Debates of Oct. 22nd, 2026

Opposition Motion—Funding of the Cultural Sector

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to remind my colleague that, over the last 12 months, our government invested over $1.5 billion to support the cultural sector. These sums helped support many cultural events that have an impact on our identity as Canadians, Quebeckers or Acadians.

Here is my question for my colleague: Given the current economic uncertainty, is a $1.5-billion investment not a testament to the importance given by our government to supporting culture and a multitude of programs that have real impacts on the ground?

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the motion on the order paper today calls for an interim payment of $600 million, and it could have been more. This money is coming out of the pockets of taxpayers, when, instead of making Canadians pay, the tech giants could have been made to pay. That would have given us more money. Allocating a certain amount is one thing, but why not seek more and make sure that taxpayers do not have to pay anything?

I think a responsible government would do exactly what our motion calls for.

[Harb Gill, Conservative, Windsor West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that protecting Quebec culture and the French language was important enough to walk away from trade negotiations with the United States, yet he backed away from requiring American streaming giants to contribute to our cultural sector. The $600 million he promised has still not reached our friends in Quebec.

Has the Prime Minister sacrificed Canada's cultural sovereignty to appease Washington? If he has not, why are American tech giants off the hook while Quebec artists, French language producers and Canadian taxpayers are left holding the bag?

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleague. Personally, I think that someone who backs down like this is not someone I would send to war to defend my own identity and my own culture. In short, it is a recurring theme for us in the Bloc Québécois. Yes, the Prime Minister has let down artists and Canadians. I hope he will be able to make amends. Once again, we are talking about the $600 million, but no one has seen a cent of that. Again, throwing out numbers is all well and good, but we have not seen a cent of this money, and the amount is not enough.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a comment and hear my colleague's thoughts on it.

Earlier, in my speech, I said that the economy and culture go hand in hand. I hear the government saying that culture is important and needs to be promoted, and it certainly seems to be congratulating itself, but is it actually doing anything concrete?

We have to use this opposition day to sound the alarm and to point out that the $600 million has yet to materialize and the government is ignoring the Broadcasting Act.

Is my colleague as discouraged as I am? It is time to get out of here.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I do not have a lot of hope that change will come. That is why I want Quebec to become a country.

I get a sense that the government is playing a kind of bait and switch game. One minute we are talking about the Broadcasting Act and the government's obligations under it, and then suddenly it backtracks. The same thing happens all the time. We see it with Bill C-5 and with Bill C-39, which threatens other bills that are currently on the table. The government says it is getting things done, but then reverses what it accomplished. It says that it is going to get the first nations drinking water issue moving, for example, but then tables Bill C‑39, without being sure what impact it will have in that regard. It could nullify parts of the bill. The government acts as though it is making progress, but ultimately, it always backs down, in every sense of the word.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is important to recognize that, on the issue of global streaming services, it is not a question of whether they should. They must be able to contribute to our cultural sector. It is not if, but how.

That is something the Government of Canada is working on. The $600 million is an interim solution so there is money to support the industry. Could the member reflect on that comment?

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would simply add that, obviously, if I were part of the government and had options, I would not be doing what the government is doing now. It is doing absolutely nothing for culture. I can barely understand my colleague's comment. He talked about an interim solution, so he might as well vote for our motion.

[Abdelhaq Sari, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to mention that I will be sharing my time with the member for Edmonton Strathcona .

There are things that cannot be measured in dollars. There is a refrain that an entire people knows by heart, a show that unites three generations in front of the same screen, a news report that forces us to face the truth; that is culture. It is not a luxury that people treat themselves to when everything is going well. It is the thread that connects us to one another and that obviously connects Quebec, la belle province, to the world. I would like to thank my Bloc Québécois colleagues for dedicating this day to culture.

We completely agree on the facts: Culture is at the heart of Quebec's identity; it sustains our economy, and it is now weathering a storm.

I am from Montreal North, Bourassa. Where I come from, culture is not an abstract concept. It is a young artist recording their first track in their basement. It is a teenager filming her neighbourhood with her phone because no one else is telling its story. It is a family newly arrived in Quebec discovering the Maison culturelle et communautaire de Montréal-Nord and the artists who give voice to their new community. For these young people, culture is often the first door that opens. It is a path to self-confidence, to a career and, ultimately, to a full and equal place in Quebec society.

The question, then, is not whether we should support culture; of course we should. The real question is how can we support it here and now, in practical terms, without leaving our creators by the wayside. What exactly is at stake?

Let us remember what is at stake. In 2024, audiovisual and interactive media generated more than $20 billion in gross domestic product and more than 172,000 jobs. Sound recording and music publishing generated over $542 million and some 5,500 jobs. Behind these figures are faces, screenwriters, sound engineers, film crews and local journalists. Around them are workshops, suppliers and restaurants that depend on every production and every event for their existence.

That talent shines. This year, the National Film Board of Canada won the Oscar for best animated short film with The Girl Who Cried Pearls.

The money we are talking about today is tied up in court, but let us not lose sight of reality while Quebeckers are watching us. The Online Streaming Act brought platforms into our system. In 2024, the CRTC required them to contribute 5% of their revenue from their sales in Canada. That decision has since been challenged in court. In May, the CRTC increased the requirement to 15%, but everyone knew that a new court battle would ensue.

In the meantime, who is paying the price for the wait, for the delay? Who is really paying the price for this opportunity cost? It is not the platforms; it is the creators. No money comes from levies stuck in court. No movie production can be funded. No newsroom can be saved.

That is why, on June 3, our government made a clear, informed and responsible choice to give $600 million a year to the audio and audiovisual sectors. That is $600 million a year now, not in five years or following a legal proceeding. This is a firm commitment from the government.

As we are permitted to under the act, we also provided the CRTC with new policy directions that set out clear priorities: French content, local news, indigenous stories and official language minority communities.

As a government, we are refusing to let families foot the bill. In my riding of Bourassa, people are counting every penny. Culture must therefore remain accessible to everyone, not just those who can afford it.

We are talking about an additional amount here. What has been added? This $600 million is on top of the investments in the most recent budget. That brings me to the comments that I heard from my Bloc Québécois colleagues today.

When stating facts and quoting numbers, it is better to take the entire amount into account. The sum total is not $600 million. The calculation must include every other investment, ant the total then becomes $1.15 billion: CBC/Radio-Canada got some money; $150 million over three years for Telefilm Canada; $127.5 million for the Canada Media Fund; $48 million for music; not to mention the National Film Board, the Canada Council for the Arts and TV5MONDE+, which showcases French-language original content. That channel is really dear to me. Before I came to Quebec, my window into Quebec culture was TV5MONDE. It was really important for me to mention it.

Unfortunately, the Bloc Québécois voted against that budget and blocked it. They cannot ask for resources to support culture after blocking all the investments I just listed. They support culture in the morning and vote against it in the evening. That is critical: There needs to be some consistency between what they are saying today and how they voted previously. They obviously should have voted for the investments announced by the government, not against them.

An important point must also be made. I encourage all members to read the recent articles published by Radio-Canada and La Presse on misinformation, because culture also includes access to reliable information. In an age of misinformation, an independent journalist who verifies facts, conducts investigations and provides context is a safeguard for our democracy. Journalism is one of the pillars of our democracy. That is why we are undertaking consultations on extending the labour tax credit for journalism to audio and audiovisual production.

Let us now turn to the future. We are also paving the way for the next generation. An advisory group is currently examining the modernization of our audiovisual institutions. No decisions have been made, but one guiding principle remains clear: Creators must retain ownership of their work and the value it generates. Having taught at university and worked in artificial intelligence, I say with conviction that AI will profoundly transform cultural and artistic creation. It is up to us to ensure that it serves our artists rather than replacing them. We must ensure that it acts as a tool that strengthens and supports their work rather than displacing it. Achieving that goal requires investment in training and respect for the work of creators.

I want to go back to the motion itself. The Bloc Québécois is asking us to respect the CRTC. We respect its independence, but the law also gives the government the responsibility of giving it direction. That is what we are doing openly before the House. Locking in a framework that is bogged down in court is not protecting culture. It is prolonging the wait and creating delays. The Bloc Québécois is asking us to provide $600 million. We share their sense of urgency. It is precisely because we share that sense of urgency that we have opted for direct funding rather than waiting for the litigation to be resolved.

In closing, I want to go back to this young man from Montreal North, leaning over his microphone in his basement. I want him to know that his story matters, that his voice matters, that his language matters and that, tomorrow, there will be a strong industry ready to welcome him. The choices we make today, as a government, are not just about jobs and businesses. They decide what stories we tell and what stories we will tell our children, our young children, and what stories the world will hear from us.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in his usual fashion, the hon. member for Bourassa is lecturing us on morality. Everyone but him has their facts wrong and plays politics.

I will take the high road and simply ask him whether it is the entire budget that has been chosen as compensation for failing to abide by the CRTC's decision, or if it is $600 million. It is the $600 million that was set aside as interim funding to compensate the government's failure to abide with the CRTC's decision on levies but that has not yet been disbursed. The levies would generate much more than these $600 million. Moreover, in terms of affordability, that sum would not be paid by taxpayers.

If it works in Europe, why would it not work here in Canada?

[Abdelhaq Sari, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from the Bloc Québécois for his attention.

Once again, I have to straighten a couple of things out. As I mentioned in my speech, it is not $600 million; it is $1.15 billion. There is a verb tense issue in my colleague's question. He used the wrong tense. He should have said that the $600 million is a commitment from the government that will come from outside the CRTC.

I hope that my colleagues in the Bloc Québécois will recognize that the previous CRTC approach did not work. I am using the correct verb tense: It did not work. Not everything that works elsewhere has to work here as well.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my esteemed colleague. As always, it was fascinating listening to him speak. He shared part of his personal journey with us today, explaining that he first discovered Canada through TV5. We are delighted that he chose to settle in Canada with his family.

My colleague spoke about the need for consistency. On that point, I would remind the House that this party, this government was elected on a promise not to implement a digital services tax initially. It later introduced one, only to then withdraw it, arguing that doing so would create more room for negotiations with the United States.

Can my colleague provide an assessment of the actual impact that the decision to withdraw it has had on negotiations with the United States? In my view, there has not been any benefit.

[Abdelhaq Sari, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague and congratulate him once again on his eloquence.

Nonetheless, I would like to set the record straight. The results are clear. I have referenced them before, and I can do so again for everyone's benefit. On top of the $600 million, there is another $550 million in concrete funding for CBC/Radio-Canada, Telefilm Canada, the Canada Media Fund, the Canada Music Fund, the National Film Board of Canada and the Canada Council for the Arts, as well as TV5MONDE.

That being said, regarding consistency, there is something we need to keep in mind. Again, in my earlier remarks on artificial intelligence, I said that the context is changing very quickly. It takes a very agile government to adapt to this reality. I really hope that all my colleagues will vote against this motion, simply because it is inconsistent with the position of the Bloc, which voted against Quebec culture.

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

Mr. Speaker, my colleague eloquently explained why it is so important to support culture across Canada's francophone communities, whether it be Quebec culture, Acadian culture or francophone culture throughout the country. The most recent budget included nearly $1 billion in investments to support the cultural sector.

As a Quebec member who voted in favour of that budget, could he explain why it was important to support those investments in culture, unlike the members of the Bloc Québécois, who spoke about culture all morning but voted against these historic investments in the cultural sector?

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

Before giving the hon. member for Bourassa an opportunity to respond, I will interrupt proceedings for a moment. There is a great deal of noise in the lobby and around the House at the moment. This is something that often occurs just before Question Period, but I would ask those present to keep quiet and refrain from disrupting the proceedings of the House.

The hon. member for Bourassa.

[Abdelhaq Sari, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

First of all, I would like to thank my colleague for his very eloquent and direct question.

I would like to tell him that I was not the only Quebecker to vote for this budget. I was among 44 members who proudly represent Quebec, represent it well and defend Quebec culture on an ongoing basis. Culture is a vehicle for development that is very important, if not essential, to it success.

I can reiterate and confirm once again that our government will always defend the Canadian and Quebec cultural sector in general. It will ensure that Canadians see themselves on screen, hear our voices and our official languages, including the French language, and celebrate what makes our country unique.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP has long been a champion of diversity in Canada. We have also long been defenders and promoters of Quebec's cultural distinctiveness within Canada and the rights of francophones.

The NDP has long supported the right of Quebec, as the only majority French culture in North America, to protect and promote the French language, including in broadcasting. We strongly support funding for media and cultural production sectors in Quebec and across Canada, and we are pleased to support this motion today.

There is a major imbalance in Canada right now between the web giants operating in our country and support for actual Canadian media and culture. Canada's culture sector is under serious pressure from underfunding and from American web giants that are profiting from our stories and our labour but not paying their fair share. The government has not done the work to protect the cultural sector across Canada. New Democrats have long demanded that the government ensure that web giants like Netflix contribute to the creation of French-language content at the same level that broadcasters are being asked to contribute in Canada.

I want to talk a little about what this actually means, and I am going to speak a bit about what it means in my constituency of Edmonton Strathcona.

In Edmonton, I saw just how important francophone media are to keeping our culture alive. Media outlets such as Le Franco, Radio-Canada Alberta and Radio Cité do more than just report the news. They tell the stories of Franco-Albertans, feature local artists and community activities and give a voice to francophones in Alberta. These media outlets are important to francophone families, keeping them connected to their language, their history and their community. They also help young people discover Alberta's francophone culture.

When a local media outlet closes its doors, we lose more than just journalists; we also lose part of our culture and history. Protecting Canadian media means helping members of every community, including Franco-Albertans, tell their stories and make their voices heard.

Canadians overwhelmingly support our broadcasting sector. Recent polling shows that Canadians support the Online Streaming Act at 83%. That includes voters for all parties. That includes 65% of Conservative voters. Canadians understand this is about defending cultural sovereignty. It is about telling Canadian stories. It is about supporting jobs in the Canadian arts sector.

The arts sector contributed $131 billion to Canada's GDP in 2024. The arts and culture sector supported 1.1 million jobs across Canada in 2024. The sector deserves the support of the government. Instead, what we are seeing is a government that is willing to give up our sovereignty, back down on our stories and stop support for our cultural communities. We saw that when the Government of Canada was willing to give up the digital services tax, income that should have gone to our cultural communities and to telling stories: francophone stories, indigenous stories, Canadian stories. Instead, the Liberal government bowed to Donald Trump and the tech giants that support him.

New Democrats supported measures announced by the CRTC that would have helped ensure that Canadian stories continued to be told and made sure Canadian stories were available to audiences across the country.

In May, the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture overruled the CRTC after he had stood in this House and told us it was independent. He effectively gave a massive break to foreign streaming giants and instead replaced those potential revenues with a $600-million promise, none of which we have seen yet and none of which has benefited broadcasters.

I want to be clear. That $600 million is our money. That is my money. Those are taxpayer dollars. That is not revenue being paid from the billions made by web giants. It is money that is coming from the pockets of Canadians to support Canadian industry. I am all in for supporting Canadian industry, but I sure would like the web giants to pay their fair share, and that is not what the government is demanding.

I want to talk about another issue that is very close to my heart and very important. The CBC and Radio-Canada are the Canadian institutions we need in this country to tell our stories. We have a massive country, and having a public broadcaster is so vitally important. Mr. Speaker, I know you are an Albertan as well. I came out of the Alberta referendum on Monday thinking how dangerous it is that our media landscape is not getting the support it requires. At this moment in time, when misinformation, disinformation and foreign interference in our media landscape continue to rise, we do not see the commitments to our public broadcaster that we need to see.

To show the cynicalness of the government, weeks before it called the 2025 election, the then minister of heritage brought forward a massive investment for the CBC. He said the government was going to invest in the CBC, our public broadcaster. It was going to make it permanent. It was going to make it stable. It was going to make it reliable. Well, the Liberals won the election and are still in government, yet we have not seen any of it. None of those protections for our public broadcaster came forward. We know the BBC and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation are funded at a level so much higher than the CBC receives in Canada.

I also met recently with representatives from Press Forward, an association of over two dozen news media publishers that employ journalists, editors, photographers, video journalists and other professionals dedicated to informing the public. Again, I will go back to the referendum in Alberta. Canadians are increasingly confronted with complex questions and this maelstrom of disinformation, fear and foreign interference. The lack of local, human-verified, quality journalism is a real problem that we need to address in this country.

I fully support Press Forward's three asks of the Government of Canada: to maintain the Canadian journalism labour tax credit at its current level of 35%, so that independent news publications can continue to provide value to the communities they serve; to expand the local journalism initiative by $6 million per year and have it go past 2035; and to defend the Online News Act to ensure sustained investment in Canadian news.

This is not just about making sure we have local news. It is about sovereignty. It is about our democracy. A strong media landscape and the ability of Canadians to get the information and the stories they require to make good decisions are cornerstones of a strong democracy. Without those, we have an uneducated electorate that does not get the information they require to do their duty as citizens.

Therefore, I urge the government to take this seriously, to start making the web giants pay their fair share, to make sure that cultural communities and our industry have the resources they need to tell our stories, to protect our sovereignty, and to ensure that francophone and indigenous stories are front and centre across this country.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr Speaker, I need not tell you how much I appreciate the comments we just heard from my colleague from Edmonton Strathcona, with whom I once had the great pleasure of working on the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage and, incidentally, on this sort of bill.

I want to ask my NDP colleague what she thinks of what I would call a cynical move. What does she make of the fact that the government has the power to impose levies on the tech giants, as recommended by the CRTC, but chose not to do so? Instead, it chose to pass on a $600-million bill to Canadians, many of whom, out of solidarity with the cultural sector, but also in support of the government's efforts to negotiate an agreement with the United States, have decided to cancel their subscriptions to the American platforms.

Is it not a bit cynical for the government to say that it is going to pass the bill on to people who, out of solidarity, chose not to subscribe or to cancel their subscription? What are my colleague's thoughts on this?

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for bringing this motion forward and making sure that people in Quebec and across Canada are aware of what is being done right now in Canada, what the government is doing. I think it is really important.

It is an important moment. Right now, our sovereignty is under attack. We all know that. Everyone in this place knows that our sovereignty is being threatened by Donald Trump and the United States administration, and the fact is that the Government of Canada has decided to give a gift to web giants. These are among the most bad actors in the corporate world. The government gave them billions of dollars in subsidies, in effect, and then took $600 million from Canadian citizens to make up for the shortfall.

The member spoke about cynicism. It is not just cynicism. It is so disappointing. It is such a failure of leadership.

[John-Paul Danko, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate the comments from the member opposite, especially her comments about the importance of the CBC. I listen to CBC Radio One daily and also local news. In Hamilton, we have lost our local weekly newspapers. We have lost local talk radio stations. Even the daily TV news is a shadow of its former self, as is the daily newspaper.

I am wondering if the member could expand on the importance of having a common frame of reference. She talked about how that is impacting democracies. I think this is an issue not only for Canada, but also for western democracies around the world.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is a bit of a bigger issue, and the government has a role to play on a larger scale. This is not just about making web giants pay their fair share. It is not just about taking $600 million from Canadians to make up the shortfall. It is a bigger picture.

We need to have guardrails and legislation in place to protect Canadians from the disinformation, misinformation and foreign interference we are seeing on social media platforms. We need to make sure that Canadians have the education they need so they are able to recognize AI slop, bots and whatnot. We also need to make sure that we are supporting our local news. I have incredible local journalists and news outlets in Edmonton and in Alberta that do not get the support they need to continue to provide the services we need as Canadians for our democracy to be strong.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it seems that the Liberals are very good at making really expensive promises to much fanfare, but the results are totally opposite or non-existent. I think of housing. They promised hundreds of thousands of houses, and we are seeing a fraction of that. We are seeing a decline in housing, as far as new construction and making better availability for people renting go.

I wonder if the member could share any more examples of where the Liberals are making lots of promises and not keeping them.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I could not agree with my colleague more. The fact of the matter is that the $600 million, which we should not be taking from the pockets of Canadians, has not even gone to the industry that requires the money and needs the support.

Announcements do not keep jobs. Announcements do not help Canadian workers. Announcements do not tell stories, but we would not know that by watching what the Liberal government does. It likes announcements more than action.

Alleged Mis-characterization of Members' Remarks

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I want to rise and add my voice to the matter of privilege raised yesterday by my colleague, the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands.

Debate in this House is often vigorous. We know that. We disagree about facts, policy and the direction of our country every single day in this place. That is our responsibility as elected representatives, but there is a clear distinction between challenging an argument and attacking a member's integrity. Standing Order 18 prohibits disrespectful or offensive language. House of Commons Procedure and Practice is equally clear: “Remarks which question a Member's integrity, honesty or character are not in order.”

The member for Halifax attacked my integrity when she characterized my opposition to Bill C-39 as a “wild disinformation campaign...perpetrated by members of this House”, specifically referring to me and my work opposing this legislation. I reject that characterization. I stand by my words, and I will stand by my facts. I have raised serious concerns in this House about Bill C-39 and the extraordinary new powers it would give the minister of labour. Those are not invented concerns. They are written into the legislation, and I am far from alone in raising them.

United Steelworkers national director Marty Warren stated, “the right to strike is a red line.” The Canadian Labour Congress has warned that this bill would give one minister extraordinary power to end a legal strike without parliamentary oversight. CLC President Bea Bruske put the problem plainly: “A right you cannot exercise is not a right.” Unifor President Lana Payne has warned that the proposed amendments would give the minister special authority to override workers' ability to exercise their right to strike. Unifor has also cautioned that employers may come to expect government intervention, fundamentally changing the power of the bargaining table. I can go on. I can say what Mark Hancock from CUPE has said. I can say what Gil McGowan from the Alberta Federation of Labour has said.

For me to stand in this place as a representative of the New Democratic Party, a party of labour, and speak about what I am entitled to as a member of Parliament, as somebody who represents labour in this country, is my right. This bill would not just weaken the right to strike. It would have consequences beyond bargaining. When employers believe the government will step in when negotiations become difficult, there is less incentive.

I have consistently raised these concerns in good faith based on the text of the legislation, the constitutional importance of the right to strike and the explicit warnings of Canada's labour movement. Calling that work a “wild disinformation campaign” does not answer the substance of my argument. It attempts to discredit me as a member of Parliament making that argument. Parliament must be a place where members can scrutinize legislation, challenge the government and defend workers' rights without having their integrity for doing so impugned.

For these reasons, I support the concerns raised by the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, and I ask that the member for Halifax be directed to withdraw her comments and publicly apologize.

[The Deputy Speaker, Tom Kmiec]

I thank the member for her intervention. We will take it into consideration.