Canadian Heritage Committee on Dec. 11th, 2024

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

I have one last question. Mr. Chair, do I have time?

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Martin Champoux]

You have a minute and a half left.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Thank you.

I want to ask if denying, for instance, trans children the access to puberty inhibitors is a denial of the right to health care—

[Kristopher David Wells]

Fundamentally—

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Is it a denial of the right to autonomy of the person?

[Kristopher David Wells]

It's fundamentally a violation of their human rights and their right to self-expression, to freedom of expression. Access to gender-affirmative care is a human right and is an important part of our health care system.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

We know that physicians have said that in fact it is very scientifically appropriate and clinically appropriate to give hormone replacement therapy to these kids. If you deny them by law, what are you doing to their charter rights?

[Kristopher David Wells]

You're absolutely violating their charter rights. There is a strong consensus in Canada by all medical associations and many professional associations that gender-affirmative health care is medically necessary, is evidence-based and is the right of individuals to receive and of physicians to provide.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Thank you very much, Senator, and thank you very much, Chair, for allowing me to finish my questions.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Martin Champoux]

Dr. Fry, you had two seconds left. Congratulations on being so precise.

Normally, it would be the Bloc Québécois' turn to ask questions, meaning me. However, since I'm in the chair today, I'm going to reserve a few minutes to ask a few questions after the other parties take their turn.

It is now the New Democratic Party's turn.

Ms. Ashton, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Hello, and thank you very much to our witnesses for joining us here today.

Senator Wells, we recently had a witness, Fae Johnstone, appear before this committee to discuss what we in the NDP view at the reasonable limits to freedom of expression, which is when it bleeds over into hate speech. During her presentation, she talked about the organized hate campaign she has had to deal with, which included publishing her personal information, aggressive harassment by pretend journalists at Rebel News, and the pile-on led by far-right hatemongers.

She asked in this committee, “What happens in a country where, instead of bringing people together, we normalize division and difference, with even the leader of Canada's Conservative Party, Pierre Poilievre, fanning the flames of conspiracy...?”

My question to you is what happens when that happens?

[Kristopher David Wells]

Well, I think it sends a message that people are not welcome within their communities, that they should be afraid or have to deny who they are to be able to access publicly available services and supports. Ultimately, it sends a message that Canada is not a welcoming and inclusive country.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Thank you for sharing that.

I want to focus a bit on the Alberta experience because you certainly allude to it, and many of us are very concerned about what's happening there. We've seen in Alberta how dangerous it can be when hatemongers who want to play politics with people's lives get into power. The reality is that if you're willing to demonize an entire community to garner votes, you have no business representing anyone.

The Premier of Alberta, Danielle Smith, has made demonizing the trans community a core part of her governing agenda. It is one of the most backwards and hateful government agendas we've seen in a long time. Many Albertans are watching Danielle Smith and feeling scared for their future. Trans children already face discrimination. They don't need a premier to pile onto it or leaders like Pierre Poilievre to back them into it.

As a previous witness to this committee, Fae Johnstone, eloquently said, “We need moral leadership from our politicians, from our political party leaders, to actually choose to unite Canadians, to protect these fundamental rights”. Can you describe how Premier Danielle Smith, with the full support of leaders like Pierre Poilievre, is demonizing trans youth, and what that means for children and families in your province?

[Kristopher David Wells]

Well, first, I would say that the three bills that passed in Alberta targeting the 2SLGBT community—in particular, youth—are unprecedented and represent a dangerous trend that we're seeing in Canada. A lot of this is being imported from the far right in the United States and countries like Russia and their “don't say gay” laws.

It's very disturbing. It's caused extreme distress and concern in the community, and I think that's why you've seen immediate court challenges being issued. Fundamentally, these laws are in violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and of human rights grounds that exist in every province and territory in this country. That includes sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression. We would expect that government policy would help and support young people, not hurt them.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Obviously, the goal of this study is to come up with recommendations to government in terms of dealing with the threats to freedom of expression. As I said, for us in the NDP, what's critical is to put a stop to hate, including anti-trans hate. I'm wondering whether you have some clear recommendations to make to the federal government on this front.

[Kristopher David Wells]

There's the example that I provided from the City of Calgary, the Safe and Inclusive Access Bylaw. The City of Vaughan also has a very strong bylaw that protects what's called “social infrastructure”—so hospitals, schools, libraries, recreational facilities—from protest. I think this is, as the courts have also agreed, a very reasonable limitation on the freedom of expression by still allowing people to express even hateful or awful views, but also protecting citizens in accessing public spaces and services, just like everyone else.

My recommendation would be for this committee to look at scaling up those efforts of those bylaws as a best practice and encouraging more municipalities to enact them.

Also, provincial governments do have the power, and certainly the federal government also has the power, to enact this kind of safe access, safe infrastructure laws and legislation.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Thank you for sharing that.

Quickly, do you think we need stronger federal laws when it comes to anti-trans hate in particular?

[Kristopher David Wells]

I do, absolutely, and in particular the hate crimes provisions that are in Bill C-63. I understand that the minister is considering splitting that bill. I really believe that those hate crimes provisions, which all law enforcement widely supports, need to be in the bill and will help combat hate in this country by having stronger legislation in the Criminal Code.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Martin Champoux]

You have 30 seconds left.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Thank you very much for what you've shared, and I'm looking forward to a second round.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Martin Champoux]

Thank you very much, Ms. Ashton.

Mr. Marcoux, I want to ask you a question about young people's exposure to harmful content online.

I am the father of two young teenagers, and I see how much the content they consume on social media and online in general influences the way they speak and behave. Some content is relatively harmless, but some of it is hard-core and extremely harmful, and that has deeply undesirable effects. There are all kinds of ways to prevent that. Australia has opted for a heavy-handed approach: banning social media for young people under the age of 16. They clearly want to do something definitive, but there are a lot of questions about implementing that policy.

What measures do you think could be taken in Canada? We need realistic measures that will help us prevent young people—especially teenagers, who are so impressionable—from accessing harmful content. I'm not just talking about violent or sexual content; I'm also talking about influences that can be deeply detrimental to their development and their attitude in general.

[Jacques Marcoux]

Thank you for your question, Mr. Champoux.

I'm happy you brought up the example of Australia. Australia set the tone with age 16, which is beyond what most countries are doing. If you think of that, it's actually a response due to the exasperation felt by families, regulators, government and everyone in protecting kids online. In the context where online service providers haven't really shown an interest to step up to the plate, to do what's right and to prioritize kids, what other option do governments like Australia or our own government have? If we had a situation in which the industry was taking this issue seriously and was taking appropriate steps, or wouldn't fight, tooth and nail, every attempt to be subject to reasonable regulation, then we wouldn't be in this situation. If it were....

I think I'll just end there.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Martin Champoux]

Thank you, but I'm still not hearing any proposals or suggestions for measures we can take. Basically, we still need to make the digital giants, the platforms, do their part. In a way, they are key to restricting access, controlling content and prosecuting offenders, if necessary. I think they're the problem because of their resistance to regulation.

[Jacques Marcoux]

Well, fundamentally that's what Bill C-63, in principle, aims to do: It's to establish regulations on the system itself and to impose duties of care onto those companies. Something like age verification, potentially, which has been supported by some parties, would allow websites and platforms to provide age-appropriate experiences to kids. That would be one example of something that could be done.

Bill C-63 is an example of the government trying to establish a systems approach. It's a approach similar to what's happening in the U.K. already, and in Australia and in the EU.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Martin Champoux]

Thank you very much, Mr. Marcoux.

We will now begin the second round of questions, starting with the Conservatives.

Mr. Jivani, you have the floor for five minutes.