The anti-terror measures of Bill C-51 is one very worrisome case in point.
In today's Star, Thomas Walkom makes the following observations:
Both New Democratic Party Leader Tom Mulcair and Liberal chieftain Justin Trudeau danced warily around the substance of Bill C-51.Wary of being labelled 'soft on terrorism,' the leaders of the two parties vying to replace Harper are revealing once more that the quest for power takes primacy over what is best for Canadians. No questions about why such measure are needed. No queries about what the inadequacy of existing laws might be. Only silent consent with a soupçon of carping at the periphery.
They had nothing to say about measures that would criminalize speech the government deemed pro-terrorist.
They had no views on proposals that would give 17 security agencies access to any information in any government department on any Canadian.
They said nothing about a section of the bill that would permit the Canadian Security Intelligence Service to engage in illegal and unconstitutional dirty tricks.
Indeed, the only criticism of Bill C-51 levelled by the Liberals and New Democrats to date is that it doesn’t provide parliamentary oversight of security agencies that have been given these new powers.
Which is another way of saying to Harper: We don’t mind if you erode civil liberties, as long as you let a few of us in on what you’re up to.
Contrast that cowardice with the brave and consistent integrity of Green Party leader Elizabeth May:
She said Monday in the Commons that it would turn CSIS into a “secret police force.”And so the charade goes on.
She also asked if the bill’s remarkably broad definition of crimes against the security of Canada included anti-pipeline protests (and got no answer).
But where are the rest of us on this issue? Despite a very compelling warning by Edward Snowden as well as objections by The Canadian Civil Liberties Union and others, far too many of us seem content to shrug our shoulders and dismiss concerns with a simple, "I'm not a terrorist, so why should I worry?" an attitude fraught with pitfalls.
But I guess there is at least one undeniable inference to be drawn from all of this: Human beings are remarkably consistent in their ability to ignore the lessons of history.
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiGvTlIeKmICVetftWsMf3uNq6IhY8v-5hTG9biXewB9R1mN3EbJ0bdUF035giu_7oeIKgKvKyDUqG1qNs9xH8r-zV2HSguq-t1sTaJENFSlM57_bKG_um5l59j-Q2G57vlxvo2efEkNpY/s400/download+(42).jpg)