Vancouver group continues campaign against online surveillance bill
A Vancouver-based Internet advocacy group is hoping to keep the federal government’s controversial online surveillance bill on the public radar.
Public Safety Minister Vic Toews recently quelched rumours that Bill C-30 would die on the order paper. According to media reports, Toews maintained the Internet surveillance legislation will be referred to a parliamentary committee before it goes to second reading.
Steve Anderson, the executive director of OpenMedia.ca, said the public may not know the bill is still on the table.
“I don’t think they’re aware that behind the scenes, the government is still pushing this forward, and that really they haven’t made any commitment to make any substantive changes,” Anderson told the Straight by phone.
The group launched a new video campaign today (May 24), which outlines the organization’s concerns with the bill.
“Our main concern is that it will provide a range of authorities with access to our personal information at any time without a warrant, and it looks like if nothing else happens, if people don’t reach out to their MPs, then that probably will come through,” said Anderson.
The bill titled the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act was introduced by Toews in February 2012.
The legislation will give police and intelligence authorities the power under certain circumstances to order a telecommunications company to provide a customer's name, address, telephone number, Internet Protocol address, and email address without a warrant.
An online petition against Bill C-30 launched by OpenMedia.ca has now gathered over 135,000 signatures.
“This is one of those issues that crosses the party lines and it really hits home for really all Canadians, and it’s just a matter of people being aware,” said Anderson.
The video released by OpenMedia.ca as part of the group's campaign against a controversial online surveillance bill.






Moreover, while the government may not be especially interested in our scintillating e-mail correspondence, they may be interested in who we associate with. We are on a slippery slope if we agree to this; after all, who will be watching and monitoring the government?