Bill C-51 - Threatens Rights Of All Canadians - Pt. 1 & 2

[Oscar]

Harper’s Anti-terror Legislation Threatens Rights Of All Canadians - Part One

[ http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e40891.htm ]

By Peter Ewart February 04, 2015

The Harper government is putting forward so-called anti-terrorist legislation that should be of concern to all Canadians, no matter their point of view or political affiliation. There are many things wrong, even dangerous, about this legislation, but two things stand out: (A) the threat to the right to privacy of Canadians; and (B) the threat to freedom of speech.

One thing is very clear. Canadians value their rights to privacy and are concerned when anyone, including government, abuses or intrudes upon these rights. Indeed, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, who is mandated by Parliament to act as a guardian of privacy in Canada, released the results of a poll on January 28th that show “nine out of ten Canadians were concerned about privacy,” and one in three (34%) were “extremely concerned.” The poll also reveals that “a significant majority (78%) expressed concern about how personal information about them online might be used in the context of government surveillance” (1).

Despite this, the Harper government is planning to ram through anti-terror legislation which greatly expands the ability of intelligence agencies, especially CSIS, to gather and paw through health, medical, family, tax, business, and other information from other government institutions, including Revenue Canada, on potentially all Canadians. This information only has to shown to be “relevant” in some way. This is dangerously vague and abstruse language, and open to serious abuse. As the Privacy Commissioner notes, “This Act would seemingly allow departments and agencies to share the personal information of all individuals, including ordinary Canadians who may not be suspected of terrorist activities” (2).

This expansion of surveillance powers follows the revelation recently that the federal government through its spy agency, the Communications Security Establishment, has been engaged in massive covert surveillance operations on the private online activities of millions of people around the world. Even clicking on a particular site, could result in a person being put under scrutiny. As Ron Deibert, of the Internet security think tank Citizen Lab, explains, the surveillance program, which is being conducted without search warrants, resembles a “giant X-ray machine over all our digital lives” (3).

- - - -SNIP - - - -

Bill C-51 constitutes a direct threat to the privacy of all Canadians, as well as their right to conscience and freedom of speech. People of all political persuasions, including those who traditionally vote Conservative, should take a serious look at this legislation. Once it is in place, whatever government happens to be in power will be able to use and abuse it as they see fit. It constitutes a further step towards a police state and a surveillance society.

The question needs to be asked: Why is the Harper government bringing in such flagrantly anti-democratic legislation at this time and why is the terror threat being magnified and exaggerated to such an extent in this country? These are topics that will be further discussed in Part 2 of this series.

- - - - -

Peter Ewart is a columnist and writer based in Prince George, British Columbia.
He can be reached at: peter.ewart@shaw.ca

= = = = =

Harper’s anti-terrorist legislation threatens the rights of all Canadians – Part 2

By Peter Ewart February 4, 2015

“A great evil has been descending on our world.” These are ominous words spoken recently by Stephen Harper the Prime Minister of Canada to an audience of Conservative Party supporters, police officers and security officials. He is referring, of course, to the threat of terrorism in Canada, and the fact, according to him, that “we are at war” with the terrorists, a mantra that he has been repeating everywhere in the months leading up to the next federal election.

But, as was raised in Part 1 of this series, how serious is this threat in Canada? Are we, indeed, back in the year 1939 on the eve of the Second World War as his ominous words suggest? Or is the threat of terrorism being magnified for political purposes?

- - - - SNIP - - - -

The Encyclopaedia Brittanica defines terrorism as “the systematic use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population to bring about a particular political objective” (5). Now, governments in the world today may or may not use “systematic violence”, but, unfortunately, more than a few are guilty of fostering “a general climate of fear” in order “to bring about a particular political objective.”

For example, George W. Bush had all the signs of being, at best, a mediocre president until the 9/11 terrorism happened. However, in the wake of 9/11, his popularity soared, despite serious economic woes, the Hurricane Katrina fiasco, and other problems. His popularity was maintained, in large part, by a state of extreme tension that permeated the country, pumped up by frequent colour-coded “terror alerts” flashing across the TV screens of Americans. In a shocking admission after he left office, former U.S. Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge admitted that manipulation took place and that “top aides to then-president George W. Bush pressured him to raise the “terror alert” level to sway the November 2004 U.S. election” (6).

The question needs to be asked: Is Prime Minister Stephen Harper using Bill C-51 and the fear card of terrorism to achieve his “particular political objectives”? Some journalists and politicians think so. After all, the economic outlook for the country, at least for the next year or two, is not good. Oil prices are continuing to plummet, the GDP itself is dipping, and even manufacturing in the country has unexpectedly gone down. Elizabeth May, of the Green Party, says that “with an election coming, it’s clear [Harper] would like it to be fought on the grounds of who do you see as being tough on terrorism, as opposed to the economy or how many people are unemployed” (7).

According to Kristie Smith of iPolitics, Harper has replaced his mantra of “Jobs, Jobs, Jobs” with that of “Jihadism, Jihadism, Jihadism” (8). If so, this is a reflection of the sad and cynical state that Canadian politics has degenerated into. Yes, Mr. Harper, perhaps a “great evil has descended on the country,” but more than a few Canadians would argue that it is your own government.

Unfortunately, as others have pointed out, the federal NDP and Liberals, instead of taking a strong stand in defence of the rights of Canadians, are playing coy and hedging their bets in regards to Harper’s anti-terror legislation (9) (10). This is despite the fact that organizations like the BC Civil Liberties Association and others are seriously alarmed and have characterized this legislation as “an unprecedented expansion of powers that will harm innocent Canadians and not increase our public safety” (11).

Whatever Harper’s motivation may be for this anti-democratic legislation, one thing is clear. The rights of Canadians to freedom of speech, conscience and privacy must not be politicized and criminalized. If federal politicians or governments are so bothered and feel so hampered by these rights, they should resign their office and return to private life.

So, with an out-of-control government and a dysfunctional, weak-kneed opposition in Parliament, what are Canadians to do, whether they be journalists, commentators and posters on websites, or ordinary citizens, all of whom could be targeted or impacted by this legislation in one way or another?

Speak out, speak up, get active, get organized! We must not succumb to the politics of fear. If we don’t defend our rights as Canadians, who will?

This is the final article in this series.

- - - -

Peter Ewart is a columnist and writer based in Prince George, British Columbia.
He can be reached at: peter.ewart@shaw.ca