Canada's "Strong Borders Act" (Bill C-2) Contains Four Surveillance Provisions

Canadian Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree has introduced Bill C-2

The recently re-elected Liberal government has tabled Bill C-2, “The Strong Borders Act”, ostensibly to tighten up border security after the Trump Tariff Tantrums that threw a monkey-wrench into Canada’s political landscape and economy.

But nestled within this legislation are four  surveillance mechanisms that are either new or that already existed but whose scope is being expanded.

They are:

1) Ban on cash transactions over $10,000

It amends the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to bar “certain” entities from “from accepting cash payments, donations or deposits of $10,000 or more”.

This also includes multiple smaller cash transactions that add up to more than $10K – and while section 9.21 proscribes any entity described under certain paragraphs of the Money Laundering bill (the “certain” entities part, I guess), 77.5(1):

Offence — cash payments, donations or deposits of $10,000 or more

77.‍5 (1) Every person or entity that is engaged in a business, a profession or the solicitation of charitable financial donations from the public commits an offence if the person or entity accepts a cash payment, donation or deposit of $10,000 or more in a single transaction or in a prescribed series of related transactions that total $10,000 or more.

I don’t know what “a prescribed series of related transactions means”. Back in my drinking days I would have easily dropped more than $10K in cash at my local bar in a series of ongoing (daily) cash transactions. Would something like that apply?

Whatever it means, it’s another data point in the ongoing “war on cash” that is actually happening everywhere, not just here in Canada.

2) The authorities and Canada Post can open your mail

The bill amends the Canada Post Corporation Act “to expand the Canada Post Corporation’s authority to open mail in certain circumstances to include the authority to open letters.”

It does this by modifying one sentence of in section 41(1) of the current act, and removing a few words

41 (1) The Corporation may open any mail, other than a letter, if it has reasonable grounds to suspect that

Where letters were specifically excluded from being opened “on reasonable grounds” – they will now be fair game.

It also indemnifies the government against any liability arising from the seizure or retention of any mail.

3) Expands who has access to data obtained by covertly installed tracking devices

A lot of the alarms being raised on social media over this bill focus on the fact that it would enable authorities to install surveillance software and trackers on your phones, including covertly.

This is not new, it’s already in section 492 of the Criminal Code – which outlines the provisions on warrants for tracking devices:

(3) The warrant authorizes the peace officer or public officer, or a person acting under their direction, to install, activate, use, maintain, monitor and remove the tracking device, including covertly

What Bill C-2 has done is draw people’s attention to it. What it also does is expand the scope of who else can obtain said data from your devices, amending 492(3) with:

(3) The warrant authorizes the peace officer or public officer, or a person acting under their direction, to install, activate, use, maintain, monitor and remove the tracking device, including covertly. Insertion start The warrant also authorizes a person acting under the direction of the peace officer or public officer to obtain the tracking data that is authorized to be obtained under the warrant.

Probably because of Trojan #4:

#4) It compels ISPs to assist in snooping

The new bill itself introduces another piece of legislation in the Supporting Authorized Access to Information Act (SAAIA), which will

“Ensure that electronic services providers (ESPs) have the capabilities in place to support law enforcement agencies and CSIS in criminal and intelligence investigations by requiring them to fulfil lawfully authorized requests to access or intercept information and communications.“

It does this by

“establish[ing] a framework for ensuring that electronic service providers can facilitate the exercise, by authorized persons, of authorities to access information conferred under the Criminal Code or the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act.”

A service provider is defined as 

“a person that, individually or as part of a group, provides an electronic service, including for the purpose of enabling communications, and that

• (a) provides the service to persons in Canada; or

• (b) carries on all or part of its business activities in Canada.‍ ”

Under the act, ESPs (ISPs) would be required to comply with ministerial orders to intercept communications – provided that doing so won’t introduce a vulnerability into their systems that can’t be rectified. ESPs are entitled to compensation for their costs of compliance, but those are determined by the ministry, not the provider.

All orders must have an expiry date, and there are some mechanisms in there for providers to contest the orders – but overall:

“an electronic service provider must provide all reasonable assistance, in any prescribed time and manner, to permit the assessment or testing of any device, equipment or other thing that may enable an authorized person to access information.”

With the following entities able to make requests on service providers:

• (a) the Minister;

• (b) an employee of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service;

• (c) a person appointed or employed under Part I of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act or a civilian employee referred to in section 10 of that Act;

• (d) a civilian employee of another police force;

• (e) a peace officer, as defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code.

Also, ISPs cannot inform their customers that they are tapping their data or even admit that they are under a gag order.

As University of Ottawa law professor Michael Geist notes, much of this is a retread of “Lawful Access” , which were earlier attempts by the Liberal government to introduce sweeping new surveillance regimes on Canadians.

Government now citing fentanyl and online crimes against children as the rationale for including warrantless access to information about Internet subscribers in a bill called the Stronger Borders Act. It’s the same lawful access playbook again and again.https://t.co/wdCWdVnhZr

— Michael Geist (@mgeist) June 5, 2025

The first reading of Bill C-2 passed on June 3, 2025.