Information & Ethics Committee on Oct. 1st, 2024

[Benjamin Fung]

For those fact-checking centres, there are two groups of people.

One is “information professionals and social scientists”. They try to analyze the tactics and the technological advancements used by those people who spread the disinformation. Then, by understanding that, we can prevent the next wave of disinformation.

Another group of people are grassroots citizens. They share the workload from the information professionals because of the large amount of information they receive. Also, they have the social networks to spread the information back to society, so that is also very important.

By doing these things, it also gains the trust of the general public because they know they can participate in this process.

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

Thank you very much.

Mr. Bateman, would you like to comment on that as well?

[Jon Bateman]

Sure. Of all the ways that have been proposed for countering disinformation, fact-checking is probably the one that's been most studied. There are very many studies of fact-checking initiatives, and the general finding is that they do work to an extent. They particularly work on correcting factual beliefs. That corrective effect is not necessarily enduring over time, and it does not necessarily change the attitudes or the behaviours that then result from that belief. For example, you might learn that a certain policy is based on a factual error, but you might still continue to support that policy.

There are hundreds of fact-checking initiatives worldwide that are to be commended and supported. In many countries, fact-checking itself has become the source of partisan controversy. I think fact-checking is promising and should be continued. I also worry that its effectiveness could be degraded over time as it's the victim of partisan mudslinging.

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

Thank you.

I appreciate that, Mr. Bateman, because that is one of the major concerns where people, like a lot of my constituents, have just stopped listening to news, stopped reading news, because they just can't distinguish what is true and what is not true anymore. It just, I think, hurts our democratic process when we see parliamentarians actively leveraging that disdain towards news.

I have one more question that I'll ask both of you. I'll start with Mr. Fung.

What role do you think social media companies have to play in distinguishing between what is foreign interference, what is influence and what is advocacy? There is a distinction and I think that people have a difficult time, especially Canadians, in trying to understand what the distinction is between the three.

[Benjamin Fung]

For the social media companies, they definitely have the responsibility and capability to differentiate these different activities because they own all the data. Even the government will not see that piece of information. By using AI and the more recent data-mining technologies, they have ways to differentiate them.

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

Mr. Bateman, would you like to comment as well.

[Jon Bateman]

I do agree that both government and platforms have a piece of the puzzle. Platforms have extraordinary insight into on-platform activity, including non-public activity. Governments can have extraordinary insight into some non-platform activity, such as if they can intercept communications or embed human agents in these foreign intelligence services.

For better or worse, platforms have been allowed to and been left to develop their own rules set around what is considered acceptable and unacceptable on their platforms, so each platform has taken a slightly different approach. They have a different language. Some of them are almost quasi-judicial processes. Others are much more freewheeling.

I don't know that there's an effort to standardize all of this, but I do think good communication between government and platforms is essential.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Bateman. We did go over time there.

I want to thank both our guests for being here today.

I see you, Mr. Barrett.

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

Chair, I also have my hand raised.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

That's fine. I see Monsieur Villemure as well. We'll go to Mr. Barrett first, then Ms. Khalid and then we'll go to Monsieur Villemure.

I want to thank both our guests for being here today. I appreciate your input on this valuable study that the committee is doing. Thank you both for being here today.

We are now moving to committee business.

First of all, before I go to Mr. Barrett, what I want to do is just update the committee on some of my and Monsieur Villemure's actions.

Last Friday, we met with Věra Jourová of the European Union. We also met with Ambassador-designate Geneviève Tuts, and we had a very good meeting.

I thought, Monsieur Villemure, that we talked a lot about the current study that we're undertaking and what the European Union has done to mitigate some of the issues with respect to that. We got into some other subjects, but it was a very good meeting.

I want to update the committee on a couple of things as they relate to meetings that are upcoming. We are still trying to get witnesses for Thursday. If you recall, the committee asked for an extension of up to three meetings; we have two meetings left. I didn't count last week's meeting with the previous guests that we had technological problems with. I didn't count that as one of those extras because, if you recall, we had votes and we had technology issues. We invited them back, so I haven't included that. Effectively, we have two meetings left. We're still working on witnesses for Thursday, but we're getting down to a late hour to get witnesses here.

I will tell you that invitations have been sent out for October 8. We have confirmation on at least one of our witnesses. We're still waiting for several others. Again, to try to find that balance, we're trying to find one Liberal and one CPC witness.

We have sent out invitations to social media companies for October 10 and have asked them to come that day. Typically social media companies like going through government relations. They go through various executives before they commit to coming to committee, but I know that the clerk has been on them. We will continue to be on them to have not only social media but also mainstream media come before the committee on October 10.

I see the clerk has Ms. Shanahan and then Mr. Cooper, so we have a long list here.

I know, Monsieur Villemure, that you had a question on TikTok.

We invited representatives from TikTok to appear before the committee, and we suggested October 10 as a date.

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

Is that for this study?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

It's for disinformation and misinformation, yes. The social media companies were on the list as well.

That's my update for committee business.

I'm going to go to Mr. Barrett, followed by Ms. Khalid.

Do you have a point of order, Mr. Fisher?

[Darren Fisher, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

I was watching for hands, and Iqra's hand went up first.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Yes, well, we've been through this before. I saw Mr. Barrett's hand first, and then I saw Ms. Khalid.

[Darren Fisher, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

I just wanted to say it for the record.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you.

Mr. Barrett, go ahead, please.

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

Chair, I've given the clerk this motion:

Given that:

a. the Prime Minister recently appointed Mark Carney as the Chair of the Liberal Party's Task Force on Economic Growth;

b. Mark Carney is the chair of Brookfield Corporation, a multinational investment management company that owns Sagen, the second largest mortgage insurer in Canada;

c. on the first day of Mark Carney's appointment, the Liberal government announced major changes to the regulation of mortgage insurance in Canada, allowing for bigger and longer loans; and

d. this tremendously benefited Brookfield, evidenced by their stock price hitting a six-month high;

pursuant to Standing Order 108(1)(a), the committee call upon Mark Carney to testify before the committee within 14 days of the adoption of this motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

It's a little bit different from the motion that was on notice, but we are under committee business, so I'm going to accept that.

The only thing I need clarification on, Mr. Barrett, is the 14 days. Is that 14 calendar days or 14 business days? It's 14 calendar days, to be clear. We're going to debate it based on that.

Go ahead, Ms. Khalid.

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

Mr. Chair, if you don't mind, can we please suspend for five minutes so we can review the amended text of the motion?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

The text has been sent.

I'm going to continue with Mr. Barrett. If there's a need to suspend.... I'm sure he has something to say on this.

[Darren Fisher, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

We just want to see the changes.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

We'll let Mr. Barrett go, and then, if I need to suspend after that, I will, just to give you an opportunity to reflect on the changes, but I'm going to go to Mr. Barrett.

Go ahead, Mrs. Shanahan.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

On a point of order, I want to make sure that I'm on the list for this round.

I wanted to say something previously about welcoming Mr. Williamson, who is my former chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

That's fine. Let's get through this. I love the fact that we are welcoming each other.

Mr. Barrett, you have the floor.

I'm going to go to you and then I have a list that has Mrs. Shanahan to start. I see Mr. Cooper, as well.

Go ahead, Mr. Barrett.

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

Chair, this matter is one of great seriousness and great importance.

The Prime Minister made an announcement to have Mr. Carney take over in a role that's the de facto finance minister role—effectively holding pre-budget consultations across the country. This came on the heels, of course, of expressions from the Prime Minister's Office that they didn't have confidence in the deputy prime minister.

We have Mark Carney, who's earned the nickname “carbon tax Carney” for his affection for Justin Trudeau's price on everything. This relationship seems to have earned him the opportunity to have this job.

What's Mr. Carney getting for this job? We're told he's not being paid and that he's not being employed by the House of Commons. He's being hired by the Liberal Party. That distinction's really important because although he's advising Justin Trudeau and his government members, he doesn't fall under the conflict of interest regime by virtue of how he's been appointed.

We have Mr. Carney, who we expect will be able to see non-public information and his investment firm will stand to benefit greatly from that. If you look at the first couple of days after the announcement by the Trudeau government that they would have carbon tax Carney as the de facto finance minister, Brookfield Asset Management had a great couple of days. That's reflected in their stock price.

The first is changes to mortgage rules with Brookfield owning Sagen, which is the largest private mortgage insurer in Canada. With longer amortization periods, we're now going to see more profits for mortgage insurers and big banks like Sagen.

As an aside to that, in the face of a supply crisis, the government's response is to create more demand. That must also have been advice they got from Mr. Carney.

What's more is that within the first couple of days.... A person identified as a personal friend—a buddy—of Mark Carney's is the head of a company called Telesat. Telesat was given $2.4 billion to do something that the private sector is already able to do. The government has since made all kinds of claims that this is about national security, but the Prime Minister's remarks on the day of the event speak for themselves. I think he said it's about space and satellites and cool stuff, but it's really about connecting rural Canadians. Well, that's something we know can be done by the private sector for much less. If the idea they put forward was such a good one, we know that banks and private business would have gotten involved. Again, it's to the benefit of that elite cabal.

We then have Brookfield, in the days after this announcement, signalling that it's in talks to get 10 billion dollars' worth of Canadians' pension funds. This is terrifying. It should terrify Canadians that Justin Trudeau is trading influence and favours with his friends in exchange for the management of Canadians' pension dollars.

All of this should have been put through the lens of the Conflict of Interest Act and reviewed by Canada's Ethics Commissioner, but they've bobbed and weaved through a loophole and have appointed carbon tax Carney as an adviser to the Liberal Party for zero dollars, though we know that, as the paid head of Brookfield, he's going to benefit quite well.