New York Post - Once democracy, Canada is now authoritarian

{Article in Spoiler}
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Privy Council Office commissioned confidential research on a national electronic ID system. No reason was given. Parliament has repeatedly rejected any mandatory identification program as intrusive and costly.

“Widespread adoption of digital credentials by Canadians may be difficult to achieve especially among cohorts of society who may already be somewhat distrustful of public institutions,” said a September 7 Privy Council report.

“Asked what impacts they expected would be felt by a society in which digital credentials were widely used, a number of participants believed daily life would feel far more restricted and were skeptical of assigning such high responsibility to a single department or agency to manage these credentials,” said the report Continuous Qualitative Data Collection Of Canadians’ Views.

The Privy Council last August 24 commissioned the secret focus group research in one province, Nova Scotia, regarding “digital credentials.” Participants were sharply divided, wrote researchers.

“Asked whether they were aware of the concept of ‘digital credentials,’ very few were,” said the report. “To clarify, participants were informed digital credentials represent a way for individuals to provide information about themselves electronically and that these credentials served as an electronic equivalent of physical documents.”

“While a number of participants thought digital credentials might be a more convenient way for individuals to present their identification, many expressed concerns about widespread usage of this technology,” said Canadians’ Views. “Several worried about the security risks of storing sensitive personal information on their mobile devices, believing digital credentials could be vulnerable to hackers or at serious risk in the event their device was lost or stolen.”

The focus group was commissioned under a $2.4 million contact with The Strategic Counsel, a Toronto pollster. The report did not disclose the purpose of the research.

“Most Significant Privacy Issue”

Federal departments for years recommended voluntary adoption of ID cards by identifiable groups, like a 2012 proposal by the Veterans Ombudsman for a national vets’ card. Standard identification for ex-military would help “inform them of changes to programs and services,” said an Ombudsman’s report Honouring And Connecting With Canada’s Veterans: A National Veterans Identification Card.

However proposals for mandatory identification of all Canadians have drawn protest. A 2002 recommendation by then-Liberal Immigration Minister Denis Coderre for national ID was rejected by the all-party Commons immigration committee.

“The committee was warned many times about the prospect of the police being able to stop people on the street and demand proof of their identity,” MPs wrote in a 2003 report A National Identity Card For Canada?

Then-Privacy Commissioner Robert Marleau in a 2003 report Why We Should Resist A National ID Card For Canada called it “the most significant privacy issue in Canadian society.” A national program would be costly and intolerable, wrote Marleau.

“The debate has to be about more than just cards,” wrote Marleau. “A national identification card would require an elaborate and complex national identity system with database, communications networks, card readers, millions of identification cards and polices and procedures to address a myriad of security, privacy, manageability and human factor considerations. The costs associated with such a system would be enormous. Just creating it could cost between $3 billion and $5 billion with substantial additional costs to operate it.”

“There would also be costs to Canadians’ privacy rights and the relationship between Canadians and the stat,” wrote Marleau. “Identification cards allow us to be identified when we have every right to remain anonymous, reveal more information about us than is strictly required to establish our identity or authorization in a particular situation, and allow our various activities to be linked together in profiles of our lives.”