Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 101 - 200 of 224
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 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 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 Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, it was clear from the beginning that we wanted to focus on two things: one, for social media platforms to financially contribute to our cultural industry; and two, making our Canadian artists discoverable on platforms such as YouTube. Today I was relieved to see that the Conservatives are finally listening to the cultural sector and have stopped their unnecessary two-week-long filibuster.
We continue to stand with our artists and creators. We look forward to the resumption of the committee's work very soon. The cultural sector is behind us and in support of this bill.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, let me be clear. The bill is not about what Canadians can or cannot post online. It is very explicit in this regard. Helping Canadian artists and creators is at the heart of what Bill C-10 does. It actually gives them more opportunities to meet their own artists and creators. It does so by making sure that big streaming companies pay their fair share to our culture. It also ensures that Canadian artists are discoverable on these platforms. Our creators cannot afford to wait any longer.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, if the Conservative members truly care about freedom of speech, they will let our democracy continue its work freely. This bill would not regulate the Internet, or what people choose to post online or even view online, not at all. Individual activities are explicitly exempt from all three requirements above.
Freedom of speech is not negotiable for our government. It is explicitly protected under this act and in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We will continue to abide by it. We will let the committee pursue its work, and if that means a charter review needs to go on, we will be happy to do it.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for giving me the opportunity to remind him of all the people and organizations across the country who support Bill C-10.
Among others, there is Pierre Trudel, professor at Université de Montréal's Faculty of Law and first chair holder of the L.R. Wilson chair in information technology and e-commerce law. There is also the Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, the National Alliance of the Music Industry, the Association des distributeurs exclusifs de livres en langue française, the Société civile des auteurs multimédia, the Société des auteurs et compositeurs dramatiques, Copibec, the Association—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to paraphrase Jérôme Payette, the executive director of the Professional Music Publishers' Association. According to him, Conservatives are using misinformation, fear and filibustering to prevent the passage of a bill at the expense of our cultural future. He considers that to be loathsome. He says that the Conservative Party of Canada is against culture and he feels that we need Bill C-10. I would remind my hon. colleague that this does not come from me, but from people in the cultural sector.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to share another quote from Jérôme Payette, who wrote the following to the member for Richmond—Arthabaska: “It is very disappointing that you and the [Conservative Party] have opted for partisanship at the expense of Quebec and Canadian culture. The C-10 study isn't even over yet. Yours is the only party threatening freedom of expression.”
It is purely political.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, it is clear that what we want to do is focus on two things.
First, we want social media platforms to contribute financially to our cultural industry. Second, we want to make our Canadian artists discoverable on platforms such as YouTube.
Today I was relieved to see that the Conservative Party is finally listening to the cultural sector. I would be very disappointed if the Bloc Québécois were to stop listening to Quebec's cultural sector. I hope the committee responsible for studying Bill C-10 will resume its work so that this bill, which is very important to all our artists and creators, can be passed as soon as possible.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I am always pleased to respond to the requests of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. I have appeared before that committee every time it has asked me to do so.
As my hon. colleague is well aware, clause 2(3) of the bill specifies that Bill C-10 must be consistent with freedom of expression and journalistic and creative independence. Since my colleague examined the bill so closely, I would be surprised if he forgot about that.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote members of the Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, who state, “Bill C-10 in no way infringes on the freedom of expression, nor does it represent censorship of the Internet.”
The cultural sector is very clear. It wants this bill. Hundreds of millions of dollars for art creators, artists and art musicians are at stake. We are asking the committee to accelerate the completion of its work on Bill C-10 so it can be brought back to the House.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, yesterday at committee, it was made clear that we want to focus on a few things. We want social media platforms to fairly financially contribute to our cultural industry, just like Canadian companies do, and make our Canadian artists discoverable like suggested playlists on YouTube.
We continue to stand with our artists and creators. It pains me to see the Conservatives work for the interests of foreign tech companies. I call on the Conservative Party of Canada to let the Canadian heritage committee pursue its work later today.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, we have been saying this from the beginning, and confirmed it last night. Bill C-10 is about fairness, not about what we can or cannot post online. Bill C-10 does not remove anything from Canadians. What it would do is give them more opportunities to meet with their artists and creators. How are we going to do this? By by making big streaming companies pay their fair share to our cultural institutions and ensure Canadian artists are discoverable on their platforms.
I invite the Conservative Party to join me in this important task and get Bill C-10 adopted. Our creators cannot afford to wait any longer.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, if the Conservative Party members truly cared about freedom of speech, then it would let our democracy continue its work freely.
Again, this bill is not about what anyone can or cannot post online. Freedom of speech is not negotiable for our government. It is explicitly protected under this act and in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. If the member opposite actually read the bill, she would see article 2(3). We will continue to abide by these rules and we should let the committee pursue its work. If it means a charter review. then it will be done at the end of the process.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, it is pathetic to see my hon. colleague deliberately misleading the House and Canadians, because he knows full well that subsection 2(3) of the Broadcasting Act reads as follows:
This Act shall be construed and applied in a manner that is consistent with the freedom of expression and journalistic, creative and programming independence enjoyed by broadcasting undertakings.
Why is the opposition member deliberately misleading the public and the House?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, if I understand correctly, I should ask the following question: Is the hon. opposition member misleading the House and Canadians?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
I would correct my statement then, Mr. Speaker, by asking whether the member opposite is trying to induce the House and Canadians into error.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to read a note that I received on social media from Mark, an art enthusiast from Newfoundland. He said:
Regarding the battle with the web giants, I just want to thank you for carrying on with the most pressing concerns of our times. It cannot be overstated the need for action, and history will treat kindly those who step forward to support this.
This is how the artistic community feels about Bill C-10 throughout Canada.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would invite the hon. member opposite to actually read Bill C-10, where in section 2(3) it says, “This Act shall be construed and applied in a manner that is consistent with the freedom of expression and journalistic, creative and programming independence enjoyed by broadcasting undertakings.”
I expect the committee will be able to move forward on Bill C-10 without any further interference by the Conservative Party of Canada.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to read the list of supporting organizations throughout the country that have come out in support of Bill C-10: the Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, the Professional Music Publishers' Association, the Canadian Media Producers Association, the Directors Guild of Canada, the Writers Guild of Canada, La Fédération nationale des communications et de la culture, SOCAN, la Fédération culturelle canadienne-française, the Canadian Federation of Musicians and APTN.
There is also the Union des artistes, the Association des professionnels des arts de la scène du Québec, the Association québécoise des auteurs dramatiques—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for the question, as it will give me an opportunity to continue listing the organizations that have come out in support of Bill C-10 in the past few weeks. I will continue.
On that list are the Association des professionnels des arts de la scène du Québec, the Association québécoise des auteurs dramatiques, the Association des réalisateurs et réalisatrices du Québec, the Guilde des musiciens et des musiciennes du Québec, the Union des écrivaines et des écrivains québécois, the Société des auteurs de radio, télévision et cinéma, the Travailleuses et travailleurs regroupés des arts, de la culture et de l'événementiel, ADISQ, the Association des réalisateurs—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, in his question, the member for Parry Sound—Muskoka claimed that I had said those who oppose Bill C-10 were extremists. I said no such thing. I did point out that the Conservative Party of Canada was leaning toward the more extremist elements of its party when it comes to Bill C-10, but I did not say that those who oppose it are extremists.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, our artists and creators are among the Canadians who have been hit the hardest by the pandemic. They are suffering financially and mentally. Bill C-10 brought them the hope that things would get better soon, with the promise of forcing web giants to invest in stories and music from Quebec and Canada.
Today, the Conservatives are stalling Bill C-10, siding with web giants against Canadian artists and creators who are deprived of hundreds of millions of dollars. The real question is why the Conservative Party is siding with Google, one of the wealthiest companies in the world, instead of our artists.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, our artists are among the Canadians who have been hit the hardest by the pandemic. They are suffering financially and mentally. Bill C-10 brought them the hope that things would get better soon, with the promise of forcing web giants to invest in our stories and music.
The Conservatives are stalling Bill C-10, siding with web giants against Canadian artists who are deprived of hundreds of millions of dollars. Why is the Conservative Party siding with Google, one of the wealthiest companies in the world, instead of Canadian musicians and artists?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, maybe the Leader of the Opposition should actually read the bill. Section 2.1 of the bill states that individuals who upload content on social media platforms, such as Facebook or TikTok, are not considered broadcasters. This means, Mr. Speaker, that you and I cannot be regulated by the CRTC. We have kept that clause.
Again, maybe the Leader of the Opposition should actually read the bill before he starts making statements on it.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite, who is on the heritage committee, should know that proposed subsection 2(2.1) of the bill says that individuals who upload content from social media platforms are not considered broadcasters. He also knows that subsection 2(3) of the act states:
(3) This Act shall be construed and applied in a manner that is consistent with the freedom of expression and journalistic, creative and programming independence enjoyed by broadcasting undertakings.
He knows that full well and is trying to mislead Canadians.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, the bill is about making web giants pay their fair share, not about individual content. The committee decided to include social media companies to ensure that they pay their fair share to Canadian artists and musicians. Think of YouTube making millions of dollars on the work of Canadian artists.
Tonight at committee, I urge Conservative Party members to let the Canadian heritage committee continue its important work and not delay this bill any further.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, our artists are among the Canadians who have been hit the hardest by the pandemic. They are suffering financially and mentally. Bill C-10 brought them the hope that things would get better soon, with the promise of forcing web giants to invest in our stories and music.
Now the Conservatives are stalling Bill C-10, siding with web giants against Canadian artists who are deprived of hundreds of millions of dollars. Why is the Conservative Party siding with Google, one of the wealthiest companies in the world, instead of Canadian musicians and artists?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, the bill is not about what Canadians do online. It is about what the web giants do not do, which is to support Canadian stories and music. The bill explicitly exempts individuals from contribution requirements. We have and will continue to improve the bill so it can serve Canadian creators.
Again, the real issue is why the Conservative Party is taking sides with some of the wealthiest companies in the world like Google and YouTube instead of supporting Canadian artists.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, as they say, actions speak louder than words.
My esteemed colleague has an opportunity to support francophone artists from across the country. Bill C-10 will enable the government to invest hundreds of millions of dollars in culture, in music, in our TV shows and movies and in francophone culture across the country.
If he is really such a champion of francophone culture, why is he standing in the the way of Bill C-10? ADISQ, SARTEC and Quebec's Union des Artistes are calling on the Conservative Party to support Bill C-10.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, Google made $180 billion U.S. in profits last year, and YouTube made $15.1 billion U.S.
All Bill C-10 asks is that a small portion be invested in Canadian and Quebec culture, for our artists and creators. The Conservatives insist on protecting these companies, which are among the richest and whose profits have increased scandalously during the pandemic. It is incomprehensible.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to the hon. member, I must say that what he is saying is false.
Let us not forget that a year ago, there was no obligation on the part of web giants to invest in Quebec culture. That is what we are trying to accomplish with Bill C-10. There was no taxation for web giants, but it is included in the last budget. We have also announced, as have many other countries, that we would move forward with further measures. I challenge members to find any other country that is doing as much as Canada is doing right now to take on web giants. There is no such country. That is the simple and fundamental truth.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, if anyone is abandoning our creators, it is the opposition. It refuses to let us move forward with Bill C-10, which nearly all arts organizations across the country are calling for. Just this week, it was ADISQ and the Union des artists.
Why did the Bloc Québécois vote in favour of a Conservative Party resolution to halt work on Bill C-10, through which hundreds of millions of dollars will be invested in Quebec culture and francophone Canadian culture across the country? It makes no sense.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, this issue has nothing to do with free speech. This has nothing to do with what Canadians do online. This have everything to do with what web giants are not doing, which is investing in Canadian artists, Canadian musicians and Canadian culture.
Why is the Conservative Party protecting the interests of some of the wealthiest companies in the world instead of protecting the interests of Canadian artists and musicians?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, our artists are among the Canadians who have been hit the hardest by the pandemic. They are suffering financially and mentally. Bill C-10 brought them the hope that things would get better soon with the promise of forcing web giants to invest in our stories and music. The Conservatives are stalling Bill C-10, siding with web giants against Canadian artists and creators who are deprived of hundreds of millions of dollars.
Why is the Conservative Party siding with Google, one of the wealthiest companies in the world, instead of with Canadian musicians and artists?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote the Conservative member for Saskatoon—Grasswood. On November 19, he said, “The legislation does nothing to address social media companies, such as Facebook and Google, and their various properties, such as YouTube, to pay its fair share.”
On March 26, in committee, he even added, “To the Professional Music Publishers' Association, you're right on about YouTube. It is not regulated in Bill C-10, and everybody is using YouTube. We are going to have an issue. As you pointed out, correctly, this should be regulated and it's not.”
I agree with the Conservative member for Saskatoon—Grasswood. I am only saddened by the fact that his own party does not.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I find it incredibly hypocritical that the member for Lethbridge, who, given the opportunity, would not hesitate one minute to remove a woman's right to choose, a right protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, would like us, and Canadians, to believe that all of a sudden she cares deeply about said charter.
I have rarely seen such hypocrisy before in my life.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote the Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, which said, “Bill C-10 on broadcasting has come under unprecedented attack in recent days from the Conservative Party.... Conservatives sacrifice culture on the altar of partisanship.”
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote what the executive director of the Professional Music Publishers' Association said to the member from Richmond—Arthabaska. He said, “[I]t is very disappointing that you and the Conservative Party of Canada chose partisanship over our Quebec and Canadian culture. The study of Bill C-10 is not even completed. Freedom of expression is not threatened in Canada by any party but yours.”
It is pure politics. The system has a decades-long proven track record—the Conservative Party of Canada has chosen web giants over our culture.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, this time I would like to quote the president of the Fédération nationale des communications et de la culture. Speaking directly to the member for Richmond—Arthabaska, she said, “With all due respect, we have had enough conversations in which you agreed with Bill C-10. You wanted to help us improve the legislation. You know that the legislation does not target social media users and does not limit freedom of expression. The cultural community is counting on you to explain this to your Conservative Party colleagues and stop the grandstanding. Our cultural future and the French language are at stake, as well as our production capacity. Do not let us down.”
Unfortunately, the Conservative Party has let down our artists and Quebec and Canadian culture.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote the chair of the Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions who, in responding to the member, reminded him that for 50 years the CRTC has never regulated content on radio or television and has never restricted freedom of expression in broadcasting.
The law does not allow the CRTC to do that and yet the Conservative Party of Canada is the only entity to continue to spread this false news, misinformation and political rhetoric. It is appalling.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite will be happy to learn that I will be tabling legislation on online harms in the coming week.
On the issue of cultural reproduction and the fact that web giants should be paying their fair share, as I mentioned earlier, her colleague, the member for Saskatoon—Grasswood, stated he wanted us to do that, and we are doing exactly that.
However, what is happening is that the Conservative Party got cold feet. Google and YouTube are very powerful companies and when the going got tough, those members ran for the hills. We are standing up for Canadian artists, for Canadian music and for Canadian culture.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, what I would do is quote the member's colleague, the Conservative MP for Saskatoon—Grasswood. I will say it again. I think this needs to sink in. He said, “the legislation does nothing to address social media companies, such as Facebook and Google, and their various properties, such as YouTube, to pay its fair share.” Then the member added at a later date, “To the Professional Music Publishers' Association, you're right on about YouTube. It is not regulated in Bill C-10, and everybody is using YouTube. We are going to have an issue. As you pointed out, correctly, this should be regulated.”
That is what the Conservative member for Saskatoon—Grasswood has said. I agree with him, not with the most radical elements of the Conservative Party of Canada.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, this is another example of the disinformation campaign the Conservative Party of Canada is waging against the Canadian public.
An impressive number of stakeholders came to committee to testify on Bill C-10, and they told us how necessary this legislation is. It has nothing to do with moderating content and everything to do with getting web giants to pay their fair share for Quebec and Canadian culture.
The Conservatives have chosen to side with Google and YouTube, some of the richest companies on the planet, over our artists and our culture in Quebec and Canada. It is disappointing, and the Conservatives should—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, it is an honour for me to rise in the House today to debate Bill C-12, which our government introduced in the House.
This bill, which is entitled the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, is the culmination of many years of advocacy, work and national and international negotiations. It proposes a legislative framework to support our goal of reaching net-zero emissions by 2050. The need for this net-zero target is based on the best scientific knowledge available, which was clearly set out in the most recent special report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, in 2018.
The report clearly illustrates the devastating effects of global warming of 1.5°C. It shows that human-induced warming has already reached an average of approximately 1°C above pre-industrial levels. I want to clarify, for the benefit of the House, that experts agree that humans are responsible for this warming, unlike what was said at the Conservative Party convention.
The science is clear: to hold the temperature increase to 1.5°C and stave off the worst effects of climate warming, we must achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. The Paris Agreement, to which Canada is a signatory, echoes these findings. It calls on governments around the world to take urgent, ambitious climate change action to maintain climate warming well below the bar of 2°C and pursue efforts to limit it to below 1.5°C. This would prevent the worst consequences of climate change, and it is urgent that we act quickly so as not miss this positive opportunity that is slipping through our fingers.
It is extremely important to not only act quickly, but effectively. That is why the government established the net-zero advisory body, an independent body that will help Canada achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. It will ensure that national greenhouse gas emission targets are established using the best available data. This advisory body will provide the Government of Canada with expert advice on how to reduce our emissions, reach our objectives and ensure that Canada excels in the net-zero economy of the 21st century. We expect that the proposed measures will serve as a catalyst for long-term growth that fosters low carbon emissions, sustainable jobs and our collective health and safety.
Canada is not alone in aiming for net zero by 2050. Many other countries, as well as provincial and state governments, cities and businesses have rallied to the net zero by 2050 target. Some countries have already legislated or signalled their intent to legislate their commitment to achieve net zero by 2050. These include Norway, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, New Zealand and Japan. Here in Canada, Quebec has committed, Nova Scotia has legislated its commitment, and British Columbia's current government has also pledged to do so.
This push to achieve net zero by 2050 and the steps many governments have pledged to take to achieve that goal unite not just the international community but all segments of society, including environmental government agencies, unions, first nations, indigenous peoples and the private sector. Furthermore, environmental organizations such as Ecojustice, the David Suzuki Foundation, Équiterre and many others see the introduction of Bill C-12 as a major step forward for Canada.
Combined with a strong plan to fight climate change, this legislative framework will provide the necessary transparency and accountability, no matter which party is in power, throughout the entirety of the important and crucial challenge of achieving net-zero emissions.
Many large Canadian companies have already committed to reaching net-zero emissions by 2050. Furthermore, some Canadian companies such as Maple Leaf Foods and the Canadian Automobile Association, or CAA, are already carbon neutral.
In light of these efforts on all fronts, it is now Canada's turn to commit to reaching net-zero emissions by introducing the Canadian net-zero emissions accountability act. This act will require national greenhouse gas emissions targets to be set every five years starting in 2030 in order to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. This approach will ensure transparency with regard to the measures and progress necessary to reach this goal, earning Canadians' trust.
This legislation will create accountability to ensure we are meeting our targets. It also gives the Minister of Environment and Climate Change additional responsibilities, including the tabling of several progress reports and plans before Parliament.
If the target is not met in any given year, Canada will have to disclose why the target was not met. It will also be required to provide a description of actions the government is taking or will take to address the failure to achieve the target.
The legislation also requires the Minister of Finance to work with the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to prepare an annual report respecting key measures that the federal public administration has taken to manage its financial risks and opportunities related to climate change.
We know that the cost of climate inaction can be very high. We need only think of the financial implications of natural disasters, not to mention the immense and immeasurable cost of lost biodiversity. These reports, enshrined in law, will ensure this financial transparency related to climate risks.
Finally, the legislation requires the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development to examine and report on the government's implementation of measures aimed at mitigating climate change at least once every five years.
All of these measures in the Canadian net-zero emissions accountability act will ensure a clear and credible process for setting our targets and will allow for transparency and accountability on the progress made. This accountability is essential as Canada commits to net-zero emissions by 2050 and as we meet our new and ambitious target for 2030.
I remind members that the government announced a more detailed plan to meet our Paris commitments last fall. This plan included new investments to support and encourage Canadian businesses and help them expedite the transition to a successful, net-zero and sustainable economy that is, most importantly, globally competitive.
As the Prime Minister said, “Our most important international partners and competitors are positioning themselves to attract investment in new clean technologies. Canada needs to do at least that, if not more.”
Net zero offers the biggest economic opportunities of our age and will ensure a viable future for us, our children and our children's children. A few months after releasing our detailed plan, we responded to Canadians, who called on us to be even more ambitious and exceed our 2030 target under the Paris Agreement by almost a third for a total greenhouse gas emissions reduction of 40% to 45% by 2030.
Achieving our climate targets is ambitious, long-term work that requires immediate action on the part of all governments in Canada, industry, government organizations, indigenous peoples and the entire population. It is important to recognize the individual and collective actions already taken on this front. Provincial and territorial actions are very important to ensuring Canada's success in the fight against climate change. They will complement our actions and enable us to exceed our targets. The provinces and territories continue to announce ambitious new objectives and actions.
Just recently, the Government of Quebec launched the 2030 plan for a green economy, a policy framework for the electrification of transportation and to fight climate change. Although the bill before us today does not impose any obligations on the provinces and territories, their opinions and contributions, along with those of indigenous peoples, experts, non-governmental organizations and citizens, will be solicited with regard to the targets and plans prepared under the Canadian net-zero emissions accountability act.
A single government cannot transform our economy for the future and ensure a prosperous net-zero emissions future by 2050 on its own. I dream of the day that the Conservative Party of Canada, like the Conservative Party of Great Britain, will recognize the importance of climate change and of having serious plans and targets in place to address it.
I hope that the members of the opposition will support Bill C-12, which will hold us all accountable for this net-zero emissions future. This bill is necessary not only for the transparency it will bring, but also for the positive impact it will have on the health, opportunities and well-being of our children and grandchildren. It is a question of fairness.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question.
I too find it alarming that one party in the House of Commons does not share our unease and concern about climate change.
With respect to Canada's international performance in the fight against climate change, I humbly confess that that is not only why I got into politics, but also why I joined the Liberal Party of Canada. For more than 25 years, I have been crusading for the environment and specifically for action on climate change.
I have seen governments come and go, here and elsewhere. I was impressed by what I saw from 2015 to 2019: carbon pricing, record-setting investments in public transit, transportation electrification and record-setting investments in nature-based solutions.
I would like to point out that, between 1992 and 2015, Canada managed to protect barely 2% of its marine areas. By 2019, that figure was around 19%. That all happened in four short years.
Nevertheless, we still have a lot to do. That is why we presented an even more ambitious action plan in December. As my colleague probably knows—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I would beg to differ with the hon. member's characterization of what is happening in Canada.
Just a few months ago, there was an announcement by the Government of Canada, in collaboration with the Province of Ontario and Unifor, for the construction of North America's largest electric vehicle plant. Since then, we have heard more good news on this front. We are seeing a collaboration between the federal government and the Provinces of Quebec and Ontario, and many others, on the development of battery-powered vehicles. I could talk about the recent investment in Lion Electric, a Quebec company that produces electric school buses and all kinds of different types of trucks.
The member is right. He does have a point: It is an international race and Canada must be at the forefront of that race. If we do not do that, then we will become dependent. We are doing everything we can to ensure that Canada is at the forefront of this race. There is some very encouraging discussion with the new U.S. administration with respect to Canada-U.S. collaboration on electrification and on green technologies; conversations that unfortunately were not possible until just a few months ago.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote the member for Richmond—Arthabaska, who just a few months ago said that Bill C-10 does not go far enough. He wanted social media networks to be regulated, but he was not the only one. The member for Lakeland said that we had to do something to “protect youth and victims of abuse”, and the member for Calgary Skyview said that these companies profit off sexual exploitation and racism.
We are acting as we have promised, and we will continue to do so.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I could point to SOCAN, the Canadian Independent Music Association and the Professional Music Publishers’ Association. They have all supported the amendments we proposed to Bill C-10. In fact, they have said that the characterization that this bill would affect freedom of expression is factually incorrect and dangerously misleading.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I am puzzled as to who is trying to deceive whom really. I have in front of me a press release from the Canadian Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, which says, regarding Bill C-10, that these “characterizations [that this bill would somehow attempt to infringe on free speech] are both factually incorrect and dangerously misleading. They represent neither the text nor the purpose of Bill C-10.”
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, that press release was issued yesterday.
What we are seeing now is that these are big, powerful and, in fact some of the wealthiest corporations on the planet; clearly, the member opposite and her party are just afraid to stand up to them. Again it seems that the members of the Conservative Party are listening to the most extremist element of their party, as they have on very important issues such as climate change or women's right to choose.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, during question period, the member for Lethbridge said that the Department of Justice was against an amendment that was brought forward in the heritage committee on Bill C-10.
This is factually incorrect. It is a former employee of the justice department. I am convinced my hon. colleague did not intend to mislead the House and Canadians and I would like to offer her the opportunity to set the record straight.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to read an excerpt from the Debates of the House of Commons. On November 18, 2020, the member for Richmond—Arthabaska criticized Bill C-10 when he said, “That is not covered in this bill though. There is nothing in it that would regulate social media or platforms like YouTube.”
I do not understand. One day, the Conservatives tell us we need to regulate platforms like YouTube, and the next, they tell us not to regulate platforms like YouTube.
Would the Conservative Party of Canada make up its mind?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, you will notice like me and every member of this House that the member for Richmond—Arthabaska did not respond to his quote calling on us to intervene with social media. It makes no sense. We have always said that the people who use the platforms would be excluded, not the platforms. That is exactly what we are doing. The platforms that are acting like broadcasters will have to subject to regulation. We have said that from day one and that is exactly what we are doing.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I think the member opposite is very confused, because Bill C-10 is about the Broadcasting Act that has nothing to do with online harms, which is another bill that will be introduced. I am confused because the Conservative Party of Canada has asked us a number of times to intervene so we can prevent online child pornography, which is exactly what we want to do.
Are the Conservatives saying they are opposed to us trying to act on that?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, it is the member opposite who is trying to mislead Canadians. We have said from the beginning, when we introduced Bill C-10, that user-generated content would be excluded, but that online platforms that act as broadcasters would be included in the legislation. This is exactly what the amendments that have been debated in committee try do, and that is what we will do.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question and advocacy for the arts and culture.
However, I would like to remind him that, in our budget, we kept one of our election promises, which was to increase Telefilm Canada funding by $50 million. A good part of this funding will go to French productions, which Telefilm Canada has already planned. Therefore, there will be more money for French-language audiovisual productions.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that the leader of her party, when he was Quebec's environment minister, circumvented the Bureau d'audiences publiques sur l'environnement not once, not twice, but three times in the same year. That is the worst record of any environment minister in Quebec's history. If I were sitting with the Bloc on the other side of the House, I would not be so quick to criticize.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I remind my hon. colleague that Greenpeace called the climate plan we presented in December 2020 bold. Interestingly, that is the exact same word that John Kerry, the U.S. special presidential envoy for climate, used to describe Canada's target today. He called our target a bold step and said he was proud to be working with Canada in the fight against climate change.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, Canada's plan is ambitious.
We already have one of the most ambitious carbon pricing rates in the world, more ambitious than Quebec, British Columbia and even California and Europe, places that started putting a price on carbon nearly 15 years ago.
Our investments in the green economy are double the investments in the oil sector. All of that was done before the budget brought down by my colleague the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance.
Our emissions are starting to come down, but we agree that we must do more and we will do more. That is why we presented this ambitious target at the climate summit today in the United States.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question.
There is a word for what she is describing. It is called ambition. We need to be ambitious in the fight against climate change, whether in Canada, the United States or elsewhere on the planet.
That is why Prime Minister Trudeau is very pleased to join his counterparts from around the world today at this conference, to take ambitious action in the fight against climate change.
To answer my colleague's question, yes, we will include Canada's 2030 climate change target in Bill C-12.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question.
I would like to inform her that Canada submits an annual greenhouse gas inventory to the United Nations as part of its commitments.
The environment commissioner and the Auditor General conduct regular audits of the government's efforts to fight climate change.
Furthermore, with Bill C-12, we are creating an advisory body to help us and to ensure that Canada will meet its targets.
We are one of the few countries in the world to have a bill like Bill C-12, and we urge the House to act quickly to pass this important bill.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, we are currently reviewing the independent investigation report and the recommendations of the board of trustees of the Canadian Museum of History, and we are discussing the matter directly with the board chair.
The Government of Canada expects national museums to manifest the highest standards of respect, healthy working relationships and inclusion. That means always prioritizing the physical and mental well-being of staff members. The Government of Canada has a zero tolerance policy for workplace harassment.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, we have been very clear for many months. In fact, our government is at the forefront of the battle to ensure that the web giants pay their fair share, should it be when it comes to our cultural heritage in Canada, should it be for media or online harm.
Just last week, I was in conversation with France, Germany, Australia and Finland, so we could work together to tackle these very important issues.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague knows very well that the Canadian Olympic Committee and the Canadian Paralympic Committee are responsible for deciding whether Canadian athletes will participate in the Olympics. We have full confidence in these organizations. They will make informed decisions that reflect Canada's fundamental values.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I am a bit confused. The member just spoke at length about a bill that has not been tabled, which is an upcoming bill on issues of online harm, child pornography, incitement of violence—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, as I was saying, I am a bit confused. The member spoke at length about a bill that has not been tabled, which is a bill that will be dealing with online harm, such as child pornography, incitement of violence and terrorism. It seems the member has not read Bill C-10, which deals with how the government wants to legislate to ensure that online platforms do their fair share when it comes to cultural investments in Canada. It has nothing to do with online harm, which is a very important subject, and in fact, many members of the opposition have asked us to—
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, there seems to be a confusion. The broadcasting bill deals with cultural issues and has nothing to do with issues such as online harm or disinformation. The member for Yellowhead talked about the increase in cost. Netflix has increased its subscription in 20 different countries. Does the member think that increases in subscriptions in those 20 countries are a result of Bill C-10?
The previous Conservative member spoke at great length about how the Conservatives really liked the Australian model. Believe it or not, the Australian model has regulators to enforce the legislation. I have in fact spoken with those regulators. I would like the member to tell me the difference between what Australia is doing, by using regulators, and what Canada is proposing. How is that different?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I think that the member for Port Moody—Coquitlam and I agree on many things.
Regarding the importance of the sector in Canada, just one measure that we have announced in the context of COVID is an insurance backstop that will help to create 60,000 jobs. For every dollar the federal government is investing in that measure, the private sector will put in $10.
Would the interests of the people we are trying to serve be better served if we were having these conversations at committee to try to improve the bill, which I have said from the beginning could be improved, rather than in this context where people are just talking? We can ask a question, but we are not actually working on the bill.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, the conclusions of this survey are clear. Hate speech has no place in our society. It is time to step up against online hate. The numbers are disturbing, but they come as no surprise. Almost half of Canadians report either experiencing or seeing violent or hateful content online.
Canadians want us to act, and that is exactly why we intent to introduce legislation. Our approach will require online platforms to eliminate illegal content, such as hate speech, terrorist and violent extremism, child pornography and the non-consensual sharing of intimate images online.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Brome—Missisquoi for the question.
Hate speech has no place in our society. Our government will continue to take ambitious, meaningful measures to combat online radicalization and the violence that may ensue. We recently announced funding for YMCA Canada's “Block Hate” initiative to combat cyberviolence and online hate speech.
This project will examine hate speech trends across Canada and work with experts to develop online tools and training for Canadians.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I have a couple of questions for my hon. colleague.
Bill C-10 is a direct response from artists, musicians, independent producers and technicians in the arts and culture sector in Canada. They are saying that we are losing our cultural sovereignty. What the member said is true. A number of productions are happening in Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal and Manitoba, but these are service productions with American stories being told. They are telling us that we losing our cultural sovereignty, and I think the Conservative Party recognizes that.
In fact, a few days ago, the Conservative MPs for Lakeland, Portage—Lisgar and Peace River—Westlock all said that government needed to intervene to regulate online platforms. However, the minute we try to do something and the first attempt we make at doing that, they say we are trying to take away free speech.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, as a father of three girls and a legislator, I find the content of these platforms profoundly inhumane. This is why our government has been working for months with experts, non-governmental organizations and foreign governments to bring forward legislation to the House at the beginning of 2021. This new regulation would require online platforms, not just websites, to eliminate illegal content, including hate speech, child sexual exploitation and violent or extremist content.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, online platforms are central to our everyday communications and allow us to connect with the world. However, we are extremely concerned that they are used to endanger the safety of individuals, including vulnerable persons and children. This is why our government is actively working to create new regulations that would require online platforms to eliminate illegal content, including hate speech, child sexual exploitation and violent extremist content.
I hope that the official opposition will work with us and vote in favour of this legislation when we bring it forward.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, we intend to introduce these regulations as early as the beginning of the session in 2021, and we have already started tackling online platforms. I tabled Bill C-10 just a few weeks ago.
I hope Conservative Party members will vote in favour of the bill to start tackling online platforms. I hope they will also vote for the bill that we will be bringing forward to tackle online hate and child pornography.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
moved:
That Vote 1, in the amount of $1,897,264,276, under Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development — Operating expenditures, in the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2021, be concurred in.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to participate in this important discussion about the Canada health transfer, or CHT, and funding for health care.
Our government is committed to improving the health care system so that it can meet the needs of Canadians today and in the future. Our system must adapt if it wants to provide better health care and better results at an affordable cost given the aging population, the increase in rates of chronic disease and the financial pressure resulting from new drugs and new technologies.
From the beginning of the global coronavirus pandemic, our government has been proactive, shown leadership and worked with the provinces and territories to support their efforts to deal with this crisis. More specifically, our government invested more than $19 billion to help the provinces and territories safely restart their economies. This amount includes $500 million to guarantee that health care systems will be ready to face future waves of the virus; $740 million for vulnerable Canadians, including those in long-term care and palliative care facilities, and those who receive home care, and risk having more serious cases of COVID-19; and $500 million to support and protect people struggling with mental health, addiction or homelessness.
Our government also supports virtual care services and online screening to relieve emergency services and promote physical distancing. We have invested $240 million in creating virtual care and mental health care tools in order to support the provinces and territories in this work. This investment is in addition to the $500 million from the COVID-19 response fund, which was distributed earlier this year to the provinces and territories in order to help them respond to critical needs in the health care systems and to support mitigation efforts.
This funding was provided as an ad hoc complement to the Canada health transfer, which is the primary federal funding mechanism for supporting Canada's health care system. It allows for the provision of predictable, long-term funding to the provinces and territories. In 2020-21, our government will provide nearly $42 billion in cash assistance to the provinces and the territories through the CHT. This represents on average more than 23% of planned health spending by the provincial and territorial governments. In 2020-21, the Province of Quebec will receive $9.4 billion from the CHT.
The CHT will increase each year based on economic growth, with a minimum increase of 3% per year. Over the next five years, funding for the CHT to the provinces and territories should reach more than $200 billion. These funds are allocated to the provinces and territories on an equal per capita basis, which guarantees the comparable treatment of all Canadians, regardless of where they live.
The Canada Health Act sets out the criteria and conditions the provinces and territories must meet to receive their full contribution through the CHT. With the exception of its link to the Canada Health Act, the CHT is unconditional, and gives provinces and territories the leeway to decide how best to distribute the funds in order to meet their residents’ and communities’ health care needs.
I would like to take a little time to talk about the history and evolution of the CHT. The current flexible block funding approach to the CHT differs substantially from the cost-sharing program that existed when the public health insurance plan was introduced. Before 1977, the federal government matched eligible provincial and territorial spending on doctors and hospitals at a rate of 50%. However, expenses for these items constituted only about three-quarters of the provinces’ and territories’ total health care expenses.
In other words, the cost-sharing arrangement in place before 1977 did not cover other health care expenses such as pharmaceuticals, home care, mental health services and related health care services that were beginning to represent a growing share of the provinces’ and territories’ health care expenses. As we know, these health care expenditure components increased over the years. The share of spending for doctors and hospitals decreased, and now represents less than 60% of the provinces’ and territories’ health care expenses.
Even during the first period of the cost-sharing program for eligible expenses, federal transfers never really represented 50% of spending for doctors and hospitals. They represented less than 37% of the provinces’ and territories’ total health care expenses. As the health care system evolved, all of the parties involved agreed that a more flexible funding system was required to help the provinces and territories meet their own health care priorities and not only to help foot the bill for doctors and hospitals.
When the established programs financing, or EPF, was introduced in 1977, the federal, provincial and territorial governments agreed to replace the earlier equal cost-sharing program with a more flexible block- or cash-funding approach. This meant that, instead of the federal government equalizing the provinces’ and territories’ spending on doctors and hospitals, the provinces and territories received a cash transfer that they could spend on a broader range of health care priorities.
More importantly, in our context, the EPF program included a stipulation that the federal government was to permanently transfer tax room or tax points to the provinces and territories. This transfer of tax points meant that the federal government permanently reduced its tax rates, while the provinces and territories increased theirs by the same amount, which had no net impact on the taxpayer's tab. More specifically, 13.5 percentage points of the federal personal income tax and one percentage point of the federal corporate income tax were transferred to the provinces and territories. Instead of the federal government collecting taxes and transferring them to the provinces and territories, the provinces and territories could now collect these taxes themselves and spend them as they saw fit.
In 1977-78, the value of the transfer of tax points was equivalent to approximately 22% of the provinces' and territories' spending for doctors and hospitals, the public health insurance plan, while the health transfer represented 33%, for a total of 55%. The cash transfer represented almost 25% of the provinces' and territories' total health care spending. Until recently, this threshold, which is the reference point for the federal cash contribution, was long recognized by the provinces and territories themselves.
As I mentioned, the CHT now represents more than 23% of the provinces' and territories' health care spending. But the federal government's contribution to health care in provinces and territories is not limited to the CHT. Much of the funding related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including the funds from the safe restart agreement, which are intended specifically for health care, will be transferred directly to the provinces and territories.
In addition to the extraordinary measures the government implemented to help the provinces, the territories and all Canadians deal with the coronavirus pandemic, the federal government has also provided significant and ongoing support for health care. These investments were made during the previous Parliament when, in August 2017, all the provinces and territories agreed on $11 billion in federal funding over 10 years to improve home care and mental health services. This new funding alone increased the federal contribution to provincial and territorial health spending by nearly 25%. The government also provides considerable direct health care funding as part of its health promotion and protection responsibility, which includes regulation. It supports public health, research and national health organizations, and delivers health care services to specific groups, such as indigenous populations. In addition to direct federal spending and provincial and territorial transfers, the government also helps individuals and companies via the tax system.
Let me close with the following.
In conclusion, our health system needs improvement in some areas. However, experience shows us that we cannot improve things just by injecting more cash. Canada spends more on health than most other countries, yet we are not getting the results Canadians need and deserve.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question.
In my speech, I tried to show that costs were once shared 50-50, but that this only represented part of the costs for the provinces and territories. In time, following a series of agreements between the federal government and the provinces and territories, this arrangement was changed, and the 50-50 formula that did not cover 50% of provincial costs was changed to a more flexible formula that took different factors into account when calculating the transfers.
The opposition is trying to make the House believe that we went from 50% to 23% and that the federal government disengaged from the health care system of the provinces and territories, but that is simply not true.
There is predictability built into these agreements, but COVID-19 called for targeted intervention. I believe that the Bloc Québécois would be the first to rise and oppose everything we are doing had there not been this targeted assistance to cope with COVID-19.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie for his question. I am very happy for the opportunity to talk about the environment, since the science clearly shows that pollution costs our health care system a lot of money.
For that reason, since 2015, our government has been taking a never-before-seen approach to tackling this issue. The more we can reduce pollution in Canada, whether it be air pollution, water pollution, or pollution associated with climate change, the healthier our country, planet and people will be. On top of that, if we reduce pollution, there will be fewer demands and pressures on our public health care system across the country.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her speech.
I am in complete agreement with her. The transition should have started a long time ago. We did start it, but that was followed by 10 years of inaction under the Conservatives.
She is right to say that this bill is not an action plan. It is a framework bill. We presented the first component of the action plan in 2016. It was the pan-Canadian framework on clean growth and climate change, which all of the provinces and territories adopted. The minister also announced that this plan will be updated very soon.
I would like to address two points raised by my colleague. She believes the advisory body is insufficient. However, before entering politics, I co-chaired an advisory council on climate change for this government. The council proposed a series of measures, including purchase incentives for electric vehicles and investments in energy efficiency retrofits. A few months after our report was released, those measures were incorporated into the 2019 budget.
The hon. member also said that there is no external evaluation, yet there is an entire section on the role of the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development. This is right in his wheelhouse, since he is responsible for making sure that the government meets its objectives in various areas. Consequently, I am having a bit of difficulty understanding my colleague's questions in this respect.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech.
We are both concerned about climate change, which has been my pet cause for many years. I attended the first UN Conference of the Parties in 1995. All I am missing is a cane.
I am a little confused. I will quickly read out a few excerpts from the bill, including part of the preamble:
...the Government of Canada is committed to achieving and exceeding the target for 2030 set out in its nationally determined contribution communicated in accordance with the Paris Agreement....
It also mentions the commissioner of the environment in subclause 24(2), which I will read out:
The [commissioner's] report may include recommendations related to improving the effectiveness of the Government of Canada's implementation of the measures with respect to climate change mitigation that it has committed to undertake....
If I understood what my colleague said, she would like to force future governments to meet targets. In a democracy, I do not see how we can force a government that has been duly elected by the people to not change its mind. As an environmentalist, I want all governments to meet the targets, and I believe that we have a collective responsibility to ensure that that happens.
However, how can we enact a law that forces something on people who have a perfectly legitimate democratic right to change their minds?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie for his intervention, which was very interesting and very relevant.
He talked about the importance of culture. I would like him to sum up in 30 seconds how he sees the vital connection that exists between language and culture.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I will share my time with the hon. member for Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook.
Aside from being a means of communication, language is also an expression of our culture. It tells our stories and accompanies our dreams. Language gives us the ability to understand and help each other, and it helps us move forward.
Our sense of belonging to a community is built around a common language. Language and culture are passed on in various ways, through literature, visual arts, music, science, history, philosophy or dance. Among the main instruments of cultural transmission are television and radio. A long time ago other legislators in the House realized that and started demanding that television and radio contribute to the production of Canadian stories. Their decision was greatly beneficial to our cultural landscape.
However, the definition of television and radio has changed a lot since the last time the Broadcasting Act was updated, 30 years ago. In those days, we did not have touch screens or voice-activated devices. We were lucky if we could get the remote control to work on the first try. Nevertheless our laws remained unchanged since that distant past.
That is why I introduced Bill C-10 a few days ago. Its objective is simple: to extend the scope of the Broadcasting Act to online broadcasting services, such as Netflix, Amazon Prime or Spotify, and ensure that they too contribute to the production of Canadian stories, including francophone stories. It is a matter of fairness. The web giants can no longer ignore Canada's francophones and their culture. This is particularly important because francophones and their language and culture are a minority in North America.
In order to preserve French under such circumstances, we need more than just good intentions. That is why robust legislation is so important. Bill C-10 is a way of telling francophone artists that there is no us without them. Our reform recognizes the specific challenges they are facing and addresses them directly. Their work deserves to be more well known and better funded and broadcast.
Finally, I want to talk about Montreal, a francophone city that is rich in culture and heritage. It has been my adopted home for over 30 years. From the early days of radio and television, creators have looked for ways to represent and reflect all aspects of life in Montreal in their productions.
It has been captured in such songs as Je reviendrai à Montréal by Robert Charlebois and Montréal by Ariane Moffat. On screen, the city and its inhabitants have been immortalized in documentaries such as the recent Chef en pandémie, series such as District 31 and La vie, la vie, the children's show Passe-Partout, and Montreal's distinct alleyways.
There are also those who make us laugh in French: Catherine Éthier, Eddy King, Rosalie Vaillancourt and Adib Alkhalidey. The Couscous Comedy Show stage in Montreal has launched quite a few acts now appearing on television and Apple Music.
In essence, Montreal inspires and sets the tone. It is a place where people can connect, where francophone productions around the world can collaborate. Montreal's stories, francophone stories, are there. They need to be seen and heard. Our children and grandchildren deserve to see themselves in those characters. They deserve a chance to write those stories themselves someday.
In 2016, I was honoured to be awarded the Impératif français prize for my contribution to the vitality of the language. It is not, however, my mother tongue. I learned to speak English before I learned to speak French. Switching from an English school to a French one was not without its challenges, but my mother felt that I ought to learn this beautiful language, and I have cultivated it throughout my life.
Winning the prize did not strike me as an end in itself. It was just a sign that I had to keep doing that work. Today, that commitment has brought me to my work as Minister of Canadian Heritage. Those who work to ensure the vitality of our language and our culture and to pass it on to others can count on our government to support, recognize and applaud their efforts.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for the question.
He seems to be having a hard time understanding that on this side of the House there are many proud Quebeckers to whom protecting the French language is a concern and who are working to protect it in Quebec, of course, but also from one end of the country to the other.
We are doing this through tools such as the Official Languages Act or the Broadcasting Act. I will also soon be introducing a bill on the media and web giants. We are using every tool we have to continue to protect this language and our francophone communities, whether they are in Quebec or elsewhere in the country.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her comments.
We had the pleasure of chatting recently. New Brunswick is a wonderful province I have had the opportunity of visiting many times.
I have written three books in French, and the book fairs there were even busier than in Montreal or Quebec City. The francophone community there is active, healthy and engaged.
That is why we want to continue to work with francophones in Quebec and across Canada, especially in the member's beautiful part of the country.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I must admit that I greatly admire my colleague from Louis-Saint-Laurent. There are issues on which we disagree, but I do not think that the protection of French is one of them. I think that, like many others in this room, we both agree on this issue.
I think that our government has accomplished a lot since it took office in 2015. My predecessors at Canadian Heritage, who are here with us tonight, did a lot for CBC/Radio-Canada and the Canada Council for the Arts. We will continue to address other issues to do even more to protect francophones across the country.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Chair, I thank my hon. colleague for his intervention.
I have two questions about the criticisms of Bill C-10 on broadcasting. On the issue of percentages in the bill, the Association québécoise de la production médiatique said, “The AQPM believes that it would be hard to include percentages in the legislation and that it is better to go before the CRTC to debate better conditions to impose on online broadcasters and undertakings.” That is what independent producers are saying and that is what ADISQ, the Association québécoise de l'industrie du disque, du spectacle et de la vidéo says. By the way, ADISQ says it is grateful to the Minister of Canadian Heritage and his team for being so receptive.
Will the Conservative Party vote in favour of Bill C-10?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Chair, the hon. member for Berthier—Maskinongé has said a number of times this evening that nothing people have been saying amounts to anything more than words and that nothing has been accomplished.
I have a question for my hon. colleague from Lac-Saint-Louis. The federal government has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in Telefilm Canada, Musicaction and the Canada Media Fund to support French music, French television series and French films, many of which have reached international audiences.
Does he see this as concrete action on the part of the federal government?
Let's also consider the $4 billion we invested in arts and culture, a significant chunk of which went to francophone artists in Quebec and across Canada.
Does my colleague see all that as concrete action in support of the French language from coast to coast to coast?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the member opposite that the CBC is an autonomous Crown corporation responsible for managing its own operation while offering Canadians accurate and quality information without political interference.
The Conservatives would like to tell the CBC and journalists what to cover and how, but that is not how democracy works. Some might say that the Conservatives are delusional because they seem to find conspiracy theories wherever they look.
We need to respect journalists' independence, and we will always do so.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, William Shatner is, in fact, from the wonderful city of Montreal.
One of the interesting aspects of the bill, one could argue, is that for the first time ever, it puts an emphasis on indigenous production, whether it be with regard to music, TV or the big screen. I am wondering if my hon. colleague could help us understand how this would help reconciliation with indigenous peoples in Canada.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for his speech and his passionate testimonial about local media.
I myself delivered La Tuque's L'Écho when I was a boy. I also wrote for several local media outlets. However, there appears to be some confusion. Bill C-10 is about broadcasting, not the media. I publicly announced my intention to table another bill on the media and the use by Internet giants like Facebook and Google of Canadian content without appropriate compensation.
My hon. colleague is talking about the Yale report on which our bill is indeed based. It is somewhat ironic, since the former leader of my hon. colleague's party, on the day the report was published, proposed that we scrap it, so I am not sure I understand.
If the local media is so important, and I believe my hon. colleague in that regard, why is it that the Conservative Party has opposed our every effort to help Canadian media?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
moved that Bill C-10, An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
He said: Mr. Speaker, I would first like to acknowledge that we are gathered on the traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe.
I am honoured to speak today to Bill C-10, an act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other acts.
I would like to start by illustrating the situation in which we live to the House. Digital technologies have completely changed the way Canadians discover stories, how they stay informed, how they are entertained and how they learn and share with each other.
From 2011 to 2019, the number of Canadians with Netflix subscriptions has grown from one in 10 to nearly six in 10. The number of Canadians using Spotify to listen to music online has jumped from 2% in 2014 to nearly 30% in 2019. We welcome these innovations that bring so much richness to our lives and so much diverse content. However, prolonging the status quo will only further undermine our ability to tell our own Canadian stories.
If we do not react, funding for Canadian television and music production will continue to decline. What we risk in the long term is nothing less than the loss of our cultural sovereignty. The production of francophone, anglophone and indigenous works and programs will be jeopardized.
That is why we are taking action. The Broadcasting Act was enacted in 1991, before the Internet, smart phones and online platforms. Its regulatory framework is frozen in the past.
On the one hand, we have Canadian companies that play by the rules and invest in our Canadian stories. On the other, we have online broadcasters that operate outside any regulatory framework and make money off the system with no obligation to give back. No, resistance is not futile.
One system for our traditional broadcasters and a lack of for online broadcasters does not work. This outdated regulatory framework is unfair for our Canadian businesses; it threatens Canadian jobs. It undermines the ability of Canadians to tell and hear their own stories.
We are tabling this bill for three main reasons. First, the act will strengthen our cultural sovereignty. Canada is blessed with two official languages and the unique history and stories of our indigenous peoples.
We need to put mechanisms in place to ensure Canadians can tell their own stories and express their own culture, now and in the future.
Second, implementing the new Canadian audio-visual regime under the act will generate almost $1 billion in foreign investment per year in our films, television and music.
That means more quality jobs for our economy, more opportunities for our creators and talent in the production sector, for our artists, designers and authors, and for many other people who specialize in areas in which Canada is internationally renowned.
It means greater stability for the sector. These are the same people who entertained us and made us smile during the first wave of COVID-19, and who are still doing so now, during the second wave we are now in.
Third, the act aims to ensure fairness. Asking online broadcasters to shoulder their fair share of the effort is not a luxury. It is a matter of fairness.
Our government believes those who benefit from the Canadian system should contribute to it fairly. This legislation would provide stronger financing mechanisms and would give more prominence to what is produced in Canada in English, French and indigenous languages. It will encourage better representation at all levels of production for equity-seeking groups: for women, for members of the LGBTQ2 communities, for people with disabilities and for racialized Canadians, including Blacks and people of colour.
In fact, this bill provides Canadian creators and producers with the means of achieving their ambitions. It takes into account the diversity of Canadian perspectives and their contribution to our rich and unique culture. A modernized act would guarantee that Canadians of all identities and from every background are reflected in their broadcasting system and that they can take part in it and enjoy it. In short, our stories and music must have a place in the online broadcasting universe.
In a more practical manner, the bill proposes the implementation of a modern, flexible regulatory framework for the CRTC to apply fair rules to all broadcasters and ensure it has the necessary tools to do its job effectively.
We will also go a step further and will instruct the CRTC on how to use these new tools. This will happen once the bill receives royal assent, as the bill makes amendments that allow for this essential policy directive.
In our direction to the CRTC, we want the specific needs of the French language and Canadian francophones to be recognized in a digital world dominated by the English language. On this point, I would like to add that this is perfectly in line with the throne speech, which states that the government “has the responsibility to protect and promote French not only outside of Quebec, but also within Quebec.” I know that this is an important point for all members of the House and for all Canadians, since the protection and promotion of the French language are essential for everyone.
Let me get back to our direction to the CRTC. We also want to accord special consideration to indigenous communities, as well as greater recognition of their realities and contributions. Lastly, we want to focus on racialized communities to ensure that they are fairly represented in the ecosystem.
The way the regulation currently works is it establishes a minimum investment from Canadian broadcasters into our ecosystem. In effect, this creates a baseline of investment.
With the bill and this intended policy direction to the CRTC, we aim for the CRTC to add an additional mechanism on top of this baseline. We intend to ask the CRTC to implement an incentive mechanism that would encourage behaviours that are inclusive and ensure no one is left behind.
Some of the elements we would like to see being incentivized are: diversity in key creative positions, the role and place of Black Canadians in our system, the retention of our rich intellectual property in Canada and fair and transparent compensation for our musicians. 
I would like to point out that we are listening to Canadians. This bill addresses key recommendations presented by the independent expert panel in January. Urgent action was needed to bring online broadcasters into the system.
Our approach is balanced, and we have made the choice to exclude a number of areas from the new regime. User-generated content will not be regulated, news content will not be regulated and video games will be excluded. Furthermore, only broadcasters that have a significant impact in Canada will be subject to the legislation. In practice this means that only known names and brands will be subject to this legislation.
When my daughter opens an online streaming platform, I, like many other parents, want to know that she is being offered the choice to see a Canadian series with her favourite actors, like District 31 with Vincent-Guillaume Otis. I would like her to have the choice to see a documentary on the history of indigenous peoples in Canada, for example. After all, it is our history and it is up to us to tell it.
When my daughter listens to music on another platform, I want her to be presented with a list of local artists and even, why not, someone from my home region of Mauricie.
What we are proposing will allow her not only to take advantage of an international offering, but also to discover Canadian content, which could be funded by contributions from these same digital platforms.
We know how important it is to see ourselves represented in all our complexity, either on screen or in productions. With the modernization of the Broadcasting Act, our francophone, anglophone and indigenous creators, our creators with disabilities, our creators from visible minorities and the LGBTQ+ community will have the means of telling their own stories and, more importantly, of making sure they are seen and heard.
It will be beneficial for both broadcasters and the public to produce stories that resonate with us, that speak to us and that look like us as Canadians and Quebecers.
This bill is part of a larger process. Our government is committed to ensuring greater equity among all Canadians.
The web giants are raking in billions of dollars from our content and our economy. Some of these companies are the most powerful in the world, and they operate outside any regulatory framework.
Time is up. There are no more free rides. It is about fairness. It is about everyone doing their fair share.
We are, in fact, starting to see this across the world. The European Union has adopted new rules on streamers resulting in increased investment, jobs, choice of content and ability to assert one's own cultural sovereignty. The United States has launched legal proceedings against Google for abusing its dominant market position. Australia is tackling a threat that journalism is facing, through a mandatory code of conduct targeted at Facebook and Google. As well, several other countries, including Canada, are concerned about misinformation, online hate and web giants' blatant inability to self-regulate. Voluntary self-regulation does not work.
I will remind the House that most, if not all, of these initiatives have garnered support across the political spectrum around the world. There should not be a left-right divide on these issues. Divisions only benefit large multi-billion dollar companies, not our constituents. That is why I am urging all members of the House to work together constructively and ensure that this important bill passes through second reading hastily, so that the committee can start doing its important work to amend, improve and move forward.
Let us show the world that Canada is united and standing up for itself.
Today, by proposing that we modernize the Broadcasting Act, we are standing up for our culture and forging ahead with essential reforms. We are standing up for Canadian companies and creators by saying that everyone who profits from the system must contribute to the system. We are also standing up for Canadians and Quebecers. We are standing up for indigenous peoples, who have been under-represented for far too long. We are standing up for artists, musicians, directors and producers across the country who want to create their art in French.
These same Canadians, Quebecers and indigenous people want, and expect, to see themselves in the programs they choose to listen to and watch. They expect their stories to be told in their own language and to reflect Canada’s diversity and the rich culture of indigenous peoples.
The Broadcasting Act enacted in 1991 served our society well, but it came into force before the digital era and is ill adapted to today’s reality, a fact we can no longer ignore.
Our regulatory agency, the CRTC, also has few tools in its kit to ensure that the broadcasting ecosystem continues to serve Canadians. It is dealing with a media landscape that has changed considerably in the past 30 years. By introducing this bill, our government is meeting a pressing need, namely to adapt Canada’s legislative framework to today’s digital reality.
In the mandate letter the Prime Minister gave me, modernizing the Broadcasting Act is my primary responsibility. In fact, the Prime Minister asked me to examine “how best to support Canadian [stories] in English and French”. He asked me to “introduce legislation by the end of 2020 that will take appropriate measures to ensure that all content providers, including internet giants, offer meaningful levels of Canadian [stories] in their catalogues, contribute to the creation of Canadian content in both Official Languages, promote [Canadian stories] and make [them] easily accessible on their platforms”, while also considering “additional cultural and linguistic communities.”
The bill our government tabled in the House on November 3 is a direct response to this mandate. It aims to update this important act to ensure the sustainability and vitality of our Canadian series, films and music, as well as of the people who make them and broadcast them.
I hope that the members of the House now understand that, on the one hand, we have Canadian companies that play by the rules and invest in Canadian culture, while, on the other hand, we have online broadcasters that take advantage of the system without any obligation to contribute to it. Having one regime for conventional broadcasters and another for online broadcasters does not work.
That is why we are proposing amendments to the act to support Canadian creators and independent Canadian producers: to ensure the viability of Canadian broadcasting and to protect Canada's cultural sovereignty.
The purpose of the bill is to level the playing field and ensure funding for Canadian stories and Canadian talent. It would allow us to give a higher profile to what is produced in Canada in English, French and indigenous languages, and encourage better representation of racialized Canadians, women and equity-seeking groups at all levels of production.
This bill would truly empower Canadian creators and producers. It reflects the diversity of Canadian perspectives. A modernized act would affirm and strengthen our francophone, anglophone, indigenous and Black identities, as well as all of our country's diversity by helping us to tell stories that speak to our experiences and values.
Bear in mind that we are imposing a number of guardrails. As I said earlier, user-generated content, news content and video games would not be subject to the new regulations. Furthermore, entities would need to reach a significant economic threshold before any regulation could be imposed. This keeps the nature of the Internet as it is. It simply asks companies that generate large revenues in Canada to contribute in a fair manner.
What we are proposing will not impact consumers' choices. It will not limit what any of those streamers can showcase in Canada and it will not impose a price increase. Foreign platforms will benefit from proposing local content that resonates with their subscribers.
These will be stories presented from their perspective and in their own language, or stories that will introduce them to the experiences of their fellow Canadians. This initiative will bring people together and promote social cohesion.
In these increasingly polarized times, having varied content that reflects our different experiences and perspectives across the country, through our shared stories, helps us to understand one another and to listen. Whether the perspective is from an indigenous person, a Black person, a person with a disability or a woman, we all have something to learn from each other.
Through their creative work, artists truly have a way to make us reflect, understand and feel what others feel. Global platforms will invest in local content and, by the same token, will allow our local content a greater reach globally.
This legislation will also generate investment in Canada and create jobs: two important drivers for reopening creative industries and ensuring their sustainability. This is no small feat when we consider that the broadcasting, audio-visual, music and interactive media sectors contribute $20.4 billion to Canada’s GDP and represent more than 160,000 jobs.
I would like to conclude by saying that Bill C-10, an act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts, is the result of a collective effort. It is the result of a considerable amount of work by my colleagues, the public service, a vast array of stakeholders and the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Legislative Review Panel.
I would like to thank the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages and the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry for establishing the review panel, and for putting forward the notion that every participant in the Canadian broadcasting system has to contribute to the creation, production and promotion of Canadian stories.
I would also like to thank the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons for making this bill a legislative priority for our government.
Last, I would like to thank all those who have contributed to this important file.
With this bill, we are taking a step in the right direction. Our government has opted for a step-by-step, targeted approach to modernize the Canadian broadcasting system quickly and appropriately. We recognize that the work is not over. Other measures will come, particularly regarding the important role of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the various funding mechanisms for the audio-visual production sector.
This is a bill about jobs, investing in Canada, equity and what it means, at the very core, to be Canadian. If members do not agree with all of the bill, or if members do not believe in our cultural sovereignty and that we as Canadians, as francophones, as first nations, as Métis and as Inuit are different, they can still support the bill for the jobs it will create.
However, let me reiterate that resistance is not futile. If jobs and investment in the cultural sector are not what members believe in for the future of our country, they should support this bill for its much-needed equity and fairness. We need to re-establish the fact that everyone, including web giants, must contribute to our society.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis for his question.
As I said several times, this bill is a first step in this venture of implementing a regulatory framework on the web giants' various operations. I am the first to admit that there is still work to be done. Bill C-10 goes after web giants in the field of broadcasting and streaming music. I committed to introducing another bill that will specifically target the web giants that my colleague just mentioned.
We are working with the governments of Australia and France, which are also in the process of putting these types of regulations in place.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question.
We cannot say that we have to make sure that the legislation and regulations apply to web giants if we do not allow this legislation and these regulations to apply to them. Paragraph 3(1)(a) is precisely what will allow us to ensure that Canadian laws and Canadian regulations apply to web giants.
Paragraph 3(1)(a) is not what ensures that Canadian companies have to be owned by Canadians. That was a CRTC decision in 1997. We are not changing anything with respect to ownership of Canadian companies.
What is more, Canadian companies in the field of broadcasting will still have to obtain licences from the CRTC. Beyond the current bill, there are other safeguards against foreign acquisition of Canadian companies that my colleague, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, and I have to consider. There are other safeguards for that.
This paragraph allows us to apply our laws and regulations to web giants. How else could we do this?
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, I have the Yale report right here. Members will recall that the Yale report said that service providers are in the business of infrastructure, so they should invest in infrastructure, and content providers are in the business of content, so they should invest in content. That is the gist of what the Yale report said.
I want to remind the House that for the first time in this country's history, Canada's broadcasting laws and regulations will apply to web giants. That has never been done before.
Earlier I said that this will generate nearly $1 billion a year in investments from these companies, but it is actually more than $1 billion, because if nothing is done by 2023, Canadian productions and Canadian artists will miss out on $1 billion.
On top of reversing the trend, this bill will generate more than $1 billion in investments for our artists and musicians.
View Steven Guilbeault Profile
Lib. (QC)
Madam Speaker, the CBC/Radio-Canada is a very important institution to Canadians from coast to coast to coast. The member may recall that it was our government that made a record level of investments in the CBC in our previous mandate.
After 10 years of cutbacks by the Harper government, we have every intention to implement other reforms in the coming months. We could not do this as part of the bill, but we strongly believe on this side of the House in the importance of the CBC and the role it plays in Canada. We will continue to be there for it.
Results: 101 - 200 of 224 | Page: 2 of 3

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

For more data options, please see Open Data