you do make valid points. and i agree with many of them.

however a bill like this, even if applied altruistically by the current government, doesnt mean it cant be taken advantage of by another government in the future. we nearly got a conservative government that played hard on anti immigration, anti asylum, and anti refugee policies, among other less tasteful ones. they wanted to go hard on crime as well, and what they may think of crime tomorrow may not be a crime today. retroactively punishing people who are immigrants, or use the internet in a way that is legal today, but may not be tomorrow, is pretty fucked up.

for instance, just one example, a horror story what if scenerio, unlikely, but still very possible. what if we get an american compromised PM? or just a homegrown asshole who likes trumps work? And they want to start going after trans people, purchasing their meds online? or just looking into it? we are currently seeing parties in BC and alberta forcing people into rehab clinics and psychiatric care against their will, through new or potential policies. at the discretion of the police, and whoever may or may not control them now, or in the future.

with a law like this, they could comb records, finding trans people, gay people, political dissidents, etc. and send them away to clinics, even prisons, forcing them against their will to take medication they may not need, effectively sedating, and potentially killing some, just for their search history.

also, we are likely heading towards a new world war, and climate change will increase climate refugees and asylum seekers as well. this could lead to the deaths of thousands, hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of others who likely might have survived otherwise. just because in 2025 a government passed a law that made it easier for a less compassionate or maybe even fascistic government to block aid, or even hunt people they dont like.

thats my main issue with the content of this bill. its a glaring issue that shouldnt be pushed to the side for the sake of percieved safety in this moment. things could get better, but they could also be much, much worse.

And that ignores all of the other things in this bill that are about immigration, and asylum seekers, and being able to sieze peoples’ mail, and forcing online providers to give up user data, all of which reach way beyond organized crime.

You’d need to point out specifics in the bill that you have concerns about, because combing through it, I didn’t see anything that would make me think that regular folks would be mass deported out of the country.

Regarding mail… border authorities had the power to open any and all mail weighing over 30 grams, for at least the last 30+ years.

But there was a loophole for mail under 30g, which was closed in 2017 through Bill C-37:

If they suspected drugs were being sent, authorities needed permission from either the sender or receiver in order to open it. This created a massive loophole for drug trafficking, because fentanyl was often sent in small baggies weighing under 30 g.

What was happening is that if permission was not given, then the mail was sent back to the sender. No drugs are seized, and they would do it again.

But criminals banked on the fact that some drug containing envelops would slip through, and they were right.

Bill C37 (again, from 2017) simply closed that loophole.

Bill C2 gives police the ability to search mail when authorized in order to carry out a criminal investigation.

What new concerns come up that have you worried about mail?

forcing online providers to give up user data

This one is funny. Online providers are already willingly selling our data, and they were always obligated to share our private data to law enforcement.

This is why everyone in the privacy space tells you to change your DNS, use a VPN/TOR, etc.

The new bill gives more powers for police investigating digital crime involving children, and it’s already been given full public support by the Canadian Centre for Child Protection.

But let’s not sweat things right now. This was the first reading, and all points of the bill can (and will) be debated. Expect tweaks, repeals, and amendments.

Write your MP ASAP. This bill is unacceptable, unconstitutional, and unCanadian.

regular folks

I’m not even going to ask what your definition of that is.

border authorities had the power to open any and all mail weighing over 30 grams, for at least the last 30+ years.

And now that weight limit has been removed. It used to say, the Corporation may open any mail, other than a letter." Now it says, “the Corporation may open any mail.”

It repeals the portion of the Canada Post Corporation Act that says, “Notwithstanding any other Act or law, but subject to this Act and the regulations and to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, the Customs Act and the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, nothing in the course of post is liable to demand, seizure, detention or retention,” and replaces it with, “Nothing in the course of post is subject to demand, seizure, detention or retention, except in accordance with an Act of Parliament,” which is a massive expansion of the circumstances in which it can be done.

It also rewords the section on liability to ensure that there’s…no liability, for anyone, in cases where mail is seized.

Bill C2 gives police the ability to search mail when authorized in order to carry out a criminal investigation.

The bottom line is that these should be considered law enforcement activities, but there’s no warrant required. Just an “Act of Parliament.” There’s no probable cause defined here. Maybe you’re fine with that. I’m not.

But let’s not sweat things right now. This was the first reading, and all points of the bill can (and will) be debated. Expect tweaks, repeals, and amendments.

I agree with you to an extent on this one. But things are more likely to be tweaked if people make some noise.

Even the original YT video under discussion here said that this bill contains some entirely unobjectionable things. But it also contains things that I agree need another look, and in fact are downright Trumpian in some respects.

I agree in part.

I’m genuinely curious, did you read the bill, or do you plan to? If so, I would seriously love to hear your take on it. I’ve read the backgrounder, and skimmed the actual bill. Even just doing that I’m sure I’ve read more of it than 99% of Canadians.

Generally speaking, if you’ve actually read and understand it, then I say it’s your duty to help act as a vulgarizer so others can navigate it. It’s easy to say that we value citizens’ duty to educate themselves on their democracy, then figuratively cross our arms and say “well I read it and I don’t agree” and refuse to elaborate, when asked for your informed (and valuable!) opinion–which is what certain people who claim to have read the bill in this thread appear to be doing.

I’m not trying to be cheeky. If you’ve (or anyone else has) read the bill and you care about our democracy, then please share your actual thoughts on the bill! So far all we seem to be doing is arguing meta amongst each about how to talk about bills, and not the fucking bill–pardon my language, this comment sections is frustrating me. it’s not directed at you - you’re cool.

The problem as far as I’ve read from Sam Cooper is the lack of policies like racketeering laws in Canada, thus we are used worldwide by criminal entities for laundering money. Which is likely the larger issue Trump has with drugs, and likely is a big reason how housing in Vancouver can be millions of dollars when the median salary is less than 70k.

Theres a long form interview here, Sam Cooper is a journalist who wrote Wilfull Blindness:

@17:45 the interview starts https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B73Tayj37sM

As far as postal stuff goes, don’t they only have the right to open packages, but not letters?

They have the ability to open letters over 30 g for a very long time. Bill C37 (from 2017) gave border officers power to open letters less than 30 g, because criminals were sending fentanyl over in small bags, and that closed the loophole (read here)

I haven’t heard of this being abused over the last 8 years, so why the assumption that it’s all of a sudden going to start now?

And I don’t think they have the right to get all our digital personal information either. At least not like they do in the U.S. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

If you are being investigated for crimes against children online, then your digital assets can be seized and combed through. This new bill strengthens that in this context.

The “unreasonable” part of Section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is what protects us, but that doesn’t apply if you’re under investigation for crimes and stuff like a computer needs to be accessed as part of that investigation.

It does apply. A warrant is required for confiscating and searching mail and computer equipment. It sounds here like it won’t be required.

I honestly didn’t read anything in the bill that says that warrants are not required for things that they would have currently been.

In the case of the mail, what used to happen if there are suspected drugs being sent by mail (under 30g), the officer would have to get permission from either the sender or the receiver of the letter before opening it. If no response was given, they would send it back.

The problem is that criminals banked on the fact that some would get through, and because others envelops were being returned, the drugs wouldn’t be seized and nobody was getting caught. This new bill tries to fix that.

Maybe not, but it lays the ground for it though.

I get it. There’s always a chance for abusing this power. Maybe not now, but in 10 years.

Here’s the thing: good laws can be abused by any corrupt government. And corrupt governments can always introduce bad laws (see the States).

Our current government seems to be doing this in good faith, so we have to take them at.

If Carney was giving public events saying that immigrants are all murderers and rapists, and we’ll deport them by the millions, well… that would be a different story! I guess thank god we don’t have a majority conservative federal government.

FYI, in Canada and the UK, to table something means to give it attention or handle it, unlike in America where it means to set it aside.

Write your MP ASAP. This bill is unacceptable, unconstitutional, and unCanadian.

So let’s get racketeering laws?

It means either, in the USA.

Write your MP ASAP. This bill is unacceptable, unconstitutional, and unCanadian.

This Bill is just a lie to spy on (mainly) Canadian Citizens and residents. It gives Canada Post the ability to open your mail for any cited reason. It requires your ISP to log and keep track of all your devices and online activity and require it be turned over at the governments request. It’s also gearing up to turn Canadian Border Officials into ICE. We’re cooked.

Well they can’t keep track of all your devices online, I guess one advantage of ipv4.