Just to follow up on Signy's comments, I have a couple of things that I did not mention, just so everybody is clear.
Our organization is independent of government and police. We are a charitable organization, a non-partisan organization. We work very closely not only with a variety of stakeholders but also with provincial governments in navigating some unique options when we're looking at regulations or other remedies that we can move forward on in terms of the protection of our children.
Again, as mentioned, I am the executive director of the Canadian Centre for Child Protection and I was really asked to come here today to talk a little bit about industry.
I understand that Leah Parsons and Carol Todd were both here. Our organization worked very closely following the deaths of their children and with numerous other families. We work, so you're clear, day in and day out. It's very different from some of the academics. While everything we present will be evidence-based, and we provide the statistics, as Signy has alluded to, our organization really works in the trenches. We work first-hand with families. We work first-hand with youth who are contacting us because they have been negatively impacted by a sexual violence situation.
I'm going to spend a few minutes talking about the way in which our organization collaborates with industry and addressing what we all know is their shared responsibility in addressing the online sexual exploitation of children. Then I'm going to move on to a couple of other areas that I think are very relevant to the conversation you are all having.
We certainly believe that protecting children from online sexual exploitation and bringing those who victimize children to justice require the collaborative approach that I've just mentioned. It is not enough to say this is just a police problem; we're not going to arrest our way out of it. This isn't just an industry responsibility, and it isn't us putting all the onus on parents, who then have to take full responsibility when they didn't sign up to figure out, as every age milestone is hit, how they can keep their kids safe. It is certainly something that not only Canada but all nations are significantly wrestling with.
What has happened? A number of years ago we set up the Canadian Coalition Against Internet Child Exploitation. We abbreviate that as CCAICE. Basically it is a voluntary group of private and public sector entities that work to look at ways that we can take on the war of child pornography and child sexual exploitation. We established this organization back in 2004. Its mandate is to examine and provide tangible solutions to reducing online sexual exploitation of children. Again I have to underscore that this really fits into this dilemma we have when we look at public safety versus competing priorities on privacy. This is a voluntary group coming together to work together. We come together one to two times a year.
Essentially the catalyst of this coalition coming together was the abduction and subsequent murder, which many of you will remember, of a 10-year-old girl named Holly Jones in Toronto. That time was sort of the genesis of the Internet; everything was exploding. Mr. Briere was the man who took her. She was basically a victim of opportunity. What he did talk about and admit in the court process was that he had been viewing child pornography, and basically she was essentially a victim of opportunity. That resulted in industry stepping up and understanding—even though we look at the telcos as the pipes and the content providers—that they needed to be at the table.
Over the past 12 years that we have been operating the coalition, we have had some significant results, and it is very important that you hear and have the opportunity to digest some of those successes, because Canada certainly has been doing some innovative work in leading the way. At the same time, we're not patting ourselves on the back and saying more does not need to be done. We recognize that.
One of our biggest achievements was Cleanfeed Canada, back in 2006. It is an initiative that aims to reduce Canadians' exposure to what we call child pornography or child abuse images, and it creates a disincentive for those who access and distribute such images by preventing Canadian customers from viewing non-Canadian websites that are hosting child abuse images. To date we have had nearly 30,000 total URLs added to Cleanfeed. Participating Internet service providers prevent customers from accessing an average 600 websites at any given moment in connection with the Cleanfeed list, a list that we maintain. We verify that the images within that list are typically prepubescent children, and day in and day out we stop Canadians from gaining access to that content.
What we know is that 80% of the content features young girls, so again this is an important tool in addressing this unique problem.
Cleanfeed is one of the most important examples of CCAICE looking at worldwide solutions. We are, and always will be, working with other governments looking at innovative solutions. We know we're not going to arrest our way out of it and we know this is a serious problem. For this committee, in looking at the concept of gender-based violence, we really have to look at the continuum. It starts with very young girls and goes all the way up the line. The Internet has really, as Signy said, created this perfect storm.
We also worked with police to create what we're calling the LER, the law enforcement request letter. The LER was used at a pre-warrant stage in relation to police obtaining Internet subscriber and address information. As mentioned, anonymity creates a very serious problem when police can see a very disturbing activity going on but do not have enough information to get a warrant. This whole process was successful up to and until the Spencer decision, which many of you may be aware of.
We have been working very long and hard. The coalition meets regularly, and I hope you're aware of the introduction in 2011 of the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service. Providers are required to notify law enforcement and, in some specific incidences, our agency if they're notified of an incident concerning Internet child pornography. Law enforcement in Canada receive the bulk of this information today.
Also, what we will say for sure is that industry has been very open. We were listening to the previous presenters in terms of what can the telcos do. They are very engaged. To date we've carried out 15 national campaigns with many of the providers in terms of public education about reporting and the importance of reporting. We are working with some of those companies in connection with people signing up for new technology, such as a new phone, and knowing what the developmental milestones are. We have to look at it from a relevant age perspective in terms of educating them and arming their parents, which is an ongoing challenge.
These are some of the things right now that industry is doing. We recognize it is a moving dialogue with the various electronic service providers and Internet service providers that make up some of the content about what their role may be in this complicated space.
There are a couple of things I wanted to raise to the committee that tie directly into what you're looking at. In May 2016 our organization released preliminary findings on a report we have on our site, and all of you can grab it. We have an executive summary as well as a very comprehensive piece on Abducted Then Murdered Children: A Canadian Study. Basically, we wanted to look historically at all cases of Canadian children under the age of 16. This is quite distinct from the murdered and missing aboriginal indigenous women and children issue.
We looked at all Canadian children from when CPIC began to gain insight into the children who were being abducted and the histories of the offenders and to identify intervention and prevention strategies. These findings are available on our site, and I welcome you to all take a look at them.
There are two last things I want to mention. One is that we are right now conducting the first international survey of the first generation of victims of child pornography since the onset of the Internet. Many of these victims are now 22 and upwards. We are meeting with an international working group here in Ottawa next week and we'll be looking at that.
Finally, I want to close with five specific recommendations.
The first is that we encourage the committee to continue to support our organization, which the Government of Canada has done, in our efforts to identify and rescue more victims found in child abuse material and to increase public awareness of this problem.
Second, we would like the support for our agency in becoming that unique resource centre assisting victims whose child sexual abuse has been recorded and currently is being distributed on the Internet.
Third, and perhaps more importantly, we would like you to consider legislation that targets communications and recordings that advocate harm to children. We are talking beyond child pornography, because that is covered. We mean the depictions of violent sexual abuse by adults, the sexual commodification of children, the marketing of children as sexual objects, and communications within those pedophile networks that normalize the distorted sexual views of children and guide members on how to create pretenses to gain access to them.
Fourth, we ask you to support efforts related to gender-specific education. With the overrepresentation of girls in imagery, we would like supplementary educational material that helps children understand what is not normal, what to do about child sexual abuse, and what action to take.
Finally, the issue of cyberviolence against girls should be considered as a precursor to cyberviolence against women. For example, the way in which it is experienced, the impact of victimization, and the available tactics and remedies that may be available could be much broader for girls, given their status as children. In addition, the protected status of children, as reflected in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution, and Child Pornography must be part of the consideration and evaluation.
In closing, we thank you very much for the opportunity to throw all this at you, and we welcome any questions you may have.
