By Denis Carmel
OTTAWA – A couple of hours before the House of Commons held a vote confirming the time which the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage can study Bill C-10 will now be limited, the committee held its Monday meeting and continued to spin its wheels.
Nominally, Monday’s meeting was scheduled as a return to clause-by-clause consideration of the bill, but the committee first voted unanimously against a Green Party amendment which was discussed for two hours last Friday, and then defeated an NDP motion to continue meetings into the summer.
That motion, by NDP member Heather MacPherson, proposed to hold meetings in July and August so that “we take the time to improve flawed legislation,” she said.
After a lengthy discussion, Julie Dabrusin, parliamentary secretary of the Minister of Canadian Heritage, moved to suspend debate of that motion, which passed with the support of the Bloc Québécois.
Then, the Conservatives introduced four amendments, just under the wire, since the time allocation motion, as it is written now, prevents members to introduce any further amendments.
The new four triggered questions from the Liberals who took the opportunity to read comments Conservative MP Rachael Harder made in her local paper about Canadian creatives. “…what we are talking about here is requiring these companies take 30% of their revenues generated from in Canada, and to put that 30% into a Canadian Arts Fund. That arts fund actually goes toward a very niche group of artists that are stuck in the early 1990s because they haven’t managed to be competitive on new platforms,” Harder told the Lethbridge Herald.
“So they are very reliant on government grants in order to continue to exist. And, quite frankly, they are producing material that Canadians just don’t want. Because, at the end of the day, if Canadians did want it then there would be a market for it. And if there was a market for it then these artists would get paid based on the market,” she told the paper.
“She feels this special interest group, many of whom originate in Quebec in her opinion, are the real drivers behind Bill C-10, and that’s why the Liberals, Bloc and NDP, which are all trying to gain votes in that province, are flirting with passing a bill, likely by this fall, which will certainly face a constitutional challenge as soon as it is given Royal Assent,” the story in the Herald goes on.
Harder later apologized in French on Twitter, saying she chose her words wrong and that all artists enrich our country.
At noon Monday, the Speaker of the House of Commons, chastised MPs who misbehaved on Friday for their lack of respect for the office of the Speaker. He then resumed the debate on the time allocation motion and then the motion went on to a vote, which interrupted the work of the committee.
The motion to limit the time to five hours of further study passed with the Bloc supporting the Liberals and NDP and Conservatives objecting (above is a CPAC.ca screen cap confirming the vote results).
The next committee meeting will be held on Friday and no other meetings have been scheduled so far, but after five hours of debate, the voting starts that, in itself, could take a few hours. Some 40 remaining amendments need to be voted on.
Once everything has been voted on and any further potential dilatory tactics dealt with, the bill is sent to the House for report stage, and third reading (which usually includes debates). The time allocation motion passed today was only for the committee stage and not for the House.
Then it moves to the Senate for first reading, second reading, its own committee stage and third reading then Royal Assent. It can still be done, but it will require will, skill and collaboration… and summer work.
(Ed note: Sigh…)
