While facing questioning at the Commons Justice Committee Thursday, Attorney General Arif Virani said he’s “terrified” of the internet and justified the Trudeau Liberals’ censorship bill. The internet “frankly terrifies me” said Virani as he defended Bill C-63 An Act To Enact The Online Harms Act, a piece of legislation even Liberal MPs questioned as far-reaching, according to Blacklock’s Reporter. Marco Mendicino pointed out the dangers of Bill C-63 during the same committee hearing and Élisabeth Brière said concerns should be taken seriously. The bill would require Facebook, YouTube and other social media platforms to “mitigate the risk that users will be exposed to harmful comment.” Canadians could be sent to jail if a complainant suspects they might say something “hateful” online in the future. Informants can complain to the Canadian Human Rights Commission and receive a $20,000 government payout.A person suspected of a future hate crime could be ordered, by the Attorney General, to wear an ankle bracelet and be told to stay home, Bill C-36 states. In terms of sentencing, the AG (Virani) and a federal judge would both sign off jail time, with a maximum sentence of life in prison. Despite the bill giving Virani himself incredible power to yield, the AG is the one that is “terrified.” “Social media is everywhere. It brings unchecked dangers and horrific content. This frankly terrifies me. We need to make the internet safe,” testified Virani. “The premise of this legislation is simple. We all expect to be safe in our homes, neighbourhoods and communities. We should be able to expect the same kind of security in our online communities. We need to address the online harms that threaten us.”“My children’s Lego in our basement is subject to rigorous safety standards and testing before my two boys get their hands on it. I know these days my children spend much more time online than playing with their Lego. The most dangerous toy in my home right now and in every Canadian home are the screens our children are on.”“Safety depends on a basic network of trust. This is exactly what we are lacking in the digital world. The Online Harms Act establishes rules of the road.”Conservative MP Rob Moore pointed out that despite Virani’s fears, the bill is clearly unconstitutional. “It if ever unfortunately were to pass it will be struck down by the courts,” said Moore.“Virtually everyone has come out and said this is an effort to tramp down on free speech. Even Margaret Atwood described Bill C-63 as Orwellian.”“The powers that would be imbued within this new Commission are extensive,” said Mendicino. “On my first review of this legislation it would make certain content inaccessible, it would create new investigative powers, it would create a forum in which there could be hearing that could be closed to the public.”Liberal MP Élisabeth Brière told the justice committee the bill appeared contentious. “Everyone has a right to their opinion,” said Brière.“There are those in favour or against and we are quick to categorize people and label them. I believe it would be better for us to be more caring, to listen to each other and show open-mindedness.”Compliance would be monitored by a five-member Digital Safety Commission, and a Digital Safety Ombudsman would “provide support to users of social media services.The proposal follows a failed 2021 Bill C-36 An Act To Amend The Criminal Code that went further in granting a “digital safety commissioner” powers to block websites containing legal content deemed hurtful.
While facing questioning at the Commons Justice Committee Thursday, Attorney General Arif Virani said he’s “terrified” of the internet and justified the Trudeau Liberals’ censorship bill. The internet “frankly terrifies me” said Virani as he defended Bill C-63 An Act To Enact The Online Harms Act, a piece of legislation even Liberal MPs questioned as far-reaching, according to Blacklock’s Reporter. Marco Mendicino pointed out the dangers of Bill C-63 during the same committee hearing and Élisabeth Brière said concerns should be taken seriously. The bill would require Facebook, YouTube and other social media platforms to “mitigate the risk that users will be exposed to harmful comment.” Canadians could be sent to jail if a complainant suspects they might say something “hateful” online in the future. Informants can complain to the Canadian Human Rights Commission and receive a $20,000 government payout.A person suspected of a future hate crime could be ordered, by the Attorney General, to wear an ankle bracelet and be told to stay home, Bill C-36 states. In terms of sentencing, the AG (Virani) and a federal judge would both sign off jail time, with a maximum sentence of life in prison. Despite the bill giving Virani himself incredible power to yield, the AG is the one that is “terrified.” “Social media is everywhere. It brings unchecked dangers and horrific content. This frankly terrifies me. We need to make the internet safe,” testified Virani. “The premise of this legislation is simple. We all expect to be safe in our homes, neighbourhoods and communities. We should be able to expect the same kind of security in our online communities. We need to address the online harms that threaten us.”“My children’s Lego in our basement is subject to rigorous safety standards and testing before my two boys get their hands on it. I know these days my children spend much more time online than playing with their Lego. The most dangerous toy in my home right now and in every Canadian home are the screens our children are on.”“Safety depends on a basic network of trust. This is exactly what we are lacking in the digital world. The Online Harms Act establishes rules of the road.”Conservative MP Rob Moore pointed out that despite Virani’s fears, the bill is clearly unconstitutional. “It if ever unfortunately were to pass it will be struck down by the courts,” said Moore.“Virtually everyone has come out and said this is an effort to tramp down on free speech. Even Margaret Atwood described Bill C-63 as Orwellian.”“The powers that would be imbued within this new Commission are extensive,” said Mendicino. “On my first review of this legislation it would make certain content inaccessible, it would create new investigative powers, it would create a forum in which there could be hearing that could be closed to the public.”Liberal MP Élisabeth Brière told the justice committee the bill appeared contentious. “Everyone has a right to their opinion,” said Brière.“There are those in favour or against and we are quick to categorize people and label them. I believe it would be better for us to be more caring, to listen to each other and show open-mindedness.”Compliance would be monitored by a five-member Digital Safety Commission, and a Digital Safety Ombudsman would “provide support to users of social media services.The proposal follows a failed 2021 Bill C-36 An Act To Amend The Criminal Code that went further in granting a “digital safety commissioner” powers to block websites containing legal content deemed hurtful.
