Facing pressure for dismissing the Online Harms bill before he had even seen it, Pierre Poilievre put out a statement yesterday that said that things like child sexual exploitation or “revenge porn” should be criminal matters, and that police should be involved and not a new “bureaucratic” agency. It’s a facile answer that betrays the lack of resources that law enforcement devotes to these matters, or the fact that when it comes to harassment or hate, many police bodies have a tendency not to believe victims, especially if they are women.
But then Poilievre went one step further, saying “We do not believe that the government should be banning opinions that contradict the Prime Minister’s radical ideology.” I’m not sure where exactly in the bill he sees anything about banning opinions, because he made that part up. More to the point, the provisions in the bill around hate speech quite literally follow the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Whatcott, and codifies them, which means the standard is exposing someone to “vilification or detestation” if they are a member of a group that is a prohibited grounds for discrimination. That means that it goes beyond “opinion” one doesn’t like. The minister confirmed that “awful but lawful” content will not be touched, because the standard in the bill is hate speech as defined by the Supreme Court of Canada. And it would seem to me that if the standard of “hate speech is bad” is “radical ideology” in your mind, well then, you are probably telling on yourself.
The bill quite literally codifies the #SCC standard from Whatcott of hate speech being that which exposes one to “detestation and vilification on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.”
What exactly is the “truth defence” to detestation and vilification? pic.twitter.com/4Mmz4nAwe3— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) February 28, 2024
Speaking of Poilievre making things up, he spent the afternoon loudly proclaiming that the RCMP sent him a letter saying they were investigating ArriveCan. Then he posted the letter on Twitter. The letter doesn’t say they are investigating. It literally says they are assessing all available information. That is not an investigation. That’s deciding if they want to investigate. The fact that he released the letter that doesn’t say they are investigating, and says that it proves they are investigating, feels like a big test of the cognitive dissonance he expects in his followers, which is just one more reason why our democracy is in serious trouble.
It literally says “assessing,” not “investigating.” pic.twitter.com/bMRm4DkxaI
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) February 27, 2024
Ukraine Dispatch:
As Ukrainian forces withdrew from two more villages near Avdiivka, one of which Russia has claimed the capture of, there are concerns that Russia is stepping up influence operations to scupper international support. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has landed in Saudi Arabia for meetings related to his peace plan and a push to get prisoners and deportees released from Russia. In Europe, NATO countries have been backing away from statements that French president Emmanuel Macron made about not excluding any options to avert a Russian victory in Ukraine, which were presumed to mean western troops. (Macron said this was about creating “strategic ambiguity.”)
Oops, we did it again!
Another russian Su-34 fighter-bomber was destroyed by Ukrainian warriors in the eastern direction.
And now it's 10 destroyed russian planes in 10 days! pic.twitter.com/edtDXLhskL— Defense of Ukraine (@DefenceU) February 27, 2024
⚡️Russian attacks on Sumy Oblast kill 2, injure 8.
Mortar shelling in Seredyna-Buda injured two residents. Earlier in the day, Ukraine’s National Police reported that a strike on the village of Khotin killed two police officers and wounded six.https://t.co/zr7Y5b8Bjr
— The Kyiv Independent (@KyivIndependent) February 28, 2024