SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 299

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 15, 2024 11:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 299 - Apr/15/24
Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.)
  • Apr/15/24 11:18:14 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his rationale he set out in his bill. I do not particularly disagree with his important comments about accountability and transparency, which I think would actually go a long way in accomplishing what he has set out to do. My question comes down more to the need to know, and how that relates to various different operations that might be ongoing and somebody's getting access to information. If there are too many people with access to particular information, it could actually end up jeopardizing an ongoing operation. I am not saying this is a reason to vote against the bill, but my question would be this: What are the member's thoughts on that, and how can we continue to keep individuals safe?
131 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 299 - Apr/15/24
Mr. Alex Ruff
  • Apr/15/24 11:21:08 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have looked at some of them, but not specifically on this process, because for a lot of them it is actually a lot simpler to get a security clearance or access to information. In general, the U.K. has a much broader system to allow it. I am not proposing we adopt a U.S. system of congressional or senatorial oversight; I am just suggesting the first step in a process that would just allow us to apply. As I have mentioned, my bill would not guarantee that a member or a senator would actually get the clearance, and it would not guarantee they would get access. All it is saying is that the government of the day, regardless of political party, would not be able to deny somebody's applying to get a security clearance.
139 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border