The Quiet Death of the Canadian Internet Survellance Bill 67
mykepredko writes "C-30, Canada's version of SOPA, would grant the federal government and law enforcement agencies the power to obtain information about individuals who are online without having to apply for a warrant is dead in committee. 'I don't know whether it was because the Minister so screwed up the messaging, or whether they've had some other input saying they went too far or it just can't be salvaged,' Nathan Cullen, House Leader for the NDP, speculates."
Maybe politicians saw what happened in the U.S. (Score:2)
Either that or all the maple syrup [huffingtonpost.ca] has lulled them into a diabetic coma.
Re:Maybe politicians saw what happened in the U.S. (Score:5, Funny)
In Canada, first you get the syrup, then you get the power, then you get the women.
Re: (Score:1)
You may have found a correlation between sex addiction and diabetes in Canada.
Re:Maybe politicians saw what happened in the U.S. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Not for a long time, if you know the difference between american financing vs. Canadian political financing. It's a heck of a lot more difficult to buy a politician here... Certianly not impossible, but something as hated as SOPA? Well, lets just say bribes big enough to take that political risk are more dangerous than the political risk itself.
maple syrup vs. diabeetus (Score:1)
If it is like the U.S.... (Score:5, Insightful)
...then it will just reappear, possibly a piece at a time, attached to some appropriations bill for homeless battered women's shelters.
Re:If it is like the U.S.... (Score:5, Interesting)
My understanding is that the most potent objections to the bill didn't come from the Opposition or any particular civil liberties group, but rather from the Tory caucus itself. Rumor has it there were several very blunt exchanges in caucus over this bill between the Minister and various Tory MPs, and that the Government intentionally booted into the Death By Committee.
Not to say that you're not right, but it's pretty clear there are places that sizable portions of the Tory caucus just simply will not go, and for a Government, even the hint of a caucus revolt over legislation is enough to make the legislation go away quietly.
Re: (Score:3)
Vic Tuows (or what ever his name is) didn't help with his pedophilia comparison
We need to limit political donations (Score:2)
Re:We need to limit political donations (Score:5, Informative)
Re:We need to limit political donations (Score:5, Informative)
Sure, unless you're donating to someone named "Dean Del Mastro", in which case you get reimbursed for your "donations" [ottawacitizen.com].
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
However keep in mind that it is confirmed that breathing biological entities with deep pockets can actually donate over 60k to their preferred political party by using a loophole to donate 200 dollars to each riding of their political party of choice. Something that's been acknowledged but Harper refuses to close for some reason. (Probably because his party is getting most of those willing donations lately. Probably by some people doing this very thing. - He -does- apparently serve corporate interests after
Re: (Score:2)
I'm disgusted at Canada's flagrant discrimination against the non-breathing.
Re: (Score:1)
Big money influences the voters more than it does the politicians. Why won't they vote for somebody that they hear very little about? I mean, it's not like that a politicians voting record is hidden from view or anything. It's that voters are too lazy to look beyond the mass media campaigns. The politicians are only going along. We make it too easy for them. Sorry, I can't sympathize. Let them spend what they want, and then show them how they wasted all that money by voting for somebody else. Then it will a
Re:If it is like the U.S.... (Score:5, Interesting)
They happily ignore anything the opposition or other groups say or do--they have a majority and don't care. But, accusing opponents of the bill of supporting child pornographers sure was a good strategy for bringing wayward Conservatives in line.
Extremist rhetoric might work well for Rush Limbaugh, but not so well when used against your own colleagues and supporters. With those words Vic Toews accidentally shot the bill in the back with a rocket grenade, and we're all happier for it.
Re:If it is like the U.S.... (Score:4, Interesting)
That was one group, yes. The more powerful group was Conservative party members, particularly donors. They started hearing during fundraising calls about this, and people closed their wallets in protest.
The Conservative party is better then any other party in Canada at grassroots fundraising. When that gets threatened, the party brass respond VERY quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
Forget spreading things out, they'll just lump it in with the 200 other non-budget items in another omnibus budget bill.
And I thought riders to unrelated bills were fucked up... those seem to happen frequently in the US, don't hear much about them in Canada. But, at least riders are limited to a few each bill.
The real Reason (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that was one of his worst moves. And it's not like he hasn't given us lots of examples to choose from.
Re: (Score:1)
Revolt? Was anybody voted out over this?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
That's only a minor inconvenience, far from being a 'revolt'. And I highly doubt that's what killed the bill.
Re: (Score:1)
In Canada, it was a violent revolt. Usually we just politely ask.
Re: (Score:1)
One of the really evil consequences of this bill wasn't that it allowed police to do internet surveillance but the government could assign any person, within a police department or not, to act as a agent of the government to search out anything about anyone. It was a grand open door to finding everything they could about anybody.
Not to mention "Vikileaks" (Score:3)
As people started posting personal information they found on the internet of the Minister involved, Vic Toews. Including stuff about his divorce, affairs, all sorts of good stuff...
Good Times.
Reminds me of back in the day when Stockwill Day proposed a law to have a referendum vote country wide if anyone was able to get a patition from 10% of the population, so the TV political satire show "This hour has 22 minutes" did an online patition to change Stockwell Day's name to "Doris Day" and got 450,000 signitur
No need, it's in the budget bill. (Score:1)
The Cons have put everything they want to do into the "Budget Implementation Bill" and made it intentionally obfuscated and avoided all debate.
Every bad thing they wanted to do is now simply amalgamated into one monster bill that no member of parliament wants to read.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh right, the second massive 400 page omnibus bill due to hit the floor soon. The sort of bill Prime Minister Harper himself used to complain was undemocratic when he was in opposition. What giant hypocrites conservatives are!
Re: (Score:1)
they are all Hypocrites... Liberal, Conservative, NDP, BLOC... they say one thing and do another... I give up.
Re:No need, it's in the budget bill. (Score:4, Informative)
Wasted indeed. The Libertarian party in Canada is less popular than the Communist party. Their desire to scrap the Canada Health Act endears them to few.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Libertarian would need reps in the ridings to vote for... I've never seen one.
Vote Green; same caveat the parent gave, but hey... they actually got a seat last time!
In Canada, in order to fix things, we need people who aren't interested in Politics getting fed up enough to run, and gather enough support to win, and then have enough morals to stick to their platform, even if it means getting voted out in the next round.
Re: (Score:3)
Personally, I'm willing to give the NDP a chance.
But you can vote Green if you're inclined to.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I'm willing to give the NDP a chance.
But you can vote Green if you're inclined to.
By all means, vote NDP if you want. But remember Ontario, and every other province that's ever elected an NDP government to the helm. The first and immediate effect is that our provincial(ontario) bond ratings are cut by at least one if not two to three points(it will happen at the federal level too if it they're elected). The lenders know exactly what's going to happen. Well in Ontario's case, ol'Bob Rae managed to soak up a $50B debt, without even trying. My kids, kids will be paying that one off.
Bu
Re:No need, it's in the budget bill. (Score:4, Insightful)
> Um... It is the opposition's job to oppose the government, whether they agree with the particular proposition or not
There is a time and place for opposition -- but any ideology taken to an extreme, such as oppositional defiant, is never a good idea in the long run.
i.e.
So the ruling party decides that it needs it needs to limit its spending (ha!), and the opposition is _automatically_ against that? That's asinine. But then again, this is politics.
> If a party gets elected, it is not hypocritical for them to try to pass the same legislation that they tried to stifle when they were the opposition
Yes it is and retarded. Instead of doing what's best for everyone politicians are selfish bastards who only do what's best for them.
You're part of the problem by thinking such stupid "politics" is OK in the first place.
Re: (Score:3)
Um... It is the opposition's job to oppose the government, whether they agree with the particular proposition or not -
That's insane. So their job isn't to represent the wishes of their constituents, or even their best interests?
Re: (Score:2)
That's insane. So their job isn't to represent the wishes of their constituents, or even their best interests?
Yes it is, but they still need to ensure that legislation is carefully considered and that differing views on initiatives are publicly expressed and defended. Also, they still need to be providing the public with alternative policies. No legislative proposal is so good that it doesn't need to be poked and prodded at, nor examined with a fine toothed comb.
Re: (Score:1)
What giant hypocrites conservatives are!
Um... It is the opposition's job to oppose the government, whether they agree with the particular proposition or not - just like it is the defense attorney's duty to try to get the child molesting serial killer acquitted even if the person committed the crimes. If a party gets elected, it is not hypocritical for them to try to pass the same legislation that they tried to stifle when they were the opposition. They have a different role.
I assume what you're saying makes perfect sense to people around where you live?
Meanwhile for the rest of the democratic world the job of opposition is to oppose government if they disagree with the particular proposition.
And it's not a court session.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It is the job of the opposition to ensure that alternatives are presented, that proposals are examined for loopholes and deficiencies, and that different views are considered. It doesn't matter if they agree with the proposition or not. They should still be trying to improve it, or find better solutions.
...and if they have no better solutions they should not oppose the thing blindly or to try force improvements unconditionally if it seems to be leading to a thing they basically agree (especially if improvements they want may well even be crafted afterward) being ditched.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh right, the second massive 400 page omnibus bill due to hit the floor soon. The sort of bill Prime Minister Harper himself used to complain was undemocratic when he was in opposition. What giant hypocrites conservatives are!
A big problem with getting legislation through is simple logistics. There are only so many days in the legislative calendar, and only so many members of parliament that can sit on committees to scrutinize bills. Omnibus bills are nobody's favourite, but in practise there is no other way to get some bills into law. At least the Canadian version of an omnibus bill is readable, unlike in the States, where the Obamacare legislation that Obama ultimately signed into law was 2,700 pages.
Re: (Score:3)
Right, could you please point out the relevant sections in the bill. The pre-post bill is online by the way, I'll wait.
Re:No need, it's in the budget bill. (Score:4, Funny)
Why would I waste 50 hours of my life for a slashdot comment?
That attitude, my friend, is why you only scored a zero.
In other news... (Score:2)
Property value in Canada just skyrocketed.
Re: (Score:3)
That's been happening for years. Maybe this'll keep the bubble going for awhile longer.
Sorry for this, but it applies (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not dead. It's just resting.
It won't ever die with the kinds people that are presently occupying the office. If you want to actually kill it, a different class of people must be voted in.
Re: (Score:2)
Easier... (Score:2)
"Survellance"? (Score:2)
I know this is assuming a lot (Score:1)
They're not serious about it. (Score:1)
The conservatives have a history of tabling unpopular bills that die off prematurely. It took them 6 years and 4 attempts to pass a copyright reform bill. Those bills were conveniently tabled at inopportune moments where they were guaranteed to be killed off. I have a theory that they're doing this to earn checkmarks for implementing their agenda and then using the opposition as an excuse to their cronies as to why the legislation failed. We tried, but oh darn there was an election call. They don't take a p
And there was much rejoicing... (Score:2)
Toews was an idiot to try and put this past the well-educated and often computer-literate Canadian population in the first place.