Signal tells Ottawa it will leave Canada rather than comply with Liberal lawful access bill
Ottawa's amendments to Bill C-22 have not moved the encrypted messaging app, as other privacy firms weigh exits and U.S. lawmakers of both parties frame the bill as a security and trade problem.
BECOME A MEMBER
Article by Rebel News staff.
Tonight on The Ezra Levant Show, Ottawa tweaked its surveillance bill to keep Signal in Canada. Signal says it's leaving anyway.
Signal is the encrypted messaging app journalists and dissidents rely on. Messages are scrambled on the sender's phone and unscrambled on the recipient's. Nobody in between can read them. Not Signal. Not the phone company. Not the police. That's the whole product.
Bill C-22, the Lawful Access Act, would let police and CSIS ask a company whether someone is a customer, no warrant required. It would let cabinet designate certain firms as "core providers." Those firms would have to build the tools to hand over user data and keep metadata on file for police: who talked to whom, and when. The Liberals insist it isn't a back door.
The tech sector objected in May. Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree promised to clarify the encryption language, the Globe and Mail reported. The committee cut data retention from a year to six months. Cosmetic changes. In June, the Liberals limited debate, blocked new amendments and rammed the bill through the House of Commons to the Senate.
On Monday night in Ottawa, Signal vice-president Udbhav Tiwari told senators and MPs the softened bill changes nothing. "For us, this is a serious enough issue that it would fundamentally break Signal," he said, according to Betakit. Signal "will not make changes to our products ... to comply with such demands that place the privacy of not just Canadians but everyone else in the world at risk." The law reaches anyone messaging to or from a Canadian. So Signal would rather lose a G7 market than break its promise to users. Tiwari said it plainly in June, Global News reported: "If we are ever forced to choose between betraying the people who rely on us and leaving a market, we will leave."
Signal isn't alone. NordVPN says it will consider "removing our presence from Canadian jurisdiction." DuckDuckGo says it will pull its VPN. Toronto-based Psiphon is reportedly looking at a move. Tailscale, also of Toronto, says it may have to restructure. Windscribe, a Canadian company, says it will "move HQ and take our taxes elsewhere." Apple's senior privacy director told the Commons committee in May: "When you build a backdoor into an encrypted device, anyone can walk through."
The pattern is familiar. In December 2013, Russia's FSB demanded Pavel Durov, founder of VKontakte, hand over data on Ukrainian protesters. He refused. By April 2014 he was forced out. He left Russia, calling it "incompatible with Internet business at the moment." He built Telegram. In 2018, Russia tried to ban that too when he wouldn't surrender the encryption keys. Google pulled search from mainland China in 2010 rather than keep censoring results. LinkedIn shut down there in 2021. The West called that predictable from authoritarian states. So what do we call it when it happens here?
In June, two Surrey RCMP officers came to the door of Tanya Gaw, who runs the B.C. Christian activist group Action4Canada. They said they were investigating her under section 319 of the Criminal Code over posts about Muslims and Islam. They didn't say which posts. They left no letter. No charge followed. Three months later, she told Rebel News, police still hadn't followed up. The knock was the point. Now the same police want the power to ask Signal for your messages.
The dress rehearsal was the Online News Act. When Meta refused to pay, it pulled news from Facebook and Instagram in Canada on August 1, 2023. Ottawa called that a win.
Washington has noticed, and it isn't partisan. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said last December that Canada's streaming and news laws "discriminate against U.S. tech and media firms." In May, two Republican committee chairs, Jim Jordan of Judiciary and Brian Mast of Foreign Affairs, warned Anandasangaree in writing that C-22 would "drastically expand Canada's surveillance and data access powers." In July, Democratic Senator Ron Wyden wrote to the Trump administration that the bill "threatens to weaponize American technology infrastructure." When Donald Trump called the digital services tax "a direct and blatant attack on our Country" in June 2025, Carney dropped it within 48 hours. C-22 is more likely to die by trade penalty than by court ruling.
Russia lost Durov. China lost Google. Canada is about to lose Signal, over a bill the government swears is harmless. The companies can leave. Most Canadians can't.
Guest: Stockwell Day on the state of Alberta & Canada
COMMENTS
-
Carl Linletter commented 2026-10-08 13:00:08 -0400 FlagIn Canada, the Charter of Rights is only enforced if the Government wants it to be. In Canada, your rights are gifts from the Government. In the US, your rights are gifts from God. Polar opposites. -
Dan Anders commented 2026-10-08 12:31:56 -0400Odd point to make; check out the dress code of the RCMP officers speaking with with Tanya Gaw 🙄🤦🏼♂️ Where did our expected standards go?
-
Matt Abrahams commented 2026-10-07 21:32:54 -0400How does bill C-22 not violate section 8 of the charter?
-
mark gaboury commented 2026-10-07 20:59:04 -0400(1) People who ‘say no the nine’ should go to Turkey and apply for welfare benefits. (2) Raheel Raza says we should teach our children the difference between right and wrong. She’s a Muslim. So would she have us teach this by the Koran?
-
Bruce Atchison commented 2026-10-07 20:35:25 -0400Canada will be a land of prisoners if control freaks get their way. And when people wake up, it’ll be too late.
