Canadian Government Buries “Lawful Access” Provisions in New Border Bill(michaelgeist.ca)
michaelgeist.ca
Canadian Government Buries “Lawful Access” Provisions in New Border Bill
https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2025/06/privacy-at-risk-government-buries-lawful-access-provisions-in-new-border-bill/
18 comments
These types of legal shenanigans, sadly, usually work; Politicians just keep attempting to pass the same provisions in different forms with slightly different language over a period of years until they slip, whatever it is, through.
Our countries are too big. The only way for the public to police this stuff is with small polities like the Scandinavian countries, where there isn’t too much going on.
> Our countries are too big. The only way for the public to police this stuff is with small polities like the Scandinavian countries, where there isn’t too much going on.
In armed conflict, having a large polity can pay off — big time — while having a small one can be fatal. To name just a few examples: Belgium 1914 and 1940; (the Scandanavian) Norway and Denmark 1940; Tibet 1950; Kuwait 1990; and Chechnya 1999-2000.
In armed conflict, having a large polity can pay off — big time — while having a small one can be fatal. To name just a few examples: Belgium 1914 and 1940; (the Scandanavian) Norway and Denmark 1940; Tibet 1950; Kuwait 1990; and Chechnya 1999-2000.
[deleted]
The past attempts to enact these laws have been brought to light and defeated. The current attempt has been brought to light which is evidenced by this article. Doesn’t this undermine the idea that our countries are too large for the public to police this behavior?
> The only way for the public to police this stuff is with small polities like the Scandinavian countries, where there isn’t too much going on
Are you sure you aren’t proxying something else for size? Plenty of local politics in America, for example, is plenty despotic.
Are you sure you aren’t proxying something else for size? Plenty of local politics in America, for example, is plenty despotic.
I think local politics varies between incredibly moral/functional and unbelievably corrupt/incompetent, depending on location (same for startups or any other group).
Larger groups are more consistent, they all have “bureaucratic” problems. One of these problems is too much happening and not enough (moral and competent) oversight*. Hence text sneaked into government bills, funds embezzled from big companies, etc.
* Ironically as other commenters point out, this text isn’t avoiding discovery, because the bill is public and there are enough concerned citizens to provide the necessary oversight. A better example is government contracts, if they were published and voted on like bills I suspect contractors would be way better (except they’d be more political unless we solve that…)
Larger groups are more consistent, they all have “bureaucratic” problems. One of these problems is too much happening and not enough (moral and competent) oversight*. Hence text sneaked into government bills, funds embezzled from big companies, etc.
* Ironically as other commenters point out, this text isn’t avoiding discovery, because the bill is public and there are enough concerned citizens to provide the necessary oversight. A better example is government contracts, if they were published and voted on like bills I suspect contractors would be way better (except they’d be more political unless we solve that…)
> government contracts, if they were published and voted on like bills I suspect contractors would be way better
I'd guess the opposite. As evidence I present CEO pay, which went up with more transparency.
I like the idea of making public contracts searchable. But absent controls it will just lead to the partisan poisoning and context-free excerpting that characterises our low-brow political discourse.
I'd guess the opposite. As evidence I present CEO pay, which went up with more transparency.
I like the idea of making public contracts searchable. But absent controls it will just lead to the partisan poisoning and context-free excerpting that characterises our low-brow political discourse.
I’d say size is a necessary but not sufficient criterion. The county Annapolis sits in has about half a million people, and it seems like it’s possible for the Karens to keep abreast of everything that’s going on. It helps we have a local paper.
Apparently more tools are needed in Canada to:
Find and charge criminals -> Immediately release them on bail (even if a prolific repeat offender)
Then
a) Have the charges dropped in 18 or 30 months via the SCC ruling putting strict limits on the time it can take from charges to trial, which often can’t be met because the courts are backlogged
Or
b) Have the judge accept your lawyers argument of even the most spurious explanation of systemic XYZ being the reason it wasn’t your fault and letting you go
Find and charge criminals -> Immediately release them on bail (even if a prolific repeat offender)
Then
a) Have the charges dropped in 18 or 30 months via the SCC ruling putting strict limits on the time it can take from charges to trial, which often can’t be met because the courts are backlogged
Or
b) Have the judge accept your lawyers argument of even the most spurious explanation of systemic XYZ being the reason it wasn’t your fault and letting you go
I'm appalled by how little media coverage this topic is getting in Canada right now. Hopefully, journalists and citizens will pick this up, and the bill will be defeated.
> To combat money laundering and financing terror, there are new restrictions imposed on cash transactions over $10,000 and cash deposits by one person into someone else’s account.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/liberals-introduce-s...
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/liberals-introduce-s...
Interesting how that $10,000 threshold never gets adjusted for inflation. $10,000 has been the trigger/limit for a number of financial things since the 90s.
I did a little research. The $10,000 threshold was set in 1970 in the US as part of the Bank Secrecy Act and, as far as I can tell, wasn't updated since then to reflect inflation.
According to an inflation calculator, $10,000 at the time that threshold was set is worth $82,679.12 today.
According to an inflation calculator, $10,000 at the time that threshold was set is worth $82,679.12 today.
> $10,000 at the time that threshold was set is worth $82,679.12 today
Huh. A reporting requirement on $100,000 cash transactions sounds way more reasonable.
Huh. A reporting requirement on $100,000 cash transactions sounds way more reasonable.
[deleted]
"Elbows Up" eh?
Canadians have got to be the dumbest electorate... Carney was a globalist banker who literally wrote about how Canada needed to be more authoritarian to push through globalist policies.
Trump said something stupid, spurred on by something Trudeau said that's equally stupid. Carney somehow portrays himself as Canada's protector and nationalist (!?). Gets elected. Almost immediately reverts to his globalist authoritarian self.
Canadians are somehow confused...
Canadians have got to be the dumbest electorate... Carney was a globalist banker who literally wrote about how Canada needed to be more authoritarian to push through globalist policies.
Trump said something stupid, spurred on by something Trudeau said that's equally stupid. Carney somehow portrays himself as Canada's protector and nationalist (!?). Gets elected. Almost immediately reverts to his globalist authoritarian self.
Canadians are somehow confused...