Members of Parliament return to Ottawa next week and one piece of legislation that the Carney government has set as a priority to push through the House of Commons before the summer recess is Bill C-22, “the Lawful Access Act.” This legislation establishes a new law that will expand Canadian law enforcement’s authority to access private digital data and subscriber information. It requires all online service providers to retain metadata about users’ activities for up to a year and forces them to grant government authorities access to users’ data.
The Carney government explains that its new law is a necessary expansion of “lawful access” powers in a world that is dangerous and divided. Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree says Canadians will be better protected by their police and intelligence agencies. Justice Minister Sean Fraser says the new powers are needed so the Canadian justice system can better deal with online and cross-border crime.
Skeptics of the government’s intent with Bill C-22 view this not as a single piece of legislation, but as one of a package of bills that are building an online infrastructure for Canada to become a mass surveillance state. At the risk of sounding conspiratorial, critics will argue that the Carney Liberals are building a digital cage. The Liberals are using their majority status in parliament to rush legislation and enact new tools of control under the guise of better protecting Canadians.
Bill C-22 is now being reviewed before a parliamentary committee, and the loudest and sharpest criticism of the legislation is coming from the technology industry that views the requirements of the new law as reprehensible government overreach. In forcing online service and encrypted providers to store data and install “backdoors” so the government can access that data on demand, the industry rejects the role they will be playing as part of the government’s surveillance apparatus. Tech giants Meta and Apple have filed formal objections with the Canadian government; Apple flat-out said, “We will NOT build a backdoor into our products. Ever.” The CEO of Canada’s largest tech company, Tobi Lutke of Shopify, sees the Liberals’ legislation as a huge mistake, posting on X: “C-22 is looking like a huge mistake. It worries me a great deal. There is so much nonsense in there that it may well end up dealing a death blow to Canadian tech viability.”
Here are a handful of pointed objections from tech leaders:
Signal, an American messaging service, stated the company “would rather pull out of the country” than comply with a law that places Signal in a position where users’ data and the privacy of its customers could be compromised, “Bill C-22 could potentially allow hackers to exploit these very vulnerabilities engineered into electronic systems, with private messaging services serving as an ideal target for foreign adversaries.”
Canadian VPN service Windscribe responded to Signal’s comment about leaving Canada: “We won’t be far behind if C-22 passes. In its current state, VPNs would almost certainly require us to log identifying user data. Signal isn’t headquartered in Canada so they can just shut off Canadian servers, but our HQ is. We pay an ungodly amount of taxes to this corrupt government, and in return they want to destroy the entire essence of our service to basically spy on its own citizens. Not happening. We’ll move HQ and take our taxes elsewhere.”
Panama-based NordVPN also said it would consider pulling out of Canada if the law passes: “…should Bill C-22 pass in its current form and if we are subjected to mandatory obligations, there isn’t a scenario in which we would compromise our no-logs architecture or encryption protections. To prevent this, we will consider all viable options, including limiting or, if necessary, removing our presence from Canadian jurisdiction.”
David Peterson, GM of Proton VPN, a Swiss company, posted on X that the European Union’s highest court had “struck down this type of mass data retention legislation twice already, suggesting it won’t stand up to scrutiny.” He stated, “Not happening. We’ll defend our Canadian users and never compromise them. We will fight C-22’s application by every means available.”
The growing opposition goes beyond the tech industry and includes serious concerns for national security and sovereignty and for an individual’s rights to privacy. Regarding security and sovereignty, Canadian investigative journalist Sam Cooper has suggested that C-22 will surveil Canadians and compile data that can be accessed by transnational crime cartels and, most likely, given the Canada-Sino strategic partnership, by the Chinese Communist Party. Cooper writes on this in The Bureau and, in part, he warns: “Beijing is patiently positioning itself — collecting encrypted messaging data from Western users while its universities and state-linked hackers advance quantum computing technologies powerful enough to break into private Western communications. Without entering complex legal territory, it is fair to say that enough credible experts have made the case that Ottawa would be opening the door and handing Beijing the keys to exploit exactly these kinds of structural weaknesses. In passing Bill C-22 as written, Canada would be legislating a gift to the adversary.”
The concerns of a host of U.S. high tech companies operating in Canada have been heard in Washington D.C. and a congressional committee sent a warning letter to Anandasangaree that the new requirements for retention of users’ metadata and “back door” access for government agencies is a threat to both U.S. national security and the integrity of cross-border data flows. (An important aside is that the U.S. House Judiciary Committee looking at Bill C-22 is the same committee that exposed the U.N.’s global financing alliance for net-zero policies (GFANZ) as a “climate cartel” and criticized Carney for his role).
Regarding Canadians’ privacy rights, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) has been vocal in its worry that the legislation is a serious threat. The organization’s president John Carpay baldly states, “Canadians deserve security without sacrificing privacy. When laws drive secure communications services out of the country, Canadians should be asking serious questions about privacy, security, and government overreach.” JCCF urges the government to make substantial changes to the legislation, including “removing the proposed production order, eliminating mandatory data retention requirements, requiring full judicial oversight, and adding a sunset clause.” JCCF urges Canadians to sign its petition and take action against the government’s surveillance state before it is too late: Stop Bill C-22.
MP Leslyn Lewis summarized the seriousness of Bill C-22 becoming law in her second reading debate in the House of Commons: the legislation “allows the government to build a system that makes it easier to access your telecom data, your phone, internet, and other digital activity, by requiring networks to be ready for that access. The problem is how that system is being built. It is being shaped by government ministers, behind closed doors, and without full parliamentary scrutiny. Ministers will set the rules for how your data is collected, retained, and accessed — through regulation, not through open debate in Parliament. Bill C-22 is not just about access to your data. It is about control over the system that makes that access possible.”
Dean Allison, local MP for Niagara West, brought into focus the larger picture for Canadians when he posited: “First it was Bill C-11 controlling what Canadians see online. Then Bill C-18 blocking and manipulating access to news. Now Bill C-22 takes the next step: surveillance and state control…. This is no longer about ‘safety’ or ‘protecting Canadians.’ It is about control. A government that froze bank accounts without court orders, shut off committee cameras, and faces hundreds of unresolved wrongdoing complaints now wants expanded access into your digital life. Canadians should be asking a very serious question: How much freedom are we prepared to surrender in the name of government ‘oversight’?”
Final word this week goes to Canadian broadcaster and political commentator Jasmin Laine, who summarizes the cumulative effect of the Carney Liberals’ online legislation: “When governments begin simultaneously influencing what citizens see, what narratives are amplified, what information is suppressed, and how securely people can communicate, you are no longer dealing with isolated policy decisions. You are looking at the infrastructure for behavioural and narrative control. That should terrify every Canadian—regardless of political affiliation.”
Breaking news: There are conflicting rumours coming out of Ottawa that the government may be open to redrafting the contentious parts of Bill C-22 based on the criticisms from industry. Then there are some reports that the Liberals are just going to dig in, stand their ground, and push the legislation through as is. So, it is important for Canadians to add their voice to the concerns about Bill C-22 and the government establishing a surveillance state. Speak out now while there is still a chance to make a difference. Contact your MP.
Chris George is an advocate, government relations advisor, and writer/copy editor. As president of a public relations firm established in 1994, Chris provides discreet counsel, tactical advice and management skills to CEOs/Presidents, Boards of Directors and senior executive teams in executing public and government relations campaigns and managing issues. Prior to this PR/GR career, Chris spent seven years on Parliament Hill on staffs of Cabinet Ministers and MPs. He has served in senior campaign positions for electoral and advocacy campaigns at every level of government. Today, Chris resides in Almonte, Ontario where he and his wife manage www.cgacommunications.com. Contact Chris at chrisg.george@gmail.com.
