Evidence of meeting #21 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was pornhub.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:10 p.m.
C/Supt Marie-Claude Arsenault
We received 120 reports through NCMEC.
1:10 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Here's the thing. You come here and you talk about how you could get more money to do a better job. We've had a law on the books for 10 years, and yet since 2020 you're getting reports from an American agency, when the law says that if there are allegations, it has to go to the police. You have no record of any of that? It has to go to the Canadian child centre. Thank God the Americans are sending you some information.
I ask that because we have had multiple witnesses come forward, and we're not just talking about child pornography, about encryption in the dark net. We're talking about witnesses who say that modern sexual assault is being tied to what is happening online, that it is being promoted, and that it is being promoted in a Canadian company. Just to clarify, are you saying that you have absolutely no cases outstanding against Pornhub-Mindgeek for all the cases that have been brought forward?
1:10 p.m.
D/Commr Stephen White
That is my understanding.
1:10 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Okay.
Then you said you have a problem with jurisdiction. How could you have a problem with jurisdiction when they are based in Montreal?
1:10 p.m.
D/Commr Stephen White
Part of the company may be based in Montreal, but it may be incorporated elsewhere and their servers could be located elsewhere as well.
1:10 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
I find that interesting, because when I read the law, it doesn't mention their servers. It mentions their service. Pornhub-Mindgeek is an Internet service. As an Internet service, it promotes content, adult content, sexual content. The law doesn't say that if Pornhub-Mindgeek has their servers in Cyprus, you can't touch them. They are providing a service; they have a legal obligation.
Have you had any legal opinion from your people about the difference between the service they provided and your inability to check their servers, or have you just not tried to check their servers because you haven't followed through with any cases?
1:10 p.m.
D/Commr Stephen White
No. The cases we've followed through on are the ones that were referred to us. They have a presence in the United States. They report it through that entity in the United States and pass it on to us.
1:10 p.m.
D/Commr Stephen White
The 120 reports that were mentioned are and have been looked at.
1:10 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Okay. Again, I'm looking at Canadian law, and it doesn't say that a Canadian entity should be referred to the United States so they could then refer to the RCMP. They said they have an obligation to report to the police, which is in Canada.
I want to read an email I received from one of the survivors. Again, we're not talking about one or two cases here. We've come across many. This survivor wrote to me on Friday afternoon. She said she was glad that we would be talking to the RCMP on Monday. She said, “I hope they can answer why they don't do anything. I emailed them and asked them to investigate Pornhub's part in my video, because I think it was illegal. They didn't even answer.”
Here's the point. She said she was scared to try again. She was worried if she pushed the issue, they'd just get mad and stop working on these cases. The issue of survivors having to ask you to do the job you're supposed to do, and you tell us that you haven't initiated any cases. It sounds as if you're not even going to get mad at this poor survivor; you just haven't done it.
Can you explain to us, after all the testimony we've heard, why you are still talking about dealing with the dark net, needing more resources, working with the United States, and you are not addressing the issues—the credible issues—of sexual abuse and non-consensual acts that have happened on this service? What are you giving us here?
1:15 p.m.
D/Commr Stephen White
The reports that are referred to us are assessed, regardless of which entity refers them, and if it is deemed to be content that needs to be investigated further, packages are put together and sent out to police services across the country—
1:15 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Okay, but the survivor who wrote to me said she asked them to investigate Pornhub's involvement in her video because she thought it was illegal and the RCMP didn't even answer and she was scared to try again.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Brenda Shanahan
Mr. Angus, I see that Mr. Wong has his hand up. If the committee agrees, we'll give Mr. Wong 15 seconds.
1:15 p.m.
Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Just quickly, because this issue has come up a number of times in relation to jurisdiction, it is a complicating factor in all these cases. As Commissioner White said, there is the issue of incorporation in Luxembourg, headquarters in Montreal, its servers located around the world, but mainly in the United States.
The operation of the mandatory reporting act—and Mr. Angus is correct in relation to the definition of Internet service. Pornhub meets that definition, but the obligation under section 3 of the act is when they find they have reasonable grounds to believe they've found child pornography on their servers.... The operation of the mandatory reporting act—
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Brenda Shanahan
I'll have to stop you there, Mr. Wong. If you have further information to give us, please provide it to the committee in writing.
I will now go to Mrs. Wagantall for, I believe, five minutes.
February 22nd, 2021 / 1:15 p.m.
Conservative
Cathay Wagantall Conservative Yorkton—Melville, SK
Thank you very much, Chair. It's a real privilege to be part of this conversation today on behalf of those who are being victimized at unbelievable levels. It's frightening, and we have to do something.
I noticed here a comment that we've investigated only around 120 reports, 25 of which qualified to go to our police force. That means that 90, it was indicated, did not meet the Criminal Code definition. I have to ask why. What should we be doing to improve this Criminal Code definition so that these circumstances aren't taking place? I can't imagine that these other cases shouldn't qualify to be investigated.
1:15 p.m.
D/Commr Stephen White
I'll start, and then I'll turn it over to Madam Arsenault.
Every one of these cases—
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
1:15 p.m.
D/Commr Stephen White
Sure.
Every one of these cases that come into the National Child Exploitation Crime Centre is fully analyzed. We have some very good and passionate people in that unit doing this work, and they do a good, thorough analysis—
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
Cathay Wagantall Conservative Yorkton—Melville, SK
Excuse me, Mr. White. I'm not questioning their analysis. They're doing their analysis and deeming 90 of them as not meeting Criminal Code definitions.
Mr. Wong, what's the problem here? What do we have to do to increase that and improve that area?
1:15 p.m.
C/Supt Marie-Claude Arsenault
Maybe, before you answer, I could just clarify that it did not meet the definition of child pornography in the Criminal Code. The vast majority were cases like age-difficult media, meaning we cannot definitely ascertain whether the individual is under the age of 18 years old.
1:15 p.m.
Conservative