Debates of June 3rd, 2019

Opposition Motion—News Media Industry

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Multiculturalism (Multiculturalism)]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Edmonton Centre.

I would like to take this opportunity to stand today and remind this chamber of the importance of a free and independent press to a healthy democracy. I cannot say it enough: A fundamental pillar of our democracy and all democracies around the world is a healthy, independent press. However, that is now at risk, and it is putting us all at risk.

Canada's news media industry and those around the world are fighting for their lives. They are being pushed to the limit by smaller and smaller advertising funding, and more recently by dramatic changes in how people are receiving their news. If we do not take our heads out of the sand, it will not be too long before these changes will erode our democratic process altogether.

I have seen first-hand in authoritarian countries what happens when the media are not able to speak up: minorities are ignored or, worse, punished for being who they are; criticism of the government is prevented or silenced; and people live in fear of what their government may do to them. This is not a world that I or Canadians want to live in.

This crisis faced by the Canadian news media has come to a pinnacle in recent years, with countless layoffs, once strong and vibrant newspapers closing one after another, and countless towns and cities finding themselves without local journalists or reporting of any kind. Since 2009, daily and community newspapers have seen a 48% decrease in advertising revenues alone, which is half their revenue gone just like that, in just 10 years. Any industry with that kind of loss would be struggling.

Just last week, The Hamilton Spectator announced that it will close its printing and mailroom operations and will likely sell its building. That is 73 full-time Canadian jobs and 105 part-time staff who will be laid off. Equally troubling is the loss of local content in a major media market.

The story does not stop there. Around the world, people have changed how they are getting their news. Social media and mobile phones have blown up the traditional markets. Canadians are not sitting at home any more just waiting for their curated and peer-reviewed morning paper to tell them about the news of the day. More and more, people are relying on social media, Facebook, Twitter, Google and others for their news. However, these platforms hold none of the same standards as the news media. Verification, research and sources have been thrown out the door for a quick click or negative motives. These platforms simply do not have the resources or expertise to undertake in-depth reporting that holds corporations, organizations or governments to account.

We know that the press gallery in Ottawa is shrinking and is a fraction of its former self. It does not have the resources to challenge the government or the opposition in the way it was once able to do.

With web giants offering news for free, Canadians are quick to cut their subscriptions. Not only have news organizations had a huge drop in advertising, which in itself is an important part of their revenue model, but these same organizations have also had to contend with new players in the industry who do not play by the same rules. Faced with so many challenges, there are only two options: try to adapt, or close shop altogether. Unfortunately, the second option is what appears to be happening.

This is not limited to daily newspapers: Community newspapers, the foundation of our neighbourhoods and a critical source of information for communities all across Canada, are facing the same challenges, and 32% of daily newspapers and 19% of community newspapers have had to close their doors since 2009. Those still standing have had to face the hard reality needed to adapt. Cutting staff, reducing printing and merging are just some of the choices staff have had to make to keep their newspapers alive.

All of these closures and reorganizations have had a massive impact on jobs in Canada. Since 2006, close to one-quarter of the newspaper workforce has been laid off, which means close to 10,000 jobs. In the last three years alone, more than 600 of these jobs have been cut, which means Canadians are no longer getting the news they need to make this country, province or town work. There is no more coverage of courtroom trials, no more news on current councillors or wards. People do not know what is going on in their neighbourhoods. The best they can hope for is sometimes seeing a small story in a major paper. This hurts all of us.

With a 24-hour news cycle and an endless amount of information at people's fingertips, it seems strange that millions of Canadians cannot find out what is happening just down the street.

How can we, as Canadians, make the right choices regarding our governments when we do not even know what is happening? How can we solve a problem if we do not even know it exists?

With even less accurate reporting, fake news is able to spread even faster. We can add to that the fact that people and organizations are trying to take advantage of Canadians by bombarding them with fake news on a daily basis. We have all seen the rise of the anti-vaccine movement and flat-earthers because of fake news circles spreading uncriticized information. Many countries, including Canada, are under constant threat of fake news spreading uncontrollably, made even worse because of a lack of journalists able to hold people to account.

That is why our government saw the need to take action. Our $595-million tax credit investment in Canadian news over the next five years will help restore the news industry in Canada. Our government has established a panel that comprises not only publishers but also reporters and other workers within the sector. This panel includes representation from both francophone media groups and ethnic media representatives.

Canadians deserve to know the truth about what is going on in Canada and around the world, yet it seems that Conservative members across the way continue to have problems with journalists and the truth. I do not know about other members, but I have met many journalists and none of them can be influenced or bought by a government, yet the Conservatives keep trying to follow Doug Ford's lead and imply that journalists are the enemy. Their staff said that they would “go for the jugular” when it came to the media.

The opposition continues to be out of touch with real Canadians. Journalists and the media play a fundamental role in our country. Canadians know that, and so should the Conservatives. To call them fossils is disrespectful to both journalists and Canadians. Members of the party opposite continue to see enemies and conspiracy theories all around them. Next they will be telling us that we need to ground planes because of the chemtrails, or they will start saying how the scientists are out to get them again.

Two fundamental principles have guided us in developing these policies: First, a mechanism designed to support the news industry must be independent from the Government of Canada, and second, it must be based on the creation of original content.

In closing, there is no denying that the government has an important responsibility in ensuring the health of our democracy. I am proud to sit as a member of the party that believes in investing in people, unlike the party opposite, which wants to sit on its hands or, even worse, make cuts to our news industry.

Our government is taking action to address the issues faced by the Canadian news system. We believe in the need to invest in and support the industry so that Canadians can get the news they need. These initiatives recognize that strong and independent journalism is a key element of a healthy democracy, while protecting the independence of the press on any platform. In an age when fake news is being spread freely, these investments will ensure that Canadians have access to the reliable news coverage necessary to our country.

I am thankful for this opportunity and look forward to questions.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member for Laurentides—Labelle, or rather, for Louis-Saint-Laurent.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Madam Speaker, I visited the riding of Laurentides—Labelle and I met many people there who are ready to vote for our party in six months.

I would like to note the following statement: “I am the worst nightmare of the Liberal Prime Minister. Am I coming out against the Liberal Prime Minister? You're damn right I am. I'm probably going to make it worse. The Liberal Prime Minister has really been irritating me the last few days.”

Does the hon. member consider that neutral or objective? No, not at all. That is exactly what Jerry Dias said against us, not against the Liberal Party. Can the member explain why he supports Jerry Dias on the panel, which is supposed to be neutral and objective but is anything but that?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, this panel involves eight different representatives of organizations. There is a wide-ranging spectrum of the industry that includes owners, publishers, reporters and workers.

I know the party opposite has a real problem with unions and makes no excuse for it. It is unfortunate that it has taken the position that having a member representing labour at the table is problematic. I think it is fundamental that, when we make decisions, all parties are consulted and are part of the decision-making process. That is why we have constituted the panel as it is.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

I am beginning to feel like a parrot and it is getting tiresome. Why does another four years have to go by before something gets done?

He is the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Multiculturalism. His minister's predecessor launched the ecosystem review process four years ago.

It was passed from committee to committee, then there was a committee report, and then it went back to committee. The election will be over and still nothing will have been done.

How is it that the Liberal government has not accomplished anything in this regard in four years?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, what is important is that action is being taken, decisive action. This fund will allow our media to recalibrate over the next five years and be able to support initiatives that will ensure the long-term viability of the industry.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Madam Speaker, the member has talked about how the funding will be over five years. It seems that the government is trying to become part of the financial operations of the media.

Does the government plan to have this indefinitely? Is it going to provide stable funding, something each year or every five years, or is this just a one-shot event?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is important to recognize that there is a dire crisis. As I stated in my speech, there are operations closing weekly. In Hamilton, just last week, The Hamilton Spectator closed its printing operations. That has affected many jobs in that local community.

This is essentially to ensure sustainability of the industry, both short-term and long-term.

[Bob Bratina, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for drawing attention to the Hamilton situation, which is dramatic and drastic. A lot of us are feeling a kind of heartless response from the other side, which is ignoring the plight of so many people who are responsible for delivering the news.

I would like to have my friend comment on that.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my friend's comments.

Newspapers are not just about journalists, although journalists play a very important role in producing newspapers. Many people are involved in delivering the news, from those working in the press room to those delivering the newspapers. At a young age, I used to deliver the newspaper. Right now, that is my daughter's first job.

I know that many Canadians have relied on this industry for a very long time, be it as a courier or even for part-time work while being a student. This is such a critical industry for all of us. I know that small towns like Hamilton are struggling, and we want to be able to support them.

[Randy Boissonnault, Liberal, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Madam Speaker, the opportunity to provide insight on how the government values a healthy democracy through a free and independent press is why I am here today. Voices must be heard in a democracy: diverse, dissenting and dynamic voices. Those of us who have a seat in this place must speak up for the voiceless, even when said voice sounds like it could use a little TLC.

No one will dispute that a healthy democracy requires a solid, independent news media industry, and we all agree that with today's technology Canadians now consume information differently and through various media forms. Many readers are changing their consumption habits and getting information online.

If we look at the 2018 Edelman Trust Barometer, 65% of Canadians worry about false information or fake news being used as a weapon. These are the new realities we face here in the House and as a government, and the advent of fake news has prompted our government to act to ensure that our democracy remains well served by informed and reliable journalism.

The support measures we developed ensure that Canada will continue to have an active, professional, reliable and independent press, and that, through responsible journalism, Canadians remain informed of the events that shape our country. As stated by the hon. Minister of Finance, “Whether it's holding governments to account or getting involved in a local cause, Canadians rely on the journalism industry to shine a light on what's important—and these measures will help the industry continue to do exactly that.”

Without these independent journalists, it is much easier for the opposition to peddle fake news stories, such as the ongoing attack ads using public funds, paid for by Doug Ford's government. That is why the Conservatives are vehemently disparaging journalists. However, unlike the Conservatives, our government is not afraid to be held to account by Canadians.

There was one scrum after budget 2019 where someone asked whether this fund would just make sure that the media says what the Liberals want it to say. The Minister of Finance was there, and I think his quip was “I would really like the media to say exactly what I want it to say, but that is not how an independent press works.” That is at the core of what we are doing here.

To this end, we announced a series of measures that, together, would provide support to the Canadian news system, which is crucial to our democracy. Two fundamental principles have guided us in developing these support measures. First, we choose to support the news in a way that is independent, because of all the principles that enshrine our democracy. In short, we fundamentally believe that journalists should not be afraid of their funding being cut simply because they disagree with us. Second, it must be based on the creation of original content.

The first of these measures was introduced in budget 2018, where the government emphasized its support of local news in communities presently underserved by Canadian news media organizations. In an era when fake news is ubiquitous, all Canadians deserve to have access to reliable information.

Let us take the issue of fake news head on. The Conservatives have been trying to sell a narrative recently that is completely false, related to recent government announcements. I want to take the time that I have to address these issues head on.

It is a fact that, on May 22, 2019, the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Multiculturalism announced the launch of the local journalism initiative. This initiative, which allocates a total of $50 million over five years, supports the creation of original civic journalism that covers the diverse needs of underserved communities across Canada.

It is a fact that, to protect the independence of the press, seven not-for-profit organizations representing different segments of the news industry will administer the initiative. These organizations will hire additional journalists or undertake projects to give their news greater visibility in underserved communities, thus addressing the need for local civic journalism in underserved communities. The content produced through this initiative will be made available to media organizations through a Creative Commons licence so that Canadians can be better informed regardless of the platform on which they consume their news.

Other support measures were announced in budget 2019, and the government proposed three new initiatives to support Canadian journalism: allowing not-for-profit news organizations to receive charitable donations and issue official donation receipts; creating a new, refundable labour tax credit for qualifying news organizations; and creating a temporary, non-refundable tax credit for subscriptions to Canadian digital news media.

It is a fact that an independent panel of experts will make recommendations on the eligibility criteria for the tax measures so that they are efficient, transparent and fair.

Eight associations representing Canadian journalists were invited to submit the name of a candidate to take part in the work of the independent panel of experts. Unfortunately, the Conservatives have taken issue with one of these associations and have been sharing false information that these associations will somehow be deciding who will receive funding. Fortunately, our government does not believe in such a draconian way of either sharing information or organizing a system meant to protect the independence of the media.

It is a fact that these associations were chosen because they represented the majority of Canadian news media publishers and journalists. the independent panel of experts will be able to consider the views of third parties, including industry stakeholders.

We know for a fact that these key measures will provide Canadians with more access to informed and reliable journalism.

The fact that the Conservatives are threatened by an independent panel of news media publishers and journalists is indicative of the kind of government they had under Mr. Harper and what kind of government they could be. It is the same kind of fear they had with scientists. It is the same kind they had with people of any sort of difference who might actually hold their feet to the fire. Our feet can be held to the fire and because of that, better is always possible.

Over the past week, there has been intense Conservative opposition to the appointment of Unifor to the local journalism panel. Unifor is an independent union that represents 12,000 media workers across the country. It will bring much-needed expertise to the panel on the integrity of news media, freedom of information and workers' rights.

Our government is committed to raising and improving labour standards and working conditions for all journalists across the country, while promoting free press.

We recognizes and value the importance of the independent press to a healthy democracy, and the addition of Unifor to the panel only strengthens that principle.

Let us make no mistake in assuming there is an easy fix after the deep cuts to media experienced under the Harper government, CBC alone, $150 million in cuts. The leader of the official opposition is already on record as saying hundreds of millions of dollars of cuts will come to the CBC should the Conservatives form government.

The Harper government also allocated extensive resources to monitor independent media outlets. Monitoring them is contradictory to the very independence of those media outlets. The previous government was obsessed with message control and engaged in widespread media monitoring. In contrast, our government has built an open relationship with the press.

The Canadian news media ecosystem is under tremendous pressure and that is why we take this issue seriously.

Let us look at the change of the media ecosystem since 2019.

Twenty per cent of daily and community newspapers have ceased their operations. This means that a total of 276 Canadian communities rely on alternative sources of information to obtain the news that is of concern to them. Also, we are not considering the many Canadian news media organizations that had to downsize and adapt their operations to remain in operation due to the drastic cuts of funding that has caused nearly irreversible damage.

In my time as a member of this place, the way the Edmonton media has covered stories has changed dramatically. I used to give an interview to the Edmonton Sun and an interview to the Edmonton Journal. Then about midway through their mandate, they said that I would just have to do one interview now. When I asked them why, they said that they have been consolidated. The Edmonton Sun and the Edmonton Journal are in the same offices now. Therefore, I just give quotes to one person and then the reporters take the different quotes they want to shape the story they want. That is the shape of things to come in the country, so it is time we acted.

Our government recognizes the vital and indispensable role that journalism plays in our country. That is why we will continue to protect the independence of journalists and why we are prepared to make the necessary investments and to take action to ensure Canadians continue to have access to informed and reliable news coverage that is necessary to ensure a democracy.

There used to be over 10,000 jobs in journalism, but most of them have been lost since 2007. Close to 250 daily newspapers have been affected. Some of them have had to close their doors and others have had to reduce the number of journalists that work for them. The government needs to act in this kind of situation and that is what we did.

That is exactly why we are taking these steps now.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, all of us in the House agree in the principle that the independence of our press is important. The difference I suppose is that on this side of the House we believe the best way to defend the independence of the press is for it to operate independent of government and not have a government-appointed committee that includes the most vocal of Liberal partisans determining who is a journalist and who is eligible for this funding.

It is quite Orwellian for the member to say that the best way we defend the independence of the press is to have somebody who is vocally campaigning for the re-election of his government responsible for deciding which members of the press get the money and which ones do not. Journalists realize that this makes it harder for them to demonstrate their credibility to their readers.

Will the member take a step back from this kind of Orwellian language and realize that independence requires real independence, not government control or control by a government committee?

[Randy Boissonnault, Liberal, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member's comments are double-plus bad. In the case of his messaging today, he is making a tempest out of a teapot.

Let us look at the billions of dollars existing in the media industry. Revenues have gone down from $5.5 billion in 2008 to $3.2 billion in 2016, and the member on the other side is worried about a $50 million fund that somehow will revolutionize the balance in the media.

He talked about this somehow favouring Liberal candidates in the next election. Right up to the last election, 74% of all Canadian dailies called for the Harper government to be re-elected, three times more than how it was polling. More than 50% of the population was interested in supporting it. That kind of imbalance is exactly what the member is accusing us of doing, and the Conservatives lived it. We are here to ensure that the independence of journalists is taken seriously.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Madam Speaker, I think we all agree there is a crisis here. What the government is sharing with us as a solution really misses the mark and is just a stopgap.

In Saskatoon, the Saskatoon Express, another local paper, just went under. I want to wish Cam Hutchinson and his staff well. It is a difficult time. It went under because there was no more advertising revenue.

What the government is proposing may help. However, the fact is that the tax system is unfair and large multinationals are making tax-free income from revenue from advertisers and small papers cannot make a go of it.

Would the hon. colleague not acknowledge that what the Liberals are offering today is just not enough and that it will not solve the problem of the loss of independent media in the country?

[Randy Boissonnault, Liberal, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the passion of the hon. colleague on this issue. I, too, and colleagues on this side, lament any time a daily or weekly goes under because of lack of revenues. One of the things we have learned and have heard loudly through committee work and through studies across the country us is that ad revenue that used to go to these dailies and weeklies for a dollar apiece now goes to online providers for pennies on the dollar. One cannot sustain a business model that does this.

Therefore, I agree there is more we can do. This is a start. These actions will make a difference. They will help to ensure that independent journalists can protect that independence and ensure Canadians can access media content that has a significant editorial component to it.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Elmwood—Transcona.

I am happy that the masks are coming off today, because we are talking about something that the NDP has been concerned about for a long time. For around eight years, we have been standing up for Canadian news media and cultural content, and particularly in Quebec, where there is a great deal of provincial investment in businesses that offer such content. Furthermore, as a result of the changing paradigm, every investment the Government of Quebec makes involves greater risk.

Last night, the Québec Cinéma Gala celebrated the talents of director Ricardo Trogi, actor Debbie Lynch-White, actor Martin Dubreuil and Sara Mishara, who did the cinematography for the movie The Great Darkened Days. The Québec Cinéma team reminded us that Quebec is so good at telling its stories because of giants like Jean Beaudin and Jean-Claude Labrecque, who passed away last week.

A pioneer of filmmaking on nearly 100 Canadian films and keenly attuned to the evolution of Quebec society, Jean-Claude Labrecque, considered the filmmaker who captured the essence of Quebec, used to describe himself simply as the guy holding the camera. He did right by us, as the great man he was.

To pay tribute to Jean-Claude Labrecque is to pay tribute to the architect of what we inherited today. We inherited a system that allows us to tell our stories through fiction and documentaries, but also through the news media. It allows us to talk about our democracy and to monitor what our politicians do. That is precisely what is currently at stake, because of the partisan games and mediocrity we are seeing from Canada's two main parties.

Under the Conservatives we had 10 years of inaction. Ten years of acting like nothing happened. Then the Liberals came to power saying that something had to be done, that we absolutely needed to fix the problem. That was four years ago and they have done absolutely nothing since then. This government has done a poor job because it is afraid of the opposition. I am talking about the official opposition, of course, because the NDP has been fighting for this cause for at least four years, if not eight, since this issue was not as urgent at the time. This situation has truly deteriorated in no time at all.

It is unacceptable that 80% of Internet advertising revenue currently goes to the United States. All legislators in Canada should be ashamed. It is not unusual for a society that lives in the north, like ours, to import pineapples or bananas. However, we are now importing advertising signs. Is it not appalling that we are letting all our advertising investments go elsewhere? That is a pathetic trade record. Time and again I find myself having to face the fact that we have no backbone. We have to wake up and protect our industry. We have to stop being mesmerized by five different colour letters just because they represent the most beloved brand in the United States, by Republicans and Democrats alike. We need to wake up.

It is not Google's fault that we are slackers. It is not Netflix's fault that we have not asked it to collect the GST, our country's basic tax, which is a consumption tax. The Liberals will not do it for utterly embarrassing reasons. They are afraid that those opposite, the Conservatives, who only want to win the next election, will say that a Netflix tax will raise prices. Give me a break. All Canadians pay the GST on goods they purchase. That is normal. We pay for goods and services, but they will not charge the GST.

You should all be ashamed. I, for one, as a citizen of a country like Canada, am ashamed that we are not taking a stand and charging our consumption tax. That is just disgraceful. As we can see, this mainly concerns the GST.

The government has been avoiding the issue and thinking pretty highly of itself for four years. For the past four years, it has been ignoring other people's advice. For four years, it has been afraid of being known as the government that taxed Netflix, but come on, Netflix raised its rate by about 33% a year ago and nobody said boo. The Liberals say they will not charge the GST for that kind of service. They know they do not have a leg to stand on, but they will not do it. There might be questions at the year-end review. The Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance are literally lying to us when they say taxing an intangible online service is complicated. They talk about seeking advice from their G7 and G20 friends. Seriously, though, this is a sales tax. What is the deal here? You are lying to our faces. This kind of situation—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I would ask the member to direct his comments to the Chair, not to the government.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Madam Speaker, the fact is, we are here in a Parliament where the opposition is supposed to be able to propose things and take a constructive approach. I have been fighting for the media for eight years now, and the NDP has been working tirelessly to protect our stories and our journalism, to ensure a level playing field for everyone. It is not happening. We are not the only ones. In January 2017, a report entitled “Shattered Mirror” recommended the following:

Recommendation No. 1: Enhance Section 19 and 19.1 of the Income Tax Act

We have talked about this. It is completely unacceptable that, in a wealthy, western democracy like ours, we are incapable of amending a section of an act that online advertisers are shamelessly exploiting. Basically, if a company pays to place an ad in an American magazine, it cannot include it as a deduction for its advertising expenses. It cannot put it in an American or Canadian magazine, because it is not an eligible expense. However, placing an ad on Google or Facebook is an eligible expense. It is completely ridiculous.

The Conservatives were no better. That loophole has been around for a long time but the Liberals let it be because they are afraid of being taxed. They have spent four years doing nothing even though this is such an important issue, an issue so crucial to our identity. Our stories are disappearing along with our journalism and possibly even our democracy. A number of us have pointed out that many of the weekly papers that cover local politics in every one of our ridings are closing. They are closing because advertisers can jump on that kind of outrageous advantage. That recommendation I just quoted was the first one in the January 2017 report. That was two years ago, and it came from an expert. The heritage minister requested the report. Two years have passed, and nothing has been done. The government has not done a thing about it even though that was the first recommendation.

Here is another recommendation from the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage's June 2017 report:

Recommendation 1: The Committee recommends that the Minister of Canadian Heritage explore the existing structures to create a new funding model that is platform agnostic and would support Canadian journalistic content.

That was two years ago. Let me point out that both the heritage minister and the Prime Minister summarily dismissed the report.

Here is the second recommendation from the other report from January 2017:

Extend GST/HST to all digital news subscription and advertising revenue for companies not qualifying under new Section 19 criteria. Rebate GST/HST for those that do qualify

Nothing was done. That was in the January 2017 report published by Mr. Greenspon, a distinguished journalist and expert. The Liberals did nothing.

Now, a little like the huge boondoggle they made of the SNC-Lavalin affair, the government decided once again to improvise. It slipped a line somewhere in the omnibus bill, thinking no one would noticed, but they were wrong. The government should have consulted everyone. It would have been nice if it had not tried to hide this in a huge bill the size of an Eaton's catalogue. What happened as a result? Many jobs were lost in Quebec. People might be in difficult situations, but it is not the government's problem. It is, however, a serious problem for Quebec.

Once again, a committee was thrown together at the last minute. It smacks of conflict and does not look good on the members opposite. They have always known just how much the unions hate them because they are always saying they do not care about the news or the situation facing our media here in Quebec and Canada.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Multiculturalism (Multiculturalism)]

Madam Speaker, I have to congratulate the member opposite for his performance. I think post-politics, the Canada Council for the Arts may be interested in funding his acting career.

It is important to recognize that our government is taking action. It has been taking action for the last three years. I find it quite difficult to accept the member opposite's position that the government has not moved on this.

Could the member identify aspects of the fund and the need to support journalists that he finds particularly important to him?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I want to remind members that they should not be making personal attacks on individuals. They can talk about procedures and the things being said, but personal attacks on individuals are not accepted.

I think the parliamentary secretary may want to withdraw a bit of what he indicated to the member. Does he wish to withdraw his comment?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, that was not my intention. I withdraw my comment if it was taken as offensive.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will focus on the second part of the member's comment, so that my answer is as constructive as possible.

In the second part of his comment, the member asked me what we would recommend. First, we would recommend that the government take things seriously and acknowledge that information promotes a better democracy. Such a fundamental issue should have been tackled much earlier. It would have been preferable not to wait until the last minute, as the government did with a number of very important bills. It also should have done some research and not thought it was so superior that it was above criticism.

Obviously, it is going to be a bit controversial when the government chooses a union that has very much taken a side in the debate and when it makes the announcement at the last second, right before the election. Nevertheless, the Conservatives should not be surprised. They are hated by almost everyone in the news and communications sector. The Conservatives hung us out to dry for 10, or even 14, years, because they were threatening the government.

As for the first part of your comment, you claim to have done things. The Canada Council for the Arts budget was doubled four years ago. Stop saying that; you have not done a thing since.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Again, I would remind the member that he must address his remarks to the Chair, not to the government directly.

The hon. member for Saskatoon—Grasswood.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

Madam Speaker, I used to sit on the heritage committee with the hon. member from Quebec. I want him to know that my home province of Saskatchewan is the second jurisdiction in Canada to have a provincial sales tax on Netflix. Quebec was the first, and Saskatchewan followed up earlier this years with a 6% tax.

I will say a couple of things. I worked for Bell under the CTV brand. There was a lack of innovation from Bell, Rogers and other multimedia companies in this country. They were simply beaten by Netflix, which had been out for two or three years.

Instead of Unifor telling the government where the $600 million should go, perhaps Unifor could use its membership dues to partner with these media giants it is the union for. That would be a far better use of union dues. Instead of using government tax money, Unifor could partner with Bell and Rogers and form a relationship, because they are in bed with each other right now. What the government has proposed is ridiculous.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert has less than a minute to respond.