INTREPID's National Security Crib Notes for the 2019 Federal Election
By Hannah Diegel
15 October 2019
On October 21, Canadians will vote in the federal election. Due to the current political climate, it is imperative that Canadians are able to access information about national security issues. In the subsequent sections, I summarize and analyze key national security details from the Liberal, Conservative, NDP and Green party platforms.
All parties have diverging views on the role of Canada in securing and contributing to global peace and security. The New Democrat Party (NDP) and the Green Party emphasize the continued need to uphold Canada’s peacekeeping measures. Specifically, the NDP would encourage nuclear disarmament and support a two-state resolution between Israel and Palestine. The Green Party wants to recreate the Canadian International Development Agency and, similar to the NDP, work towards increasing Canada’s foreign aid, which would equal 0.7 percent of Canada’s gross national income. The Liberal Party’s stances are somewhat similar to the Greens and NDP, pledging to advance Canada’s positive position on the global stage. However, the Liberals “…will make sure that our Armed Forces have everything they need to continue to do their job well.” At no point throughout the platform is ‘everything they need’ defined.
The Conservatives plan is a stark contrast to the other major parties, promising to cut foreign aid by 25 percent. The Tories believe that the Liberals gave too much money to ‘developed nations’ and argue that “Trudeau has also spent $110 million on the United Nations Relief and Works Agency – which is openly antisemetic and continues to support terrorist organizations like Hamas.” The UNRWA provides funding for Palestinian refugees, although there are debates surrounding issues within the UNRWA. The Conservatives seem to be aligning themselves with American foreign policy, as the U.S. ended its funding to the UNRWA in 2018. It is also notable that the Conservatives want to strengthen Canada’s relationship with Israel. The party is committing to move the Canadian embassy to Jerusalem, and officially recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
One area where the parties appear to agree is the need for enhanced regulation surrounding the issue of digital privacy and cybersecurity.Both the Green Party and the NDP are committed to enhancing privacy laws for Canadians. Further, the Green Party wants to eliminate the surveillance of Canadians who choose to protest and making it mandatory for all companies to delete personal data if asked by consumers. The Liberal Party plans to introduce a ‘digital charter’ for Canada giving Canadians increased rights regarding the use of their personal information.
Again the Conservative Party is taking a different approach, advocating for a ‘Canada Cyber Safe’ brand, which would essentially inform Canadians about the cybersecurity features their electronics. Interestingly, the Conservatives would also create a Cabinet Committee on Cyber Security and Data Privacy.
On the issue of intelligence, the Green Party wants the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) to require a warrant before accessing someone’s data and personal information. The Conservatives have a contradictory stance to the Greens, as they believe that Bill C-59 additional constraints are inefficient for CSIS agents. However, the Conservatives do not outline what the alternative would to some of the relevant provisions of Bill C-59 might be. Interestingly, the words ‘CSE’ or ‘CSIS’ are not mentioned in the Liberal platform at all, however they do plan to create a new framework to monitor Canada’s gathering of defence intelligence.
All parties have interesting stances on terrorism. Last week the Conservative’s dusted of a 2015 campaign pledge to designated ‘terrorist hot spots’. Essentially, Canadians travelling to these ‘hot spots’ would need to prove beyond on a balance or probabilities that they did not travel for terrorist purposes. But what exactly is a terrorist hot spot and how exactly the proposed crime would work is not layed out in the platform and could raise constitutional issues.
For their part, Liberals suggest creating a position called Director of Terrorism Prosecutions. Again, how exactly this will advance terrorism prosecutions or bring “to justice” Canadian foreign fighters or Canadians who are involved in domestic terrorism is unspecified. The current Liberal government has consistently rejected the idea of repatriating foreign fighters. Given recent events, this will only become more pressing, and at the same time more challenging.
Each of the parties’ platforms omits key national security issues. Although the parties mention the Arctic, most merely indicate that Canada needs to take a leadership role in the region. There is no obvious plan for what that entails or how to achieve that objective. Further, there is hardly any reference to Canada’s current diplomatic issues with China. Although the Conservatives acknowledge that “Canada’s relationship with China needs a total reset,” there is no indication about what this reset would look like or mean for Canadians.
Should you wish to read further about the party’s national security platforms, the points are easy to find – just look at the last pages of each platform. If you can’t find them, it’s not you, you may just need a magnifying glass.