Canadian officials clarify foreign interference definitions

Canadian officials are preparing for the country's federal election, focusing on foreign interference that could disrupt the democratic process. They emphasize that open opinions shared by influential figures, such as Elon Musk, do not qualify as foreign meddling. This will be Canada's first general election since new measures were introduced to safeguard against foreign interference. Officials are closely monitoring social media for attempts to create discord but clarify that expressing personal opinions does not constitute interference. Laurie-Anne Kempton from the Privy Council Office stated that Musk's activities are public and do not fit the definition of covert interference. Musk has a significant following and has openly discussed political issues in Canada, supporting various politicians. His comments on social media, particularly regarding former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and current Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, have drawn attention. However, officials such as Allen Sutherland stressed that opinions shared publicly can be evaluated by Canadians without being labeled as interference. The government is prepared to investigate any evidence of foreign actors manipulating social media to push specific messages. Larisa Galzada from Global Affairs Canada mentioned that if they find indicators of state-backed campaigns, they will take action. Election officials, including the chief electoral officer, noted that while they have not identified specific threats from the U.S., sharing opinions does not equate to malicious actions. They highlighted that Canada is an open society, which includes receiving influence from both domestic and foreign sources. The Security and Intelligence Threats to Elections task force is tasked with monitoring foreign interference. They warned that the nature of threats may evolve, with new tactics like artificial intelligence being used to influence voters. Foreign state actors, particularly from countries like China and Russia, are seen as potential threats during the election. Officials will continuously assess the situation and inform the public if significant threats emerge. They have set high standards for what constitutes a warning, focusing on covert interference and disinformation rather than legitimate public influence.