“There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time.” – George Orwell, 1984.

You may believe that “The Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act” or Bill C30 sounds very laudable, in fact that is why the government has given it that title. I just ask that you educate yourself.

According to my MP Bev Shipley “The police will not be able to read emails or view web activity unless they obtain a warrant issued by a judge. We have constructed safeguards to protect the privacy of Canadians, including audits by privacy commissioners. This proposed legislation does not require either police or telecommunications service providers to create databases with information collected on Canadians”

On the other hand, according to Terry Milewski “Among other things, the bill requires ISPs to install surveillance technology and software to enable monitoring of phone and internet traffic. Section 34 is there to make sure ISPs comply. So what, exactly, does it say?

Essentially, it says that government agents may enter an ISP when they wish, without a warrant, and demand to see absolutely everything — including all data anywhere on the network — and to copy it all. “

I appreciate what you are saying Rc, and I suspect Canada Customs, and assorted other agencies know far more about me than I would like.

What is getting up my nose about this since I originally posted is the fact that my MP obviously lied to me, although I suspect he did it in all innocence. After all if the Justice Minister had not even read the bill, why would I expect that my MP would have read it. As I said in a previous post, they are just trained seals, and it is beginning to look as though they are not very well trained. If assorted reporters and pundits take the time to read it, is it to much to expect that the Justice Minister and MPs read it? Isn’t that what they are supposed to receive their exorbitant salaries for?

Vic Toews should do the honorable thing and resign as he has admitted that he does not know what is in his own bill. But there is not much honor in that place so I am not holding my breath.

PS. We really are following Orwells clockwork orange and 1984. I think they must be modelling our future on those two books meaning our Government. That is a secret you know

The Government has now referred the whole bill to committee. In my opinion this is just to reduce the heat. They are hoping the furor will go away and we will all forget about it. There is a real danger this will happen, but the more we learn about the bill, the more frightened we should be. If this were just an attempt to track child porn and terrorists then I am sure I, and every other Canadian would support it, but it patently is not. This will give the authorities, and those authorities will probably be the police, but the way the bill is written, not necessarily the police, the opportunity to track everything you and I do on line. Now I don’t know about you, but I do my banking on line and my taxes. I talk with my family, express my political views and a thousand other things. I don’t want some agent of the Conservative Party, or any other party mining information about me.

Over the top you think? Well just look at the news this week about the fraudulent calls during the election. Calls that maybe effected the result of the May election. We are talking 34 ridings now, and the Conservatives only have a majority of 11.

I grew up many years ago with an ingrained respect for authority. That has all gone now. The police will do what they have to do for a conviction. You know that is true just from the number of people who have been convicted of murder in this country, and it is subsequently proved, beyond a doubt, that they didn’t do it. We know that the PM and his government will do what they have to do in order to remain in power, or gain power. Just remember Shawinigate and what has been revealed so far this past week about the Conservative campaign.

Now is not the time for complacency, now is the time to protest and stand for the few rights you have left.

Ipsos Reid has a poll on the subject, it is all over the map, but interesting:

“Despite the support in general terms for the bill, most believe (80 per cent) that if the bill is enacted, it may lead to government or police spying on Canadians for “activities outside the realm of illegal activity.”

Read more: http://www.canada.com/technology/Poll+suggests+Canadians+support+online+surveillance+bill+point/6223793/story.html#ixzz1nlinOajE

Mr.Cowtan you make good points, in particular your desire to protest and stand against the continued reduction on our rights. But how exactly do we accomplish this? Any and all ideas are welcome as a solution to this issue and the many dual purpose bills government leaders conceive now and in the future is quite perplexing.

I strongly support implementing measures to reduce, with the optimum goal to, and eliminate crime perpetrated via the internet. But this bill in it’s current draft does not target that problem in any specific manner. What this bill, if given royal ascent, would ultimately and indisputably become the “Guilty by internet access use until proven innocent act” (seems this bill gets new names from time to time). Think about this and look at this bill and see where this new bill title cannot be applied?

The governments process of naming this bill has been blatantly designed to FOOL Canadians into supporting a bill that does little to correct the tragic crimes it refers to. Originally the bill was called “Lawful Access Act” however the spin doctors changed that one as it was in direct contradiction to what the bill actually does. In order to garner support from the masses that would not bother to even read the bill they decide on it’s current guise by adding a terrifying word “predator”. If this bill ascends the truth is that the government and there appointed policing agencies have the legal right to be the “predators” with no accountability to our judicial system. Whose preying on who now?

Our elected officials (not all but many in the name of party unity) are willing to cross the blurred lines of right and wrong for political gains. Why. Because slowly, we as a society continue to allow our government to enact laws to further blur the lines and reduce elected officials accountability.

Perhaps you have read this page of information, perhaps not. Please take a few minutes and do so and see if there is some info here that you were unaware of. And if you find something appalling please come back here and comment on it. Here is the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protecting_Children_from_Internet_Predators_Act

At the start of this submission I asked how can we make a difference?
For now I believe that all actions of all government leaders must be analyzed and broken down to the basic pros and cons. From there honest and open PUBLIC debate must ensue so that ultimately we put in place laws, rules, budgets, etc. that are progressive, functional and above all else, provide law abiding Canadians their rightfully earned honour.

Please consider the ramifications of Section 64 of this bill. In an a nutshell? If the government forgot something in the bill right now they can add to it when they bloody well please.
This kind of section proves the authors to be of a self serving, arrogant, hypocritical, my way or the highway…..ummmm…….oh what word am I looking for…………..hmmmmmmm………
PREDATOR.

My MP, Bev Shipley, has written this huge letter to the Wallaceburg Courier Press detailing all the government talking points regarding this bill. I cannot possibly reply to them all, but I thought what I might do is list some of those people and organisations that have spoken out against this bill. This is just a partial list, and the only federal politicians included are those conservative MPs who have voiced their opposition.

John Williamson MP New Brunswick Southwest
David Tilson MP Dufferin Caledon
Rob Anders MP CalgaryWest
Ann Cavoukian, Ontario’s privacy commissioner
Rick Mercer of the Mercer Report
The Editorial Board, The Province, Vancouver BC
Terry Milewski CBC
Lorne Gunter, Columnist, The National Post
Reporters Without Borders
Chantal Bernier, Federal deputy privacy commissioner
The National Post Editorial Board
Ivor Tossell The Globe and Mail
Heather Mallick, Toronto Star
Michael Geist, the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-Commerce Law at the University of Ottawa.
Ezra Levant, Lawyer and Sun Media Host.
Chris Selley National Post columnist
British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
Sarah Schmidt Canada.com
David Fraser The Canadian Privacy Law Blog
Elizabeth Denham BC Information and Privacy Commissioner
Connie Fournier Freedominion.ca
Frank Work, Q.C., Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta
Irene Hamilton, Ombudsman for Manitoba
Anne E. Bertrand, Q.C., Access to Information and Privacy Commissioner of New Brunswick
Ed Ring, Information and Privacy Commissioner for Newfoundland and Labrador
Dulcie McCallum, Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Review Officer for the Province of Nova Scotia
Maria C. MacDonald, Information and Privacy Commissioner of Prince Edward Island
Me Jean Chartier, Président de la Commission d’accès à l’information du Québec
R. Gary Dickson, Q.C., Information and Privacy Commissioner of Saskatchewan

When you can get Lorne Gunter and Heather Mallick on the same side, there is something wrong.