Comments about foreign influence among Municipal and Provincial politicians, as well as members of the bureaucracy coming from the head of CSIS in a June 22nd interview with Peter Mansbridge, are now being called unfortunate by Richard Fadden.

Appearing before the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, Richard Fadden told lawmakers that while he regretted using the taped interview with Peter Mansbridge of the CBC to tell Canadians that there were questions of loyalty among politicians and public employees.  The fear being, that individuals in places of influence in government are working for foreign powers, or at least making decisions benefiting foreign entities over Canadian interests.  He said that he should have waited until the CSIS investigation into unnamed individuals was competed and taken to the Privy Council's Office, instead of declaring the cause for concern prematurely and publicly. 

That being said, he insisted that as a matter of policy, Canadians should be informed on the threats faces them.  He pushed back hard on the idea that he gave away intelligence during the interview, adamantly defending himself.  When asked if he thought he should apologize to the Chinese community for having referenced the possibility of a Chinese Canadian being involved, he said no.  He said that their report would be completed shortly and the rare instances of someone of foreign decent being guilty of influence peddling would not reflect poorly on an entire group. 

It's my sense that Mr. Fadden, whether mistakenly or not, engaged in a bit of politics and is now dealing with the blow back from that.  However, it's relatively common practice in the United States for the CIA to release warnings, sometimes generally, sometimes specific, to the public at large.  It appeared that his comments which preceded the Canadian hosting of the G8/G20 was purposefully timed, and quite honestly something to be concerned with. 

There are questions being raised as to whether or not the CSIS director has either compromised his position, or has unfairly targeted minority groups.  I personally don't think the director has disparaged any ethnic groups, or brought undue scrutiny on anyone other than public servants and politicians in general.  And quite frankly, any added scrutiny on the public service and elected officials is just fine in my book, as I'm sure it's something all people and cultures can identify with, whether it's for foreign influence, or just being plain old corrupt.

Watch his opening remarks below: