Canadian Heritage Committee on May 5th, 2026

[Francis Bilodeau]

Thank you. It's an interesting question. Again, a lot of governments are grappling with the realities of AI. It is part of industries, and it creates both opportunities and specific challenges.

With regard to AI in the cultural industries, as I believe you know, we've started more robust engagement with AI and the potential impact on the industries, including this: What does that mean with regard to regimes around copyright? How should we be thinking about them, both in how AI systems can ingest copyrighted or copyrightable materials and in how they might be used in production? To that end, we recently had a consultation and a summit, in Banff, to hear and to engage with those in the cultural industries about what that means for their own industry. However, it was also to try to bring together people who are from the AI industry, who are innovating in that space, with cultural creators, so that they can identify and start to think about how the industry will evolve and what benefits can be drawn from it.

There are very real potential upsides, but there are also industries that are being profoundly changed in how they're structured, including the revenue streams around those. Those are fundamental questions, I think, for us, but also for governments around the world.

Blair has done a lot of work in that space and was at the summit.

I don't know if there's anything you would like to add to that.

[Blair McMurren]

You were an active participant at the summit. You heard some of the discourse and debate about this. It is live debate in terms of the legislative piece. That debate will continue but, in the meantime, as the deputy said, there are some very compelling sets of practices emerging. You might recall that MusicAI was at the summit, talking about how they use AI themselves to police the infringement of copyright and to build a service that can help artists navigate the current complexities.

We think examples like that are great. If there were opportunities to help support that form of creative technology, that could be a useful role for government, at the same time as we look to the legislative and regulatory piece, which is also our responsibility, of course.

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

One question we've asked, about AI in general, is about the adoption. In Canada, we talk about people being comfortable with adopting it. With my being on this committee, I can't help but think that, if we want adoption in general by the public, it would help if we had the confidence of artists. Right now, I don't feel like we have the confidence of artists, judging by what we heard in the committee, and particularly when they're worried about having their intellectual property and some of their fundamental economic levers, as businesses, potentially compromised.

How do you see the relationship between public trust and cultural/artistic trust? I think there's a connection there.

[Francis Bilodeau]

In many ways, artists shape our identity and create pieces that are public. As you flagged, the challenges there are around issues of copyright, licensing, and whether or not there's recognition and transparency when something that's been created by an artist is used in the training and then the subsequent creation of product by AI.

Topics that are under consideration are things like clear identification of what's been done by AI versus an individual, clear issues around how you build and advance licensing rights, conversations about copyright and the recognition of what is or is not copyrightable. There are active debates. Those are exactly the issues we're engaging in, with the artists and cultural industries, to try to think how we can build out a regime that supports creation within culture and arts in Canada; maintains that capacity; and is reflective of the changing potential economic dynamics that are brought about, not just by AI specifically but digital as well.

There is an analogy between what's happening in the AI space and digital, where the structures and economics of sectors...and they're not all the same. The music sector will not be the same as the visual arts sector, which will not be the same as the performing arts sector, as examples. How each of these is being impacted by digital and AI is, I think, core to what we are currently engaging in and discussing, and Parliament will be engaging in and discussing.

In a way, online news and online streaming, both pieces of legislation, were an initial step forward in creating a regulatory environment that attempts to deal with the digital realities facing some of our sectors that are being transformed by digital technologies. However, the dialogue, the engagement and thinking through the policy are things we'll welcome from this committee, but they are also things the department is advancing.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you.

We now go to Mr. Champoux for two and a half minutes.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We talked about AI. We also talked about young people's access to social media, misinformation and disinformation. The digital citizen contribution program is a tool to counter disinformation, increase digital literacy, and help Quebeckers and Canadians become better digital citizens. Nevertheless, the government made major cuts to the program. I wonder why. Did the program get the job done, meaning we're all social media and Internet wizards now, or did the money go to something else?

Why were the cuts made? What steps is the department taking?

[Joëlle Montminy]

We did indeed make progress. In our view, the program helped move things forward. It mobilized civil society to think about ways to counter disinformation and create a favourable environment for young people to develop those skills. We know of countries that are doing a good job of that within the school system. We initially created the program to start that conversation by issuing calls for proposals to support research projects. They are available on our website.

That said, we are currently considering our approach. Instead of continuing to do the same thing and hand out grants and contributions for individual research projects as we've been doing for a number of years, we are thinking about next steps. How do we encourage people to keep acquiring the right tools and support their efforts to counter disinformation?

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I'm going to switch topics.

Neither the government's fall budget nor its economic update leave much room for certain parts of the cultural sector. Cultural groups are very concerned about that, since they were expecting to see more support. They're seeing the opposite, with programs being cut and responses to funding applications being delayed.

In the face of that reaction, how do you respond to cultural industries, particularly Quebec's, which I have more contact with? They're very worried and concerned—and rightly so—about what they see as the federal government's withdrawal from support for culture.

[Francis Bilodeau]

I don't necessarily agree with the idea that significant cuts to culture were made. There were major reinvestments in 2025, even as budgets were being cut government-wide. There were actually considerable investments in the Canada Media Fund, the Canada music fund and the Canada periodical fund, in addition to reinvestments. In that regard, I'm not sure I agree with the idea that funding was cut. In fact, I think funding support for culture remains fairly strong. As far as the main estimates for our department are concerned, we are at $1.9 billion.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

All the people in theatre, performing arts and entertainment broadcasting who desperately needed financial help have been completely overlooked. Yes, it's true that the production and audiovisual sector saw investments, but entertainment broadcasters, small theatre producers and small event halls feel totally forgotten. They are the very foundation of our system, our cultural ecosystem.

[Joëlle Montminy]

Of course there is always more to do. We realize that help is really needed across the ecosystem. You mentioned sectors that continue to argue that they need more help. That is something we will keep working on.

However, as the deputy minister said, the 2025 budget did contain some rather sizable investments, despite a very difficult economic context.

In addition, our department was somewhat spared in the government-wide cost-cutting measures, precisely to protect our funding.

As for last year and next year, I think we're well positioned to keep supporting the sector and ecosystem.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

How much time do I have left, Madam Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

You ran out of time a while ago, Mr. Champoux.

We have two members left, and then we have to vote on the main estimates.

We now go to Mr. Généreux for three minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Before I get to my questions, I'd like to know something. Mr. Bilodeau, can you provide the committee with the Statistics Canada report you paid $70,000 for?

[Francis Bilodeau]

Of course. We will follow up with the committee.

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

Thank you very much.

I want to follow up on the questions about Bill C‑18. You admitted that there were fewer media businesses now than there were before Bill C‑18 was passed. In the end, it didn't fulfill the commitment to keep Canada's entire journalism ecosystem intact. We know that many media organizations are in dire straits.

What is your department's advertising budget? Where do you spend the money? Do you have the answers to my questions?

Earlier, I told the minister to lead by example. If your department doesn't lead by example, how can we ask private businesses to do that in Canada?

[Francis Bilodeau]

Our department's advertising budget for 2025‑26 was $709,000.

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

How much of that was spent in Canada and how much went to GAFAM?

[Francis Bilodeau]

About $100,000 went to GAFAM.

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

If I understand correctly, then, $600,000 was spent in Canada.

[Francis Bilodeau]

I can't confirm that the remainder in its entirety was spent in Canada. I can get back to you with those details later.

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

All right.

For the entire government, it's $80 million, I believe, and the vast majority of that was spent outside Canada. I don't think I'm wrong, then, but I'll wait for the detailed information from you.

[Francis Bilodeau]

Yes, it's about $80 million, but it's not under our control. It's actually administered centrally by the Privy Council Office.

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

The minister talks about social cohesion. We can debate the terminology, but the reality is that many local media organizations aren't seeing any of the federal money that is going to the media. That is the observation we consistently heard from witnesses.

I imagine you follow our proceedings regularly. What do you think of the comments we've heard from witnesses on the subject thus far?

[Francis Bilodeau]

We are definitely very aware of the comments that were made regarding media spending. The department is examining those issues, and we will support the government if it decides to go in one direction or the other.

It's not something our department is responsible for, however. We can comment on the implementation.

In short, it's an issue we are aware of.