Officials were uncomfortable with a state-owned Chinese company operating in the far north.
A May memo confirms “vast majority" of early government pandemic-related contracts included a national security exemption.
The national security report was facing a May 3 deadline.
The company announced it will create 200 jobs, but that doesn't mean it has Canada's best interests in mind.
A single tweet kickstarted the campaign years ago.
From mass surveillance to continuing the No Fly List, nearly all the "problematic" aspects of Bill C-51 remain unfixed.
The ICLMG simply cannot support Bill C-22 in its current form. Not only will it not create a Committee of Parliamentarians capable of real and strong oversight over our national security apparatus, its mere creation will give Canadians the impression that proper parliamentary oversight exists - which will not be the case.
Proponents say preclearance will facilitate the flow of people and goods between the US and Canada. Under preclearance, a traveller passes through US customs in Canada, so they do not need to do so once they enter the US, and vice-versa. There are US preclearance areas in eight Canadian airports, along with some train and ferry crossings in BC, and plans to expand this to more Canadian airports and train stations. Canadian preclearance zones would also be established for the first time in the United States.
The White House statement on International Holocaust Remembrance Day did not mention Jews or anti-Semitism. As Holocaust historian Professor Deborah Lipstadt put it, "what we saw from the White House was classic softcore denial. The Holocaust was de-Judaized."
The RCMP feels that its voice and the voices of other law enforcement agencies aren't being heard in the government's public consultation on national security, which runs online until midnight PST December 15. Could something so weighted towards police powers have truly excluded the police?
What's true is violent extremism is a greater threat than terrorism in Canada today. Furthermore, it is supremacist-motivated attacks that make up the majority of violent extremist incidents as the TSAS report articulates. Not surprisingly, supremacist-motivated attacks are hardly ever the focus of media stories.
Canadians have spoken out loudly against Bill C-51. Last year, hundreds of gatherings took place across Canada, and Canadians clearly showed and expressed their concerns about its contents and the extensive, unjustified powers it grants to security agencies. So, why is the Liberal government conducting consultations?
Human rights or security? In Canada and around the world the debate rages on; but it is an utterly false debate. We must, finally and firmly, reject the assumption and assertion that more of one necessarily leads to less of the other. There is no security without human rights.
In early June, 2003, Air Canada was about to launch its inaugural non-stop flight from Montreal to Beirut. But then, inexplicably, the Canadian government pulled the rug out from under Air Canada -- citing "national security" issues.
It's part of the Tory leadership contender's plan to make Canada safer.
Today, the political landscape has changed. We have a government that promised to conduct public hearings on several issues and to listen attentively to the demands of the population. Nevertheless, when it comes to solid gestures and courageous actions, there seems no political appetite to tackle Bill C-51.
As the House of Commons finished its spring sitting last week, the Government of Canada introduced new legislation to make progress, as promised, on critical national security priorities. Publishing the details now will give ample time for these three measures to be studied before they come up for debate and votes in the fall.
Built by diversity and stronger because of it, Canada is fundamentally a safe and peaceful nation. The Aga Khan has described Canada as the finest expression of pluralism the world has ever known. But we are not immune to tragedy, as demonstrated by the horrible events in St. Jean-sur-Richelieu and in Ottawa in October of 2014 (and elsewhere on other occasions too). So how should we respond? One thing is clear -- Canadians want thoughtful, inclusive consultation and dialogue. Not fear mongering. And not naivete. The public wants to be honestly informed and sincerely engaged.
It is now almost a pattern: every time we, as a human right organization or activist, write to government agencies inquiring about cases of Canadians detained abroad or of Canadians subject to abuse or possible discrimination, the governmental response will certainly contain somehow the issue of "privacy."
For some time, Canadians have been calling for answers from the RCMP and other police forces across Canada about the use of these invasive cellphone surveillance devices. Stingrays enable wholesale monitoring of our most intimate moments, and undermine our privacy and security.