Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre insists that the federal Liberals must make substantial revisions to their border legislation, Bill C-2, in order to secure the necessary backing for its passage. Poilievre emphasized the need to eliminate elements that infringe on the freedoms and privacy of Canadians, stating that law-abiding citizens should not bear the consequences of the government’s shortcomings in border and immigration matters.
The proposed Strong Borders Act, also known as C-2, was introduced by the Liberal government as a strategic move to address concerns raised by the Trump administration regarding border security, which had led to the imposition of tariffs. While Government House Leader Steven MacKinnon has described the bill as essential for law enforcement to maintain border security, critics, including civil rights groups and privacy experts, have raised objections, arguing that certain provisions extend beyond the intended scope of the legislation.
The 140-page legislation grants extensive powers to security and intelligence agencies, allowing for measures such as the inspection of mail and the authority to revoke or suspend immigration documents. Additionally, Bill C-2 proposes empowering police to request subscriber details from internet and online service providers.
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association has highlighted the wealth of personal information contained in such requests, questioning the bill’s alignment with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Conservative Party had previously voiced concerns over intrusive provisions in the bill and reiterated their refusal to support the current version, urging the Liberals to introduce a new, more balanced piece of legislation.
Poilievre emphasized the importance of upholding Canadians’ freedoms and privacy while maintaining law enforcement capabilities within legal boundaries. In a minority Parliament scenario, the Liberals require support from at least one other party for legislative approval, with the New Democrats, Bloc Québécois, and Green Party expressing similar reservations about potential governmental overreach.
The response from MacKinnon’s office regarding the possibility of significant revisions to the bill or the introduction of a new one remains undisclosed at this time.