Senator Klyne: I have trust in the minister as well but, again, I have to hearken back to 2022, when the Saskatchewan government clawed back payments from people with disabilities. I think we’ll see a repeat of that unless we have some type of formal agreement before we go forward with this. I don’t want to stall it, I don’t want to see it slowed down, but we need some assurance to make sure that this goes to where it’s intended. I do want to see that happen. If there is anything I can say or do, please call on me.

Senator Cotter: I’m desperate not to run out of those five minutes. Senator Black in our Agriculture Committee often puts up his hands to get us to stop, and I was hoping that wouldn’t happen here.

The positive feature of this is that those agreements need to be negotiated and made public. It was a requirement in the bill; it was an amendment. You and I will be able to have a look at those agreements and see whether they are rich enough and strong enough to achieve the goals that you and I are looking for here. It will occur after the bill is passed, but it probably has to be in that fashion. I don’t think we have too many other options, but at least we get a good look to see whether the expectations and the commitments of the minister — and to the extent that I’m making any kind of a commitment, my commitment to you and people with disabilities — will be honoured. We can verify or unverify. Thank you.

(On motion of Senator Seidman, debate adjourned.)

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Audette, seconded by the Honourable Senator Mégie, for the second reading of Bill C-29, An Act to provide for the establishment of a national council for reconciliation.

Hon. Amina Gerba: According to data published by Statistics Canada in January 2023, two years after earning a bachelor’s degree, the employment income was lower among racialized graduates than non-racialized graduates.

For example, among women, West Asian graduates earned 16% less and Arab graduates earned 15% less than non-racialized women. Among men, Black, Southeast Asian, Filipino, Chinese and Korean graduates had the lowest employment incomes, earning from 11% to 13% less than their non-racialized counterparts.

Minister, what is the government doing to ensure more inclusion and fairness in the processes for recruiting racialized graduates in our country?

[English]

Hon. Seamus O’Regan, P.C., M.P., Minister of Labour: Senator, with all due apology, I wish my French was advanced enough on this subject that I could offer an answer in the language in which you have asked me.

Let me just say that in answering this question, I will get back to you with particulars on exactly what we are doing. I do not think there is any argument about where we want to be. I do not think that we have any argument about the goal. But I would like to get you a more detailed answer on precisely how we plan to get there, aside obviously from employment equity and other reports and legislation that we are working on.

I will get back to you on that.

Hon. Julie Miville-Dechêne: Honourable senators, I rise at second reading of Bill C-18, the online news bill. This bill is important to me personally because I spent many years in the world of journalism.

For starters, the crisis is real. Over the past 14 years, 469 newspapers and news organizations in Canada have closed up shop. The majority of the surviving media organizations have been through cuts that have eviscerated newsrooms. Bill C-18 is clearly not a solution in search of a problem. We really do have a big problem, and the government is right to tackle it.

There are many reasons for this crisis, but nearly all of them have to do with the internet revolution. Over the past 25 years, traditional media, which used to have a monopoly on broadcasting information, lost their exclusivity to multiple competitors: online ads, foreign media, government sites, streaming platforms, countless specialized sources for things like weather forecasts, sports scores and financial news, audio and video-sharing platforms, news and opinion blogs and, lastly, social media platforms, which pounded the last nail into the coffin.

Today, traditional media organizations are facing a profound crisis that affects both their profitability, now that advertisers have left, and the value they add, since so much content is available elsewhere.

Some say that the media has not been able to adapt and is simply a victim of technological change, similar to how the typewriter disappeared when computers became ubiquitous. Others add that the traditional media outlets are the victims of their own inertia and arrogance, and that they deserve their fate.

It gives me no pleasure to say this, but there is some truth to that. Many didn’t see the threat coming, and for a long time, they believed that the competition from online media and social networks, sometimes called the “barbarian invasion,” had no value and would not interest anyone. Accustomed to the comfort of their monopoly, some media outlets looked down on new platforms, different models and alternative paths, and were unwilling to take a hard look at themselves, rethink their offerings and adapt.

However, that is not the whole story. Many Canadian media organizations, big and small, young and old, have been trying out innovative approaches for 20 years. In Quebec in particular, the media landscape changed dramatically with the emergence of not-for-profit agencies or cooperatives, as in the case of Les Coops de l’information. La Presse has gone exclusively digital, and the hybrid subscriber model is working for Le Devoir. Experts such as Sue Gardner and Jean-Hugues Roy have noted that a lot of experiments are under way, and even though there are no conclusive results yet, this could be the key to the solution.

However, we mustn’t confuse traditional media with journalism. We can criticize our media and also have legitimate concerns about the future of journalism. While some organizations have lost their aura and their influence, the importance of journalism has remained intact and is as big as ever.

Whether reports address the need to expose lies, scandals, corruption or cronyism, the essential character of journalism is no less great today than it was 25 years ago. In any free society, journalism is a public good that needs to be protected and supported. As the Washington Post‘s slogan goes, “Democracy Dies in Darkness.”

That being said, investigative work or analysis has the same public value regardless of whether it is done by CBC/Radio-Canada or by a new online journalism platform and whether it is broadcast on the radio, on television, on Twitter or on Facebook.

What is important to Canadian society is that organizations, no matter which ones, have the resources to deliver quality journalism and that the content reaches the public. In other words, Canada needs a robust and diverse news ecosystem that fulfills its role as the watchdog of democracy.

With Bill C-18, the government is proposing a response to the financial difficulties facing journalism in Canada. The government’s proposed solution is quite simple and is directly inspired by the Australian model. Given that the media have lost their advertising revenue to major platforms such as Facebook and Google, these companies should pay the media to publish their content. It is a pragmatic solution. Rich companies will support companies that have become poor.

[English]

For some, Bill C-18 is nonetheless on the wrong track because it is based on a fiction, namely, that Google and Facebook “hurt” the media by making their content available. Media expert Sue Gardner sums up this criticism well:

. . . that premise makes no sense. We know that because news publishers have always been able to opt out of appearing in Google search results, and they don’t. In fact they do the opposite: they vigorously compete to maximize their presences on Google and on Facebook. News publishers want to appear on those platforms, because that’s where people are finding news.

For these critics, the reality is that Google and Facebook offer their users a huge variety of content — of which the media is only a small portion — and the media profit more from the platforms’ referencing than the latter profits from news content. It is possible, but nobody knows. The figures are not public.

The solution for some media experts would be to tax Google and Facebook and set up an independent fund to support journalism.

In an ideal world, setting up a fund would be an easier option, but in reality this is not the avenue the government has chosen for reasons that have to do, apparently, with our trade agreements. As senators, we are called upon to vote on the bill before us. It is possible to improve it, but impossible to rewrite it in such a fundamental way.

I see a number of issues to be addressed in our review of Bill C-18.

First, there is a fundamental question of the expectations of the parties. For large digital platforms, negotiations should focus on the commercial value of the content and services exchanged. In other words, what is the value of news content for Google and Facebook, and how much revenue do those platforms generate for news organizations? For the media, on the other hand, the logic seems different. Some consider that the major platforms should finance up to 30% of their operating costs. This approach is more likely a subsidy than a commercial deal.

To align the expectations of the parties in future negotiations, it would be useful to clarify the objectives of the bill.

Then there is the issue of eligible media. Amendments in the House of Commons have already broadened the admissibility criteria to include small, non-profit community and Indigenous outlets, including those owned by journalists. These broadened criteria mean that we went from about 200 to more than 650 organizations potentially admissible under Bill C-18. This is a welcome expansion because the important thing is to support journalism no matter where it is practised, and not to support only mainstream media. On the other hand, we must ensure that by broadening the scope, we do not open the door to people who do not practise real journalism, but who focus instead on lobbying, fictional or intimate narratives, personal growth or entertainment.

Questions also arise regarding the platforms targeted by Bill C-18. Even though the definition of “digital news intermediary” in the law is very broad, we know that it only covers Facebook and Google at the moment. But we also have to think about the future. Already, Facebook is threatening to block the sharing of Canadian news on its platform if Bill C-18 is adopted. If Facebook carries out the threat, will the bill only target Google? In that case, will this new financing mechanism for Canadian media depend on only one foreign platform? This would be a peculiar situation.

It will also be important to consider the use of funds received by the media. This is a very delicate question, because the government does not want to interfere too much in what it presents as private negotiations. This is a consequence of the approach adopted. That said, the bill won’t be of great assistance to journalism as a public good if the amounts received from Google and Facebook are directed to shareholders or interest payments rather than to hiring journalists, upgrading platforms and to conduct investigations. Much more transparency is needed in this bill.

Questions also arise about the long-term viability of an approach that makes Canadian media partially dependent on foreign private companies that can change or disappear at any time.

[Translation]

In conclusion, Bill C-18 addresses an issue that has a real impact on the democratic health of our country.

Today, even innovative new platforms can’t be profitable without public support, with some exceptions. Excluding CBC/Radio-Canada, many newsrooms are hanging on by a thread.

The Transport and Communications Committee, of which I am a member, will have its work cut out for it. We will have to come to grips with the implications and its limitations of the bill, and perhaps suggest improvements. As with Bill C-11, Bill C-18 is a legislative foray into the ever-changing world of the internet. In the medium term, it is difficult to assess the impact of the measures being put forward. There will inevitably be a process of trial and error, and adjustments will be necessary. However, in my opinion, this effort is certainly more commendable than inaction.

Thank you.

[English]

Senator Miville-Dechêne: First of all, Senator Housakos, journalists do have a choice of whether or not to post their articles online.

I know that you believe very strongly in the principle of individual choice. However, we are talking here about a complete paradigm shift. That means that if media outlets don’t allow their articles to be shared, then they lose a lot of readers. It’s a bit of a paradox because the survival of journalism depends in part on really solid content, the kind of journalism that is different from what circulates on social media.

We know that stand-alone, isolated media outlets will not be able to reach enough people. They are therefore obligated, in this new universe, to make their content available by agreeing to share it. The real problem is that we don’t know how much that journalistic content is worth to a platform like Google. Of course, Google won’t give us its figures. As a result, it is extremely difficult to implement a bill like this one, which seeks to put a value on journalistic content, because we have no idea how much that content is worth to the platforms or what it brings to individual media outlets.

We know they no longer get any advertising revenues because the entire advertising market has been picked up by the platforms, but we don’t know whether that could make a difference in terms of traffic. For example, people from the daily newspaper La Presse told me that they were bringing in decent advertising revenues. It wasn’t a windfall, but they had what they needed to survive. That’s why everyone wants to be on social media. Did you have another question?

[English]

Senator Housakos: And what about copyright protection?

[Translation]

Senator Miville-Dechêne: Yes.

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Senator, are you asking for five more minutes?

Senator Miville-Dechêne: Australia certainly isn’t a perfect model, but we noticed that journalists were hired there after the secret agreements that Google and Facebook unfortunately reached with media outlets. We also noticed that, according to some sources, larger media organizations have more money than small ones but that small community media organizations received some money.

As for the Uber that gets you to the restaurant, I tend to agree with Senator Harder because I’m not convinced that’s a good analogy for what’s really happening. There is an exchange, but we don’t really know if the value of journalism to these platforms is equal or unequal to the value journalists derive from being broadcast on these platforms.

[English]

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): Incomprehensible. Inconceivable. Heartbreaking. Horrifying. Yesterday, in Laval, a morning like any other turned into a nightmare.

A Laval city bus crashed into the Garderie éducative Ste-Rose, smashing through a room of preschool children.

Two children died and six others were injured.

Today, our hearts ache for the grieving community of Sainte-Rose in Laval and, in particular, for the relatives of the two victims. My thoughts are with the children, the families, the educators. All of Canada is mourning with you.

[English]

In the immediate aftermath of this incomprehensible catastrophe, we are left with more questions than answers. But today we send our thoughts and prayers to the families of the victims, even as we cannot pretend to imagine what they are going through. We send our positive energy, our best wishes to the injured children who remain in hospital and to their families. We think of the other children at the Garderie éducative Ste‑Rose, their caretakers and, of course, their parents, who will also require support so that they may move forward.

I would like to also express my gratitude to the first responders, to the health professionals and to the police for their work in managing the unthinkable. I want to also acknowledge the bravery of onlookers on the scene who are reported to have put their own welfare at risk to subdue the driver.

[Translation]

Tonight, at 6:30 p.m., a candlelight vigil will be held in the square in front of Sainte-Rose-de-Lima church for those who wish to pay their respects.

To the parents and families of the two lost angels, on behalf of the Government of Canada and the Senate, I offer my deepest condolences.

Hon. Leo Housakos: Honourable senators, today a community and our entire country are reeling from the terrible tragedy that occurred in my hometown of Laval, just outside Montreal.

Yesterday morning, many parents got a call that no parent would want to receive. They learned that a city bus had crashed into a daycare in Sainte-Rose, where they had dropped their children off just moments before. This senseless act took the lives of two children and injured six others.

As a father, there are no words to describe the panic a person feels when they are worried for their child, or to describe the unimaginable pain of the parents who experienced the most tragic of losses. No parent should have to mourn their child, and my heart breaks for the two families who are currently going through that nightmare. I want to offer them my deepest condolences.

I know Sainte-Rose is a tight-knit community, and it is no doubt in shock in the wake of this tragedy. Yesterday, people came together to help with the rescue efforts and support each other in this time of tragedy.

I want to personally express my sincere gratitude to the first responders for quickly apprehending the suspect and bringing him to justice, to the nursing staff for their hard work in caring for the injured children, and to all those who came together to help the children.

My heart goes out to every child, parent and staff member at the Garderie éducative Ste-Rose. They have experienced inconceivable pain and trauma. Today, we grieve with them, and we wish the injured children a full and speedy recovery. Nothing can ease the pain and suffering these families are going through, but I hope it will bring them comfort to know that Canadians across the country are thinking of them.

[English]

Honourable senators, Laval is my hometown. My children went to a daycare similar to the one in Sainte-Rose. My heart breaks for the children, their families, their friends, and I know that, in this moment of nightmare and tragedy that these people are facing, all of our thoughts and prayers are with them.

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson: Honourable senators, Ottawa is buzzing this week with the Northern Lights Business & Cultural Showcase, just across the street from our Senate Chamber at the Ottawa Convention Centre. Northern Lights celebrates the best that Canada’s Arctic and Northern communities have to offer. It boasts events featuring industry, tourism and arts and culture in aid of showcasing the creativity and huge development potential of this vast region in our great country.

Sponsored by the Labrador North Chamber of Commerce and the Baffin Regional Chamber of Commerce in a partnership first formed in 2003, the first conference was so successful that it’s now held every two years. This year, it’s attracted well over 1,600 registered delegates, who are busily attending workshops, events and cultural celebrations.

Yesterday, I attended a standing-room-only workshop on Nunavut 3000, an ambitious plan of the Government of Nunavut and Nunavut Tunngavik to build 3,000 much-needed housing units by 2030. The premiers of Nunavut and Newfoundland and Labrador signed a memorandum of understanding at the trade show this week. This morning, the CEO of Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation announced a new shipping route based on Baffinland providing its high-quality, low-emission iron ore to make green steel, for which there’s now a strong demand in Europe.

One highlight of every Northern Lights Business and Cultural Showcase is the Arctic Inspiration Prize — the largest annual prize in Canada with its $50 million endowment. It inspires, enables and celebrates the achievements of the people of the North, recognizing diverse teams with innovative projects in a wide variety of fields.

Last night was the eleventh such award ceremony and showcase. Just under $3 million in prizes were awarded. I wish to congratulate the winners of the one-million dollar prize awarded last night, the Pilimmaksaijuliriniq Project, which will build mental health competencies and Inuit wellness traditional teachings for delivery of community-based projects all across Inuit Nunangat, from the Northwest Territories, or N.W.T., Nunavut and Nunavik to Nunatsiavut.

Other prizewinners from Yukon, N.W.T. and Nunavik won $500,000 and $100,000 prizes.

I’m pleased that our guests today, the Nunavut economic development officers, used this networking opportunity to engage with their counterparts in Nunavik. I’m glad to welcome them here. Thank you.

Hon. Tony Loffreda: Minister O’Regan, in your mandate letter, the Prime Minister asked that you work with your cabinet colleagues to accelerate the review and improve the Employment Equity Act in a timely manner. Last spring, I asked government officials appearing before our National Finance Committee for an update on the work of the task force undertaking this review. We were told then that consultations were under way with the public service, the federally regulated private sector and separate employers.

Officials confirmed they would be gathering all this information in the coming weeks, that the chief human resources officer would report back to the task force on May 26 and that a report is due next fall. Minister, when can we expect to see the report and the results of this review of Canada’s employment equity framework?

Hon. Seamus O’Regan, P.C., M.P., Minister of Labour: Thank you, senator, for the question.

Here is some background. We have been working for some time now to strengthen the legislative framework to make workplaces more inclusive and to promote equality through proactive pay equity legislation, pay transparency and accessibility legislation. We also, as you said, launched an independent task force to conduct the most extensive review of the act that we’ve seen since 1986.

The task force completed its consultations with stakeholders, which included collecting statistical information and hearing about the lived experiences of many groups, including visible minorities, women and persons with disabilities. They will submit the report in the spring — this spring. It will include concrete, independent and evidence-based recommendations on how we can modernize the act.

[Translation]

Hon. Seamus O’Regan, P.C., M.P., Minister of Labour: There is another phrase, too: “just transition.” The just transition came from the labour movement itself. It is just so disruptive, it addles so many people and it creates so much anxiety that it is redundant; it actually sets us back when we use it.

Another phrase that we came across, and have been using in reports, is “decent work.” There are two ways of saying the word “decent,” and words matter. We’re all in public life; we’re all in politics. Decent work in a more European and French sense, I think, is a very positive thing; it is decent. But in Newfoundland, if you ask people what the weather is like — and it’s grey and mauzy — the answer would be “decent.”

So when we started to use the phrase “decent work,” it was being taken as “okay.”

I will tell you how I believe we can’t go wrong: The people who built up this industry with all of their know-how, derring-do, acumen and guts are the workers, so we go back to the workers in terms of what training they think needs to happen. Often, it does not mean having to leave the industry at all.

None of us in this room — hardly anyone in Ottawa — know where to tighten the screws on a pipeline to make sure the methane doesn’t leak. I’m talking about that kind of work.

When I was the Minister of Natural Resources and COVID hit, my first concern was the workers — specifically, losing workers from the industry, not transitioning them to another industry. We have too much work ahead in the industry — in the oil and gas industry. So we came up with the orphaned and abandoned wells program and, in Newfoundland, the low-carbon $400-million fund.

Keep them there.

Hon. Seamus O’Regan, P.C., M.P., Minister of Labour: Senator, with all due respect, I will have to get back to you with answers to those five questions, I think, that you asked. We will get back to you very shortly on them.

Hon. Seamus O’Regan, P.C., M.P., Minister of Labour: I am very proud to answer that question as the former executive director of the Goose Bay Airport Corporation, and as a former baggage handler at YYR, Goose Bay Airport. That is how I worked my way through college. I think of ground crews every time — and this has probably happened to many senators present today — I land at an airport on time, but do not make it to the gate for 40 minutes. That’s because we do not have enough ground crews. They work hard.

Because I was out in the middle of the ramp in Goose Bay, I did not get affected by the black flies, so I took a respite out there. I learned never to complain about the heat in Labrador in the summer, because everyone with whom I was working had to work there in the winter.

Aircrew work outdoors — there is not enough you can wear. It is tough work. We lost a lot of them to Amazon warehouses and other places that paid equal, if not greater, money and benefits. I do not believe the market has caught up with what are extraordinarily essential workers.

It is a problem. It is not a problem, I will admit, that I have been tackling as a minister, but it is one that I will take back to the Minister of Transport. We do need to do a lot more there — on every front you mentioned.

[Translation]

Hon. Amina Gerba: Honourable senators, Roxham Road is sadly known as an easy way for asylum seekers to get into Canada, and many people are calling for it to be closed. That is how Roxham Road is presented to us every day in the media, and the topic stirs up partisan debate in our governments on immigration management.

As part of my ongoing series for Black History Month, today I have decided to talk to you about Roxham Road from a different angle, through the eyes of a person who embodies the selflessness, altruism and bravery of a true citizen.

It is with great pleasure that I pay tribute here to a person whose actions are improving lives: Kicha Estimée.

Kicha is a product of immigration herself and has spent years helping immigrants deal with the many challenges of life abroad. As a social worker at the Laval Immigration Holding Centre, Kicha was appalled by the conditions in which residents were living. To her, the centre seemed like a prison.

She also noticed there were few support services available, even though most of these immigrants need someone to take them by the hand and teach them how to live in their new country.

This gave Kicha the idea to create a welcome centre that would help guide immigrants through the process and provide shelter to those who are going through a tough time. This centre, known as the Centre d’hébergement Latraverse, was created in 2020 in Montreal North and has become the first stop for new immigrants, many of whom come in through Roxham Road.

In the few years it has been open, this centre has already welcomed and helped thousands of people by providing food, clothing, compassion and short-, medium- or long-term accommodation.

Colleagues, while our governments sit around and debate, ordinary folks like Kicha Estimée are taking action. While our governments speculate on how to integrate immigrants, kind souls are investing their own money for the well-being of humanity. We must support and encourage these kinds of initiatives, because they illustrate how compassionate Canadians are.

Please join me in wishing Kicha the very best for the continued success for her bold initiative.

Thank you.

[English]

Hon. Seamus O’Regan, P.C., M.P., Minister of Labour: Senator, we are far away from that.

In regard to the issue of replacement workers, I come back to the remarkable record that my team has at the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, or FMCS, which is our mediation and conciliation team. The longer you can keep people focused on the table, and not on other things, the better. What we have learned are the lasting — and extremely scarring and emotional — effects of using scabs or replacement workers. It can poison a work environment for years, if not decades. When all of that is happening, the emotional turmoil of that and the physical time it takes in order to coordinate it distracts people from a solution at the table. That is where I’m coming from on this.

I want security and stability in our supply chains. I do not want further disruption. It will be crucial that we get this legislation correct and the regs that stem from it. At some point, senators here will have a hand in that, but I want you to know — and I will impress this upon you — that the stability of that table means the stability of our supply chains. The more that I can have unions, industry and business focused on finding an agreement that is long-lasting, the better. I do not think that finding third-party sources is going to do any of that.