility? Normally, a person's mike should be off once they've finished speaking, so that two people don't talk at the same time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

That's a good question. There is someone in charge of turning our microphones on and off.

Mr. Champoux, did you have a question?

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Chair, can you see the virtual participants on your screen? I am asking because Mr. Waugh has his hand up, but I'm not sure whether you can see it.