Column: Bill C-51 topic of much debate

The Harper government’s proposed anti-terrorist legislation, Bill C-51, has triggered a negative response.

The Harper government’s proposed anti-terrorist legislation, Bill C-51, has triggered a negative response, Canada-wide, ranging from formal panel discussions to a national day of protest this Saturday.

The bill is intended to protect us from terrorist attacks but many say it goes too far in attempting to control terrorism. It tramples on the lives of ordinary Canadians. Do we care? Well, we won’t know what we’ve got until it’s gone.

Opposition leaders Thomas Mulcair and Elizabeth May are gibbled by the sweeping powers of C-51, and there are howls from civil liberty and environmental groups. That’s to be expected. What wasn’t expected was the outcry from heavy hitters like former prime ministers and cabinet ministers, former Supreme Court justices, and a retired RCMP watchdog who say the bill would give too much power to intelligence agencies and police with too little oversight, and given the secrecy surrounding national security activities, abuses could be “undetected and without remedy.”

Privacy Commissioner Daniel Therrien echoed their concerns in a lengthy report to the Commons’ Public Safety Committee.

He said our security must be protected, but used words like unprecedented, excessive, and seriously deficient when referring to parts of the bill. First Nations groups, lawyers, Premier Christy Clark, Conrad Black and Rex Murphy are in the ever-growing NO chorus which believes C-51 threatens our personal freedoms.

Many say the bill’s wording is so broad and vague, government agencies could actually criminalize legitimate news, speech and debate, and C-51 could create a secret police force to spy on innocent Canadians.

Some even accuse the Conservatives of fear-mongering to scare Canadians into accepting it. Others contend it’s a political ploy to distract attention from contentious issues, like the economy. Whatever, if C-51 passes, it will no doubt be challenged in court. My question is do we reap what we sow? Has poking our noses (and armed forces) into Middle Eastern affairs triggered terrorism?

Diana French is a freelance columnist for the Tribune. She is a former Tribune editor, retired teacher, historian, and book author.

Williams Lake Tribune