Business of Supply

The debate focused on the government’s commitment to allocate $600 million to Canada’s cultural sector, which was originally intended to be supported by a digital services tax on large online streaming companies. Bloc Québécois members asserted that the government has failed to deliver these promised funds over the past 18 months and argued that large tech corporations should be required to pay into the cultural industry. Government representatives countered these claims by citing recent expenditures exceeding $770 million to support Canadian media and culture, while other opposition members challenged the government’s overall record of keeping promises on various initiatives. The discussion also touched on the importance of protecting the cultural sector and its role in national identity.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

51 statements

Martin Champoux, Drummond

Bloc Québécois
“I want the government to make big online streaming companies pay fees to support our cultural sector. I also want the government to pay the cultural sector the $600 million it promised for this year. Quebec and Canadian culture are facing a serious crisis, and big tech companies should help pay for it instead of regular taxpayers.”
  • A repeated line

    “As set out in the Broadcasting Act.”

    Said 4 times by 4 members since October 22.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

moved: That, given that,(i) culture is central to Quebec’s identity,(ii) the cultural sector plays a critical role in Quebec’s economy,(iii) the media and cultural production sectors are facing serious pressures that hamper their development,(iv) the government nevertheless abolished the Digital Services Tax levied on the U.S. digital corporate giants,the House call on the government to:(a) uphold the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission’s decisions imposing levies on streaming services, as set out in the Broadcasting Act; and(b) make the interim payment of $600 million promised to the cultural sector for the current year. He said: Mr. Speaker, today is an important day because we are once again bringing an issue to the floor of the House that is very important to us, namely culture, and, more specifically and as a priority, Quebec and francophone culture. Before I begin my speech, I would like to extend my heartfelt congratulations to the MNA for Matane-Matapédia-Mitis in the Quebec National Assembly, Pascal Bérubé, who was appointed Minister of Culture, Heritage, Communications and the French Language. Pascal Bérubé is a highly capable and passionate man, as we saw at his swearing-in ceremony yesterday, and certainly someone who will fight for culture with the same passion and commitment to Quebec identity for which he is so well known. Today’s motion is important to the Bloc Québécois. It is also of vital importance to the cultural sector. Earlier this week, the Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, or CDCE, was on Parliament Hill, accompanied by dozens of representatives from its member organizations. I took the opportunity to get a sense of their mood and take stock of the situation, since it is important to do that from time to time. I wanted to know whether the concerns and priorities we are advancing on behalf of the cultural sector are still relevant. I also wanted to find out whether we are, as my former colleague from La Prairie always said, “on the right track”. It is worse than I thought. The cultural sector is facing an unprecedented crisis. What is particularly troubling is that we have been warning about this crisis for years, yet the sector continues to receive little more than piecemeal support, despite the widely recognized urgent need for adequate, fair, sustainable, predictable, long-term funding. We can pile on all the adjectives we want. It is simply unacceptable that culture be left in this state of precariousness year after year, budget after budget. The motion that we are tabling today is not that complicated. First, we want to speak out against this government’s abandonment of culture, an abandonment that, in my view, has been almost systematic since it entered office in April 2025. The Liberals have done nothing but backtrack on cultural issues. Let me explain, although I suspect they will rise later to tell me that significant amounts were allocated to culture in budget 2025 and will be announcing good news in the coming weeks. Not abandoning culture involves more than giving away money now and then. It involves a commitment to fund the cultural sector in a meaningful way. First, we are facing an economic situation involving a southern neighbour ready to rock the boat at every opportunity. Our economic situation demands that we strengthen our sectors as much as possible. When we can, we must. When it comes to culture, we can. We have the means; they have been requested and demonstrated and they constitute a logical choice for ordinary, average people. Failing to act would be alarmingly irresponsible. Even the Liberals have been campaigning for years to bring in a system to ensure fairness in the broadcasting and cultural sector. Bill C-11, which I had the pleasure, so to speak, of working on for several years, was drafted in collaboration with and at the request of this Liberal government. However, the conclusion of that study, that work, was to give the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, or CRTC, the responsibility, under the new Online Streaming Act, of establishing a system that would ensure that American digital companies—those multibillion-dollar companies that call the shots wherever they go and that governments lack the courage to regulate—contribute their fair share. The most logical approach is the one that has been used for decades with the traditional broadcasters and that is to impose some form of levy. That is what the CRTC has done. The CRTC worked on this for a long time, as it usually does, holding hearings and listening to representations from various stakeholders in the industry, and concluded that the right approach was to impose a 5% levy, a decision that was subsequently revised, resulting in a 15% levy. What did the government do? It did not say, finally, a fair way to establish a framework to ensure that companies making billions of dollars off our culture and our broadcasting system contribute so that people can continue to create and produce content that reflects who we are and ensures that Quebec culture, francophone culture and Canadian culture remain very much alive and can develop, continue to evolve and be the envy of many countries around the world in this ever-changing digital landscape. I mentioned earlier that the government will boast about having invested funds in budget 2025. It did invest in a number of sectors, including the audiovisual sector, and that was certainly appreciated. However, while the budget provided hundreds of millions of dollars to various areas of the cultural sector, some sectors facing even more acute challenges than others were completely overlooked. There was unanimous support for increasing the budget of the Canada Council for the Arts by $140 million. It received $6 million. Sectors such as entertainment presenters, cultural presenters, the visual arts and the performing arts were entirely ignored in this budget, and yet they are on the front lines sustaining culture, theatre, dance and other artistic disciplines. We need to support the entire cultural sector. It is not a collection of isolated groups. It is an ecosystem, an integrated whole that must function effectively and generate benefits throughout the sector. When the cultural community as a whole is properly supported, all of its sectors thrive. It is a vital part of both the Quebec and Canadian economies, and one that we simply cannot do without. The evidence is clear. I am fed up with hearing that the cultural sector is being funded or subsidized. That is not what is being done. We invest in culture, and that brings in billions of dollars for the Canadian economy. We cannot do away with that, especially at a time when we need to affirm our identity and protect our culture. We have been experiencing this in Quebec for decades now. I get the impression that, in Canada, people are also starting to realize that culture is important and that they need to protect their identity. Perhaps this would be a good time to learn from Quebec’s traditional demands on the matter. As I said earlier, CDCE representatives spent the week on the Hill. Their demands remain unanimous: They want the money they were promised, but they also want a system in place that will reassure them. The only way to reassure them is to have a funding system that is not subject to the government’s whims. The government cannot say that, this year, when it scrapped the 5% or 15% levies, it replaced that with $600 million, as promised. The government might say that this is great news because, next year, it intends to do the same thing and even index the amount. Next year, the amount would be $800 million. The government believes this should please the cultural sector. However, the year after that, the amount might drop to $200 million, which might put everyone into a bit of a pickle. Then, the year after that one, another government might be in power that is not interested in culture and might decide to get rid of it. We would be back at square one. It is unacceptable for the government to take this approach. It is important to create a system that reassures all cultural sector stakeholders. This means fair funding for culture and a significant contribution from big tech. There is the money, and then there is the principle. I hear the government saying that levies cannot be imposed on digital companies because they will simply pass the cost on to consumers. That is hogwash, so as not to use an expression that the Chair would reprimand me for. What a load of nonsense. Let us look at what has happened elsewhere, particularly in Europe. I was just at the French embassy yesterday with officials from the CDCE, and we discussed this very issue. Europe has imposed such levies. The European Union itself has imposed levies and has allowed other EU states to do the same, which France and others have done. The reality is that there has been no decrease in subscriptions to the digital platforms that are already generating billions of dollars in profits, and there has not been any dramatic increase in consumer costs. By choosing to fund culture itself rather than have the digital companies do it, the government is passing the bill on to Canadians. When Canadians are asked what concerns them the most right now, they point to the cost of living. Everything is becoming more expensive. However, Canadians are now being handed a $600‑million bill when the digital companies, which are raking in billions of dollars on the backs of our creators, are the ones that should be funding culture. That is the purpose of our motion today. I have a hard time imagining how the Liberal government, which has always claimed to support culture, or at least given the appearance of that, could oppose our motion. I would take a very dim view of that.

Leslie Church, Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretaries of State for Labour, for Seniors, and for Children and Youth, and to the Minister of Jobs and Families (Persons with Disabilities)

Liberal
“Why did the Bloc Québécois vote against the budget when it gave record support to Quebec's arts and culture?”
  • A repeated line

    “Which provided unprecedented support for Quebec's cultural industries.”

    Said 3 times by 2 members since October 22.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his comments today. I want to ask him if he can explain why the Bloc Québécois voted against budget 2025, which included unprecedented support for Quebec’s cultural industries.

Martin Champoux, Drummond

Bloc Québécois
“We voted against the budget because the government ignored all 11 of our recommendations, especially the ones about culture. We voted against it to stand up for our people and our culture.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, a budget is like a big stew. There are all sorts of things in there. We can love corned beef but not cabbage. When we vote for a budget, we are voting for a series of measures. Before a budget is tabled, parties make requests. We have recommendations to make for the budget. The Bloc Québécois had 11 amendments, many of which were culture-related. None of the Bloc Québécois’s recommendations, particularly those concerning culture, were included in the budget. When the Liberals ask us why we voted against funding measures for culture, it is because they did not listen. They did not get the job done. They botched the job. In that case, we take responsibility, we stand up for our people and our culture, and we vote against it.

Todd Doherty, Cariboo—Prince George—Omineca

Conservative
“The government has failed for 11 years to get a softwood lumber deal. More than 30 mills in my riding have closed, and thousands of people are out of work. People should not trust this government to keep its promises.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Relevance 0 of 100

    None of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
  • Question or comment in debate

    Signal 34 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

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for bringing this forward. For 11 years, we have seen broken promise after broken promise. Another promise the government made, with regard to an industry that is, I know, as important to Quebec as it is to British Columbia, is that it has, for 11 years, promised to secure a softwood lumber agreement. Today, over 30 mills have closed in my riding. Thousands of British Columbians are out of work. Why should Quebeckers feel that the Liberal government would deliver on this promise when it has broken every other promise it has made to Quebec, and to the nation, over the last 11 years?

Martin Champoux, Drummond

Bloc Québécois
“The government has not yet kept its promise to give $600 million to Canada's cultural sector. This money is not just for Quebec, but for all of Canada. The cultural sector brings in hundreds of billions of dollars every year.”
Official Hansard

That is a very good question, Madam Speaker, and I thank my colleague for asking it. My colleague is obviously generalizing; he is really broadening the scope of the issue, but fundamentally, I understand that we are talking about broken promises. In our motion today, we are addressing a promise that, while not yet broken, has not yet been kept, and that is very concerning. I am talking about the $600 million. This $600 million is not a request from Quebec. It is an amount intended for Canada’s entire cultural sector. As a result, it is not just about a request from Quebec. Of course, the Bloc Québécois is more focused on Quebec’s demands, that is well known, but in this case, it is a promise to all Canadians and to Canada’s entire cultural sector, which, I would like to remind you, generates hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue annually.

Mario Simard, Jonquière—Hébertville—Pays-des-Bleuets

Bloc Québécois
“I want my colleague to tell the House about the government's cultural failures as it tries to please Donald Trump.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, my colleague has already kindly briefed me, in private, on all the government’s setbacks in the area of culture as it tries to please Donald Trump. Therefore, I would perhaps invite him to brief the House on all of these setbacks, since it is quite interesting and relevant, after all.

Martin Champoux, Drummond

Bloc Québécois
“The government backed down on taxes that could have helped culture and broadcasting to please Donald Trump. We got nothing in return. Now the government looks bad because it gave up those taxes for nothing.”
  • Reply to a comment in debate

    Signal 28 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

Madam Speaker, I am being asked for a brief answer to a question that would take several minutes to address, but I will simply talk about the digital services tax, which could have been used to fund the cultural and broadcasting sectors, as well as the backtracking on the levy of 5% to 15%. These concessions were made during negotiations with Donald Trump. What did we get in return? Nothing, period. Nothing. This is a somewhat awkward position for the government to be in now, saying that it will not reinstate the levy after having removed it to appease someone who never responded favourably to our request. I could go on, but I do not have enough time.

Gérard Deltell, Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk

Conservative
“The government keeps changing its mind about the digital services tax. Businesses need a clear direction. How does this back-and-forth hurt the cultural sector?”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, what does my colleague make of the Liberal government’s position on the digital services tax? First, it opposed the tax. Then it supported it. Now it opposes it once again. In any business or economic endeavour, it is important to have a clear sense of direction. What impact does this sort of Liberal flip-flopping have on the cultural sector?

Martin Champoux, Drummond

Bloc Québécois
“We needed a tax on big foreign digital companies to help our media and culture. The government did not give the money to those sectors, and then it got rid of the tax. This wastes billions of dollars that could help our culture and our economy.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 93 of 100

    Of this reply, 90% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague very much, and I look forward to hearing his comments on today’s motion later on. We should remember that this tax was originally requested and required to fund the cultural sector and the media, this entire sector where American digital companies swoop in and get rich. In the end, it was not used for that purpose at all; it was used for something else entirely. It went into the consolidated revenue fund instead of serving the sectors that had been hit hard by those companies entering the market. Yes, as my colleague said, this kind of flip-flopping and back-and-forth is absolutely pointless. In the end, the tax was repealed. We are depriving ourselves of billions of dollars that could give some serious breathing room to our cultural sector, as well as other sectors.

Christine Normandin, Saint-Jean

Bloc Québécois
“The government needs to pay the cultural sector the $600 million it promised right away. It must also let the regulator make online streaming giants pay fees to support our local culture. Instead of standing up to these big foreign companies, the government canceled the fees and made taxpayers pay the bill. That hurts Quebec's culture and our creators.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, it is always a bit intimidating to follow my esteemed colleague from Drummond, who enlightens us with his knowledge. We know that he is very passionate about the issue before us today, and that came through in his remarks. I will begin my speech with an analogy to explain the subject we are discussing today. Imagine a charming little village somewhere with several public parks that are the envy of many of the villagers in the surrounding areas. People gather there to play with their children. One day, a business from a neighbouring town decides that there might be some money to be made. It decides to organize festivals and parties in the small neighbouring village’s parks and it charges people to attend. This all happens little by little. People buy tickets and come have a good time. The business then leaves and continues paying municipal taxes in the other town. One day, the municipal councillors in the small village with the beautiful parks realize that they are paying to maintain these parks, which are deteriorating faster because they are being used for festivals. They then decide to bring a resolution before the municipal council proposing that a portion of the cost of maintaining the parks be charged to the company using them to make money. That makes perfect sense, so the village passes the resolution. One day, the mayor of the village stands up and says that he has veto power and that he is going to use it. He wants to maintain a good relationship with the mayor of the neighbouring town, so to avoid offending him, he is repealing the levy that his municipal council had imposed on the company from the other town. However, since the parks do still need to be maintained, he decides to raise taxes in his own village and make the folks there pay for maintaining the parks. I believe that if this were ever to happen in any village, there would probably be a public outcry, and with good reason. That is precisely the situation we are facing today, because the government has decided to overturn an order of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, or CRTC, imposing levies on web giants such as Netflix, Amazon and Disney+ that are making money in our territory without supporting the local cultural community that is suffering as a result of their actions. It is important to protect content creators in Quebec and across Canada, but especially in Quebec, because Quebec culture is not just another commercial product. As we know, French is a minority language in North America, and our way of compensating for our demographic reality is by making our culture vibrant and resilient. It is important to support it. By supporting content creators, we allow them tell our stories, and their voices will fall silent if we do not support them. If their voices are silenced, we will be left hearing only the stories of others, rather than the stories that have shaped who we are. I sincerely believe that our government colleagues share our views on the importance of protecting culture. If we asked them whether it is important to protect culture, I am sure that they would say yes and that they would mean it. That is not the issue. The issue is that they do not have the courage to make decisions that will actually protect culture. I am not trying to impute motives today. I am simply saying that they do not have the political courage needed to stand up to the United States and the web giants. There are two parts to our request today. First, the government must give the cultural industry the $600 million that it was promised and that has still not been paid out. The government is saying that the money is coming, but the clock is ticking. Since the government decided to abolish the levy of 5%, which was supposed to increase to 15%, the cultural industry has been left without support. This is urgent. As I was saying, there are really two parts to our request because that $600 million is not a lasting solution. We cannot truly ensure the survival of the cultural industry with money taken from taxpayers’ pockets and doled out by a government that could change at any time. The tariff crisis has reminded us of how important stability and predictability are for all industries, and that is especially true for the cultural industry. Moving forward, what we are asking the government to do is to respect the CRTC’s decision. The CRTC is an organization with its own governance structure and its own expertise. The CRTC holds public hearings and consultations. Citizens, businesses, artists, associations and community groups all participate. The CRTC knows what it is doing when it makes a decision, and the decision to raise the levy from 5% to 15% was based on concrete evidence. Ultimately, what we are asking the government to do is to respect its own law, which gives the CRTC full discretion to require the web giants to pay whatever amount it deems appropriate. What we hear in response is the completely misleading argument that the money collected from the tech giants would ultimately end up being passed on to taxpayers. When the government takes $600 million to partially offset this loss of revenue, where does that money come from? The government does not have any money of its own. Its money comes from taxpayers’ pockets. Ultimately, it passes the bill on to taxpayers and, what is more, it also passes it on to people who may have chosen not to subscribe to Netflix, Amazon or Disney because they want to support Quebec’s cultural sector. It passes this bill on to them to avoid making the American giants pay. The Liberals argue that this cost would simply be passed on to consumers, but it is worth noting that the European experience has already shown that that is not the case. There are a number of other factors that can contribute to higher subscriber fees, but I would like to quote an expert from the École des médias at the Université du Québec à Montréal on the issue of affordability. Professor Catalina Briceño has stated that the affordability argument raised by the Minister of Culture is misleading too. A private company can always justify a price increase on a wide range of grounds, including rising costs, shareholder expectations for profitability, required investments or other considerations. Unless Ottawa has secured an explicit commitment from these companies, which we would certainly like to see, there is no guarantee that subscriber fees will not increase in the short or medium term. The Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions has also pointed out that the experience of other countries, particularly in Europe, contradicts that argument. In other words, the amount consumers pay to companies like Amazon could still increase, even in the absence of government-imposed levies. As I mentioned, predictability is also important. Systematic levies on web giants would bring in billions of dollars in revenue, a far cry from the $600 million that the government is promising. What is more, this revenue would be ongoing and would not be subject to any dubious political discussions, as could happen with a future change of government. Ultimately, all this will serve absolutely no purpose. My colleague from Drummond mentioned the government’s backtracking on the digital services tax. This was done on the sidelines of the G7 summit in the hope of encouraging the U.S. government to refrain from adding tariffs and perhaps to come back to the negotiating table. However, it has been over a year and a half, and we see where things stand today. Did it change anything? The answer is absolutely not. In fact, it is probably perceived as a sign of weakness that the U.S. government can focus on, and there has been one step backward after another. It was all for nothing. The key thing to remember is that, for the web giants, Quebec and Canada are just a market and a way to make money. However, for the cultural community, the people of Quebec and Canada are channels through which they keep their stories, their endeavours and their culture alive. This is a reflection of the soul of our cultural agents. If the government cannot muster the courage to correct the inequity between the web giants and our content creators, unfortunately, a part of what we are and who we are is doomed to disappear. That is why the discussion we are having today in the House is so important.

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

Liberal
“Culture and the French language are an important part of Canada's identity, especially in Quebec and French-speaking communities across the country. Our government has spent a lot of money to support our heritage, and our upcoming budget will continue to support Canadian culture and the French language. What does the member think about the importance of our budget?”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I agree with the member that culture is what gives us our identity. I look across our great nation, and I see the uniqueness of the province of Quebec and all sorts of wonderful things in other jurisdictions. I think of our francophone communities in Saint-Boniface in Winnipeg and in St-Pierre-Jolys in rural Manitoba, which are a part of the very fabric of our society. Over the years, we have seen significant federal investments to support our culture and our heritage. We have a minister who is very proactive on the file. The good news is, as the Minister of Finance would say, we have a budget coming up on November 5. I am sure it will reinforce the importance of culture for all of Canada. In particular, it will single out the province of Quebec and our French language, which every Canadian, I would suggest, is proud of. I would ask the member for her thoughts on the importance of a federal budget.

Christine Normandin, Saint-Jean

Bloc Québécois
“The government must deliver the investments it promised. It must also make big tech companies pay their fair share instead of letting them take from our market and give nothing back.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 35 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

Madam Speaker, I mentioned it in my speech. Our request is twofold. Yes, we are asking that the investments promised by the federal government be delivered. If they are included in a budget, and if the federal government makes additional investments, all the better. What we are saying, however, is that it will never replace the share that should be paid by the web giants, which pillage the market and give nothing in return. The government is selling us out for cheap without even collecting on the deal. That is what is shameful.

Helena Konanz, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay

Conservative
“Why do you think the government's promises to help culture in Quebec never lead to real results?”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, why does my colleague think that the Liberals’ promises to support Quebec’s cultural sector never translate into concrete results?

Christine Normandin, Saint-Jean

Bloc Québécois
“The Liberals always break their promises. We have been waiting months for the $600 million they promised to the cultural sector. They are also breaking their promises to protect the environment.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 20 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

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for making an effort to speak in the language of Molière. I grant that French is not an easy language. It is a very broad question that may go beyond today’s topic, but it is still related to it. Unfortunately, we know the Liberals have a history of broken and unfulfilled promises, as my colleague, the member for Drummond, mentioned. We have been waiting for the $600 million they promised for the cultural sector for months. It is also very much the government’s style to break with tradition, even though that tradition has, in fact, been typical of the Liberals on a number of issues, like the environment. After all, the current Prime Minister is the former UN special envoy on climate action and finance. What we are seeing in Bill C‑39 when it comes to protecting the environment is nothing more than broken promises and shattered illusions.

Martin Champoux, Drummond

Bloc Québécois
“Big tech companies were supposed to pay $600 million to help our culture, but the government stepped in to pay it instead. Other businesses are struggling with tariffs and need help too. What message does it send to them when the government suddenly finds $600 million for this?”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, it is my turn to thank my colleague from Saint-Jean for her excellent speech and for her passion. I believe the House can see that that passion is shared by all Bloc members when we talk about culture and the French language. The government has decided to step in for the digital giants, which were supposed to pay out $600 million in compensation. In my colleague’s view, what message does this send to the other sectors of the Quebec and Canadian economies that are struggling with the impact of tariffs? Businesses are looking to the government for support in the face of the tariff threat that constantly hangs over their heads. Meanwhile, there was already a funding mechanism for the cultural sector that made sense to everyone. The government is capable of coming up with $600 million. What must the other sectors of the economy be thinking when they see this money appear, just like that?

Christine Normandin, Saint-Jean

Bloc Québécois
“The government should give businesses money to help them pay for unfair duties. This would cost the government nothing in the end, because it would get the money back once trade courts rule on the disputes. We sent this idea to the government, but it has not even answered us.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 44 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, a lot of people must be thinking that it is time something was done for them as well. Earlier on, we were talking about the long-standing softwood lumber crisis, which started long before the tariff crisis and for which we submitted proposals to the government. Furthermore, if the government gave businesses an advance to offset the countervailing duties and give them some breathing room, it would be a zero-cost measure, since we know that international trade tribunals will eventually hand down a decision and the government will be able to pay itself back out of the proceeds. These proposals would help our sectors and cost nothing in the end. However, we are having a hard time getting so much as an acknowledgement of receipt from the government. I think that a number of sectors must be justifiably disappointed by some of the government’s actions.

Todd Doherty, Cariboo—Prince George—Omineca

Conservative
“The government does not keep its promises. In 2021, it promised $500 million to help provinces fight forest fires, but it did not deliver.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, culture is very important. What is also important is keeping one’s promise, and the government has a record of not keeping its promises. In 2021, it pledged $500 million for provinces to help fight forest fires, and it has failed to do that—

Christine Normandin, Saint-Jean

Bloc Québécois
“We cancelled the digital services tax to end the tariff war. We are still waiting for that war to end.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 49 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I have a very simple answer. The digital services tax was scrapped in exchange for an end to the tariff war. We are still waiting for that war to end.

David Myles, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture and Minister responsible for Official Languages and to the Secretary of State (Nature)

Liberal
“Our government is putting more than $770 million into Canadian media, culture, and the arts. Cultural industries create thousands of jobs, bring billions to our economy, and tell our stories. They are facing tough times, and our funding will protect them and help them grow.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I rise today to provide an update on the major commitments our government has recently made to support our creators, our media and our cultural businesses and to secure their future in a rapidly changing environment. Our government was elected a little over a year ago with a clear commitment to stand up for who we are and what sets us apart. Our culture is at the very heart of who we are. It allows us to tell our own stories in our own way and in our own languages. Here in Canada, we are proud to have artists, creators and innovators pushing the boundaries of art. Our artists embody our culture and showcase it here and around the world. We have a duty to protect this culture. Behind the issues of funding and regulation that we are debating, there are people working, companies taking risks, and communities that want to continue to see themselves reflected on screen and hear their stories told in the media. There is a screenwriter developing a show, a producer securing funding for a shoot, a songwriter writing her next track. There are also technicians waiting for their next contract and a radio station trying to hang onto its local news team. These people contribute to our economy. They also help us get to know each other better, discover other realities, and share the experiences that bring us closer together. A song can transcend generations. A TV show can help us learn what life is like in another community. A news report can spark a much-needed discussion. These shared moments strengthen our sense of belonging and contribute to social cohesion. However, the cultural sector is facing significant challenges that are undermining its business models and its ability to create, produce and reach audiences. As an artist, I am familiar with these difficulties. We recognize the financial pressures facing the industry. Simply acknowledging the importance of our culture is not enough. We must take action. That is what we are doing. With more than $770 million announced in budget 2025, we are investing in our media, our artists, our audiovisual sector, our festivals and our celebrations. The Bloc Québécois voted against that budget. It voted against $150 million for CBC/Radio-Canada, funding meant to strengthen its mandate to serve the public and to better reflect the needs of Canadians in both French and English. It voted against $150 million for Telefilm Canada. It voted against $125.5 million for the Canada Media Fund. It voted against $48 million for the Canada Music Fund. It voted against $95 million for the creative export strategy, which helps thousands of Canadian businesses and cultural organizations reach new international markets and has helped generate over $466 million in export revenue and secure hundreds of trade agreements. Our government knows how important it is to ensure that Canada has a strong, resilient creative economy. We understand the importance of showcasing our stories and talent beyond our borders. We understand the importance of fostering Canadian creativity. We understand the importance of investing in our greatest asset, which is who we are and the people who bring our culture to life. Our audio and audiovisual sectors bring Canada prestige and help strengthen our economy. In 2024, the audiovisual and interactive media sector contributed over $20 billion to Canada’s GDP, or nearly 30% of culture GDP. This sector alone accounts for over 172,000 jobs. Sound recording and music publishing generated over $542 million in GDP and accounted for approximately 5,500 jobs, which is a lot. When a production starts, it creates jobs for film crews, performers, editors and visual effects specialists. It also makes work for workshops, transportation services, hotels and restaurants. In music, recording involves writers, composers, performers, directors and technicians. Publishers, record companies and partners then work to publicize the music so that it finds an audience. There have been tangible success stories from across the country. In 2026, The Girl Who Cried Pearls, a short created by Chris Lavis and Maciek Szczerbowski and produced by the National Film Board, won the Oscar for best animated short film. This success followed on the heels of Matthew Rankin’s triumph in Cannes in 2024, when his film Universal Language won the Directors’ Fortnight audience award. Francophone talent also shines in the music field. In 2024, Charlotte Cardin won the Félix Artist of the Year award in the international category. That same year, Yannick Nézet‑Séguin and his collaborators won the Grammy for best opera recording for Champion. We want to see more success stories like these because Canada has the world-class talent and innovators that the world is looking for. When our creators succeed, all of Canada succeeds. Beyond the numbers and markets, it is these success stories, our creativity and our identity that we are known for abroad. Our media also contribute every day through the connections they maintain with the people they serve. A radio station can be a familiar presence in a region. It introduces listeners to artists, follows local issues and gives community members a voice. Local media help us understand decisions that affect our region or municipality. Journalism therefore plays an essential role in our democracy. It allows us to debate issues based on verified facts, better understand the challenges facing our society and make informed choices. At a time when false information spreads quickly, we need journalists who check the facts, cross-check sources and put events into context. This reporting creates a shared space for discussion. It helps people with different opinions better understand the issues they are being asked to consider. Supporting independent, rigorous journalism means preserving our ability to make informed choices and participate fully in democratic life. Journalism also makes an important contribution to our economy and the vitality of our communities. In 2024, newspapers alone generated more than $1.1 billion in GDP and supported nearly 13,000 jobs. Journalism also continues to inform Canadians through radio, television and digital media. However, the importance of these activities does not shield them from difficulties. Market shifts are changing audience habits and the distribution of revenue. Over the past few years, traditional broadcasting revenue has declined overall, while revenue from online services has increased. For production companies, funding decisions are becoming more difficult. For workers, this may mean more time between contracts and more income uncertainty. For a local media outlet, this can jeopardize its ability to keep a team on the ground. These pressures also have long-term consequences. These skills are developed through participation in projects. Teams become stronger through experience. When this continuity is compromised, it becomes harder and harder to retain talent and prepare the next generation. A lot of time goes into a TV show, documentary or album before it reaches the public. Decisions made today determine, in part, what we are able to watch and listen to down the road. Timely and substantial funding is therefore essential. This is why our government announced an investment of $600 million to provide stability and support to the audio and audiovisual sectors. This significant investment will provide the stability and long-term support our cultural sector needs to thrive, while ensuring that Canadian culture remains accessible to Canadians. This funding is part of a broader reflection of the contribution of all stakeholders to the Canadian broadcasting system. Online streaming services have become an important part of our daily lives. We recognize the importance of their equitable contributions, like those of other stakeholders, to the creation and promotion of Canadian content. That is why the Online Streaming Act was passed in 2023. We needed to modernize our system and incorporate online businesses. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, the CRTC, then set out to clarify the major online services’ obligations through mechanisms adapted to audio and audiovisual content. Unfortunately, the Online Streaming Act did not produce the desired results. The contributions that were supposed to support our cultural sector have never been paid, as they have been stuck in litigation for years. The CRTC’s initial contribution model did not provide the necessary support for our cultural industries, either in Quebec or elsewhere in the country. We had to be pragmatic and come up with a new approach. Our government therefore announced its intention to review certain requirements and develop new guidelines. We want the act to be implemented in a way that keeps services affordable, preserves consumer choice and provides businesses with flexibility while maintaining strong support for Canadian content. Beyond these investments, we are also exploring how to modernize the institutions and funding mechanisms that support our audiovisual sector. Our government announced this intention in January at Prime Time and again in April at the Association québécoise de la production médiatique conference, along with the launch of an advisory panel on audiovisual modernization. This is a unique opportunity to modernize our audiovisual sector, strengthen our industry and consolidate Canada’s position as a world leader in audiovisual excellence. We are working in partnership with the industry, drawing on the expertise of an advisory committee made up of industry leaders to develop ambitious, innovative solutions that respond to the sector’s needs and help it thrive in a rapidly changing environment. The discussions also highlighted the importance of innovation and skills. Workers and businesses need opportunities to experiment, pursue training and build their expertise as AI and other technologies evolve. These opportunities must reach communities across the country and groups that face greater barriers. I will conclude by speaking about our two official languages, particularly French, which is at the core of our identity and a source of pride. French-language productions operate in a unique market, whether the production in question is a TV show or a song. Our francophone creators must be able to produce their works and reach their audiences, both in Quebec and elsewhere in the country. Indigenous creators must be able to share their stories and keep their languages alive. Official language minority communities need to be able to see themselves reflected in the content that they watch and listen to. It is this conviction that led Canada to become one of the founding members of UNESCO’s 2005 Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions. When our media and cultural works reflect this diversity, they help us better understand the country that we share. They allow everyone to feel that their experiences have a place in our collective life. Our government is committed to supporting a strong, dynamic and viable cultural sector where creators and businesses can thrive in the digital age. We must take into account the financial pressures facing the sector and the financial realities of households while also preserving the ability to tell our stories and to understand our own reality. Canada is home to internationally recognized talent and considerable expertise. We want to provide them with the conditions that they need to continue creating and connecting with audiences. By supporting these sectors, we are investing in our economy, our democracy and the ties that bind us together.

Luc Thériault, Montcalm

Bloc Québécois
“The member's speech was full of good intentions, and it showed his knowledge.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I was almost moved by the first part of my colleague’s speech. It was a litany of good intentions. It shows his knowledge—

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 153

  1. Government Orders Business of Supply 51 statements
  2. Government Orders Business of Supply 64 statements
  3. Oral Questions Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 2 statements
  4. Oral Questions Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 6 statements
  5. Oral Questions Government Priorities 6 statements
  6. Oral Questions Public Services and Procurement 14 statements
  7. Oral Questions Canadian Identity and Culture 4 statements
  8. Oral Questions Canada Revenue Agency 4 statements
  9. Oral Questions The Economy 6 statements
  10. Oral Questions Employment 2 statements
  11. Oral Questions Steel and Aluminum Industry 15 statements
  12. Oral Questions Employment 3 statements
  13. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  14. Oral Questions Sports 2 statements
  15. Oral Questions Finance 6 statements
  16. Oral Questions Foreign Affairs 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions Points of Order 2 statements
  18. Government Orders Business of Supply 31 statements
  19. Oral Questions Government Priorities 2 statements
  20. Oral Questions The Economy 6 statements
  21. Oral Questions The Economy 4 statements
  22. Government Orders Business of Supply 30 statements
  23. Private Members' Business Canada Labour Code 4 statements
  24. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  25. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  26. Oral Questions Business of the House 2 statements