Latest news with #CanadianHumanRightsAct
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Who's responsible for online harms? Responsibility for troubled file floats between ministers
OTTAWA — As ministers settle into their new roles, discussions are underway about who is best suited to steer the government's efforts to legislate against online harms, cabinet minister Steven Guilbeault said on Tuesday. Questions have arisen about which minister and department would be best suited to handle the complicated issue after the Liberals' proposed Online Harms Act died in Parliament when Prime Minister Mark Carney triggered a federal election in March. 'It's a good question,' said Guilbeault, who oversees the Canadian Heritage department, told reporters on his way into the Liberals' weekly cabinet meeting. 'We're having conversations to see what would be the most appropriate department to bring this forward.' Canadian Heritage had been the first department to develop and later introduce the Liberals' initial plan to combat the harms Canadian users experience online. That proposal, which was released in 2021, was met with widespread backlash over concerns about the requirement for social media companies to remove content within 24 hours after receiving a complaint. Experts had warned the provision was overly broad and risked infringing on free expression, given that companies could remove legal content. The Liberals then struck an advisory group and got to work on figuring out a Plan B. Responsibility for the bill also shifted from Canadian Heritage to the Justice Department. In early 2024, former justice minister Arif Vriani introduced Bill C-63, which proposed to create a new digital safety regulator that would be tasked with ensuring social media giants took steps to reduce users' access to content, such as child sex abuse images and incite extremism and violence. That bill was also met with backlash over its proposal to introduce stiffer sentences for hate-related offences and reintroduce a controversial section to the Canadian Human Rights Act to allow people to bring forward complaints of hate speech, which civil liberties advocates and Parliamentarians said risked violating free speech. Virani spent months defending the need for the tougher Criminal Code measures to be included in the online safety bill, but last December announced the government was prepared to split the bill to help get it passed. In January, former prime minister Justin Trudeau announced his resignation and that Parliament would be suspended until March. Emily Laidlaw, a Canada Research Chair in cybersecurity law at the University of Calgary, who sat on the government's expert advisory group, said it was a mistake for the government to have combined different provisions into the same legislation and that by the time it announced the legislation would be split, 'it was too late.' 'What I'm hoping is, when they reintroduce it, they have very firmly the platform regulation law,' she says. Should the Liberals want to propose changes to the Criminal Code or the Canadian Human Rights Act, that should be separate, she said. Justice Minister Sean Fraser told reporters on Tuesday that the government was going to look at different measures when it comes to protecting children online, but would have more to say in the months ahead. One new factor in how the Liberals may decide to proceed is the fact that Carney named to his cabinet the country's first minister responsible for artificial intelligence and digital innovation, a position currently held by former broadcaster Evan Solomon, who was elected in late April's general election. The Liberals in their last bill listed AI-generated sexualized 'deepfakes' as one of the harms companies would have to take steps to tackle. Asked whether online harms would fall under his mandate, Solomon told reporters on Tuesday that it was 'up for debate.' 'But probably yeah.' Laidlaw said while she does not believe the government needs to start a new round of consultations, it ought to take a second look at the scope of harms it is seeking to tackle. For example, she suggested there was room to include the issue of identity fraud. 'I actually think it should be broadened to include some of the ways that AI can be used to facilitate harm, so it might not just be the typical social media on Instagram.' National Post staylor@ Hate crime laws to be split from Liberals' online harms bill after blowback PBO: Creating proposed online harms regulators estimated to cost $200M Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what's really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here. Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.
Vancouver Sun
4 days ago
- Politics
- Vancouver Sun
Who's responsible for online harms? Responsibility for troubled file floats between ministers
OTTAWA — As ministers settle into their new roles, discussions are underway about who is best suited to steer the government's efforts to legislate against online harms, cabinet minister Steven Guilbeault said on Tuesday. Questions have arisen about which minister and department would be best suited to handle the complicated issue after the Liberals' proposed Online Harms Act died in Parliament when Prime Minister Mark Carney triggered a federal election in March. 'It's a good question,' said Guilbeault, who oversees the Canadian Heritage department, told reporters on his way into the Liberals' weekly cabinet meeting. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. 'We're having conversations to see what would be the most appropriate department to bring this forward.' Canadian Heritage had been the first department to develop and later introduce the Liberals' initial plan to combat the harms Canadian users experience online. That proposal, which was released in 2021, was met with widespread backlash over concerns about the requirement for social media companies to remove content within 24 hours after receiving a complaint. Experts had warned the provision was overly broad and risked infringing on free expression, given that companies could remove legal content. The Liberals then struck an advisory group and got to work on figuring out a Plan B. Responsibility for the bill also shifted from Canadian Heritage to the Justice Department. In early 2024, former justice minister Arif Vriani introduced Bill C-63, which proposed to create a new digital safety regulator that would be tasked with ensuring social media giants took steps to reduce users' access to content, such as child sex abuse images and incite extremism and violence. That bill was also met with backlash over its proposal to introduce stiffer sentences for hate-related offences and reintroduce a controversial section to the Canadian Human Rights Act to allow people to bring forward complaints of hate speech, which civil liberties advocates and Parliamentarians said risked violating free speech. Virani spent months defending the need for the tougher Criminal Code measures to be included in the online safety bill, but last December announced the government was prepared to split the bill to help get it passed. In January, former prime minister Justin Trudeau announced his resignation and that Parliament would be suspended until March. Emily Laidlaw, a Canada Research Chair in cybersecurity law at the University of Calgary, who sat on the government's expert advisory group, said it was a mistake for the government to have combined different provisions into the same legislation and that by the time it announced the legislation would be split, 'it was too late.' 'What I'm hoping is, when they reintroduce it, they have very firmly the platform regulation law,' she says. Should the Liberals want to propose changes to the Criminal Code or the Canadian Human Rights Act, that should be separate, she said. Justice Minister Sean Fraser told reporters on Tuesday that the government was going to look at different measures when it comes to protecting children online, but would have more to say in the months ahead. One new factor in how the Liberals may decide to proceed is the fact that Carney named to his cabinet the country's first minister responsible for artificial intelligence and digital innovation, a position currently held by former broadcaster Evan Solomon, who was elected in late April's general election. The Liberals in their last bill listed AI-generated sexualized 'deepfakes' as one of the harms companies would have to take steps to tackle. Asked whether online harms would fall under his mandate, Solomon told reporters on Tuesday that it was 'up for debate.' 'But probably yeah.' Laidlaw said while she does not believe the government needs to start a new round of consultations, it ought to take a second look at the scope of harms it is seeking to tackle. For example, she suggested there was room to include the issue of identity fraud. 'I actually think it should be broadened to include some of the ways that AI can be used to facilitate harm, so it might not just be the typical social media on Instagram.' Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here .
Calgary Herald
4 days ago
- Politics
- Calgary Herald
Who's responsible for online harms? Responsibility for troubled file floats between ministers
OTTAWA — As ministers settle into their new roles, discussions are underway about who is best suited to steer the government's efforts to legislate against online harms, cabinet minister Steven Guilbeault said on Tuesday. Article content Questions have arisen about which minister and department would be best suited to handle the complicated issue after the Liberals' proposed Online Harms Act died in Parliament when Prime Minister Mark Carney triggered a federal election in March. Article content Article content Article content 'It's a good question,' said Guilbeault, who oversees the Canadian Heritage department, told reporters on his way into the Liberals' weekly cabinet meeting. Article content Article content 'We're having conversations to see what would be the most appropriate department to bring this forward.' Article content Canadian Heritage had been the first department to develop and later introduce the Liberals' initial plan to combat the harms Canadian users experience online. Article content That proposal, which was released in 2021, was met with widespread backlash over concerns about the requirement for social media companies to remove content within 24 hours after receiving a complaint. Article content Experts had warned the provision was overly broad and risked infringing on free expression, given that companies could remove legal content. Article content The Liberals then struck an advisory group and got to work on figuring out a Plan B. Article content Article content Responsibility for the bill also shifted from Canadian Heritage to the Justice Department. Article content In early 2024, former justice minister Arif Vriani introduced Bill C-63, which proposed to create a new digital safety regulator that would be tasked with ensuring social media giants took steps to reduce users' access to content, such as child sex abuse images and incite extremism and violence. Article content That bill was also met with backlash over its proposal to introduce stiffer sentences for hate-related offences and reintroduce a controversial section to the Canadian Human Rights Act to allow people to bring forward complaints of hate speech, which civil liberties advocates and Parliamentarians said risked violating free speech.
National Post
24-04-2025
- Politics
- National Post
Mia Hughes: Canada's courts must protect women's sex-based rights, like the U.K.
Article content Within a week of the U.K. Supreme Court issuing a landmark ruling confirming that women are female, the Conservative Party of Canada has taken a small, but long-overdue, step in the same direction. The newly released CPC platform announced it would repeal a federal policy that allows trans-identified men to be housed in women's prisons and committed to ensuring that 'women's spaces and services remain protected in federal institutions and policy.' Article content Article content Article content After years of official political platform silence on the erosion of women's sex-based rights in Canada, this marks the first major promise by any federal political party to confront the legal consequences of gender ideology head-on. The Canadian legal system may also soon be forced to wrestle with the matter. Article content Article content Across the Atlantic on April 16, the U.K.'s highest court delivered clarity that remains sorely lacking in Canada. Five justices ruled that under the U.K. Equality Act, the term 'woman' refers specifically to biological females, and 'sex' denotes biological sex. Article content The ruling further clarified that when it comes to women-only spaces or services, men who identify as women — even those in possession of a gender recognition certificate denoting a female gender identity — do not have a legal right to access those spaces. The judges maintained this was the only interpretation that could be consistent and coherent within the law. Article content Such consistency and coherence have been absent from Canadian law ever since gender identity was embedded in the nation's legal framework. This happened through a gradual process that began with the Northwest Territories in 2002 and culminated in the federal Parliament's passage of Bill C-16 in 2017, amending the Canadian Human Rights Act and Criminal Code to include gender identity and gender expression as prohibited grounds of discrimination. Article content Protecting gender identity alongside sex isn't just contradictory — it's logically impossible. Ontario's Human Rights Code perfectly demonstrates this doublethink. It permits sex-based segregation in spaces like bathrooms and change rooms to preserve 'human dignity,' yet the Ontario Human Rights Commission's own interpretation of the Code states that trans-identified people 'should be provided access to facilities that are consistent with their lived gender identity.' This means men who identify as women are permitted into female-only spaces, rendering those spaces no longer female-only, while all concern for the safety and dignity of women is tossed aside in the process Article content Article content It should be self-evident that sex matters in contexts where safety, dignity, and vulnerability are at stake. Males in Canada (and elsewhere) commit most sexual offences, and females comprise nearly all the victims. That fact alone ought to justify single-sex spaces. But in Canada, evidence still takes a back seat to ideology.
Yahoo
07-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
WATCH: Amy Hamm on advocating for sex-based rights as a nurse in Canada
The verdict is in. After a four-year battle with the British Columbia College of Nurses and Midwives, nurse Amy Hamm has been found guilty of 'professional misconduct.' It started when Hamm's advocacy for sex-based rights (as opposed to gender-based rights) — including her co-commissioning of a billboard that read, 'I love JK Rowling,' and her suggestion that transgender women should not be in the same formerly private spaces and leagues as biological women — led to public complaints and an investigation, which determined that doing so was discriminatory, derogatory and undermined trust in the nursing profession. As a nurse, Hamm has never once received a patient complaint. The entire case against her was based solely on her conduct outside of work. Hamm's case highlights the legal tensions that exist between professional associations, women's rights and the more recent protections in the Canadian Human Rights Act for 'gender identity or expression.' But is Amy Hamm a bad nurse for voicing her concerns? B.C. nurse committed professional misconduct with transgender commentary, hearing rules J.K. Rowling saved western civilization
