Thread by @leahwest_nsl

Come along with me on a history lesson about NSICOP..

https://twitter.com/AaronWherry/status/1405592651471233038

In 2016/7 in the lead up to the passage of the NSICOP Act there were concerns and questions about the maturity of Parliamentarians & their capacity to be entrusted with classified information and not leverage security intelligence for political purposes.

The opposition wanted greater powers for members of NSICOP. Government officials pushed back. The nat sec community feared that classified intelligence and our international alliances that support Cdn intel collection would be endangered by political theatre.

MPS argued that these concerns were unfounded, a way to avoid accountability. They dismissed the idea that MPs and Senators would not be able to work together in an nonpartisan fashion on matters as important as national security. Indeed, Erin O'Toole, said in the Commons:

"the operations and, indeed, the safety of our security and intelligence personnel depend upon this committee of parliamentarians not being politicized or not being used to advance political ends." ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer…

The Libs refused to amend the act despite proposals from the opposition parties, arguing that a promise to revisit the legislation in 5 years was the better way to go.

This time, gov officials & national security experts said, would help build trust between the national security community and parliamentarians. The hope being MPs would prove capable of not politicizing intelligence and matters of national security.

With that trust would come expanded powers for NSICOP, similar to the evolution of the UK's parl. review body (eg. subpoena powers). PS Minister Goodale testified: ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer…

"Remember how the U.K. experience started... it started with a different structure, with more prime ministerial responsibility that was gradually devolved over time.
The advice from Senator Segal, but also the advice from the U.K. committee, is to start prudently,

start cautiously, and allow the committee the time to earn its credentials, both in the public arena and among the security agencies that it needs to oversee. Gradually, as that credibility grows, then structures can be changed."

Fast forward four years and we have our elected officials doing exactly what everyone was afraid of & tarnishing the credibility of NSICOP. Who, I should note, has been putting out some incredibly important non partisan reports & enhance nat sec transparency.

Ultimately, @CPC_HQ & @liberal_party are responsible for the political theatre playing out now, perhaps, sadly proving that our elected officials are not mature enough to handle these matters. A sad sad revelation on the state of our democracy.

To read more on the history of Nat Sec review in Canada check out my chapter in Top Secret Canada:
amazon.ca/Top-Secret-Can…