Wesley Wark, a national security expert with the Centre for International Governance Innovation, said Trudeau’s testimony wasn’t terribly revealing.
Wark pointed to the report the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) released in June, which suggested some parliamentarians had been “'semi-witting or witting participants” in foreign interference activities.
Wark also said it’s not clear to what extent the unnamed parliamentarians could be compromised — and suggested many may not even be aware that they are.
In the past, Poilievre has defended his decision not to receive a national security clearance and get briefed by intelligence agencies by arguing that it would prevent him from speaking freely and criticizing the government on foreign interference issues.
(Richard) Fadden said that wouldn’t be the case.
“Just because you have a security clearance doesn’t mean you have to become a Carthusian monk and never speak,” he said. He also said that Poilievre could choose to be briefed only on issues affecting his own party if he wanted to create a buffer ensuring he could criticize the government on foreign interference.
Polievre knows exactly what he’s doing by remaining an uninformed stooge. It’s much easier to blatantly lie to Canadians when you purposefully ignore the truth.
PP is a giant piece of shit that has no business running for leadership of Canada.
Poilievre and the Conservatives have been calling on Trudeau to release the names of allegedly compromised parliamentarians. They repeated that demand on Wednesday.
But law enforcement and national security agencies have been clear on this point: sharing any classified information is a crime.
“Anyone who reveals classified information is subject to the law equally and obviously, in this case, those names are classified at this time and to reveal them publicly would be a criminal offence,” RCMP Deputy Commissioner Mark Flynn told MPs on the public accounts committee in June.
When CBC News later asked Flynn whether the names could be released in the House of Commons, where MPs enjoy certain legal protections, he suggested that could be a legal grey area.
“That’s a question that should be asked, due to the complexities of parliamentary privilege, of a legal expert,” Flynn said.
Stephanie Carvin, a former CSIS national security analyst, said there are several reasons why national security agencies wouldn’t want the names made public — starting with the fact that it could compromise ongoing investigations.
“We don’t want foreign governments knowing how we are collecting information. That’s why we protect our sources and methods,” she said.
Pierre asking Trudeau to do a crime should be a bigger story than it is, Pierre asking Trudeau to put our information gathering operations at risk should be a bigger story than it is.
Makes me sick to think that weasel could get elected on not much more than Liberal fatigue, and we will pay the cost as a society for it when the childcare funds dry up, green money heads to the oil fields, we adopt punishment based healthcare for those addicted or women, and he reintroduces Harpers sneaky style of voter suppression and court stacking.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
Polievre knows exactly what he’s doing by remaining an uninformed stooge. It’s much easier to blatantly lie to Canadians when you purposefully ignore the truth.
PP is a giant piece of shit that has no business running for leadership of Canada.
Pierre asking Trudeau to do a crime should be a bigger story than it is, Pierre asking Trudeau to put our information gathering operations at risk should be a bigger story than it is. Makes me sick to think that weasel could get elected on not much more than Liberal fatigue, and we will pay the cost as a society for it when the childcare funds dry up, green money heads to the oil fields, we adopt punishment based healthcare for those addicted or women, and he reintroduces Harpers sneaky style of voter suppression and court stacking.