SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 176

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 30, 2023 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 176 - Mar/30/23
Mr. Colin Carrie (Oshawa, CPC)
  • Mar/30/23 1:44:55 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, my colleague pointed out some of the flaws in this bill. Professor Michael Geist, whom I know she has worked with in the past, said that this bill is going to restrict how people can be heard. I want to read the definition of “censorship” into the record. “Censorship” is defined as “the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information”. I was wondering if the member could please comment on why the government cannot be trusted with any type of legislation like this, on Margaret Atwood's comment that this is creeping totalitarianism and on why we have to be very cautious of it.
113 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 176 - Mar/30/23
Mr. Brad Redekopp
  • Mar/30/23 3:55:57 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, that is definitely a trick question. The part of this that is really important, too, is that we do need to stand up and support our Canadian artists. What this bill misses is the fact that in Canada we have amazing artists, whether from Quebec or from English Canada. Our content creators and our artists in Canada are among the best in the world. We can compete on any stage at any time. When the government steps in and starts to create winners and losers, that affects everything and that disrupts the natural way that things work. We need to give our artists, producers and content creators the tools they need to produce that content without trying to limit them and without trying to restrict them. Many of the messages we have heard from some of these people is that this bill will restrict them, and it will limit their ability to market themselves outside of Canada.
159 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 176 - Mar/30/23
Mr. Rick Perkins (South Shore—St. Margarets, CPC)
  • Mar/30/23 6:35:45 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I think it is ironic that the members opposite do not understand that they are censoring the censorship bill. In second reading, the government and its costly coalition partner, the NDP, imposed closure, and then they used their coalition in the House to impose a rule on the committee study of the bill that did not allow for the amendments being proposed to even be read in the committee before committee members voted on them, which is another form of censorship and closure. Today, they are again putting closure on the Senate amendments. I would like the member to comment on this. On a bill that would restrict the freedom of what people can do on the Internet, why would we expect anything other than the government censoring it all along the debate?
135 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border