House of Commons Hansard #157 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was online.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Bill C-41—Proposal to Apply Standing Order 69.1 Conservative MP Andrew Lawton asks the Speaker to divide Bill C-41 into separate votes on MAID eligibility for people with mental illness and advance requests for people who later lose capacity. 1400 words, 10 minutes.
Safe Social Media Act Second reading of Bill C-34. The bill would establish online safety duties for social media and chatbot services, require safeguards for children under 16, speed removal of specified harmful content, and create a commission to oversee compliance and penalties. Liberal speakers say it supports families and addresses risks such as exploitation, bullying and harmful algorithms; Conservatives and the Green Party support examining protections but raise concerns about privacy, enforcement, exemptions and decisions deferred to future regulations. 61200 words, 7 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.
Protecting Young Persons from Exposure to Pornography Act Second reading of Bill S-209. The bill requires commercial pornography websites to use age-verification or age-estimation measures to restrict minors’ access, with safeguards for personal privacy and penalties for non-compliance. Members broadly support its goal of protecting children, while the government also points to related online-safety legislation. The House passes the bill at second reading and refers it to committee. 6600 words, 45 minutes.
Bill C-41—Proposal to Apply Standing Order 69.1Points of OrderPrivate Members' Business
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
I thank the member for his intervention. Of course, the Speaker will take it back to make a decision on it.
Bill C-41—Proposal to Apply Standing Order 69.1Points of OrderPrivate Members' Business
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order to indicate that we would like the opportunity to respond to the point of order that has been raised before you make your ruling.
Bill C-41—Proposal to Apply Standing Order 69.1Points of OrderPrivate Members' Business
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
It is noted.
I wish to inform the House that because of the deferred recorded divisions, the time provided for government orders will be extended by 73 minutes.
It is my duty, pursuant to Standing Order 38, to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Nanaimo—Ladysmith, Finance; the hon. member for Yellowhead, The Economy.
Charles Sousa Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fifth report of the Standing Committee on National Defence, entitled “The Department of National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces Contaminated Sites”.
Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to this report.
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is a great honour for me to table petition e-7590.
As members are likely aware, I often like to tell individuals in the chamber that my riding has the highest percentage of Korean Canadians out of all 343 ridings in our country. Bearing that in mind, and given that some of them are here in the gallery today, it is a great honour—
Foreign AffairsPetitionsRoutine Proceedings
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
I have to interrupt the member. A member cannot mention a presence or absence, and especially of people who are in the gallery. Only the Speaker can make reference to those who are in the gallery. I will allow the member to continue and to finish, but the member has to remember not to make reference to people in the gallery.
Ali Ehsassi Liberal Willowdale, ON
Mr. Speaker, the petition is regarding the Korean War armistice of 1953.
As we are all aware, one of the proudest moments in our current history was when Canada contributed to the Republic of Korea during the Korean War. In fact, we were the third-largest contributor to that effort. Over 26,000 Canadians served in the Korean War, and of course, 516 gave their lives. As a result of that, and given the flourishing relationship between the Republic of Korea and Canada, and the sizable community of Korean Canadians from coast to coast to coast, petitioners are presenting this petition. It is about how the absence of a peace agreement will certainly fuel military tension and humanitarian suffering in the Korean region.
Petitioners have requested that we publicly support international efforts to negotiate a formal peace agreement replacing the 1953 armistice. They are requesting that we work with allies, including the Republic of Korea, to advance multilateral diplomacy toward durable peace and stability on the Korean peninsula. They also ask for the tabling in Parliament of a report outlining our strategy for a permanent peace settlement. Finally, they ask that we demonstrate global leadership by advocating in international forums for peaceful conflict resolution and a formal peace settlement on the Korean peninsula.
Alexis Deschênes Bloc Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj, QC
Mr. Speaker, today I am tabling a petition from Greenpeace Canada, Oceans North and MiningWatch Canada that calls for the protection of deep seabeds; it is signed by 10,398 people.
In 2023, Canada announced its support for a moratorium on deep sea mining in international waters. However, a business registered in Canada, The Metals Company, holds exploration contracts in the Pacific. This Canadian company also responded to the Trump administration's call to seek authorization to mine the seabed under U.S. legislation, in breach of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Deep seabeds are mankind's shared heritage. We have a responsibility to protect our oceans for future generations. Accordingly, this petition calls on the government to clearly prohibit any Canadian individual or company from undertaking deep sea mining activities.
I am honoured to table this petition in the House.
Terry Dowdall Conservative Simcoe—Grey, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise on behalf of petitioners in Simcoe—Grey.
An individual, Erin Small, started a petition that has quite a few signatures on it. The petitioners are very disappointed in the judicial system with respect to intimate partner violence.
They are calling for the implementation of strict conflict of interest rules requiring investigating officers to disclose any personal or professional relationship with either the accused or the victim, with mandatory reassignment where a conflict exists. They also call for reform of mandatory charging policies to prevent survivors from being criminalized when the accused attempts to countercharge the victim. Third, they ask us to ensure that sexual assault charges cannot be resolved through peace bonds, diversion agreements or other non-conviction resolutions without judicial oversight and clear public interest justification.
They also ask that we remove barriers to victim impact statements by allowing survivors to provide statements, regardless of the final judicial outcome. Finally, they are asking for the creation of independent civilian oversight bodies to review investigative failures, wrongful countercharges, mishandled cases and systemic bias within police and prosecutorial systems.
Marc Dalton Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition on behalf of concerned Canadians.
Since October 2023, Health Canada has prohibited all pentachlorophenol wood preservative products used to treat Douglas fir utility poles. Basically, all the stock had to be used by this month.
The petitioners highlight that DCOI is an arsenic-free, chromium-free and dioxin-free preservative that has been standardized by the American Wood Protection Association since 1989 and has been approved by the United States and Europe for use in wood preservatives. Of the four pole preservatives registered in Canada, only creosote is oil-borne, leaving utilities without a modern oil-borne option, causing fir logs to be uncoated and hence unusable as utility poles.
There are only three processing plants left, and this has resulted in Canadian fir being exported to the United States for further processing, which could have been done right here in Canada. There is a loss of jobs, and it is not really helping the environment in the long run. This is an important issue the petitioners are bringing forward.
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand at this time.
Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings
Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings
Some hon. members
Agreed.
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I ask that all notices of motions for the production of papers also be allowed to stand at this time.
The House resumed from October 21 consideration of the motion that Bill C-34, An Act to enact the Digital Safety Act and the Digital Safety Commission of Canada Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of my comments, I will emphasize that the government, coming out of the last federal election, made commitments to Canadians in regard to the Internet and how we can protect children. That is really what Bill C-34 is all about.
If we were to canvass and talk to the constituents we represent, we would find that there is genuine concern in regard to some of the harmful things that are on the Internet. The bill is not meant to replace parents but is rather to support parents. The Internet is 24-7. There are things on it that are very harmful, particularly for children 16 and under, and there is a role for government to play.
We have seen other countries take action, as we are taking action. I appeal to my colleagues across the way to listen to what is being expressed through our constituents, which is genuine concern over the harmful things that take place on the Internet, and vote accordingly in regard to Bill C-34.
The bill is a solution, in good part, that would protect and complement what parents have to go through in raising a child. The Internet did not exist when my children were young, and I can only imagine what parents today have to go through given the seven-day-a-week, 24-hour availability of the Internet. The Internet is going to power our economy and society in many positive ways; there is no doubt about that, but to ignore the potential harm, particularly to our children, would be irresponsible.
We have had other private members' bills on the issue of our children and what is on the Internet that causes problems. I made a note of some of those things. We can think of what harmful content is. I have heard Conservatives talk about it, and obviously many members of the Liberal caucus have had opportunities both inside and outside of the House to talk about it. These are the types of discussions that take place in our communities.
There are things such as sexually victimizing a child, revictimizing a survivor, using intimate content without the consent of the person and inducing a child to harm themselves. Just the other day, a Conservative MP was talking about an incident where committing suicide was being promoted. Unfortunately, these are the types of things we see. They are things that promote extreme hatred or violence, or that deal with issues like terrorism and the promotion of terrorism. One could easily classify these things, I would suggest, as harmful content.
It is one thing to talk about harmful content. I suspect if we were to canvass the House, we would find virtually unanimous consent that there is harmful content on the Internet. The challenge I put across the way to my Conservative friends in particular is, what are they prepared to do about it? Bill C-34 has an action that would protect children and support parents. That is why I believe it is time for us to not only talk about this, but look at taking substantial action.
The establishment of an independent digital safety commission is long overdue. It would have a profound, positive impact on the children of Canada no matter where they live. If members believe that there is harm on the Internet and we have a role to play in Ottawa, I suggest that supporting an independent digital safety commission is something they ought to be voting in favour of. If they cannot vote in favour of it, I believe they owe an explanation to their constituents as to why they do not see the merit in doing that.
Having a commission that has the ability to ensure there is a higher sense of responsibility and duty to act responsibly is critically important. We could regulate service providers, as an example, to assess and mitigate risks in the form of a report, with a sense of accountability and transparency. We could enable the commission to do the follow-through, to the degree that it would have the ability to go after the major players, not only here but also abroad, and levy fines.
These are all ways in which we can play a role in protecting the children of Canada by having a ban on social media content for children under the age of 16, with the opportunity for some exceptions if they are proven to be safe for our children. This is good legislation. I hope every member of the House will get behind it and vote for it.
Alexis Deschênes Bloc Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois definitely believes that social media needs to be regulated. It is a new sector, and we are already seeing serious harms emerge. Most recently, in August, Meta agreed to a settlement and paid $16 billion in compensation for the harm caused to young people.
Quebec has already undertaken a collective review with the aim of protecting our young people from screen time, and it has made significant progress in that endeavour. The Select Committee on the Impacts of Screens and Social Media on Young People's Health and Development tabled a report recommending a ban on social media for children aged 14 and under, rather than 16 and under, as proposed in Bill C-34.
My question for my colleague is this: Will the government respect Quebec's jurisdiction over youth protection? Has the report been consulted and has the question been asked—
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
I must interrupt the member to give the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader the opportunity to reply.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to chat with the minister responsible for the legislation earlier today. He amplified and explained in great detail the degree to which there is a high level of expertise.
The age has been well documented. If the member believes that the age should be lowered, he should attend the standing committee and make his case. If he is inclined to suggest that he has the evidence and science that demonstrate that it would be better to lower it, he should share it with the minister.
There are certain aspects of note in the legislation, but I will wait for my next question.
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Speaker, I am very concerned about the implication of children being exposed in particular to pornographic content online. This is a major and still underdiscussed issue and problem. Many children are exposed to pornography online at the age of nine, 10, 11 or 12 years old, and it has significant negative implications for them, their understanding and their expectations.
In looking at this bill, my understanding is that it deals with some of this content if it is on social media websites. It does not deal with other situations outside of social media where young people may encounter this content. I think it is incumbent on us to work together to look at this and/or other legislation that addresses it.
I wonder if the member could comment on ensuring that children are not accessing this material not only on social media but anywhere else.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, the minister has made very clear that he wants to work collaboratively. The simple message that needs to get across is that there is a role for the Parliament of Canada to protect the interests of our children from the negative side, the very hurtful side, of social media and the Internet. I would suggest to the member opposite, who I know has a number of young children, that this is not to take away any sort of parenting from the child, but is rather to complement the parent's role. At the end of the day, there is a wonderful opportunity to have that dialogue. The minister is very much open to it, and I look forward to ongoing discussions both here and at committee.
Wade Grant LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change
Mr. Speaker, I too grew up in an era that did not have the Internet. All we had was a land line, which we used to phone our friends to talk to them. However, I am the father of two young children. My daughter is now 15, and, of course, she is exposed to things like social media. I have seen things that I have never had to deal with. I wish I could protect her 24 hours a day, seven days a week, but unfortunately we cannot do that.
The member talked about protecting children. I have heard it from a lot of parents. He has probably heard it from a lot of parents. Can he expand on how he feels this bill would protect them going forward?
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question, because it is important to recognize that Bill C-34 would create the digital safety act. It would regulate major social media services, AI chat services and some other online services. Through those regulations, we would have the opportunity to have them enforced by the safety commission.