Canadian Heritage committee  I was. Thank you.

Canadian Heritage committee  The only reason I brought this up was because of the intent. The way that proposed subparagraph 9.1(1)(j)(v) is drafted, it is intended to be a paragraph that provides flexibility for the CRTC to consider other factors. The way that the provision is written, it seems to add a lot

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thanks for the question, Mr. Waugh. Programming control, as I indicated earlier, is a defined term in the bill. Let me get the exact wording. It means: control over the selection of programs for transmission, but does not include control over the select

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for the question, Mr. Rayes. The way that proposed section 9.1 is currently formulated makes it very clear the types of discoverability provisions required on undertakings that carry a social media service and those that don't. This specific amendment seems to be about

Canadian Heritage committee  For this to be an effective provision.... I understand what you're saying. These algorithms are constantly in flux, but I think the power speaks more generally to receiving broad information about how these algorithms work in a general sense. To get a precise snapshot of how an a

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for the question, Mr. Shields. I interpret this as more of a precision. Mr. Champoux, I don't intend to speak to the intent of your motion, so I'd be happy to have you explain this as well. I see two aspects to this motion. One is about transparency for recommendati

Canadian Heritage committee  I'm not sure I would say that. I think it's more about how they are delivering or recommending content broadly, all the programming on a platform to Canadians, and then how a subset of that programming—Canadian programming—is also being recommended to Canadians. However, I would

Canadian Heritage committee  Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Rayes, for the question. There are a couple of points I would mention to the committee with respect to this motion. First of all, it seems to rely on an amended definition of “programming control” that was proposed in amendment BQ-3. T

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Could I please have the language of the amendment again?

Canadian Heritage committee  Yes, please.

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess there are a couple of things relating to this, perhaps just relating to the way in which the words are presented. It's whether the requirement being imposed is that the promotion itself and the recommendations themselves be done in both official la

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for the question, Mr. Housefather. You are correct. Currently in proposed section 9.1, which I'm sure we'll get to in a couple of days, there is a condition of service power relating directly to discoverability, and this is not circumscribed to an

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. With respect to proposed subparagraph 3(1)(q)(ii), this is a fairly heavy requirement that would involve some intervention from the commission with respect to the packages, contractual arrangements and terms of carriage. If the committee is in support of a

Canadian Heritage committee  To answer the question, I agree with Mr. Champoux's statement that it's something that the act is striving towards and something that is obviously reflected in several other objectives of the act, as moved by the members of the committee on Friday, and today as well. The specific

Canadian Heritage committee  I think Mr. Ripley would like to answer this question.