Debates of Nov. 26th, 2024

Official Languages

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, those are very interesting questions.

When my grandmother talked about her sometimes rowdy grandsons, she would say that we were all smart enough to start a fire, but not smart enough to put it out. When I hear the Conservative leader say that he is going to get rid of the CBC but protect Radio-Canada, it sounds a bit like what my grandmother used to say. It reminds me a little of that. It is impossible.

It is impossible, and just about everyone who has taken the trouble of looking into the matter can vouch for that. It is impossible to make cuts to the CBC without doing serious harm to Radio-Canada. Ultimately, the cost of avoiding any damage at all would be almost as high as maintaining Radio-Canada's services for Canada's entire population.

As for the second question, perhaps Radio-Canada's original productions and shows are more successful. Perhaps Radio-Canada is more of a mainstay among Quebec's news and culture consumers than the CBC is in the rest of Canada. However, the CBC does have a number of very successful platforms. The CBC's online platforms are strong performers. The television side may be struggling a little, but the radio side is putting out excellent programs.

Yes, it is still an essential service for Canadians living in remote regions, like the northern B.C. region my colleague represents. Everyone has the right to have access to this service, to quality service. As far as the Conservative leader's rhetoric on defunding CBC/Radio‑Canada is concerned, I am afraid he will make good on his threats. However, it is going to blow up in his face because Canadians will never let something like that happen.

[Louis-Philippe Sauvé, Bloc, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my esteemed colleague for his excellent intervention.

I want to come back to something he covered in his intervention, namely dubbing. I have a friend whose father works in the dubbing industry. That industry is in crisis right now in Quebec.

My generation grew up on Quebec French. I am thinking of the translated versions of Captain Hook or Richie Rich, which are no longer available in Quebec French.

When CBC gets its shows translated in Paris, what message does that send to our creators, the dubbers in Quebec, people like Pierre Auger?

I would like my colleague to share his thoughts on this.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague is correct in saying that the dubbing industry is having a tough time. There is a whole host of challenges currently facing Quebec's dubbing industry, given the changes in technology and the rise of artificial intelligence. This is a real concern. The fact that officials here are not sending a strong signal of support is really disappointing, and this will only hurt the industry.

I completely agree with my colleague on that. I do not think the industry should be in that situation, and I do not think the CBC should have taken that approach with its podcast.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House to speak to this motion moved by the Standing Committee on Official Languages.

I have never been a member of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, but I have served as a replacement at that committee at times. I always found that the committee operated well. Its members understand the importance of the official languages and the importance of advancing the cause of language equality. The committee's work is extremely important. I would like to acknowledge the contribution of our representative on that committee, the member for Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, who does tremendous work. She is bilingual and speaks several different languages. She is a staunch defender of the French language, both official languages and bilingualism in general. She wants people to speak minority languages. Regardless of what language we speak in Canada, she is always there to defend language rights. I would like to acknowledge her work and the work of the committee.

Now, the motion before us today has been amended and, at the end of my speech, I will move an amendment to the amendment. It is coming later. The committee's motion reads as follows:

That the committee report to the house its deep condemnation of the CBC using a Paris-based audio studio to record a podcast, choosing it over a Quebecois-based recording studio to avoid the Quebec accent.

It is true that there are no more beautiful accents in the international Francophonie than the Québécois, Acadian, Franco-Ontarian, Franco-Columbian and western Canadian francophone accents, our local accents. Wherever I travel in the world, whether it be in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, South America or the Caribbean, these accents have a truly magnificent reach.

It does not make any sense that the CBC used this Paris-based recording studio. That was a big mistake. It is only right that the committee reminded the CBC that this never should have happened. That is important because we need to be proud of our francophone heritage and our French language in Canada. No matter what the accent, whether it be Acadian, Franco-Newfoundlander, Franco-Columbian or Québécois, it is important to be proud of one's language. It is therefore important to say that this was not a good decision.

Other CBC/Radio-Canada decisions are open to criticism, including the bonuses, as my colleague from Churchill—Keewatinook Aski has repeatedly pointed out. The idea of giving bonuses to senior CBC/Radio-Canada executives while cutting basic journalism and services across the country makes no sense. For the NDP, taking care of this journalism is what really matters across the country. That necessarily means investing in basic journalism. Communities need to talk to one another, whether it is in English or in French. We have witnessed the erosion of good journalism from one end of the country to the other because a growing number of big chains, sometimes foreign chains, are buying up assets in Canada and often shutting down newspapers, which is killing local radio and TV journalism.

Now more than ever, it is important to focus on investing at the local level, so that communities know what is going on in their own backyard. An NDP government will do just that. It will require CBC/Radio-Canada executives to invest locally in order to encourage local journalism so that, regardless of where they live in the largest democracy on the planet, people know what is going on in their community.

That is important. That is why we condemn the idea that executive performance bonuses should take precedence over local journalism. We believe it should be the other way around. That is what an NDP government will do.

Now, let us talk about Radio-Canada's qualities. Sometimes, a bad decision is made, and people are quick to say that it is not a good decision and that we need to talk about it. The fact is that Radio-Canada's journalism is something that people across the country are proud of. It has won hundreds of journalism awards not only domestically, but also internationally. Not once in my political career have I seen a single Conservative MP stand up to congratulate CBC/Radio-Canada for winning another award given out by independent judges. They have never done that.

What the Conservatives want is to destroy the public broadcaster. They have been very clear about that. The member for Carleton says it is possible to eliminate all the services in English and eliminate all of CBC's English-language journalism, which has won hundreds of awards, without touching Radio‑Canada's French-language journalism. That is ridiculous, and it shows how little respect the Conservatives have for the average Canadian. The Conservatives are saying something that is obviously false, thinking that everyone will simply accept this falsehood coming from the Conservatives.

Vancouver has services and several radio stations. Naturally, there is an online service that has millions of subscribers. People watch Radio‑Canada news on their computers more often than on TV. The radio is also very popular.

The Conservatives are saying that they are going to do away with the whole English side and that even if all of the French-speaking journalists end up on the street, they will somehow magically keep working. That is ridiculous. Radio-Canada would be wiped out in western Canada, in Edmonton, Regina, Calgary and Winnipeg. Radio-Canada would be destroyed in Atlantic Canada, in Moncton, Halifax, Saint John and Charlottetown. Everything would be wiped out and destroyed in Ontario, in Sudbury, Toronto and Windsor. All of Radio-Canada's services would be cut in Ottawa and Quebec City. Services would be cut everywhere in Quebec, including Montreal, Saguenay—Lac‑Saint‑Jean, where I lived for many years, the Eastern Townships, Sherbrooke, the north shore, the Gaspé, the Lower St. Lawrence, Quebec City, Trois-Rivières, the Outaouais and Abitibi-Témiscamingue.

The Conservatives are claiming that they are somehow going to magically succeed in protecting Radio-Canada while they destroy the CBC, which is completely ridiculous. It is dishonest to say that. When we look at the Conservatives' track record for the years when they were in power, we can see that they have no respect for official languages. They made no progress whatsoever for official languages at either the provincial or the federal level. When the Conservatives are in power, they destroy all of the services that are offered.

For a francophone who believes in official languages, voting Conservative is voting to put an end to all possible services. According to the Conservatives, these people, these taxpayers, do not have the right to any services in their language. That is what history shows. I am not talking about the stance being taken by the Conservatives because, of course, the member for Carleton will always hide his real motives, which involve major cuts.

If we look to the past, we can see what the Conservatives will do for official languages and for Radio-Canada once they are in power. In the past, they gave extremely generous and irresponsible gifts to billionaires. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, they gave $30 billion a year for tax havens, $116 billion in liquidity supports for Canada's big banks, and billions upon billions of dollars for CEOs. What the Conservatives do is give to the rich. That is their reason for being. The Conservative Party is a party for the rich. As the member for Carleton criss-crosses the country to meet with rich people, he always asks those well-off people to donate the maximum amount in support of his pro-wealthy policies. He did so just this week.

When we look at how the Conservatives operate, it is clear that they are very bad at managing money. They also make cuts to public services. We saw all the cuts they made. As far as pension plans are concerned, they told people that they would no longer be allowed to retire at 65, that they would be forced to work extra years. They also said they were going to cut services to veterans. They do not want these people to have access to services, even though they have sacrificed their lives and sometimes their health for our country. Of course, we also saw cuts to health care and social housing.

The member for Carleton brags about having built six affordable housing units in his entire career. Let us compare his career to that of the NDP leader. The member for Burnaby South did more over the past 20 weeks than the member for Carleton did in 20 years: dental care, pharmacare, affordable housing, anti-scab legislation, and the list goes on. In 20 weeks, the member for Burnaby South did far more to help people than the member for Carleton did in 20 years.

What the Conservatives did when they were in power was cut, cut, cut. They made cuts to all services so they could give money to billionaires. That is how the Conservatives operate. That is their reason for being. They are also going to make cuts to services provided in the official languages. French-speaking taxpayers will no longer be entitled to services that should exist. In a bilingual country where citizens pay taxes, people should have access to services in their own language, but no, that will not be the case with the Conservatives, because they make cuts to all services, and they will make cuts to this one too.

They are also going to destroy CBC/Radio-Canada. It is all based on Trumpism. It is no surprise that, in the United States, Trumpism targets good journalism and all of the award-winning journalists. This movement attacks public radio and public television so that news sources are once again concentrated in the hands of billionaires. That is the way they operate, giving everything to billionaires so that ordinary people do not have access to proper, professional news. CBC/Radio-Canada is not immune to criticism. I would not say that it is always 100% accurate, but it is possible to get an apology from the public broadcaster. Mistakes are sometimes made, but they are corrected. That is the difference. With billionaires who own newspapers and TV networks, no corrections are ever made, because the billionaires are the ones who decide on the message and on what people should hear.

I think it is harmful to our democracy that Conservative members want to make cuts to all independent sources of news and ensure that a single class of people, namely billionaires, gets to tell us what to do. Francophone members of the Conservative Party from Quebec are also defending these actions and say they are ready to see CBC/Radio-Canada collapse. If they were honest with their constituents, I am sure these people would tell them that they want nothing to do with the Conservative attack on CBC/Radio-Canada, that they want quality journalism, and that when Radio-Canada or the CBC makes a mistake, they want it corrected. These people want local journalism. They want to know what is happening in their community, in their region and in their country.

I wanted to raise this before reading my amendment to the amendment. It makes me sad to know that journalists are not appreciated. I want to point out today in the House that there are quality journalists at CBC/Radio-Canada. They work hard every day to keep Canadians informed. I thank them for their work.

Before reading my amendment to the amendment, I would like to say one last time to my Conservative colleagues that they need to be honest. Trump's victory in the U.S is not a sign that Canadians are going to be okay with the truth being kept from them. It does not mean that it is time to start peddling conspiracy theories and killing effective journalism to prevent Canadians from having access to the facts, the truth and information, which is so important. Canadians do not want that. They want the opposite. They want to have access to information that is based on science and facts.

If we want to overcome the challenges that Canada is facing, such as climate change, poverty, the lack of social housing, the fact that families are struggling while billionaires receive so many gifts from the current government, as they did from Harper, we need access to information. It is vital to support CBC/Radio‑Canada's important broadcasting mandate.

I move:

That the amendment be amended by adding, after the words “to avoid the Quebec accent”, the following: “and redirect any amount received as a bonus or performance pay to support CBC/Radio-Canada's important broadcasting mandate”.

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

The subamendment is in order.

Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I am wondering what the member thinks about how the Conservative Party has targeted not only the CBC, but at times and quite often CTV. One of the best illustrations I can think of off-hand is the Conservatives' lack of willingness to participate in political panels. The last time I participated in a CBC and CTV panel, there was a New Democratic representative, but the Conservatives do not feel they want to contribute. Rather, they discredit the mainstream media in favour of supporting social media, which is in essence spreading a great deal of misinformation through what many would suggest, including me, are further-right organizations that have a vested interest in propping up the Conservative Party or spreading misinformation.

Could the member provide his thoughts on that? It is not a healthy situation for our democracy, especially when we think of defunding the CBC, which the leader of the Conservative Party is talking about doing.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, this is indeed what the Conservatives are trying to do. What they cannot control, they destroy. We have seen this from authoritarian governments around the world. There is no independent journalism practised in Russia. Hungary saw independent journalists being attacked. We are seeing now an attack on public radio and public television in the United States with the triumph of Trumpism. The reality is that they do not respect the kind of journalism that is a vital part of democracy.

When we stand up to do a scrum, as my colleague is well aware, we get tough questions sometimes, and Canadians expect us to answer those tough questions. For Conservatives to refuse to go on panels, for Conservatives to refuse to stand up for their positions and for the leader of the Conservative Party, the member for Carleton, to be thin-skinned whenever he is asked tough questions by legitimate journalists shows a singular disregard and disrespect for democracy that I think Canadians should heed.

The reality is that journalism, like the kind of journalism we are seeing from CBC/Radio-Canada, which has won hundreds of awards, is very much the foundation of democracy, and that the Conservatives do not respect it shows how much disrespect they have for our democratic system.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Madam Speaker, when a public broadcaster like the CBC prefers to have its programs dubbed in France, what message is it sending to private international broadcasters like Disney+ and Netflix?

Does my hon. colleague have a proposal addressing that? Does he agree with the Bloc Québécois's motion to require that programs be dubbed in Quebec if they are going to be broadcast in Quebec?

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague. If a program is broadcast in Canada, it should be dubbed in Canada. There is no question about that.

Radio-Canada should be promoting the Quebec accent, the Acadian accent, the Franco-Colombian accent and the Franco-Ontarian accent. I think it sends a very negative message, as she said so well, to say that we are not going to respect the beauty of Canada's French accents. Yes, regional variations do exist. The Montreal accent is not quite the same as the accent in the place where I learned French, in Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean. The reality is that our French is beautiful and it deserves to be broadcast. Dubbing needs to be done here.

I think that Radio-Canada got the message. I certainly hope it will not happen again and that the broadcaster realizes the importance of respecting the beauty of our French language.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, like the member, I was shocked to learn that CBC chose to hire a company from Paris to avoid the Quebec accent. Quebec has a world-class industry. It is ridiculous that this was not done in Quebec.

I was also shocked to learn that CBC executives received multi-million dollar bonuses while laying off workers. The Conservatives want to slash and gut the CBC and reduce funding for public broadcasting. This is the Conservatives' partisan objective.

That said, the Liberals continue to give ammunition to the Conservatives. The Liberal Privy Council approved these multi-million dollar bonuses. The Conservatives want to cut CBC funding. We, the New Democrats, want to invest and fix these problems.

Could the member speak about the need to stop paying multi-million dollar bonuses to executives and use that money to invest in local journalism?

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Victoria for her question, which she asked in impeccable French. It just goes to show how important official languages are. We have two members from British Columbia speaking to each other in French in the House.

I do not think the Bloc Québécois will ever admit that the French language has a presence all across Canada. It is spoken in British Columbia, where the francophone population continues to grow. Members from the other side of the country, 5,000 kilometres from here, are speaking to each other in French in the House. This shows the importance of bilingualism. This shows the importance that New Democrats attach to the French language. That is why we want Radio-Canada and CBC to continue together.

The Conservatives want to cut everything. They want to run roughshod over Radio-Canada and the CBC and destroy them. Sometimes they do not like the CBC saying things that expose their contradictions. Sometimes, the CBC gives the Conservative Party's positions plenty of air time. It does the same thing for everyone. Sometimes our party is criticized. Sometimes we are appreciated. It is the role of journalism to criticize us sometimes. The Conservative leader, the member for Carleton, does not want to hear any criticism. He does not want to hear any questions that might be tough or difficult to answer. He just wants to do away with it. I find that unfortunate.

The fact that bonuses are being given out is just more ammunition. People say that it is important to support local journalism. The NDP has never shied away from the topic. We have always been very clear. We want Radio-Canada and CBC to invest at the local level, we want journalism to be encouraged. Unlike the Liberal government that allows these bonuses to continue and the Conservatives who want to destroy everything, the NDP proposes a role for Radio-Canada and CBC across the country. The NDP has respect for both official languages, which the other political parties are lacking. That is a speech for another day, but when we look at the NDP governments across the country, they have always respected the official languages. That is something that is important. We are proving again today that two MPs from British Columbia can debate each other in French.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore.

It was wonderful to hear the speech by the member for New Westminster—Burnaby and see that there are anglophone MPs from British Columbia who speak impeccable French in the House. Today we saw anglophone members from all parties who are able to manage in French in the House. This is part of Canada's richness. We have people who come from one community, learn each other's language and love each other's culture. We are trying to flourish together in a country that is much bigger than a single province.

As for the dubbing issue, it is absolutely shocking that CBC chose a Parisian studio to do the dubbing. There are very talented people all over Canada. There has been a lot of talk about the industry in Quebec, but there is also an industry in Acadia and other parts of Canada. There are skilled francophones throughout Canada. There has been a lot of talk about the Quebec accent, but there is not just one Quebec accent. There are many different accents in Quebec. There are also francophone accents from all over the country. I think it is completely contradictory that CBC/Radio-Canada says it wants to promote French and support Canada's various cultural institutions but chose not to use a Canadian firm for the dubbing work.

I, too, completely agree that CBC/Radio-Canada management has some explaining to do. I saw Ms. Tait's appearances before the committee. I would like to ask her a number of questions, not only on this matter, but on a number of other issues as well.

There are definitely some problems with CBC/Radio-Canada management, but this institution is still very important, not only for francophone communities but also for all anglophone communities in Canada.

The CBC is an institution that helps unite this country. We can go back to La famille Plouffe from the 1950s, a show broadcast in both French and English. That allowed Canadians from all across the country to understand what was going on across Canada, and it bridged linguistic gaps that sometimes seem insurmountable.

There are francophone populations in Canada. Most of them are in Quebec, but they do exist across the country. I have visited francophone communities in Newfoundland, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Manitoba, British Columbia, Alberta, even Saskatchewan and, certainly, here in Ontario. Radio-Canada is so important in those communities. Unlike in Montreal, where we have TVA and other networks and programs, in some parts of Canada, Radio-Canada is the only station they have.

The same is true for English-speaking Quebeckers who live outside the Montreal region. The Conservative Party's position to cut the English CBC means that English-speaking taxpayers across the country will be paying to have only the French service, not the English service. How long do we believe governments will sustain Radio-Canada when English-speaking taxpayers turn against having a network that only broadcasts in French as our national broadcaster?

More importantly, while Conservatives pretend they care about the English-speaking community of Quebec, this is just one example where they clearly are not thinking of English-speaking Quebeckers. Whether it is Saguenay, Gaspé, Côte-Nord, Rouyn-Noranda or Quebec City, there are many parts of Quebec where the CBC is the primary vehicle for English-speaking Quebeckers to get local news in English. They have no other local vehicle that does that.

If we were to cut all of the English services of the CBC, we would be depriving the English-speaking community of Quebec, 1.3 million people, all of those who live outside of Montreal, the chance of getting their news in English. How can any party support that position? Why should we pay taxes toward denying one language community a broadcast in their own language? Then there is the question of francophones outside of Quebec.

Outside Quebec, Radio-Canada and CBC share resources. People who produce French-language programs outside Quebec generally also do English-language work for CBC. It makes no sense to deprive all Radio-Canada offices outside Quebec of the vast majority of their resources. This policy should be changed. We should all be saying that Radio-Canada and CBC are important, not only for news broadcasting, but also for Canada's national unity.

I also want to deal with the question that the NDP brought up about bonuses. The question of whether to pay bonuses when employees are being cut is a very legitimate question. It is not wrong to ask those questions. It is not wrong to ask questions about whether Ms. Tait should get a bonus, given performance and all the issues about which we are talking. It is perfectly appropriate for the committee to have those discussions and to inform itself on that matter.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the manner in which the member expresses the future of Radio-Canada, that we should not be taking it for granted. If the Conservatives defund CBC, as they have said they would, that would follow. At the very least, Canadians need to be aware that this is a very serious issue, if we believe in public broadcasting and the independence of journalists. Doing investigative reporting and other reporting, something to counter social media, for example, is absolutely critical for our democracy.

I wonder if the member could provide his thoughts on that.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I do not believe that the country will long sustain Radio-Canada without the CBC. As I mentioned, Radio-Canada services outside Quebec, where the populations are the most vulnerable, are using CBC offices, CBC cameras, CBC equipment and CBC personnel to cover the news and to do shows in French. The idea that Radio-Canada would sustain itself outside of Quebec very easily without the CBC being there is a fallacy.

The second thing is that I do not believe English-speaking taxpayers will agree to pay for the service to be available only in French and not in English.

Finally, it would be drastically unfair to the English-speaking minority in Quebec, who would lose their only source of news in most parts of Quebec, if we took away their service in English. It is supposed to be a national broadcaster uniting us, not dividing us.

[Louis-Philippe Sauvé, Bloc, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague raised a point that I wanted to address earlier when I questioned the member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière‑du‑Loup. He talked about national unity and the fact that anglophone taxpayers would not be okay with paying for a French-only service if the CBC were abolished. I am a separatist, obviously, and that does not bother me. However, I would like to know what the member for Mount Royal thinks about the need for Canada to retain both official languages if it wants to ensure its long-term survival. Former prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau said it was a matter of realpolitik. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that argument.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to welcome my colleague to the House. This is the first time we have had the opportunity to share ideas. I agree, this is realpolitik. Canada is a bilingual country where both official languages are supposed to be present in every province, with national services available in both languages. I will always fight to ensure that all services available in English are also available in French. Sometimes they are not. Sometimes, things are not equal but they should be, always, 100% equal. I believe that CBC/Radio-Canada provides an important service to the entire country. We should ensure that it is available in both official languages.

[Louis-Philippe Sauvé, Bloc, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his valuable response.

If the Canadian government, led by the Leader of the Opposition, were to cut services to anglophones, including in the province, would my colleague not be convinced that Quebec needs to be independent? Does he not think that a Quebec republic could better protect the rights of anglophones in Quebec than the current constitutional framework? I would like to hear his thoughts on that.

.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am a proud Canadian. I love this country from coast to coast to coast.

Apparently, one need only look at the separatist governments that have taken power in Quebec to see that very few people in Quebec's anglophone community believe our rights would be better protected in an independent Quebec than in Canada. That said, I would have a major quarrel with any government that cut the CBC or Radio‑Canada.

I worked with the Bloc Québécois on a number of cultural issues at the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. We need to have the debate here and change any government that does that kind of thing.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am very concerned about the Conservative leader's tactics to divide Canadians and create conflict between francophone and anglophone communities. My riding has a very strong and proud Franco-Ontarian population. Many francophone communities are in rural areas. In my region, Radio-Canada is essential. In northern Ontario, it would be impossible to separate Radio-Canada from CBC because it is the same company.

Why are the Conservatives trying to use divisive politics to force a confrontation between francophones and anglophones across Canada?

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I could not agree more. His comments give me the opportunity to share another obvious point. There is a member from northern Ontario here in the House who speaks perfect French. It is proof that Canada can work.

It is true that, in the hon. member's region, Radio-Canada's resources are mixed with the CBC's. Therefore, if the CBC is cut, all the equipment, all the trucks and all the people who work for Radio-Canada will be gone as well. It is very divisive.

I encourage my Conservative friends to change their policy, which is not good for anglophones, not good for francophones, not good for Quebec and not good for any other province.

[James Maloney, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by thanking members of the standing committee for their examination of the issue of the adaptation of CBC/Radio-Canada's audiovisual content for the international market. I would also like to thank the representatives of CBC/Radio-Canada, Ms. Catherine Tait, president and CEO, and Mr. Marco Dubé, chief transformation officer and executive vice-president for people and culture, for appearing before the committee as witnesses.

In its report, the committee reported to the House “its deep condemnation of the CBC using a Paris-based audio studio to record a podcast, choosing it over a Quebecois-based recording studio.”

If we are to understand the situation, it is worth reviewing the facts of the matter. On October 11, 2023, the Journal de Montréal reported that CBC/Radio-Canada had selected a company based in France to create a French adaptation of its podcast, Alone: A Love Story, choosing it over a Quebec-based recording studio to avoid the recording being done in a Quebec accent.

The podcast, released in 2017 and created by CBC/Radio-Canada employee Michelle Parise, has won multiple international awards and much acclaim from international press. The Paris-based studio Ochenta, in collaboration with Radio-Canada OHdio, was commissioned to adapt the Canadian podcast into French and Spanish. The decision was made in part because using a narrator with a Quebec accent would have less international potential.

Cesil Fernandes, an executive producer at CBC Podcasts, a subsidiary of CBC/Radio-Canada's English language network, was quoted as saying, “We didn't want a Quebec French, to foster international interest... We wanted to reach out to a larger audience to tell Michelle's story. The Ochenta studio made us a pitch to translate it into French and Spanish. We decided to work with them for their experience in adaptations and to reach out to international audiences.”

The article naturally led to questions, particularly in Quebec, as to why CBC Podcasts chose to ignore Quebec's expertise in the field of dubbing, and to complaints from people in the province working in the arts and cultural industries.

For example, Tania Kontoyanni, president of the Union des artistes, stated, “For a podcast produced and broadcast in Quebec, the narration should be done by local artists. And especially in the context of a Canadian podcast translated into French.” Similarly, voice actor Sébastien Dhavernas stated that the decision showed a “disrespect for our industry.”

There are certainly Canadian studios that are able to adapt podcasts. The Journal de Montréal article mentions Quebec companies ContenuMultimedia.com and Toast Studio, for example. Indeed, CBC Podcasts has previously worked with Radio-Canada itself on the French adaptation of the podcast Brainwashed, which is hosted in standard French by Quebec journalist and columnist Sophie-Andrée Blondin.

That is the background to this issue. With that in mind, I can say that the government echoes the committee's review that CBC/Radio-Canada's use of a Paris-based recording studio for this work instead of a Quebec-based recording studio was a lapse in judgment.

It is true that the decision should be taken in context. To quote the head of CBC/Radio-Canada during her testimony to the standing committee:

I think it's important to know that the CBC/Radio-Canada teams produce hundreds of programs every month, thousands of hours of programming in both official languages and eight Indigenous languages. In this case, one mistake was made among the thousands of hours of programming.

Furthermore, it is also true that section 46(1)(d) of the Broadcasting Act gives the corporation the power to “make contracts with any person, within or outside Canada, in connection with the production or presentation of programs originated or secured by the Corporation.” Nonetheless, it is clear that CBC/Radio-Canada should not have acquired the services of a foreign company for this work rather than look to domestic opportunities.

What is important to remember, however, is that this mistake does not represent how CBC/Radio-Canada generally operates. CBC/Radio-Canada is a thoroughly bilingual organization. Radio-Canada is headquartered in Quebec and produces a myriad of French language programming.

As Mr. Dubé noted in his testimony to the standing committee, eight members of the corporation's senior management team are francophones. That represents the majority of members. The senior management team works in English and in French at all of its meetings and makes business management decisions exercising considerable concern for balance between English and French. Half of the corporation's workforce in the organization as a whole is francophone and the other half anglophone. As Ms. Tait said, “I would dare say that we are one of the most bilingual businesses in the federal family.”

Even more importantly, CBC/Radio-Canada itself agrees that its original decision was a mistake. Almost immediately upon publication of the Journal de Montréal story on October 13, Catherine Tait, president and CEO, wrote to Tania Kontoyanni, president of the Union des artistes, acknowledging the error. In her letter, Catherine Tait stated clearly that “it was an error, period. We admit this unequivocally and we apologize for it....We are fortunate to have, here in Canada, an outstanding dubbing industry that works with very talented actors. We often use their services, and that is what we should have done in this case”. She also admitted the corporation's initial response to media questions was lacking in sensitivity.

Furthermore, she promised CBC/Radio-Canada will review its practices to ensure this sort of mistake would not occur again.

At the same time, Mr. Marco Dubé, chief transformation officer and executive vice-president, contacted the association with the same message.

Ms. Tait also appeared as a witness before the standing committee on November 8, 2023. During her testimony, she again apologized, not only confirming that the failure to use Canadian dubbing expertise was an unfortunate incident and mistake, but also reaffirming that the corporation's initial attempts to justify it were deplorable, hurtful and unacceptable. Ms. Tait indicated the corporation would withdraw the French episodes for the time being and re-record them. The adaptation of the podcast will be made in this country and Radio-Canada will be responsible for it. Production is already under way and the new version will be online at the beginning of the summer.

Ms. Tait also reaffirmed during her appearance at the standing committee that steps are being taken to ensure there will be no repetition of this sort of error. At the same appearance, Mr. Dubé, head of transformation and senior vice-president, confirmed that the issue was discussed with the teams who made the decision and that they understand the scope of their error. More specifically, the corporation has introduced measures to ensure that when CBC teams are required to interpret or translate a podcast into French, they call upon Quebec firms.

It is equally important to note the reaction from the industry to this apology. “We accept the apology and pass it on to our members”, said Ms. Kontoyanni in a press release on October 13.

To sum up, this was an error. CBC/Radio-Canada has taken note of it, has acted to correct it and will ensure it does not reoccur. While regrettable, this incident does not reflect on CBC/Radio-Canada's fundamental values or the work it does.

I will conclude by simply quoting Ms. Tait once more:

We know how much people depend on us, particularly in minority language communities where we are one of the few media broadcasting in the French language. We take our commitment seriously, particularly our ability to support the health and vitality of the French language every day across the country.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in what universe would any single member of the Conservative Party care about public broadcasting? It is impossible. They live and feed in a swamp of disinformation. This is what elected Donald Trump.

The attack on the CBC is about attacking public journalism, just like the leader of the Conservatives attacked CTV, Global, the Toronto Star and The Canadian Press. Individual journalists have been targeted by the member who lives in Stornoway, who wants the world to live in a swamp of disinformation.

I am appalled that we are having to discuss contract choices made at what should be an arm's-length institution. There are many things I disagree with regarding the CBC. There are many times I rant as I listen to the radio driving in my car. However, I believe democracy requires an independent, credible media system.

The Conservatives sit there like numpties, laughing and ridiculing because they feed themselves on disinformation. They would not know truth if it came down naked, painted in purple, and danced all over their heads for two weeks. They have never seen truth because they live in a world of disinformation and are trying to reduce the rest of us to live in that fetid swamp.

[James Maloney, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I do not know if that was a question, but I will thank the member anyway. If he is looking for an argument, he is not going to get one from me.

We all know why we are having this discussion in the House of Commons today. It is another opportunity for the Conservatives to attack the CBC, as they do day in and day out. As my friend rightly pointed out, their attack on media, public or private, is constant, outrageous and offensive.

The CBC serves a meaningful purpose. I represent the good people of Etobicoke—Lakeshore now, but I grew up in Thunder Bay. Without the CBC, I would not have had sports or news. I would not have had the information that all people in northwestern Ontario need to survive and get through the day. It is absolutely vital. This is nothing more than just another shameless attempt to attack the CBC to score some cheap political points.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for my friend across the way. In the midst of declining viewership and poor performance overall with the CBC, does he feel it was a prudent thing for the CBC to grant such massive executive bonuses, and why does he think his government would give the CBC the additional money to do that without putting in some checks and balances?

[James Maloney, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have a great deal of respect for the member, as he knows. He is from Manitoba and I grew up in northwestern Ontario. We have a kindred relationship.

The answer is no, obviously. My reaction when I heard the news was, I am sure, identical to his own. At a time when employees are being laid off or having to take pay cuts, there is no place for bonuses and the type of behaviour that took place. However, let us deal with that in isolation. Let us not use that as just another weapon to attack the CBC.

I am happy to talk about that issue in itself and take measures to address it, but the CBC is an institution that is critical to Canada and Canadian culture.