Bill C-354

An Act to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act (Quebec’s cultural distinctiveness and French-speaking communities)

This enactment amends the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act to provide that the Commission must, in furtherance of its objects and in the exercise of its powers, consult with the Government of Quebec or the governments of the other provinces, as the case may be, before regulating aspects of the Canadian broadcasting system that relate to the cultural distinctiveness of Quebec or that concern French-speaking markets.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Thank you very much.

I'd like to thank the witnesses very much for joining us today.

Ms. Roy, as president of the FCFA, you clearly explain the situation in which we find ourselves in Canada, that is, the danger posed by the decline of French. Tools have been made available to us through Bill C‑13, and I'm very proud to have worked closely with the former minister of official languages to get a better bill passed. However, it doesn't change the need to move things forward in all areas, if there's a political will to stop this decline of French.

Let's go back to Bill C‑354, which states, among other things, that the CRTC must consult provincial governments other than the government of Quebec about French‑language markets when regulating and monitoring the Canadian broadcasting system.

According to everything we've seen from their governments, do you believe that people like Blaine Higgs in New Brunswick or Danielle Smith in Alberta are acting in the interests of francophone communities and aiming to protect their rights? Do you think it's essential to add measures in this bill to ensure that francophone communities themselves are heard by the CRTC, not only to protect their rights, but also to halt the decline of French in our country?

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

First of all, I want to say how impressed I am by Mr. Noormohamed's French skills. He spoke only French for his entire six minutes. Given that we are studying a bill that deals with protecting French and francophone culture, I find that admirable. I just wanted to point that out. Hats off to him.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am pleased to see the three of you here. We've met on a number of occasions, in many different situations, and I've had the opportunity to discuss with some of you the concerns around Bill C‑354 and the provisions relating to consultation with the provinces.

Ms. Henrie‑Cadieux, you said in your remarks that you completely agree with the Quebec consultation mechanism and believe that it is good not only for Quebec, but also for French throughout Canada. Obviously, I find it very rewarding to see that Quebec, which strongly defends French and has powerful tools to defend francophone culture, has an influence outside Quebec. Can you expand on that?

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Roy.

We talked to representatives from the CRTC earlier. They are relatively lukewarm—pardon the expression—to Bill C‑354 because they don't want to give an advantage to the Government of Quebec, or any other provincial government, for that matter. The CRTC prefers to cast a wide net in its consultations and invites everyone who wants to submit briefs to do so, including governments and associations across Canada. It says that it does not necessarily place greater importance on government briefs than on briefs submitted by associations.

Have you noticed the CRTC's way of doing things? Could you comment on that, please?

[Liane Roy, President, Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada]

Good evening, Madam Chair and members of the committee.

Thank you for inviting us and our colleague from the Fédération culturelle canadienne‑française, the FCCF, to testify before you today.

My name is Liane Roy, and I'm accompanied by our director of communications, Serge Quinty, who is attending the meeting in person and who will be able to answer your questions.

The Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, or FCFA, is the national voice of 2.8 million French‑speaking Canadians living in a minority situation in nine provinces and three territories. The FCFA is the head of a national network of some 900 French‑language organizations and institutions across the country. Our communities are determined to live in French, and they work to do so every day.

Over the years, we have invested in a number of spaces and sectors necessary for the vitality of our francophonie, including the media and audiovisual space. We have developed a network of francophone community radio stations. We have an educational television channel, TFO, which is present not only in Ontario, but also in Manitoba and other provinces. We are constantly working with Radio‑Canada to ensure that our communities are better represented, not only in the content broadcast by regional stations, but also in national programs and newscasts.

In recent years, two major pieces of legislation in our country have been modernized. The FCFA has taken a leadership role in the modernization of the Official Languages Act. At the same time, we supported the FCCF's work to ensure that the new Online Streaming Act adequately takes into account the realities and needs of our communities. One of the major gains in this regard is the addition of section 5.2 to the Online Streaming Act, which requires the Canadian Radio‑television and Telecommunications Commission, or CRTC, to consult official language minority communities when it is preparing to make decisions that have an impact on them. This clause is essential because, I admit, the CRTC's consideration of our realities has been uneven over the years, and even unsatisfactory in a number of cases.

For 18 years now, there has been a discussion group reserved for dialogue between the CRTC and official language minority communities, the CRTC‑OLMC discussion group. As its name suggests, it is essentially a forum for discussion and not an advisory body. Since October 2023, our communities have been calling for the group to become a proper advisory committee. This transformation is necessary, given the CRTC's new obligations under the Online Streaming Act.

All that said, we agree on the importance of the CRTC conducting much more systematic consultations on the realities of francophone markets in the country, including the cultural specificity of Quebec.

However, part of Bill C‑354 poses a problem, the part dealing with francophone markets outside Quebec. As worded, the bill provides that the CRTC will have to consult the governments of provinces other than Quebec on the realities of the francophone markets there. However, to be perfectly frank with you, the sensitivity of these governments to the francophonie varies. Some governments have difficult relations with their francophone communities. The francophone and Acadian communities and the organizations that represent them are in a much better position to describe the realities of the francophone markets at the CRTC, as required by the bill. For example, the FCFA, the FCCF, provincial and territorial francophone organizations, the Alliance nationale de l'industrie musicale and the Alliance des producteurs francophones du Canada have all been part of the CRTC‑OLMC discussion group for 18 years now. This shows that the CRTC understands and recognizes their legitimacy in speaking on behalf of francophone and Acadian communities. We therefore respectfully ask you to amend Bill C‑354 so that the organizations of the francophone and Acadian communities, and not the provincial governments, are the CRTC's first points of contact for reporting on the realities of francophone markets outside Quebec.

Thank you for your attention. We are ready to answer your questions.

[Manon Henrie-Cadieux]

Thank you for inviting the FCCF to discuss the opportunities afforded by Bill C‑354, which the Bloc Québécois introduced. The bill seeks to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act to make it mandatory for the CRTC to consult with the Government of Quebec on Quebec's cultural distinctiveness, before furthering its objects and exercising its powers in respect of aspects of the Canadian broadcasting system. We very much support that. The fact that Quebec would have an additional say in matters relating to its cultural distinctiveness and the CRTC would increase the importance of protecting and promoting French. That, in turn, would benefit us.

The FCCF is asking the government to ensure that its directions to the CRTC help to broaden the impact of measures to support the French language, ranging from supports for francophone production to the discoverability of francophone cultural content. You, our elected officials, just finished working on a modernized Official Languages Act in order to strengthen the obligations set out in the act. It reaffirms the goal of achieving substantive equality between the official languages, and now is the time for action.

Leading up to October's francophonie summit in Paris, stronger Canadian leadership is needed in order to overcome the barriers that threaten the future of the French language and francophone culture all over the world. This bill would go a long way on that front.

As representatives of the vital cultural sector, we are here today to highlight the importance of removing a reference from Bill C‑354. Unlike Quebec, the other provinces should not be called upon to inform the CRTC about matters relating to their French-speaking markets. That is asking them to do the impossible. That misguided notion should be removed from the bill, and groups like ours should instead be designated to represent francophone communities when it comes to these issues. We have legitimate mandates, effective mechanisms for advocacy and the necessary expertise. We have a decades-long track record of helping to shape policies that support the development of francophone communities. We are the only stakeholders with the on-the-ground knowledge to carry out this responsibility.

We would be grateful to you for determining that groups like ours are best equipped to inform the CRTC of what Canada's francophone minority communities need. The choices the country is about to make to support our language and culture are more critical than ever. At stake is the diversity of our cultural expression, its future and influence at home and abroad.

Thank you for this opportunity. I look forward to answering your questions.

[Manon Henrie-Cadieux, Director, Strategy and government relations, Fédération culturelle canadienne-française]

Good afternoon, members of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, Madam Chair, and ladies and gentlemen.

I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today. My name is Manon Henrie‑Cadieux, and I am the director of strategy and government relations at the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française, or FCCF for short.

I should say that the FCCF is the political voice of arts and culture in Canadian and Acadian francophone communities at the national level. The FCCF co‑operates closely with, and has the support of, the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada in providing leadership in broadcasting matters.

A clear and active stakeholder in the Yale report and the bills that followed, the FCCF helped to highlight the specific circumstances, concerns and needs of francophone minority communities. We are deeply engaged in sustained advocacy with the CRTC, to ensure that the Online Streaming Act is effectively implemented. Our active involvement in the current public consultations attests to that advocacy, especially regarding the strengthened provisions on the duty to consult communities and the way they are to be consulted. Our impactful contribution to the dedicated forum for communication between the CRTC and OLMCs, the CRTC-OLMC Discussion Group, also attests to the FCCF's advocacy work.

Thank you for the invitation to discuss the opportunities afforded by Bill C‑354, which the Bloc Québécois introduced.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I call the meeting back to order, please.

We are meeting with our second round of witnesses on the bill.

I'm sorry, everyone. I am just a little punchy. I came in on a red-eye, and I don't even know what I'm saying right now.

We're hearing from witnesses on Bill C-354. I will introduce them.

We have, from the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française, Manon Henrie-Cadieux, director of strategy and government relations. From the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, we have Liane Roy, president, by video conference, and Serge Quinty, director of communications.

Please begin now. You have five minutes to present per group.

I want to thank you for coming.

We'll begin with Manon-Henrie Cadieux for five minutes, please.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Sure.

One thing that is continually happening at this table is a lot of talk about consulting with Quebec. However, you'll note that Bill C-354 also requires you to consult with the governments of other provinces.

Is that correct?

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'll continue in the same vein as my colleague Mr. Noormohamed by talking about the notion of burden.

So far, I have heard all kinds of arguments against Bill C-354. None of them so far have made me blink, and none have led me to believe that, in the end, it may not be a good idea. None have led me to believe that we should discuss any aspect in particular, other than an amendment that may be discussed later on concerning consultations with the governments of the other provinces.

Mr. Shortliffe and Mr. Hutton, you said that passing the bill would add a workload to what you already have. It is a matter of informing the Government of Quebec of a study or a hearing that you are conducting on a particular topic. Explain to me how such a process could be considered an additional burden on an already full schedule, as I would like to know how you view that approach.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses for joining us today.

In its current form, does Bill C‑354 contain any factors that bind the CRTC in its day‑to‑day operations?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 126 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. I would like to acknowledge that this meeting is taking place on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, February 28, 2024, the committee is resuming its consideration of Bill C‑354.

We're going to begin, and I'm going to give you the usual housekeeping speech. Please read the little card you have on the table in front of you, witnesses. Because of sound quality, we need to make sure you don't have any devices, such as your hearing devices, close to your microphones. There's a little decal on your table. Can you put it face down on that when you're not using it? Also, you have to use the black earphones and not your own. We're not allowed to take photographs, because this is going to be put on the website anyway, and you'll be able to get what you'd need out of it.

We're in a hybrid form, and for those of you who are virtual—I think Niki Ashton is virtual—when you need to speak, please raise your hand on your website. For those of you who are in the room, please put your hand up, and I'll recognize you based on when you put your hand up, or at least we will try. Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking.

I now want to welcome our witnesses. I want to thank you for waiting, because normally we were supposed to start at four o'clock. We're half an hour late, but votes occurred, and they tend to push things back a little bit.

From 4:30 to 5:20, we're going to have witnesses from the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, the CRTC. It's represented by Scott Shortliffe, executive director of broadcasting; Scott Hutton, chief of consumer, research and communications; and Rachelle Frenette, legal counsel. Welcome.

You have five minutes to present, not each of you, but one of you, on behalf of CRTC. You probably know who that's going to be, so we shall begin for five minutes, please.

Mr. Shortliffe.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Having ended that, let's go back to the project. We have five minutes.

Are there any questions on Bill C-354?

On the bill, I have Taleeb Noormohamed.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ladies and gentlemen, it's an honour for me to speak to the members of the committee today about Bill C-354, which was sponsored in the House of Commons by my colleague the member for La Pointe-de-l'Île, Mario Beaulieu.

As my colleague could not be here today, I'm happy to be able to speak on his behalf about our bill, which is very straightforward.

Subsection 12(1) under the heading “In relation to broadcasting” in the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act, states: “The objects and powers of the Commission in relation to broadcasting are as set out in the Broadcasting Act”.

We propose the addition of a “Consultation” section and a new subsection 12(1.1):

Consultation (1.1) The Commission shall consult with the Government of Quebec about the cultural distinctiveness of Quebec and with the governments of the other provinces about the French-speaking markets in those provinces before furthering the objects and exercising the powers referred to in subsection (1) in respect of the aspects of the Canadian broadcasting system that concern those matters.

This bill is not really very complicated. It constitutes a response to the express request submitted on February 4, 2023 by Quebec's Minister of Culture and Communications, Mathieu Lacombe, in a letter he had sent to Mr. Pablo Rodriguez, the then Minister of Canadian Heritage.

At the time, the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage had completed its study of Bill C-11, whose purpose was to amend the Broadcasting Act. Following study in the Senate, the bill was referred back to the House to obtain approval for the final amendments proposed by the Senate.

The recommendations in the letter to Mr. Rodriguez included the Quebec minister's demand, or firm suggestion, that Quebec be consulted systematically when the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, the CRTC, was developing regulations and decisions that could have an impact on Quebec and francophone culture, and on the Quebec broadcasting system.

The Bloc Québécois is convinced that telecommunications and broadcasting are extremely important for the vitality of Quebec's culture. Broadcasting has a direct impact on our language and culture. Bill C-354 is a modest attempt at a minimal response to the expectations and concerns of Quebeckers with respect to the culture and management of their broadcasting ecosystem.

Quebec has always developed its own rules for the broadcasting sector and has always striven for more autonomy. I would like to take you back to 1929, when the premier of Quebec at the time was Louis‑Alexandre Taschereau, who adopted the first “law respecting broadcasting in this province”. That was the actual name of the act. Later, in the 1930s, the federal government followed his lead and adopted a broadcasting act, which led to the establishment of the CRTC as we know it today.

However, over the years, various successive Quebec governments—and they were certainly not all sovereignists—with several federalist Liberal governments among others, working towards more autonomy and more power for the Government of Quebec with respect to broadcasting. In 2008, Christine St‑Pierre and Benoît Pelletier, both Liberal ministers in the Quebec government, sent the following letter:

This letter is written to inform the federal government of Quebec's desire to begin talks, as soon as possible, with a view to concluding a Canada-Quebec agreement for the broadcasting and telecommunications sector and an agreement relating to culture. Considering the distinct culture of Quebec, the only French-speaking state in North America, we feel that concluding such an administrative agreement would make it possible to better reflect the specific characteristics of Quebec content in broadcasting and telecommunications, and would serve as recognition of the importance of protecting and promoting Quebec's specific culture.

CRTC decisions have an impact on francophone and Quebec culture. CRTC decisions have an impact on Quebec broadcasting, and we think that it is important for Quebec to automatically be consulted in advance by the CRTC when it is undertaking work on Quebec and francophone broadcasting and culture.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I call this meeting back to order.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, February 28, 2024, we are commencing consideration of Bill C-354, an act to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act, regarding Quebec’s cultural distinctiveness and French-speaking communities.

The sponsor of this bill was Mario Beaulieu. We have Mr. Martin Champoux, who is going to present on his behalf because he is not able to be here.

Mr. Champoux, you have five minutes for your opening statement. I will give you a 30-second cue when you're getting there.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Yes, that's right.

Could we have a vote on the schedule Mr. Noormohamed has brought out here, starting with safe sport on June 6 and going to Bill C-354 and the rest on June 11, June 13, June 18 and June 20?

(Motion agreed to: yeas 9; nays 1)

Thank you.

Does anyone move to adjourn?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Ms. Ashton, I think you're going to get defeated here. Everyone kind of agrees with the Liberals on this one. Thank you, though, for bringing it up, because Bill C-354 has to be reported to the House by September 27.

I need someone to move to adjourn.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

I think Mr. Méla wants to know about the deadline for amendments on June 13 for Bill C-354.

We're running over time here, so we have to—

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

I guess, regarding “loosey-goosey”, we could take out the “whatever”. I just think it's not very prudent for parliamentarians to commit to a June 20 clause-by-clause when it's likely we're not going to be sitting. If we're going to be loosey-goosey, that's the way to do it.

My proposal is that we move Bill C-354 to take over the two previous meetings, ending clause-by-clause on June 18. June 20 could be for online harms.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

I'm suggesting bumping it up, so one of the online harms meetings could move to the 20th, in case we're still sitting, or into the fall.

I understand we wouldn't have the witnesses right away for June 11, so we could leave online harms there. We could do safe sport, or whatever, but if folks want to move with online harms, that's fine. However, we could move Bill C-354 to June 13 and make June 18 clause-by-clause, and then June 20 would be online harms or whatever.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

We would need clarification on where you would want Bill C-354 to move to, if not June 20.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Yes, okay. We can do that.

We'll vote on Ms. Ashton's comments on Bill C-354, especially for June 20. We may not be here, and we need to get this....

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Yes. Bill C-354 has to be done by Friday, September 27.

Is there any discussion on this? I see none.

Do I call for a vote? What is the procedure with this?

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Yes, exactly.

We have some thoughts on how things could be done more effectively. Our concern is with pushing Bill C-354 until the very end. I understand it has to be back in the House by the end of September. I think it might be more prudent to switch out even one of the online harms sessions to move Bill C-354 up, and then we could do online harms later.

I know we don't always sit until the very end of the House sitting, so in the hope of finishing Bill C-354 before we leave and in time for September, I'm wondering if folks might consider that.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Just to recap, June 6 would be on safe sport and Bill C-354; June 11 would be on online harms for both hours; June 18 would be on Bill C-354 and the amendments; and on June 20 we would have Bill C-354.

Is there any conversation?

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Fully recognizing that there is a desire on the part of the committee to get safe sport and Bill C-354 done, as well as to do the online harms study, I move:

That, with respect to the review of Bill C-354 and other matters before the committee, the committee be scheduled as follows:

That:

(a) June 6 be dedicated in the first hour to reviewing the Safe Sport draft and in the second hour to the sponsor's appearance on Bill C-354;

(b) June 11 and 13 to witnesses on online harms;

(c) June 18 to witnesses for Bill C-354, and that the deadline for amendments on Bill C-354 be at noon on that date; and

(d) June 20 to clause-by-clause on Bill C-354.

That way, we can get at least those three things done.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I wasn't trying to pull your leg; let me reassure you on that score. I just wanted to say and explain to you that consulting could be useful in some future time and place. Bill C-354, which was sponsored by my colleague Mario Beaulieu, the member for La Pointe-de-l'Île, is a bill that concerns the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission and that will eventually land here, on the table of this committee. In developing that bill, we considered francophone communities outside Quebec because it concerns them. We asked them questions. I think that's a habit that should be cultivated when something specifically concerns Quebec, where there's a lively bilingual culture. I think it would be appropriate to consult those groups. It's not that we're opposed to this bill—on the contrary—but I have a quick question that I could ask you about Bill C-316.

Do you think anyone has considered the idea of providing greater transparency so, for example, we can get access to information on applications to the court challenges program and applicants who are funded by it? Do you think it would be in the public interest to disclose funding amounts granted to different groups in various cases?

Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

The House will now proceed to the deferred recorded division on the motion at second reading on Bill C-354 under Private Members' Business.

The House resumed from February 15 consideration of the motion that Bill C-354, An Act to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act (Quebec’s cultural distinctiveness and French-speaking communities), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C‑354, which seeks to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act to impose additional consultation obligations on the CRTC, namely the obligation to consult the Government of Quebec on its cultural distinctiveness and the governments of the provinces and territories on their French-speaking markets.

Our government is already working tirelessly to ensure that our broadcasting system is in tune with the evolution of our digital world and that it represents all Canadians. Our actions in this regard prove it. Modernizing the legislative framework for broadcasting is one way our government has been able to provide ongoing support for the French language. A good example of this is the Online Streaming Act, which received royal assent in April 2023.

That was the first major reform of the Broadcasting Act since 1991.

This act will enable all Canadians, including members of Canada's francophonie, to recognize themselves more clearly in what they watch and listen to, thanks to a new framework that better reflects our country's diversity.

The reform of the Official Languages Act is just one example of our hard work in support of the French language. The purpose of the act is to protect and promote the French language by recognizing its status as a minority language in Canada and North America.

While the objectives of Bill C-354 are laudable and relevant, it is clear the bill poses more problems than it solves and would create redundant obligations and impede existing processes, and that is why the government is opposed to this bill.

Among other things, the bill has a number of problems. It proposes to impose redundant consultation obligations on the CRTC and it could be perceived as jeopardizing the CRTC's independence.

With respect to redundancy and increasing the burden on the CRTC, this administrative tribunal already holds extensive public consultations before making decisions. Quebec therefore already has the opportunity to participate in these consultations, regardless of their scope, and it does just that.

Furthermore, in carrying out its mandate, the CRTC must respect the Government of Canada's commitment to enhance the vitality of official language minority communities in Canada.

The obligation set out in Bill C‑354 to consult the government of Quebec, the other provinces and the territories would, however, impose an additional burden in terms of time and resources.

While our government understands the importance of having regulatory measures in place to ensure that the broadcasting landscape is equitable and representative, it is hard to see how additional consultations would add value when the provinces and territories can already participate in said process and do so regularly. That is the issue with this bill. It is simply not necessary.

Another problem lies in the implications of this bill on other obligations under the Broadcasting Act.

As an administrative tribunal operating at arm's length from the federal government, the CRTC regulates and supervises broadcasting and telecommunications in the public interest. With regard to broadcasting, the CRTC's job is to assess how best to give effect to the policy objectives of the Broadcasting Act. One of these objectives is to support the creation and discoverability of original French-language programming.

In a democracy like ours, it would be inappropriate for any level of government to exert inappropriate influence on the day-to-day decisions of the CRTC, which is an independent body. Just as a requirement for the CRTC to consult the federal government would undermine its independence, so too would a requirement to consult provincial and territorial governments.

Bill C-354's requirement to consult directly with provincial and territorial governments on certain matters in the exercise of its powers would be unprecedented for the CRTC. Moreover, it would risk interfering with the decision-making process and undermine public confidence in its independence.

At the risk of repeating myself, I would like to remind the House and all Canadians that the government already actively consults the provinces and territories, particularly when it comes to broadcasting. I understand the intention behind my good friend's proposal, but the reality is that the work that the CRTC does already takes into account the very requests that he is making.

The CRTC plays a critical role in regulating Canada's broadcasting system. It is essential that we give it the necessary flexibility to carry out its mandate effectively. Bill C‑354 goes against these objectives.

It is clear that Bill C‑354 poses several problems. It does not target the right legislative vehicle, it creates ambiguities and imposes a disproportionate and unnecessary burden on the CRTC, to name just a few. Imposing a consultation requirement on the CRTC, as proposed, is inappropriate for the various reasons I mentioned.

In conclusion, I believe that, although this bill is motivated by good intentions, it presents major risks for the effective functioning of the CRTC and for the legitimacy of our processes for regulating our broadcasting system.

I encourage my hon. colleagues to consider the consequences of this proposal carefully before making any decisions. Our government will be ready and willing to answer members' questions and will continue to ensure that the CRTC has the means to fulfill its critical role without imposing unnecessary burdens on it.

The reality is that if we consider the motivations behind the proposal in this bill, there are many things that the hon. member, as I mentioned before, seeks to achieve. We need to understand that the mandate of the CRTC, what the CRTC already does and seeks to do, particularly with regard to consultation, already exists. It is important for us to remember that provinces like Quebec already get involved, make their submissions and appeal to the CRTC, as and when required. For us to add an additional layer of reporting requirement on the CRTC causes a significant concern with respect to interference from levels of government.

It is important for us, particularly in this challenging time, to ensure that the independence of the CRTC is maintained, that we do not cause the perception of undue influence on it and we do not create an environment where the CRTC feels it is under an obligation of specific levels of government, whether federal or otherwise. I would encourage all members to consider seriously, while taking into account the laudable and certainly well-intentioned thinking behind the proposal, that the CRTC is already responsible for this. There is an arm's-length relationship with government that must always be maintained and we cannot do anything to create the perception that the government, at any level, is telling the CRTC what to do.

With that, I again ask hon. members in the House to consider seriously the ramifications and implications of opening up the CRTC to direction from any level of government.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Elmwood—Transcona for being so concise.

On this February 15, before I begin my speech, I would like to salute a few illustrious people, namely François-Marie-Thomas Chevalier de Lorimier, Charles Hindelang, Pierre-Rémi Narbonne, Amable Daunais and François-Stanislas Nicolas. We think of these persons today, as we have done every year on February 15 since 1839.

The bill we are discussing today is a very simple bill. What we are really asking is that the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act be amended to ensure that Quebec is systematically consulted when the CRTC puts in place any regulations that would have an impact on Quebec culture.

It is a short bill involving one very simple amendment. Earlier I listened to my Conservative colleague recount the events that followed the passage of Bill C-11. When Bill C-11 was almost ready to be passed, the Conservative Party released a letter that was sent to the government, the Liberal Party, to the heritage minister at the time. That letter set out Quebec's specific demands with respect to Bill C-11, which reformed the Broadcasting Act.

I would like to provide a bit of context. With a little good faith, I think that my Conservative colleague will lend credence to what I am going to tell the House. The Conservatives unduly delayed and blocked the bill in committee for a very long time. Quebec had demands and it was not consulted during the study of the bill, at least not formally.

By the time Quebec's demands finally arrived, the bill was about to be passed. Does that mean that the demands therein were illegitimate? No, not at all. Realistically, however, it was too late to reopen the file in committee and go back to the drawing board, so to speak.

If my Conservative colleague had the slightest understanding of how the Government of Quebec operates in this kind of situation, he would not have talked about having Quebec's minister of culture and communications, Mathieu Lacombe, appear before the committee. If he had the slightest understanding of how the relationship between Quebec and Ottawa works, he would know that Quebec government ministers do not testify in committee. They have a nation-to-nation relationship with Ottawa. They speak minister to minister. Ministers from Quebec do not appear before committees. He should know this, but he does not. It was much more dramatic to take the letter and say that the Bloc and the Liberals do not listen to Quebec. He said the Bloc did not listen to Quebec, did not listen to cultural groups and did not listen to groups in Quebec's broadcasting sector during the study of bills on broadcasting, online news and anything to do with Quebec culture. What a joke. It is funny, actually, so that is how we will take it.

That being said, we have here Bill C-354, which was introduced by my colleague from La Pointe-de-l'Île. This bill addresses one of the most important demands set out in that letter from Minister Lacombe and the Government of Quebec. This is a natural demand and Minister Lacombe was not the first to make it. Quebec's need, its desire, its demand to have its say in the decisions that are made in Ottawa and that have an impact on francophone culture and the French language dates back to 1929 and has been kept alive by successive Quebec governments.

The premier at the time, Louis-Alexandre Taschereau, saw this weird new technology called radio and thought that it needed to be regulated immediately. That is when a regulatory body was created to provide oversight.

To no one's surprise, instead of agreeing with what Quebec was doing and choosing to play a part in this regulatory body, Ottawa decided to do something else. It created the Canadian Radio Broadcasting Commission, or CRBC, the current CRTC's ancestor. Both organizations were developed in parallel, as is so often the case, with a tiny intrusion into Quebec's jurisdictions. It seems that this was even more commonplace back then and that people did not complain as much. There was no Bloc Québécois to fight for Quebec in Ottawa.

Long story short, wanting to have a say in French-language communications and culture in Quebec is not just a Quebec separatist or nationalist thing. Liberal governments also asked for it, and so did Union Nationale governments. Even former minister Lawrence Cannon, who was a Liberal minister in Quebec before becoming a Conservative minister in Ottawa, asked for it.

This is not a demand being made by spoiled sovereignist brats who want to repatriate all powers to Quebec. This is a reasonable request to ensure that Quebec is consulted on decisions made by the next-door nation that affect the Quebec nation's culture.

We will be voting on Bill C‑354 in a few days. We are not asking for the moon. At the moment, we are not even asking for the right to immediately create a Quebec CRTC, which is also among Quebec's requests and the Bloc Québécois's plans, and quite reasonably so. For now, this is not what we are asking. For now, we are simply responding to a straightforward request from Quebec.

As my Conservative colleague said earlier, the Conservatives tried to promote this request themselves, but it was already too late in the Bill C‑11 process. I presume that the entire House of Commons will support this very reasonable request when we vote on this amendment to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act.

Bill C‑354 was introduced in response to a request from Quebec, the Government of Quebec and the people of Quebec, and I think everyone in the House should agree that Quebec and the provinces that are concerned about preserving French in some of their communities should be consulted when regulations are put in place that will have an impact on the French language and culture in those places.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take part in this debate on Bill C‑354, which was introduced by the Bloc Québécois.

The Bloc Québécois's bill seems pretty straightforward. It states:

The Commission shall consult with the Government of Quebec about the cultural distinctiveness of Quebec and with the governments of the other provinces about the French-speaking markets in those provinces before furthering the objects and exercising the powers referred to in subsection (1) in respect of the aspects of the Canadian broadcasting system that concern those matters.

This seems like a fairly simple request for consultation, and it would require the CRTC to consult Quebec and the provinces.

Of course, I support the principle that the Government of Quebec should have the opportunity to express itself, especially when it comes to Quebec's cultural distinctiveness. The Government of Quebec and the National Assembly of Quebec are not shy about making their position known, especially when it comes to protecting the French language and Quebec culture.

As Conservatives, we on this side of the House recognize that French is the only official language that is in decline in Canada. As such, we have an essential role to play in protecting it.

To continue the debate, I would like to come back to Bill C-11, which amended the Broadcasting Act. The Government of Quebec had called for specific amendments to this bill so that Quebec's concerns would be heard.

In February 2023, Quebec's minister of culture and communications, Mathieu Lacombe, wrote to the then minister of Canadian heritage. I will read some excerpts from that letter to provide some context for the Bloc Québécois bill. At the time, the Bloc refused, for months, to convey this request from Quebec's elected officials to the House of Commons.

I will now quote Minister Mathieu Lacombe:

It is essential, both in Bill C‑11 and in its implementation by the CRTC, that Quebec's cultural distinctiveness and the unique reality of the French-language market be adequately considered. I would like to reiterate our demand that a formal, mandatory mechanism for consultation with the Government of Quebec be set out in the act to that effect....[Quebec] must always have its say before any instructions are given to the CRTC to direct its actions under this act when its actions are likely to affect companies providing services in Quebec or likely to have an impact on the Quebec market....

This letter that came from the Government of Quebec was sent to the Minister of Canadian Heritage. Unfortunately, as far as we can tell, it seems that no one in the Liberal government saw fit to respond to this request. There was complete radio silence after that letter.

However, on this side of the House, the Conservatives heard this plea. The member for Louis-Saint-Laurent and the member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles rose in the House several times to urge the government to receive the Quebec minister in committee in order to hear what Quebec was asking for and determine how Bill C‑11 could contribute to ensuring that the act takes Quebec's cultural distinctiveness into account. That is something tangible. We had a tangible request from Quebec to be heard on a bill that would have considerable repercussions on Quebec's cultural distinctiveness and on Quebec's language. We felt it was important to grant this request and allow the Quebec minister to come testify in committee.

Allow me to quote an article from La Presse from February 14, 2023. That was a year ago almost to the day. The headline of the article read, “Broadcasting Act reform: Conservative Party supports Quebec's request for a say”. That about sums it up.

I think La Presse hit the nail pretty much on the head. I will read some of the article:

The Conservative Party is urging the [Prime Minister's] government to refer Bill C‑11, which seeks to modernize the Broadcasting Act, to a parliamentary committee in order to examine Quebec's request for the bill to include a mandatory mechanism requiring the province to be consulted to ensure that the CRTC protects Quebec's cultural distinctiveness.

That article was written by Joël‑Denis Bellavance, someone who reliably reports the facts.

A little further on in the article, it talks about what happened here in the House of Commons when we discussed this issue. It states, and I quote:

In the House of Commons on Tuesday, the Conservative member [for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles] and his colleague [from Louis-Saint-Laurent] both questioned [the heritage minister] on this subject and urged him to consider Quebec's “legitimate request”.

The article goes on to quote the question that was asked that day:

“[The] Quebec government is urging the Liberal government to include a mechanism for mandatory consultation in Bill C-11 to ensure the protection of Quebec culture....Do the Prime Minister and the Bloc agree with Minister Lacombe when it comes to Quebec culture and the fact that the government needs to send the bill to committee?” asked the member [for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles].

That is a very legitimate question that was asked in response to the letter published the day before by journalist Joël-Denis Bellavance.

The answer given by the then minister of heritage was rather cold. It was more of a diversionary tactic. The minister completely avoided my colleague's question. Instead, he chose to go on the attack and to completely avoid answering the simple question about the fact that the Quebec minister of culture and communications was asking to appear before the parliamentary committee.

During the same question period, my colleague from Louis-Saint-Laurent raised the issue again. I would like to quote from the article and the question at the same time:

“[H]ow can a member from Quebec, a minister from Quebec, refuse to listen to the demands of the Government of Quebec? I understand that the purpose of Bill C-11 is to centralize power in Ottawa, with help from the Bloc Québécois, which I might have to start calling the ‘centralist bloc’”, fumed [my colleague from Louis-Saint-Laurent].

Members will understand the reason for his anger, not only toward the governing party, the Liberal Party, but also toward the Bloc Québécois. The Liberal minister came out with a sledgehammer argument. Instead of answering the question and granting the Quebec minister of culture and communications' legitimate request to appear in committee, the then minister of heritage accused the Conservative Party of trying to stall the bill's passage again. It was as though asking to hear from the minister of a duly elected government was not a good enough reason to slightly delay a bill's passage in order to find out what Quebec had to say. That is unacceptable.

In his letter, Minister Lacombe argued that, as the “heartland of the French language and francophone culture in America”, Quebec considered it “vital to have a say in these instructions”. It seems to me that the committee should have listened to what Minister Lacombe had to say.

My colleague from Louis-Saint-Laurent moved a motion in committee. Unsurprisingly, the Liberal Party voted against that motion, which was intended to allow a discussion of the amendments proposed by the Senate and Quebec's request. Again unsurprisingly, the NDP sided with the Liberals. How did the Bloc Québécois member vote in committee? Did he seize the opportunity to be the voice of reason, speaking on behalf of Quebec and Quebeckers? After a formal letter from the Government of Quebec and a unanimous motion from the National Assembly, which side did the Bloc Québécois take?

The answer will shock everyone, even our our viewers: The Bloc Québécois voted against the common-sense motion moved by my colleague from Louis-Saint-Laurent, which would have allowed the voice of a Quebec minister to be heard in committee. At the time, not only did we agree in principle, but we took concrete action to ensure that the Government of Quebec would be heard.

Now let us see how negotiations unfold in committee, so we can find out whether everyone really meant what they said.

The House resumed from November 30, 2023, consideration of the motion that Bill C‑354, An Act to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act (Quebec’s cultural distinctiveness and French-speaking communities), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise to address Bill C-354, for a number of reasons. For me personally, as I indicated in a question to the Bloc a little earlier this evening, I want to recognize Quebec and how, as a community and a province, it has evolved to what it is today.

I have had many discussions throughout my political career, going back to the mid-1980s and then in 1988 when I was elected back in the Manitoba legislature, about Canada's diversity, and in particular how Quebec really does stand out in many ways. I have worked with many politicians from Quebec over the years, whether members of Parliament or others, and one gains an appreciation for their advocacy for arts and culture.

I do not believe other provinces do not have that same sort of strength of character and diversity, but what I have seen over the years is that it is held a little closer to the heart in Quebec, and I truly appreciate that. However, I also value the diversity of my home province of Manitoba, or even the Prairie regions.

The member made reference to the Quebec French factor, if I can put it that way. Although I cannot speak French or do not necessarily have the courage to say it out loud, and I might think of it in my mind at times, I am very proud of the community of St. Boniface in Winnipeg.

My great-great-grandfather, and there might even be a third great, is from St-Pierre-Jolys, and his family went to live just outside Montreal over 100 years ago. I really do appreciate and love the French factor, or the culture, that has evolved in Quebec and will do what I can to encourage it and promote it.

I like to think there is some uniqueness we all love. I was a big Montreal Habs fan, for example. Well, today it is the Winnipeg Jets, but when I was growing up we did not have the Jets. I do not want to betray my own city. I also like poutine. Maple syrup, and I believe poutine, originate out of Quebec. Poutine is a great dish, and maybe I have it a little too often at times.

The point is we have seen so many artists come out of Quebec, and a lot of the pride that stems out of provinces ultimately leads to superstars around the world. We should do what we can to support it, which is one of the reasons I have been very supportive of other government pieces of legislation.

Having said all of that, I am also a fairly strong advocate of the role the CRTC plays. Sometimes it frustrates me. Sometimes there are things happening in Manitoba in particular, where I maybe would have liked to see more competition of sorts, but more programming to deal with the diversity of our communities. At the end of the day, I recognize it already does an extensive amount of consultation. I know provinces will often intervene with the CRTC when there are decisions being made.

When I think of the CRTC into the future, I see its role ultimately expanding. If we compare 30 years ago to today, there is now the Internet and a whole area that is fairly new. I believe the CRTC plays an important role in many forms of communication nowadays. However, when it comes to our culture and heritage, and making sure that we do what we can to promote and preserve it, I would suggest that it is important that we make sure there is a consultation that continues on.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Madam Speaker, we are here today to discuss a crucial issue, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act.

We have been discussing Bill C-354 for some time now. This bill is designed to establish an assurance mechanism to guarantee that the CRTC consults with the Quebec government before regulating aspects of the Canadian broadcasting network that relate to the province's cultural distinctiveness. This is crucial.

The bill also proposes to have the CRTC consult with the governments of other provinces on aspects related to francophone markets or the Canadian francophonie. This is important. It does not impose any binding obligations on the CRTC, but it does provide crucial assurance to the provinces that they will be involved in this decision-making process.

It is essential to understand the CRTC is not currently required to consult Quebec before making regulatory decisions that affect it. The bill responds to a legitimate concern about the decline of the French language and the threat of cultural assimilation. It establishes a proactive approach to ensure adequate representation of Quebec's interests, particularly with regard to its cultural distinctiveness, and of the French fact in the rest of Canada.

This approach is a legacy of the past. It goes back to 1929, when Quebec premier Alexandre Taschereau passed the province's broadcasting law. Unfortunately, instead of collaborating with Quebec, Ottawa came up with its own version, creating the Canadian Radio Broadcasting Commission, the precursor to the CRTC and the current federal broadcasting legislation.

The idea of sovereignty over telecommunications is alive and well despite federal interference. It goes way back. Every government since Taschereau's has advocated for Quebec's independence in managing its telecommunications.

That is why it is so frustrating to run up against a refusal to listen and maybe even sheer ignorance. I interpret Ottawa's ongoing silence as the federal government's disdain for and indifference toward Quebec culture. Otherwise, we would not be here today.

Having said that, it is not through the courts that we will win our right to develop and maintain our culture. The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled on numerous occasions that telecommunications and broadcasting are the responsibility of the federal government. However, the delegation of this administrative power is based on the will of parliamentarians in the House of Commons. This type of agreement already exists. Earlier, my colleague from La Pointe-de-l'Île talked about agreements with the RCMP. I will not go through the whole list. Members are familiar with them. There are plenty of them in Quebec.

All it takes is a little willpower. I have become more confident over the years. I think we will be able to sign an administrative agreement in 2023-24 that will change the fate of Quebec culture. If it really wanted to, the federal government could amend the Broadcasting Act and the Telecommunications Act today to include such an administrative agreement. We have proof that this can be done, looking at the employment insurance pilot projects, which have been incorporated into the federal legislation bearing the same name. It is possible.

The Bloc Québécois firmly believes that telecommunications and broadcasting are vitally important to the vitality of Quebec's culture and language, which deserve to be preserved and, more importantly, to be showcased with pride. I hope that all parliamentarians share this belief.

Quebec's cultural industries, including film, music, literature and other art forms, contribute significantly to Canada's cultural diversity. That is why we think that these sectors should regulated by Quebec, ideally under a Quebec radio-television and telecommunications commission, a “QRTC”, which is the only way we would have total control over decisions that relate to our language and culture. However, until that becomes a possibility, Quebec should be consulted when it comes to its culture and how its communications are handled.

As I said at the start of my speech, this bill provides assurances, a formal guarantee that Quebec will be consulted during the CRTC's decision-making process. This consultation would not be a constraint imposed on the CRTC, but rather an inclusion mechanism. I hear parliamentarians say that we could take this further in committee, and I am happy about that. We could take this much, much further, but we have to start somewhere.

It is important to note that this measure does not seek to diminish the CRTC's authority. I have repeated that three times now. Canada is a diverse country with provinces and territories that have distinct cultural identities. As my colleague mentioned earlier, this diversity needs to be celebrated and reflected in regulatory decisions concerning aspects as crucial as broadcasting.

The bill provides the provinces with the necessary assurance that their voices will be heard during the CRTC's decision-making process. With respect to consulting governments of other provinces about aspects that concern francophone markets or the francophonie, this inclusion fully recognizes the francophonie outside Quebec. This provision highlights the importance of taking the perspectives of all provinces with sizable francophone populations into account.

It is important to note that Quebec is not alone in its attachment to the French language. Other provinces and territories, such as New Brunswick, Manitoba, Alberta, Yukon and Ontario, have vibrant, dynamic francophone communities. These communities make a significant contribution to Canada's cultural diversity and play an essential role in preserving and promoting the French language.

In closing, it is time to assert our right to develop our culture and ensure that broadcasting mechanisms come under our control. Creating an independent organization is not just a political issue; it is about preserving our identity, our language and our cultural heritage. It is time to take action and give Quebec the means to shape its cultural future as it sees fit.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to rise in the House to speak to this important issue and this very interesting bill, which was introduced by our colleague from La Pointe-de-l'Île. I thank him for initiating this debate.

I am also very proud to be part of a political party that has recognized Quebec as a nation for many years, even before this Parliament did so. Other political parties did so too. We just heard the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent talk a little bit about that a few moments ago. I am not just mentioning it because he was motioning to me that I should emphasize that. It is true.

What is a nation? I am not going to give a sociology lesson, but I think that we can all agree that the things that define a nation are language, history, culture, institutions, lifestyle and other factors. Some of the essential components of culture are the singers and songwriters, music and TV shows we are exposed to. I was lucky to grow up in a house where we were surrounded by books, by Quebec and French literature, as well as by music by Quebec and French singers and songwriters. We listened to Félix Leclerc, Georges Brassens, Diane Dufresne, Claude Dubois and many others.

Because we were immersed in this atmosphere, we fell in love with the French language, with Quebec culture, with our Quebec songs and TV shows. Now I am about to say two things that will give away my age. First of all, when I was a kid, if we wanted to change channels, we had to get up off the sofa. There was a little dial on the television set, and there were not many stations either. Second, I am of the generation that grew up watching the original Passe-Partout.

The whole atmosphere of Quebec television and music shapes each generation and creates cultural touchstones. This builds connections between people and communities. We had these major television events that everyone tuned in to watch. They often reached the rest of Canada too if they were broadcast by Radio-Canada. The TV show Les Beaux Dimanches, for example, featured classical music and theatrical plays. It was broadcast everywhere.

These were major television events. It is important for us to have them, because it is important to preserve social cohesion and this bond that unites all Quebeckers and, if possible, all francophones across Canada. However, that bond is eroding over time. In my family, there are four children between the ages of 13 and 23. Their reality is completely changing, completely different. As a parent, I remember that the last big TV show in my house was Les Parent. We watched it as a family with the kids. There was also Les Bougon at one point. There is also Tout le monde en parle, which is still a great television event.

Of course we need a way to ensure that the CRTC's regulatory framework respects the linguistic and cultural requirements of Quebec, which is a nation. What Bill C‑354 proposes today is not all that complicated. It proposes that Quebec be consulted before any regulations are made and come into force if they relate to Quebec's cultural distinctiveness. This is no big deal. It is nothing revolutionary. I think it makes a lot of sense. It is just plain common sense, which should make my Conservative friends happy. We should be able to go knock on the door of the Government of Quebec to let it know about regulations that will impact broadcasting in Quebec, so that we can gather its feedback and figure out a way to work things out. I do not think that is asking too much at all.

As a New Democrat, I find it interesting that the Bloc Québécois's bill states the following: “to provide that the [CRTC] must, in furtherance of its objects and in the exercise of its powers, consult with the Government of Quebec or the governments of the other provinces, as the case may be, before regulating aspects of the Canadian broadcasting system that relate to the cultural distinctiveness of Quebec or that concern French-speaking markets”.

The bill therefore includes francophone minorities outside Quebec. That is very important to us, too, because this is not exclusive to the Government of Quebec, and it could be just as important for the CRTC to consult francophone communities outside Quebec, such as New Brunswick Acadians. Manitoba also has a sizable francophone community. This can have repercussions for those communities.

I think that, when Bill C‑354 goes to committee to be studied and improved by amendment, we absolutely have to make sure that representatives of francophone communities outside Quebec and Acadian communities can come and be heard. They should have a chance to tell us how they see this, whether they think it is a good thing, what the obligations should be and under what circumstances the CRTC would have an obligation to consult them or their provincial governments. This is something that matters very much to the NDP caucus. This is the kind of thing we will want to clarify, verify and maybe amend in committee.

I also think that the committee's study should include some reflection on the rules governing radio and television broadcasting of content in indigenous languages. There are two official languages, of course, one of which is and always will be endangered and vulnerable, given our demographic position in North America. However, there is also the recognition of indigenous nations, which are producing more and more interesting content in television and especially in music. I was at the ADISQ gala recently, and some very successful, talented people won awards. How can we make sure we do not forget about the cultural vitality of many indigenous nations, the Métis and the Inuit? They also need to be taken into consideration to ensure they are not shunted aside and forgotten, as they were for far too long in the past.

I think we also need to collectively reflect on how to make francophone and Quebec content more attractive, but also more accessible and discoverable. There are some absolutely extraordinary musical works, TV shows, videos and movies out there. How do we make sure that they are seen by our young people, teenagers and young adults? How do we make sure that this content, which is truly a reflection of who we are here in Quebec, Canada or North America, can be seen, heard, listened to and shared?

My fear, which I shared a bit earlier today, is that we do not live in the same environment as the one I grew up in, where I had to get up off the sofa to change the channel. The vast majority of the content that is promoted to our young people comes from the U.S. and is in English. I think that we need to reflect on this and find a way to give make these works and this Quebec and francophone content easier to access.

It is hard because we cannot go into every teenager's iPhone or iPad and tell them what they should do or listen to. I think this is an extremely serious cultural problem: the loss of major television events and the fact that our cultural offerings often come under the heel of American imperialism. Our offerings are so fragmented and so broad that it makes us wonder how we are going to be able to legislate and regulate all this. Can we really have a francophone and Quebec culture that is going to be vibrant, attractive and seen, but also profitable? These artists and artisans need to be able to make a living from their work, after all.

I think that we need to do a lot of collaborative thinking. We started to do so awhile back with Bill C-11 on discoverability, on the idea of forcing these digital platforms to promote French-language content and make it visible. These international companies are highly resistant to any attempt to force them to put prompts on their home pages to ensure that these songs, movies and TV shows are accessible and profitable. We can no longer rely on the traditional over-the-air channels to present these works. They need to be on YouTube, Netflix and Spotify. They need to be discoverable. There needs to be a French or Quebec category. How can we ensure that these web giants accept the unique status of Quebeckers and francophone minorities outside Quebec in order to make that possible? We need to find the right restrictions or incentives to make that happen. I think that this bill is a good start when it comes to consulting the Government of Quebec, but we need to put our heads together to take this a lot further.

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

Madam Speaker, on September 19, Bill C-354, an act to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act regarding the cultural specificity of Quebec and the Francophonie was tabled and read for the first time. From the outset, I would like to thank the member for La Pointe-de-l'Île for giving me the opportunity to reiterate our government's commitment to supporting the French language.

Bill C-354 aims to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act, and this is closely tied to the government's ongoing work to ensure a broadcasting system in Canada that reflects the evolution of our digital world and in which all Canadians, including Quebeckers and members of the Canadian Francophonie, see themselves represented. In fact, closely linked is an understatement. The government's efforts have already been going very much in the same direction as the objective of this bill.

On February 2, 2022, our government introduced Bill C-11, aimed at reforming the Broadcasting Act so that Canadian laws reflect the evolution of our digital world. The latter aimed to clarify that online broadcasting services fall under the act, to ensure that the CRTC has the appropriate tools, to encourage greater diversity and inclusion in the broadcasting sector and to better reflect Canadian society.

The legislative process surrounding Bill C-11 took a very long time. Indeed, one year to the day passed between the initial tabling of the bill in the House and its adoption at third reading by the Senate. Both the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage and the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications spent many hours dissecting, analyzing, hearing from witnesses and refining Bill C-11. During the same legislative process, several modifications were made to Bill C-11 to strengthen the commitment to the French language and official language minority communities.

The Broadcasting Act, as recently amended, put in place new guarantees to ensure continued support for the production and broadcast of original French-language productions, the majority of which are produced in the province of Quebec. What is more, the CRTC is required to interpret the Broadcasting Act in a manner that respects the Government of Canada's commitment to promoting the vitality of Canada's French-speaking and English-speaking minorities and supporting their development. Added to this is the fact that the act provides that regulations must take into account regional concerns and needs. It should also be noted that the government is already actively consulting the provinces and territories, particularly when it comes to broadcasting.

At each stage of the process surrounding the implementation of the Online Streaming Act, the provinces and territories were consulted. In particular, the government consulted its provincial and territorial counterparts as part of the consultations related to the decree of instructions proposed to the CRTC concerning the implementation of the law.

The final decree also contains various instructions to support the official languages of Canada and official language minority communities. The decree recognizes, among other things, the minority nature of the French language in Canada and North America and the fact that the broadcasting system should promote the development of Canada's official language minority communities and promote full recognition and use of French and English in Canadian society. A section was even added to the final version of the decree to support the creation and availability of programming in French.

In addition, for its part, the CRTC has published a road map describing the main stages of the implementation of the act and is already actively consulting the public. It should be noted that as an administrative tribunal, the CRTC already holds in-depth consultations before making decisions under the rules of practice and procedure that it adopted in order to respect the principles of procedural fairness and of natural justice incumbent upon it. Provinces and territories have the opportunity to participate in CRTC consultations. To this end, the provinces and territories, including Quebec, can already present observations to the CRTC on issues of provincial interest during hearings and consultations.

It is important to specify that the Government of Quebec has the right and already uses its right to intervene in the CRTC's consultative processes. The Broadcasting Act provides for three forms of consultation, depending on the decisions it is considering. They are, in no particular order, one, with official language minority communities on any decision likely to have a detrimental effect on them; two, with CBC/Radio-Canada on its conditions of services; and three, with any interested party for decisions regarding conditions of services. The latter is an open consultation, where provinces and territories and, in fact, any interested intervenor can put forward their opinions and concerns.

In other words, the addition of the consultation obligation provided for by Bill C-354 could raise concerns that are being addressed in the course of the work of the CRTC and under the requirements of the Broadcasting Act. An obligation for the CRTC to consult elected provincial governments could also have an impact on public confidence and the independence of the CRTC. It is important that we are all mindful of not just the independence of the CRTC but the importance of that independence.

As outlined, “The CRTC is an administrative tribunal that regulates and supervises broadcasting and telecommunications in the public interest. [It is] dedicated to ensuring that Canadians have access to a world-class communication system that promotes innovation and enriches [the] lives [of Canadians].”

Further to this, under the section of the CRTC's own website entitled “We listen and collaborate”, it states that, in order to “fulfill [its] mandate, [it] must understand the needs and interests of Canadians who make use of broadcasting and telecommunications services.”

In conclusion, the government supports and will continue to support the French language. The Online Streaming Act and the act to amend the Official Languages Act are concrete examples of our commitment to the French language. Once more, the government regularly consults the provinces and territories, including Quebec.

The minister has consulted her counterparts on numerous occasions when it comes to regulating the broadcasting sector. The government will welcome any questions from members regarding Bill C-354 as the debate on this legislation continues.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

moved that Bill C‑354, An Act to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act (Quebec's cultural distinctiveness and French-speaking communities), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Madam Speaker, the Bloc Québécois's Bill C‑354 seeks to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act so that the CRTC must consult with the Government of Quebec about the cultural distinctiveness of Quebec and with the governments of the other provinces about their French-speaking markets before carrying out its mandate and exercising its powers with regard to aspects of the Canadian broadcasting system that relate to those things.

Essentially, Bill C‑354 seeks to protect Quebec's cultural distinctiveness and the francophone community in the enforcement of the new Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act. That involves organizing consultations with the Government of Quebec and the provincial governments before regulating aspects that relate to the cultural distinctiveness of Quebec.

This bill responds to an official request from the Government of Quebec during the debates surrounding Bill C‑11 for the federal government to set up a mandatory, formal consultation mechanism with the Government of Quebec. Quebec wants to have its say before the CRTC takes any action that could affect businesses providing services in Quebec or the Quebec market. The motion adopted by the Quebec National Assembly in this regard specifies that Quebec intends to use all of the tools at its disposal to protect its language, culture and identity.

Bill C‑354 also constructively responds to the federal government's disturbing decision last year to end the tradition of alternating the CRTC chairship between francophones and anglophones. The bill is also consistent with the House of Commons' recognition that Quebeckers form a nation. Quebeckers form a distinct people, a nation with a unique identity based on our history, and particularly on our culture and language. It is only natural, and even essential, for a nation to manage its culture. Access to Quebec's common public language and culture allows newcomers to participate in and enrich Quebec society, and to enjoy the same rights and obligations as every Quebecker.

The idea of being sovereign in telecommunications management is not new. In 1929, Quebec Premier Louis-Alexandre Taschereau passed the law governing broadcasting in that province. However, instead of working with Quebec, in 1932, Ottawa responded to Taschereau's idea by creating the Canadian Radio Broadcasting Commission, the forerunner of the current CRTC, under the Canadian Broadcasting Act. The idea of being sovereign in telecommunications management remained alive, despite federal interference.

In 1968, Quebec Premier Daniel Johnson said the following:

The assignment of broadcasting frequencies cannot and must not be the prerogative of the federal government. Quebec can no longer tolerate being excluded from a field where its vital interest is so obvious.

Between 1990 and 1992, the Quebec minister of communications at the time, Liberal Lawrence Cannon, prepared a draft Quebec proposal that read as follows:

Quebec must be able to establish the rules for operating radio and television systems, and control development plans for telecommunications networks, service rates and the regulation of new telecommunications services.... Quebec cannot let others control programming for electronic media within its borders.... To that end, Quebec must have full jurisdiction and be able to deal with a single regulatory body.

In 2006, that same Lawrence Cannon became a minister in the Conservative cabinet under Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

On April 9, 2008, Liberal ministers Christine Saint‑Pierre and Benoît Pelletier sent a letter to the Conservatives in Ottawa—Josée Verner and Rona Ambrose at the time—to conclude repatriation agreements in the culture, broadcasting and telecommunications sector.

This is what it said:

The purpose of this letter is to express the will of Quebec to engage, as soon as possible, in discussions on concluding a Canada-Quebec agreement on the communications sector...and a Canada-Quebec agreement on culture.

Considering the distinct culture of Quebec, the only French-speaking state in North America, we believe that concluding such an administrative agreement would make it possible to better reflect the specific characteristics of Quebec content in broadcasting and telecommunications, and would serve as recognition of the importance of protecting and promoting Quebec's specific culture.

The Bloc Québécois is convinced that telecommunications and broadcasting are of capital importance for the vitality of Quebec culture. That is clear. That is why we are of the opinion that, ultimately, these sectors need to be regulated by Quebec. This should happen under a Quebec radio-television and telecommunications commission, a QRTC. That is the only approach that would allow us to have full control, to be masters of the decisions that concern our language and culture.

Quebec must have the tools needed to promote a diversified Quebec offer in the television markets and on digital platforms, which are increasingly predatory. As the serious media crisis in the province shows, from the small regional newspapers to the restructuring of Groupe TVA, it is crucial to maintain a francophone diversity of information sources and plurality of voices, regardless of the size of the media group.

Furthermore, the Internet deployment strategy must be better aligned with Quebec’s interests, particularly to ensure the right to a stable, affordable, quality connection. Quebec’s cultural development hinges on the ability to determine its own transmission terms, namely for television, radio and new media. Should the government of Quebec deem that a decision goes against the public interest, it is the National Assembly that would call for a review.

The closure of radio station CKAC in 2005 illustrates the government of Quebec’s inability to influence decisions that directly impact its duty to develop, promote and disseminate our culture. Despite a unanimous motion from the National Assembly, adopted on March 10, 2005, calling for CKAC to stay on the air, the CRTC kept silent and allowed this historic radio station to shut down.

Furthermore, this is not even a partisan issue in Quebec. All governments since the Taschereau era have argued for Quebec's independence in managing its telecommunications. It is therefore particularly frustrating to run into refusals or downright ignorance. The many times Ottawa has stayed silent demonstrate contempt, if not federal indifference, toward Quebec’s culture and its political institutions.

That said, our right to develop our own culture will not be won through the courts. The Supreme Court of Canada has repeatedly ruled that telecommunications and broadcasting fall under federal jurisdiction. However, the members of the House of Commons have the authority to delegate this administrative power if they are willing to do so. One such agreement already exists. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police delegated its powers to the Sûreté du Québec to protect the province. The Sûreté du Québec manages interprovincial heavy transportation and issues freshwater fishing licences. All it would take is a bit of political will to sign an administrative agreement that would change the fate of Quebec culture.

If it so wished, the federal government could change the Broadcasting Act and the Telecommunications Act today to include such an administrative agreement. This is how EI pilot projects are integrated into the Employment Insurance Act.

Introducing Bill C‑354 is a modest attempt to ensure that Quebeckers enjoy a modicum of respect when it comes to their right to culture and managing their telecommunications. It is the least that can be done.

In an ideal world, the Quebec government would pass legislation to create a Quebec radio-television and telecommunications commission, a QRTC. The CRTC could then delegate the management of Quebec's licenses to the QRTC, which would regulate telecommunications and broadcasting companies that operate in Quebec. This would remedy the injustice that has persisted for a hundred years.

The decline of the French language and culture is undeniable. It is now crucial that we take the necessary steps to protect them.

We therefore invite members from all parties who care about Quebec culture and the francophone community to vote in favour of our bill.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-354, An Act to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act (Quebec’s cultural distinctiveness and French-speaking communities).

Mr. Speaker, we in the Bloc Québécois like to stress that a nation must not leave its own culture in the hands of its neighbour. That is exactly why I am tabling this bill today.

This bill provides that the CRTC must consult the Government of Quebec before regulating any aspect that relates to the cultural distinctiveness of Quebec. It responds to a formal request made by the Government of Quebec during the debates around Bill C-11 for a mandatory and official mechanism for consulting the Government of Quebec.

This bill is also in line with the House's recognition of Quebec as a nation. It is a constructive response to the disturbing decision made by the federal government last year to end the long-standing practice of alternating between francophone and anglophone chairs of the CRTC.

The bill also provides that provincial governments must be consulted before regulations are made that concern French-speaking markets. That will no doubt be well received by every francophile in Canada and every advocate for cultural diversity in a broader sense.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)