S-210 – the Protecting Young Persons from Exposure to Pornography Act – creates specific requirements for age verification to access sexually explicit material online.
Offence
So first up S-210 makes it so making sexually explicit material available to a minor online is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 for the first offence. Every offence after that the fine is up to $500,000.
S-210 is very clear that not knowing the person was a minor isn’t a valid defence unless you’re using an age verification method recommended by the government. You can’t be charged under S-210 if the sexually explicit material is being distributed for science, medicine, education, or the arts.
Non-Compliance Notice
Under S-210 the government is able to designate an agency of the government as being responsible for enforcing S-210.
If the agency thinks a site is in violation of S-210 they can issue a non-compliance notice. The notice needs to include the steps required for the site to be compliant. If the site doesn’t take those steps within 20 days the agency can make a request to the government to have Canadian ISPs block access to that site in Canada.
The ISP block on a site needs to be processed by the federal courts. The court will determine if the site has failed to follow any steps to become compliant with S-210, and if so will issue the order to block it. S-210 clarifies that this will be a total block, including material that isn’t sexually explicit and blocking access to adults as well as minors. Canadian ISPs won’t be allowed to provide access to the site. (Someone can correct me on this but I’m pretty sure that means a VPN won’t get around it as the ISP itself will deny access to the site)
Annual Report
Every year the Minister will need to present a report on S-210 to the House. The report will include the number of non-compliance notices sent out, the number of applications to block a site that were made, and whether or not those applications were successful.
Regulations
The government can make regulations about age-verification methods through an Order in Council. When doing so they need to consider if the method:
- Is reliable
- Maintains user privacy and protects personal information
- Collects and uses personal information solely for age verification, except to the extent required by law
- Destroys any personal information collected for age verification once the verification is done
- Generally follows best practices for age verification and privacy protection
Author’s Note
I think it’s worth noting here how big of an impact this could have, specifically the note that allows S-210 to block access to non-sexual material. This means pretty much all social media could be targeted by it. Reddit, Twitter, Facebook, anywhere that people could post sexually-explicit material could be shut down if they don’t meet the age-verification requirements.
There’s also nothing here about what the age verification requirements would be. They can be issued through an Order in Council, so they can be changed pretty much whenever the government decides to do so.
Progress
S-210 has passed through the Senate and went up for its Second Reading in the House, passing with 189 in favour and 133 against.
| Party | For | Against | Paired |
|---|---|---|---|
| Liberal | 15 | 132 | 1 |
| Conservative | 115 | 0 | 1 |
| Bloc Quebecois | 32 | 0 | 0 |
| NDP | 24 | 0 | 0 |
| Green | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Independent | 2 | 1 | 0 |
The NDP support S-210 because they’re worried about how accessible porn is to children. They say the average age of people first accessing it is 9, and they’re worried about the impact porn has on youth’s understanding of what a healthy sexual relationship looks like.
The Bloc make a similar argument, though focus more on the mental health of young girls being exposed to porn and thinking what they see is normal in a relationship.
The Liberals are against S-210 based on what they heard during consultations for other Bills they’ve worked on, like the Online Harm Bill. They argue that Canadians don’t trust companies doing enough to protect their privacy which raises issues with having a third-party collecting information for age verification. They also argue that parental controls already exist on any device that could be used to access porn, so measures like what S-210 pushes for aren’t needed and a different approach should be used.
S-210 will now be sent to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.