Bill C-22, the government’s lawful access legislation, is awaiting Senate consideration this fall with the encryption provisions likely to be the centre of attention given diametrically opposing views from law enforcement and technology companies and experts. Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree told the Toronto Star earlier this month that the bill strikes “the right balance” on encryption, claiming that cracking encryption is “off limits” except in “extenuating circumstances” where there is a “minor opening,” and that “everybody has had to have some water in their wine.” The government’s approach follows the typical legislative playbook of seeking a middle ground that stakeholders can (sometimes reluctantly) live with. Yet the past few weeks have produced an unusual situation in which both sides say no viable middle ground exists. Police claim the bill’s encryption provisions do little to change what they can obtain under existing law. Nearly two dozen technology companies and industry groups argue the same provisions leave every user at risk since even partial weakening of encryption undermines its effectiveness.
Archive for September 30th, 2026

Law Bytes
Episode 279: My Keynote on Digital Sovereignty: Control, Choice, and Connection
byMichael Geist

October 19, 2026
Michael Geist
August 10, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
“Position Has Not Changed”: The Canadian Government Reaffirms That Antisemitism Includes Anti-Zionism
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 279: My Keynote on Digital Sovereignty: Control, Choice, and Connection
The What, Me Worry? Consultation: Media Quietly Tells Government It Wants Even More Funding With Little Concern for Independence Risks
Years of Uncertainty: Bill C-22’s Missing Regulations and Secret Ministerial Orders
The Missing Charter Statement: Why Hasn’t the Government Explained How Bill C-34’s Social Media Ban Complies with the Charter?

