this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2025
47 points (96.1% liked)

Canada

10601 readers
2259 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They have split the bill off into separate ones hoping we wont notice.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Oh I see. I read a bit more carefully and it seems that Greenpeace'es reporting might be outdated on the lawful access bits of C-2. Reading from Michael Geist it seems that they've been removed from the bill:

The government today reversed course on its ill-advised anti-privacy measures in Bill C-2, introducing a new border bill with the lawful access provisions (Parts 14 and 15) removed. The move is welcome given the widespread opposition to provisions that would have created the power to demand warrantless access to information from any provider of a service in Canada and increased the surveillance on Canadian networks.

But we have to be vigilant as Canadian governments have been trying to pass lawful access since Harper.

That's just lawful access though, nothing to do with the rest of the nastiness around immigration which is still there.

[–] kbal@fedia.io 2 points 2 days ago

There is much confusion about such things. "Increased surveillance" is how many people understood the worst part of C-2, but it was much worse than just that. The stuff that remains (presumably; I haven't read the new bills) could also be described as increased surveillance but isn't the same thing as the completely over-the-top ill-considered lunge in the direction of "lawful access" that was in the original.