Canadian Heritage Committee on Sept. 22nd, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

I have Madame Thomas, and then Mr. Champoux and Mr. Al Soud.

Mrs. Thomas, go ahead.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

I just want to lend our support. As Conservatives, we would support defining this study as being five meetings long. We'd be prepared to accept that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Mr. Champoux, you have the floor.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I'd like to say two things to reassure Mr. Généreux.

We did indeed specify that we would submit a list of preliminary witnesses by Wednesday to allow us to begin the study. We can obviously add witnesses later and take a bit more time to think about our list.

As for defining the creative industries, as the chair said earlier, I don't think it's essential. We know what we're referring to when we talk about creative industries and there may be individuals in a specific sector of the creative industries you'd like to include in this study. The Liberals may have a different idea, us too, but I think we're capable of understanding the definition of creative industry in the context of this study.

I'm in favour too of having at least five witnesses. Just based on today's conversation, I think that number could be higher. So I believe we should keep that in mind too. I think this study has the potential to come back.

Furthermore, what Mr. Généreux is saying is true. In the previous Parliament, the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology considered Bill C‑27. It dealt mainly with AI, but the impacts are being directly felt by artisans and content creators and in all sectors of the creative industries. We must be able to anticipate some of the challenges. I think we have often been behind the curve of technological progress over the past 30 years and we still are. Then, I think there are things we will hear from the witnesses we invite. They'll tell us how much we need to regulate in some areas.

Perhaps the committee will reach that conclusion, but this study will truly help us have a better understanding of the effects on the creative industries, in particular.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Mr. Al Soud, you are next.

[Fares Al Soud, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

It has already been discussed.

I'd also like to mention that we need at least five meetings, because, in my view, there is significant potential for a more elaborate study.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Mr. Généreux, you have the floor.

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

You're correct, Mr. Champoux: we spent two years working on Bill C‑27, which unfortunately died on the Order Paper.

Mr. Myles, I don't know whether the government intends to table its bill on AI again this time minus everything on privacy. That's because when it's all lumped together, it goes nowhere. I don't know whether the government intends to table a new bill, and perhaps you could find out. If so, perhaps we should be advised quickly if we need to plan a study on it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Mr. Ntumba, the floor is yours.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Based on what he said, Mr. Champoux presumes we all agree on the definition of cultural industry. I'd still like to include a written definition, so that we can move forward without ambiguity or any misinterpretation of what a cultural industry is. A definition could state, for example, that “a cultural industry designates all economic activities that produce, distribute and market goods and services related to arts, culture and creative activities.” In other words, these are sectors where artistic and cultural creation is transformed into products or services for public consumption, be it in cinema, audio-visual media, music, entertainment, publishing, books, newspapers, graphic novels, video games, visual arts, fashion and architecture. It's quite broad. Therefore, if we imply a definition without putting anything in writing, we risk lacking focus.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Is everyone in agreement that we take this study to a minimum of five meetings and add that to the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

I also note that in our subcommittee motion, we do not ask for a report or a response from the government. Do we want to add that to this motion?

Mr. Al Soud.

[Fares Al Soud, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

I don't see any other hands up.

Mrs. Thomas.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

I understand that we have our trajectory in front of us. I would like to propose a study that might follow after the one on AI. Depending on how long that study is, if it is continuously expanded, then maybe this one could be interjected in there at some point. It has to do with my motion.

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 no less than 5 meetings; that the committee invite the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture and the President and CEO of the CBC/Radio-Canada to testify in relation to the study for no less than two hours each, separately; and that the committee invite other witnesses selected by parties to testify.

I would move this motion to be passed by the committee, so that this would be a topic of study going forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Mr. Généreux, you have the floor.

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

In terms of this motion, in keeping with what we just said in relation to the previous motion, I move adding that the committee report back to the House. However, I wonder whether we need to report back to the House or to—

[The Clerk]

That can be done at the conclusion of the study. When the committee concludes its study, it can move motions to adopt the report, and then ask the government to respond. We don't need to do it now.

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

Okay. I understand.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Mr. Champoux, you have the floor.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I'm still in agreement when we talk about undertaking studies on the journalism and media sectors. I agree with the proposal to hold five meetings. I consider this study to be broad enough.

I also note that, yet again, there is a request to invite the CEO of CBC Radio-Canada to testify for two hours as part of this study. I understand full well the importance of the public broadcaster in the Canadian and Quebec news ecosystem. However, I think there are other major players in the news media sector and so I am somewhat reticent to set aside a two-hour meeting just for the CEO of CBC Radio-Canada as part of this study. That's a lot. There's nothing to prevent us from inviting her, I think it's quite relevant, but there are other challenges facing Quebecor, Cogeco Media, as well as the newspapers and all sectors of journalism in Quebec and Canada. I get the impression that devoting two hours of this study just to CBC Radio-Canada may distract us a little from this study. I am a little less comfortable with that part of the motion. I move it simply be removed.

I quite agree with the motion to invite the minister again. I don't see a problem with having the CEO of CBC Radio-Canada as part of this study. However, I am really much less comfortable with setting aside two hours for her appearance. I get the feeling that industry stakeholders, particularly those from Quebec with whom I've been speaking, might say that the committee is inviting Ms. Bouchard yet again, and that CBC Radio-Canada is in the spotlight yet again, whereas those stakeholders would like more time to speak and, once again, be heard by the committee.

I would amend the motion by moving simply that the invitation to the CEO of CBC Radio-Canada be withdrawn. As for the rest of the motion, I fully agree for us to undertake a study on this subject and give it priority, after the study on AI. I don't know what the committee thinks.

Will we debate the motion as amended?

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Is there any debate on the amendment?

We have Mr. Al Soud, and then Mrs. Thomas.

[Fares Al Soud, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

Madam Chair, would it be possible to move to suspend for a second?

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Do you understand what just happened?