Bill C-27: Digital Charter Implementation Act Returns, With AI Provision

Bill C-27, the Digital Charter Implementation Act (or Dee CIA), has been brought back. In the last session, this was Bill C-11.

Contrary to what many might assume, this is not about gun control. Instead, it concerns digital privacy, and the way and means that personal information will be shared.

In fact, a lot of the Bills in this current session are recycled versions of legislation that died in previously. This is no exception.

One major difference here is something that was created:

The Artificial Intelligence and Data Act

[Section 2: definitions]
artificial intelligence system means a technological system that, autonomously or partly autonomously, processes data related to human activities through the use of a genetic algorithm, a neural network, machine learning or another technique in order to generate content or make decisions, recommendations or predictions.

[Section 3] Interestingly, this Act, and the limitations, do not apply to:
(a) the Minister of National Defence;
(b) the Director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service;
(c) the Chief of the Communications Security Establishment; or
(d) any other person who is responsible for a federal or provincial department or agency and who is prescribed by regulation.

The legislation then gets into how the Act would be applied, and what the limitations would be. There’s a provision to prevent “biased outcomes” from being determined by artificial intelligence.

[Section 5(1)]
biased output means content that is generated, or a decision, recommendation or prediction that is made, by an artificial intelligence system and that adversely differentiates, directly or indirectly and without justification, in relation to an individual on one or more of the prohibited grounds of discrimination set out in section 3 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, or on a combination of such prohibited grounds. It does not include content, or a decision, recommendation or prediction, the purpose and effect of which are to prevent disadvantages that are likely to be suffered by, or to eliminate or reduce disadvantages that are suffered by, any group of individuals when those disadvantages would be based on or related to the prohibited grounds.

For reference, the Canadian Human Rights Act lists: “race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, genetic characteristics, disability and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered”, as protected grounds

In other words, AI can be used to pander to specific groups of people. However, “noticing” things would presumably violate the law.

[Section 6] lays out a requirement to add safeguards to anonymized data, which actually a really good idea. Guess we’ll have to see what those protections are later.

[Section 11] states that anyone or group that is involved in running a high-impact system must publish information — in plain terms — how the system works, and what safety protocols are in place.

(from the Bill) High-impact system means an artificial intelligence system that meets the criteria for a high-impact system that are established in regulations. However, the regulations haven’t been established yet.

[Sections 13, 14] allows Cabinet Ministers to require the disclosure of certain records, particularly if there is the risk of “biased outcomes” in what the AI is generating.

[Section 26] lists others who may be able to access confidential information, including:
(a) the Privacy Commissioner;
(b) the Canadian Human Rights Commission;
(c) the Commissioner of Competition;
(d) the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission;
(e) any person appointed by the government of a province, or any provincial entity, with powers, duties and functions that are similar to those of the Privacy Commissioner or the Canadian Human Rights Commission;
(f) any other person or entity prescribed by regulation.

[Section 28] gives the Minister the authority to publish information about people or a group (without their consent), if it’s believed that doing so will prevent harm from coming to them. However, it’s not stated what “reasonable grounds” actually means.

[Section 29] gets into Administrative Monetary Penalties, and the stated goal of ensuring compliance with the The Artificial Intelligence and Data Act.

[Section 30] states that it’s an offence to violate Sections 6-12, as well as providing misleading information to the Minister, or anyone acting for the Minister.

[Section 36] is a backdoor provision, which exists in many pieces of legislation. It allows the Governor in Council to make regulations without the need to Parliamentary oversight.

[Sections 38-40] lay out penalties, both monetary and potential prison time, for violations of this Act. Fines can be up to $25,000,000 + 5% of revenues. Prison time can be up to 5 years (if proceeded by indictment), and 2 years less a day (if proceeded summarily).

Aside from the Artificial Intelligence and Data Act being included, this legislation is essentially just Bill C-11 from the last session of Parliament.

Consumer Privacy Protection Act

The Consumer Privacy Protection Act was the bulk of the last version of this Bill, and was in this one as well. While name appears to take privacy seriously, it’s worth noting that that Section 4 states that it doesn’t apply to:

(a) any government institution to which the Privacy Act applies;

(b) any individual in respect of personal information that the individual collects, uses or discloses solely for personal or domestic purposes;

(c) any organization in respect of personal information that the organization collects, uses or discloses solely for journalistic, artistic or literary purposes;

(d) any organization in respect of an individual’s personal information that the organization collects, uses or discloses solely for the purpose of communicating or facilitating communication with the individual in relation to their employment, business or profession; or

(e) any organization that is, under an order made under paragraph 122(2)‍(b), exempt from the application of this Act in respect of the collection, use or disclosure of personal information that occurs within a province in respect of which the order was made.

In other words, personal information can be shared with just about anyone.

[Section 8(1)] requires that organizations designate someone to be responsible for the security of this information, and that their contact information be furnished if requested.

[Sections 9-11] outline how a privacy safety management program must be established, and some considerations in setting it up.

[Section 18] lists how and when businesses can collect personal information, or disclose it, and when consent isn’t required to go through with it.

[Section 19] says that no consent or knowledge is required from the individual to share personal information with a service provider in the course of business.

[Sections 20-22] permit research to be done using customer information as data, although it’s expected that it would be anonymized. It’s also okay to do this for prospective business transactions that haven’t yet been approved.

[Sections 23-24] are about disclosure during the course of employment. This has been the norm for a long time, as companies routinely share data for things like payroll.

[Sections 25-28] says information can be shared without knowledge or consent for the purposes of disclosure to a notary, obtaining witness statements, suspected fraud, and debt collection.

[Section 35] allows information to be disclosed without the person’s knowledge or consent if it’s being done for statistical purposes, study or research, if obtaining consent is impractical.

[Section 36] gets into the disclosure of “records of historic or archival importance”, which again, can be done without knowledge or consent.

[Section 38] allows journalists, artists and people performing literary purposes to disclose information without the knowledge or consent of other parties involved.

[Sections 43, 44] mean that Government employees would be able to access personal records without the knowledge or consent of others, if done for the purpose of administering laws.

The Act then goes on at length about procedures that would be in place if these other rules were violated.

Bill C-27 would make various changes to other acts such as: the Canada Evidence Act; the Access to Information Act; the Aeronautics Act, the Competition Act; the Telecommunications Act; and the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act.

While it sounds great to enshrine digital privacy, there are so many exceptions written in that one reasonably has to wonder what protections are really offered.

Of course, there is a bit of a conflict of interest here. Reporters and journalists require access to information in order to do their jobs. While doxing isn’t acceptable, the ability to dig deep is essential in order to properly prepare a broadcast or newspaper.

Bill C-11, (the last version of this), didn’t get far in the last session, and it doesn’t appear to be urgent now. Who knows if this will actually pass?

(1) https://www.parl.ca/legisinfo/en/bill/43-2/c-11
(2) https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/43-2/bill/C-11/first-reading
(3) https://www.parl.ca/legisinfo/en/bill/44-1/c-27
(4) https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/44-1/bill/C-27/first-reading
(5) https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/h-6/page-1.html

Ottawa To Ban Handgun Imports August 19th Using Regulatory Measure

The Canadian Government announced on August 5th that a national ban on the importation of handguns would take effect on the 19th, which is two weeks away. The full video is available from CPAC’s website.

There would supposedly be a small number of exceptions for the importation ban. However, it’s fair to assume that the retailers would no longer have access to new ones.

According to Ottawa, Bill C-21 would have 3 main effects:

  • National handgun “freeze”, meaning no more purchases, sales, or transfers
  • Red and yellow flag laws, to make seizures of firearms easier
  • “New tools” which apparently include stiffer sentences and new wiretapping powers

As with everything, the devil is in the details. For example, what new wiretapping powers would the police receive? They’re already allowed to apply for warrants to monitor suspected criminal activities.

Also, given this Administration’s pattern of reducing penalties for criminal offences, it seems unlikely that any changes here will be a deterrent against committing firearm offences.

Bill C-21 would be the so-called freeze on handgun movements, but apparently, the Federal Government doesn’t really want to wait for that. Banning imports would effectively shut down the market immediately. It’s troubling to see the democratic process subverted by just making an order.

Bill C-21 was introduced in the previous session, and died when the 2021 election was called. However, it’s been brought back, with some changes.

If handguns cannot be imported, sold, transferred, or gifted, how long until they are subjected to a mandatory buyback? After all, that’s what happening with what the Government calls “assault style” weapons.

(1) https://www.cpac.ca/episode?id=38406422-ecdb-494b-8439-a1fbdeaf4e28
(2) https://calgary.citynews.ca/2022/08/05/canada-temporary-ban-handgun-imports/
(3) https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/temporary-ban-import-handguns-canada-1.6542492
(4) https://www.parl.ca/legisinfo/en/bill/44-1/c-21
(5) https://www.parl.ca/legisinfo/en/bill/43-2/c-21

Canadian Parliament To Resume Study On Facial Recognition Use After Summer Break

The Canadian Parliament is taking a break for the summer on studying the issue of facial recognition in society. Considering the vast privacy implications, this isn’t a topic to be decided lightly.

There have been 8 briefs submitted for public viewing, and some 33 witnesses have been scheduled to appear before the House of Commons. There has been overlap in the concerns, particularly around what sort of safeguards would be in place to prevent misuse and abuse of this technology.

Questions have also been asked about how reliable this type of equipment is, and can its use inadvertently lead to large numbers of false positives. This seems particularly true given how many people are still wearing masks. Beyond that, how broadly could this be used? Would the scope be narrow and focused, or turned onto society more broadly?

Given the increasing use of AI, or artificial intelligence, it seems that much of this would be done automatically, with little to no personal oversight. That again raises the potential for more errors.

And really, many just don’t want such systems around.

Hearings went from March through June 2022. However, with Parliament recessed for the summer, the issue is on hold for the time being.

The timing is also bad for another reason. Earlier this year, it was revealed that the Public Health Agency of Canada had been tracking cell phone data from users without their knowledge or consent. See their recommendations. This doesn’t exactly contribute to gaining the public’s trust.

Clearly, we will have to see where things go this these issues. However, there is a significant portion of the population which is unhappy with ever encroaching measures.

(1) https://www.ourcommons.ca/Committees/en/ETHI/StudyActivity?studyActivityId=11566271
(2) https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/441/ETHI/Brief/BR11882158/br-external/MaslejNestor-e.pdf
(3) https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/441/ETHI/Brief/BR11713948/br-external/CanadianHumanRightsCommission-e.pdf
(4) https://www.ourcommons.ca/Committees/en/ETHI/StudyActivity?studyActivityId=11471238
(5) https://canucklaw.ca/privacy-phac-snooping-on-cell-phone-records/
(6) https://www.ourcommons.ca/Committees/en/ETHI/StudyActivity?studyActivityId=11471238
(7) https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/44-1/ETHI/report-4/
(8) https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/441/ETHI/Reports/RP11736929/ethirp04/ethirp04-e.pdf

We’re Being Ruled By Charities (Video Compilation)

Most people (reasonably) assume that the institutions stripping rights away in the name of “infection control” are at least part of the Government. But is that really the case? Turns out, many “health authorities” are registered charities which receive millions each year from outside sources.

All of this information is freely available on the Canada Revenue Agency’s website. The C.R.A. is responsible for monitoring the finances of charities.

Side note: most colleges and universities in Canada are also structured as charities. Presumably, it makes it easier to attract donations, knowing that the public really pays for almost half. Of course, the University of Toronto — epicenter of the Ontario Science Table — is one as well.

All of this would be common knowledge if the media wasn’t paid to deceive and mislead.

(1) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/bscSrch

INTERNATIONAL HEALTH REGULATIONS
(A.1) WHO International Health Regulations Legally Binding
(A.2) A Look At International Health Regulation Statements
(A.3) Quarantine Act Actually Written By WHO, IHR Changes
(A.3.2) Oversight For QA Proposals Removed, Slipped In Budget Bill
(A.4) Provincial Health Acts Domestic Implementation Of WHO-IHR, Part I
(A.5) Provincial Health Acts Domestic Implementation Of WHO-IHR, Part II
(A.6) World Health Treaty Proposed, Based On WHO-IHR

CHARITIES, PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCY OF CANADA
(B.1) Public Health Agency Of Canada Created As WHO-IHR Outpost
(B.2) Health Canada Initially Created For Population Control Measures
(B.3) Robert Steiner Claims To Be Major PHAC Advisor To Liberals
(B.4) BC Provincial Health Services Authority A Private Corporation, Charity
(B.5) BCCDC Foundation A Registered Charity; Funded By Big Pharma
(B.6) Alberta Health Services: Mostly Autonomous Corporation, Charity
(B.7) Ontario Public Health An Autonomous Corporation, OST Ties
(B.8) Executives Of “Charity” Public Health Orgs. Paid Very Well
(B.9) Canada Public Health Association A Charity, Funded By Big Pharma
(B.10) University Of Toronto; Charity; Merck; Millers; OST
(B.11) McMaster University; Charity; Gates; Donations; Pandemic

(C.1) Hotel, Restaurant Groups Getting Wage/Rental Subsidies
(C.2) Liberals, Conservatives, NDP All Getting Bailout Money
(C.3) Lawyers, Bar Associations Receiving CEWS Money
(C.4) Conflicting Out? Lawyers Getting More Than Just CEWS
(C.5) Churches Are Charities, Getting CEWS, Subsidies & Promoting Vaccines
(C.6) Trucking Alliance Grants Raising many Eyebrows
(C.7) Chambers Of Commerce Subsidized By Canadians, Want Open Borders
(C.8) Banks, Credit Unions, Media Outlets All Getting CEWS
(C.9) Publishing Industry Subsidized By Taxpayer Money
(C.10) Gyms Getting Subsidized To Implement Masks, Vaxx Passes

(D.1) Unifor, Media, In Bed With Gov’t, $595M
(D.2) Government Subsidizes Media To Ensure Positive Coverage
(D.3) Postmedia Subsidies/Connections, Lack Of Real Journalism
(D.4) Latest “Pandemic Bucks” Grants In 2021, Lorrie Goldstein
(D.5) Nordstar; Torstar; Metroland Media; Subsidies & Monopoly
(D.6) Aberdeen Publishing Takes Handouts, Ignores Real Issues
(D.7) More Periodicals Taking Grants, Parroting Gov’t Narrative
(D.8) Tri-City News, LMP Pulls Bonnie Henry Article; Pandemic Bucks
(D.9) Black Press Group; Media Outlet Doxing Of Convoy Donors
(D.10) Subsidized Fact-Check Outlets Run By Political Operatives
(D.11) Digital Citizen Contribution Program: Funds To Combat “Misinformation”
(D.12) Counter Intelligence “Disinformation Prevention” Groups Are Charities
(D.13) CIVIX, More Grants To Combat “Disinformation” In 2021, Domestic, Foreign
(D.14) PHAC Supporting #ScienceUpFirst Counter Intel Effort
(D.15) Rockefeller Spends $13.5 To Combat Misinformation
(D.16) Media, Banks, CU, Getting CDA Emergency Wage Subsidies (CEWS)
(D.17) John Tory’s Sister Board Member At Bell; CEWS; Subsidies
(D.18) True North Not Honest About Bailouts/Subsidies It Receives

Gyms, Fitness Centers Getting The CEWS As They Enforce Vaccine Passports

Ever wonder why your local gym, health club, fitness centers, yoga outlet, or related institution was so keen to enforce the so-called “vaccine passports”? Maybe, just maybe, they were paid off to do so. The above listings include private gyms and some chains.

CEWS is an acronym for “Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy”, and the program is pretty self explanatory. For most businesses, salaries are the largest expense, by far.

Keep in mind, there are other programs, like the rental subsidy.

The last image requires an explanation. It’s from a gym in British Columbia that requires patrons to have the vaccine passport and to register with the front desk. However, that same gym supports and advocates for the rights and choices of the RCMP in this matter. As most know: the RCMP is the enforcement arm of medical tyranny throughout most of Canada. This company demands its customers have the vaxx pass, you know, the people who pay the salaries. But, they “back the blue” in their fight with Ottawa. And yes, this particular gym is also getting CEWS, which shouldn’t surprise anyone.

This continues the list of institutions that are getting funded to shill the “pandemic” narrative. These include: restaurants and hotels, political parties, law firms, more law firms, churches, trucking associations, chambers of commerce, financial institutions, and the publishing industry, to name a few.

Remember: things often don’t make sense until you see the entire picture. This site tries to show you as much of it as possible, and money seems to always be the driving factor.

(1) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/cews/srch/pub/bscSrch
(2) https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/dsplyBscSrch?request_locale=en
(3) https://search.open.canada.ca/en/gc/
(4) https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/advSrch

(A.1) Hotel, Restaurant Groups Getting Wage/Rental Subsidies
(A.2) Liberals, Conservatives, NDP All Getting Bailout Money
(A.3) Lawyers, Bar Associations Receiving CEWS Money
(A.4) Conflicting Out? Lawyers Getting More Than Just CEWS
(A.5) Churches Are Charities, Getting CEWS, Subsidies & Promoting Vaccines
(A.6) Trucking Alliance Grants Raising many Eyebrows
(A.7) Chambers Of Commerce Subsidized By Canadians, Want Open Borders
(A.8) Banks, Credit Unions, Media Outlets All Getting CEWS
(A.9) Publishing Industry Subsidized By Taxpayer Money

(B.1) Unifor, Media, In Bed With Gov’t, $595M
(B.2) Government Subsidizes Media To Ensure Positive Coverage
(B.3) Postmedia Subsidies/Connections, Lack Of Real Journalism
(B.4) Latest “Pandemic Bucks” Grants In 2021, Lorrie Goldstein
(B.5) Nordstar; Torstar; Metroland Media; Subsidies & Monopoly
(B.6) Aberdeen Publishing Takes Handouts, Ignores Real Issues
(B.7) More Periodicals Taking Grants, Parroting Gov’t Narrative
(B.8) Tri-City News, LMP Pulls Bonnie Henry Article; Pandemic Bucks
(B.9) Black Press Group; Media Outlet Doxing Of Convoy Donors
(B.10) Subsidized Fact-Check Outlets Run By Political Operatives
(B.11) Digital Citizen Contribution Program: Funds To Combat “Misinformation”
(B.12) Counter Intelligence “Disinformation Prevention” Groups Are Charities
(B.13) CIVIX, More Grants To Combat “Disinformation” In 2021, Domestic, Foreign
(B.14) PHAC Supporting #ScienceUpFirst Counter Intel Effort
(B.15) Rockefeller Spends $13.5 To Combat Misinformation
(B.16) Media, Banks, CU, Getting CDA Emergency Wage Subsidies (CEWS)
(B.17) John Tory’s Sister Board Member At Bell; CEWS; Subsidies
(B.18) True North Not Honest About Bailouts/Subsidies It Receives

(C.1) Media, Facebook, Google, Tech Collusion To Create “Trust” Networks
(C.2) CommonTrust, Commons Project, WEF, Rockefeller, Health Passes
(C.3) C2PA; Project Origin; Content Authenticity Initiative; CBC-BBC-Microsoft
(C.4) Public Media Alliance, Global Task Force, Brussels Declaration
(C.5) Institute For Strategic Dialogue: Govt/NGO Funded Counter-Intelligence
(C.6) Institute For Strategic Dialogue: Open Source Intelligence Gathering

Nova Scotia FOI: $19.1 Million Spent On “Vaccines”, Questions About PCR Testing Companies

More freedom-of-information requests has taken place in Nova Scotia. It would be nice to know how much is being spend on tests, vaccines, and to see some of the contracts. Anyhow, we have at least some information to share on those topics.

Our friend in Nova Scotia is back at it again, digging up dirt and information about the tyranny of Robert Strang. Here are some of the latest finds. Previously, there was the hospitalization scam debunked, the lack of data for masks in schools, the screwy definition of “cases”, Nova Scotia reduced (yes, reduced) ICU capacity, there’s no evidence “asymptomatic spreading” even exists, and they refused to provide the CANImmunize/Clinic Flow contract.

Let’s take a look at how your money is being spent:

[Amended January 26, 2022:]
All monetary distributions/payments to all pharmacies in NS for administering COVID-19 vaccines. Not including any staff salaries.
(December 20, 2020 to January 20, 2022)
.
All monetary distributions/payments to all pharmacies in NS for administering COVID-19 PCR tests. Not including any staff salaries. (January 1, 2020 to January 20, 2022)
(Date Range for Record Search: From 12/19/2020 To 1/19/2022)

The Government claims to have spent $19.1 million on vaccines for pharmacies, and this doesn’t include any salaries. They also answer that the only testing that goes on it paid for by the patients seeking them. They included a list of pharmacies, along with the amounts each has received.

What else do we have here?

Another FOI request involved getting copies of the testing contracts that the Province has with 3rd party providers. This has been put on hold as it’s claimed that it may release confidential business information of those 3rd parties. The company(ies) must respond in 14 days to either consent to the release, or to provide written reasons for refusing.

While Nova Scotia may be hesitant to turn over the contracts, we can guess who might be doing the testing. They may not be too proud of this.

One such company is BGI Genomics, a Chinese company, based in Hong Kong. It received interim authorization from Health Canada on May 4, 2020. This raises all kinds of questions.

Their product has also been allowed into Japan, Singapore, Australia, and the United States. Considering the potential for mass data mining with people’s DNA, it’s certainly worthwhile to know who’s actually in charge of this.

At the time of writing this, there are about 100 versions of testing authorized by Health Canada, many of them foreign owned. Many more applications are under review. Now, any of them who are either infiltrated — or owned — by a Government could use this as a DNA dragnet.

And if you haven’t seen Christine Massey’s work with Fluoride Free Peel’s, go do that. There are some 200 or so FOIs showing that no one, anywhere in the world, has ever isolated this “virus”. It’s never been proven to exist. There’s no point having a discussion on what treatments are beneficial, until the existence of this is demonstrated.

[Author’s note: there have been issues with subscribers not getting notifications recently. If someone could confirm they received the article, it would be appreciated. It’s editor(at) canucklaw.ca. This portion will be deleted soon.]

(1) 2022-00106-HEA Response Package Nova Scotia Vaccine Payments
(2) 2022-00106-HEA Response Package Nova Scotia Testing Contracts
(3) https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/bgi-receives-health-canada-authorization-to-supply-sars-cov-2-rt-pcr-test-in-canadian-market/
(4) https://bgi.com/us/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/07/FAQ-BGI-RT-PCR-Kit.pdf
(5) FAQ-BGI-RT-PCR-Kit
(6) https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/covid19-industry/medical-devices/authorized/list.html
(7) https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-around-the-world-have-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification/

PREVIOUS FOI RESULTS FROM NOVA SCOTIA
(A) https://canucklaw.ca/nova-scotia-foi-no-real-increase-in-deaths-due-to-pandemic/
(B) https://canucklaw.ca/nova-scotia-foi-shows-province-has-no-evidence-asymptomatic-spreading-even-exists/
(C) https://canucklaw.ca/nova-scotia-foi-more-deaths-as-vaccination-numbers-climb/
(D) https://canucklaw.ca/nova-scotia-foi-response-tacitly-admits-there-is-no-wave-of-hospitalizations/
(E) https://canucklaw.ca/nova-scotia-foi-result-province-refuses-to-turn-over-data-studies-justifying-masks-in-schools/
(F) https://canucklaw.ca/more-foi-requests-from-nova-scotia-trying-to-get-answers-on-this-pandemic/
(G) https://canucklaw.ca/nova-scotia-foi-request-shows-province-reduced-icu-capacity-in-recent-years/
(H) https://canucklaw.ca/nova-scotia-foi-province-refuses-to-turn-over-contract/

%d bloggers like this: