The US system dates to the 1930s and was created to deal with fascist agents. What the US has areenforceable laws and enforcement. The Australian system was deemed too broad and is currently undergoing review, we shall see about the UK legislation.
Other countries ( the US, Australia) have registries in place and the UK is currently drafting legislation. Are these efforts as flawed as the Canadian proposals?
Sir, in terms of how to enforce any rules that might (just might) be put in place - what? several eons from now? - you write, "FITR imagines a sanctions regime, part financial penalties, part criminal." You then proceed to offer a sentence that suggests a somewhat different "enforcement" mechanism.
As I read your (very fine) piece, I could not help but think about how Canada would entice, persuade, cajole, etc. Canadian citizens and permanent residents to comply with such a registry. Simultaneous with that series of thoughts (i.e., two streams of thought at once - wonder of wonders!) I thought about a news piece this last weekend wherein it was reported that the FBI had arrested a retired American diplomat (who served, among other things, at the ambassador level) as being an unregistered agent of Cuba.
I have no concept of an idea of the validity or non-validity of the charges against the particular individual but it certainly seems to me that having the FBI sniffing around would tend to deter many folks from "doing" or "not doing" as the case may be.
On the other hand, the idea that we even have a national police force capable of such investigations is laughable. And, yes, I do include the red serge brigade in my derisory comment.
I think that criminal sanctions have a great deal of merit; further, it seems to me that financial sanctions (i.e. fines) are basically just a cost of doing business unless they are spectacularly punitive.
So, what do I think is the best answer? Pretty much nothing will work unless we have stiff (nay, harsh) sanctions that are promptly applied and even more promptly brought to trial. The idea that a trial might occur somewhere in the next century, which currently seems to be the norm, is not at all a deterrent. And, then, the idea that some of our "worsers" (definitely not our betters!) would spend real quality, extended, time at, oh, Kingston Pen or St. Vincent de Paul is perhaps an entirely salutary.
Please understand that I approach this topic - and so many others when discussing the conduct of various persons in the public eye - with an entirely jaundiced view wherein I expect that our worsers are so often "in it" to protect their own - you should pardon the expression - rice bowl, not for the benefit of Canada generally.
In other words, the continued egregious behavior of our worsers, (elected, appointed, etc., etc.) has caused me to become (remain?) a cynic and to believe pretty much the worst of them. At the same time, our worsers have made it so there is almost no consequence ("against by human / civil rights, don't you know?") to violation of the norms that we expect of the "little people" of society.
The US system dates to the 1930s and was created to deal with fascist agents. What the US has areenforceable laws and enforcement. The Australian system was deemed too broad and is currently undergoing review, we shall see about the UK legislation.
Other countries ( the US, Australia) have registries in place and the UK is currently drafting legislation. Are these efforts as flawed as the Canadian proposals?
Other countries already have Foreign Agent Registries.
Copy their approaches.
The Liberals would love to put up roablocks to a Foreign Agent Registry.
Sir, in terms of how to enforce any rules that might (just might) be put in place - what? several eons from now? - you write, "FITR imagines a sanctions regime, part financial penalties, part criminal." You then proceed to offer a sentence that suggests a somewhat different "enforcement" mechanism.
As I read your (very fine) piece, I could not help but think about how Canada would entice, persuade, cajole, etc. Canadian citizens and permanent residents to comply with such a registry. Simultaneous with that series of thoughts (i.e., two streams of thought at once - wonder of wonders!) I thought about a news piece this last weekend wherein it was reported that the FBI had arrested a retired American diplomat (who served, among other things, at the ambassador level) as being an unregistered agent of Cuba.
I have no concept of an idea of the validity or non-validity of the charges against the particular individual but it certainly seems to me that having the FBI sniffing around would tend to deter many folks from "doing" or "not doing" as the case may be.
On the other hand, the idea that we even have a national police force capable of such investigations is laughable. And, yes, I do include the red serge brigade in my derisory comment.
I think that criminal sanctions have a great deal of merit; further, it seems to me that financial sanctions (i.e. fines) are basically just a cost of doing business unless they are spectacularly punitive.
So, what do I think is the best answer? Pretty much nothing will work unless we have stiff (nay, harsh) sanctions that are promptly applied and even more promptly brought to trial. The idea that a trial might occur somewhere in the next century, which currently seems to be the norm, is not at all a deterrent. And, then, the idea that some of our "worsers" (definitely not our betters!) would spend real quality, extended, time at, oh, Kingston Pen or St. Vincent de Paul is perhaps an entirely salutary.
Please understand that I approach this topic - and so many others when discussing the conduct of various persons in the public eye - with an entirely jaundiced view wherein I expect that our worsers are so often "in it" to protect their own - you should pardon the expression - rice bowl, not for the benefit of Canada generally.
In other words, the continued egregious behavior of our worsers, (elected, appointed, etc., etc.) has caused me to become (remain?) a cynic and to believe pretty much the worst of them. At the same time, our worsers have made it so there is almost no consequence ("against by human / civil rights, don't you know?") to violation of the norms that we expect of the "little people" of society.