Industry Committee on Oct. 3rd, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Mr. Sheehan.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much for the motion.

Of course, the information is being discerned right now and will be debated in the House, so what I'm saying is perhaps we do it later but not right now.

I can't support it right now, but at some point in time we'll be taking a look at various aspects of the new USMCA.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you.

Mr. Jowhari.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I move to adjourn the debate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

That's non-debatable, so we'll go to a vote for that.

[Rémi Massé, Liberal, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Really?

I don't think that's—

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

It's non-debatable.

I don't understand what the concern is. It's non-debatable, so we go to a vote on that.

[Michael Chong, Wellington—Halton Hills, CPC]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, having chaired House of Commons committees before, my recollection of a dilatory motion is to adjourn the committee, not to adjourn debate.

I never recall a situation where a member of a committee was permitted to move a motion to adjourn debate on a motion. That would be considered a dilatory motion.

My understanding that adjourning a committee is non-debatable, it being a dilatory motion, but not to adjourn debate on a motion in front of the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

It is a dilatory motion. This has happened in our committee on numerous occasions.

We don't adjourn the committee. We adjourn debate on that motion, and that's what was called. It is non-debatable.

If you'd like, the clerk can explain that to you.

Mr. Masse.

[Rémi Massé, Liberal, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

For clarification, technically I suppose it might be right, but that would be breaking from the more collegial approach at this committee. The Liberals want to shut down even the interest of allowing people to have an intervention.

Perhaps you might be right on the technical aspect of it, but it clearly sends a message to members like me, who can't even participate for a moment in something that is put on the table.

Perhaps you will be ruling in favour of this, but it is a technical thing. It's certainly counter to the history of this committee and what we've worked towards.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Mr. Masse, I would agree.

I think part of the challenge is that we have witnesses in front of us with very limited time because of the votes. There has not been a vote to shut this down.

As Mr. Sheehan said, there is not adequate time today to debate that.

Again, we do have witnesses in front of us with limited time.

We've always tried to operate in a collegial way, and I want to make sure that you have your time with the witnesses as well.

It is a non-debatable motion.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, it is my understanding that we can bring this debate up at the next meeting when we have more time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

You certainly may.

There are two choices here: you either vote the motion down and it's done—that's it; it's over—or you bring it up again in the future.

From what I'm understanding, there's not a desire, because of our lack of time, to have a substantive debate about this.

[Rémi Massé, Liberal, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Sorry, Mr. Chair, I have just one last quick question.

Even though I have an amendment to the motion, I cannot put an amendment to the motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

I go by the hands that go up, so whoever has the floor.

[Rémi Massé, Liberal, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

I just want to make sure that's clear with everybody. We are going to go to a vote.

[Rémi Massé, Liberal, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Can I ask for a recorded vote?

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Fair enough.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 5; nays 4)

I will ask if you can keep...because I do want to make sure that Mr. Masse gets his time.

[Dan Albas]

I appreciate that, Mr. Chair.

I will just go straight to the Entertainment Software Association of Canada.

Video streaming is a huge market right now. We see twitch streamers getting viewer numbers that many TV shows would be envious of. Streamers are making money from playing a copyrighted work; however, they're also showing potential customers the work. How does the video game industry see streaming? Is it free advertising or do you believe it's copyright infringement?

[Jayson Hilchie]

The answer is that each company that has its content being streamed online has different policies with respect to that. Some actually partner with the streamers in order to partner in the revenue that comes from the advertising revenue that comes from that channel. Others flat out ban it, and others encourage it, as you say, because it does promote the game. You're right in that it is the copyright-protected property of the companies, but each one has its own policy for it.

[Dan Albas]

What is your policy on streaming of the games, as an organization?

[Jayson Hilchie]

My policy on streaming of games with respect to—

[Dan Albas]

Do you believe that the current act's provisions allow for fair use of that copyrighted material, or is it something that your members haven't given you your marching orders on?

[Jayson Hilchie]

Well, as I said, each member has its own policies with respect to the streaming of the TV—