By Denis Carmel
OTTAWA – It now appears senators on the transport and communications committee (TRCM) are suffering from witness fatigue.
On Wednesday evening, five associations of artists involved in the creation of content in various forms came in front of committee to offer their comments on the Online Streaming Act, but they generally repeated the same arguments the committee had heard before.
This prompted Senator Julie Miville-Dechêne (above) to quip that they all had heard these arguments, which were presented, in writing, by the Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (CDCE) and supported by them and others before. So, she veered deliberately to another line of questioning, which although interesting did not raise the interest of our panellists.
She concluded that the positions taken by various parties showed a generational fracture as well as a linguistic one. The younger crowd seems to be against the bill so they can continue to benefit from the freedom they have today, and the francophones seem to be more vocal in their support of the bill.
This anecdotal observation shows a different reality as the opponents of the bill focus their attention on the impact of it on user-generated-content (UGC). They tend to be younger, and the successful ones tend to be anglophones.
The Québec cultural sector is very organized, very easy to mobilize, and they get their voices heard.
Most witnesses at the meeting favoured the quick adoption of the bill, but they proposed amendments which, again, have to do with:
- The exclusions of artists involved in digital creation from the Status of the Artist Act, which would leave the creators not covered by negotiated agreements.
- The difference of treatment of the Canadian broadcasters and on-line streamers would mean different treatment in terms of the expectations of the use of Canadian resources (maximum use versus greatest practicable use).
- CRTC would hold hearings for the renewals of Canadian licensees but not for foreign authorizations and these decisions could not be appealed to Cabinet.
- The ability of Cabinet to issue more detailed policy directions, which would diminish the autonomy of the CRTC.
The outlier was the Canadian Tax Federation (represented coincidentally by a younger anglophone), which opposes giving more powers to the CRTC without transparency, giving the power to the Commission to regulate UGC and finally allowing bureaucrats the ability to filter content, which they view as mission creep. So, they suggest to not move forward with this bill.
