​I will begin this weeks report by sharing part of a conversation I once had with a now retired provincial cabinet minister. 

The former Minister shared an observation that one of the challenges in government, when attempting to try and resolve a problem, is the need to be very careful to ensure that the proposed solution does not create more new, unanticipated problems.

I am reminded of this as the Liberal Government has tabled, and recently amended, Bill C-10: “An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts”.

Few would dispute that in an age of increased digital steaming, and various online media platforms, that the Broadcasting Act and the oversight regulation with the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) is badly in need of updating.

The challenge, as the now retired former cabinet minister would remind us, is how make these much-needed updates without inadvertently creating new problems?

Recently the Liberal Government removed a critical exemption to Bill C-10, that in my view and the view of many other experts and stakeholders, will create serious setbacks to our Charter protected right of free expression.

When Bill C-10 was first proposed it exempted 'unique user generated content' from the bill.

For example, if a Canadian created and posted their own video on YouTube, Facebook, Tik Tok or any other online social media platforms, their content was exempted by the changes proposed in Bill C-10. 

However, during clause by clause examination of Bill C-10 in the Industry, Science and Technology committee, the Liberals removed this exemption.

Removing this exemption means that the unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats at the CRTC could have the power to regulate, remove and censor what Canadians post to their own social media.

This in turn can also limit what Canadians are able to see online in Canada.

Instead of Canadians having the choice, the choices could be limited based on a yet to be announced criteria set and enforced by the CRTC.

The Liberals so far defend this amendment stating that the intent is to limit the broadcast of unlicensed content online to protect copyright holders, who have lobbied for these changes.

That ultimately is the problem with the Liberal approach in Bill C-10.

Rather than resolving the unlicensed content issue through copyright law, the government proposes to cut it off at the broadcasting level, allowing Canadian's content to be sacrificed in the process.

In a statement on the bill’s Charter compliance, justice officials argued that the original exemption, removed by the Liberals, alleviated potential concerns of breaching section 2 (b) of the Charter on free expression.

With the exemption's removal, many are speculating on what impacts this bill will have.

This approach by the Liberals, according to one of Canada’s foremost law professors, who also holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa,  is a “shocking and likely unconstitutional speech regulation.”

Professor Michael Geist further notes:

“We would never think of subjecting the content of the letters, emails or blog posts to CRTC regulation, yet Canadian Heritage Minister, Steven Guilbeault, and the Liberal government believe it is appropriate to regulate a new generation’s form of speech – TikTok videos, Instagram posts, Facebook feeds, and YouTube videos – as if they are the equivalent of broadcast programs.”

For the record I share the concerns of Professor Geist. 

My question this week:

Do you support or oppose this amendment to Bill C-10?

I can be reached at Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca or call toll free 1-800-665-8711.

​This week the Liberal Government tabled its first budget in over two years.

In her budget speech, the Finance Minister stated that we must build:

“a more resilient Canada: better, more fair, more prosperous and more innovative.”

This raises the obvious question.

Who has been governing Canada for the past five years to have made Canada so un-resilient, so un-fair, so unprosperous and lacking in innovation?

This is generally the pattern of Liberal budgets and this one is no exception.

By the numbers this budget promises a massive level of spending, all told some $143 billion in new spending over the next six years.

Where is it all going? 

Despite promises not to use omnibus budgets, this Liberal budget comes in at over 700 pages, so it is only possible to highlight some of the proposed spending areas.

$30 billion has been earmarked for daycare and early learning over the next five years.

This will require partnerships with the provinces to fully implement.

Ultimately the goal is to provide $10 per day daycare.

$18 billion in promised spending over the next five years in an effort to close the gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people.

$17 billion is promised to be spent in future years on the promotion of what the Liberals have termed the “green recovery effort".

There is also a $12 billion promise to extend COVID business aid programs as well as other income support measures.

Another announcement is $12 billion over five years to increase the OAS benefit that includes a one-time bonus payment of $500 expected at some point later this year.

I should also add this is not a tax and spend budget.

Many speculated this budget would include a “wealth tax” or other significant tax increases. 

From my read of this budget so far, while there have been some minor increases in places, there are no significant tax increases.

How does all this spending get paid for? 

While there is no actual debt reduction plan, the Liberals indicate that the levels of spending will decrease over time as many support programs will be wound down and that, combined with economic growth, will offset this spending.

What is ignored in this budget? 

Surprisingly there is no significant increase to Federal health transfers, when compared to what was requested by Provincial Premiers.

I say surprisingly as this is the most significant priority request from provincial governments with healthcare system under significant pressure right now.

For those hoping for a universal basic income or a national pharmacare program, these items are left out of the budget. 

Also given that this budget takes Canada to a debt to GDP ratio of roughly 50%, there is limited fiscal capacity to potentially add these programs.

My question this week:

Based on what you have read here, and likely heard reported elsewhere, what are your thoughts on this budget?

I can be reached at Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca or call toll free 1-800-665-8711.

Spoiler alert.

This weeks MP report will likely only be of interest to boaters.

More specifically boaters who operate motor driven boats and are currently required to hold a Transport Canada 'Operator Card for Pleasure Craft'.

For those of you who hold this 'Pleasure Craft Operators Card, chances are at some point in your past you wrote an exam that was administered by a third party operator and, if you passed, were issued a 'Pleasure Craft Operator Card'.

These cards are required to be carried by skippers at all times when operating a motorized vessel and in the majority of cases have no date of expiry. 

The only exception to this requirement was for those who were renting a powerboat or personal watercraft such as a Sea-Doo or WaveRunner.

This exemption was based on the fact that it was not practical to be able to administer the test in such a short period of time and that boat rental agencies provide safety instructions for operators who are renting the boats in question.

The reason for my report this week is that Transport Canada is considering making significant changes to this program.

How will these changes potentially affect you if you currently hold this card?

For starters the cards may no longer become permanent. 

There may be a new requirement to take a new course potentially every five years.

The courses themselves may also become considerably more expensive as Transport Canada has proposed that course operators pay a fee of $5000 for a five-year term. 

It is also proposed that there would be an additional fee payable to Transport Canada for each individual who passes the course and receives a new 'Pleasure Craft Operator Card'.

In addition, is a proposed elimination of the exemption for those who would rent a powerboat or personal watercraft. 

This proposal has generated significant concern from local boat rental agencies as it is unclear how a test could be administered in a short period of time as well as the economics of the added costs to the boat rental industry, of which we have many here in the Okanagan.

I am not a boater however the comments I have heard from boaters are greatly concerned about these proposed changes.

As one boater shared with me – our local lakes are not serviced by the Canadian Coast Guard, for the most part the Okanagan does not have many of the costly to service navigation aides located in other bodies of water, and it is proposed to remove VHS weather services that many boaters do use.

In other words, the concerns can be summarized that the federal government is offering less services to local boaters but wanting to take more money from them in return.  

In fairness, Transport Canada they have indicated that the current program, as it exists, generates no revenue for the federal government but does carry costs.

The fees raised by these changes will contribute towards the costs of Transport Canada to administer this program.

My question this week is to boaters – Are you supportive of these changes? 

Unfortunately, the window of time Transport Canada provided to comment on these proposals has expired but more information can be found here:

https://letstalktransportation.ca/pcoc

I can be reached at Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca or call toll free 1-800-665-8711.
 

​If you have lived in the Okanagan long enough, chances are you may have come across the odd sign at a local business that reads:

“No shirt, no shoes, no service”.

Now imagine reading a sign that reads “No COVID vaccination passport, no business.”

While that may sound extreme, in New York City (as one example), there is a passport program being launched this month geared at allowing vaccinated individuals to attend sports, arts and entertainment venues.

In Israel there is a COVID-19 vaccine passport program called “Green Pass” that provides proof of vaccination via a QR code.

Individuals with a “Green Pass” are allowed to attend certain public places, including theatres and concerts.

The International Air Transport Association (IATA), IBM and others are in the process of developing apps that provide a similar vaccination verification service.

Many airlines are working with these app developers to put these vaccine verification app programs into use.

Regardless of what Canada decides on the topic of proof of vaccination, for many who travel for work or pleasure, it is likely those Canadians may require Canadian vaccination documentation in order to satisfy requirements, either from other countries, or travel related organizations like airlines.

Another example is the cruise ship industry.

Celebrity Cruises, Royal Caribbean, Crystal Cruises, Virgin Voyages, American Queen Steamboat Company and Victory Cruise Lines have all announced various vaccination verification requirements.

Currently our Federal Health Minister, Hon. Patty Hajdu, has met with health ministers from other G-7 countries to discuss the potential for proof-of-vaccine documents related to travelling.

My question this week is:

What are your views on the subject of vaccination passports?

I can be reached at Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca or call toll free 1-800-665-8711.