That's something I covered at PROC quite in depth when I appeared. We were just starting to see signs of concern. We were seeing a lot more signs on the economic security side. I just spoke about that a few minutes ago, so I'll spare your time on this.
For example, in the summer of 2015, when I was deputy minister of foreign affairs, and just a few months before the election, we issued a diplomatic note to all diplomatic missions, advising them that they should not get involved in elections—knowing the election was going to come soon—as per the Vienna Convention. We were heavily criticized, a bit like Mr. Fadden was in 2010. A few people criticized us for doing that. They felt it was rude. We were seeing signs that some people from foreign countries were trying to intercede at the local level—not to the extent as described in those leaks you've been seeing, but enough to say that an ounce of prevention is worth....
We issued that diplomatic release. We did that. We worked very hard on the economic security side. I spoke to you about that. We first had an attack on the World Anti-Doping Agency in 2016 in Canada. Three months later, the same GRU officer carried out the attack on the U.S. election.
As is often the case in our society, the shiny object is always what's in the paper. A lot of the attention was on cyber foreign interference. We did a lot of work, and that's what led to a lot of the mechanisms you're reviewing in your work on this. We did a lot of work to say that foreign interference may happen in both the cyber and analog worlds, so you need to be equipped for both.