Yes. I would welcome a follow-up response to that in writing. My understanding is that, in any case where Canada has recognized a genocide, the mechanism has been through Parliament. That's the appropriate mechanism to tie it to if we believe that entities involved in committing genocide shouldn't be able to transmit their genocidal propaganda into this country.
Now, it seems to me that there's an inconsistency in the way in which the government has approached the issue of disinformation from violent hostile regimes. When the government is asked in certain cases about this kind of disinformation, they have said the CRTC is independent and it should make these decisions. However, in the case of RT, the government issued a directive to the CRTC that led to the revocation of RT's licence.
The irony of this is that we know that, for instance, certain Chinese state-affiliated media are pushing disinformation specifically about Russia's invasion of Ukraine and that is showing up in Canadian broadcasting, as well as things like forced confessions obtained through torture. It seems troubling and maybe a bit convenient that, in the case of one media outlet controlled by a foreign genocidal actor, a directive has been issued, but in the case of another one that's sharing some of that same misinformation, the government says that the CRTC is independent.
Isn't it valuable for Parliament to say that there should be a consistent approach, that it shouldn't depend on whatever other factors inform this differential treatment and that there should be a consistent approach around disinformation by foreign states involved in genocide?