One of the Brampton Board of Trade’s concerns with the previous federal government was its lack of meaningful engagement with industry and communities on immigration policy. This isn’t to say that nothing should have changed with immigration but when entire sectors of our economy depend on immigrant labour, and postsecondary institutions rely heavily on international student tuition to offset stagnant public funding, it becomes clear just how vital immigration is to Canada’s stability. The approach cannot be blunt, it has to be surgical and intentional.
During the campaign, there was hope that a Liberal government under Mark Carney would take a different approach. And while there are early signs of change, in some critical areas, we’re seeing more of the same.
Bill C-2 is a troubling example.
Positioned as a border security measure, Bill C-2 proposes sweeping changes that would fundamentally alter how Canada treats refugees, upholds privacy rights, and manages immigration. If passed in its current state, it would:
- Retroactively impose a one-year deadline for refugee claims starting from a claimant’s first entry into Canada—even if their need for protection arose years later.
- Grant the government broad authority to revoke or alter immigration documents—including visas, permits, and permanent residency cards—without due process.
- Allow warrantless access to internet subscriber data, vastly expanding law enforcement surveillance powers. This has nothing to do with immigration.
This bill goes well beyond what is necessary for border management. It reflects a troubling shift toward U.S.-style border militarization that casts refugees, immigrants, and ordinary internet users as potential threats. It treats newcomers not as contributors to our country, but as liabilities to be controlled.
While the U.S. is rightfully garnering the attention and ire of immigration advocates, Canada is quietly laying the legal groundwork for a similarly authoritarian approach to its immigration system.
For Brampton businesses, this bill sends the wrong message. Our members need a federal government that listens to employers, immigrant-serving organizations, and local communities—not one that makes policy in secret and imposes it by force.
So far, the current government still has a lot to prove.
But this isn’t the only area of concern. The federal government is seeking to pass multiple omnibus bills with significant consequences. Bill C-4 is a direct threat to democratic accountability.
Tucked into Part 4 of this omnibus bill that is ostensibly an affordability bill are provisions that give federal political parties sweeping, unchecked power to collect, use, and share the personal information of Canadians—without consent, oversight, or recourse.
Here’s what C-4 proposes:
- Exempts political parties from provincial privacy laws, even where they previously applied.
- Blocks individuals from accessing or correcting personal data held by federal parties.
- Provides no third-party oversight, no transparency requirements, and no avenues for complaint or correction.
This flies in the face of global best practices on privacy and the principles laid out in Canadian privacy law. In fact, it seems to be a preemptive strike against a BC Supreme Court case challenging the federal parties’ exemption from privacy rules.
If passed, Bill C-4 will grant political parties greater control over your personal data than you have yourself—without meaningful transparency or oversight. Meanwhile, Bill C-5 echoes Ontario’s controversial Bill 5 by allowing cabinet to unilaterally declare projects as being in the “national interest.” This would effectively guarantee federal approval, even if those projects infringe on Indigenous rights, damage the environment, or jeopardize public health.
As MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith put it, “Worse, in Bill 5 déjà vu, this federal government is proposing to shut down democratic debate, curtail committee scrutiny, and jam the bill through the legislature. It would all make Harper blush. Liberals would rightly scream if a federal Conservative government attempted the same.”
Guillotine motions, which the federal government is using for Bill C-5, forgo important parliamentary functions by expediting debate and committee scrutiny. Such a motion is used when there is strong political will or, as is the case with President Trump, a crisis at play.
Additionally, omnibus bills like C-2 and C-4 are the legislative equivalent of Trojan horses—packaged as urgent or necessary, but stuffed with unrelated and far-reaching measures that escape proper scrutiny. They obscure the truth, stifle accountability, and weaken democracy by preventing Parliament and the public from engaging meaningfully with what’s actually being proposed.
Bills like C-2, C-4, and C-5 aren’t just poor policymaking. They’re a direct threat to responsible government. By eroding transparency and bypassing debate, they short-circuit the very mechanisms that ensure our laws are fair, effective, and democratically legitimate.
If Prime Minister Carney wants to restore public trust, he must break with this practice of circumventing democracy. That means meaningful consultation, real engagement with industry and civil society, and a firm commitment to accountability. We must double down on a robust democratic culture. This is precisely the best antidote to Donald Trump.
