admin
The Trudeau government says it will amend Bill C‑22 — the so‑called Lawful Access Act — after a loud chorus of Big Tech, privacy experts and even U.S. House Republicans warned the bill would weaken encryption and expand secret surveillance. Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree promises tweaks on how the law treats encryption and what metadata companies must keep. That sounds reassuring until you read the fine print nobody has seen yet.
Why Ottawa is suddenly “clarifying” the bill
Mr. Anandasangaree says the amendments will give “clarity on what encryption is” and will narrow metadata retention language to match U.S. counterparts. The government still argues that “this is something that needs to happen,” meaning Ottawa wants new tools for police and intelligence agencies. But the row over secret ministerial orders, gag rules that could stop companies from telling users, and the ability to force providers to change their systems is what set off Apple, Google, Signal and a string of VPN services.
Don’t be fooled by soothing words
Big Tech warned MPs that the bill, as drafted, could force a backdoor into end‑to‑end encryption or create systemic vulnerabilities. As Apple’s privacy director put it, this might be “one of the last times we are permitted to discuss the consequences of this legislation publicly,” because secrecy provisions would gag companies. That is the heart of the problem: vague legal language plus secret orders equals executive power without enough oversight. Adding a line about “clarity” does not fix a framework that lets ministers compel engineering changes in major platforms.
Market flight and political hypocrisy
Companies such as Signal and several VPN providers have warned they would rather pull their services out of Canada than break privacy promises to users. That would leave Canadians without some of the most secure tools available — and it would be the government’s fault. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre called the bill “extremely suspicious,” and U.S. House Republicans even wrote to Ottawa raising cross‑border privacy risks. If you’re wondering who’s protecting digital liberty here, don’t expect the government that wants more power to volunteer.
What to watch next — text matters, not press conferences
The only thing that will prove Ottawa’s sincerity is the amendment text. Watch for an explicit ban on compelling companies to dismantle end‑to‑end encryption, the addition of judicial oversight for secrecy orders, and narrow, specific rules about metadata retention — not vague phrases that invite ministry engineering mandates. If the amendments read like glossy wrapping paper over the same surveillance toolbox, Canadians should be as suspicious as the Conservatives are now. This debate isn’t about being soft on crime; it’s about whether the government gets a master key to people’s private lives without proper checks and public visibility.
