Parliamentary Speeches

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows of the friendship and admiration I have for her. I respectfully disagree. Frankly, it is not about me, it is not about how rude some Conservative Party committee members have been either in the House or in committee, it is about artists. Every month that passes, we deprive our artists, musicians and technicians across the country of $70 million, every single month. Why? It is because we want some of the wealthiest companies in the world to pay their fair share. I just do not understand. Yes, it is an extraordinary measure, but these are extraordinary circumstances.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question. He referred to an estimate put forward in committee by Canadian Heritage about the expected outcomes in terms of funding for the arts and culture sector from web giants. This would be around $830 million per year. If we do the math, we see that that is where the $70 million that the sector loses per month comes from. I could not agree with him more that Bill C-10 must be passed as quickly as possible. That is what the cultural communities in Quebec and across the country are asking us to do. That is what the Quebec National Assembly wants, and that is what the majority of Canadians want too.

Mr. Speaker, what we are hearing from the NDP is rather astounding given that ADISQ, the Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, the Union des artistes and many other organizations want this bill to pass quickly, saying that it is a good bill. The Quebec National Assembly has said that Bill C-10 should pass because it is a good bill. The NDP is saying that it knows the subject better than anyone and that Bill C-10 is a bad bill. It is rather astounding. I would have expected that from the Conservatives, but I am amazed to hear it from the NDP. If the committee can resume the same pace as before, there is ample time for it to adopt all the amendments presented, if it so chooses.

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite and the Conservative Party of Canada know full well that Bill C-10 has nothing to do with content moderation and what people can and cannot post online. In fact, professional independent civil servants from the Department of Justice, including the deputy minister, came to committee to testify to that effect. It looks to me like the Conservative Party is continuing to mislead Canadians deliberately or unwillingly. I do not understand. It is simply not true. I do not understand why the Conservative Party would not want to force Google, one of the wealthiest companies in the world, to pay its fair share for Canadian artists.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question. I almost thought she was going to congratulate the Department of Canadian Heritage for its excellent work, but maybe next time. She is quite familiar with the realities of artists since she is part of the arts and culture community. Who in Quebec could forget Pierre Lapointe's strong statement a few years ago pointing out how platforms like Spotify and YouTube pay our artists hardly anything? That is exactly what we want to address with Bill C-10. We want these huge multinational corporations to pay their fair share. We are not asking them to do more than everyone else. We are simply asking them to pay their fair share, as Canadian broadcasters already do.

Mr. Speaker, since the last time the Broadcasting Act was reformed, we have seen the important and ever-increasing role of platforms on the television, movie and certainly on the music side of things. Our laws and regulations simply have not adapted to this new environment, which is costing our artists, musicians and technicians tens of millions of dollars every year. Bill C-10 aims specifically at correcting this so we can continue to have a thriving artistic and cultural ecosystem in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, what I find unexplainable is the fact that throughout the question and preamble of my hon. colleague he did not mention artists once, not once. Yes, there is a sense of urgency that I am feeling and that our government is feeling regarding the adoption of Bill C-10, but that urgency comes from artists themselves. We have heard artists from coast to coast to coast saying to get Bill C-10 adopted, and there stands the NDP with the Conservative Party saying that they know better than the artists, the technicians and the musicians. I am baffled by the position of the NDP.

Mr. Speaker, I completely agree with my hon. colleague. The comments made by the member for Lethbridge are unacceptable. She must apologize to the House. The Leader of the Opposition must also apologize to the House. I am curious to know whether, according to the member for Lethbridge's criteria, Quebec's Michel Charette, who stars in District 31, a show that draws a record-breaking 1.8 million viewers every day, is one of those outdated artists. Does she think that this is material Canadians do not want? That is unacceptable. The member for Lethbridge and the Leader of the Opposition must apologize.

Mr. Speaker, according to the member for Lethbridge, “That arts fund actually goes toward a very niche group of artists that are stuck in the early 1990s because they haven't managed to be competitive on new platforms.” She added, “These artists are not able to make a living off of what they are producing, so they require grants that are given by the government.” I would like to know if a series like Heartland, in its 15th season and filmed in Alberta, is one of those outdated series. Would the member wish to comment on Schitt's Creek, a winner of nine Emmys and also one of those series that is stuck in the early 1990s because it has not managed to be competitive on the new platforms?

Madam Speaker, I would first like to point out that the premise of my colleague from Richmond—Arthabaska is absolutely incorrect. First of all, as the Minister of Canadian Heritage, I am not the one who decides what changes are made at committee; it is the committee itself that decides. Second, as I have said repeatedly, every bill has room for improvement, and this bill to amend the Broadcasting Act is no different. That is why we ourselves brought forward amendments as a result of recommendations we heard from people in the arts sector and several stakeholders in the cultural sector, as well as requests from committee members. Third, I would like to clarify that Bill C-10 is supported by cultural organizations from across—

Madam Speaker, as I was saying when making my fourth point, which was about freedom of expression, the deputy minister of justice appeared at committee and said that Bill C-10 was entirely consistent with freedom of expression in Canada. Furthermore, with respect to legislation governing the CRTC, I would point out that the CRTC is not a state within a state and must also abide by Canadian laws, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Madam Speaker, first, I would like to say that the premise of my colleague's question is completely false because public servants who are independent from the Department of Justice Canada conducted an independent analysis of Bill C-10 and the deputy minister appeared before the committee to say that Bill C-10 falls completely within the framework of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The committee has already adopted a clause in Bill C-10 that states that the CRTC must exercise its power within the limits of freedom of expression, journalistic freedom and creative freedom—

Madam Speaker, I would remind my colleague that Bill C-10 is the result of the Yale report, issued by a commission that worked for over 18 months and received 2,000 submissions from across the country. Furthermore, Bill C-10 is supported by the entire arts community across the country. A petition signed by several thousand artists supports Bill C-10. As recently as last week, The Globe and Mail published a letter signed by several leading Canadian artists who also support Bill C-10. The problem with Bill C-10 is that the Conservative Party unfortunately does not want to support artists.

Madam Speaker, I would like to remind my colleague that the Bloc Québécois supports Bill C-10. The NDP supports Bill C-10. The Greens support Bill C-10. Obviously, the government supports Bill C-10 and artists across the country support Bill C-10. The real question is, why has the Conservative Party decided to side with some of the wealthiest companies in the world, such as Google, instead of supporting our artists?

Madam Speaker, for the Conservative Party of Canada to say that it supports artists is like when it says it supports climate change, yet it voted down a motion to recognize climate change at its annual meeting. The Conservative Party says it supports the Charter of Rights, yet 81 Conservative members voted this week to strip away women's right to choose. Canadians do not buy it, and artists certainly do not buy it. The Conservative Party has never been in favour of artists. When it was in power, we saw a number of cutbacks. Frankly, this is just more of the same.

Madam Speaker, yet again, we have more fearmongering on the part of the Conservative Party. Let me point out that during the first four meetings of the committee, the committee was able to study 79 amendments. Since the Conservative Party decided to start systematically obstructing the work of the committee, during the last 11 meetings, we were barely able to make it through seven amendments. If the committee were to pick up the same pace that it had initially, it would have plenty of time to go through all of the remaining amendments. However, if we continue going at the rate we are going now, in six months' time the bill would still be in front of the committee.

moved that Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation), be read the third time and passed. Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by acknowledging that we are all, whether physically or virtually, present today on the ancestral lands of first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples. This is not just something we say. The land acknowledgement speaks to the context we are living today, and to the new relationship that we are trying to build through our everyday actions. Like many, I am still in shock about the horrors that have been uncovered at the Kamloops Indian Residential School in B.C. Having the remains of 215 children be at the residential school is horrifying. The residential school system caused harm to generations of indigenous children and communities. For that, the government has apologized, first in 2008 to former students of residential schools, and in 2017 to former students of Newfoundland and Labrador residential schools, for example. As we are all acutely aware, Canadians continue to witness tragedies perpetuated against indigenous peoples. Racism in Canada is an undeniable reality and reconciliation must be more than apologies. Reconciliation must be about big legislative actions and smaller gestures. It must be about both everyday actions and bold moves. Reconciliation is a long-term commitment that requires the engagement of all. It is made up of many actions, apologies, commissions, family conversations, school assemblies, community collaborations, conversations with colleagues, friendships, distinction-based policy changes, infrastructure support and commemorations. There are many opportunities that could be seized for real change. We must act now. In budget 2019, our government invested $7 million over two years to help non-governmental and community organizations recognize and commemorate the history and legacy of residential schools. Thanks to this investment, over 200 communities and organizations across the country are receiving funds this year for projects to raise awareness and educate Canadians about this dark chapter of Canada's history. Budget 2021 also proposes to provide $13.4 million over five years, with $2.4 million ongoing, to Canadian Heritage for events to commemorate the history and legacy of residential schools and to honour survivors, their families and communities, as well as to support celebrations and commemoration events during the proposed national day for truth and reconciliation. These numbers show that despite the pandemic, the need and interest of communities to be able to honour and commemorate as they see fit are high. People want to tell their stories and they want to stand witness so new stories can be told. They want to honour the survivors. They need to heal and they want to learn so they can act for change. This kind of groundswell of interest shows that indigenous and non-indigenous people alike recognize the importance of commemorating this history. This commemoration funding and the creation of a national day for truth and reconciliation reflect the recognition that all histories and cultures are important. These actions speak to our capacity to expose the wrongs of the past so we can face this history and commit to do better. I think we can all agree that it is important to recognize the profound impact residential schools had on first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples. In fact, the Indian Act legislated government control over almost every aspect of indigenous peoples' lives, including mandatory attendance at residential schools. Governments throughout Canada's history continued to uphold legislation and follow policies that perpetuated systemic racism in our society. With the social upheaval occurring globally, we must harness the generational potential to reduce racism in our world. Residential schools targeted the children. We can turn that on its head and aim to educate the next generation to uphold inclusive values and to prioritize respect above all in communities, in schools, in families and in digital spaces. The words from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's final report bear repeating: All Canadian children and youth deserve to know Canada's honest history, including what happened in the residential schools, and to appreciate the rich history and knowledge of Indigenous nations who continue to make such a strong contribution to Canada, including our very name and collective identity as a country. For Canadians from all walks of life, reconciliation offers a new way of living together. This statutory holiday helps to build that new way of living together, particularly in the global context of calls for social justice. This day is part of how we build back stronger together. People might ask how one day will make a difference. How will one day that establishes a statutory holiday for a limited number of people make a difference? It is telling that people do not ask these questions about Remembrance Day. Recognizing the selfless sacrifices that veterans made to a global effort against oppression is appropriate and right. Shining a light on a dark history of oppression of our own making is also right. It is uncomfortable, but perhaps it is because it is uncomfortable that we should commit to it. Dr. Marie Wilson, one of the three commissioners of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, spoke to the importance of a national statutory holiday. She said that reconciliation is “very tied to issues of law and public policy”. That signals the importance of reconciliation to those who work on these issues, and that it is valuable. As we have said before, a national day reveals our priorities. It says that this issue is important and we should be paying attention to it not just on this day, but throughout the year. Just as Remembrance Day is not only for veterans, a national day for truth and reconciliation is not only for first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples. Just as we honour veterans and highlight our values as a nation on Remembrance Day, we would honour survivors and those lost on the national day for truth and reconciliation, but also reflect on our path as a nation, on our values, on how our values have shifted and on how we can chart a new path for Canada: one that includes everyone who calls these lands home. In so many ways, our lives and our world have witnessed loss and our realities have been forever changed. There is no doubt that these are complex, difficult times right now, but Canadians do not shy away from the tough issues. Reconciliation is tough, but we can make progress on a just journey together with first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples. The establishment of a national day for truth and reconciliation fulfills call to action 80 of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's final report. It is an important action to take, and we must act immediately so that this day becomes part of our reality this year.

Madam Speaker, as I said the first time that Bill C-5 was introduced to the House, I recognize all of the work done by Madame Jolibois on all of this. In fact, the bill does reflect what had been tabled during the last Parliament. As the member well knows, the Senate is an independent body of Parliament. That being said, the government has been hard at work for many months, talking to a number of senators to try to ensure that the bill makes it through the Senate in the fastest possible way.

Madam Speaker, in my view, and I think in the view of most member, reconciliation is a path and journey that we are taking with first nations, Inuit and Métis people. There are a number of things that we as government, as the Crown, need to do on that path to reconciliation. This includes things like the adoption of the bill on UNDRIP and the implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act, for which I have the honour and privilege of being responsible. Speaking of indigenous languages in our country, I would like to remind the House that when our government came into power in 2015, the federal government invested $5 million for indigenous languages across the country. This year, it will be more than $100 million, and I do not think that is enough. We need to do more. We are working with our indigenous partners to see what the adequate and long-term level of funding would be for indigenous languages. There are many things we must do on this path to reconciliation, but moving forward with Bill C-5—

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for the question. We have been working hard for months to get Bill C-10 passed. We have defended it at every forum across the country, while the Conservative Party has been fearmongering by spreading misinformation. We have worked with the cultural sector. There is a petition that has been signed by thousands of artists in support of the bill. We will continue to do what we can to get the bill passed as soon as possible.

Mr. Speaker, I am rather shocked by my hon. colleague's question. I did not hear the Bloc Québécois speak out in forums all across the country against the Conservative Party and in support of Bill C-10. I spoke with over 4,000 artists from across the country over the last few months, and they told me they want Bill C-10 to be passed. We are doing everything we can. Obviously, the bill is in the hands of the committee. We are working with a party that does not want to collaborate and that has said in the past that it did not want this bill to see the light of day. There is a certain guile—

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 53(3) of the Privacy Act and to Standing Order 111.1, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, a Certificate of Nomination, and biographical notes, for the proposed reappointment of Daniel Therrien to the position of Privacy Commissioner for a term of one year. I request that the nomination and biographical notes be referred to the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

Mr. Speaker, I believe there is some misconception about the concept of net neutrality because it refers to hardware: to Canadians being able to access the Internet and having these conditions be the same for all Internet users. Bill C-10 is not about telecommunications or hardware. It is about ensuring that web giants pay their fair share and that Canadians have easy access to the content developed by Canadian creators.

Mr. Speaker, I believe there is some confusion about the nature of the definition of net neutrality, since it has to do with the infrastructure, that is, how people can access the Internet. Bill C-10 will not affect the issue of telecommunications and infrastructure in any way. All Bill C-10 seeks to do is ensure that the web giants pay their fair share and that our Canadian artists become more and more accessible on these platforms.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to once again confirm that what we are going to do with Bill C-10 is ensure that web giants pay their fair share. Bill C-10 will not apply to health apps, for example, or to videos produced by individuals. We have been very clear on that. My colleague was there when a Department of Justice statement presented to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage indicated that there is no issue with Bill C-10—

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that a petition initiated by Quebec's Union des artistes has been signed by people like Yvon Deschamps, Ariane Moffatt and Claude Legault, who all support Bill C-10, as well as by artists from English Canada. I am thinking in particular of Loreena McKennitt, of the CRTC's former executive director, Janet Yale, and of University of Montreal law professor Pierre Trudel. As far as individual activities are concerned, whether it be podcasts, workout videos or personal videos, the bill will not contain any requirements concerning this type of content.

Mr. Speaker, again, this is a profound misconception about what we are trying to do. In fact, the Department of Justice has stated that there is no problem with free speech in Bill C-10, and the member opposite was at the committee. She got to ask the Minister of Justice questions regarding this. Frankly, what I cannot understand is why the Conservative Party of Canada continues to oppose the fact that we are asking some of the wealthiest companies in the world to pay their fair share when it comes to Canadian artists and Canadian musicians. I just do not understand.

Mr. Speaker, I profoundly disagree with the basis of the hon. member's question, as does the Department of Justice Canada. Its analysts confirmed that Bill C-10 remains consistent with the charter's guarantee of freedom of speech. Bill C-10 is about levelling the playing field between creators and web giants. It will require big, powerful foreign streamers to provide information on their revenues in Canada and make financial contributions to Canadian stories and music. I wonder why the Conservative Party continues to oppose this.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question, as well as the National Assembly, which unanimously supports the speedy passage of Bill C-10. This bill is very important to us, but it is much more important to the cultural and artistic community in Quebec and across the country. We will do everything we can to get it through as quickly as possible. It would be very helpful if the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage were to resume its work.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question. Our main focus is to do everything in our power to help the cultural sector across the country, including in Quebec. This sector was hit particularly hard by the pandemic. Bill C-10 will invest hundreds of millions of dollars more in our cultural ecosystem, including hundreds of millions of dollars in Quebec, to support francophone artists and musicians in Quebec and across Canada.

Mr. Speaker, it has been clear from the beginning that what we want to do is focus on two things. First, we want social media platforms to contribute financially to our cultural industry in Quebec and Canada. Second, we want to make our Canadian artists discoverable on platforms such as YouTube. I was relieved to see that the Conservative Party is finally listening to the cultural sector and that they have put an end to their pointless two-week filibuster. We will continue to be there for our artists and creators. We look forward to the committee resuming its work in the very near future. The cultural sector is behind us and supports this bill.

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-10 is designed to level the playing field between Canadian creators and the web giants. It will force powerful foreign broadcasters to provide information on their revenue, contribute financially to Canadian stories and music, and enable different audiences to discover our culture. The bill explicitly stipulates that these obligations apply only to web giants and not to Canadian users. The web giants have been exempt from regulations for far too long. Our government has chosen to take action instead of simply reacting.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately we have another sad example of a Conservative Party member dragging, through the mud, our great Canadian creators, who are wildly renowned around the world. Recently, a number of them won a number of awards at a number of different festivals. It is a sad moment. Unfortunately, it is another example of the Conservative Party listening to the most extremist elements of its own party while dragging our Canadian artists through the mud and—

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-10 aims to level the playing field between creators and web giants, and I continue to be baffled by the fact that the Conservative Party of Canada has decided to side with some of the wealthiest and most powerful companies in the world, against our Canadian artists in this country and our musicians. We would require big, powerful foreign streamers to provide information on their revenues in Canada, to financially contribute to Canadian stories and music, and make it easier for individuals to discover our culture. The bill explicitly says that obligations apply to web giants only, not to Canadian users.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to read an excerpt for a letter that was published in La Presse this morning. It was written by Alain Saulnier, a communications professor at the University of Montreal and former executive at Radio-Canada. “Quebec's entire cultural community is aware that francophone content is being increasingly marginalized by foreign companies on their platforms. What kind of dangerous game is the Conservative Party playing?” The opposition member claims to be a great defender of the French language, when he and his party would deprive Quebec creators, artists and musicians of hundreds of millions of dollars.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for providing me with this opportunity to read a long list of organizations that have already lent their support to Bill C-10 in the past few weeks. I am thinking of the Société civile des auteurs multimédia, the Société des auteurs et compositeurs dramatiques, Copibec, the Alliance nationale de l'industrie musicale, the Association des distributeurs exclusifs de livres en langue française, the Fédération nationale des communications et de la culture, SOCAN, the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française, the Union des artistes, the Association des professionnels des arts de la scène du Québec, the Association québécoise des auteurs dramatiques—

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. member that Peter Grant, counsel at McCarthy Tétrault LLP and past chair of Technology, Communications and Intellectual Property Group, came out in support of Bill C-10. Others that came out in support include Jane Yale, chair of The Broadcasting and Telecommunications Legislative Review Panel; Pierre Trudel, law professor at the University of Montreal and first head of the L.R. Wilson Chair in Information Technology and E-Commerce Law, and communications professor; and the Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, which actually represents 200,000 artists across the country, musicians from coast to coast to coast, artists, creators, the Canadian actors—

Mr. Speaker, this will allow me to continue enumerating the list of supports that Bill C-10 has received. It includes, the Music Managers Forum Canada; the League of Canadian Poets; Quebec English-language Production Council; Professional Music Publishers' Association; Canadian Media Producers Association; Professional Music Publishers' Association; Directors Guild of Canada and the The Writers Guild of Canada; Songwriters Association of Canada; Access Copyright; and the list goes on.