Sheila Copps

[The Constitution, October 26th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, we form such a partnership that, next week, a meeting will be held in Mont-Tremblant to deal with cultural issues, and I personally invited Mrs. Beaudoin to take part in it.

[Foreign Publishers Advertising Services Act, October 22nd, 1998]

I hear the member. Approximately $45 million in postal subsidies are going out to organizations as diverse as the Ontario Corn Producers Association. Those organizations have indicated very clearly to the government that they support the policy and they support the government because they want their voices heard in the Canadian agricultural industry.

This is about the future of Canadian magazines for veterans, Canadian magazines for fishermen, Canadian news magazines, business magazines like BC Business Magazine which has supported the policy put forward by the government, and Canadian scholarly and consumer magazines. This is about making sure that we have Canadian kids magazines to tell stories for our kids.

There is also criticism from those who say the legislation may upset the United States. Those opposite seem to forget the reason they were elected to the Parliament of Canada was to fight for the interest and the survival of their country. Those people who say the legislation will upset the United States must understand the fact that no country on earth has ever imported and read as many magazines per capita as Canada now imports from the United States. The legislation will keep that market open.

No country in the history of the globe has ever exported as many magazines per capita to any other country in the world as has the United States to the Canadian market. We are more open to American magazines than any other country in the world.

Can we imagine the reaction of Americans if they walked into their neighbourhood smoke shop and saw that 80% of the magazines being sold on the rack were Canadian magazines? That is what we would like our American neighbours to think about.

The United States is our closest ally and friend. We welcome American cultural influences with open arms, but we have a responsibility and a legacy to our children to stand up for Canada. With serious respect, we will not subject as has been suggested in some quarters Canada's laws to scrutiny and approval by the United States before we pass them.

Can we imagine the United States Congress putting a bill before parliament before it passed its own legislation? The simple fact is that unless Canadians stand up for culture, who will? Unless Canada stands up for Canadian interests, who will? Of course there are risks in acting but there is a far greater risk in doing nothing.

There is a far greater risk in the cultural cowardice being shown by the members of the Reform Party. There is a far greater risk in failing to stand up for Canada's legitimate interests.

Some critics think that governments should not get involved in policies to help periodicals. But the answer to that is simple: if Canada does not support Canadian culture, if Quebeckers and the Quebec government do not support Quebec culture, who will?

Unless we stand up for our interests who will? Forty years ago there were only a handful of Canadian magazines. The government of Prime Minister Lester Pearson saw a need to act in the national and public interest to create a framework, not to write the magazines, not to censor the magazines and not to block other magazines, but to create a basis for 1,500 Canadian magazines that we all enjoy.

This Christmas I want my daughter to be able to read about Canadian tradition. I want her to read about my sister-in-law's tourtiere. I also want her to read about how I prepare my garden in Canada for our Canadian winters. I do not want her to have to read a magazine that celebrates American holidays, American culture and American values because it is the only choice she has. That is what is at stake.

From L'Actualité to Western Living , from Vancouver magazine to Canadian Geographic , from Maclean's to Canadian Gardening , 1,500 magazines in our country now tell us the story of who we are. They talk about our way of life. They allow us to see the regions of the country we do not have a chance to visit personally. They allow us to read the stories of all the ages, from kindergarten to great-grandparent.

Maybe we could do nothing to ensure the chance for these magazines to survive but we would be the losers. The losers especially would be our children.

The other suggestion by those cultural cowards is that we should test the bill in the courts before we bring it into parliament. I suggest that such an approach compromises the democratic, judicial and parliamentary principles that say that the highest place for laws to be made and the responsibility for those laws reposes in the Parliament of Canada. Those naysayers would tie the hands of parliament and make us hostage to every group that did not like a proposed law.

We will not compromise Canada's basic legislative rights as a nation by seeking external approval from outside governments before legislating in Canada's national interest.

I would like to add to the point made over and over again by the Minister for International Trade. Advertising services are just that, services. Services are subject to the general agreement on services. The measure before parliament is absolutely and completely consistent with Canada's international obligations under that agreement.

I underscore another point that has been made over and over in the past few months. This bill will not oppose any foreign publisher's ability to export products into the Canadian market. We will continue to have and nurture the most open magazine market in the world. This will not affect existing commercial operations.

The objectives of Canada on this matter are fair. The approach taken in this bill is fair. The need for action is clear. The need for speed is vital. There are no taxes proposed by this bill. There are no subsidies in this bill. There is no restriction on the circulation of foreign goods proposed by this bill.

This bill shows that we are committed to regulating advertising services to develop our own policies reflecting the nature of our country and the identity of our people.

Canadian cultural achievements are not a coincidence. Achievements in our culture and our country require the work, the intelligence, the dedication and the creativity of many individuals and of parliament.

To contribute to these achievements, Canadian citizens must resolve to promote Canadian content and to support Canadian culture.

That is why the bill to establish the foreign publishers advertising services act is before parliament. It is not about parliament acting in the government's interest or in parliament's interest. It is about parliament acting in the interests of Canada.

Advertising revenues are the backbone of Canadian magazines and the fuel for a crucial vehicle of social, economic, political and cultural expression of our nation. What we seek as Canadians is a chance to hear our own stories, to see our own creators, to watch our own talent and to hear our own voices at home and abroad.

The new bill before the House is in support of a cultural heritage grounded in history and handed to our generation by generations of parliamentarians who had the courage to make a difference in the past.

This bill upholds longstanding Canadian cultural objectives and it upholds and supports the right of Canada and the right of Canadians to advance and promote Canadian culture and by doing so to advance and promote our identity and our nationhood.

Members of parliament who truly believe that Canada is a nation worth supporting and preserving have no option but to support this legislation.

[Foreign Publishers Advertising Services Act, October 22nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, the responsibility of parliament is to stand up for Canada, and to stand up for Canada means to play by the rules.

That is why Canada is implementing every element of the World Trade Organization decision on magazines. The tariff code measure will be eliminated. The excise tax measure will be eliminated. Postal rules will be altered.

To stand up for Canada means to respect the bodies that make our shared globe function, but it also means to stand up for Canadian culture.

Under the bill introduced in the House of Commons, only Canadian publishers will have the right to sell advertisement directed at the Canadian market.

Advertisement revenues allow us to sustain Canadian writings, to promote Canadian viewpoints and to see our own stories. They also allow to sustain writing and production and to publish many periodicals that tell proudly and openly our own stories.

Advertisement revenues represent 60 % of Canadian periodical revenues. Canada cannot allow foreign publishers to chip away at our advertisement market and thus harm an essential part of our culture and identity.

Parliament is not being asked to support censorship. Parliament is being asked to prohibit the sale and distribution of advertising services directed specifically at the Canadian market by non-Canadian publishers. Parliament is being asked to put in place fines for foreign publishers that attempt to violate these laws.

What is at stake here is the capacity of a country to secure and promote its own culture. What is at stake is Canadian content, stories by Canadians for Canadians and the world. What is at stake is the collective and individual capacity of thousands of our writers, editors, photographers, publishers and entrepreneurs. What is at stake is cultural diversity in the world.

Let me address some of the criticisms directed at the legislation. There are those, particularly in the Reform Party, who say that if a Canadian magazine cannot compete then it should not exist. What kind of a level playing field is it if there are no editorial costs for foreign publications that can come into Canada and skim the gravy off advertising revenues? This is not about competing for readers. Canadian magazines are happy to compete for readers. It is about Canadian advertising revenues nourishing an industry and giving it a capacity to exist.

I must underscore the fact that Canadian magazine policy supports magazines like Legion Magazine which tells the stories of Canadian war heroes to Canadians. It is absolutely shameful a party that claims to support the grassroots across the country is opposing legislation which would provide continued existence to Legion Magazine , a magazine that by the way has indicated it needs this support to survive.

This is about foreign magazines whose costs are already covered with foreign content coming in and squeezing the lifeblood out of Canadian stories. It is about ensuring the future of Canadian farm magazines. The Canadian Corn Producers Association—

[Canadian Heritage, October 22nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, not only do I oppose censorship vigorously, I want the Canadian people to be able to read every magazine that they can get their hands on, including Canadian magazines like the Alberta Report , the Legion magazine and Maclean's magazine.

The only party in this House that is supporting censorship is the party that would stifle the voices of Canadian magazines instead of supporting the right of Canadians to tell their stories.

[Canadian Heritage, October 22nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member asked this question. One of the challenges that I made to the Reform Party today was to stand and tell Canadians why it is opposing legislation which provides support to Canadian Legion magazines across the country.

I would like Reform members to stand in their places and answer that question. On the eve of Remembrance Day, it is absolutely disgraceful that the Reform Party does not support Canadian Legion magazines.

[Foreign Publishers Advertising Services Act, October 22nd, 1998]

Of course. People are very much entitled and open to subscribing to and receiving American magazines. There is absolutely nothing in this legislation that will stop that.

What this legislation will do is it will ensure that when my daughter becomes a mother, her children will be able to read stories about her country, her geography and her history. That will be the legacy of this legislation. If that is protectionist—

[Foreign Publishers Advertising Services Act, October 22nd, 1998]

That is a thought that would even stop me in my tracks.

This closed market that the Reform Party is talking about should be underscored by the fact that in a small market like Canada there are 71 American magazines with a Canadian circulation of over 30,000.

[Foreign Publishers Advertising Services Act, October 22nd, 1998]

Nobody is talking about censorship. This is not about censorship. This is about multiple voices in a global world.

The truth is that it has never been easy to publish a Canadian magazine. The first one was printed in 1792 by John Howe. The very first magazine was the Nova Scotia Magazine and Comprehensive Review of Literature, Politics, and News . This magazine folded after three years because of high publishing costs, a small domestic audience and the marketing power of far more established publications imported from abroad.

For 206 years Canadians have had to fight hard to ensure the survival and growth of our nation's magazine industry.

I repeat to those who would twist and distort the truth, to those who would sell out the Canadian magazines on the altar of globalization, I want to reinforce the fact that Canada has the most open cultural market in the world. More than 80% of the magazines sold on our newsstands come from other countries. Ninety-five per cent of those magazines are American magazines. And we have no intention of stopping that. We want to see a multiplicity of ideas.

The sale of U.S. magazines in Canada is far and away the largest export of magazines to a single country in any country in the world. There is no other nation that comes within a country mile of our country when it comes to being open to magazines from around the world. If that is protectionist, then I should be a member of the Reform Party.

[Foreign Publishers Advertising Services Act, October 22nd, 1998]

It is not promotional protection. The challenge is to address those issues of globalization with real solutions, not to snuff out the Canadian voices, not to fall prey to the globalization trend of those who would say that there is no difference between Canadian and American magazines, not to fall into the trap of claiming that we are building barriers.

These same members of the Reform Party who are crying down legislation that would help protect those Canadian voices are the same members of parliament who want the government to support the Canadian Legion Magazine . If there is anyone opposite who does not want us to directly support the Canadian Legion Magazine , I would dare them to stand in their place today, on the eve of Remembrance Day, and tell us they are against the support of the Canadian people to Legion Magazine . I do not see anyone putting their name forward. The truth is—

[Foreign Publishers Advertising Services Act, October 22nd, 1998]

moved that Bill C-55, an act respecting advertising services supplied by foreign periodical publishers, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, Canadian culture is our inheritance from the past. It is our joy in daily lives and it is our gift to the future.

Generations of Canadians who came before us made possible the birth of Canadian television. They did so through extraordinary artistic effort and through an act of national will.

Canadians who went before us made it possible for us to be a world leader in the music industry.

In less that 10 days, I will be in Montreal for the ADISQ gala, hosted by Céline Dion, who is known all over the world not only for her talent, but also for her support of national cultures.

They did so through exceptional talent and through national will.

Canadians who went before us made it possible for books by and about Canadians to be published in Canada. They did so through hard work and again through a collective national decision.

Generations of Canadians who went before us made it possible for us to have our own magazine industry, to have stories about Canadian information, ideas, news, art, talent, culture and voices.

The results produced by those generations of Canadians are really quite spectacular.

They worked hard to make Canada one of the countries most open to foreign cultures, while building a strong cultural identity that unites us all and shines throughout the world.

The sad reality, as world citizens, is that for the first time in history the number of spoken languages is diminishing. This reality should give us food for thought and raise the alarm. The futures of our respective cultures and cultural diversity are at stake.

There were difficult and controversial decisions made by previous governments and by previous members of parliament. Those decisions were taken starting with the creation of a national broadcasting system 60 years ago because successive governments believed that culture is central to our identity. They understood that culture is an element of individual, community and national strength. They knew that culture speaks to our heart, to our mind and to our soul as a country.

Today it is our turn as parliamentarians to rise once again to the challenge. It is our turn to ensure the future flourishing of Canadian magazines. It is our turn to show wise stewardship over our cultural birthright and our future. It is our turn to exercise an act of national will.

Magazines like Canadian Legion Magazine are important to Canada. Magazines like Canadian Legion Magazine survive because of the support of the government.

Bringing Canadian magazines to life requires an industry with imagination, dedication and nerves of steel. Bringing Canadian magazines to life entails a belief in cultural autonomy and a love for the free flow of ideas. Bringing Canadian magazines to life requires policies and actions by the Parliament of Canada.

In some ways the challenges that we face today are even more daunting than those faced by previous parliaments. We live in a more connected world. We live in a time when communication barriers are falling everywhere. We live in a country that thrives on exports and competition. And I repeat that we are the most open country in the world for all cultures of the world. We live in a world that thrives on exports and competition in which technology is turning old thinking and old rules on their ears. We live next door to the world's only remaining superpower and dominant cultural influence.

A member asks why we are putting up barriers. We are not putting up barriers. Canadian Legion is a magazine that deserves the support of the government for its voice to be heard. That does not prevent us from reading the American legion's magazine, but we have an opportunity and a responsibility as the Parliament of Canada to provide some space on the world's cultural shelf for our stories to be written about and to be heard.

We can walk into any magazine store in Canada and we will see more American magazines available for sale than any other country in the world. We are not putting up barriers but we reserve the right as a country to have a small space for our own voice.

Part of the role of parliament is to make sure that this voice is there for future generations. The law of the marketplace does not respect the law of cultural diversity upon which this country has been built and this party will continue to support until—