Canada’s public safety minister on Tuesday urged parliamentarians to quickly wrap up their study of the government’s controversial lawful access bill, saying it was time to “choose” whether to stand with law enforcement and victims of crime.
Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree accused Conservatives, who have raised several privacy concerns about Bill C-22 along with tech companies and independent privacy experts, of employing “stalling tactics” during debate over amendments to the bill at the House of Commons public safety committee.
The Liberal government gave notice Monday that it is prepared to table a motion forcing the committee to conclude its clause-by-clause review of the bill and quickly move to a final reading in the full House of Commons, without considering the dozens of amendments still remaining.
“When Parliament makes law, there’s time for debate and there’s time for choosing,” Anandasangaree told reporters Tuesday in Ottawa.
“It’s time to choose. It’s a time to choose between victims of crime who are demanding that we, as parliamentarians, act to protect them. It’s the time to choose because law enforcement needs modern tools to fight modern criminals. Those tools are in Bill C-22.”
Anandasangaree’s comments echoed those of his Conservative predecessor Vic Toews in 2012 when the Harper government was pushing its own expanded lawful access bill. During debate in the House of Commons that year, Toews said critics “can either stand with us or with the child pornographers.”
Michael Geist, a law professor and the Canada Research Chair in internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa, told Global News it was “incredible” to hear the Liberals adopt Toews’ language after the party heavily criticized it at the time.
“It is astonishing to hear the government, having heard what they’ve heard over the last number of weeks, basically cut off all debate and say they’re marching ahead with what they know to be deeply flawed legislation,” he said in an interview.
Get daily National news
Get daily Canada news delivered to your inbox so you’ll never miss the day’s top stories.
“It’s staggering to see what they’re doing.”
The legislation would give police and national security agencies expanded powers to seek subscriber information and other data from telecommunications providers with a judicial warrant for the purposes of an investigation, if they have reason to suspect an individual is involved in a crime.
A section of the bill that has raised considerable alarm would require “core” providers to retain all users’ metadata for up to a year and create capacity for investigators to access their systems, so long as doing so wouldn’t create a “systemic vulnerability.”
The public safety minister could then order other tech companies to do the same.
Several companies have warned such orders as defined in the bill would force them to weaken encryption and raise the possibility of data breaches, leading some to warn they may pull their services from Canada.
“This is such an evisceration of both the privacy and security of Canadians — putting not only Canadians at risk, but frankly, putting many of our companies at risk in terms of their willingness to continue to service the Canadian market,” Geist said Tuesday.
Anandasangaree has promised to put forward amendments making clear that encryption will be protected and more clearly defining “systemic vulnerability.” He has also agreed to shorten the metadata retention period from a year to six months after previously refusing to do so.
However, if the motion to fast-track the bill is passed, those and all other amendments would be considered adopted without giving MPs a chance to scrutinize how they’re written or get advice from government, RCMP and CSIS officials guiding the committee’s review.
Anandasangaree said just seven amendments have been adopted over 10 hours of clause-by-clause study so far.
“One amendment was considered over a three-hour period and, in fact, that amendment was supported by and adopted by the Conservatives. So that to me demonstrates that there is a clear filibuster taking place,” he said.
“You can call it any other name, but delay and stalling tactics is not what’s warranted right now. What is warranted is collaboration and cooperation.”
Conservative MP Frank Caputo, a vice-chair of the committee, said his party is not filibustering but merely ensuring the bill receives proper scrutiny.
He called the Liberals’ attempts to fast-track the bill “shameful” and vowed Conservatives would fight to ensure the process plays out.
The committee’s chair, Liberal MP Jean-Yves Duclos, said Tuesday it would take 260 hours — or until the end of 2028 — to consider all the remaining amendments at the current pace.
Geist noted that even if the Liberals are successful in getting the bill passed in the House quickly, it would then move to the Senate, where it is expected to be scrutinized all over again.
“The law will not take effect at the end of the week,” he said. “All they want to do is be able to tick a box to say they got this through, as opposed to getting it right.”
—With files from The Canadian Press
© 2026 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.