Parliament failed to protect our children: Senator Miville-Dechêne
Tags
I got into politics to make a difference. During the pandemic, I discovered just how ubiquitous pornography is on the web and how porn platforms are making huge profits by streaming millions of free videos of women — unfiltered, without any meaningful verification and sometimes without their consent — and often videos that sexually exploit children.
I decided to tackle one aspect of this social issue: the children, teenagers and minors glued to their screens during the pandemic, taking in millions of images often depicting violent sexuality and women being submissive — disturbing depictions for young minds who often know nothing about sexuality.
I felt that asking porn consumers to take a few seconds to confirm on a secure site that they are of legal age was a minor compromise to help protect children. After all, there’s nothing absolute about freedom of expression for pornography consumers. Protecting the most vulnerable is also one of our responsibilities as parliamentarians.
However, over the four years I spent defending Bill S-210, I ran into plenty of roadblocks. I’ve been called an evangelist, a prude, a censor and an idealist. I’m actually a feminist and a progressive. The attacks came both from libertarians outside Parliament, who want the sacrosanct virtual world to be free of regulations, and from within Parliament. However, the bill was strengthened and improved throughout the parliamentary process in the Senate.
When my bill landed in the House of Commons, I was unpleasantly surprised to discover that the minority Liberal government had instructed its members to vote against it, without coming up with an alternative.
This was hard for me to accept because senior Liberals had told me that my message had been heard and that the government would act. So why this about-face and opposition? Although difficult to understand, I have a few theories:
- Pornography is seen by some progressives as a symbol of sexual freedom, and any attempt to regulate it is akin to right-wing moralizing.
- They did not want to upset the sex industry lobby whose livelihood depends on porn site volume.
- Age verification poses too great a risk for minorities.
- Ultimately, it is up to parents, and parents alone, to protect their kids. However, a Léger poll shows that 77% of Canadians support this bill, not to mention the fact that several Western countries have already gone in this direction.
At the time of prorogation, three parties — the Bloc Québécois, the Conservatives and the New Democrats —supported this bill at report stage before third reading. So it could have passed, even if most of the Liberals had voted against it.
The government decided otherwise by proroguing Parliament. What a waste — it means that we’ve failed, as parliamentarians, to protect our children.
Senator Julie Miville-Dechêne represents the province of Quebec and the senatorial division of Inkerman.
This article appeared in the January 16, 2025 edition of Le Journal de Montréal (in French only).
I got into politics to make a difference. During the pandemic, I discovered just how ubiquitous pornography is on the web and how porn platforms are making huge profits by streaming millions of free videos of women — unfiltered, without any meaningful verification and sometimes without their consent — and often videos that sexually exploit children.
I decided to tackle one aspect of this social issue: the children, teenagers and minors glued to their screens during the pandemic, taking in millions of images often depicting violent sexuality and women being submissive — disturbing depictions for young minds who often know nothing about sexuality.
I felt that asking porn consumers to take a few seconds to confirm on a secure site that they are of legal age was a minor compromise to help protect children. After all, there’s nothing absolute about freedom of expression for pornography consumers. Protecting the most vulnerable is also one of our responsibilities as parliamentarians.
However, over the four years I spent defending Bill S-210, I ran into plenty of roadblocks. I’ve been called an evangelist, a prude, a censor and an idealist. I’m actually a feminist and a progressive. The attacks came both from libertarians outside Parliament, who want the sacrosanct virtual world to be free of regulations, and from within Parliament. However, the bill was strengthened and improved throughout the parliamentary process in the Senate.
When my bill landed in the House of Commons, I was unpleasantly surprised to discover that the minority Liberal government had instructed its members to vote against it, without coming up with an alternative.
This was hard for me to accept because senior Liberals had told me that my message had been heard and that the government would act. So why this about-face and opposition? Although difficult to understand, I have a few theories:
- Pornography is seen by some progressives as a symbol of sexual freedom, and any attempt to regulate it is akin to right-wing moralizing.
- They did not want to upset the sex industry lobby whose livelihood depends on porn site volume.
- Age verification poses too great a risk for minorities.
- Ultimately, it is up to parents, and parents alone, to protect their kids. However, a Léger poll shows that 77% of Canadians support this bill, not to mention the fact that several Western countries have already gone in this direction.
At the time of prorogation, three parties — the Bloc Québécois, the Conservatives and the New Democrats —supported this bill at report stage before third reading. So it could have passed, even if most of the Liberals had voted against it.
The government decided otherwise by proroguing Parliament. What a waste — it means that we’ve failed, as parliamentarians, to protect our children.
Senator Julie Miville-Dechêne represents the province of Quebec and the senatorial division of Inkerman.
This article appeared in the January 16, 2025 edition of Le Journal de Montréal (in French only).