Bill’s C-10 & C-11. If we aren’t talking about it already, shouldn’t we be?

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
50,983
4,302
113
Washington DC
The nanny state worries me. Not that I have much use or liking for threatening and harassing behavior on-line, but they always push laws to insane extremes. Who among us has not said, upon learning of something stupid a spouse, or a boss, or a kid has done, "I'll kill her/him?" Obviously merely a manner of speaking, meaning "I'm angry at the idiot," but it only takes an overzealous bureaucrat or two to turn it into a crime.
 

Taxslave2

Electoral Member
Aug 13, 2022
649
315
63
Worst case scenario is that the bureaucraps will turn the whole thing into an internet version of CBC, where only censored versions of events get through.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dixie Cup

The_Foxer

Council Member
Aug 9, 2022
1,760
1,153
113
Worst case scenario is that the bureaucraps will turn the whole thing into an internet version of CBC, where only censored versions of events get through.
no, worst case is they do that, and criminally charge or fine those who tried to put up things they disapproved of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
18,542
4,268
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
There is a link between the Rouleau Commission and the Trudeau Liberals’ internet censorship law that is currently being debated in the Senate.

The overreaction of the Trudeau government to last winter’s Freedom Convoy (which has been very much on display at Justice Paul Rouleau’s ongoing inquiry into the use of the Emergencies Act), and the government’s justification for Bill C-11 both show the Liberals neither understand nor trust ordinary Canadians.

Both the imposition of the Emergencies Act and the desire to regulate internet content grow out of the Liberals’ arrogant belief that they – and they alone – have been imbued with the intellectual and moral superiority to determine what is in your best interests. You can’t be trusted to do it yourself. After all, left to your own devices, you might not agree with them.


Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland and other federal cabinet ministers all claimed on numerous occasions the truckers were a radical fringe controlled by white nationalists or foreign governments hellbent on overthrowing Canada’s democracy.

That’s because, unlike frontline police commanders, Liberals have almost no contact with ordinary Canadians and they see the country beyond their isolated little social and professional bubbles as a dangerous pit seething with mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging cretins who will swallow any cockamamie conspiracy theory circulating online.

Were it not for their enlightenment and munificence, the Liberals are convinced Canada would quickly descend into chaos.

That’s the mindset behind their move to regulate the internet, too: They must filter our browsing so you and I do not fall prey to “misinformation.”


Never mind the vast majority of misinformation being spread about the Freedom Convoy was coming from the Trudeau government itself (and from its in-house news agency, the CBC), the Liberals want to filter what you can and cannot see online because they are sure without their wisdom, you will fall for crackpots, racists and radicals.

They must protect you from yourself. Democracy is too important to be left to the people.

This bunker mentality in Ottawa may even partly explain why Saskatchewan and Alberta have both proposed sovereignty acts to blunt Ottawa’s influence in their provinces.

Majorities in both provinces are fed up with remote, detached, smug, central elitists dictating environmental and economic policies to them. So they are erecting barriers to Ottawa’s control.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
18,542
4,268
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
The bill was first introduced in the fall of 2020 as C-10. It became controversial in the spring of 2021 when the government removed an exemption for user-generated content, putting online posts under the CRTC’s regulatory authority, which critics said would harm Canadians’ freedom of expression. After the Senate refused to fast-track the legislation, that version of the bill died on the order paper when the 2021 federal election was called.

The Liberal government then re-introduced the legislation as Bill C-11. Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez has maintained the new bill “fixed” the problems identified in C-10 by re-introducing the exemption for user-generated content. In an appearance in front of the committee Tuesday, Rodriguez maintained only “commercial content” would be covered by the bill.

But critics and experts say the bill includes exemptions-to-the-exemption that are actually much more broad than the narrow use case described by the government, which has repeatedly given the example of professional music on YouTube as an example of what is scoped in.

Vivek Krishnamurthy, director of the Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic at the University of Ottawa, told senators in an earlier appearance: “I’ve been a lawyer for the better part of 15 years and this section is about the most confusing thing I’ve ever encountered.”

He said the wording of the exemptions-to-the-exemption means “there’s nothing that prevents the CRTC from imposing regulations on the full stack of online audiovisual content distribution.”

After nearly a year-and-a-half wait, senators will have a chance to make changes to the Liberal government’s online streaming bill and its controversial provisions involving user-generated content. A key question now is whether senators appointed by the current Liberal government, but who sit as independents, will support changes.

The rest at the above link.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
25,062
5,729
113
B.C.
How do we ensure that Provinces with smaller populations get a say in our government? Become a Republic? With 2 Provinces having the larger population, they pretty much control who is in government & the rest of us can basically go to h3ll under this government anyway.
That is how Canada was set up , why do you think there are three Maritime provinces ?
 

The_Foxer

Council Member
Aug 9, 2022
1,760
1,153
113
How do we ensure that Provinces with smaller populations get a say in our government? Become a Republic? With 2 Provinces having the larger population, they pretty much control who is in government & the rest of us can basically go to h3ll under this government anyway.
Being a republic doesn't help. Ask maine and california :)

Having an elected senate would have helped. The senate is more based on geography than population. And the short answer is that's how you address the problem, the parliament elected by the people, the senate based on geography and similar geographic interests. That prevents domination by geography which is largely what we have now.

of course the other way is to grow the population in the smaller areas and we've been working on that too. There was a time not long ago where the entire west only mattered as a tiebreaker between the two parties in the east. Now, it's actually hard to get a majority without strong support in the west. The west has as many votes now as quebec. And as that increases over time we'll see the power balance becoming more even. But of course that a slow process over generations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dixie Cup

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
25,062
5,729
113
B.C.
Being a republic doesn't help. Ask maine and california :)

Having an elected senate would have helped. The senate is more based on geography than population. And the short answer is that's how you address the problem, the parliament elected by the people, the senate based on geography and similar geographic interests. That prevents domination by geography which is largely what we have now.

of course the other way is to grow the population in the smaller areas and we've been working on that too. There was a time not long ago where the entire west only mattered as a tiebreaker between the two parties in the east. Now, it's actually hard to get a majority without strong support in the west. The west has as many votes now as quebec. And as that increases over time we'll see the power balance becoming more even. But of course that a slow process over generations.
When does Quebec lose seats with a shrinking population ?
 

The_Foxer

Council Member
Aug 9, 2022
1,760
1,153
113
When does Quebec lose seats with a shrinking population ?
The snarky answer would be 'when we elect a cpc gov't :) But - the fact is that it's more likely for political reasons that they'll simply give the other provinces more rather than take any away from quebec.
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
25,062
5,729
113
B.C.
The snarky answer would be 'when we elect a cpc gov't :) But - the fact is that it's more likely for political reasons that they'll simply give the other provinces more rather than take any away from quebec.
Yup political reasons put us here .
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
102,841
7,856
113
Moccasin Flats
Or that Alberta & Saskatchewan that were going to be a province were cut into two provinces?
That was done by subterfuge. Haultain was in PA and only that the night before that Sask, Alberta part of Manitoba and the Territories were split. The was no Territorial representation. Haultain fought Ottawa for years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Twin_Moose

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
18,542
4,268
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Senators have added stronger privacy protections to the Liberal government’s controversial online streaming bill, although other amendments to exclude smaller platforms and add a reference to consumer choice were voted down by Liberal-appointed senators.

The Senate transport and communications committee is in the clause-by-clause process of amending Bill C-11, which sets up the CRTC to regulate platforms like Netflix and YouTube. The committee hasn’t yet reached the most contentious section of the legislation that deals with exemptions for user-generated content from CRTC regulation.