24 Hours columnist Leo Knight joins City Caucus today on Bill C-30
It's good that Vancouver Police Department Deputy Chief Warren Lemcke came out swinging at the critics of the federal government's legislation attempting to drag our laws into the 21st Century, otherwise known as Bill C-30. Frankly, the deafening rhetoric was bordering on outrageous.
Technological changes in the past 37 years since the current law was drafted have been dramatic. As Lemcke pointed out, the chief method of communication when the existing law was drafted was the rotary phone. Lawmakers then couldn't have even imagined texting or Blackberry Messenger, let alone e-mail or VOIP. Times have changed and laws need to change with them.
But, as with any potential intrusion into the public's privacy and increase in the powers of the police, a healthy public debate on the need for that intrusion should be held. We, as a society, should give up any privacy rights grudgingly and only after a well-demonstrated need.
That’s been part of the problem with Bill C-30. The government has done a very poor job of explaining the need and the opposition has been acting like so many Chicken Littles bellowing that the sky is falling. There has been no debate beyond what one might encounter on a playground.
In the first instance, there’s nothing in the bill that says the police can see your e-mail or spy on your Internet activities without a warrant. Nothing. It does mandate that your Internet service provider keep a record of all of your traffic for a period of 21 days in the event that police might need to review it in a bona fide investigation and after convincing a judge to give them a warrant to do so.
The other apparent bone of contention is the requirement that an ISP provide subscriber information to police upon request. The opposition claims the police should need a warrant to get this when in fact, it is exactly for that purpose that the police need the information.
Getting a warrant in Canada is not an easy thing. It used to be done in a page or two summary of the grounds to obtain a warrant. Now, many warrant applications, called an "Information to Obtain," tend to read like War and Peace so complicated have they become.
The suggestion by Justice Minister Vic Toews that opposing the bill is akin to supporting child porn is nonsense. The reality is that this will help police investigate all manner of crime.
I applaud the VPD for the straight talk on this issue. Too bad there has been precious little of that coming from either side of the House of Commons.
- post by Leo Knight. Read Leo every week in 24 Hours Vancouver. Photo credit: CARMINE MARINELLI/24 HOURS.
PDF 
Umm, Leo, perhaps you should actually read some of the analysis that has come from Michael Geist at http://www.michaelgeist.ca/ as things are far from as clear-cut as you cite.
On this particular issue, the police’s perspective is probably the last one that should be listened to, as civil liberty concerns are notoriously irrelevant to police.
Actually Geist was one of the people setting his hair on fire and using inaccurate information to inflame opinion. There were many others.
Well between a respected law professor and a hard right political commentator, I know which one I will believe on matters of law.