Bill C-63

An Act to enact the Online Harms Act, to amend the Criminal Code, the Canadian Human Rights Act and An Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts

Part 1 of this enactment enacts the Online Harms Act , whose purpose is to, among other things, promote the online safety of persons in Canada, reduce harms caused to persons in Canada as a result of harmful content online and ensure that the operators of social media services in respect of which that Act applies are transparent and accountable with respect to their duties under that Act.
That Act, among other things,
(a) establishes the Digital Safety Commission of Canada, whose mandate is to administer and enforce that Act, ensure that operators of social media services in respect of which that Act applies are transparent and accountable with respect to their duties under that Act and contribute to the development of standards with respect to online safety;
(b) creates the position of Digital Safety Ombudsperson of Canada, whose mandate is to provide support to users of social media services in respect of which that Act applies and advocate for the public interest in relation to online safety;
(c) establishes the Digital Safety Office of Canada, whose mandate is to support the Digital Safety Commission of Canada and the Digital Safety Ombudsperson of Canada in the fulfillment of their mandates;
(d) imposes on the operators of social media services in respect of which that Act applies
(i) a duty to act responsibly in respect of the services that they operate, including by implementing measures that are adequate to mitigate the risk that users will be exposed to harmful content on the services and submitting digital safety plans to the Digital Safety Commission of Canada,
(ii) a duty to protect children in respect of the services that they operate by integrating into the services design features that are provided for by regulations,
(iii) a duty to make content that sexually victimizes a child or revictimizes a survivor and intimate content communicated without consent inaccessible to persons in Canada in certain circumstances, and
(iv) a duty to keep all records that are necessary to determine whether they are complying with their duties under that Act;
(e) authorizes the Digital Safety Commission of Canada to accredit certain persons that conduct research or engage in education, advocacy or awareness activities that are related to that Act for the purposes of enabling those persons to have access to inventories of electronic data and to electronic data of the operators of social media services in respect of which that Act applies;
(f) provides that persons in Canada may make a complaint to the Digital Safety Commission of Canada that content on a social media service in respect of which that Act applies is content that sexually victimizes a child or revictimizes a survivor or intimate content communicated without consent and authorizes the Commission to make orders requiring the operators of those services to make that content inaccessible to persons in Canada;
(g) authorizes the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting the payment of charges by the operators of social media services in respect of which that Act applies, for the purpose of recovering costs incurred in relation to that Act.
Part 1 also makes consequential amendments to other Acts.
Part 2 amends the Criminal Code to, among other things,
(a) create a hate crime offence of committing an offence under that Act or any other Act of Parliament that is motivated by hatred based on certain factors;
(b) create a recognizance to keep the peace relating to hate propaganda and hate crime offences;
(c) define “hatred” for the purposes of the new offence and the hate propaganda offences; and
(d) increase the maximum sentences for the hate propaganda offences.
It also makes related amendments to other Acts.
Part 3 amends the Canadian Human Rights Act to provide that it is a discriminatory practice to communicate or cause to be communicated hate speech by means of the Internet or any other means of telecommunication in a context in which the hate speech is likely to foment detestation or vilification of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination. It authorizes the Canadian Human Rights Commission to deal with complaints alleging that discriminatory practice and authorizes the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal to inquire into such complaints and order remedies.
Part 4 amends An Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service to, among other things,
(a) clarify the types of Internet services covered by that Act;
(b) simplify the mandatory notification process set out in section 3 by providing that all notifications be sent to a law enforcement body designated in the regulations;
(c) require that transmission data be provided with the mandatory notice in cases where the content is manifestly child pornography;
(d) extend the period of preservation of data related to an offence;
(e) extend the limitation period for the prosecution of an offence under that Act; and
(f) add certain regulation-making powers.
Part 5 contains a coordinating amendment.

Online Harms Act

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I recall serving with the hon. minister on the justice committee and talking about this exact thing. One thing that came to light was how the previous government, the Harper government, got rid of section 13 of the human rights code. Basically, that section created a remedy for those who were being targeted and victimized online. I think that, yes, there is a balance between what is freedom of expression and what is hate speech. Hate speech should absolutely not be protected. We have seen how much it has impacted our communities and our ability to work together as a country.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo. I listened to part of my colleague's speech, and she was referencing protecting children. This is a government that has not addressed mandatory minimums when it comes to sexual offences. The Harper government addressed mandatory minimums on drugs, on guns and on sexual offences. The current government has legislated on guns and drugs, but it has not touched sexual offences.

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from St. Catharines can complain all he wants about this. At the end of the day, the reality is that we have people who are committing sexual offences against children and serving sentences on house arrest. I will also note that he did not vote to have Paul Bernardo's transfer revisited. I wonder how the people of St. Catharines feel about that.

How can the member say they are there to protect children when the reality is that they are allowing predators to serve their sentences at home?

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will take no lessons about the protection of Canadians from a party that continues—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Order. I am hearing a lot of cross-conversation going on.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I just want to say it is disgusting that the hon. member across the way, with a smile on his face, would mention a serial killer's name in this place and attempt to use it for political gain—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Order. I have the floor.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Order.

The hon. member for Mississauga—Erin Mills.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be the voice of reason in the House today.

Unfortunately, when we hear colleagues accusing each other in righteous indignation, we have to look at our track record. We have done a lot as a Liberal government to protect children while a lot of slogans have come from that side. There is a lot of politicization of the issue when we should be protecting children here in our country. We are not able to get to that because they continue to completely restrict and hold up legislation, instead of letting it go forward in the House so that it can protect Canadians and protect our children all across the country.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Consular Affairs)]

Mr. Speaker, today I am going to speak about one of the online harms act's core purposes, and that is the protection of children. Our government will stop at nothing to ensure that kids in this country are safe, and this includes their online safety.

Our children spend many hours of their day watching online videos, chatting with their friends and posting snippets of their lives. Being online is integral to their lives and offers many benefits. It is a way for them to connect, learn and find entertainment. However, the online space is not always safe for children. We have rigorous toy standards to ensure that Canadian kids do not get hurt while playing. The Internet is the most complex and riskiest toy ever invented. It must have its own safety standards to protect kids from the harms embedded within social media platforms.

For too long, we have tolerated a system where social media platforms have off-loaded their responsibilities onto parents, expecting them to protect their kids from harms that platforms create and amplify. Until now, there have been no safety regulations for online platforms. Parents and kids do not know where to turn to get help when things go wrong online.

The bill would create a baseline standard for online platforms to keep Canadians safe. It would hold platforms accountable for the content they host.

Over the last several years, we have conducted extensive public consultations. A common theme that was heard was the vulnerability of children online and the pressing need to take steps to protect them. At the same time, the consultations highlighted a desire for a flexible, risk-based approach to online regulation. Bill C-63 would balance these two objectives.

I am disappointed to see the Conservatives discredit the hard work of the organizers, victims and survivors across the country who were consulted on the legislation. By refusing to support the bill, they are rejecting this experience and the reality of today's world that children are not currently safe online. The bill was meticulously created to keep Canadians safe while ensuring that their rights are maintained.

The online harms act introduces a new duty to protect children. It requires platforms to integrate design features that protect children on their platforms and report on the measures they are taking to protect children. The specific design features will be identified following open regulatory processes where all interested parties have a chance to be heard. This would ensure that the measures are fit for purpose and consider the latest research and evidence, as well as that they are workable for the social media services that need to implement them. We believe this approach to protecting children respects the government's position of supporting a safe and inclusive digital space in Canada.

The online harms act would require operators of social media services to integrate design features that protect children, such as age-appropriate design. Bill C-63 does not opt for a prescriptive approach requiring the use of a specific technology, such as age verification; instead, it opts for a principle-based approach that can evolve with technology. The goal of age-appropriate design is to make the online user experience of children safer by decreasing the risk that they will encounter harmful content. This might include design features such as parental controls, default settings related to warning labels on content and safe search settings.

Age-appropriate design is useful because it is not a one-size-fits-all approach. It recognizes that a five-year-old and a 16-year-old interact with the online world differently, so they likely require different design features to improve the safety of their online experience. The digital safety commission would articulate these features through regulations after examining industry practices and available technology, as well as engaging with stakeholders and Canadians. This process would ensure that the subsequent regulations on design features that protect children are well-informed and in line with Canadians' expectations of privacy and digital expression.

Bill C-63 was crafted with special attention to freedom of speech, a charter right that the government will always protect. At each step, we made design choices with freedom of expression top of mind. Under the online harms act, the risk-based approach is anchored in a duty to act responsibly that requires platforms to create safer spaces online so that users are less likely to encounter harmful content. The duty to act seeks to ensure that we have in place adequate systems by services that limit the likelihood of users viewing harmful content.

Bill C-63 would also enhance the protection of children online by amending an act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service, the mandatory reporting act. The bill would amend the mandatory reporting act to strengthen reporting obligations under the act to help facilitate child pornography investigations. The bill would allow for the centralization of reporting to a single law enforcement body, a response to a long-time ask from law enforcement and child advocates.

The duty to report would be triggered when the service provider has reasonable grounds to believe that their network is being or has been used to commit a child pornography offence. The reporting requirement would also be enhanced to require the provision of transmission data in any report where the service provider believes that the material is manifestly child pornography.

We recognize that children are spending more and more of their time on the Internet. Our goal is not to prevent children from having access to valuable information and a social experience online. Our goal is the opposite: to make the online environment as safe as possible for them to explore. The duties set out in the online harms act would be critical to accomplishing this goal.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on her speech.

Would she agree that we should split the bill? That way, we could deal with part 1, which covers everything dealing with sexual content, separately from the other parts of the act that we find more problematic.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the government spent four years consulting on the bill, and I think it is important that we look at the entire bill together. I know it is going to be going to committee, and hon. members can discuss those kinds of things there. However, given that it has had four years of consultation, I believe the government has listened to that consultation and put what needs to be put into the bill.