Response by the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Signed by (Minister or Parliamentary Secretary): Kevin Lamoureux

The Government would like to thank the petitioners for expressing their concerns regarding the serious issue of online safety and the rise of misinformation.

There are currently no industry standards to ensure the safety and well-being of Canadians online and the rise of misinformation online has led to manipulations and distortion of facts. In this context, the Government of Canada understands that everyone in Canada should be able to access an online environment where they can express themselves freely, without fearing for their safety or their life, going so far as to introduce the Online Harms Act, Bill C-63, which supports the objective of empowering Canadians to freely express their thoughts and opinions by creating a safer and more inclusive online space. The Government of Canada has also taken every opportunity to ensure Canadians always get reliable, independent and fact-checked news by passing Bill C-18, the Online News Act.

It is of utmost importance to uphold Canadians’ right to freedom of expression, which is essential in a healthy democracy. The Parliament of Canada operates independently from the Government of Canada; Members of Parliament of all parties, Members of the Senate, Officers of Parliament and employees of Parliament are responsible for the communication and management of their own social media accounts.

The House of Commons is responsible for managing their own social media accounts, including that of the Speaker of the House of Commons. The House of Commons generally uses its social media accounts to share timely and factual information about activities in and related to the House of Commons Chamber, committees of the House of Commons and parliamentary diplomacy; announcements, media advisories, news releases and other communications products from the House of Commons about events and activities at the House of Commons and on Parliament Hill; information about the Board of Internal Economy; information about products and services, digital and otherwise, maintained and offered by the House of Commons; information about recruitment and job opportunities at the House of Commons; information about the history, art and architecture of the House of Commons; and General interest content, including photos, audio, video and links to websites, information pertaining to activities related to the House of Commons, announcements and media advisories. The House of Commons does not publish any material considered to be of a political or partisan nature or that aims to support or oppose a political party or one of its members. Links and contact information can be found here: https://www.ourcommons.ca/en/social-media

The Senate of Canada is responsible for managing their own social media accounts. The Senate uses social media accounts as an alternative method of sharing the content posted on the Senate of Canada website. Links and contact information can be found here: https://sencanada.ca/en/sencaplus/social-media/

The Library of Parliament is responsible for managing their own social media accounts. The Library of Parliament shares relevant and non-partisan information about its products, programs and services, as well as Parliament’s processes, history and figures, on a variety of social media channels and platforms. Links and contact information can be found here: https://lop.parl.ca/sites/PublicWebsite/default/en_CA/About/Social?selected=Social

  • Beaver [she/her]OP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    It’s pretty disappointing that they don’t sound interested in the fediverse.

    Why wouldn’t they choose Mastodon over Facebook and Twitter for communicating with the public.

    • morbidcactus
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 month ago

      Totally agreed, the site formerly known as Twitter especially. At least the CBC posts articles to mastodon, so there’s that.

    • Swordgeek
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Why WOULD they?

      FB and Twitter are simpler, better-understood, and better-attended than Mastodon. They serve the goal of ‘meeting the votors where they live,’ admirably.

      Spinning up a Mastodon instance would require money and effort and risk, but most of all, leadership; both in the sense of the groundbreaking, and in the sense of leading Canadians here (rather than going where they already are).

      Honestly, the reasons to abandon the existing sites are non-issues for the majority, as evidenced by the majority still using them. The fascist robber barons who run them are an easily-ignored inconvenience.

      I’m not happy with the government’s response, but it was 100% predictable.

    • RickyWars1
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      I agree very disappointing. I find it increasingly difficult since Twitter closed its doors to those signed in as my account is long deleted.