Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???

[HavokFour]

And he’s said he’s prepared to keep Parliament sitting into the summer to fast-track the bill, but the Bloc is committing to studying it fully through committee.

Carney prepared to sit over the summer to pass new bill to fast-track major projects

'If Parliament needs to sit longer, it should sit longer in order to get it passed. That's what Canadians expect,' he said.

nationalpost.com

PMMC’s not dicking around on his priorities. that’s for sure. This is three major bills in about as many days.

Beat me to it, and over all good to hear he's seems to be adamant about getting this through.

EDIT: Here's the bill for anyone looking for some reading material.

Government Bill (House of Commons) C-5 (45-1) - First Reading - One Canadian Economy Act - Parliament of Canada

Government Bill (House of Commons) C-5 (45-1) - First Reading - One Canadian Economy Act - Parliament of Canada

www.parl.ca

 

[The Bread Guy]

PMMC’s not dicking around on his priorities. that’s for sure. This is three major bills in about as many days.

Fingers crossed, indeed, but it’s interesting to see so many unanimous votes back to back after the heat of the campaign. I hope he doesn’t think this is how Parliament works all the time. Ride the wave for now, baby!

 

[Jarnhamar]

Liberals sneak privacy law exemption into tax cut bill

Canada’s federal parties have been united in fighting this battle for years. The Liberal and Conservative parties collect massive amounts of personal data on Canadians, the better to get them out to vote, volunteer, and donate. And the parties don’t want to follow laws governing how they keep or use that info.

The big parties have been fighting a court battle to preserve their hands-off status, after a British Columbia court ruled that they should have to follow the province’s privacy laws.

Instead, the parties want to make their own rules, and without any consequences if they break them. They tried in the last Parliament to pass legislation to that effect, but ran out of time. So they’ve squeezed the legal changes into Carney’s tax-cut bill.

The proposals in C-4 include a clause that makes explicit that any registered political party, or anyone acting on its behalf, may “carry out any activities in relation to personal information”,

 

[MilEME09]

Liberals sneak privacy law exemption into tax cut bill

Here's the actual text and it basically covers third parties

Personal Information Collected by Political Parties
End of inserted block
Definition of personal information
Start of inserted block
446.‍1 In sections 446.‍2 to 446.‍4, personal information means information about an identifiable individual.
End of inserted block
Purpose
Start of inserted block
446.‍2 The purpose of the provisions of this Act related to the protection of personal information, including the provisions of this subdivision, is to provide for a national, uniform, exclusive and complete regime applicable to registered parties and eligible parties respecting their activities in relation to personal information, including the collection, use, disclosure, retention and disposal of personal information.
End of inserted block
Activities in relation to personal information
Start of inserted block
446.‍3 In order to participate in public affairs by endorsing one or more of its members as candidates and supporting their election, any registered party or eligible party, as well as any person or entity acting on the party’s behalf, including the party’s candidates, electoral district associations, officers, agents, employees, volunteers and representatives, may, subject to this Act and any other applicable federal Act, carry out any activities in relation to personal information, including the collection, use, disclosure, retention and disposal of personal information in accordance with the party’s policy for the protection of personal information.
End of inserted block
Provincial or territorial Act
Start of inserted block
446.‍4 (1) When participating in public affairs by endorsing one or more of its members as candidates and supporting their election, a registered party or eligible party, as well as any person or entity acting on the party’s behalf, including the party’s candidates, electoral district associations, officers, agents, employees, volunteers and representatives, cannot be required to comply with an Act of a province or territory that regulates activities in relation to personal information, including the collection, use, disclosure, retention and disposal of personal information, unless the party’s policy for the protection of personal information provides otherwise.
End of inserted block
For greater certainty
Start of inserted block
(2) For greater certainty, the registered party, eligible party or person or entity acting on the party’s behalf cannot be required to provide access to personal information or provide information relating to personal information under its control or to correct — or receive, adjudicate or annotate requests to correct — personal information or omissions in personal information under its control.
End of inserted block
Policy for the protection of personal information
Start of inserted block
446.‍5 (1) A registered party or eligible party, as well as any person or entity acting on the party’s behalf, including the party’s candidates, electoral district associations, officers, agents, employees, volunteers and representatives, must comply with the party’s policy for the protection of personal information.
End of inserted block
Clarification
Start of inserted block
(2) For greater certainty, a person or entity referred to in subsection (1) that fails to comply with the policy referred to in that subsection contravenes that subsection and commits a violation referred to in section 508.‍1.
End of inserted block
Required contents
Start of inserted block
446.‍6 The policy for the protection of personal information of a registered party or of an eligible party must be publicly available in both official languages, be written in plain language and
(a) designate a privacy officer who is responsible for overseeing the party’s compliance with the policy;

(b) include the name and contact information of the privacy officer;

(c) state the types of personal information in relation to which the party carries out its activities;

(d) explain, using illustrative examples, how the party carries out its activities in relation to personal information, such as by indicating whether it does so online or through the use of cookies; and

(e) describe the training related to the protection of personal information that is offered to the party’s employees and volunteers who may have access to the personal information that is under its control.

End of inserted block
Meetings relating to protecting personal information
Start of inserted block
446.‍7 The Chief Electoral Officer shall hold at least one meeting each calendar year relating to the protection of personal information by registered parties and eligible parties.
End of inserted block
48 Section 446.‍1 of the Act is repealed

Government Bill (House of Commons) C-4 (45-1) - First Reading - Making Life More Affordable for Canadians Act - Parliament of Canada

Government Bill (House of Commons) C-4 (45-1) - First Reading - Making Life More Affordable for Canadians Act - Parliament of Canada

www.parl.ca

 

[Jarnhamar]

Here's the actual text and it basically covers third parties

Thanks.

So what do you think? Anything bad about this or is the author overreacting?

 

[Haggis]

Meanwhile, PMMC's new Public Safety Minister admits in the House that he has not a clue about firearms licensing or the process to become licensed and insists that recent legislative changes to firearms laws are not about lawful firearms ownership.

 

[MilEME09]

Thanks.

So what do you think? Anything bad about this or is the author overreacting?

Over reacting and likely hasn't actually read it. Basically all political parties have a privacy policy, third parties must follow that policy if acting on behalf of that party. Also third parties cannot be forced to give over that information to the political party. All persons and third parties working for the parties must comply with the privacy policy other it would be an offense.

In other words anyone hired to do surveys or polling for example for the LPC cannot be forced to give up who they called for example or phone numbers, etc

 

[Rifleman62]

Carney gov’t tables bill to reduce interprovincial trade barriers, build national projects

Isn't that just Federal interprovincial trade barriers?

 

[Blackadder1916]

Thanks.

So what do you think? Anything bad about this or is the author overreacting?

This is something we should be looking closer at. The article doesn't reference the former bill that attempted to introduce this, but I assume that, as it is to amend the Canada Elections Act, the concerns raised by the Privacy Commissioner over the previous attempt still stand.

https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/privacy-and-transparency-at-the-opc/proactive-disclosure/opc-parl-bp/lcjc_20230503/is_lcjc_20230503/

Bill C-47 Amendments
Key Messages
Bill C-47 amends the Canada Elections Act to authorize political parties to collect, use, disclose, retain, and dispose of personal information in accordance with the party’s own privacy policy – this is essentially self-regulation.
Unfortunately, the amendments do not establish standards for political parties to follow in their handling of personal information, nor do they provide for independent oversight of the privacy practices of political parties.
Given much of the personal information gathered by political parties on electors, such as political views and voting intentions, is sensitive, parties should be subject to privacy requirements, based on internationally recognized privacy principles, including an independent third party with authority to verify and enforce compliance.

Edited to add
Some background from Elections Canada to add to the discussion.

Discussion Paper 3: The Protection of Electors' Personal Information in the Federal Electoral Context

---

www.elections.ca

Current Rules Protecting Electors' Personal Information - Discussion Paper 3: The Protection of Electors' Personal Information in the Federal Electoral Context

---

www.elections.ca

Elections Canada and Privacy

---

www.elections.ca

 

[The Bread Guy]

Meanwhile, PMMC's new Public Safety Minister admits in the House that he has not a clue about firearms licensing or the process to become licensed and insists that recent legislative changes to firearms laws are not about lawful firearms ownership.

A lot of staff effort went into prepping 1) a big binder telling the guy “welcome to the job - here’s your big files, what to consider & what we’re doing,” and 2) a smaller binder prepping him for the committee hearing. Here’s past examples of (1) …

Transition Binders: Public Safety Canada

Briefing materials

www.publicsafety.gc.ca

Did he read the material, not understand it & not ask enough questions to get it?

Did he just skim it & not get it?

Did he just look hard at the chapters of the text that The Boss said are priorities for the moment, with gun legislation being considered a “nice to know,” not a “must know”?

Yeah, a new minister may not know EVERY detail, but WTF?

Then again, in an era of new security bosses south of us not knowing what habeus corpus is, again, WTF???

Late add: Here’s what was shared in a binder last year on gun control- quick skim didn’t show mention of the acronyms in question …

Transition Binder: Firearms

Briefing materials

www.publicsafety.gc.ca

 

[brihard]

I suspect gun control and related legislation and policy just isn't a policy priority at the moment for the new government, so the new guy was focusing more on other more urgent stuff.

 

[Haggis]

I suspect gun control and related legislation and policy just isn't a policy priority at the moment for the new government, so the new guy was focusing more on other more urgent stuff.

He was probably ambushed by the CPC's Andrew Lawton. I will give him points for answering honestly and without hesitation, something refreshing from a Liberal MP in recent memory. But with a potential minimum bill of $765M, the commercial buyback barely underway, the individual buyback not even planned out yet and the amnesty expiring in 22 weeks, it's going to come up again very soon.

Still, it was shocking to hear that, as a former Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and later short term Minister of Justice, he thinks Bills C-71 and C-21 were intended primarily to actually combat gun crime.

 

[Blackadder1916]

Over reacting and likely hasn't actually read it. Basically all political parties have a privacy policy, third parties must follow that policy if acting on behalf of that party. Also third parties cannot be forced to give over that information to the political party. All persons and third parties working for the parties must comply with the privacy policy other it would be an offense.

In other words anyone hired to do surveys or polling for example for the LPC cannot be forced to give up who they called for example or phone numbers, etc

My concern is not that "anyone hired to do surveys or polling" would be forced to give up who they called but my concern is that the party gives them my information so that they call me, or that either the party or a contracted lackey can use my information for any purpose they claim is suitable, or that they provide my information to another associated political entity (e.g., the provincial version of their party or candidates for municipal office who ascribe to their political credo).And doing all that without oversight by a privacy regulator.

The portion that reads

(2) For greater certainty, the registered party, eligible party or person or entity acting on the party’s behalf cannot be required to provide access to personal information or provide information relating to personal information under its control or to correct — or receive, adjudicate or annotate requests to correct — personal information or omissions in personal information under its control.

means that if the personal information they have about me is incorrect, or being used for a purpose that I object to, or even if I want to find out that they have information about me (other than that which is provided to a political party by Elections Canada - i.e., the register of electors), they do not even have to put into place a mechanism for me to request that they correct it, stop using it, or tell me about it. Being able to do those actions are all part of any of the federal or provincial privacy laws.

I was having a look at the privacy policies of a few of the registered political parties. The only one whose wording addressed my objections was this one:

Privacy Policy
The Xxxxxx xxxxxxxx Party of Canada is committed to safeguarding the confidentiality and safety of personal information under its control. It does not deal in commercial or any other kinds of exchanges with the personal information it gathers. It does not use data brokers.

The XXXX does not use cookies, nor deploy any other methods of on-line tracking of individuals.

The XXXX collects voluntarily-provided names, addresses, phone numbers and email addresses of individuals and organizations for specifically agreed to purposes. It collects this information via the party website, email, or in person-to-person exchanges, including door-to-door work, public rallies and meetings. Before using the information for communications it sends the individual an email to get their affirmative consent.

The XXXX ensures that activists who solicit subscriptions for party publications are aware that subscriber information can only be used for the stated purpose of collection. Information compiled for the purpose of distributing the Xxxxxxx Weekly or other party publications is used only for that purpose unless permission is obtained to use it for another reason. Similarly, information obtained through petition campaigns is used only for the aim of that campaign and not retained or used for any other purpose.

When individuals contribute to the Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx Party of Canada, they are informed that the Canada Elections Act requires their name and address to be provided to Elections Canada if the amount is greater than $200 and that their name and partial address will be published on the Elections Canada website. When individuals contribute less than $200 and more than $20, the party must retain their full name on file for compliance with the law, while their name and address is retained if they request an official tax receipt.

Every three years, the names and addresses of 250 party members are submitted to Elections Canada, as required by law. Members whose names are submitted consent to having their information shared with Elections Canada.

Personal information is protected by ensuring that it is only available to a limited number of people who use it for the purpose under which it was obtained and that they are trained in best practices for security. It ensures that personal information is not retained on unprotected computers and that network protections and firewalls are kept up-to-date. It keeps paper authorizations through which people have agreed to receive electronic mail in secured cabinets.

Individuals who have subscribed to receive electronic mailings can unsubscribe at any time by writing to [email protected]

If you have any concern about our privacy policy, contact Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx

I've redacted the name of the party for shits and giggles. You'd be surprised.

 

[dapaterson]

They're an anarcho-syndicalist commune.

 

[The Bread Guy]

He was probably ambushed by the CPC's Andrew Lawton. I will give him points for answering honestly and without hesitation, something refreshing from a Liberal MP in recent memory. But with a potential minimum bill of $765M, the commercial buyback barely underway, the individual buyback not even planned out yet and the amnesty expiring in 22 weeks, it's going to come up again very soon.

If the latest briefing binder posted publicly (December 2024) is anything to go by, not much meat for him to absorb in that document alone:

Assault-Style Firearms Compensation Program (Buyback): At the time of the prohibition, the Government committed to a cost effective Assault-Style Firearms Compensation Program that would offer fair compensation to impacted firearms owners and businesses. In 2022, Public Safety secured minimal funding for the program which was used to support a small Secretariat to develop the program, and to put in place a contract with IBM Canada for the development of a pricelist and delivery options considering international lessons learned. A public consultation on the resulting pricelist was held in August 2022, and feedback was incorporated into the program design. In April 2023, the Government announced that it would work with the firearms industry through a contract with the Canadian Sporting Arms and Ammunition Association (CSAAA), to represent business interests in the Program's design, including informing the compensation amounts for businesses. In 2024, Public Safety Canada received funding and authorities for both phases of the program. After finalizing the Phase 1 design and appropriate testing, Public Safety opened Phase 1 of the program for all firearms businesses in December 2024. As of December 17, 2024, 27 businesses have submitted claims with the Program for over 3,900 assault-style firearms (more than 1/3 of the total estimated inventory). Design of Phase 2 continues to advance for a planned launch in 2025. Public Safety is working with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and other federal departments as required, in addition to provinces and municipalities, which will be critical to delivering this phase for individual gun owners. A comprehensive communications strategy has been developed for both phases of the program with detailed information being posted on the Public Safety website.

Still, it was shocking to hear that, as a former Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and later short term Minister of Justice, he thinks Bills C-71 and C-21 were intended primarily to actually combat gun crime.

Like so many politicians (or others, for that matter), what he says may not always match what he thinks Here's "the script" from what looks like an aide memoire from the same briefing period as the above:

Media Lines​

Key Messages​

• I am honoured that the Prime Minister has entrusted me with a mandate of such importance and significance. I am proud to represent the extraordinary women and men across the portfolio who keep Canadians safe
• Canadian communities are fundamentally safe and peaceful places to live, work and play but that doesn't mean there isn't more work to do
• In the days ahead, I look forward to working with the Public Safety portfolio (RCMP, CSIS, CBSA, CSC and PBC) to move forward on keeping people safe
• Job one is continuing the work of securing our border and meeting the incoming U.S. administration as partners in keeping our respective citizens safe

Hot Issue Messages​

(...)

Firearms​

• The safety and security of everyone in Canada is the government's top priority, and it requires strong action to protect individuals from gun violence
• Prohibiting assault-style firearms from Canadian communities is one of the key ways to prevent gun violence and crime
• We have introduced practical and targeted measures that will help reduce illegal firearms activities, intimate partner and gender-based violence, and self-harm, support municipalities in tackling handgun violence, and make our communities safer for everyone

C-21​

• Our Government introduced Bill C-21 in May 2022 as part of a comprehensive approach to address firearm violence and control. This bill represents the most significant changes to gun control legislation in more than 40 years
• On December 5, 2024, our Government also announced that 324 unique makes and models that share the characteristics of an assault-style firearm have been added to the list of prohibited firearms in Canada. The prohibition takes effect immediately
• The Assault-Style Firearms Compensation Program is now available for licensed firearms businesses across the country
• The program is not yet available for individuals. Individuals in possession of prohibited firearms and devices must continue to securely store them according to their classification prior to May 1, 2020.
  
  (...)

 

[Jarnhamar]

Over reacting and likely hasn't actually read it.

Maybe, but I'm not so sure. I've seen a number of concerns raised over this which doesn't strike me as just overreacting.

Concerns

1. Expanded access to personal information. There's no detailed summary available for Part 4 of the bill. There's a huge lack of transparency that could lead to measures being implemented that infringe on individuals privacy rights.

2. Potential for increased surveillance. Amendments to the elections act could empower political parties to collect and store more personal data. Currently no clear guidelines or oversight and it could lead to increased surveillance on individuals, especially those involved in political activities.

3. Lack of oversight and accountability. The Bill does not specify mechanisms for oversight or accountability regarding handling of personal information by political parties. Obviously a risk this information can be misused or not properly protected leading to potential privacy violations.

4. Exemption from Provincial/Territorial Privacy Laws
Section 446.4(1) explicitly exempts political parties and affiliated individuals and entities from having to comply with provincial or territorial privacy laws, even if those laws are more stringent than federal requirements. This creates a gap where political parties may operate under lower privacy standards, leaving individuals' data less protected.

5. Limited individual rights to their data. One of the sections indicates individuals cannot request access, correction, or annotation of their personal information held by political parties. Not very transparent.
Risk: This denies individuals basic data subject rights that are common in many privacy regimes (e.g., GDPR, PIPEDA), such as the right to access or correct one's data.

6. Section 446.3 allows parties and their representatives to conduct any activities related to personal information, with minimal specificity or limits. That could lead to unchecked use of personal information, including profiling, microtargeting, and data collection and use without meaningful oversight. Noticing a pattern?

7. Self-regulation and lack of external oversight. Compliance with the rules is governed by the party's own internal privacy policy, not an independent authority. I'm sure you would agree there's a huge conflict of interest when parties regulate themselves.

8. Inadequate consent and transparency mechanisms. There is no mention of obtaining consent from individuals for the collection or use of their data. Even the mobile games on your phone ask for consent to collect and use your information.

9. No information on how long data is retained, the conditions under which data is shared or sold, what safeguards in place to protect data. "Trust us"?

10. Potential overreach by volunteers and third parties. The provision allows for volunteers and third parties (e.g contractors or digital service providers) to handle personal information.

11. Lack of independent privacy audit requirements. There's no mention of independent audits or reviews of compliance with the privacy policy.


What do the experts say?

Michael Geist is widely recognized as a leading expert on privacy, specifically with Canadian Law. He says the government is dangerously misleading on its warrantless demands for internet subscriber information.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Carney defends inviting Modi to G7 after RCMP linked India to murders and extortion​

Why would Carney invite Modi to the G7? Beaverton explains it.

Carney limits G7 guests to one assassination each​