Jessica Fancy

“I want the House to pass this bill and send it to committee for study. Children can easily see pornography online, and our laws have not kept up. This bill makes websites check users' ages to keep kids safe, which fits well with the government's other online safety bills.”

“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill S-209, the protecting young persons from exposure to pornography act. I want to begin not only as a member of Parliament in the chamber but also from the perspective of a former educator and as a mom. Before I entered politics, I spent almost two decades working with young people. I saw their potential, their curiosity and their struggles. Every day, I was reminded that the adults in a child’s life have a responsibility to create conditions where they can learn, grow and thrive safely. Today that responsibility extends far beyond the classroom. It extends into a digital world that is available to our children 24 hours a day, seven days a week. That reality should concern us all. In rising here today as a mom, like parents across the country, I have watched technology transform childhood. Many of us remember growing up in a world where childhood had limits, where certain materials were difficult to access and where adults acted as gatekeepers. Today a child can stumble across explicit and violent sexual content in a matter of seconds, and not because they were looking for it, not because parents have failed and not because teachers have failed but because the online world has been built in a way that makes that exposure possible, and where, instead, they are learning from an industry designed to generate profits. That should alarm every one of us. As an educator, one of the most important lessons I tried to teach my students was the difference between reality and performance, yet when children encounter pornography at a young age, often before they are emotionally prepared to understand what they are seeing, that distinction becomes very blurred, as their expectations are shaped, their perceptions are shaped and their ideas about relationships are shaped. In some cases, those consequences can be quite profound. Our laws have not kept pace. Our Parliament is right to examine ways to reduce that exposure, because protecting kids from these harms is a responsibility we all share, regardless of party. I want to take a moment to also thank Senator Miville-Dechêne for her work and service by keeping this issue before us here in Parliament, as well as my colleague from Saskatchewan, with whom I sat on HUMA, for her undying support in protecting children. I am happy to also be a seconder to the bill. Our government is committed to keeping Canadians, especially children, safe, including online. We agree on the objective of preventing children from accessing online pornography. Bill S-209 shares this objective very closely and aligns with Bill C-34, the safe social media act. Let me be clear. Our government fully supports the principle behind the bill. Its alignment with Bill C-34 is not an obstacle. It is precisely why we support sending Bill S-209 to committee for study, as the bill asks the right questions and demands action to prevent children from accessing online pornography. At its core, the bill would require commercial providers of online pornography to take concrete steps to restrict access by people under 18 years of age The status quo is not acceptable. Online services must take greater responsibility to protect children from being exposed to harmful content on their platforms. The remaining question is not whether action is needed but how to build a framework that works in practice, protects privacy, can be enforced effectively and remains responsive as technology changes. Bill S-209 closely aligns with the work of our government that we are advancing through our safe social media act, Bill C-34, which would place an affirmative obligation on operators of regulated services. This would ensure that safeguards are put in place to mitigate the risk before children are exposed to harmful content, rather than after the situation has occurred. If an operator has reasonable grounds to suspect that its service makes pornographic content accessible, it would have to implement age verification or age estimation measures to mitigate the risk of children’s being exposed to this content. Adequate protection is the first consideration. The digital safety and data protection commission of Canada, an independent, permanent regulator that would be created through the safe social media act together with Bill C-36, would have to be satisfied that the measures implemented by an operator will meet that requirement. This is so essential, as the objective is not merely to demonstrate that an age assurance measure has been implemented. Its objective is to mitigate the risk that children will be exposed to pornographic content. This approach recognizes that regulated services do not all operate in the same way, as their designs, users and methods of providing access to content might differ. Bill C-34 would establish the required outcome and assign responsibility for assessing the adequacy of the measure to the regulator with the necessary technical expertise to do so. Second, Bill C-34 would also set clear limits on the collection and use of personal information for age assurance so that personal information could only be used to verify or estimate a person’s age, and it would have to be protected and destroyed as soon as the process is complete. These safeguards are built directly into the safe social media act because protecting children should not create new privacy risks. The digital safety and data protection commission of Canada would provide the continuing institutional capacity needed to apply this framework. As the body responsible for administering and enforcing that legislation, the commission would also assess the measures used by regulated operators and determine whether they satisfy the applicable requirements. This commission could establish guidelines concerning the protection of children in relation to regulated services. It could also make regulations specify design features that operators must integrate into regulated services as part of their duty to protect children. While this authority also extends beyond age assurances, it demonstrates the central role that the commission would play in giving practical effect to the duty to protect our kids, much like our senator’s bill. That continuing role is particularly important because age assurance technologies and industry practices will evolve. Different services might require different measures, and new evidence might identify more effective, privacy-protective approaches. The framework would therefore permit this flexibility and innovation without leaving adequacy entirely to the discretion of its regulators. As we know, the Internet has created some extraordinary opportunities, but it has also created unprecedented access to harmful content. The question before us is whether we are willing to acknowledge that reality and then take action. As a former educator, I want young people to learn about relationships through respect, empathy and healthy human connection. As a mother, I want children protected during the years when they are most vulnerable. As a woman, I want girls growing up in a society that values their dignity, equality and humanity. Those goals should be uniting all of us. This debate is not about politics. It is about children, families, the kind of culture that we are going to build for this next generation, and whether we are willing to say that the safety and well-being of our children matter more than a convenience of an online industry. I believe they do. For those reasons, I am pleased to support Bill S-209 and these objectives of protecting young persons from exposure to pornography online.”

• Echo ×4

  A repeated line

  “Our laws have not kept pace.”

  Said 4 times by 4 members since October 28.

  Every time it was said →

In response to a question from Sherry Romanado

“We need to support Canadian Armed Forces members. That means giving them the tools, housing, base hospitals, and infrastructure they need. We have neglected our military buildings for too long. Our buying strategy helps fix this while supporting our troops and small businesses.”

“Madam Speaker, of course, our members of CAF are some of the hardest-working people that we have here in Canada, and we need to support them. How do we support them? It is by giving them the tools they need, by giving them the housing and infrastructure they need and by giving them the hospitals they need within base. We have let our infrastructure go for a little too long, and things like our DIS and our procurement strategy help streamline that process so that we are better able to help support our CAF members, as well as our SMEs.”

“I want the House to pass this bill. It requires the federal government to keep working to stop intimate partner violence, report on its progress every two years, and include survivors when making decisions.”

“Mr. Speaker, I stand before the House today to support Bill S-242, Georgina’s law. Above all else, I stand here in support of every victim and survivor of intimate partner violence across this country. At the heart of this bill is Georgina McGrath. For years, Georgina lived through physical, mental and emotional abuse. In 2014, her life was nearly taken away from her. Her experience is her own, but the fear, the control and the isolation she endured are a reality that far too many people across Canada know. Intimate partner violence does not always begin with physical violence or physical harm. Sometimes it begins quietly, through control over someone’s choices, their relationships and eventually their sense of safety. For many survivors, leaving does not mean the danger is over. This is what makes intimate partner violence so devastating. It can follow someone into their home, their workplace, their relationships and every part of their daily life. The numbers tell us how widespread this violence remains. In 2024, nearly eight in 10 people who reported intimate partner violence to police were women and girls. Most devastatingly, in 2024 as well, a woman in Canada was killed by an intimate partner every five days. Behind every one of these numbers, though, is a person whose life and story cannot be reduced to those statistics. While anyone can experience intimate partner violence, we know people face greater risks and greater barriers when they try to finally get help. Indigenous women, women with disabilities and those living in northern, rural and remote communities, including members of the 2SLGBTQ+ community, often face greater barriers when it comes to ensuring their safety and access to justice. For many, these barriers are compounded by discrimination, language differences and limited access to services that understand their experiences. Too often, their stories are questioned and not believed. Survivors have told us what they need: a safe place to turn, someone who will listen and a system that meets their needs with understanding. They need systems that understand. That is the principle behind Canada’s work through the federal gender-based violence strategy and the national action plan to end gender-based violence. However, these are strategies and plans. They are only good if changes can be made to somebody’s life. This bill would require the Minister of Women and Gender Equality to continue leading these national efforts. For example, it would mean that a child arriving at a shelter, scared and confused, can be met with someone better equipped to understand what they have been through and to help them feel safe. Between 2021 and 2024, that work trained hundreds of shelter staff across Canada, including staff in indigenous shelters and northern communities. For a survivor who has already endured so much, having someone beside them to explain their rights and guide them through the justice system can make a very overwhelming experience a little less lonely. I myself will be forever indebted to Chrysalis House in Kentville, Nova Scotia, a women’s shelter that took me and my one-year-old in for eight weeks after we had left a situation that still shakes me to my core today. Places like Chrysalis House can mean getting help with navigating the justice system. I had received a public defender who did not even know my name, failed to show up to review my statement and forgot to attend my pretrial hearing prep. I was up against a very well-known defence attorney and large resources. Having navigators, which would be part of this bill, could mean not having to face these processes alone. This is what it means to put survivors at the centre of our work and to build systems that understand what people have lived through, but also respond to what they need most. When we speak about the importance of the work, we must also remember Georgina. After everything that she had endured, she chose to speak. She chose to use her voice, hoping that her experience could help protect someone else. Together with Senator Fabian Manning, she helped bring forward Bill S-242. Last spring, I got the chance to meet Georgina and hear about her personal story and what having this bill passed would mean to her. This bill would require the federal government to continue the national work to prevent intimate partner violence and publicly report on the progress every two years. It would also require ongoing discussions with governments, indigenous partners, victims, survivors and stakeholders about whether our response is working, and that matters. Survivors should never be brought into a conversation only after decisions have been made. Their experiences must help shape the decisions themselves, because they understand in many ways where our systems have fallen short and others might not. In speaking today about the impact of sexual violence, I would also like to add that it was an absolute honour on Monday to attend the Governor General’s 2026 award event to celebrate two extraordinary Nova Scotians whose work is also making a lasting impression in this realm. Sunny Marriner, from my riding of South Shore—St. Margarets, has spent nearly 30 years advocating for survivors of sexual violence and demanding accountability from the institutions responsible for protecting them. Her leadership has helped transform how police investigations are reviewed, with independent advocate review teams now operating in 32 communities across five provinces. Sunny recently chaired the expert advisory panel for the Federal Ombudsperson for Victims of Crime’s systemic investigation into survivors’ treatment in the criminal justice system, and testified on the institutional police response to sexual violence during Nova Scotia’s Mass Casualty Commission. Also recognized during this event was Shianne Gordon, an African Nova Scotian two-spirit queer community advocate from Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, with deep roots in Africville. It is through her work in violence prevention, youth outreach and supporting survivors of sexual violence that she is also helping build a safer, more inclusive community. That is the type of navigation we are talking about that is needed, and bills like this one will help bolster programs and support those giants. Both women remind us that meaningful change takes courage, compassion and commitment. It is tough work to ensure that every person is treated with dignity. On behalf of South Shore—St. Margarets, I congratulate Sunny and Shianne on this very well-deserved recognition. Nova Scotia is very proud of them. Addressing intimate partner violence should never be a partisan issue, as we are talking about today in this House. This is an issue where we can come together and protect the women in our country. Georgina chose to use her voice. We have an opportunity to make that hope a reality now, but we must also remember the women who are no longer here to share their stories, and those who remind us why this work matters. May Georgina’s law honour their memory and help ensure that other women have a chance to live the lives that they deserved. That is why I am proud to support Bill S-242.”

“I want to congratulate two young Nova Scotians, Landon Smith and Darcy Eygun. They both ran long distances across the province this summer to raise money for autism camps and food banks.”

“Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize two remarkable young Nova Scotians who have gone the distance for causes that matter. Landon Smith, a marathon runner and volunteer firefighter from Cape Sable Island, ran 804 kilometres from The Hawk to Meat Cove in just 14 days this summer. He ran for Autism Nova Scotia and its summer camps and helped raise $65,000. Inspired by his autistic nephew, Landon turned a personal connection into meaningful support for Canadian families. Darcy Eygun, from Bedford, ran 1,000 kilometres across Nova Scotia, raising money and awareness this summer for Feed Nova Scotia. I completed a 25-kilometre leg with him. These young men remind us that leadership is defined not by our age or our title, but by a willingness to act for others. They have shown determination, compassion and community spirit in what they have accomplished. I ask all members to join me in congratulating Landon and Darcy for turning every kilometre into a powerful message of hope and generosity.”

“Our government wants to cut red tape for farmers. We just introduced a bill to do that. I want the minister to explain how this bill helps our farm communities.”

“Mr. Speaker, as chair of the Liberal rural caucus, ensuring that we make life better for our rural Canadians, particularly our farmers, is a top priority for me and my colleagues, and it should be for the Conservatives. From the very beginning, our new government has had a clear and genuine focus on reducing red tape, and yesterday Bill S-7 was tabled, which builds on those existing efforts. I wonder if the minister could help us in addressing some of the long-standing concerns from our agricultural communities.”

“High fuel prices are hurting people and businesses in my riding. They saved money when we paused the fuel tax last spring, and they want us to extend that break. What is the government doing to help Canadians pay less for gas?”

“Mr. Speaker, in the face of rising fuel prices driven by global instability, Canadians deserve real relief. I heard this from the families and businesses in my riding of South Shore—St. Margarets throughout the summer. They benefited from our government’s decision to suspend the fuel excise tax last spring, and they are hoping to see it extended. I have a question for the finance minister that I am hearing from my constituents. How are we helping Canadians pay less at the pump so they can keep more money in their pockets?”

“I want the House to pass this bill. It makes it easier for skilled trades workers to move and work across different provinces without losing their certification. This will help fill job shortages, especially in rural areas, while still respecting provincial rules and safety standards.”

“Mr. Speaker, before I start talking today about Bill C-266, I would like to first take a moment to thank all the wonderful people in South Shore—St. Margarets. It was wonderful to be back home in the riding over the summer, getting out into our communities, meeting with constituents, listening to their concerns and celebrating the incredible work happening across the south shore. It was also a real privilege to help deliver some exciting investments to our communities, including $6.2 million to the Lunenburg Opera House and over $15 million to Hawboldt Industries, which received the Davie contract. Of course, I loved getting out to meet our students in the Canada summer jobs program, where young people are gaining valuable experience, building confidence and contributing to their communities. I want to thank everyone who opened their doors, shared their stories, invited me into their workplaces and to their community events, and reminded me every day why I am here to serve. I am grateful to be back, and I am excited to bring the voices of South Shore—St. Margarets to Ottawa. I am pleased to rise today to speak on behalf of Bill C-266 and to the importance of making it easier for skilled trades workers to take their skills, experience and hard work with them wherever opportunity exists in this country. I would like to thank my colleague, the member for Richmond East—Steveston, for the bill. At its heart, the bill is about something very simple: opportunity. It is about making sure that if a Canadian has the skills and training to do a job in one province, unnecessary administrative and regulatory barriers do not prevent that person from doing the same job in another province. Bill C-266 proposes the development of a national framework on skilled trades and labour mobility. The objective is to reduce barriers, improve credential recognition, identify those equivalencies between jurisdictions and find, as I said before, opportunities to harmonize certification processes. Importantly, this is not about Ottawa telling provinces how to regulate their skilled trades. It is about governments working together. It is about provinces and territories, industries, unions, apprenticeship organizations, indigenous partners, employers and training institutions sitting at that same table and asking one very practical question: “How do we make it easier for Canadians to work?” That question matters enormously in a country as large and diverse as Canada. I come to this conversation with a very different professional background from many of the members of the House. Before becoming a member of Parliament, I was a teacher. I spent many years working in the education system, including as a high school principal. One of the things that experience taught me is that when we talk about workplace development, we cannot start at the point where someone wants to get onto the job site. We have to start much earlier. We have to start with the young people. We have to start with the students sitting in a classroom wondering what kind of future is possible for them. We have to start with the young person who is incredibly capable with their hands and who can build, fix, design, operate, and solve problems but who might not see themselves already reflected in a traditional academic pathway. We have to make sure young people understand that there are many different ways to build a successful life here in Canada. A good education system should not tell every student that success means following the exact same path. It should open doors, and that means universities, colleges, apprenticeships, skilled trades, entrepreneurship and technology. It means creating opportunities. There is a theme here for young Canadians to develop skills that are valued in their communities across this country. I represent South Shore—St. Margarets. It is a beautiful riding, but it is also a riding that knows very well the challenges that come with being rural. Young people have enormous potential. We have people who are working in construction, transportation, marine industries, forestry, fisheries, energy and manufacturing. I could go on. We have small business owners who are looking for workers, and there are communities that need housing. Infrastructure needs to be built, and we have employers who tell us that finding people with the right skills is one of the biggest challenges. At the same time, we have young people who are asking themselves whether they can build a future in the community where they grew up. That is an important question, because if a young person has to leave their community to find opportunity, sometimes they never come back. What does that mean to a rural community? It loses more than just a young worker. It loses volunteers, parents, future business owners, coaches and community leaders, and we lose people who would eventually become the next generation of teachers, tradespeople, nurses, entrepreneurs and public servants. Therefore, when we talk about building Canada’s workforce, we have to talk at the same time about building strong communities. That is why labour mobility matters, but it is also why education and training matter. I am a former member of HUMA, which completed a study on youth employment. One of the lessons that came through very clearly is that young people do not experience the labour market in the same way that many of us did growing up. There are young people who are ready to enter that workforce but cannot find the first opportunity. There are young people who have the education but not the experience that employers might be looking for. There are young people who need access to training, and, most important, there are young people in rural and remote communities who face additional barriers simply because of geography. There are many young people who have the trades, but they also need a pathway to put those to work, and that is what the bill would try to do. The last point is particularly important, because when we talk about the skilled trades, we talk about how we can train people. We encourage through apprenticeships, we invest in education, and we can help young people enter the workforce, but if unnecessary barriers prevent these workers from taking their skills where they are needed, we have not solved that problem. We have simply moved the problem, kicking the can down the road. Canada’s workforce needs to be flexible. A worker in Nova Scotia might have an opportunity in Alberta, a worker in Quebec might have an opportunity in British Columbia, and a worker in Newfoundland and Labrador might have the skills that are desperately needed in other parts of the country. All Canadians should be able to make these choices. That does not mean we eliminate the safety standards. It does not mean that we lower training requirements. It does not mean that we undermine provincial authority. It does not mean that every certification system needs to be identical. What it does mean, though, is that we should be asking whether these differences between jurisdictions are genuinely necessary or whether they come from simply creating duplication and the old red tape that we talk about a lot in the chamber. Bill C-266 takes a framework approach to this problem. It proposes mapping equivalencies across jurisdictions. It proposes identifying opportunities for harmonization. It proposes modernizing certification processes, and it proposes bringing the right people together to have these conversations. That is important because the young people who understand these barriers best are the ones who encounter them. Unions also understand the importance of safety, wages and working conditions. Provincial regulators understand their responsibilities. Indigenous communities and organizations have important perspectives on workforce development and economic participation. Governments have the responsibility to bring these voices together. I also want to emphasize what the bill would not do. It would not override provincial authority, and that matters. Provinces and territories have important responsibilities when it comes to training, certification and labour market regulation. These responsibilities must be protected. The strength of the bill is that it would recognize that reality but would also recognize something else, which is that the labour market does not stop at a provincial border.”

“The government added 25,000 summer jobs for young people this year. I want the minister to explain how this program helps our communities.”

“Mr. Speaker, in South Shore—St. Margarets, every summer we see young people across our communities stepping into jobs, gaining confidence, experiences and new skills and contributing to the local businesses and organizations that make our region so vibrant. This summer, the government has added an additional 25,000 jobs to the Canada summer jobs program, giving the opportunity for 100,000 kids to gain hands-on experience. In my riding, there are over 300. Can the Minister of Jobs and Families please share how this program is helping communities?”

“Canada's mining industry needs 250,000 new workers over the next 10 years. What is the government doing to help Canadians get these jobs?”

“Mr. Speaker, mining is already one of Canada’s largest economic drivers, contributing billions of dollars to the Canadian economy annually, but the sector is experiencing a labour shortage right now, needing 250,000 new hires over the next 10 years. Can the Minister of Jobs and Families please update the House on a national announcement that was recently held in my riding of South Shore—St. Margarets about what is being done to ensure that Canadian workers can take advantage of these generational opportunities?”

In response to a question from Andréanne Larouche

“Groups in my area work to stop abuse before it happens and support victims when they go to court.”

“Mr. Speaker, I served with my colleague across on the status of women committee briefly while I was subbing in for another member and looking at this report. She mentioned prevention. It is the focus of organizations in my riding, like Be the Peace, the Second Story Women’s Centre, Harbour House and Thriving Twogether. They offer preventive measures so that if or when some of these court cases come forward, they have the support systems they deserve.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

In response to a question from Kristina Tesser Derksen

“Building housing takes groups and local governments working together, like in my riding. I want MPs who oppose this bill to talk to these local groups and help get homes built.”

“Mr. Speaker, as a former municipal councillor, the example that I used in my speech today in regard to our municipality and district in Lunenburg and my town of Bridgewater is how people were trying to put together a larger supportive housing complex just outside of the town of Bridgewater, but they did not have the waste-water system. Therefore, they are working with the town. They are working with the municipality and collating a larger project that is going to help over 3,000 people in my riding, so these partnerships are key. I would ask members who are negating this legislation whether they have sat down with all the different key players and stakeholders. What are they doing, as their representative, to help make these plans to get these shovels in the ground?”