Unfortunately, I didn't hear the panel before, so I'm not sure of the differences that were discussed.
At a very practical level, we have to recognize that the online space is not at all like the real world, where there are geographic boundaries that Canada can police and patrol. The online world doesn't have those kinds of boundaries. Let's for now confine ourselves to what would constitute criminal hate speech under the Criminal Code. It's much more difficult for the Canadian government to deal with that online. Even that kind of content, if it originates outside of the country online, is going to be very difficult for a Canadian court to do anything about.
I don't think it's a problem of political will or enforcement necessarily. It's just the reality of the infrastructure that exists that allows both the good and the bad that comes from democratizing freedom-of-expression media. It used to be that only people who could afford to establish a printing press could have a megaphone. Today everyone has a megaphone, and there are obviously good and bad aspects of that reality. I think that's what accounts for that difference, and I'm not sure it's a problem the law can really address. We wouldn't want a court in Russia deciding what Canadians can access on the Internet. By the same token, Canadian courts can't decide what the world can access. We shouldn't be allowing our courts to make orders that would remove content from the Internet worldwide.