4 reasons to be concerned about Bill C-4's threats to Canadian privacy and sovereignty

Canada News.Net

4 hours ago

In Canada, federal political parties are not governed by basic standards of federal privacy law. If passed, Bill C-4, also known as the Making Life More Affordable for Canadians Act, would also make provincial and territorial privacy laws inapplicable to federal political parties, with no adequate federal law in place.
Federal legislation in the form of the Privacy Act and the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act sets out privacy standards for government and business, based on the fair information principles that provide for the collection, use and disclosure of Canadians' personal information.
At the moment, these laws don't apply to political parties. Some provinces - especially British Columbia - have implemented laws that do. In May 2024, the B.C. Supreme Court upheld the provincial Information Commissioner's ruling that B.C.'s privacy legislation applies to federal political parties. That decision is currently under appeal.
Bill C-4 would undermine those B.C. rights. It would make inapplicable to federal parties the standard privacy rights that apply in other business and government contexts- such as the right to consent to the collection, use and disclosure of personal information - and to access and correct personal information held by organizations.
Why should we be concerned about Bill C-4's erasure of these privacy protections for Canadians? There are four reasons:
In light of threats to Canadian sovereignty by United States President Donald Trump, the Canadian government and Canadian politicians must rethink their approach to digital sovereignty.
Until now, Canadian parties and governments have been content to use American platforms, data companies and datified campaign tactics. Bill C-4 would leave federal parties free to do more of the same. This is the opposite of what's needed.
The politics that resulted in Trump being elected twice to the Oval Office was spurred in part by the datafied campaigning of Cambridge Analytica in 2016 and Elon Musk in 2024. These politics are driven by micro-targeted and arguably manipulative political campaigns.
Do Canadians want Canada to go in the same direction?
Bill C-4 would undermine one of the mechanisms that makes Canada a society: collective political decisions.
Datified campaigning and the collection of personal information by political parties change the nature of democracy. Rather than appealing to political values or visions of what voters may want in the future or as a society - critically important at this historical and troubling moment in history - datified campaigning operates by experimenting on unwitting individual citizens who are alone on their phones and computers. It operates by testing their isolated opinions and unvarnished behaviours.
For example, a political campaign might do what's known as A/B testing of ads, which explores whether ad A or ad B is more successful by issuing two different versions of an ad to determine which one gets more clicks, shares, petition signatures, donations or other measurable behaviour. With this knowledge, a campaign or party can manipulate the ads through multiple versions to get the desired behaviour and result. They also learn about ad audiences for future targeting.
In other words, political parties engaging in this tactic aren't engaging with Canadians - they're experimenting on them to see what type of messages, or even what colour schemes or visuals, appeal most. This can be used to shape the campaign or just the determine the style of follow-up messaging to particular users.
University researchers, to name just one example, are bound by strict ethical protocols and approvals, including the principle that participants should consent to the collection of personal information, and to participation in experiments and studies. Political parties have no such standards, despite the high stakes - the very future of democracy and society.
Most citizens think of elections as being about deliberation and collectively deciding what kind of society they want to live in and what kind of future they want to have together as they decide how to cast their ballots.
But with datified campaigning, citizens may not be aware of the political significance of their online actions. Their data trail might cause them to be included, or excluded, from a party's future campaigning and door-knocking, for example. The process isn't deliberative, thoughtful or collective.
Political parties collect highly personal data about Canadians without their knowledge or consent. Most Canadians are not aware of the extent of the collection by political parties and the range of data they collect, which can include political views, ethnicity, income, religion or online activities, social media IDs, observations of door-knockers and more.
If asked, most Canadians would not consent to the range of data collection by parties.
Some governments can and do use data to punish individuals politically and criminally, sometimes without the protection of the rule of law.
Breaches and misuses of data, cybersecurity experts say, are no longer a question of "if," but "when."
Worse, what would happen if the wall between political parties and politicians or government broke down and the personal information collected by parties became available to governments? What if the data were used for political purposes, such as for vetting people for political appointments or government benefits? What if it were used against civil servants?
What if it were to be used at the border, or passed to other governments? What if it were passed to and used by authoritarian governments to harass and punish citizens?
What if it was passed to tech companies and further to data brokers?
OpenMedia recently revealed that Canadians' data is being passed to the many different data companies political parties use. That data is not necessarily housed in Canada or by Canadian companies.
If provincial law is undermined, there are few protections against any of these problems.
Bill C-4 would erase the possibility of provincial and territorial privacy laws being applied to federal political parties, with virtually nothing remaining. Privacy protection promotes confidence and engagement with democratic processes - particularly online. Erasing privacy protections threatens this confidence and engagement.
The current approach of federal political parties in terms of datified campaigning and privacy law is entirely wrong for this political moment, dangerous to Canadians and dangerous to democracy. Reforms should instead ensure federal political parties must adhere to the same standards as businesses and all levels of government.
Data privacy is important everywhere, but particularly so for political parties, campaigns and democratic engagement. It is important at all times - particularly now.