Bill C-10
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
171.62686
Summary
In this episode, we discuss Bill C-10, a piece of legislation that could have potentially led to The Blueprint being cancelled. We are joined by Rachel Harder, the Shadow Minister for Digital Government, to discuss the legislation and its potential impact on freedom of speech.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hello and welcome once again to The Blueprints. This is Canada's Conservative Podcast. I'm your
00:00:06.160
host, Jamie Schmael, Member of Parliament for Halliburton Corwithal Lights, Brock, with new
00:00:10.180
content every single Tuesday. We're a bit early. It's usually at 1.30 p.m. Eastern time. We invite
00:00:15.200
you to join us. Not only that, we need you to like, comment, subscribe, share this program,
00:00:20.720
help us push back against the ever-moving liberal agenda. I normally was going to say this and move
00:00:26.480
on to my next part, but Bill C-10, this is the topic we're going to be talking about today.
00:00:31.860
That potentially may have led to The Blueprint being cancelled. Justin Trudeau obviously didn't
00:00:37.280
want any scrutiny of his vision, his musing, so we're glad that changes are being made,
00:00:43.520
but we're not quite sure they're actually going to be the changes we want to help us talk about it.
00:00:48.080
We're bringing in Rachel Harder, the Member of Parliament for Lethbridge, also the Shadow
00:00:51.860
Minister for Digital Government. Welcome to the first time on this program. Thank you, Jamie. It's
00:00:57.640
so nice to be here with you today. All right, we're going to kick off Bill C-10 discussion in
00:01:01.660
just one moment. Today is May the 4th, and of course, our leader is a big fan of Star Wars. He
00:01:06.900
has this video. I think we should share it, because it's appropriate being May 4th.
00:01:21.860
Yes. Taken down. Taken down. That is very sad. You saw the little empire emblem here as
00:01:29.620
the Galactic Empire brings its will down on the people. We'll quickly just give a background.
00:01:36.340
C-10, it was introduced last November. It was slowly making its way through the committee process.
00:01:41.320
It was just doing its thing. It was meant to make the big web giants pay. Then a couple of weeks ago,
00:01:47.720
on a Friday, a committee, the Liberals who dominate committee took a clause out that would have
00:01:53.820
exempted user-generated content like those from Facebook and TikTok, YouTube, that kind of thing,
00:02:00.200
from government's regulation. The government continued and said, it's no big deal. There's
00:02:07.760
no problem to see here, even though the Heritage Minister, Gilboa, could not explain it at all.
00:02:12.460
Now, they're saying, after pressure, they're going to bring an exemption back in that will
00:02:18.460
hopefully make this crystal clear. But they had one at first, which was no big deal. Maybe you can
00:02:24.000
unpack this. It's hard to follow. Liberal logic.
00:02:29.080
Well, that's exactly it, Jamie. It is difficult to follow. You're entirely right. There was a clause
00:02:34.940
originally in this legislation when it was announced in the fall. That clause protected the content that
00:02:41.680
individuals would put on their social media pages. And then, you know, about a week ago at committee,
00:02:46.480
that was removed. And of course, Canadians were rightly outraged because, let's be honest,
00:02:53.040
at the end of the day, they want to be able to put up their cat video or a video of them dancing in
00:02:56.680
their kitchen or, you know, maybe they're having a barbecue with friends and they post that.
00:03:00.480
They want that freedom without, you know, having that content censored by the government or an arm of
00:03:06.220
the government. That said, Canadians pushed back. Of course, Conservatives have pushed back.
00:03:10.280
Now, Minister Gabot is telling us that he's going to come forward with an amendment
00:03:14.420
and somehow that this amendment is going to clarify that individuals are protected.
00:03:20.020
I haven't seen that wording. I look forward to seeing that wording. But I think what needs to
00:03:25.340
be highlighted here is that this is yet another liberal attempt at trying to save face. They're
00:03:33.540
trying to make themselves look innocent. They're trying to say, you know, all along, they never meant
00:03:38.540
to infringe upon, you know, Canadians' rights. Look, over and over and over again in question
00:03:44.420
period, the minister has buckled down on this and has tried to, you know, push this legislation
00:03:53.180
through. If there's any change that is made, it is because the Canadian people were effective in
00:03:58.680
using their voice and pushing back for what matters.
00:04:00.860
Keep in mind, this is not the first time these Liberals have tried to take away the role of an
00:04:08.800
opposition party or opposition voices. You remember in the previous Parliament, what was known as,
00:04:14.080
I believe, Motion 6 led to Elbowgate. That was taking away the powers that the opposition have
00:04:20.740
in the House of Commons. Then we fast forward to the pandemic. The first thing they do, the Liberals do,
00:04:27.120
when the kind of restricted Parliament was brought back, fake Parliament, if you will, was to bring in
00:04:32.940
a bill that gave the executive branch sweeping powers to spend or tax on anything they wanted
00:04:39.060
up until 2022, free reign. Basically, any opposition voice, again, trying to be censored.
00:04:45.320
And now we have Bill C-10, which had that clause that protected freedom of speech, and they took it out,
00:04:52.900
acted so confused when people were upset, couldn't believe it. Why would you want to have opposing
00:04:58.880
views? And here we are again. It's as if this is a path, a pattern with this government.
00:05:07.280
Yeah, absolutely. That's exactly it. I think this government has proven themselves again and again
00:05:12.960
and again to be against freedom. And look, at the end of the day, Jamie, you and I both know
00:05:19.600
that freedom is messy. It is. To grant people freedom can be messy. But the alternative to that
00:05:27.260
is a dictatorship. The alternative to that is government control. The alternative to that,
00:05:33.280
I would argue, is absolutely soul-crushing and destructive. And so if we want to contend for
00:05:40.320
and protect the Canadian society in which we live and the freedoms that we enjoy, we have to push back
00:05:47.020
on these things. Because the Liberals want nothing more than to push their ideological agenda
00:05:52.280
and impose their value set on Canadians. I mean, another example of this, Jamie, is we saw this,
00:05:58.820
you know, a few years back in 2018 with the Canada Summer Jobs Grant. You know, they said companies
00:06:03.920
could apply for the grant, but they needed to sign off on a statement of values. Well, who created those
00:06:10.560
values? Liberals created those values. And if businesses or, you know, not-for-profit organizations
00:06:15.480
weren't willing to sign off on that value set, then they didn't get the grant. That's wrong.
00:06:21.180
It is wrong for the government to dictate the values that an organization needs to sign off on.
00:06:26.900
When you're talking about the values, let's unpack that a bit. Without this clause, without this
00:06:31.740
exemption giving people the right to post whatever they want on YouTube or TikTok or whatever platform,
00:06:37.180
that sends this country potentially down a very, very dark and dangerous path. I don't think
00:06:44.360
many Canadians, regardless of how they vote, would be happy with that.
00:06:50.560
Absolutely. And this is where I would, again, contend this is not a partisan issue, or at least
00:06:55.600
it shouldn't be. You know, protecting Canadians' charter rights should just be a no-brainer for every
00:07:00.680
single political party. But for whatever reason, Conservatives seem to be the only ones that are
00:07:05.760
willing to raise our voices and really contend for the protection of, you know, freedom of expression,
00:07:12.260
freedom of belief, freedom of opinion. And so, you know, kudos to our colleagues. And again,
00:07:18.460
kudos to Canadians for using their voices to speak out and to show that they are incredibly unhappy
00:07:24.920
and even outraged with the current legislation that is before the House Bill C-10.
00:07:31.100
And what is funny is we, as Conservatives, raised many concerns about this bill prior to the clause
00:07:39.340
being taken out a few Fridays ago, and no one was really paying attention. So I'm glad the media
00:07:43.700
finally caught up. But I just want to say, if this was Stephen Harper as Prime Minister, and Stephen
00:07:51.060
Harper brought in this bill, the media would be losing their collective minds. And it's just been
00:07:57.480
a slow, slow burn here, and they're finally catching up. Yeah, it's so interesting, right,
00:08:04.180
just to see the discrepancy there between the way that we would, you know, perhaps be treated if we
00:08:09.280
were in the same boat. You know, again, at the end of the day, we know that the Liberals enjoy
00:08:16.200
some protections from the media that we aren't and weren't granted as Conservatives. Nevertheless,
00:08:22.780
you know, I would just highlight again, you know, I think because Canadians have been so vocal on this
00:08:30.960
topic and have made their voices heard. The media, you know, has started to be sympathetic to them.
00:08:38.680
And therefore, you know, they've given us as Conservatives an opportunity to have our voices
00:08:43.280
heard as well, which, you know, I genuinely appreciate. So the Heritage Minister, Stephen
00:08:48.100
Bilbo says he is going to bring a new clause that will make it crystal clear that there won't be
00:08:53.460
that government regulation on these kind of social media platforms. Do we trust him?
00:08:58.380
Frankly, no, no, I would say that Minister Bilbo has been sneaky, he has been disingenuous. He's been
00:09:08.860
crafty, you know, anytime in question period where he has been asked to respond to our concerns,
00:09:14.880
he has resorted to the typical Liberal response, which is deflect, deflect, attack, deflect,
00:09:22.300
repeat. And that's, that's, that's generally their response. And again, it's shameful, you know, and so
00:09:30.140
just even in the House this week, you know, we saw that the Liberals were incapable of disagreeing
00:09:36.060
without being disagreeable. I asked the Minister a question, he wasn't able to answer, it made him
00:09:41.120
feel uncomfortable. And so instead of actually engaging with the issue at hand, he decided to
00:09:45.840
deflect and attack me on personal values and beliefs that I hold. You know, again, I would never wish for
00:09:54.320
freedom of speech to be taken from the Minister, we have the freedom to use or misuse our voice,
00:10:01.040
I would contend that the Minister misused his voice, rather than answering the question, he decided to
00:10:05.780
attack me. But again, that's his freedom to do so, he now has to bear the consequences. And of course,
00:10:11.580
you know, at the end of the day, it, it just makes it obvious that he is trying to deflect from the
00:10:16.680
issue at hand. Jamie, my point is this, if they cannot give a straight answer in the House of
00:10:21.780
Commons, if the Minister cannot defend this piece of legislation, why would I trust him to be able to
00:10:28.740
bring forward an amendment that is going to serve Canadians well, and for him to be straight up,
00:10:34.720
honest and forthright about that? He hasn't, he hasn't possessed those qualities thus far.
00:10:39.840
I have my doubts about whether or not he's able to possess those qualities going forward. But maybe
00:10:46.180
he'll prove me wrong. Well, I would almost say that I haven't seen the Prime Minister answer a
00:10:53.040
question and question period in, in almost six years now. So that's fair, maybe, you know, it'll
00:10:58.960
happen someday, but I don't see it. But yeah, I should have, it's my mistake, I should have had that
00:11:03.260
video of question period yesterday queued up. And I apologize for that, where the the minister just
00:11:08.680
basically gaslight you, he, he didn't even answer it, he just attacked you on a personal level.
00:11:13.460
And, and really, that shows that they had nothing, the minister had nothing, you had him dead to
00:11:19.640
rights. And he just flips on the personal attack button. Yeah. You know, I mean, that that certainly
00:11:28.180
was the case yesterday. He didn't even refer to the question that I asked him, he just launched,
00:11:33.800
you know, straight into personal attack. Like I said, you know, I feel that it was inappropriate.
00:11:39.080
At the same time, freedom is messy. He chose to misuse his freedom. And, you know, at the end of
00:11:45.680
the day, I think Canadians can see through it. Absolutely. So what are we looking for in this in
00:11:50.920
this clause that the Liberals say they're going to bring in is, you know, obviously, this dark and
00:11:56.400
dangerous path without it allows the government to determine what is basically speech they don't agree
00:12:01.940
with, right? So eventually, where the dark and dangerous path goes, anything that becomes contrary
00:12:08.240
to the government view, the government narrative, the government message becomes content that is
00:12:14.140
offensive in some way. And so we want to avoid that altogether, allow people to post their opinions on
00:12:20.580
social media, and have the freedom to do so. So is that kind of what we're looking for? Any specific
00:12:27.140
Well, I think certainly, you know, when the minister brings forward this amendment,
00:12:32.020
I'm going to be looking for language that is succinct, precise, definable, you know, and of course,
00:12:41.900
I'm going to seek, I'm going to seek the opinions of legal experts, including also, you know, Peter
00:12:47.920
Menzies, former CRTC co-chair. And so that being the case, you know, I'm going to I'm going to want to
00:12:53.820
see what they say with regard to this amendment and how it's brought forward. But what I find
00:13:00.400
interesting is, you know, the minister thus far, when he has had questions posed to him, or concerns
00:13:09.420
raised, or when people have disagreed with his legislation, he's labeled them as, quote, unquote,
00:13:15.560
extremist. If he labels those individuals as extremist, and therefore squelches their voice,
00:13:23.820
it doesn't give me a lot of confidence in his intent when it comes to protecting individual
00:13:31.100
rights and freedoms concerning the content people post. I don't know that he's really interested in
00:13:36.520
that. I think he's interested in appearing as if he cares. I think he's interested in saving face.
00:13:43.240
I think he's interested in getting the media off his back. You know, but at the end of the day,
00:13:48.520
is he truly interested in making sure that Canadians are rightly protected? No, I don't think so. So I'm,
00:13:55.640
you know, obviously, I'm a skeptic when it comes to this amendment that's coming forward. I'll be
00:13:59.700
reading it very closely. And as I said, I'll be seeking legal opinions from individuals who are
00:14:05.180
experts in this field as well. I think we should also ensure that Canadians continue to write into the
00:14:10.060
minister and try to keep pressure on that this is a very clear definition.
00:14:15.500
Absolutely. Absolutely. And again, I think, you know, if there's one reason, you know, why the
00:14:22.580
minister would actually change this, it's because of the voices of Canadians, because they matter.
00:14:27.620
And so I would encourage Canadians from coast to coast to speak up, to have their voices heard,
00:14:33.620
to express their concerns. Let's fill the minister's inbox. Let's, you know, make his phone ring off the
00:14:40.240
hook. Let's have our voices heard. Because right now, we have the freedom to express our opinions. Right
00:14:46.320
now, we have the freedom to make our voices heard. But if we do not defend those rights and freedoms
00:14:54.180
right now, I believe this government is going in the direction of actually squelting those voices
00:15:00.800
and preventing them from being heard. That's a scary spot to land at.
00:15:05.280
Rachel Harder, we are almost out of time. So I want to do a happy thing. I want to congratulate you
00:15:09.900
on your recent engagement. You had a COVID engagement. Congratulations. Well done. And I also give the floor
00:15:16.080
to our guest for the final word, the final message. It's all you.
00:15:20.680
Jamie. Well, thank you so much for that congratulatory note. Of course, my fiance and I are very excited to
00:15:26.740
be getting married. And not only are we going to have a COVID engagement, but also a COVID wedding.
00:15:31.900
And so we're looking forward to our small wedding of 10 in June. And I look forward to my colleagues
00:15:37.520
having the opportunity to meet him and hopefully, you know, for friendships to form. With that, I would
00:15:43.140
just say, you know, when it comes to the legislation that is in front of us, ultimately, at the end of the
00:15:48.920
day, the goal of the Conservative members within the House of Commons is to stand up for and protect
00:15:54.640
the voices of Canadians. And those voices are often expressed through social media platforms,
00:16:00.240
which is becoming the new public square. And so we must do everything that is in our power
00:16:05.940
to defend that space and the freedom that Canadians have to post the things that matter most to them
00:16:13.420
Thank you very much, Rachel Harder, the Member of Parliament for Lethbridge, also the Shadow Minister
00:16:17.540
for Digital Government. We will have her on again. That is a great show. We do appreciate
00:16:22.100
her time. I know she's busy. This topic is heating up evermore. And we appreciate the support from
00:16:27.000
Canadians right across the country to keep pressure on this Liberal government. Remember, please like,
00:16:32.580
comment, subscribe, share this program, help us push back against the ever moving Liberal agenda
00:16:37.620
with new content every single Tuesday at 1.30pm Eastern Time. Of course, if you can't watch this
00:16:43.620
all now on Facebook, please download it. Listen to it later on on platforms like CastBox, Google Play,
00:16:49.300
iTunes, Spotify, you name it. It is out there. We do appreciate your time. We do appreciate Rachel's
00:16:54.800
appearance. We'll have her on again. Like I said, remember, low taxes, less government,