The government’s border security bill has been divided into two parts to expedite the passage of some measures and allow for further scrutiny of others. Bill C-12, presented recently, encompasses various provisions from a previous bill in June aimed at expanding the Coast Guard’s responsibilities, strengthening the immigration and refugee system, improving information sharing on sex offenders, and regulating chemicals used in producing illegal drugs.
Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree stated that the government remains committed to advancing the initial bill, C-2, which includes granting authorities new search and personal information access powers. This decision results in the progression of federal border security proposals through Parliament on separate tracks, with Bill C-12 anticipated to move forward first.
Bill C-2 will subsequently undergo Parliamentary procedures, with components duplicated in C-12 removed to prevent redundancy. The government’s new strategy, as reported by CBC News, has drawn criticism from civil society organizations opposing the border measures due to concerns about liberties and human rights implications.
Tim McSorley, the National Coordinator of the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group, criticized the government for splitting the bills instead of addressing the issues directly. He emphasized the need for both bills to be withdrawn. Similarly, Karen Cocq from the Migrant Rights Network voiced objections, asserting that the new bill, like its predecessor, would infringe on due process protections for vulnerable individuals and should be retracted.
Anandasangaree explained to the media that revising Bill C-2 during the legislative process was challenging due to stringent amendment guidelines. The government’s initial intent with the legislation was to enhance border security, combat organized crime, curb the influx of dangerous substances like fentanyl, and tackle money laundering issues.
The legislation was prompted by pressure from the U.S. administration under President Donald Trump, citing concerns about migrant flows and drug trafficking. Although the bill received backing from law enforcement agencies, fentanyl control authorities, and child protection advocates, over 300 civil society groups urged the government to withdraw it, citing threats to freedoms, refugee and migrant rights, and Canadians’ privacy.
The minority government faced difficulties in securing support from opposition parties for the bill. The International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group raised alarms about proposed measures that could impede asylum claims, grant Canada Post mail inspection powers, and expand access to internet subscriber information under revised laws governing CSIS and the Criminal Code, allowing warrantless police access in urgent situations.
