Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 121 - 180 of 317
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Obviously, intellectual property is a very important aspect of Canadian production, not just in Canada. It's an important aspect of cultural productions all around the world and it's certainly top of mind.
We've had numerous conversations. I've met with independent producers a number of times over the course of the last year and a half. I've heard their concerns, I've heard their ideas, and we are looking at how best, through the modification of the Broadcasting Act, we can help foster intellectual property so it serves Canadian artists and Canadian companies as best as possible. That's what we're working toward.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Yes, that's a really important point. I've said it earlier, we are a minority government. The reality of minority government in the British parliamentary system is that they don't tend to last very long. I think we do have a shot at being able to adopt this bill and it's not me saying it. A number of organizations you've met have said that this was a groundbreaking bill. Someone called it historic.
Let's work together and get this adopted as soon as possible. I'm not saying we have to cut corners or shortchange anything, but let's work together to try to get this done. If we do that, I think we'll all be able to go home and say we've helped Canadian artists; we've helped Canadian culture come into the next century.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
The phenomenon you mention is obviously related to the advent of platforms and the very significant upheaval we have seen in the broadcasting world in Canada and elsewhere in the world. That is why this bill is important; it will regulate what is done online. Obviously, it will regulate the online activities of the Web giants, but it will also regulate the online activities of Canadian businesses.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
We must be careful; the legislator cannot act on behalf of the regulator, just as the regulator cannot take the place of the legislator. In our ecosystem, we all have functions and roles to play. One of the innovations in Bill C-10 is to increase the ability of the government to give direction to the CRTC. It is possible to do so now, but it is not easy. With this amendment, we are giving ourselves more flexibility.
Imagine what would happen if the legislator, in this case the committee that meets for a few hours a week, tried to hold public hearings to define regulatory elements. It would never happen. France, Britain and Australia have a regulatory body that enforces their broadcasting legislation. I don't know of any country that operates differently. I don't think we invented the model. If anything, we may have been among the first to use it, a long time ago.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Facebook and Google are not exempt from—I think Mr. Ripley, Mr. Piché and I have answered that question—the law or the regulation. When they act as broadcasters, then the regulation will apply to them.
As I said earlier in a response to a question asked by Mr. Waugh, as a legislator, I'm not particularly interested when my step-uncle posts pictures of his cats on YouTube or Facebook. This is why we've excluded user-generated content from the regulation. When they act as broadcasters, then the regulation will apply to them.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
As I said, Bill C-10 does not exclude Facebook and YouTube. This is a false assumption that you're making. They're simply not....
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you very much. My apologies for the lateness of my arrival. It seems that events are conspiring against my participation in this committee meeting. We had a fire alarm where I am right now, so we had to exit the building.
That being said, we actually explored the possibility of my joining by phone outside. That was technologically complicated, it seems.
I am joining you from Montreal, on the traditional territory of the Mohawk and Haudenosaunee peoples.
I want to start by acknowledging that, four years ago today, a gunman took the lives of six people at the Quebec City mosque and seriously injured 19 others. They were Muslim fathers, husbands, loved ones and friends. Their sudden and tragic deaths were heartbreaking not just for their families, but also for Muslim communities around the world and all Canadians.
Mr. Chair, I am very happy to be appearing before you again today.
With me is the deputy minister of Canadian Heritage, Hélène Laurendeau; as well as Jean-Stéphen Piché, senior assistant deputy minister.
The pandemic continues to weigh heavily on Canada's heritage, arts, culture and sport communities. We are all committed to helping them get through the crisis and supporting them in their recovery.
I want to thank the committee for pursuing it's important work despite the difficult circumstances. Your study on the challenges faced by the arts, culture, heritage and sport sectors caused by COVID-19 will be a valuable asset in these efforts. Canadian Heritage was pleased to participate.
I would also like to acknowledge the excellent work you have done on Bill C-5, which seeks to establish the National Day of Truth and Reconciliation as a statutory holiday.
When we met for the main and supplementary budget estimates review, I had just tabled Bill C-10, an act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other acts. It will be referred to your committee shortly, and we will welcome your input on this legislation as well.
As I indicated before the holidays, I look forward to better understanding your perspectives and how the bill could be improved.
Like many Canadians, our government is concerned about the current imbalance that favours the web giants at the expense of Canadian businesses. The economic and social stakes resulting from this situation are too important for us to stand idly by.
That is why the Speech from the Throne mentioned that things must change to ensure more equitable sharing of revenues with our Canadian creators and media.
Mr. Chair, our government is committed to regulating digital platforms and putting them to work for Canadians. One of the objectives of Bill C-10 is to require those platforms to invest in our creators, our music and our stories, which could lead to more than $800 million of additional money being invested here in Canada every year.
This bill has been positively received by the community and stakeholders. I must share the credit for this success with the employees of Canadian Heritage, as it would not have been possible without their supporting work. I would like to salute their expertise and professionalism. As you know, it is up to elected officials to lead the development of public policy, and our government has been very clear on how we want to tackle social media platforms and web giants. The Canadian Heritage team is providing excellent evidence-based support in this regard.
Our government will also complement these efforts by levelling the playing field on the tax front, as we proposed in the 2020 fall economic statement. Digital businesses will now be required to collect and remit the GST. We will also ensure that digital corporations pay their fair share of taxes in respect of their activities in Canada.
I must also note that we are currently studying a made-in-Canada formula to ensure fair remuneration of news publishers by online platforms, similar to what you might have seen move ahead in certain other countries.
We have seen during the pandemic that digital platforms are more than ever at the heart of communications between Canadians, and are keeping us connected. Unfortunately, some Internet users are also exploiting these platforms maliciously to spread hate, racism and child pornography. There is currently illegal content being uploaded and shared online, to the detriment of Canadians and our society. This is simply unacceptable.
My apologies, Mr. Chair, but I'm having some technical problems.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
I'm going to stop here. I'm sure I'll be able to tell whatever I need to tell as I answer questions from my colleagues from the House.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Yes, absolutely. Thank you for your question.
Perhaps I should turn to Mr. Piché or Ms. Laurendeau, but I believe we can get you the information on the calculation or formula behind the $800-million-plus figure. Either a public servant or someone from the department could appear before the committee, or we could provide the information in writing. I should also point out that it's a projection, not an exact figure.
We can certainly provide the information to the committee. You're right that it's entirely appropriate to share the information with the committee members.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Ms. Laurendeau, Mr. Piché, could one of you round out my answer to Mr. Rayes?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Rayes, I think Mr. Piché can provide you with more information.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you for your question.
This morning, I read an excellent piece on Radio-Canada's site about how the shooter had become radicalized on social media before doing what he did on January 29. A few months ago now, we undertook a joint initiative with several departments and ministers. The Department of Canadian Heritage is working with the Department of Justice, the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, and the Department of Innovation. We are preparing to bring forward a bill that will set out a regulatory framework to control hate speech, child pornography, incitement to violence, incitement to terrorism and the non-consensual disclosure of images.
Not many countries have tackled the problem, but a few have. Meetings and discussions have been held with representatives of those countries, at both the working level and the political level. The idea is to see how we could adapt existing models to Canada's reality and needs. Just last week, I was talking to Australia's eSafety Commissioner in an effort to really understand how the country went about implementing its system and what to watch out for.
Like anyone who endeavours to introduce these types of controls, we are concerned about protecting freedom of expression. In the real world, however, we established rules over the years to control freedom of expression, through both laws and court rulings. We are working to determine how we can replicate the framework that already exists in the real world and apply it to the virtual world.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
The purpose of the bill is to establish a new regulatory framework in Canada, one social media platforms will have to abide by.
A regulator will be created to enforce the new regulations and monitor the efforts made by platforms to combat hate speech in relation to the five categories I mentioned earlier. The broadcasting legislation, Bill C-10, will provide more clarity, including the various tools at the regulator's disposal to impose fines for non-compliance.
You're right. It is an issue of concern to a growing number of Canadians. As you probably know, the results of an Abacus-led survey commissioned by the Canadian Race Relations Foundation came out earlier this week. The findings show that the vast majority of Canadians have witnessed or directly experienced violence on social media. Women and racialized groups are much more likely to be targeted than other segments of the population. A very large percentage of Canadians want the government to do something.
There is no doubt. We are going to do something. We are introducing a bill soon, and we would be pleased to return to discuss the legislation in support of the committee's work.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you for your question.
Our approach to the web giants consists of three pieces, if I can put it that way. We've already introduced the first piece, Bill C-10, which concerns the cultural component. Shortly, in the spring, we'll introduce a second bill, which will deal with online hate speech, and then a third bill, which will deal with the media issue.
You asked us what's holding us back. As you know, as legislators, we can't copy and paste a model that works in one country and import it to Canada. Every country has its own laws, regulations, institutions and practices, whether cultural or legal. Models really need to be adapted to reflect these differences. For example, we have a free-trade agreement with the United States, but not every country in the world does. It's important to realize that there are countries that, in the space of just one year, have decided to regulate the web giants with respect to culture, online hate and media. I know of only one that hasn't, and that's Canada.
Other countries are doing different things. For instance, just before the holidays, Britain passed its online hate speech law. Canada isn't the first, but it is certainly among the first in the world to address these issues, and to do so on these three fronts at the same time.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
I don't agree with you, it isn't a void. We recognize that there's a problem, and have done so for a long time. That's why we've given hundreds of millions of dollars to the media. We started doing that before the pandemic, and we continue to do so. We've even increased that support to media in times of pandemic. It's true that for some media, it's difficult, but for others it's different. You may have seen, as I did, the results of La Presse published recently. For some, it's going pretty well, despite everything. This won't prevent us from acting as quickly as possible.
As you know, in a parliamentary system in a democratic society, you can't pass laws that have been drafted hastily. It takes a few months. A few months ago, I announced that we were working on this and that we'd be introducing a bill this spring. It's going to be done in virtually record time.
Is there one model that we like more than another? France and Australia have taken two very different approaches to tackling the same problem. France has focused instead on copyright by creating the notion of neighbouring rights. Australia, on the other hand, relied instead on market forces and recognized that there was an imbalance in the market. It created a forum for economic arbitration, so to speak.
These are two very different models. We are working with our colleagues at Canadian Heritage to determine which model would be the most relevant and would yield the best possible results, given our laws, regulations and institutions.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
It should be this spring. We want to introduce this bill during the current parliamentary session.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
As I said in my introductory remarks, I've been minister for a little over a year, but my experience with the Canadian civil service preceded my arrival in politics. As many of you know, I was an environmental lobbyist for many years.
We have one of the best civil services that this world has to offer. It's one of the most professional, talented and dedicated. I knew that before coming into politics. I didn't know the ministry of heritage so much. I knew others, but my previous experience and my actual experience just confirmed what I knew from the outside. That's the first thing I'd like to say.
In terms of a specific job offer that would have been sent to the ministry, I don't have that in front of me. Perhaps Hélène or Jean-Stéphen might be able to provide a bit more clarity on that.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
I did ask the department to look into the matter. Obviously this is not political staff. Since it's someone from the ministry, I turn to the deputy minister for answers on that.
Hélène, you could provide the member with the response that you gave me on that.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
She just told you that it doesn't violate any code of ethics or best practices from the government, so I think that from that you can't say, well, it may not be advisable. Does that violate any code of ethics—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
—or code of conduct? The answer is no. How many times did it happen in the last year? Once, that particular instance.
I take issue with the fact that we would question the ethical value of our civil service in Canada based on something that's simply not there and that we would—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Of course, we in the department talk with Facebook on these issues, but we also speak with the National Council of Canadian Muslims, the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, la Fédération des femmes du Québec, the World Sikh Organization, the Chinese national council for social justice, Amnesty International and the Anti-Hate Network. When drawing up legislation, we try to gather as diverse as possible points of view and opinions on an issue so that we can better inform the legislation that we will do.
I am a strong believer in the benefits of technologies, but we also have to recognize that many technologies have a perverse impact. We've seen that throughout the years. I think our role as legislators is to maximize the benefits to society of these technologies while trying to minimize those perverse impacts. I am on record saying that when Facebook threatened Australia with cutting ties with the Australian public on Facebook because of what Australia was trying to do in terms of legislation, it was no less than bullying. In fact, we have an upcoming meeting with France, Australia and Germany to see how we can work together on issues relating to GAFA.
Yes, we meet with these companies, but we meet with a whole range of different intervenors on these issues. What we're working on with the department is what will be in the best interest of Canadians, regardless of what the social media platforms, Facebook or others, think about it.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
I agree. I said it earlier: I think Canada has a world-renowned public service, and it's integral that we not attack them to try to score political points. We saw on January 6 where that can lead, just south of the border.
It's interesting that many of us would condemn the fact that social platforms were instrumental over the past few years in the escalation that led to what we saw on January 6. We would condemn those media platforms for sowing doubt in the population in regard to public institutions among our neighbours to the south.
I hope no one is under the false impression that we're somehow shielded from that result in Canada and that what we saw there couldn't happen here.
I think everybody in this country has a responsibility, a duty, and especially elected officials, to ensure that we protect our institutions. The last thing we should try to do is to somehow diminish them in the hope that we could score points. There are other ways we can score political points. Of course we're political adversaries—I understand that—but certainly not at the expense of our institutions.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Obviously we are as legislators, under the advice of our civil service.
Bill C-10 is a very good example. I will be the first to admit that the bill can be improved. The team and I are looking forward, to the proposed changes we will hear about starting next week on Bill C-10.
When I look, however, at the way the bill was received by the vast majority of people in the sector, I see that it was widely well received. Some talked about a historic day; others talked about a significant step forward. It was from coast to coast to coast, or as some of my indigenous friends say, from sea to sea to sea.
I would like to tell you that it was all due to the amazing work of my political team and me, but it wasn't. I would hope to think that we worked well at the political level, but we would not have been able to do any of this if not for the amazing work and input from our civil service.
You spoke earlier about the pandemic. I hope there's no illusion around this virtual meeting that we could have done CERB, helping more than nine million people, without the help of our civil servants in Canada.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
That's an excellent question. In fact, most of us would agree that the bill could be sent to committee. Some hon. members still want to speak in the House.
Procedurally, a number of bills are unavoidable. The bill on the economic statement is absolutely necessary. Otherwise, it will be very bad for the country. So some priorities are higher than others, and can't be sidestepped. However, I am hopeful that we will have a moment in the House to quickly conclude debate on Bill C-10 so that it can be referred to committee.
Thank you for doing a preliminary study even if the bill isn't yet before you. This will allow us to speed things up. Once again, thank you.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Earlier, I told your colleague that I made a quick inquiry with the deputy minister to find out whether this action violated a code of conduct or a code of ethics and whether it had ever happened before. This was not the case for either the first or the second question.
Are we losing employees from the Department of Canadian Heritage who were recruited by these platforms? This isn't the case either. Perhaps Ms. Laurendeau can tell you more about this.
Facebook is calling on governments to regulate the issue of online hate. If this is the case for all platforms, between you and me, not to mention everyone listening to us, it's perhaps to share a little bit of the pressure that these companies are under because of everything that's going on. The more governments intervene, the more this pressure will be shared between them and us.
This appeal to the government to intervene is not completely disinterested.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
I'm not sure I understand the question.
If we're doing legislation, we should gather as wide an array of opinions and points of view as possible to ensure that we have all the information we need as legislators when we do move ahead with legislation.
As an environmentalist I would talk to people in the oil and gas sector all the time to understand what they were thinking. Should we only be talking with these people—that would be hugely problematic. That's not at all what we're doing. We've consulted about 50 to 60 organizations—and we'd be happy to share the list with you—specifically on the issue of online hate. That's not broadcasting or what we're doing on media, but specifically on online hate.
Yes, we spoke to Google and Facebook, but we spoke to a bunch of other organizations as well.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Members of the committee, thank you for inviting me here today.
I'm joining you from Montreal, on the traditional territory of the Mohawks and the other Haudenosaunee peoples.
With me are Hélène Laurendeau, deputy minister of Canadian Heritage, and Jean-Stéphen Piché, senior assistant deputy minister of cultural affairs. I want to thank them for their outstanding work under circumstances that have not been easy in the past few months.
The COVID-19 pandemic is affecting all of us. Its impact on our country is significant in every part of our society.
The Department of Canadian Heritage supports the commitments of the Government of Canada, grows the country's cultural and creative industries, and shares Canada's stories both at home and around the world. As you will recall, the 2020-21 main estimates were tabled in Parliament last February 27. The total funding allocated to my department was $1.5 billion, including $1.3 billion in grants and contributions, and $203.2 million in operating expenses. Heritage portfolio organizations received $2.1 billion in funding.
In early March, we all entered a period of uncertainty. The pandemic hit the cultural, heritage and sports sectors hard. Following the Prime Minister's announcement in April of a $500-million emergency support fund to provide temporary assistance to these three sectors, I announced further details of this funding on May 8, June 18 and July 7.
A survey conducted by Canadian Heritage of the recipients of the first phase of the fund's implementation showed that we met our objectives, both in terms of supporting business continuity and jobs. With a 56% response rate, we obtained a wealth of information. For example, 77% of respondents indicated that the fund helped them a great deal or moderately to stay in business, and the vast majority of respondents, 98%, expressed satisfaction with the speed with which they received the funds.
In rolling out this emergency support fund in record time, in designing all the supplementary measures that went into effect this summer, and in doing so while the department was operating at limited capacity on a business continuity plan, we relied upon our network of dozens of portfolio organizations, thousands of partner organizations, and tens of thousands of stakeholders.
All of these partners contribute to the cultural, heritage and sports sectors which together comprise almost $62 billion of our GDP, contribute 750,000 jobs to the country, and provide us all company, comfort, community and identity in moments like these. Their work demonstrates the power of art, sport, music, literature, and the simple power of telling stories—our stories—in myriad ways.
Since the spring, I have been in close contact with these sectors, which have suffered income losses, job losses and structural changes because of the health measures. To give you an idea of the extent of these losses, according to Statistics Canada, the GDP in the information and cultural industries sub-sector declined by about $3 billion in July compared to February of this year. Similarly, GDP in the arts, entertainment and recreation sub-sector fell by more than 50%.
While this picture is incomplete, it does reveal some vulnerable sectors. This is why I participated in a series of town halls and roundtables to hear from stakeholders, so they could share their ideas about how we can work with them and better support them. Roughly 4,000 participants attended these town halls and roundtables in September and October.
These discussions allowed me to target our assistance more precisely. For example, in September, I announced a $50-million short-term compensation fund to help our film and audiovisual industries resume production activities. The fund will be administered by Telefilm Canada.
Our various assistance measures are reflected in the 2020-21 supplementary estimates (B). The increase in appropriations for Canadian Heritage and its portfolio organizations has made several things possible, including the following: the implementation of the emergency support fund that I mentioned previously; support for students and youth affected by the pandemic; support for the six national museums and the National Battlefields Commission; support for several key cultural organizations, such as the National Arts Centre and Telefilm Canada; and finally, financial relief for broadcasters through a waiver of CRTC licence fees.
Canada's cultural offering is among the best in the world, and I am pleased that our government is supporting it during this critical period.
On Tuesday, I introduced Bill C-10 to amend the Broadcasting Act. This is an important first step in modernizing the Canadian broadcasting system. I also intend to propose other measures to put in place a regulatory framework in which digital platforms contribute their fair share.
We are following developments in France, which has enacted a neighbouring right for newspaper publishers into domestic law. We are also following the situation in Australia and are examining options here in Canada.
In addition, I want to introduce a bill proposing new regulations for social media platforms, starting with a requirement that all platforms remove illegal content, including hate speech. Finally, I am committed to reviewing the Copyright Act.
I would also like to reiterate that our government has made reconciliation with indigenous peoples a priority. That is why, despite the circumstances, we are continuing to implement the Indigenous Languages Act in cooperation with our indigenous partners, and to support their projects to reclaim, revitalize, maintain and strengthen their languages.
Indigenous cultures, arts, heritage and sport are among our key priorities, and we continue to support them.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am ready to take your questions.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
This varies depending on the type of business. I'm thinking of cable companies, for example. The level of investment in a given market—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
I'm not sure I understand you. Is your question about the Canada media fund specifically?
Several investments are made by—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Ms. Laurendeau, I don't have the number for the Canada media fund handy. Can you clarify this for Mr. Rayes?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Rayes.
I'll tell you what the employees of the department did. When you look at the overall investments of Canadian broadcasters, depending on the type and size of the company, as I said earlier, the percentage of their revenues that must be invested in Canadian culture varies between 25% and 45%.
Applying this percentage to the revenues of digital platforms in Canada yields a figure of approximately $830 million. Of course, this is an approximation based on modelling. This is the additional amount that would be invested annually in Canadian and, of course, Quebec culture.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
The bill calls for digital platforms to contribute to the sector equitably, as do Canadian distributors and broadcasters.
Why ask the regulator to do this? First of all, it is an independent tribunal of experts. It's not unique to the broadcasting sector, where the legislator asks the regulator to do this kind of work. It's done in the energy field, for example. The government gives direction and passes bills, and the implementation is done by the Canadian Energy Board. This is also done in the legal field. So it's done in several sectors.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
However, I would like to add another important element.
It has been 30 years since the Broadcasting Act was amended. If the past is any indication of the future, it may not be for another 30 years. Over the years, it is much easier to change regulations than it is to change legislation.
I think that over the next 30 years, our consumption habits, cultural production and technologies will change a lot. If we were to propose a very rigid bill, we might end up with the same kind of problems we have today.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Platforms will have obligations with respect to the production of French-language content, as is the case for Canadian broadcasters.
I want to make it clear that many organizations across the country do not share your pessimism. The Fédération culturelle canadienne-française welcomed the minister's wishes. The ADISQ spoke of a historic day. The Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions thanked the minister for keeping his word and called on all parties to support this essential review—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you for your question.
We have done several things. I talked earlier about the $500-million emergency fund. In that fund, $72 million is earmarked for the sports sector. We divided that money into two parts: half of the money went to the national federations, which in turn gave it to their partners, and the other half went to the provinces to help the provincial and regional federations. The federal government is not in contact with these organizations. We have worked with the provinces and territories to ensure that this money is distributed.
Normally, in federal-provincial agreements, funds are spent on a pro-rated basis, but in this case we have tried to maintain the provincial and territorial sport ecosystem. Instead, we have allocated money based on the number of organizations in a province. This means that Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba and Saskatchewan received a much higher percentage of money than if we had pro-rated the funds. We really did try to maintain the ecosystem.
The Olympic Games have been postponed, which is creating all kinds of problems, as you well know, for the high-performance athletes who are supported by federal funding programs. In terms of funding, we've simply extended the support we provide to these athletes and their entourages until the next Olympic Games.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you for your question.
It was quite a challenge. We quickly recognized that people receive grants year after year from the Department of Canadian Heritage—that doesn't mean that they are always the same—and the same goes for the Canada Council for the Arts, Telefilm Canada and the Canada Media Fund.
We realized that, if we did not help organizations that normally do not receive funding, it would be very difficult for them to get through the crisis. That's why we set aside almost 40% of the $500-million envelope for organizations that we do not normally fund.
So we conducted a thorough and very broad search with our partners in order to reach those organizations. I spoke about that a little earlier. We created a new website and a simplified application form so that those organizations could quickly become eligible and receive funds. It allowed us, for example, to fund seasonal museums that Canadian Heritage does not normally fund.
It was a very interesting exercise for us, but it shows that we have a lot of work to do in terms of diversity in our ability to reaching organizations of that kind.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
The media in general, and local media in particular, were hit hard by the pandemic, essentially because of the major decrease in advertising revenue. The people who normally buy advertising in those media were themselves facing significant financial difficulties.
Part of our emergency assistance was set aside for the media so that we could support the sector and help it through the crisis. We did other things to help the sector, such as the Department of Health's advertising campaign on COVID-19. The federal government bought advertising in local media all across the country, in print media, in radio and in television.
I could find the exact figures, but several hundred print media and local radio outlets all across the country received that support.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
I agree with you. We can always do better and we would love to help as many artists, cultural workers, and cultural and artistic organizations as possible.
As an example, I can tell you about major festivals, which we did not manage to help in phase 1 or phase 2 of the emergency fund. We were not able to find an program with an adequate fit. There are all kinds of major festivals all across the country.
So we are working on it, and I hope that I will be able to announce something along those lines soon. It is certainly one of the sectors where we have to do more, and the quicker the better.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
We have established a number of financial mechanisms to support the people, the ecosystem, the organizations and the companies.
Of course, another one we can think of is the wage subsidy—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
No, I am talking about the emergency wage subsidy. I will talk about the CERB in a minute.
Mr. Piché and Ms. Laurendeau, I don't recall the exact percentage of cultural organizations that received the emergency wage subsidy. As I recall, it was about 75% but Mr. Piché would be able to give us the exact figure.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Right. It allowed those organizations to keep artists, cultural workers and technical people employed.
Then, as you pointed out, the Canada Emergency Response Benefit is about to expire, but it is going to be replaced by a “CERB 2.0”, called the Canada Recovery Benefit. We also announced that it would be available at least until the middle of next year, because the situation is going to remain very uncertain in the area through the coming months.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
I know that some people are asking for those programs to be extended over very long periods of time.
Let's take the CERB, for example. We have already extended it three times, because people were saying that they are not out of the woods yet and still need help. We are extending it, in a different form, at least until the middle of next year.
The situation is changing so quickly from province to province and from moment to moment that it is difficult to announce three-year measures when you do not know what the situation will be next week or next month.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
As I was just telling your colleague, this issue of long-term support has been coming up. Our response is that the situation evolves so quickly it's difficult to plan for the long term, but we've said from the beginning that we would be there and we would have their backs. I think we've shown that we have been there. We will continue to be there to support them until we're back to something that looks like a new normal.
If it takes six more months or a year, well, the government will be there. The Prime Minister has been very clear on that. We won't let them down and we haven't.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
On the first one, where you say that funding has been going down for museums, can you be more specific?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
I don't have those numbers in front of me. I can tell you that about 10% of the emergency funding did go to a special museum program, $53 million, and we provided additional funding for the national museums.
That was announced in August, I believe, Madam Laurendeau?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
It depends on how successful I am in convincing my colleague at Finance that it should be the case, but we're not quite there yet.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
I'm also a big fan of CBC/Radio Canada. I've confessed so publicly before. The CBC was able to redirect some existing funds to help compensate for some of the challenges brought on by COVID-19. We are looking at measures to further help CBC in the coming months.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
As part of the reform of the Broadcasting Act, hopefully, once the bill is approved by the House, cabinet will send the CRTC a directive. We want to ensure that there's an increased level of funding for indigenous productions, francophone productions and other equity-seeking groups. Since there will be a large increase in the amount of money available for cultural productions in Canada, we're confident that this will happen.
Let me give you another example. It's not specifically related to broadcasting, but I'm also responsible for the implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act. When we came into power in 2015, $5 million went to indigenous languages in Canada. That amount is at $40 million right now. It's going to be north of $50 million next year and at least $115 million...so that's 15 times what it was in 2015. Obviously, storytelling is intrinsically linked to language and culture. This is another way we're helping, by encouraging and making sure that indigenous peoples in this country can tell their stories.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Hélène or Jean-Stéphen can correct me, but I believe there's been no increase in the CBC funding. I believe those media reports were inaccurate, unless I'm misunderstanding the question.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
The first thing I need to say is that the CBC is not a government organization; it's a public broadcaster. It's an independent broadcaster, an independent organization, with its own independent board.
As Minister of Heritage, I am not involved in the day-to-day decisions of the CBC. They make their own internal decisions.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
To be totally honest with you, I've been a bit busy this week with the broadcasting bill. I have heard of the story you're talking about; it's not something I've had a chance to look into in depth.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
One issue that was brought forward to us this summer by the sector is the fact that because of the pandemic they weren't able to get insurance for sets to go back.... Without insurance, they couldn't get funding from banks.
Believe it or not, the government is now in the business of insuring TV production and production sets. Who would have thought that this would be possible? The government provided a $50-million insurance fund for the audiovisual sector so that these productions can start again in Quebec, Ontario, the Prairies and British Columbia. The sector was very happy.
One thing we are looking at is the possibility of extending it. We are having ongoing conversations with the sector to make sure this measure is helpful and will continue to be, as long as it's needed.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Well, we've clearly seen how successful Canadians are on the international scene with our TV production. For a number of our shows—Schitt's Creek, Kim's Convenience and, in French, District 31 and Les pêcheurs, which has become the first Quebec TV series to be bought by Netflix—we really punch above our weight.
I agree with you that we can't always put a price on that, but that $50-million insurance that we're providing the audiovisual sector will put 17,000 people back to work, and the economic benefits for Canada are in the billions of dollars. I don't have the exact number, but Jean-Stéphen could probably give you that very quickly.
Results: 121 - 180 of 317 | Page: 3 of 6

|<
<
1
2
3
4
5
6
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data