House of Commons Hansard #176 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was c-11.

Topics

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:15 p.m.

NDP

Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB

Madam Speaker, there is one kind of threat to free debate, which is to silence people. Another way to silence people is by putting words in their mouths. What I said earlier is that I am concerned, and I think it is naive to expect that social media platforms do not have an agenda and that as they write algorithms in private, outside of any kind of transparency or accountability, they do not consider their own self-interests in the ways they promote particular kinds of content.

The point is not to say that someone else is going to police all of that content. Bill C-11 is talking about promoting Canadian content within the feeds of Canadians. I do not think there is anything particularly nefarious about that, and there is room for reasonable debate about how that gets defined. However, what I was saying earlier is that I do not understand why this guy, who says he is so concerned about freedom, does not care a whit about what is going on behind closed doors right now with people who are accountable to no one and have all the power and control he says he is concerned about.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:20 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON

Madam Speaker, let us be clear. The member is not proposing to take away any power from Google, Facebook or any other social media giant. All he is proposing to do is give the government the power to manipulate the controls that those social media platforms already have.

Right now, social media algorithms are designed to give people the stuff they want to see, because that is how social media companies make money, just like a restaurant gives people the food they want to eat. The government wants to take away the power of people to choose for themselves and have government authorities decide for them.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:20 p.m.

Conservative

Leslyn Lewis Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time today with the member for Saskatoon—University.

I am thankful for this opportunity to rise again and speak to the government's disastrous bill, Bill C-11, the online streaming act, which would regulate the Internet and stymie free expression. It is ironic that the government claims to be modernizing the Canadian Broadcasting Act by creating a “flexible, fair and modern” approach, when in fact the bill would punish Canadian digital creators and move Canada's cultural, creative and media industries backwards.

It is disheartening to see that the criticisms and calls for reform coming from Internet and media experts, former CRTC commissioners, and Canadian artists and creators themselves are being ignored. Bill C-11 is an example of what happens to a government that has been in power for far too long. It has forgotten who it serves. Frankly, it has grown fat on entitlement and hubris.

This bill gives unacceptable and inappropriate permission to the government, and any future government, to control Canadians' use of the Internet with respect to what they choose as content, what they watch and listen to and even how to express themselves freely online in a public square. The greater danger of Bill C-11 is that it opens the door to an increasing government manipulation of technology and algorithms for the purpose of social control. Why would any government want to limit expression in a strong, free and democratic society such as Canada? It wants to do this simply for power and to seek control.

Any government can give into the temptation of overstepping its authority when it is left in power for far too long. When there are too few checks and balances in place and when institutional legacy media begins to do the bidding of the governing party, the system breaks down and the doors for the thought police open. When that happens, all of the freedoms and liberties we take for granted in this precious country slowly disappear, even freedoms in our own homes. Government, if given the chance and opportunity, will trespass into telling us what we can watch even in our own homes by using algorithms that will determine the content we see online and the narratives we hear.

This is what we must guard against. Clause 7 of Bill C-11 specifically gives permission to cabinet to direct the CRTC with regard to this legislation. The bill requires that online platforms prioritize Canadian content over non-Canadian content. It grants the CRTC the ability to require platforms such as YouTube and Facebook to change and manipulate algorithms and search engines to meet government directives. What does this mean? It means this bill gives the government control over what Canadians see, what they post and what they watch online. Bill C-11 will also give Ottawa bureaucrats the power to regulate any content that generates revenue directly or indirectly, which could apply to most user content online.

The government had a chance to accept the Senate's amendments to narrow the scope and protect Canadian content, but it failed to do that. It failed to do the right thing and voted against the Conservative amendments. Why? I would argue it is because the government does not trust Canadians with their own thoughts and their own freedoms, and is, in fact, trying to expand its control of Canadians online, even in the privacy of their own homes.

Jeanette Patell, the head of Canada government affairs and public policy at YouTube, explained it like this: “[Bill C-11] explicitly give[s] a government regulator authority over what content is prioritized, and how and where content is presented to Canadians, handing the CRTC the power to decide who wins and who loses”.

Timothy Denton, who is a former CRTC commissioner and chair of the Canada chapter of the Internet Society, said this about Bill C-11: “C-11 makes user-generated videos or podcasts—virtually anything involving sound or video—subject to CRTC regulation. Indeed it is a wonder the government stopped there: why not regulate email as well? Nor does the regulation of speech stop at Canada’s borders. Bill C-11 permits the CRTC to exercise global authority over 'programs' in any language, from any source.” He goes on to say, “The CRTC is all about control: who gets to speak, within what limits, how often, and to what effect. Usually the control is exercised indirectly, but in this case it was overt.”

Bill C-11 would empower government-dictated algorithms to decide what one can see and which videos and sources are Canadian enough to see. Conspicuously, there is no definition of what is classified as Canadian content in the bill, which focuses on Canadian content.

Moreover, the current definition used by the CRTC is so antiquated and so narrow that it eliminates productions like the The Canadian Story and The Handmaid's Tale, which were filmed in Canada with Canadian actors and Canadian producers, or Netflix's major francophone film Jusqu'au déclin, which was made and written in Quebec.

I would argue that the bill is a form of censorship that is more insidious than a government-issued order, mandate, or sanction because, in this case, Canadians will not know what they are being censored for. If the bill passes, bureaucrats behind closed doors, subject to the will of their political masters, will issue directives to manipulate algorithms and control the search bar in people's homes. Canadians will never know what is not being allowed. In this scenario, the government could control what is presented to them and what is put in their very mind by controlling what they see.

Canadian creators would not know the reason why their content is not going viral. Canadian creators will never know when their content is being demoted by government-dictated algorithms. This is a form of technocratic control. I fear, as many Canadians do, that this technocratic control will grow as our society becomes more digitally dependent on artificial intelligence and Internet-connected smart technologies.

As parliamentarians, it is our duty and our responsibility to serve the interests of Canadians and uphold the rights and freedoms of all Canadians. The bill is an attack on freedom of choice and freedom of expression of all Canadians online. We must not allow the government to creep down a path that leads to silencing critics by promoting some voices over others that politically suit its ends.

In closing, I want to say that creativity blossoms in a culture of freedom and not control. We need to go back to the days when governments served the people. As we consider the bill, I urge all parliamentarians in the House to remember our great foundations of freedom upon which this country was built: the freedom to think, the freedom to speak, and the freedom to live without government interference.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:30 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, I want everyone to understand and have an appreciation for the contrast—

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

Order. We are in a period of questions and comments. Could the hon. members listen to the questions being asked, please?

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:30 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Madam Speaker, I want to talk about contrast. If we want to use the word “attack”, we can put it in the perspective of how the Conservative Party has made it very clear, through that member's speech and the leader of the Conservative Party's speech, that this is an attack on Canadian content. This is an attack on the CRTC. We now have the leader of the Conservative Party with another policy platform, and that is to diminish the role of the CRTC here in Canada.

As he and his other colleagues clap, there are Canadians who are in the arts and culture industry. That industry is so valuable to Canada, and the Conservatives are throwing it up in the air, saying they do not care. The Liberals and the government care about that community.

My question for the member is why the Conservative Party has given up on Canada's heritage and those who promote it through arts and—

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

The hon. member for Haldimand—Norfolk.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:30 p.m.

Conservative

Leslyn Lewis Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

Madam Speaker, in fact, we have not given up. We are the warriors who are fighting to preserve this heritage, because we know that this heritage can only be preserved if we have freedom of expression, and we have to ensure that governments cannot dictate what Canadians see, what they think or what they hear online. That is not the role of government. The role of government is to stay out of the lives of Canadians and let freedom reign.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:30 p.m.

Green

Mike Morrice Green Kitchener Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, I wonder if I can clarify something from the speech of the member for Haldimand—Norfolk. My understanding is that Bill C-11 already passed in this House back in June. I understand she did not support it then, and it is clear she does not support it now. Tonight, we are debating the message being sent back to the Senate with respect to the amendments that the Senate proposed, some of which the governing party disagreed with.

Would she like to comment on that which we are voting on this evening?

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:30 p.m.

Conservative

Leslyn Lewis Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

Madam Speaker, I think it is a travesty that the Liberals, the NDP and the Bloc did not support the amendments of the Senate, specifically about excluding creator content. That would have done a lot to protect Canadian creators. It is a travesty that the Senate put so much work into that and that this House partially rejected it. I am proud to say that the Conservatives stood with the Senate proposals.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:30 p.m.

Conservative

Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

Madam Speaker, I found it really fascinating that the Senate, which is filled with a lot of the Prime Minister's supposedly independent senators, was upset about the bill and was pushing back. I am wondering if the member has any thoughts about what the Senate was trying to do and how the senators were actually standing up for the rights and freedoms of Canadians.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:30 p.m.

Conservative

Leslyn Lewis Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

Madam Speaker, I think it is clear that this is one of the most dangerous pieces of legislation that have ever been passed in this nation, and I think the Senate sees the danger in the legislation, the danger of encroaching upon the freedoms of Canadians. I think that, as sober second thought, these amendments should have been taken more seriously by this House. The Senate spent a great deal of time, as the House of sober second thought, crafting these amendments to make sure Canadians' liberty and freedom are protected in the online forum.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:35 p.m.

Conservative

Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS

Madam Speaker, I think it is ironic that the members opposite do not understand that they are censoring the censorship bill. In second reading, the government and its costly coalition partner, the NDP, imposed closure, and then they used their coalition in the House to impose a rule on the committee study of the bill that did not allow for the amendments being proposed to even be read in the committee before committee members voted on them, which is another form of censorship and closure. Today, they are again putting closure on the Senate amendments.

I would like the member to comment on this. On a bill that would restrict the freedom of what people can do on the Internet, why would we expect anything other than the government censoring it all along the debate?

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:35 p.m.

Conservative

Leslyn Lewis Conservative Haldimand—Norfolk, ON

Madam Speaker, it is very sad. With the interest that this bill has generated among grassroots, average, everyday Canadians, it is very sad that the Liberals did not take this to heart but actually sought closure. We should have had prolonged debate on this bill so that the Liberals could convince Canadians that they were in fact not taking—

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Saskatoon—University.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:35 p.m.

Conservative

Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK

Madam Speaker, what is happening in Canada? The world is watching our nation and seeing a big, bossy government close down debate on censorship. The Liberals are censoring the debate on censorship. This is what the world is seeing. This puts us in the category of the Communists of Beijing and countries like North Korea and Russia. Putin would be envious of the ability to change the algorithms of his viewers to watch content online.

This is a dangerous time in Canada. We have all had struggles for the past three years. The division in our country has never been as great as it is today, and now we have a government that wants to take it a step further, jumping on that raw nerve in Canada that distrusts government because of its actions on this bill. We are here tonight debating because of the forcing of closure on this bill. If people are watching this online, I am going to clip this and put it out there and hopefully if Bill C-11 does not pass they will still be able to watch this. People should like and share this right now, because this might be the last opportunity. People will be able to post things, but no one will be able to find them. This is what is in this bill. This is a layering-on of effects on our freedoms.

Even this beautiful Parliament, where 338 people from across Canada are elected to bring our views here, to debate ideas and policies and directions for our country with respect to what is right and what is wrong, has been affected, even before this bill. We are taking a system of communication that has been a tool of democracies all over the world and we are taking a tool out of the tool box.

There are problems in Canada. There are problems in our democracy. We have seen it with foreign influence in our country. We have seen that the state is now sponsoring media throughout our land, and when Canadians turn on the news, they are saying that it does not reflect their views and the Canada they know. Then they come to the realization that it is being sponsored by government and so they mistrust it. This goes back to the divisions that we have in our country. We have to come up with policies and ideas and laws that bring people together and not divide them. This is the problem that I have with this bill. It is another big, bossy government wanting to divide Canadians.

Censorship has been in our history in the world. History does not always repeat itself, but it rhymes. We only have to look to the failed regimes around the world, and not even that far back in our history, to the 1940s in eastern Europe. In 1945, there was a vote in Hungary. There was democracy in Hungary in 1945. In the vote, the Communists finished sixth. By 1949, it was a Communist country. How is that possible? One of the tactics they used is called a salami tactic, where they just take a slice, and every time a little slice more and a bit more each time. Right now, this is what this bill represents. The government will tell its citizens what they can watch, what they can consume, how they should be thinking or what thoughts they should be portraying.

I send pleas to the members here tonight to think about the impact if this bill becomes law in our country and in a future Parliament there is a leader who takes these tools and censors their party and their beliefs and what they want to post. This would take us into a country of Canada that I do not want any part of for myself or for my kids.

The bill would allow one to post all one wants, and we heard this earlier tonight, but one's fellow Canadians would not be able to view it. We still have time to stop this.

Later in my speech I will have two direct asks to Canadians who are watching live tonight or who are watching this online. I ask them to please, once again, like and share this video.

I would like to go back to some of the struggles we have in Canada because our institutions such as this place, Parliament, are not functioning how they were set up to function. Everybody in here has probably had people phone their office and say that they were watching question period and that everyone was asking questions but they were not hearing any answers. The citizens of this country see this over and over. They hear questions asked that they want to hear the answers to. They phone and write and ask why the Speaker is not telling them to answer those questions.

The problem is not so much that the Speaker needs to impose new rules on this place; it is how this was set up. We have freedom of press in Canada. How this place is supposed to work is that if we have an opposition grilling a minister or a prime minister and they are giving us garbage, the media would hound that minister or prime minister until they received answers to those questions. If they did not answer, it would heighten the question of what they are trying to hide.

We are not getting that right now in Canada. We have some great journalists who are working hard on uncovering the truths of what is happening, but those stories are not being published. This is because, like I said, when states start sponsoring media, everyone questions the stories they are hearing. We know whoever pays the piper picks the tune.

That is how this place is supposed to work. We should have the galleries full of media right now. We do not. During question period, we do not have media filling the galleries. It is because there are no stories; the opposition heckles. There is nothing they want to hear.

I do not know how this is going to end. We heard the government talking about proroguing, which is cancelling or shutting down Parliament. That could kill the bill. The bill is going to be passed to the Senate, unless the Bloc and the NDP decide they are not going to vote for it later tonight. There are still chances. I am an optimist; there is still hope.

The Canadians who are watching should not give up on hope. They can search out the petition we are circulating right now. They should be sure to sign up to get updates because we do not know what YouTube is going to show people in the months or years to come if this becomes law. However, they can have confidence. We heard earlier tonight from the Leader of the Opposition that one of the first things we would do is cancel Bill C-11.

I know my time is limited. I would like to thank everyone for being here tonight. I have one last ask of the people watching online. They should please like and share. I ask them to contact their NDP member of Parliament, because they can perhaps get the courage to stand up for their convictions, vote against the government and bring the government down. We could then have an election that elects a government that will protect our freedoms.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:45 p.m.

Liberal

Jenica Atwin Liberal Fredericton, NB

Madam Speaker, it felt a lot like we were listening to a sermon of sorts with some of the fire and brimstone coming our way in regard to the bill. I wonder if the member would be willing to apologize to Canadians once this bill reaches royal assent, is implemented in Canada and inevitably the sky does not fall and it is not the end of times. Will he apologize for the fearmongering and the mis-characterization of this bill?

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:45 p.m.

Conservative

Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK

Madam Speaker, governments have always enacted things for people's safety. It is for their benefit, and it will all be okay, my hon. colleague has pointed out. The problem is that people will not realize that they are not watching the videos that they want to watch; they are watching what the government wants them to watch. That is the problem. This is how badly written this is: People will not realize that the content they consume in the future is what the government wants them to consume, not what the viewer is looking for.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:45 p.m.

Bloc

René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC

Madam Speaker, there is a guarantee that private companies cannot be held responsible for the comments that third parties post on their platforms. At the same time, the act already strengthens the protection of personal information. I would like to know why the Conservatives are saying that freedom of expression is threatened when the companies have the duty to leave the comments online.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:45 p.m.

Conservative

Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK

Madam Speaker, I believe the analogy is a little bit about what is being spoken in the town square. The comment is that we cannot have people speaking their mind in the town square because it might go against other people's views. Instead, they would like to shut down town squares across Canada. That was in the past.

How we consume information right now is online. Anything that changes what people are viewing online is wrong, and it is censorship.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:45 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Madam Speaker, that is the craziest, wackiest speech that we have heard from Conservatives although they have, through this debate, been crazy and wacky at every single step. It is quite clear to Canadians that there is not a single Conservative who has actually read the bill because they all have the same speech: something, something, tyranny, North Korea; something, something freedom. We saw how devoted—

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:45 p.m.

Conservative

Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC

Madam Speaker, on a point of order, it is incorrect for the member for New Westminster—Burnaby to state that Conservatives have not read Bill C-11

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès) Liberal Alexandra Mendes

This is a matter for debate.

The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

Online Streaming ActGovernment Orders

6:45 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Madam Speaker, it is quite obvious that they have not read the bill. At no point in the hours and hours of debate—