3 ms·
Reading about the report is scary for reasons the authors probably didn't intend. A bunch of talking points to justify further cracking down on talking points t
by SuperNinKenDo 3y ago
Reading about the report is scary for reasons the authors probably didn't intend. A bunch of talking points to justify further cracking down on talking points the government wants people to shut up about.
As TFA notes, the massive irony of flagging erosion of trust, followed by a massive redaction is a perfect metaphor.
- addicted 3y agoIt’s a report meant to highlight possible future risks. Is there any organization that can operate with no non-public communications at all? And none of them have the sort of checks most western governments do, including heavy protection for whistleblowers, many have a statutory period after which all documents are declassified, right to information laws. And from what I can tell based on the following link: https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/access-information-privacy/access-information-act.html https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services... Canada appears to require federal court approval for classifying certain aspects of the report. So it appears the only agenda here is by TFA which deems this as the action of “government censors”. Maybe Canadians would prefer a system that is even more open and can vote accordingly, but it appears that the current system does have decent checks and balances, and is very clearly much more transparent than likely any other institution in Canada (which is indeed how it should be).