The Security Intelligence Review Committee Is Not Doing the Job

If the prime minister thought public pressure to institute a more robust review system for national security would slowly die down, he has miscalculated.

Last week, a number of former prime ministers and Supreme Court justices penned an open letter calling for the government to keep a closer eye on federal intelligence activities. While certainly increasing the visibility of the issue, the letter was lacking as far as specific policy prescriptions.

There are a number of concrete steps the government should take to address the gap in national security accountability. Chief among those are improving the integrity of the application process for national security warrants, re-establishing the Office of the Inspector General of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, and expanding the Security Intelligence Review Committee's (SIRC) size, capabilities and mandate.

Spy agency's review group, SIRC, has no mandate for 'oversight' role

The small group watching over Canada’s spy agency says it was purposely devised to be a limited, after-the-fact “review” body – not an all-seeing “oversight” committee that would vet spy operations.

During three days of lively debate in the Commons over the controversial anti-terror Bill C-51, Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney, Justice Minister Peter MacKay and other Conservative MPs have repeatedly characterized the Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC) as providing oversight of the spy agency, known as the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS). Prime Minister Stephen Harper has done the same.

How should Parliament keep an eye on CSIS?

“Mr. Speaker, the security intelligence review committee is the same body that said in its last report that CSIS ‘seriously misled’ it in one of its investigations, and that was just last year,” Tom Mulcair told the House last Wednesday. “How can the Prime Minister contemplate radically expanding the powers of CSIS without equally expanding oversight? Is it because the Prime Minister believes, just like his minister, that the oversight that protects Canadians from abuse of power is just red tape?”

The Prime Minister was entirely unmoved by any of this.

Bill C-51: CSIS oversight body lacks resources, former member Bob Rae says

As the government's anti-terrorism bill is set to enhance the powers of the national spy agency, a former member of the independent body that watches over the Canadian Security Intelligence Service is concerned it is not equipped to provide sufficient oversight.

Bob Rae — the former premier of Ontario and one-time interim leader of the Liberal Party — was for five years a member of the Security Intelligence Review Committee, which keeps tabs on CSIS.

SIRC's mixed record in watching Canada's spies — remember Air India?

Oversight, oversight. Now that we've seen the sweeping new powers in the government's anti-terrorism bill, everybody wants oversight.

But we already have it, says the government. Don't worry, the prime minister tells the House of Commons, SIRC is there and SIRC will do the job just fine. It "provides robust oversight," he says.

Of course, if you asked a hundred Canadians what "SIRC" means, you might not find many who know it's the Security Intelligence Review Committee, in charge of keeping tabs on CSIS, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.

Stephen Harper blinded by partisanship in choices for SIRC

Stephen Harper is about as adept at picking spy watchdogs as he is at picking senators.

More evidence of his abysmal record arrived late last Friday when Chuck Strahl, the chair of the Security Intelligence Review Committee, suddenly announced his resignationfrom the part-time post watching over Canada’s civilian spy service, CSIS.

Strahl, a former Reform/Canadian Alliance MP and Tory cabinet minister, left the job in the wake of conflict of interest allegations that arose after it was revealed that while he was SIRC chair he had lobbied the federal government on the controversial Northern Gateway Pipeline. (CSIS has reportedly monitored native and environmental groups opposed to the development. Indeed, SIRC is stacked with members closely aligned to the oil patch.)

Tougher Conflict of Interest Act needed following SIRC controversy, say experts

The part-time nature of the Security Intelligence Review Committee and inadequate conflict-of-interest rules are behind the recent furor that led committee chair Chuck Strahl to resign, say ethics experts and a former SIRC member.

Mr. Strahl spoke with The Hill Times three days before he announced his resignation from the committee on Jan. 24. He expressed frustration at the criticism he had received for lobbying the B.C. government on behalf of Enbridge while chairing the Security Intelligence Review Committee, but gave no indication that he was considering resigning from the intelligence oversight committee.

The Doctor of Panama: A strange tale of Harperite politics and national security

It's almost bizarre, and almost certainly driven by political expediency, that no one seems to have so much as commented on the serious security implications posed by Arthur Porter's troubles with the law.

Dr. Porter, as is by now well known, is the former head of what's constantly referred to in journalistic shorthand as "Canada's spy agency watchdog," the federal Security Intelligence Review Committee.

But despite the fact that earlier this week he was arrested in Panama on Canadian fraud charges, no one seems to be paying much attention how or why Porter got to be the chairman of SIRC, or what that means for national security in the context of his current troubles.

Spy watchdog SIRC seems strangely uninterested in Galati and Porter cases

Chuck Strahl has flunked the test.

The rookie chair of the Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC) — the part-time review agency over Canada’s spy service, CSIS — has, regrettably, but not surprisingly, failed to disabuse anyone of the notion that he is little more than a loyal Conservative apparatchik.

The former Tory cabinet minister was appointed SIRC chair last June by his former political boss, Stephen Harper. Immediately, questions were raised about whether Strahl, given his political pedigree, would or could exercise any independence when it came to keeping tabs on this nation’s scandal-prone spy service.

Naming of Chuck Strahl to spy oversight agency is predictable and depressing

How predictable.

Late on Thursday the Harper government finally announced the new head of this nation’s anemic review agency for Canada’s spy service, CSIS. The timing was so predictable: delivered while Parliament and much of the media were still preoccupied with the exhaustive voting on the opposition’s voluminous amendments to the Conservative government’s omnibus budget bill.

I suppose the government’s thinking was that nobody would notice or particularly care about an appointment that could, in fact, have profound consequences for Canadians’ lives and security. Traditionally, the powers-that-be in Ottawa have treated the review of one of Canada’s most powerful and intrusive agencies almost as an afterthought.