Danielle Martin

In response to a question from Elizabeth May

“Many Canadian parents are angry, and tech companies must be held accountable when bad things happen. But we do not need to go as far as calling for the death of their leaders.”

“Madam Speaker, I think the member’s enraged state reflects how many parents in this country feel. Of course we want to see tech giants held accountable. Particularly where catastrophic outcomes occur, there have to be appropriate consequences. I do not know if we need to necessarily go as far as that, as killing the CEO, or whatever the member said, but the purpose of any regulation is—”

In response to a question from Lisa Hepfner

“We need this bill to protect children's mental health. Social media feeds kids content that makes them hate others and hate themselves. At the same time, some kids need the internet to find safe spaces and good information. We need an expert regulator to balance both needs.”

“Madam Speaker, indeed, mental health is one of the major reasons this bill is so critical at this time. We certainly saw a massive spike in mental illness and distress among young people coming out of the pandemic and since then as social media has infiltrated people’s lives. As I mentioned in my speech, many of these algorithms are feeding information to our kids that makes them hate others and, very worryingly, hate themselves. This is an area where we really need clear intervention. I will also say, as I learned at our round table, it is important to recognize that there are circumstances in which the ability to have online access to good information and safe spaces can be life-saving for kids who are not safe at home. It is important that we have a balanced approach, which is why an expert regulator would be so critical in us getting this right as a country.”

In response to a question from Amarjeet Gill

“Parents have the main duty to protect their children, but they cannot do it alone against big tech companies. We need to regulate these companies and hold them accountable. We also need to teach adults how to spot when a child is in trouble online or in real life.”

“Madam Speaker, of course parents have primary responsibility for their children. We also know that parents are no match for these tech giants whose strategies are evolving every day. It is important that we have regulation of those companies and that we hold them accountable. There needs to be ongoing public education for children and youth, parents, teachers and caregivers, as well as the people who are coaching our kids in sports and beyond in our communities, so that we all know how to recognize the signs that a kid is in trouble, whether it is in the digital world or in the real life world, as we say.”

“I want the House to pass this bill. Unregulated social media harms children's mental health and exposes them to predators and bullying. This bill holds tech companies responsible, bans social media for kids under 16 until platforms prove they are safe, and quickly takes down harmful material.”

“Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time this evening with the member for Toronto—St. Paul’s. It is a privilege to rise this evening to participate in this important debate about Bill C-34, the safe social media act. As a member of Parliament representing an urban riding where social media has had a profound impact on every aspect of city life, as the mother of a teenager who lived through the isolation of the COVID-19 pandemic just as she should have been building her in-person community, and as a family doctor who cared for people whose lives were changed both for the better and for the worse by digital tools, I support this bill and want to thank the minister for the extensive and thoughtful work that has gone into its development. The use of social media has completely transformed all our lives, and many platforms have played and will continue to play positive roles in our communities. For a person trying to connect with others affected by the same rare disease they struggle with, for a community seeking to organize in support of a charitable cause, or for a friend group trying to gather to discuss its next favourite book, social media platforms have offered ways for people to connect with one another and to build community. However, we also all know that to leave platforms unregulated is to put our kids in harm’s way. The activity on these platforms can teach young people to hate others. It can teach them to hate themselves. Platforms can offer a window for predators engaging in human trafficking and violence, and they can stunt the development of the very skill they are ostensibly designed to support: the skill of socializing with other human beings. Leaving these platforms unregulated amounts to putting our children at risk. We owe it to our communities and to our children to demand better from platforms that enable harmful activities and use algorithms that jeopardize mental health. In communities across the country, parents are concerned about the impact of social media on their children’s health and well-being. They are asking us to take action, and we have a responsibility to listen to them. At its core, the purpose of Bill C-34 is to protect Canadians in online spaces. It would ensure that social media services and AI chatbots are safe by design. The major pieces proposed in the bill include a ban on social media for people under the age of 16 until a service can prove that it is safe, a new digital safety commission that would ensure that these platforms are held accountable and are working for Canadians, and the ability to remove harmful or victimizing content quickly. While everyone came to the conversation with their own experiences and perspectives about what getting it right looks like, just as we are hearing in the House tonight, there were some very clear messages that I took home with me. First, we need to make sure that platforms are held accountable for the harms they enable. Second, we need research and evidence in order to understand whether our protections are working, and the generation of that evidence must be ongoing. Third, we need to make sure that, in protecting children, we do not take away access to the safe spaces and communities our young people depend on. I want to touch briefly on each of these. With respect to harms, it is clear that social media platforms as currently used have negative impacts on the health, mental health and well-being of our children and youth, and there is a very wide range of evidence to support this statement. We have heard some of it in the debate today already. The Media Technology Monitor research report of 2023 reported that one in five teens has experienced bullying or harassment online. StatsCan, in 2023, found that anxiety, depression and suicidal ideation increase with more frequent use of online platforms. As many parliamentarians have, I have really engaged with my community on the subject of making the online space safer for our kids. People feel very strongly about it, and they want to make their voices are heard. As part of that engagement process, over the summer, I held a round table on the proposed bill in my community of University—Rosedale, along with my colleague, the member for Taiaiako’n—Parkdale—High Park. Participants in that round table included the leadership of organizations such as Kids Help Phone, experts from SickKids Hospital, academics, parents, local community organizations, and importantly, youth. We heard from dedicated professionals who work directly with children, from experts studying the impacts of social media and AI chatbots, and from people who understand how these platforms are designed and how they are operated. The feedback was clear: Canadians support this bill, and they want to make sure it is done right. There are negative impacts on girls and women in particular from the unregulated use of deepfakes and sexual violence online. There is proof that these apps are enabling human trafficking and targeting vulnerable people. Social media apps are being used to track and target youth and kids for the purpose of committing violence and for the purpose of social exclusion. I think we have all heard these stories, and the experts at our round table spoke compellingly to these harms. The bill would establish the mechanisms for holding these services accountable. As outlined in the bill, we would have 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 and action on the most serious victimizing content, such as child sexual exploitation material and intimate content that is communicated or posted without consent. Further to that, because I know we have heard this evening that we need to have detail, we would have the ability to instruct services to regularly identify and assess certain risks, to mandate transparency in chatbot services and to require services to transparently inform the new digital safety commission of their policies for referring conversations to the RCMP and to emergency services in case of threats to seriously harm others. As a health care provider, that is one I feel particularly strongly about. There would be an obligation on the part of the services to publish a digital safety plan. If these services can prove that they are safe spaces, we can have a conversation. We can work together. One of the things we need to recognize is that these harms do not always come from what we or our kids believe to be safe and innocent spaces. The online world is constantly changing, and this is one of the reasons why having a regulator is so important. We cannot legislate for every possible future. A platform that might look like a new place to have fun, play games or share pictures can suddenly become a place where young people are exposed to harmful content, contacted by strangers or targeted by people who want to take advantage of them. During our round table, we heard concerns about platforms that may not be traditionally thought of as social media, including gaming platforms, where some of these same risks can exist. We need to look at how these platforms actually function, how they are used and what risks they create for children and youth. We cannot rely only on what a platform says it is designed to do. We need to look at what is actually happening to the people who use it when they are on these apps or these sites, and we need to be continuously keeping up with that technology, which is why passing legislation is only one part of this work. We also need to understand whether the protections we put in place are actually making a difference. This was the second take-home from our round table, that we must invest in research to monitor the impacts of these measures and the ongoing identification of the gaps. We need to study what young people are experiencing online, ongoingly, and learn from other countries. In other words, our policies must be informed by evidence. We must contribute to that growing body of evidence in this field, which is quite new to the human experience. This brings me to the last lesson I learned at our round table, which is, at its core, about not overcorrecting. I heard from Kids Help Phone that the online universe can, at times, be the only safe space for many kids and youth who have nowhere else to go. For a young person who has questions they cannot safely ask the adults in their life, for a child who is not safe in their own home, we need to be thoughtful about ensuring that we do not close the doors a child may knock on to ask for help. Our aim must be to make digital spaces safer, without depriving vulnerable young people of the connections and resources they need. Bill C-34 has emerged from the grassroots of our communities. As a government, it is our job to listen to parents, youth and experts, and to hold accountable powerful companies who have not seen it as their job to protect our kids. Bill C-34 is Canada’s response to that reality, and I am proud to support it.”

• Echo ×4

  A repeated line

  “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.”

  Said 4 times by 4 members since October 28.

  Every time it was said →

In response to a question from Gord Johns

“The Prime Minister supports public services. Ontario covers medicine for seniors, but people across Canada still struggle to afford their prescriptions. Our work on a national drug plan is not finished. No one should have to cut pills in half to save money.”

“Madam Speaker, the Prime Minister has spoken passionately about his commitment to ensuring that Canadians have access to the critical public services they need. In my home province of Ontario, luckily there are not seniors cutting pills in half, because all seniors are covered by the provincial public drug plan. However, it is true that there are people across the country who continue to struggle with the cost of their prescription medications. The work toward pharmacare is not complete, and I certainly continue to believe that no one in the country should be cutting pills in half because they cannot afford them.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this statement addressed the specific topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

In response to a question from Kelly McCauley

“We are testing automatic tax filing and benefits with a small pilot program for low-income Canadians. Over time, we can learn from it and add more benefits if it makes sense. I want to work with the member to make as many programs automatic as we realistically can.”

“Madam Speaker, I think the member opposite’s question is an important one. There are, of course, all kinds of federal benefits that over time might be appropriate to consider as part of the automatic tax filing and automatic benefits suite of services. We are beginning this responsibly as a pilot to understand what it takes to undertake this work on behalf of low-income people in Canada. We are going to be learning and progressively improving the program as we go along. I look forward to joining the member in his advocacy for making as many programs automatic as we possibly can where it is realistic and possible.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 47 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“I want the House to pass this bill. It pauses the federal fuel tax until January 2027, then cuts it in half until March. This helps care workers who drive to work and small businesses facing high shipping costs.”

“Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time today with the member for Edmonton West. I am very pleased to take part in today’s debate on this bill, which affects all Canadians, including the people of my riding, University—Rosedale, in downtown Toronto, where the issue of affordability is of great concern to us. Like all members of the House, I spent my summer listening to my constituents. At the doorsteps, on the streets, and at festivals and fairs, I heard two things. First, Canadians understand very well that we are in an economic situation that is not entirely in our control. They know full well that the rapidly changing global landscape around us is creating uncertainty for our businesses, our workers and Canadian families, and that these are factors beyond our control. However, they also understand that there are factors we can control, and they expect our government to do everything in its power where it can. In this situation, our government is focusing on what it can control. That is why we are focusing on building a stronger economy over the medium term while reducing costs and increasing our support measures for the public during this very difficult period. More specifically, our government is well aware of the pressures associated with rising gas prices. Across the country, we have recently seen gas prices skyrocket, and this is causing financial hardship for many Canadians, including those in my riding. As this House knows well, in order to help Canadians and businesses manage these pressures, our government introduced a temporary suspension of the federal fuel excise tax on gasoline, diesel and aviation fuels. We will all recall that the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance and National Revenue initially announced this important measure this spring. We suspended the full amount of tax with an initial sunset date of September 7 of this year, but our approach to this excise tax has always been flexible. Over the course of the summer, it became increasingly apparent that gas prices would remain volatile due to ongoing geopolitical pressures and supply chain disruptions, so we have acted accordingly. Earlier this month, the government further extended the temporary suspension until January 31, 2027, with a 50% reduction in the regular excise tax from February 1 through March 31, 2027, which of course is what brings us to today’s debate. Much as the initial suspension provided real, tangible and immediate relief to Canadians at the pump, that measure was part of a broader suite of measures to address rising everyday costs for Canadians and businesses in the transport, food, agriculture, housing, construction and delivery sectors. There is a reason this measure has support across the political spectrum. It is precisely because we all know that in the current climate, we must do all we responsibly can to reduce operating costs across the economy and reduce pressures on the food, agriculture, housing, construction and delivery sectors in particular. When I think about the people in my riding who need this measure the most, I think about two groups in particular. The first are the individuals who work in the care economy in downtown Toronto, in hospitals, home care and long-term care homes, often commuting long distances to get to their jobs in the downtown core or traversing the city multiple times a day to serve different clients, clients who are our family members, to give them a shower, to bring them food and to attend to their health needs. For those people, a small break at the pump is significant in their weekly budgets, and we owe it to them to do what we can. The second group are the small businesses in my riding that fear seeing the cost of their inputs rise as the price of transporting them increases. Small and medium businesses, major targets of the current round of unjustified and illegal tariffs, need this protection in order to be able to plan and invest in their own success. This relief is as important to the people of University—Rosedale as it is for everyone across the country, but we all know that alone it is not enough. That is why it is just one of several measures that we have put forth and have been debating actively in this House as part of our vibrant democracy. We put these measures forth to alleviate the pressure from the high cost of fuels on Canadian household budgets. For far too many people in Canada, groceries and essentials have been too expensive for too long. We all know that the pandemic caused a global spike in inflation, which drove up the cost of groceries and essentials for all of us. Food prices have risen faster than overall inflation, because of shocks to global supply chains due to tariffs, weather events related to climate change and, of course, geopolitical disruptions. To support those most affected by rising food prices, in January 2026, our government announced the new Canada groceries and essentials benefit to help more than 12 million Canadians afford the essentials they need. Together, those measures will enable a family of four to get nearly $2,000 this year and around $1,400 per year for the next four years. Our government is also delivering significant reforms to our tax system and other areas of public policy during this affordability crisis. In my riding, where the dream of home ownership in the core of Canada’s largest city has been a dream for too many for too long, the movement we have made on housing has been very significant. Our government has eliminated the GST for first-time homebuyers on new homes up to $1 million and reduced the GST for first-time homebuyers on new homes between $1 million and $1.5 million. It is these kinds of actions that bring home ownership back into the realm of possibility for so many young people who live in my riding. We have also made the national school food program permanent, providing school meals for up to 400,000 children each year and saving participating families up to $800 on groceries annually, which is significant for a lot of people. We have also introduced automatic federal benefits starting with the 2026 tax year. I would like to spend just a moment to say a bit about why this step is so important to me personally. During my 20 years as a practising family physician, I regularly saw patients who I knew should be accessing income supports of various kinds but were not accessing them. Application processes for federal and provincial programs are complex. At times, we know they can feel invasive and even humiliating. At other times, they are just simply confusing. For some people, the requirement to file taxes on a very low income does not make it to the top of the priority list. Those patients are now my constituents, and our commitment to automatic tax filing is a major improvement for them. The Canada Revenue Agency will be able to help eligible Canadians who do not file their taxes by preparing and filing a return on their behalf. Before this happens, of course, they will have the opportunity to review the information and make necessary changes, but this means that people who may not have the time, resources or ability to navigate the tax system on their own will have another way to access the supports that are available to them and for which they are eligible, supports they deserve. Automatic filing and benefits will ensure that up to 5.5 million low-income Canadians automatically receive the benefits they qualify for. This builds on other efforts to make it easier for Canadians to receive the benefits for which they are eligible. I am so proud to be part of a government that is beginning to break down those barriers. Our plan is moving Canada’s economy from reliance to resilience. Some of the biggest long-term payoffs of the transformation that we are undertaking will take time to be felt. To ensure that Canadians have the support they need right now, the Government of Canada is acting quickly with measures that will serve as a springboard to the future. To support Canadians through this global energy market disruption, we are delivering timely, meaningful and tangible relief for Canadians. It is my pleasure to support this bill.”

• Echo ×14

  A repeated line

  “We have also made the national school food program permanent.”

  Said 14 times by 11 members since May 7.

  Every time it was said →

In response to a question from Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault

“People in my riding are struggling to afford life. They want a steady government that helps with their immediate needs without making big, permanent changes right now.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is true that during the by‑election, I spoke with many people in my riding who are deeply affected by the affordability crisis that we are facing here in Canada right now. I would say that people are generally very happy to have a responsible government that is trying to implement measures that meet their needs without making drastic policy changes at a time of real uncertainty. For people in my riding, this means having access to stable public services and having a government that responds to immediate needs without rolling out permanent policies. I believe that people see this as a very responsible approach.”

In response to a question from Gabriel Ste-Marie

“We cannot control everything. It makes sense to use short-term measures for this crisis so we do not get stuck with long-term problems.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is true that there are many things that we cannot control. That is why it is also very responsible to take temporary measures to deal with the crisis that we are facing right now, without putting ourselves in a long‑term position that we cannot get out of.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 48 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

In response to a question from Kelly McCauley

“We need to cut taxes carefully and keep funding social programs. Programs like dental care and child benefits help Canadians and we must protect them.”

“Mr. Speaker, absolutely, we need to focus on what we can control. What we need to do is reduce taxes in ways that are responsible, and we need to also continue to invest in the critical social programs that matter to all Canadians. They certainly matter to my constituents and, I am sure, to the constituents of the members opposite. Whether they are the Canadian dental care plan, which is very important to the people in my riding who were not able to access dental services until this plan came into place, or the Canada child benefit, which benefits families with children who need it the most, these are the kinds of benefits we can control, and we need to continue to protect them for Canadians.”

• Echo ×3

  A repeated line

  “We need to focus on what we can control.”

  Said 3 times by 3 members since May 26.

  Every time it was said →

“Our government is taking action to make life more affordable for Canadians facing high costs from global conflicts and trade issues. We paused the gas tax for the summer, cut income taxes, increased grocery benefits, and lowered banking fees. I want the House to support our efforts.”

“Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kingston and the Islands. I am very pleased to rise today to call attention to our government’s efforts to make life more affordable. Naturally, Canadians are living in a complex, unpredictable world. Unfortunately, in many ways, this world is also more expensive. In response, the government is staying focused on what it can control: building a strong Canadian economy, diversifying our foreign trade partners, ensuring responsible fiscal management and, of course, supporting Canadians. I am pleased that the opposition motion underscores that the government has taken action because, yes, we have taken action to help Canadians. We are working tirelessly to make life more affordable for them. Here is one very practical example. As we all know, ship traffic in the Strait of Hormuz has practically been at a standstill for several weeks. This has caused oil prices to spike, gas prices to soar and the price of other essential goods to increase not only here in Canada, but everywhere. Was it our government that started the war in Iran? Obviously, the answer is “no”. Did we take action to lower costs for Canadians? The answer is “yes”. Global conflicts and persistent supply disruptions in the Middle East are not things the government can control. What we can do, and what we are doing, is helping Canadians who are impacted by these conflicts. Since April 20, just over a month ago, the federal excise tax on gas has been suspended, and it will remain suspended until September 7. The suspension of this tax is expected to save Canadians up to an estimated $5.75 when filling up a 50-litre tank. It provides real savings for families, who will hopefully be able to travel across Canada this summer. It also lowers costs for truckers and businesses. It is expected that this measure will provide Canadians with over $2.4 billion in relief in 2026-27. By lowering the cost of gas and diesel at the pump, the government is taking meaningful action to support Canadians through these challenging times. At a cost of a little over $2 billion, we are doing it without putting the public purse at risk. I can give yet another example. Even before the conflict in the Strait of Hormuz, the historic rise in tariffs plunged the economies, businesses and workers of several countries into uncertainty. Canada was no exception. Did Canada cause the global trade disruptions that sent the cost of essential goods skyrocketing? Of course not. Did we take action? The answer is yes. Earlier this year, to help Canadian families make ends meet, we launched the new Canada groceries and essentials benefit. This benefit is based on the GST credit, as we all know, and provides increased support to more than 12 million low- and modest-income Canadians. Next Friday, June 5, these 12 million Canadians will receive a one-time supplement payment equal to 50% of this year’s annual GST credit. This measure alone will provide more than $3 billion in assistance to individuals and families in need. That is not all. Starting this July, low- and modest-income Canadians will receive higher quarterly payments. The benefit will be increased by 25% for five years, providing over $8 billion in additional support. In total, a family of four could receive up to almost $2,000 this year and approximately $1,400 per year over the next four years. That is real and meaningful support that will help cover the cost of groceries, bills and everyday expenses. However, that is not all. We also cut taxes for 22 million Canadians by reducing the lowest marginal personal income tax rate from 15% to 14%. This year, in 2026, that means savings of $420 per person or over $800 for a two-income family. We eliminated the GST for first-time homebuyers on new homes at or under $1 million, which is a big deal in my riding of University—Rosedale, and we lowered the GST for first-time homebuyers on new homes between $1 million and $1.5 million. We made the national school food program permanent to give 400,000 children access to healthy meals and to help their parents save $800 a year in groceries. We have also taken concrete steps to make the banking system fairer and, above all, more affordable for Canadians. Since March, consumers can no longer be charged more than $10 in fees when there are non-sufficient funds in their personal account to cover a payment. Financial institutions can no longer charge more than one NSF fee in a period of two business days for the same account. Furthermore, and this is important, no NSF fees may be charged when the account shortfall is under $10. We will be starting automatic federal benefits this year that will reach up to 5.5 million low-income Canadians by the 2028 tax year. This will ensure that millions of low-income individuals across Canada can receive the assistance they are entitled to. In addition, in the spring economic update, we announced our intention to reduce the Canada pension plan base contribution rate from nearly 10% to 9.5% effective January 1 of next year. Our government is focusing on what we can control, such as building a stronger Canadian economy and helping Canadians who are struggling every day because of the cost of living. We will continue to shift from reliance to resilience, and we are doing all of this while maintaining a strong fiscal position. According to the spring economic update, the projected deficits are lower than anticipated in the 2025 budget. Is Canada responsible for the upheaval in the global economy? No. Is the government taking action to mitigate the consequences? Yes. We are building Canada strong for all, and I urge the members of the House to support our efforts.”

• Echo ×29

  A repeated line

  “We introduced the Canada groceries and essentials benefit.”

  Said 29 times by 19 members since April 23.

  Every time it was said →