Discussion · Government Orders
Garnett Genuis Conservative
“This bill has good parts, but good intentions are not enough. We must look at what the bill actually does. It does not stop kids under 16 from using social media. It also only covers pornography on social media, not on actual pornography websites. We need to study this bill carefully in committee to see what it really does and does not do.”
“Madam Speaker, I do not doubt the sincerity of every member who is talking about their aspirations to protect kids. I think that aspiration is widely shared. It is also important to underline that good intentions are not enough in legislation. What becomes law is not the good intentions of legislators. What becomes law is the text of the bill. That is the work we are doing now and that we will do at the committee. It is to discuss, as I did in my speech, the alignment between the intentions and the results as they would be created by the legislation. There are good things in this bill. It is important to acknowledge that there may have been some dissonance in the communication that there would not be an age ban. It would not actually prevent people under 16 from accessing social media. While there are important and positive provisions around pornographic content, it would not cover pornography websites; it would only covers social media. That is why Bill S-209 is important. The work that is going to happen at committee, the study, is very important. It is important to acknowledge what the bill would do and what it would not do. Again, it would not create an age ban. It does not address all issues of pornography. It only deals with pornography on some kinds of websites. However, there are important and positive aspirations that are expressed through it, and it is worthy of serious and thoughtful study.”
-
Reply to a debate question
Relevance 100 of 100
Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.
See full analysis
Madam Speaker, I do not doubt the sincerity of every member who is talking about their aspirations to protect kids. I think that aspiration is widely shared. It is also important to underline that good intentions are not enough in legislation. What becomes law is not the good intentions of legislators. What becomes law is the text of the bill. That is the work we are doing now and that we will do at the committee. It is to discuss, as I did in my speech, the alignment between the intentions and the results as they would be created by the legislation. There are good things in this bill. It is important to acknowledge that there may have been some dissonance in the communication that there would not be an age ban. It would not actually prevent people under 16 from accessing social media. While there are important and positive provisions around pornographic content, it would not cover pornography websites; it would only covers social media. That is why Bill S-209 is important. The work that is going to happen at committee, the study, is very important. It is important to acknowledge what the bill would do and what it would not do. Again, it would not create an age ban. It does not address all issues of pornography. It only deals with pornography on some kinds of websites. However, there are important and positive aspirations that are expressed through it, and it is worthy of serious and thoughtful study.