Our series of examining different political parties through the lens of digital rights continues with the People’s Party of Canada.
We are continuing our series of analysis of different political party platforms. Previously, we analyzed the Green Party and the Liberal Party. Today we are examining the People’s Party of Canada.
In previous elections, it has been difficult to analyze the platforms because what is presented is generally outdated and the party barely even bothered to present a platform at all. This time around, they surprisingly actually have a platform to read, though it has been sporadically updated with some sections dating clear back to 2023 as being what was last updated. To say that this is an odd way of handling this would be an understatement. Anyway, it can be found on the party’s main webpage or, alternatively, can be downloaded here (PDF). So, let’s plug our noses and get straight into this one.
The platform spends the first 26 pages actively promoting racism and bigotry, regularly decrying DEI programs in Canada and psychotically screeching at “wokism” (which is a term used by the far right to refer to respecting other human beings). This while pushing anti-science agenda’s and pushing to end healthcare systems in Canada.
Then, on page 27, it reads as follows:
A People’s Party government will:
- Counter anti-oil and anti-pipeline propaganda from radical environmentalists and foreign foundations.
This was a campaign promise we saw from the previous election from this party. It’s basically trying to kill off free speech and only allow speech that the far right agree with while actively suppressing other speech. It’s hardly surprising because if there is one thing the far right hates with a burning passion, it’s actual free speech. The above shows that they still hate free speech, so that hasn’t changed.
On page 33, we did see the following:
Restrict the definition of hate speech in the Criminal Code to expression which explicitly advocates the use of force against identifiable groups or persons based on protected criteria such as religion, race, ethnicity, sex, or sexual orientation.
These comments were made within the context of freedom of expression. By curtailing this to such an extreme, however, will actually lead to the opposite where freedom of expression is actually under threat. If you speak your mind about something, then this promise would open that person up to attack. For instance, programming dialers to constantly phone that person, threats to that persons job, threats to their financial well-being, and more would be opened up. As a result, people would actually be afraid to speak their mind and be compelled to self-censor for fear of political retaliation.
From there, this is said:
Repeal any existing legislation or regulation curtailing free speech on the internet
This… actually doesn’t really say much of anything. It’s just a vague hand gesture more than anything else. I get there is a reference to the Charter shortly after, but that is outside the scope of this analysis (and I’m already quite liberal with what to include as it is).
Repeal Bill C-11, which could be used to regulate user content on streaming platforms.
You know the saying “a stopped clock is right twice a day”? That can definitely be applied here. Bill C-11, or as it is more accurately referred to, the Online Streaming Act, needs to be repealed as it does actually curtail free speech and regulates speech online when the government shouldn’t be doing so. So, bravo, they actually got something right.
After vowing to reopen the abortion debate and pushing the promotion of more anti-science measures, the platform ended.
Conclusions
I’m actually kind of amazed they completely forgot about the Online News Act (formerly Bill C-18). Plenty of right wing voices regularly attacked that law during the debates. Yet, despite all of that, it got no real mention there. I was actually expecting something like “repeal Bill C-18” or “repeal the Online News Act”. Other then that, I’m not really surprised at what I saw. This is a party that is clearly not ready to govern by any stretch of the imagination as they are so heavily focused on childish obsessions like attacking science and pushing racist ideologies. I didn’t think any of that would change and this platform didn’t disappoint on being a poorly thought out abomination. So, wit that, here are my notes:
The Good
- Call to repeal the Online Streaming Act
The Mixed
- Fighting legislation that challenges freedom of expression (the point was so vague, it could mean anything)
The Bad
- Promoting the policing of thought crimes that disagree with their political ideology
- Rolling back protections for various cultural and social groups, leaving them more vulnerable to attacks for their speech
- No plan to reform Canadian privacy laws
- No plan to expand broadband to rural and indigenous communities
- No plan on helping digital first creators that are currently driving economic growth in the online space
- No plan to break up advertising monopolies of tech giants
- No plan to tackle abusive market practices of various carriers
- No plan to increase competition in the cellular and internet space
- No plan to crack down on scam calls
- No plan to modernize the definitions of Cancon
- No plan to fix/abolish the Online News Act
- No plan to fix the problem of the Digital Services Tax
- No plan to combat digital frisking at the border (US border patrol demanding passwords to devices, etc.)
Overall Rating: Kill it with fire
