Feds promise 'almost' all political debate will be 'untouched' by Online Harms Act

The Liberal government has tabled its long-awaited, and highly contentious, Online Harms Act.

If passed, the law – Bill C-63 – would create a new regulator that could force social media firms to remove what the government considers to be damaging content.

Platforms that do not comply could be fined millions of dollars.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau pledged to introduce new laws to regulate the internet within 100 days of the 2021 federal election.

Bill C-63 covers the non-consensual sharing of intimate images – including those created with artificial intelligence – and also content used to bully or incite violence, terrorism or hatred.

It also promises to change the Criminal Code to “better address hate crime and hate propaganda.”

The Canadian Human Rights Act would also be changed by the bill to allow both individuals and groups to file complaints against “people who post hate speech online.”

A new “Digital Safety Commission” would be given the power to order the removal of content that “sexually victimizes a child or revictimizes a survivor.”

The new rules will not, however, apply to private communications, e.g. emails and direct messages.

Justice Minister Arif Virani said last night the law would not remove “awful but lawful” content from the internet.

The Liberals also pledged to dramatically increase the punishment for advocating genocide to life imprisonment, up from today's five years in jail.

“I am the parent of two young boys,” Virani said.

“I will do whatever I can to ensure their digital world is as safe as the neighbourhood we live in. Children are vulnerable online. They need to be protected from online sexual exploitation, hate and cyberbullying.”

Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre has strongly criticized the proposals in the past. Last week he said Trudeau simply means “speech he hates” when he refers to “hate speech," and said the Tories would oppose the legislation.

The leader of the opposition said that Trudeau should “look into his own heart and ask himself why he was such a hateful racist.”

He added: “I point out the irony that someone who spent the first half of his adult life as a practising racist, who dressed up in hideous racist costumes so many times he says he can’t remember them all, should then be the arbiter on what constitutes hate.”

Trudeau dismissed Poilievre’s remarks as “ranting.”

The federal government said Bill C-63 would define “hate speech” based on decisions from the Supreme Court of Canada.

That means it will be defined as “the content of a communication that expresses detestation or vilification of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of prohibited grounds of discrimination.”

The “grounds of discrimination” are extremely wide-ranging, and include:

• Race

• National or ethnic origin

• Colour

• Religion

• Age

• Sex

• Sexual orientation

• Gender identity or expression

• Marital status

• Family status

• Genetic characteristics

• Disability

• Conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted where a record suspension has been ordered

The government added: “In order to constitute a discriminatory practice, the hate speech would need to be communicated where it is likely to foment detestation or vilification of an individual or group on any of these prohibited grounds.

“The provisions would focus on both the content of the speech and its likely consequences—as online threats too often turn into real-world harm.

“Speech would not fall within the definition of hate speech solely because it expresses dislike or disdain, or it discredits, humiliates, hurts or offends. This distinction is intended to reflect the extreme nature of hate speech captured by the amendments.”

The Department of Canadian Heritage also said that “hate speech” would be “carefully defined” to ensure that only “extreme” expression was targeted.

That would leave “almost the entirety of political and other discourse untouched,” the department claimed.