Canadian Heritage Committee on Sept. 22nd, 2025

[The Clerk]

Yes. For the minister it's two hours, but we take out the time for CBC/Radio-Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Should we just take out the time for both of them? There's only one instance of time in there.

[The Clerk]

Shall we set aside two hours for the minister?

Okay, so we keep the minister for two hours. It's only the CBC.... That's in the motion, but with no time, as a regular witness.

Agreed.

I don't have the exact wording there. I will make sure to work on it, and I can show it to you after. I don't have the text now, but that's my understanding.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Mr. Champoux, go ahead.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

The wording of my motion aims to help everyone understand: That the committee undertake a study on the journalism and media sectors in Canada and Quebec, including issues of fairness and competition; that the study be comprised of at least five meetings; that the committee invite the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture for a minimum of two hours; that the CEO of CBC Radio-Canada be on the list of witnesses appearing before committee; and that the committee invite other witnesses selected by the parties to appear.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

All right. I don't see any other hands up to speak to the amended motion.

Go ahead, Mr. Myles.

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

I would propose to amend it so the minister does not have to come for two hours, because he's coming in two days for two hours. That would be the amendment I propose.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Do we have to vote on the first amendment?

[The Clerk]

Yes, we have an amendment. We vote on that. Then he could move his amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Mr. Généreux.

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

Mr. Myles, I'm sorry but I don't agree with your idea.

It's the same principle again as for the CEO of CBC Radio-Canada. We haven't mentioned the number of hours she would be testifying. However, the minister also needs to be there. These are two completely separate files that concern the department. So it's important the minister be present.

Since we don't often get the opportunity to hear from the ministers in a given year, we can afford to invite them for two hours for the first study and one hour for the second. That said, it is clear that, at the very least, the minister needs to appear.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

If we delete all the hours….

I'm hearing no.

We are going to vote on Mr. Champoux's amendment now.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Now Mr. Myles can move his amendment to that motion.

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

Could I just propose to reduce the amount of time to one hour?

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Mr. Champoux, you have the floor.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Usually, when we invite the minister for two hours, he only comes for one. That will be the case on Wednesday: we invited him to a two-hour meeting, but he will only be here for one hour. We will have the deputy ministers for the second hour.

The minister must be accountable: It's his department. This will be an important study and it will be quite separate from his appearance next week. We're talking about a study on AI, which will take place in the coming weeks and will last several weeks. I don't believe it will be too exhausting for him to appear twice before committee in that period.

Furthermore, let me repeat that this file is directly related to his department. We are inviting him for two hours, which is entirely reasonable. He will probably again negotiate with us to come for just one hour. What do you expect? Ministers' schedules are like that. That said, it is reasonable to invite him for two hours, meaning for the full meeting, and it's entirely reasonable in the context of a study like this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

All right. We will vote on the amendment proposed by Mr. Myles. I think we should do a recorded vote. I think that's easier.

(Amendment negatived: nays 5; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Okay. We will vote on Mrs. Thomas's motion as amended by Mr. Champoux, and we will do a recorded vote.

(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 9; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, on a point of order. What is happening on screen?

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

We're seeing the interpreter.

Okay. The problem is resolved.

Going once, going twice.... Nobody else has any other interventions. We will adjourn our meeting a bit early today, then.