The reason the identities of the MPs remain confidential is the same reason the identity of any suspect in a criminal investigation remains anonymous. Until prosecutors have developed a case that they feel is ready to bring to trial, the investigation itself must remain confidential to protect the privacy of the people under investigation and to ensure that a fair trial can take place, should that come to pass.
The opposition parties - primarily the Conservative Party - is doing all they can to smear the Liberal Party with the taint of official corruption or foreign interference in much the same way that Trumpists are working to undermine the legitimacy of democracy by alleging that Democratic leaders are corrupt.
I’m not shoe-horning. The Conservative Party of Canada is leveraging the same right-wing populist rhetoric as Trump’s Republican Party. By contrast, perhaps Trudeau’s failing is that he isn’t playing the same game, preferring to continue with a mostly technocratic style that is increasingly disliked by low-information voters. I suppose if they can squeeze out another 18 months to get a few more things done before it’s all burned down, it will be a victory of sorts. And then the Liberals can go into hiding again for 8-10 years until Canadians get tired of the Conservatives.
This was after a two year investigation by joint members and orgs of the governement, it's not a single event being blown up - I agree it could be weaponized, but its like not treating an infected wound with antibiotics because you don't want yo hurt your microbiome - wrong priorities
Edit0: reworded
Edit1: "Federal organizations involved: Canadian Security Intelligence Service; Communications Security Establishment; Department of Justice; Elections Canada; Global Affairs Canada; The Office of the Commissioner of Canada Elections; Privy Council Office; Public Prosecution Service of Canada; Public Safety Canada; Royal Canadian Mounted Police"
Many MPs involved as well. Hard to look at this like it's not worth releasing the report unredacted and take action
It would hardly be the first time intelligence community certainty fell apart under further scrutiny. I'd be leery of giving unelected spooks veto power over elected legislators.
Perhaps you aren't from Canada. Our judicial system has turned into quite a joke over the last decade. It's not unusual for even hardcore criminals to not be prosecuted, or to be charged and then have the charges thrown out due to failure to provide a timely trial.
The correct thing to do here is what is done when any other serious potential crime comes to light among MPs. Release the names, have their respective parties kick them out so they sit independent and then proceed to trial. What has been done is completely untenable. Any party that signs the security clearance agreement to see the names effectively can't act on that information because it would disclose the confidential names. Whoever these people are can't be allowed to hold any serious position either until/unless their names are cleared in a trial.
Our NDP (left wing) party leader has been very vocal about releasing it too. It's been suspected that both left/right parties are on the list but only the Liberals are vocally against releasing it (also Greens seem to be against it too). The Liberals probably think they have the most to lose since they are already getting completely destroyed in the polls and don't need another thing, but the mystery of not knowing and Steisand effect is just as bad, so the decline will surely continue.
> But surely the Opposition will raise hell? Don’t count on it. On the day after the committee’s report was released, the Conservatives asked 24 questions in Question Period. Not one was about the report, or its allegations. (On Wednesday, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre called on the government to release the names – after it had become clear it wouldn’t.) Possibly this might reflect a suspicion that some of its own partisans might be involved. Didn’t the committee say it had seen “considerable evidence that Parliamentarians across all parties and groups are potential targets for interference activities”?
> Doesn’t its report also note – again confirming previous media reports – that two recent Conservative leadership races have been subject to interference by China, and one by India?
> Here again, however, we are likely to face an all-party conspiracy of silence. None of the parties has shown the slightest willingness to have its internal elections vetted by independent regulators – just as none is likely to be too keen to look into what some of its MPs might have been up to. In time, they may hope, the public will get bored, and the media will move on. And in this regard they are probably right.
Indeed, but HN is supposed to be pretty much a no-politics zone. In practice it doesn't seem to stop people poking at foreign politics, just US politics. And in this case, the irony is so thick you'd trip over it.
Then flag the article as politics. If n people do that, the article is flagged. (With n = maybe 5?)
(And behold, the article is now flagged.)
To me, I think it's at least a bit interesting, because of the "maintain their privacy, at least until charged" vs. "stop the treason" issue. I can see no way to proceed that doesn't fail to satisfy one demand or the other.
