CSIS Suspects Undue Foreign Influence. Conservatives Admit to It.
CSIS told the public today that it suspects a few politicians are being inappropriately influenced by foreign powers. CSIS hasn’t said who these politicians are but on June 2nd it became public knowledge that the Conservatives were pushing certain legislation purely for the sake of satisfying the US.
The CBC1 article (23 June 2010) quotes CSIS director, Richard Fadden talking about the danger of the situation
“The individual becomes in a position to make decisions that affect the country or the province or a municipality. All of a sudden, decisions aren’t taken on the basis of the public good but on the basis of another country’s preoccupations.”
We recently saw that the chief of staff of former Conservative Industry Minister, Maxime Bernier, admitted that the Conservatives were pushing through copyright legislation purely to satisfy the preoccupations of the US.
This news is visible from a number of sites (NDP) such as the Speak Out on Copyright site. But its source is an analysis of digital copyright reforms called North American Digital Copyright, Regional Governance and the Persistence of Variation2 (PDF – 1 June 2010), which covers Canada, the USA, and Mexico, and was written by Carleton doctoral student, Blayne Haggart. The document includes the following information about the Conservatives last (failed) attempt at revising Canadian copyright law.
“The 2007/2008 bill and its delay demonstrate the complex role of the United States and civil society in the Canadian copyright debate, especially in the context of a minority Parliament, and the supreme role of the Prime Minister’s Office and Privy Council Office as the final arbiter of legislation in the Canadian parliamentary regime. The decision to pursue DMCA-style TPM rules was purely political, the result of pressure from a Prime Minister’s Office intent on passing a U.S.-friendly law. As Michele Austin, then-Industry Minister Maxime Bernier’s (2006-2007) chief of staff, recounts: “The Prime Minister’s Office’s position was, move quickly, satisfy the United States.” When the two ministers responsible protested for political and technical reasons, the PMO replied “We don’t care what you do, as long as the U.S. is satisfied” (Haggart forthcoming).” [emphasis mine]
It’s difficult to see how that comment could be interpreted as anything other than Conservative office holders operating in the interests of a foreign power while disregarding the public good.
It might be argued that the comments were taken out of context and perhaps the Conservatives involved had made other additional comments about ensuring Canadian interests are satisfied. But giving them the benefit of the doubt presents a logical problem. When the US interests are at odds with Canadian interests, one has to give, and the speaker of the quote above makes it clear that it’s the Canadian one, which can be discarded.
Additionally, a benefit-of-the-doubt argument doesn’t hold up to the evidence of the last few years. With respect to copyright and digital rights types of issues, the Conservatives have not acted inline with Canadian interests. They disregarded popular Canadian opinion with respect to copyright policy in favour of foreign commercial and political interests. Even their latest contentious attempt still includes the worst of the US DMCA.
This is a betrayal of Canadian trust.
