What CSE actually has done is admit in a considerably more frank way than normal that it has been legally spying on Canadians.
As I explain here, the laws under which CSE operates permit the kinds of activities CSE described (assuming they're not struck down as a result of the BCCLA's current lawsuit).
That said, being legal doesn't necessarily make CSE's monitoring justifiable. (And there's certainly no justification for misleading judges.) We need to know a lot more about the nature and extent of CSE's eavesdropping activities before we can feel reassured that they're justified, and we ought to take the rights and needs of non-Canadians into consideration as well when deciding the boundaries of acceptable activities.
The ironic thing about all this is that CSE's brain trust put considerable effort into convincing Canadians that it is illegal for CSE to monitor them. The agency's boilerplate assurances all came with what I call secret asterisks attached.
Now that they've had to admit that at least some monitoring of Canadians does occur, it's hardly surprising that most people conclude they must have broken the law.
They should have been more honest with us in the first place.
Thanks for the coverage you've been giving to these issues!