“I want to know if the member thinks this new, higher CRTC tax will hurt Canadian artists. Making this tax three times higher will push companies to make movies and shows in the United States instead of Canada.”

“Mr. Speaker, I have a question for my hon. colleague. Does he think that the tripling of this tax by the CRTC will not hurt the cultural industries and artists we seek to support? I worked for the provincial government back in 1996 when the Ontario government passed the Ontario film and television tax credit. Back then it was Mike Harris’s government, and the industry thrived. It grew tremendously. We are putting that at risk, making the industry more uncompetitive, by tripling a tax on them, so companies will not reinvest in Canada. They will make the decision to invest in productions in the United States, not here in Canada, supporting Canadian industries, supporting Canadian artists and telling Canadian stories.”

“The government is making streaming services pay money for Canadian content. These new rules will raise subscription costs for Canadians and hurt our trade ties with the United States. The government should reverse these rules, stop telling people what to watch online, and stay out of the way.”

“Mr. Speaker, I will start by saying that there are many ways to describe the latest CRTC ruling on streaming services, but I will start with the obvious one: This is wild. However, it is not all that surprising. Conservatives warned that this would happen. We warned that the Online Streaming Act was never just about making Netflix and others pay their fair share. The real issue was always much bigger. The government handed the CRTC broad new authority over the Internet and then asked Canadians to trust that the regulator would not go too far, but here we are. The CRTC has decided that streaming services such as Netflix, Disney, Amazon and others must spend or contribute 15% of their Canadian broadcasting revenues towards Canadian programming. That includes the 5% payment already imposed in 2024, which several major streaming companies are still fighting in court. If the government believes , like the Conservatives do, that this ruling has perhaps gone too far, it does have options at its disposal. It can direct the CRTC to change course. It can bring forward legislation to narrow or repeal the powers that it gave the CRTC. It can stop pretending this is someone else’s problem. However, what it cannot do is hand the CRTC a blank cheque over streaming and then deny responsibility when the bill is passed on to Canadians. Let us be clear about what is happening. The government is taking the old Canadian broadcast model built for cable boxes, rabbit ears, licences and cable packages and is trying to stretch it out over the entirety of the Internet. The CRTC says this is going to create far more money for Canadian content. On the surface, that sounds absolutely wonderful. Why would we not want more money flowing to Canadian content? No member of the House, including me, is against Canadian stories, artists, actors, writers, directors, musicians and all the people behind the scenes who make the industry work. We all support Canadian creators, but this is not the debate. The question is whether supporting Canadian creators requires another unnecessary and costly tax while Canadian consumers are paying more for their services. Make no mistake. As much as the government likes to claim it, this is not just free money becoming available. Streaming companies are not charities. When the government makes it more expensive to operate in Canada, there are only a few places the money can come from. It can come, which is most likely, from higher subscription services and prices. It can come from fewer services, less choice or reduced investment in Canada. The money will come from somewhere. That is the part that defenders of this scheme always seem to skip. They talk as if the government had discovered a new cultural oil well: Lower the bucket, haul up the cash and sprinkle it around, and everything is going to be fantastic. What they have really done is impose a new cost on platforms that Canadians already pay for and then pretend that the cost is never going to show up on anyone’s bill any time in the future. This is the loony-tune type of rhetoric the government likes to project on taxpayers. Costs are never costs, and taxes are never taxes. It is always a framework, a contribution, a modernization or a flexible approach, but flexible for whom? It is flexible for the lobbyists who know how to work the system at the expense of citizens. It is flexible for the established players who know how to fill out the forms, meet the specific definitions, hire the right consultants and navigate the maze that is the CRTC. However, for a family watching the cost of its monthly subscriptions go up yet again, it is not that flexible at all. People are leaving and have left cable for a reason. They wanted choice. They wanted control over what they consume. They wanted a service that could bring a little bit of joy at the end of their busy days. The Internet is not cable with Wi-Fi. It is a completely different world. The old broadcasting system was built around scarcity. There were only so many frequencies, channels, licences and time slots available. That is why the old system was built around quotas, licences, mandatory contributions and rules about what had to be shown. The Internet functions entirely differently, as we all know. It is built around abundance: endless shelf space, choice and competition, with millions of creators reaching audiences directly without needing permission from a broadcaster or a regulator. A small creator in Winkler with a camera can reach an audience. A musician in Portage can create a song and put it online. A podcaster in Morden can speak directly to listeners anywhere in the world. They do not need to wait for a broadcaster to discover them. That is not a loophole in Canadian culture. That is Canadian culture in the modern world, and it does not stop at money. The CRTC is also getting involved in something called “discoverability”. Discoverability might sound harmless, but on the Internet, discoverability is everything. It is about what appears on someone’s home page, what gets recommended to them, what shows up in their search, what gets suggested next, what becomes easy to find and what gets buried. When the government starts saying that certain content must be made more discoverable, the question becomes simple: Is something more discoverable because viewers asked for it, or is it more discoverable because the regulator nudged the platform into pushing it? This is no small question. On streaming platforms, the recommendation system is the store. It is the shelf. It is the front window. It is the clerk saying, “Hey, you may also like this.” When government starts directing how content should be presented, promoted, searched and surfaced, it is no longer just funding Canadian creators. It is getting involved in what Canadians are nudged to watch. That should make people uncomfortable, because that should not be the job of the government. The Liberal government has already pushed through enough censorship legislation and has advocated for more control in the lives of Canadians. Nobody wants the government to further interfere in what they watch at home alone or with their family. I believe that culture is strongest when people choose it freely. It is definitely not when the government puts its thumb on the scale and then congratulates itself for creating demand. The more government regulates online culture, the more it starts deciding what counts as Canadian culture in the first place. A show is treated as Canadian not simply because Canadians like it or because it is a Canadian story. It has to pass through a maze of ownership rules, spending rules, rights rules and points for approved jobs behind the scenes. The entire purpose of streaming was for people to watch what they wanted, when they wanted it, and definitely without the government’s interfering in it. The government will say it is about fairness: Canadian broadcasters have had to contribute to the system for decades, so foreign streamers should contribute too. That is, frankly, the strongest argument. However, Netflix, Disney and Spotify did not break Canadian broadcasting. The Internet changed, as did its its viewers, its advertising and its technologies. People got used to choosing what they wanted instead of paying for a bundle of things they did not want to watch. There is also, of course, a serious trade issue with this. Companies such as Apple, Amazon and Spotify have already challenged the 5% ruling from the CRTC, and it is still before the courts. The United States has raised trade concerns regarding the decision. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has criticized the CRTC’s move, arguing that the rules target American streaming services and interfere with platform operations. These are not some fringe organizations on the sidelines. This is the organized voice of major American businesses looking at the Canadian regulatory system and raising concerns. This lands, of course, at the worst possible time, because, as we know, we are heading into a CUSMA review. Our economy depends heavily on keeping access to the American market stable and predictable. At a time when our trade relationship with the United States is already uncertain, the CRTC has handed the American negotiators a fresh grievance to use. Why are we making Canada look more complicated, more expensive and more hostile to digital investment? The Liberal government should be trying to attract investment instead of giving reasons to scare it away. The defenders of this scheme will say it helps Canadian creators, which is partially true. Some established producers will benefit: the people who already know how to navigate the system and exactly where to line up. However, what about the independent Canadian creator building an audience on YouTube, Spotify, Patreon, TikTok or a podcast? What about the Canadian filmmaker who gets global backing but does not fit neatly into the CRTC’s preferred category? What about the next generation of Canadian creators who do not want to wait at the gate? They want to build, they want to publish, they want to stream, they want to sell, they want to perform, and they want to compete. There is a much easier way to support Canadian creators: Make it easier to produce content here, attract more investment, keep our taxes competitive, remove barriers, and open markets. We need to let Canadian stories reach audiences in their living room, at home and around the world. We cannot build a cultural industry by giving government more power over the Internet. I strongly support Canadian content, and we should absolutely celebrate it, but Canadians are not children. They do not need the government hovering over the remote control. Canadian culture and Canadian wallets would be better served if government got out of the way.”

“The government should not decide who succeeds online. Their laws stop local journalists from sharing news on social media. We should let all Canadian creators share their work freely without complicated rules and special funding for only a few.”

“Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is usually here, but he must have stepped out, because he has not listened to the speech I just gave. My point is that the government should not be picking winners and losers. I have absolutely no faith when it comes to the Liberal Government’s efforts to previously censor what we see and say online. In fact, I would love it if my local news creators could share any of their news stories on any Meta platform, but thanks to this government’s terrible legislation, they are no longer able to do that. My point is this: Let all of us, Canadian content creators of all types, the up-and-comers, not just the established creators who know how to operate the maze of CRTC rules to get special funding, have the opportunity to succeed, share our stories loudly and proudly, not just in Canada but around the world.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“The Liberals have handled trade talks with the United States poorly. Also, the government's tax on streaming companies is not free money. These companies will pass the extra cost to consumers instead of paying it themselves. Our broadcast rules are too confusing and help only the biggest players, instead of giving all Canadian creators a fair chance.”

“Mr. Speaker, I certainly agree with my Bloc colleague on how bad the Liberals have been on their trade negotiations with the United States for the master negotiator to have achieved absolutely nothing so far except giving up elements of Canadian sovereignty and wealth. However, the member raised the issue of the money that the CRTC says it is going to create. Of course, that is what a tax does, but I fail to understand why it is believed in the House, or why any rational person would believe, that this is free money and that all of a sudden these big companies are just going to voluntarily not pass those costs on but say, “You know what, we should help out Canadian content. We’ll just do this out of the goodness of our heart because we’re a charity.” They are not charities. They are private enterprises. As much as I want Canadians to compete on the big streaming services, I want to give every content creator across any platform who wants to educate or to offer entertainment around the world the same opportunity, and not just let the big players take advantage of a system that is so confusing for everybody who tries to deal with the CRTC.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“The greatest artists in history did not get money from the government. I cannot think of any great artist who did. Why do the Liberals support this?”

“Mr. Speaker, I was trying to think of great artists in history, such Shakespeare, Michelangelo, Cicero and Plato. Some of them had private benefactors, but none of them, to my knowledge, had government support behind them. I cannot think of any artist that had government support— Some hon members: Oh, oh! Scott Anderson: Mr. Speaker, on the other hand, I cannot think of any artist who did have government support and who is great. I cannot think of a great Soviet artist. I wonder if my colleague could tell us this: Is it because the Liberals hate Canadian culture?”

“I support Canadian artists, but the CRTC has too much power. It created a new tax that will drive away investment instead of helping creators. We need to keep Canadian entertainment affordable.”

“Mr. Speaker, I think we should all be so proud. I heard the names of a few bands shouted out. However, this is not about not supporting Canadian artists. I think there is a role to play. This is about the CRTC’s being handed a suite of powers by the Liberal government, saying that there is no chance, as a regulator, that it is going to overstep its boundaries, but then it went ahead and did that. The CRTC has imposed, at a terrible time, this new tax upon Canadians that is ultimately more likely going to drive away investment than create the opportunity for another Hallmark film to be made in Morden. This is about common-sense policy and making sure we are protecting the affordability of entertainment made by Canadians for Canadians.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“The CRTC is raising taxes on online streaming services from 5% to 15%. I want the government to cancel this tax. It makes life more expensive for regular people, hurts jobs in film and technology, and upsets our trade with the United States.”

“Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of families in Quebec who are sick and tired of being bled dry. On May 21, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, the CRTC, made a unilateral decision that is out of touch with reality. It announced that it is tripling the tax on streaming platforms from 5% to 15%. That is aggressive taxation. Let us think about this for a second. The initial 5% tax is still being challenged in court, and the CRTC has not yet collected a single penny of it, but that is not stopping the CRTC from trying to triple the tax before the court has even ruled. This is madness. Let us be realistic. Who will end up footing the bill? I asked two of my Liberal colleagues about this earlier, and neither was able to answer me. The obvious answer is: consumers. Web giants will not absorb the cost; our own consumers will have to shell out. Once again, the middle class will get hit. I am talking about families in Saint-Pacôme, La Pocatière and the 73 other municipalities in my riding whose bills will go up yet again. Who else will get hit? Seniors who keep track of every dollar so they can make it to the end of the month. Subscriptions to Netflix, Spotify, Disney+ and YouTube will cost quite a lot more. Given the current inflation, the groceries that cost an arm and a leg, and the housing crisis, a bit of family entertainment will end up becoming a luxury. This tax hike is yet another punitive measure by the Liberal government. It is another tax that is driving up the cost of living. Let us talk about the regions. In many parts of Quebec, cultural offerings are rather scarce. Not everyone can have a large movie theatre, a theatre or a performance hall across the street. Online platforms are becoming a way for families in the regions to access new releases, both Canadian and foreign, and the same culture as everyone else at the same time. Taxing these services by 15% creates an additional geographic injustice for Canadians who live farther and farther away from major urban centres. It is doubly punitive for the regions. There is a fundamental principle in our democracy, and our parliamentary work has been clear for decades and centuries: Parliament alone has the power to tax citizens. The CRTC is a committee of civil servants appointed by people elected by the public. By what right can these bureaucrats decide overnight to tax Quebeckers and Canadians? The government has the power to reject this decision, and it must do so. If it refuses to act, it is complicit. The CRTC is becoming our very own Internet czar. People sitting in offices decide what is good or bad for citizens. It is an insult to consumers’ intelligence. Ultimately, it is consumers who decide what they want to consume. Freedom of choice is an important value in both Quebec and Canada. People are mature enough to decide for themselves what they want to listen to or support. Quebeckers are proud of their culture and have always shown it, as have the Conservatives. When a local show is good, we watch it in droves. When a song is good, we listen to it on repeat—which I do regularly, by the way. We do not need Ottawa to dictate what we should watch or listen to. The Quebec public is sovereign when it comes to its cultural choices. Furthermore, by imposing a 15% tax, Canada is totally shooting itself in the foot. Our country is becoming one of the most expensive and least competitive countries in the world for investment. What message are we sending to investors? What message are we sending to all the communications and culture giants and non-giants that are interested in investing in Canada? We are telling them to come here to be taxed. Who is going to pay at the end of the day? Once again, it is always the same people: consumers. The message we are sending companies that might want to invest in Canada is that they should not come here because it is complicated and unpredictable and they are going to be taxed to the hilt. This is impeding investment in this country, of course. It is threatening paying jobs in technology and film. Heaven knows that in Quebec and especially Montreal, the top global hub, especially for video games, there are all kinds of organizations making films and that world-class productions are also being created in Quebec and Montreal. In the long term, what message are we sending these people? Time and time again, the message is that the government is going to tax them. Some will say that the francophone minority in Quebec and across the country certainly needs the tax money to survive. That is a bad idea masquerading as a good one. That involves a misunderstanding of the reality of the francophone market. If we impose such a heavy tax, what is going to happen? The major platforms will make economic choices. Producing in French is expensive, and the content is intended for a smaller market. If the government slams them again with a 15% tax, these multinationals may simply cut their francophone production budgets to cover their losses. Instead of helping francophone culture, this tax will discourage platforms from commissioning new series or films in French. It is our own culture that we are stunting. Our technicians, directors, actors, visual effect experts and post-production studios also work with these major platforms. They are already funding, in part, some productions. These people earn their living through huge contracts with them, which brings new money into our economy. By imposing a punitive 15% tax, the government is halting this economic momentum. If Canada becomes hostile and unpredictable, these companies will simply go film their series and produce their projects somewhere else. Quebec cultural workers will lose good-paying jobs. The way to protect the francophone minority is not by putting our own people out of work. Quebec content producers, technicians and artists need solid partnerships, predictability and private investments to showcase our talent. The government, by waging war on the big platforms, is hurting our artists, pulling the rug out from under them, and denying them a unique opportunity to become known worldwide. To add to the absurdity, this decision comes at the worst possible time. The U.S. administration and its ambassadors have clearly warned us that they see this as an unfair provocation and trade barrier targeting their companies. Canada is getting ready to renegotiate CUSMA, a trade agreement that supports thousands of Quebec families, workers and businesses. Why is the government trying to pick a fight with our biggest economic partner? I am going to digress for a moment. In my riding, like everywhere else in Quebec and Canada, this agreement with the United States, the one that the Liberals are dragging their feet on renegotiating, offers Canada and our regions, especially Quebec, absolutely fundamental economic benefits. This holds true in all sectors, including the cultural sector, the industrial sector, the agricultural sector and the food sector. The U.S. is our biggest customer, partner and friend. Right now, we are putting up all kinds of barriers to stop these people from showing any interest in doing business with Canada. We have no idea why the government is picking fights with the United States like it is right now. It is sheer recklessness. Instead of making us competitive, it is damaging our ability to compete internationally. It is absolutely unbelievable. There is still time to backtrack. The minister and the government have the power to block this ridiculous CRTC decision. They need to heed the warnings of our trading partners. They need to stop thinking that every problem can be solved with a new tax. Once again, the Liberals are telling us that they are giving more and more money, but they are putting that on credit. Then they turn around and collect more and more taxes to be able to pay for it. In doing so, they are harming the Canadian cultural economy. Canadians are asking for a break, not for unnecessary tax hikes. I do not want to hear that the Conservatives need to be better informed. The Conservatives have our culture and the protection of the French language in mind and at heart. We are proud of our artists. We have always been proud of our artists. The government is saying that the Conservatives do not like artists and other such things, but that is not so. That is completely false. We refuse to believe that the only way to support homegrown talent is to punish consumers and drive away investment. That is absurd. That is not the way to build a strong, competitive economy. The more prosperous our economy gets, the easier it will be for our local businesses to fund, produce and disseminate homegrown works. Making people poorer and hurting economic growth is no way to help Quebec and Canadian culture flourish. The Conservatives are staunchly opposed to this tax, and we demand that it be eliminated outright. We need to give taxpayers some breathing space, encourage investment and stop creating taxes that make life harder for people.”

“The Liberal government keeps adding taxes and rules that make everything more expensive. Now they are adding another 15% tax on streaming services like Netflix. They always find ways to make everyday life cost more.”

“Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleague that we can have regulations in Canada and that we can make all kinds of decisions. The problem is that all the decisions the Liberal government has made over the past 11 years have been to impose taxes, fees and all sorts of regulations, left and right, that inevitably have an impact on the cost of the products we consume. This is true for housing, it is true for food, and it is true for gas. It is true for everything. In this case, we are adding another 15% tax on a product that people consume at the end of the day, often in the evening, watching a movie on Netflix. The Liberals always find a way to add taxes and make consumers pay.”