As the Senate prepares to pass Bill C-11 after making history with the extent of its legislative study, the Conservatives are decrying the government for moving to limit the hours left to debate the legislation known as the Online Streaming Act.
Calling it one last "censorship measure" before the bill becomes law, Leader of the Opposition Sen. Don Plett said Monday that the government's plan to use time allocation to conclude debate in the next day or so is "a slap in the face" to Canadians who have concerns with Bill C-11 and to all senators who tried to improve it.
Bill C-11 proposes the first substantive updates to Canada's Broadcasting Act since 1991, before online content or digital media was a factor. It is aimed at ensuring social media and streaming giants are subjected to Canadian content requirements and regulations comparable to traditional broadcasters, and as a result promote and pay their fair share towards Canadian creators.
While many in the "CanCon" music, film and television industries are backing the bill, alarms have been sounded by critics— including the platforms that would find themselves subjected to new regulations— that the Liberal proposal could have knock-on effects for content creators and what everyday users see online, due to provisions that would compel platforms to promote Canadian content.
After years of discussion, study, and modifications to the initial piece of legislation, last month the House of Commons decided it would take most, but not all, of the amendments made by the Senate during its history-making committee study of Bill C-11. Canadian Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez told the Senate as much in late March.
Last week, Government Representative in the Senate, Sen. Marc Gold presented a motion that would see the Senate accept the version of Bill C-11 that the House of Commons signed off on.
The presentation of Gold's proposal was followed by hours of debate and procedural wrangling around amendments to it.
After appearing at an impasse, late Thursday night following a push from the Conservatives to adjourn, Gold gave notice of what's known as "time allocation," a move that puts limits on how much further time can be spent talking about a specific item of business.
"This is a censorship measure on a censorship bill in a chamber that has been repeatedly touted as more independent," Plett said in his Monday statement. "The Trudeau government has decided, and demonstrated, that speedy passage of its legislation trumps Senate independence."
If passed when it's presented on Tuesday, the time allocation motion would mean the Senate would be provided up to six further hours of debate on Bill C-11—specifically on Gold's proposed Senate message to the House on the bill.
Then there will be votes on a pair of amendments, including one from Plett that would see the upper chamber stand its ground and insist on the amendments that Bill C-11's sponsor Rodriguez rejected, followed by a vote on Gold's main motion proposing the Senate signoff on the version of the bill the majority of the Commons' voted for.
If the amendments fail and the main motion passes as it stands, the House will be informed that the current version of the legislation has cleared the Senate and the contentious bill is ready for royal assent, the final step before a bill becomes law.
Gold's motion asked the Senate to acknowledge the Liberals' "stated intent" is that Bill C-11 "will not apply to user-generated digital content" despite persisting concerns that the legislation has inadequate protections. But, during deliberations last week, senators passed a tweak to the wording, replacing the words "stated intent" with the words "public assurance."
During last week's debate, several MPs from various groups within the upper chamber took turns speaking to Bill C-11 as it stands, how the long-languishing Liberal promise has evolved after considerable scrutiny even after the government rejected some of the more substantive changes, and how they felt about standing down or insisting on certain amendments.
"This is our time. This is our moment to stand up," said Conservative Sen. Leo Housakos, who led what he called an "unprecedented" Senate committee study on Bill C-11 that included nearly 70 hours of testimony.
"The government claims it rejected the amendment that would have scoped out user-generated content because they want to afford the CRTC flexibility through the consultative process on the regulatory framework. They’re sacrificing clarity in the law itself to supposedly ensure clarity in the consultative process. Does that make any sense to anybody here?" Housakos asked his colleagues.
In his speech, member of the Progressive Senate Group Sen. Andrew Cardozo called the process surrounding Bill C-11 "a textbook case of how our bicameral system works," while suggesting that the way this legislation has been handled may be a forbearer for future policymaking.
"It is also a textbook case because of the high political drama it has encountered, replete with many delay tactics and fundraising off the process," said Cardozo. "But it is still an interesting case where we have seen a massive online campaign over the last few months. This is either an exception to the norm of constructive policy-making or, in fact, the 'new normal' that will eliminate constructive policy-making in favour of divisive, partisan and extra-parliamentary campaigns."
The Conservatives have led the legislative charge—alongside tech giants including YouTube, Google and Meta—against Bill C-11. In a fundraising email to supporters sent Sunday, the party said the Senate was their "last shot" at stopping the bill before it becomes law.
Speaking to reporters in Ottawa last week, Rodriguez said Bill C-11 is an important bill and "it's time to move on."
