Information & Ethics Committee on Dec. 11th, 2020

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you very much, gentlemen. This is really great.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Your testimony has been very enlightening.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I have point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Yes, Mr. Angus. Go ahead on your point of order.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I am so glad to see Mr. Erskine-Smith back at our committee. He hasn't been here in two years, but because of his testimony, I feel he should have been here in July. He would have been the top student in July, but he hasn't read any of the documents since then.

If he wants, I could give him a tutorial on the meetings of April 17 and what happened in those meetings, or on the email of May 3, in which Ms. Wernick says that she is happy to go along with WE if that's what Minister Chagger wants to do, as it was ultimately her choice.

I really want to work with Mr. Erskine-Smith on so much, so I am offering to spend Christmas on this. Other people can join us. We could have a special tutorial, and I could walk him through the documents, because I think I am the only one who has read all 5,000 of them.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

I've only been chair of this committee for a short period of time, but we do have to create a reward for the person who can milk a point of order the most. That would be Mr. Angus, for certain.

Colleagues, let me excuse our witnesses.

Again, Monsieur Gallant, Mr. Blumberg, Mr. Scott, I thank all three of you so much for the in-depth testimony. I'm actually going to read the blues of this meeting again, because it was very informative in many different dimensions. Thank you, and you can certainly log off now. We have some committee business to deal with.

[Mark Blumberg]

Thank you very much.

[Denis Gallant]

Thank you.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Colleagues, we can avoid going in camera. The budget was distributed to you. It's just for some basic things so that we can get testimony from witnesses. If there is no disagreement, I'll consider the budget unanimously passed.

Do we have consent on that?

(Motion agreed to)

Thank you very much. Madam Clerk, you're good to go in that regard.

Now, as promised, Mr. Erskine-Smith, I give you the floor.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Thanks very much.

Before I move the motion, I have spoken to Michael and also briefly with Charlie. I have not had a chance to speak with my Bloc colleague.

In relation to Bill C-11, I'm not going to move any motion on Bill C-11. I just hope that we have a common understanding. As we head into the new year, I hope to be a more permanent member of the ETHI committee when Bill C-11 will ultimately be referred to us.

Just so that we take advantage of January as much as we reasonably can, there needs to be a broad consensus that we'll work off-line to develop a work plan and witness list. We can then hit the ground running in a collaborative way when we get back. I just want to put that out there, and I hope there is broad consensus for that.

Specifically, you all have noticed, and I think we have all read, the horrifying stories in relation to the failure of Pornhub and MindGeek to take down illegal content in a timely way, and that has seriously damaged lives. Women's testimony in media reporting has indicated very clearly that they have not been able to come back to living a normal life because of the damage of those videos and the images that have been shared.

As I provided notice, I move:

That the committee call representatives of Pornhub / Mindgeek, namely Feras Antoon and David Tassillo, to explain the company's failure to prohibit rape videos and other illegal content from its site, and what steps it has taken and plans to take to protect the reputation and privacy of young people and other individuals who have never provided their consent.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Colleagues, I suspect, based on those I have spoken with, that there is pretty much agreement on this motion and not much debate.

Madame Gaudreau, do you want to weigh in?

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I think there were some problems with the interpretation but I understand that we now have to vote on something. Can you tell me what that is?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Madame Gaudreau, there was a notice of motion given by Mr. Dong. Mr. Erskine-Smith is actually filling in for Mr. Dong, so he moved the motion that the two owners of Pornhub and MindGeek be called before the committee.

Obviously I am going to open it up to debate, but as I said, I only mentioned at the beginning that there seemed to be agreement with the colleagues I had spoken with that we would like to do this when we get back.

Did you understand, Ms. Gaudreau?

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I did understand, but, given that I was not up to speed, I have to think about it for a few moments. If there is any documentation, I will certainly have to read it. You are taking me by surprise and so I am unable to express an opinion on anything at the moment.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

The clerk will resend the motion to you, Madame Gaudreau. The notice of motion was tabled before the committee a couple of days ago, but we're going to send it to you right now.

I have two other hands up, so we'll deal with those two hands while you're taking a look at the motion, Madame Gaudreau.

Go ahead, Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you so much.

I thank my colleague for stepping forward with this motion. I had been looking at this issue as something that we maybe would have looked at under Bill C-11 in terms of privacy rights.

The shocking news that we've seen—and shocking news internationally that has come out—is that Canada is home to a company that has been accused of hosting child pornography, revenge porn and non-consensual acts that have destroyed lives. It is something our committee needs to take very seriously. I think we need to bring in the owners of Pornhub.

I think we need to find a way to allow some of the survivors of this horrific abuse to speak to us if they're willing. If that's the case—and we don't have to debate that now—perhaps we could provide a safe forum where they could testify if they don't want to testify in public, so that they could provide that testimony to us. We should make that offer so that we know what the real-life impacts are.

Another issue that concerns me, a broader issue that Mr. Erskine-Smith and I dealt with to some degree in the last Parliament, is the safe harbour provisions. The safe harbour provisions allow large tech giants to be legally absolved from some content that is extremely destructive. In the past, we dealt with content that was extremist, racist and violent, content that has led to people being hurt and killed in other jurisdictions, but under the safe harbour provisions, you have to go after the person who posted it, which is not always easy.

If we had no safe harbour provisions for sites that post sexual violence and attacks on children and they were liable, that content would be down immediately, and it wouldn't get up there to begin with.

I think our committee can look at this issue. I don't think it needs to be a big study. I think we need a study that reports to Parliament. We could do this in a couple of meetings. Urgency is important. We need to vote on it today so that we're ready in February to deal with it. I would like to suggest two meetings and then a report. We could have more meetings if needed.

This is the kind of thing that our committee needs to be able to report on to Parliament with recommendations that we can move on very quickly.

As for Mr. Erskine-Smith's other suggestion about January, I certainly am very interested in talking about witnesses for Bill C-11, because I think this is going to be a very important study. I'll make myself available as long as we're not.... Maybe more informally, as a subcommittee, we could just talk through some of this and find a way to get ourselves oriented for February.

Those are my comments. However, I'm definitely ready to vote on this motion now.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. Angus.

Go ahead, Mr. Barrett.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Thanks very much, Mr. Chair.

Welcome, Mr. Erskine-Smith. I only had the opportunity to be on a committee briefly for a few appearances during the justice committee last year. I'm looking forward to it.

We have to take meaningful action to protect victims of child abuse and sex trafficking. When these abuses are documented on video and then put online, they're there forever. Once they're online, as we saw with reports in The New York Times, there's no getting them down.

It's very concerning that we have the distinction of being home to this organization. Certainly, they should come and appear before committee. Conservative members are prepared to support the motion and to move swiftly to a vote.

With respect to preparations for looking at government legislation, I'm definitely open to assisting with an informal working group to get witnesses and a timetable worked out and presented to the committee. We can circle back on that off-line.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. Barrett.

Madame Gaudreau is next.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have done my homework, I have familiarized myself with the motion. As I understand it, it replaces Mr. Dong's motion. We are probably all tired. Some bits really escaped me. By the way, my thanks to the interpreters.

So we are going to vote on this today in preparation for when we return. That is the bit that I did not understand. I did read the motion and I had time to listen to you.

I am always very wary, particularly with the whole matter of videos aimed at young people. That really concerns me.

We just must not forget the reason why we are meeting today. Life goes on and clearly, we have to deal with what drops into our plate. However, it would be worthwhile for everyone to be able to read everything we just heard at the committee. It contains a lot of good material for our structure.

I hear it said that the current situation is much the same as it was 10 or 15 years ago. Canada is actually far behind in terms of protecting personal information. That has consequences on international trade.

Perhaps this is not the case for you, but it affects me enormously. It is urgent for us to act. We must have transparency and we must make sure that people are protected. This is part of that protection.

I am ready to vote, keeping in mind that we have a lot of work to do. I am ready to work, and work even harder, because people deserve us to make everything better and to provide them with the very best.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Ms. Gaudreau.

I hope this translates okay, but thanks for setting the bar high for us. It's a high standard.

Going back to Mr. Angus's comment, I was thinking exactly that, and if you'll give me that latitude in this motion, we'll reach out. A couple of the young ladies, I believe, have been public in their statements. We'll reach out to them, and to me it would be advantageous to have their testimony first, because then we'd have sworn testimony before the committee that we could refer to when we get the characters from Pornhub and MindGeek before us. If you will give me that latitude, I'll work on that for the two meetings Mr. Angus suggested.

Is there a consensus around that? I see there is.

There's one last thing. I think we have unanimous consent as well in regard to the motion. Is that clear as well, colleagues?

Okay. I think that might be our first unanimous vote.

Thank you very much, colleagues—

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Mr. Erskine-Smith is the great consensus builder.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

You just haven't had me on the committee.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Yes, look at that. You wouldn't have given us 40 days of filibuster.

Chair, on that motion, are we reporting this to Parliament? I don't remember if I saw it, but I want to make sure that we have a report to Parliament in that motion.