Thank you for the question.
I would say that it shows a weakness in the current policies regarding the critical election incident public protocol. They need to perhaps improve and clarify the threshold under which information regarding active attempts of foreign interference in Canadian elections needs to be made public.
I think something that is important to highlight from our Five Eyes partners, notably Australia, is that they exercise something called controlled transparency, which is transparency when it comes to information that is unambiguous, that is verifiable and that has been verified by intelligence agencies—and in the case of Australia, by the electoral integrity assurance task force.
The information that is made public in those countries does not concern active investigations or any potential threats to elections. They concern active threats that have been verified and that are being made public because they're unambiguous.
I think that's something that perhaps needs to be incorporated within the Canadian election security policy and within this threshold of information that currently is somewhat unknown and up to a select few individuals to decide upon. I think there is certainly work that can be done in this policy area.