Information & Ethics Committee on May 7th, 2024

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Ms. Khalid.

Gentlemen, thank you for being here today.

Before I let you go, I do have a question. I'm going to pose this question to all three of you, but I'm going to direct it first at Mr. Frank. It dealt with your comment earlier in your testimony about trusted, credible sources of news being lost.

There was a time, Mr. Frank—and all of you know—that trusted news sources, whether it was anchor people or news people, were the go-to places for trusted sources. Now with social media, the difficulty is in finding those trusted sources.

It's even more difficult now, because there's a standoff going on right now—I'm sure you're all aware—between Facebook and the government as it relates to Bill C-18. Facebook, for many Canadians, is a source of information, but they have made the decision that they're not going to allow the sharing of links on their platform from dailies like The Globe and Mail and others. Paywall notwithstanding, I'm interested in hearing from each of you how this situation is playing out to allow further disinformation or misinformation—I call it lies—to be propagated on social media without access to these credible sources for all this information that is clearly fact-checked, that is clearly vetted through legal departments. If that information is not available on Facebook, how much impact does that have on people's abilities to get the right information?

I'll start with you, Mr. Frank, and then I will work around to Mr. Loewen and Mr. Al-Rawi.

[Dr. Richard Frank]

This is a serious question. A lot of people think that anything they see on social media is true and trustworthy. I think that educating them and saying that this is not a vetted, independent, neutral source is one of the solutions to this.

Newspapers are edited. They are fact-checked. We need to highlight other sources that are also neutral, fact-checked and edited, and we need to know that people understand the difference between the two.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you.

Again, I'm talking specifically as it relates to Facebook's decision to not allow links to these sources of information on their platform, so maybe think about that.

I'm going to go to Mr. Loewen next and ask if he can answer the question for me.

[Peter Loewen]

Yes, Mr. Brassard. Our research group has a little paper on this, which I'll send to the committee, on what happened after the Facebook link ban.

The one consequence to this is that people still feel like they're getting their news on Facebook when you ask them about this. They're not accessing news stories, but they are learning about politics from Facebook. Some news stories do creep through, but they're really learning about politics from there, so they're learning about it, then, logically, in a more content-free way.

If I could say one more thing, Mr. Brassard, it is that the biggest and most important loss in journalism in our country has been the loss of local newspapers. I think all of you who are members of long standing would know that what was reported on you in your local paper really mattered, because people in the constituency would read about what you did. In the Toronto Star, nobody writes about what you do back in your constituency. That loss of local journalism is the thing that in the long term will be devastating to our democracy.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Loewen.

Go ahead, Mr. Al-Rawi.

[Dr. Ahmed Al-Rawi]

Thank you, MP Brassard, for the question.

I think that if we look at the previous surveys and studies, we see a very clear decline in trust in mainstream media. There are many reasons for that, including the failings of some reporting about events around the world.

Of course, we had social media emerging about a decade ago and prompting people to consume more news from there, and people got used to that. It's a big challenge that we have today following Facebook's decision to ban news outlets on this platform, because people got used to the news from Facebook, but now suddenly they are exposed to other sources. That's the main challenge that we have today.

If I may just mention one thing, exposure doesn't mean impact or effect, and it doesn't mean that if I am exposed to misinformation I will be directly impacted by it. It's really important to make that distinction. We are not like sponges, just observing everything we get and immediately being influenced by it. We have different backgrounds, different ideologies, and of course different thoughts, so it's really useful to be more nuanced when we talk about this.

Finally, I don't think TikTok is the problem. I think we have other major problems that we face today when it comes to the information ecosystem.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Al-Rawi.

Lastly, Mr. Frank, do you have anything you'd like to add, or did you say what you needed to say?

[Dr. Richard Frank]

I did, more or less, but I completely agree with others that trusting social media as a viable news source is what is causing the problem.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, gentlemen.

On behalf of the committee and on behalf of Canadians, I want to thank you for your testimony before the committee in this very important study. Thank you for taking the time out of your day to share your expertise and your information with the committee members.

I'm going to dismiss the witnesses.

We are going to move into some committee business. There are a few items that I need to discuss, and I apologize.

First of all, some of the witnesses we had scheduled for today had to cancel. That's the reason we had only one hour with witnesses today. Invitations to reschedule the other witnesses' appearances have been sent for May 21. We're working on that. Unless members have a desire to extend this study on disinformation and misinformation, we can do that, but I know we have our final hour set up on Thursday afternoon. We have a witness list, and the notice of the meeting will be sent out after this meeting.

Ms. Damoff, I saw your hand. Go ahead, but I have some other things that I have to discuss as well.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

It is on the comment about extending the study, because I was actually going to make that suggestion today, Chair. You have mentioned a number of the witnesses who have come forward with with information for us and how interesting it is and that we just don't have enough time. I do think we should spend more time on this. I think it's an important study that we're doing.

If you need a motion for it, I would do that, however you would like to proceed, but I do think it makes sense to extend it.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Can I get you to hold off on that thought for a second?

The scheduling of our committee meetings is really tight right now. Let me explain why.

As I mentioned last week, we received a letter from the RCMP with respect to SNC-Lavalin. The information that was supplied by Mr. Wernick has now been received. It was left was for the committee to determine whether we were going to have an additional meeting based on the information we received from the RCMP or Mr. Wernick, as well as perhaps asking the Privy Council Office for more information if there wasn't satisfaction with the information provided by Mr. Wernick.

We decided in the motion that we were going to deal with that within 14 days of receiving that information, and we're in that period right now. We don't have to think about it and we don't have to determine it right now, because I realize the information was just recently passed on to committee members, but I want you to think about where we'll go with this, if anywhere. We have to have that discussion at some point within 14 days.

The other thing that's happening is that because of the 23rd and the plan to visit the RCMP, we're not going to have a meeting. That takes away one meeting for us.

Those are some of the challenges we're having with scheduling.

The other thing we have to deal with is the study on the use of technological tools and data. It's been indicated by the analysts that you will receive the draft a week from Friday, so we are going to have to make time for that. The report, as it stands in draft right now, is about 50 pages long, and there are roughly 14 recommendations. That may take some time to deal with.

I have asked the clerk to look at some deviation opportunities for us to have additional meetings. In order for us to conclude our work before the session ends, we may have to do that.

I just want you to keep that in mind, because after Thursday, we're starting our study on the Winnipeg lab and Mr. Villemure's motion that was passed by the committee. I want you to keep that in mind, Ms. Damoff.

We're going to have to find time for more meetings. We can certainly hold off until the fall if we need to, or we can do that now. That's up to the committee.

Mr. Barrett, go ahead, sir.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Chair, I'll give notice of a motion that I'd like to move.

It reads, “That pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(h) and in light of new media reports, the committee undertake an immediate study into Minister Randy Boissonnault’s allegations of fraud and contravention of ethics and lobbying laws; that the committee invite Minister Randy Boissonnault for three hours; Kirsten Poon, Stephen Anderson of Global Health Imports, and the Ethics Commissioner to testify individually, in addition to any other relevant witnesses; and that the committee report its findings to the House.”

If I may, Chair, I'll speak to it.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

You have the floor. You moved the motion, and the motion's in order. Go ahead, Mr. Barrett.

I have Mr. Fisher right after you.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I have a point of order. I'm only saying this out of procedural fairness.

Ms. Damoff moved a motion that you asked to set aside. We then went into a roundabout discussion about the schedule, and now we're sitting here with a motion that you've considered to be duly put by the Conservative side.

I don't have a horse in this game, but I'm just saying that from the outside looking in, it looks a bit suspect, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Well, it wasn't suspect.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I'm just saying what it looks like.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

I saw Mr. Barrett's hand up.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

You know it could come off—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Yes, we were discussing it. You're quite right. I thought I'd explain, but I didn't see any indication that Ms. Damoff wanted to go again.

You know what? You're quite right, Mr. Green, so I am going to go back.

I'm going to come back to you right afterward, Mr. Barrett, but I'm going to go to Ms. Damoff right now.

Go ahead.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

I appreciate the context you gave. I was hoping committee members might want to have some discussion.

As I said to you, I'll put a motion on the floor, if we want to officially do it that way. I thought it would be more of a casual conversation, but I'll put a motion on the floor: I move that we extend the current misinformation and disinformation study by three meetings.

I will say, Chair, I appreciate your laying out what we have before us, but having said that, I think the Canada-China committee finished a study on the Winnipeg lab, so I don't know if that's a high priority for us to get to before the end of June. I don't see any reason, when we've started this study on misinformation and disinformation, that we can't add those extra meetings to our schedule before we move on to something else.

I will formally put that motion on the floor, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

The motion is to extend by three meetings. Is that correct?

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

That's correct.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Okay. That's fine.

I will go to Ms. Damoff's motion to extend it to three meetings.

Go ahead—

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

I have a point of order, Chair.