Just weeks after last year’s election, Mark Carney’s government committed not one, but two privacy blunders in rapid succession. First, Bill C-2 – literally the first substantive bill of the new government – buried lawful access provisions in an omnibus “border measures” bill that would have established unprecedented warrantless access to the personal of information of Canadians. Second, days later it introduced Bill C-4, which was framed as affordability measures bill but included provisions that exempt political parties from the application of privacy protections. The bizarre assault on privacy felt like an opportunistic attempt to insert unpopular rules in the hope that few were paying attention. The strategy was failure: the government ultimately introduced a new border measures bill with lawful access removed (new lawful access rules are expected in their own bill this year) and now a Senate committee which studied the Bill C-4 privacy rules has recommended that they be killed, removed from the bill, or subject to a two-year sunset clause.
Latest Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 257: Lisa Given on What Canada Can Learn From Australia’s Youth Social Media Ban
Social media bans for younger users have begun to take hold in various countries, particularly in Europe. In Canada, Bill S-209 may ostensibly be about underage access to pornography sites, but the bill’s proponents seem positively giddy at the prospect of a broader application to social media. This trend started in Australia, which passed a social media ban for those under 16 in late 2024 with the law taking effect just a couple of months ago.
Lisa Given is the Distinguished Professor of Information Sciences at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology or RMIT in Melbourne, Australia. She has been closely tracking and commenting on the Australian legislation and she joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss its origins, how the law functions, the concerns it has raised, and what lessons Canada might draw from the experience to date.
Court Ordered Social Media Site Blocking Coming to Canada?: Trojan Horse Online Harms Bill Clears Senate Committee Review
Critics of Senator Julie Miville-Dechêne’s successive bills that ostensibly target pornography sites have for years warned of the privacy and equity risks that arise from mandated age verification and the dangers of over broad legislation that would extend far beyond pornography sites by covering social media, search, and AI services. The Senate committee reviewing the latest iteration of those bill – Bill S-209 – met yesterday to conduct a clause-by-clause review of the bill. That the bill passed through committee pending some supplementary remarks was not a surprise. However, that the privacy and equity concerns barely merited a mention and that regulating social media sites was viewed as feature not a bug was a wake up call.
An Illusion of Consensus: What the Government Isn’t Saying About the Results of its AI Consultation
The government quietly released a “what we heard” report this week discussing the response to its 30-day sprint AI consultation from last October. Described as the “largest public consultation in the history of ISED”, the report relies heavily on AI for its analysis as the government notes that it used “Cohere Command A, OpenAI GPT-5 nano, Anthropic Claude Haiku and Google Gemini Flash to read through the submissions and identify common themes.” Given that it received 64,600 responses to 26 questions, it says AI enabled it to shrink a process that would typically take many months into a matter of weeks.
In addition to the public consultation survey, AI Minister Evan Solomon formed a 28 person expert committee that provided the government with 32 different papers and reports. Those documents were similarly subject to AI analysis with the “what we heard” report devoting several pages to the expert analysis and recommendations. Yet unlike the public survey responses, the government has posted all the experts’ reports, which allows the public to see the actual advice alongside the government’s summary of it.
Since the government used AI to summarize the expert reports, I thought I would do the same.
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 256: Jennifer Quaid on Taking On Big Tech With the Competition Act’s Private Right of Access
Concerns about the dominance of big tech companies has been steadily mounting for years, leading to an increased emphasis on the role that competition law might play. The government recently expanded the tool set within the Competition Act by expanding the private right of access that enables individuals to launch their own claims. That led quickly to a case against Google, which the Competition Tribunal addressed in a recent ruling.
To help unpack the state of the law, the Tribunal’s decision and what it means for future actions, my colleague Professor Jennifer Quaid joins the Law Bytes podcast. Professor Quaid is an internationally recognized leading legal expert and scholar in the fields of organizational criminal liability, corporate accountability, competition and business regulation as well as a Senior Fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI).
Recent Posts
Time for the Government to Fix Its Political Party Privacy Blunder: Kill Bill C-4’s Disastrous Privacy Rules 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 257: Lisa Given on What Canada Can Learn From Australia’s Youth Social Media Ban 
Court Ordered Social Media Site Blocking Coming to Canada?: Trojan Horse Online Harms Bill Clears Senate Committee Review 
An Illusion of Consensus: What the Government Isn’t Saying About the Results of its AI Consultation 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 256: Jennifer Quaid on Taking On Big Tech With the Competition Act’s Private Right of Access
