44th Parl. 1st Sess.
January 31, 2023 10:00AM
Mr. Speaker, that question was something that I tried to ask one of her colleagues in my very clunky French, so I understand why maybe it was not understood adequately.
I actually do believe that there is a role for the federal government to have strings attached to ensure that there is equitable quality of care across the country. Something she might be particularly interested in is that I think there should be linguistic ties to our child care agreements. I think we have a charter obligation to ensure that French child care is available across the country, including in Alberta, and that this is something that is possible, because 15% of my population is francophone. They have every right to have child care in French.
I think there should be some strings attached to the funding coming from the federal government to the provinces for things like that.
149 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/23 5:28:34 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we request a recorded vote.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/23 5:28:34 p.m.
- Watch
The question is on the motion.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
46 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, 2022, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, February 1, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.
The hon. parliamentary secretary is rising on a point of order.
38 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/23 5:28:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I suspect if you were to canvass the chamber you would find unanimous consent to call it 5:30 p.m. so we could begin private members' hour.
30 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/23 5:29:05 p.m.
- Watch
Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is truly an honour to rise this evening to speak to and express my support for this very important bill. This bill was brought forward by the member for North Okanagan—Shuswap. Bill C-291 is an act to amend the Criminal Code and to make consequential amendments to other acts, namely child sex abuse material.
I will underscore the fact that words do, indeed, matter. Definitions matter and language matters. It matters for the elected officials and the staff who work in this House of Commons. It is why the legislative drafters write the technical text of legislation and spend hours upon hours and days upon days refining and crafting the language.
Once a bill becomes law, it sets the parameters and the boundaries of behaviour within a free and democratic society. Bill C-291 is a very important bill that would ensure that there is no confusion around what “child pornography” actually is. It is child abuse.
As a former litigator, I am proud to see a common-sense and important change being proposed. As a mother, I am encouraged to see this House take action to protect and fight for our children, our country's most precious gift.
Changing the term “child pornography” in our federal laws to “child sexual abuse and exploitation” is not just semantics. If we understand the power of our words, especially when codified, then we know that this change will affect how we see and categorize this evil perpetrated against our children, and how we must all unite and fight against it.
This change would increase the clarity, the understanding and the precision in our legislative and legal framework. It would recognize that when pornography involves children, make no mistake, it is not pornography; it is sexual abuse material.
As Judge Koturbash said in a decision on this subject, “These are not actors. It is not consensual. These are images and videos of child sexual abuse.”
This kind of material is abhorrent. It cannot be consensual. These images are serious and they cause lifelong damage and trauma to children. Therefore, we must fight it with every tool that we have at our disposal in society. Without clarity and precision in our laws, and in the Criminal Code, there is confusion.
In this case, as Judge Koturbash said the current phrase “child pornography” actually dilutes the true meaning of what these images and videos represent. This change will recognize that children are victimized by such material.
As has been mentioned earlier, here in Canada, the age of consent for sexual activity is 16. There is no legal basis for a child to consent to participate in such material, and this, absent of consent, constitutes abuse and exploitation.
Around the world, we have been seeing similar initiatives to make this clear distinction. Child advocacy groups in the United States, like the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, as well as the 2016 Luxembourg Guidelines, which were put forward by 18 international partners, have sought to harmonize the terms and definitions that relate to child abuse and protection.
We need to see more decisive action from the government to bring perpetrators of sexual violence to justice. We need laws that will prosecute the broadcasting of sexual abuse and violence materials. We need laws that will make it clear that it is a crime to sexually exploit children.
This is one small but very significant step forward in protecting vulnerable boys and girls in Canada. Once again, I want to commend and thank the member for North Okanagan—Shuswap for his excellent work. I also want to thank the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo for his work on this bill.
I believe this bill reflects the collective strength of this united House and that we will stand together in denouncing child abuse and strengthen the laws to protect children from all forms of abuse. I believe that this bill would save lives. It is my honour to publicly support and vote for this bill.
686 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C‑291. Some bills seem less substantial than others, but are just as important. The bill amends the Criminal Code to replace the term “child pornography” with “child sexual abuse and exploitation material” and make consequential amendments to other acts. Words sometimes carry great weight.
As I just mentioned, this bill makes no other changes than replacing the term “child pornography” with “child sexual abuse and exploitation material”, and has no legal consequences per se.
First, I want to say that the Bloc Québécois supports this bill. Even though this bill has no legal consequences, it does make us think about the importance of terms, their scope and their deep meaning. According to the bill's sponsor, the member for North Okanagan—Shuswap, the objective is to link the charge of child pornography to sexual abuse. Without changing the definitions, since the notions of consent and current sentences will stay the same, Bill C‑291 explicitly expresses the fact that such an offence is an act involving the sexual abuse of a child.
We understand and support the underlying principle. In my speech, I will share my thoughts on the importance of the words used to provide additional detail about this bill, reiterate the importance of training judges and conclude by expanding my argument to include cybercrime.
First, the term “pornography” seems overused and ambiguous in the sense of both the legal definition and the general definition, because its scope is very relative and can depend on a given individual's sensitivity. Moreover, some schools of thought disagree on the degree of consent pornography supposes and whether pornography is essentially a form of violence. Some feminist thinkers see it that way, and regular consumption of pornography also contributes to rape culture.
One thing is clear: Pornography in and of itself is not a crime, but there are the exceptions we are all familiar with, including child pornography. In other cases, it is difficult to see a clear and consensual difference between eroticism and obscenity, pornography and violence. It all comes down to the participants' consent, which is impossible to establish or obtain. When children are involved, the Criminal Code pretty clearly defines the acts, but I will spare my colleagues a reading of that.
It is understandable to be shocked by the fact that a term with no criminal or even negative connotations is attached to such despicable acts, hence the principle of Bill C-291. In the healing process, it is important, from the outset, that the victim is relieved of guilt about the events and that the burden is carried by the abuser. Naming the abuse can also help the victim. It may not seem important, but being a victim of child pornography does not have the same connotation as being a victim of child sexual abuse. A person charged with possession of child pornography will not be charged with sexual assault. However, they are indirectly participating in it by not reporting it and by taking advantage of the situation to deliberately indulge their deviant urges.
Most of the time, the victim is not mentioned in child pornography cases, except to say that they were indeed a child. When we talk about child sexual abuse material, we are doing two things: We are naming the abuse that the child is suffering, and we are calling the accused a child molester. These are much more powerful words, even though we are talking about the same act. They put things in perspective. In a crime involving child pornography, there is a victim of abuse and there is an abuser, the child molester.
In many types of crime, there is often a grey area, extenuating circumstances, possible doubt over the degree of guilt, participation and consent of the victim. In the case of child abuse, everything is clear and we have to call a spade a spade.
What is more, this term is already being used by some advocacy groups, including the Canadian Centre for Child Protection and Canada's national tipline for reporting the online sexual exploitation of children. Children are disproportionately the victims of sexual offences and are especially vulnerable. In Quebec, 54.4%, or the majority, of victims of sexual assault are adults, but the number of victims under 18 is growing faster than the number of adult victims, with annual increases of 9.5% and 4.3% respectively. Victims of other sexual offences are nearly exclusively minors, at 90.8%. These offences include sexual interference and invitation to sexual touching, luring and publication of intimate images.
These statistics make it clear why victims and their loved ones feel as though these situations are being downplayed.
If an offence is not a direct aggravated sexual assault, then it gets classified under “other offences”. In reality, however, the possession of child pornography often involves sexual assault that is often even documented.
According to the Quebec Department of Public Safety, these types of crimes are on the rise. Cases of sexual interference and luring have risen by 6% and 9% respectively. These are moderate increases. Cases of incest have risen by 4.3%. Cases of publication of an intimate image without consent have risen by 7.4%, and cases of invitation to sexual touching have risen by 1.4%, and that number has held steady. These are chilling statistics.
Sexual acts and activities must only take place with the free and informed consent of the participants. The concept of consent is essential. It is based on the idea that the person is fit to make a decision and that they understand the implications and consequences.
In Canada, the age of consent to sexual activity is 16. However, in the case of all minors, including those who are aged 16 and 17, a young person cannot legally consent if a sexual partner is in a position of authority over them. If the young person is dependent on their sexual partner for support and has nowhere else to go and no one else to care for them, then they are in a relationship of dependency.
The relationship is exploitative when, as of the age of 12, there are close-in-age exceptions. A person who is 12 or 13 can consent to sexual activity if their partner is less than two years older. A person who is 14 or 15 can consent to sexual activity if their partner is less than five years older. That means that even if one of the partners is over the age of majority, as in the case of a couple consisting of a 15-year-old and a 19-year-old, consenting sexual contact can take place with a minor as long as they are close in age.
This also means that, conversely, in a situation where one member of the couple is over the age of majority, as in the case of a 14-year-old and a 19-year-old, the child cannot legally consent to sexual activity and the act becomes a sexual offence, even with the consent of the minor's parents. There is no possibility of consent when a child is under the age of 12.
It is worth noting that the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill in committee took only 30 minutes. This is an uncontroversial bill, despite the number of amendments that were moved. In fact, most of the amendments came from the government. There was absolutely no debate on the substance of the bill, and all the amendments proposed by the government, 15 in all, were adopted unanimously. This is important work. Amendments G-1 and G-12 essentially added the notion of exploitation to the term “child sexual abuse material” to make it clear that possession of such material automatically involves the exploitation of a child. Naturally, these amendments were also adopted.
Also, not all judges have the knowledge required to deal with sexual assault cases or cases involving certain groups. We have been talking about this for a long time. Training for judges is important. The case of Judge Jean-Paul Braun is a shocking example. He said out loud during a trial that the victim, who was a minor at the time of the assault, had a pretty face and should feel flattered to have attracted the attention of an older man. An Alberta judge was fired after making what were considered sexist and racist remarks about indigenous people, abused women and victims of sexual assault.
An acquittal was overturned because a judge who found a man accused of sexually assaulting children not guilty relied on stereotypes. The judge suggested that, because nobody noticed anything, the girl, who was only between the ages of 6 and 12 at the time, was not credible. The judge said the child's testimony was not transparent, reliable, sincere or credible. Forcing all judges to participate in sexual assault and social context training would destroy certain stereotypes and myths that influence judges' decisions and their attitudes toward victims.
Fortunately, Bill C‑3 called on the Canadian Judicial Council to ensure that federal judicial appointees to various courts have the tools to help them preside over sexual assault cases. My colleague from Rivière-du-Nord, who worked on that bill, pointed that out. The third time around, Bill C‑3 was finally unanimously passed by all MPs. It was passed on division in the Senate and received royal assent on May 6, 2021. It is an important bill.
In addition, the whole issue of cybercrime is also troubling. Last week, I had a chance to talk with Hugo Loiseau, a professor at the Université de Sherbrooke who is studying this issue. A cybercrime is a criminal offence committed through a computer system that is usually connected to another network. This whole issue of child pornography content, along with incitement to terrorism or hatred, falls under the category of cybercrime.
In conclusion, the All Party Parliamentary Group to End Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking is following this issue closely and is considering recommendations that could be made to the government to take action.
1724 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/23 5:46:08 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for North Okanagan—Shuswap has five minutes for his right of reply.
16 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, as always, it is an honour to rise in this House as the representative of the great people of North Okanagan—Shuswap as I make some final comments on Bill C-291.
Bill C-291 proposes to change the term in the Criminal Code from “child pornography” to “child sexual abuse and exploitation material”. I would like to acknowledge and again thank my colleague, the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, who drafted this bill after recognizing the need for Criminal Code amendments that this bill proposes. I also acknowledge members from all parties who have made meaningful contributions to the development of this bill, both in this chamber and at committee stage.
Committee review of the bill strengthened it by adding the words “and exploitation” to the proposed new term in the original bill, and I thank the parliamentary secretary and the Minister of Justice for their collaboration and continuation on this important initiative.
Expressions of support and collaboration from all sides reflect that this bill is a step in the right direction, a step that must be followed by more steps: additional steps toward strengthening the Criminal Code and other federal laws to increase protection of children; additional steps to increase capacities of those entrusted with enforcing and prosecuting offences; and additional steps to support healing and recovery of those victimized by child sexual abuse and exploitation.
I want to thank people who have approached me in North Okanagan—Shuswap on the streets and at events to express their support and appreciation for this bill. The spontaneous face-to-face support from constituents is always reassuring that we are moving in the right direction. I also thank all of the Canadians who supported the bill by signing petition e-4154 initiated by Rachel Enns back home in Vernon. I would especially like to acknowledge and thank the organizations that have expressed support for this bill, that work every day to fight child sexual abuse and exploitation.
I look forward to the vote on Bill C-291 and I hope all members support this important bill to move it forward and send it to the other place toward completion so that it will establish the proposed changes in Canada's Criminal Code.
384 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/23 5:49:23 p.m.
- Watch
Is the House ready for the question?
Some hon. members: Question.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The question is on the motion.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division or wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
The hon. member for North Okanagan—Shuswap.
72 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/23 5:50:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would request a recorded vote.
8 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, 2022, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, February 1, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.
27 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/23 5:50:47 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, Canadians are going through tough financial times. We see higher interest rates, inflation, high food costs and soaring housing prices. This all leads to a very shaky and uncertain future for many Canadians.
On top of this, the government is proceeding with a series of taxes on fuel at a time when many households are just trying to heat their homes. If the clean fuel standard led to just a $30 monthly increase for Canadians, what harm would it cause? The answer is, plenty. According to the Daily Bread Food Bank, “A $30 per month increase in rent would lead to 73,776 more visits to food banks annually in Toronto and 375,512 more visits across Ontario.” That 375,512 is equivalent to everyone in Spadina—Fort York, my riding, and two other ridings of my Toronto colleagues, the parliamentary secretary's colleagues. How disconnected from the economic realities of Canadians is the federal government?
The clean fuel standard adds $1,277 annually to energy costs. It also does not stop at creating higher prices for gasoline, diesel or home heating fuel. It is added at every component in production processes. For example, it is added to the cost of nitrogen that is purchased by farmers to grow food we all eat, to trucks transporting food to the grocery store, and to the selling of food to consumers. Even if people do not drive, they still eat, and the clean fuel standard will drive up those costs. These associated costs contribute to higher prices at the grocery store but also to inflation, and everyone is struggling with inflation.
On the one hand, we have the Bank of Canada trying to wrestle inflation to the ground by raising interest rates, and on the other hand we have the government trying to pile-drive Canadians into the ground by raising taxes. What a tag team of indifference to economic hardships that abound.
The government has refused my request to delay implementing the clean fuel standard until the Canadian economy no longer faces a looming recession, to a time when Canadians have some breathing room and the government has found realistic answers on how to get the country back on some semblance of sound financial footing. Moreover, to add insult to growing food bank visits, the lack of environmental benefit from the clean fuel standard is appalling. The only thing that is being cleaned is what little money is left in the pocketbooks of Canadians.
In light of the fact that the clean fuel standard would actually increase net emissions, what environmental catastrophe would occur if we delayed the implementation of the clean fuel standard by six months? Is this just another way for the government to pay for its wanton overspending off the backs of Canadians?
470 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/23 5:54:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be presenting a starkly different view from that of the hon. member.
The clean fuel regulations, CFR, are critical to meeting Canada's 2030 climate targets and laying the foundation for a net-zero economy in 2050. The CFR will deliver up to 26 megatonnes of GHG emission reductions in 2030. This is a significant contribution to Canada's climate change goals, equal to removing about two weeks of annual greenhouse gas emissions from the entire Canadian economy.
The CFR will do more than reduce emissions. The regulations have been designed to work in conjunction with the Government of Canada's $1.5-billion clean fuels fund. Together, these measures will drive innovation and send a clear market signal for investors and industry to bring more clean technologies and low-carbon fuels, such as biofuels and hydrogen, to market to help decarbonize the economy.
The refinery in Come By Chance, Newfoundland, has recently been retrofitted by Braya Renewable Fuels to produce renewable diesel and sustainable aviation fuel. This is an example of the type of new investments in Canada's transition to a net-zero economy supported by the CFR. The CFR will reduce emissions across the life cycle of fossil fuels, similar to the approaches that already exist in British Columbia, California and Oregon. These jurisdictions have benefited enormously from the expansion of clean technology industries as a result of these regulations.
Working in tandem with carbon pricing, the clean fuel regulations will also help diversify energy choices and promote faster adoption of zero-emission vehicles by incentivizing the deployment of vehicle-charging infrastructure.
269 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/23 5:56:33 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, what my hon. colleague does not mention is that, to comply with this regulation, U.S.-imported ethanol will need to be used, which has a greater carbon intensity than gasoline.
Shame on the government's smoke and mirrors. Shame on it for resorting to sham taxes to bankroll its overspending and shore up its lack of prudent economic action, and for raising taxes to pay for things that are questionable to the protection of Canadians during difficult times. Shame as well on the NDP for propping up the government until it manages to get a few dollars to undertake a precision, Rolex-type election without having to get a high-interest bank loan to compete in it.
120 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/23 5:57:20 p.m.
- Watch
4 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/23 5:57:25 p.m.
- Watch
I want to have some order, please. We are doing the late show, and there is no opportunity for questions and comments other than those from the person who is bringing forward the question they raised during question period. I would ask members to please ensure they do not participate during this debate.
The hon. parliamentary secretary has the floor.
60 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/23 5:57:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, thank you for giving that good talking to to my hon. colleague from the ENVI committee, who I enjoy working with.
I would just in closing say that the impacts from the CFR on the cost of fuel for transportation will be gradual and will not occur for several years. In 2030, Canadians who drive gasoline-powered vehicles may see between six cents to 13¢ per litre in an increase to the cost of gasoline. Any increases in fuel prices will be partially offset, as new vehicles sold in Canada are required to become more fuel efficient every year, and as more zero-emission vehicles that do not use any gasoline enter the market.
The federal government is moving to increase the availability and the affordability of zero-emission vehicles. The government is also investing in charging infrastructure across the country.
144 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jan/31/23 5:58:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to be here this evening to discuss an issue that Canadians are very concerned about. That, of course, is the cost of living. Life seems so unaffordable for so many these days. We have folks lining up at food banks in record numbers. A third of those users are children, which works out to about 500,000 children using food banks in a single month. People are telling us that they cannot afford to heat their homes. They are skipping meals and reducing their grocery orders because they cannot afford to feed their families.
That is the backdrop to what took place and started on January 1, a year of tax increases from the Liberal government. Payroll taxes went up on January 1. Workers and employers are paying more. We know that the Liberals are continuing their march to triple the cost of gas, groceries and home heating. The carbon tax is going up on April 1. Then we have what will affect most especially our restaurant industry and hospitality sector, the alcohol escalator tax. That will go up this year as well.
There has been a rising cost of living and rising taxes under the Liberal government. After eight years under this Prime Minister, Canadians are getting less and they are paying more. They are looking to elected representatives from across this country for some relief. We have proposed straightforward steps to the government that it can take. I hope that it takes note of these as we prepare for the presentation of the budget in a few weeks.
To introduce new spending, one needs to find new savings. Where are we going to find those savings? We could start with the increase in consulting fees at 50 times more than before. That is one spot. McKinsey & Company has received more than $100 million in contracts from the government. We do not know exactly how much but more than $100 million. What are the virtues that it brings? Certainly not its ethics or international reputation because it has proven to drag Canada's down.
At a time when so many Canadians are hurting, it is so important that the government pay close attention to what Canadians are looking for: relief. Let us stop the tax increases and not introduce any new taxes. For any spending that the government plans it needs to make sure that it finds savings to match.
Is the government ready to provide that relief to Canadians today?
419 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
