Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for the question, Mrs. Thomas. I will refrain from offering an opinion on that question. What I would say is that when we bring forward a bill like this, there is careful consideration given within the department but also in consultation with our colleagues in the machinery of government about how to structure the regulatory powers that are laid out in any piece of legislation.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mrs. Thomas. I believe this is the first piece of legislation that uses this term. It's a concept being created for the purposes of the bargaining framework that recognizes that you can have platforms that have multiple types of services. The way the bill is structured recognizes that you have a parent company, such as Meta or Alphabet.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mrs. Thomas. My assessment of Facebook Messenger is, again, that it is primarily a messaging service. Therefore, that type of service, a service like WhatsApp.... Those, again, are excluded from this definition of “digital news intermediary” in light of that last sentence, which clarifies that private messaging services are excluded.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mrs. Thomas. My assessment is that a service such as TikTok would qualify as a social media service and thus, yes, potentially be subject to the framework. Before it is designated, though, any service would have to respond to the criteria set out in clause 6, and those specific thresholds would be set through Governor in Council regulations.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mrs. Thomas, for the question. The Governor in Council is the typical process used for regulation-making in many instances when it's not the regulatory body making those regulations but rather the government. The way that is typically done is that a government department would pre-publish proposed regulations in part I of the Canada Gazette for consultation, and stakeholders would have an opportunity to consult on those proposed regulations.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mrs. Thomas, for the question. At the end of the day, the assessment was that this is an appropriate extension of the constitutional heads of power that fall to the federal government and that a bargaining framework targeting online communications services, including search engines and social media services, is within the federal government's heads of power under the Constitution Act.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mrs. Thomas. In short, it would be a communications platform that facilitates communication between individual Canadians—that point-to-point communication—or is integral to the functioning of the Internet. We have sought to provide greater clarity in terms of what it applies to by making the reference to “a search engine or social media service” as part of that definition of digital news intermediary.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mrs. Thomas. The definition of “digital news intermediary” specifies that it does not include an online communications platform that is a messaging service, the primary purpose of which is to allow persons to communicate with each other privately. Text messaging, for example, is excluded from the definition of “digital news intermediary”.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for the question, Mrs. Thomas. For the purposes of this framework, our view would be that a platform like Twitter would be potentially a digital news intermediary and subject to the legislation if, as you likely know, it met the thresholds outlined in clause 6, which are to be set out in Governor in Council regulations.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for the follow-up question, Mrs. Thomas. Let me be clear. My assessment would be that Twitter is a social media service and thus, yes, meets the definition of a digital news intermediary for the purposes of this framework. Again, whether it's subject to the framework—and that is why I caveated my answer previously—would depend on whether it meets the threshold set out in clause 6 and whether it then becomes a designated platform.

Canadian Heritage committee  Madam Chair, may I respond?

Canadian Heritage committee  As I responded to Mr. Bittle, activity on the Internet, depending on the nature of the activity, would fall either under federal jurisdiction or provincial jurisdiction. The basis for this piece of legislation is regulating.... Again, the key definitional concept here is online communications platforms, which would be platforms that are integral to the functioning of the Internet or permit person-to-person communication, and those are under federal jurisdiction, so the definition here is clarifying the scope of what digital platforms would be subject to this piece of legislation.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mrs. Thomas. Indeed, the constitutionality of the bill was weighed before it was tabled. That is part of our normal assessment to make sure that any bill that's being brought forward by the government does fall under the federal government's jurisdiction. Again, the way that this bill has been crafted focuses on those entities subject to federal government jurisdiction in a way that respects provincial jurisdiction in terms of activities that may fall under their sphere of jurisdiction.

Canadian Heritage committee  If I've understood the amendment correctly, it would modify the definition of digital news intermediary by removing the reference to the legislative authority of Parliament, if I've understood that correctly. I would defer to the mover in terms of what the motivation is behind that amendment.