I wonder if our much reduced press corp has left us able to have a public conversation about anything? It used to be there was a meaningful intermediary between press releases on one side, and public inquiries on the other.
The CBC is a shell of its former self, both in terms of ambition and raw numbers. Two things which are assuredly linked.
Our other large scale media is openly partisan, not so much for any particular party as for their corporate owners. Not to mention also staffed at minimum viable levels.
So we’re left with everyone releasing statements, which are “reported”. But there’s no engagement, no accountability, no interaction, and no leverage. And next week it will be forgotten in the media because they don’t have the numbers left to keep up with actual current events, let alone a “story” from two weeks ago.
Edit: on a less purely philosophical note, I suspect the number of researchers, reporters, and support staff necessary for the press to meaningfully dig into this issue exceeds the total remaining national news personnel, even if you combined all the organizations. We are incapable of getting answers
You know what. I’m beginning to think the only real foreign interference going on is by CSIS and the “five eyes” intelligence services who have been flinging accusations and innuendo, all part of US efforts to amp up cold war tensions with China. Notice CSIS never names names or provide more details because that would compromise “national security.” So the politicians mostly have to sit there and take it, trying their best to not look guilty in the face of these invisible claims. No doubt there’s a lot of skullduggery among ethic communities around elections but that’s been going on forever and they are just playing dirty politics like everyone else.
It’s laughable that Erin O’Toole has emerged as a self proclaimed China hawk. He was the parliamentary secretary to the minister of international trade in 2014 when the Harper government signed the controversial trade deal with China (FIPA) in 2014 and was riding shotgun to sell the deal.
See follow up column and the remarks of Elizabeth May who saw the classified report and called it a nothing burger. Sadly foreign interference in Canadian elections has been going on forever. See the 1963 elections where the U.S. government bent over backwards to unseat PM John Diefenbaker in favour of Lester Pearson who eventually won.
Evan, and many other commentators, are quick to use the term traitor and treason. Treason has a specific definition in the criminal code. It is unlikely that any of the activities described in the report meet the definition of treason. That does not make it right or ethical, but we need to be precise in our wording when there is an exact definition available.
There are several serious issues with making the names of alleged colluders public. First, the intelligence information may come from foreign sources, it is not up to Canada to share this information (unless we never again want to receive intelligence from our allies). Secondly, intelligence is not automatically evidence. It can be a rumour, it can deliberate misinformation, etc. and in many cases it does not even meet the “more likely than not” standard. Finally, it is almost impossible to defend against an accusation like this. Reputations and careers will be destroyed, in some cases based on incorrect or misleading information.
We have to do something!
At the same time, doing nothing regarding this topic is not option either. So what to do? One option could be to require MPs and their staffers to maintain a foreign interaction record. Each time they are in contact with a foreign entity or somebody reasonably expected to represent a foreign entity, this event is logged in a register. MPs that welcome foreign help will likely not record all meetings. As soon as there are too many discrepancies, caucus leadership can decide to remove an MP from the caucus for being not truthful in their reporting, without making the claim that they have evidence of colluding with a foreign entity.
Every accusation is an admission
At the height of the targeted and undoubtedly torqued leaks last year, the CPC accused not only the Liberals of being too slow in responding to these issues, but also that this was deliberate and for partisan gain. I still find this odd, being slow to respond to this issue is damaging enough, why is it necessary to claim that this is for partisan gain?
Well, I think the answer is simple, because that is what the Conservatives would do if they were in the same position. I have zero doubt that Poilievre and team are neck deep in foreign assistance in their leadership campaign. And the current government knows this, but (right now) cannot use this information. Or perhaps, they have made the calculation that it is more beneficial for this info to become “available” during an election campaign…
“Due Process” can mean more than court and legal processes. Due process for something like this can mean deeply researched and vetted stories in the press. But as I expanded in my own comment, I don’t think we still have the national capacity for that.
I agree. And I think there is another dimension as well. In today’s world there does not seem to be an appetite for complex issues. Everything needs to be distilled to “treason” or “traitors”, where the real story is much more complex.
As late as the mid-90s I recall seeing posters in Toronto to meet Gerry Adams and funding for the IRA. I have no affection for Britain, but people who were generations removed from Ireland, were involved in supporting and funding international terrorism.
Speaking as a non-white immigrant who came here more than 50 y/a, I can say that letting in people who don’t believe in secularism, liberal democracy, and accountable government, but just want a safe harbour, is why Canada is flopping on the immigration front.
Based on polling, the majority of Sikhs and Indians are supporters of the Conservatives. Muslims, on the other hand, are supporters of the Liberals. Many Chinese nationals, who settle in BC or Markham have little interest in the finer points of Burkean Conservatism or Rawlsian liberalism. That’s not to say they are illiberal, but they aren’t thinking about making Canada into a citadel for democracy.
Look at the folk who are engaged in organized crime in Canada. Sikhs are the 3rd largest ethnic group after the mafia and natives. South Asians are routine faces in online criminality, gang activity, human trafficking, and bureaucratic crimes. That’s how things worked back home. Exploit and game the system. Low risk, high reward. Elections aren't much different.
Again, Toronto was run by Orangemen until the election of Nathan Phillips in 1955; the 1st Jewish mayor of the city. So, these themes aren’t new.
A key problem is that these issues fall into holes or dead zones. Most of us don’t understand how intelligence information is collected or used. This often includes media. So, allegations quickly default to truth that must be acted upon. We seem incapable of explaining to the general public that something contained in an intelligence analysis may come with 10% to 90% confidence. Even then it might not be provable in a court of law.
It benefits opposition politicians and media, however, to treat the information as gospel in order to score political points or drive attention. But the other dead zone is that there never seems to be a path ahead as to how we might resolve the problem. Of course, we all want to know if there are MPs or other citizens wittingly or semi-wittingly working with foreign governments against Canadian interests. We should all be prepared to trust and wait for our institutions to look to address the problem. Yet, none of us would want to sit in the dark forever waiting for action to be taken or for clarity to be provided. That too easily builds narratives of government complicity or weakness. Right now though none of us are being offered a path forward to bolster the general ask that we trust in our institutions. Everything in life demands that we balance objectives against each other. At some point, there needs to be an ability to prioritize openness, even with the potential risk to the privacy and reputations of some citizens.
What is this supposed to mean. How does immigration all of the sudden come into play?
But your example of the Japanese and Italian internment camps are excellent. Locking up people purely on the basis of where their parents are born without any evidence of wrongdoing. Just like we are now going to throw a few people under the bus because their parents were born somewhere else.
I wonder if our much reduced press corp has left us able to have a public conversation about anything? It used to be there was a meaningful intermediary between press releases on one side, and public inquiries on the other.
The CBC is a shell of its former self, both in terms of ambition and raw numbers. Two things which are assuredly linked.
Our other large scale media is openly partisan, not so much for any particular party as for their corporate owners. Not to mention also staffed at minimum viable levels.
So we’re left with everyone releasing statements, which are “reported”. But there’s no engagement, no accountability, no interaction, and no leverage. And next week it will be forgotten in the media because they don’t have the numbers left to keep up with actual current events, let alone a “story” from two weeks ago.
Edit: on a less purely philosophical note, I suspect the number of researchers, reporters, and support staff necessary for the press to meaningfully dig into this issue exceeds the total remaining national news personnel, even if you combined all the organizations. We are incapable of getting answers
You know what. I’m beginning to think the only real foreign interference going on is by CSIS and the “five eyes” intelligence services who have been flinging accusations and innuendo, all part of US efforts to amp up cold war tensions with China. Notice CSIS never names names or provide more details because that would compromise “national security.” So the politicians mostly have to sit there and take it, trying their best to not look guilty in the face of these invisible claims. No doubt there’s a lot of skullduggery among ethic communities around elections but that’s been going on forever and they are just playing dirty politics like everyone else.
It’s laughable that Erin O’Toole has emerged as a self proclaimed China hawk. He was the parliamentary secretary to the minister of international trade in 2014 when the Harper government signed the controversial trade deal with China (FIPA) in 2014 and was riding shotgun to sell the deal.
You think CSIS fabricated foreign interference? You're as nutty as QAnon! What a conspiracy theory.
See follow up column and the remarks of Elizabeth May who saw the classified report and called it a nothing burger. Sadly foreign interference in Canadian elections has been going on forever. See the 1963 elections where the U.S. government bent over backwards to unseat PM John Diefenbaker in favour of Lester Pearson who eventually won.
One more comment.
Evan, and many other commentators, are quick to use the term traitor and treason. Treason has a specific definition in the criminal code. It is unlikely that any of the activities described in the report meet the definition of treason. That does not make it right or ethical, but we need to be precise in our wording when there is an exact definition available.
Due process
There are several serious issues with making the names of alleged colluders public. First, the intelligence information may come from foreign sources, it is not up to Canada to share this information (unless we never again want to receive intelligence from our allies). Secondly, intelligence is not automatically evidence. It can be a rumour, it can deliberate misinformation, etc. and in many cases it does not even meet the “more likely than not” standard. Finally, it is almost impossible to defend against an accusation like this. Reputations and careers will be destroyed, in some cases based on incorrect or misleading information.
We have to do something!
At the same time, doing nothing regarding this topic is not option either. So what to do? One option could be to require MPs and their staffers to maintain a foreign interaction record. Each time they are in contact with a foreign entity or somebody reasonably expected to represent a foreign entity, this event is logged in a register. MPs that welcome foreign help will likely not record all meetings. As soon as there are too many discrepancies, caucus leadership can decide to remove an MP from the caucus for being not truthful in their reporting, without making the claim that they have evidence of colluding with a foreign entity.
Every accusation is an admission
At the height of the targeted and undoubtedly torqued leaks last year, the CPC accused not only the Liberals of being too slow in responding to these issues, but also that this was deliberate and for partisan gain. I still find this odd, being slow to respond to this issue is damaging enough, why is it necessary to claim that this is for partisan gain?
Well, I think the answer is simple, because that is what the Conservatives would do if they were in the same position. I have zero doubt that Poilievre and team are neck deep in foreign assistance in their leadership campaign. And the current government knows this, but (right now) cannot use this information. Or perhaps, they have made the calculation that it is more beneficial for this info to become “available” during an election campaign…
“Due Process” can mean more than court and legal processes. Due process for something like this can mean deeply researched and vetted stories in the press. But as I expanded in my own comment, I don’t think we still have the national capacity for that.
I agree. And I think there is another dimension as well. In today’s world there does not seem to be an appetite for complex issues. Everything needs to be distilled to “treason” or “traitors”, where the real story is much more complex.
As late as the mid-90s I recall seeing posters in Toronto to meet Gerry Adams and funding for the IRA. I have no affection for Britain, but people who were generations removed from Ireland, were involved in supporting and funding international terrorism.
Speaking as a non-white immigrant who came here more than 50 y/a, I can say that letting in people who don’t believe in secularism, liberal democracy, and accountable government, but just want a safe harbour, is why Canada is flopping on the immigration front.
Based on polling, the majority of Sikhs and Indians are supporters of the Conservatives. Muslims, on the other hand, are supporters of the Liberals. Many Chinese nationals, who settle in BC or Markham have little interest in the finer points of Burkean Conservatism or Rawlsian liberalism. That’s not to say they are illiberal, but they aren’t thinking about making Canada into a citadel for democracy.
Look at the folk who are engaged in organized crime in Canada. Sikhs are the 3rd largest ethnic group after the mafia and natives. South Asians are routine faces in online criminality, gang activity, human trafficking, and bureaucratic crimes. That’s how things worked back home. Exploit and game the system. Low risk, high reward. Elections aren't much different.
Again, Toronto was run by Orangemen until the election of Nathan Phillips in 1955; the 1st Jewish mayor of the city. So, these themes aren’t new.
A key problem is that these issues fall into holes or dead zones. Most of us don’t understand how intelligence information is collected or used. This often includes media. So, allegations quickly default to truth that must be acted upon. We seem incapable of explaining to the general public that something contained in an intelligence analysis may come with 10% to 90% confidence. Even then it might not be provable in a court of law.
It benefits opposition politicians and media, however, to treat the information as gospel in order to score political points or drive attention. But the other dead zone is that there never seems to be a path ahead as to how we might resolve the problem. Of course, we all want to know if there are MPs or other citizens wittingly or semi-wittingly working with foreign governments against Canadian interests. We should all be prepared to trust and wait for our institutions to look to address the problem. Yet, none of us would want to sit in the dark forever waiting for action to be taken or for clarity to be provided. That too easily builds narratives of government complicity or weakness. Right now though none of us are being offered a path forward to bolster the general ask that we trust in our institutions. Everything in life demands that we balance objectives against each other. At some point, there needs to be an ability to prioritize openness, even with the potential risk to the privacy and reputations of some citizens.
I'm not sure the breathless shock at this news is warranted, given our history as an immigrant nation.
Just off the top of my head:
Thomas D'Arcy McGee (those damn Fenians!)
WWI "aliens" (Eastern Europeans)
WWII Japanese internment, Italian workcamps
Surveillance of anyone connected to apartheid South Africa, leftist regimes, etc.
Feel free to add to the list....
What is this supposed to mean. How does immigration all of the sudden come into play?
But your example of the Japanese and Italian internment camps are excellent. Locking up people purely on the basis of where their parents are born without any evidence of wrongdoing. Just like we are now going to throw a few people under the bus because their parents were born somewhere else.