The federal government’s proposed lawful access legislation will be amended to “clarify” protections for encrypted data and types of metadata that may be retained and accessed by law enforcement, Canada’s public safety minister said Wednesday.
Gary Anandasangaree defended Bill C-22 as necessary for investigators as the legislation faces growing privacy concerns and pushback from major internet service providers and tech companies, including Apple and Google, who have called for amendments to clarify and reign in what they called “boundless” powers.
Those companies have said the bill as written could see the government force them to break end-to-end encryption to allow law enforcement access to customer data, something they have promised to never do as it would violate their privacy policies.
“To be very clear, the encryption issue is one we will clarify, because this bill was never meant to breach encryption,” Anandasangaree told reporters outside the House of Commons.
He said amendments will also “clarify what metadata is” that could be retained for up to a year in future regulations under the legislation.
Yet he defended the year-long timeline as “reasonable” and in line with allies like Australia, despite widespread concerns from privacy experts who note some allies like the U.S. do not have similar retention laws.
“As this goes through the Parliamentary process, we look forward to working in a collaborative manner to ensure that we listen and respond to some of the concerns that have been expressed,” he said.
“So whether that’s on encryption, whether it’s on ensuring that our laws are in line with our Five Eyes partners — including the U.S. — we will respond in kind and ensure that the bill is strengthened.”
Yet the minister also criticized Apple, Google and other critics of the bill for spreading “misinformation” about the government’s intentions and not being transparent about their own privacy commitments.
“We’re living in a world where Big Tech — whether it is Apple, Google, or the range of other Big Tech companies — are operating without any type of accountability, without any kind of protection of privacy,” he said.
Get breaking National news
Get breaking Canada news delivered to your inbox as it happens so you won’t miss a trending story.
“So the companies that are coming forth and talking about privacy, talking about privacy protection, talking about vulnerabilities, better step up and provide their path to how they’re protecting the privacy rights of Canadians.”
Anandasangaree added that tech companies have “refused to essentially cooperate in this process” by helping to give law enforcement what they need through “better collaboration.”
“What we are looking for right now with lawful access are modest measures that every other Five Eyes country has, and we’re just trying to keep up,” he said, “and misinformation doesn’t help us advance what I think should be a very important debate.
“It is not a matter of, you know, this is (not) an optional bill. This is something that needs to happen.”
Tech companies have said they support the first part of the bill, which allows law enforcement to access basic data like subscriber information from telecommunications providers through a judicial warrant for the purposes of an investigation.
Where concerns have arisen is with the second part, which would create regulations that require “core” providers to establish access points for investigators to comb through retained metadata — including location and transmission data — that must be retained for periods of time up to a year.
The minister would then be able to order other providers to adhere to those regulations without sign-off from a judge.
Investigators would only be allowed to access the data with a judicial warrant under the legislation as written, and companies can refuse to follow a regulation if it would create a “systemic vulnerability” in their systems.
Tech companies say the definition of a systemic vulnerability is overly broad in the current version of the bill, and does not adequately make clear that encryption would be protected.
Anandasangaree has previously refused to commit to specific amendments that specify encryption protections, including when he was asked directly this month at the House of Commons public safety committee, which is studying the bill.
The minister said Wednesday he hopes the bill will be amended and passed by the House of Commons and the Senate before Parliament breaks for the summer.
© 2026 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.
