Fate of cybersecurity bill targeting Huawei uncertain after senator finds ‘drafting error’

The fate of a crucial Liberal government bill aimed at safeguarding vital infrastructure from cyberattacks and empowering Ottawa to prohibit telecommunications providers from partnering with what it deems as risky vendors, such as Huawei, has been thrown into uncertainty. The bill, known as Bill C-26, was initially introduced in 2022 and comprises two main components.

The first part of the bill seeks to amend the Telecommunications Act to grant the federal government explicit legal authority to forbid Canadian telecom companies from using products and services from “high-risk suppliers.” This move was primarily motivated by national security concerns, with the government intending to prevent Canada’s upcoming mobile networks from utilizing offerings from Huawei and ZTE, two Chinese state-supported telecommunications entities.

The second segment of Bill C-26 introduces the Critical Cyber Systems Protection Act, which mandates companies operating in crucial, federally regulated sectors like finance, telecommunications, energy, and transportation to enhance their cybersecurity measures against potential attacks or face substantial penalties.

Despite its initial introduction, the progress of the bill through Parliament has been sluggish, and recent developments have cast doubt on its future. During a clause-by-clause examination of the proposed legislation by senators, Independent Sen. John McNair, the bill’s sponsor in the upper chamber, identified what he referred to as a “drafting error.” This revelation prompted the Senate’s national security committee to convene in-camera for further discussion.

Sources familiar with the situation disclosed that a critical aspect of the bill, pertaining to the implementation of new cybersecurity measures, could be rendered ineffective if the drafting issue is not rectified. The problem stems from the renumbering of clauses within the bill following modifications made to the Canada Evidence Act in the context of the foreign interference law, Bill C-70. Consequently, the foreign interference law inadvertently annuls the cybersecurity provisions of Bill C-26 due to the mismatch in section numbers.

The next steps regarding the bill remain unclear, with the Senate committee scheduled to reconvene early the following week to deliberate on the cybersecurity legislation. Should amendments be deemed necessary, the bill would have to be returned to the House of Commons, further prolonging an already delayed legislative process amidst parliamentary deadlock.

Matt Malone, a Balsillie scholar at the Balsillie School of International Affairs, highlighted broader issues with Bill C-26, particularly regarding its ambiguous language that could potentially enable government overreach. He underscored the necessity for enhanced oversight concerning the new powers granted to the government for issuing orders and collecting information.

Apart from the imperative to fortify critical systems against cyber threats, concerns have also been raised regarding the potential impact of a delay in passing Bill C-26 on Canada’s stance towards technology from Huawei and other flagged companies. While the government announced intentions to restrict the use of Huawei and ZTE products and services over two years ago, the legal authority to enforce this ban is contingent upon the passage of Bill C-26.

Notably, the federal government reached out to major telecommunications companies this summer for updates on compliance with the Huawei ban deadlines. While Rogers and Bell affirmed their non-utilization of Huawei in their 5G networks, Telus did not provide a direct response. Telus had initially planned to deploy Huawei technology for its 5G network but subsequently opted for partnerships with other providers.

The transition to 5G networks holds the promise of faster internet connectivity and increased data capacity, enabling more devices to connect online. However, apprehensions persist regarding Huawei’s involvement in these networks, with concerns about potential data security risks and the company’s alleged ties to the Chinese government. Huawei has consistently refuted accusations of espionage and maintains its independence from governmental influence.

In conclusion, the future of Bill C-26 hangs in the balance as lawmakers grapple with addressing the identified drafting error and navigating the complexities surrounding cybersecurity and vendor partnerships in the telecommunications sector. The outcome of these deliberations will have far-reaching implications for Canada’s national security and technological landscape.