Canadian Heritage Committee on May 5th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

We're over time, so give a quick answer, please.

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

I will simply say two things. We did change the funding parameters after the incident with Mr. Marouf. It is disappointing not to see the same results; I will agree with you. Perhaps we have been able to prevent other types of funding.

As regards the StatsCan issue, this is news to me. I'm glad to provide a supplementary answer in the future, but I don't have anything additional to support an answer today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you.

Before I turn the floor over to Ms. Auguste, I have a question from a stakeholder from the Woodlands Cultural Centre, a Six Nations museum in Brantford. I'm sure you're familiar with it.

They're wondering about your department's plans to complete the review of the federal museum policy. I believe it was last updated in the 1990s. They're wondering how the plan will align with UNDRIP.

We know that this committee has heard about some of the challenges of repatriation of first nations items and sacred artifacts, so give us a general overview, if you wouldn't mind, sir.

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

Thanks, Chair.

Any repatriation of indigenous artifacts, whether inside Canada, to communities, or outside Canada, to proper holding and then to communities themselves, is a multi-year process. Given the sensitivity of the issue and the sheer number of artifacts involved and identifying them across institutions, with every cultural minister that I've spoken to, including my colleague in France, I've highlighted the concern that many indigenous groups are seeking to repatriate some of their items, often a great number of which are considered sacred and not treated in the sacred context that is due to them.

My question about the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is whether the museum policy itself is the proper space for a repatriation policy, because we're not talking about bringing them back to museums; we're talking about bringing these sacred things that never should have been in museums in the first place to areas of the country that don't have the facilities to house them properly or may not necessarily have the protocols and the relationships ready to do that.

I think that's why there is more reflection to be done about how that gets articulated. There was a member who advanced a private member's bill many years ago that never got royal assent, or may have died on the order paper, specifically dealing with repatriation of artifacts. That is one solution. Maybe a stand-alone law is the way to make sure we are doing this right as opposed to simply modifying a museum policy and calling it a day. There are much better ways to do this.

This will require funds and the support of the Government of Canada. We've supported some of the repatriation from the Vatican, but that's only a very small part of the story.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you for your thoughtfulness.

Ms. Auguste, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Tatiana Auguste, Liberal, Terrebonne, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I'd like to thank the minister and all the other witnesses for joining us.

I'd like to talk about the Canada Strong pass, which—over the summer alone—generated $60 billion in economic benefits and also enabled, as you mentioned, nearly 500,000 young people to travel across Canada. In my community of Terrebonne, many young people told me that this allowed them to broaden their horizons and visit Canada.

Could you tell me about the value of such a program for you and your department?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

In the current climate, many people are wary of visiting the United States, largely because of the way that country behaves. We all know the situation—I won't talk about the 51st state, because we’re all fed up with that discussion. The reality is that people are opting out of the United States as a tourist destination. So they’re turning to Canada, which has so much for them to explore—including our national museums and our great parks. The pass gives them the opportunity to enjoy our national parks at a low cost and to travel on Via Rail trains, among other things. It’s wonderful, when the trains are on time, of course. The pass also gives them the chance to enjoy our national museums.

The results are clear. This winter, we renewed the program so that young people could visit museums. I was at the Canada Aviation and Space Museum here in Ottawa to see young people taking advantage of this pass. They can also enjoy other major national museums that define our beautiful country and are a source of pride. It’s great that young people can enjoy them. There’s no better way to get young people away from their iPhones than to take them to a museum so they can discover all that is beautiful and defines us as Canadians.

[Tatiana Auguste, Liberal, Terrebonne, QC]

Thank you very much.

My second question has to do with official languages.

In Quebec, we're fortunate to be a community that's predominantly francophone. We're always looking at things from the perspective of protecting the French language, but I also think we're somewhat seen as francophiles. In other words, we want to promote the French language elsewhere and in francophone minority communities.

I would like to hear how your department promotes French, not only in Quebec, but also in francophone minority communities across Canada.

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

First, we are talking about 10 million French speakers. While my responsibility in Quebec is shared with the Quebec government, I also have a responsibility toward minority language communities, and I most often speak about francophone communities outside Quebec.

The bilingualism strategy, which has a $4 billion budget, allows small communities to benefit from our programs to ensure that people have access to services in their language.

Meanwhile, a Senate committee is currently studying the overhaul of the regulatory framework for businesses under federal jurisdiction. That involves francophones' right to receive services in their language. The regulatory framework will immediately affect our responsibilities in Quebec and will be implemented two years later in minority communities, whether in French-speaking Ontario, Acadia, or other small communities across the country.

We are therefore assuming our responsibility and doing what we must do—although we have not necessarily always done it well.

I'd also like to mention the billions of dollars allocated for integrating newcomers, especially in light of the new 12% goal for francophone immigrants. These newcomers will be welcomed primarily into small communities, given that Quebec controls its own permanent immigration. Therefore, integration implies a responsibility to ensure that services are provided in French. I am thinking more specifically of education and health care services.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Ms. Auguste, if you don’t mind, I’m going to call on the next speaker now, since it’s almost noon.

Mr. Champoux, you have two and a half minutes, after which our time with the minister will be up.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I’m pleased to have the opportunity to speak again, since it allows me to clarify something the minister said earlier regarding Via Rail delays. I am a regular Via Rail user. I love Via's services. When there are delays, most of the time it’s because of Canadian National. That’s another issue—which might be better discussed by another committee—but it’s still very important, and frankly, everyone would benefit from a more reliable passenger rail service.

Again, I’m pleased to have one last question for you. I’m straying a bit from today’s topic, but it’s an issue that could be relevant to this committee.

Recently, we conducted a study on the effects of social media on children and adolescents. The report from this study is highly anticipated. Many people believe that access to social media for young people should be restricted or banned—some propose the age of 16—as is the case in other countries. During our study, whose report will be released shortly, we heard thought-provoking arguments regarding a blanket ban on social media access for young people.

Following a convention you held in Montreal during the April by-election, rumour had it that the government was preparing to introduce legislation to that effect.

Do you think a bill regarding young people’s access to social media will be introduced? Will this fall under your department's purview? Where do things stand on this? Can you provide further details?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

That's a shame, because I wanted to talk to you about the Drummondville Poutine Festival, which we support. I certainly hope to see you there.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I’ll be expecting you. I’ll show you around the poutine vendors, and we’ll listen to The Offspring and other Quebec artists performing this year.

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

I believe that as a federal government, we must take action. Frankly, we have no choice when we see the harm being done, especially to young people. It’s not limited to young people, but as a father and a minister, I have a responsibility to ensure we’re doing the right thing for our youth. We know the impact. The science is increasingly clear regarding the effects of social media and screen time, especially on younger children. We’re talking about brains that aren’t fully developed yet.

We must take action. If an age limit is to be imposed, it must be part of a broader strategy. We know the system is porous. Even if we restrict access, people can get around it fairly easily. Australia has shown us the results—it doesn’t work perfectly.

However, such a measure must be part of a bill aimed at harm reduction—specifically, reducing the most serious harms—while respecting freedom of expression.

In my view, such a measure should be implemented as soon as possible, but there is still work to be done before anything can be proposed.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I sincerely hope that, when this bill is introduced, the government will engage in a broad conversation and also listen to proposals from opposition parties, as this is a responsibility we all share. I hope you will also bear in mind the feedback we received during the study our committee recently completed. This is a very important issue. I have reservations, but I agree that we absolutely must take action. It is extremely important to act quickly, as you said. I hope this will be done with a great deal of openness and that a variety of opinions can be taken into account. I hope this will not be done solely in response to a public outcry demanding that we take a firm stance and simply ban access.

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

It is precisely because I have deep respect for my colleagues in the House, regardless of political affiliation, that I have not spoken out more publicly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you, Minister.

I will suspend the meeting for a few minutes while the minister leaves. We will then have about an hour with officials.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

I call the meeting back to order.

I believe Mr. Lawton is up next to ask questions of our officials.

You have the floor now for five minutes.

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

Thank you very much.

I will be asking questions about Bill C-18. I'm not sure who is the best suited to answer them.

I want to delve into whether this is actually living up to its stated purpose, which was to provide something of a lifeline to media in this country. Who is paying into the pot, so to speak? Who is actually funding this project so far?

[Francis Bilodeau, Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage]

I think the minister mentioned that, at this point, the potential funders are a combination of Google and Facebook. Google has paid into the fund.

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

You said potentially funded, but it's just Google that's actually paying into it.

[Francis Bilodeau]

It's Google at this point.

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

Of that, 7%, as I understand it, is going to the CBC. Is that correct?

[Francis Bilodeau]

That's correct.

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

How much of that is going to larger media outlets?