Earlier quoted context omitted.
i know this is an american thing, but does it actually happen in Caanda?
one of those 'does it happen' vs. 'can it happen'. the latter is all that matters.
[deleted]
Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
141–150 of 374 posts
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#142It feels like many democratic leaders are starting to think the CCP model—mass surveillance of citizens—is the right direction, with growing demands for chat control, facial verification, age verification, and more. Fxxk any politician who thinks they are above the citizens in a democracy.
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#143Quick summary for the impatient (the original looks like an extract from Orwell's 1984): Bill C-22 (Canada, 2026) updates laws to give police and security agencies faster and clearer access to digital data during investigations. It expands authorities to obtain subscriber information, transmission data, and tracking data from telecom and online service providers and from foreign companies. The bill also creates a fra…
You missed 'warrentless' in your summary. It's sort of important. The push by the government here is because Canada is the only one of the Five-Eyes countries that doesn't have these powers, and for the government that's a bad thing.
That access has produced nothing for the USA, the director of the program has stated such to congress. Complete waste of time and money
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#144Never vote for the politicians that even remotely support this.
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#145this just legalizes what's alrsady happening.
The "just" is underplaying how invidious this is.
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#146How can I not be flippant? I lived in Canada for a large part of my life (30 years-ish, 15 years ago). The bills are introduced, not passed.
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#147It is beyond time for a Representation Reconciliation. If the People do not control their destiny then tyranny reigns. There is no debate.
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#148It feels like many democratic leaders are starting to think the CCP model—mass surveillance of citizens—is the right direction, with growing demands for chat control, facial verification, age verification, and more. Fxxk any politician who thinks they are above the citizens in a democracy.
[dead]
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#149The problem for all 5 eyes (or 9 or 14) is that our co-operation dates back to the cold war and the institutions and thinking have not caught up to current geo-political and technical changes. If anything we are accelerating our co-operation at a time when many voters are seriously questioning the future of the US alliance. I wish some of our leaders would be more forthcoming about the amount of foreign pressure thei…
Silence? Didn't Canada's prime minister give some very loud speeches regarding the US and the changing geopolitical landscape, and start making deals in response to such?
Carny seems like two people when talking about trade vs security/military
Re: Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act: Dangerous backdoor surveillance risks remain
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
I totally agree, but that's a question aside from the institutional authoritarianism of statist countries. Canada and European nations are not very 'liberal' in the sense a lot of people would like - they are communitarian. We lament Trump breaking norms ... the office of the Canadian PM is almost only bounded by norms, he has crazy amounts of power - on paper. A Trump-like actor in Canada (maybe UK as well) could do…
On paper, there is no Canadian PM. The Constitution reads: "The Executive Government and Authority of and over Canada is hereby declared to continue and be vested in the Queen." The existence of a Prime Minister and the fact executive powers are delegated to them are customary. A Trump-like actor in Canada would do far less damage than in USA. There is no position they could held that would give them the power to do…
"are one motion from the House of Common from being overthrown." - so this is a form of political constraint, which we can see in the US doesn't work very well if the ruling party wants to ignore concerns and acts at the behest of the Executive.
If the PM holds enough popular support and has even a narrow majority that he can effectively whip, he's almost above reproach.
Everything at the top in Canada is 'convention' even the Constitution and there's barely any real constraint at someone driving a truck through all of it.