SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Member of Parliament

Colin Carrie

  • Member of Parliament
  • Conservative
  • Oshawa
  • Ontario
  • Voting Attendance: 68%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $112,288.05

  • Government Page
Context: House Hansard - 173 - Mar/27/23
Mr. Colin Carrie (Oshawa, CPC)
Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Calgary Rocky Ridge. It is a pleasure to speak on Bill C-11, a bill that the citizens of Oshawa have been very clear about. Oshawa wants us to kill this bill. Canadians are not ignorant or dumb but the Prime Minister and the Liberal government clearly believe that Canadians are simply not smart enough to decide for ourselves what we want to see and hear. There is a quote I have on my front door. It is from John F. Kennedy, a man that I admire. It states, “the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened.” This quote helps frame the debate about the bill. Does this bill expand the rights of every Canadian or does it diminish their rights and freedoms? Does this bill threaten Canadians' ability to communicate, make a living or be heard? Some very prominent Canadians have weighed in on this unprecedented bill and how it threatens freedom of speech. Section 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the right to free speech, which can only be effectively exercised if one has the ability to be heard. As Professor Michael Geist explains, “to be clear, the risk with these rules is not that the government will restrict the ability for Canadians to speak, but rather that the bill could impact their ability to be heard. In other words, the CRTC will not be positioned to stop Canadians from posting content, but will have the power to establish regulations that could prioritize or de-prioritize certain content, mandate warning labels, or establish other conditions with the presentation of the content (including algorithmic outcomes). The government has insisted that isn’t the goal of the bill. If so, the solution is obvious. No other country in the world seeks to regulate user content in this way and it should be removed from the bill because it does not belong in the Broadcasting Act.“ Canadian author Margaret Atwood has a gift of boiling down rhetoric to a very specific phrase. She sees this bill as “creeping totalitarianism“ and I agree with her. Conservatives believe in freedom of speech, thought and belief. Traditionally and historically, these rights and freedoms were not considered a left- or right-wing thing. They were based on a fundamental understanding that in free societies, we have fundamental rights. Let us review the fundamental question that this bill is forcing us to ask. This legislation is about one thing: trust. Do Canadians trust this government to respect our rights and freedoms if Liberals are given these new, unprecedented powers? Trust is unfortunately a challenging concept for the government. Trust is a characteristic, a quality that needs to be earned. It is a belief in reliability, truth or ability of someone or something. Trust can be predicted from past behaviour and past actions. Given this government's past, we see a record of distrust and concern. Let us examine that statement. Let us take a look at the Prime Minister and his government's history and what has been said about their approach to governing and what premises and ideologies drive their behaviour, in regard to Canadians' rights and freedoms. We could talk about Bill C-18. We could talk about the Emergencies Act, the freezing of bank accounts of Canadians who disagree with the government, or Canadians who should not be tolerated and instead punished due to their unacceptable views or we could talk about David Pugliese's exposé in the Ottawa Citizen about the Canadian military who “saw the pandemic as [a] unique opportunity to test propaganda techniques on Canadians” or Swikar Oli, who wrote in the National Post. We could talk about privacy advocates raising concerns, about the Public Health Agency tracking Canadians without their permission or Susan Delacourt writing about “nudging” techniques to manipulate Canadians' behaviour. Were these government behaviours warranted? Maybe, maybe not, but it begs to the question: what else is going on that we do not know about? What direction is the government racing toward? More freedom and choice or more government control? Our democracy is fragile and “creeping totalitarianism” can be insidious and appear to be harmless or based on noble lies or intentions. There are so many examples but let us focus on the bill in front of us and what it means and could mean. Let us review. Bill C-11 is an online censorship bill designed to control search engines and algorithms so that the government can control what Canadians see and hear. What is censorship? Censorship is defined as “the suppression of speech, public communication or other information”. As Canadians know, whoever controls the narrative controls the world. Canadians are storytelling creatures. We tell each other what is going on by talking, singing, dancing, creating and showing others about ourselves, our ideas and our feelings. Historically, we have been able to do this freely. With the advent of the Internet, Canadians embraced a new way of telling these stories. We could now send birthday videos around the world, sing a new song and post it for all to see. If people liked it, they shared it. New innovations allow Canadian creators and storytellers to earn a living online, communicate, educate, debate, explore. We could choose what we wanted to see and enjoy where it sent us, but this ability is being challenged. Bill C-11 would prevent Canadians from seeing and watching the content that they choose for themselves. The Liberals and their big government, big corporate friends would decide who is heard and who is silent. Have colleagues ever heard the term “inverted totalitarianism”? It is a term coined by Dr. Sheldon Wolin to describe a system where big corporations corrupt or subvert democracy. Elitist politicians with their ability to control and regulate are influenced by the big players, the big corporations that have the money to lobby government officials and regulators such as the CRTC to get the rules that benefit their monopolies and their bottom lines. Is this where the Liberal government has taken Canada? Such arrogance. Perhaps Canadians should not really be surprised. The New York Times reported that our Prime Minister once said that Canadians have no core identity and that he wanted us to become the first post-national state. Does that sound like someone who wants to protect our unique Canadian culture, our unique Canadian values? After all, we did elect the Prime Minister who said he admires the basic dictatorship of China so much because it gets things done. Perhaps this explains why the Liberal-NDP coalition has been so focused and intent on ramming this bill through the House. Sadly, this legislation models practices directly from the Communist Government of China. The CCP has created the great fire wall, a heavily censored Internet that directs users to approved content under the guise of protecting the public and keeping people safe. It blocks unacceptable views and connections that the CCP considers harmful to the Chinese public. The goal of its Internet is to reshape online behaviour and use it to disseminate new party theories and promote socialist agendas. It is about shaping the Communist government's values. Could that happen in Canada? One of my constituents, Rhonda, who lived and taught in China for two years in the early 2000s recounts, “When I lived in China for two years, we always had to verify the news and Internet content with friends and families back home or in free countries, as we knew we were not receiving unaltered information. It was highly regulated by the Communist government in China. I fear we are heading in this direction in Canada and I am having a hard time understanding how this is possible when it's supposed to be a free and democratic society.” I agree with Rhonda. This idea of creeping totalitarianism seems to be alive and well in Canada. If Canadians give governments these new powers, I believe it is just a matter of time before these powers are abused. Bill C-11 would give the current Liberal government and future governments the authority to pick and choose what individual Canadians are allowed to watch, essentially placing the government as a content regulator. Homegrown Canadian talent and creators would no longer succeed based on merit. Bureaucrats in Ottawa would determine content based on its level of “Canadian-ness”, but the culture of minorities would be cut out. By the way, how does one define “Canadian-ness”? This bill certainly does not do it. The CRTC would have control, big government would be lobbied by big corporations to wedge the little guys out. Corporate government would grow. Entrepreneurs, creators and artists would be squashed. Sadly, we saw Canadian content creators come to Ottawa to have their voices heard but, as expected, they were shut down. The government wholly rejected any amendments brought forward that would narrow the bill's scope and fully exempt content that Canadians post on social media. Canadians are asking the questions, asking what the government is afraid of. Is it freedom? We have had different journalists and commentators around saying that this could change the independent Youtubers' way in which they make their money. Their viewership and revenues would take a hit. That is something that I think is quite worrying. To finish, why does the government want to cause more uncertainty, loss of income and pain to make Canadians depend on the government? Why the attack on Canadian innovators in a way that no other country does, except maybe under the Communist Government of China? Why does the government not trust Canadians to be their own directors of their own destinies? We trust Canadians. A Conservative government would repeal this horrible bill.
1665 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border