Parliamentary Budget Officer Yves Giroux suggested it was up to Canadians to decide whether they saw the government’s proposal to set up a new regulator for online harms as mere bureaucracy or a necessary enforcement measure.
Earlier this year the government introduced legislation aimed at reducing exposure to harmful content online, including child sexual predation, sharing intimate material without permission, and material promoting hatred, violence and extremism.
The bill, called the Online Harms Act, would create a Digital Safety Commission to handle enforcement, an ombudsman to assist Canadians, and a new executive branch to support both.
Canadian Heritage estimates it would take more than 300 people to staff those organizations, and last week Giroux released a report suggesting it would cost about $201 million over five years.
Justice Minister Arif Virani says the legislation is needed to force social media companies to better protect Canadians, especially minors.
But Conservative Party leader Pierre Poirievre pointed to Giroux’s cost estimate as evidence the law would only create more bureaucracy and vowed to repeal the bill.
Villani and other judicial officials say the bill respects the right to free speech under the Charter, but he has slammed it as an attempt at censorship by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government.
“You can say this is more bureaucratic, or you can say it gives this law force by having an enforcement body that makes sure that this law is respected,” Giroux said in an interview Monday.
“But the government says it will actually require 330 employees. You could say it’s bureaucracy. You could say it’s a necessary tool.”
The bill was introduced in February, but debate only began last month when the House of Representatives was on summer recess.
One expert the government consulted in drafting the bill said spending on setting up a new regulator was bound to be controversial.
“This is an unavoidable cost,” Emily Laidlaw, a Canada Research Fellow who studies cybersecurity law at the University of Calgary, said in an interview.
“We don’t question the existence of the Competition Bureau or, you know, the (Canadian Broadcasting and Communications Commission). We know they are necessary, and the same goes for platform regulation and online harms.”
The Liberal government has introduced Bill C-63, which aims to protect people, particularly children, from harmful content online, including sexual exploitation and hate speech, through the creation of a new regulatory agency called the Digital Safety Commission and amendments to the Criminal Code.
Michelle Rempel Garner, the Conservative MP who asked Giroux to provide a cost estimate, wrote in an online post last week that the cost of the new system is even more insulting given what she described as a lack of funding for police to enforce the current law.
The Conservatives say if the Liberal bill passes, they will repeal it and instead ensure existing laws are enforced and updated to take into account how Canadians live their digital lives and face realities like online harassment.
Laidlaw agrees that tougher reforms to criminal law are needed, but adds that such reforms alone are not enough.
“How do you actually regulate these giant digital companies that have such an enormous impact on our society?” she said.
“Other jurisdictions are establishing regulators because it’s the only way to address these issues, and Canada is following suit.”
The proposed bill would give the new regulator more powers to fine companies that breach the rules, including requiring them to remove child sexual abuse imagery or intimate images shared without consent within 24 hours.
Companies will also have to provide safety plans outlining the steps they are taking to reduce users’ exposure to other content, such as terrorism-related content or content that could be used to bully children.
Giroux said regulators could offset some of the costs by levying fines and fees, but he didn’t factor that into his analysis because there wasn’t enough detail about how that would work.
He added that, based on his ministry’s figures, it will likely take at least two years to get an enforcement agency up and running, but costs could be higher if a proposal to allow the Canadian Human Rights Commission to handle complaints is implemented.
“There may also be some legal costs if we file a lawsuit or need legal advice to enter what is a relatively new field,” he said.
The opposition Conservative party and civil society activists have warned that restoring the commission’s power to hear complaints about online hate speech could overwhelm the commission’s work and lead to a surge in cases that threaten to stifle free speech.
Law enforcement officials have said only the most extreme statements are likely to be investigated.