This week on Spark, we’re taking a close look at lawful access — controversial new proposed legislation. To be clear, the legislation hasn’t been made public. But based on previously introduced bills (C-50, C-51, and C-52), it’s expected that lawful access would give police new electronic surveillance and interception powers. We’re talking about police being able to track your online behaviour, email, and text messages. In some cases, they could track these things without a warrant. That, as you can imagine, is highly controversial.
To find out why police feel they need updated powers, Nora talked to two guests: Tom Stamatakis, president of the Canadian Police Association, and Murray Stooke, Deputy Chief of the Calgary Police Service and Former Vice-Chair of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police‘s Law Ammendments Committee.You can hear the full, uncut interviews below, or download the MP3. [runs 25:51]
Play audio:
If you like hearing these extended interviews, why not subscribe to Spark Plus? You’ll get regular weekly episodes, plus additional blog-only content like this. [Subscribe via RSS] or [Subscribe with iTunes]
There are a variety of data to be considered here.
Earlier, the govt wanted no-warrant no-judicial-review access to subscriber’s “tombstone” data like name, address, phone, current geographic location, etc.
In addition, they wanted no-warrant no-judicial-review access to “address” information like URLs of web pages and email addresses of correspondents. These have obvious privacy implications!
These are the biggest sticking points. Why not have judicial approval and regular reports and reviews? What have the police/government got to hide?
(If you ask what individuals have to hide, just consider love letters.)
Why not have sufficient justification to infringe on citizens’ privacy that a judge can approve rather than unsupervised fishing expeditions.
As well, they have other demands which have some reason, like requesting the recording of a subscriber’s traffic while waiting for a search/wiretap warrant. Alas, this means major changes in ISPs’ equipment and setup, which means more costs to ISPs and subscribers.
tOM
We just had a case of a police officer being arrested for using the police computers to get information on his ex-girlfriend and her new boyfriend. Are these the people we want to give unfettered access to our private lives?
Great to have such thorough interviews, thanks for the CBC! In particular in the first interview, it seemed clear the officer was saying they are NOT looking for power to access data without a warrant. That's the main sticking point for me, otherwise it's a fishing expedition. What's considered suspicious activity really? At a meeting to organize a public demonstration in Saskatoon for later in October, two plain clothed officers were standing outside in the hallway listening. Is it now suspect to plan public demonstrations? Apparently.
In these times of hyperbole around security, bad guys, and jailing everyone under the sun, we must remain vigilante about our civil liberties.
herr harpo seems to showing himself to be more and more like the proverbial bull in a china shop!! Every time he turns around, he's breaking unions, dismantling co-operatives, destroying democracy, putting the 99% deeper into a hole, all for what??? His deluded 'govern by my (radical fundamentalist) church' beliefs??? Is he totally moronic?? He shows nothing but contempt for Canadians (except his rich cronies and sycophants) and our democratic rights. This guy really needs to be 'recalled', 'de-seated', or whatever you want to call it ….. he is a psychopath, and that becomes more clear every day!!
Warrantless access to private conversations is exactly that- unwarranted. Criminals erase their digital messages about criminal activity- isn't that akin to trying to erase fingerprints? Why aren't we all wearing cameras so that the police will know exactly what each of us are doing at every moment. He's asking who is concerned about the privacy aspect, and saying the average Canadian is unconcerned, the only concern is from those engaged in criminal activity. So we best be quiet and allow this to happen- otherwise we will be labeled as the criminal element. What a dope- trust us- we won't overstep any bounds- in a pig's eye.
Who is concerned?? Everyone should be!! Who the hell wants to live in a police state?! How about this … let the cons open ALL their 'in camera' dialogs …. on $$, budgets, plans, etc. – THEN we may think about it!! To want this kind of unwarranted intrusion into our privacy makes me wonder if they plan on making this country into hitler's germany!! They are just sooooo stoopid!! They want every bit of info they can gather on the citizens of this country – yet they are the most clandestine, cloak-and-dagger, answer no questions, govt we've ever had!!
As I've always said … how do you know if a Con is lying?? if his mouth is open, that's how!! Well harpo, screw you!