Canada’s news agencies “should not have the ability to censor” political messaging, the federal government said Thursday, in response to questions about its plans to change this country’s copyright law.

The opposition used question period Thursday to challenge the Conservatives about a CTV News report that outlined how the government plans to change the law to allow political parties to use content published and broadcast by news organizations for free in their ads.

The change is buried in the government’s latest omnibus budget bill, which is expected to be introduced in a few weeks.

Deputy Liberal Leader Ralph Goodale said Canadian artists have been asking for changes to copyright law and will continue to have to wait, “but the Conservative Party gets served right now, this fall, by changes bootlegged into an omnibus bill.

“Journalists will have their news content taken, they would say stolen, without permission or remuneration, and then they’ll be forced to broadcast their own stuff in partisan attack ads. It’s expropriation without compensation, it degrades integrity and freedom of the press,” said Goodale. “Why does this government behave like such a tin pot banana republic?”

Heritage Minister Shelly Glover responded by saying she would not comment on “rumours and speculation.”

But she went on to say that “there is a public interest in ensuring that politicians are accountable for their actions and accountable for what they say in public settings. Major television networks should not have the ability to censor what can and cannot be broadcast to Canadians. We believe this has always been protected under the fair dealings provisions of the law, and if greater certainty is necessary we will provide it.”

Harper responds

Prime Minister Stephen Harper later said he would not “speculate on future decisions.” Harper was asked about the proposed changes during a tax credit announcement Thursday afternoon.

“I will simply say this: That as political people who conduct much of our business in public, we fully expect that we will be held publicly accountable for the statements we make in public. That’s what I think we all expect. That’s certainly the standard that I’m held to.”

He added that in terms of copyright, “it’s our view that the law is already such that this material is publically available and circulates freely for public commentary. I think that’s the public’s expectation, we think that’s the way the law already is, and obviously I would be concerned about any proposal that would attempt to censor or block that kind of information from the public.”

Wendy Freeman, President of CTV News, said Thursday that like several other Canadian media organizations, “we believe using our content in political ads without permission may compromise our journalistic independence and call into question our journalistic ethics, standards, and objectivity.”

Later, Parliamentary Press Gallery president Laura Payton issued a statement to say the gallery is “troubled by reports the government is considering an exception to Canadian copyright laws that would give parties free reign in using news content for political advertisements.”

“Journalists report facts and balance them with context to ensure their stories are fair,” Payton went on. “Political ads, particularly during election campaigns, are by nature one-sided. Giving political parties the ability to selectively use news stories runs counter to the neutrality we strive to provide to Canadians every day.”

On Wednesday, CTV News reported on an internal Conservative cabinet document that details an amendment to the Copyright Act, which would allow “free use of ‘news’ content in political advertisement intended to promote or oppose a politician or political party.”

The amendment also removes “the need for broadcasters to authorize the use of their news content.” It would also force media outlets to run political ads, even when their own footage and content was used in a negative message to voters.

The document anticipates an outcry from the media, and suggests that a communication plan be established for dealing with the reaction.

NDP MP Craig Scott asked during Thursday’s question period whether the amendment will be brought before Parliament “for proper study” rather than be included in an omnibus bill.

Glover responded by quoting an editorial written by University of Ottawa law professor and copyright expert Michael Geist, who argues that attempts to use copyright to claim absolute right over the use of a clip runs counter to the principles of fair dealing.

What the experts say

Later, Parliamentary Press Gallery president Laura Payton issued a statement to say the gallery is “troubled by reports the government is considering an exception to Canadian copyright laws that would give parties free reign in using news content for political advertisements.”

“Journalists report facts and balance them with context to ensure their stories are fair,” Payton went on. “Political ads, particularly during election campaigns, are by nature one-sided. Giving political parties the ability to selectively use news stories runs counter to the neutrality we strive to provide to Canadians every day.”

Steve Anderson, executive director of OpenMedia.ca, said in a statement that copyright laws “should never be used to stifle free political expression.

“However, this government is shamefully trying to carve out a self-serving, narrow exception that would only benefit political parties, while excluding the free expression rights of everyday citizens. Every Canadian should benefit from sensible fair use rules that enable us to express our views freely.”

The opposition has also accused the federal government of trying to gain an edge a year out from the next federal election.

While the new provisions would apply to all political parties, NDP finance critic Nathan Cullen told CTV News on Wednesday that his party is “guided by a different ethic” and does not want to use attack ads or “smear campaigns.”

With a report from CTV’s Deputy Ottawa Bureau Chief Laurie Graham