Business of Supply

Debate on a supply-day motion asking the government to reject the CRTC’s decision to increase the fee that online streaming services must pay toward Canadian content, from 5% to 15% of their Canadian revenues. Conservatives said the increase would raise costs for Canadians, hurt jobs in film and production, and strain trade relations with the United States, and they called on the government to cancel it. Liberals defended the fee, saying streaming companies should contribute to Canadian and French-language creators the way traditional broadcasters do, and accused the Conservatives of siding with American companies; Bloc members agreed web giants should pay their share and asked about the government’s cancellation of the digital services tax. Some time also went to a member’s inaugural speech on affordability and human rights, and to exchanges about trade negotiations with the United States. The bill title provided (the Military Justice System Modernization Act) does not match the subject discussed and is not part of this debate.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

29 statements

Tatiana Auguste, Terrebonne

Liberal
“Promoting Canadian and Quebec culture is very important to me and other Quebec members. We have worked with everyone in the House to support the large amounts of money our recent budgets gave to Canadian culture.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 47 of 100

    None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I think that being a spokesperson within the government to continue promoting Canadian and Quebec culture is very important to me and to all the members from Quebec who are here. Of course, we have worked with everyone in the House so that we can continue promoting the investments we made in Canadian culture in recent budgets. These were rather historic investments, after all.

Karim Bardeesy, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Liberal
“I oppose this motion. Canadian artists and film workers need government support and rules that make big streaming companies invest in our culture. The film and television industry is growing and creates good jobs here. We should protect Canadian stories, not cut the programs that support them.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak to this motion today because it gives us an opportunity to really celebrate the cultural productions, the musicians, the directors, the TV producers, the workers and the makeup artists, all the people who participate in this rich cultural economy that we have in Canada. I will also speak to what is happening in Taiaiako’n—Parkdale—High Park. The motion also gives me an opportunity to speak to some trends I have been seeing in the party opposite, over my time in this chamber of just over a year, when it comes to trade issues and to cultural issues. With respect to trade, there really are two kinds of things that we generally see. There is the misread of the trade situation, whereby the party opposite either wants to go back to some historic past that does not exist anymore, as in the encouragement to bring back the auto pact in its complete form in a way that is not resonant with the current state of negotiations, the current state of the auto sector, or wants to capitulate. In this case, I know the party opposite was opposed to the Online Streaming Act, but it is recommending that we simply give up the real gains that we have made through mechanisms like those in the Online Streaming Act and through all the kinds of things that we need to do to build ourselves and our sovereignty up in this moment of real challenge for Canada. I believe there is a misread of the trade situation, but there is also a misread of culture and the way culture is generated in Canada. Artists do not just emerge fully out of whole cloth, ready to take on the world without any support whatsoever. I noted that my colleague from York—Durham made mention of Lucy Maud Montgomery, and I appreciated my colleague from Hamilton’s very spirited embrace of Lucy Maud Montgomery and her work, but it is also important to note that Lucy Maud Montgomery was writing at a very different time, when cultural communications travelled differently, when books travelled differently and when curricula were designed differently. We are now in an era of very rapid digital communications. We need to change with the times, and we need to have the cultural assets that we have built up and convert them for a new generation. I would just add regarding Anne of Green Gables, Lucy Maud Montgomery’s work, that it has continued to prosper in Canada in part because of the mechanisms we use to support digital culture. There is both the 1985 CBC series of the novels and the later Anne with an E series, which ran for three seasons. I know my daughter and my family were very big fans of that. Those cultural products, which came out of a place of strong Canadian culture, were generated from the kinds of supports that have been embraced and furthered on this side of the House, whether it is support for the CBC or, indeed, supports through mechanisms like those, if not in that particular case, in the Online Streaming Act. Artists do not emerge out of whole cloth, ready to take on the world. Artists are nurtured by community, and taxpayer funds are important for that. Also, where we can, the benefit of a policy that has large American multinational companies play their role in supporting this production is very important. Indeed, the mechanisms that we have in place are working. I want to quote from the CEO of the Canadian Media Producers Association, Reynolds Mastin, on the release of its recent annual report on the state of media production in Canada. He said, “The Canadian production industry has established itself as a great partner for foreign production, and with the promised investments from the Online Streaming Act, we’ll see a boost in Canadian content production, reversing the downward trend of recent years”. In the report, CMPA also referred to foreign production activity, a set of activities that we are being told by the Conservatives is at constant existential risk, as actually being up 9.8% in 2025. The value of film and production in Canada, from the CMPA report, was $10.2 billion, and the industry is responsible for 181,360 jobs. This is a sign of a growing sector, a sector that is already mature and a sector that has excellence. This is a sector that not only produces original content but also produces a whole set of workers and capacities that producers and investors, including American investors, want to participate in. I was recently at the launch of The Testaments. It is a new Hulu series that is being filmed based on the work of Margaret Atwood, a great Canadian cultural producer and a great Canadian author from Toronto. At that launch, the producers, both American and Canadian, lauded the capacity, expertise and talent that exists in Canada to put on this production, including the makeup artists, the costumers and the builders of the film production sets. I have to add Mrs. Huizenga thrift shop to that list, which is in Toronto’s Junction area of Taiaiako’n—Parkdale—High Park, which was featured in The Testaments tv show. The story that the Conservatives are telling is representative of neither the current state of affairs nor the excitement that Canadians feel about the cultural productions that are being produced here. It is a misread to say that artists emerge whole cloth, ready to take on the world without any of the kinds of supports that we, on this side of the House, know are necessary. We know that different kinds of artists need support, for example, if they come from different identity groups or speak different languages. We know that Canadian companies need to grow and to have the opportunity to play on an equal playing field. We know that Canadian producers want to partner with American companies, but we also need that opportunity to have the resources come in to do that work. In this era of streaming, there is an increasingly complex dynamic between streamers and creators. There is a whole set of intermediaries who have now been displaced from our arts and culture sector, including the A and R people, many independent producers, local television stations and even video stores. The intermediaries, who help create those connections between artists and the very large producers, are starting to be displaced and are starting to adapt. Creators are having to take on more of the work themselves, of managing their careers and building up their resources, so they are playing the role of not only part-time artist but also part-time business person. Creators are ready and willing to do that work, but they do need some help and some support. The Online Streaming Act, like the Online News Act, is a very important part of the mechanism that gives the creators in Canada the opportunities to participate with revenues from very profitable companies that Canadians embrace and that Canadians subscribe to by the millions. This allegation that it is a tax on Canadians is purely fictional. It is an imaginary assertion. The payments that are being made under the Online Streaming Act and have been made under the Online News Act go to real benefits and to real creators who are creating products. Those subscriptions that I talk about have not changed. I want to talk about some of the beneficiaries of the complete set of funding mechanisms that we have in Canada in my riding of Taiaiako’n—Parkdale—High Park, including through vehicles such as Telefilm Canada; the Canada Media Fund; Canada Council for the Arts; CBC, which is constantly denigrated on the other side of the House; and yes, some of the revenues from the Online Streaming Act and the Online News Act. There are the creators like Kunsang Kyirong, who created 100 Sunset, which won the Discovery Award at the Toronto International Film Festival and was filmed in my riding. There are creators in west Toronto like Matt Johnson, the creator of Nirvanna the Band the Show the Movie and, of course, the very beloved movie, BlackBerry. On the TV side, we have tons of workers and unions, like IATSE, which is supported by its international vice-president, John Lewis in my riding. I have heard from so many cultural workers in my riding about the real and essential need to support Canadian cultural producers through mechanisms like those in the Online Streaming Act. There are musicians like Charlotte Cornfield, who has launched her recent album to great acclaim, and musicians like Daniel Lanois, who has a studio in my riding. They are all part of an ecosystem where some are internationally renowned. Some came up through America, and some through Europe. Many came up through Canada. They all benefited from the connections and resources we have created through the CBC, through the revenues that we help them get attached to with things like the Online Streaming Act and through resources like Telefilm, the Media Fund and the Canada Council for the Arts. It is part of an entire ecosystem that supports creators. If we are really here to support creators, to say that creators are essential to telling Canadian stories and that those stories are essential to Canadian sovereignty, then we need to have a way of bringing them from where they are to where we know they can shine on the world stage. That is done through mechanisms like this. It is not done by denigrating the real work that comes out of funds like this. For that reason, I will be opposing the motion.

Natilien Joseph, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert

Liberal
“I am asking my colleague if it is right that the Conservatives support big American web companies instead of Canadian and Quebec artists.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, obviously, this motion sends a clear message to our artists in the Quebec and Canadian cultural sectors. My question for my colleague is this. Does it seem right that the Conservatives are choosing American web giants over Quebec and Canadian artists and culture?

Karim Bardeesy, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Liberal
“We can support Canadian artists and make big American tech companies be good corporate citizens at the same time. This policy gives artists more money and helps Canadians find their work on platforms like Netflix and Spotify.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, that is a very good question. We believe that it is possible to support creators, filmmakers and musicians while at the same time ensuring that the American giants make good corporate citizens. This policy helps creators and artists secure more funding for their creations and ensures that Canadians and Quebeckers can access this information and these programs. They often have access to these creations through American companies like Netflix or Spotify. A policy like this one will help ensure that creators, Canadians and businesses can all do well.

Karim Bardeesy, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Liberal
“We are protecting Canadian culture and independence. We do this by protecting our culture in trade deals and giving historic amounts of money to the CBC.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 48 of 100

    None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, we are here to defend Canadian sovereignty, whether by including cultural exemptions in our free trade agreements or by supporting the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation through historic investments. During the 1990s, I spent several years in Quebec, in Montreal. Back then, I appreciated the measures and the level of commitment with which Quebeckers defended their culture. We are very familiar with these policies, not only in Quebec but across Canada.

Karim Bardeesy, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Liberal
“Both parties in Ontario agreed on supporting local and international productions, and that policy worked. We are getting the balance right to attract foreign investment. I want to keep working with the member on this.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I have had the opportunity to talk to my colleague about his involvement in that file, which actually resulted in a bipartisan consensus in Ontario, whereby both Progressive Conservatives and Liberals supported the policy of supporting production, not only by Canadian companies, but also by international companies. That policy has led to results, including the one that I quoted. I believe that we are getting the balance right here. We want to continue to attract foreign investment. I do appreciate the hon. member’s work, particularly in his community with the great cultural productions coming out of that place, which then potentially lead to film, TV and musical productions. I am very much looking forward to working with him on this file.

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

Liberal
“Canada is not the only country charging fees on streaming services. The government does not want to control what people watch. The Conservatives are siding with big American companies instead of Canadians.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Signal 26 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, Canada is not the only G7 country that recognizes that streaming fees need to be there. Members of the Conservative Party have put on their tinfoil hats and have come up with the idea that there is a great conspiracy of government wanting to control what they watch and see, which is a bunch of garbage. What I have witnessed throughout today, morning and afternoon, is the Conservative Party of Canada, Canada’s official opposition, taking the side of the citizens of the United States. One would think they are working for them, or at the very least for companies such as Netflix. My question is, why is the Conservative Party, Canada’s official opposition, not looking at the best interests of Canadians?

Dominique O'Rourke, Guelph

Liberal
“Canada has the right to make its own rules about taxes, the environment, and what is sold here. We are in a trade war, and the Conservatives should not call the Americans our friends while they put unfair tariffs on us. We must protect Canadian and Quebec culture from American influence.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there are often times in the House when we can find common ground. I think we can all agree on the fact that a sovereign Canada, a sovereign country, has the right to make decisions on matters within its borders. If someone wants to sell something in Canada, we have the right to make safety, environmental or tax regulations. It is also a fact that Canadians want us to be self-sufficient. We are in a tariff war, as others have mentioned, and we have the right to make decisions accordingly. I am shocked that the Conservatives are calling the Americans our friends when they are imposing unfair tariffs on us. We can, however, agree on the importance of Quebec and Canadian culture. My colleague talked about a geographic injustice, but there is also the matter of the American and anglophone culture flooding in. Would my colleague not agree—

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

Liberal
“I am asking everyone to agree to end debate early so we can move to private members' hour.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I suspect that if you were to canvass the House, you would find unanimous consent at this time to call it 5:30 p.m. so we could begin private members’ hour.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 124

  1. Government Orders Business of Supply 114 statements
  2. Oral Questions Foreign Investment 13 statements
  3. Oral Questions Justice 6 statements
  4. Oral Questions Canadian Identity and Culture 6 statements
  5. Oral Questions The Economy 4 statements
  6. Oral Questions The Environment 4 statements
  7. Oral Questions Finance 6 statements
  8. Oral Questions Agriculture and Agri-Food 4 statements
  9. Oral Questions Steel and Aluminum Industry 2 statements
  10. Oral Questions Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 6 statements
  11. Oral Questions Aerospace Industry 8 statements
  12. Oral Questions International Trade 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions Seniors 4 statements
  14. Oral Questions Public Safety 6 statements
  15. Oral Questions Oil and Gas Industry 3 statements
  16. Oral Questions Labour 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions Climate Change 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions Air Transportation 2 statements
  19. Oral Questions Business of the House 2 statements
  20. Government Orders Business of Supply 66 statements
  21. Oral Questions Health 4 statements
  22. Private Members' Business Canada Revenue Agency Act 12 statements
  23. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  24. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  25. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  26. Government Orders Business of Supply 462 statements