44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 30, 2022 11:00AM
Mr. Speaker, I am trying to emphasize why it is so important that we support the industry. From a government, from a party or even from the average person in our communities, they all recognize the true value of fact-based news. It is somewhat foreign to the Conservative spin doctors, and that is why I brought up the truck issue.
In the very brief discussion I had moments ago, another example came up. Do members remember the fake news when the Conservative Party said the Liberals are going to put a tax on the sale of principal homes? We can stand up in the chamber and tell Conservatives that this is just wrong and is an outright untruth. I did not say the word “lie”; I said “untruth”.
The Conservatives would say something of that nature, and we would stand up and say that it is just not true, yet the Conservatives still try to say something that is questionable—
166 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/22 1:26:23 p.m.
- Watch
Order. Let us all take a moment and take a deep breath. Question period is not for another hour or so. Let us bring the temperature down, but also let us not do indirectly what we cannot do directly either.
The hon. member for Winnipeg North.
46 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, let me restart, if I can put it that way. There is an expectation that we all have. We all have it because we went through a national election where it was made very clear that the government was given a new mandate and part of that mandate was to show there was a need for opposition parties and government to work together. We see that taking place quite often between different opposition parties and the government.
Unfortunately, the Conservative Party has taken an approach where it does not matter what the legislation is and the importance of Bill C-18—
104 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/22 1:27:37 p.m.
- Watch
There is a point of order from the hon. member for Regina—Lewvan.
14 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, we hear this narrative all the time with the Liberal Party saying that the Conservatives do not co-operate. We had unanimous consent on the constitutional amendment for Saskatchewan, so we have co-operated—
37 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/22 1:27:53 p.m.
- Watch
We are descending. This is debate, and I am sure there are lots of slots that people can fill on this debate on the bill before us today.
The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader has the floor.
40 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, being inspired, I would ask if there would be unanimous support to see this legislation go through, given the fact that all political parties supported the principle of the legislation and supporting the principle would only see it go to committee stage. I would encourage that sort of enthusiasm for support on Bill C-18.
The point I was trying to get at is that Bill C-18 is important legislation that would have a profoundly positive impact. The minister has done an incredible job, through the ministry, of gathering and sharing thoughts and ideas and getting the information necessary to bring forward legislation that would make a difference and would be a true reflection of what Canadians wanted back in September of last year.
We also need to recognize there is the expectation that the government will bring forward legislation and that opposition parties will participate and be engaged. We often see that, especially from members of the New Democratic Party, the Green Party and the Bloc. At times we will see it from the Conservatives. It is not too often, but maybe at times.
The bottom line is that what we have witnessed in recent months is a great filibuster on whatever the legislation might be. That is the reason we needed to bring in time allocation on this legislation. The best example I could probably give would be Bill C-8. Members might remember Bill C-8 as the fall economic statement legislation that was just recently passed. That is an excellent example of the manner in which the Conservative Party will go out of its way to stop legislation from passing.
Bill C-8 was all about supporting Canadians through the pandemic. Bill C-18 is all about protecting a critical industry here in Canada. It is an industry that needs legislation of this nature. Canada is not alone. There are other countries that have moved in this direction and recognized the need for national governments to bring forward legislation. In fact, the official opposition recognized and seemed to support what was taking place in Australia on this issue. It has made reference to that.
I believe Bill C-18 is—
368 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/22 1:31:06 p.m.
- Watch
Order, please.
Somebody has their microphone on in the parliamentary feed.
The hon. parliamentary secretary has the floor. I am sorry to be interrupting him so much.
27 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am sure I will be given the time back.
At the end of the day, I believe we have better legislation than Australia. I understand the Conservative Party supports what is taking place in Australia. There is more transparency in Bill C-18, so one wonders why the Conservative Party would not see the value of it and not only support the legislation but allow it to ultimately pass as opposed to continue to put up some form of a filibuster.
At the end—
88 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/22 1:32:24 p.m.
- Watch
It seems we keep getting the hon. member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount on the parliamentary feed, so let me once again make sure we are clear.
The hon. parliamentary secretary has the floor.
38 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
We will try this again, Mr. Speaker.
What we are looking at in Bill C-18 is legislation that would provide more transparency and ultimately more accountability than we saw in Australia. Canadians as a whole, in all regions of the country, desire to see fact-based news reported. One of the ways in which we can ensure that takes place is to support Bill C-18.
On one hand, we had every political entity inside this chamber in the last federal election say that it supported that form of legislation. The good news is that, like so many other platform issues in an election, the Government of Canada has brought forward legislation that would fulfill yet another commitment to Canadians, so it should be no surprise. Part of that commitment is to see this legislation ultimately pass. That is why the Minister of Heritage was here about half an hour ago, talking about why it was important that we bring in time allocation to get this legislation passed.
I would appeal in particular to my Conservative friends to recognize the true value of the legislation and suggest to them that times have changed. When I was first elected as a parliamentarian a few years back, I can remember walking back into the Manitoba legislature in 1988 and looking into the press gallery. We have a press gallery up here, but it is not very often that we actually see members of the press in there. Having said that, when I first walked into the Manitoba legislature during a question period, the press gallery was packed. We would have two cameras from CBC. We would have CKND there. We would have CTV. We would have at least three reporters from the Winnipeg Free Press and from the Winnipeg Sun and even some rural media. There were not that many chairs, and often we would see media personalities standing. When I left the Manitoba legislature a number of years ago, prior to coming here, we might get one or two members of the media sitting in the gallery.
We need to recognize the number of local news outlets that have been lost through print media, radio and television. Our communities really miss community-based reporting of local news. At large companies, including CTV, CBC and other major media outlets, there have been cutbacks. We should all be concerned. We are a parliamentary democracy in Canada. Our system is very much dependent on having a healthy, modern media industry. I have used the word, as many of my colleagues have. When we talk about a modern industry, it is absolutely critical that it be fact-based. That is why more and more we are seeing a sense of urgency in getting this type of legislation put before the House and into committee, and ultimately coming back and getting the royal assent that is necessary in order to make it the law of the land.
The legislation would ensure that there is a free, independent press that is able to enhance our democratic values, and it would ensure that there is a certain element of fact-based news that we see when we look at Facebook and YouTube and those high-tech world-leading giants, if I can put it that way.
Let us compare yesterday to today, yesterday being a number of years ago, and the advertising that would have taken place. I will use the Winnipeg Free Press as an example and the advertising dollars it would have generated during the 1990s. We can compare that to the amount of advertising required today. Whether it is print, radio or TV, it is advertising dollars that generate the revenue to provide opportunities for those companies to pay their employees, from the people delivering, publishing or printing the papers to the journalists, the ones writing the stories and providing the editorials. There has been a massive loss of advertising revenue not only by our major newspapers, but also our community-based newspapers. If we look at rural communities and municipalities versus larger urban centres, we have seen a reduction in what I would suggest is reliable, fact-based reporting because of the loss of revenue.
Where we have seen an explosion, on the other hand, is through the Internet. It has been cited, for example, that Facebook and Google consume somewhere in the neighbourhood of 80% of what goes into advertising. Are the reporters and investigative journalists receiving any sort of real financial compensation for the work they are doing to create and provide the fact-based stories that come from Internet giants Google and Facebook? If we do a Google search or look at Facebook, we see these streams that incorporate news broadcasts. Is there fair compensation being provided?
The government and, based on the last federal election, I would argue all members recognize that there is a deficiency and that fair compensation is not being provided. It is the Government of Canada that is in the best position to ensure that there is a higher sense of awareness and that we have an industry that is being protected. It goes much further than the issue of jobs. It is an industry that we cannot afford to lose or neglect. I would suggest there is an obligation for us to protect it and do what we can to enhance it. When we read through Bill C-18, that is what we will find it would do. The sooner it gets through the House of Commons and becomes law, the sooner we will enable many news agencies to have the opportunity to have fair discussions and negotiations with companies such as Google and YouTube. That is why I believe it is so critical.
In the questions and answers the Minister of Canadian Heritage provided earlier today, he was talking in part about the number of people we are losing in that industry. I do not have the actual numbers, but I could speculate in terms of salaries. I suspect the average salary in that industry has modestly increased and I would not be surprised if, in many ways, it has decreased at a time when, as the Internet explodes, there is an even higher demand for reliable news.
I know how important it is. On a weekly basis, I go to a local restaurant where every so often a certain gentleman would come by, and I could tell what paper he was reading by the criticism he was providing. One day I suggested to him that he should broaden his reading and share other stories that were being published. Interestingly, he never did show up again. I suspect it was because he had been looking at the broader media and reading what was being published by some of those agencies that we have grown to trust over the years. There is a high sense of accountability for Global, CTV and CBC, and newspapers both nationally and locally. When they appear in newsfeeds, whether it is on Facebook or YouTube or in whatever format, it does make a difference.
This government is not going to be intimidated in any fashion by the tech giants of the world. We want to ensure that the industry is protected, and we need to put everyone on a more level and fairer playing field. There needs to be proper compensation to our media outlets that are being tapped into in order to foster greater profits for those high-tech world companies, and in short, that is exactly what Bill C-18 would do: It would put in place a process that would enable negotiation and a much higher sense of fairness. It would protect our news industry as we modernize and continue to move forward.
I encourage all members not only to support the legislation before us but also to support its passage so that it can get royal assent possibly as early as the end of June.
1330 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I would say that I would like to thank my colleague for Winnipeg North for his speech, but that would be disingenuous.
The member talked a lot about support for local media, which is funny, because in the operations committee about three years ago, we actually studied government advertising in Canada. The committee came up with recommendations that the government should stop sending all its money to Google and Facebook and use government advertising to support local media, small newspapers, the Winnipeg Free Press, which he mentioned, and a lot of local ethnic newspapers. What did this government do? It took the recommendation, threw it in the garbage, and continued to push more money to Google, Facebook and these big web giants.
Why, then, is the member speaking out of both sides of his face? He is saying to support local business, but when we had the chance to do so, the government gave the money to Facebook and Google.
162 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, this legislation is actually good news.
Let us be realistic. The federal government, as it has for many years, invests in advertising in a significant way, from community newspapers to radio programs, both urban and rural. We have ethnic advertising that takes place, and yes, there is advertising that takes place on Google and on YouTube. There are very important programs that the government has, and it is important that Canadians find out about them, whether they be programs that serve our vets or programs that advertise the greener home building program or other programs from which Canadians can really benefit if in fact they are informed about them.
Governments have done advertising for many years, although not with as much money as Stephen Harper ever spent, but governments have done it for many years.
137 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I organized a major public consultation during last week's constituency week. There is an airport in my riding, and I held public consultations on developing that airport. It is an important piece of infrastructure that affects the lives of 400,000 people in the region.
My riding has just one local weekly newspaper, Le Courrier du Sud. We wanted the media to come and cover this event, which would affect everyone in my riding, not to mention people in neighbouring ridings, so we sent a press release to the newspaper. We were told that no journalists were available to cover this event, despite how important it was to our local community.
The legislation presented for our consideration does not ensure that small local weekly newspapers will have enough bargaining power to fully participate in negotiations with web giants.
Can my colleague comment on that? Can he assure us that local media will be able to get sufficient funding through the negotiations that will take place with the web giants?
172 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, with Bill C-18's passage, we will see for the first time a greatly enhanced opportunity to ensure that we do get fair compensation, not only for the large media outlets but for small media outlets also. I can understand and relate to what the member is talking about, especially in rural Manitoba, as an example, or even in some of our major urban centres where there is a need for more journalists. As a society, we want to support that industry. For me personally, fact-based news is of critical importance.
I hope to see the bill go to committee, and maybe the member can participate at the committee stage. If there are things we can do to improve and enhance the legislation, I am sure that the minister would be open to those ideas. In fact, if the member has specifics, he should probably raise them with the minister or the parliamentary secretary in advance of the bill going to committee.
166 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, this bill is important, and it is so important that we make web giants pay their fair share. It is also important that we learn lessons from other countries.
The member mentioned Australia, and I want to follow up on the question from my colleague in the Bloc. We have seen in Australia that Facebook and others have been entering into revenue agreements with the large publishers. It means that the smaller publishers are not getting fair compensation. Therefore, I am wondering if the member will commit to advocating for changes at committee stage to ensure that smaller publishers get a fair shake.
105 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question and I think there is a great deal of interest not only on my part but from within the Liberal caucus and hopefully others, such as the member, in recognizing the importance of the smaller news agencies. That is one of the reasons I incorporated this point in my comments and talked about ensuring fairer compensation for both large and small media outlets. They are absolutely critical, especially to our local communities.
I really do believe that this legislation would enhance that sense of fairness for both large and small media outlets. If there are things that we could do to better ensure that outcome, I would encourage my New Democratic friends to raise the issue and bring up the example, and if they have an amendment, to share it with the minister or the staff. They do not have to wait until it goes to committee; they can do that at any point in time. I am sure that if there are ways in which we can improve the bill, the minister would be open to them.
184 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am very troubled by what has happened to journalism in Canada. I agree, as the hon. parliamentary secretary said, that democracy itself is under assault when we lose our local journalists. In fact, there have been empirical studies that show that as parliamentary bureaus of local papers across Canada close up shop, the level of voting in those communities goes down. I agree with the diagnosis, but I do not know that we have the right prescription.
What we now see in Australia are a lot of concerns after the Australian model, which we are now pursuing, has been used as a big stick to drive people to private negotiations with no transparency. There is a lot of concern about following this model.
I am not saying I am against it and I want to figure out how it might work, but surely the simplest thing is to go to the source and say to Google, Twitter, Facebook and anything that is undermining our journalism that they are publishers, just like the newspapers. They are not platforms but publishers, and they have to follow all the same rules as print journalism in Canada.
Would the hon. member comment on that?
203 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, for many years, giant tech companies such as Facebook, Google and YouTube have been going around the world and getting away with a great deal while enriching themselves worldwide. We are seeing more countries today saying that it is not acceptable and that we want to ensure that there is protection for their media industries, and that is something that is very tangible coming from this government. This legislation will go a long way toward ensuring a higher sense of fair compensation and protecting a critically important industry.
90 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, thank you for fitting me into this debate.
I would say this to the hon. member for Winnipeg North: We just heard a comment from the Conservatives across the way that they did not want to hear from him because he had an alternative point of view. In fact, a lot of news is presented online in a biased fashion. Could the member talk about news as entertainment versus news as a source of information on the different points of view that help to inform us?
88 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
