Harper Government To Attack Privacy Rights Again

[Mighty AC]

The Harper government is rebooting the civil liberty stealing, failed Bill C-30, now called Bill C-13 under the guise of fighting cyber bullying. This is really just an omnibus justice bill with just 4 of 70 pages dealing with cyber bullying; the rest designed to increase police power and strip privacy rights. For example the bill includes sections that would create a possible 2 year sentence for cable theft.

Certainly cyberbullying is a serious issue currently on the minds of Canadians. As news pegs go, linking the bill to it was a strategic move, but little more. For all the connection the provisions in the bill have to either cyberbullying or revenge porn (posting images of someone naked or in a sexual situation) – another problem it claims to address – one wonders if those drafting C-13 didn’t consider calling it the Protecting Canadians from Rob Ford Act or the Protecting Canadians from Russian Meteors Act or the Protecting Canadians from Kim Kardashian’s Baby Act.

Mr. McKay insists his bill doesn’t contain the warrantless wiretapping provisions that caused Canadians to reject the government’s last effort, the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act. However, that’s almost a moot point as it offers up a number of warrants that are easier to obtain, while granting service providers immunity to prosecution and lawsuits, should they fork over whatever information the authorities request.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/columnists/maybe-one-day-revenge-porn-will-be-have-no-power/article15804000/

When Vic Toews lead the Bill C-30 charge under the guise of combating child porn, it resulted in his divorce records being publicized and the #TellVicEverything Twitter protest. Due to the backlash Vic backed down on the bill. I'm hoping MacKay is the target of similar protests this time around.

[ReeferMadness]

You're with us or you're with the alien, sheep-loving, kitten-eating zombies.

Edited December 13, 2013 by Charles Anthony
deleted re-copied Opening Post

[Moonlight Graham]

This makes me livid.

A related article denouncing the bill from the Globe And Mail's editorial board: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/editorials/electronic-interception-should-not-be-without-a-warrant/article15551915/

I love how these politicians table these bills they know are horrible and will get a lot of opposition from other politicians/media/citizens so they give the bills names like the "Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act" or the "PATRIOT Act"...just so they can claim that "if you don't support this bill you aren't a patriot!" or "you don't want to protect children from internet predators!". The Harper gov is a stinking pile of garbage. I swear I'd love to run as an independent MP just so I can get myself on public record verbally destroying all these corrupt fools in Parliament.

[Bonam]

I wish it was as simple as blaming this on one particular political party. Sadly, bills like this have been pushed by almost every political party, both left and right, in many Western nations. If there is one thing that enjoys broad bipartisan support, it is the eradication of civil liberties and the concentration and expansion of surveillance, censorship, and police powers in the state.

With any luck, this bill will be shot down. But in the long run it's inevitable; if this bill doesn't pass, another like it soon will.

[GostHacked]

I wish it was as simple as blaming this on one particular political party. Sadly, bills like this have been pushed by almost every political party, both left and right, in many Western nations.

I chat with people in Nz and Australia, and similar laws have been passed recently or are being tabled. You are correct, it is the left, right, and middle. Cons, Libs, Dems, NDPs any party label you want to attach to them.

If there is one thing that enjoys broad bipartisan support, it is the eradication of civil liberties and the concentration and expansion of surveillance, censorship, and police powers in the state.

Any one who argues different has not been paying attention.

With any luck, this bill will be shot down. But in the long run it's inevitable; if this bill doesn't pass, another like it soon will.

We need to get more involved as a populace. Wonder how many have actually read the bill.

I loved what Kucinich said when asked why he voted against the PATRIOT ACT..... he said he read it.

[On Guard for Thee]

I certainly applauded the backlash that Canadians threw up in response to Toews bill and his ridiculous statement about us all being involved in child porn if we didn't agree with it. I think he got thrown under the bus, eventually stepped down, and damn near lost the riding. But what scares me is the idea that he was just a "wind vane" for Harper. He wanted to test the waters, which failed, but I don't think he was expecting such a backlash, especially right back into a cabinet minister. Which is why he now tests the waters with backbenchers like Warawa on things like abortion.

Harper likes those omnibus bills which he might just label a budget and then throw 400 plus pages in that affect 60 plus other laws having nothing to do with budget. I guess now would be the appropriate time to replay the tape of him saying he would never do an omnibus bill. And then there's the one about I would never appoint a non-elected senator. etc etc.

Edited December 13, 2013 by Charles Anthony
deleted re-copied Opening Post

[Michael Hardner]

I'd like to try to look at this bill objectively. It does step back from C-30 significantly, however I'd like to know how the increased police powers will protect anybody who is being harassed.

I've heard people say that they're against warrant-less searches, but this bill doesn't allow for that, so I'm wondering how the government could ever investigate cyber crimes.

There was also a similar bill passed in NS, it seems:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/08/07/cyberbullying_law_inspiredly_by_rehtaeh_parsons_suicide_takes_effect.html

I don't remember much of a backlash there, but maybe it's because people can't forgive the Harper government for C-30.

My questions:

1. How will the new Conservative bill help investigations moving forward ?

2. How is that bill different from the Nova Scotia bill ?

3. Given that this is a new problem, and that there was a huge outcry against what Rehtaeh Parsons went through, how should politicians deal with it ?

I'm looking at this issue separately from any previous discussions on cyber-terrorism, etc. The factors to consider are vastly different: more personal, more sensitive, local police involved and so on...

[Topaz]

I'm wondering if this passes and since the Tories have the power, it will, can WE use it against them in the Senate scandal and give the RCMP more power for more information????

[Michael Hardner]

can WE use it against them in the Senate scandal and give the RCMP more power for more information????

The answer is 'no'.

[PIK]

Privacy. What is that ,they know everything, even today people have their personal records all over cyber space and don't think anything about it. Even us gun owners have all our records in tennesee, and that my friend was a liberal government that did that.

Edited December 12, 2013 by PIK

[GostHacked]

The answer is 'no'.

Why not?

[Michael Hardner]

Why not?

The law isn't for that.

[Moonlight Graham]

I wish it was as simple as blaming this on one particular political party. Sadly, bills like this have been pushed by almost every political party, both left and right, in many Western nations. If there is one thing that enjoys broad bipartisan support, it is the eradication of civil liberties and the concentration and expansion of surveillance, censorship, and police powers in the state.

When I said "all these corrupt fools in Parliament", that means every single one who would support such a bill regardless of party.

[GostHacked]

The law isn't for that.

Explain?

[Michael Hardner]

Explain?

The government passed the law to be used against cyber bullies. The government did not pass a law that it could use against itself.

And... this is another thread where we're in an obvious circle. I suspect you're unable to analyze issues dispassionately, in which case I'm just the wrong person for you to discuss things with.

I framed the issue as I see it with the 3 questions in post #7 if you'd like to answer them. I haven't made my mind up on this one yet, but I'm leaning towards being against it. It would be nice for people with opinions here to express the reasons behind them, and then I might learn something from them.

[GostHacked]

The government passed the law to be used against cyber bullies. The government did not pass a law that it could use against itself.[/quite]

Whatever law they pass, they are subject to. And come on, you think this bill is really to combat cyber bullies? You are with us or with the terrorists, you are with us or you are with the child pornographers. Now you are with us or with the cyber bullies. Really?

This bill is nothing new and not a response to Parsons killing herself. This is the government using her death as a political point to pass laws that erode our privacy. People need to toughen up and get a thick skin. Cyber bulling has been going on since the net was introduced close to two decades ago. It's just now that our technology 'connects' us so much that it is hard to escape. How do you deal with bullies? Do you fight back? If so, then good.

I think we are raising a generation of wusses and assholes. And I would be a wuss compared to my parents generation. Buck it up, life sucks sometimes, how you deal with it will determine how well you come out of it.

And... this is another thread where we're in an obvious circle. I suspect you're unable to analyze issues dispassionately, in which case I'm just the wrong person for you to discuss things with.[/qouote]

No, some passion is needed here. You can leave the circle if you want. No one is forcing you to participate.

I framed the issue as I see it with the 3 questions in post #7 if you'd like to answer them. I haven't made my mind up on this one yet, but I'm leaning towards being against it. It would be nice for people with opinions here to express the reasons behind them, and then I might learn something from them.

The first two are not really answerable. And I don't know anything about the NS bill or how the national bill will help with investigations.

In the end if you were against the other versions of this bill, then you are against this one. They are simply using different incidents and politicizing them to pull at your emotional strings to get a bill passed. That's just dirty. If the bill is sound, then they would not have to try and 'sell' it this way.

[eyeball]

Will we have to rely on the libertarian values that are purported to still exist in the Conservative base to kill this bill like we did with C-30? Great, leaving it up to the fringe of the right wing to flirt with authoritarianism seems like a real game of chicken or dare to me.

It would be nice to see the opposition parties get more angry about this and start pushing their weight around but they're obviously with the government when it comes to pushing the governed around if the so-called loyalty agreement MP's intend to impose on their employees to nip whistle-blowing in the bud is anything to go by.

It's the governed who really need to develop more of a bullying attitude in this country.

[Michael Hardner]

This bill is nothing new and not a response to Parsons killing herself.

Well, it is at least ostensibly that since such things are tied together by the legislators themselves.

This is the government using her death as a political point to pass laws that erode our privacy.

Again, there's nowhere to go with this discussion because you're arguing a 'hidden agenda' and as such the evidence of such a motivation is 'hidden' too. We can't proceed with a discussion because you can't prove a negative.

People need to toughen up and get a thick skin.

You're not going to convince people of that, I don't think.

I think we are raising a generation of wusses and assholes.

...

Buck it up, life sucks sometimes, how you deal with it will determine how well you come out of it.

Wow. One could really make that argument to people who are angry at government snooping too. Instead of whining about it on a web board, go out and organize a lobby group, hold a meeting, or learn how to hack the government I guess...

The first two are not really answerable.

Well, they are - you would just need to have knowledge of the legislation. Given your outrage on such things, I was assuming you had such knowledge.

And I don't know anything about the NS bill or how the national bill will help with investigations.

Ok... well I guess I won't look to you for any knowledge on these topics then ?

In the end if you were against the other versions of this bill, then you are against this one.

Makes zero sense. Your decisions are made in your heart, it seems to me. You just don't like government so why trust anything they do at all ?

[Bonam]

Makes zero sense. Your decisions are made in your heart, it seems to me. You just don't like government so why trust anything they do at all ?

Government is bloated far bigger than it needs to be, has far more powers than it needs to have, regulates far more than it needs to regulate, and costs far more than it needs to cost. The more power it has, the more power it wants. It is a beast that can never be satiated, not until it devours the whole of society.

[Mighty AC]

I wish it was as simple as blaming this on one particular political party. Sadly, bills like this have been pushed by almost every political party, both left and right, in many Western nations. If there is one thing that enjoys broad bipartisan support, it is the eradication of civil liberties and the concentration and expansion of surveillance, censorship, and police powers in the state.

With any luck, this bill will be shot down. But in the long run it's inevitable; if this bill doesn't pass, another like it soon will.

I agree that eroding civil liberties seems to have near universal support among parties, but Canada's current government is worse than past regimes. It was a Liberal government that passed the controversial, freedom stealing, Anti-Terrorism Act. However, it included a sunset clause, and the Libs allowed it to expire. The Harperites fought to prevent the expiration and then later, when in power, fought to reinstate the laws.

It's true that all those with power tend to want more of it, but the current Harper government has been obsessed with eroding the privacy of its citizens while simultaneously hiding government information from the public.

[GostHacked]

Well, it is at least ostensibly that since such things are tied together by the legislators themselves.

They tried to ram this through with the notion from Toews that you are with us or the child pornographers. Now they tweak it and use Parson's death as a political tool to ram the same bill through.

Again, there's nowhere to go with this discussion because you're arguing a 'hidden agenda' and as such the evidence of such a motivation is 'hidden' too. We can't proceed with a discussion because you can't prove a negative.

it's not hidden, it's in plain site right in front of your face. Just some chose not to see it.

You're not going to convince people of that, I don't think.

Because they don't have the ability to thicken their skin.

Wow. One could really make that argument to people who are angry at government snooping too. Instead of whining about it on a web board, go out and organize a lobby group, hold a meeting, or learn how to hack the government I guess...

There are more idiots out there in the public than here on this board. It's a lot harder to convince anyone who is not at least kind of paying attention to this.

Well, they are - you would just need to have knowledge of the legislation. Given your outrage on such things, I was assuming you had such knowledge.

Not even the people who pass these bills knows what is in them. And you want to slight me for not knowing what is in the NS bill compared to the national bill? Watch out I may get emotional in my response.

Ok... well I guess I won't look to you for any knowledge on these topics then ?

I just recently heard of the NS bill. My knowledge on that is minimal. But nice deflection from the real problem.

Makes zero sense. Your decisions are made in your heart, it seems to me. You just don't like government so why trust anything they do at all ?

My decisions are made with my brain. But if some of what they are doing does not piss you off, then you simply are not paying attention. And I don't trust much of what the government does period. Why should I? There is nothing they have done or said that is changing the course we are currently on. The other thing that some are noticing is that these laws are being implemented in many other countries as well. Our governments are working together to put this big surveillance grid in place.

The laws passed in New Zealand recently allow for this to happen, Easier wiretapping without warrants. Look at the USA since 9/11. The TSA is at the mall now. Drones in the sky, the NSA, Homeland 'security'. Warrant less wiretapping, indefinite detention without charge.

http://rt.com/news/new-zealand-pass-spy-law-777/

The new amendment bill gives the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) – New Zealand’s version of the NSA – powers to support the New Zealand police, Defense Force and the Security Intelligence Service.

Opposition to the legislation has voiced concerns it will open the door to the NSA-style monitoring of New Zealand citizens in violation of their rights. A recent survey by Fairfax Media-Ipsos found that three quarters of New Zealand’s population is “concerned by the law.”

Even if the majority of the people are against it, that simply does not matter.

http://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2013/july/1372600800/richard-cooke/how-nsa-surveillance-destroys-privacy-and-undermines-our-so

Not only is the Canadian government working against the citizens here in Canada, it is working with other governments to do the same to it's citizens. And vice versa. Echelon, PRISM, The Five Eyes. Massive international surveillance grids.

Our current and past governments wants to go down the same road and have been working very hard to get it to this stage. You and I are the frog and the water is actually quite hot. Let's put the brakes on this now before it's too late, or it might already be too late because people have not been paying attention.

When the government wants to change the laws to make it easier to snoop on people and in many cases without oversight and circumnavigating it's own rules and laws, then you have to get a little pissed off. Try turning those cameras in on the government and see what kind of resistance you get.

Of course emotions come into it.

[Michael Hardner]

Of course emotions come into it.

Well, I think they're actually driving your decisions here. The fact is that people are concerned about cyberbullying, so it's natural for the government to produce legislation to satisfy that political need.

You admit that you don't trust the government, that you're pissed off, and you bring PRISM and all kinds of things into it - pretty much admitting that you're not interested in looking at this bill, and the problem, objectively and on its own.

You can be pissed off, but you're actually playing into "their" agenda if you just go off in all directions.

[GostHacked]

Well, I think they're actually driving your decisions here. The fact is that people are concerned about cyberbullying, so it's natural for the government to produce legislation to satisfy that political need.

Sure there is a concern with cyberbullying, however that is just the point of the day to ram through more laws.

You admit that you don't trust the government, that you're pissed off, and you bring PRISM and all kinds of things into it - pretty much admitting that you're not interested in looking at this bill, and the problem, objectively and on its own.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-cyberbullying-law-has-larger-agenda-expands-police-powers-1.2434797

I don't trust them for a very damn good reason.

Under the banner of anti-cyberbullying measures, the government is "trying to push through a number of things that have to do with law enforcement but nothing to do with cyberbullying."

Among other things, these new measures include giving police easier access to the metadata that internet service providers and phone companies keep on every call and email.

MacKay has acknowledged that law enforcement did not have the tools to prevent the deaths of Canadian teens such as Rehtaeh Parsons and Amanda Todd, who endured years of torment online. C-13 would give police a greater ability to investigate incidents of cyberbullying by giving courts the right to seize computers, phones and other devices used in an alleged offence.

But then ....

Currie likens the omnibus nature of C-13 to Bill C-30, also known as the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act, which was introduced in February 2012 by then-public safety minister Vic Toews.

"It was supposed to be all about [fighting] child porn, but it had all kinds of other stuff in it," Currie says.

The 'other stuff'

That other "stuff" included lawful access provisions, which would force internet service providers to hand over customer information to police without a warrant. This led to a public outcry and the government’s abandonment of the bill.

Without a warrant. It was shot down. This new bill is pretty much the same as the old one, just using Parson's death as a political tool to ram some more snooping laws.

You can be pissed off, but you're actually playing into "their" agenda if you just go off in all directions.

I am playing into their agenda? By talking about it and being against it? That's a new twist. But that is part of the language used today. Up is down, right is left. Bad is good.

[Michael Hardner]

It's really a struggle for me to get information on this bill in this discussion with you. You want to bring up C-30 and your general anger about this topic. Yes, it plays into their agenda because you don't come across as reasonable. Case in point - you could be using evidence to convince me about this new bill, since I haven't made up my mind yet but instead you're bringing up all kinds of other things.

Thanks for posting that article, though, I learned some things from that.

[GostHacked]

It's really a struggle for me to get information on this bill in this discussion with you.

What is the struggle exactly?

You want to bring up C-30 and your general anger about this topic. Yes, it plays into their agenda because you don't come across as reasonable. Case in point - you could be using evidence to convince me about this new bill, since I haven't made up my mind yet but instead you're bringing up all kinds of other things.

You are not getting it. This new bill is just another attempt at implementing something like the C-30. Change some words, use someone's death as a talking point to get the message across. Pull at heart strings 'someone think of the children'.

Thanks for posting that article, though, I learned some things from that.

Beware of the other 'stuff' (other things) that is thrown into these bills. That is the point I made for the past few posts. You and I cannot be expected to know everything about the bill when our politicians are not even really reading it before passing it.

Someone else seems to think as I do.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/is-canada-s-cyberbullying-bill-giving-the-government-new-powers-to-spy-on-you-1.1557224

Critics of the federal government’s new cyberbullying bill say the campaign is exploiting the memories of Amanda Todd and Rehtaeh Parsons in order to gain online surveillance powers.

http://globalnews.ca/news/983071/critics-say-cyberbullying-bill-will-revive-online-surveillance/

OTTAWA – Civil libertarians say the federal government’s new cyberbullying bill will erode Internet privacy by reviving many elements of the Tories’ controversial online surveillance legislation.

Groups that oppose undue intrusion by the state are painting the cyberbullying legislation as a Trojan horse containing dozens of pages of provisions from Bill C-30 – killed by the government earlier this year following a public outcry.

READ MORE: Understanding bullies, shedding light on why they need help, too

“This is not a bill about cyberbullying,” said Micheal Vonn, policy director of the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association.

“It’s a bill essentially to reintroduce most of the components of Bill C-30, despite the government’s assurances that they would not do so.”

So what are you not getting Mike? What is your failure to understand what is being done here?