Marino

Context: a renewed Canadian debate, with a global backdrop

In early March 2026, Canada’s discussion about online harms and child exploitation re-ignited after Prime Minister Mark Carney said Canada should have an open debate about a possible social media ban for children as part of upcoming online harms legislation. Carney did not commit to a ban, saying there are arguments on both sides, but argued Canada is “lagging” on legislation related to online harms and the exploitation of children. Reporting also noted that earlier online harms legislation intr

This Canadian debate is happening while multiple countries consider (or implement) age limits for social media. Commentary and policy tracking highlight the central trade-off: supporters frame age limits as child-safety protections, while critics warn that bans can be technically porous, may push teens toward less-regulated corners of the internet, and often rely on intrusive age-assurance systems that create privacy and surveillance risks.

Direction: Should Canada pursue a child social media ban, an “age of majority” threshold, or a non-ban approach within an Online Harms Bill?

Package: If Ottawa brings back online harms legislation, which child-safety obligations on platforms should be emphasized publicly?

Privacy line: How much age verification should be acceptable, given concerns that strict age-gating can drive data collection and surveillance?

This proposal is designed to “ride the news” responsibly: the vote options and the pro/cons are limited to what is described in the sources below. Use comments to add additional reporting, explain enforceability concerns, and propose safeguards—always citing sources.

Canada online harms bill: should Ottawa ban social media for kids?

London is moving into a new phase of facial recognition in policing: a pilot where officers can use handheld tools to check faces against watchlists during interactions. Supporters say this could reduce wrongful arrests, speed up identity checks, and help find people who are wanted or missing. Critics warn it may normalize face scanning in public spaces, expand stop-and-search in practice, and deepen trust issues if oversight, accuracy, and safeguards are not strong enough.

The issue is not just “technology good or bad”. It’s about what is acceptable in day-to-day life, what rules constrain use, and who is accountable when mistakes happen. This proposal is a structured way to decide what London should ask for next: a pause, a tightly limited pilot, or a broader expansion tied to clear conditions.

First, the policy direction for operator-initiated facial recognition checks. Then, the guardrails London should insist on, regardless of direction. The goal is a decision that is understandable, enforceable, and reviewable over time.

When should face scanning be allowed, and when should it be off-limits?

What level of independent oversight is needed, and with what powers?

How should accuracy, bias, and error-handling be tested and reported?

What happens to data for non-matches, and how is that audited?

Use comments to suggest concrete limits, for example “only for violent crime watchlists”, “no use for low-level checks”, “public reporting every month”, or “independent approval before scaling”.

Public proposals about privacy

Search and filter proposals

Public proposals tagged privacy

Canada online harms bill: should Ottawa ban social media for kids?

London facial recognition checks: pause, pilot with limits, or expand?