On the surface it seems like the Canadian Human Rights Act would be a good thing, but Westlock-St. Paul MP Brian Storseth says the act needs to be revised to ensure freedom of expression is respected.
In particular his private member’s bill, Bill C-304, seeks to remove a controversial section of the act. Section 13, which is intended to protect individuals from hate messages, has been said to infringe on the right to free speech.
“We can simply not allow the most fundamental freedom in our country to be adjudicated upon by a quasi-judicial body that isn’t open, isn’t transparent, and quite frankly doesn’t respect freedom of speech or expression in our country,” he said.
The bill was given second reading and debated in the House of Commons last Tuesday, Nov. 22. The next hour-long debate on the bill is expected to take place this spring.
While there is little doubt the bill will pass, considering the Conservatives have a majority in Parliament, some opposition parties have used the opportunity to attack the government.
“It’s unfortunate. The NDP, who I would think would be an advocate of free speech, they seem adamantly against it,” he said.
During the one-hour debate, Storseth said he felt the opposition parties failed to put forward any significant argument against the bill, but rather complained about the government invoking closure on other bills.
“I just reminded them this isn’t a government bill it’s a private member’s bill,” he said. “They’re actually trying to do to my private member’s bill what they’re upset that the government does on their stuff.”
Storseth emphasized his endorsement of this bill should not be construed as an apology for hate speech, but rather that a human rights tribunal,
“This has nothing to do with extremist messaging,” he said. “I do believe that with extremist messaging — hate speech that promotes genocide or incites violence — an individual should absolutely be punished in a free and democratic society. We have the means to do that in Canada.”
Specifically, sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code address this type of messaging through the criminal justice system, where people have the right to legal representation and a speedy trial. These rights are not guaranteed with a human rights tribunal.
“If you are likely to expose somebody to even hurtful speech in this country, once you get in front of the commission you lose all your natural rights of justice that we hold dear,” Storseth said.
The right to free speech, especially with respect to issues that aren’t politically correct to talk about, has been a crucial part of the democratic development of this country. Storseth said his favourite example of this is the women’s suffrage movement in the early 1900s when women like Nellie McClung refused to stop talking about their right to vote.
“It wasn’t a politically correct thing to be talking about,” he said. “It was through her freedom of expression and her freedom of speech she was able to push the limit of political correctness.”
The Canadian Human Rights Act can be viewed online at laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/h-6/index.html, and the proposed amendments can be read at www.brianstorseth.ca/bill-c-304.
