Rumours of Industry, Heritage rift on C-48 denied after MP’s comments in House

A senior government official is defending Ottawa’s Internet retransmission legislative process in the strongest possible terms even as rumours persist that as-yet-announced regulations are being bogged down by departmental in-fighting. Michèle Gervais, head of Industry Canada’s Intellectual Property Branch, tells Canadian NEW MEDIA that allegations of a rift between her department and Canadian Heritage are wrong. The categorical denial comes despite assertions of in-fighting by Canadian Alliance MP Chuck Cadman in the House of Commons on February 22, and further indications to the same effect by several CNM sources in the past weeks. In a speech presented during debate on Bill C-48 by Cadman, but written by colleague Jim Abbott (Kootenay-Columbia) who was unable to attend that day’s session, it was asserted that bad blood between the two departments stems from the 1996 Bill C-32 process. "The purpose of Bill C-48 is to amend the Copyright Act, which was originally amended under Bill C-32 in 1996," Cadman stated. "At that time, due to pressure exerted on the (Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage) by the current Heritage minister, there were at least two significant deficiencies in the resulting legislation. Furthermore, due to interdepartmental rivalry between the two responsible ministries, Heritage and Industry, and to a certain extent the personal rivalry between the ministers of the day, the revisions to the Copyright Act in 1996 yielded some questionable results. Those rivalries between ministries and ministers continued into December 2001 and the lack of agreement is reflected in the bill." Those comments echo many made in the past weeks by Canadian NEW MEDIA sources that the clash between Heritage and Industry is delaying regulations that will set out the conditions by which retransmitters may or may not be protected by compulsory licence. The regulations must be in place before C-48 can pass. Some have even suggested that the rift threatens to spill over into the broader digital copyright proceeding slated to begin later this year. In an interview with CNM, Abbott says he has no specific examples of how the departments may be feuding. "It’s as much intuitive as it is hard evidence," he says. "If you go back to when John Manley was the Industry minister and the whole battle over copyright…it’s all just what you pick up as you go through a whole process. You have the Industry and the Heritage people working with us in committee, as we were trying to work our way through C-32. As a matter of fact, it was interesting because as we were working through C-32…we were managing to really challenge both departments, and the responses that we were getting from the two departments were really profoundly different. "The second part was Sheila , being Sheila, was doing things in a very grandiose let’s-feel-good kind of style and John was going at it from the point of view of more plodding forward in a straight line. Then you fast forward to Brian Tobin and Sheila Copps, and again, you didn’t exactly have the two of them singing from the same chorus sheet, and it’s just an ongoing feeling as opposed to something I can say because this happened or because that happened…I can’t point to anything specific, but within the confines of politics, one has a fair amount of licence and as long as you don’t feel you’re stepping too far out of line, you say these things." Abbott and other unattributed sources are taking too much licence, however, according to Gervais. "It is not true," she tells CNM. "We are working together. We have teams of people working on this together and we are working diligently and as a team…There are policy issues but we are working together to address these issues…In the end we will agree. The work is evolving and there are decisions being made as we go through the policy development…I’m very pleased with the way the work is moving. We’re working as quickly as possible. Those are not easy questions and we are putting all our efforts to get around this." Efforts to pose questions about the progress of C-48 regulations to Copps were frustrated by the minister’s office. While allegations of a dispute between the departments may be salacious, opposition MPs are most concerned that the bill apparently puts digital copyright issues such as Internet retransmission outside of Parliamentary control by putting responsibility for regulations in the hands of the Privy Council. Says Abbott: "It just continues to chip away at what is supposed to be happening, which is that the people of Canada are supposed to be electing members of Parliament who can be held accountable for legislation. Basically, you’re taking that away (with this bill)." Three other MPs – Progressive Conservative Grant McNally, New Democrat Wendy Lill, and Christine Gagnon of the Bloc Québécois – have demanded to see regulations in place before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage deals with the bill (CNM Update, Feb. 27/02). While all three have supported the bill in principle, at least the BQ would like greater input through a series of hearings when regulations are on the table. "Witnesses who are interested in the issue of copyright protection could certainly give a useful input," Gagnon told the House on February 22. "They will appear before the committee. This caveat has also been expressed by various stakeholders and witnesses who are involved with the issue of copyright. Witnesses will give us useful information on the type of regulations put forward by the government, which will be examined in the coming weeks. For this reason, the Bloc Québécois will be giving its opinion on the bill in general, while we wait for the regulations to be clarified in committee. At first glance the introduction of this bill is good news, but we will have to wait to see all of the regulations that will be proposed." McNally echoed those comments. "We do have some concerns with the bill in terms of regulations. Time and time again we see the notion of regulations that will be developed after the fact and we do not always get a chance to see them at committee…The bill does not define the qualifying conditions that the Internet based distribution systems will need to meet in order to receive the compulsory licence."

Rumours of Industry, Heritage rift on C-48 denied after MP’s comments in House

News | 03/07/2002 5:00 am EST

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us