Official Languages Committee on Nov. 27th, 2025

[Simon Claus]

They invest in all areas. Like all the professionals in our industry who are experiencing the fragmentation of music listening and discovery methods, artists are investing in different channels, whether it's radio, television, platforms or social media.

All of this means that today, our industry is also under pressure and facing significant financial challenges, because much more needs to be done for revenues, which are lower.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Mr. Dalton. You used your speaking time very effectively.

I now give the floor to Ms. Mingarelli for three minutes.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, Ms. Paré and Mr. Claus.

Thank you very much for agreeing to testify before the committee today.

Some broadcasters claim that quotas lead to a decrease in listeners.

How do you respond to the argument that too many constraints could harm the very viability of French‑language music radio stations?

[Simon Claus]

Thank you for the question.

I think we’ve discussed the issue of constraint several times. We disagree with the statement that francophone music drives listeners away.

We also see that there’s flexibility. It’s not true that there isn't any. We talked about montages, and we can also discuss how francophone music is programmed.

What we notice is that francophone music is mainly broadcast when there are few listeners, particularly in the evening. We can talk about official quotas, but we can also talk about the actual exposure of our French‑language music.

We realize that, due to the way francophone music is programmed, it has less chance of being heard because it airs at times when there are fewer listeners.

We can denounce the quotas, but we can also say that there are certain manoeuvers being put in place by radio stations today to circumvent the spirit of the law.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

Thank you very much.

How does ADISQ assess the balance between programming freedom and cultural responsibility?

[Simon Claus]

In terms of programming freedom, we will not tell radio stations what to program. They are free in their programming.

What we say and what the law states, in fact, is that radio stations must make predominant use of Canadian and French‑language content in their programming, because they have a responsibility in that respect.

Broadcasting is considered to be in the public interest. It’s stated in the law. In this respect, they are accountable.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

You have 40 seconds left.

[Giovanna Mingarelli, Liberal, Prescott—Russell—Cumberland, ON]

You describe radio as a privileged space for discoverability.

How has this role evolved in the era of platforms like Spotify, TikTok and YouTube?

[Simon Claus]

Where we have platforms that are more on mass media but individualized, radio remains a tool for social synchronicity, meaning it maintains a wide reach. It continues to gather a large audience. We talked about Billie du Page earlier. We could also take the example of Roxane Bruneau, who is a bit older.

However, it can be said that it has changed the careers of many artists. It’s an acknowledgement, but it also serves as a real springboard, which other media may not necessarily provide.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you, Ms. Mingarelli.

On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank the witnesses, Ms. Paré and Mr. Claus, for being with us.

The committee will now discuss its work on the regulations. I will therefore excuse the witnesses and thank them once again.

Colleagues, we have about 20 to 25 minutes left to discuss our work regarding the regulations. To help us plan our work, I asked the clerk to distribute a calendar. She emailed it to you during our meeting, and she will also distribute it in printed form.

Once all the members have received the schedule, I will make a few comments before we start our discussion. The clerk also helped me prepare some notes regarding the process and the regulations. Finally, I am open to comments and suggestions on our approach.

If you look at the page showing the December calendar, you can see what the clerk has planned for the meetings before the Christmas break, which are meetings 14 to 17. For meetings 15 and 17, which will take place on the remaining Thursdays, the clerk indicated who will come to testify before the committee.

For meetings 14 and 16, a small change was made after printing for meeting 14, namely that witnesses are now confirmed for meeting 14 concerning the study on the quota of French‑language music. They are Cogeco and Alexis Normand. I would therefore ask you to add that to your notes. For now, that’s what’s planned.

I would like to bring up a few other points. With respect to the work that’s not on the calendar, that’s not planned, I would simply ask you to take it into account.

First, there’s the report on the education continuum. We need time to prepare it. The first step is to give our instructions to our analyst, Ms. Lecomte. We also need time to do that. It’s up to you to decide when, but it’s something you need to take into account.

Secondly, we discussed, as a committee, the fact that we would prioritize a study on the appointment of the new commissioner when that person is chosen. Obviously, they haven’t been chosen yet, but I just wanted to let you know that it’s something the committee will need to address at some point. This summarizes the schedule and the work in the immediate future.

With respect to the regulations, I just want to make sure you understand the process. The regulations were submitted yesterday, and there are 30 sitting days before the regulations are published in the Canada Gazette. This means that those 30 days will end on February 25. After that, there will be a public consultation lasting a minimum of 30 sitting days. So, at a minimum, the public consultation will end on May 6. As a committee, we can decide how many meetings we want to dedicate to the study. In fact, we can decide on the witnesses and whether we want to write a report. That decision is up to our committee.

The clerk searched to find out if there were any precedents concerning the approach to take in studying the regulations and, honestly, there aren't many for this committee.

The last time the regulations were tabled and presented to the committee was in 2018, and the committee did not review them, which means there are not many precedents. It’s really up to the committee to decide how to approach the study.

In my opinion, we need to decide together when we want to start the study, how many meetings we want to hold, which witnesses we would like to invite and whether we want to write a report at the end of this study. We must always take into account that if we want to produce a report, we need to determine whether we want to complete it before the 30 sitting days are up, namely before February 25 or May 6. It’s up to us to decide. These are questions we need to answer.

I asked the clerk to distribute the agenda. I wanted you to be informed and to know that if we start the study during the next meetings, we may need to cancel a meeting or make changes to the schedule.

I’m happy to receive your feedback.

Mr. Dechênes-Thériault has the floor next. It will then be Mr. Beaulieu, Mr. Villeneuve and Mr. Godin’s turn.

You have the floor, Mr. Deschênes.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

If you allow me, Mr. Chair, before making my comment, I would like to ask questions to clarify a few things regarding two studies.

How many sessions are left for the study on the quota of French‑language music and the study on the use of French in government communications and federal institutions?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

I will let the clerk respond to you, Mr. Deschênes-Thériault.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Madeleine Martin]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Regarding the study on the quota for French‑language music, technically, we just had to adopt a minimum number of meetings. We have reached this minimum, but we could hold other meetings if the committee wishes.

Some of the witnesses we received appeared individually in their witness group, which extended the meeting time a bit. That’s why the representative from Cogeco will come next Tuesday.

It’s at the committee’s discretion to determine what it wants to do for the study of the quota for French‑language music. If the committee is satisfied with the statements it has heard regarding this study and is ready to move on to the next step, that’s perfectly fine.

For the study on the use of French in government communications, there was still a meeting with the Commissioner of Official Languages scheduled for December 11. On December 4, the ministers are invited to appear to discuss their mandates and priorities, while possibly having an opening for the use of French in government communications.

To answer your question, Mr. Deschênes, it would be one or two meetings. Again, the committee had only agreed to a minimum number of meetings, which has been met. After that, we would need to see what you want to do.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Thank you.

Now that I have these answers, I will make a few comments.

I don’t think we should start the study on artificial intelligence before the holidays. We have a lot on our plate, and I think we should avoid spreading ourselves too thin with different tasks. It would be better to finish the current studies. I propose that we postpone the study on artificial intelligence until after the holidays, definitely.

In terms of our priorities, we should submit our comments to our analyst for the drafting of the report on the education continuum. I think we should set aside some time before the holidays to make sure we don’t lose too many weeks of work on that. I think the report on the education continuum—

[Madeleine Chenette, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

I don’t think they’re listening to you on the other side of the table.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

These proposals were also intended for them.

[Madeleine Chenette, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

That’s it. You make suggestions, but no one listens to you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

I would just like to ask the members to listen.

Please continue, Mr. Deschênes-Thériault.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

I would like to make suggestions regarding the four meetings that are planned.

I suggest that we address the issue of artificial intelligence after the holidays. Time should be reserved during the four meetings for the draft report on the education continuum. Otherwise, we will significantly delay the preparation of the report. If we want to finish this file, we need to set aside some time.

With respect to the regulations, we had agreed as a committee that it was one of our priorities. For our part, we are ready to start the study whenever the committee wishes. If you want to start the study next week, we agree. If you would like to wait, we are also okay with that. We recognize the importance of this issue, but we would like to hear your perspective on it. We are ready to start the study.

I would also like to hear my colleagues’ opinions on my suggestion regarding the regulations. I propose that we study each regulation separately and that we do not study all the regulations at the same time. In any case, only one regulation has been submitted. Even if two regulations were submitted, I would suggest that we study the regulations separately.

If we study monetary administrative sanctions, we are only studying monetary administrative sanctions. If we study the use of French in federal communications, we are only studying the use of French in federal communications. If we are working on part VII, we are only working on part VII. This is what I propose to avoid mixing everything up. These are still three distinct components. My suggestion is that we reserve a set number of meetings for each of the three regulations, with guests, so we don’t mix things up. This is a suggestion I would like to bring to the committee’s attention.

In my opinion, it’s certainly the studies of part VII and of federal communications that will require the most time in committee, and for which we may need to hear the greatest number of witnesses.

For the study on administrative monetary penalties that was proposed yesterday, I believe that four sessions on the topic could be sufficient. That said, we are ready to hear suggestions. Initially, in our work plan, we discussed about a dozen meetings on the regulations. If we add six to eight meetings on part VII, six meetings on federal communications and four meetings, we end up with a total of 16 or 17 meetings. That’s more than what we initially envisioned. My suggestion would be to study these topics one by one and to start with the one that requires fewer meetings than the other two regulations.

The last comment I would make about our work plan is as follows. If there is an appointment before the holidays for the position of Commissioner of Official Languages, one of our priorities should be to have a meeting with that person to provide our input to the House.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

Thank you very much, Mr. Deschênes-Thériault.

Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

As for the regulations, we will see. We have one at the moment. We can start studying that regulation, but I don’t know when. It should be fairly short, but we’ll see. As for the other regulations, we will see when we have them. It seems to be dragging on. At the moment, there is a regulation that strictly pertains to travel. I think that could be done quite quickly. I’m not against the idea of starting right away.

As for the preparation of the report, that will also depend on certain factors. We need to give the analyst time to prepare and start it. We will have a work plan, and we can discuss it to see if we want to operate as usual. We will see which time would be the most suitable. As for the issue of the music quota, if we already have the guests, I think we should study it.

As for the study on artificial intelligence, I don’t know if it’s better to work on it intermittently or to start with a section on the regulations. A proposal should be made. It all depends on how quickly the other regulations will come in.

We saw on Thursday that two mandates are mixed up. I will let my colleague weigh in on that. It’s not clear. We could start with the regulation we just received. The analyst will surely give us information on this subject. She just told me that it’s not the case for now. We will wait to see when the discussion on the report drafting plan will take place.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

The next speakers on my list are Mr. Villeneuve and Mr. Godin.

Regarding the report, the clerk distributed a draft of the report proposed by our analyst last week. The first step regarding the education continuum report is to find time to provide instructions to the analyst. Our analyst will be able to prepare the report based on those instructions. We will need another meeting for drafting.

Did I explain that well?

[Lucie Lecomte, Committee Researcher]

The study of the report will certainly require more than one meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yvan Baker]

So it will be at least one meeting.

Before continuing, I wanted to respond to your comment, Mr. Beaulieu. I’m only talking about possible processes. I discussed it with the clerk. In principle, if you wanted to start studying the regulations, we could start it on Tuesday. It depends, among other things, on the witnesses we invite, but know that it is possible. I think you were wondering about that a bit.

Mr. Villeneuve, you have the floor.