C-51: 5 Points for Security or 6 Points against Freedom

The Conservatives' platform is about the economy (hey, we're in a recession!) and security. Today, let's look at one of the foundations of Conservative thinking, Bill C-51.

According to the article "Bill C-51 for Dummies", the bill was proposed by Public Safety Minister Steve Blaney as Bill C-51 "is in line with the government’s “firm commitment” to protect Canadians from jihadist terrorists who seek to destroy the values Canadians hold dear...The international jihadist movement has declared war on Canada and our allies,” Blaney told the House of Commons on Feb. 18. “As we have seen, terrorists are targeting Canadians simply because they despise our society and the values it represents.”

Is there a fear that people from here ...

threaten our lives here ...

... without a lot more of this?

According to the same article, "its main provisions would facilitate information sharing among 17 (and some say more than 17) federal institutions, give police powers that would allow them to preventatively detain or restrict terror suspects, ban the “promotion of terrorism,” allow the public safety minister to add people to Canada’s “no-fly list,” and enhance the powers of Canada’s spy agency CSIS."

Sounds reasonable if security trumps certain freedoms included in Canada's Charter of Rights, according to critics.

According to a CBC article, the 5 main points are:

1. Promoting terrorism is now a jailable offence
2. There will be a crackdown on terrorist propaganda
3. More arrests without a warrant are allowed
4. More personal information is shared among departments
5. CSIS can now disrupt terrorist plots

According to the Canadian Journalists for Free Expression, here are the top 6 ways our lives will be affected:

1. Your private information will no longer be private
2. Innocent words can be interpreted as terrorism
3. Online posts will be censored
4. Protesting could put you under government surveillance
5. Your travel may be restricted without explanation
6. Your material possessions may be seized

The bill is indicative of the rift we see the world over today between security and freedom. My own stand is mirrored by Benjamin Franklin's quotation (so often butchered on the web!)

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

So who voted it in?

Conservatives - Everyone voted "yes" except those not voting

Liberals - Everyone voted "yes" except those not voting

NDP - Everyone voted "no" except those not voting

Bloc - 2 "no"

Green - 2 "no"

F&D - 1 "no" and 1 not voting

For the complete record on the vote, click here. For the list of Senators who voted in the Upper House, click here.

Seems simple enough. Conservatives and Liberals put Security over Constitutional Freedoms.

NDP, Greens, Bloc and F&D put those freedoms first.

That's what the hoopla is about. EXCEPT, Trudeau is backtracking a bit. Click below to see his backtracking on the vote. Or is it really?

I agree with Elizabeth May's comment that the bill will make Canadians "less safe". By further developing a narrative of "them vs. us", it plays into the hands of those who want Canada to have a less open and less accepting society. 

Creative Commons Labeled for Reuse
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Seal
_of_the_United_States_Department_of_Homeland_Security.svg

The Lively Albatross is concerned that the Canadian Parliament passed a bill the seems like "Homeland Security", further enhancing the rumour that Stephen Harper is George W. Bush Lite.

On this one, for me, it's NDP and Greens 1, Conservatives and Liberals 0.