blankety-blank-blank @metaHashBang

Canada has reportedly signed the UN Cybercrime Convention. The Liberal government should explain why there was no parliamentary or public debate on this treaty that many believe will impact on the surveillance of Canadians: 1. Why was this decision not announced publicly? 2. What changed since Canada’s earlier concerns about surveillance? 3. Will implementing legislation be required before Canada can fully ratify and implement the Convention? 4. How will Charter rights and privacy protections be safeguarded? 5. Will Parliament have the opportunity to fully examine any implementing legislation before ratification? 6. Has the government assessed the Convention’s implications for AI, cloud computing, and cross-border data governance? These are important questions for Parliament and for Canadians. unodc.org/unodc/en/cyber…

Nine months ago, Canada joined key allies by declining to sign the UN Cybercrime Convention, given longstanding surveillance and human rights concerns as well as the absence of key safeguards. Last week, it quietly signed the treaty. What changed? michaelgeist.ca/2026/07/a-surv…

The government presumably hoped pushing Bill C-22 through a Commons committee past midnight without debate would put an end to the lawful access controversy. That plan has backfired, leading to a political and trade backlash that could have been avoided. michaelgeist.ca/2026/07/rushin…

Now starting to ban "free speech" ...

Blacklock's Reporter @mindingottawa

7 days ago

Minister @rechievaldez's dept Women & Gender Equality is first in fed public service to ban all Twitter accounts, says hurtful remarks by the public "created significant mental strain for employees."  blacklocks.ca/first-dept-to-… #cdnpoli

161 126 263 34K 20

Access delayed is access denied. And there have been a lot of delays for anyone filing access-to-information requests in Canada. Information Commissioner Caroline Maynard joins my Law Bytes podcast to critique the government’s plan to fix a broken system. michaelgeist.ca/2026/07/the-la…

Flock cameras automatically photograph passing vehicles, capturing licence plates, timestamps, locations, and often vehicle make, model, and colour. The data can be searched and shared across police agencies to track where vehicles have travelled. Privacy experts warn that this creates a powerful mass-surveillance network capable of revealing people's movements, associations, and daily routines, even when they are not suspected of any crime. While the cameras are already widely deployed across the United States, their use in Canada remains relatively limited – for now. You can learn more here: panopti.ca

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

Per my local police department, Flock charges approximately $3000/year per camera. So American taxpayers are spending $349,671,000 per year to be constantly monitored. Most Americans are unaware this is happening. @therealDeFlock

Is the government’s planned social media ban constitutional? Given that its implementation plans will require millions to age verify before any privacy safeguards or exemptions are established, I make the case that a court will grant a stay blocking it. michaelgeist.ca/2026/07/why-th…

The US government has positioned itself as regulator and guardian of new frontier AI models with discretionary power to switch AI access on and off. Cybersecurity and economic impacts are huge. Open version of my Globe op-ed on how Canada should respond. michaelgeist.ca/2026/07/why-be…

The focus of Bill C-36 has centred on the government stripping the Privacy Commissioner of power over private sector privacy law. Former BC privacy commissioner David Loukidelis joins the Law Bytes podcast to explain why it’s an unnecessarily risky policy. michaelgeist.ca/2026/07/the-la…

The government defends Bill C-22's mandatory metadata retention as consistent with its Five Eyes allies. But the US never imposed such a mandate, and this week its Supreme Court ruled that even two hours of location data is a search the state must justify. michaelgeist.ca/2026/07/shaky-…

Making web giants pay is over. In its place, we’ve got a reversal of the CRTC streaming decision, mandatory metadata retention, a social media ban, and the Privacy Commissioner of Canada no longer enforcing private sector privacy law. What just happened? michaelgeist.ca/2026/06/the-tw…

The Australian government is effectively acknowledging the obvious: its social ban isn’t working. But its answer is apparently to make the law even tougher, as if that will stop the widespread circumvention. cp24.com/news/world/202…

Bill C-34 supporters say it has a "soft ban" on social media: meet safety standards, earn an exemption. But when it takes effect, there are no standards and no way to apply for one. My post on why the soft ban is really a hard age verification mandate. michaelgeist.ca/2026/06/soft-b…

The government could have introduced a privacy bill with new protections for Canadians and had it taken immediate effect with enforcement by the Privacy Commissioner. Instead, it plans to delay the new safeguards for years and do this... x.com/mgeist/status/…

Michael Geist @mgeist

a month ago

The government claims privacy is an urgent priority, but Bill C-36 suggests otherwise. I unpack the many steps required for privacy reforms to take effect, concluding that it will take years for Canadians to benefit from any improved privacy protections. michaelgeist.ca/2026/06/new-ri…

3 49 99 17K 18

The kids’ social media has been Bill C-34's dominant issue. The Globe granted permission for my Law Bytes podcast to rebroadcast my recent appearance on The Decibel podcast, which discussed the bill, the ban, and online harms and safety legislation. michaelgeist.ca/2026/06/the-la…

This was a very bad week for privacy in Canada.

If the government believed that privacy was an urgent issue, it wouldn’t delay the privacy protections and rights in Bill C-36 until 2030 at the earliest. My post on why the bill takes one step forward and two steps back. michaelgeist.ca/2026/06/billc3… x.com/EvanLSolomon/s…

Evan Solomon @EvanLSolomon

a month ago

Your data should not be used against you. That’s why the Protecting Privacy and Consumer Data Act will help protect Canadians from unfair profiling and surveillance pricing, while giving people more control over their personal information. 🇨🇦 Vos données ne devraient jamais

148 12 49 18K 4

Well past midnight and the votes continue on Bill C-22 amendments. Just amendment numbers with no discussion, no debate, and no way for the public to even know what is being voted on.

With Minister @gary_srp invoking "you're with us or with the criminals" language as the government seeks to shut down debate on Bill C-22, he would do well to remember how Liberal MPs reacted to that approach years ago on a different lawful access bill. x.com/mgeist/status/…

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

Michael Geist @mgeist

a month ago

In 2012, Liberals condemned Vic Toews for telling lawful access critics they could “stand with us or with the child pornographers." Now @gary_srp, shutting down Bill C-22 debate, tells critics to "choose" between police and victims. Same shameful playbook. michaelgeist.ca/2026/06/gary-a…

4 60 150 14K 9