this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2025
41 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

9789 readers
595 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Related Communities

🍁 Meta

πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories

πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.

πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

πŸ’» Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.

πŸ’΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales

πŸ—£οΈ Politics

🍁 Social / Culture

Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
41
Liberals introduce bill proposing sweeping border security powers (www.cbc.ca)
submitted 2 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
31 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

So not only is this significantly expanding government's power to arbitrarily fuck with people's immigration paperwork but this is a significant expansion of police powers in general:

  • The Coast Guard is being turned from an emergency search and rescue service to an agency that also carries out surveillance for the police and military

  • People convicted of sex crimes will have their personal information shared with foreign governments

  • Police can more easily search your mail

  • "Electronic service providers" will be banned from deleting certain user data just in case the police will want it

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Is that electronic one about VPN logs?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The banker will save us from fascism guys you're going to have hold your noses and wipe out the third parties!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I mean, PP wouldn't be better, and you know damn well a third party government wasn't an option.

Unfortunately, most voters just don't see things our way.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Most of it is fine on the border/tough on crime provisions, whatever.

The export inspections is good and will help with the car theft epidemic. (I don't own a car but I can understand communities being frustrated by our current laws not being able to respond effectively to theft rings).

The one part I am concerned about is Part 15 (Supporting Authorized Access to Information Act), a mandatory confidential pathway for electronic service providers to provide information to authorities. Even though "systemic vulnerabilities" are not meant to be introduced in that Act, I can't help imagine certain edge cases may serve as loopholes to install backdoors that are exploited by both our government and others.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The proposed changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act give the government increased power over immigration documents in cases where public health or national security are at risk. Specifically it allows officials to cancel, suspend or change immigration documents immediately, pause the acceptance of new applications and cancel applications already in process if deemed in the public interest. Asylum claims would also have to be made within a year of entering the country, including for students and temporary residents. The immigration changes would also require irregular border crossers, people who enter Canada between official ports of entry, to make an asylum claim within 14 days of arriving in Canada.

Not the kind of legislation I would want a Tory government to inherit (and hence "strengthen").

The changes would also speed up voluntary departures by making removal orders effective the same day an asylum claim is withdrawn.

And this kind of shit is straight up alarming.

Basically, at a time when the US is going full on fascist with respect to immigrants, I want Canada moving confidently in the opposite direction.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Fair point, while I wouldn't like a Conservative government to expand on it, I read those sections but I don't consider it beyond the pale. My impression was it is more about removing slack in the process. There are many good arguments to maintain that slack, but that to me is a matter of debate, not a certain slide into fascism.

I'm not a fan of the bill, why it's the first thing the House gets to is concerning, but I'm trying to keep a level head while analyzing the bill and not get into an immediate frenzy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

Sweeping border powers? What, they gonna give them brooms?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago

Canadians, take this as a reminder that your fight with fascism is not even close to over. You avoided the immediate crisis with what is basically an act of God; now it's time to ensure that clowns like these guys don't bring Canada back to that same crisis in three years.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Silver lining - sounds like something that could be used to stem the illegal gun importation from the US?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Guns, drugs, pornography, refugees, factual information contradicting or embarrasing the powerful.

You might see a moral difference, but it's all the same from an enforcement perspective. It's a thing, and you want to keep it out. The real question is how much control you trust them with.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Have you heard of drones being used to smuggle guns? No physical person even needs to cross a border now. Personally, I can't think of a practical solution to this.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/drone-carrying-bag-of-handguns-from-united-states-to-canada-intercepted-by-tree-1.6438267

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago

Goddamn.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Better air space monitoring. We need to develop technology to accurately detect small drones anyway since thats the direction a lot of militaries are going.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Anything that's capable of detecting drones would get hella false positives from birds/bikes/cars/people. There's a reason radar usually ignores movement under a certain altitude.

You could detect via radio signals, but fly-by-wire drones are already a thing, perfect for short distances, like what you'd need to move a package over a wall.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Birds might be tough, but modern radars/lidars can get smart. I doubt anything terrestrial would be a problem.

How much border you can cover for a given price and how well is a much different question, though.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

It probably can be done with some combination of signal sources. Yeah radar alone doesn't sound great. It might be possible combined with computer vision, other computer signal pattern recognition, etc. Whoever gets a decent system like that working would have a lot of sales for it.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Shocking, it's like BOTH parties will do what every they need to do to gain power and the favour of more powerful, people. The Canadian government has been an economic and political appendage of the US since long before Trump got on the scene.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago

It also doesn't work. It completely gives in to conservative framing, and conservatives will always win against liberals on being "tough" on the border.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

ICE deporting people

Canada "Hold my beer".

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Very, very different scope:

"We need to ensure Canada's law enforcement is equipped with the tools they need to stay ahead of organized crime groups and crack down on their illicit activities."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

That's exactly the justification Trump made to start unleashing ICE

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

Totally different from when Trump talks about cartels /s

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yes but that's all lip service to Trump's wild claims of Canada and Mexico being hotbeds and the source of all drugs, criminals, dark skinned people, etc. To even acknowledge that clown's claims in their language is to let them set the agenda. Canada can and should do what it wants at its border but not with a fucking patriot act style national security giveaway.

Just remember, once it's there, it's there for any future admin. This was written for Trump and by industry lobbiests in CA who would benefit from decreased tarrifs and/or security/weapons/data companies that want far contracts.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Hmm. I didn't read it like that. To me, since the source of many of our issues with drugs and guns come from the States, we need to protect our borders from Americans, not for Americans.

And since organized crime, and not "immigrants", are the problem, it seems like that's who we are addressing.

Sounds to me like Canada is doing what's best for Canada, not Trump. I guess we'll see how these new powers are put into effect.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Their point (well, part of it anyway) is that whatever the government says, there's no guarantee that the powers provided to the government by this bill will only be applied to organized crime, or that it'll stay that way. "America doing what's best for America" got them ICE.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

We are better than that. At least, I hope and trust that we are.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Hope and trust will only take you as far as your politicians are willing to play along. Trump happened to the United States, but demagogues with great aspirations and a willingness to bend rules to (and beyond) the breaking point are by no means unique to them.

Which is to say: make it legally binding instead of relying on the goodwill of politicians.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 2 days ago (2 children)

This is essential to maintaining the safety and security of our country … it is also a priority that we share with our neighbours.

Am I the only one who finds this statement deeply troubling?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago

There's a lot of sucking up to Trump going on. One hopes that it's strategic and the elbows up stuff was genuine, not the other way around.

Time will tell. I lean towards the good option right now because Carney doesn't seem dumb enough to not recognise a bad deal.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago

Nope. You are not.