Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for the question and the comments, MP Thomas. I have a couple of observations. With respect to the first part of your question, the CRTC has the authority to ask for information it requires in the administration of the act. Its authority is bound by information that it needs to administer the act.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for the question. The intention here is that the CRTC has the ability to request information it needs for the purposes of administering the act, so it is bound by that. The idea is not that the CRTC should be able to request any kind of information it wants. “Reasonably” further specifies that degree of connection or nexus with that, from my perspective.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for the question, MP Thomas. Madam Chair, if I may, the mechanism provides that since digital news intermediaries are best placed to assess whether they meet the threshold set out in clause 6, it is incumbent on them to come forward. The alternative would be to empower and require the CRTC to survey everybody who they think could potentially be subject and then ask for information, which is a much heavier process.

Canadian Heritage committee  No. That is correct. Again, the expectation is that digital news intermediaries will identify themselves when they meet those thresholds. Again, they are best placed to assess whether they meet the threshold and are to come forward and indicate such to the CRTC, at which point they would be added to the list you referred to.

Canadian Heritage committee  The CRTC would have a variety of tools at its disposal. At the end of the day, failure to comply with the act could result in the imposition of an administrative monetary penalty. However, I think the goal at the end of the day is to ensure compliance with the act. From my perspective, the first step would be to have discussions with the digital news intermediary to make sure it understands that, based on the information it has provided, it is subject to the act and would be expected to comply.

Canadian Heritage committee  It is users, or active users—again, acknowledging that the business model of digital intermediaries who may be subject to it could look different.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for the question. I would say that clause 6 is not actually about the definition of a DNI. Clause 2 sets out the definition, as we discussed the other day. Clause 6 is really a question of threshold. It recognizes that there will be entities that meet the definition of digital news intermediary that will not be subject to that bargaining obligation.

Canadian Heritage committee  Paragraph 6(b) is intended to speak to something like the advertising market in search or the advertising market in social media. The question of a strategic advantage is whether an intermediary has a particular advantage, given its business model. One of the issues in this space is that these intermediaries often act as a distribution platform for news businesses, but they compete against those news businesses in the advertising market at the same time.

Canadian Heritage committee  The idea behind paragraph 6(b) is to articulate the particular market in which the intermediary operates. Again, the example I would give you, acknowledging that the specifics will have to be worked out through regulatory processes, would be the advertising market in both search and social media.

Canadian Heritage committee  On paragraph 6(c), what we had in mind was the number of Canadian users, or something along those lines. The combination of paragraphs 6(a), 6(b) and 6(c) is all under the hat of, as has been pointed out.... We're talking about where a significant bargaining power exists. You're looking at something like a revenue threshold, looking at the articulation of the particular market in which you may have that strategic advantage, and looking at something like a Canadian user threshold.

Canadian Heritage committee  It speaks to there being a market presence here in the Canadian context. Otherwise, again hypothetically, if you're looking at a global revenue threshold under paragraph 6(a), you can have a strategic market advantage, but that could theoretically exist outside of being grounded in the Canadian context.

Canadian Heritage committee  Paragraph 6(a) is indeed intended to speak to something like a revenue threshold. That could be either in relation to global revenues or Canadian-earned revenues, the details of which would be worked out through a regulatory process where the Governor in Council would come forward with a proposed threshold.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for the question, MP Gladu. The question boils down to whether a news business is eligible or able to bargain under the framework. I would draw your attention to the criteria, which include that the news business has to produce content “that is primarily focused on matters of general interest and reports of current events, including coverage of democratic institutions”.

Canadian Heritage committee  Chair, perhaps I may comment. No. As you've outlined, Mr. Julian, those clauses have been included to provide clarity on how the act should be applied in a way that's consistent with Canadian values and to respect the independence of the news sector.

Canadian Heritage committee  There is a role for the Governor in Council as it relates to certain regulatory decisions, yes, so you are right that the Governor in Council would set the criteria at clause 6, which is about what platforms or digital news intermediaries are subject to the act, and then there is a power at clause 11 for the Governor in Council to further elaborate on those exemption criteria.