Thread by @timmcsorley

I haven't had a chance to read the entire #SIRC report on #CSIS myself yet, but the issues revealed just in this CBC article from @cattunneycbc are highly concerning, to say the least: cbc.ca/news/politics/… #cdnpoli 1/12

First, timing: It's impossible not to note that this report, which could have had a direct impact on the debate on Bill #C59, was released the day after the bill passed 3rd reading and was sent to the Senate. It will remain important for the debates this Fall, though. 2/12

Second: #SIRC calls out #CSIS for its continued unlawful practice of collecting bulk datasets - including of people who are not considered direct threats to national security. CSIS claims it is dealing with these issues as part of their transition to the provisions in #C59 3/12

But: #C59 has yet to be adopted. The argument appears to be that #CSIS will continue an unlawful practice while waiting for #C59 to make it lawful. How can the Minister of Public Safety allow this to continue? 4/12

This is also another admittance #C59 will make the collection of third-party bulk data legal. While there will be new authorizations/safeguards, I don't think it's clear to most people that one goal of this bill is to make a current illegal practice legal. 5/12

Third: the report also reveals that CSIS continues to share information with countries that engage in #torture, without even meeting the (insufficient) level of safeguards set out in current government directives. 6/12

Incredibly concerning is that CSIS in only now being directed to put in place guidelines regarding how to assess potential mistreatment and torture based on the sharing of personal information. 7/12

We have known since at least the Arar Inquiry that information shared with foreign states can lead to torture. And yet CSIS is only now being asked to put guidelines on how they assess risk and place? 8/12

And it's important to note that there is some significant dispute about the new guidelines on information linked to torture that have been added to #C59. The government continues to state that these rules will put restrictions on these practices into law. 9/12

But reading the actual amendment, it simply states that there must be rules, and that they must be public. There is nothing stating what those rules must be, leaving the door open to future exceptions and weakening of the rules. 10/12

A lot is being said about how national security practices are in flux and changing, as an argument for leeway on CSIS' practices. This points to an underlying problem with how security agencies operate in secrecy and away from the public eye. 11/12

What other agencies would be allowed to continue unlawful practices because they are sorting their way through a period of change, biding their time for a new law to come in? We deserve clear and detailed answers both from CSIS and Minister Goodale 12/12