The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage conducted a long-overdue hearing yesterday on the department’s funding of Laith Marouf, a known antisemite, as part of its anti-hate program. The hearing, which was held almost seven months after the issue began to attract to public attention, featured departmental officials answering questions from MPs seeking to understand how this could have occurred. While most of the discussion emphasized fixing the grant approval process to ensure this doesn’t happen again, that framing misses that there were at least two failures: a process failure that led to the approval and a response failure once officials knew or ought to have known about the process failure. The process failure, including the lack of due diligence, can be addressed by fixing the systems and engaging in greater antisemitism education. But response failure is harder to address since it requires accountability from the department and its ministers that has thus far been absent.
Post Tagged with: "canadian heritage"
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 156: Senator Paula Simons on Why the Government Should Accept the Senate’s Bill C-11 Fix on User Content Regulation
Bill C-11 is in the hands of the government as Canadians await a decision on which Senate amendments it will accept, which might be rejected, and then how the Senate responds. A key question involves a fix to the regulation of user content provision, which provides that sound recordings are in, but user content is out. Senator Paula Simons, an independent Senator from Alberta nominated by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to the Senate in 2018, co-crafted the compromise amendment and has been one of the most engaged and informed Senators throughout the Bill C-11 legislative process. She joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss the hearings, her amendment, and what may lie ahead for both Bill C-11 and the upcoming Senate review of Bill C-18.
Why Margaret Atwood is Right to Criticize Bill C-11 and What the Backlash Teaches About the Risks of Challenging Government Policy
Margaret Atwood, the famed Canadian author, has been the target of a predictable backlash for her comments criticizing Bill C-11. Her comments, which came in the aftermath of Senator David Adams Richards forceful denunciation of the bill on the Senate floor, describe the bill as “well meaning”, but express concern about the uncertainty over how it will be interpreted, the role of government officials in determining what counts as Canadian, and the secrecy associated with the CRTC. The reaction has led to columnists suggesting she’s speaking nonsense and one writer group calling her comments “misguided and uninformed”. Yet the reality is that Atwood’s comments are consistent with longstanding criticisms raised by many stakeholders. So why the backlash?
Actions Speak Louder than Words: Ministers Rodriguez and Champagne Post Mandate Letter to New CRTC Chair Vicky Eatrides
Canadian Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez and ISED Minister François-Philippe Champagne publicly released what amounts to a mandate letter to new CRTC Chair Vicky Eatrides this morning. The letter contains many laudable goals and aspirations: a more timely, transparent, and inclusive commission, an emphasis on competition in telecom, and an affirmation of the importance of freedom of expression in broadcast. Yet what matters when it comes to the current government and communications issues is not what it says, but what it does. The letter may represent a tacit acknowledgement of the disaster that was the Ian Scott era – the ministers themselves note the waning public trust in the CRTC – but the problems go beyond its chair.
Senate Passes Updated Bill C-11 as Heritage Minister Rodriguez Suggests Government Will Reject Any Amendments that Have an Impact
Bill C-11 entered what may be its final phase yesterday with a near split screen: at the Prime Time conference held at the Westin Hotel in Ottawa was Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez telling an industry audience that he would reject any Senate amendments that have an impact, stating “there are amendments that have zero impact on the bill and other that may have some and we will not accept them.” The clear signal was that despite heralding the Senate study of the bill as one of the most extensive ever, he will reject any of their findings that might actually make changes. Meanwhile, across the street, the Senate was in its final third reading debate of Bill C-11, closing the day by passing the bill with 26 amendments that include a change that scopes out user content but leaves professional music intact, consistent with the government’s stated objectives.
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 231: Sara Bannerman on How Canadian Political Parties Maximize Voter Data Collection and Minimize Privacy Safeguards 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 230: Aengus Bridgman on the 2025 Federal Election, Social Media Platforms, and Misinformation 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 229: My Digital Access Day Keynote – Assessing the Canadian Digital Policy Record 
Queen’s University Trustees Reject Divestment Efforts Emphasizing the Importance of Institutional Neutrality 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 228: Kumanan Wilson on Why Canadian Health Data Requires Stronger Privacy Protection in the Trump Era
