Dear editor:
The editorial Feeling Insecure (Jan. 28) touched on a prevailing theme in democracy: the tension between security and individual rights, specifically, freedom of expression.
The new law, which is criticized by the editorial, would bring about at least three changes designed to increase the security of Canadians in a world which has just seen the attacks in France, Australia, Belgium, and, of course, here at home, in St.-Jean-sur-Richelieu and Ottawa.
A government’s most important duty is to ensure its people’s security. That is the paramount intention of Bill C-51.
The bill specifically attempts to prevent terrorist travel, disrupt planned attacks on Canadian soil, and criminalize the incitement of terrorism.
The bill also expands the powers of Canadian Security Intelligence Service to allow it to “disrupt” suspected terrorist threats.
The proposed legislation includes checks and balances to ensure it respects the rights of Canadians. Some have criticized the bill as “not enough;” others, like the North Shore News editorial, say it goes too far.
Like most Canadians, I believe in the protection of our freedoms and liberties, a belief that ties in to our common-law protections going back to the Magna Carta, and what motivated Canadians to fight in two world wars.
This belief motivated me with others to create the Canadian Constitution Foundation, to stand up for individuals whose rights are menaced by overreaching governments.
But one would be hard-pressed to find someone who stands for the right of anyone to promote terrorism.
Meanwhile, the charter, our courts, and organizations like the Canadian Constitution Foundation are all there to prevent governments from using anti-sedition laws merely as tools to put down political opposition.
Surely, knowing what we know about the metastasizing of terrorism, we have to take measures to stop the violence before it starts. In a world in which violent enemies are constantly changing, our government needs to be nimble, to adapt our laws in response to evolving challenges.
Bill C-51 tries to arrive at a correct balance. Meanwhile, the healthy debate will always pit security against individual liberties to a certain extent. But, in a sense, there is no conflict; the two objectives — security and freedom — are not really in conflict; rather, they are co-dependent. Without one, we cannot have the other.
John Weston
MP West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky Country
