By Parry-Sound Muskoka MP Scott Aitchison
By now you have probably heard of Bill C-10.
This now-controversial legislation was introduced last fall by Liberal Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault. Guilbeault insisted that the Bill was intended to amend the Broadcasting Act to “level the playing field” between traditional broadcasters and online streaming companies.
Specifically, his stated goal was to give the Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) powers to regulate internet broadcasters in the same way it does for conventional radio and television broadcasters, including the ability to compel foreign streaming media services to contribute to the Canadian Media Fund for the creation of Canadian content and to force these companies to adjust their user-preference algorithms to give greater prominence to Canadian content.
While this may all seem like a good idea, I have questioned their method of attempting to apply antiquated broadcasting legislation to the internet. Limiting access of foreign broadcasters to the Canadian market may have made sense at the beginning of the era of television, but does it really make sense to limit the access of individual Canadians to what they want to watch or listen over the internet? Does it make any sense to limit what individual Canadians share with the world over the internet via platforms like Facebook or YouTube?
Well, included in the original version of the legislation were sections ensuring that these new regulations would not apply to individual Canadians posting to their personal social media pages.
Inexplicably, however, one of these sections (section 4.1) was pulled from the Bill by the government during the review at the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, which has been studying this legislation. As a member of the committee, I am among the members of parliament pushing back and challenging the government and Minister Guilbeault to explain the change.
While section 2.1 remains in the Bill and the government declares that this section makes clear that individuals will not be regulated, the consequences of removing section 4.1 are that the government will give the CRTC the power to regulate what Canadians post to their social media pages, by regulating the social media companies we use.
In response to questions my colleagues and I have raised, Minister Guilbeault has attacked us, calling us ‘extremists’ and ‘spreaders of misinformation’. Many Canadians have watched Minister Guilbeault in media interviews where he has failed to explain his Bill or to adequately answer questions from journalists.
Even though Minister Guilbeault insisted for two weeks that protection for individual Canadians was ‘crystal clear’ in his legislation, he has now introduced a new amendment to make it ‘crystal clear’ that our individual online content would not be regulated as broadcasting.
Already, internet and legal experts have said this latest amendment is inadequate.
University of Ottawa law professor Dr. Michael Geist, who also holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-Commerce, has been a vocal opponent of what Minister Guilbeault is doing, calling the Trudeau government “the most anti-Internet government in Canadian history.”
I have argued, and will continue to argue, that granting the CRTC and the Heritage Minister the ability to regulate what Canadians post online is a dangerous move. Even if, as Minister Guilbeault insists, he does not want to regulate his uncle’s cat videos, ensuring that neither he nor some bureaucrat at the CRTC could ever wield such power is important.
With this kind of power, how could Canadians be sure that Minister Guilbeault or some future minister won’t quietly exercise this authority to limit online criticism of their government? How could Canadians be sure that government is not manipulating the algorithms of social media companies to limit the expression of ideas and policies contrary to their own?
Freedom of expression is fundamental to a free society. Despite Minister Guilbeault’s altruistic claims that he only wants to protect Canadian artists and preserve French-language media, to do these things while presenting even a hint of infringing on our freedom of speech and expression online is too high a price to pay.
I believe that promotion of Canadian art, culture, and creation is important. I believe that this can be done effectively while also permitting Canadians to make their own choices online and to express themselves online without the meddling of government or government agencies.
Bill C-10 started as a mediocre effort but has become an unmitigated disaster of public policy. I commit to all Canadians that I will continue to stand up for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms while also working to promote Canadian creators.
I, and my Conservative colleagues, will oppose Bill C-10 and the threat it represents.
(Photo of Parliament Hill by festivio on Pixabay. Photo of Scott Aitchison courtesy of Scott Aitchison.)
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox three times per week!
Click here to support local news
Jim Logagianes says
Thank you Scott your article addresses the potential problems this type of legislation can create. I hope your government can help to stop this bill before it’s too late. Censoring the internet, subsidizing the media and continuous polling are spending priorities of our current Federal Government. And the urgency to pass this bill now is cause for concern. Billions of our hard earned tax dollars wasted polishing the Liberal’s tarnished image (How the hell can this be a spending priority at this difficult time) There is a big difference between spending money and wasting money especially when you are running massive deficits. Canada is a far cry from having equal access to quality Health Care and Long Term Care across the country. The neglect of our entire health care system is one of the main contributing factors to the lockdown measures which are currently in place. The Fed’s spending priorities seem out of touch with reality. Canada needs a leader who will make the health of the nation our number #1 Priority. It’s time to stop pretending. It’s time to show us that you really care about all Canadians not just segments of the population.
BTW If you put Freeland and Trudeau in charge of the Sahara Desert they would run out of sand in five years. Something you might want to consider when you go to vote next time if you can afford the gas to get you there. You can take comfort in knowing were all in this together.
Hugh Holland says
Scott by all means you are right to stand up for freedom of speach. But we know that regulating or not regulating freedom of speach is very tricky business that can cut both ways. .We know that not everyone has the discretion or self-dicipline to stop themslves from posting, believing, or distorting comments that are beyond the limits of civil society regarding lies, hate, or inciting insurrection. We know it is easier than ever before to post something very nasty on the Internet and in social media about someone you have never met and do not know. So, is it healthy to have a complete ugly free-fall-all? If not, would an all party review panel be the answer? Can only conservatives or only liberals or only NDP be trusted to do an honest and fair job? Or is it best to trust the duly elected government or their professional agency, that can be tossed out or sued if they are blatantly overbearing or partisan? There are no easy answers, so please keep working with your collegues from all parties to try to find the right answer. Pretend you all work for the same company and are trying to find a workable solution. Because you are.
Kathy henderson says
I’m really upset about Bill C10. It is infringing on our freedom of speech. There is already in place guidelines on hate speech and racism so we don’t need this bill c10. I think they want to limit anyone who is political or disagrees with government. Down with Bill C-10. Please join in the debate.
JimLogagianes says
Toronto Sun Editorial How much did CBC lawsuit folly cost
https://apple.news/Av8G-oweGStmFRvOgTJmWiw
kelly zytaruk, says
While I have no complaints with the promotion of Canadian art and culture I do not see the validity of FORCING and controlling my Canadian art and culture content.
Who does the government think that they are telling me what I can and cannot watch. Maybe I am not interested in Canadian art or I have a preference for American art or Swedish art or whatever.
Yes, please promote our culture, but not by forcing it on me and controlling what I can and cannot see or say. The choice is mine. Don’t get me wrong, I am proud of my Canadian heritage but if at the end of the day no one is interested in Canadian culture then maybe there is something wrong with it and it doesn’t deserve to be promoted in the first place.
Promotion is fine, regulating and censorship is not.
Let the viewer be the judge.