Public Safety / Bill C-2
Public safety depends on fairness and compassion. True security comes from addressing poverty, mental health, and substance abuse—not harsher penalties.
Bill C-2 threatens Canadians’ rights. It allows police and CSIS to access online activities without a warrant, based only on “reasonable suspicion,” violating longstanding privacy protections. Surveillance under this law could target activists, workers, and community advocates.
The bill also creates new data-sharing agreements with foreign governments, including the U.S., putting Canadians’ personal data at risk—especially given the U.S. government’s hostile record toward migrants and human rights.
Refugees and migrants are particularly endangered. Bill C-2 restricts claims, enables mass deportations, and gives the Immigration Minister sweeping powers to cancel permits outside established procedures, breaching Canada’s international human rights commitments.
Canada must uphold its core values rather than yield to external pressure. I will work to stop Bill C-2 and defend the rights and dignity of all Canadians.

The federal NDP says the Liberals need to include provisions to reestablish a port policing program in the government’s new border security bill.

The original Ports Canada Police was disbanded back in 1997. A 2023 report to the City of Delta, B.C., by former Mountie and money-laundering expert Peter German says the move has allowed organized crime to take root and proliferate through Canada’s ports.

“With its disbandment, policing of port property became the responsibility of the police force of jurisdiction. For Greater Vancouver, this meant a multitude of different municipal police forces and the RCMP,” German’s report explains.

NDP MP for Vancouver East Jenny Kwan says gang activity and trafficking through the country’s ports has “increased exponentially” since then.

She says harmful goods are entering Canada and also leaving its ports for destinations like Australia, New Zealand, and some African countries.

“We have actually left a giant hole for criminal activities to target us, and that has to be closed,” said Kwan.

Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree says Ottawa continues to have “difficult conversations” with New Delhi about the 2023 killing of a Canadian Sikh leader, but the Prime Minister’s Office has declined to say if the matter was raised earlier this week in talks between Mark Carney and his Indian counterpart, Narendra Modi.

Mr. Carney ducked a question Tuesday about whether he and Mr. Modi had discussed the killing of the Sikh leader, Hardeep Singh Nijjar, during a one-on-one meeting that day at the G7 leaders’ summit in Kananaskis, Alta.

The Globe and Mail pressed the PMO on Wednesday about whether Mr. Nijjar’s slaying and Indian foreign interference were part of the discussions. Sikh organizations and human-rights activists have also sought clarification on what was discussed.

Mr. Carney’s press secretary, Audrey Champoux, would not comment on Wednesday. She referred The Globe to a statement the two leaders released Tuesday: “Prime Minister Carney raised priorities on the G7 agenda, including transnational crime and repression, security, and the rules-based order.”

After the meeting, the two leaders announced that they would designate new high commissioners and restore regular diplomatic services to citizens in both countries.

Bilateral relations went into a deep freeze in 2024, after then-prime minister Justin Trudeau and the RCMP said there was evidence linking agents of the Modi government to Mr. Nijjar’s slaying.

Canada expelled the Indian high commissioner and five other diplomats over the killing. India denied any role and responded with similar diplomatic expulsions.

NDP MP Jenny Kwan, an outspoken human-rights activist, said in a June 17 letter to Mr. Carney that re-establishing diplomatic normalcy with India when it has yet to account for its role in the death of Mr. Nijjar “sends a deeply painful message to Sikh Canadians who continue to live under threat.”

Major Sikh organizations and human-rights advocates also wrote a separate letter to Mr. Carney on Tuesday, saying the Nijjar killing was part of a co-ordinated campaign of transnational repression that “continues to violate Canadian sovereignty.”

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.

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.

B.C. NDP MP Jenny Kwan is calling on the government to suspend all security sharing and intelligence agreements with India and publicly call on the Modi government to “fully co-operate” with investigations into extrajudicial killings in Canada, including Nijjar’s murder.

Kwan sent Anandasangaree a letter saying it is “beyond disappointing” that Carney invited Modi to the G7 as security issues with India persist.

“Continuing to engage the Modi government without full transparency and accountability undermines Canada’s credibility in defending human rights and the rule of law — both at home and abroad,” Kwan wrote.

On Tuesday, B.C. Premier David Eby called on Carney to add the Bishnoi gang to the government’s list of designated terrorist organizations.

The federal NDP’s public safety critic, Jenny Kwan, also wrote to Carney on Wednesday to urge his government to list Bishnoi as a terrorist group, among other things.

The letter added that Modi’s right-hand man Amit Shah “has been credibly accused of approving illegal activities on Canadian soil, yet Canada appears to be proceeding with diplomatic normalcy.”

“This is no longer simply a matter of foreign policy—it is about justice, accountability, and the safety of Canadians.”

Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree said listing terrorist groups was “an independent process” done through national security agencies.

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.”

Are you ready to take action?

Contact Jenny
Mobile Offices
Constituent Resources

Sign up for updates