Garnett Genuis

“Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for New Westminster—Burnaby—Maillardville. I rise today in support of Bill C-34, the safe social media act. I will begin by sharing that I am a mother of three children, ages 10, 13 and 16. I, like all parents, am keenly aware of the risks of social media, and I understand the difficulties of regulating its use by our children and our youth. Even though I feel fairly confident that my kids are generally well protected, I cannot be sure, because parenting alone is not enough to protect our children. Many parents do not want their children on social media at a young age, but it is incredibly difficult to keep them away when all of their friends are online. It can be a major source of family tension and stress, to say the least. This is not a failure of parenting. We want what is best for our children, and a large part of that is ensuring that they are not isolated from their peer groups. It is also important to recognize the ease at which these services are accessed. Often without their parents’ knowledge, children are entering the digital world, and with only a few clicks, they can create an account and begin using platforms that may contain harmful content and expose them to dangerous actors at an early age. A World Health Organization study found that more than one in 10 adolescents showed signs of problematic social media behaviour, struggling to control their use and experiencing negative consequences. Notably, this report also included the following call to action: “Ensure social media platforms enforce age restrictions and create a regulatory framework encouraging responsible design of digital tools for young users.” With the introduction of Bill C-34, this is exactly what we are aiming to do. The bill covers both aspects of that call to action. It would create a nationwide restriction on social media services for Canadians under the age of 16 and implement three core duties for social media services. The duty to act responsibly would require regulated services to assess and mitigate risks linked to harmful content. The duty to protect children would require services to build age-appropriate safeguards into the design and operation of their products. The duty to make certain content inaccessible would require faster removal action on the most serious victimizing content: child sexual exploitation material and intimate content posted without consent. Technology is ever-adapting, and our legislation must reflect that. Online harms are intensifying, and our laws have not kept pace. Protecting our kids from the harms of social media is a responsibility that I know we all share. The digital world connects us, it educates us, and it drives our economy. Unfortunately, it has also become a space where too many children are exposed to preventable harm. A study co-led by researchers at the University of Alberta found that spending more time on social media is making Canadian teenagers, especially girls, feel anxious, depressed and disconnected. The results showed that just one extra hour of daily device use was linked to a 15% higher chance of moderate to severe depression, along with a nearly 13% higher likelihood of similar levels of anxiety. This is not just a concern for parents at home. This has societal implications that go beyond one child and one family. That is why it is our responsibility to act to address these rising trends. We are also seeing a rise in dangerous behaviour being presented online, and without effective safeguards in place, our children are subject to observing, internalizing and repeating these behaviours. A report released by Stats Canada in 2024 found that one in eight young people saw online content daily that could incite hate or violence. A study from the Canadian Centre for Child Protection found that 50% of youth had watched the Charlie Kirk assassination video, while 33% had seen videos of mass or school shootings. Despite these high rates of exposure, only a small minority said they had actively searched for that content. Instead, most said that the content frequently appears unexpectedly in posts by strangers or in algorithmic platform recommendations. There is an unfortunate connection between viewing this sort of content and repeating it in real life. The same report from Statistics Canada found that more than a third of people suspected of cyber-related hate crimes were between the ages of 12 and 17. The harms being perpetrated online are not being left on the screen. They are being translated into real-life actions in our schools, in our homes and in our communities. Moving past the physical violence, these harms extend into sexualized violence and graphic content. Statistics from the Canadian Centre for Child Protection show that 10% of Canadian youth reported exposure to child sexual abuse material, while 13% had seen a video of adults being sexually abused. Anything above 0% is completely unacceptable, in my view. The reality is that there has been endless research done that showcases a clear link between social media use in adolescents and mental health concerns, rising hate and sexual violence. This research is well documented and well studied. It has been presented with the backing of parental safety organizations, our world-class research institutions and even tech companies. This topic was first brought to my attention when similar legislation was presented in my home province of Nova Scotia by Iain Rankin, member of the legislative assembly for Timberlea-Prospect and the interim leader of the Nova Scotia Liberal Party. In presenting his piece of legislation at the provincial level, he started a conversation that introduced me to the work of Jenna Poste, a tech executive by trade and founder of the Nova Scotia chapter of Unplugged Canada. Jenna and the team at Unplugged Canada have been advocating for this sort of action for years. Jenna spoke at a press conference where she highlighted a point that I made in my speech earlier, which is that many parents do not want their children to have a presence on social media, but when that comes at the cost of social ostracization, it sometimes becomes too difficult to make that decision and enforce it. The most common criticism I have heard since this bill was first tabled in the spring is that the government has no place in parenting. I agree, but the government does have a responsibility to step in when it comes to matters of public safety. Canada does not have to reinvent the wheel. Similar laws have been passed in a number of jurisdictions around the world, including Australia, Norway, Spain and Greece. Even provinces such as Manitoba are also looking at taking matters into their own hands at a provincial level. I also want to present a historic comparison with regard to opposition to matters regarding public safety. In 1984, when Nova Scotia was implementing its mandatory seat belt legislation, it came with much public outrage and scrutiny. In my research regarding Bill C-34, I found an archived CTV interview with people who were opposed, in which a Nova Scotian justified that opposition by calling the legislation “something that infringes on the petty details of the organization and conduct of people’s lives.” I feel quite confident that if we ask most Canadians today, they will recognize that seat belt laws are appropriate measures to protect our citizens, and I feel quite confident that 42 years from now, this legislation would be met with the same wide-reaching opinion. As we continue to debate on this important legislation, I urge my fellow members to consider the public safety concerns I have presented today and remember the full range of regulations that exist within this piece of legislation that would not only protect our children but also provide sufficient opportunities for social media platforms to implement necessary safeguards, because the safety of our children must be our top priority and should not and cannot be a responsibility left to parents alone. The digital environment is not safe for children. Leading health authorities now warn we cannot say that social media is sufficiently safe for young people and that governments must act decisively to reduce these risks. We are proposing this legislation because it is our responsibility to act, to act now and to act with urgency.”