What's going on Canada?
🍁 Meta
🗺️ Provinces / Territories
🏙️ Cities / Regions
🏒 Sports
Hockey
Football (NFL)
unknownFootball (CFL)
unknownBaseball
unknownBasketball
unknownSoccer
unknown💻 Universities
💵 Finance / Shopping
🗣️ Politics
🍁 Social & Culture
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:
I care more that Pierre hasn't bothered to get security clearance so he can read it himself.
I don't understand Singh because May said it wasn't that bad and when questioned repeatedly, Singh refused to answer the simple question of, 'did the report contain names'.
At 3:40 in the video of OP he states there are names in the unredacted report but "some names is not also there".
I think people are reading to much into how alarmed Singh is of the report vs May. As noted in the article there will be a public inquiry with the final report well before an expected election and they've made amendments to include concerns found in this report.
Justice Marie-Josée Hogue is currently leading the public inquiry into foreign interference and is expected to deliver a final report at the end of the year.
Earlier this week, the Liberals supported a Bloc Quebecois motion for the foreign interference commissioner’s mandate to include the report’s allegations – though whether or not it will be included in Hogue’s probe is ultimately up to her.
What exactly would knowing the name do for you?
This is a national security matter, those people are likely being used to bait out further interference from 3rd parties and keeping their names hidden forces those third parties to have to worry about if they're being monitored or not.
I think the benefit of knowing the names publicly might be the public's ability to then no longer elect these people, which cuts off the foreign interference at the root, as far as can be done within the country. It might also act as a deterrent for future MPs knowing their names could be released if they too partake in this behavior. It would accomplish stamping out the problem and publicly shaming these people for the rest of their careers.
Not saying it's realistically feasible or prudent overall to actually release them though.
It doesn't cut off interference at all, it just provides new targets who have less knowledge and awareness about the situation.
I think the bigger concern is that if there are other foreign influenced MPs who aren't listed in the report, then they and the country influencing them realize that CSIS/Canada doesn't know about them. Keeping it vague and uncertain makes it more likely that those people will be concerned and may reduce their interference to avoid detection.
Likewise, revealing which MPs are known to be influenced may reveal moles or informants that Canada has, thus curtailing future efforts at limiting foreign interference.
That's not what "at the root" means. The guy selling himself and his country is the final part, the branch as it were. The root is the source of the money.
As for your reasoning, being able to further track intermediaries and see what else they have their fingers in is good security policy, as is sending back disinformation until such time as it becomes known the subject is compromised. Throwing these guys under the bus is usually the last step in the process.
Or leave them there. Let foreign interference put effort into these people. Pull the rug right at/just before election.
Pull the rug now and there is time to turn more politicians.