Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Lawrence, I was going to be somewhat complimentary of your efforts on this, but I don't think I can top the kind words from Ms. McPherson. I am now a bit more suspicious of your motives since you're being called a closet New Democrat.
In all seriousness, though, thank you for your work on this.
I want to start with a comment to respond to the very sincere and good questions from Mr. Sarai. It seems to me that, as this legislation is constructed, the government has the flexibility to define what it considers to be a prisoner of conscience. It may get questions in the context of a report about how it operationalizes that, but it does provide a significant level of flexibility, which, from the government's perspective, is probably appreciated.
On this issue of genocide recognition and whether that would apply to a state that committed a genocide at some point in the past, that question is, I think, answered quite clearly by the legislation that you've drafted. It says:
No licence shall be issued, amended or renewed under this Part in relation to a broadcasting undertaking, including one that distributes foreign programming, that is vulnerable to being influenced by a foreign national or entity
(a) that has committed
It says certain crimes. In other words, it's not about the fact that it comes from a country where genocide has been committed. It's a question of whether it is subject to the influence of an individual. Clearly this wouldn't apply to Germany, for example. Clearly this wouldn't apply to Turkey. It wouldn't apply to Rwanda. In cases where there has been a change of the individuals in charge, there's no sense in which this provision would apply.
Even if there's a certain level of political continuity, but there has been a change in the individuals involved, it likely wouldn't apply. It would seem to me that it only applies in the case where individuals have been included in the context of a genocide recognition. If those individuals also control a broadcasting entity, that would trigger this section.
I hope that answers the concern of whether this applies to Germany, Turkey or Rwanda—cases where the current government has nothing to do with the governments that were involved in genocides past—but I'd love to hear your reflections on those clarifications.