Secure Line

From balance sheets to ballads, the 2025 budget doubles down on soft power and spectacle, but keeps Canada’s national security stuck in the same old song.

In this episode of Secure Line, hosts Stephanie Carvin and Jessica Davis dive into the 2025 Canadian federal budget — a self-proclaimed “transformative” plan that, on closer inspection, mostly reinforces the national security status quo. From record defense spending to long-delayed reform, Steph and Jess unpack what the budget really means for Canada’s intelligence, enforcement, and foreign policy landscape.

They debate whether the long-promised National Security Strategy will finally materialize and take a close look at the newly resurrected Canadian Financial Crimes Agency — a long-talked-about but still-undefined enforcement body meant to fix Canada’s chronic money-laundering and financial crime failures. The hosts also explore what cuts to Global Affairs Canada and the Privy Council Office mean for diplomacy, development, and intelligence coordination, and they catch a surprising “Easter egg” about foreign bank investment reviews that could reshape national security screening in the financial sector.

Between witty asides about “making it rain” for the Canadian Armed Forces and an unexpected detour into Eurovision diplomacy, the episode captures the blend of sharp analysis and humour that Secure Line is known for.

In this episode, former Canadian environment and infrastructure minister Catherine McKenna joins Secure Line to discuss her memoir Run Like a Girl and the escalating threats faced by public officials—especially women—working on contentious files like climate policy. McKenna recounts how online harassment (“Climate Barbie”) evolved into offline intimidation during and after her time in office, and reflects on the Ottawa convoy as a failure to protect vulnerable communities and Canada’s international reputation. She describes inconsistent security support, jurisdictional buck-passing, and slow recognition of gendered extremism, bot-driven rage farming, and foreign interference. The conversation shifts from personal experience to systemic fixes: serious threat briefings and protection for candidates, properly scoped online harms legislation, accountability for social platforms, and higher standards for political discourse. McKenna urges more women to enter politics, argues climate is a national security issue, and insists most Canadians are still reasonable—if leaders act with focus and courage. The hosts close by tying these lessons to Canada’s broader democratic resilience.

In this episode of Secure Line, Stephanie Carvin, Leah West, and Jessica Davis speak with returning guest Thomas Juneau to unpack a turbulent year in the Middle East and what it means for Canada. Juneau argues that U.S. policy under President Trump lacks a consistent doctrine and is driven largely by personal involvement that helped force a fragile Gaza ceasefire through pressure on Israel and coordination with key regional actors. He adds that Canada’s recognition of Palestinian statehood is not a historic shift but a calibrated diplomatic signal aligned with Europe and meant to strengthen the Palestinian Authority while maintaining Canada’s long-standing proximity to Israel.

The discussion surveys a shifting balance of power. Juneau says Iran has endured its hardest stretch in decades: Assad is gone, Hezbollah and Hamas are weakened, and direct clashes with Israel exposed Iran’s conventional military limits. Syria’s new leadership under Ahmed al-Sharaa is fragile and pragmatic, with Turkey emerging as a relative winner. Qatar’s mediator role is reaffirmed—despite the shock of an Israeli strike in Doha and ensuing U.S. damage control that highlighted Qatar’s importance and accelerated ties amid a luxury-plane controversy. In Yemen, the Houthis have effectively won the civil war; U.S. strikes without a political strategy are counterproductive, and threats to Red Sea shipping are likely to resume.

For Canada, Juneau is blunt about limits. Ottawa will not lead peace talks, but it can matter by acting with allies through humanitarian and development assistance, security-sector training for Palestinian forces, and modest re-engagement with Gulf partners as part of broader trade and security diversification. He also notes China’s growing commercial footprint alongside a deliberately constrained security role, and he questions how long that gap can persist without deeper political or military commitments.

In this episode of Secure Line, hosts Stephanie Carvin and Jessica Davis unpack the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency’s (NSIRA) October 2 report on the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). The review examined the CRA’s handling of audits on charities for potential terrorist financing, following long-standing allegations of bias against Muslim-led organizations. Davis explains how NSIRA — created in 2019 to review Canada’s expanding national security powers — found not evidence of bias, but rather an alarming lack of internal governance, documentation, and methodology that made determining bias impossible. This “vibes-based” decision-making, as Davis calls it, reveals deep flaws in how Canada’s counter-terrorism powers are exercised and reviewed. The discussion expands to the broader implications for rule of law, transparency, and the politicization of Canada’s terrorism listings process, with both hosts urging stronger oversight and governance to prevent bias, ensure accountability, and rebuild trust. The episode closes with a call for NSIRA to review Canada’s terrorism listings next — before “vibes creep” takes over more elements of national security policy.

This episode asks the deceptively simple question: is espionage legal? Host Leah West sets the stakes for Canadian operators—CSIS and the CAF must comply with international law unless clearly authorized otherwise—before welcoming scholars Asaf Lubin and Russell Buchan to square off on how international law actually treats spying. Using the African Union–Huawei affair as a provocation, Lubin argues we’re moving toward (and should embrace) a bespoke international law of intelligence that recognizes pervasive state practice and constrains it with principles like necessity, proportionality, and efficacy—even when activities pierce sovereignty. Buchan agrees international law applies, but says we’re not there yet: current rules (sovereignty, diplomatic inviolability, human rights, IHL) already regulate espionage, and declaring a new custom risks handing blank checks to powerful states. The trio parse peace-time vs wartime rules, Canada’s evolving positions (including the “de minimis” cyberspace view), and the Federal Court’s inconsistent jurisprudence, highlighting how secrecy, strategic ambiguity, and politics complicate “opinio juris.” The upshot: states spy constantly; the legal question is whether to formalize tailored guardrails now—or keep operating in the grey.

In this episode of Secure Line, hosts Stephanie Carvin and Jessica Davis unpack the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency’s (NSIRA) October 2 report on the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). The review examined the CRA’s handling of audits on charities for potential terrorist financing, following long-standing allegations of bias against Muslim-led organizations. Davis explains how NSIRA — created in 2019 to review Canada’s expanding national security powers — found not evidence of bias, but rather an alarming lack of internal governance, documentation, and methodology that made determining bias impossible. This “vibes-based” decision-making, as Davis calls it, reveals deep flaws in how Canada’s counter-terrorism powers are exercised and reviewed. The discussion expands to the broader implications for rule of law, transparency, and the politicization of Canada’s terrorism listings process, with both hosts urging stronger oversight and governance to prevent bias, ensure accountability, and rebuild trust. The episode closes with a call for NSIRA to review Canada’s terrorism listings next — before “vibes creep” takes over more elements of national security policy.

In this episode of Secure Line, Leah West, Jessica Davis, and Stephanie Carvin unpack one of the most contentious parts of the Carney government’s Strong Borders Act—the sweeping amendments to Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA). Joined by immigration lawyer Jackie Bonisteel, they explore how sections 6 through 9 of the omnibus bill grant the government broad powers to suspend or terminate immigration applications “in the public interest.” The hosts probe whether these provisions are about genuine border security—or an attempt to quietly rewrite Canada’s immigration policy under the guise of national security.

As Bonisteel explains, the legislation’s implications reach far beyond border management. The proposed one-year limit on filing refugee claims could bar legitimate claimants—from long-term residents to LGBTQ+ individuals discovering their identities in Canada—from ever seeking protection. The episode highlights how the new pre-removal risk assessment process offers a paper-based substitute for Canada’s robust refugee system, stripping claimants of hearings, appeals, and due-process safeguards. Bonisteel warns that these measures will deepen backlogs, create legal limbo for thousands, and erode Canada’s obligations under the principle of non-refoulement.

The conversation broadens into a critique of omnibus lawmaking, where unrelated reforms—from immigration to privacy—are bundled together and rushed through Parliament. The hosts and Bonisteel question whether the government’s “Strong Borders” rhetoric masks a deliberate tightening of humanitarian pathways and a retreat from Canada’s long-standing refugee commitments. With the bill now facing mounting opposition from lawyers, privacy advocates, and civil-society groups alike, Secure Line asks: is this about strengthening Canada’s borders—or weakening its values?

Jess, Leah, and guest Michael (Mike) Nesbitt unpack Canada’s proposed Combating Hate Act: what it actually does, why it’s being introduced, and where it may overreach. They break down the bill’s key moves—creating a stand-alone hate-motivated offense, criminalizing intimidation or obstruction outside religious, cultural, educational and similar spaces, banning public display of certain terrorist/hate symbols, and codifying a definition of “hatred”—and test each against Charter limits, policing capacity, and real-world edge cases. The conversation probes whether gaps in law truly exist or if the problem is resourcing and trust, the risks of politicized terrorist listings spilling into speech offenses, and how ambiguous symbols/memes complicate enforcement. They also flag constitutional soft spots (e.g., obstruction without intent to cause fear), tensions between denunciation and Canada’s anti-carceral rhetoric, and the need for equitable application across communities most targeted by hate. It’s a clear-eyed guide to where protest becomes crime—and how Parliament should sharpen the bill before it passes.

In this episode of Secure Line, Jess, Steph, and Leah dive into the Strong Borders Act—Bill C-2—an omnibus bill that stretches far beyond its title. While marketed as a measure to curb fentanyl and strengthen Canada’s borders, the legislation also proposes sweeping changes to immigration, refugee processes, anti–money laundering powers, and surveillance authorities. Leah takes the lead by unpacking Parts 14 and 15 of the bill, which expand lawful access, information sharing, and production orders.

The conversation explores Canada’s fraught history with lawful access reforms, the ongoing clash between government security goals and civil liberties advocates, and the potential consequences for privacy, oversight, and professional-client relationships. From IP addresses as “breadcrumbs” in investigations to backdoor legislation and the risks of placing too much responsibility on service providers, the hosts break down what’s at stake. They also connect the debate to international agreements like the U.S. CLOUD Act and the Budapest Convention.

With oversight gaps, broad applicability, and the potential to affect everyone from telcos to small service providers, the episode asks whether Bill C-2 gets the balance between liberty and security right—or if Canada is once again repeating old mistakes under a new name.

In the season two opener of Secure Line, Steph, Leah, and Jess unpack the national security and intelligence stories that unfolded over the summer. They kick off by discussing the Carney government’s priorities, the RCMP reform white paper, and highlight ongoing frustrations with Canada’s outdated policing model.

The hosts also spotlight the upcoming CASIS Symposium on November 7, featuring Michael Kovrig as keynote speaker, the organization’s 40th anniversary celebration, and student essay contest winners.

From there, the conversation broadens to international concerns:

U.S. chaos and politicized intelligence – The Trump administration’s purges, loyalty tests, and weaponization of intelligence are raising alarms about Canada’s heavy reliance on U.S. partners. Jess introduces her “Trump tracker,” charting how U.S. financial dominance is being undermined through sanctions abuse and the rise of an “axis of illicit finance” (Iran, Russia, North Korea).

Canadian Armed Forces controversies – From hateful conduct in Facebook groups to Nazi salutes and the arrest of four soldiers on terrorism-related charges, the CAF faces persistent extremism challenges. The hosts analyze ideology, legal thresholds for terrorism charges, and Canada’s tendency toward mischief charges over terrorism prosecutions.

RCMP statistics spin – A reported 488% increase in terrorism-related charges is deconstructed, showing that the figure stems from charge counts, not individuals, leading to misleading public messaging.

China-related developments – Canada’s move against Hikvision under the Investment Canada Act and the case of TikTok’s offices are discussed as examples of economic security tools being applied, with Steph praising the ICA as one of Canada’s most effective national security instruments.

Looking ahead, the hosts preview fall content:

Leah will lead a multipart walkthrough of Bill C-2 (Strong Borders Act).

Jess will dive into her work on espionage financing and illicit finance.

Steph and Leah will share findings from their gender and online extremism project.

Guest academics Russell Buchan and Asaf Lubin will join for a deep-dive on intelligence law in international law.

Thanks for tuning in for season 2 of Secure Line! Like, share and subscribe!