Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Oct. 24th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

I call the meeting to order.

I would like to welcome the Honourable Bill Blair, Minister of National Defence, to the procedure and House affairs committee.

Minister Blair, you have up to 10 minutes for your opening comments. The floor is yours. You can give me back any free time, and I would welcome it.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Madam Chair, I'll do my best to make very brief comments. I know the committee has a number of questions.

First of all, let me begin by thanking you and the committee for the invitation to appear again on this study. As I've said, I will endeavour to be brief in my remarks.

As I have said before at this committee, no parliamentarian or their family should ever be threatened for advocating for their beliefs. It is utterly unacceptable that any member of Parliament from any party might be the target of intimidation. If there is evidence of a threat of violence or intimidation against any Canadian, it is critical that it be referred immediately to police for further action as quickly as possible, for the safety of those individuals.

As I testified in June, I first learned about the threats made against the member for Wellington—Halton Hills when they were published in The Globe and Mail on May 1. These were serious claims and particularly disturbing, as they named both the member and his family. It was my clear expectation, as minister of public safety at that time, that CSIS would brief me on all threats to our democratic institutions. However, unfortunately, I was never informed of any attempt by any foreign actor to harm a parliamentarian, or of threats against their loved ones.

If there was sensitive information CSIS wanted to transmit to me, my expectation was that the director or his team would request a briefing. I would then attend a secure facility, either in Ottawa or Toronto. It was the responsibility of officials who had access to the top secret network to provide information that would then be printed and presented for my review during these meetings.

If I may be very clear, there was no such secure terminal located in the minister's office. Neither I nor any of my staff had log-in credentials to that system. Any suggestion that it was a matter of simply not opening emails is, frankly, absurd, because top secret, secure information is not transmitted as an email. It is, rather, sent to a secure terminal. The only secure terminal at 269 Laurier, where my office as public safety minister was located, was not located in the political minister's office, but rather on the deputy minister's side of the building. No one on my staff, including myself, had any access to that terminal.

To keep Canadians safe, intelligence must be shared and disseminated so it can be acted upon. The committee has heard testimony from senior officials, including the national security and intelligence adviser, who acknowledged a failure in how intelligence was shared with and among ministers and departments. To begin to address this, the former minister of public safety issued a ministerial directive to CSIS requiring them to inform the minister in all instances of threats to the security of Canada, or directed at Parliament or parliamentarians, in a timely manner. It is also why the Prime Minister created the national security council as a committee of cabinet.

Foreign interference has been a significant threat to Canadian interests since before this government was elected and has only become more serious in recent years. This is a non-partisan issue. It is why we established the public inquiry into foreign interference after reaching consensus among all parties on the terms of reference. It is my sincere hope that by looking at the hostile activities of all state actors—including China, of course, and others—this commission will provide us with recommendations to build upon the important work already under way.

We must continue to review these matters in a way that respects our national security obligations, including to those who put their lives at risk collecting intelligence on our behalf in the field.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I look forward to any questions the committee may have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you, Minister Blair.

Your comments came in at three minutes and 28 seconds. I appreciate your being short with those comments, so we can get to questions.

We will now have a six-minute round, starting with Mr. Cooper and followed by Ms. Romanado, Madam Gaudreau and Ms. Blaney. It will be six minutes through the chair.

As you know, we had a first hour of committee business. We all know how that went. I would just say mindfully to all committee members that you know what the expectations of this committee are, so go through the chair. Interpreters can only interpret one person at a time. We are dealing with a very important study, the question of privilege by the member for Wellington—Halton Hills and other members with regard to a very serious matter. I hope we all take note of that.

Mr. Cooper, through the chair, you have six minutes.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Minister, when you last appeared before this committee on June 1, you made the incredible assertion, with regard to the May 2021 CSIS issues management note that warned that MP Michael Chong and his family in Hong Kong were being targeted by the Beijing regime, including by an accredited diplomat at Beijing's Toronto consulate, that “CSIS, quite appropriately, made a determination that they didn't believe it was necessary to pass that information along”, which you characterized as “an operational decision”.

Your testimony, Minister, is directly contradicted by the director of CSIS, David Vigneault, who on June 13 told this committee that no such operational decision had been made, that the issues management note, distinct from other intelligence memos, pertains to a matter of high importance and that, in regard to you, Minister, “I think the fact that we did an issue management note speaks to the notion that we wanted to highlight the information.”

Through you, Madam Chair, Minister, can you explain why your testimony was flatly contradicted by the director of CSIS?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

With great respect, it was not contradicted. In fact, I sincerely believe it was the director's intent that the information be made available to me.

Unfortunately, the steps were not taken by CSIS or by the Department of Public Safety to make that information available to me. I had no way of knowing that they had a secret they wanted to tell me.

Under every other circumstance—and I was the minister of public safety for over two years—the director of CSIS would advise my office they had information to brief me on. He would advise my office they had information they wished to share with me. I would then go to a secure room where that information was shared.

In some other circumstances, I was actually asked to attend the CSIS office in Toronto where that information would be briefed to me, but it did not take place in this circumstance.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Minister, I understand what you are now saying, but you said it was the intent of the director of CSIS that that information be shared with you. That's not what you said on June 1.

Minister, you used very specific language, that the director—that being the director of CSIS—determined that this was not information the minister needed to know. Those were your express words, and that it was an operational decision not to pass that information on to you. That's very different from saying that there was an intent to pass it along to you.

What you're saying now is the opposite of what you said on June 1.

Why did you use that very specific language when you evidently knew that it simply wasn't true based upon what you're saying today?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Respectfully, Mr. Cooper, I listened to the testimony that Director Vigneault gave before this committee after my testimony. I heard him very clearly say that it was his intent. I know Director Vigneault very well. He's a very decent man. I've worked with him for many years, and I trust him. However, I would point out that he, unfortunately, notwithstanding his perhaps good intentions to share that, did not take the steps that were necessary to ensure that information was actually brought to my attention.

Under every other circumstance the director would notify my office, and he would either brief me personally or ask that I attend the CSIS office in Toronto to have that information shared. That did not take place at that time.

By the way, there's a great deal of information that CSIS comes in possession of, and they make determinations as to its validity and usefulness. I assumed that when they did not share it with me, they didn't intent to do so.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

You're repeating yourself.

Minister, you said it was your expectation that matters of national security such as that impacting MP Chong and his family would be brought to your attention. It was also the director of CSIS's expectation that when a top secret issues management note on a matter of high importance was sent to you, your deputy minister, and your chief of staff, that you would have seen that.

Will you, Minister, at the very least concede that under your watch there was a colossal breakdown in communications that resulted in MP Chong being kept in the dark for two years and a Beijing thug allowed to stay in Canada for two years to continue his campaign of intimidation against Chinese Canadian citizens? Would you at the very least concede that there was a breakdown of communications under your watch as minister?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Mr. Cooper, there are two things that are incorrect with what you have just said.

First of all, that information was not sent to me and it was not sent to my chief of staff. You've incorrectly characterized that. It was sent to a secure terminal to which we do not have access. That was not the way in which top secret information was shared with the minister or the minister's office. It was shared more directly by the director. That did not happen in these circumstances, so your characterization that this information was sent to me is, quite frankly, incorrect.

However, I would also acknowledge, as the national security intelligence adviser acknowledged, and as I believe the director of CSIS acknowledged, that in this circumstance they did not do what was necessary to make sure that information was brought to the attention of the minister. For that, as the minister of public safety at the time, I do take responsibility. We've taken steps to remedy that mishandling of that particular information and the failure to ensure that it got into the hands of people who needed to see it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

Ms. Romanado, you have six minutes, through the chair.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Through you, I'd like to welcome the minister back to PROC.

Thank you so much, Minister, for being here.

Last Thursday Mr. Rob Stewart presented at PROC with respect to the question of privilege. He testified that the issues management note dated May 2021 was not forwarded to you. He testified in that regard. We understand that while Monsieur Vigneault may have had this information, the intelligence, at the end of the day, was not provided to you. It's pretty difficult to act on anything if it's not actually provided to you.

I would like to give you a little bit more time to elaborate on this, from the time you came to see us in June to now. I know that you've changed portfolios. I want to look ahead. You mentioned some steps that are being put in place. What steps are we putting in place to make sure that this does not happen again and that in the event there is a threat to a sitting member of Parliament, it gets to the right eyes in real time?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thanks, Ms. Romanado.

First of all, I want to acknowledge and appreciate the testimony of Deputy Minister Stewart. He's absolutely correct. That information was not shared with me, as I previously testified and, I believe, the director of CSIS also testified.

We recognize that there is certain information that needs to be shared in a far more timely way. I was very concerned when I learned by reading in The Globe and Mail that a threat had been made against a member of Parliament and his family. The reason I was very concerned about that is I think we all share a responsibility to make sure that the people who do our important work can do it safely. Had I been aware of that information, I would have insisted that very assertive steps be taken in order to provide that member with all of the support and protection he needed for himself and his family. I think that is our first priority. Frankly, that's what most concerned me.

I can tell you that since becoming aware of this breakdown in information..... Again, I'm not making an excuse for it. It's simply an explanation.

I was not aware that CSIS had a secret they thought they should share. I was never made aware that they had that information. Frankly, the simplest remedy for that would have been for someone at CSIS or Public Safety to notify me, as the minister, that there was information I needed to see and actually get me into a secure location to do that.

The new minister of public safety who succeeded me in that role, Mr. Mendicino, issued a ministerial directive that all such information should be and must be brought to the attention of the public safety minister. That is the first step.

I will also tell you that I now work in an area, Ms. Romanado, that deals with a lot of top secret and classified information. I will tell you from my experience now as the Minister of National Defence that there is a very robust system. I am briefed by the Communications Security Establishment chief, by the CDS and by the commander of CAF's intelligence command, General Wright. I'm briefed on a weekly basis very comprehensively.

In addition to that, if there is other information that needs to be brought to my attention, the CDS, the deputy minister, the chief of CSE or even their CRO—employed at CSE—deliver those documents to my office in a secure environment. That information is being shared in a very robust and very regular way. Most importantly—God bless the military—they are meticulous about their record-keeping. Every document that's put before me is recorded with the date and time, what was shared and who shared it. That makes us all responsible for it. I think it also remedies a situation that previously existed with CSIS.

Finally, I would also point out that the Prime Minister has now created a national security council. It's a cabinet committee that will be very routinely briefed on top secret and classified material, not just so that the government can be aware of it, but so that action can be taken.

I think that's ultimately our responsibility in dealing with this classified material. It needs to be appropriately shared so that appropriate actions can be taken in response to it, such as the threat that was made against a member of Parliament. That needed to be actioned immediately. It's important that that situation be remedied. We've taken some very significant steps.

As you know, over the past several years, our government has taken a number of steps to improve the oversight and accountability of national security matters. We've seen very significant progress in the past few months.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Thank you so much.

As you know, Minister, my son is an intelligence officer with the Canadian Armed Forces, so I'm very well versed in how intelligence is gathered and the importance of keeping issues of national intelligence in a confidential manner.

You mentioned the fact that in your new role in National Defence, you have the facilities necessary to be briefed appropriately on top secret matters.

Would you recommend going forward...? You mentioned that in your previous portfolio of public safety, the minister's office did not have such facilities in being able to be briefed. They didn't have access to the terminal, and so on and so forth.

Would you recommend that perhaps the Minister of Public Safety also have something similar?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

On the one hand, I believe in the security of such information. It's highly sensitive in its nature. It can affect our national interest and our national security.

I would also be concerned.... Frankly, when I read about leaks of top secret information, I'm deeply concerned by them because they can, if done as recklessly as they have sometimes been done, compromise and undermine the ability of those who risk their lives every day to collect information for us. Their safety and the security of that information are also a priority for me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Minister, thank you. Her first question was quite short, and the answer was quite long. I feel it's only appropriate that I move on to Madam Gaudreau.

Ms. Gaudreau, you have six minutes.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Minister, thank you for appearing before our committee again and for your time. This gives us the opportunity to see where we are.

I'm going to ask my question slowly, and I'll ask you to respond in kind, to assist our interpreters, who are doing an exceptional job.

I wonder whether all my colleagues read the press review in French this morning. Minister, did you see the proposal by the Bloc Québécois to table a bill to create a foreign agents' registry?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I apologize, Madam Gaudreau.

First of all, thank you for the reminder to speak slowly. I will endeavour to do so, because we do want to take care of the translators, who do such an exceptional job for us. I apologize. I was in cabinet this morning, and we've been rather busy since very early, and I have not yet seen the papers.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Minister, I'm asking you the question because, like you Madam Chair, the Bloc Québécois is concerned that it'll never happen.

In light of all the recommendations in the previous months, we expected a registry to be created. We determined it was essential to act and to find solutions. Minister, given your expertise, what do you think about a foreign agent registry?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

There are a couple of things.

First of all, I'm aware that a number of our allies also have foreign agent registries, and I know their value. I believe that Canada would benefit from such a registry. I'm also aware that this is something the public inquiry that has now been called will also look at, and I expect that there will be recommendations.

I'm reluctant to comment on the Bloc bill, but I really look forward to reading it. I think we all believe and agree that a foreign registry would help protect Canada's interests, but it's also important that we do it in a thoughtful way.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you.

A number of experts gave top priority to several recommendations. How come the Bloc Québécois has to table a bill to ensure progress? Talks are currently underway, but there is still nothing official. Why is there still nothing?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Again, the work that is being done and continues to be done is important. What you speak to, Madam Gaudreau, is the importance of Parliament and the important role of opposition to continue to strongly advocate, to bring forward and to bring pressure, quite frankly. I think it's entirely appropriate that it's how government works, because I think we all are here to act in the best interest of Canadians. I will tell you that this is a priority for our government.

I know that the public safety minister has indicated his intention to bring this forward, but, frankly, we welcome the advocacy of the Bloc, and if you have recommendations for a path forward, I look forward to reading them.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

That's reassuring and confirms that it's important for me to be here, even if the Bloc Québécois is eager to focus on our affairs in Quebec. In the meantime, Quebeckers are also among the victims here.

From what I gather, you haven't been given a date in relation to the work done proactively by your predecessor. Furthermore, you aren't prepared to table a bill while waiting to see what the Bloc Québécois, namely, is going to propose. There's no date because the process is ongoing. Is that correct?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Madam Gaudreau, to be very clear, that's work that's going on under Minister LeBlanc at Public Safety, working very much in collaboration with a number of others. I have not been involved with that. Unfortunately, I'm not able to share with you either a date or the progress on that work, but I can tell you that I've been part of a number of discussions that talked about the importance of bringing forward a foreign agent registry and the legislation that would be required to do so.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Naturally, I am concerned to hear that. I don't know much about the role of the minister responsible for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS). Everything I've learned about the matter demonstrates that, in Canada, our intelligence culture is weak. We may have made great strides; however, when I go back to my riding, I cannot provide my constituents with anything that says we've got this under control.

It's sad that, today, we have to push for what we all know need to be done. It isn't a lack of ability, but I wonder whether you have too much work or whether this isn't important enough.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Oh, no, that's not it at all, ma'am. We're busy, of course, but this is a priority. It's also a priority that we do it right, and so we're looking at the experience of other jurisdictions. There are extensive consultations.

We're also aware that as a result of an all-party consensus, we have now appointed a public inquiry that's also going to be able to examine this issue and make recommendations.

We think there's value in that public inquiry. We think there's value in what we have all agreed is the right thing to do, and it will inform the decisions that are made around all of our next steps including creating a foreign agent registry.