Canadian Government Recommends VPNs as it Drives Them Out of the Country

VPN services are saying they will leave Canada thanks to warrantless wiretapping. Guess what the Canadian government recommended people use.

The messaging from the government has grown increasingly incoherent with the mess that is Bill C-22, Canada’s warrantless wiretapping legislation. This as experts and critics have remained very consistent with their concerns about the legislation.

Indeed, the criticisms of the legislation have included the year long retention of data, the controversial and unconstitutional nature of demanding meta-data since it covers every Canadian (not just those suspected of a crime), the lowered threshold for authorities to scoop up personal information without a warrant, and production orders from web services like Google or Meta among other things. Some of these experts and scholars have even signed an open letter to express a united opposition to the legislation. In fact, services like Signal, Windscribe, and NordVPN have all said that they’ll be leaving the country should this terrible bill become law.

Meanwhile, the messaging from the government has bee, at best, incredibly chaotic. The Justice Department tried to play defence by releasing a charter statement which pretty much does what it can to ignore all the problems and say everything is just fine and dandy with the legislation. One government official tried defending the legislation by releasing a propaganda video saying that their massive surveillance intrusion into your daily lives totally protects your privacy right. In short, the government is defending the legislation by saying that it’s totally constitutional and perfectly fine because, uh, just trust us, bro! For reasons that should be obvious, that response is nowhere near satisfactory for experts and critics.

The thing is, if you thought that the government’s response was chaotic before, well, apparently, the response so far has got nothing on the recent messaging pushed out by the Canadian government. The funny thing with VPN (Virtual Private Network) services is that it’s difficult to say that they are not something that can be useful. In fact, they can be very useful in that they change the location of where you are formally coming from. It’s an added layer of security that people use on a regular basis. So, if the government were to demand that people stop using VPNs, well, that’s just a recipe for disaster given how many know what a VPN is actually used for.

So, what is a government to do in this scenario? Apparently, recommend the very services they are driving out of the country, of course! In a post on famed Nazi bar, X, Public Safety Canada issued a recommendation that people use VPNs to better protect themselves.

For those who can’t see the picture, the post reads as follows:

Public Wi-Fi is convenient, but using an unsecured public network can bring increased risks. Using a VPN protects your data. Learn more: https://getcybersafe.gc.ca/en/secure-your…

Readers added context they thought people might want to know

VPN providers like NordVPN and Windscribe have warned they may exit Canada if Bill C-22 passes, as it requires electronic service providers to retain user metadata for up to one year and assist law enforcement with access, potentially compromising privacy protections. https://globalnews.ca/news/11851363/lawful-access-nordvpn-canada/ https://www.parl.ca/legisinfo/en/bill/45-1/c-22

While the community notes is rather amusing and saves me from having to write about why the governments post is hilariously tone deaf, the post is also being put side-by-side with this post:

For those who can’t see the picture, it says this:

Bill C-22 would not require electronic service providers to retain browsing history or a log of social media activities. In fact, it would protect against making any regulations that would require this information to be shared. https://canada.ca/en/public-safe…

Readers added context they thought people might want to know

Bill C-22 authorizes regulations requiring providers to retain categories of metadata/transmission data for up to one year. Privacy experts have raised concerns that metadata can reveal sensitive communication patterns.
parl.ca/DocumentViewer…
canada.ca/en/public-safe…
michaelgeist.ca/2026/03/the-la…

The irony was not lost on Michael Geist who happily pointed this out:

Public Safety urging Canadians to use a VPN to protect their privacy while simultaneously misleading Canadians about Bill C-22, a bill that would drive those same services out of Canada, is peak lawful access.

[image or embed]

— Michael Geist (@mgeist.bsky.social) May 19, 2026 at 11:00 AM

The text of the post for those who can’t see the embed:

Public Safety urging Canadians to use a VPN to protect their privacy while simultaneously misleading Canadians about Bill C-22, a bill that would drive those same services out of Canada, is peak lawful access.

The messaging from the government is both hilarious and sad at the same time. If the implications weren’t so serious, I’d just sit here, poke fun at the stupidity of the government, and move on without much of a second thought. The reality is that things are very quickly unravelling for Canadians who value their privacy and protecting their personal information. How much is it unravelling and how quickly? Apparently, ProtonVPN has joined with the many other voices expressing concern about the bill and saying that they are never going to comply with the legislation. From X:

The text for those who can’t see the image:

Regarding Canada’s Bill C-22: @ProtonVPN is Swiss. Complying with foreign surveillance orders without Swiss legal process is a criminal offence. Not happening.

We’ll defend our Canadian users and never compromise them. We will fight C-22’s application by every means available.

So, more and more are coming out against this legislation. It’s a spectrum of responses with some saying they are concerned about the legislation while others are saying they’ll fight against this and some are even point blank saying they’ll leave if this garbage bill becomes law. Either way, the backlash is pretty big and only getting bigger as time goes on.

It stands to reason that this fight is only going to get uglier. When I say that this legal concept should’ve died in 2016, I didn’t just say it because I oppose the legislation. I said it because it has a host of problems that simply cannot be resolved. It’s an absolute nightmare of a bill that should never become law. Sadly, the government seems to be pushing this bill yet again despite all of the baggage that inherently comes with it. Bringing this bill back from the dead was a mistake and the government is only just beginning to see why it was such a regrettable decision.

Drew Wilson on Mastodon, Bluesky and Facebook.