this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2024
27 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

7161 readers
318 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Regions


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social & Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Track_Shovel 4 points 1 day ago (5 children)

I'm glad to see this hitting the fucking fan. As much as I hate to say it, PP is right: canadians need to see who is compromised. I'm a staunch left voter, but I wrote my conservative fuckstick MP when the report was first leaked.

[–] swordgeek@lemmy.ca 3 points 16 hours ago

I would agree, except that it may be legally prohibited. At present, I believe JT would be violating national security laws by revealing the names.

Meanwhile, PP would much rather falsely scream "LIAR!" than admit that BS like that is exactly why he refuses to get a security clearance.

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 5 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

PP needs to see who is compromised.

When it comes to national security there's no excuse for our second major party and likely next PM to not have clearance.

At least Trudeau can hide behind national security on this, and I would like to see more. But PP isn't behaving responsibly or in good faith.

[–] Track_Shovel 1 points 20 hours ago

Certainly not doing the job of the opposition leader. He should be all up in that business, but he's playing coy.

[–] prodigalsorcerer@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If pp cares so much, he can get the security clearance and look at the list himself.

[–] Track_Shovel 1 points 1 day ago

Oh I agree: he's being a typical spineless conservative. The point remains, however, that if there is hard evidence of our MPs literally working with foreign interests, they should be held accountable and the public should know who they are voting for.

[–] joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I must have missed the part where there was definitive evidence that anyone was compromised. I thought this was still an investigation.

If this has progressed to the stage that the evidence is strong enough than sure the names should be released, but I didn't think the investigation was at that point.

The alternative is the list of names is released and then it later comes out that a few names were actually innocent but it's too late to take it back because that incorrect news being public will have ruined their chances or reelection.

[–] Track_Shovel 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm not suggesting a witch-hunt without evidence; just accountability from the government that is supposed to serve us. In power or otherwise.

[–] joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca 4 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

That's what the investigation is. And that's happening. All parties with the correct access can access that information. What accountability isn't happening?

[–] voluble@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 hours ago

Out of curiosity, and if you don't mind sharing, do you think the Liberals have done a good job of dealing with election interference issues?

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That would be irresponsible - this is intelligence, not evidence that would hold up in court.

Trudeau himself says that some of the intel could be wrong.

Of course, if they have irrefutable evidence regarding any individuals, I agree with you.

[–] voluble@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The issue is that foreign interference isn't properly encompassed by the legal system in Canada. The party in charge doesn't seem to be bothered by this fact, and has done nothing to actively remedy it. They could be setting definitions, and standards for what counts as interference, determining where the bar for intelligence credibility should be set, etc. Instead, they've left the door open to interference, and made it clear that when it happens, nothing will be done about it.

[–] joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Do you think an acting government should be the one who sets the bar on what foreign interference is? That sounds like a huge conflict of interest. What's wrong with leaving it to the courts to decide?

[–] voluble@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

I think a responsible government would be having an open conversation about it, getting consensus from the other parties, and doing something, rather than nothing. That conversation should have started 7 years ago, when the PM was first briefed on election interference. A responsible government wouldn't have tried to minimize or bury the issue.

We've had two federal elections since the PM was first briefed on interference, and are about to have another without a clear plan for how to deal with compromised parliamentarians. As a citizen, I don't find that acceptable.

The line that gets trotted out is that interference "didn't change the outcome of the election" in 2019 and 2021. That is absolutely not a satisfactory threshold for action to be taken. Nobody is talking about how the threshold should be much, much lower. If the current government isn't making an attempt at defining that threshold in an ethical and non-partisan way, that's their failure.

To your question, I think egregious examples of foreign compromise should absolutely be criminalized, and handled by the judicial branch. But the legislative branch needs to be empowered to act swiftly to prevent compromised parliamentarians from operating in Ottawa unhindered.