Thank you for contacting my office regarding Bill C-30, the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act.
Canada's laws currently do not adequately protect Canadians from online exploitation and we think there is widespread agreement that this is a problem.
We want to update our laws while striking the right balance between combating crime and protecting privacy.
Let me be very clear: the police will not be able to read emails or view web activity unless they obtain a warrant issued by a judge and we have constructed safeguards to protect the privacy of Canadians, including audits by privacy commissioners.
What's needed most is an open discussion about how to better protect Canadians from online crime. We will therefore send this legislation directly to Parliamentary Committee for a full examination of the best ways to protect Canadians while respecting their privacy.
For your information, I have included some myths and facts below regarding Bill C-30 in its current state.
Member of Parliament for Provencher
Myth: Lawful Access legislation infringes on the privacy of Canadians.
Fact: Our Government puts a high priority on protecting the privacy of law-abiding Canadians. Current practices of accessing the actual content of communications with a legal authorization will not change.
Myth: Having access to basic subscriber information means that authorities can monitor personal communications and activities.
Fact: This has nothing to do with monitoring emails or web browsing. Basic subscriber information would be limited to a customer’s name, address, telephone number, email address, Internet Protocol (IP) address, and the name of the telecommunications service provider. It absolutely does not include the content of emails, phones calls or online activities.
Myth: This legislation does not benefit average Canadians and only gives authorities more power.
Fact: As a result of technological innovations, criminals and terrorists have found ways to hide their illegal activities. This legislation will keep Canadians safer by putting police on the same footing as those who seek to harm us.
Myth: Basic subscriber information is way beyond “phone book information”.
Fact: The basic subscriber information described in the proposed legislation is the modern day equivalent of information that is in the phone book. Individuals frequently freely share this information online and in many cases it is searchable and quite public.
Myth: Police and telecommunications service providers will now be required to maintain databases with information collected on Canadians.
Fact: This proposed legislation will not require either police or telecommunications service providers to create databases with information collected on Canadians.
Myth: “Warrantless access” to customer information will give police and government unregulated access to our personal information.
Fact: Federal legislation already allows telecommunications service providers to voluntarily release basic subscriber information to authorities without a warrant. This Bill acts as a counterbalance by adding a number of checks and balances which do not exist today, and clearly lists which basic subscriber identifiers authorities can access.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Dear Vic Toews...
I wrote Vic Toews some time ago to complain about his C-30 bill, and his nonsense about if you don't agree then you side with child molesters. I mean, really? So I signed a petition and sent an email to him. I didn't expect a response, but the one he's having sent out is a load. So I wrote him back, from the heart. Here's my thoughts that I shared with him, for your reading pleasure:
Hello, and thanks for your automated reply, which reads as propaganda and not at all a reasoned response.
However, since you have gone on record admitting you don't know the details about this bill, allow me as a critically thinking person to tell you that I think you are overreaching boundaries in democracy and are showing no respect for the Canadian people or the Charter, for that matter.
Police do have adequate powers already to catch child predators. This bill would invite abuses from police, something that is almost a certainty as large increases in power never prove to result in an increase in responsible behaviour. The average person, or law official, isn't Spider-man, after all.
Now, I would like to point out some matters concerning your recent humiliation via Twitter, regarding your divorce. Seeing as the details are matter of public record, and someone chose to broadcast these public details publicly via a public forum, I don't see what crime has been committed against you. It sucks to be you, certainly, but I can't help but see the karma playing out in this situation.
Truly, I fail to see why the police should be involved. That is hardly an appropriate use of their time. Surely someone as troubled about child molesters as yourself would prefer to see the police use their time for more important matters, like, for example, catching child molesters, not protecting your vanity.
As a side note, to touch further on other personal failings of yours, I am also disturbed that someone who has touted himself as some sort of beacon of "family values" has behaved as you have in your own marriage. If one purports oneself as a committed family man in an effort to deny rights to others who are different than oneself, one should not behave so hypocritically in one's personal life. I mean, come on. Does the special sanctity of heterosexual marriage include the clause, "To have, to hold, to cheat on, till divorce does us part?"
Cheat on your wife and father however many children with other women as you like (Though I and other decent people will judge you for it, sorry. That's just awful. Shame on you) but not if you're trying to sell an image of a devoted family man to win votes and curry favour politically. That is immoral. And it's sneaky. I really don't know how you live with yourself, come to think of it. You're really quite terrible.
Frankly, sir, I think you should resign. I see nothing of value you have to offer this country. You rather stand apart from what a true Canadian is. You're not ethical, you don't play fair and you're unkind, impolite and invasive. Perhaps when you resign, you could take some time for your personal life, which is obviously in sore need of your attention. Don't worry, we'll be just fine without you.
Proud Canadian who values privacy and does not support child molesters, thank you very much, you ass.
PS I value living in a society where I can write you such an email without fear of arrest. Somehow I doubt you share this value. Your politics sicken me.
***Obviously I used my real name.
And here's the automated BS reply for your viewing pleasure. I haven't found one person yet who agrees with this clown. Thankfully, I must not know anyone that stupid.
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:19 PM,