If government were reliably a force for good — always benevolent, never abusive — we would not need constitutional protections for freedoms of speech, movement, religion, assembly, or association. We wouldn’t need to worry about the abuse of state power. We could ignore Lord Acton’s famous warning that “power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” But, we should learn from history.The latest cause for Canadian concern comes from Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree, who claims his Bill C-2 — the Strong Borders Act — will protect Canada from organized crime. Yet upon examination, it’s more a Strong Surveillance Act.Politicians never revoke rights without a nice-sounding excuse, of course. So it is with C-2… it’s all for the sake of safety, security, public health and the common good. Is it, however? In the spirit of ‘the price of liberty is eternal vigilance,’ let’s look more closely. .Citing the “live abuse” of a child, the government claims that Bill C-2 will “clarify” the ability of law enforcement to exercise specific powers and seize specific information without a warrant. But, law enforcement already has such powers in urgent, time-sensitive circumstances. What this looks like, is that cracking down on organized crime and money laundering may just be the pretext for new restrictions on our right to use cash. Predictably, Minister Anandasangaree claims that C-2 complies with the Charter, just like every other politician who introduces legislation that violates our rights and freedoms..But, Bill C-2 also gives police new powers to intercept mail in transit, thereby repealing privacy protections at the post office that have protected Canadians since Confederation. According to Blacklock’s Reporter, police already have the power to track suspicious letters and packages to delivery, “a requirement that’s seen RCMP pose as mail carriers and courier drivers in sting operations.”Minister Anandasangaree claims, “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 illicit activities.” While organized crime is a pressing issue (and as old as mankind itself,) we need restraints on power (including law enforcement power) because power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.Minister Anandasangaree claims Bill C-2 is “essential to maintaining the safety and security of our country.” Not true. Canada has maintained a high level of safety and security for 157 years, while also respecting Canadians’ privacy when they mail a letter. Law enforcement already has the power to apply in court for search warrants and other powers to be used against selected individuals and organizations, all while respecting the privacy of 99.99% of the population..Bill C-2 would also force almost any organization offering nearly any form of electronic services to organize users’ data in such a way that it can be requested and accessed by law enforcement or intelligence agencies. An organization that uses any form of electronic services geared towards people in Canada, or that operates in Canada, will have to implement tools to ensure data relating to those services and the users can be extracted and provided to authorities when mandated. CSIS agents, the police, peace officers, border agents, prison guards and special constables will acquire the right to demand information about internet subscribers — including their locations — without a warrant from a judge.Matt Hatfield, executive director of advocacy group OpenMedia, reportedly said Bill C-2 could compel a large range of electronic service providers, including social media platforms, e-mail and messaging services, gaming platforms, telecoms and cloud storage companies, to disclose information about their subscribers, including the province and local area where they use their services, without judicial oversight..If Bill C-2 passes, it will become a Criminal Code offence for businesses, professionals, and charities to accept cash donations, deposits, or payments of $10,000 or more. Even if the $10,000 payment or donation is broken down into several smaller cash transactions, it will be crime for a business or charity to receive it. This is similar to Quebec's Bill 54, adopted in March 2024, which empowers police to presume that any person carrying $2,000 or more in cash is connected to an illegal activity. Police can seize the money, and the citizen must prove his or her innocence to get it back..It is true that very few Canadians use cash in the amount of $10,000 or more for a single purchase or donation. But once doing so becomes a Criminal Code offence, it’s easy for the federal government to reduce the legal amount to $5,000, then $1,000, then $100, and then what? Nothing?Restricting the use of cash is a dangerous step towards tyranny and totalitarianism. Cash gives us privacy, autonomy, and freedom from surveillance by government and by banks, credit card companies, and other corporations. If we cherish our privacy, we need to defend our freedom to choose cash, in the amount of our choosing.This includes, for example, our right to pay $10,000 cash for a car, or to donate $10,000 cash to a charity. Law enforcement already has the tools to fight crime. Perhaps they need a bigger budget to hire more people, or perhaps they need to use existing tools more effectively. In a free society, violating our right to use cash is not the answer.Governments need to get creative. The violation of the privacy and security of all Canadians is not the right solution to permeable borders, financial crimes, or fentanyl in mailboxes.
