Canada considers itself a society built on tolerance, diversity, and free expression. There is a great deal of tolerance as long as opinions are deemed non-offensive, and while the population is diverse, there is little diversity of thought. When it comes to free speech, it is slowly dying. If George Orwell were alive today, he would be writing 1984 to incorporate how the Canadian government has enacted a significant number of laws to control the flow of information and force people to self-censor.
Controlling free speech is intertwined with several laws, such as Bill C-11, which regulates what can be said online, and Bill C-18, which aims to extract hundreds of millions of dollars from companies like Google and Meta, and also invites the government to decide which news outlets receive funding. Additionally, the Online Harms Act, which was stalled when the Trudeau Liberals prorogued government, is expected to make a comeback in the fall when Parliament resumes its activities. The Online Harms Act is a draconian piece of anti-free speech legislation that gives the Canadian Human Rights Commission the power to punish thought crimes and preemptively arrest anyone who may say something deemed offensive about another person. Toby Young, founder of the Free Speech Union, describes it as “even more sinister than the UK’s Online Safety Act.”
The government maintains ideological control by providing hundreds of millions in subsidies to legacy media and its state broadcaster, the CBC. The industry relies on taxpayer money for its survival, clinging to outdated business models that thrived when TV and newspapers had a mass audience. The media has stopped innovating and demands even more subsidies, arguing that support is essential for sustaining democracy. The impact is significantly more detrimental to democracy, as journalistic objectivity has disappeared, causing newspapers to publish stories that align with the government’s narrative.
In total, the Liberal government spends $1.7 billion more annually, funding the media, than it spends supporting people with disabilities. The CBC receives $1.4 billion of that amount, while its ratings continue to decline, management rewards itself with bonuses, and it has lost the public’s trust. One recent example of how sloppy its journalism has become involved its chief political correspondent, Rosemary Barton, who commented following a federal campaign debate, “Yes, there have been remains of Indigenous children found in various places across the country,” amplifying the serious issue of the residential school investigations of dead children in unmarked graves. However, no evidence of buried children or genocide has ever been corroborated, and the CBC was forced to issue a retraction.
At the city level, politicians are just as intolerant. In the City of Hamilton, a billboard by the Christian Heritage Party of Canada featuring a photo of a woman with bold print stating “An Adult Female” was banned. According to the city, the messaging was of concern as it appears to support “a traditional and biologically determined definition of gender in line with conservative values.” While real crime increases, a billboard of a normal-looking woman is deemed to make the transit system feel unsafe.
The country’s largest city, Toronto, has recently enacted a bylaw called Access to Social Infrastructure, which establishes a 50-meter buffer zone around places of worship, schools, and childcare centers. Within the designated area, officers can issue large fines and prohibit any protests. The city of Calgary passed a similar bylaw that sets out geographical “access zones” which ban protests within 100 meters of public libraries and recreation centers. These seemingly harmless bylaws are spreading rapidly, raising the question: What is the purpose of democracy if protests are increasingly limited and, in an age of safe spaces, those bubble zones will likely expand? Protesting is important because it attracts attention, allows people to express their emotions, and motivates governments to focus on critical issues such as war.
The cancellation of American Christian worship leader Sean Feucht’s concerts highlights the ongoing assault on free speech. Feucht has been a preacher for over 20 years, has been critical of abortion rights, during the pandemic held outdoor public gatherings called the Let Us Worship Tour, and is a supporter of Trump. He performed in Montreal, and the church he performed in was fined $2,500. A spokesperson for the city’s mayor, Valerie Plante, issued a statement saying, “This show runs counter to the values of inclusion, solidarity, and respect that are championed in Montreal. Freedom of expression is one of our fundamental values, but hateful and discriminatory speech is not acceptable in Montreal.” Former CRTC Vice Chair Peter Menzies has spoken about how ideological creep has entered the country’s cultural institutions, and with Parks Canada banning Feucht’s concerts, he said, “When did government agencies start having values? Pick up the garbage. Don’t litter. That should be the end of it. Now we have values weaponized.”
Protesting in China is allowed as long as it does not challenge the Communist Party. When President Xi imposed COVID-zero restrictions, protests surfaced across the country, and dissent was quickly quashed. The Canadian government took similar actions, suppressing trucker protests in Ottawa during COVID by invoking its emergency powers. Today, the Crown is putting the screws on Chris Barber and Tamara Lich, who organized the convoy protests. Barber is facing a prison sentence of 8 years, while Lich is facing 7 years for their involvement in mischief. But they were not convicted of assault, nor did they storm any buildings or incite riots; instead, they encouraged Canadians to continue protesting COVID mandates. The government’s message is loud and clear: if one protests and challenges the state, one will be crushed. Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre summed it up best when he said, “Violent offenders get released in hours. The Crown wants 7 years for mischief?”
According to a survey on free expression in universities, a majority of undergraduate students fear speaking their minds. A majority of students are reluctant to discuss the Israel-Palestine conflict, and 45 percent don’t want to talk about politics on campus. However, 70 percent of students felt comfortable discussing climate change and DEI. This is a sad reflection on society when young people, who are meant to be future leaders, are afraid to engage in discussions about politics in a university setting, where the primary purpose is learning. Free speech in Canada is on its deathbed, and after 100 days in office, Prime Minister Carney has demonstrated that he is a fresh face on the same old liberal policies, with a touch of pragmatism. During the 2022 Freedom Convoy protests, Carney described the protesters as guilty of “blatant treachery” and declared the protest “sedition.”
The Trump administration is pressuring the Carney government to drop its Online Streaming Act, and with ongoing trade negotiations, anything is possible. Without significant changes, the final nails in the free speech coffin will likely be driven in the fall when the Online Harms Act is passed, making Big Brother a permanent feature of Canadian society.
