SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 136

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 28, 2022 11:00AM
  • Nov/28/22 12:40:34 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, the member spoke about the protection of minors. I have a simple question. I cannot find anywhere in the bill where it defines a minor or a reference to “sensitive information”. Could the hon. member please inform the House how the bill defines a minor and sensitive information?
52 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 12:41:08 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the concern the member brings with that question. We have many definitions of “minor”, but it is generally understood that it is the different provinces that would legally establish who a minor is. We can understand it being youth using the Internet, and we need to make the extra effort to protect them and ensure they have the tools to protect themselves.
68 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 1:17:26 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, I have heard the Conservatives talk a couple times, as did the member, about the definition of a “minor”. For a lot of people, that is self-explanatory. I think we can assume what is intended by the definition of “minor”. Would the member support this going to committee so questions like that could be answered? If it is a matter of defining that, and the member and others feel so passionately that it should be in there, would it not be beneficial to get it to committee so that discussion could be had?
100 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 1:18:15 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, I suspect the bill will go to committee given the costly coalition of the NDP and Liberals. Specifically on that question on defining “minors”, it is not clear in the bill because it does not set an age. We are allowed to drive at 16 and vote at 18. The age of majority can be 19 for consuming alcohol. In the United States, the law for the purpose of the digital economy, I think, defines it as low as 13. That is where some of the confusion will lie. If people are running businesses and we have all these different definitions in Canada of what a minor is, how are they supposed to determine, for the purpose of managing that database and whether that information should stay there or not, what the cut-off age is? It is too vague. I am hopeful that is one of the areas, presuming the bill will reach committee with the coalition, that we will study in depth and perhaps be able to come up with a more precise definition.
180 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 1:45:38 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, the member mentioned some of the things that are missing in the bill and that it will hopefully get to committee, but there was no mention, as he said, about minors and defining “minor”. My other colleague mentioned today that in the U.S. it is defined as 13 years old, which I found quite surprising. Here in North America we have so many definitions of “minor” that we still do not know what they meant here in Canada when they wrote the laws. There was no mention of seniors, which I mentioned already this morning. Overall, why did the government pick such an ambiguous or bureaucratic way of approaching this legislation and offering clarity versus having the rules and doing it right the first time?
132 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 1:46:32 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, when I first looked at the word “minor” I just assumed what a minor would be. I think my natural assumption was that it meant anybody under the age of 18. That was an assumption I probably should not have made. I have been listening to the discussion today, and when I asked that question of the member for South Shore—St. Margarets, he gave a really good answer that made me pause and reflect on the fact that even in Canada, we have various terms for minors. I am looking forward to seeing this go to committee so that it can be studied and then we can hear the pros and cons of defining it. Maybe there is no con to it and only pros, in which case I look forward to hearing what the committee puts forward on that. Maybe there is another reason it should not be defined that I am unaware of at this point. Again, that is something I would like to hear the answers to. However, the debate today has certainly opened my eyes to that perspective.
188 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/28/22 1:48:10 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-27 
Madam Speaker, my understanding, based on the information that I have received, is that the bill aligns itself very closely with the approaches of other jurisdictions, such as where the member is from in Quebec. I think that the two bills can work together and this does not necessarily supersede the other. Again, that is a good question for the committee to study and report back on. At least, my understanding at this point is that it works very closely with other laws that exist. That may be part of the reason the information was not conclusive in relation to defining a minor. Perhaps that is a decision that has to be made with the provinces and other jurisdictions. I do not know, but I think it is a good question and I too would like to hear the answer to it when this returns from committee.
147 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border