Trudeau’s ‘online harms’ bill is ‘Orwellian’: John Carpay

John it took me two and a half hours to go through the bills about 100 pages long there’s so many poison pills in it for our democracy so many shocking things if I had to ask you what the worst part of it is I know you couldn’t

Answer me with one example but tell me what the most worrisome parts of this bill are to you and the Justice Center for constitutional freedoms at the top of the list or close to to the top of the list is the power it gives to the federal cabinet to pass

New laws known as regulations which have the force of law uh where they get to Define what is a social media provider and so without consulting Parliament without transparency cabinet meetings are held in secret the cabinet can secretly uh talk about plan and then declare into being new regulations that

Could Define a social media provider uh or a social media service could be uh something like uh a church or a nonprofit or a Citizens advocacy group or Independent Media like like the rebel and true north and Epoch times and so on uh you could be deemed by the federal

Cabinet to be a social media service and so we could have Federal bureaucrats uh looking at the content of the uh email newsletter that that the church sends out to its its uh members and supporters that is frightening they can decide that uh they get to uh finalize

The the definition of harm there’s there’s this wide latitude uh if this bill is passed Federal cabinet uh can turn this into an orwellian nightmare without any Democratic accountability whatsoever uh unless and until there’s an election and and a change of government uh but that that’s uh the power regulation is is frightening

Because it it takes the the legislative authority of of of Parliament and transfers it to the prime minister’s office effectively you know isn’t that incredible I went on for two and a half hours yesterday I didn’t even think of that risk I mean I sort of thought okay

Social media provider I know what that is Twitter YouTube Facebook Instagram Tik Tok but says who know and if if the bill said uh social media provider means uh Facebook Tik Tok Twitter X whatever uh okay it would still be a terrible piece of legislation for so many reasons

But at least we would have certainty on that front but they could they could decide that that the rebel news is a uh uh social media Service uh you know because you’re you’re sending out emails and posting YouTube videos yeah uh Nothing Stops a federal government from

Declaring a church a nonprofit a charity an independent media uh to be covered by this uh the other frightening thing is you’ve got let me stop you for one second hold that thought don’t lose that thought don’t lose it because I want to

Add I want to add a a a clause to what you just said there if we are deemed to be a social media company then that gives them all sorts of invasive powers to come in and root around in our material I did cover that part I just

Thought okay they want to Snoop around Elon musk’s business they want to look through his files look through and do education and advocacy I did think about that yesterday but I only thought of Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg as the target deeming us a social media service lets bureaucrats come into our office

And have access to our computers I didn’t understand the threat until you just said that I didn’t mean to interrupt you but I wanted to say what happens if we’re deemed a social media Network because I never contemplated that until you put the fear into me any

Sorry to interrupt your flow you were about to make a second point before I interrupted you I just noticed it because the the the bill says expressly that the the federal cabinet uh gets to Define what is a social media service they get to Define that it’s not defined

By the law that is passed by part Parliament if it was defined as being limited to uh you know fa Facebook and Twitter again it would be terrible legislation but we wouldn’t have to worry about that but now now we do uh are they going to go after uh Charities

And say we want to look into your electronic records and we want to Monitor and control what you’re putting into your email newsletter that you’re sending out to your donors and supporters um in conjunction with that we’re going to hire a vast new Army of bureaucrats that will have the power to

Uh shut down these regulations also empower the the federal cabinet to create penalties and to specify what kind of content is allowed or not allowed yeah um we’ve already got a situation I’ve been thinking about this this chant I’m sure you’ve heard it and many many of the viewers of the Rebel

Have heard it from The River To The Sea Palestine will be free yeah now uh in Estonia and Germany and Czech Republic the authorities have declared that to be criminal speech uh it was somebody was charged with it in the Netherlands and then ultimately acquitted by the Dutch Supreme Court

Saying it was not criminal speech we had a man in in Calgary uh charged with saying that uh charges were stayed but do we really want the government parsing political slogans however offensive they might be uh because this is this is the real risk they’re increasing the penalty

For uh advocating genocide so let Advocate that the killing of of a people group uh presuma based on ethnicity or religion or otherwise um maximum penalties five years I think that’s enough of a deterrent uh it’s already dangerous considering how the government could use its power to Define advocacy

For genocide but no that’s not good enough uh that penalty for advocating for genocide Ju Just words alone you could go to prison for life yeah for that I I think that five five year five years maximum penalty is more than adequate as a deterrent and by the way

There’s this new Standalone hate speech crime that they’re proposing that doesn’t just cover that example there’s a list of prohibited characteristics that you’re not allowed to offend uh or their phrases to F hatred towards and in that list there’s the ones that we’re used to race religion sex national

Origin things like that but there’s sexual orientation and there’s two new ones gender identity and gender expression and what do those words even mean gender identity is you say well I don’t care what you say I feel like a woman I feel like a girl I

Sure I have a beard and I still have my twig and berries but I identify as a woman so I’m going into the girls change room now and I’m going to swim against the girls that’s gender identity gender expression is okay I shaved my beard I

Put on makeup and I’m pretending to be a girl if you run a foul of those two band characteristics you could be liable for a hate crime I mean listen we don’t have the details here yet but that Standalone hate crime is is life in prison it’s not just you I mean and

Think about what a controversy transgenderism trans transgenderism is in the country anyone who dares to challenge it can be charged with a hate crime am I wrong on John you’re you’re the guy who’s been looking at this through a legal lens is it true that if you criticize transgenderism and someone complains you

Could either be hit with a Criminal prosecution you could be hit with a recognizance order where you’re put under house arrest you could be prosecuted before the human rights tribunal and subject to $20,000 in compensation and $50,000 fine if you fight against transgenderism in a way that the government doesn’t like you

Could be refined or even jailed or put under house arrest did I get that right you got it right and this gets back to the duplication because the gender identity and gender expression have already been added to the criminal code of Canada so the willful promotion

Of hatred uh against a group on the basis of gender identity or gender expression is already a criminal code offense as things stand right now so potentially uh if you were a vifer Critic and maybe you didn’t choose your words wisely and you you came out with

With a a sledgehammer maybe you used an atomic bomb to kill a fly if you go over the top on criticizing this uh transgender ideology and and the activism uh you could be facing criminal charges but there there you would have the defense of Truth you would have the

Defense of discussing a topic in the public interest you would have the uh um you would have other defenses available the other duplicate of thing and this is really interesting the criminal code already empowers judges to uh uh impose a more severe penalty if the judge has

Who’s reviewed the facts and has looked into it if if the judge is sentencing somebody to a crime of uh sentencing somebody for murder or assault or vandalism or any other crime if the judge determines that that crime was motivated by hatred the judge already has the authority to impose uh

A stronger sentence now I’ll give you an example if there’s a bunch of idiot Thugs who very mindlessly put uh a bunch of graffiti on the wall on the outside wall of a synagogue but they don’t really care where they’re doing it and they’re just using any old wall they’re

Guilty of vandalism uh property destruction which is a criminal code offense however if they’re painting uh swastikas and slogans like death to the Jews on the synagogue wall they could get a more severe punish pment because that would be a hate crime so the judges already have the authority that that if

A crime property damage murder assault whatever if a crime is motivated by hate the judge can impose a more severe sentence that’s already on the books and this gets back to this Grand standing of you know oh well now we need a standalone hate crime no uh it’s one

Thing to have a stiffer penalty where there is evidence that the crime was motivated by hate but you have to actually be found guilty of doing that other crime of the underlying crime and and then you can get a higher penalty but a standalone hate crime is uh it’s just Orwellian

? | See our coverage and help us fight back!
Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms president John Carpay joins The Ezra Levant Show, where he tells Ezra Levant that the Trudeau government’s ‘online harms’ bill is an ‘Orwellian’ attack on free speech.
Visit Rebel News for more on this story ?

Rebel News: Telling the other side of the story. for more great Rebel content.

Unlike almost all of our mainstream media competitors, Rebel News doesn’t receive any government funding. We rely on our generous audience to help keep us reporting. Please consider supporting Rebel News by making a donation, purchasing a RebelNews+ subscription, shopping in our online store, or any of the other methods below:

?Support our independent journalism –
?We accept cryptocurrency! –
?Rebel News Plus – Become a Premium Content subscriber –
?BUY Rebel News gear –
?LISTEN to our FREE podcast –

Make sure to follow Rebel News on social media too!
FACEBOOK –
TWITTER –
INSTAGRAM –
RUMBLE –

Follow all of our YouTube channels here:
Rebel News Canada –
Rebel News Australia –
Rebel News USA –
Rebel News UK –
Rebel News Québec –
Ezra Levant –

An original video production by Rebel News.

#RebelNews #EzraLevant #JohnCarpay

Reference