Canadian Heritage Committee on April 14th, 2026

[Cindy Simard]

I'll let you answer, Mr. Côté. Then I'll add to that.

[Sébastien Côté]

I will add something to what he said, since we basically have the same vision. At the end of the day, what we want is for everyone, as a society, to recognize that the work we do is an essential service. This recognition must come with all the supports it entails, such as predictable and stable funding through the ILNF and guaranteed discoverability. You're talking about a business model. We're currently having discussions about discoverability on existing digital platforms, on how we can be included in that precisely to go further in the business model.

We're talking about having access to the labour tax credit for news production, but it bears repeating: That's extremely important. You have the power to do it quickly. It's already available to the print media sector. All you have to do is make companies that have a broadcasting licence eligible, and the problem is solved. You can do that very quickly.

What we're really looking for is to be on an equal footing with all other media.

There's also work to be done in terms of government spending on advertising. A number of people have talked about it. I would refer you to our brief, in which we also have an interesting proposal about that.

[Cindy Simard]

I'll elaborate on my ideas.

I was talking about the investment tax credit for purchasing equipment. That's also something that could be done quickly and it would help a great deal. As we mentioned, we constantly need new equipment. A new control room costs $700,000. For a small station like ours, that's a huge sum of money, but it's necessary and mandatory for us to be able to broadcast a quality newscast for our viewers. We must invest in equipment. We could use some help with that. That would be easy to do, and worthwhile.

[Pierre Harvey]

I can add a clarification. This tax credit used to exist at the federal level, but there was one detail: It only applied to equipment that was used to generate revenue. So a small amendment would have to be made to the act so that it applies to equipment used to produce local news. That would be an important nuance to consider in the proposal.

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

Great, thank you.

Mr. Wood, do you have any thoughts on the question regarding the relationship between public and private, particularly in rural areas of the country?

[Murray Wood]

I'm sorry. Were you asking me?

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

Yes.

[Murray Wood]

With sincere respect to my colleagues at the CBC, I don't think the solution to the local journalism crisis, if you want to call it that, is a bigger CBC opening more bureaus. A reporter who may be stationed in a place like Swift Current, Saskatchewan, filing a couple of stories a week to a provincial desk is good. It's better than no content, but it's not even close to the same as a local news outlet that's covering the traditional range of stories and events day in and day out, with people who are living in the community and covering the events.

As for the point that was made by Ms. Simard, very often, the people who go to these smaller centres are not going to stay, so their familiarity with the people and the issues is always going to be new and not at the same depth as the station that, frankly, is there seven days a week. I wouldn't say it's bad that they may look at doing this, but I do not think the answer to the local journalism issue is a bigger and more expanded CBC.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

We have come to the end of the round.

Members have an appetite to do one more round of five minutes each. This will take us a bit beyond 1 p.m. I hope everybody in this room is okay with that.

Mrs. Thomas, are you taking it for the Conservatives? No.

Mr. Waugh, you now have the floor for five minutes.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon South, SK]

Thank you.

I'm going to pick up on Mr. Myles' question.

What we've seen in the last two years with the public broadcaster is...20 local and regional bureaus last year. This year, when Marie-Philippe Bouchard came to committee.... In January, they had 11 new markets.

As you said, Mr. Wood, now there are no deserts. They said, “We're going to put a reporter in Yorkton. We're going to put a reporter in Moose Jaw. We're going to put a reporter in Swift Current.” Last year, they also put a reporter in Lloydminster, causing some angst in that the television station then closed because it simply could not compete with the public broadcaster. There were more reasons than that, but going into so-called news deserts—I don't believe Medicine Hat, Lethbridge, Lloydminster, Yorkton, Prince Albert, and so on are—to me, crossed the line.

I want to pick up on this with you, because you were right on. They had a reporter in La Ronge, who didn't like the temperature and was gone in two weeks. It is cold in La Ronge. Is La Ronge a news desert? Perhaps, but the public broadcaster, in my estimation, has overstepped the boundaries on what it considers a news desert, because communities like Yorkton, Swift Current, Moose Jaw, Lethbridge and Medicine Hat are not deserts.

I'd like your comment on that, because it's taking money away from the private industry when it starts this.

[Murray Wood]

In all those communities you mentioned, Mr. Waugh, there is still media. Moose Jaw has a radio company that operates three stations, and so does Swift Current. It has Golden West, which is a very strong, family-based prairie radio company. Yorkton has two or three radio stations owned by Harvard, a Saskatchewan-based company. It's not as though there is no news coverage there.

To be fair, in most of those communities, such as Prince Albert and Moose Jaw, they have lost their local papers, and this is a challenge, but radio has leaned in and added.... Pattison, for instance, has been looking to add reporters in some of these smaller communities, such as Prince Albert, Melfort and so forth.

This is not to say that the CBC should not be allowed to expand to smaller communities. That's their decision. To suggest this is the answer to the local journalism issues.... It's not the answer. It's fine, but somebody filing a story a couple of times a week is not the same as somebody speaking to the community, specifically covering the local, granular, organic issues of the community, day in and day out.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon South, SK]

Does anyone want to comment on this? We have seen the public broadcaster expand into areas where, quite frankly, it doesn't need to be.

Someone pick it up on the board.

[Robert Ranger]

Radio-Canada shut down a lot of receivers.

It has abandoned many of the regions. Now, since the funds are available, it's coming back to the regions, but its mission is different from the one it had at the outset.

For our part, over the years, we have built a relationship of trust with our viewers and our audience. We have credibility with these people. We therefore have a responsibility to continue to maintain that credibility.

We were talking about a code of ethics earlier. We have a very strong code of conduct. We don't use artificial intelligence. We have journalists on the ground. We go out and see people. We take the temperature. Radio-Canada will never do that. In Abitibi, it brought journalists into its newsroom to make digital newscasts, but they aren't out in the street. They don't go out in the field with cameras. They file news reports from inside. They talk to each other and then they put together reports. For us, that's not real journalism.

If Radio-Canada could make some of our content and news feeds available, if it could let us use its platform ICI T̓OU.TV, which we've paid for through our taxes, I would say that it would be much easier for us to follow our listeners and viewers on the various platforms. That's when we're not blocked.

[Cindy Simard]

If I have time, I would like to add something.

In eastern Quebec, for example, Radio-Canada has added a number of new journalist positions, while TVA has eliminated many in the same region. However, at the end of the day, Radio-Canada produces the same 30‑minute evening newscast, which includes national news. If you're in eastern Quebec and listen to the Radio-Canada Est‑du‑Québec newscast, you'll see that it's not 100% local, unlike ours, which will be 100% local news.

Radio-Canada broadcasts national news in its local newscast. Personally, I've always had a bit of a problem with that. I find it unfortunate. They have the means to produce a 100% local newscast, given the 40 or so journalists they have in eastern Quebec. I do it. I manage to do it even though I have a very small team.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you.

Mr. Al Soud, I'll turn the floor over to you for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Poisson, you have had your hand raised for quite some time, so my next questions will be addressed to you and to Mr. Chartier. I would also like to give you the opportunity to add your voice to the discussion regarding what has been proposed today.

In 2022, during a meeting of this committee, you said the following:

By controlling the algorithms, the web giants have cannibalized our revenues, without assuming any of the associated social and fiscal responsibilities. They have upended the business model and diminished the real value of the news. In particular, they have attracted 80% of the advertising dollars of companies and local and regional businesses without providing any tangible benefits to those communities.

At the time, the discussion focused more on Bill C‑18.

Now, what would it look like if the web giants assumed social and fiscal responsibility in this particular context?

[Benoit Chartier]

There’s no doubt that the web giants are the elephant in the room. Since the start of today’s committee meeting, we have been talking and asking the government for money, but the root of the problem is Google and Facebook. That is the source of our problem. Eighty per cent of digital advertising goes to these web giants, and all the money flows to California. It is important to note that Google and Facebook engage in illegal, monopolistic, anti-competitive and dubious business practices. If we do not tackle this problem at its root, we will find ourselves, week after week, in the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage fighting for the survival of the media, be it television, radio or newspapers across Canada.

I am pleased to hear that the Competition Bureau is getting involved. It has filed an official complaint with the Competition Tribunal of Canada. I look forward to the hearings beginning.

There is no doubt that Google and Facebook are the elephant in the room today. These people are not acting in good faith when they negotiate with the government. I’ve experienced it first hand. I was involved in drafting Bill C‑18 with former minister Pascale St‑Onge and Mr. Champoux, who is on the committee today. We fought hard.

I will answer the question regarding the CJC, the Canadian Journalism Collective. We wondered where the CJC came from and why it existed. It is because Google demanded that the existence of the CJC be enshrined in law, so that it could control the CJC and ensure that control was not handed over to the Canadian giants of the print and broadcast media.

That is the root of the problem. We need strict laws against Google and Facebook. It is on this basis that our problems can be resolved. Until then, it will be very difficult, because there is a digital and advertising exodus that is causing funds to flow rapidly to the United States.

Negotiations on the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement are coming up. There are currently many discussions between the Canadian government and the U.S. government. The U.S. government and the Trump administration will put on the negotiating table the legislation arising from Bill C‑18, the legislative provisions arising from Bill C‑11, and so on. The Canadian government will have to stand firm and prevent any possible negotiations concerning elements arising from these two bills. The provisions arising from these two bills must remain in place, especially the legislation arising from Bill C‑18, and they must be made even stronger.

We haven’t even mentioned Facebook yet, which is flouting the law. That, too, is a scandal. Facebook chose to remove media outlets from its network rather than accept and apply Canadian law.

[Sylvain Poisson]

If I may, I’d like to add a comment.

Thank you for the question.

We have been talking for some time now about business models. Obviously, we have discussed diversifying revenue streams within the business model which, as we know, is essentially based on advertising revenue.

I have had a very cost-effective solution to propose to you from the outset. I’d like to return to the issue of federal government advertising placements. When I say it’s very cost-effective, it’s because we’re very aware of the scarcity and limited nature of the funds available to media of all kinds. However, the Government of Canada would not spend a single extra penny from its annual government advertising budget if it were to significantly increase the percentage of its annual placements in our media. I mentioned earlier that this represents 1% of its annual budget of $78 million. If it were to increase this percentage, it could make a huge contribution to preventing the disappearance of local and regional media, without spending a single penny more. It is a very simple accounting mechanism. If, instead of allocating $222,000 of its budget to local and regional media, it tripled that 1% share, quadrupled it, or increased it to 7% or 8% without spending a single penny more, we would already be in a different position. For that, however, it takes genuine political will and government directives.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you, sir. Your speaking time is up.

Does anybody think journalism would have a dearth of advertising dollars right now if organizations could gather as much personal, specific information about each one of its viewers, readers or listeners as they wanted? I'll leave that as a rhetorical question for now.

Mr. Lemire, welcome you back to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. I believe you will be asking questions on behalf of the Bloc Québécois. You have the floor for five minutes.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair. I will ask the first question and then give my colleague Mr. Champoux the opportunity to ask the remaining questions.

Firstly, Mr. Ranger and Mr. Côté, thank you for joining us, as well as all the other witnesses. I believe it is important to preserve community media, French-language media, regional media and independent media. That needs to be said.

I also feel compelled to endorse what you have said about the reality of Abitibi–Témiscamingue. I believe I am one of the elected representatives in my region with the strongest media presence. As such, I have noticed that the number of interview requests from CBC/Radio-Canada has fallen significantly over the past year, particularly during the election campaign. In my view, this campaign—and I have made this clear to them—was rather problematic from the perspective of accountability and democracy.

That said, RNC Media plays a fundamental role, but it is fragile. There is an urgent need for action, within an independent model. Moreover, you have mentioned your challenges. I want to expand on what has just been described. Since Facebook removed news from its platforms, it has been flooded with fake news. Alternative media outlets have moved onto social media. Consequently, this has reduced the discoverability of your content.

Can you tell us about this situation, particularly in relation to the diversity of information? How can we save regional news, which is absolutely fundamental for a region like Abitibi–Témiscamingue?

If my region no longer has access to your content, I fear it will cease to exist. It is already difficult to put it on the map in the vastness of Quebec and Canada.

In short, I thank you for being here on behalf of RNC Media, but the situation is urgent and action must be taken.

[Robert Ranger]

It’s true that the situation with Facebook was critical for us, because we had a significant number of followers.

How many followers did we have in Gatineau, Mr. Côté?

[Sébastien Côté]

These were the most popular local pages before they were removed.

[Robert Ranger]

In Abitibi, a region with a population of 140,000, we had 60,000 followers.

We certainly tried to sit down with Meta representatives to negotiate. We sent them a notice of negotiation. As Mr. Chartier said, it was a flat refusal. They believe the law does not apply to them, so they just go home.

I think that’s a shame, because, under our business model, we need to track our viewers and listeners to continue providing our essential service to these people. Nowadays, content is consumed on mobile phones and social media. I was in Puerto Vallarta when the cartel blew up some cars. I saw just how much misleading information there was. Honestly, it was absurd. We were watching the local news on TV and the news posted on Facebook, and they were completely at odds with each other. Everything was designed to generate clicks and create anxiety among the public. For example, it was claimed that on Monday evening at 5 p.m., the cartel would attack the hotels, that a plane was on fire on the tarmac, or that there was a sniper at the airport. None of these things were true. The little artificial intelligence icon was at the top of the posts, but it was barely visible. For their part, the local media were doing a good job.

The Facebook platform has become a conduit or distribution channel for our news, and people would like to have access to this information there. We wanted to negotiate with the people at Meta, but they said no. We then filed an application under part 1 of the CRTC’s rules, but the CRTC told us it had no jurisdiction in this matter. We will continue to fight, because it is important for us to be on these platforms. At the moment, Facebook is the most important platform, Instagram is there too, and our access is blocked on both of them.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Earlier, Ms. Simard, we joked a little about this, but I think the list of suggestions and recommendations you’ve made are actually very serious. Put simply, if we really wanted to help regional news media and save them, there are accessible solutions that would be easy to implement.

For example, there is the well-known tax credit that already applies to print media and which could also apply to electronic media and the radio and television sectors.

We could also resolve the ILNF issue. The solution exists: You propose monthly support of $1.5 million until contributions from the digital giants come through.

We could also discuss the tax exemption granted for advertising purchases on foreign platforms, which is a complete absurdity that should have been rectified long ago.

We could also encourage the government to commit to investing more in advertising in regional media.

I don’t know if I’m forgetting anything, but there are surely other solutions.

Do you think that, if only these solutions were implemented, you would be able to save regional news media?

[Robert Ranger]

The obvious answer is yes.

Basically, we don’t need all that. All we’re asking for is to be recognized as an essential service and to receive funding that will allow us to continue our mission. Indeed, for us, it is a mission.