“This bill protects Canadian children from harmful content online. It creates a digital safety commission that can fine companies that break the rules. I want to know if the member supports this bill and the commission.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is really important that we recognize that Bill C-34 is all about protecting the children in Canada. It would complement the wonderful job that parents and guardians provide, but it recognizes that the Internet is seven days a week, 24 hours a day, and that there is harmful content there. What we are hoping to see from the Conservative Party is support in principle for a digital safety commission so that when we have the regulations, they would actually be enforced with, potentially, things like fines. There has to be a consequence that gives the legislation teeth in its actions to protect our children. In principle, does the member support the legislation and, in particular, the commission?”

“I want the House to pass this bill to keep Canadians safe online. Social media platforms spread harmful content, and their rules are not consistent. This bill sets basic safety rules for all platforms and defines what harmful content must be stopped, including content that sexually abuses children.”

“Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to participate in second reading debate on Bill C-34, the safe social media act. Our government is focused on supporting victims of crime as well as the important work of protecting Canadians online. My time today will focus on how the bill would address these priorities through the types of harmful content covered and why it is necessary in protecting Canadians online. While the online world continues to evolve, and our digital reality continues to change, platforms, self-expression and the exchange of information have given rise to a new set of challenges. Online platforms have algorithms designed for harmful content to spread and multiply, exposing users to terrible harm. Some platforms have limited rules, community standards or terms of service. However, those definitions, thresholds and practices vary hugely from service to service. One platform may label or remove content, but another may even promote it, creating visible inconsistencies and significant gaps in protection. Canadians should be able to rely on a minimum baseline safety standard across all platforms. Bill C-34 would do this by defining specific categories of harmful content, including the following seven categories: content that sexually victimizes a child or revictimizes—”

“I want the House to pass this bill. It makes social media platforms protect Canadians from seven kinds of harm, like bullying kids, spreading hate, and sharing private photos without consent. It also keeps children off adult websites and labels fake content made by computers.”

“Mr. Speaker, I was addressing the following seven categories, which are outlined in the bill: first, content that sexually victimizes a child or revictimizes a survivor; second, intimate content communicated without consent; third, content used to bully a child; fourth, content that induces a child to harm themselves; fifth, content that foments hatred; sixth, content that incites violence; and, last, terrorism or violent extremism content. The first category is content that sexually victimizes a child or revictimizes a survivor, which is among the most serious harms that this bill would address. I have travelled across the country and talked to law enforcement, and of course to the RCMP here in Ottawa, and cases involving this type of harmful content are on the rise. The pain caused by this kind of content is profound, ongoing and not limited to the original act of victimization. When such material is communicated, reproduced, circulated or re-encountered online, the harm is continuously experienced over time, each reappearance reviving the pain of the original trauma to the victim. The second category is intimate content communicated without consent. This category has a particular gender dimension. Online harassment affects women at a much higher rate than men. This may take the form of revenge porn, which is a specific type of intimate content shared or posted without consent. It also manifests itself through sexual extortion, in which victims are forced to pay sums of money to have images taken down. In this category, the harm is deeply personal, often immediate and in many cases particularly devastating for the victims, whose dignity, privacy and autonomy are violated in an online world accessible to their friends and family. The third category is content used to bully a child, which addresses the harm that many children experience online, but is not currently adequately or expeditiously addressed. Content used to bully a child can have significant cumulative and negative impacts on a child’s physical and mental health, development and self-esteem. Over time, relationships can also be impacted by this type of harm. Bill C-34’s definition does not catch mere rudeness or criticism. The act’s definition focuses on content that could cause serious harm to a child’s physical or mental health. General expressions of opinion are not captured, and this carefully bounded definition addresses serious cyber-bullying while respecting broader expression. The fourth category is content that induces a child to harm themselves. This addresses content that advocates for, or advises a person to engage in, self-harm, disordered eating or dying by suicide. In fact, over the past decade, depression has doubled among Canadians aged 15 to 24. Anxiety has quadrupled, and emergency room visits for self-harm among teenage girls has risen by 138% in my home province of Ontario. The fifth defined harm is content that foments hatred. The definition of “hatred” abides by the Supreme Court’s now widely accepted definition, as set out in R v. Keegstra. This content expresses extreme detestation or vilification on the basis of a protected characteristic under the Canadian Human Rights Act. The sixth category is content that incites violence and captures content that actively encourages real-world harm and pain. Violence and the threat of violence have spiked online, enabled by circulation and amplification. I am sure many of my colleagues have witnessed this themselves. It should be noted at this point that Bill C-34 would not newly criminalize this. Death threats are already illegal, as they should be in a free society. This inclusion in the bill would simply strengthen online platforms’ obligations to address it and to remove it. The seventh and final category is terrorism or violent extremism content. Here, the definition captures content that actively encourages, promotes, facilitates, offers training for or recruits for violent extremist or terrorist activity. Training, encouragement, operational assistance and recruitment play a role in international terrorism networks, festering and predating online. In addition to the seven types of harmful content, the act tackles access to pornography, requiring covered services to ensure that pornographic content is not accessible to children. It would do so by requiring age verification or estimation measures to be used to prevent access to pornographic content. The act also addresses an emerging technology with potential for significant harm: synthetic content. In the bill, synthetic content is defined as computer-generated content whose depiction is likely to be mistaken as authentic. This captures content like deepfakes and AI-generated materials that look real. Synthetic text is excluded from the scope of the bill. Only synthetic images, audio or video would be subject to the labelling requirement. The safe social media act also addresses coordinated, inauthentic behaviour or bot campaigns. Under the duty to act responsibly, social media services would have to mitigate risks to exposure and label content from bot campaigns, combatting disinformation and foreign interference campaigns. Bill C-34 would combat the most damaging types of harmful content online in a manner that aligns with other regimes and other jurisdictions. The safe social media act is in line with our government’s commitment to supporting victims of crime, as well as the protection of Canadians online, while respecting rights, institutional roles and the realities of today’s online world.”

• Echo ×6

  A repeated line

  “Content that induces a child to harm themselves.”

  Said 6 times by 6 members since October 28.

  Every time it was said →

“I want the House to pass this bill. Harmful online content has increased a lot over the last 10 to 12 years. This bill helps police by removing harmful posts while they investigate crimes, which protects victims. The police want this change.”

“Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, the increase in these types of situations has been severe over the last 10 to 12 years, with more people in these online spaces and the changes that have happened to social media. This bill would augment the work of law enforcement. It would not hinder it. It would help support the work they are doing. Giving this commission a clear threshold and removing this type of harmful content online would, as I mentioned in my speech, help victims not be revictimized while the police are doing investigations and the work they need to do when criminal thresholds have been met and criminal charges can be laid. This would complement the work of law enforcement, and they welcome this change.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

  Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

  See full analysis →

“Our government is committed to holding big tech companies accountable and protecting children from online harms like sextortion. We showed this by passing another bill that makes tech companies keep evidence to help police solve crimes, even without the opposition's support. All our online safety bills are meant to regulate these companies and punish people who harm others online.”

“Mr. Speaker, I think people can see our commitment just by looking at Bill C-22, which is currently in the other place. It took over a year of debating that bill in the House of Commons to finally get it through committee and get it passed, without the support of opposition parties. That bill is going to be crucial in helping to solve a lot of cases and going up against the big tech companies, which can preserve the information needed in an online space when harm is done to someone. Take sextortion as an example. Many children have lost their lives over sextortion in our country. Those cases could be prevented and solved quicker, and people could be held accountable. All the pieces of legislation that we are putting forward are for making sure that these companies are better regulated and are accountable and that the person who does the harm is charged and convicted.”

“I support this bill. It protects Canadian children and helps make our communities safer. I thank the secretary of state for her work on it.”

“Mr. Speaker, I want to personally express my appreciation for and thanks to the secretary of state. She has been leading the fight here, with a number of legislative initiatives to make our communities safer, on behalf of the Prime Minister and the entire government caucus, working with a couple of other ministers. I believe she is right when she says that this is a very important aspect of protecting the children of Canada, and it complements many other initiatives. This Parliament has brought forward a historic number of pieces of legislation to make our communities safer, and I want to express my appreciation, as I know many of my constituents do, for what she has been able to accomplish.”

“I agree with my colleague. We need to pass these bills together to fight harmful online activity and better protect children.”

“Mr. Speaker, to my colleague, who has done a lot of heavy lifting in debating these issues in the House, I appreciate the feedback on these important bills. He is right. They are all complementary. We need to put all of these things together so we can combat this type of activity and protect our children better.”

“The federal government has the power and the duty to protect young people on social media. Taking action at the federal level does not stop Quebec from passing its own rules to protect children too.”

“Mr. Speaker, some aspects of my colleague’s speech were clear, but others were not. One thing he made clear is that the Government of Canada has both the jurisdiction and the responsibility to protect our young people when it comes to social media. Less clear were his suggestions that the Canadian government could prevent the Government of Quebec from doing the same. How does the fact that the Canadian government is providing strong leadership to protect our children prevent the Government of Quebec from implementing its own measures to protect our young people, if it chooses to do so?”

“I support this bill and want it sent to committee. Social media companies must protect children and stop online abuse. The bill makes platforms remove shared private photos and child abuse content within 24 hours. It also sets safety rules for users under 16 and holds companies accountable with fines.”

“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-34, the safe social media act. I will be talking about young people, concerned parents and women who are victims of violence online. Social media is part of our lives. It helps us stay connected and keep up with the news. For young people, it is also where friendships are formed and where they try to find their place. I am not saying social media is bad. It has many positive aspects. We also know there are risks, and these risks can sometimes have very serious consequences. A young person can be humiliated in front of their entire school. An intimate photo can be shared without their consent. A child can gain access to content that encourages them to harm themselves. The consequences do not just disappear when we turn off our phones. They follow us to school and home, and sometimes they even keep us awake at night. In Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, and everywhere else in the country, families want their children to be safe. That is only natural. That is why we must take action. A lot of demands are placed on parents today. They have to set limits, understand constantly changing applications and talk about new dangers. Of course, parents play a vital role. No one is saying otherwise. However, we have to be realistic: Parents cannot look at every video and comment. They cannot predict what a platform is going to offer their child the next day. Businesses know how their platforms work. They pick the tools provided and the content recommended. They have to accept their share of responsibility too. Leaving families and victims to fend for themselves is not normal. I would now like to move on to something near and dear to my heart: the protection of women, children and girls. Take a simple example. A young woman shares an intimate photo with someone she trusts. Later on, that photo is sent on to others without her consent. This is a violation of her privacy, even if it follows an argument or separation. Consent matters. Giving someone a photo never amounts to agreeing that it be shown to everyone else. Today, there is another problem to contend with. Artificial intelligence makes it possible to create a fake intimate image. A person’s face can be used to create a photo that was never actually taken. This is called deepfaking. Even if the image is fake, the shame, fear and consequences can be very real. Imagine a teenage girl returning to class the next day, or a woman seeing this image circulating at work. No one should have to go through that. Bill C-34 provides for a swift response to certain types of very serious content. This includes intimate images shared without consent, including sexualized deepfakes. It also includes content related to the sexual exploitation of children. For both of these categories, the bill stipulates that the content must be made inaccessible in Canada within 24 hours of being detected or reported. It also provides a process for appealing the decision. The reason it is so important to be so swift is that an image can cause enormous damage in just a few hours, and the victim should not have to take it upon themselves to remove every copy of that image. We also need to better protect children before problems arise. Today, many young people spend time on platforms that were designed to keep their attention. One video leads to another, then another and another. Even adults sometimes have a hard time stopping, so imagine what this must be like for a child. The bill would require the services in question to look at the risks their platform presents and do what is needed to mitigate those risks. I am thinking of cyber-bullying, attempts at sexual exploitation and content that encourages young people to harm themselves. Children’s safety must be taken into account when the platform is designed. It must not depend solely on a child’s ability to find the right button to ask for help. The bill proposes a rule for some social media platforms. Young people under the age of 16 would not be allowed to have an account. However, I want to clarify. This does not mean that the bill bans all digital tools for all young people. A service can get an exception if they demonstrate that they meet the child protection requirements. This is worth considering. Young people need to talk to their friends. Their personal information needs to be protected and their age needs to be verified. Those are important issues. We need to carefully examine them in committee. To put it simply, if a company wants young users on its platform, it must be able to demonstrate that it is protecting them. We also need to talk about artificial intelligence. Chatbots respond around the clock. They can make people feel like someone is listening, but a digital tool will never replace a loved one, nor can it replace a professional when a person is in distress. Bill C‑34 introduces measures to reduce the risks associated with these services. For example, when a user expresses suicidal thoughts or says they want to harm themselves, the service would be required to direct them to appropriate help. This is an important safeguard, especially for young people and vulnerable individuals. Drafting good regulations is one thing; ensuring compliance is another. The bill would create an independent digital safety commission of Canada tasked with overseeing compliance with the regulations. Platforms would be required to explain the risks and the measures taken to reduce those risks. Financial penalties may apply in cases of non-compliance. When a company’s decisions affect the safety of millions of people, it must be held accountable. I would also like to say a few words about freedom of expression and privacy. These rights are essential. Protecting young people and victims does not mean silencing those who hold different opinions. The bill targets specific categories of harmful content. Private messaging does not fall within its scope. We must remain vigilant about the way in which users’ ages will be verified. The committee’s study will provide an opportunity to hear from parents, young people, experts, and organizations that defend the rights of Canadians. We have to get this right. No law can prevent all problems on the Internet. Parents and schools will always have a role to play. That said, we can do better. We can ask platforms to prevent risks and respond quickly when someone experiences online abuse. I am thinking of the families in Boisbriand, Saint-Eustache, Rosemère, and Deux-Montagnes. They want the same thing as all Canadian families: for their children to grow up and learn in safety. I am also thinking of the women and girls who simply want to live, work and express themselves without fear of being humiliated and intimidated online. For their sake, we must move forward. That is why I support Bill C-34 and am in favour of referring it to committee, where we will have the opportunity to review it, ask the right questions and improve it if necessary.”

“The federal government and the provinces must respect each other's powers and work together. Quebec MPs also need to respect each other and represent their people well. This bill helps keep young people safe online.”

“Mr. Speaker, we must respect provincial and federal areas of jurisdiction. We must also ensure that we work together. We must ensure that all MPs from Quebec, who represent Quebec, respect one another and ensure that they represent their constituents effectively. Governments at all levels, whether provincial or federal, must work in partnership to make meaningful progress. Bill C-34 specifically helps to ensure that the young people using these platforms are safe.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 32 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“Children face new dangers today from social media and artificial intelligence. How can Parliament make sure our laws keep up with these fast technological changes?”

“Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, whom I hold in high regard, for her speech. As legislators, we have a responsibility to adapt to the issues of the day. As we know, kids today do not face the same threats as kids from previous generations. Virtual spaces and social media are ubiquitous, and AI use is on the rise. What are my colleague’s thoughts on our responsibility as parliamentarians to acknowledge these technological changes? How can we ensure that the legislative framework keeps pace with these changes?”

• Off topic
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Relevance 47 of 100

  None of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“I support this bill and want it sent to committee. Social media harms young people and women through fake videos and pictures shared without permission. Our laws need to catch up with new technology to keep people safe online.”

“Mr. Speaker, laws often lag behind a changing society . Twenty years ago, we did not have to deal with social media, but now we need to create new laws to regulate it. We need to make sure that our young people are able to surf the Internet safely and that any non-consensual images are taken down. We have to make sure of that. These things did not exist 20 or 30 years ago. The bill will help us to regulate this phenomenon. I am deeply troubled to know that deepfakes and images that young people did not consent to share are being posted on social media. This causes enormous harm to these young people and these women. The bill will be sent to committee. We will hear from experts and we will move forward. I am sure that we will find a solution that everyone can agree on.”

“We need new laws to regulate big tech. The Senate must pass our foundation bill, and the House should pass this bill to make social media companies protect young people.”

“Mr. Speaker, we must ensure that we respond appropriately through legislation. Bill C-34 will address certain issues, such as ensuring that social media platforms implement programs to protect young people. That said, Bill C-22 is also important because it serves as the foundation for all of this. That bill is currently before the Senate and it must be passed. The same is true for Bill C-34, which will ensure that we continue to regulate big tech.”

“The member had many questions about this bill. I want to know if he has specific changes he wants to bring to committee.”

“Mr. Speaker, the hon. member had a lot of questions in his speech about details that should come forward. I wonder if he has any specific amendments he would like to see brought to committee.”

“If social media companies follow this bill, that is a success. It forces them to act responsibly, protect children, and block harmful contact. I want the member to agree that this is success.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member said that success should not be measured by mere compliance. Well, if these companies comply with this bill, I believe we can say that is success because they would have a duty to act responsibly, a duty to protect children and a duty to make certain contact inaccessible. Would the member agree that that would be success?”

“I want the House to pass this bill to protect children online. Parents cannot watch their kids every minute. This bill stops children under 16 from opening accounts on platforms unless those platforms prove they are safe. It also requires tech companies to quickly remove intimate photos shared without consent, and it fines companies that break the rules.”

“Mr. Speaker, today we are debating a very important bill aimed at protecting our children. I have no children of my own, but I am an uncle and a godfather. I know these children will grow up in a world that is quite different from the one I grew up in, even though I am not that old. The digital world has become omnipresent in our lives and in the lives of young people. Obviously, social media is everywhere, and artificial intelligence is on the rise. This opens up a number of possibilities. These new technologies can be very useful to young people, but they also come with risks, new threats and new dangers that previous generations may not have had to deal with in the same way. As a legislator, I think it is important to pay attention to these changes and adapt our legislative framework to keep kids safe. For example, when parents send their kids to school, to activities run by community organizations or to other institutions, they expect their kids to be safe in those environments. The same should be true in the virtual spaces that are becoming increasingly ubiquitous in modern life. As a result, big tech and social media platforms should have certain obligations to keep kids safe online. Parents certainly have a role to play, but they cannot monitor their kids 24 hours a day. I believe that, as parliamentarians, we must give parents the tools they need and help them keep their kids safe online. That is exactly what we are doing with Bill C-34. We are implementing an appropriate framework to protect children from being exposed to harmful content while using chatbots and social media. This bill is in keeping with the spirit of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, because one of the articles of that convention talks about measures that should be taken to protect children from material or information that could be injurious to their well-being. As members know, children can be exposed to a lot of such content online. With Bill C‑34, we are proposing a better regulatory framework governing how children under the age of 16 use social media. This is an important issue because, when we look at the data, it is clear that young people are experiencing mental health problems. A number of indicators are quite worrisome, all things considered. The excessive and addictive use of social media can have an impact on mental health. This has been documented. Research also shows that the adverse effects social media can have on mental health are even more pronounced among preteens and teens. We also know that there is harmful content out there that young people can be exposed to. We have a responsibility to protect young people from that kind of content. Our approach with Bill C-34 is to ban people under the age of 16 from having accounts on platforms that have not proven that their services are safe. An important distinction needs to be made here. This is not an outright ban. We are not banning all social media for people under 16. We are preventing them from creating accounts on platforms that do not submit a safety plan. Bill C‑34 sets out a specific procedure. Platforms that want to allow young people under 16 to create an account will have to apply to the new digital safety commission for an exemption and prove that their products are safe for children. They will have to show how they protect children from harmful content, like content that could incite violence or bullying, content that involves sexual exploitation or intimate images shared without consent, or content that could encourage young people to harm themselves or others. That kind of content should not be available to our youth online. Unfortunately, as they are currently designed, the algorithms sometimes expose young people to content like that much too early in life, and it can affect their mental health. If the digital platforms want young people to have accounts, they will have to implement safety measures and revise their algorithms. I am no technology expert, but there are ways to prevent young people from being exposed to this type of content. The platforms will have to prove their measures work. If not, they will have to implement age verification. Several age verification tools are available. There are models in Australia and the United Kingdom. We did not identify a specific model in the bill because we know that technology evolves. The model that is ultimately adopted will need to be approved by the new digital safety commission, which will bring together experts in the field. There must be a degree of flexibility in determining the most effective methods of verifying people’s age online while also respecting their privacy. This is an important point. Where age verification is required, there will also be obligations regarding privacy protection and the prompt deletion of supporting documents. In this way, the platforms can effectively verify age while also ensuring that this data is not retained, thereby protecting privacy. We know that artificial intelligence is revolutionizing the world as we know it. It is therefore important to address the issue of our young people’s safety when they use various AI-powered tools, particularly chatbots. The aim of Bill C-34 is to require certain safeguards to be built into these tools from the design stage onward. We are taking proactive measures through prevention. When algorithms are used, how does the system work? How can we set guidelines to ensure that these services are safe for young people to use? These services must embed age-appropriate safeguards into the design and operation of their products. We have an obligation to act responsibly and to mitigate the risk of harmful behaviour that could be incited by these chatbots. Here is a concrete example. Unfortunately, young people may experience mental health challenges. If somebody uses a chatbot to ask about self-harm or say they are contemplating suicide, certain mechanisms should be set in motion. There would be requirements in this respect. If a young person asks a chatbot a question about these types of issues, they would automatically be referred to the appropriate resources. There would also be measures in place if somebody talks about harming others. In what context should the company that owns the chatbot refer a matter to the RCMP? There will be clearer guidelines and procedures to ensure that these tools are safer to use. The chatbots will have to be transparent. Companies will also have to submit a safety plan to the commission. Simply making an effort will not be good enough. They will have to explain how they plan to implement these safety measures. The bill also requires a faster process for removing harmful content. We know how harmful it can be for someone to have their intimate images shared without their consent. This also includes deepfakes. In the age of AI, it is possible to create images that appear very real, featuring someone’s face, but that are in fact fake images depicting situations that are sometimes intimate. The sharing of this kind of image is extremely harmful. Incidentally, we legislated on this issue by passing Bill C-16. Bill C‑34 goes one step further. It imposes a duty on the platforms to quickly suppress this kind of content. If non-consensual intimate content is posted on online platforms or social media, the companies will have a duty to ensure that it is quickly taken down. If they do not, the digital safety commission will have the authority to levy fines. We need to take action and take this issue very seriously, because it has a real impact on the victims. Lastly, Bill C‑34 will also create the new digital safety commission of Canada. This commission will bring together experts in the field and report annually to Parliament. Its report will be submitted to the minister and tabled in Parliament to ensure accountability. This commission and these experts will examine the digital safety plans prepared and published by social media platforms and chatbot services to verify whether they meet the required standards. Do they sufficiently meet the standards to allow people under the age of 16 to use them? This commission will also help ensure transparency by requiring platforms to submit their safety plans to it. The commission will also be responsible for imposing fines. I think imposing fines is important because we need to ensure a certain level of accountability. If platforms fail to meet their obligations, there need to be real consequences. In the event of non-compliance, there could be a fine of up to 3% of global revenue, so these amounts could be very significant. This is essential.”

“This bill clearly defines harmful content, like encouraging violence, sharing private pictures without permission, and bullying. It sets up an independent group of experts to study online harms and protect young people. This group will report to Parliament every year.”

“Mr. Speaker, the bill sets out very clearly defined categories of harmful content. These include incitement to violence, non-consensual sharing of intimate images, incitement to bullying, and other forms. It is important to note that an independent digital safety commission will be established. Experts will serve on this commission. They will be able to examine what constitutes harmful content and explore ways to protect young people from exposure to such content. In terms of accountability, the commission will be required to submit an annual report to the minister, which will then be submitted to Parliament.”

“We consulted across Canada and used scientific studies to write this bill. Regulating big global tech companies is a federal public safety issue. All young people in Canada deserve this protection, no matter which province they live in. We will still listen to the provinces when a committee studies this bill.”

“Mr. Speaker, consultations were conducted across the country. In developing this bill, the government drew on scientific articles and studies. Consultations were held in Quebec, the Maritime provinces, western Canada and Ontario. A considerable amount of groundwork has gone into the preparation of this legislation. There will also be work carried out in committee, where we will be able to hear other perspectives. I have heard several questions from the Bloc Québécois regarding jurisdiction. However, when it comes to these platforms, we are talking about regulating web giants and access to international digital platforms in Canada. This is a public safety matter. I believe that protecting young people on social media is just as important whether the young person lives in Charlo, on my side of Chaleur Bay, or in Bonaventure, on my colleague’s side. As the federal government, I believe we have a responsibility to act and to provide a national framework that helps ensure our young people are safe online, while, of course, listening carefully to what the provinces have to say.”

“People in our regions struggle to get good cell service. Good cell service matters so everyone can connect to social media. I want my colleague to talk more about this.”

“Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Madawaska—Restigouche gave a very eloquent speech about about Bill C-34. I want to elaborate on what he said and talk about cellular connectivity, because my colleague and I face the same challenge with regard to cellular connectivity in the regions. That is an issue that we are working on together. I would like him to talk about the importance of cellular connectivity in the regions, which will enable everyone to connect to social media.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“Online safety depends on reliable cellphone service. Most young people use cellphones, but rural areas still lack good service. I am working with my colleague on new rules, funding, and a bill to make sure underserviced regions get better cellphone networks.”

“Mr. Speaker, as my colleague mentioned, it is always a pleasure to work with her on this issue affecting our rural communities. Access to technology and online platforms depends on stable and reliable access to cellular networks. I am pleased to co-sponsor her bill on cellular connectivity to give priority to underserviced regions in future tendering processes. I would say that this is also a critical issue because it is a matter of safety for our young people. We are talking here about protecting our young people. Most of them have cellphones these days, so they need access to reliable cellular networks. We are working together to see what can be done not only in terms of investments, but also in terms of federal regulations, to support technologies that would significantly improve cellular connectivity in our regions.”