Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for the question. What we see in the world is that there have been two general approaches to this problem. You have seen Europe pursue an approach based on giving news publishers a form of copyright for their content when it gets shared. The outcome in Germany that you

Canadian Heritage committee  I believe the media reports the minister referred to—I don't have the precise currency figure—mentioned that it was five million, but I can't remember if it was dollars or euros. It was in that range. The other model is the Australian model. That was a bargaining framework, whi

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, MP Julian, for the question. If I understand correctly, it's about section 19 of the Income Tax Act. The starting point for that provision is that businesses should be able to deduct expenses accrued in the regular course of their business. Those would include adverti

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for the question. I wouldn't characterize it as a subsidy, because the default rule for businesses is that you are able to deduct your expenses incurred in the course of business.

Canadian Heritage committee  The only thing I might add is that CBC/Radio-Canada is unique in that it has a mandate prescribed in legislation, and that includes reflecting Canada and its regions to national and regional audiences and serving the special needs of those regions. That is why you see, when CBC/R

Canadian Heritage committee  Mr. Shields, I believe you're likely referencing the fact that there are existing agreements in place, and Bill C-18 does provide a transition mechanism for those agreements to be taken into account. However, once Bill C-18 receives royal assent, the CRTC will have to assess wh

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mr. Bittle. Madam Chair, we have an observation with respect to paragraph 86(2)(c.1). From our perspective, this is information that the auditor could already ask for or that could be included in the report. MP Julian's amendment, however, would make it obligatory fo

Canadian Heritage committee  This is what I believe MP Julian is seeking to do: The commission is the entity in possession of the confidential information, so they're the only entity, other than the person whose confidential information it is, that can assess whether or not it's relevant. Indeed, it relies o

Canadian Heritage committee  It's at their discretion. With the way the bill is constructed right now, in the context of final offer arbitration, the decision the arbitration panel would be making would be based on the information provided by the two parties in their two offers. That's the information the ar

Canadian Heritage committee  My understanding of the subamendment is that if they were provided confidential information, they could use it only for the purpose of the activity of arbitration and, practically speaking, there would have to be some mechanism limiting their further disclosure. I suspect that wo

Canadian Heritage committee  As the bill is constructed right now, the confidential information remains in the hands of the CRTC. This would be an expansion of that, and since the panel or the arbitration roster is composed of individuals from the private sector, from other sectors, it would be an expansion

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you. As MP Gladu noted, right now, at clause 55, there are provisions in place to ensure the protection of confidential information in the possession of the regulator, the CRTC. If this amendment were to pass as is, there would be no protection for that confidential inform

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for the question, MP Thomas. My reading of the proposed amendment would be that it would likely apply only to agreements moving forward, because the proposed amendment is circumscribed by eligible news businesses. Right now, in any agreements that are in place, there's

Canadian Heritage committee  They're not quite dealing with the same things. Clause 27 is about the eligibility of the news business. Again, that's at a higher corporate structure level. Clause 31 is about the DNI being able to challenge the way that a news business has articulated the news outlet over w

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for the question. In terms of context, I'll take one quick step back and then go to your specific question. Eligibility criteria are set out in clause 27 of the bill. Clause 31 was provided for a mechanism for digital news intermediaries to challenge and make sure that