Try the political quiz
@ISIDEWITHQuestionsForeign policy10yrs ago1 here now

Do you support Bill C-51, which expands local police and intelligence agencies’ authority to prevent terrorism?

In January 2015, the Canadian government introduced Bill C-51 which would give police and spy agencies more power to detain terror suspects. Provisions to the bill include expanding police powers that would allow them to preventively detain or restrict terror suspects, ban the “promotion of terrorism”, allow the public safety minister to add people to Canada’s “no-fly list”, and enhance the powers of Canada’s spy agency CSIS. Proponents argue that law enforcement and intelligence agencies need more power to combat terrorism in the wake of the attacks on…  

Read more
+
Expand
+ Settings

Filter by author

Narrow down the conversation to these participants:

Political party:

Ideology:

Political theme:

Province/Territory:

Electoral District (2011):

Electoral District (2013):

Reply

 @9L5NYBVLiberalfrom Ontario  answered…1yr1Y

Yes, if a House of Commons committee is tasked with reviewing the decisions made by intelligence agencies in enforcing this act.

 @9FJJRKYLiberalfrom Ontario  answered…2yrs2Y

Not well informed enough on this

 @9FFZKL8Liberalfrom Ontario  answered…2yrs2Y

this is not imported to me

 @9F86WNDLiberalfrom Alberta  answered…2yrs2Y

It gives them too much power, racism would be big.

 @99YD6GCLiberalfrom Alberta  answered…2yrs2Y

Yes, but with limits so people are not discriminated against.

 @93RV3N4Liberalfrom Ontario  answered…3yrs3Y

I don't understand what that is

 @93R6N9ZLiberalfrom Ontario  answered…3yrs3Y

I'm worried racism may play a part in this, like they might target Muslims, islams, or Arabs.

 @933BQJRfrom Ontario  answered…3yrs3Y

this should be heavily monitored because it may lead to racism

 @922QFN7Liberalfrom Manitoba  answered…3yrs3Y

Kind of, the bill should be only implemented when needed.

 @8ZX5HSVLiberalfrom Alberta  answered…3yrs3Y

Yes, so long as the attempts do not violate the rights and freedoms protected by the Canadian constitution and Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

 @8ZR4S7LLiberalfrom Alberta  answered…3yrs3Y

Yes, so long as it does not interfere with the privacy and rights of citizens.

 @8ZMM6QQfrom Ontario  answered…3yrs3Y

Don’t really know a lot about that

 @8ZMDCV6Liberalfrom Ontario  answered…3yrs3Y

I don't really support it as much just because we won't get our own privacy back but at the same time, it's for the best to prevent crime so Overall as long as the expansion isn't too big then I'm fine with that.

 @8ZJQRBDLiberalfrom Ontario  answered…3yrs3Y

No, only let them expand a small amount

 @8YM24WNLiberalfrom Ontario  answered…3yrs3Y

As long as they don't use the information collected to discriminate against ordinary citizens.

 @8XZDDXDLiberalfrom British Columbia  answered…3yrs3Y

somewhat, but it can have consequences

 @8TW7QR6Liberalfrom Ontario  answered…4yrs4Y

No, there is already very little terrorism in Canada

 @8T9WJLTfrom Ontario  answered…4yrs4Y

yes but with regulation.

 @8RHSJRRLiberalfrom Saskatchewan  answered…4yrs4Y

only if it is 100% necessary

 @8R8JWDNLiberalfrom Ontario  answered…4yrs4Y

Yes, since we are protecting our country

 @8QVYYDRfrom Ontario  answered…4yrs4Y

I don't really know the full info or extent of this, so I'm going to have to stay neutral on it.

 @8NQW2H6from Ontario  answered…4yrs4Y

No, because I believe that it will end up leading to more racism and police brutality.

 @8DJ6QS3Liberalfrom Ontario  answered…5yrs5Y

yes, but so long as it is regulated and normal search warrent rules apply

 @8D8QNF3from New Brunswick  answered…5yrs5Y

Yes but oversight through a civilian committee must be maintained.

 @9CQHHM2from Ontario  answered…2yrs2Y

yes but there has to be limits

 @9B5XK62Liberalfrom Saskatchewan  answered…2yrs2Y

who the hell is Bill C-51?

 @9B5PZCBfrom Ontario  answered…2yrs2Y

I don't have any knowledge about this issue.

 @98FNX2JLiberalfrom Alberta  answered…2yrs2Y

Yes, however it depends if there's no exploitation.

 @983TFQLLiberalfrom Saskatchewan  answered…2yrs2Y

depends on the sitchewation

 @97SL85NLiberalfrom Nova Scotia  answered…2yrs2Y

As long as they don't abuse their power, and provide contracts for searching areas and private propertu then yes, I support it.

 @8VRYRTYfrom Manitoba  answered…4yrs4Y

They are dangerous fro people living in canada,

 @8VG554Vfrom Manitoba  answered…4yrs4Y

yes. but with a very cautious action.

 @8VDDFN9Liberalfrom Newfoundland  answered…4yrs4Y

Do not know enough about the bill to comment

 @8VBZ9HNfrom Alberta  answered…4yrs4Y

Yes, but with limits to restrict police state and Marian civil liberties

 @8V292FSLiberalfrom Ontario  answered…4yrs4Y

Yes, but it need a more clear scope

 @8TYLQCKLiberalfrom Alberta  answered…4yrs4Y

Yes, but with hreater oversight

 @8VQ73D3Liberalfrom British Columbia  answered…4yrs4Y

Spooder man

 @98F8C34Liberalfrom Ontario  answered…2yrs2Y

No, it is a slippery slope towards a police state No, the bill is too vague on the issues of scope, oversight, and accountability it will probably bring more death of minorities

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

Active 2hrs ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…5mos5MO

Kamala Harris is considering running for president again in 2028

Kamala Harris has been lying low since her defeat in the presidential race, unwinding with family and senior aides in Hawaii before heading back to the nation’s capital.But privately, the vice president has been instructing advisers and allies to keep her options open — whether for a possible 2028 presidential run, or even to run for governor in her home state of California in two years. As Harris has repeated in phone calls, “I am staying in the fight.”She is expected to explore those and other possible paths forward with family members over the winter holiday season, according to five people in the Harris inner circle, who were granted anonymity to discuss internal dynamics. Her deliberations follow an extraordinary four months in which Harris went from President Joe Biden’s running mate to the top of the ticket, reenergizing Democrats before ultimately crashing on election night.“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”Harris concedes: 'We must accept the results of this election'SharePlay VideoMost immediately, Harris and her advisers are working to define how and when she will speak out against Donald Trump and reassert her own role in the Democratic Party. Closing out her term as vice president, she’s set to preside over certifying the November election she lost to Trump, and then appear at the once-and-future president’s inauguration on Jan. 20.“There will be a desire to hear her voice, and there won’t be a vacuum for long,” a person close to Harris said.At the same time, Harris and her husband, Doug Emhoff, will have a long checklist to plow through before they leave the Naval Observatory for good.They have to decide whether they’ll take up permanent residence at their home in Los Angeles, or establish a base elsewhere. No matter where Harris and her family live, some around her have expressed concerns about safety, as her Secret Service protection expires six months after stepping away.

▲  1027 replies