CHPC Committee Meeting
Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
Minutes of Proceedings
Bloc Québécois
Thomas Owen Ripley and Patrick Smith answered questions.
The committee resumed its clause-by-clause study of the Bill.
The Committee resumed clause-by-clause consideration on Clause 7 of the Bill, as amended.
On Clause 7,
Martin Champoux moved, — That Bill C-10, in Clause 7, be amended by replacing line 2 on page 8 with the following:“broadcasting services, including any information related to any means of programming control, and
(vi) information related to any means of promoting, recommending or selecting programming, including Canadian programming.”
Debate arose thereon.
At 1:55 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 2:08 p.m., the sitting resumed.
Scott Aitchison moved, — That the amendment be amended by adding:
a) after the word “services” the following: “excluding social media services whose programs are primarily uploaded by users,” and;
b) after the words “Canadian programming” the following: “with the exception of algorithms or other means used by a social media service to determine the presentation of programs uploaded by users of the social media service”
After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Scott Aitchison and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Scott Aitchison, Alain Rayes, Martin Shields, Kevin Waugh — 4;
NAYS: Alexandre Boulerice, Martin Champoux, Julie Dabrusin, Anthony Housefather, Marci Ien, Tim Louis, Geoff Regan — 7.
The question was put on the amendment of Martin Champoux and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Alexandre Boulerice, Martin Champoux — 2;
NAYS: Scott Aitchison, Julie Dabrusin, Anthony Housefather, Marci Ien, Tim Louis, Alain Rayes, Geoff Regan, Martin Shields, Kevin Waugh — 9.
“(k) the provision to the Commission, by the Corporation, of any information that the Commission considers necessary to determine whether the Corporation has satisfied the public interest criteria set out in subsection 46(6) and may proceed with the introduction of a new undertaking or activity.”
Debate arose thereon.
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 770 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
The Chair ruled that the following two (2) amendments were consequential to the previous amendment and therefore they were also negatived:
That Bill C-10, in Clause 8, be amended by replacing line 34 on page 9 with the following:“behalf of the Commission;
(j.1) prescribing requirements for determining whether the Corporation has satisfied the public interest criteria out in subsection 46(6); and”
That Bill C-10, in Clause 25, be amended by adding after line 35 on page 29 the following:
“(3.1) Section 46 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (5):
(6) Before initiating a new undertaking or activity, the Corporation shall ensure that the undertaking or activity is consistent with its mandate as the national public broadcaster and that it satisfies the following public interest criteria
(a) the undertaking or activity contributes to the implementation of the objectives of the broadcasting policy set out in section 3 and to the fulfillment of the Corporation's mission;
(b) the Corporation has put in place measures to mitigate the adverse effects of the undertaking or activity on healthy competition; and
(c) public interest justify any adverse effects of the undertaking or activity on healthy competition.”
“(1.1) The Commission may amend the term or conditions of any order made under subsection (1).
(1.2) The Commission may also suspend or revoke any order made under subsection (1) or renew it for a term not exceeding seven years and subject to the conditions that comply with that subsection.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Martin Champoux and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Alexandre Boulerice, Martin Champoux — 2;
NAYS: Scott Aitchison, Julie Dabrusin, Anthony Housefather, Marci Ien, Tim Louis, Alain Rayes, Martin Shields, Kevin Waugh — 8.
At 3:07 p.m., the committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.