Dulcinea

Does anyone besides me have a problem with this? It seems no one is paying attention to this bit of news. I understand 'why' they're doing it I guess.. but how much is too much? Do we really need to go this far? And what about my rights to privacy?

New legislation that will enable authorities to conduct surveillance on e-mails and telephone calls won't step on civil rights, Prime Minister Paul Martin insists.

"When the government brings forth this kind of legislation obviously the question of civil rights is first and foremost in our minds and they will be protected," Martin told reporters during a visit to Toronto Tuesday.

The Lawful Access Bill, which will be introduced in the House of Commons next month, requires telecommunications companies to install high-tech equipment capable of intercepting exchanges.

The government insists their proposals will bring Canada's laws on wiretaps up to date and will mean police will be able to keep up with organized criminals who are using high-tech to get around wiretaps.

"We're not giving the police any new powers, it's just keeping up with the technology and keeping up with the criminals," Ontario Liberal MP Roy Cullen told CTV News.

Winnipeg Police Chief Jack Ewatski said it was time to "play catch-up."

"There are people in our society who are looking at Canada as an intercept-free safe haven, and we don't want that to be the case," he said.

The new technology would give police and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, Canada's spy agency, the ability to intercept the e-mail, Internet chat, telephone and cell phone conversations of thousands of people at a time.

The United States has already adopted similar legislation.

In May, federal Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart raised concerns about the proposed legislation with Justice Minister Irwin Cotler.

"Law enforcement agencies will not only have a greater ability to obtain communications data there is also much more data available and, as discussed above, they now have far more sophisticated means of analyzing this data," Stoddart wrote in her submission to Cotler.

"This combination could result in law enforcement agencies being able to gain access to far more information about our personal lives than they have in the past.

"We remain sceptical about the need for these potentially intrusive and far-reaching measures."

Privacy advocate Darrell Evans echoed that concern. He says the legislation is excessive and fears criminals will find ways around new surveillance.

"It means you and I have lost our privacy, with no net gains in security," he told CTV News.

Despite higher perceived security alert levels since the 9-11 terrorist attacks, applications for judicial wiretap orders in Canada have declined over the last three years, from a high of 180 in 2002, to just 127 last year.

However, police agencies have lobbied extensively for greater technological capabilities to eavesdrop on Canadians and the federal government wants to give them the tools to do so, Alex Swann, a spokesman for Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan, told the Canadian Press.

"As a government we cannot seek a certain number of wiretaps," she said.

"We can ask industry to ensure that there's adequate capacity. But ultimately it's judges who will determine how many criminal code wiretaps there will be."

Under the proposed regulations, telecommunications companies would be required to build a new wiretapping capacity only when they decide to upgrade equipment.

"There is going to be a gradual implementation of the legislation, Zuwena Robidas, a spokeswoman for Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada, told CP.

Busta

If you're worried about it then encrypt your emails.

__________________
Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take but by the number of hits we take from the bong

Dulcinea

That wasn't really the point...