The interview on CTV was a little different from the parliament press release. The difference between wittingly and unwittingly is where she appears to draw the line, and judging who was wittingly aiding is based off her own judgement call.
Of particular note, the most egregious case is the one of a former MP directly aiding and giving confidential secrets, as May specifically said "proactively" aided. While good to know we don't have a literal raging spy and foreign agent sitting in parliament today, that sure as heck doesn't warrant a sigh of relief. How is such a former MP that can be so blatant not in jail or charged right now considering this would have been since the 2021 or even 2019 election? We also know that this individual would have involved India and we have a list of former MPs available. At this point at the very least this person should be charged as it will unfairly cast a cloud.
But at the same time reading between the lines Elizabeth May specifically mentions Han Dong by name (as she states is public domain) and categorizes him as one of the unwitting or one where it's not black and white if we was a foreign agent. If that's her standard of what gives a sigh of relief, it's not exactly comforting
Did she think that we were completely infiltrated by foreign spies or something and that there was a list of known agents handing out confidential government intel? That's not at all what the released redacted report insinuated. Her threshold of what constitutes wittingly seems high.
The redacted report specifically states "Some elected officials, however, began wittingly assisting foreign state actors soon after
their election"
That's not "one". The report says "some"
Line 59 states "The *** network had some contact with at least 11 candidates and 13 campaign
staffers, some of whom appeared to be wittingly working for the PRC. 151"
Again, the term "wittingly working for the PRC" was used when mentioning candidates and staffers
In any case, this is still a start of a clearer picture but most definitely not comforting that we only have just one clearly obvious spy that betrayed Canada that May's judgement can safely say is a spy
