Are we not now though in a world where the most important thing is to make statements that sound bold and authoritative even if close examination shows the real situation is more complex or that the person making the statement does not have the means to make it happen? You look at what you believe a particular group whose support you want thinks and make a statement in favour of what they want. And then if you a bit more sophisticated you direct that message to those people while sending a different message to others with another point of view.
A top secret security clearance should be a requirement for all elected officials in the Provincial legislature and Federal parliament - especially in this age of foreign influence. However, the process can take months - dependent on size/activity of family including spouse. And, it needs updating when circumstances change. So, given timelines and desire for avoidance, can PP even achieve top secret security clearance?? Security clearance requirements should be a policy as clearly it won't happen unless its law.
This is B.S. ....Ok course she has politicized this information; that is her job and it is the reason this inquiry was done to see how far foreign influence has penetrated our political system. So to point to this and call her down for it is not only stupid but misleadingly mean. Her 3 point approach to deal with it is astute and to the point.... to keep those that need to know informed and for that they must have the clearance and have an awareness of the present day dangers and pitfalls that one can easily get entangled into almost unknowingly .
You seem to be going out of your way with suppositional acquisitions against this woman with a little bit of meanness.
Okay, how would Freeland force/require a leader of another party to obtain a security clearance? Is she going to pass a law? How would she enforce such a law? That is the real BS.
The foreign interference report actually deals with this. It states it is desirable for leaders to have a clearance, but that there are no avenues to compel this.
If Freeland had been smart, she would have said: “when elected as party leader, I will request the Liberal party to pass a bylaw that the leader of the party must seek and be able to obtain a security clearance. And I will encourage other parties to do the same.”
Are we not now though in a world where the most important thing is to make statements that sound bold and authoritative even if close examination shows the real situation is more complex or that the person making the statement does not have the means to make it happen? You look at what you believe a particular group whose support you want thinks and make a statement in favour of what they want. And then if you a bit more sophisticated you direct that message to those people while sending a different message to others with another point of view.
A top secret security clearance should be a requirement for all elected officials in the Provincial legislature and Federal parliament - especially in this age of foreign influence. However, the process can take months - dependent on size/activity of family including spouse. And, it needs updating when circumstances change. So, given timelines and desire for avoidance, can PP even achieve top secret security clearance?? Security clearance requirements should be a policy as clearly it won't happen unless its law.
This is B.S. ....Ok course she has politicized this information; that is her job and it is the reason this inquiry was done to see how far foreign influence has penetrated our political system. So to point to this and call her down for it is not only stupid but misleadingly mean. Her 3 point approach to deal with it is astute and to the point.... to keep those that need to know informed and for that they must have the clearance and have an awareness of the present day dangers and pitfalls that one can easily get entangled into almost unknowingly .
You seem to be going out of your way with suppositional acquisitions against this woman with a little bit of meanness.
Okay, how would Freeland force/require a leader of another party to obtain a security clearance? Is she going to pass a law? How would she enforce such a law? That is the real BS.
The foreign interference report actually deals with this. It states it is desirable for leaders to have a clearance, but that there are no avenues to compel this.
If Freeland had been smart, she would have said: “when elected as party leader, I will request the Liberal party to pass a bylaw that the leader of the party must seek and be able to obtain a security clearance. And I will encourage other parties to do the same.”