Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 108
View Jean Yip Profile
Lib. (ON)
Can you reiterate Canada's commitment to the promotion and protection of freedom of expression around the world?
View Kenny Chiu Profile
CPC (BC)
Thank you.
My second question is for Ms. Lhamo.
With regard to the trolls of the CCP proxies, the 50 Cent Army, that you referenced, do you have any good suggestions? Let's just assume that these are people who live in Canada here. Do you have any good suggestions for government to deal with these people to make them understand the limit of freedom of speech versus criminal actions?
View Christine Normandin Profile
BQ (QC)
Thank you.
Mr. Matthews, I have a question for you. The Chinese Communist Party is successfully curtailing freedom of speech here, especially for Tibetan, Hong Kong and Uyghur nationals.
Are you concerned that this curtailing of freedom of expression will extend to the average person in Canada and that it will involve more and more subjects?
View Rachael Harder Profile
CPC (AB)
Thank you.
Minister, in the charter statement for BillC-10, clause 3, proposed section 4.1 is cited as grounds for the bill being in compliance with the charter. We know that section was removed. Experts in the industry now say that the removal of section 4.1 takes away the safeguards that were imperative to protect user-generated content.
Do you agree with that?
View Rachael Harder Profile
CPC (AB)
I appreciate that you're calling it an explanatory document, because it's not a new charter statement, so thank you for acknowledging that. It is simply an explanatory document. This committee did request a charter statement, so we'll get to that later.
In the explanatory document, there's no acknowledgement of section 4.1 being taken out. Why?
View Rachael Harder Profile
CPC (AB)
It's interesting to me that in your opening statement, you said “the bill as tabled” supports the charter, again giving no acknowledgement to the fact that proposed section 4.1 has been removed. Even now, as I'm asking you questions, you're skirting the issue. You're refusing to address the fact that proposed section 4.1 has been removed and to give a statement as to whether or not the bill is still charter compliant.
Why are you avoiding my question?
View Rachael Harder Profile
CPC (AB)
Did this include the removal of proposed section 4.1?
View Rachael Harder Profile
CPC (AB)
Why won't you just address it? Why not just say, “Yes, 4.1 being removed still respects the charter”?
View Rachael Harder Profile
CPC (AB)
Dr. Geist makes things very clear when he says, “There is simply no debating that” by removing section 4.1, “the bill now applies to user-generated content, since all audiovisual content is treated as a program under the act.”
Do you agree with that? Is that a correct statement?
View Rachael Harder Profile
CPC (AB)
Minister Lametti, I think as I've already expressed.... I know you to be very capable and very competent. I know you to be a strong defender of free expression online. You've certainly written to that effect and made statements to that effect, so I am very glad that you are here today.
I do have a question with regard to discoverability and its requirements within this bill. Again, Dr. Geist said that, in his view, the prioritization or deprioritization of speech by the government through the CRTC necessarily implicates freedom of expression. Based on the charter statement that you produced, would you agree with that?
View Rachael Harder Profile
CPC (AB)
I have a question with regard to the charter—as to whether or not section 2(b) of the charter is actually held up by this bill—so let me explain further.
If I go to an art exhibition owned by a private individual, I expect to walk in and the art to be curated for me. Some artists are going to be given the front room; other artists are going to be given a back room. The curators are going to choose which paintings come first and which are toward, maybe, the end of the exhibition. That curation is expected because I'm going into a private gallery, and they've offered to do that for me. At the same time, however, if the government was to come in and dictate to that gallery how the art should be hung, where it should be hung or which artist should be promoted, that is censorship in its finest. The same thing is happening on our social media platforms with Bill C-10.
How does that fit within section 2(b) of the charter: to have what we post online carefully curated and censored by a government arm, the CRTC?
View Anthony Housefather Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Minister Guilbeault, it's great to see you here again. Thank you.
Also, thank you to Mr. Ripley and the officials from Canadian Heritage.
I want to particularly thank Minister Lametti and express my personal appreciation to him, to Nathalie Drouin and to the team from the Department of Justice for being here today, which is outside the normal course.
Minister Lametti, this committee asked you to provide a document “focusing on whether the Committee's changes to the Bill...have impacted the initial Charter statement provided, in particular as relates to Section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” Somebody was trying to use a technical term in terms of what we're calling the document to tell us whether or not you have delivered. Do you believe the document you provided delivers exactly what the committee requested?
View Anthony Housefather Profile
Lib. (QC)
I know that you've said this already, but I just want to make sure we're all clear on this. In reference to the explanatory document, is it accurate to say that you have determined that the bill, as amended and as proposed to be amended, does not change the relevant considerations in the original charter statement?
View Anthony Housefather Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Minister, would you agree that the charter statement carefully considers that the CRTC, in making any regulations on the discoverability issue, including with respect to algorithms, would have to respect the charter, including section 2(b), as opposed to the social media companies themselves, which do not have to respect the charter in their use of algorithms?
View Martin Champoux Profile
BQ (QC)
View Martin Champoux Profile
2021-05-18 15:02
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to both ministers for being here today.
Mr. Lametti, you said in your opening statement that the principle of freedom of expression was not absolute. Like it or not, it has its limits.
Can you give us examples of situations in which limiting freedom of expression would be justified?
Results: 1 - 15 of 108 | Page: 1 of 8

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data