House of Commons Hansard #122 of the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was farmers.

Topics

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 12:40 a.m.

Conservative

Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC

Mr. Speaker, earlier this evening in the debate, the member for Toronto—Danforth, in response to a question I posed, wanted to make it super clear that this bill “specifically excludes content uploaded by users.” In response to that, the Canada research chair in Internet and e-commerce law stated on Twitter that it was false, that she was just wrong.

Who has it right? Does the government have it right? Are content users impacted by this bill, as many critics are saying, or is the government right, that they are not? Which way is it?

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 12:40 a.m.

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for this question.

Unfortunately, I believe that we will never have unanimity on this issue. However, I have absolute confidence in the bill before us, in sections 2, 35 and 46 of the Broadcasting Act, the two opinions of the Department of Justice to the effect that the bill is charter compliant, and the fact that the CRTC must also abide by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I am absolutely certain that social media users can sleep soundly tonight, tomorrow, the day after tomorrow and next week. These users will not be subject to the regulations adopted together with the new law, but the platforms will be.

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 12:40 a.m.

NDP

Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Mr. Speaker, I have watched my colleague in meetings with stakeholders. I have watched him in the House. I have watched him in the media, and he really is a friend who is fighting hard for the cultural sector in Canada. The work that he has done to stand up for our artists and our writers and folks who are in the creative sector is outstanding. While I am disappointed by the Conservatives' attempts to derail this legislation, I am not surprised. We know that they have never been friends of the cultural sector. That has been very clear all the way along. I am surprised by how badly the Liberals have managed this.

Could the member speak a little more about what he would have done to make sure this legislation was treated with the urgency and the importance that I know he thinks Bill C-10 has?

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 2021 / 12:40 a.m.

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Edmonton—Strathcona and I want to reiterate my thanks and congratulations for all the extraordinary work she has done at the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage on this issue that is so important for both Canadians and Quebeckers.

Obviously the Liberals fell into some traps, sometimes even traps they set themselves. An NDP government would not have acted in this way to support the cultural sector. We would have communicated the purpose of the bill and our objectives much more effectively.

I also think that we would not have excluded social media at the start only to then withdraw a clause halfway through committee; this monumental mistake by the Liberals and the Minister of Canadian Heritage created a brouhaha, prompted fearmongering and allowed the Conservatives to enter this debate only to engage in scare tactics. Obviously, we would have anticipated these issues and would not have introduced a half-baked or botched bill, like the minister of heritage did.

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 12:40 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Mr. Speaker, I was interested in the member's comments specifically about the importance of art and how art is not just something that we enjoy, but is something that can shape our view of the world and our understanding of deeper concepts. Does that not underline the importance of this space being democratized and of limiting government control?

Once we accept that art can be a powerful way of conveying senses, messages and experiences, should that not underline the importance of government not being in a position to shape the kinds of content that people can see over others, and of not being able to intervene and prioritize certain content based on criteria that they establish?

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 12:45 a.m.

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

Arts and culture do indeed shape our views of the world and can influence how people see things or perceive their interactions with others.

However, this bill does not give the government the ability to dictate or impose views. It simply requires that the new digital broadcasters, the web giants, contribute financially to our ecosystem. It is simply a matter of fairness that will benefit the production of cultural content in Quebec and Canada.

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 12:45 a.m.

Green

Paul Manly Green Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour and privilege to rise again tonight to speak to Bill C-10. It is always an honour to speak from the unceded traditional territory of the Snuneymuxw First Nation, and to serve the community of Nanaimo—Ladysmith within the traditional territory of the Snaw-naw-as, Snuneymuxw, Stz'uminus and Lyackson First Nations. Hych'ka Siem. It is National Aboriginal Peoples Day today, a day to celebrate the rich cultural heritage, the languages, the governance structure and the traditions of the indigenous people of Canada.

I spoke to many organizations about this bill. As an independent party called the Greens, we do not have the same ability to question witnesses in committee, so I held my own meetings and asked my own questions. One of the meetings I had was with APTN and indigenous producers. I want to talk tonight about the importance of indigenous voices in our broadcasting system. If we left this content up to the United States, our views of indigenous people would continue to be the Disneyfied view seen in Pocahontas and spaghetti westerns. It is really important that indigenous voices are heard.

In the early 1990s, my father found a letter written by a woman in 1898 named Elizabeth Shaw. She wrote a scathing 18-page letter about the residential school system and the abuses that were happening at the Port Simpson school. We made a documentary film about her and a number of indigenous people were involved with it.

Afterward, indigenous people told me about some of the other experiences they had and they wanted to make films as well. I said that it was not really for me to tell their story. That is what they should be doing and I helped facilitate it. I worked with a lot of indigenous producers, young people and older people. These people were interested in getting into media production, and I facilitated training and mentorship so they could tell their stories.

What came out of that? I worked with a young guy, Don Claxton. I worked with his sister Dana Claxton as well, who is an indigenous artist, and played music with their sister, Kim Soo Goodtrack. They had an idea for a show. That was in the late 1990s and, lo and behold, APTN, the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network, was born. We produced a pilot for the first preschool show on APTN. I worked with them, a whole bunch of first nations and an indigenous technical crew, who we trained, to create 64 episodes of a show called Wakanheja.

The idea behind CanCon is to hear these important indigenous voices. We need to make sure that the independent producers creating Canadian content have access to the Canada Media Fund when they are producing for social media streamers like Netflix and others, rather than just for the Canadian broadcasters, because that is where a lot of this production is going.

I heard a lot of discussion about freedom of expression and that some YouTubers have to go down because Canadian content goes up, that somebody has to go down because somebody is going up. I do not know how many times I heard that at committee during filibusters. A Conservative member gave a great example of somebody they know who does coupon clipping and gives how-tos, and that is great. I looked at the top 100 Canadian YouTube producers and there were people doing nails, gaming commentators and spoof videos. There was lots of content that could be produced anywhere. People knew it was Canadian because they would drop an “eh”, say “get 'er done” or say “about” wrong, but that is not what the idea behind CanCon is all about.

This commercial content drives advertising dollars, and that is what the commercial Internet giants are all about: selling advertising. That is what the algorithms are designed to do. What is important in CanCon is indigenous voices, stories from Canada's north, Canadian documentaries, stories of new Canadians and emerging Canadian musicians. These are the programs that need to be discoverable, and that is what discoverability is about. It is about learning about each other and about Canadian stories, not being inundated by American culture or the dominant culture.

I missed my late show tonight. I want to talk about a Canadian story that needs to be shared and understood. In recent decades, Canadians have learned more and more about our former government's attempt to commit cultural genocide, to commit genocide, to wipe out indigenous cultures through the residential school system. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission has reported extensively and provided a path forward with 94 calls to action.

What most Canadians are unaware of is a parallel set of institutions, the racially segregated Indian hospital system operated by the federal government between the 1940s and 1970s, and those hospitals have their own horror stories. I first heard about the Nanaimo Indian Hospital about 15 years ago, and many people in my community have no idea it ever existed.

In 2013, I was commissioned to produce a film for the Hul'qumi'num Health Hub about cultural safety in the health care system within the Hul'qumi'num speaking areas. Part of that film was to give health professionals an understanding of the history of institutional racism in health care and why indigenous people did not seek help when they needed medical attention.

I interviewed elders who spoke about the trauma they experienced in the Nanaimo Indian Hospital. I heard about painful treatments and I heard about people going into the hospital who were never heard from again. As part of the research for the film, I spoke with researcher Laurie Meijer Drees, who is the co-chair of the First Nations Studies Department at Vancouver Island University. She has documented the oral stories of people who have been in these hospitals, and wrote a book entitled Healing Histories: Stories from Canada's Indian Hospitals.

Of course, not all these stories were bad. Some people went to the hospital sick, were given antibiotics and returned home feeling better, but the horrific legacy of the Indian hospitals was based on treating all indigenous people as wards of the state. Consent for medical treatment only came into being for the general public in the 1960s. However, as wards of the state, indigenous people were not asked to consent for their hospitalization or treatment. The system patronizingly viewed them as lacking the capacity to give consent.

An indigenous person could be arrested by the RCMP for not going to the hospital if instructed to do so by a doctor. That twisted, racist mentality facilitated and led to women being sterilized without giving consent and patients being subject to experiments with medication without their prior knowledge.

These hospitals were underfunded and understaffed. Family members and communities were not updated on loved ones in the hospital. People died, children were shipped off to residential school or adopted out and family members were never informed. Some children were taken to hospital and years later no longer knew who they were, what their real names were or where they came from.

Most of what is known about this dark history comes from oral accounts told to researchers and shared through the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, but the medical files are locked and researchers have not been granted permission to access them. Apparently the reason given is that those records contain personal information. It is important to protect personal information, however, we do not need to expose personal information to get to the bottom of what happened.

To heal from those past traumas, we need to know the truth. The truth is sealed in those medical records, and it is incumbent upon the government to give researchers and independent adjudicators appropriate clearance, access and analysis of this data to conduct a full independent inquiry. I am looking forward to a first nations producer, an indigenous producer, creating a documentary about this and having members of this place finding this through discoverability on YouTube. These are stories we need to hear. These are the truths we need to hear. We also need to hear about the rich cultural heritage of indigenous people.

Let us talk about censorship. We are worried about censorship. The real concern about censorship is these large corporations. On May 5, red dress day, the National Day of Awareness for Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, family, friends and loved ones were posting about their missing loved ones. Thousands of those posts disappeared.

Right here in my community, I know Lisa Marie Young went missing years ago. What happened to all these posts? They were all pulled by Instagram. This is happening with other things like Black Lives Matter, Israel and Palestine, Sheikh Jarrah and SOS Colombia. I heard one of the Conservatives say that their posts were missing, right-wing posts, but this is clearly not Conservative posts.

Freedom of speech is important to me and we need to uphold it, and this bill would do that.

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 12:55 a.m.

Liberal

Lenore Zann Liberal Cumberland—Colchester, NS

Mr. Speaker, the arts are such an important part of our woven tapestry here in Canada, including indigenous arts and arts from across the cultures. What is it about this bill that the member actually supports, and why should this bill be passed?

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 12:55 a.m.

Green

Paul Manly Green Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am a huge supporter of the arts, and I have worked in the cultural industries in this country for a long time. I have worked as a professional musician, but I have also worked in artist management, so I know how the MAPL system works: music, artist, performance and lyrics. Two out of four of those, and they have CanCon and they can get that on for radio play.

I understand how the certification works for CRTC. It is a very easy check box: Who is the director? Who is the producer? Who is the writer? Who are the creative key talents on that? They need six out of 10 and they have Canadian content.

It is important that we bring those voices forward and that we support Canadian content, because we have unique stories to tell in this country.

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 12:55 a.m.

Conservative

Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to both this speech and the previous speech, and specifically the member's impassioned explanation of indigenous history that needs to be told.

My concern is about allowing the state, in this case the CRTC as an agent of the state, to determine what content meets a certain satisfactory requirement to be prioritized in the next-to-play or the algorithm that shows up in someone's feed. If the state, for example, were to try to diminish some of its history, then it would put the very content that the member is so passionately defending at risk of being silenced.

I am just curious as to how the member would reconcile some of the concerns that have been outlined with this bill about the possibility of state intervention, and specifically with the Liberals being able to determine what that may or may not be. How does he reconcile that with the need to ensure that there is actual freedom of expression so that these voices can be heard and, in the example that he shared, that this Canadian history can be told and accessed—

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 12:55 a.m.

The Deputy Speaker Bruce Stanton

The hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith.

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 12:55 a.m.

Green

Paul Manly Green Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Mr. Speaker, the CRTC has not silenced speech in the past. All we need to do is look at Rick Mercer's show. He made fun of politicians and governments freely and had no problem. He was never censored. I find it hilarious to hear the previous Conservative speaker say that he has never read the bill or the act, but he does not trust it because the Liberals put it forward. What they need to know, as Conservatives, is that the 1991 act was created by the Mulroney Conservative government, and it quite clearly states in the act, and this remains in the act:

This Act shall be construed and applied in a manner that is consistent with the freedom of expression and journalistic, creative and programming independence enjoyed by broadcasting undertakings.

That is the language of the Conservative bill that was established in 1991. It remains in this act, and we still have freedom of speech under the Broadcasting Act.

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 1 a.m.

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I found that last response from my colleague from Nanaimo—Ladysmith quite satisfying.

What does my colleague think of the fact that cable companies, which are fewer and fewer in number and have fewer and fewer customers, are the only ones contributing to the production of original Canadian content, when giants like Netflix, Crave, Disney+ and YouTube are currently excluded and are not contributing to the production of artistic and cultural content in Canada?

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 1 a.m.

Green

Paul Manly Green Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is high time that those other Internet giants all contributed to Canadian content and put money into the Canada Media Fund, and that the Canada Media Fund was opened up. One of my amendments was to have the Canada Media Fund available to independent producers who are producing for those streaming services, so that somebody making a documentary that is just going to go out on YouTube could actually get Canada Media Fund money to help tell good, Canadian stories.

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 1 a.m.

The Deputy Speaker Bruce Stanton

It being 1 a.m., pursuant to an order made earlier today, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the third reading stage of the bill now before the House.

The question is on the motion.

In the usual way, if a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes to request either a recorded division or that the motion be adopted on division, I invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 1 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would ask for a recorded division.

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 1 a.m.

The Deputy Speaker Bruce Stanton

Accordingly, call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #174

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 1:30 a.m.

The Deputy Speaker Bruce Stanton

I declare the motion carried.

(Bill read the third time and passed)

Broadcasting ActGovernment Orders

June 22nd, 1:30 a.m.

The Deputy Speaker Bruce Stanton

It being 1:30 a.m., pursuant to an order made on Monday, June 21, the House stands adjourned until later this day at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 1:30 a.m.)