LILLEY: Trudeau hid public criticism of his online censorship plan

Article content material

When the Trudeau authorities proposed introducing a “digital harms” invoice final 12 months, the response was swift and unfavorable.

Article content material

Bought by the Liberals as a method to make the web safer and take away unlawful content material, it was extensively denounced as a plan to provide sweeping and draconian powers to the federal government akin to censorship.

Confronted with such widespread criticism, the federal government stated they might return to the drafting board after which to indicate everybody they had been nonetheless all about openness and transparency, they hid a lot of the unfavorable response they obtained. Think about making an attempt to guarantee those that your authorities wouldn’t have interaction in politically motivated elimination of fabric on-line by hiding criticism of your authorities.

This previous week, the vital proposals had been launched via an Entry to Info request compelled on the federal government by College of Ottawa legislation professor Michael Geist. This isn’t a minor level as Geist himself identified.

Article content material

“The federal government’s willpower to maintain the consultations submissions secret till compelled to reveal them by legislation eviscerates its claims to help open, clear authorities. There’s merely no good motive to make use of secrecy because the default for a authorities session,” Geist wrote.

Particularly not when you might have been accused of desirous to increase authorities surveillance and censorship powers throughout the web. These public submissions ought to have been available for all to see, however maybe they had been embarrassed by Twitter comparing the government’s actions to dictatorships.

The social media platform in contrast the federal government’s proposal to dam web sites to techniques utilized in China, North Korea and Iran whereas additionally saying requiring “proactive monitoring of content material sacrifices freedom of expression to the creation of a authorities run system of surveillance of anybody who makes use of Twitter.”

Article content material

There have been 422 submissions, practically universally vital of the proposed measures, together with appointing a Digital Security Commissioner. But the federal government’s personal report on the suggestions they obtained, referred to as What We Heard and launched earlier this 12 months, makes it sound like there have been some considerations raised however that it wasn’t that unhealthy.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association warned blocking web sites and giving a authorities bureaucrat censorship energy on-line – just like the Digital Security Commissioner – would result in much less democratic nations enacting comparable legal guidelines.

“Many nations look to Canada as a mature liberal democracy and should search to emulate the instruments developed for tackling on-line harms right here,” the CCLA submission learn.

Article content material

This proposal was not the Trudeau authorities’s first try to control the web and it received’t be their final. Whereas paying lip service to freedom expression as assured within the Constitution, the Liberals have proven a bent in the direction of Orwell’s Massive Brother.

Invoice C-11, at present earlier than Parliament seeks to control the podcasts or audiobooks you take heed to, the streaming providers you utilize for music or motion pictures, beneath the guise of selling Canadian content material. But it might additionally give the CRTC, Canada’s broadcast regulators, sweeping energy over what you watch, take heed to, or learn on-line.

Their said motive for trying to take care of what they euphemistically name “on-line harms” is to provide legislation enforcement powers to take care of terrorism or youngster sexual exploitation. Nobody desires to see youngster sexual exploitation proceed on-line however the reply isn’t to provide the federal government broad powers to censor what you see on-line.

The likelihood that this might shortly flip to political censorship is all too actual. The truth that the Liberal authorities tried to cover the unfavorable suggestions they obtained on these proposals must also give residents pause for concern.

Giving any authorities these kinds of powers needs to be a non-starter for all Canadians.

blilley@postmedia.com