Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Privacy rights in Canada eroding, report warns

JILL LAWLESS

The Associated Press

Latest comment posted at 11:08 PM EDT 01/01/08

Rights group cites CIA's accessing the banking records of Canadians through the SWIFT banking information system, the Canadian no-fly list, and the Toronto Transit Commission's installation of security cameras as examples of the erosion of privacy rights ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Nelson Rivers from Thornhill, Canada writes: Ok, So let me get this straight. Canada's privacy standing takes a hit because the TTC installs cameras in a "public" transit system? Who cares! Knowing that the TTC is taking security seriously will motivate me to use transit more. The real issue pertains to persuading us to take transit and feeling secure when we do. So bring on the cameras.
  2. Gordon Murray from Canada writes: Maybe a suited Hydro Authority appearing at my door telling/asking me to present my last Hydro bill is competitive.
    Right to my files on the fly without notice? No outline necessary?
    Not a privacy concern? That must be a FASCINATING initiative.

    Maybe Marshall Law is closing in.

    Maybe next to present at my door with demands absent notice will be some U.S. Transit Authority, having mistaken me for someone else passing too quickly through turnstyles, a price on my head: "C'mon...the token had hardly dropped and your early test of the turnstyle turn was an act of vengeance. Give it up."
  3. brian bishop from Brantford, Canada writes: I hardly consider the installation of security cameras at the TTC, the no-fly list & the SWIFt banking information system a erosion of privacy!

    Can Mr. Davies please provide some examples of sensitive information that's flowing across the Canadian U.S. boarder, otherwise stop with the fear mongering!
  4. Ter3 Hamer from Peace River, Canada writes: My major concern is that the credit card processing has moved to the control of a very few American companies (eg. Paymentech) -- Canadian credit card processing and approvals should be in the hands of Canadian banks or companies only. Period.
    The CIA can keep their paws out of my Visa and Mastercard information. Period.
  5. Jan Steinman from Salt Spring Island, Canada writes: Perhaps Nelson Rivers and Brian Bishop are too young to remember the Nixon era. He had a "hit list" of political enemies, and he wielded the government against them. They were denied tenure at universities and their taxes audited, among other things.

    Imagine if Nixon had today's surveillance technology at his disposal!

    You don't think transit system cameras are a problem? What happen if you're spotted going into an adult book store? What happens if that tape somehow gets into the hands of your employer?

    "Well, I don't go to adult bookstores," you may reply. Then I guess it's okay if anyone who behaves in a way you don't approve of gets their movements used against them. Let's say you're a reporter, known for your anti-government views, and you're going into an adult bookstore as part of investigative journalism. It won't matter when the tapes are plastered all over the front page of your competition, which happens to be pro-government.

    Remember, the old "I'm doing no wrong and therefore I don't have anything to fear from surveillance" argument only works as long as those in power agree that you're doing no wrong. And the definition of "wrong" seems to change rapidly these days.
  6. brian bishop from Brantford, Canada writes: Jan Steinman -

    Unfortunately I'm old enough to remember Nixon, but you forget, what Nixon did was illegal!

    So what happens if my employer sees me going into an adult bookstore? Seriously, unless I'm visiting the adult bookstore during paid company time what will happen is absolutely Nothing!

    What your writing is fear mongering based on paranoia, stores have used cameras for years, you don't hear about teens being blackmailed by store owners because they bought condoms!

    Now if you want to talk about potential privacy issues we should look at the copyright reforms that didn't get introduced in the legislature on the 17th. We don't even know what was in these proposed changes, but the backlash was regarding privacy concerns among other things & the backlash was so widespread it prevented the Minister from even introducing the reforms. So it's obvious by the Ministers actions or lack there of, that the reforms did contain changes that would affect our individual privacy.
  7. Bill Needle from Canada writes: It's the price of security. No big deal. Next.
  8. Devil's Advocate from Canada writes: Nelson Rivers from Thornhill, Canada writes: "The real issue pertains to persuading us to take transit and feeling secure when we do."

    That's just it... it makes you FEEL more secure, but doesn't do anything except help with investigations afterwards. If some person wants to start a shoot-out or blow up some train, the cameras won't make you more secure, they'll merely record your demise.

    It's not for security - it could be for assisting in investigations.
  9. brian bishop from Brantford, Canada writes: Devil's Advocate -

    No your wrong! it is more for security than anything else, just like having a greater police presence in an area.

    With both the likelihood of any illegal activity declines.

    Plus we haven't had to many train bombings on the TTC of late! As if that's why their installing camera's, more of the same fear-mongering.
  10. della baird from vancouver, Canada writes: dee vancouver, science fiction writers have been trying to warn us for years about the privacy concerns we do face today. a certain toronto newspaper circa 40's&50's, featured a few futuristic pieces. i believe they were entitled 'ripley's believe it or not'. one of them was a picture of a monorail.voila! seattle used a monorail to move people around and above the crowd at their world's fair. while in that city in 67', i marveled at the sight! now i cease to be amazed at anything.thinking people,dreamers,and those who seek the truth, are not to be castigated but admired. too many of us are brainwashed about too many issues and many refuse to face the truth.the rest of us are just happy to bury our heads in the proverbial sand.as far as i'm concerned,if your head is in the ground, you know what part of your rosy anatomy is in the air! how tempting for the bullies of the world. this very format we use to post our points of view and a wonderous machine it is, is just another example of the sand eater's denial. it's time to take the word 'fiction' out of some of the science novels. i would advise the 'nay sayers' to grab their derriere's and run for the hills. good luck! i wish you all PEACE for /08 and in all the years to come.
  11. New Nazi from Canada writes: Jan Steinman from Salt Spring Island You don't think transit system cameras are a problem? What happen if you're spotted going into an adult book store? What happens if that tape somehow gets into the hands of your employer? Hahahahaha what a moronic statment .. Yeah Law enforcement really cares about you going into a adult store to give yourself a handjob. You are very parnoid person ... maybe u are listening too much "someone is watching me" or "watching x-files". Get a life! Security cameras are used by law enforcement for the evidence required for prosecution of the crime and thats all. brian bishop from Brantford, Canada "Plus we haven't had to many train bombings on the TTC of late" Can u say without doubt their might not be a train bombing in the future and what happens if their was ? With no security cameras their be very little evidence in finding criminals and terrorists. Anyways, TTC has the right to install whatever protective electronic equipment on their property and if u don't like it then don't travel TTC. I wonder if London or Madrid law enforcement would find it easier to apprehended the plotters of those terrorist attacks if they did not have security cameras ?? I wonder also if security cameras not installed how many violent assualts and rapes would have been not reported or had evidence to prosecute. Think about that. Security cameras are just tools in helping law enforcement but to reduce crime are several. 1)Stricter law enforcement penalties for violent offences and violent offenders (judges and correctionial authorities should be less liberal) 2)more police officers on the street 3) more outreach programs and 4) more psychological help for people who require it. I have no problems in installing security cameras. The only people who object to security cameras are criminals , (potential) terrorists and lefties.
  12. A. Nonymous from MTV Ville, United States writes: "New Nazi" Writes "The only people who object to security cameras are criminals , (potential) terrorists and lefties."

    Interesting, you don't object to surveillance, but write under a pseudonym.
  13. Jan Steinman from Salt Spring Island, Canada writes: brian bishop from Brantford, Canada writes: "... you forget, what Nixon did was illegal!"

    And everything Hitler did was legal. What's your point? That legalizing actions that are subject to abuse somehow makes them less subject to abuse?

    Just look south of the border to see a direction we seem to be rushing toward without fully understanding the implications.
  14. Green Defender from Canada writes: A. Nonymous from MTV Ville, United States writes:
    Interesting, you don't object to surveillance, but write under a pseudonym

    Interesting you write under pseudonym also A. Nonymous. Calling the kettle black isit?

  15. Consumed Consumer.org from Canada writes: Some comments show what we all know but would never say out loud: the reason privacy rights are being eroded is that most of us don't even fully understand what privacy is. Secondly, most people have not even heard of Bruce Schneier, let alone of "security theatre". People don't understand that security is a trade-off, and most of the measures being taken against us are bad trade-offs. Some security measures are good, but the ones presented in the article are bad because we lose far more in privacy and openness of our society compared to what we gain in terms of security. In fact, we are not gaining anything securitywise, it's only the perception of the uninformed that changes.
  16. brian bishop from Brantford, Canada writes: Jan Steinman -
    What Nixon or Hilter did has no bearing on any privacy issues being discussed in the article. The only reason I can see for bringing them up is fear-mongering, is that what your doing?

    As for your last comment regarding us rushing in the same direction as the U.S., well that maybe what you see but it's not the reality that's taking place!

    Sure we need a better means of identification to make cross border travel simpler, do we need some form of biometrics or even identity cards? Probably not! Do we need a no-fly list, absolutely not! Do we need laws that allow law enforcement to detain people indefinitely without cause? No!

    These measures are brought forward by lobbyist & special interest groups, each tries to sway the government into implementing them, some are successful others are not. But whether we like it or not the issues are still there, whether they need solving is another question!

    That's what we do as a society, issues arise & we try to solve them, whether we need to or not, it's nothing new & certainly has nothing to do with the good old U.S of A.

    Do you think smoke detectors became mandatory in most places because they save lives, NO! They got that way through lobbying, saving lives was simply the justification for making them mandatory. Do you think the smart meters being installed in every Ontario home is because they save hydro? Nope! Again that's just how their justifying them, the reality is it's a way to raise hydro rates.

    How do you police a public place like huge subway systems, have 100 police officers patrolling them or install cameras & have a dozen officers?

    It all boils down to Capitalism in the end!
  17. Bob In from Canada writes: The article is shallow (what do you expect from a small blurb), the comments mostly naive/ narrow especially Brian B. Lawless' broad brush is correct though - think on it and ponder our future. Those not willing to defend their freedom will lose it to those who wish to rule - ever more conveniently/ completely/ absolutely.
  18. New Nazi from Canada writes: brian bishop from Brantford, Canada writes Do you think smoke detectors became mandatory in most places because they save lives, NO! U are idiot smoke alarms do save lives Smoke Alarm Statistics Did you know that 90 per cent of residential fires are preventable? In Ontario, from 1995 to 2004 almost half (48 per cent) of the preventable fatal fires had no smoke alarm warning. Out of those fires: 60 per cent had no batteries or power removed ;7 per cent had dead batteries ;4 per cent the batteries were not properly installed Do you think also that wearing seat belts won't save your life in majority of car accidents? Do we need some form of biometrics or even identity cards? Yes Do we need a no-fly list, absolutely not! I got to agree with you here Do we need laws that allow law enforcement to detain people indefinitely without cause? well yes and No, I do think that police should have the right to detain someone up to 1-2 days and Judges should determine if that person is dangerous enough to be held for a longer term . Yes, smart meters should be installed in condos, and apartment buildings. People who waste alot of electricity should be charged more on rent then those who don't. Smart meters in homes is nonsense.The homeowner knows how much he or she pays in electricity and the incentive is to save money . The Home owner would install energy saving appliances and equipment to save electrical costs. Did smart meters raise hydro rates ?? No not really in the scheme of the costs .Hydro rates are determine mainly by how much consumption , electrical output and the debt Ontario hydropayers must pay for the infrastructure and the overbudget nuclear powerplants Ontario constructed. Now Dalton is getting rid of those coal fire plants which will increase hydro rates dramtically in the near future. Dalton doesn't know that coal fire plants can be install with Canadian developed clean coal technology which is 99.99% emission free.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top