Anna Roberts

In response to a question from Grant Jackson

“We need to send this bill to a committee and study it line by line. We must find ways to make tech companies protect children, because children are our future.”

“Madam Speaker, I think what we need to do is sit down as parliamentarians in committee, go over the bill line by line, and find ways that we can ensure that these tech companies become responsible and are accountable to protect our children. Without our children, this country has no future.”

In response to a question from Will Greaves

“We must hold big tech companies responsible. Vulnerable children are being groomed and harmed on social media platforms, and we have to keep them safe.”

“Madam Speaker, that is actually a really good question. Here is the situation. All kids want to have what the other children have. We know that. It is part of nature. However, one thing that we have to really understand is that we need to hold these big tech companies responsible. I am going to tell a sad story. I met with a mother whose child is autistic and was groomed through the Internet. The mother found her daughter five years later. The daughter had to go through multiple surgeries. She is now on suicide watch. That all happened through the Internet, through a social media platform. I do not want that to be anyone else’s child. It is our responsibility to make sure that those innocent, vulnerable children are kept safe.”

“We must protect children from online bullying and sexual abuse, and we must help parents do that. But we need to study this bill carefully. Rules in other countries failed to keep kids off social media. We need strong fines for tech companies that break the rules. We also must make sure this law does not take away parents' rights or put Canadians' private data at risk.”

“Madam Speaker, I am rising today to address an issue that has been on the minds of concerned parents both in King—Vaughan and across this country. In this increasingly digital and connected world, it has become more important than ever to ensure that our children are able to access the Internet in a safe manner that is beneficial to their well-being. We are at a tipping point where access to age-inappropriate content and increasingly addictive social media algorithms run the risk of corrupting the minds of our youth and damaging their mental health. Canadian parents are well-meaning and, as we all do, want the absolute best for their children. Parents are seeing the effects that unfiltered access to all corners of the Internet can have on their children in real time. They are overwhelmed and are trying their best to keep their children safe from online harms, but many feel that they are fighting a losing battle and need help. What are average parents supposed to do to keep up with the rapid development and progress made by big tech companies, making all forms of content more and more accessible online? The statistics on online harm that children are exposed to are staggering. Twenty-five per cent of Canadian youth between the ages of 12 and 17 have reported experiencing cyber-bullying, which is correlated with a number of serious mental health considerations for our youth, who are already struggling. Police reported an increase in the sexual exploitation of children online of 347% between 2014 and 2024, a figure that both stuns us and fills us with disgust. We have seen real-world examples of the impact that these figures have in the country. The heartbreaking example of Amanda Todd some years ago, who tragically died by suicide following sexual exploitation and cyber-bullying on online, is especially important to this discussion. It is critical that we give her and other young people like her justice. Our youth are living more and more digitally forward lives and, in the vast majority of cases, are more tech-conscious than their well-intentioned parents. However, having technological capability does not necessarily mean they are safe from vulnerability. One of the benefits of growing older is growing wiser and knowing when someone is trying to take advantage of us. Social media algorithms are specifically targeted to keep us engaged and take advantage of our addiction to their apps. These digital world interactions can have real-world consequences for our youth, whether that comes in the form of cyber-bullying, sexual exploitation, content that imposes unrealistic and damaging body image standards, or exposure to violence and pornography. I am a mother and a grandmother. I know first-hand how important it is to protect and provide for our children. I know what it is like to want our children to have a better life than we had and to prepare them as best as possible for life’s many challenges. Parents today are in an increasingly difficult situation, and I worry about the future of my own grandchildren. I want my grandchildren to have a social and fulfilling life, not one in which their self-worth is determined by what they see and read on social media. As parents, we can set all the guardrails and house rules on technology we want, but we can only do so much to fully protect them, especially when removing devices and removing all access are not an option. What then? What can we do to protect our kids? As legislators, we have a unique and profound responsibility to give parents all the tools that we as parliamentarians can. We also have the unique ability to provide those tools. Parents know what is best for their children and should be empowered when making decisions in their children’s best interest. We cannot expect them to do all the work in keeping their kids safe. These parents are asking for our help. As legislators, we need to comply. A survey by Angus Reid showed that 75% of Canadians, and 70% of Canadians whose children live in the home, are in support of a ban on social media use for youth under 16, but 72% of Canadians believe parents should hold the primary responsibility for regulating the social media use in accordance with their own parenting policies. Parliament should not tell parents how to raise their children, but Parliament should be involved in helping parents keep their children safe on the Internet. We need to ensure that whatever the House puts forward in terms of solutions is effective and minimally restrictive on the freedoms of Canadians. We need to ensure that whatever is put forward does not have the unintended effect of forcing children into spaces that are even more unregulated, unmonitored and dangerous. We need to hold technology companies accountable for what children have access to on their platforms, and we need to work with them to ensure that protection of children is at the forefront of their internal policies. How can we make sure that any future policy actually requires that technology companies take responsibility for our children’s safety on their apps and does not simply keep them chained to social media to generate more revenue? There need to be strong penalties for a corporation that fails to protect our children, and Parliament needs to ensure that the relevant authorities are empowered to enforce these penalties. We have seen the results of some similar legislation in other Commonwealth countries, like Australia and the United Kingdom. In Australia, for example, restrictions on Internet usage did not have a strong effect on access. As of three months after the bill was passed, 70% of children kept accessing the Internet and their accounts, and there was no reduction in reports of online harm. What can we, as legislators, do to make sure that any legislation in Canada will actually make a difference? Kids are tech-savvy, and they will find the bypasses if we let them. VPNs, or virtual private networks, are often used to bypass age- or location-based restrictions, and statistics in countries with this kind of legislation show that VPN usage has gone up considerably. How can our legislation address this? Is it within our power to curtail VPN usage if the bill is passed? How are we going to actually enforce age-based restrictions on certain content? Other comparable legislative bodies have required submission of government-issued ID. What would this mean for the privacy concerns of Canadians, who would be placing their sensitive personal information in the hands of a private corporation, many of which may not even be based in Canada? What are they supposed to do when there is a data breach and their information is released to all kinds of bad actors? One thing is certain, which is that the legislation will need a great deal of scrutiny and careful consideration, which Parliament should be equipped and prepared for. The Conservative Party wants nothing more than to keep Canadian children safe, healthy and strong. Conservatives in the House will do everything they can to ensure that any future legislation protects kids from cyber-bullying, social media addiction, explicit content, sexual exploitation and bad actors online while also empowering parents to retain their decision-making power and protecting the privacy interests and freedoms of all Canadians.”

In response to a question from Michael Coteau

“How can we make tech companies take responsibility for protecting our children?”

“Madam Speaker, I apologize. What can we do to ensure that tech companies take accountability in protecting the future of our country?”

In response to a question from Michael Coteau

“We must protect our children, or this country has no future. My colleague explained this well, and I want to know what we should do to make sure they are safe.”

“Madam Speaker, the important thing we have to understand today is that we are concerned about the future of this country. If we do not protect our children, we will not have a future for them. That is what we are looking for. We are looking to protect our children, and I think my colleague did a wonderful job of explaining that. What do you think we need to do to ensure that—”

• Little substance
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Signal 34 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

In response to a question from Connie Cody

“Seniors cannot afford a secure retirement because of government spending. The Liberals waste taxpayers' money, and hard-working Canadians have to pay that debt back.”

“Madam Speaker, last week I had to sit down with a group of seniors who said to me, “You know, Anna, when we came to this country, we were promised a future. We were promised an opportunity to be able to retire with security and dignity.” That is not happening today, and the reason it is not happening is that seniors are expected to live on a budget. We have to make the difference between spending and understanding how much that budget is going to cost us at the end of the month. Liberals have no idea. They continue to spend hard-working taxpayers’ dollars so foolishly that they do not understand the money has to be paid back. Who has to pay it back? It is the hard-working taxpayer.”

In response to a question from Gord Johns

“We should cut taxes, including on diesel and for single seniors. We cannot afford to lower taxes because the government is spending too much money.”

“Madam Speaker, I am not sure whether the member was in the House this week, but we were discussing the opportunity to cut the diesel tax. We discussed cutting taxes abroad. We have single seniors who are paying 10 times more in taxes than a couple earning the same amount of money. We expect those taxes to go down, but as long as the Liberal government continues to blow our money, we are never going to be able to afford it.”

In response to a question from Kevin Lamoureux

“The government is not listening to Canadians who cannot afford enough food. The Liberals have not made life affordable. They waste money abroad instead of helping Canadian families.”

“Madam Speaker, I have to admit that my colleague is out of touch. He is not listening to Canadians in this country. He is not listening to Maria. He is not listening to the seniors who cannot afford to eat three meals a day. They are lucky if they can afford one meal a day. Where is the affordability that the Liberals have created? They have not. They continue to spend money foolishly, sending it abroad without thinking about the children and the parents who want to feed their families and not have handouts.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 40 of 100

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

  See full analysis →
• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 41 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

In response to a question from Mario Simard

“I want the House to pass this motion saying Canada is in an affordability crisis. High prices for rent, groceries, and mortgages are hurting seniors and families. The government spends too much money on consultants and foreign aid. It needs to cut spending and help Canadians first.”

“Madam Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in this House on behalf of the residents of King—Vaughan. Today, we are discussing something Canadians already understand because they are living it every day. Canada is in an affordability crisis. I hear it constantly in my community: Seniors worry about how long their savings will last; families are spending more on groceries and housing; and young people wonder whether owning a home will ever be possible. A senior in my riding of King—Vaughan recently shared her story with me. Maria could no longer afford her home, so she had to move. She now rents a basement apartment from another senior who relies on the rental income to help pay her mortgage and household expenses, but the homeowner is struggling too. Even with Maria paying rent, she worries she may no longer be able to afford the house. If that happens, Maria will have to move again. This is the financial reality facing two seniors in my community. One has already been forced out of her home, while the other is worried about losing hers. After working hard, paying taxes and contributing to this country their whole lives, this should not be what retirement looks like. As shadow minister for seniors, I regularly hear from Canadians living on fixed incomes who are struggling to keep up with the rising costs. We see the consequences at food banks across this country. In King—Vaughan, organizations like the King Township Food Bank and Vaughan Food Bank are doing incredible work supporting those in need. I am grateful for their volunteers, but we should be concerned that so many Canadians now depend on their services. Seniors, working families and Canadians with jobs are turning to food banks because they simply cannot make ends meet. The affordability crisis is also taking a serious toll on younger Canadians. For many, the question is no longer when they will buy their first home, but whether they will ever be able to afford one. Statistics Canada reports that the average asking rent for a two-bedroom apartment in the Toronto area was $2,650 a month in the second quarter of this year. That is more than $31,000 annually before groceries, transportation and other necessities. It is no wonder young adults are staying at home longer and parents are helping their adult children financially. A recent RBC survey found that more than half of Canadian parents with adult children between the ages of 18 and 40 provided financial support over the past year, contributing an average of more than $6,100. These parents are supporting their children while facing rising costs themselves in preparing for retirement. For existing homeowners, another challenge comes when their mortgages are up for renewal. This is something I understand from my previous career. Before entering politics, I spent many years in banking as a branch manager and mortgage specialist. I remember working with families in the 1980s, as mortgages came up for renewal and suddenly their payments became much harder to afford. Let us remember who was the prime minister in 1980. We will all remember that it was Mr. Trudeau. These were people who had jobs, made their payments and worked hard to provide for their families; then renewal time came, and they were left wondering whether they could keep the home they had worked so hard to buy. I remember the stress those conversations caused. Today, I am concerned that history is beginning to repeat itself. Canadians who took up mortgages several years ago are renewing under very different conditions. Even a few hundred dollars more each month can quickly strain a household budget. For some, that means cutting into savings or reducing spending on necessities. For others, it means questioning whether they can afford their home at all. I have seen what that does to families, and I do not want Canada to repeat that experience. This weekend, Canadians will celebrate Thanksgiving. For many families, that means driving to visit parents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, friends and relatives, but in the Toronto area, gas is now roughly 50¢ a litre more expensive than at this time last year. For families already struggling with rising costs, another tank of gas is one more expense to consider. Some may decide they simply cannot afford the trip. Canadians should not have to think twice on whether they can afford to spend Thanksgiving with their loved ones. The Prime Minister gave Canadians a clear standard by which to judge his government. He said Canadians would judge him by the prices they see at the grocery store. Let us apply that standard. Statistics Canada reported that grocery prices are 29% higher than in August 2021. Food Banks Canada recorded 2.2 million visits in March 2025, almost doubling the number in 2019. Nearly one in five food bank users was employed. By the Prime Minister’s own standard, the record is clear. After 11 years of Liberal government, Canadians are paying more for the basics while the Liberals continue spending heavily on bureaucracy, outside consultants, corporate subsidies and foreign aid. Billions of dollars continue to be committed outside of Canada. I was raised by my wonderful grandparents. They taught me to be compassionate. If someone needed help, we helped them. However, they also taught me that we have to make sure our own house is in order first. Canada is a generous country, and we should be, but there must be a sense of priority. When seniors like Maria are worried about losing their housing, young Canadians cannot afford their first home, and working families rely on food banks, the government must put Canadians first. Conservatives have reviewed federal spending and identified $150 billion in potential savings, including from bureaucracies, consultants, corporate welfare, foreign aid and other expenditures. That represents almost $10,000 per Canadian family. Families must make difficult financial decisions every single day. When household budgets get tight, they examine their spending, determine what is essential and find ways to save. The federal government should be expected to demonstrate that same discipline. Every dollar the Liberal government spends was earned by a hard-working taxpayer. It could be a construction worker, a farmer, a small business owner, a young Canadian saving for a home or a senior who worked for decades to build a retirement. That money deserves to be treated with respect. After 11 years of Liberal government, Canadians should not be working hard and making responsible decisions only to wonder whether they can afford groceries, housing or their next mortgage payment. Young people deserve a realistic path to home ownership. Families should be able to afford the basics. Seniors should be able to retire with dignity and security. The people I represent in King—Vaughan are facing the same pressures as Canadians from coast to coast. The Liberals need to start listening to Conservatives, get spending under control, put Canadians first and focus on making life more affordable here at home. Canadians have done their part. It is time for the government to do its part. That is why I am supporting this motion.”

• Echo ×8

  A repeated line

  “Canada is officially in an affordability crisis.”

  Said 8 times by 7 members since October 8.

  Every time it was said →

“Farmers in my area are hurting from high diesel fuel prices. I want the member to explain how this policy will affect their growing season.”

“Mr. Speaker, we went from a swampland to the salad bowl of Canada. We have over 125 farmers in the Holland Marsh. They farm 7,000 acres. At Eek Farms, they are commercial third-generation farmers. They are feeling the impact of the diesel prices. Can my hon. colleague please explain to the farmers of my community how this will impact their growing season?”

“This bill does not help seniors who live on fixed incomes. Many seniors in my community live in poverty and pay high taxes, especially if they are single. Most seniors disagree with the government on this.”

“Madam Speaker, my colleague spoke about seniors. I have seniors in my community who disagree with the government’s position. A lot of them are living below the poverty line. When we take single seniors and look at the amount of taxes they are paying versus a couple earning the same amount of money, it is higher. If we look at a couple earning $50,000, they are paying $600 in taxes, but if we look at an individual, they are paying $5,800. How is this going to benefit someone who cannot currently live within their current fixed income? Seventy-two per cent of seniors disagree with the government’s position.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Relevance 8 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“The government made sudden, complicated online changes to a grant program for seniors. Many senior volunteers cannot meet the new rules in time. I want the government to remove these barriers.”

“Mr. Speaker, community organizations are warning that the rush changes to the New Horizons for Seniors program are putting hundreds of projects at risk. Many volunteers are seniors who already struggle with technology. With only weeks to register for a CRA business number and navigate a complex online portal, these changes are overwhelming and many fear they will be disqualified. Will the Liberals fix these unnecessary barriers or will they have to create another program to help seniors apply for a current one?”