SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Bill

Bill C-63

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 26, 2024
An Act to enact the Online Harms Act, to amend the Criminal Code, the Canadian Human Rights Act and An Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts
  • This is a bill called the Online Harms Act that was introduced in the Canadian Parliament. The purpose of the bill is to promote online safety, reduce harms caused by harmful content online, and ensure that social media services are transparent and accountable. The bill establishes the Digital Safety Commission of Canada, the Digital Safety Ombudsperson of Canada, and the Digital Safety Office of Canada to enforce the act and support users of social media services. The bill also imposes duties on social media service operators to act responsibly, protect children, make certain content inaccessible, and keep records. It also amends the Criminal Code and the Canadian Human Rights Act to address online harms.
  • H1
  • H2
  • H3
  • S1
  • S2
  • S3
  • RA
  • Yea
  • Nay
  • star_border

SteelmanSpren in Favour

  • Steelman Argument: The Online Harms Act, as outlined in Bill C-63, is necessary to promote online safety, protect children, and reduce harms caused by harmful content online. The Act establishes the Digital Safety Commission of Canada, which will administer and enforce the Act, ensure transparency and accountability from social media service operators, and contribute to the development of online safety standards. The Act also creates the position of Digital Safety Ombudsperson of Canada, who will provide support to users of social media services and advocate for the public interest in relation to online safety. The Act imposes duties on operators of social media services, including the duty to act responsibly, protect children, make certain content inaccessible, and keep records necessary for compliance. These duties are necessary to mitigate the risk of users being exposed to harmful content and to ensure that operators are accountable for their actions. The Act also amends the Criminal Code and the Canadian Human Rights Act to address hate crimes, hate propaganda, and hate speech communicated through the internet. By enacting the Online Harms Act, Canada is taking proactive measures to address the growing concerns of harmful content online and to protect its citizens, especially children, from the negative impacts of such content. The Act strikes a balance between promoting online safety and protecting freedom of expression, as it does not unreasonably or disproportionately limit users' expression on social media services. The Act also provides for transparency and accountability by requiring operators to implement measures, provide user guidelines, and establish a resource person to address users' concerns. Overall, the Online Harms Act is a necessary and comprehensive legislation that addresses the challenges posed by harmful content online, protects vulnerable individuals, and promotes a safer online environment for all Canadians.

SteelmanSpren Against

  • The Online Harms Act, as proposed in Bill C-63, raises concerns from a right-wing perspective regarding government overreach and potential infringement on freedom of expression. The Act establishes the Digital Safety Commission of Canada, which is given broad powers to administer and enforce the Act, including the ability to make orders requiring operators of social media services to make certain content inaccessible. This raises concerns about government interference in online platforms and the potential for censorship. Opponents of the Act argue that it places too much power in the hands of the government and the Commission, allowing them to determine what content is harmful and should be made inaccessible. This could lead to a subjective and biased approach to content moderation, potentially stifling conservative voices and viewpoints. Critics argue that the Act could be used as a tool to suppress dissenting opinions and limit political discourse. Furthermore, opponents argue that the Act imposes burdensome obligations on operators of social media services, including the duty to act responsibly and implement measures to mitigate the risk of harmful content. This could place a heavy regulatory burden on businesses, particularly smaller platforms, stifling innovation and competition in the online space. Opponents also raise concerns about the Act's provisions regarding hate speech and hate crimes. While it is important to address and combat hate speech and hate crimes, critics argue that the Act's definition of "hatred" is too broad and could potentially infringe on freedom of speech and expression. They argue that the Act could be used to silence conservative voices and limit political discourse by labeling certain viewpoints as "hateful" or "discriminatory." Overall, opponents of the Online Harms Act argue that it represents an overreach of government power and could have a chilling effect on freedom of expression and political discourse. They believe that the Act's provisions could be used to suppress conservative voices and viewpoints, and that it imposes burdensome regulations on businesses in the online space.
House Second Reading
  • Feb. 26, 2024, 11 a.m.
  • In Progress
  • Read
House First Reading
  • Feb. 26, 2024, 11 a.m.
  • Passed