Canadian Heritage Minister Marc Miller publicly rebuked Conservative MP Rachael Thomas at a parliamentary hearing on Thursday. He said she misrepresented a producers’ remark as if it came from news media. The exchange centered on comments by Reynolds Mastin of the Canadian Media Producers Association (CMPA) during the Prime Time industry conference in Ottawa.
What sparked the clash
At Prime Time in late January, Mastin introduced Prime Minister Mark Carney and told him that people working in production “have your back.” The Conservative Party framed that line as proof that “mainstream media” support the government. Thomas echoed that view in fundraising and on the convention stage. She raised it again at committee, arguing media should “tell the news” and not take sides. Miller replied that the remark came from producers, not journalists, and accused Thomas of misleading the public. He added that these are people who “make shows,” citing legacy series like The Littlest Hobo.
Marc Miller accuses and explains the context
Miller argued the remark related to trade friction with the United States over Canadian content rules. He said producers voiced support for Ottawa’s position in those talks. He also referenced creators of the hit series Heated Rivalry, who defended the current law. The minister’s point was direct: the CMPA represents producers, not newsrooms, and the statement should be read in that light.
What the CMPA is—and isn’t
The CMPA represents more than 600 independent companies that make film and TV. It does not represent news organizations. Its work covers financing, production, distribution, and policy advocacy for scripted and unscripted screen content. A CMPA spokesperson reiterated the group’s non-partisan status and clarified that it does not speak for the news media.
The policy backdrop: what the Online Streaming Act does
The Online Streaming Act extends broadcast-style rules to major streaming platforms. In practice, the federal regulator—the Canadian Radio‑television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC)—can require large foreign services to contribute a portion of revenues to Canadian content. The current plan sets a five per cent contribution. “Canadian content” refers to certified projects that meet Canadian ownership and creative-control tests. These measures are under U.S.–Canada trade scrutiny, which is why industry support became part of the political debate.
Why this matters beyond one hearing
The disagreement shows how culture policy feeds partisan narratives. Producers want predictable funding streams and market access. Politicians want clear lines between advocacy and journalism. Confusing the two distorts public understanding of who speaks for whom. It also fuels distrust in media at a sensitive time for the sector.
What happens next
Committee work on cultural policy and streaming rules will continue. The CRTC is implementing contributions and related frameworks. Trade discussions with the United States remain a parallel track. For now, Miller’s pushback seeks to separate an industry lobby’s rhetoric from claims about newsroom bias, while Conservatives keep pressing their argument with supporters.
