Debates of Dec. 8th, 2016

Tax Convention and Arrangement Implementation Act, 2016

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I want to go back to the CETA comments. I wonder how the member would feel if I were to present him with a half-knit sweater for Christmas and package it up.

We honestly recognize that the Conservatives did do some work on CETA. We have acknowledged that.

We had leaders in Europe who had a very difficult time and it was off the tracks. If it were not for a very aggressive Minister of International Trade, working with the parliamentary secretary and a Prime Minister who was prepared to pick up the discussions and carry it over the goal line, we would not have that agreement. That is the reality.

It was signed off by this government. It does not mean that we cannot share in the glory, because at the end of the day, Canadians and Canada's middle class will benefit from it.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Is the House ready for the question?

[Some hon. members]

Question.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The motion is carried. Accordingly, the bill stands referred to the Standing Committee on Finance.

(Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to a committee)

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I believe if you seek it you would find the unanimous consent of the House to see the clock at 5:30 p.m.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Is it agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Accordingly, the House will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's Order Paper.

The House resumed from November 14 consideration of the motion.

Instruction to the Standing Committee on Health

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will be honest that when this topic came up, I never thought it would be something I would discuss here in the House of Commons. I know that when my parents watch this debate, whom I discussed this with a last night, they too will be surprised by some of the information I am going to be sharing.

I would really like to thank the member for Peace River—Westlock for introducing such a timely motion. Currently, in the status of women committee, we are studying violence against young women and girls. Through that study, I have learned more than I ever expected to learn. I think it is really important for all Canadians to know about this important topic relating to pornography and the necessity of the health committee's studying the effects of pornography.

I will start with a little story. I am just going to go off the cuff on this. There is a member I sit with on the status of women committee who will laugh at the fact that I am telling this story. It is a little embarrassing. I will start with a commercial called The Boys. I will ask everyone in the House to go home and watch this advertisement for some underwear made by an Australia company. The underwear's name is Bonds.

I first viewed this commercial on my flight back from some work I did on the status of women file. It was one of the award-winning commercials for underwear. On Air Canada, during this nice flight, I was watching this commercial. It has two testicles, and they are talking about how comfortable, and sometimes uncomfortable, underwear is.

I found the humour absolutely hilarious, because it is the type of humour that anyone who ever watched Seinfeld would appreciate. It was a little off the cuff, a little, “Oh my goodness, I cannot believe they said that”, but at the same time extremely witty.

The first thing I did when I got home was to say to my husband, “You have to watch this commercial. It is absolutely hilarious.” The commercial has two segments, part one and part two. I believe there may be a part three, as well. I allowed my son, who is 13 years old, to watch it, because I recognize what is appropriate and inappropriate. I also think parenting is very important.

After watching part one and part two of these commercials, the next thing that came up was pornography, as we were on an automatic loop. It was of two young girls and a young man. I will let members know that we could not run faster to that channel changer so we would not show our 13-year-old son what was playing next.

It was one of those embarrassing moments when we sit and wonder how we got to this from an underwear commercial that is playing on television in Australia 24 hours a day. How could pornography follow this?

At the status of women committee, we are also studying the algorithms involved. I see the parliamentary secretary here, and she, too, would understand the things that we are studying and how algorithms are a huge part of our study of the issue of violence against women and girls. We looked at algorithms this week and how when people put certain things in a search engine, there are crumbs that will show what people have watched in the past and then send that person to something on the web.

Of course, in my home, the first thing I said was, “Who is watching pornography? How did we possibly get this coming up after watching part one and part two of the commercial?” I had to ask every single person, and everyone said they did not watch it.

The first thing I did was to go to my iPhone and do the exact same search. I can promise members that not once has the word “pornography” been put in the search engine in my iPhone. I kind of look at it as a safe place, because there should not be any crumbs leading to this. The third thing that came up after viewing part one and part two of this commercial was pornography. Somehow it is being linked.

The reason I am talking about this is that I understand, from all the studies that we have done, that a huge majority of young boys have already watched or come across pornography by the age of 11.

In this regard, I would really like to thank the member who has moved this motion for the work he has done with the Over 18 documentary, which really focuses on the pornography industry and its effects.

While we were watching this documentary in the House of Commons last month, there was a young boy from Ontario, I believe, in the documentary who talked about the fact that every single day he was watching pornography. He was not just watching one or two segments; he was watching it sometimes up to five times a day.

His parents found out about this, and the first thing they did was have a discussion with him about pornography, because they had noticed a huge change in their son's behaviour. They are stating that they watched a huge deterioration in their son's behaviour toward his sisters, the fact that he had become much more violent with them, and it became much more of a violent situation. It was quite unbelievable for these parents that they were having to discuss healthy relationships and sex with their young son. I believe he was 11 or 12 years old at the time.

In this documentary, Over 18, they also talked about the desensitization of pornography and the effects that it has on healthy relationships. The week before last I was at a breakfast with a professor who has done tons and tons of work around this country and around the world on pornography and the effects of pornography. Some of the things she talked about included a discussion she had with a 12-year-old who asked if strangling while having sex was right, because he understood that was normal. Things like violent relationship stuff at the age of 12 is now being introduced to our young children.

I am a mother of five. I have two young girls and three young boys. I am very concerned with what we are seeing. When we talk about pornography, what is happening to healthy relationships?

I think this study is very timely, especially when we see the effects of pornography on our young children, our families, and our relationships, especially since it has not been studied for over 30 years, and we have now been introduced to the Internet. Thirty years ago, pornography would have been something as simple as a Playboy. My husband shared stories of coming across Playboy magazines many years ago when he was at a friend's house or something like that. Those are the things 14- or 15-year-old boys would get their hands on.

Now the pornography is much greater and much further into the craziness, where we are seeing violent behaviour toward young girls and women and even young boys as well, and we have to recognize the effects it is having on relationships.

During the study of violence against women, we had a witness by the name of Jane Bailey. She said there is absolutely a correlation between pornography and violence against women. If we are to continue wanting to make sure that we have a world of equality, a country where there is no violence, a country where women and children are treated properly, we need to look at pornography as a huge issue.

I am a mom, and any parent in this chamber today or anyone watching would be concerned. It is really important that, as parents, we know what is on the Internet. We recognize that companies like Google, Twitter, and Facebook are doing as much as they possibly can to remove some of these horrible images off the Internet, but we need to do more. We need to do more because pornography is desensitizing normal healthy relationships.

A normal healthy relationship is something we can always discuss, and we see that it expands and changes all the time. However, when pornography is there and we know that over 80% of our young boys are watching pornography, what will it do to them when it comes to having a healthy relationship?

Those are some huge concerns I have, so I think this is most timely and that we should be studying this in the health committee. I also urge the status of women committee to make sure this is very important in the report we will be doing about violence against women, because we need to see the correlation between pornography and what it is doing to our country, to our young boys and girls, and to our families. We see that abuse occurs because of that.

I appreciate all the work that the member for Peace River—Westlock has done on this to bring it to the committee and to the House of Commons so that we can have a conversation about it and make sure that we recognize what is healthy and what is unhealthy. As a parent, whenever I come across pornography, I recognize that it is extremely unhealthy.

Once again, I thank the member for bringing this forward. I recognize that many members are nodding their heads and that they understand this really important topic.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary for Status of Women]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to speak in favour of Motion No. 47, which calls on the Standing Committee on Health to examine the public health effects of violent, degrading, and sexually explicit online content.

Such an examination would reinforce Canada's commitment to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. It would also help achieve the goals of the 2013 agenda for sustainable development, which include eliminating all forms of violence against women and girls and ending abuse, exploitation, trafficking, and all forms of violence against and torture of children.

In 1983, then minister of justice Mark McGuigan appointed lawyer Paul D.K. Fraser to head a committee to examine current issues related to pornography and to recommend legal and social reforms. In 1985, the committee issued its report.

In that pre-Internet world, cyberbullying was not even imagined. In its report, the Fraser committee made 108 recommendations. They were based on the principles of the equality of women and men, that society must protect children, and that human sexuality and sexual relationships reflect an inherent mutuality and respect.

These recommendations remain as relevant today as they were 30 years ago. They serve as a foundation for addressing the issues we now face. The Internet brought a whole new world, including instant access to information and communication and worldwide connectivity. However, it also made it possible for criminals to target, isolate, and harm people through the modern-day crime of cyberbullying.

Cyberbullying occurs when people use computers, cell phones, and other devices to embarrass, humiliate, torment, threaten, or harass someone else. It usually happens over a long period of time. The frequency and intensity often increase over time, and the victim feels increasingly degraded and powerless.

Cyberbullying can take many forms, from the sharing of one humiliating photo to a constant stream of hateful text messages. It can also lead to tragic consequences. The harmful effects of cyberbullying are especially troubling when children and teenagers are the victims.

The suicides of Amanda Todd in British Columbia in 2012 and Rehtaeh Parsons in Nova Scotia in 2013 are examples of the tragic consequences of cyberbullying. Amanda was barely 17 years old when she died, and Rehtaeh was only 15. Those two teens were at opposite ends of the country, but they were both victims of toxic, traumatic, and prolonged cyberbullying. They were both harassed and humiliated to death. Their suffering and their senseless deaths confirmed the urgent need to put an end to cyberbullying.

Almost one in ten Canadian teens says they have been the victim of online bullying on social networking sites, and 18% of Canadian parents say they have a child who has experienced cyberbullying. A vast majority of Canadians want to see action to deal with cyberbullying.

According to a 2012 survey, 90% of Canadians would like to make it illegal to use electronic means to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause other substantial emotional distress.

Our government has heard the concerns of Canadians and is taking the necessary action to put an end to this problem.

The Prime Minister mandated the Minister of Status of Women to work with experts and advocates to develop and implement a federal strategy against gender-based violence.

As a result, in June, our government established the advisory council on the federal strategy against gender-based violence. The advisory council serves as a forum to exchange views, promising practices, and research on issues related to gender-based violence. The advisory council members represent a range of sectors and bring a diverse range of knowledge, skill, and areas of expertise, including expertise in prevention, survivor support, justice, and other systemic responses.

Over the summer, the minister and I held 13 round tables across Canada on a wide range of issues related to gender-based violence. In July, a round table on youth and online gender-based violence took place in Toronto. This round table explored the influence of social media on GBV with a particular focus on youth.

Stakeholders discussed actions our government could take toward preventing and addressing different forms of online GBV among youth, and on the specific experiences of at-risk populations. Stakeholders at the event included young people under the age of 24, anti-violence researchers and advocates, and representatives from front-line youth and feminist organizations, and from industry organizations engaged in media and online safety.

These round table discussions brought forward a range of effective approaches to address online GBV and its impact on youth, to name just a few: the need to look at root and systemic causes, including patriarchy, sexism, racism and capitalism; the importance of challenging the separation of online violence and real life violence, where online violence may be seen as less serious than other forms of violence; the imperative of taking an intersectional approach, which is all-inclusive; and the need to be youth centred, as these are among the most vulnerable.

The women's program under Status of Women Canada continues to fund projects to end violence against women and girls and to prevent and eliminate cyber violence. A Safe City Mississauga project supports inter-community networks of girls who act as ambassadors in schools and youth groups in order to come up with the best ways to end cyber violence.

Another project by victim services in Toronto brings together women and girls, school boards, police officers, employees of digital enterprises, and other local stakeholders to improve data collection, knowledge exchange, and the coordination of programs on cyber violence, especially to address sexual violence against young women and girls.

Our government understands that gender-based violence is a major public health issue here and around the world, an issue with lasting consequences for the victims, the families, and society. We are resolved to protect the health and safety of the entire population, including by preventing violence of any kind and supporting victims.

Public Safety Canada is working in partnership with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police's National Child Exploitation Coordination Centre, the Department of Justice, and the Canadian Centre for Child Protection, a registered charity, to implement the national strategy for the protection of children from sexual exploitation on the Internet. This will make it possible to investigate and identify Internet predators, to make the public more aware of this reality, and to fund other research on the sexual exploitation of children.

Today's generation is the first ever to have such easy access to worldwide communications. As a government, we must remain steadfast in ensuring they are not also the first generation to be harmed by easy access to the worldwide web.

Motion No. 47 is a way to gain deeper knowledge and understanding of the health effects of online violence and degrading, sexually explicit material, and an important stepping stone toward preventing and eliminating online crimes. This is why I am pleased to support the motion.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. Speaker, today's topic of conversation might be a little bit awkward for some. I am going to talk about sex, but I am not talking about sex between two people who have consented as adults. I am talking about sexual acts performed for the sake of entertaining a remote audience.

I am talking about pornography, which is an industry that targets young people to get them hooked on their product as children in order to profit from them for life. I am talking about an industry that produces a product that portrays violent, degrading, and dehumanizing acts toward women. I am talking about a product that plays a significant role in shaping the development and attitudes of our nation's young people.

We no longer exist in the year of 1985, a time when those who wanted to access pornographic materials had to enter a public place and pay for said materials. In the digital age, there is no store clerk to verify a user's name. In fact, many children are not even looking for pornography when they stumble across it for the first time on the Internet. This is 2016, and where there is Wi-Fi, there is access to pornography. The videos that are often accessed, however, are not the so-called miracle-of-life educational videos. The videos that are most often accessed nowadays are, in fact, violent in nature.

The material I refer to often goes by the label “hard core”. These videos are graphic, exploitive, dehumanizing, sadistic, aggressive, and altogether violent. They are humiliating. They routinely show men ignoring consent and performing sexual acts on women against their will. These videos are readily available and easily accessed by children during school hours and at home. This is deeply concerning, because there is a growing body of medical research that has shown that early age exposure to sexually explicit material is harmful to the development of young people.

Exposure to sexually explicit material does the following. It influences youth's sexual values, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviour. It shapes youth's expectations of relationships and love. It incites youth to experiment sexually before they are ready or prepared, and also gives them expectations of body image, which are often unrealistic. It can lead to compulsive behaviour and addiction. It feeds the demand for sex trafficking and sex workers, and lures youth into a field that they would not otherwise enter. Most alarmingly, it shapes the attitudes of boys and men toward women, and it blurs the boundaries of consent.

The average age of first exposure among boys is at the age of 12. This is often before they have hit puberty, or have had the opportunity to receive proper sex education or an understanding of consent. In fact, many young people are reporting that pornography serves as their primary source of information with regards to sex. This is extremely frightening, given that 90% of mainstream sexually explicit content features violence against women, and in fact goes so far as to normalize it.

It comes as no surprise then that young people who watch violent pornography are significantly more likely to hold a negative attitude towards other genders. They are also more likely to engage in sexually aggressive behaviour, including non-consensual violent acts toward women. Several studies have shown that youth who view pornography engage in higher levels of delinquent behaviour and, due to higher incidences of depressive symptoms and decreased emotional bonding, often lack in their social development.

Lois Roth, director of the Caribou Child and Youth Centre has noted that, “Positive messaging about gender and relationship equality, consent and respect, are undermined by this mainstream industry, which promotes and endorses sexual and physical violence.”

The issue of pornography is not just an issue of physical security for women and girls but of the mental effects and brain development of our nation's young people. Viewing pornography can shift a young person's psychological and emotional perception of other genders, and it further creates a flawed perception of what it looks like to be in a healthy sexual relationship.

Viewing pornography causes women to go from being a sister, a daughter, a niece, a neighbour, a person, to being little more than just an object. Women become a hair colour, an age, a body type, a breast size, or simply a living sex toy.

Because of the quantity of pornography that is consumed by individuals, the values that are taught in school and at home are simply just not enough. They become overwhelmed.

Dr. Victor Cline, a researcher in psychology, stated that in the scientific world, the question of pornography effects was no longer a hot issue, that the scientists and professionals were no longer pretending not to know.

Everybody knows that pornography can cause harm. It can also change people's sexual appetite, values, and behaviours. It can also condition people into deviancy and cause addictive behaviour.

The president of the Australian Medical Association also noted that there had been an increase in sexually transmitted diseases and violent practices which were not the norm and were accompanied by the availability of porn. This was resulting in physical and mental harm in youth.

In Canada, we prohibit young people from access to alcohol or tobacco because of the negative impact on their healthy development. We delay their ability to access these substances because they have not reached the age of majority, the time when our society considers youth capable of making a fully informed decision. Therefore, why are we allowing pornography then to go unregulated when it too has a negative impact on the development of our young people?

Ph.D Gail Dines likens the unregulation of pornography to “standing outside a convenience store handing out cigarettes” to kids.

Surprisingly, Parliament has not studied the impact of sexually explicit content since 1985, well before the Internet existed. That is over 30 years, as my hon. colleague has already pointed out. During this time, there have been huge advancements in terms of how pornography has evolved.

The worldwide revenue from porn is estimated at $57 billion, which is more than Microsoft, Google, Amazon, eBay, Yahoo or Apple. The mainstreaming of pornography increases daily. This is having a significant impact on how boys grow up perceiving women and thus treat them during adulthood. One in three women in Canada will experience sexual assault in their lifetime.

One in three women will be harassed, inappropriately touched, taken advantage of, or forced into sexual acts against their will. In addition, one in three of these women will be under the age of 16. These are women and girls in Canada, our daughters, our granddaughters, our nieces, and our sisters.

It took a generation of feminists to legalize pornography in North America. Pornography was seen as a positive force for the liberation of a woman's sexuality. Four decades later, a new generation of feminists is now fighting against the negative impact that pornography is having on their lives.

It is truly scary how many boys do not understand that “no” does in fact mean “no”. At the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, which I am a part of, the mother of Rehtaeh Parsons explained to us how one of the boys that raped her daughter did not even understand that what he did was in fact rape. He felt that it was just simply appropriate sexual behaviour with a peer. That peer committed suicide.

We need to understand the impact that pornography is having on our young people. We need to change the attitudes and behaviours that are fuelling violence against women and girls.

As policy-makers, we have a shared responsibility to take a stand for the health and the well-being of all Canadians. We have a particular obligation to ensure the healthy development of our children.

Today, I respectfully ask my colleagues from all sides of the House to support Motion No. 47. Together we can help ensure that women and girls are treated with dignity instead of degradation, as human beings instead of objects.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to rise today and contribute to this critical debate. Before being elected, I had the honour of serving on the board of a local organization in my constituency, called Saffron Centre, that works on education as well as on counselling regarding violence against women. Therefore, this is an issue that is very important to me and, I think, to all members in the House, and it speaks to this critical problem of violence against women.

I think there is consensus across parties about the importance of addressing this issue through new strategies and perhaps new legislative mechanisms. This could be a major project of this Parliament, that we not only pass this motion, which by all indications is going to pass with flying colours, but that we also use the resulting study to move forward with some legislative changes that would make a real difference in countering violence against women.

We have the desire to confront these issues in the House. It is so important, in the context of confronting violence against women, that we think about what I would call the sources of false belief that contribute to violence against women. Why do people do bad things, in this particular case in the way that we are talking about? It is probably because in many cases they have false beliefs about those actions. They think that what they are doing or would do is okay. Perhaps they think it is normal. Perhaps they think it would make them happy.

Therefore, when we talk about countering violence against women, we have to really dig into learning what the sources are of these false beliefs and how we can counter them.

Much of the discussion about responding to violence against women, but also other kinds of social ills, talks about the importance of education. Education certainly is very important, but if we have education happening on the one hand, and people developing false beliefs as a result of something else happening on the other side, then there is a kind of push and pull effect. Therefore, we need to deal with positive education, but also the countering of misinformation, and looking at the sources of that misinformation.

I would argue as well that, underneath all that, we need to pay attention to the development of character, because people's tendency to accept false beliefs versus true beliefs is ultimately going to be shaped by their character.

When we talk about the origins of false beliefs, I actually think we have a problem in language, because when we speak in English about education, it always, necessarily, has a positive connotation. We have a word to describe providing people with true, useful, and good information, the process of providing that information being education. We do not really have a corresponding word to describe when people, by viewing images that present distortions or by receiving false information, come to absorb and believe things that are not true, which have an injurious impact on their well-being and on the community. We do not really have a word for this latter phenomenon. One might call it mis-education though, the opposite of education. It is not ignorance. It is absorbing information that is wrong, but coming to believe it, whether through viewing movies or reading books or whatever the source of information might be.

When I think about this distinction between education and mis-education, I think of a quote from C.S. Lewis that I quite like, and I mentioned it at the status of women committee before. He said that education without values is about as useful as making people into clever devils.

Right now, we have a crisis of sexual violence on our university campuses. This should be troubling for the obvious reason, but also because these are supposed to be hubs for the most educated people, for our current and future leaders. However, in the presence of so much education, there is also this huge problem of sexual violence and other forms of gender-based violence.

It should give us pause if we think that education about positive consent is the full solution. It is part of a solution, but we need to also look for what the sources are of false belief, because this is the reality that often happens to young boys today. Their first exposure to sexuality is viewing violent pornography at a very young age, often before they have even reached their teenage years.

Over the course of their teenage years, they have viewed significant amounts of violent pornography. They have come to develop these false beliefs about what is okay, about what is normal, about what will make them happy. Yes, they have teachers and authority figures who tell them “consent, consent, consent”, but so much of their formative sexual experience has told them something completely different.

If we just provide the positive education side and do not respond to this mis-education, this shaping of perceptions and beliefs from a false, negative direction, then we will really be missing a critical part of the battle. If we want to address violence against women, and I think all of us in this House do, then we have to ask what the opportunities are for us to provide good and true information about consent. On the other hand, how do we respond to these sources of false belief that are really a central cause of the violence against women we see?

This is what this motion asks us to do. It asks us to start by undertaking a study at the health committee about these impacts. Again, I hope that hon. members, either though private members' business or the government, will be prepared to take the next step after the study and look for legislative responses.

I want to say that part of the reason we likely have not addressed this up until now is that there are some very legitimate concerns about civil liberties when we talk about possible restrictions on pornography that we might put in place. It is important to have that discussion, because civil liberties are important and need to be protected in the context of any action we take in this respect.

There are a few points I want to make specifically in my remaining time about civil liberties.

The first point is that civil liberties always entail exceptions for children. We do not allow children the same liberties we allow adults. That is because it is important that people, before they are able to exercise their full freedom in the interest of themselves and the wider community, have some degree of personal formation, a sense of the way the world works at a basic level, before they are prepared to fully manage their own affairs. That is fairly obvious, and that is how the world operates on so many other fronts.

For the law to step in and look for ways to protect children, or at least to make sure that children are not accessing certain kinds of material without the awareness or oversight of their parents, I think is a legitimate activity of the law. We are talking about something different if we are talking about adults. The reality is that there is a formative process of absorbing these false beliefs about the relationship between violence and sex that often starts very, very young. In fact, it often starts well before the age of legal consent.

The second point I want to make on civil liberties is that I think we need to recognize the potentially addictive and choice-distorting nature of pornography.

Very often we put restrictions on people's liberty to do certain things if we recognize that, for instance, in the case of drugs, the consumption of a drug will limit the ability to make choices in the future. It can lead to a level of addiction that will make it very hard for them to make a different choice that will be better for their well-being and happiness.

When we talk about the interaction of children with something that is potentially addictive, that is where we can get into a real problem. We can see many of these cases where young boys, before they really have any sense of what they are getting into, go through this process of finding themselves addicted and developing these false beliefs that will have negative social repercussions.

Finally, very briefly, as quickly as I can say it, our intellectual foundations, when it comes to rights, are connected with a deeper conception of justice. That a person has a right to a thing is necessarily rooted in a concept of justice in terms of what is owed them in a good society. We need to start from a place of what a just and good society looks like if we are going to have a coherent conversation about how we apply rights in this case.

Very clearly, a just and good society is not one in which very young boys are getting pornography addictions that are shaping their attitudes about violence against women as they grow older. Again, I look forward to supporting this motion, and I hope that it leads to strong next steps to confront this significant problem.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Resuming debate.

Accordingly, I invite the hon. member for Peace River—Westlock for his right of reply. The hon. member has up to five minutes.

The hon. member for Peace River—Westlock.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak once more to my Motion No. 47.

I want to start by acknowledging the support from the members of all parties, and expressing my appreciation for that support as it has been shown throughout this debate. It was encouraging to hear the speeches from members in each party. Many points they raised were points that I had wanted to include in my initial speech, but I just did not have the time to do so.

For example, my colleague from Calgary Nose Hill discussed issues around consent and youth education. The parliamentary secretary noted the staggering 342% increase in reports of child sexual abuse online over the four years at Cybertip.ca. The members for Abitibi—Témiscamingue and Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot both spoke about the health impacts of sexually explicit material on an increasing number of young men who are developing erectile dysfunction.

Since the last hour of debate, the support for Motion No. 47 has grown. There are now over 50 organizations from across Canada that support Motion No. 47. Just yesterday, I received a letter of support from the Colchester Sexual Assault Centre, which is coincidentally based in the riding of the chair of the health committee. The executive director wrote, “Unfortunately, online pornography has become the main source of sex education for our youth, and research has shown the damaging effects on personal sexual development and relationships. While we believe there is no simple solution to this epidemic, it is a necessary first step to help address the pervasive impact of sexualized violence in our community and culture.”

Dr. Kim Roberts, a professor of psychology at Wilfrid Laurier University, who is a researcher on child development and memory and also a consultant on the thousands of cases of child sexual abuse, wrote to MPs in support of Motion No. 47, stating, “The issues in this topic are not simply moral. They are very real consequences of exposure and/or participation in sexual activities before it is appropriate for children. Further, the way that sexual content is presented does not project the ideals of equality in sexuality. As a child victim grows up, they see themselves as someone else's property to be manipulated as they wish.”

In a letter of support from the Canadian Centre for Child Protection, the organization responsible for Cybertip.ca, executive director, Lianna McDonald, wrote, “Numerous studies have examined how viewing violent pornography that depicts the dehumanization of women can harmfully shape children's development of values about healthy sexual relations. These are not just statistics, these are our children, the ones growing up with these distorted views of healthy relationships and the ones growing up to be treated as a body instead of a person. It is our job to teach them otherwise.

The Centre to End All Sexual Exploitation in Edmonton wrote, “We think it's important to understand the multiple health impacts and to create prevention initiatives and support programs to assist Canadians of all ages who want help to stop viewing violent and sexually degrading materials. Research will enable all of us to better understand and create appropriate responses.”

During the first hour of debate, one of my colleagues from the NDP asked why I had not tried to introduce this directed motion at the health committee instead of debating it here first. One of the reasons I introduced Motion No. 47 in this chamber is that I believe that it is such an important issue that it warrants the attention of this House and all MPs. I also believe that the impact of strong, all-party support for Motion No. 47 will resonate across our country at provincial and municipal levels and significantly increase awareness about online sexual violence from coast to coast to coast.

In fact, inspired by Motion No. 47, in the past month the Alberta School Boards Association voted strongly in favour of integrating education on the harmful impacts of pornography into the provincial curriculum. A Manitoba MLA made a statement in the Manitoba legislature on sexual violence online. Three municipalities in British Columbia, the City of Victoria, the City of Colwood, and the District of Highlands, formally passed resolutions in support of the study.

Boys and girls are not born with the idea that violence and degradation are a normal part of sexual activity. They are taught by a multi-billion dollar industry that sexual violence is normal and acceptable. This has to stop.

I have a daughter and a son, and just like all members of the House, I want to see them grow up and develop attitudes of respect instead of objectification, of affection instead of coercion. We can do better for all youth.

I look forward to working with stakeholders, parents, my colleagues, and those on the health committee to find solutions that foster the healthy development of youth, increase child protection, and reduce violence. I again thank my colleagues for their support of the motion.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

(Motion agreed to)

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Rail Transportation

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me explain why I asked for this adjournment debate.

A high-frequency train has been a very big dream of the people of Trois-Rivières and also, I am sure, of the people in my colleague's riding of Saint-Maurice—Champlain. We get excited just hearing those three words because the last time a passenger train came through Trois-Rivières was on January 15, 1990.

VIA Rail has proposed a project involving a high-frequency passenger train that would travel along a dedicated track on the north shore of the St. Lawrence, and everyone is anxiously awaiting news on this subject.

When I asked the question in the House, I was dissatisfied with the answer that I got because I was told about the many investments that the government has made in VIA Rail but none of them had anything to do with the high-frequency train, and that is the project that I really want to focus on. In fact, the only figure I was given had to do with an assessment that is being conducted on the feasibility of providing funding for this VIA Rail project.

In response to this same question, on November 21, 2015, the Minister of Transport stated in an interview with La Presse that he was closely monitoring Via Rail's high-frequency rail proposal on dedicated Via Rail tracks. On September 9, 2016, 10 months later, he declared before the Canadian Railway Club that he was still studying the VIA Rail project. On October 21, 2016, I asked a question in the House, and I was told that the government was continuing its study. On November 17, at the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, I again asked the minister the question, and I obtained the same response: the government was still studying the project.

In light of the fact that $33 million was allocated to the study of this project, a study that was already under way in 2015, my question is very simple.

When does the government intend to finalize its report and provide funding for the VIA Rail high-frequency rail line, which would pass through a corridor on the north shore of the St. Lawrence River and end in Trois-Rivières, in order to service not just the people of Trois-Rivières, but all of Mauricie, with a train station that we are all anxiously awaiting? Having the train pass through the area is also an important change in the economic profile of the entire Mauricie region.

Imagine the day when one can travel from Trois-Rivières to Montreal or Quebec City in under 60 minutes several times a day. Everyone knows that Mauricie is becoming increasingly important and is already well known for its quality of life. Trains are such a comfortable way to commute that anyone could go work in either big city, and I am absolutely sure my colleague and I would often see each other on the same train to Ottawa for work.

When will it happen?

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Trois-Rivières for the opportunity to share our government's vision for the future of transportation in Canada and how passenger rail in particular fits into that long-term view. Building a national transportation system that is fluid in its operations, organic in its connection to Canada, and responsive to meeting the needs of our society and economy are critical to increase growth and better service. That is why our government allocated $3.3 million to support a comprehensive assessment of VIA's high-frequency rail proposal. VIA Rail proposes to reduce overall operating funding requirements from government and reinvigorate services in the Quebec City-Windsor corridor by investing in dedicated passenger rail service. I know that my friend the parliamentary secretary for finance, the member for Saint-Maurice—Champlain, is very excited about that. VIA believes that dedicated tracks would allow it to set schedules and frequencies to satisfy demand for passenger rail service by Canadians while providing a potentially greener mode of transportation.

I recognize the interest expressed by the people of Trois-Rivières, among many other Quebeckers and Canadians alike, with regard to VIA's high-frequency rail proposal. They can be assured that ongoing dialogue and consultations will remain an integral part of the process going forward. We are very interested in VIA Rail's proposal, as it aligns with this government's vision for the future of transportation in this country. The proposal offers a range of potential benefits: relieving congestion, boosting economic development, delivering a more efficient and sustainable rail transportation system, and reducing Canada's transportation-related environmental footprint.

We are committed to laying the groundwork for a transportation system of the future for Canada that will be safer and more secure, innovative and green, and sensitive to the needs of the traveller. VIA Rail's proposal is one of several options being considered for the future of passenger rail in Canada. Our government will take the time to not only carry out an in-depth assessment of the proposal but also fully consider other options available for delivering a safe and efficient intercity passenger rail service in Canada over the long term.

I can assure the member opposite and Canadians that this government has already begun its assessment of VIA Rail's high-frequency rail proposal. We look forward to communicating further with Canadians on the outcome.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in his answer, the member touched on a number of major principles that I agree with, of course. However, he did not say anything about a deadline.

If one person gives another a contract to conduct a study, the report is expected on a specific date. The date can be postponed for any number of reasons, such as needing a bit more time. However, there is still a deadline. In the government's case, it cannot tell us what the deadline for this study is.

Am I to assume that they keep postponing the study because they want the project to be funded by the proposed infrastructure bank, which would likely lead to higher costs for passengers than if it were among the major government-financed infrastructure projects?

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to again thank the member opposite for raising this subject, a subject of interest to him and my good friend from the riding of Saint-Maurice—Champlain.

Our government's long-term vision for Canada's transportation network is a future where alternative and green modes of transportation are more widely used, a future where air, rail, and transit are more integrated and seamless, a future where the Canadian travelling experience is better and more affordable.

VIA Rail's high-frequency rail proposal offers promising benefits that would put us on track, pun intended, to meeting these goals. We will work diligently to determine the best approach for passenger rail service in Canada in a way that best fits into our vision for the future of transportation.