Plamondon provided zero evidence of his own for his claim. Until he does - and he likely won't, because there likely is none - we should treat it as a bizarre kind of reverse McCarthyism, explicable only by the fact that he and his party have a commitment to a third referendum that is a bit of an albatross, given the aversion at present of the Quebec public for yet another go-around of the neverendum. Why not toss some unsustantiated mud at the feds, since on the McCarthy premise, some of it might stick? One could note that the most popular politician in Quebec today is not Plamondon, but Mark Carney. That must sting!
On the bridges to cross: do you think we could realistically increase the capacity of things like the SITE Task Force and Rapid Response Mechanism and allow them to work with provincial Election Commissions? My understanding is that referendums fall under provincial authority and that these provincial oversight bodies don't have the resources or mandates to look for interference or disinformation. Should we have a public conversation about whether provincial elections across Canada should come under federal oversight? Should we talk about it before the Alberta referendum, or after? I was also wondering about foreign money funding domestic political actors or even parties, do we have good policing tools to make sure that foreign influence isn't coming in the form of financial support?
[My understanding is that referendums fall under provincial authority and that these provincial oversight bodies don't have the resources or mandates to look for interference or disinformation. ]
This is a curious point, and one I keep meaning to delve into. I *highly suspect* that federal laws on privacy of information (amongst others) were broken.
So far, silence, perhaps (pun) *judiciously* so.
A quick delve shows this:
[...]
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms
[Although the word “privacy” does not appear in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Charter protects certain privacy interests. For example, section 8 of the Charter protects personal, territorial and informational privacy through the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure by the government.]
[Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees that everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure, serving as the primary constitutional shield against unjustified state intrusions into personal privacy. This protection is grounded in three distinct spheres of privacy interest: personal privacy (protecting bodily integrity and autonomy), territorial privacy (safeguarding spaces such as homes, vehicles, and commercial properties), and informational privacy (controlling the dissemination of personal data like medical or financial records).
For Section 8 to apply, a government action must constitute a search or seizure that infringes upon an individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy. A search is defined as any state activity that interferes with this expectation, while a seizure involves the taking of property without consent. If a search violates Section 8, any evidence obtained may be excluded from trial under Section 24(2), provided the intrusion was not authorized by law, the law itself was unreasonable, or the manner of the search was excessive. ]
[...]
- Various references re: Section 8
So...can the Feds 'quietly remind' a province that CCRF covers them? Is there a legal precedent that pertains?
To be continued...
Edit to Add: Further delving shows:
[Canadian federal privacy laws do not currently have jurisdiction over this specific breach.
The Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) and the Federal Privacy Act do not apply to political parties, which is the entity that originally held the voter data before it was leaked. Because the data was legitimately obtained by a provincial political party (the Republican Party of Alberta) and subsequently posted by a third-party group, it falls outside the scope of these federal regulations.
[...]
Existing Protections:
While federal laws do not apply, the Canada Elections Act and Alberta’s Elections Act do impose rules on the distribution and use of voter lists, with violations potentially leading to fines or imprisonment, but these are distinct from comprehensive privacy oversight. ]
I do know that Elections Alberta can look into this voters list privacy breach, and has an active investigation. So in that instance they do have the mandate and capacity, and maybe it will lead to fines or worse.
[Alberta’s Privacy Commissioner, Diane McLeod, has stated her office may not have jurisdiction to investigate the Republican Party of Alberta’s handling of the data, a gap she and privacy advocates argue allows political parties to operate outside binding privacy rules.]
Rather than my list the entire number of references that Brave AI lists for this, here's the Brave AI link:
The more I dig, the less defined anything on this appears. What's a given is that the Feds would have 'every diplomatic reason' to stay in the background until Alberta states a definitive position.
Boy i have a real different opinion on this matter then most who have been talking about it . If His Majesty's Canadian Federal Government is not spying on separatist Traitors then parliament needs to be dissolved and we need to go to an election ASAP and vote in a Government who will spy on them . If the Crown is not spying on them then they are not considering all options , if they are not considering all options then they have no plans set out for an assortment of problems that can occur due to the separatist traitors , if they have no plans then they have no workable tactical operations to take them out when and if the time/need calls for action . When i first heard about this , the first thing that came to my mind was " ya , no sh!t , your a seditious traitor " , seeing every one talk about how they are " crazy " for thinking so is very weird to me , i think its crazy if they are not being watched 24/7/365 very very closely . His Majesty's Federal Government is elected to head Parliament with a mandate , but no matter what that mandate is there main job is to do what's best for the Crown , The Citizens and the Country . Like i said if our Government is not watching Seditious Traitors then OUR Country has a serious and deep rooted problem .
ideally, they should run on their ideas and their ideas should either keep them afloat or sink them. The more discourse the better. Use our spies for real problems, like organized crime.
Plamondon provided zero evidence of his own for his claim. Until he does - and he likely won't, because there likely is none - we should treat it as a bizarre kind of reverse McCarthyism, explicable only by the fact that he and his party have a commitment to a third referendum that is a bit of an albatross, given the aversion at present of the Quebec public for yet another go-around of the neverendum. Why not toss some unsustantiated mud at the feds, since on the McCarthy premise, some of it might stick? One could note that the most popular politician in Quebec today is not Plamondon, but Mark Carney. That must sting!
On the bridges to cross: do you think we could realistically increase the capacity of things like the SITE Task Force and Rapid Response Mechanism and allow them to work with provincial Election Commissions? My understanding is that referendums fall under provincial authority and that these provincial oversight bodies don't have the resources or mandates to look for interference or disinformation. Should we have a public conversation about whether provincial elections across Canada should come under federal oversight? Should we talk about it before the Alberta referendum, or after? I was also wondering about foreign money funding domestic political actors or even parties, do we have good policing tools to make sure that foreign influence isn't coming in the form of financial support?
[My understanding is that referendums fall under provincial authority and that these provincial oversight bodies don't have the resources or mandates to look for interference or disinformation. ]
This is a curious point, and one I keep meaning to delve into. I *highly suspect* that federal laws on privacy of information (amongst others) were broken.
So far, silence, perhaps (pun) *judiciously* so.
A quick delve shows this:
[...]
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms
[Although the word “privacy” does not appear in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Charter protects certain privacy interests. For example, section 8 of the Charter protects personal, territorial and informational privacy through the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure by the government.]
https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pa-lprp/modern.html
[Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees that everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure, serving as the primary constitutional shield against unjustified state intrusions into personal privacy. This protection is grounded in three distinct spheres of privacy interest: personal privacy (protecting bodily integrity and autonomy), territorial privacy (safeguarding spaces such as homes, vehicles, and commercial properties), and informational privacy (controlling the dissemination of personal data like medical or financial records).
For Section 8 to apply, a government action must constitute a search or seizure that infringes upon an individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy. A search is defined as any state activity that interferes with this expectation, while a seizure involves the taking of property without consent. If a search violates Section 8, any evidence obtained may be excluded from trial under Section 24(2), provided the intrusion was not authorized by law, the law itself was unreasonable, or the manner of the search was excessive. ]
[...]
- Various references re: Section 8
So...can the Feds 'quietly remind' a province that CCRF covers them? Is there a legal precedent that pertains?
To be continued...
Edit to Add: Further delving shows:
[Canadian federal privacy laws do not currently have jurisdiction over this specific breach.
The Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) and the Federal Privacy Act do not apply to political parties, which is the entity that originally held the voter data before it was leaked. Because the data was legitimately obtained by a provincial political party (the Republican Party of Alberta) and subsequently posted by a third-party group, it falls outside the scope of these federal regulations.
[...]
Existing Protections:
While federal laws do not apply, the Canada Elections Act and Alberta’s Elections Act do impose rules on the distribution and use of voter lists, with violations potentially leading to fines or imprisonment, but these are distinct from comprehensive privacy oversight. ]
Brave AI, references posted at:
https://search.brave.com/search?q=does+canadian+federal+law+have+jurisdiction+over+Alberta%27s+voters%27+information+being+released%3F&source=desktop&summary=1&conversation=0914c281ffe470ff0f951bd1fe72d7f5aed0
But note this from Elections Canada:
[...]
Recently, the BC Privacy Commissioner ruled that federal electoral district associations operating in British Columbia would be subject to PIPA.
[...]
- Current Rules Protecting Electors' Personal Information
Full references/footnotes @ bottom of link posted above
I do know that Elections Alberta can look into this voters list privacy breach, and has an active investigation. So in that instance they do have the mandate and capacity, and maybe it will lead to fines or worse.
Further:
[Alberta’s Privacy Commissioner, Diane McLeod, has stated her office may not have jurisdiction to investigate the Republican Party of Alberta’s handling of the data, a gap she and privacy advocates argue allows political parties to operate outside binding privacy rules.]
Rather than my list the entire number of references that Brave AI lists for this, here's the Brave AI link:
https://search.brave.com/search?q=canada+federal+government+position+on+Alberta%27s+voter+list+investigative+jurisdiction&source=desktop&summary=1&conversation=09148c2a9b95f8cb876f92648ec049cfdc02
The more I dig, the less defined anything on this appears. What's a given is that the Feds would have 'every diplomatic reason' to stay in the background until Alberta states a definitive position.
Very curious...
Boy i have a real different opinion on this matter then most who have been talking about it . If His Majesty's Canadian Federal Government is not spying on separatist Traitors then parliament needs to be dissolved and we need to go to an election ASAP and vote in a Government who will spy on them . If the Crown is not spying on them then they are not considering all options , if they are not considering all options then they have no plans set out for an assortment of problems that can occur due to the separatist traitors , if they have no plans then they have no workable tactical operations to take them out when and if the time/need calls for action . When i first heard about this , the first thing that came to my mind was " ya , no sh!t , your a seditious traitor " , seeing every one talk about how they are " crazy " for thinking so is very weird to me , i think its crazy if they are not being watched 24/7/365 very very closely . His Majesty's Federal Government is elected to head Parliament with a mandate , but no matter what that mandate is there main job is to do what's best for the Crown , The Citizens and the Country . Like i said if our Government is not watching Seditious Traitors then OUR Country has a serious and deep rooted problem .
ideally, they should run on their ideas and their ideas should either keep them afloat or sink them. The more discourse the better. Use our spies for real problems, like organized crime.
Front de libération du Québec (not de Quebec).
Let me add USA to the list of possible sources of foreign interference.