SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 296

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 9, 2024 10:00AM
  • Apr/9/24 5:04:13 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, ironically, there was a provincial budget in the Province of Manitoba that saw the price of a litre of gas drop because it reduced the tax. In the province of Alberta, the Conservative premier, who has been so critical and onside with the leader of the Conservative Party saying to axe the tax, actually increased gas in Alberta four cents a litre, which is more than the three cents from the carbon tax, yet Conservatives collectively have been silent on that. They will criticize the federal government on a three cent a litre increase, but are absolutely silent on a four cent a litre increase from an Alberta Conservative premier. The member posed the question about two million people going to food banks. How does that four cents a litre factor into that?
135 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:05:22 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, what I would love to do this summer is to go on a rural tour in Manitoba with the member and ask all the farmers there how they feel about the carbon tax costing the agricultural producers of our country $1 billion in 2030, and if they think that would be fair. It is going to cost the average farm of 5,000 acres $175,000 a year in carbon tax. I want to know if the member thinks those farms are going to be able to survive.
90 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Madam Speaker, related to today's discussion is Bill C-234. Conservatives have been campaigning loudly about how they would like to see the Senate amendments to that bill rejected and it be passed in its original form. I can say now, as I have said before, that the NDP supports that position because we think the bill's principles are in line with what is in the original Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act. Every time the bill has come forward to the House, it is lined up with Conservative speakers; thus we never seem to get to a stage where it will come to a vote. I hear Conservatives complaining about all of these costs. When is the member's party going to let the bill come to a vote so that we can actually get these changes implemented?
140 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:06:53 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to join with this member and say we should pass it right now with unanimous consent. Then it can go back to the Senate and we can get the relief our producers need. One more thing I would like to say about the Liberals' rebate program is this. They say it is revenue-neutral. If they thought the carbon tax was revenue-neutral, they would not have exempted home heating in the Maritimes and across the country. They have admitted that the carbon tax is not revenue-neutral by bringing in exemptions, because they knew that people were out more money than they were getting back.
111 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:07:27 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I am going to ask my colleague the same question I asked earlier. Canada's provincial premiers are not Parliament's puppets. They will never be Parliament's puppets, no matter who is in power. Should it not be up to Canada's provincial premiers themselves to demand a meeting as soon as possible, and with our support, since it is important that they are heard? Is it not actually their prerogative to put their foot down, pound their fists on the table and say they want a meeting?
91 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:08:25 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I agree with the member opposite. The premiers of Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Saskatchewan and Alberta have all written the Prime Minister to ask for a meeting. Adding our voice to support those premiers is something the House has the ability to do and should do. The problem with the Prime Minister is that he just does not give a damn what the premiers say.
71 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:08:51 p.m.
  • Watch
I would advise the member to be a little more careful with his language. Resuming debate, the hon. member for Yellowhead.
21 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:09:04 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, in a move that can only be described as completely out of touch, the NDP-Liberal coalition has once again chosen to burden Canadians with a staggering 23% increase in the carbon tax. As we gather in the House, families from coast to coast to coast are struggling under the weight of soaring prices for essentials like fuel, food and heating. This tax hike is a direct hit on the wallets of hard-working Canadians, particularly in Alberta, where the carbon tax costs by far the most. Opposition is not limited to just voices in this chamber. It echoes from the west to the east, with premiers across Canada standing united against this absurd increase. The message from Canadians is loud and clear: Enough is enough. It is time for the Prime Minister to convene an emergency carbon tax meeting with all of Canada's first ministers. This issue is bigger than just partisan politics. It is about the livelihoods of our citizens. We demand action and we demand it now, for the future of our federation and the well-being of every Canadian family. The April 1 23% increase in the carbon tax orchestrated by the NDP-Liberal government significantly inflates the cost of living, affecting not just the cost of gas but everything that goes through our supply chain. The burden is most felt in Alberta, where, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, the average family will pay a staggering $2,943 in carbon tax this year, which is the highest in the nation. The Parliamentary Budget Officer also disproves the claim that the government keeps making about the rebates. The rebates fall dramatically short of offsetting the financial impact on families, no matter whether they reside in urban centres or rural Alberta. This tax hike is not an isolated issue. It is representative of a broader, more concerning trend of inflationary pressures made worse by the government’s fiscal policies. As prices soar, the government's insistence on increasing the carbon tax adds fuel to the inflationary fire that is engulfing Canada. The notion that the rebates would cushion the blow has proven to be false, leaving Canadians to grapple with diminishing household budgets. This policy does not discriminate. Its reach extends to every corner of the country, leaving no one insulated from its effects. From the single parent in Edson struggling to make ends meet to the small business owner in Rocky Mountain House facing increasing operational costs, the message is clear: This carbon tax increase is financially and morally wrong and one that demands immediate re-evaluation. The fiscal health and well-being of Canadians must be the priority, not the relentless pursuit of a tax scheme that deepens the divide between fantasy policies and real-world outcomes. The backlash against the carbon tax is not just a small group of angry Canadians. It is a national outcry for change from millions. Representing the will of the people are the premiers of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario, Newfoundland and Labrador, and P.E.I. These leaders, representing diverse political and geographical backgrounds, have united in their opposition. Their stance reveals a critical flaw in the carbon tax policy, which is that it fails to acknowledge the unique economic and environmental realities of each province. This united front of opposition is mirrored by the Canadian people, with two-thirds expressing opposition to the tax hike. On April 1, I met with many of these Canadians who are frustrated, and I joined them at axe the tax protests along Highway 43 and in Drayton Valley. Every business owner I meet and every person at the homes I door knock has shared their experiences with the worsening cost of living because of this tax. Between the provinces and the federal government, the essence of Canadian federalism is collaboration and respect for jurisdiction, yet the current approach to the carbon tax defines the NDP-Liberal government’s preference for unilateral decision-making. It disregards the principle that provinces should have the autonomy to pursue their own economic objectives. This moment calls for a return to true partnership, where provincial voices are not only heard but answered, crafting a more cohesive and effective strategy for Canada’s future. Aside from this, the imposition of a steep carbon tax by the government, under the banner of environmental preservation, presents a glaring problem. Despite the financial strain this policy places on Canadians, there is a troubling lack of evidence and measurable targets concerning its impact on emissions. Astonishingly, by the government's own admission, specific outcomes tied to the tax's effectiveness in reducing emissions do not exist. This is further compounded by an inconvenient truth: emissions in Canada are on the rise, not the decline. Our country finds itself ranked 62nd out of 67 countries on the climate change performance index, a clear example of the policy's ineffectiveness. I would like to move an amendment. I move that all the words after “That” be replaced with: the House note: (a) that the federal carbon tax is causing a debate in the country, and (b) that, while Quebec, British Columbia and the Northwest Territories already have their own systems in place, the federal government mandates carbon tax policy; that the House call on the Prime Minister to convene an emergency carbon tax and tarification meeting with all of Canada's 14 first ministers; and that this meeting be publicly televised and held within five weeks of this motion being adopted.
928 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:17:44 p.m.
  • Watch
We are taking the amendment under advisement and will be back in a few minutes, as soon as it is considered.
21 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:25:36 p.m.
  • Watch
I would like to ask the hon. opposition House leader if he accepts the amendment as moved.
17 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:25:50 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I do.
4 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:26:26 p.m.
  • Watch
The amendment is in order. It being 5:15 p.m., it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the business of supply. The question is on the amendment. If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
83 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:29:16 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I know that Canadians are very curious as to how members in this House vote and whether they vote to agree to have their premiers have a sit-down meeting with the Prime Minister over the carbon tax urgency. Therefore, I request a recorded division.
47 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:29:32 p.m.
  • Watch
Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, April 10, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.
23 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:29:52 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I would ask to see the clock at 5:30 p.m., so we can begin private members' hour.
21 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:30:02 p.m.
  • Watch
Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.
7 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
moved that Bill C-270, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (pornographic material), be read the second time and referred to a committee.
24 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
He said: Madam Speaker, imagine being the parent of a teenage daughter who has been missing for months and somebody discovers 50 explicit videos of that daughter being sexually abused on Pornhub, the most popular porn site in the world. Imagine how one would feel if intimate images of one's sibling was uploaded and Pornhub refused one's request to remove that content. Now, imagine if those videos of their exploited loved ones were being monetized and published for profit by Pornhub and were made available to Pornhub's over 130 daily visitors. How would someone feel if Pornhub’s only response was an auto-reply email? Understandably, one would be outraged. One would be furious, yet this happens over and over. Survivors, including a 12-year-old from Ontario, have had to seek justice through their own lawsuits because in Canada, the onus is on survivors and on law enforcement to prove, after the material has been uploaded, that the individuals depicted in those videos are either under age or have not consented to their distribution. This is a serious problem that Bill C-270, the stopping internet sexual exploitation act, seeks to fix. it’s important to note that for years, survivors, child protection agencies and the police have spoken out about this exploitation. They have not been silent. Survivors have shared how pornographic companies like Pornhub have been profiting from content depicting minors, sex trafficking victims, sexual assault, intimate images and gender-based violence for years. As early as 2019, companies like PayPal cut ties with MindGeek due to the availability of exploitive and abusive content. In March 2020, a few parliamentarians and I wrote a public letter to the Prime Minister to alert him about the exploitation that was happening on MindGeek. We followed up in November 2020 with a letter to the then Minister of Justice, urging him to ensure that our laws were adequate to prevent women and girls from being exploited by Pornhub. It was The New York Times exposé on December 4, 2020, in a piece written by Nicholas Kristof, that finally got the public's and the government’s attention. It was entitled “The Children of Pornhub: Why does Canada allow this company to profit off videos of exploitation and assault?” That article finally kicked off a firestorm of international attention on Pornhub, which is one of many pornographic websites owned by MindGeek, a Canadian company based in Montreal. About a year ago, it was bought and rebranded as Aylo by a company called Ethical Capital Partners, based in Ottawa. A few days after that article, the House of Commons ethics committee initiated an investigation into Pornhub. I joined the ethics committee for its study on Pornhub and listened to the harrowing stories of young women who had videos of sexual assaults or intimate content shared without their consent. Many of these women were minors when the videos were created and uploaded to pornography sites like Pornhub. I want to take a moment to share some of their testimony. Serena Fleites, whose story was covered by The New York Times exposé, had videos of her at age 13 uploaded by her ex-boyfriend. After that, her whole life came crumbling down. She experienced depression and drug use. She was harassed by people at her school who found her video and sent it to family members. She was blackmailed. She had to pretend to be her mother to have the videos taken down from Pornhub. This was all while she was 13 years old. In the end, she stopped going to school. She told us: I thought that once I stopped being in the public so much, once I stopped going to school, people would stop re-uploading it. But that didn't happen, because it had already been basically downloaded by [all the] people...[in] the world. It would always be uploaded, over and over and over again. No matter how many times I got it taken down, it would be right back up again. It basically became a full-time job for her to just chase down those images and to get them removed from Pornhub. Some witnesses appeared anonymously to protect their identities. One witness stated, “I was 17 when videos of me on Pornhub came to my knowledge, and I was only 15 in the videos they [were] profiting from.” She went on to say, “Every time they took it down, they also allowed more and more videos of me to be reuploaded.” That witness also said, “Videos of me being on Pornhub has affected my life so much to the point that I don't leave my house anymore. I stopped being able to work because I [am]...scared to be out in public around other people.” Another survivor who spoke to us at committee is Victoria Galy. As a result of discovering non-consensual images and videos of herself on Pornhub, she completely lost her sense of self-worth, and at times, she was suicidal. She told us at committee, “There were over eight million views just on Pornhub alone. To think of the amount of money that Pornhub has made off my trauma, date rape and sexual exploitation makes me sick to my stomach.” She added, “I have been forced to stand up alone and fight Pornhub”. It is a serious failure of our justice system when survivors have to launch their own lawsuits to get justice for the harms caused by companies like MindGeek. This Canadian company has not faced a single charge or consequence in Canada for publishing its videos of exploitation and for profiting from them. This is truly shameful. Last year, a survivor named Uldouz Wallace reached out to me. Uldouz is a survivor of the 2014 iCloud hack. She is also an award-winning actress, executive producer, activist and director of Foundation RA. Uldouz had photos and videos taken in the 2014 iCloud hack and uploaded onto porn sites like Pornhub, and she fought for years to get them taken down. As a result of this, she told us, “I lost followers, I lost everything that you could think of. It was just such hard time for me. I ended up spending over a million dollars over a three-year span just to get the content taken down on me with no success.... They're making so much money off of the non-consensual uploading of images and videos. The re-uploading is also a billion dollar industry.” She added, “There's still no federal laws. There's barely any laws at all to hold anyone online accountable. There's currently foreign revenge laws but for people like me there's nothing.” Rachel, a survivor from Alberta, said that it was devastating and that it is going to haunt her for the rest of her life. She said that she will always be someone's porn. I want to point out the incredible courage of Victoria, Serena, Uldouz, Rachel and many other survivors who have spoken out. In the midst of one of the most difficult moments of their lives, they are fighting back against a billion-dollar industry that seeks to profit from their pain and exploitation. I thank Victoria, Serena, Uldouz, and Rachel for refusing to back down. I thank them for their courage. I thank them for their relentless pursuit of justice. I would encourage members to listen to their full testimonies, and they can do so at www.siseact.ca. Throughout the ethics committee hearings and from the interactions I have had with survivors since, it is clear that this is a common problem. Pornographic companies are publishing and monetizing content without verifying the age and the consent of the people depicted in them. This is particularly a problem for Canada as many of those websites are hosted here. Bill C-270, the stopping Internet sexual exploitation act, would stop this. I am going to quote right from the summary of my bill. It states that the SISE act would: ...prohibit a person [including companies] from making, distributing or advertising pornographic material for commercial purposes without having first ascertained that, at the time the material was made, each person whose image is depicted in the material was 18 years of age or older and gave their express consent to their image being depicted. The SISE act would also allow individuals to revoke their consent. This is an important part to express the ongoing consent. Finally, the SISE act would provide for aggravating factors when the material created or published actually depicts minors or non-consensual activity. I am also pleased to share that I consulted on the bill with a variety of child protection agencies, law enforcement groups and the Canadian Centre for Child Protection to ensure that there are no gaps and that police have the tools to ensure they can seek justice. The heart of the bill is consent. No one should be publishing sexually explicit material without the express consent of everyone depicted in that material. Children cannot consent to exploitation. Victims of sex trafficking and sexual assault cannot consent. Those filmed without their knowledge cannot consent, yet pornography companies freely publish this content and profit from it because there is no onus on them to verify the age or the consent of those depicted. That is why the second recommendation of the 2021 ethics committee report is: That the Government of Canada mandate that content-hosting platforms operating in Canada require affirmation from all persons depicted in pornographic content, before it can be uploaded, that they are 18 years old or older and that they consent to its distribution, and that it consult with the Privacy Commissioner of Canada with respect to the implementation of such obligation. We have heard from survivors who testified that their images of abuse would not be online if companies like Pornhub had bothered to check for age and consent. Bill C-270 would fulfill this important recommendation from the ethics committee report and, importantly, I should add that this report was unanimously supported by all parties at the ethics committee. The recommendation also suggests consulting with the Privacy Commissioner. I happy to share with my colleagues that on February 29, 2024, the Privacy Commissioner released his investigation into Pornhub's operator Aylo, formerly MindGeek. The report was initially scheduled to be released on May 23, but it was delayed for over nine months when MindGeek, or Aylo, and its owners, Ethical Capital Partners took the Privacy Commissioner to court to block the release of that report. The Privacy Commissioner’s investigation into Aylo, MindGeek, was in response to a woman whose ex-boyfriend had uploaded intimate images of her to MindGeek's website without her consent. The young woman had to use a professional service to get it taken down and to remove her images from approximately 80 websites, where they had been re-posted more than 700 times. The report shared how the publishing of the woman’s intimate images led to a permanent loss of control of the images, which had a devastating effect on her. It caused her to withdraw from her social life and to live in a state of fear and anxiety. The Commissioner stated: This untenable situation could have been avoided in many cases had MindGeek obtained direct consent from each individual depicted in content prior to or at the time of upload. Pornhub’s own Monthly Non-Consensual Content reports suggest that non-consensual content is still regularly uploaded and viewed by thousands of users before it is removed. We find that by continuing to rely solely on the uploader to verify consent, MindGeek fails to ensure that it has obtained valid and meaningful consent from all individuals depicted in content uploaded to its websites. Ultimately, the Privacy Commissioner recommended that Pornhub and its owners adopt measures that would verify age and consent before any content is uploaded. I would urge all members to read the Privacy Commissioner's report on Pornhub. While Pornhub and its owners are the biggest pornography company in the world, this bill would ensure that age verification and consent applies to all pornography companies because whether it is videos of child exploitation, sex trafficking, AI deepfakes, sexual assault or an intimate encounter filmed by a partner, once a video or image has been uploaded, it is virtually impossible to eliminate. Each video can be viewed and downloaded millions of times within a 24-hour period, starting an endless nightmare for victims who must fight to get those videos removed, only for them to be uploaded again within minutes or hours. Canada must do more to prevent this exploitive content from ever reaching the Internet in the first place. I hope I have the support of my colleagues in ending this nightmare for so many and in preventing it for so many more. To the survivors, some of whom are watching today, we thank them. Their voices are being heard. I want to thank the organizations that have supported me along the way in getting this bill to this point: National Centre on Sexual Exploitation, National Council of Women of Canada, Ottawa Coalition to End Human Trafficking, London Abused Women's Centre, Defend Dignity, Vancouver Collective Against Sexual Exploitation, The Salvation Army, Survivor Safety Matters, Foundation RA, Montreal Council of Women, CEASE UK, Parents Aware, Joy Smith Foundation, Hope Resource Centre Association, Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, Colchester Sexual Assault Centre, Sexual Assault and Violence Intervention Services of Halton, and Ally Global Foundation.
2292 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:47:05 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-63 
Madam Speaker, the topic that the member is dealing with is particularly important. One of the arguments that he is making is with respect to taking down this heinous material online. I agree with him. However, the bill does not make any provisions for it. Bill C-63, which is government legislation, does make provisions for taking down these types of heinous materials. The member's leader has said that he would vote against it. I wonder if the hon. member will be supporting Bill C-63 or if he is going to stick with what is here that would not accomplish the objectives that he is seeking, which I hope we would all be in favour of.
118 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Apr/9/24 5:47:55 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Re: Bill C-63 
Madam Speaker, Bill C-63 has no criminal offences around the uploading of this kind of content. In this bill, it would be a criminal offence to upload. We want to make sure this content never hits the Internet. A 24-hour takedown period is not good enough. We want to ensure that companies are doing their due diligence to ensure that their content is of people who are of age and that people consent to it. An important piece of this bill is also that, if somebody has made a written request saying they revoke their consent, immediately that content must come down.
104 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border