Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you for that. I think I captured most of my initial concern about the short-term implications of the bill. We know that it's taken 30 years for us to look at this piece of legislation. Right now, with the provisions that are in the proposed bill, our concern is that this type of structural disadvantage or asymmetry will be enshrined for many years to come and not allow Canadian media companies to evolve their business and effectively compete with the increasing amount of foreign competition that is now in our markets.

Canadian Heritage committee  We believe the time is now to get it right. The proposed amendments that we put forward should be considered and should be part of a future passage of the bill.

Canadian Heritage committee  It would be the issues of asymmetrical application of the rules and regulations on Canadian companies, which would amount to more onerous obligations than those that are imposed on the U.S. tech giants. That is the core of our concern in this bill.

Canadian Heritage committee  The short-term implication of passing the bill as it is currently proposed is that it would enshrine, in our view, an asymmetrical approach to Canadian versus foreign broadcasters operating in the system. That's why we have proposed the amendments that we have today, to address some of that structural inequity that might be built into the legislation.

Canadian Heritage committee  Our preference is that the language be broadened to capture all players in the system in an equitable fashion—

Canadian Heritage committee  I can take it from there.

Canadian Heritage committee  We have five recommendations to improve Bill C-10 and the government's policy direction to the CRTC that will follow the legislation. First, include a provision that will ensure regulatory fairness between Canadian companies and foreign streaming services. Bill C-10 should direct the CRTC to impose comparable obligations on all media players drawing revenues from the Canadian broadcasting system.