Others, such as Charles McVety and REAL Women of Canada, argued that the provision recognized that public funding should not be available for movies which were offensive to large numbers of people.
Among a 600-page list of minor changes to tax law, the bill contained a clause that would have amended s. 125.4 of the Income Tax Act to give the Minister of Canadian Heritage the power to deny taxation credits for films made in Canada, if the Minister concluded that public financial support of the production would be "contrary to public policy".
[3] Critics of the clause argued that it was equivalent to censorship because most Canadian films cannot afford to be produced without government assistance.
She also explained the purpose for the clause: "It ensures that the government has the ability, in exceptional circumstances, to exclude certain material from public support.
"[4] The hearings in the Senate committee on the bill were described as a "gong show" by Jim Abbott, MP, the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Canadian heritage.
Opponents of the clause, such as director David Cronenberg and actor-director Sarah Polley argued that it amounted to government censorship of videos and movies.
Sam Sullivan, the mayor of Vancouver, testified against the clause, arguing that it would have a negative impact on the Canadian film industry, which provided large numbers of jobs.
When the Conservative Party released their platform for the election, Prime Minister Harper announced that if re-elected, they would not proceed with the clause.