44th Parl. 1st Sess.
December 13, 2022 10:00AM
Mr. Speaker, first, if I may, I would like to speak about the passing of Jim Carr, a dear friend and someone I have known for a number of years. I would like to extend my condolences, prayers, love and best wishes to his family and friends.
I had the opportunity in 1988 to be elected at the same time as Jim Carr. He was appointed as the deputy leader of the Liberal Party of Manitoba. I was the deputy party whip. From virtually day one to what we witnessed just a few days ago in the House, he served as an inspiration to me personally. I genuinely believe that, no matter where Jim went or what he went through in his life, he left a large footprint. He has deep respect in all corners.
I do want to make quick reference to what he said in his last speech in the House, because I think it embodies many of the wonderful attributes Jim brought not only to the chamber but beyond. He stated:
Madam Speaker, I want to start by expressing some deeply held emotion. I love this country, every square metre of it, in English, in French, in indigenous languages and in the languages of the newly arrived.
He went on to say:
In wrapping up this debate, I want to thank the people of Winnipeg South Centre, without whose confidence this would never have been possible.
He concluded his remarks by saying:
It is with gratitude, thanks and a deep respect for this institution that I humbly present this bill to my colleagues in Parliament.
I am very grateful for the fact that the building a green prairie economy act passed. It was something I know Jim spoke at great length about both inside and outside the chamber. It was one of a number of visions he carried, one of a number of ideas that he shared with so many Canadians in many different ways.
I appreciate the opportunity to share those few thoughts.
With respect to Bill C-18, the online news act, this legislation is an absolute must. The minister made reference to Bill C-11 to amend the Broadcasting Act and now Bill C-18, the online news act. These would assist us in modernizing our systems. So much has changed in regard to Internet accessibility, from what it was to what it is today. The Internet is an absolutely essential service today. It continues to grow as an essential service, and we need to overcome some challenges that are there.
As we look to the weeks, months and years ahead, in terms of conquering some of those challenges, one of the biggest ones is getting that fast, reliable Internet service into our rural communities. We have made significant progress over the last number of years, ensuring that it is taking place. I believe we are on the right track and are aggressively pursuing better interconnectivity for all Canadians. It is absolutely essential.
The act itself is something absolutely essential. I am pleased to see it is at the third reading stage. I was listening to what the minister was talking about. One can sense the passion and urgency just by listening to the minister. When we think about Canada and our democracy, one of the fundamental pillars of democracy is to have a free, independent media.
I recall sitting in the Manitoba legislature and seeing at least 10 or 12 members of the media in the gallery. There were representatives from all the major networks and local community newspapers. There might even have been a few others. When I left the Manitoba legislature back in 2010, I might have seen one or two reporters in the media gallery.
When we look at what has happened to our media and our news sources over the last 10 years or so, we have seen a mass reduction in the number of professional journalists. We have seen literally hundreds of news outlets in one form or another close. I do not believe for a moment, and I do not think anyone would even attempt to suggest, that it is nothing more than what we have been witnessing taking place on the Internet. We have seen a tremendous rise in things such as fake news.
The minister made reference to the war in Ukraine, and we talk about what happened during the pandemic. Canadians and people around the world, but particularly here in Canada, are very dependent on that essential service and ensuring what we see and read is factual. One of the ways we can ensure that is by going to the mainstream media.
One of my colleagues made reference to that fact that we have a wonderful ethnic media. I often look at the Pilipino Express, CKJS and numerous Indo-Canadian newspapers. There is the Portuguese community, the francophone community, the indigenous community and all of those different independent news outlets. For our community newspapers, whether rural or urban, there are things we can do to ensure they continue to be independent and continue to be supported, rightfully so, because of the Internet.
These are some tangible examples. Google and its search engines have benefited from mainstream media and from our media outlets. All the work has been done at one level, which is the creativity and reporting, and Google has directly benefited from that. There is advertising on YouTube, and in social media there are things like Facebook. The amount of advertising done through Facebook has been estimated to be, in terms of the advertising dollars going into media, as high as 80% in those giant companies.
This legislation would ensure, by utilizing the CRTC, that we can level the playing field. We could ensure that, for the information being conveyed by these giants like Google, Facebook and YouTube, they are paying their fair share. There would be an obligation in the legislation. By doing that, there would be better, more appropriate and more fair compensation for those media outlets. It would ultimately ensure that we have a healthier and stronger independent media. That is good for Canada and good for our democracy. It is the type of legislation that is necessary to get us back on track with regard to what we have been witnessing over the last number of years with the reduction of news media.
1064 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of the member's speech, he member made reference to Jim Carr. It did mean a great deal to Jim when the member and one of his colleagues walked over to shake his hand afterward, which I thought was a classy thing to do.
I wonder if the member could provide some additional thoughts on this. Many different other types of media outlets do not get the same sort of reference to which the member mentioned, magazines and so forth. They could be automotive industry or sport magazines. There are a number of them.
The CRTC would be given a fairly significant responsibility. The ultimate goal is to ensure that we have an independent and free media that is far-reaching. Could the member provide further thoughts on that?
134 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, let me begin by thanking my colleague and all members who have been so empathetic in expressing their grief over the death of our friend, the Hon. Jim Carr.
I know we will have an opportunity to talk about him more tomorrow. I really want everyone to remember that he was an exceptional man and an extraordinary parliamentarian.
His devotion to community, to region, to country; his devotion to the idea of a Canada that was even better, where everyone came together to build a strong future; his passion, his thoughtfulness, his commitment to the Prairies and to Canada will be long remembered and need to inspire us all every single day, as we notice the empty seat among us.
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/13/22 2:34:32 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, before answering the member's question, I would just like to state the deep sadness that we are all feeling at the passing of our friend and colleague, the Hon. Jim Carr. Jim was a tireless representative, a true defender of his constituency, his city, the prairie west and all of Canada. He was my mentor and my friend. He will be dearly missed.
All members of this government share his deep and abiding passion for providing for Canadians in their time of need, for sticking up for them during the pandemic and for facing these economic headwinds together.
101 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, as always, it is an honour to enter into debate in this place and to talk about the important issues facing Canadians.
Madam Speaker, I would ask that I be given a little latitude here, as this will likely be the last time I stand in this place before we all break for Christmas, whether that be tomorrow or in the next couple of days. I would wish you and all members of this place, as well as all Canadians watching a very merry Christmas and many blessings in the new year.
Further, I also want to acknowledge the passing of one our colleagues, the late Hon. Jim Carr. I want to acknowledge his service to this country, his many years in this place. Although we have disagreements on many issues, it is at times like this where we see the true heart of Canadian democracy in looking back at one's legacy and one's record. Certainly on behalf of myself and the people of Battle River—Crowfoot, I would like to pass our condolences along to you and your colleagues, as well as the late Mr. Carr's constituents and family and friends, who I have no doubt are grieving his loss.
As we discuss the issue of Bill C-18, we see before us something that I would suggest is typical of the way the Liberals approach many aspects of government. We hear them making accusations about how the Conservatives are somehow supporting Facebook and other social media companies and their monopoly of the Internet. I would like to take a moment to refute that.
First, I have never heard anybody suggest that social media is overly favourable to Conservatives. I would like to unpack a little as to why the very foundation of this bill is problematic. I am going to unpack that to the very basis that assumes that a government agency, and in this case specifically the CRTC, should become intimately involved and exercise a great deal of authority over something which I think all Canadians, or certainly most Canadians I speak with, truly support and that is freedom of expression, freedom of the press and free expression on forums like the Internet, including social media.
One of the concerns that I have is that the very foundational elements of what is proposed here is to increase the size, scope and authority that an agency of government has. I would suggest that at the very foundation of what this bill is doing, that is deeply problematic.
It has been mentioned that Conservatives ran on a plan to ensure that big tech pays their fair share, and absolutely. However, when we look at Bill C-18 and what is included in this bill, we see that it misses the mark.
Instead of attempting to do what I think many Canadians actually support, the government instead simply increases the size of bureaucracy. As we have seen throughout the committee study, what the Liberals have said this bill would do and how much it would cost versus what the consequences of the bill could be and the actual cost are two different worlds.
Unfortunately, I do find this is par for the course for the Liberals who are great at making announcements, great at doing press releases and even writing preambles to bills. However, in many cases, when we look past the preamble, that is where the concerns and the problems are made very clear.
I am going to cut my speech a little short to ensure that some other colleagues have a chance to speak to this important bill.
I would simply highlight something that has been missing from the conversation, and that is rural voices. Specifically, I think it should be noted, as one of my colleagues did just a few minutes ago, that rural is missing out on the conversation. The biggest beneficiary of this bill would be the CBC. I have about 14 weekly newspapers, some of which do not even have a website, and local radio stations. There are small newspapers, family-owned businesses, and in some cases multi-generational operations that will not benefit from anything to do with this sort of bill.
At the very foundation, I find the bill flawed in how it would grant massive authority and jurisdiction to the CRTC, which has difficulty fulfilling its current mandate let alone a greatly expanded one. I look at almost anything this government touches, and the service outcomes of any department over the last seven years certainly have not been improved. Therefore, I hope members will forgive me for not trusting a massive expansion of the scope of an agency of the government. I find that deeply problematic.
To conclude, more bureaucracy and administration is not the solution. We need to see that freedom of the press is preserved and freedom of expression is preserved in this country. When it comes to ensuring that the big tech players in Canada pay their fair share, I fear this would create a bloated administration that falls far short of the mark that is required to actually deliver on what the objective was when the bill was first introduced.
With that, I will conclude a whole four minutes early and look forward to answering questions from my colleagues.
888 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, at the outset let me acknowledge that I am speaking to you from the traditional lands of the Algonquin and Anishinabe people.
As this is my first opportunity to speak since the passing of the Hon. Jim Carr, I want to express my deepest condolences to the Carr family and my appreciation to them for sharing Jim with us, both in Parliament as well as in Canada, and for the remarkable legacy that he leaves in being who he was, such an honourable gentleman who crossed party lines and in many ways reached out across the aisle. I am heartened to see so many very positive comments coming from everyone, from all parties.
I wanted to particularly express my condolences to Ben Carr, whom many in the House may know as someone who was very much part of our government at the beginning stages. He moved on to Winnipeg, to serve his community locally.
As we close the year, Jim's passing should give us some guidance in terms of how we should not only work with each other and towards strengthening this institution, but also work across the aisle to make things happen for Canadians. As we know, one of the last things Jim did was see the passage of his private member's bill to build a green prairie economy, Bill C-235, which received unanimous support.
Today, we are in a very similar moment here, with Bill C-291, an act to amend the Criminal Code and to make consequential amendments to other acts in respect of child sexual abuse material, brought forward by the member for North Okanagan—Shuswap, providing that opportunity.
I would note that during this process we worked very well together, collaboratively, with him and his colleague, the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, in terms of getting this bill both through the House and through the committee stage at the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. I want to thank the member and his colleague, and all members who are part of the justice committee, for working on this bill expeditiously and getting us to this point.
We must take measures to fight child sexual exploitation. We have comprehensive and robust criminal laws against it. We need to have strong and effective law enforcement, and we need to continue to advance and facilitate measures that seek to support victims.
I would like to take this time to highlight the vital work done by the child and youth advocacy centres across this country. These centres provide a coordinated, multidisciplinary approach in a safe, comfortable environment to address the needs of children and youth and their families. Children and youth who are victims or witnesses of crime in Canada deserve protection and justice. Online child sexual exploitation is some of the most disturbing conduct facing society today. The pandemic has contributed to a rise in sexual offences committed against children, including their facilitation through technological means.
In the fiscal year 2021-22, the RCMP's national child exploitation crime centre received 81,799 complaints, reports and requests for assistance relating to online child sexual exploitation, which was a 56% increase compared to the previous fiscal year in 2020-21, with only 52,306 reports received, and an 854% increase compared to 2013-14, when 8,578 reports were received, based on the internal numbers provided by the NCECC.
The website cybertip.ca, run by the Canadian Centre for Child Protection, reported a 120% increase in reports of children being victimized online in comparison to prepandemic rates.
According to Statistics Canada, in 2020, police reported crime data which included the first year of the pandemic, as indicated, and that incidents of making or distributing child pornography had increased by 26% in 2021 compared to 2019, and by 58% over the five-year period of 2017 to 2021. Possession of or accessing child pornography increased by 44% in 2021 compared to 2019, and represents a 146% increase since 2017. Incidents of luring a child via a computer have gone up 23% compared to 2019, a 48% increase from the previous five years.
This bill changes the term “child pornography” to “child sexual abuse and exploitation material”. This new term captures the full scope of Canada's law, as well as the jurisprudence available from the last 30 years. The Government of Canada, therefore, is committed to preventing and protecting children from sexual abuse and exploitation of any kind, including internationally.
Canada works closely with international partners to combat online child sexual exploitation. This includes not only the extent of information regarding new and emerging threats, but also the sharing of best practices and lessons learned in combatting this crime.
Canada is a state party to a number of international agreements to protect children from sexual exploitation, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, and the convention on cybercrime, or what is called the Budapest convention.
The sexual exploitation and abuse of children has devastating and long-lasting consequences on victims. We remain committed to taking meaningful action to combat child sexual exploitation and abuse materials. Canada's existing criminal laws against child sexual exploitation and abuse materials are among the most comprehensive in the world. The Criminal Code prohibits all forms of child sexual exploitation and abuse materials, including against possessing, accessing, making or distributing it, which can be punishable with a term of imprisonment of up to 14 years for each event.
Serious crimes deserve serious consequences. I, along with my fellow members, look forward to watching this important bill progress in the other place. As a community, we all have a role to play in protecting children.
984 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/13/22 6:37:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that was an interesting speech, as always, from our colleague.
I would remiss if I did not begin tonight by speaking about the late Jim Carr, a colleague to all of us and a friend to many. He was someone who served with distinction provincially and federally, among so many other different pursuits, and who had a very impressive life. He was a mentor to many MPs who began with him in 2015, and words of advice given by him over the years will not be forgotten, certainly not by myself, not by anyone.
I listened with interest to the hon. member, and we thank the Auditor General for her report, which was tabled last week. The government affirms her independence and integrity, which is true of the minister and true of myself. As I said, this is a very important office, and we affirm all of those important principles. In listening to my hon. colleague though, I wonder if he actually read the report or only those parts he could use to his political advantage.
First of all, the report makes clear that, without the emergency programs put in place, the poverty rate in Canada would have doubled. Particularly important was the CERB, but there was also the wage subsidy. It is also true that we would have seen th massive economic contraction that was impacting the country at the outset of the pandemic simply continue. In 2020, we saw GDP contract by 17%. Again, this is all in the report.
I am sure my friend has the report at hand, if he has not looked at it already, which I suspect he has not, but he can easily bring it up. The report makes clear that, by November 2021, the economy had come back to prepandemic levels. Again, that is because of the emergency programs that were put in place by the the government and supported by all parties in the House.
Interesting also is what was said by the Parliamentary Budget Officer, who recently made it clear that, were it not for the programs, the results for the country would have been “catastrophic”. We would have seen mass bankruptcies, and it would have resulted in significant human costs. Again, I leave that for the consideration of the hon. member.
Underpinning all of the emergency programs, of course, was the attestation-based approach put in place by the government to ensure that funds needed by Canadians, either individuals, families or businesses, were dispensed very quickly, and I am thinking of CERB, the wage subsidy and various other programs. The attestation-based approach made that very possible.
Verification is certainly the objective, but it comes after the fact, which is about the only part of the speech from my hon. colleague across the way that I agree with. Verification was not possible at the beginning. It had to come after the fact because of the unique circumstance, which was a crisis. A crisis necessitates specific approaches tailored to the moment. This is why the government took the approach that it did. The work is ongoing to verify whether or not individuals, businesses and others were actually in need of the various supports that were received.
Yes, there is respectful disagreement on the $27.4 billion between the CRA and the Auditor General, which is, again, a respectful disagreement over calculating the wage subsidy eligibility over GST revenue loss versus general revenue loss. That is a technical matter that will be sorted out.
Over 800,000 notices of redetermination have been given to individuals. Thousands more will be sent. The work of the CRA continues on these matters. It is very serious about ensuring fiscal responsibility and verification.
622 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
