wordpress free

 Pretty similar to the old Section 13 , with a few twists, is the gist of it.  I am just summarizing, so go look at the stuff through the link.   Richard doesn't do much in the way of archiving: 1. It’s basically the same thing as the old s. 13 but explicitly doesn’t apply to social media companies... 2. The Bill provides the Commission with the ability to protect anonymity of a complainant – s. 40(8)... 3. Provides explicit power to dismiss a complaint as vexatious if there is no indication of hate speech in the material complained of... 4. Most of the remedies the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal can grant if a complaint relating to online hate is upheld remain the same (a permanent injunction and possible damages if someone is specifically targeted by the online hate). The only change is the potential penalty clause has been increased from $10,000 to $50,000... 5. The Tribunal can now order costs against a party for an abuse of process in relation to the Tribunal inquiry...

That's the hate speech provision, which I've written about it at numerous occasions  in the past.  The CPC ditched it after a years long smear campaign engineered by white supremacists, Ezra Levant, various scribblers in the press, and a few easily gulled artsy farts.  But the point is--and this should be obvious when you considered the ill-favoured crowd that pushed it--the repeal was never popular. The deed was accomplished via a private member's bill in the dead of night and pundits who had howled for repeal for years suddenly found something else to ruminate over.  And while we may argue over the philosophical underpinnings of any hate-speech law, its worth noting that the concrete misdeeds ascribed to various government agencies in enforcing S13 were fabrications. Furthermore, some of the real weaknesses in the Human Rights Commision/Tribunal system pointed out during the ongoing debate (the possibility of forum shopping among federal and provincial bodies) were...