44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 17, 2022 10:00AM
Madam Speaker, I asked this question of one of my colleague's Conservative colleagues and did not get much of an answer, so I will pose it to him. There was interesting news coming out of the United Kingdom today, where the Conservative government of that country announced it was increasing the windfall tax rate on highly profitable oil and gas companies to 35%. It is doing that because it realizes the amount of money they are making is simply unfair to the British people.
Why is it that the U.K. Conservatives have the courage to do something like this but I do not hear anything from Canada's Conservatives, when we have the exact same problem affecting our two nations?
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am not going to get trapped in the ideological entrenchment of the NDP, but the fact of the matter is that the Liberal government collects billions and billions of tax dollars and promptly wastes it. Instead of collecting more taxes from companies and hard-working Canadians, I suggest we get rid of the government, put a Conservative government in place, and actually spend their money wisely.
69 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise in this chamber and bring the voices of the constituents of Chatham-Kent—Leamington to this place, and it is an honour to speak to Bill C-32, the fall economic statement implementation act.
The Conservative Party had two asks going into the fall economic statement process. One was to stop the tax increases and have no new taxes, which includes cancelling all of the planned tax hikes and the tripling of the carbon tax. The other was to stop the spending and have no new spending, and ensure that any new spending by ministers or ministries is offset by equivalent savings found elsewhere. We need to cut the wasteful spending and stop the inflationary deficits that drive up the cost of living. Of course, none of our demands were met in the fall economic statement, and for that reason, the Conservatives, me included, will not be supporting it. I know that is a shock to the members opposite.
The cost of government spending is the main driver of the increasing cost of living. As stated by a colleague in an earlier speech this week, Canadians now have to make tough decisions. Why? It is because the government did not make tough decisions.
Of course, the pandemic required extra spending. The Conservatives knew that and supported the early programs. However, $200 billion of it, almost half of the $500 billion of added debt, was not pandemic-related. Program spending by the government is now 30% above prepandemic levels. It is amazing.
Last week I was in my riding and hosted a series of coffee meetings over two days to hear from constituents. I was just talking about the rising cost of living, and that is exactly what I heard from my constituents. Over and over again, the rising costs of everything, particularly food, fuel and housing, were highlighted. Last month it was reported that there was 11.4% food inflation. This month the rising cost of food is reported as being 10.7%. That is what Canadians are facing when they make a trip to the grocery store.
While rising inflation is causing pain for Canadian families in their everyday lives, it has boosted the tax revenues of the government. One would think there would have been an opportunity in the fall economic statement to bring some fiscal responsibility to budgeting.
I am not an economist, but let me share some thoughts from some respected voices on the fall economic statement. I will begin with Douglas Porter and others from BMO Capital Markets, who stated:
Less than half of this year’s revenue windfall will make it through to an improved bottom line. Moreover, the double-whammy of slower (or no) growth and rising interest rates will limit flexibility into 2023.... [T]he boost to government finances from higher inflation is temporary. Eventually, costs do catch up to the run-up in prices, and revenues get crimped by the economic slowdown. Accordingly, after a nice run of better-than-expected fiscal outcomes, Ottawa’s finances are expected to turn more challenging next year.
Will the government look ahead and plan accordingly? Obviously from prepandemic times we know that it did not.
543 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/17/22 5:30:28 p.m.
- Watch
It being 5:30 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business as listed on today's Order Paper.
25 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
moved that Bill C-291, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and to make consequential amendments to other Acts (child sexual abuse material), be read the second time and referred to a committee.
He said: Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise today in the House of Commons to speak to my private member’s bill, Bill C-291, an act to amend the Criminal Code and to make consequential amendments to other acts.
At the outset, I would like to express my thanks to the hon. member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, who was central to the conception and drafting of this bill. The hon. member's years of experience as a Crown prosecutor have afforded him insights into how Canada’s laws and legislation in some instances are not necessarily as succinct as they should be and where changes could be made to improve them. Not all MPs have a chance to introduce and debate their private member's bill, so I was certainly happy to work with the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo to achieve this. The hon member's experience also afforded him insight into how the House and our colleagues in the upper chamber can strengthen our federal statutes. I thank the member for his work on this bill and other proposals that seek to enhance the protection of Canadians, especially children.
The Criminal Code of Canada contains many elements, including essential elements that define, prohibit, deter and penalize criminal activities. Bill C-291 does not propose amendments to definitions, prohibitions or penalties. It clearly and succinctly proposes to change the term “child pornography” to “child sexual abuse material”.
Some members in the House or Canadians watching this debate may wonder what the motive or value of Bill C-291’s proposals are. This is a question that I believe all legislative proposals should be subject to, and I will endeavour to answer this question.
Let us start with my motive in presenting this bill. I believe it is essential that the Criminal Code of Canada contain terms that accurately describe prohibited activities. I also believe that the code’s use of the term “child pornography” is a misnomer that fails to accurately describe the gravity and reality of such material. “Pornography” is a term typically used to describe material involving consenting adults, but there is no legal basis for children to consent to participating in such material. This factor of consent is central to the motivation behind this bill, and if hon. members agree that pornography describes material involving consenting adults, I hope they will also recognize that children cannot legally consent to being depicted in pornography.
What the Criminal Code currently calls “child pornography” is more severe than mere pornography because it involves children and cannot be consensual. It is exploitive and abusive, and the Criminal Code should clearly reflect these realities. So-called child pornographers are producers of child sexual abuse material. Those who distribute it are distributors of child sexual abuse material. Those who possess it are owners of child sexual abuse material. Those who view it are consumers of child sexual abuse material. These are the realities that compelled me to table this bill.
I hope all hon. members understand and support my motivation in proposing this bill. Together, we can collectively make a difference by ensuring that Canada’s Criminal Code contains clear terms for what is prohibited by the code. Words matter, especially the words and terms Parliament chooses to apply to federal statutes and especially the Criminal Code. The term “child pornography” is a misnomer, and I hope all members can recognize the necessity for our statutes to do away with this term. We cannot miss this opportunity to update and strengthen the Criminal Code so that it reflects reality. We must call child sexual abuse material exactly what it is: child sexual abuse material.
As I mentioned earlier, it is important for us to understand the motive and the value of all legislative proposals and I hope that I have provided the House a clear account of my motive in pursuing the proposals of this bill.
As for the value of the bill's proposals, I believe that changing the term “child pornography” to ”child sexual abuse material” will not only provide our statutes with a greater degree of accuracy, but will also provide a more accurate and true recognition of those victimized by such material. The terms “abuse”, “sexual abuse” and “exploitation” currently exist in the Criminal Code. I believe that the House must acknowledge that these terms afford a truer recognition of the victimization of children and potential future victimization of children caused by child sexual abuse material.
We must support those who, as children, have been victims of sexual abuse and exploitation. I believe this bill is a valuable opportunity for the House to acknowledge the true and severe nature of the crimes inflicted on victims of child sexual abuse material.
It is time that Parliament addresses the seriousness of what is occurring by providing clear terms to ensure that the words used in our laws reflect the severity of offences and the gravity of what is inflicted on victims.
I also see the value of the necessity of this bill's proposals, considering the latest crime data from Statistics Canada, which clearly states that child exploitation and abuse are on the increase here in Canada.
In a report released in August 2022, Statistics Canada reported that from 2019 to 2021, the rate of police-reported child sexual abuse material increased by a staggering 31% to a rate of 31 incidents per 100,000 of population. For a Canadian city of one million people, less than half the size of Vancouver, that translates to 310 cases per year. Those are just the cases reported to police. We all must understand that many more cases go unreported to police, but they do exist.
This increase from 2019 to 2021 follows a 47% increase in 2019. These increases have likely been contributed to by criminals using the Internet to abuse and exploit children.
The Statistics Canada report from this August states:
For many child sexual exploitation and abuse violations, the incidents that occur are committed online as cybercrimes. For instance, 61% of incidents of child pornography and 20% of sexual violations against children were recorded as cybercrimes. The pandemic has potentially exacerbated issues related to cybercrimes for these offences as children have been more likely to be staying at home and individuals are more likely to use the internet to engage with others.
It is also shocking to see that in 2021, there was a 14% increase in sexual violations against children. A Statistics Canada 2021 report on the 2020 data detailed how child sexual abuse material is a growing problem across our nation, especially in my home province of British Columbia. The 2021 report showed that among Canada's census metropolitan areas, or CMAs, Vancouver, Montreal, Winnipeg and Victoria reported the largest increases in the number of child pornography violations. Together, these four CMAs represented 75% of the increase in incidents of child pornography among CMAs from 2019 to 2020.
The same 2021 report further demonstrated how from 2019 to 2020, incidents of child sexual abuse material significantly increased across Canada. The majority of the national increase was due to more incidents in British Columbia and Quebec, but the data showed troubling increases in other provinces as well. This includes 81% more incidents in New Brunswick and 55% more incidents in Nova Scotia.
The data is truly shocking, but it is not enough for us as parliamentarians to be just shocked. These realities demand a response, especially our response as parliamentarians. By passing this bill, we can strengthen our Criminal Code. We can acknowledge the true severity and often long-lasting effects of child sexual abuse material inflicted on victims. We can also demonstrate the responsiveness that Canadians expect and deserve from us as parliamentarians.
At this juncture, the first hour of second reading debate, I will welcome input from all parties represented here in this chamber for this important debate. Child sexual abuse material is a growing problem across our nation, as I pointed out in the report from Statistics Canada, and Canadians look to us, their elected representatives, to take the steps, big and small, that are required to deal with problems like child sexual abuse and exploitation of children.
I believe this bill is a step in the right direction. It is a small but important part of the response that must be issued by Parliament, and I hope that this debate will lead us to an outcome that benefits Canadians, especially Canada's children and the communities that look to us to deliver results.
In closing, I would again like to thank the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo for his work in drafting Bill C-291 and his passion for improving our federal statutes of law.
I commit to answering members’ questions today on this bill to the best of my ability. I commit to listening to members’ input, their suggestions and the interventions of other members as we participate in debate today and in the future. I commit to the dialogue we need for moving this bill diligently and expeditiously through the debate and committee stages so that it can continue through the legislative process to receive royal assent. I feel it is so important for Canadians, especially our children.
I commit to working with all to deliver results for Canada.
1628 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my friend from North Okanagan—Shuswap for introducing Bill C-291.
I want to ask him about what kinds of consultations he has had with victims and survivors, as well as those in the policing and justice communities. Could he maybe comment on who he has consulted and how that has informed the bill presented today?
64 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, consultations have taken place, and as I mentioned, I want to thank the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo for his work, advocacy and experience in his role as a prosecutor in his riding in Kamloops.
Consultation has been done. The key piece here is we are seeing that sexual exploitation and sexual abuse of children is continuing to happen. The production of sexual abuse material is also continuing to happen, so I hope members from all parties will support us as we move this bill forward.
90 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech and his very important bill.
I imagine that many people in the House have children. I have children myself, and with the Internet these days, all kinds of things can happen. We are always wondering what is going on. It is terrible to think that intruders can get into our homes and take advantage of our children through screens. It is quite worrisome.
What we are about to do is really important. Changing the wording will have very important consequences.
However, while we are talking about the problem of child sexual abuse, does my colleague have any ideas on how we could go even further to counter this phenomenon?
118 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, there is much more that can be done to protect our children here in Canada. There is so much stress out there right now.
I do not want this bill to become a partisan bill, but part of the stress being created out there is the cost of living. There are people who are homeless. There are children in vulnerable situations because of the conditions this country is under right now. Getting our country back on track, getting people back to jobs and having the ability for families to live and thrive as families are key to being able to do more for children, as the member suggests.
110 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is rare for me to be able to intervene in the Private Members' Business hour, and I am pleased to be able to ask my hon. colleague from North Okanagan—Shuswap how he sees this bill as making a difference. I know he covered a lot of this in his speech, but how will this bill better enable Canadians and the Canadian court system to protect our children?
72 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, we spoke the other day, and I believe the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands is supportive of the bill.
The way this bill can help is it would provide a better term for the definition of child pornography within the Criminal Code of Canada. Our judicial system relies on clarity so there is no ambiguity. A big part of our duty as parliamentarians is to provide clarity in legislation and remove the ambiguity that might be there.
80 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I wonder if the member could talk a little about how this bill will help enforcement and also for making sure children are safer.
26 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, as I said, it is all about clarity in terms and clarity in the Criminal Code. We have seen how society has changed so much in recent years, and keeping our Criminal Code up to date with the terms that are used is so important.
47 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to join the second reading debate on Bill C-291, an act to amend the Criminal Code and to make consequential amendments to other acts, child sexual abuse material, introduced by the member for North Okanagan—Shuswap on June 17, 2022.
At the outset, I would like to acknowledge that I am speaking from the traditional lands of the Algonquin people.
I want to thank my colleague for introducing this bill. It has a very important objective, which is to ensure that the terminology used to refer to child pornography names what this abhorrent material actually is. It is the abuse of children.
The Government of Canada is committed to preventing and protecting children from sexual abuse and exploitation of any kind, in Canada and abroad. Canada works closely with international partners to combat online child sexual exploitation. This includes international co-operation regarding new and emerging threats, as well as sharing of best practices and lessons learned in combatting this crime.
Here at home, our government continues to fight child sexual exploitation through our national strategy for the protection of children from sexual exploitation. Four pillars underpin this important initiative: raising awareness, reducing the stigma associated with reporting, increasing Canada's ability to pursue and prosecute offenders, and working with tech leaders to find new ways to combat online sexual exploitation of children.
Under this strategy, we are working to build a safer Canada. We are protecting Canadian children by intensifying our engagement with digital industry leaders to encourage new online tools to prevent online abuse; increasing prevention activities, such as research and public engagement; and enhancing the capacity of Internet child exploitation units in provincial and municipal police forces, to name a few projects.
We are grateful to the many organizations that work tirelessly to halt the sexual exploitation of children, as well as Canadian parents, educators and civilians who remain vigilant for signs of potential abuse and work to educate others on how to recognize and report this despicable behaviour. However, there is still more work to be done. The incidences of making or distributing child sexual abuse and exploitation material increased by 26% from 2019 to 2021, contributing to a 58% increase over a five-year period from 2017 to 2021.
I welcome the opportunity that this bill provides to address a problem that has emerged in recent years, both domestically and internationally.
More specifically, there has been a shift away from the term “child pornography” to terms that are more descriptive of the harm caused by the production of such material. Some people feel that the term “child pornography” is too close to ordinary pornography, which is of course generally legal when produced by consenting adults and does not contain obscene material.
This bill, on its face, appears simple. It proposes to replace the term “child pornography” with the term “child sexual abuse material” in the Criminal Code and in four other federal statutes that use that term: An Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service; the Corrections and Conditional Release Act; the Criminal Records Act; and the National Defence Act.
It is important to acknowledge that the definition of the term “child pornography” in Canadian criminal law has been part of the Criminal Code for almost 30 years, having been enacted in 1993, and expanded in 2002 and 2005. Our existing definition is very broad and includes a wide range of material involving the depiction of abuse of a child, both real and fictional, as well as materials that advocate engaging in sexual activity with a child.
This definition has been interpreted and applied by the courts for almost 30 years, including by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2001 in R. v. Sharpe. In this case, the Supreme Court made clear that the prohibitions against child pornography, including the broad scope of the definition, seeks to prevent the exploitation of children, both actual or real and imaginary or fictional, through material that sexualizes them and fuels the demand for such material. This decision also ruled that a person includes both actual and imaginary children.
I think it is important to be clear that the intent is not to change the definition. Rather, it is to more accurately reflect the definition in the name. Courts should not change their interpretation of the law based on the change in title.
I also want to be satisfied that the proposed new term of “child sexual abuse material” accurately reflects the full scope of material that is captured by the existing definition. For example, I think it is important to ensure that the new term cannot be interpreted more narrowly than the current definition. While I do not think this is intended by the bill, I think it would be important to consider it more fully and consider whether the proposed term should be clarified.
While there is no one term that has been universally adopted, terms like “child sexual abuse material”, which is the one proposed in this bill, or “child sexual exploitation and abuse material”, and other variations, are gaining favour on the international stage. The Luxembourg Guidelines, otherwise known as the Terminology Guidelines for the Protection of Children from Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse, suggest using “child sexual exploitation material” as a more general term to encompass material that “sexualises and is exploitative to the child although it is not explicitly depicting the sexual abuse of a child.” As such, I have had discussions with my colleague about potentially expanding his bill to include the term “exploitation”, and I look forward to continuing those discussions at committee.
Lastly, I think it would be important to consider whether there are other implications of changing the term. For example, although Bill C-291 proposes consequential amendments to four other federal statutes, which are the ones I mentioned at the outset, it would not amend the federal regulations made pursuant to An Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service, also known as the Internet child pornography reporting regulations. Of course, the making of regulations falls generally to the executive branch of government and is not normally done by Parliament. When this legislation passes, the government will likely have to also update the regulations to match.
Most provinces have legislation that refers to the Criminal Code's child pornography prohibitions and definition. It is estimated that there are at least 50 such provincial and territorial statutes and regulations that refer to it. In some cases, the reference is made to the term “child pornography” as well as to section 163.1 of the Criminal Code. However, there are some instances where a reference is made only to the term “child pornography, as defined by the Criminal Code”. Should this bill pass, we will work with our provincial and territorial partners to ensure the legislation is updated accordingly.
I want to conclude by expressing my thanks to the member for North Okanagan—Shuswap and his colleague from Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo for providing us with an opportunity to review the Criminal Code's definition of “child pornography” and the way that provision is incorporated into not only federal but provincial and territorial legislation.
The government will be supporting the bill, and I look forward to working with my colleagues opposite at committee to ensure that this legislation is as strong as it can be.
1280 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, unfortunately, pedophilia is standard practice among far too many people in positions of power or even with a drive to feel powerful. In some of his works, the Marquis de Sade described the domination of children as the logical sequel to the domination of women and pleasure as a type of aspiration to despotism.
In the 20th century, Sigmund Freud showed that civilization is built on restrictions. According to Freud's theory of the Oedipus complex, fathers and mothers could not be the sexual partners of children and the love that children have for their parents would ultimately turn into desire in adulthood.
The bill before us today amends the Criminal Code to replace the term “child pornography” with “child sexual abuse material” and makes consequential amendments to other acts. The bill does not have any direct or immediate legal effect to speak of, other than changing a term. However, that change is an important one.
In Canada, the age of consent for sexual activity is 16. Young people between the ages of 12 and 16 who are in the same age group have the right to engage in sexual activity with each other, but adults are prohibited from engaging in such activity with anyone in that age group. Under the age of 12, consent is not legally possible under any circumstances.
Using children to produce pornographic material is abuse. Child pornography is most definitely child sexual abuse. We support the bill.
Unfortunately, the term “pornography” is not clear. Everyone has their own definition. There is no consensus about the degree of consent in pornography. It was not uncommon for certain libertarian authors in centuries past to explicitly promote pedophilia.
Not everyone agrees that pornography is fundamentally violent. It is not criminal in the legal sense of the term, but there are certain exceptions such as child pornography. The fact that it is impossible to ascertain, understand and conclusively assess the participants' consent makes it difficult to distinguish between material that is erotic and material that is violent and obscene.
In the case of children, the acts are clearly defined by the Criminal Code. It is obvious that to fully heal, the victim must shed the guilt associated with the events. The burden must be borne by the abuser. We must use the term “child sexual abuse” rather than “child pornography” to make the gravity of the offence clear, so the victim can fully come to terms with it.
A person charged with possession of child pornography will not be charged with sexual assault even though they are indirectly participating in it by not reporting it and by taking advantage of the situation to satisfy their own urges. Most of the time, we do not talk about the victim in cases of child pornography, except to say that the child was indeed a child.
By calling it “child sexual abuse material”, we do two things: We name the abuse that the child suffered, and we also describe the accused as a sexual abuser of children. This term is much weightier, even though it means the same thing. It puts things into perspective: There is a victim of abuse in a crime involving child pornography, and there is a person sexually abusing children.
In many types of crime, there are often grey areas, extenuating circumstances, possible questions about the victim's level of culpability, participation and consent. In the case of child abuse, it is very clear. In the case of child abuse, we have to call a spade a spade and denounce this act without any nuance. There is no possible justification.
The term “child sexual abuse” is already being used by certain victim services organizations, including the Canadian Centre for Child Protection and Canada's national tip line for reporting the online sexual exploitation of children.
In Quebec, the majority of victims of sexual assault are adults, but the number of victims under the age of 18 continues to rise. It is rising more than the number of adult victims. The victims of other sexual offences are almost exclusively minors, specifically 90%.
Sexual assault is not the only such offence. Other sexual offences include sexual interference, invitation to sexual touching, luring and the non-consensual distribution of intimate images.
The change in terminology proposed in the bill, which, once again, I welcome, would undoubtedly bolster judges' awareness because, let us face it, not all judges have all the knowledge required to deal with this type of case.
Let us not forget that in 2019, only three years ago, a judge said out loud during a trial that the victim, who was a minor at the time of the assault, had a pretty face and should therefore feel flattered to have attracted the attention of a mature man.
Furthermore, a judge in Alberta was removed after making comments deemed sexist and racist about indigenous people, abused women and victims of sexual assault.
Lastly, an acquittal was overturned because the judge, who found a man charged with sexual abuse of children not guilty, had made comments suggesting a stereotypical attitude. The judge said that, because nobody saw anything, the girl, who was between six and 12 years of age when the assaults happened, was not credible. According to the judge, the child's testimony was, and I quote, “not transparent, not reliable, not sincere and not credible”.
These examples speak volumes. They remind us of the importance of forcing judges to get training on sexual assault and the social context surrounding it. Bill C‑291 does not go that far, but a terminology change like the one proposed here is sure to be beneficial.
Masquerading as a libertarian utopia, child pornography is actually a system in which humans exploit other humans. We need to tackle it head-on.
987 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, let me start by saying that I do accept the good intentions of those who brought this bill forward. It is an important distinction in changing the terminology from “child pornography” to “child sexual abuse material”, which brings to the fore the question of the fact that there can never be consent for children.
However, given that there is absolutely no disagreement in this House, I had hoped we would move quickly through this bill today, perhaps all stages. If I had been able to ask a question earlier, I would have asked for assurances that this bill would be dealt with quickly and not become part of some larger strategy of delay by any given party later on either in committee or at third reading.
Let us not kid ourselves. This change would have, at best, only marginal impact on combatting child sexual exploitation. We know what works when it comes to combatting child sexual exploitation, and that is enforcement. That enforcement needs additional resources, especially for the specialized law enforcement units that work so hard to combat this scourge. We also need better coordination among federal, provincial and international partners, both public and those in the non-government sector, who are working to fight child sexual abuse.
Today, I want to say thanks to the police and those others who work in non-government organizations to combat sexual exploitation of children. This is, by default, unpleasant work and difficult work, but it is so important to the future of children in this country and around the world.
Today, I want to say to victims that I am not just an ally, but as an adult survivor of child sexual exploitation, I am with them and I know first-hand the lifelong impacts that can carry forward from child sexual exploitation.
I hope that once we have dispatched this bill as quickly as we can, all parties will still be there when it comes time to support improvements to services and supports for survivors. I trust the good intentions, as I said at the beginning of my brief remarks. I hope we can move quickly and I hope that when the time comes, we will all be there to provide the support that survivors need.
382 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is an honour to stand on behalf of the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo.
Standing here, for me, is a bit of a dream. As my colleague for North Okanagan—Shuswap mentioned, this is a bill that I drafted. As I stood behind him when he was speaking, I was moved because two years ago, I never would have imagined that I would be sitting behind him in the House of Commons or standing up on this point, which deals with an issue so close to my heart.
Making this a reality is key. When I stood on people's doorsteps, I would tell them that this is something I wanted to change when I got to Parliament, and I am indebted to my colleague for North Okanagan—Shuswap for using his spot in the priority to work together to get this bill passed.
Before I get any further on this point, I would like to say that, in my maiden speech, this issue came up. I implored everybody in the House to change the definition of the term “child pornography” because it is not pornography. It is not consensually made material. To be speaking to this bill here today is one of the greatest honours of my career.
I would like to read from somebody who was a mentor to me on the bench and also in the classroom, the hon. Judge Gregory Koturbash. Like most good lawyers, he was educated at the University of Saskatchewan faculty of law, and I would like to read a decision of his. He wrote:
The phrase “child pornography” dilutes the true meaning of what these images and videos represent to some degree. The term “pornography” reinforces the perception that what is occurring is consensual and a mutual experience between the viewer and the actor. These are not actors. It is not consensual. These are images and videos of child sexual abuse.
Judge Koturbash continued:
The problem is so pervasive that police are required to triage and pursue only those with extensive collections or those involved in dissemination. One judge describes it as a virtual firehose spewing depraved and disturbing images across the internet. In addition to the ever-increasing supply, changes in technology make fighting its growth increasingly challenging.
I am standing before members today as a legislator, but I am not the Minister of Justice and I am not the Prime Minister. I do not want to put words in the mouth of my colleague from the NDP who spoke before me, but I understood him to say that this is a change in the wording and not necessarily a change in what is happening in combatting what is occurring.
Let us not make any mistake. What is occurring in this sort of material is the repeated victimization of children. I say “repeated” because the act itself happens, and the act is recorded. Every time that media is disseminated, viewed or passed on to somebody else, that child is revictimized, and we cannot lose sight of that. The children do not ask to be abused. However, not only are they abused, but that abuse is also perpetuated. It is my view that sentencing must get in line with the pernicious and insidious nature of this offence.
As my colleague from the NDP just alluded to, I also thank the police officers. Most people do not know what police go through. If there is a large downloaded data extraction for the police, often a police officer will have to go through nearly all of those images to ensure there is not a victim that was offended against by the person in possession of them.
We will have police officers at a constable level who go through, literally, 3,000 media files. They could be out on the streets. They could be investigating robberies. They could be investigating break and enters, but no, they are looking at media that will probably harm them psychologically maybe for the rest of their lives, maybe for a few months.
As a former prosecutor, I remember that some of the most scarring things were reading about what was in these files. I did not generally have to look at them. Those times as a prosecutor that I had to deal with these things even in the written word, I can say I viewed it as traumatizing, disgusting, vile material.
Make no mistake. I am not in a position to legislate unfettered on this point, but I will say this. If I ever am in the position where I can legislate with respect to sexual offences unfettered, I have a message. Those who carry out these offences should be worried. In a world where children do not even know that they may be being victimized, I will advocate for real penalties. In a country where people repeatedly trade images of children being abused, I will not take my foot off the gas pedal, nor will my Conservative colleagues do so, until anyone who trades in these images sees the inside of a jail cell.
Why? They are perpetuating the victimization of children again and again and again. We will not stop until that is exposed. I will look under every single rock I have to legislatively to put an end to this. I can speak for my own Conservative colleagues that we will do the same and I hope that every single person in the House does the same and is prepared to commit to the same.
Some people may disagree ideologically, but house arrest, where a person can enjoy the comforts of their life, is not an appropriate sentence legislatively for people who produce these materials, who access these materials and who distribute these materials. I call for us to end conditional sentence orders for possession, distribution and production of child sexual abuse material.
One of our greatest failings as a society is to allow our children to be victimized in this way.
This is not a partisan issue, but I can say this much. When I would attend conferences with people in British Columbia, there would be people in the same room, police officers, who, again, investigated this work, oftentimes to the detriment of their mental health, as well as prosecutors, subject matter experts and people who worked for non-profits. I will never forget when someone in the room said, “I am not going to use the term 'child pornography' anymore. Let us call it what it is: 'child sexual abuse material'.” That person stopped saying what they were saying because it is not pornography.
I encourage the House to not stop here. Let us deal with Internet luring. Let us deal with sexual interference. Let us deal with all of these cases. It is time for sentences to get stronger, just like I proposed in Bill C-299.
I know that my colleague from North Okanagan—Shuswap is passionate about this. I can speak for my colleagues on this side of the House. We are prepared to do whatever it takes.
Again, I thank my colleague for using his position in the order of precedence to bring this bill forward. I hope that it is the first of many to come in which we take seriously the protection of children.
1234 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member from the NDP who spoke on this bill hoped it would move through the process quickly. Seeing the debate collapse here tonight, I think, is an indication that everyone wants this bill to move quickly through the process.
I thank all the members who spoke. I thank the member for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo for drafting the bill, and I am glad we were able to work together as neighbouring ridings, as neighbouring seat mates in the House. It is an honour to work with him.
It is an honour to represent the people of not just our communities of North Okanagan—Shuswap and Kamloops—Thompson—Caribooo but all of the constituents of Canada. The people of Canada are relying on us as legislators to strengthen our laws and to make them clearer and more concise, so that the judicial system can have the tools it needs and the direction it needs to drive our country forward.
I want to thank all the members who spoke today on this. I look forward to the bill moving quickly through the committee stage and back here hopefully for final reading, so we can move it through the other house and receive royal assent. I thank everyone for their participation.
215 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/17/22 6:21:16 p.m.
- Watch
The question is on the motion.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
46 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/17/22 6:21:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I request a standing vote.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
