Hon. Patti LaBoucane-Benson (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate): Honourable senators, pursuant to rule 4-13(3), I would like to inform the Senate that as we proceed with Government Business, the Senate will address the items in the following order: third reading of Bill C-51, followed by consideration of the message from the House of Commons concerning Bill C-18, followed by third reading of S-12, followed by second reading of Bill C-54, followed by second reading of Bill C-55, followed by third reading of Bill C-47, followed by all remaining items in the order that they appear on the Order Paper.

Hon. Patti LaBoucane-Benson (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate) moved third reading of Bill C-51, An Act to give effect to the self-government treaty recognizing the Whitecap Dakota Nation / Wapaha Ska Dakota Oyate and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate): I certainly will. I’m so sorry to hear what your niece had to go through. Thank goodness that she survived the ordeal.

I certainly will do everything I can to bring this to the minister’s attention.

Hon. Patti LaBoucane-Benson (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate) moved third reading of Bill C-51, An Act to give effect to the self‑government treaty recognizing the Whitecap Dakota Nation / Wapaha Ska Dakota Oyate and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, I have the honour to inform the Senate that a message has been received from the House of Commons which reads as follows:

Wednesday, June 21, 2023

EXTRACT, —

That a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint Their Honours that, in relation to Bill C-18, An Act respecting online communications platforms that make news content available to persons in Canada, the House:

agrees with amendments 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 made by the Senate; and

respectfully disagrees with amendments 4 and 5 because they undermine the objectives of the bill, which focus on encouraging fair deals that reflect what each party contributes to, and how each party benefits from, the making available of news online, and narrow the scope of the bargaining process and the key factors guiding final offer arbitration decisions.

Honourable senators, when shall this message be taken into consideration?

(On motion of Senator Gold, message placed on the Orders of the Day for consideration later this day.)

Hon. Patti LaBoucane-Benson (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate) tabled the reply to Question No. 159, dated May 5, 2022, appearing on the Order Paper and Notice Paper in the name of the Honourable Senator Plett, regarding the answers provided by the Department of National Defence to Order Paper question No. 15 during the 1st session of the 44th Parliament.

Hon. Marty Klyne: Honourable senators, on the traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg, and with tremendous pride, I rise to speak to Bill C-51, An Act to give effect to the self-government treaty recognizing the Whitecap Dakota Nation / Wapaha Ska Dakota Oyate and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.

I rise not just to speak to a bill but to celebrate Whitecap Dakota reclaiming their legal rights to self-determination.

Chief Darcy Bear and I have talked about this moment for some time now, so it is with great pleasure I salute Whitecap Dakota Nation on this historic achievement, one which will serve as another step on the long road to reconciliation.

It comes on the heels of other achievements of reconciliation, including the recent passing of Bill C-45, an Act to amend the First Nations Fiscal Management Act, to make consequential amendments to other Acts, and to make a clarification relating to another act; not to mention this week’s Action Plan for the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which is another such milestone; as is the announcement of a site on Parliament Hill for a monument to residential school survivors and victims.

In the case of Whitecap Dakota, I make no mistake that before we can celebrate, we need to get this bill across the finish line, so I’ll keep my remarks short.

We should take a moment to reflect on the context of this legislation and discuss how we came to this point. Historically, Canada’s relationship with Indigenous peoples has been stained with injustice and discrimination. We still see the effects of the residential school system, the underfunding of community services, the outstanding specific claims to the fulfillment of historical treaties and other agreements and the misappropriation of lands. Yet today, I am filled with tremendous optimism and growing confidence that brighter days lay ahead.

The story of Whitecap Dakota Nation adds to my positive outlook. Senator Cotter gave a wonderful overview of their history in his speech yesterday, so I am satisfied that part of the story has been told. I expect that Senator Cotter will further complement his speech shortly.

Suffice it to say that, in facing the many challenges and betrayals over the last two centuries, Whitecap Dakota has endured with resilience and courage. They began to push back and take charge of their own social, political and economic affairs with great determination and the courage to make the right choices, with perseverance in goodness over time and with lasting effort and patience when things were tough. Today, Whitecap Dakota First Nation has attracted over $160 million in capital investment — and they are just getting started!

Colleagues, rather than provide an overview of the numerous economic achievements of Whitecap Dakota, I refer you to my inquiry speech of May 2 launching the inquiry celebrating Indigenous-led businesses and economic development organizations, a speech in which Whitecap Dakota Nation’s was the economic success profiled.

That said, I would be remiss if I didn’t acknowledge the efforts of my friend Chief Darcy Bear and his council and elders, who, for the past three decades, have led the people of Whitecap Dakota with honour, humility and dedication. He has spoken about their success:

We can’t change the wrongs of the past . . . but certainly going forward we can all change the future by working together in partnership. We have that attitude that we don’t believe in the word “can’t.” There’s always a way to moving something forward.

Whitecap Chief and council should be recognized on our national stage for their many achievements to date and, soon, this significant achievement.

As I said, the self-government agreement between Whitecap Dakota and Canada represents another step on our federation’s path towards reconciliation. It’s a positive step forward, and I’m thrilled that we, as legislators, can play a part. This is the first self-government agreement signed in Saskatchewan, and I hope that more will follow.

Let’s take a moment to discuss what the impact of this legislation will be. Why should Canadians pay attention and support this agreement? It matters because self-government restores Dakota Whitecap’s legal right to self-determination, realizing their underlying inherent rights. It recognizes them as a First Nation under section 35 of Canada’s Constitution. It matters because this agreement means an opportunity for Whitecap Dakota to reclaim what was taken or withheld from them generations ago. Despite being some of Canada’s most committed allies, this is what they’ve been fighting for ever since, with truth and justice on their side. It matters because this is an opportunity to enhance prosperity and pride of place in Canada for this great people.

This agreement means Whitecap Dakota can continue to grow and that the hope that endured was hope well placed to bear fruit. It means positive change that will benefit everyone as they create wealth and contribute to the prosperity and the well-being of this country.

As honourable senators know, we will not achieve true reconciliation until Indigenous peoples are empowered to take advantage of their full economic, social and political potential. This agreement gets us one step closer. Let us speak with one voice in our vote for Bill C-51, and let’s get this done.

Thank you. Hiy kitatamîhin.

Hon. Mary Coyle: My question is for Senator Gold.

The Toronto Star recently reported that $7.8 billion earmarked for climate programs between 2016 and 2022 was either unspent or spent at a slower pace than planned. For example, the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program was supposed to direct $5.5 billion to public transit and green infrastructure by 2021-22, but had only spent 43% of it by that time.

Cabinet ministers have responded that the flow of money to projects depends on the pace at which those projects are completed by Canadians.

On Monday, Prime Minister Trudeau told the Atlantic Economic Forum that Canada’s action on climate will attract investors from abroad.

Senator Gold, investors are looking for the actual installation of more renewable energy and the actual construction of new green infrastructure in Canadian communities. I believe that, at this moment, funding for the program I mentioned earlier has now been allocated.

Most importantly, Senator Gold, what does the federal government do to ensure that these types of climate programs are well understood by the people, businesses and communities who are eligible for them? What lessons are we learning from this to ensure that Canadians make full use of the billions in investment tax credits for clean technology manufacturing and clean electricity announced in Budget 2023?

Hon. Patti LaBoucane-Benson (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate) tabled the reply to Question No. 207, dated February 2, 2023, appearing on the Order Paper and Notice Paper in the name of the Honourable Senator Plett, regarding the Newfoundland-Labrador fixed transportation link.

[Translation]

Hon. Patti LaBoucane-Benson (Legislative Deputy to the Government Representative in the Senate) tabled the reply to Question No. 66, dated November 23, 2021, appearing on the Order Paper and Notice Paper in the name of the Honourable Senator Plett, regarding Canada’s military justice system.

Hon. Brent Cotter: Honourable senators, it’s a pleasure to be here. I’ll be mercifully brief today.

With respect to Bill C-51, let me begin by thanking Chief Darcy Bear, Chief of the Whitecap Dakota First Nation, and Councillors Dwayne Eagle and Frank Royal, who came to Ottawa to appear before our committee and meet with senators, enabling us to celebrate with them the achievements of this bill. Also a thank you to their policy adviser Murray Long, who joined them in that work and in their appearances both here and in the other place at committee. Also, congratulations and thanks to Minister Miller and his staff and to Federal Negotiations Manager Aayah Shadad and her team. Some of you were able to participate in briefings on this bill from Ms. Shadad. I was as well. They provided outstanding and insightful explanations of the bill to those of us who attended. I also want to extend thanks to each of you for agreeing to expedite consideration of this important bill. It means a lot to the people of Whitecap Dakota and it means a lot to Canadians, I think.

Briefly, to highlight the self-government treaty again, it does essentially three things. First, it brings Whitecap Dakota into the fold of Aboriginal peoples, pursuant to section 35 of the Constitution Act — a long-standing and unfair oversight to this First Nation and to a few others who are in the same category of essentially refugees from the United States, as you will recall, from a few hundred years ago. Second, it changes the official name of the First Nation to the Whitecap Dakota Nation; and, third, as a result of the name change, it enables them to transition out from under most aspects of the Indian Act.

This is a bilateral agreement between Canada and the Whitecap Dakota First Nation, but you should be aware that the Government of Saskatchewan — and the nation is located in Saskatchewan, just south of Saskatoon — does not oppose this agreement. In fact, there is a whole series of additional bilateral agreements between the First Nation and the Government of Saskatchewan that facilitate the effectiveness of the self‑government agreement.

Chief Bear described this at the hearings yesterday. This has always been a concern for many First Nations, namely, being able to enforce their own bylaws or band laws. The RCMP, for a variety of reasons, have been unwilling to do that in Saskatchewan in relation to Whitecap Dakota. However, there is an arrangement with the provincial government where they will make available community safety officers, who have law enforcement powers — not quite as enriched as policing powers but significant ones — and will provide that service. Those partnership agreements with the province are making possible this agreement not only to be lawful and meaningful but also to be highly effective, I think. That’s to the credit of Chief Bear and his team and also the Government of Saskatchewan.

Furthermore, this agreement helps to unlock what Senator Klyne was speaking about, namely, the power of this nation to be able to govern itself effectively. You heard the story about its successes over the last 30 years. This will continue the nation on that progress. Indeed, Chief Bear used the phrase, “This will make it possible for us to operate at the speed of business.” That’s a lovely phrase when you think about it. I think all of you have some, maybe deep, understanding of the way in which the Indian Act and various other colonial constraints have put handcuffs on First Nations who are keen to make both social and economic progress on behalf of their people.

My sense is that this orientation, a can-do attitude, an entrepreneurial spirit — all in the interests of the citizens of Whitecap Dakota — is exactly what can be achieved by acting on a commitment to reconciliation, to moving away from a century‑plus approach based on the imposition of colonial values and policies and a century-plus paternalistic attitude which the Indian Act tends to generate.

Adopting this bill will be a way of actualizing reconciliation for the Whitecap Dakota Nation and also a model of optimism for other First Nations and for Canada as a whole. I hope that you will support this bill and that we’ll be able to move it into actuality so that it can come into force in September, as planned.

Thank you very much.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, I rise to speak at third reading of Bill C-51, An Act to give effect to the self-government treaty recognizing the Whitecap Dakota Nation / Wapaha Ska Dakota Oyate and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.

First, I want to send my best wishes and hopes for a speedy recovery to Chief Darcy Bear, who suffered a medical emergency at committee last night. I was encouraged to hear that Chief Bear, though hospitalized overnight, seems to be doing well.

It was a frightening moment for all concerned, I’m sure, and a reminder to all of us that life is delicate and time is precious. It also pleases me to know that the committee kept its wits last night and finished the necessary work on Bill C-51, a landmark piece of legislation that is long overdue and that Chief Bear has been so instrumental in bringing to fruition.

As he said in his opening remarks last night, “it has been a long journey,” and indeed it has, tracing in many ways all the way back to the War of 1812, more than two centuries ago.

As I mentioned the other night and as Minister Miller acknowledged in his remarks to the committee, the specific process leading to the treaty and this bill began in 2009 under the Harper government. Minister Miller, echoing the words of Chief Bear, said that too has been a long process, but to their credit the Whitecap Dakota First Nation used that time to work steadily and relentlessly toward this moment.

As Chief Bear said:

. . . as far as self-government goes, Whitecap First Nation has been, over time, had our own election code, our own First Nation land management code and our own membership code. We eliminated about 35% of the Indian Act already.

That was before the self-government treaty that this bill will bring into law, a law that will add a very important element that has long been missing and is long overdue.

Again, I can do no better than to quote Chief Bear:

. . . when we looked at changing it to a self-government treaty, that was when we talked about the acknowledgment of the Whitecap Dakota people as Aboriginal peoples of Canada.

Honourable senators, I am sure you have heard me and other senators complain in the past that this government too often expects us to rush bills through. Bill C-51 is a bill that we only got this week, but we cannot ignore that it has been two centuries in the making and we cannot ignore that with this bill we are righting an historic wrong, and in doing so we have the chance to make history. Thank you.

Hon. Yonah Martin (Deputy Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, I rise to speak at third reading of Bill C-51, An Act to give effect to the self-government treaty recognizing the Whitecap Dakota Nation/Wapaha Ska Dakota Oyate and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.

First, I want to send my best wishes and hopes for a speedy recovery to Chief Darcy Bear, who suffered a medical emergency at committee last night. I was encouraged to hear that Chief Bear, though hospitalized overnight, seems to be doing well.

It was a frightening moment for all concerned, I’m sure, and a reminder to all of us that life is delicate and time is precious. It also pleases me to know that the committee kept its wits last night and finished the necessary work on Bill C-51, a landmark piece of legislation that is long overdue and that Chief Bear has been so instrumental in bringing to fruition.

As he said in his opening remarks last night, “it has been a long journey,” and indeed it has, tracing in many ways all the way back to the War of 1812, more than two centuries ago.

As I mentioned the other night and as Minister Miller acknowledged in his remarks to the committee, the specific process leading to the treaty and this bill began in 2009 under the Harper government. Minister Miller, echoing the words of Chief Bear, said that too has been a long process, but to their credit the Whitecap Dakota First Nation used that time to work steadily and relentlessly toward this moment.

As Chief Bear said:

. . . as far as self-government goes, Whitecap First Nation has been, over time, had our own election code, our own First Nation land management code and our own membership code. We eliminated about 35% of the Indian Act already.

That was before the self-government treaty that this bill will bring into law, a law that will add a very important element that has long been missing and is long overdue.

Again, I can do no better than to quote Chief Bear:

. . . when we looked at changing it to a self-government treaty, that was when we talked about the acknowledgment of the Whitecap Dakota people as Aboriginal peoples of Canada.

Honourable senators, I am sure you have heard me and other senators complain in the past that this government too often expects us to rush bills through. Bill C-51 is a bill that we only got this week, but we cannot ignore that it has been two centuries in the making and we cannot ignore that with this bill we are righting an historic wrong, and in doing so we have the chance to make history. Thank you.

The Hon. the Speaker: Are senators ready for the question?

The Hon. the Speaker: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

The Hon. the Speaker: Are senators ready for the question?

Hon. Senators: Question.

The Hon. the Speaker: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

Hon. Marc Gold (Government Representative in the Senate) moved:

That, in relation to Bill C-18, An Act respecting online communications platforms that make news content available to persons in Canada, the Senate do not insist on its amendments with which the House of Commons disagrees; and

That a message be sent to the House of Commons to acquaint that house accordingly.

He said: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak to the message on Bill C-18.

Just last week, the Senate adopted this key piece of legislation to support Canadian journalism with a dozen amendments. The bill returns to us from the other place with support for most of those changes. Today, I am proposing that the Senate accept the other place’s position in response to the Senate’s amendments and bring the online news act to Royal Assent.

Before turning to the message from the other place, I’d like to reflect on the situation facing journalism and how we have come to this point. This is a critical moment for journalism in Canada. Despite the tenacity and commitment of the witnesses we have heard here, we have painted a worrying picture of our nation’s news industry. Local newspapers are disappearing across the country. Canadian journalists are losing their jobs. We have heard devastating news from Bell Media in recent days. This can have long-term impacts on the Canadian news media ecosystem and on Canadian democracy.

We all lose if Canadian news businesses are starved to the point where they can no longer produce high-quality journalism. When no one is there to report on democratic institutions and to counter the growing wave of disinformation, citizens suffer the consequences. Every day brings new evidence of this phenomenon worldwide. The message we have heard from these stakeholders is clear: The time to act is now.

Colleagues, it’s clear that the internet has changed how Canadians get their news as they turn toward social media, apps and aggregators.

Canadian news businesses have pivoted to adapt their content to digital media but they are operating in a world where a handful of large players have an inordinate amount of power over how online content is accessed.

These large digital platforms have used their outsized market power to make news content available without compensating news organizations. Platforms claim that news has little to no value. But data shows us that Canadians rely heavily on social media to access news: 55% of Canadians use social media to find their news.

Platforms claim that they are providing a service to news businesses by making their content available to online audiences. But platforms are the ones who reap the benefits from monetizing Canadians’ access by selling user data, or targeted ads based on that data, to advertisers.

Colleagues, at the same time, I do not deny that news organizations benefit from their content being shared on digital platforms. Canadians across this country use these digital spaces to access information, exchange ideas, connect with each other and create content that reflects their unique experiences. Such spaces have the potential to strengthen our democracy by promoting foundational values such as freedom of expression. The problem lies not in the technology, but in the power imbalance between the platforms and everyone else.

Honourable senators, we have heard platforms and their proponents argue that any regulation that challenges their business model is a threat to the internet and free speech itself. We know that platform services are not the internet and free speech is not a product sold by an online platform or a search engine. Dr. Winseck, who testified here last month, estimates that in 2021 Google’s advertising revenue in Canada alone was $4.9 billion. Meta’s was $4 billion. This represents 80% of the online advertising market in Canada. Bill C-18 is a necessary response to these platforms’ dominant market position.

For Canada’s news industry, the numbers stand in stark contrast to the $9 billion in advertising revenue I just mentioned. Since 2008, close to 500 news media outlets have closed in 335 communities across Canada and more than 20,000 Canadian journalists have lost their jobs.

Throughout our study of the bill, we have heard first-person accounts from stakeholders that add a human dimension to these numbers. News businesses large and small are cutting back on journalists. Newsrooms are shrinking down to the bare bones or closing altogether. Students are turning away from careers in journalism. News deserts are multiplying as communities across the country lose their local papers. Under these pressures, many of the stories that Canadians want to hear are simply not being told.

Despite being a pillar of a functional democracy, reliable journalism has never been easy to finance. And today, as always, committed publishers, broadcasters, journalists and editors continue to find creative ways to produce quality journalism. But all the innovation and business chops in the world will not help when news organizations are not operating on a level playing field.

The situation is untenable. Reasonable intervention is needed before players can meet on even ground. Senators showed their support for this legislation last week in a vote of 51 to 23.

Our colleagues in the other place have now returned the bill to us, recognizing the work that we did and accepting almost all the amendments we made. Thanks to the diligent work of us here in the Senate, the bill before us today is a better bill.

[Translation]

The other place supported several of the amendments regarding the definition of “news outlet” in the bill. An amendment proposed by Senator Cormier adds references to “Indigenous news outlets” and “official language minority community news outlets,” while another amendment proposed by Senator Simons removes specific examples of what could be considered news content. The other place also accepted an amendment proposed by Senator Clement, with the support of the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network, which makes the definition of “news content” less specific with regard to Indigenous media.

Senator Cormier’s definitions of “official language minority community” and “official language minority community news outlet” were also accepted by the other place.

The other place also accepted an amendment proposed by Senator Cormier that sought to create a separate category for agreements with official language minority community news outlets as part of the exemption criteria for platforms. Two technical amendments were adopted as a result.

[English]

Senator Dasko’s proposal, which aims to provide clarity with respect to the designation of news organizations by request from news organizations themselves, was also accepted.

The other place also supported the proposal by Senator Clement to create a distinct reporting category within the independent auditor reports to understand the impact of this legislation on Indigenous news outlets, outlets that serve local and regional markets, outlets that serve Black and other racialized communities and outlets that serve official language minority communities.

The other place further accepted a technical amendment that I presented at committee, which would ensure that the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission can impose conditions on members of the arbitration panel regarding the disclosure of confidential information and that the panel members know their obligations as it relates to such confidential information. Many witnesses had raised the importance of protecting commercially sensitive information throughout the negotiation process.

Finally, the other place supported an amendment proposed by Senator Miville-Dechêne to put a tripwire in place to bring the full regime into force within six months after Royal Assent.

There is, however, one point on which the other place has respectfully disagreed with us, with reasons articulated in their message. They have done so following a robust and vigorous debate in a minority parliament. Their decision is clear, informed and carefully considered, and I am asking this chamber to concur.

The amendment in question aims to narrow the scope of negotiation between news businesses and platforms by specifying that the deals must be based on the “value derived” by both parties. The amendment would then require parties to assign monetary value to news content. It would have an effect of attributing value through negotiations.

As noted by the sponsor of the bill, Senator Harder, by narrowing the scope of the negotiation process to determine the value exchanged between the two parties, this amendment would result in negotiations less favourable to the media and contrary to the objectives of the bill. As currently drafted, the legislation already requires that if parties cannot agree and reach the stage of final offer arbitration, the arbitration panel must look at an array of factors.

Indeed, the bill provides great leeway for parties to reach a mutually satisfactory arrangement during the negotiation and mediation process. When an arbitration panel intervenes as a solution of last resort, its decision must be based on the following factors: the monetary and non-monetary value added to the news content in question, the benefits that each party derives from the content being made available on the platform as well as the bargaining imbalance between the parties. Colleagues, as you can see, this approach allows the parties to negotiate over elements that go beyond financial compensation.

The amendment that was not retained by the other place constrains this process. It may introduce challenges related to the determination of fair market value. It may be interpreted in a way that is less favourable to news organizations and that would result in significantly reduced compensation for the outlets.

Stakeholders have raised these concerns, and I believe these concerns bear repeating. For example, Paul Deegan, the CEO of News Media Canada, which represents 560 titles, said the following:

The amendment would limit the ability of news publishers to negotiate fair compensation with dominant platforms. Value will be determined during negotiations.

Similarly, Pierre-Elliott Levasseur, the President of La Presse, indicated:

This amendment would tie one hand behind our back and hamstring us in negotiations with the platforms that enjoy a massive power imbalance over news publishers. The majority of media outlets in Canada have tried to get deals with Facebook and Google, only to have the door slammed in their faces. This is particularly true in Quebec, where La Presse, the Quebecor titles and the Hebdos have all been left out in the cold. This amendment benefits the platforms at the expense of publishers.

Our colleagues in the other place note that the new clause would govern what is supposed to be a free negotiation process more restrictively than the end game of final offer arbitration. The other place’s decision to reject this amendment is based on its conclusion that including this language could constrain both parties by limiting the amount and form of compensation that platforms award news businesses early on in the bargaining process, a stage when parties should have the most flexibility.

[Translation]

Colleagues, with the online news act, we’ve come up with a made-in-Canada solution that offers a clear path forward. Bill C-18 requires news businesses and platforms to sit down at the negotiating table to determine fair compensation for online news content. It allows news businesses to form collective bargaining associations so that news businesses of all sizes are included in the negotiation process. The bill also requires platforms to enter into agreements with a range of news businesses reflecting the diversity of Canadian journalism. If the two parties fail to reach a fair agreement, the bill gives the CRTC the power to facilitate a final offer arbitration process.

Some will argue that existing agreements between platforms and news businesses make the passage of Bill C-18 unnecessary. We know full well that the platforms only began entering into agreements with certain publishers in Canada when the government indicated it was going to act. In the absence of a transparent accountability framework such as Bill C-18, agreements are subject to the whims of the platforms and could expire without being renewed.

It is up to us to keep pressuring the platforms to bring them to the negotiating table. Bill C-18 gives us a way to do that. It also guarantees more Canadian news businesses a seat at the negotiating table, instead of a handful of privileged media companies chosen by the platforms.

[English]

International momentum to regulate online platforms that make news available is growing. In addition to Canada and Australia, the United Kingdom and New Zealand are putting forward comparable legislation. Just last week, our friends on the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary voted to advance the bipartisan Journalism Competition and Preservation Act. Although each case is different, with lawmakers considering different approaches, a clear trend is emerging. The reality is that Bill C-18 is part of a bigger global trend to hold tech giants to account.

Colleagues, we all know Bill C-18 will not be a silver bullet, but it will level the playing field. It will check the power of the most dominant digital platforms, and it will empower even small news businesses to get fair compensation for the valuable news content they create for Canadians.

News media stakeholders across the board have signalled the urgency of passing Bill C-18, a piece of legislation that will not only save Canadian jobs and businesses but support Canadian democracy by ensuring that diverse Canadian news media can keep covering our institutions and our decision makers.

Governments and people around the world are waiting to see what happens in Canada. As I’ve described, some countries are already regulating the big tech platforms to ensure the sustainability of their own news industries. Will we, in Canada, have the courage to do the same? I hope the answer to that question will be a resounding “yes.”

I urge honourable senators to accept the message from the other place and pass Bill C-18. Thank you.

[Translation]