Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 136 - 150 of 319
View Alain Rayes Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alain Rayes Profile
2021-05-11 14:34 [p.7059]
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Canadian Heritage outdid himself yesterday by tweeting that public opinion is being manipulated by a deliberate misinformation campaign orchestrated by commercial interests that would prefer to avoid the same regulatory oversight applied to broadcast media.
Does he honestly think that the concerns of Canadians, analysts, experts, professors and all those who have spoken out against his bill are part of a huge conspiracy theory? Seriously?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
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.
View Alain Rayes Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alain Rayes Profile
2021-05-11 14:35 [p.7059]
Mr. Speaker, this minister is a pro at deflecting questions.
I find it a serious matter and quite insulting that this minister, after his repeated failures, would put the blame on honest Canadians who are shocked by the Liberals' attack on our freedom of expression. This only happened because he is unable to introduce a good bill. Judging by his recent public statements, he is doing nothing to dispel the doubts surrounding the bill.
Why is the minister insisting on playing politics, as he just did when he attacked those who are defending freedom of expression?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
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—
View Doug Shipley Profile
CPC (ON)
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are trying to regulate the Internet and the algorithms of social media platforms. Bill C-10 is an attack on accounts with blue check marks that are simply wanting to express their opinions.
Recently, University of Ottawa law professor Michael Geist stated that Bill C-10 had been a fundamentally flawed piece of legislation from the outset. The former CRTC chair, Konrad von Finckenstein, also said the legislation should not be passed in its present form.
It is clear that the heritage minister is struggling with his own bill. Why is the Liberal government so determined on attacking Canadians' freedom of speech?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
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—
View Earl Dreeshen Profile
CPC (AB)
Mr. Speaker, my constituents of Red Deer—Mountain View are shocked to discover that the Liberal government is planning to regulate what content they can post on social media channels like Facebook. They are also shocked and disturbed by the confused, contradictory and misleading statements from the minister. On Monday, we found out that thanks to public backlash, the Liberal government's Bill C-10 has now been forced on hold pending a charter review.
Canadians have fought and died to defend our right to free speech and freedom of expression. Why is the Liberal government so determined to wipe out that proud tradition and put these rights at risk?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
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.
View Bob Zimmer Profile
CPC (BC)
Mr. Speaker, the International Grand Committee brings together parliamentarians from around the world to discuss the issues surrounding the role social media platforms play in our democracies. As one of the committee's founders, I have always stressed the importance of ensuring our fundamental right to freedom of speech is protected. It is why I am so deeply disturbed by Bill C-10. As former CRTC commissioner Timothy Denton wrote, the bill is “Clearly intended to allow speech control at the government’s discretion.”
What does the Liberal government have against free speech in Canada?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote the Professional Music Publishers Association, which said, “It is absolutely fundamental for the future of Canadian culture...It makes sure that we have Canadian creation and production, and that this production reaches Canadians” and ”There’s a misunderstanding of what this means.” It also said that the situation had created an unfair advantage for companies like YouTube, which must be changed.
View Michael Barrett Profile
CPC (ON)
Madam Speaker, the Prime Minister and his heritage minister are engaged in an offensive against their critics. Yesterday the heritage minister, quoting an article, accused his critics of “a deliberate campaign of misinformation by commercial interests that would prefer to avoid the same regulatory oversight applied to broadcast media.”
While the heritage minister is quoting individuals who are part of the groups that have lobbied him and his ministry, the opponents, which he and the Prime Minister accuse of being part of a conspiracy theory and wearing tinfoil hats, number in the tens of thousands of Canadians. They include noted professors of law, Internet law experts and the former chair of the CRTC.
The government is rightly under siege for its flawed bill, Bill C-10. It is a bill that the minister seems to know shockingly little about, as evidenced in his disastrous appearances on news shows over the past two weeks.
While the minister and the Prime Minister are threatening the freedom of expression of Canadians and proposing draconian measures that would restrict and limit the expression of Canadians online, they are also proposing measures that would establish a regulatory body that could block websites from Canadians being able to see them and have social media posts ordered to be taken down. It is concerning when any government seeks to limit the freedom of expression of its citizens, especially so when it is completely unable to articulate the rationale for why this is appropriate.
The government says it is to protect Canadian culture, but there were protections included in the legislation for individual Canadians. However, the government stripped those protections, saying the bill did not need them, and now is proposing half measures that would still not address Canadians' concerns.
Some of the concerns Canadians have include the fact that the Prime Minister has a history of silencing his critics. When he is talking about being able to order web pages blocked, social media posts taken down and the regulation of social media users who have followings that meet no decided threshold, but just have a lot of followers or views, it raises concerns.
This is the same Prime Minister who fired his attorney general, the member for Vancouver Granville, as she was speaking truth to power and stopping him from his attempts to interfere in the criminal prosecution of his friends at SNC-Lavalin. This is the same Prime Minister who kicked the member for Vancouver Granville and Dr. Jane Philpott out of the Liberal caucus for speaking out against him. This is the same Prime Minister who obstructed the investigation in what was later labelled the “Trudeau II Report”, which detailed his attempted interference in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. It is the same Prime Minister who silenced committees and parliamentarians investigating the WE scandal when he prorogued Parliament and locked the doors to this place.
Canadians are rightfully wondering, as are Internet law experts and the former chair of the CRTC, to name a few, what the government is really trying to do with this clumsy legislation and its spokesperson, the minister, who does not seem to have even read the legislation. Is it really about protecting Canadian content or, in fact, is this legislation about silencing critics of the government?
View Julie Dabrusin Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Julie Dabrusin Profile
2021-05-11 19:04 [p.7098]
Madam Speaker, I am honoured to have the opportunity to respond to the issues raised by my colleague tonight.
Our government is committed to upholding the ideals of freedom of expression and protecting Canadians' rights as guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That is why I want to clarify that Bill C-10 in no way seeks to silence Canadians.
Our government stands strongly in favour of the protection of freedom of expression and charter rights, and it is incorrect for the opposition to state that Bill C-10 would regulate the Internet or that it would restrict freedom of expression.
I would like to point out that the act itself has a specific requirement that the Broadcasting Act be construed and applied in a manner that is consistent with freedom of expression and journalistic, creative and programming independence. I would like to further clarify that the changes that we are proposing through Bill C-10 to modernize the Broadcasting Act do not have the impact that the member opposite states.
The purpose of this modernization is to update a law that has remained unchanged since we were renting videos from the local cornerstore and we had yet to even imagine streaming services. The law is outdated and has created an uneven playing field for web giants that do not have to contribute to the creation of Canadian stories and music. Our artists have shown overwhelming support to update this law.
The bill does not apply to individuals posting content to social media. In fact, individuals are specifically excluded. This bill is not about what Canadians do online; it is about what web giants do not do in Canada, which is support Canadian works, languages, stories and music.
There is an amendment before the heritage committee that clarifies the powers that the regulator, the CRTC, would have over social media companies and the companies alone. The only things that will be asked of social media companies are the following. The first is how much revenue the platform makes in Canada, Second, they are asked to invest a certain percentage of that platform's Canadian revenues into our cultural production funds. Third, they are asked to promote and make discoverable our artists.
Another important point is that the discoverability requirement for social media companies is not the same as the one that applies to traditional TV and radio broadcasters. The social media company will not need to show or play a proportion of Canadian shows or music. The discoverability requirement for social media companies is only to make our creators discoverable, for example, to include them as suggestions in playlists.
Finally, the regulator will not have any powers relating to broadcasting standards for social media companies. The only powers will be the three that I have stated on Canadian revenue, investing in Canadian stories and music and making our artists discoverable.
I was pleased to see that Quebec's National Assembly unanimously supported Bill C-10. I would like to thank its members for their commitment to creative artists. The CRTC is not just going to start regulating content posted by users. Let me reiterate that this bill is in no way an attack on Canadians' freedom of expression.
I look forward to welcoming the justice minister's new charter statement on Bill C-10 as well as hearing from expert witnesses on the changes that have been proposed.
Canadians are at the heart of Bill C-10.
View Michael Barrett Profile
CPC (ON)
Madam Speaker, the parliamentary secretary said that this was not designed to target individual Canadians. However, the protection that would have protected Canadians was stripped out by Liberal members at the committee. Amendments that were proposed by the opposition that would have enshrined protections and would have done what the parliamentary secretary purported to be the intention were rejected again by Liberal members at the committee.
The Liberals and the parliamentary secretary want to make this out as if the opposition is Chicken Little and the sky is going to fall, but it is the public that is saying this. It is experts and it is law professors. Canadians have legitimate concerns about this bill. The minister went on national television and said that the bill would, in fact, apply to individual Canadians if they had enough views.
The government needs to make a decision. Is it targeting Canadians or is it not? If it is not, it needs to scrap this and come back to Canadians with something that protects their freedoms.
View Julie Dabrusin Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Julie Dabrusin Profile
2021-05-11 19:08 [p.7099]
Madam Speaker, I would invite the member opposite to actually review the amendments that are before committee at this moment. This bill had nothing to do with regulating users' content, and it is specifically excluded in the bill.
I look forward to the Conservatives doing the responsible thing and helping us to move this bill forward. We can work together to support our artists.
Numerous stakeholders have said that the Broadcasting Act is in dire need of an update. It has not been significantly updated since 1991, which was well before most Canadians had home Internet access.
I think we can all work together to make sure that we modernize the Broadcasting Act.
View Rachael Harder Profile
CPC (AB)
View Rachael Harder Profile
2021-05-10 14:32 [p.6956]
Mr. Speaker, when the heritage minister first started coming under fire for Bill C-10, he insisted that YouTube content would not be censored. However, just yesterday the truth slipped out. Uh-oh. In an interview he said, “at some point the CRTC will be asked to put a threshold.” Wait a minute. With one breath the minister says YouTube users have nothing to worry about, but in his next breath he says that at some point they will be censored.
Why does the minister want to dictate to individual YouTubers what they can and cannot post?
Results: 136 - 150 of 319 | Page: 10 of 22

|<
<
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data