Poilievre clarifies stance on Bill C-63
Punish with jail, not bureaucracy, Tory leader says
• Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has softened his opposition to the proposed online harms bill introduced this week, but signalled that his party is still prepared to vote against it.
In a statement, Poilievre said that Conservatives believe in criminalizing and enforcing laws against much of the “harmful content” defined in Bill C-63, specifically sexually victimizing a child or revictimizing a survivor online, bullying a child online, inducing a child to harm themselves or inciting violence.
The bill also mentions “harmful content” as material “that foments hatred” and that “incites violent extremism or terrorism,” but Poilievre made no mention of them.
Poilievre said that criminal bans on intimate content communicated without consent, including “deepfakes” created with artificial intelligence, must be “enforced and expanded.”
“We believe that these serious acts should be criminalized, investigated by police, tried in court and punished with jail, not pushed off to new bureaucracy that does nothing to prevent crimes and provides no justice to victims,” he said, referring to the new entities created under the proposed legislation.
The bill aims to force social media, user-uploaded adult content and livestreaming services to reduce exposure to online content deemed harmful, to strengthen the reporting of child pornography and to better address and denounce hate propaganda and provide recourse to victims of hate online.
Online services will be forced to remove two categories of content: intimate content communicated without consent and content that sexually victimizes a child or revictimizes a survivor of sexual abuse.
The bill also creates a new Digital Safety Commission, which will be responsible for enforcing rules and holding online services accountable, as well as a Digital Safety Ombudsperson, which will support and advocate for users and make recommendations to social media services and the government.
Finally, it amends the Criminal Code to create a new stand-alone hate crime offence that would allow penalties of up to life imprisonment to deter hateful conduct, as well as the Canadian Human Rights Act to empower people to file complaints against hate speech at the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
Last week, Poilievre blasted the bill before seeing it as an “attack on freedom of expression” and said the government should not decide what constitutes “hate speech.” While he did not repeat those exact terms in his formal statement after seeing the legislation, the sentiment remained the same.
“We do not believe that the government should be banning opinions that contradict the Prime Minister’s radical ideology,” he said.
Justice Minister Arif Virani said he was glad that the Conservative party took the time to read the bill before commenting on it, and that it is “possible to walk and chew gum at the same time.”
Virani said that there are very specific aspects of the legislation that will improve law enforcement and the Criminal Code and said there are new preservation requirements for the kind of sensitive material that could end up in a court of justice to facilitate the ability to prosecute these crimes.
But many victims who have intimate images of themselves shared without consent, he said, just want that material taken off the internet and might not want to go through a difficult and lengthy criminal process.
“This stuff spreads virally very, very quickly, and when it stays online and it stays on the internet, even if you were successfully able to prosecute the offender, the victimization of that individual, child or that woman remains for years thereafter,” said Virani.
Noa Mendelsohn Aviv, executive director and general counsel of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) said that while her organization endorses the general principles of upholding public safety, the bill raises “over-broad violations of expressive freedom, privacy, protest rights and liberty.”
“Bill C-63 risks censoring a range of expression, from journalistic reporting to healthy conversations among youth under 18 about their own sexuality and relationships. The broad criminal prohibitions on speech in the bill risk stifling public discourse and criminalizing political activism,” she said.
Mendelsohn Aviv also took issue with the “vast authority” bestowed upon the proposed Digital Safety Commission, made up of up to five government appointees, “to interpret the law, make up new rules, enforce them, and then serve as judge, jury, and executioner.”
“Granting such sweeping powers to one body undermines the fundamental principle of democratic accountability,” she said.
But Richard Marceau, vice president of external affairs and general counsel for the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) said he welcomes the legislation at a time when it is needed most, given that antisemitism is at an “all-time high” since the start of Israel’s war on Gaza.
“Part of the solution lies in diminishing the level of Jew-hatred online because what happens online does not stay online,” said Marceau. “It affects our community, our children, in real life.”
Meta Canada, for its part, said that it is open to talks on the online harms bill and that it looks forward to collaborating with lawmakers and industry peers on its “long-standing priority to keep Canadians safe.”