GayandRight

My name is Fred and I am a gay conservative living in Ottawa. This blog supports limited government, the right of the State of Israel to live in peace and security, and tries to expose the threat to us all from cultural relativism, post-modernism, and radical Islam. I am also the founder of the Free Thinking Film Society in Ottawa (www.freethinkingfilms.com)

Thursday, June 18, 2009

Why are the Conservatives doing this???

I'm all for the new powers, but there must be judicial review.
Police will be given new powers to eavesdrop on Internet-based communications as part of a contentious government bill, to be announced today, which Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan has said is needed to modernize surveillance laws crafted during "the era of the rotary phone."

The proposed legislation would force Internet service providers to allow law enforcement to tap into their systems to obtain information about users and their digital conversations.

Police have lobbied for a new law for almost 10 years, saying that they need to access "Internet safe havens" for gangsters, sexual predators and terrorists.

"This is really not about the warrantless tracking of Canadians' Internet use," said Clayton Pecknold, of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police.

Privacy advocates and civil libertarians, however, have vocally opposed the prospect of giving police "lawful access" to the digital conversations of Canadians by being able to access such things as their text messages, e-mails, web surfing habits and Internet phone lines.

"It is an issue that has proven to be very, very controversial," said Michael Geist, a law professor at University of Ottawa and public commentator on Internet legal issues.

"The consistent criticism and concern that has been expressed is that there has to be some evidence that there is a real problem here and in the past we haven't seen that," he said. "Why is the status quo not good enough? What investigations have been impeded?"
Stockwell Day had previously said there would still be a need for warrants....but somehow this seems to have been shelved. Let's hope some sanity returns to the front bench and this gets amended.

6 Comments:

Anonymous Surecure said...

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

This is just bad. I am all for giving the police access under a warrant or when emergency or mitigating circumstances demand immediate action. But, any policy that gives the police carte blanche is a slap in the face to our rights.

It's getting harder and harder for me to keep supporting the Conservative party. They have shown themselves to be fiscally liberal and now are showing themselves as indulgent in fascist police powers.

At this rate, I won't know what they really stand for by the next election except that they are not the Liberal party. That's not exactly a rousing endorsement of policy if you ask me.

11:55 PM  
Blogger L said...

Be careful to actually read the legislation - it is being spun as "scary" by the press. The police can only get a name and address without a warrant, I think (see Power Play with the Minister). To track or monitor or read, they need a warrant. It might be OK.

3:45 AM  
Blogger Alberta Girl said...

I agree with L - remember the arts cuts or the 14 year olds in jail.

Of course this is in the best interests of the opposition to be made out to be a bad thing.

Don't trust ANYTHING you read that comes from the media or the opposition.

7:52 AM  
Blogger GayandRight said...

Sorry..I don't want the police to get a name and an address without a warrant. This takes away net anonymity...again, I want the police to have these power...but not without a warrant.

fred

9:47 AM  
Anonymous Surecure said...

Just as I don't want the police to have the right to stop me in the street or pull my car over and demand my name and address for whatever reason they like, I don't want them to have the right to demand names and addresses from ISP's without just cause. Police action must be done within the context of the law. Giving them full control to do what they like when they see fit does not contribute to a just society.

As I said, if they have just cause, they should go to a judge and get a warrant. If there is a matter of urgency, they should be given the means through legislation to demand of ISP's the names and addresses so long as the ISP's have an automatic recourse to demand that a warrant be served to them within a set number of days after they have given information to the police. And if the police are found to have obtained unwarranted information, then they should go before a review board to justify their actions.

There must be accountability. There's that word again... accountability. If there is no accountability for unwarranted actions by government representatives against the public, then we lose our liberties. It's that simple.

As I've described above, there is a solution if they want it. But they must answer to somebody.

12:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Conservatives luv bigger government

9:26 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home