Bill C-2, the proposed Strong Borders Act, would amend many existing federal laws and create a new Supporting Authorized Access to Information Act. Its stated goal is to strengthen border and security measures; that goal is not a guaranteed result. Different provisions would start at different times: some after Royal Assent, others only on dates set by the Governor in Council.
Border and enforcement: Owners or operators of specified bridges, tunnels, railways, airports, wharves and docks would have to provide and maintain adequate facilities for border enforcement, free of charge. Exporters and warehouse operators would have to give officers access to specified controlled premises and allow packages or containers to be opened.
Drugs and mail: The bill would change how some controlled substances and precursors are scheduled, and allow regulations to exempt designated police or military-police members and people acting under their direction from specified Criminal Code offences. It would change rules for opening and seizing mail and create an offence for knowingly interfering with mail without legal authority.
Immigration and asylum: Officers could end processing of some applications or cancel, suspend or vary immigration documents in prescribed circumstances. The Governor in Council could also, in the public interest, stop accepting, suspend or end specified applications, or cancel or change specified documents and their conditions. New rules would change asylum-claim screening, processing and appeal steps, and make some claims ineligible based on when or how the claimant entered Canada.
Financial crime: The bill would require enrolment for many businesses covered by anti-money-laundering law, prohibit anonymous accounts, and create new record-keeping and enforcement rules. It would also prohibit many businesses and charities from accepting cash payments, donations or deposits of $10,000 or more, subject to exceptions.
Information access: Police and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) would get new ways to demand or seek court orders for certain information from service providers. A new law would let the Minister impose time-limited requirements on electronic service providers to support access authorized under existing laws. It bars requirements that would create a systemic vulnerability in electronic protections.
Other security measures: The bill would expand Coast Guard security work, change access to sex-offender registry information, and allow certain personal information disclosed by police or other agencies to be used for financial-intelligence purposes under limits.
Bridge, tunnel, railway and designated port or airport operators: They would have to provide, equip and maintain adequate facilities for specified border enforcement purposes without charging Canada. The bill does not set out facility standards or a process for deciding what is adequate.
Exporters and warehouse operators: On request, they would have to give officers free access to specified controlled premises and allow packages or containers to be opened or packaging removed.
Immigration applicants and document holders: Regulations would set circumstances in which application processing could be terminated, or documents cancelled, suspended or changed. Some people outside Canada could also be required to answer questions truthfully, provide documents and attend an examination, including a medical examination.
People making asylum claims: A claim could be ineligible if made more than one year after entry to Canada after June 24, 2020, or after a prescribed time limit following certain entries across the Canada–U.S. land border outside a port of entry. Regulations could set exceptions. Other proposed changes would require claimants to meet document and examination requirements before referral and would affect when claims and appeals proceed.
Businesses and charities: Many covered businesses would have to enrol with FINTRAC, keep records and respond to information requests. Accepting cash of $10,000 or more in one transaction or a prescribed series could be an offence, unless an exception applies. The maximum fine on indictment for that cash offence would be three times the amount accepted.
Service providers and people whose information is sought: Providers could receive information demands, production orders or requirements under the new access law. Some demands allow at least 24 hours to respond and can be challenged in court. The bill also creates limits and review steps, but does not require providers to introduce a systemic vulnerability.
Mail users: The bill would set conditions for government action involving mail and change when Canada Post must be notified. It would also broaden the Corporation’s authority to open mail in specified circumstances, including letters.
No publicly available information on the bill’s total public cost is supplied.
Specified infrastructure operators would have to provide facilities free of charge; the bill gives no estimate of their costs.
The new electronic-access law allows, but does not require, compensation for some or all costs of a Minister’s order to a provider. No estimate is given.
The bill would authorize substantial fines and administrative penalties, but the material does not estimate how often they would be imposed or how much revenue they might raise.
Staffing and operating costs for government departments, enforcement bodies and FINTRAC are not estimated.
Many key details depend on regulations or future orders, including which immigration cases are affected, how some asylum exceptions work, and what provider duties or cash-transaction exceptions will apply.
The bill does not provide full procedures, timelines or review rights for every new power. Those details may depend on regulations or other laws.
The supplied material does not explain how the new immigration powers would interact with all existing programs, or how often application and document powers might be used.
The supplied text is incomplete in places, including provisions on refugee appeals, foreign-provider information requests and agreements for collecting penalties. Their full effects cannot be assessed from this material.
The bill appears intended to give border and law-enforcement bodies more tools to access information and carry out investigations. A possible argument for it is that demands, warrants and provider assistance could help obtain relevant evidence more quickly.
Requiring border facilities and access to export premises could make enforcement at key transport points more workable.
The financial-crime measures could be seen as addressing gaps in identifying clients, tracking regulated businesses and responding to suspected money laundering or sanctions evasion.
Several information powers include limits, such as judicial approval for some orders, review rights for some demands, and a ban on provider requirements that create a systemic vulnerability.
The bill would create broad powers to stop or change immigration applications and documents, and to make some asylum claims ineligible. The effect on individuals could be serious, while many details depend on future regulations or orders.
Some information demands could be made without a court order, and provider requirements could involve costs and affect users. The bill does not provide a full account of how often the powers may be used or their total effect on privacy.
New duties for businesses, infrastructure operators and service providers could impose costs and compliance work. The supplied material does not quantify them.
The bill combines many significant changes, with different safeguards and start dates. That could make it difficult for affected people and organizations to know which rules apply and when.