Canada’s Bill C-2: A New Threat

Canada’s Bill C-2: A New Threat By Dale Jodoin Canada’s Parliament is debating Bill C-2, the Strong Borders Act. The government says it will stop smugglers, fight organized crime, and keep Canadians safe. But hidden in the bill are sweeping surveillance powers that reach far beyond border checks. Bill C-2 would let police, border agents, and intelligence services: Demand personal details from phone and internet providers. Track travel history, financial records, and online accounts on “reasonable suspicion.” Share that information with foreign governments, including the United States, with weak safeguards. These powers bypass the oversight of judges. Traditionally, warrants ensured that police only entered private lives when evidence justified it. Bill C-2 breaks that safeguard. Once powers like this are written into law, they rarely vanish. They survive governments, ready to be used by whoever is in charge. Why Oversight Matters Oversight is the shield of democracy. A warrant system forces government agencies to justify intrusion. Lowering that standard to “reasonable suspicion” invites abuse. Security experts warn of mission creep: powers granted for one purpose slowly expand to others. A law written for smugglers could easily be turned on critics, protesters, or journalists. Governments argue these tools are needed for safety. But once surveillance becomes ordinary, it grows quietly until freedom shrinks without anyone noticing. The Shock from England For proof, look at England. In 2016, the UK passed the Investigatory Powers Act, often called the Snooper’s Charter. It promised protection against terrorism. The law required internet providers to store everyone’s online history for a year. Security agencies could access that data without a judge. Police were given authority to hack into devices and read private messages. At first, this was framed as anti-terror. But over time, the scope expanded. Protest organisers, journalists, and ordinary citizens became subjects of surveillance. Public order rules combined with spying powers to manage dissent. In some cases, people faced police visits or fines simply for statements critical of government policy. The chilling effect was immediate. Activists moderated their language. Journalists thought twice before pursuing sensitive stories. Citizens held back their opinions. Safety had become the excuse for control. The Canadian Risk The parallels with Bill C-2 are undeniable. Both laws: Promise security but grant wide surveillance. Reduce judicial oversight. Use vague definitions of “threat.” Permit broad data-sharing abroad. Canada risks following the same path as England. Once the tools exist, they will be used — and not just at the border. Free Speech at Risk Free speech is more than the right to talk. It is the confidence to speak without fear. If Canadians believe their words and messages are being stored, many will go silent. That silence weakens democracy. Debate narrows, media hesitates, and citizens avoid speaking against government policy. In England, that reality is already visible. Bill C-2 could bring the same culture of self-censorship here. The Conservative Opposition Conservative MPs have raised alarms, arguing Canada already has laws to fight smuggling and crime with judicial oversight. They warn that Bill C-2 tips the balance, giving the government unchecked power. Their concern is for the future as much as the present. Surveillance powers do not fade away. They grow stronger with each new crisis and each new government. A Choice for Canada England shows what happens when freedoms are traded for safety. Rights are not lost in one moment. They are chipped away, one small step at a time. Canada faces that same choice. Do we accept a law that prioritises surveillance over liberty? Or do we demand security measures that also respect the rights of citizens? Three Word Warning The warning is simple: Democracy in Danger. Bill C-2 may not punish critics today, but it creates the framework for future governments to do so. We should not wait until Canadians are questioned for their words to recognise the risk. By then, the system will already be in place. A Word to Our Readers If this investigation has shown you what is at stake, act now. Contact your Member of Parliament. Ask where they stand. Speak to your friends and neighbours. And if you value journalism that investigates threats to democracy, let our office know you appreciated this work. Reader feedback ensures that freedom, privacy, and accountability remain part of Canada’s national debate. Your voice matters in Parliament, in the press, and in the defence of democracy itself.