Last Tuesday, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews introduced Bill C-30 (a.k.a. the “Lawful Access Bill”) into the House of Commons. One day earlier, in a foolish attempt to demonize critics of this controversial bill, Toews proclaimed that citizens “can either stand with [the government] or with the child pornographers.” The media heard this and, unsurprisingly, went wild.
The frenzy and public backlash is not without reason: Bill C-30 would bring us an expensive, expansive surveillance structure, creating a giant data registry that records (and allows authorities access to) the private information of any Canadian, at any time, without a warrant. It is outrageous to suggest that anyone who opposes these ideas supports child pornographers. Furthermore, the government has failed to present any evidence that the expansion of these online spying powers is necessary.
Don’t Toews me, bro
The resulting boom in the bill’s media coverage set off an avalanche of social-media activity. On Twitter, people started using the hashtag #TellVicEverything, flooding Toews’ Twitter feed with the mundane details of their lives as an ironic way of protesting the loss of privacy threatened by this bill. By Thursday, Tell Vic Everything had become the top-trending topic in Canada.
In a slightly more controversial vein, an anonymous tweeter (under the pseudonym “Vikileaks30”) began tweeting, on Tuesday, about Minister Toews’ personal history, including the details of his affair and messy divorce. The tweeter justified the action by saying, “Vic wants to know about you. Let’s get to know Vic.”
While there’s contention around whether these attacks on Minister Toews are appropriate, they do highlight an oft-misunderstood fact about the importance of privacy: It’s not about having nothing criminal to hide.
The Tories try to get out of the sun
All this outcry has borne some dissent within Conservative ranks. Bowing to pressure from their ridings, several Conservative MPs – including Rob Anders of Calgary and New Brunswick’s John Williamson – have indicated some opposition to the “intrusive” surveillance legislation. As a result of such resistance, the associate director of communications for the Prime Minister’s Office released the following statement: “The government is open to having a thorough study of this at committee to make sure the bill gets done the right way [and] so that we do make those changes that will protect more people while at the same time not intruding on anyone’s privacy.”
All this as the petition calling on the government to scrap the bill hit its 90,000 mark – a growth of 10,000 petitioners in less than a day.
How the bills have already changed
Lawful Access legislation has been kicking around for a while. It was initially introduced by the Liberal party in 2005, and then by the Conservatives in 2009 before Parliament was prorogued. The Conservatives introduced it again just last year before the election. The Conservatives’ platform for the election included a vow to pass the Lawful Access legislation in the first 100 sitting days of Parliament.
That’s when we at OpenMedia.ca began work on the Stop Online Spying campaign.
Months before Bill C-30 saw the light of day, the petition gained momentum through a variety of citizen-created viral videos, a mini-documentary, and other citizen-engagement tactics.
It is perhaps this citizen-fuelled opposition that led the Conservatives to make some changes to their original legislation. While the current version of the bill would give authorities warrantless access to a citizen’s name, address, telephone number, email, IP address, and local service provider identifier, the previously tabled version also proposed access to mobile identification numbers, electronic serial numbers, international mobile equipment identity numbers, international mobile subscriber identity numbers, and subscriber identity module card numbers, which have since been removed from the bill.
Clearly, some pressure was exercised effectively, especially around the surveillance of mobile devices, which would have been extremely problematic.
Unfortunately, though, most of the key subscriber data would still be obtainable without a warrant under the new legislation. Of these, access to IP addresses is particularly concerning: When linked with other personal data, an IP address has the potential to unlock a lot of information about what someone is doing and seeing online, and also who they are communicating with. According to Ontario Privacy Commissioner Anne Cavoukian, “Your IP address is not just a number. Right now there is no assurance that once in their hands, authorities can protect that data or prevent its misuse.”
What Canadians are asking for
We’re asking the government to remove aspects of the bill that bypass warrants. That means setting up comprehensive internal controls, clear oversight, meaningful deterrents, and a system to make sure these privacy protections are enforced.
This is easily the most unpopular legislation this government has tried to push through (and that’s saying something after the Omnibus Crime Bill). Since we’re talking about our fundamental freedoms, the bill is downright dangerous. Canadians need a balanced approach that respects our right to privacy and our digital economy: The Lawful Access legislation that is currently before Parliament achieves neither.
Let’s keep up the pressure. Visit http://StopSpying.ca or http://openmedia.ca/mp to voice your opposition.
Photo courtesy of Reuters.
5 comments