Rex Murphy on COVID-19: The power to censor speech and other great ideas from our Liberal overlords

Posted on by

Rex Murphy on COVID-19: The power to censor speech and other great ideas from our Liberal overlords

Let’s tap this serpent of an idea on its little head before its fangs emerge and it develops a real appetite


Rex Murphy

April 17, 2020
7:35 AM EDT

If there is one positive thing that can be said about this terrible plague we’re enduring, it is that now and then, it gives the Trudeau government some really, really great ideas.

Sure it was only a couple of weeks ago that the Liberals came up with the idea that they — a minority in Parliament, remember — should give themselves the power to tax and spend for the next two years, without having to get parliamentary approval. It was a truly brilliant idea, except that it ignored the fact that approving government spending is one of the most important functions of Parliament. Take away its authority over spending and the House of Commons might just as well be any old bingo hall, or with a little imaginative renovation, a one-of-a-kind Costco store.

Now, compliments of Privy Council President Dominic LeBlanc, we learned that the Liberal government is contemplating legislation to make it an offence to, as a CBC report put it, “knowingly spread misinformation that could harm people.” In plain language, this government is openly thinking of making itself the official censor of what can and cannot be said about COVID-19. Pure brilliance again, don’t you agree?

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, right, embraces Privy Council President Dominic LeBlanc in 2019. Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press

Well, actually, no. Don’t even think of it. Better still, to borrow a phrase from Greta Thunberg: how dare you? There is already a government that has that power, and in some cases brutally exercises it. That is the government of the Communist Party of China.

And what has it done with that power? It barred telling the truth about COVID-19, and instead told lies about it. On the where it happened, when it happened, how it happened and how it spread, the Chinese government confounded, confused and lied about a plague that has now hobbled the whole planet. And China “officially reprimanded” the doctor who initially tried to warn people about the coronavirus, and who, with dread irony, actually died from it. (A postmortem apology followed from the government. That surely helped.) Admire the Chinese government if that’s your thing, but on this subject, it is not an example to be followed.

So, let’s tap this serpent of an idea on its little head before its fangs emerge and it develops a real appetite. The problem with government having control over what is said and written, completely aside from it being the utter contradiction of a liberal democracy, is that governments — especially on a matter such as this pandemic — are simply not competent enough to know what is right and what is wrong.

Legislators in the House of Commons convene to give the government power to inject billions of dollars in emergency cash to help individuals and businesses through the economic crunch caused by the coronavirus disease outbreak, on Parliament Hill, April 11, 2020. Blair Gable/Reuters

What is required for a government to pass a law against misinformation? To begin with, it presumes an infallible authority that’s able to make judgments on what is, or is not, correct information. Even worse, it presumes the government has the ability to make judgments on a matter that, incontestably, is not yet fully understood by anybody.

This virus is new. The investigation of its nature, transmission, the best policies to confront it, the extent of the response to it, even the nature of the response — all of these elements are, at best, in an incomplete and early stage of understanding.

Experts have varying degrees of skill and knowledge. If experts disagree, which happens often, will some of them be silenced? In actuality, a divergence of opinions can be seen as a path to the full truth emerging. But this cannot happen if the government gags those who may seem to be wrong at the present moment.

A man wears a mask as he walks past a mural showing a modified image of the Chinese Communist Party emblem, in Shanghai, on Jan. 28. Aly Song/Reuters

On the purely political front, there are equal objections to giving government censorship powers. Governments take to extensions of their power like bears to honey. The more power they get, the more they believe they alone should exercise it. Power swells the ego. Add more power, and if you follow the analogy, a little balloon soon thinks it’s the Hindenburg. And a government swollen with power does not like other voices.

It was only a couple of weeks ago that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau barred the leader of the Opposition from joining talks with other opposition leaders because, in Trudeau’s own memorable words, Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer “disqualified himself from constructive discussions with his unacceptable speech earlier today.”

Yet it is not for Trudeau, or any other prime minister, to determine what is “acceptable speech” from his constitutionally positioned critic, the leader of the Opposition. Nor is it proper for this minority government, which has had enough struggles of its own over misinformation — on masks, on screening at airports, on our relative security from the pandemic — to decide what the rest of us can, and cannot, say or write about this unique crisis.

National Post

Marni Soupcoff: Don’t make free speech the next COVID-19 victim in Canada

Posted on by

Marni Soupcoff: Don’t make free speech the next COVID-19 victim in Canada

As we have seen with this pandemic, the government doesn’t – and shouldn’t – have a monopoly on the truth

It’s not difficult to imagine productive things the Canadian government could be doing to respond to a virus that has caused more than 1,000 deaths in the country, infected tens of thousands of Canadians, and shut down the economy.

Passing a law dictating what people can and cannot say about SARS-CoV-2 is not one of those things.

The government could be using its power to secure personal protective equipment for health-care workers, facilitate an increase in testing capacity, and clear regulatory red tape that stands in the way of efficient vaccine research.

There is no question these steps could be helpful, and they are just three examples of many. Then, why oh why are federal politicians instead using their time to make plans to censor online expression about a pandemic that could use more creative ideas, not fewer.

Why are federal politicians using their time to make plans to censor online expression?

A sample of what Privy Council President Dominic LeBlanc has to say on the matter of criminalizing the online spread of ideas the government deems dangerously untrue: “This is not a question of freedom of speech. This is a question of people who are actually actively working to spread disinformation, whether it’s through troll bot farms, whether (it’s) state operators or whether it’s really conspiracy theorist cranks who seem to get their kicks out of creating havoc.”

Realizing that the people running the country believe that freedom of speech doesn’t apply — even as a consideration — in cases where they don’t like the speech in question … well, it’s scary, especially in the middle of a frightening crisis that makes government power grabs seem deceptively innocuous.

It sounds great to crack down on dangerous “cranks” pushing “disinformation.” Until you realize that a couple of months ago, anyone who was suggesting COVID-19 could and would spread through community transmission here — a notion Canadian public health leaders were scoffing at — would have been considered such a “crank.” Just a couple of weeks ago, anyone stating that wearing a mask in public was useful in stopping the spread of COVID-19 would also have been deemed a crackpot by the feds’ standards. Thankfully Mr. LeBlanc hadn’t yet come up with a law that would have shut them up.

Dominic LeBlanc is embraced by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau after being sworn in as President of the Privy Council in Ottawa on Nov. 20, 2019. Blair Gable/Reuters

As we have seen with this pandemic, the government doesn’t have a monopoly on the truth — it’s barely competent enough to recognize the truth when the truth is hitting it on the head. Do you really want that entity to have the power to decide which ideas about COVID-19 are valid and may be voiced and which ones are wrong and must be punished?

It’s not necessary to imagine, in the abstract, what sort of damage this kind of censorship would do. The scenario has already played out in China.

In December 2019, ophthalmologist Li Wenliang tried to sound the alarm in China about a mysterious new virus that was causing SARS-like symptoms. Within days, he was picked up by police and reprimanded for “making false comments on the Internet.” He died of COVID-19 six weeks later.

The scenario has already played out in China

A recent report by researchers at the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy showed that a day after Chinese doctors issued their warning about the illness, China’s most widely used social media app, WeChat, quickly blacklisted related terms, including “SARS outbreak in Wuhan” and “Unknown Wuhan pneumonia.” (WeChat doesn’t have a lot of competition since the Chinese government blocks access to Facebook and Twitter.)

While the deadly disease was spreading through China’s Hubei province, WeChat was censoring instructions and advice about wearing face masks and washing hands — information that would have saved lives but was deemed fake news by Chinese authorities at the time.

Doubtless it is obvious that this is an example Canada should not follow. One man’s whistleblower is another man’s havoc-wreaking conspiracy theorist. Allowing one of those men to impose criminal penalties on the other is a damaging way to deal with the difference.

A lone person walks past closed businesses in Toronto’s Kensington Market on April 15, 2020. Nathan Denette/The Canadian Press

It is true that there are scammers out there taking advantage of the fear generated by the pandemic, trying to make a buck by posing as people or institutions they aren’t.

But it is also true that there are already laws on the books to punish and prevent this foul flavour of fraud.

Don’t add on a new law that will leave skeptics — a group that has grown in number as the government’s flubbed response to COVID-19 has become evident — even more distrustful of government than they already are.

This is a matter of free speech. And during a pandemic, free speech and the unimpeded flow of information can mean the difference between life and death.

Let’s hope the federal government finds safer ways to keep itself busy.

• Email: soupcoff@gmail.com | Twitter:

COVID-19: Small group protests coronavirus restrictions in Vancouver

Posted on by

COVID-19: Small group protests coronavirus restrictions in Vancouver

Author of the article:David CarriggPublishing date:8 hours ago  •  2 minute read

A group protesting COVID-19 restrictions gathered in Kitsilano on Sunday. Susan Standfield is standing on the left in the yellow t-shirt.
A group protesting COVID-19 restrictions gathered in Kitsilano on Sunday. Susan Standfield is standing on the left in the yellow t-shirt. NICK PROCAYLO / PNG

Article Sidebar

Trending

Article content

Susan Standfield, inspired by the Operation Gridlock movement south of the border, decided to join a small anti-COVID restrictions protest on Sunday afternoon.

Standfield — who co-founded the Hope in the Shadows calendar that raises money in the Downtown Eastside — said her household income had dropped by 80 per cent since a state of emergency was declared in British Columbia last month to try and curtail the spread of COVID-19 infection.

“I saw something going on in Ohio, and then D.C., with Operation Gridlock. So I thought let’s go,” said Standfield.

Operation Gridlock is a protest movement across the U.S. in which protestors demand the governors of their states lift or loosen stay-at-home and other COVID-19 restrictions in the nation that has seen the most COVID-19 deaths. On Sunday, there were protests in Arizona, Colorado, Montana and Washington.

The protest in Kitsilano on Sunday attracted about 25 people, carrying an array of of placards. Standfield, wearing a ball-cap saying Silenced, had a sign “I don’t want to be an unpaid teacher. No more lockdowns.”

Article content continued

The group was standing in close quarters and did not attract any positive reaction from passersby while Postmedia News was present.

A group protesting COVID-19 restrictions gathered in Kitsilano on Sunday. Susan Standfield is standing on the left in the yellow t-shirt.
A group protesting COVID-19 restrictions gathered in Kitsilano on Sunday. NICK PROCAYLO/PNG

Standfield said she contacted the Vancouver Police Department two hours before the protest to let them know. This was the third anti-restrictions protest in Vancouver. Last Sunday’s protest made use of the #endthelockdown tag in several of its placards.

The following day, B.C. Minister of Health Adrian Dix described the protesters as “marginal” and asked that they be ignored.

Standfield said several police officers escorted the protest group from Burrard and 1st Avenue, south to 4th, west to Yew Street, then north to Cornwall.

Article content continued

She believed countries like Sweden, South Korea and Belarus had done a better job than Canada and British Columbia with managing the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Lots of countries are doing it more strategically, more surgically, protecting weak people, but keeping the economy going,” Standfield said.

As of April 18, there were 579 active cases of COVID-19 in B.C., of whom 169 were recovering in hospital. Eighty-one people have died from the infection, that is passed through coughing and sneezing.

Last week, provincial health officer, Dr. Bonnie Henry, said it would be at least three weeks before any restrictions were lifted.

Close to six million people have applied for COVID-19 emergency aid benefits across Canada in the past month.

dcarrigg@postmedia.com

twitter.com/davidcarrigg

VANCOUVER, BC., April 19, 2020 - Anti social distancing protesters at Burrard St and 1st Ave during the COVID-19 pandemic, in Vancouver, BC., on April 19, 2020. (NICK PROCAYLO/PNG) 00061095A ORG XMIT: 00061095A [PNG Merlin Archive]
Anti social distancing protesters at Burrard St and 1st Ave on Sunday. NICK PROCAYLO/PNG

The Liberals Contemplate A New Law to Outlaw “Misinformation” About Coronavirus

Posted on by

The Liberals Contemplate A New Law to Outlaw “Misinformation” About Coronavirus

The Canadian Association for Free Expression has warned from the beginning of the Coronavirus hysteria that governments would use this as an opportunity for a power grab and to curtain civil liberties.

We’ve seen people heavily fined for walking their dog in a park or kicking a soccer ball to their child in a park.

Now, the power mad elite is contemplating a law to gag discussion of the Coronavirus crisis, if the discussion contradicts the government’s party line. CBC (April 15, 2020) reports: “The federal government is considering introducing legislation to make it an offence to knowingly spread misinformation that could harm people, says Privy Council President Dominic LeBlanc. He said he has discussed the matter already with other cabinet ministers, including Justice Minister David Lametti. If the government decides to follow through, he said, it could take a while to draft legislation.”

Needless to say the NDP is supportive of restricting free speech. “

NDP MP Charlie Angus said he would support legislation to fight online misinformation.

“Extraordinary times require extraordinary measures and it is about protecting the public,” he said.

“This is not a question of freedom of speech. This is a question of people who are actually actively working to spread disinformation, whether it’s through troll bot farms, whether [it’s] state operators or whether it’s really conspiracy theorist cranks who seem to get their kicks out of creating havoc.”

To his credit Conservative leader Andrew Scheer has spoken out strongly against this totalitarian power grab. “

“We’re concerned when this government starts talking about free speech issues,” Scheer told reporters at a news conference Thursday. “They’ve got a terrible history over the past few years of proposing ideas that would infringe upon free speech.”

“Any time this government starts talking about regulating what people can say and not say, we start off the conversation with a great deal of healthy skepticism,” Scheer added, pointing out that the government has changed its pandemic messaging on travel restrictions and the use of masks.”

Mr. Scheer is hinting at the fact the Sinophile government has spread a good deal of false news itself. Faithfully parroting the Red Chinese propaganda line, they early denounced any calls for a travel ban or restrictions on visitors from Red China and pooh poohed the usefulness of face masks.

__________________

Federal government open to new law to fight pandemic misinformation

It’s one of several measures the government is considering to counter fake news about the virus online

Elizabeth Thompson · CBC News · Posted: Apr 15, 2020 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 2 hours ago

Privy Council President Dominic LeBlanc’s cabinet mandate letter gave him responsibility for fighting online disinformation. (Jessica Rubinger/CBC News)

The federal government is considering introducing legislation to make it an offence to knowingly spread misinformation that could harm people, says Privy Council President Dominic LeBlanc.

LeBlanc told CBC News he is interested in British MP Damian Collins’s call for laws to punish those responsible for spreading dangerous misinformation online about the COVID-19 pandemic.

LeBlanc said he has discussed the matter already with other cabinet ministers, including Justice Minister David Lametti. If the government decides to follow through, he said, it could take a while to draft legislation.

“Legislatures and Parliaments are meeting scarcely because of the current context of the pandemic, so it’s not a quick solution, but it’s certainly something that we would be open [to] as a government,” said LeBlanc.

NDP MP Charlie Angus said he would support legislation to fight online misinformation.

‘Cranks … creating havoc’

“Extraordinary times require extraordinary measures and it is about protecting the public,” he said.

“This is not a question of freedom of speech. This is a question of people who are actually actively working to spread disinformation, whether it’s through troll bot farms, whether [it’s] state operators or whether it’s really conspiracy theorist cranks who seem to get their kicks out of creating havoc.”

Opposition Leader Andrew Scheer criticized the idea of using legislation to curb misinformation.

“We’re concerned when this government starts talking about free speech issues,” Scheer told reporters at a news conference Thursday. “They’ve got a terrible history over the past few years of proposing ideas that would infringe upon free speech.”

“Any time this government starts talking about regulating what people can say and not say, we start off the conversation with a great deal of healthy skepticism,” Scheer added, pointing out that the government has changed its pandemic messaging on travel restrictions and the use of masks.

The comments come as governments around the world struggle to curb dangerous misinformation and disinformation circulating about the COVID-19 pandemic.

Collins, who chaired an international committee on big data, privacy and democracy in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, said at the outset of the pandemic that much of the misinformation and disinformation in circulation was promoting fake cures for COVID-19 or offering tips on how to avoid catching it.

British MP Damian Collins is calling for new laws to make it an offence to knowingly spread misinformation that can harm people. (Stephanie Jenzer/CBC)

More recently, said Collins, the misinformation has shifted to conspiracy theories about what triggered the pandemic — claims that it was cooked up in a lab, for example. A conspiracy theory claiming the disease is caused by 5G wireless signals prompted attacks on wireless towers in the U.K.

The British government has set up a rapid response team to correct false information circulating online. Collins has launched a fact-checking site called Infotagion, along with Angus and Liberal MP Nate Erskine-Smith, among others.

‘Maliciously’ spreading lies

Collins is calling for legislation to combat online disinformation, perhaps modelled on Germany’s laws governing online hate speech or France’s legislation countering disinformation during election campaigns.

“It’s such a serious public emergency that I think for someone to knowingly, willingly and at scale and maliciously spread this content should be an offence,” he said.

“And equally for the tech companies, if it is highlighted to [them] that someone is doing this and they don’t act against them doing it, then it should be an offence for them to have failed to act — they would have failed in their duty of care.”

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government set up an elaborate system to watch out for attempts to disrupt last year’s federal election through disinformation, including a committee that brought together several departments and a special group chaired by the clerk of the Privy Council to sound the alarm.

Opportunistic criminals

The Communications Security Establishment (CSE) has been monitoring what’s happening online during the pandemic, and has helped to remove fake sites set up by cybercriminals.

“Opportunistic cyber threat actors are attempting to take advantage of Canadians’ heightened levels of concern and legitimate fears around COVID-19,” said CSE spokesperson Ryan Foreman. “They are trying to spread misinformation and scam Canadians out of their money or private data.

“COVID-19 has presented cybercriminals and fraudsters with an effective lure to encourage victims to visit fake web sites, open email attachments and click on text message links. These emails typically impersonate health organizations, and can even pretend to be from the government of Canada.”

Health Canada has the lead on monitoring for misinformation. For example, it is sending compliance letters to companies it finds making false or questionable claims about COVID-19.

“It’s really the Public Health Agency of Canada and Health Canada that have been, amongst other things, identifying as best as possible some of the more flagrant examples of misinformation, disinformation,” said LeBlanc.

Last week, the Canadian Heritage department announced $3 million in grants to eight groups across the country to combat “false and misleading COVID-19 information.”

LeBlanc admits that while the government’s previous work leading up to the election made Canadians more aware of online misinformation and disinformation, the structures that it set up were designed with an election campaign in mind.

“I think governments around the world were caught, to some extent, by surprise in terms of the rapidity by which the pandemic spread,” LeBlanc said, adding that the online misinformation emerged as quickly as the pandemic itself.

“So governments in Canada, and I say governments plural … were forced to stand up very quickly a bunch of measures. I think we’ve done, comparatively, in Canada very well.”

Angus said the speed of COVID-19’s spread left the government without a game plan. Now, he said, it should set up a team to fight misinformation about the virus.

“I think it would be reasonable to enact with the RCMP, with our security officials and some public officials, a team to monitor disinformation and have the power to shut it down so it does not interfere with the efforts of our frontline medical workers,” said Angus.

“We need to be taking all measures right now because we don’t know how long we’re going to be in this crisis.”

With files from Katie Nicholson and Jason Ho.

Elizabeth Thompson can be reached at elizabeth.thompson@cbc.ca