32% Yes |
68% No |
13% Yes |
66% No |
13% Yes, but only by court order |
2% No, and enact legislation preventing government surveillance of citizen communications |
3% Yes, but only for those with criminal backgrounds |
|
2% Yes, this is necessary to combat terrorism |
See how support for each position on “Government Surveillance” has changed over time for 1.4m Canada voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
See how importance of “Government Surveillance” has changed over time for 1.4m Canada voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from Canada users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.
@9L2P5YG4wks4W
Depends. If the person is under government radar for illegal activities, then yes. But if the person is off radar or reformed and is completely fine, even with criminal background, then should be occasionally monitored but not strictly.
@9JC6BKV3mos3MO
Yes, and all communications for any elected official should be public record before ANY private citizens are subjected to monitoring excepted by court order.
@9GNXSP76mos6MO
No, only in cases where a warrant is needed and deemed necessary for extreme crime and terrorist activities.
@9F98QST7mos7MO
Only if there is a confirmed threat in the country
@9F5KMPV7mos7MO
No, this is a severe violation of privacy. Emails, messages and phone calls should be private. Privacy is a fundamental right and it is not the government's business what Canadians are talking about on call, email or messages. National security is an excuse the government shouldn't be allowed to monitor it's citizens regardless.
@9D4R2DY9mos9MO
Yes, but only for those with criminal backgrounds for violent; sexual; financial; and/or gang related crimes.
Explore other topics that are important to Canada voters.
