Three problematic pieces of legislation are currently going through Canada’s Parliament that should be of concern to all Canadians.
Bill C-10 is commonly referred to as the Omnibus Crime Bill. It recently passed the Green Chamber of the House of Commons with little debate, and as of Feb. 22, it is now in the Conservative stacked Senate process. This bill is a plethora of US, Republican-style, failed policies.
Bill C-11 is Canada’s version of the US SOPA/PIPA legislation concerning digital lockdowns. This type of legislation recently prompted Wikipedia to shut down its website for 24 hours, or on what was dubbed "black Wednesday." The legislation, recently tabled in the House, is flying under the Canadian public’s radar.
Bill C-30, formerly and commonly known as lawful access legislation, got a name change last week to Protecting Children From Predators Act. Unlike C-11, it is finally getting much-warranted mainstream media attention. Currently, there is a growing backlash from the public about this bill, and with good reason. It's a resounding call for the federal government to kill Bill C-30, but despite this, PM Harper announced Sunday he sent the bill to committee for revisions, a committee whereby the Conservatives will determine what revisions will be made.
In totality, the bills are very disturbing because all three undermine the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Thus, every Canadian is encouraged to spend a little time to become informed about all three very important pieces of legislation. What follows are links to sites that will give people information, mostly on C-30. Other information may be obtained via these links, as well as by a Google search based on the name of the other two bills. Become informed and speak out. Also, please share information with others. Canada’s future is in our hands, not the federal Conservatives.
The egregious C-30 legislation:
http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/292611-bill-c-30.html
Bill C-10 (A bundle of crime and justice bills):
http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&billId=5120829
Bill C-11 (An Act to Amend the Copyright Act or the Copyright Modernization Act):
http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&billId=5134851
Cutting through the rhetoric of lawful access legislation. A story of vital concern to every Canadian:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/02/16/pol-vp-terry-milewski-bill-c30.html
Hear what the experts say:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyHnOCDewuQ&feature=player_embedded
For more information visit:
http://www.unlawfulaccess.net/
Cutting through the rhetoric of the Omnibus Crime Bill. A news video worth watching:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTqD8KbmevA&feature=related
More cutting through the rhetoric of lawful access (three other stories worth reading):
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/02/21/pol-c30-surveillance-caution.html
http://openmedia.ca/blog/surveillance-expert-chris-parsons-dismantles-lawful-access-phone-book-comparison
http://blogs.canada.com/2012/02/15/can-you-spot-the-difference-on-lawful-access-bill/
Sign the Petition on C-30 or send a message to the minister with respect to Bill C-11 or a message to provincial senators on Bill C-10 located at:
http://stopspying.ca/ and http://openmedia.ca/lockdown and http://leadnow.ca/keep-canada-safe
Tales, truth in politics, and other noteworthy stuff
Showing posts with label lawfull access. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lawfull access. Show all posts
Wednesday, 22 February 2012
Bill C-30 a slippery slope and the demise of Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms
February 18, 2012
Open Letter
To: Dave Wilks, MP Kootenay/Columbia
From: Bobbie Saga
This letter is to state my unequivocal opposition to the egregious lawful access legislation, now known as Bill C-30 or Protecting Children From Internet Predators Act, tabled in Parliament February 14.
First, I wish to point out that a recent United Nations report on the subject of lawful access is highly critical of such forms of legislation that, in short, invites abuse of power and chills free speech. Essentially, the UN denounced legislation passed since 9/11 in other jurisdictions, taking issue with "criminalization of personal data;" that is, the use of innocent sources of mundane personal information as databases for crime control. It specifically took issue with the excuse currently being touted by law enforcement agencies and governments as being required for the protection of children, as well as it being used as a guise for combating terrorism. The report is a condemnation of unconstitutional measures that are not only unjustified, but are also often abused, such as the UK model, and/or used to further the goals of authoritarian regimes like China. It makes for rather interesting reading.
With all due respect, it is well documented that in Canada law enforcement agencies already have significant powers of investigation. Thus, it would be prudent for them to actually substantiate a legitimate case for spying on all Canadians without warrants because to date, they have not done so. Plus, neither law enforcement agencies nor the federal government have given the public any indication of how they might safeguard law-abiding Canadians from abuse that is sure to occur with such sweeping new powers. Alone, the UK model highlights the dangers inherent with this type of legislation. Like the UK model, the current tabled legislation does include a review mechanism, but up-front procedures and harsh penalties for violations by authorities do not exist in C-30. Individuals having colour of right can use any justification, including mistakes, to defend what may in fact be abuse. Thus, an unfunded, after-the-fact audit by the privacy commissioner’s office is hardly comforting in the face of legislation that essentially trumps significant privacy rights as guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. At best, it is a slippery slope upon which other Charter rights could be eroded, such as freedom of association.
As well, I hold disdain for any government representative who would be so arrogant as to attempt to spin the facts concerning this legislation, or engages in disingenuous doublespeak, or makes statements that are the opposite of the truth.
In September, and following much criticism to the then pending legislation, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews stated on record the government had no plans to allow interception of private communications without a warrant. Then on Monday, Liberal public safety critic Francis Scarpaleggia alleged during question period the government is "preparing to read Canadians' emails and track their movements through cellphone signals, in both cases without a warrant." Toews responded by stating, again on record, that Scarpaleggia "can either stand with us or with the child pornographers."
The wording of the tabled legislation is clear enough to read and proves Toews misled Canadians back in September. Now, however, there is a blatant attempt by Toews and others to spin a fundamentally flawed piece of legislation. Canadians can read, and many can interpret legislation right down to the legal difference between the words may and shall.
As such, I am outraged by Straw Man Toews going over the top by utilizing an utterly transparent tactic. His response to the opposition critic merely sets up a false dichotomy of the worst form. Toews words from September may now ring hollow, at best. But his response to Scarpaleggia is nothing short of reprehensible. Canadians might disagree with this legislation for legitimate reasons other than being aligned with child pornographers. It’s insulting.
Additionally, today’s news of Toews claiming he did not read C-30 is, to say the least, the most disturbing display of backpedaling I have ever witnessed. Give me a break! Here, is Toews telling the truth, or are Canadians witnessing a government in serious damage control with Toews coming forward as the sacrificial lamb? Or is he being thrown under the bus in the face of heavy opposition to a complete and utter fiasco that is growing by the day? Please state on record which member(s) of the Conservative caucus is/are responsible for this legislation. And please state on record which members of the Conservative caucus read and/or understood every word of the legislation prior to it being tabled.
Moreover, I love the title change of this dangerous piece of legislation –– whereby the only reference to children is in the title. I take extreme exception to a bill granting sweeping new powers to both the government and law enforcement that is NOT limited to the investigation of criminal offences, or for that matter, any offence whatsoever. What hypocrisy from a government that nixed both the long-form census and the gun registry under the guise of standing up for the rights of Canadians! This legislation is no more about child pornography than I am about staying silent. Indeed, the whole "going after the molesters" rhetoric is nothing but emotional drivel and fear mongering to allow monitoring of the general population without appropriate legal oversight. It is about invading the privacy and violating the privacy rights of every Canadian.
Neither governments nor law enforcement agencies are above the law. And in Canada, the law of this land is embedded in our constitution. Shame on the Conservatives.
Open Letter
To: Dave Wilks, MP Kootenay/Columbia
From: Bobbie Saga
This letter is to state my unequivocal opposition to the egregious lawful access legislation, now known as Bill C-30 or Protecting Children From Internet Predators Act, tabled in Parliament February 14.
First, I wish to point out that a recent United Nations report on the subject of lawful access is highly critical of such forms of legislation that, in short, invites abuse of power and chills free speech. Essentially, the UN denounced legislation passed since 9/11 in other jurisdictions, taking issue with "criminalization of personal data;" that is, the use of innocent sources of mundane personal information as databases for crime control. It specifically took issue with the excuse currently being touted by law enforcement agencies and governments as being required for the protection of children, as well as it being used as a guise for combating terrorism. The report is a condemnation of unconstitutional measures that are not only unjustified, but are also often abused, such as the UK model, and/or used to further the goals of authoritarian regimes like China. It makes for rather interesting reading.
With all due respect, it is well documented that in Canada law enforcement agencies already have significant powers of investigation. Thus, it would be prudent for them to actually substantiate a legitimate case for spying on all Canadians without warrants because to date, they have not done so. Plus, neither law enforcement agencies nor the federal government have given the public any indication of how they might safeguard law-abiding Canadians from abuse that is sure to occur with such sweeping new powers. Alone, the UK model highlights the dangers inherent with this type of legislation. Like the UK model, the current tabled legislation does include a review mechanism, but up-front procedures and harsh penalties for violations by authorities do not exist in C-30. Individuals having colour of right can use any justification, including mistakes, to defend what may in fact be abuse. Thus, an unfunded, after-the-fact audit by the privacy commissioner’s office is hardly comforting in the face of legislation that essentially trumps significant privacy rights as guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. At best, it is a slippery slope upon which other Charter rights could be eroded, such as freedom of association.
As well, I hold disdain for any government representative who would be so arrogant as to attempt to spin the facts concerning this legislation, or engages in disingenuous doublespeak, or makes statements that are the opposite of the truth.
In September, and following much criticism to the then pending legislation, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews stated on record the government had no plans to allow interception of private communications without a warrant. Then on Monday, Liberal public safety critic Francis Scarpaleggia alleged during question period the government is "preparing to read Canadians' emails and track their movements through cellphone signals, in both cases without a warrant." Toews responded by stating, again on record, that Scarpaleggia "can either stand with us or with the child pornographers."
The wording of the tabled legislation is clear enough to read and proves Toews misled Canadians back in September. Now, however, there is a blatant attempt by Toews and others to spin a fundamentally flawed piece of legislation. Canadians can read, and many can interpret legislation right down to the legal difference between the words may and shall.
As such, I am outraged by Straw Man Toews going over the top by utilizing an utterly transparent tactic. His response to the opposition critic merely sets up a false dichotomy of the worst form. Toews words from September may now ring hollow, at best. But his response to Scarpaleggia is nothing short of reprehensible. Canadians might disagree with this legislation for legitimate reasons other than being aligned with child pornographers. It’s insulting.
Additionally, today’s news of Toews claiming he did not read C-30 is, to say the least, the most disturbing display of backpedaling I have ever witnessed. Give me a break! Here, is Toews telling the truth, or are Canadians witnessing a government in serious damage control with Toews coming forward as the sacrificial lamb? Or is he being thrown under the bus in the face of heavy opposition to a complete and utter fiasco that is growing by the day? Please state on record which member(s) of the Conservative caucus is/are responsible for this legislation. And please state on record which members of the Conservative caucus read and/or understood every word of the legislation prior to it being tabled.
Moreover, I love the title change of this dangerous piece of legislation –– whereby the only reference to children is in the title. I take extreme exception to a bill granting sweeping new powers to both the government and law enforcement that is NOT limited to the investigation of criminal offences, or for that matter, any offence whatsoever. What hypocrisy from a government that nixed both the long-form census and the gun registry under the guise of standing up for the rights of Canadians! This legislation is no more about child pornography than I am about staying silent. Indeed, the whole "going after the molesters" rhetoric is nothing but emotional drivel and fear mongering to allow monitoring of the general population without appropriate legal oversight. It is about invading the privacy and violating the privacy rights of every Canadian.
Neither governments nor law enforcement agencies are above the law. And in Canada, the law of this land is embedded in our constitution. Shame on the Conservatives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)