Canadian Heritage Committee on Feb. 3rd, 2026

[Carol Todd]

The restriction in British Columbia goes from K to 12 in schools. It's based on personal mobile devices.

In my school district, which is the third-largest school district in B.C., in our elementary and middle schools it's bell to bell. Kids are not to bring in their devices; they need to be in lockers or at home. You'll say that kids in elementary school, in grades 4 and 5, shouldn't have devices, but the number of children eight and above who have a mobile device for personal use is up to about 62%. The numbers are rising; kids are getting them at early ages.

In high school, we teach digital literacy. All the schools in my school district have a digital literacy class for grade 9 students. We teach them about cyber-abusive behaviours—restricting the social, the emotional, the physiological, all that stuff—to put it into their heads. My role is to educate teachers and parents on this. I think it's a good thing to have.

I just want to clarify that although Australia has a social media ban, it's not restricting kids from having screen time at all. It's only with regard to 10 applications. Some of the applications that are still allowed are communication apps. Those are the ones that create the cyber-bullying effect, the predatory effect of predators out there. That's why we really need to look at what social media is.

It's not a restriction of devices for all children under 14, or in Australia under 16. It's only 10 applications. I just wanted to clarify that.

I'm sorry for taking your time to do that.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you.

My next question is for Ms. Orser from the Luna Child and Youth Advocacy Centre. Thank you for running 50 child centres.

My question is about the national data. How do social media platforms presently collect and use data from children, and what risk does this pose to their well-being and privacy?

[Karen Orser]

I'm not sure I'll be able to answer this question. The national dataset I'm referring to.... The 50 child and youth advocacy centres have created a minimum dataset related to what we see at child advocacy centres and child abuse. It's not related to how technology companies are collecting and using child data. I'm referring to how we hope to collect more national data around the prevalence of child abuse.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

From the perspective of a child and youth advocacy centre, how has social media, including influencer content, contributed to cases of exploitation of or emotional harm to children?

[Karen Orser]

I'm happy to provide more details, but at CACs, we are definitely seeing significantly more files every year that involve online components, CSAM and cyber-bullying, especially with crossover between contact that is made through applications and abuse in person. These are disturbing trends for child advocacy centres, and for all of us.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you.

My next question is for the Shalem Mental Health Network.

Ms. Berends, from a clinical perspective, what mental health patterns are you seeing that are connecting to social media influencers, particularly regarding anxiety, depression or body image?

[Aimee Berends]

We don't collect that data here at Shalem, and there are several reasons for that, but I do know that we have so much research about this. Numbers exist, but I can't provide them from Shalem. What we're more concerned about is, could we have some policy, some legislation or something that reduces harm? Any kind of harm reduction would be welcome.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you.

Mr. Champoux, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I'll be quick.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'll continue with you, Mr. Desrosiers. One of your recommendations is to regulate the industry. This is something that many have attempted to do, with limited success so far. It's not just here in Quebec and Canada, but everywhere around the world. It's going to become essential. How do we regulate the industry, how do we legislate, when we face systematic obstruction from these industry giants, who are all-powerful and very influential with the most powerful governments? Just look at what is happening in the United States.

[Guy Desrosiers]

I think we need to try to work with the levels of government that have already started the work. The European Union has begun this work, and I think it has laid some pretty interesting groundwork. Australia is also somewhat ahead of the curve in this area. It's very difficult to do this alone. For example, we've seen this with the news media that has been banned. Be that as it may, I believe in it. We mustn't forget artificial intelligence, which is behind all these solutions today. I would invite you to learn about Yoshua Bengio's global LawZero initiative. I think we need to work together on this, because alone, we can't stand up to these giants.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

That is indeed my opinion. I don't entirely agree with what my colleague Mr. Waugh said earlier about the studies we are conducting here leading nowhere.

Indeed, we had elections, which caused some of our legislative initiatives to die on the Order Paper, but the fact remains that we have been far too slow to react to this phenomenon, even though it was fairly predictable. Is there room for optimism? It's hard to know. Is it still possible? Should we impose severe restrictions, as some are proposing, while we put a regulatory framework in place and regain control, if you will? Is there a way to do all this from where we are now and succeed in putting something effective in place?

[Maude Bonenfant]

Something needs to be done. Legislation must be put in place. We can't let companies continue like this. We've seen what happens. Now, we have the knowledge to take very specific action. Yes, we can restrict profitability, meaning that these giants would no longer be able to make billions of dollars off the backs of our young people, but without destroying the economic model either. There could be barriers to restrict certain practices. Here, we could take action on several fronts. We could take action at the database level. We could control how databases are organized, how algorithms work, the structure of the design, and the type of access. All of this could be implemented in a very precise manner. Companies could continue to have a certain economic model, but with reduced harm. We were talking about individual responsibilities earlier, but I think the pendulum is no longer on the side of individuals, of young people, who respond very well to the measures, by the way. Now, it's on the side of companies. They need to be regulated.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

How much time do I have left, Madam Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

You've already gone past your time by a minute.

Mr. Diotte, you now have the floor for five minutes.

[Kerry Diotte, Conservative, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thanks to everyone for being here.

I'm losing my voice. Hopefully I can last the five minutes.

We're hearing about the effects of influencers and social media on children. We've heard about the bullying, which is horrific, and the graphic porn and sextortion. We've heard some terrible things.

We know that this has been studied to death. I believe it has been more than 1,600 days since the online harms act was first debated, so in turning to immediate solutions, I want to get something from everyone on what big tech should be doing today to stop harms to children.

Maybe we could start with Aimee Berends, and then anybody else who wants to wade in on that question would be most welcome.

[Aimee Berends]

I really feel this is outside my purview, so I'm going to let someone else answer.

[Maude Bonenfant]

What we can do very quickly is intervene on certain aspects of the device, that is, anything that is more likely to create addiction. We could intervene on the design itself.

I talked about dark patterns, which should be regulated to prohibit this type of practice. Then, we could also act at the database level. If these images appear, it means they are in the databases. We can establish a framework that would regulate both the algorithm and the database on the content that is viewed. We could also intervene in terms of networking between individuals themselves, between young people, again to try to curb certain practices and indicate promotional content more clearly. Some efforts are being made in this area, but we could take even more vigorous action.

It's really a whole range of measures that could be put in place. Earlier, Mr. Desrosiers spoke about Europe, which has put certain rules in place that are currently being implemented and that we could use as a model. If we take global action to regulate these companies, they will have no choice but to comply with certain legislation, if only in terms of privacy.

[Kerry Diotte, Conservative, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Thank you.

Ms. Austin, would you care to respond?

[Sara Austin]

Thank you.

We have spent two decades hoping that the tech industry would do the right thing, and they have proven themselves to be untrustworthy. They are not going to do this as a voluntary effort. Currently in the United States, there are major lawsuits against all of the major tech platforms. Carol Todd and other families in Canada are part of that. It's clear that the tech industry will not do this voluntarily. It requires legislation and imposing strict regulations on them to act and do the right thing for our children and for all Canadians.

We have recommended several key elements for an online safety act. They include a duty of care; clear, enforceable obligations on platforms to prevent foreseeable harms to children; and independent public oversight so there's a strong, independent regulator that has real enforcement powers and technical capacity, along with transparency and authority.

We recommend youth protections by design. We need age-appropriate design, with limits on addictive features, meaningful defaults for minors and safeguards for AI-enabled abuse. Another critical element is data access for public interest research so that Canada can actually measure the harms and enforce compliance.

Last but certainly not least, we want to see AI systems in scope. We can't simply regulate social media; we need to look at AI systems in the whole digital landscape in which children are living and ensure that there is accountability for AI systems, whether they be chatbots or other functions that are exploiting and harming our children.

[Kerry Diotte, Conservative, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Does anyone else care to wade in? There's been some very good testimony.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

You have 30 seconds.

[Kerry Diotte, Conservative, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Perhaps it could be Ms. Todd.

[Carol Todd]

I can talk. I can always talk.

These social media platforms are a business model for big tech. They have algorithms that not only grab our kids; they grab adults as well. How many times have you seen adults who can scroll endlessly? If you look at brain science and at the neuroplasticity of the brain, everything we see and watch embeds into our brains. We can't unsee it. What our kids are seeing harms them in some ways.

I teach technology. I am not anti-technology. I feel that we need some regulations in place to ensure safety, for the same reason we have regulations in place for safety in vehicles, the same reason we have CSA-approved items that we use in our homes, and the same reason we watch to make sure, as parents and grandparents, the playground is safe for our kids. That digital playground doesn't have the oversight needed to keep our kids safe right now. That's why I am imploring our government....

I do not want our testimonies to be shelved. This is my fifth standing committee. I have probably met some of you in other standing committees that I've spoken at. Each time, I ask this: Please create action. We're not creating action. We're creating words. We're creating briefs. We're creating something that is stored somewhere.

This is the time—right now—with this committee. We need something done. If we don't do something, we'll lose more Canadian kids, more Canadian youth and more Canadian young adults to online harms.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lisa Hepfner]

Thank you.

Ms. Royer, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Zoe Royer, Liberal, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We have an extraordinary panel here today.

I'd like to begin by acknowledging the profound loss, Carol, of your daughter, Amanda. I think it was just shortly after her 15th birthday. It happened in our community. I know that the community grieved Amanda's tragic death—at the time and for many years. I really want to recognize your courage. You have turned this profound loss into advocacy and education.

Given that you are an educator in school district 43, the Coquitlam school district, and you are supporting kids, can you talk a bit about more tools for prevention that we can implement? I'd like to really explore that with you. You have four minutes if you need them.