John Brassard

[Online Streaming Act, March 30th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, I did not say that the Bloc Québécois does not support freedom of expression. We agree with the Bloc on that.

What I said is that there are a lot of people across the country who do not agree with this bill for the reasons I have already outlined.

[Online Streaming Act, March 30th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, as I said during my speech, there has not been any other issue that I have been seized with other than Bill C-21, which is the firearms legislation, more than this piece of legislation.

I have heard from more people who are opposed to this piece of legislation, because of the impact it would have on user-generated content. I have listened to the voices of those people I represent. I have heard, at committee, the testimony of people. I read many of their comments about their concern about this piece of legislation. The Senate has a concern. The only sides that are not concerned about this are the Liberal and NDP side, and to some degree the Bloc. It is understandable why the Bloc is in support of this piece of legislation, but the NDP and the Liberals are not doing what they need to do, and that is to listen to those people who have expressed concerns.

[Online Streaming Act, March 30th, 2023]

Don't get ahead of yourself.

Madam Speaker, his post continues, “To the claims that user content regulation is excluded from the bill, Section 4.‍1(2)‍(b) and 4.2.2 clearly scope such content into the bill, an interpretation that has been confirmed by dozens of experts and the former Chair of the CRTC. Liberal and NDP MP claims to the contrary should be regarded as disinformation, a deliberate attempt to spread false information. Indeed, the Senate proposed a fix. The government rejected it. That was supposed to be the focus of the debate, yet Liberal MPs such as [the member for Winnipeg North] falsely claimed that it is not there.”

He continued, “There were many other misleading or inaccurate statements throughout the day. Contrary to what some claim, the bill will not result in hundreds of millions of new spending or lead to increased consumer choice (the opposite is true). It will require the CRTC to re-examine Cancon rules, which experience suggests are only loosely correlated to the professed goal of “telling Canadian stories.” But leaving all of these things aside, there was really only one question that needed answering: if the government’s intent is not to regulate user content and the Senate passed an amendment consistent with that goal after concluding that Bill C-11 in its current form opens the door to CRTC regulation, why is the government rejecting the amendment?”

That is the fundamental question to this debate, and it is a question that has not been answered by either the government or any other members of the opposition.

In fact, Mr. Geist goes on and actually references a Bloc MP's intervention. He says, “[It probably provides] what is likely the most accurate, if deeply troubling answer. When asked to confirm that the bill maintains freedom of expression safeguards, [this Bloc member] responded with the following per the House of Commons translator 'if violating freedom of expression means ensuring that Quebec content is well represented online then that’s worth it.'”

To hell with everyone else.

We need to be able to protect freedom of expression online for everyone in this country, not just based on a geographical region. That is what is most egregious about this bill.

Mr. Geist goes on, “in the zeal to court support from the Quebec culture lobby, [the] Canadian Heritage Minister and the government are choosing in Bill C-11 to sacrifice some freedom of expression, which includes both the right to speak and the right to be heard.”

I mentioned earlier there have been other Canadians who spoke out against this. Timothy Denton, former CRTC commissioner and president of the Internet Society Canada Chapter, spoke out against this, as did Peter Menzies, former CRTC commissioner, and Scott Benzie, content creator and director at Digital First Canada. J.J. McCullough, in a well-document Twitter intervention, posted his video. He talked about his concerns, and he is a journalist and commentator, about the impact this is going to have on user-generated content.

The Digital Media Association has expressed concern, as did Jeanette Patell, the head of Canada government affairs and public policy at YouTube. We have heard all of these interventions at committee all expressing concern about this particular piece of legislation and the impact it is going to have on the ability for Canadians to be seen and heard for the type of content they create.

As I said at the outset, we are dealing with Senate amendments. The Senate found it within itself, many of its members who are Liberal-appointed senators, to approve the amendments and send those amendments back to this place so we could have a wholesome debate. What is so sad throughout this whole process is the fact that this debate is being stifled at this point by closure by the government because it does not want to hear the truth from many of those Canadians who have expressed serious concern with this bill. Of course, the government is being aided and abetted by its coalition partners within the NDP.

We will always stand for the rights and freedoms of Canadians. We are not going to sit idly by and allow the government to kill democracy at night.

[Online Streaming Act, March 30th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin.

Democracy does, indeed, die at night. We are sitting here dealing with amendments from the Senate on a deeply flawed and deeply controversial piece of legislation. I have not been in the House all day, but for the last couple of hours. I have heard the debate and the concern expressed by the Leader of the Opposition. It was a profoundly convincing argument that he made as to why this piece of legislation should not be passed.

However, it is not just the words of the Leader of the Opposition that tell us why this piece of legislation needs to be, at a minimum, overhauled or, better yet, halted at this time. The concerns of Canadians, the concerns of digital content creators, those who understand this space, those who have looked at this piece of legislation, those who have taken the time to appear before committee to express their views and all of their concerns, including the Senate amendments, to deal with one part of this deeply flawed piece of legislation are being ignored by the government, which is certainly being aided and abetted by other opposition parties.

What I thought I would do tonight is take a different tack from where this debate has gone today. There have been, like I said, hundreds of thousands of voices. There is not one issue, perhaps other than Bill C-21, the firearms legislation that I heard more about from my constituents than Bill C-11. Like the member for North Okanagan—Shuswap, I am an elected member of this place, I am the voice of the people who I represent in Barrie—Innisfil and I am going to share their voices this evening. I am going to share the voices of other eminent Canadians who have expressed a concern about this piece of legislation.

I received an email from Kim, who said, “Dear Mr. Brassard, The passing of Bill C-11 will be a sad moment in Canadian history. Please consider making sure this bill does not get passed. This kind of censorship should not come from our government or any free society.” Violet said, “Dear Sir: I want the brakes put on this Bill now! I am not a fan of this ridiculous Bill.”

Rose said, “This bill is an overreach. It needs to be scrapped. Anyone who has been following this bill understands that we do not need the government to tell us what we can read/see [online].” Peter said, “Hello John, Regarding the above, my opinion is Bill C-11 should be scrapped and the [...] government keep their hand off of our social media. I hope you are [doing your] best to keep this Bill from being passed. Hopefully the Liberals will be ousted in the next election.”

John and Corrine from Barrie said, “Trust all is going well with you and your family. We ask that you vote 'no' to Bill C-11. This will hurt and restrict healthy free speech and debate which is the democracy our nation is founded on. This is a great concern to us. As our constitutional freedoms and rights are restricted, this opens doors to tyranny and dictatorship which is dangerous to every level of our nation.”

Another says, “Good afternoon Mr. Honourable Brassard, I know you're busy so I'll be brief.” This is from Brent in Barrie. “I'm very much against Bill C-11. I don't want an unelected government official/body determining what my family can watch. Margaret Atwood is against it. The previous CRTC commissioner is against it. This bill will stifle freedom of speech and shut down contrary views under the threat of 'misinformation and/or disinformation'. Please fight for our freedom of speech.”

We have certainly heard in the arguments from the opposition, the NDP and others about this being an issue of disinformation. In fact, I would suggest the ones spreading the disinformation are those on the government side.

The other person who has been directly involved in this entire debate has been Michael Geist, who is a law professor at Ottawa University. Interestingly, I was going through some his posts earlier today and he has been watching the debate intently in this House of Commons. He made a post earlier that said, “Bill C-11 is not China, Russia or Nazi Germany. As I’ve stated many times, it does not limit the ability....[of] implications for freedom of expression but it does [not] turn Canada into China.”

[Online Streaming Act, March 30th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I ask for you to be judicious in this particular speech. This is an elected member of Parliament. He has been elected by his constituents to represent them in this place, and I ask that you not allow these interruptions to occur. You have ruled that the member will be going back to the point. He has already made that clear. He is an elected member of Parliament and has every right, in spite of the fact that they stand up and interrupt him, to—

[Parkinson's Awareness Month, March 28th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, April is Parkinson's Awareness Month in Canada and I want to recognize the residents of Barrie—Innisfil and my friend Greg McGinnis for using their voices to bring awareness to Parkinson's disease for the 100,000 Canadians who are living with Parkinson's.

In 2023, 35 Canadians a day will be diagnosed with Parkinson's. It is the fastest-growing neurological disease in the world. It is widely considered a disease of older Canadians, but young-onset Parkinson's is afflicting 20% of diagnosed Canadians under the age of 50. There is presently no cure for Parkinson's, but researchers continue to search and hope that one will be discovered.

Greater awareness about Parkinson's is needed, in an effort to work together so every Canadian who has been diagnosed with Parkinson's can enjoy a good quality of life. This greater awareness is what my friend Greg has asked me to undertake by bringing this message to the House of Commons today.

I would also like to thank Parkinson's Canada for its commitment to transform the lives of people living with Parkinson's.

[Canadian Firefighters, March 27th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, firefighters from across Canada are in Ottawa this week for the 30th Canadian Legislative Conference of the International Association of Fire Fighters. As a retired firefighter and former president of Markham local 2727, I know first-hand just how important these next few days of advocacy will be for firefighters and their families.

In the coming days, MPs from all parties will hear about the increase in occupational illnesses like cancer among firefighters, including the need to remove PFAS from firefighting gear, now being linked to cancer and other serious health effects. There will also be a discussion for federally regulated airports in Canada to meet ICAO standards. Under the leadership of president Ed Kelly, the IAFF is laser-focused on protecting the health and safety of its 334,000 members and their families, both here in Canada and in the United States.

On behalf of our Conservative team to my former colleagues in Markham, to the Barrie and Innisfil firefighters and all firefighters who have come to Ottawa this week, welcome. We hear them, we respect them and we are here for them and their families.

[Business of Supply, February 16th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, I recall what happened a year ago. I was opposition House leader when the coalition agreement came into effect between the NDP and the Liberals. It actually gave the NDP a lot of power. They could use this power right now if the leader of the NDP simply walked up to the third floor, to the Prime Minister's office, and said that he wanted this type of stuff to happen. Instead, he spends 10 minutes in this House railing against the Liberals, Conservatives and provincial premiers. If the leader of the NDP had any course of action at all, why does he not rip up the agreement that he has with the Liberals, force an election and let Canadians decide which health care vision is best for this country? They will decide: NDP, Conservative or Liberal.

Let us do this. The member could rip up the agreement and let Canadians decide.

[Business of Supply, February 16th, 2023]

Madam Speaker, to hear the member for Cumberland—Colchester is almost like getting a playing lesson from a pro. He is a former medical doctor who is intimately aware of the system. This is as opposed to a playing lesson from a former kayaker.

I sense his frustration. It is a frustration that many Canadians are feeling. We are hearing news today about doctors with foreign credentials. Canadian doctors who are foreign trained are unable to come back into this country to practise. They number in the thousands.

What role can the federal government play in ensuring that doctors with foreign credentials, many of them Canadians, can come back into this country and work with provincial governments to ensure that we build up our capacity in the health care system and have those health care professionals work in Canada?

[The Economy, February 15th, 2023]

Mr. Speaker, after eight years of the current Prime Minister, Canadians are struggling to pay for their food and for their heat, and moms are going to bed every night worried about keeping roofs over their heads. However, if someone is a Liberal-connected insider, or a friend of the Prime Minister like McKinsey, they get their palms greased to the tune of $120 million, yet the Prime Minister does not care. He takes no responsibility either.

Will the Prime Minister either step aside and let Conservatives fix the problem, or is he going to add to the problem like he has over the last eight years?