Second, he said, I will show this to me. So five minutes thanks. And
it is to provide at least in in law in the mandate is
noted I have with me the two leaders of CBC and the video Canada to help me answer any questions you have.
This motion states that this invitation is to discuss my mandate following my reappointment. I feel it's important to start by clarifying that the President and CEO of CBC Radio Canada does not receive her mandate from the government. As many of you know, CBC Radio Canada as an independent Crown Corporation has its mandate set out in law in the Broadcasting Act. It is to provide and I quote, services incorporating a wide range of programming that informs enlightened and entertained that law also protects the corporations and I quote, freedom of expression, and journalistic, creative and programming independence. I mentioned this because that independence is essential to our existence. It marks the fundamental difference between a public broadcaster that serves citizens at a state broadcaster that serves the government. CBC hydro Canada is accountable to the public. And I mentioned this because I'm concerned by some views expressed that the power of a parliamentary committee could be used to summon employees who make day to day decisions about our journalism. political interference in journalism is precisely why the Broadcasting Act protects journalistic independence in law. As President and CO CEO I'm also responsible to parliamentary ease parliamentarians for CBC hydro Canada and that is why I'm here today. The hopes of CBC and hydro Canada are here with me to provide accountability to you and to Canadians without threatening that independence. I trust you will support me in that effort. I'm proud to be able to lead this public media service that touches the lives of Canadians every day. The public money invested in CBC hydro Canada not only ensures that everyone can get the best quality news and information in the country, but also the very best in Canadian drama, comedy, music, podcasts and so much more. Before we take your questions let me tell you about a few of the priorities. They flipped with the support of our board of directors. First for us, legislators in concert with indigenous advisors, stakeholders and communities built
with the public Branca
that just took our portion report tax global scale often Yeah, beaucoup effect.
Finally, there is much to do to prepare CBC federal candidate for an uncertain future. We are experiencing the same challenges as other media in Canada and around the world. The first the fierce competition of the global giants have upended our domestic industry in the new press earning me
Minister, that is a fact. The prime minister the Minister of now it's an issue everyone's headline. Big dangerous disagree,
proud. Both
tell you it but tell you about it. And with that lunch when you
have six minutes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mistake. I want to take this first opportunity to ask you an important question. I am proud. Both residents I'm proud of my heritage. Do you find my accent? difficult to understand? No, not at all. Then why has the CBC decided to to turn it back on the Quebec accent? And use people with a different ad with a different accent? Well, Mr. Chairman through you. I immediately called the head of the Quebec Artists Union and I apologized for using non Quebec actor for the role that you mentioned and we have corrected that practice. Thank you. Thank you and I will give the floor to miss Landsman. You mentioned
in your opening comments that public trust was the most important so I want to speak to this motion on October 17, the CDC published a false headline based on dangerous disinformation that incorrectly stated that Israel was responsible for the explosion at the hospital in Gaza that resulted in the deaths of innocent civilians and if you don't have it, I have it right here. That is the that is the headline. It says hundreds killed in Israeli airstrike on Gaza City Hospital Palestinian health ministry in Gaza says and that was since changed if you don't have this to Palestinians. Say hundreds killed in Israeli airstrike on hospital. Israel blames Islamic Jihad. This still lives on the CDC website. So this headline, it's still there. It remains on the website. And I would hope that you would agree with me that in fact, the Palestinian health authority isn't is controlled by Hamas. I think that is a fact. The Prime Minister, the Minister of National Defense, the United States, the British and French governments, all have definitively said that the attack did not come to from Israel. So why won't the CBC
if I may bring the members attention to the facts and correct the record. CBC first reported on the terrifically horrific attack or a bomb in the hospital in the Gaza Strip, on based on an Associated Press report, that we that is a trusted source of news for us, we will you'll notice if you go to cbc.ca or fender panadapter.ca We often use news feeds from other trusted reputable news organizations and we saw and we sourced and we cited the source of that information as Madame lansman has just pointed out, 90 minutes later when we received the corrected information, we also updated the site. I just would like to say we stand behind our journalism, in conflicts and in war. news comes at a very fast rate, and people are claiming on both sides of the story. Our journalists on the ground and in our newsrooms are obliged to measure and take by
appreciate this an Associated Press article and your mandate is to you know, you are responsible to Canadians it's $1.4 billion of taxpayer money. But you said that the that that you stand by the statement Palestinians say hundreds killed in Israeli airstrike on Israel Hospital, Israel blames Islamic Jihad that still exists. It is a headline that has been debunked by governments across the world, including even our own Prime Minister. I'll wait seven days late. So I want to know if you'll apologize to Jewish Canadians. I want to know if you'll apologize to Canadians and I want to know when we can expect a retraction from CBC.
Mr. President, I will Mr. Chair by viscerally praising him. I will not apologize because the journalism is among the finest in the world are journalists who operate in an independent fashion independent of management independent of the board of directors and independent of government and political influence. They are guided by their journalistic standards and practices and I invite any member of any Canadian to refer to these practices on our website. They are transparent and they are public and if you have a concern, anyone has concerned with our journalism, I invite you to address it to the independent ombudsman office cause saint who are non gay, in order to have them independently investigate and review the application I
understand that you're not going to apologize for printing disinformation, but how can the CBC who is committed to truth who's committed to standards not called Hamas terrorists we saw a leaked a leaked memo from the director of journalistic standards. That's Mr. achey, who sent a directive to journalists for saying not using, too to say to not use or describe Hamas as a terrorist group. You do agree? It is fact that that Hamas has been listed as a terrorist organization in 2002 in this country, correct.
I will address the issue as follows. Mr. Chair, the I think there's an a fantastic blog by our head of news, Brody fenlon, which you can refer to it he does this very often to comment on making trip journalism transparent explaining to Canadians how we do the journalism and in the case of attribution, this is a policy that we've had at CBC Radio Canada for over several decades. It is shared and mirrored by many other reputable news organizations, including the Globe and Mail, the BBC as your spouse pass Reuters and or any number of other agencies. So I would just say the attribution we use the word terrorists and terrorism and acknowledge that Canada, the UK and the US consider Hamas a terrorist organization, but we, as journalists do not make that attribution. My man has been voted down Madame Landsman, we'll see what equilibrium.
Thank you. Your time is up. Ms. Landsman will now go to the liberals. We have MS hip for six minutes,
John, and thank you to our witnesses for being here today to explain the journalism process to people at this committee. And I'll go back to your final your last point because people keep saying that this was a leaked directive from the CBC. But in fact, it was just a note pointing to the CBC style guide, which as you mentioned, is in accordance with other journalism organizations which have style guides. Could you maybe explain it in a little bit more detail to this committee? Why we have style guides in journalism and how they help journalists be more? Be more independent or be more you know what I'm trying to say?
So, thank you for the question. The journalistic standards and practices have been developed over many years they are under regular review. With social media and different things changing in our industry. We have to constantly make sure that they're up to date, but they are founded on five critical principles, impartiality, fairness, balance, integrity, and accuracy. And these are absolutely fundamental and they are common to CBC hydro and hydro Canada newsrooms and they inform everything we do. Today is our annual public meeting. I have to mention that Adrienne Arsenault and Eclipse it's the most moving thing I've ever heard. She said of all the journalistic practices, it is integrity that informs everything our journalists do. The integrity speaks to balancing the impact of a story, trying to understand the source, trying to and to make sure that we acknowledge source and to be as fair as possible so that Canadians receive the best possible information the fact based information and they can then judge the news as they see fit. So to the question of how does that work? I've had the privilege I'm not a journalist, I was a producer before I had the privilege of serving in this role. And I've had the honor of witnessing and assignment room at CBC Radio Canada. And that's where every morning across this country at stations, managing editors are sit down with their teams, journalist, producers, researchers, and they talk about the news. fast breaking news. heart issue, news, investigative news, international news, and they discuss and balance and consider and that's where the integrity comes in. They determine what they feel they must be focusing on on that particular day.
And I listen to CDC coverage, all the time and I hear regularly CDC say Hamas is considered a terrorist organization by Canada. It's simply that the journalist isn't making that distinction. Right. They
determination is as mirrored in other news organization is that the word is extremely politically charged. And if journalists use the word, it, it causes them to enter into a debate. That is not our business. Our business is to remain independent, and fact based.
And you mentioned, I mean, you're the head of CBC as a whole. So you really don't have any say, in the newsroom. Well, I've worked in many newsrooms and management is there's a there's a lie that separates management from the newsroom. So you're not part of those conversations. No,
absolutely not. No. And in fact, it's not only that we have an independence from government, by the Broadcasting Act. Then we have an independence from the board of directors oversight role. Then there is this team that you see in front of you, and we have an oversight role, but we have and then there's the journalism and the journalism is entirely independent. It's extremely important for Canadians to understand there are three Kush, three layers of independence, we do not interfere or direct or try to influence the news.
And so how did you feel? I'm sure you were kept apprised of this committee and the last few meetings we had How did you feel about politicians or members of this committee trying to tell CVC how to tell the news how to tell the stories and what words to use?
Well, very honestly, I'm disturbed. I'm disturbed by political interference. I worry about our journalists. We're living in a world where the world freedom press index, in its annual survey, they've been conducting this survey for many years, concluded that over 80% of the population on this planet is living under authoritarian regimes where there is limited to no press freedom or independence. We are the minority. This is a precious asset. This independent journalism is the pillar of our democracy. If we try to influence on any side of any particular debate, we are threatening the fundamental building block of this country's democracy. And that's why I speak with the level of passion that I do today about this subject.
And how would you say see, journalists reacted to hearing a parliamentarian accuses CBC of being on the side of Hamas?
As again, I do not speak to the journalists about how they feel or react. I respect their independence. I can only imagine that they are concerned and mostly because we have spectacular teams on the ground in Israel right now who are putting their lives in danger bringing the news back to Canadians. So any conversation that foments division or suggestion that they are on one side of a war puts them in danger.
UFC will call that MF snare. Thank you very much, Miss Landsman. So usually it wouldn't be in now the turn of the block club but since the only block member is cheering then I would move again to the conservative for six minutes. And I may have questions after that. I'm not it doesn't bother me. If you'd like to ask your questions right now. Please. Go ahead. Mr. Julian,
this this important discussion as you cited I think is Hefner asked that question. The conservative member of this committee stated in in the most irresponsible and incendiary way possible CBC journalists were on the side of terrorists. She has not apologized. She has not in any way taken responsibility for those appalling comments I know.
Heritage want to welcome everyone today. We
thank you your environment where journalists safety, maybe maybe put in peril.
Absolutely. Mr. Julian, the the reality is that 363 journalists last year were imprisoned I'm talking on around.
policy that I would
we also know about the Putin regime and its use of the Internet Research Bureau to spread disinformation false information. You've mentioned the foreign interference to what extent is that part of this?
Feel that they contribute to an environment where journalists safety? Maybe Maybe put in peril?
Absolutely. Mr. Julian, the the reality is that our 363 journalists last year were imprisoned. I'm talking on around the world. 86 were killed last year alone, as according to the UN, and as you say, it 33 have been killed just in this conflict. We know here at home, we are not immune. We have the highest incidence of online attacks which have knock on effects in the physical environment. We've had to remove logos from our trucks. We've had to protect our journalists during demonstrations. We've had to actually begin domestic War Zone training we always have had training for for journalists that go into war zones or conflict areas, but now we do it domestically. It is an extremely serious issue. It's why last year we launched the online harm initiative called hashtag not okay, hashtag CIT essay. I invite you to visit it. It's an open source platform where we develop with all our news colleagues here in Canada, a guideline for newsrooms to manage post traumatic stress syndrome that many of our journalists are suffering from.
Thank you for that. And I certainly hope that that member of the Conservative Party will apologize for what it appallingly irresponsible comments I want to come back to miss Landsman questions because the conservatives have been spreading disinformation they've ever apologized. They've never retracted they've never clarified their remarks. The attribution of word terrorist. You have correctly pointed out is been used consistently at CBC coverage. There was the appalling horrible terrorist attacks that killed over 1400. Israelis are seeing now the horrible civilian casualties in Gaza. I have been watching CBC coverage and the word terrorist has been used always attributed of course, but use consistently. Do you can you in a sense refute Ms. linesman's contention that the word terrorist has not been used on on the CBC network, but that when it has been used and has been used frequently, it's always been attributed? That is correct. I want to come to the other bit of disinformation which is the Associated Press article and the headline misled spoons correctly identified with the headline says, but the CDC has also run other stories that have updated the the the horrible situation they existed with the hospital in Gaza. So how many articles that have updated and provided information as more information has come out about the role of that assignment she had. Failed rock played in in, in in killing those people, how many articles
several several times and attributing the UN conclusion and other sources? I would say it's important to understand that in any conflict context is extremely important. That's why we cite the source in the case of the Palestinian health authority. And then, according to the Israeli government, or then according to the UN, it's extremely important context, especially in a fast moving situation is critical and you cannot look at an article in isolation. You have to look at the body of the work which is what you're suggesting. There are very many articles that point to a bigger story.
Thank you for that. So it's disinformation. 2.21 article and there's a series of other articles and if Miss Landsman was being honest, she would actually show the evolution of the reporting can see on that issue as more information came out as we've seen with CNN, as we've seen with BBC, Now, you mentioned foreign interference and this is profoundly disturbing. Last weekend, we learned through Canada land which has done terrific work that a lot of the conservative material videos actually don't come from Canada. They come from a the shop in Egypt that is financed apparently through the United States. We also know about the Putin regime and its use of the Internet Research Bureau to to spread disinformation false information. You mentioned the foreign interference to what extent is that part of this sort of coordinated attack on institutions like the CBC, have you been able to determine to what extent where where these foreign this foreign interference is coming from? That seems to be targeting CBC journalists, and go clip on
top very quick. Enter, please
proceed. The reality is is that our world has changed every day. There are fake CBC and hydro Canada websites being put up every day. We have deep fakes having a journalist like Ian and Ian Hanuman Singh selling health food products each day. We have this kind of infiltration, whether it's from foreign actors, and that particular concern is during the federal elections, but also people seeking to make money on the internet. So these bad actors have targeted, the most trustworthy and I really do want to underline for the record that CBC 100 Canada remains, according to 75% of Canadians the most trustworthy source of news in this country. So we are spending money on cybersecurity. We are joining our international colleagues at the BBC at Reuters all over the world in a trusted news initiative to try to combat a an absolute tsunami of disinformation. And what is truly disturbing is when the disinformation is actually coming from our own country. That is the word we really need to stand united arms linked to fight what is an extremely disturbing trend.
Merci beaucoup Monsieur Julian authentically. Thank you very much, Mr. Julian. myState. I would like to ask a few questions on the topic. That is our priority today especially what Ms. Thomas raised last week. That is that if CBC in Canada didn't identify Hamas directly as terrorists, then they were taking the side of the terrorists. There was a report in Israel that shark has been allergy radio Canada journalist had his camera ripped away from him. It was a brutal attack. Do you fear an ex escalation of this kind of violence if we continue to have the type of speech we've seen? Yes, absolutely. You made the connection earlier and I felt that was very relevant. That when that you said that CBC had to vehicles had to have their logo removed because they could be targets of violence. If I could add something it's not just journalists, it's also the producers, cameramen, the fixers. People that are in other countries that help with interpretation and identifying contact. So all these people are in danger. We have many of those people in Ukraine and elsewhere helping us. Do you believe that politicians also have a duty and responsibility of course, we have to be accountable. Journalism over the last 20 or 30 years since the beginning of CNN 30 years ago or so. Has journalism has become much more direct and in real time, especially in complex situations, it's hard to identify reliable sources and so on. Do you think that these journalistic practices have contributed to the impression that people get and I agree with you that politicians have to watch the language that they use, but do you think that journalism has to take stock of the effect of these practices? There is a decline in confidence and trust in the standard media and people decline? People depend more on social media which isn't very reliable. And we know that we see less trust in politicians in all sorts of institutions. It isn't because of the way journalists carried out. But I would just say that journalism public information has a very important role to play, which isn't the case of airlines, which was another example you gave. So do you not agree? Yes, of course. I agree. I'm not making a direct connection between the fact that we have such a fast news cycle. And the fact that journalism is under great pressure, we have our journalistic standards and practices. I just want to take a little time on another topic. We talk a lot about CBC and the less about how to Canada but of course I'm very concerned about Canada because there are different perspectives. And you won't be surprised to hear that we hear rumors about tensions within the federal Canada and we between the CBC in Canada in that there are different mentalities and attitudes. Do you have the impression that everything is going well within the corporation? Yes, there are very different cultures in Canada, not only for English and French, but others as well. And that's what's interesting about Canada and Canadians, but I can say that things are going well. We agree on the standards of and practices and we have very close cooperation between Ms. Williams and Mr. million. Perhaps. We could have we could hear from my colleague, Mr. Milou. And urbanism not just to since working in hydro Canada, but before that, I have seen very short very close cooperation between hydro Canada and CBC. We have good discussions and good relations and I'm sure that's going to continue to be the case. Thank you. My own time is over, and we will now go to the second round or five minutes for the Conservatives and the liberal and then two and a half minutes for the block and the NDP. So Miss Thomas, has five minutes please.
Thank you, madam keetsa. You said that integrity is of utmost importance to you just a moment ago when you've referred to it in the journalistic standards as well. I would just return to my colleagues question. You'll see here that this is the article when it was originally published by the CBC, you claim that 90 minutes later it was changed. I have that article title it's here. This is after 90 minutes. Now in your journalistic standards, you say that and I quote, when we make corrections and clarifications online, we should include on the story page and explanatory note to the audience. Again, I have this article right here and I don't see an explanatory note. So with the journalistic standard and integrity being so important, why wasn't this done?
by Andreas understanding and again, as Mr. Julian pointed out, there were several other stories that followed those two that if you read the entire thread,
I'm not holding those other folks accountable. I'm asking the CBC with regards to journalistic standards. You say that you're supposed to offer correction. Notice that didn't happen. Why?
Again, I defend the journalism and its independence. I'm not, I guess what I'm saying. If I may answer, I would say I if I may answer are journalists conduct themselves in an independent fashion? I cannot answer the question as to when they post a correction or when they do not, that is their business, and they conduct themselves according to the JSPs mystery. I'm not here to answer there's no I'm not here to answer on the whether or not they corrected a piece of journalism or not. And again, I would invite you to, if you are concerned about the journalism I invite you to, to reach out to the ombudsman, just as every Canadian has the right to do so. If you do not feel that the journalism has been adhered to directly
and not to me and perhaps to refrain from raising her voice toward me. Madam President,
I don't have the impression that she raised her voice, but I do agree that the answers should come through the Chair. Thank you. Let's date and time is
when an article is written, blaming Israel for an airstrike that it did not commit. And that has been confirmed by countries around the world and intelligence agencies from around the world. And the CBC still insists that it stands behind that article professing that the attack did come from Israel. That is in fact the spreading of dangerous disinformation. We are inviting you mistake through the chair to offer an apology to the Jewish population in Canada and I dare say to all Canadians, because they have $1.4 billion invested in this public broadcaster and you are right they do depend on you to tell the truth. So when the truth is not told, when a miss truth is spoken, when disinformation is spread, especially dangerous if this information like this and apology seems right, and if not an apology, bare minimum a correction. Neither of those things have happened. So again, would you apologize to the Jewish population and all Canadians?
No. What I will say though, is I'm going to quote from the article just for the record. After the first piece there was a second piece updated that said gases Hamas run health ministry said an Israeli airstrike Tuesday hit a Gaza City Hospital, packed with wounded and other Palestinians seeking shelter, killing hundreds. However, the Israeli military said it had no involvement in the explosion, which it says was caused by a misfired rocket from the Palestinian militant group Islamic Jihad. I think it speaks for itself.
Yeah, miss. Thank you. Thank you for again, admitting that there was dangerous disinformation spread in that article.
I have not admitted that. I'm sorry. I'm corrected order record.
Mr. Miss you have a point of order.
line of questioning and I would ask you Mr. Chair to enforce the rules that we have a committee seems to Julian that I'm done is done a failed dilemma then. Thank you.
Mr. Julian, I would invite Miss Thomas to not have to say that Mr. Tate said things that she did not.
Mr. Chair, I would give the Florida lansman Please,
ma'am, take him out itself admits that it uses terrorism to further its goals. those facts are not disputed. And the choice not to call Hamas terrorists is is willful obstruction of the facts. It is bias and it does help Hamas that said your funding has increased 21% Your ratings have dropped it since since 2016. The ratings the primetime ratings have dropped 7.6% Since 2018, trust is down 40%. That's a 60% Dis trust. I will never apologize for holding the CDC to account for $1.4 billion of taxpayer money that you receive. The NDP used to be an opposition party. They used to do that in committee. They used to do that in the house, and I will never apologize for it. But can you tell,
can you I'm sorry, Miss Landsman. Your time is up. Your five minutes is well over. Thank you very much. We will go now to Mr. No Mohammed for the liberals. You have five minutes. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, you here mistake to talk about your mandate. And the importance of that mandate. The leader of the opposition and various members have talked about defunding eliminating the CBC. And that funding who what impact would that have and and what would the effect would that have on Canadians
and English conservatives their leader has promised that defund the CBC funding. What impact would that have on you doing your own delivering on your mandate? What impact would that have? Been content?
Thank you so much. I beg your pardon. Just to be clear, over the last 30 years, CBC hydro Canada has not had a real increase in its budget. real dollars aside we are flat. And yet today, as opposed to just providing traditional linear television radio. We are providing service across a number of digital platforms because that's where Canadians are. Interesting fact. When I started at CBC, the number of people watching traditional television was at about 28%. It is now dropped to 14% the number of people watching only digital was at about 14% And now it's high in the high 30s So what we're seeing is a shift to, to digital. So to defund this organization in a world of extreme polarization. We are the only national news media organization in the country with a mandate to serve all Canadians, and therefore should we be defunded, we would no longer be reaching all those Canadians.
And if you could briefly tell me what impact would that have in particular on rural communities?
It would be devastating we already have in English, Canada 33 communities with populations of over 50,000 that have no CBC presence, and I just flag to member Thomas that we were delighted to open a one person bureau in Lethbridge last year.
Thank you Misty two quick question was a good question for you on this. I'm just looking at some of the headlines on on CBC over the last little while and one of the headlines reads Pierre polyps inner circle divided on how to tackle gender issue. Sources say does that mean that a CBC is saying that the inner circle is divided or is that saying that sources are saying that sources are saying there is an article that reads with a headline Ed fast says Polly of supporters tried to muzzle him on monetary policy is that the CBC saying that probably have supporters tried to muzzle Ed fast or is that Ed fascinating that that's a fascinating so if I were to read the totality of all of the stories that were written in respect of the tragedy at the hospital, in Gaza, I would just start with the letter that Miss Thomas and Ms. Letson have had referred to and then I would continue to read all of the articles that had been written, what conclusion? What conclusion would a reasonable person reach that the
CBC and hydro Canada are reporting on the facts and on the sources that they have received on the ground or through other reputable news organizations
and why does the CBC or why does any credible journalist indicate who their sources
because otherwise we would be in the business of opinion?
And if you are in the business of opinion, how would that make you different from journalist? Well, I'm asking these questions because I think it's really important for Canadians to understand the difference we know and so I shouldn't laugh. Because presenting sources and presenting opinions it is extremely
I go back to the five guiding principles, impartiality, fairness, balance, accuracy, and integrity
with the time I have left, which I believe is 42nd 40 seconds, I would like to talk about accuracy for a moment. What is the degree of confidence that you have in the accuracy of the work and the quality of the work of our journalists at CBC and HUD to Canada, particularly in areas of conflict?
I think that we are the most outstanding high quality journalistic organization in this country. I have enormous pride in the work that our journalists do, and we are the only journalistic organization that has any level of presence internationally and even men it's rather inadequate, but we do that work with extraordinary care. Our purpose is the public interest, first and foremost. UFC machine.
Thank you Majan No, Mohammed Mr. Julian, you have two and a half minutes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's true. We have a situation here where the comments by the Conservatives are out of line. And they are putting our journalists in danger. So what steps have you taken to support the journalists who were on the front lines in the Middle East right now? And can you talk about the situation has it has evolved over the last five years. We have an end awards that they've received. They've received hundreds of awards. We are recognized by our colleagues in Canada, but also around the world.
Journalist organization to receive the trusted a news certification by Reporters Without Borders. The first question
was staff report MMS kisana.
About the threats to journalists. Well, it is, as I said, we do a lot of work to train our journalists to prepare them and we offer that training to other organizations in the private sector. So they don't have the means to provide it. And so we provide it to them. So to our own journalists, but also to private sector journalists to prepare them for the calm conflict and other dangerous situations.
You've pointed out and conservatives have to admit that there have been a series of articles in the evolution after the explosions at the hospital that have clearly indicated as more information came out where that information is coming from, whether it's us or United Nations, but if somebody said, Well, I still like that article being in the archives, even though CBC is updated with new articles. If they didn't like seeing that CBC article in the archives, what is open to that that Canadian to do? I mean, with Fox, they can't do a thing because Fox has no ombudsman. Where can see where can somebody who's concerned about something like that and all article that they don't like, work with us to do as the Atlantic witness
take that I'm afraid the time is about 10 seconds please.
Even if they don't like anything they see on any of our in any of our journalism, but first and foremost, they can reach out to the ombudsman. I'll call eight one on day and have someone on the case they're concerned the ombudsman operates independently from management, and in fact reports directly to the board and the public on an biannual basis and reports on any errors or concerns in the journalism and that is entirely public, Miss seaman. I'm
thinking this tape. I would just like to ask a question about the process, the process for independence and how you prevent the newsroom from being subjected to any pressure from management or elsewhere. I would like to know how that wall actually works between the journalists and management for example, the executive committee there must be an executive for the news portion. I would imagine they must have an ideological position in CBC or casual Canada so when they're having their meetings that have must come out and it must be translated through the policy so how do you have a protection against that? I I can certainly tell you that our executives fiercely protect that independence and my colleagues here can vouch for that. There we have a board. We have a board of directors, and we make sure that we respect that independence. If we have a comment, then certainly we will be told that that is not acceptable. So Miss Thomas, you now have five minutes on our third round.
I'm just gonna go back the funding increases for the CVC have been 21% since 2016. That's $1.4 billion of taxpayer money. The trust score has done gone down and by your own principles outlined on the CBC website, what you discussed impartiality, fairness, balance, integrity. Can you tell Canadians who expect those principles to be upheld? Why the state funded broadcaster sued the Conservative Party? In the middle of the 2019 election while covering that party? By the way, you lost the lawsuit, and our taxpayers are on the hook for the costs. But why should Canadians trust you?
By May Mr. Chair, I just want to correct the record on the on our on our budget of $1.4 billion is a very significant sum of money but I just want to put it into perspective that constantly Vizio I had to of course receive 4 billion euros for a population not 67 million or so. And one timezone one language. We are providing service in two language official languages, eight indigenous languages across six time zones with a funding of 330 $3 per capita per year. That's a less than a dime a day. And we also earn commercial
estate. You don't just have to you get enough money. My question was about why you sued the Conservative Party in the middle of the 2009. When my injuries have an answer, that's fine, and if not, I'll pass the time over to Miss Thomas who maybe can ask you that same question that you won't answer. So that
I didn't want to answer I wanted to correct the record on the funding. The purpose of the public broadcaster is to present all news in the most ACC as you've heard in the most fact based, accurate, balanced way possible. We object to the use of our journalism, whether it's clips, sound bytes, or photographs of our journalists, when they are manipulated and used by political parties for their political ends. That was the substance of our concern. It continues to be a concern. Do we wish to sue any political party? Absolutely not. But we absolutely have to protect the not only the appearance of of independence, but the reality of independence. And so therefore, we will always protect that journalism.
Well, not not all political parties, just some mountaintops.
Through you, Mr. Chair, Madam teat seems to like to correct the record here, but unfortunately, doesn't ensure that the record is corrected for the sake of the Canadian public who is investing 1.4 billion taxpayer dollars annually into the CDC and of course, wanting unbiased and reliable news coverage. She stated that trust is of utmost importance, but obviously telling the truth doesn't fit into her definition of gaming the Canadians trustees. My question for Miss Tate is this sorry, Mr. Chair point of order. I just
want to be clear, what I heard I believe, Miss Thomas, accused the witness of lying and I just want to make sure that that's not what happened because if it is, I think you as the Chair, I would humbly request that you perhaps ask Miss Thomas to take back her words and to reconsider what she is saying.
Madam Thomas, excuse me. Miss Thomas, did you hear the request by your colleague, Mr. Normal Hamid, would you retract what your words and to perhaps change your approach a little bit in your question?
I think you chair the question that I have for misstates is to do with boiling water. It's Klansman.
Miss you, Juliana. Mr. Julian place.
Has a long experience. She knows what she just said was incredibly unparliamentary inappropriate for this committee inappropriate in every way. And in so yes, I you have asked her to retract and I believe she said this, this is this is a parliamentary committee. It's not some kind of street brawl and it is really unfortunate. I know that conservatives are frustrated because see, Mr. Julian has been saying things that are
Thank you, Mr. Julian. Ms. Thomas. Yes, I would ask you to please use the word that you use. And I think that there was not very parliamentary of you in your approach to her. Thank you. You have a couple of minutes left.
Thank you, Mr. Shampoo. Of course, that was not what I was intending to say. But this censorship coalition, of course, will try to silence my voice and interrupt as much as possible. With regards to miss landmines question concerning the lawsuit that was put out by the CDC or undertaken by the CDC toward the end of the 2019 election. It seems like a bit of a suspicious time to launch that. Nevertheless, it was unsuccessful the courts did in fact, determine that it was within the right of the Conservative Party of Canada to take footage provided by a public broadcaster and to use it within its frame of reference. And so I wonder then, why on earth would the public broadcaster the CBC undertake this case, only a few days before the end of an election? I mean, right in the middle of a federal election, when in fact the CBC claims to want to be independent and truthful and to function with integrity. That doesn't seem to be the case. In this instance, again, the court has determined that the CPC the Conservative Party of Canada, was in the right to use this footage was this just gamesmanship on behalf of the CBC?
I just would like to clarify oops, sorry. I would like to clarify that this is not the only political party that we have had to take action on. It went further than
a Mr. Chair. I would just ask that you would kindly ask the witness to answer the message of a echo they can give
an installment I will just give a few more seconds to mistake but your time is up
fed the the political case Are they are they legal case, in the case of this of the Conservative Party is not the only time that we've had to take injunctions. We've done that to the NDP and to the liberal party as well. We are here to protect our journalism.
Thank you, Miss Thomas. Thank you. Your time is well over. Thank you, Miss Thomas. The last two turn goes to the liberals and his Gainey. Thank you and thank you for being here today. I would like to go back if we could. While we're
with respect to others on the ground. I know maybe Barb could provide it because of her background with gold. I know global and CTV, CTV have people go to conversations with EPG continue
minutes public funding
that environment that I described described all the levels of management up to
just saying I needed three hours with the CBC President done Israel
challenge to the chairs fair. So
the move on mental
See, sure that that's not what happened because if it is
calculated as a notice of motion, that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage affirms that CBC Radio Canada, journalists and crew members are risking their lives every day in the Middle East covering the Israel Hamas conflict and the horrific events impacting Israelis and Palestinians that CBC graduate candidate journalists have received or been nominated for. Over 200 prestigious national journalism awards in the past five years, such as the Canadian Association of Journalists awards, radio, television, digital news Association, National Awards and National Native Media Awards and National Association of Black Journalists awards. And finally that the independence of CBC Radio Canada journalists from political interference is protected in the Broadcasting Act, Section 46 Five which states that the corporation shall in pursuit of its objects, and in the exercise of its power, enjoy freedom of expression and journalistic, creative and programming independence.
Merci, monsieur. Thank you, Mr. Julian. All due respect, I would first ask you the committee's permission to thank Miss Tate and also a few colleagues, Miss Williams and Miss Miller and let them leave. I want to thank all three of them before we get into the debate on the motion. Thank you for answering all the questions even the most difficult so your attendance today has been very much appreciated. We can now begin to debate Mr. Julian's motion. Mr. Julian, you can speak to this first. Very
much, Mr. Chair. I mean, it's very clear from the testimony today. And I will say again, that conservatives just basically ran out of speed, given the fact that the facts were very clearly at first you Julian.
Mr. Julian, we have a point of order. Spent until the witnesses leave the room then we go into gamma. That's reasonable. Absolutely much stuff everyday. Yeah, absolutely. We will just suspend the minute the meeting for a couple of minutes.