Government’s censorship sequel sparks alarm
A Canadian charity dedicated to the advancement of constitutional rights is sounding warning bells about the Carney Liberals' latest ploy to revive internet censorship legislation.
Ottawa’s latest plot twist has free speech advocates on edge, as whispers of a revived Bill C-63, coined the Online Harms Bill, swirl.
The Democracy Fund (TDF) is sounding the alarm, warning that the government’s renewed push to regulate online speech could usher in a chilling era of censorship.
📷UPDATE: TDF expresses concern about possible new censorship bill
— The Democracy Fund (@TDF_Can) July 4, 2025
The government is considering reintroducing the Online Harms Bill.
Ottawa: The Democracy Fund is concerned that the government intends to re-introduce the previously abandoned Online Harms Bill in the same or… pic.twitter.com/XywRVGCwE9
Last year, Bill C-63 sparked outrage with its vague crackdown on “harmful content,” thinly veiled in noble aims like curbing child exploitation and terrorism – crimes already addressed by Canada’s existing laws.
The bill’s murky definitions and draconian fines for social media platforms smelled more like a power grab than a public safety win. It would’ve turned Big Tech into speech police, silencing voices under the threat of hefty penalties.
Rodney Ghali, Assistant Secretary to Cabinet @ Impact & Innovation Unit at Canada's Privy Council, thinks that behavioral science is an important policy tool, says misinformation is a symptom of distrust in government
— Tamara Ugolini 🇨🇦 (@TamaraUgo) January 24, 2023
Censorship doesn't uphold democracy, https://t.co/T1ZAS1uTQi pic.twitter.com/pzLJrHfmvc
When Parliament was prorogued earlier this year, by then-prime minister Justin Trudeau on January 6, C-63 bit the dust.
But now the Mark Carney Liberals are teasing a sequel.
TDF Litigation Director Mark Joseph isn’t buying the remake. “There are laws in place that the government can, and does, use to address most of the bad conduct that the Bill ostensibly targeted,” he said.
“To the extent that there are gaps in the Criminal Code, amendments should be carefully drafted to fix this. However, the previous Bill C-63 sought to implement a regime of mass censorship. TDF is concerned that the government will try once more to give itself the power to criminalize and punish online speech and debate. TDF will oppose that."
UNESCO has unveiled global online censorship guidance
— Tamara Ugolini 🇨🇦 (@TamaraUgo) November 7, 2023
Unelected “free expression” chief Guilherme Canela says that we must invest in these guidelines because of democracy, but also if people don’t “vaccine themselves” it will cost public health systemshttps://t.co/T1ZAS1vrFQ pic.twitter.com/zHvptXdn2j
Joseph’s warning is clear: the government’s obsession with controlling speech risks trampling the very freedoms that define a democracy. The Minister of Justice claims he’s just “taking another look,” but civil rights advocates are concerned that this is code for looming mass surveillance and state-sanctioned silencing.
With the original bill’s broad strokes painting “harmful” as whatever the government dislikes, Canadians could face a future where dissent is a crime.
Will Canada’s online town square remain a place for open debate, or will it morph into a government-monitored echo chamber?


COMMENTS
-
Bernhard Jatzeck commented 2025-07-04 22:40:18 -0400When’s a Carney tax not a Carney tax when it’s pretending that it isn’t a Carney tax?
-
Bruce Atchison commented 2025-07-04 20:19:26 -0400Will Pierre Poilievre challenge this 1984-style legislation? He had better do so or lose credibility. And what about the Meta shakedown? Why hasn’t anything been done about that?