Rosemarie Falk

Mr. Speaker, Reasoning · 25 wordsprotecting children from harm should always be a priority. As legislators, we have the responsibility to protect the vulnerable and put reasonable safeguards in place.Vague promise Thanks · 17 wordsI want to thank members from across party lines who have spoken in support of Bill S-209, ThanksClaims · 334 wordswhich seeks to protect children from online pornography. Many members who have taken part in this debate are parents themselves. They understand the challenges of raising children in a digital age, when so much content is available at the click of a button. Children are being exposed to pornography at very young ages. Sometimes they come across it accidentally. Other times, curiosity leads them to content they are not mature enough to understand. The concern is not just how young children are when they encounter this content, but what they may see. Age checks are often absent or ineffective on websites that host pornography. Children can encounter videos that portray aggression, degradation and sexual violence. Some depict acts that can cause serious physical harm, including choking, while presenting them as healthy or even desirable. Children’s brains are still developing. They are learning to understand relationships, consent and appropriate behaviour. Repeated exposure to this content can shape how they understand sex, consent and expectations in relationships. Parents have a very important role to play. They set boundaries. They have difficult conversations and use parental controls, but in reality, they cannot monitor every search, every link or every video. They should not have to carry this responsibility alone. During this debate, the member for Vancouver Granville raised Bill C-34 as another way to address children’s exposure to online pornography, ¹but that is not correct. Bill C-34 does not have the same explicit reach as Bill S-209. Bill C-34 would require age verification to user-generated pornography on sites like OnlyFans.² Just so members know, OnlyFans is a site where users generate pornography and upload it. However, Bill C-34 does not stipulate age verification for pornography websites.³ The government has provided Bill C-34 to the House, a bill that is supposed to protect children, but it does not cover pornography websites. The Liberal government has not clearly stated that it intends to use the powers in Bill C-34 to ensure that all commercial pornography websites restrict children’s access. Reasoning · 31 wordsIf we agree that protecting children from online pornography is important, we cannot just leave it to Bill C-34. We need a direct approach, and that is what Bill S-209 is. Claims · 173 wordsIt is a targeted approach that would require all commercial pornography websites to use prescribed age verification or age estimation methods to restrict children’s access to it.⁴ To be clear, Bill S-209 would not ban pornography for adults. It would establish an additional safeguard to help keep this adult content away from children. It also would not come at the expense of Canadians’ privacy. This bill includes safeguards governing the collection, use and destruction of personal information used for age checks.⁵ We can protect children from content they are not ready to see while also protecting Canadians’ personal information. This issue has been before Parliament since 2016, when the House unanimously supported Motion No. 47, ⁶which called for a study on the public health effects of easy access to online sexually explicit material.⁷ This is the third version of this legislation being considered, ⁸yet children still lack these safeguards. Other jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom, France, Germany and more than 25 American states, have taken steps to restrict minors’ access to online pornography.⁹ Reasoning · 9 wordsWe cannot keep debating this issue without taking action. Claims · 4 wordsOur children deserve safeguards, The ask · 12 wordsand I urge all members in the House to support Bill S-209.