Roundup: Disagreeing with NSICOP’s interpretations

Posted on by

From the G7 summit, Trudeau wouldn’t confirm or deny whether any current Liberal MPs are implicated in the NSICOP report, but also mentioned that there was some disagreement with the conclusions that the committee drew in their report, but again, wouldn’t point to what those disagreements are. His foreign minister, Mélanie Joly, said that if there were “traitors” in the Liberal caucus, they would have been booted by now. So there’s that.

More to the point, if you listen to some of the Elder Pundits chirping away over the Twitter Machine, it’s like they’re allowed to have disagreements. “Oh, Trudeau said that he thinks NSICOP is the right place to do a review but then he disagrees with them! Hmm!” I’m not sure why disagreements are such a scary prospect for these people. CSIS isn’t a magical arbiter of what is true and what isn’t. They get wrong or misinterpret things too. That’s why we need more holistic views, but certain politicians and the Elder Pundits demand absolute clarity, and an authoritative voice that can never be wrong (so long as it confirms their priors, because if it goes against what they believe, in which case all bets are off). But also, NSICOP hasn’t done itself any favours by not really defending their work in public, or by the chair being cute about the conclusions (when he has a record of being overly dramatic in some of his conclusions in order to get attention).

The fact that members of the government aren’t really spelling out the disagreement is frustrating. Is it the murky line between diplomacy and foreign interference? It sounds like it, reading through the lines, but maybe actually saying so would be helpful (and no, unlike what certain Elder Pundits have tried to assert, the difference between the two is not actually a bright line). And deflecting questions on this by trying to change the channel to the “good economic news” has not helped their credibility or the ability of the public to find a shred of reassurance hasn’t helped either. We’re talking about other party leaders needing to be gown ups, but the Liberals have a little work to do on this space as well, and that means stop trying to feed the public pabulum on this issue, and to be as frank as security concerns allow.

Summer sitting?

The Conservatives are once again putting on the dog and pony show to claim that they want to sit through the summer, and are trying to call out the NDP to join them, even though that’s not how this works, they know it’s not how this works, and this move would only advantage the government. This didn’t work at Christmas, it won’t work over the summer, and if they want to run committees through the summer, more power to them, but that doesn’t actually change anything.

Ukraine Dispatch

The 78 of the countries at the peace summit in Switzerland agreed that peace must include the territorial integrity of Ukraine, though not every country attending did sign on. (Full text here). LGBTQ+ soldiers in Ukraine marched in Kyiv’s Pride parade over the weekend, calling for the kinds of partnership rights that would allow couples to make medical decisions or claim bodies killed in the conflict (and also further differentiate Ukraine from Russia).

Good reads:

  • From the G7 summit, Justin Trudeau said that Canada will cooperate with India on a number of issues, but wouldn’t say what they are after his brief meeting with Modi.
  • From the Ukrainian peace summit in Switzerland, Trudeau spoke about Russians kidnapping and Russifying Ukrainian children as an “element of genocide.”
  • Bill Blair says the decision to send a Canadian patrol ship to Cuba alongside a Russian submarine is carefully planned to show a Canadian presence.
  • Mark Miller says he is continuing to look at giving status to some undocumented migrants, but there isn’t any consensus about that in society or his party.
  • Patty Hajdu is set to announce federal funding for a new hospital near James Bay.
  • Here’s a look into the issue of sponsored travel, and the questions about how legitimate it is, or how much it is related to foreign influence.
  • The Star has an in-depth look into the Toronto—St. Paul’s by-election.
  • Here is a profile of Naheed Nenshi on his Alberta NDP leadership campaign.
  • Kevin Carmichael contemplates whether Canada’s strong banking regulation is having an impact on our productivity crisis.
  • Justin Ling reflects on the allegations swirling around the NSICOP report, and has some fresh insights, including into the alleged meddling in Conservative leaderships.
  • My weekend column points out that Pierre Poilievre’s refusal to act like a grown-up and get the classified briefings is a telling sign about his level of seriousness.

Odds and ends:

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

One thought on “Roundup: Disagreeing with NSICOP’s interpretations”

  1. If NSICOP ever does have to defend their report, I hope they’re asked about the attitude towards the leaker, which comes uncomfortably close to saying that they did the right thing, because look what they started.

Comments are closed.