Analysis · Debate question · beta

Elizabeth May

137 words · 5 sentences · 7 clauses

Following a speech by Chi Nguyen (Liberal)
“Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Nipissing—Timiskaming. I rise in the chamber in support of Bill C-34, the safe social media act. As a mom of two young boys, I think a lot about what it means to help them navigate an increasingly digital and online world. I want them to be able to learn and keep up with the things that delight them, while also keeping them safe from the challenges that the digital environment presents. I know first-hand that parents are doing their best to help their kids to navigate an online world that is changing faster than any generation has experienced before. I also know that keeping up with fast-paced changing technology is a full-time job. I frequently speak with parents about how difficult it is to understand the apps our children use, as well as the difficulty in managing the content and people they might encounter. By the time many of us feel that we have understood one platform, something new replaces it and the learning curve starts all over again. Even if we do everything we can, there is still a steady stream of decisions that are being made about our children’s online experiences that we do not always have control over. We may not always understand why an algorithm keeps recommending specific videos or how a platform responds to discrimination and harassment. We cannot know everything an AI chatbot might say to a child who stumbles across it on purpose or by accident. Those decisions often belong to companies that build and operate these services. They have responsibilities here too. In a 2024 survey from Public Safety Canada, only three in 10 youth said they felt safe online. Parents were even less likely to feel their children were safe in these digital spaces. The data is alarming. Young people spend so much of their time learning how to interact with one another and the world online. This is the new place where they explore who they are and find a sense of belonging. We also know that these consequences reach well beyond the screen. Classmates can circulate messages and pictures too quickly for parents, teachers and educators to keep up. All of this has an impact on whether our children can walk into school the next morning. With artificial intelligence advancing at a rapid pace, we are at a crossroads. As legislators and parliamentarians, we have a responsibility to act now to ensure that these technologies are safe and accountable and that they support, rather than harm, the well-being of our children. That is the future I want for my two young boys and for every child growing up in Canada. It is in this context that our government is introducing Bill C-34. This legislation would ensure that social media services and AI chatbots are safe by design. The bill includes measures such as a ban on social media for those under the age of 16 until a service can prove it is safe, a new digital safety commission to adjudicate the efficacy of a platform’s safety policies and hold them to account, and faster removal processes for harmful or victimizing content. The commission would be responsible for the enforcement of the provisions of the act. In this era where we are all navigating lives that have a physical and digital presence, there is a real urgency to act and to do this thoughtfully and well for all Canadians. It is an issue that many stakeholders who are concerned with the well-being of children and women have raised the alarm bells on, and on behalf of the residents of Spadina—Harbourfront, I am grateful that we are using our legislative tools to act. One of the key measures of Bill C-34 is that it would ban children under the age of 16 from having accounts on social media services. AI chatbots would be subject to the duty to protect children and the duty to act responsibly, requiring them to mitigate risks of harmful behaviour by or induced by the chatbot. Everyone has a responsibility to protect our kids. Bullying 25 years ago often ended when the school day was over. Today, children carry that harassment with them everywhere they go, with direct access through their phones and on social media platforms. They are also more vulnerable to online predators and other harmful actors who can now reach them easily. From online harassment and the spread of misinformation to the proliferation of harmful content such as revenge porn and AI-generated deepfakes, young people are facing challenges that previous generations could never have imagined. In this new digital era, AI, algorithms and deepfake technologies are also enabling new forms of gender-based harassment and violence toward women and young girls. We must take a whole-of-government approach and consider how these measures, along with the actions we have taken over the past year, connect together. We moved forward on part of this work through Bill C-16, the Protecting Victims Act, whereby our government introduced reforms to protect children in online environments. This has included expanding the child luring offence to better address sextortion, criminalizing non-consensual sexual deepfakes, criminalizing bestiality depictions used to groom children, increasing penalties for child exploitation offences, and requiring online platforms to preserve evidence longer so offenders can be brought to justice. As a woman who stands in public office, it has been incredibly powerful to see our government work alongside other parties in the House to ensure that the sharing of non-consensual sexual deepfakes was criminalized. No one bill can address every angle of these harms. Our legislation, prevention efforts, stakeholder groups and other supports must work in concert together to keep young people safe. Last week, I hosted a documentary film screening on the Hill where parliamentarians, staff and community partners gathered together to watch Miss Representation: Rise Up. The documentary, directed by Jennifer Siebel Newsom, explores how social media and AI are fuelling a cultural backlash against women and young girls, affecting their mental health, autonomy and political power. The film is a sequel to the original, which debuted 15 years ago, and this update demonstrates how women’s and young girls’ experiences with media and technology have intensified quickly over time. The film not only reminds us of the harms the online space can present to young women but also sends a powerful message that technological innovation must be accompanied by accountability. We need social media platforms to have the framework and regulations in place so that our children are safe online. Bill C-34 is the first piece of national legislation that establishes a regulatory framework for AI chatbots. The bill would require greater transparency from AI chatbots and impose obligations to direct users to intervention services when they express suicidal thoughts, self-harm or an intent to seriously harm others. It would also require operators to provide the new digital safety commission with clear, transparent information on their policies for referring conversations to the RCMP and other emergency services in the case of threats to seriously harm others. The tragedy in Tumbler Ridge is a stark reminder of what is at stake. It reinforces an important principle as we build this legislation and framework. Canadians expect online platforms to have robust safety protocols and escalation practices in place to protect online safety and ensure that law enforcement is warned about potential violence. We must and can do better for our children and their families. The bill is an important step toward creating a safer digital environment for children across Canada. As the world changes, our legislation must reflect the new terrain we are living in, and the responsibility does not lie with parents and educators alone. Earlier this month, I had the opportunity to participate in a round table discussion with Pinterest alongside representatives from civil society and academia. The message that came through clearly was that we must get the legislation right. That includes building a system that provides strong protections for children and young people while also recognizing that digital platforms are not all designed or used in the same way. Bill C-34 reflects this approach. The commission can exempt certain companies from the age limit requirement if they demonstrate that they meet adequate safeguards designed to protect children and youth. Our government was elected on a mandate to protect Canadians, and that responsibility includes our children. Many democracies around the world are already taking action and understanding that the digital age requires new safeguards and standards of accountability. As a middle power with strong democratic values and a tradition of defending human rights, Canada now has the opportunity to help shape the growing global conversation on digital safety. We can work alongside our international partners and establish common standards, best practices and shared expertise. As we consider what will work best in Canada, we have an opportunity to encourage platforms to design safer spaces from the beginning. That means giving clear responsibilities to put young people’s safety at the centre of how their products are built. Blanket bans alone are not enough to support young people navigating the digital world. We must pair this with the right skill sets to recognize harm and set boundaries so everyone can use the technology responsibly. This can act as a model for the rest of us as we all trip through using new technologies together. We do not have to choose between innovation and safety. Canada can lead with both. Through legislation such as Bill C-34, Canada can help set the standard for a digital future that puts the well-being of young people first.”
Statement grade
A+
Average 95 / 100
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Thanks 5%Reasoning 31%The question 40%Claims 15%Procedure 9%

This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.

Mr. Speaker, Thanks · 7 wordsI really appreciate the hon. member’s speech.Thanks Reasoning · 42 wordsThe difficulty I struggle with is that even as good as the bill is, there is an assumption that these so-called platforms have a right to exist, that they are a part of our world and we cannot do anything about it. The question · 55 wordsI wonder if the government has given any thought, or whether it would be something the member could take up within the caucus, to how if we did not call them platforms and instead called them publishers, we would have a mountain of common law for what we do when a publisher publishes something damaging. Claims · 21 wordsIf there is joint and several liability, it is the person who posts something anonymously and the publisher who are responsible.1 Procedure · 12 wordsThis is a larger question, but I want to pose it now.Procedure

Analysed on