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)

66 statements

Alexis Deschênes, Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj

Bloc Québécois
“Big foreign streaming companies make a lot of money here without helping fund local news and culture, while our own broadcasters have to pay. The real issue is whether taxing them helps support our culture, especially in Quebec. What does my colleague think about that?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I want to address the argument put forward by my colleague and his party about how we must never, ever tax web giants because that would be a trade irritant. Why is it a trade irritant for the Americans? Obviously, because massive corporations like Amazon, Netflix and Prime Video want to come here and make as much money as possible without contributing to the media ecosystem while traditional broadcasters and distributors pay their share to support cultural and news programming. The real question is not whether this is a trade irritant. The real question is whether or not it is good for culture, especially Quebec culture, to make sure there is money available for it. What are my colleague’s thoughts on that?

Bernard Généreux, Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata

Conservative
“The government already spends over 1.2 billion dollars a year on culture. Lack of money is not the problem, and Canadians are tired of paying high taxes.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would simply say to my colleague that the federal government invests astronomical sums, more than $1.2 billion a year, in culture in Quebec and across Canada. I sit on the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, and during our most recent studies, we were told that money is not currently an issue. Rather, more authority is needed to ensure wider distribution across Canada. I therefore believe that the crux of the matter is that, as we speak, the average consumer has had enough. People are fed up with paying taxes. It is the only way the Liberals have found to squeeze extra money out of consumers’ pockets, and people are sick of it.

Alex Ruff, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound

Conservative
“I want my colleague to tell Canadians who will pay for this 15% streaming tax if the government does not cancel it.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I simply wish to give my colleague the opportunity to remind all Canadians who will ultimately foot the bill for the 15% increase if the Liberal government does not reject this streaming tax increase proposed by the CRTC and does not scrap it.

Bernard Généreux, Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata

Conservative
“Regular consumers are the ones who will end up paying this new 15% tax. The older 5% tax is still being fought in court, but if it goes through, ordinary Canadians will be stuck with the bill.”
  • 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 thank my colleague for his French. That is a really great question. I have anglophone colleagues who are making incredible efforts in French. In fact, some come to study in La Pocatière, in my riding, in the summer. The answer to that is the consumer. At the end of the day, it is the consumer who is going to pay this 15% tax, which used to be 5%. By the way, that 5% tax has still not been collected because it is being challenged in court. The legislation stemming from Bill C‑11 is still not enforced. This future tax will inevitably apply one day if the court settlement is finally reached. Once again, the reality is that ordinary Canadians are the ones who will end up paying the tax.

Tony Baldinelli, Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake

Conservative
“I want the government to cancel the new tax increase on streaming services. The government is making streaming services pay 15 percent of their Canadian earnings. Families cannot afford higher costs right now, and this tax will drive away investment in our cultural industries.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, in the short time I have available to me, I want to say how pleased I am to speak on our Conservative motion that “the House call on the Liberal Cabinet to use their powers under the Broadcasting Act to reject the CRTC’s streaming tax increase and eliminate the streaming tax.” For the Canadians who are watching, the Liberal-appointed CRTC recently ordered online streaming services to pay 15% of their annual Canadian revenues to the government. That is up from the current 5%. There are three basic reasons why we are advocating for that to be rolled back and eliminated. First, it is an affordability issue. At a time when families are struggling to afford food, gas and housing, another tax hike makes no sense, particularly now. Second, it hinders investment. It does not do anything to enhance the competitive nature of our cultural industries in Canada. In fact, it will only hinder our cultural industries. It works against what we are trying to do. Earlier, when I was talking to a colleague, I said that in 1996, the Conservative government in the province of Ontario, the government of Mike Harris, introduced an Ontario film and television tax credit, which allowed the industry to grow and thrive and supported the cultural industries and artists. That is being put at risk by an increased tax burden that will only drive those investments away.

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

Liberal

Linked statement

“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