Public Safety Committee on Dec. 8th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. MacKenzie and Ms. Morin.

Mr. Kania is next.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

I'd like to go back and establish some facts. In early 2010--in January, according to your answer--Mr. Fadden contacted you and raised concerns about some politicians being under foreign influence. That's accurate.

[Marie-Lucie Morin]

Mr. Fadden gave me a heads-up about a generic concern with foreign interference. He said basically that he would get back to me at some point on this issue.

As I mentioned, the point of the heads-up was to talk about process.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

When did he get back to you on that point after January 2010?

[Marie-Lucie Morin]

Do you mean about the process?

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

When did he next contact you to discuss this issue again?

[Marie-Lucie Morin]

Allow me to repeat this: the general issue of foreign interference is not new. It is part of the basket of vulnerabilities that we deal with in the realm of national security. With respect to the cases in hand, I think that Mr. Fadden told the committee that he had not briefed me as of the time he gave the interview.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

It's a specific question. I'd like you to focus on this question.

He contacted you in January 2010 with respect to this issue. When did he next contact you on this issue?

[Marie-Lucie Morin]

Honestly, I do not recall, but I was not briefed on the specific cases by the time he gave the interview.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

He says in his letter of August 31, 2010: “The speech I proposed to deliver at the RCMI was reviewed by staff in the Minister's office as well as the national Security Advisor's (NSA) Office”.

He says that you reviewed his speech before he delivered it. Is that accurate?

[Marie-Lucie Morin]

I probably did not review it myself, but my office would have. I am aware that there were two or three lines in there about foreign interference.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

In reference to that, he also says that prior to his retraction, which took place on June 23, it was once again reviewed by your office. Did you also review his comments before he made a retraction?

[Marie-Lucie Morin]

I would not call it a retraction; I would call it a clarification. I believe that Mr. Fadden provided a letter. In fact, I think he was asked by the committee in July whether he had actually talked to me at the time of the clarification. I recall Mr. Fadden's phoning me and saying “I gave this interview and I think there is a need for me to issue a clarification on a point or two.”

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

In January 2010, he brings this to your attention. Based on what you're saying, he did not raise it again with you until around the time he was going to give his speech, so for that block of a number of months, there was no further contact from him to you.

During that block of time, I'd like to know whether you contacted the minister, the minister's office, the Prime Minister, or the Prime Minister's Office to bring to their attention what Mr. Fadden had advised you of.

Mr. Fadden said, "There are several municipal politicians in British Columbia and in at least two provinces there are ministers of the crown who we think are under at least the general influence of a foreign government."

Then he said, "We just don't keep the information to ourselves. In the case of the couple of cabinet ministers, we're in process of discussing with the centre how we're going to inform those provinces."

What I'd like to know from you, as a second part to my question, is whether or not he ever advised you, your office, the Prime Minister's Office, or the minister's office of the names of the individuals that he made those allegations against. If so, I'd like to know whether you agree with those allegations and whether there are any municipal or provincial politicians that are under foreign influence. In essence, were his comments accurate or not?

[Marie-Lucie Morin]

First of all, I don't want to leave committee members with the overall sense that between January and June Mr. Fadden and I had no contact whatsoever. I would like to say that in the nature of my work and in the course of doing business, of course I would have had multiple meetings with representatives from the security and intelligence community. I just want to put that on the record.

With respect to names and so on, I simply don't think it's appropriate for me to discuss cases, so I will leave it at that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Ms. Morin.

Now we'll go back to Mr. MacKenzie.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I had indicated that I wanted to talk with you briefly about the overview body. I think it's important that the committee, and the people at home who may watch this, know that CSIS has an oversight body called SIRC. The Honourable Gary Filmon, a former premier, is chair of that Security Intelligence Review Committee, which we frequently call SIRC.

This is a quote of Mr. Filmon:

Let me say first that having served on SIRC for nearly nine years, during which time I have been in regular contact with many organizations with similar mandates, I'm confident that Canada's model is, and is recognized to be, one of the strongest review functions in the world. This is not to say that changes and improvements are not possible, but simply that we have in SIRC an effective tool for helping to ensure the accountability of Canada's security intelligence agency, CSIS. As I'm sure you are aware, SIRC came into being at the same time that Canada created CSIS, its civilian security intelligence service. With the passage of the CSIS Act in 1984, Canada became one of the first democratic governments in the world to establish a detailed legal framework for the operation of its security service. It is equally significant that the CSIS Act created a framework to make CSIS accountable in exercising its powers, a framework that by and large has stood the test of time. Specifically, the CSIS Act defines the mandate and limits of state power to conduct security intelligence. It also spells out how the service's work is to be monitored through a rigorous system of political and judicial controls, including two review bodies, each with a distinct mandate, to watch over the new agency.

That is a quote from Mr. Filmon.

I would draw your attention to this, because it's important to appreciate the context in which CSIS operates. I think we all accept that the people of CSIS are dedicated to the protection of Canada's national security interests and to the safety of all Canadians. It's also clear that what CSIS does is done in accordance with applicable laws and respects human rights.

My recollection from the testimony given on May 11 is that CSIS is, in fact, one of the most monitored intelligence agencies in the world.

Can you provide any insight to us on how being subject to this oversight helps CSIS accomplish its mandate?

[Marie-Lucie Morin]

First of all, let me say, Mr. Chairman, that I would concur with the comments made by Mr. Filmon. I would say that we are, in fact, very fortunate to have high-quality Canadians who are willing to dedicate their time to serve on SIRC, which is in itself a unique body and takes its work extremely seriously. It reviews the activities of CSIS to make sure that they are carried out absolutely appropriately.

I am absolutely confident, Mr. Chairman, from the two years in which I had the great privilege of serving as national security advisor, that we have in SIRC an excellent oversight body for the service.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

The extension is that because of the oversight agencies we have, if there is something my colleagues feel is detrimental, SIRC has the authority to review the agency. As it was originally constructed back in 1984, and as you have viewed it over the last couple of years, there are those bodies to deal with those issues.

[Marie-Lucie Morin]

Those bodies exist, indeed.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

When you talked to certain members, your position was that you would be in regular contact with a number of agencies and individuals during that period of time to deal with a variety of different things.

[Marie-Lucie Morin]

Absolutely. Part of the duties of a national security advisor, Mr. Chairman, if this is what the honourable member is referring to, would be to chair a number of committees. All the departments and agencies that form the group dealing with national security issues would be represented within these committees.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much.

I will now move back to the Bloc.

Monsieur Gaudet.... Go ahead, Madam Mourani.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Ms. Morin, we received a letter from Mr. Fadden in response to the committee's questions. He seems to say that he consulted the minister's office, his staff and your office to clarify his remarks about his interview with CBC. Is that right?

[Marie-Lucie Morin]

Yes, the director contacted me to say that he had been thinking about issuing a clarification of his comments. He wanted to set the record straight, because he had said that he had already briefed me on the specific cases, which he hadn't.