Government Accountability

Daily Hive: Canadian woman left in limbo after CRA accidentally declares her dead

When June “Juna” Miller filed her taxes in spring, she expected a refund, but instead, she was declared legally dead.

A few weeks later, she attempted to log in to her CRA account. It didn’t work, and she called the agency.

“The woman on the phone said, ‘Well, you’re deceased.’ I said, ‘What are you talking about? You’re speaking to me!'” Miller explained.

What followed was a month-long ordeal that cost her her pension, Social Insurance Number, and sense of stability.

“It took them five seconds to say I was dead… without even asking for a death certificate,” she said. “Now I’m being told it could take six months to prove I’m alive. That makes no sense to me.”

But with her account frozen and no payments coming in, she was suddenly without any source of income.

Her Social Insurance Number had been cancelled, making it impossible to access her bank account or even apply for temporary work to stay afloat.

Even Service Canada wasn’t much help, Miller claimed.

She recalls one interaction with an agent who questioned why she kept insisting she was alive, while another refused to proceed because her name didn’t match across various documents.

When Miller attempted to order a copy of her marriage certificate to fulfill the requirement, her request was denied because her ID had already been flagged as invalid.

Vancouver East MP Jenny Kwan stepped in as well, formally raising Miller’s case with the federal government.

Miller provided Daily Hive a copy of the letter dated June 30, in which Kwan wrote directly to Minister François-Philippe Champagne, asking that CRA fix the mistake immediately, restore her pension, and ensure all missed payments were sent without delay.

Resurrection, at last

On June 30, Miller received the call she’d been waiting for.

“CRA just called and I have been resurrected,” she told Daily Hive. “They’re sending an apology letter in the mail.”

 

NDP Media Release: NDP reaction to Carney's new NATO defence spending pledge

NDP Media Release 25.6.2025

NDP reaction to Carney's new NATO defence spending pledge 

In reaction to Mark Carney's new NATO defence spending pledge to hit 5 per cent of GDP by 2035, NDP critic for Defence Heather McPherson issued the following statement:   

“Increasing defence spending to 5 per cent was never part of Mark Carney’s election campaign – which ended less than two months ago. This was not part of the mandate he received from Canadians.

Carney's new pledge would cost Canadians more than $100 billion per year. That’s twice the amount the federal government transfers to the provinces and territories for healthcare. At a time when Canadians urgently need investments in healthcare, affordable housing, and climate change mitigation, they should be worried about what services they may lose to make up this extraordinary and unexpected cost.
 
Right now, workers are losing their jobs because of Trump’s reckless trade war, and this Liberal government is telling them it can’t provide proper support. That's not what Carney promised on the campaign trail.

New Democrats recognize that Canadian Armed Forces personnel and infrastructure were underfunded by successive Liberal and Conservative governments, and there is a need to increase investment in these services. And the growing threats to Canadian sovereignty and security are real. But these threats are not only military, and defence spending is not the only solution – that’s why the Liberals should be reversing their cuts to conflict prevention, peacebuilding and international development.

While this Liberal government emphasizes Arctic security and sovereignty, there is an excessive focus on security. Northerners continue to face barriers to fully participating in Arctic sovereignty, which in turn limits their engagement in Arctic security. That’s why greater investment in Arctic sovereignty is essential—including funding for housing, schools, airports, and marine ports. These investments will empower Northerners to contribute meaningfully to the region’s security and future.

Canadians deserve a government that puts their needs first. When the Liberal government says it has billions for weapons but not enough for affordable housing or healthcare, it means more people will fall through the cracks.
 
New Democrats will fight every day so that you and your family aren’t left behind.”

The Tyee: ‘Ass Backwards’: Canada’s New Legal Posture Post-Bill C-5

The government gave Indigenous rights holders just seven days to review and respond to Bill C-5, said MP for Vancouver East Jenny Kwan in an interview with The Tyee. “That is absolutely disgusting,” she said. “It is not in any stretch of the imagination meaningful consultation.”

Hill Times: Government’s border security bill draws heavy criticism from civil rights groups

Since Bill C-2’s introduction, vocal critics of the legislation in the House have included NDP MP Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, B.C.), her party’s critic for public safety, immigration, and citizenship. On June 11, Kwan told the House that the “so-called stronger borders act makes Harper’s Bill C-51 look like child’s play.”

“Bill C-2 is a sweeping attack on Canadian civil liberties. It would allow the RCMP and CSIS to make information demands from internet providers, banks, doctors, landlords and even therapists, without judicial oversight. This is not about border security. It is about government overreach and Big Brother tactics, plain and simple. It is a violation of our privacy, and it will be challenged in court,” she said in the House.

In response to Kwan, Anandasangaree defended the bill, saying the Strong Borders Act would help keep Canadians safe.

 

HANSARD: How can government defend Bill C-2's violations of Canadian privacy?

Global Editorial: Another sneak attack on your privacy rights

Like another government before them, the Liberals are trying to satiate law enforcement’s perennial desire for warrantless access to personal information in the digital age by linking it to a perceived emergency.

The Conservatives under Stephen Harper did it in 2013, when Vic Toews, the public safety minister, famously said of a Liberal opposition critic that, “He can either stand with us or with the child pornographers.”

Mr. Toews was talking about the 2012 Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act, which would have given police unprecedented powers to monitor Canadians’ internet activities without a warrant.

The bill did not in fact mention children or internet predators anywhere except in its title, and the Conservatives abandoned it in 2013 under a withering public outcry.

The Carney Liberals are now throwing around the words “fentanyl,” “sex offenders” and “money laundering” in Bill C-2, and suggesting Canada’s borders are porous, for the same purpose.

Michael Geist: “Big Brother Tactics”: Why Bill C-2’s New Warrantless Disclosure Demand Powers Extend Far Beyond Internet and Telecom Providers

The government’s inclusion of warrantless information demand powers in Bill C-2 may make this the most dangerous lawful access proposal yet, exceeding even the 2010 bill led by Conservative Public Safety Minister Vic Toews. The initial concern regarding the bill’s warrantless disclosure demand unsurprisingly focused on whether the proposal was consistent with Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence upholding the reasonable expectation of privacy in basic subscriber information (there is a strong argument it is not). The application of this new power was generally framed as a matter for telecom and Internet companies, given that companies such as Bell, Rogers, and Telus are typically the focal point for law enforcement seeking information on subscriber activity. However, it has become increasingly apparent that this is an overly restrictive reading of the provision. The Bill C-2 information demand power doesn’t just target telecom providers. It targets everyone who provides services with the prospect of near limitless targets for warrantless disclosure demands.

Globe & Mail: Border bill powers would allow warrantless police requests to doctors, abortion clinics, hotels

The bill would give CSIS and the police, or a “public officer,” the power to demand the basic information without a warrant if there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a crime could be committed, or that any breach of a law passed by Parliament may take place. A draft form for making the information demand says to help with the investigation of an offence, the information must be provided “as soon as possible.”

The bill would gag the provider from saying they had received such a demand.

“With these powers, any official tasked with enforcing a federal law could go to the company you rented a car from or the hotel you stayed at and paint a detailed picture of your activities simply by confirming the various companies you interacted with,” said Tamir Israel, director of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association’s privacy, surveillance and technologies program.

“Even health providers could face secret demands and would need to hire a lawyer and challenge these in court within five days of receiving them if they wished to avoid revealing that you are their client.”

Media Statement: Bill C-5 undermines the democratic process, the right of Indigenous People, the rights and safety of workers, and critical environmental protections

Bill C-5 undermines the democratic process, the rights of Indigenous Peoples, the rights and safety of workers, and critical environmental protections.

The NDP opposes this bill in its current form.

Through Bill C-5, Carney is using the threat of Trump's tariffs to provide Cabinet and Ministers with overreaching powers to eliminate environmental oversight, violate Constitutional obligations to Indigenous peoples, and lower labour standards for workers throughout Canada.

There is no doubt that the unjustified and illegal trade war initiated by Trump opens an opportunity to buy and build more of what we need at home and make sure workers and Indigenous people benefit.

Although Part 1 of C-5 deserves positive consideration, we have many grave concerns about part two of Bill C-5. That is why the NDP will oppose fast-tracking this legislation and will oppose this bill in its current form.

Guardian Opinion: Canadians said no to Trump – so why is Mark Carney pushing a Maga-inspired border bill?

The Carney Liberal government introduced Bill C-2, the Strong Borders Act, as their first piece of legislation in the House of Commons after the federal election.  This Bill is supposed to appease Trump with his delusional claims on fentanyl trafficking against Canada.  Instead of elbows up, speaking truth to power, he is bending a knee to Trump.  

Worst still, this legislation intends to align Canada with the US's refugee policies - it is an anti-immigrant and anti-refugee bill that goes against Canadian values and historically progressive policies.  Due process and administrative fairness are tossed out the window.  Oversight and accountability - non-existent.  

This Act will result in a mass deportation by administrative means, rather than law enforcement. It prevents persecuted individuals from applying for asylum in Canada.  It will result in the same outcome, putting thousands of people into precarious and vulnerable situations. It also upends privacy laws and creates a backdoor to accessing the private data of individuals. This legislation is a direct attack on civil liberties. The NDP will work with civil society, refugee and immigration organizations to actively oppose this draconian legislation. This is an excellent summary from the Guardian on Bill C-2: