Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 61 - 75 of 319
View Gérard Deltell Profile
CPC (QC)
View Gérard Deltell Profile
2021-06-07 12:22 [p.8004]
Mr. Speaker, since coming to power, the government keeps saying over and over again that committees are independent and the government can never interfere with a committee. This government motion means that it recognizes the existence of the standing order that has been used on three occasions. The government is using its power to interfere directly in the work of committees, although it keeps saying the opposite. It is odd that some opposition parties agree with the government on the issue of closure, since that is what we are talking about now. The government wants to muzzle parliamentarians. The fact that some opposition parties are okay with this is beyond comprehension.
I remember when I was at the National Assembly, I was advocating for stricter measures regarding the red squares, but I denounced the fact that we were put under a gag order. That was why I even suggested that question period be suspended so that the premier could go and speak with the student leaders who had come to the National Assembly.
My question to the government is very simple. Why invoke closure on a bill that clearly attacks freedom of expression?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for his question. I will remind him that the motion is before the House and that it is the House of Commons, and not the government, that will make the decision.
Why did we proceed in this fashion? I tried to answer this question last week, but I will try again. During the first four Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage meetings where Bill C-10 was being studied, the committee made it through 79 amendments. In the 11 subsequent meetings, when the Conservative Party began filibustering, the committee was only able to review and vote on seven amendments. If the committee can resume its initial pace, there is ample time to get through all of the amendments still before it.
View Garnett Genuis Profile
CPC (AB)
Mr. Speaker, it is quite absurd for the minister to suggest the only way he can help artists is by attacking freedom of speech. One of the problems with the debate that has happened on this bill at committee and elsewhere is that the minister has, frankly, not been able to answer some critical questions about the nature of the bill. We can understand why Canadians continue to have more questions when the minister is not answering them.
One question was asked of the minister by one of my colleagues, and I will re-ask it. Does the government give the CRTC the power to regulate social media algorithms through this bill? Many experts have said, yes, it does. When I asked this question at committee, the minister said it is not a “yes” and it is not a “no”. What is it, then?
I will ask the minister again because it is very important for Canadians looking at this bill and coming to conclusions. Is the government giving the CRTC the power to regulate social media algorithms through this bill?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I will use an analogy which my hon. colleague may understand. What we are interested in is the vehicle, the car, preferably electric, and how fast it can go. We are not particularly interested in what is happening under the hood.
View Garnett Genuis Profile
CPC (AB)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to follow up on my earlier question, which was bizarrely not answered, which again reveals the problem here. The government is eager to shut down debate and cannot answer basic questions about what the bill does.
Is the government seeking, through Bill C-10, to give the CRTC the power to regulate social media algorithms, yes or no?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I did try to answer my hon. colleague's question many times. Maybe it is not the answer he wanted to hear, but I have tried time and again to answer the question. What we want is an obligation of results. That is what we are looking for. It is what we are aiming for.
View Brad Redekopp Profile
CPC (SK)
View Brad Redekopp Profile
2021-06-07 15:03 [p.8025]
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal-Bloc coalition cutting off debate on its Internet-censorship bill is an act of cowardice by this government. It is doing this because it is afraid of the public backlash against going down in history as the government that trampled over Pierre Trudeau's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
In my riding of Saskatoon West, constituents have made it clear that they do not want this Prime Minister to censor their social media posts. Bill C-10 will censor Canadians' Facebook and TikTok posts.
Will the government do the courageous thing, reverse course and stop Bill C-10 ?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
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?
View Alain Rayes Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alain Rayes Profile
2021-06-04 11:35 [p.7973]
Madam Speaker, in Bill C-10, the Liberals are attacking freedom of expression and net neutrality. Now, they are attacking the freedom of expression of the parliamentarians who are examining the bill in committee by imposing a gag order. That is unbelievable. The problem with the bill has to do with freedom of expression, and to solve it, they are imposing a gag order with the help of the Bloc Québécois.
Is there a Liberal in the House, a single one, who will have the courage to speak out against this undemocratic move?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
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—
View Alain Rayes Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alain Rayes Profile
2021-06-04 11:37 [p.7973]
Madam Speaker, what the minister is doing here, trying to silence the Conservatives with this gag order, is unacceptable. In doing so, the Liberals are ignoring the advice of experts, university professors, former CRTC commissioners and thousands of Canadians who have been standing up for freedom of expression and net neutrality since the very beginning of this study. I would be ashamed to be a Liberal member today.
How can they show so little respect for all these Canadian citizens and experts by muzzling parliamentarians in committee?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
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.
View Alain Rayes Profile
CPC (QC)
View Alain Rayes Profile
2021-06-04 11:38 [p.7973]
Madam Speaker, the minister is spreading misinformation. We have nothing against culture, but we do oppose this minister's and the Liberal's censorship.
Today they are showing us that they are opposed to net neutrality, they are attacking Canadians' freedom of expression on social media and they are using any means they can to give more power to the CRTC. If we do not think like the Liberals, then we deserve to be silenced.
To make things worse, the Liberals have been trying for six years to make us believe that committees are independent and today they are imposing time allocation. How—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, the Conservative Party is attacking our artists and artisans. Every month that goes by, the Conservative Party is depriving Canada's artistic community of $70 million. Bill C-10 will make web giants pay. I do not understand why the Conservative Party has decided to stand with some of the richest companies in the world, such as Google, rather than support our artists.
View Rachael Harder Profile
CPC (AB)
View Rachael Harder Profile
2021-06-04 11:39 [p.7974]
Madam Speaker, “how low can they go” is the name of the game when it comes to free speech with the Liberals and their attack, time and time again.
Bill C-10 undeniably threatens the voices of Canadian creators. MPs have contended for them by standing up for their voices and their right to both freely express and be freely heard. What the government is doing now is nothing less than a gag order. Censoring the voices of creators was not enough. Now it is having to stop members of Parliament from debating this atrocious bill at committee.
Why is that?
Results: 61 - 75 of 319 | Page: 5 of 22

|<
<
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data