Bill C-70

Countering Foreign Interference Act

An Act respecting countering foreign interference

Part 1 amends the Canadian Security Intelligence Act to, among other things,
(a) update provisions respecting the collection, retention, querying and exploitation of datatsets;
(b) clarify the scope of section 16 of that Act;
(c) update provisions respecting the disclosure of information by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service;
(d) provide for preservation orders and production orders as well as warrants to obtain information, records, documents or things through a single attempt;
(e) expand the circumstances in which a warrant to remove a thing from the place where it was installed may be issued; and
(f) require a parliamentary review of that Act every five years.
It also makes a consequential amendment to the Intelligence Commissioner Act .
Part 2 amends the Security of Information Act to, among other things, create the following offences:
(a) committing an indictable offence at the direction of, for the benefit of, or in association with a foreign entity;
(b) knowingly engaging in surreptitious or deceptive conduct at the direction of, for the benefit of or in association with a foreign entity for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the State or being reckless as to whether the conduct is likely to harm Canadian interests; and
(c) engaging in surreptitious or deceptive conduct, at the direction of or in association with a foreign entity, with the intent to influence, among other things, the exercise of a democratic right in Canada.
It also amends that Act to remove as an element of the offence of inducing or attempting to induce — at the direction of, for the benefit of or in association with a foreign entity or terrorist group — by intimidation, threat or violence, a person to do anything or cause anything to be done, that the thing be done for the purpose of harming Canadian interests when the person who is alleged to have committed the offence or the victim has a link to Canada.
It also amends the Criminal Code to, among other things, broaden the scope of the sabotage offence to include certain acts done in relation to essential infrastructures and ensure that certain provisions respecting the interception of “private communications” as defined in that Act apply to certain offences in the Foreign Interference and Security of Information Act .
Finally, it makes consequential amendments to other Acts.
Part 3 amends the Canada Evidence Act and makes consequential amendments to other Acts to, among other things,
(a) create a general scheme to deal with information relating to international relations, national defence or national security in the course of proceedings that are in the Federal Court or the Federal Court of Appeal and that are in respect of any decision of a federal board, commission or other tribunal;
(b) permit the appointment of a special counsel for the purposes of protecting the interests of a non-governmental party to those proceedings in respect of such information; and
(c) allow a person charged with an offence to appeal a decision, made under the Canada Evidence Act with respect to the disclosure of certain information in relation to criminal proceedings, only after the person has been convicted of the offence, unless there are exceptional circumstances justifying an earlier appeal.
It also adds references to international relations, national defence and national security in a provision of the Criminal Code that relates to the protection of information, as well as references to international relations and national defence in certain provisions of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act that equally relate to the protection of information.
Part 4 enacts the Foreign Influence Transparency and Accountability Act which, among other things,
(a) provides for the appointment of an individual to be known as the Foreign Influence Transparency Commissioner;
(b) requires certain persons to provide the Commissioner with certain information if they enter into arrangements with foreign principals under which they undertake to carry out certain activities in relation to political or governmental processes in Canada;
(c) requires the Commissioner to establish and maintain a publicly accessible registry that contains information about those arrangements;
(d) provides the Commissioner with tools to administer and enforce that Act; and
(e) amends the Public Service Superannuation Act , the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act and the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency Act .

[Richard Bilodeau]

Mr. Chair, thank you for the question.

I would add that this model already exists in the federal government. I'm thinking, for example, of the Commissioner of the Competition Bureau, who acts independently in enforcing the act. The act also provides for consultations with parliamentarians, either in the House of Commons or the Senate. Lastly, ultimately, once a Governor in Council appointment is made, the commissioner may only be removed from his or her position for a valid reason. So there's a certain obligation to be accountable.

However, we understand that Bill C‑70 can be amended. We can discuss the amendments and analyze them, and it will be up to you to decide. However, we believe that it provides for a great deal of independence in the commissioner's key work. That independence is also reflected in his reports to Parliament, which are not sent to the minister for approval; rather, they are sent to the minister for tabling in the House.

[Nathalie Drouin]

In terms of information sharing and being able to communicate more with universities in Canada, for example, the provisions in Bill C‑70 would really go further to help us prevent situations like that. The same is true of exchanges with our leading scientists.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

My next question is for both you and Mr. Vigneault.

I participated in the committee's work analyzing the report on the Winnipeg lab. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service was asked to conduct background checks on this file. If we took that situation as it existed at the time, with scientists in the lab, would Bill C‑70 make it possible to do things differently from what was done at the time?

[Nathalie Drouin]

There has always been foreign interference. Unfortunately, there always will be some. The objective is to be able to detect it.

Furthermore, we know very well that as we refine our legislative processes, foreign actors, on the other hand, refine their methodology. That's why the work you're doing in connection with Bill C‑70 is absolutely fantastic and necessary.

This is a first step, but we'll always have to continue working on this together to keep our body of legislation modern and effective.

[Nathalie Drouin]

There are a number of small elements that would make significant changes.

One is the ability of CSIS to engage with different levels of government and universities. Being able to provide more information to these various stakeholders will lead to better defence of all our Canadian institutions.

Then, the various criminal offences that Bill C‑70 adds could capture the kind of information that can be read in the report of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians. This provides more clarification, which will facilitate the work of police forces and criminal prosecution.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I believe that transparency is a tool to build trust, and trust is what we're looking for, isn't it? Right.

If Bill C‑70 were in effect today, as it stands, could something be done differently in response to the report of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians?

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

When I look at Bill C‑70, the three words that come to mind are very positive: “trust”, “transparency” and “exemplarity”. If we try to compare this bill to the situation my colleagues are discussing this morning, the report of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians, or NSICOP, we find a paradox, the paradox between the need for secrecy and the need for transparency.

Ms. Drouin, how do you reconcile the two elements of this paradox?

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you, Ministers.

Given the importance of Bill C-70, we know that Parliament has been doing its job. Now we want the government to do theirs. Will each of you ministers commit today to having Bill C-70 in place and fully implemented before the next election, yes or no?

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'll try to do my best in two and a half minutes.

Mr. Virani, I would ask you to give me short answers, please.

You've had many consultations on Bill C‑70. How much time did you spend on it?

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

I think I have time to get one more question in.

When I read through Bill C-70, there's obviously a thematic nature to most of the amendments. We have important amendments to the CSIS Act, the SOIA and the Canada Evidence Act, and, of course, it enacts a new act to deal with a foreign registry. What seems to stick out, though, are the amendments to the Criminal Code, particularly as they relate to sabotage. I'm wondering if you could provide some rationale to this committee as to why it seems so important to update the definition of “sabotage” in the Criminal Code in a bill that's primarily dealing with foreign interference.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you for your answer.

In the past, solutions have sometimes been a long time in coming, which has undermined public confidence. I think Bill C‑70 can be summed up in three words: trust, transparency and exemplarity. That's what we're looking for.

I'm going to ask you a question that's more related to the bill. Oddly enough, the bill doesn't seem to define foreign interference. There are a few occurrences in a part where it can be inferred, but it isn't defined at the outset. What isn't defined doesn't exist.

What are your comments on that?

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I want to focus on foreign interference and its impact on diaspora communities. We've had different groups come here and raise that concern. One of the groups was the World Sikh Organization. They were largely in favour of this bill. They said that more needs to be done to counter foreign interference and that, in that respect, Bill C-70 is a step in the right direction. They did want to highlight, however, that CSIS would have the ability to disclose information to any person or entity should CSIS deem that relevant. This would be a great step, but they are concerned about whether foreign consular officials in Canada would count as entities, what kind of information could be disclosed to them and whether diaspora communities could be put at risk because of that disclosure.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

I'm not done my question, Minister.

Do you think Canadians have the right to know, when they cast an X next to the name of somebody in the next 15 months—the very thing that we're dealing with here in Bill C-70—whether a member is under the influence of a hostile foreign state, yes or no?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Minister of Justice]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I'm very pleased to be here today to speak to you about the threat of foreign interference in Canada and how this bill, Bill C-70, aims to help detect, disrupt and protect against the threats to our country and its institutions by foreign actors.

Bill C-70 modernizes Canada's laws to better protect our democracy and protect people in Canada against new and evolving threats. We are particularly concerned about members of diaspora communities who are disproportionately targeted by those who engage in foreign interference. The reforms to our criminal laws proposed in the bill are strong, measured and direct.

Looking first at the Security of Information Act, this bill would amend the existing offence of using intimidation, threats or violence on behalf of foreign states against Canadians and people living in Canada. It would simplify prosecutions by removing the requirement to prove that the prohibited act resulted in harm to Canadian interests or helped a foreign state. All that would be required is that the threat or violence was done on behalf of or in association with a foreign state.

The bill would also ensure that these protections extend to people working outside the country or travelling to visit loved ones. It would ensure that the law addresses threats by foreign states against family members of Canadians. This captures instances where family members are being threatened to exert pressure on someone to do or not do something, like protesting a foreign government. This is a significant step in addressing transnational repression and some of the fears we heard from community groups and stakeholders during the consultations we have already undertaken.

The bill would create a new offence for committing an indictable offence for a foreign entity, as well as a new general foreign interference offence when a person knowingly engages in surreptitious or deceptive conduct for a foreign entity. We are also strengthening protections for our democratic institutions. The new offence of political interference for a foreign entity criminalizes interfering with a democratic process and would apply at all times to all levels of government—this is a significant change—and, importantly, to the nomination process of political parties.

In terms of the Criminal Code, the bill proposes to modernize the existing offence of sabotage, which hasn't been revised since 1951. We also propose adding two offences to protect critical infrastructure and to criminalize the creation and distribution of devices intended for sabotage.

This is to clarify that the offence applies to the public and private infrastructure that is essential to the health, safety, security and economic well-being of people in Canada—for example, the private and public infrastructure systems that enable transportation or communications, or support the delivery of health and food services.

During public consultations, Canadian association and industry stakeholders made clear the need to protect critical infrastructure. The proposed amendments would expressly recognize the right to freedom of expression and the right to peaceful assembly, protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and confirm that individuals acting under these rights without the intent to commit an act of sabotage do not fall within the scope of the offence.

I will now speak to part 3, which amends the Canada Evidence Act and the Criminal Code.

This section of the bill would create a new, standardized mechanism with robust procedural protections to ensure the protection of national security information in the judicial review of government decisions.

Through these important legislative proposals, our government is taking concrete action to protect all people in Canada, our institutions and our democracy from foreign interference. These changes have been built with the input of Canadians, including members of many diaspora communities. They are balanced, they are fair and they are necessary.

At this point, along with Minister LeBlanc, I would be pleased to answer your questions.

Thank you very much.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Chair and colleagues, good morning. Thank you for inviting me to be with you this morning for Bill C-70. It's a vital part of our government's and Parliament's efforts to counter foreign interference.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for introducing the senior colleagues from the department, the RCMP and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service who have joined me this morning.

I think we can all agree that the government and, by conclusion, Parliament have no greater obligation than the protection of the Canadian people and our democracy.

Like us, Canadians are aware of and rightly concerned about the pervasiveness and increasing complexity of foreign interference. They also know that foreign interference poses a real and serious threat to our country, our democratic processes and our institutions.

State actors seek to exploit Canada's vulnerabilities by targeting governments at all levels, our open academic systems, private enterprises, and even communities and individuals. And we must close those vulnerabilities in the face of ever‑increasing and, as many others have said before me, ever more complex threats.

Our response includes engaging with those directly affected on potential solutions. That's why the Government of Canada engages with private companies, researchers and the health sector, for example, to inform them of threats and help them better understand how they can protect their work. It provides mechanisms for public reporting through various websites and national security threat phone lines. It engages with at-risk communities in Canada to help them better protect themselves against foreign threats. It helps critical infrastructure operators defend the critical cybersecurity systems that Canadians properly rely on. It coordinates and shares information with the Five Eyes and other allies, such as G7 and NATO partners, on foreign interference and other threats. It also enhances collective resilience to disinformation by helping Canadians and individuals in Canada become better informed about disinformation tactics and actors and by enhancing transparency.

Based on what we heard through a diverse and robust consultation process, we introduced Bill C-70, an act respecting countering foreign interference, earlier last month. In order to bolster our ability to detect and disrupt foreign interference threats, Bill C-70 proposes important and necessary amendments to modernize the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, the Security of Information Act, the Criminal Code and the Canada Evidence Act.

Moreover, Bill C-70 introduces the foreign influence transparency and accountability act, which is designed to increase transparency by creating a foreign influence transparency registry for individuals and entities acting on behalf of foreign principals that are seeking to influence activities within our political and governmental processes. All individuals or entities who enter into an arrangement with a foreign principal and who undertake activities to influence a government or political process in Canada would be required to publicly register these activities.

To be clear, the registry creates a positive registration obligation for individuals or entities who are in a foreign influence arrangement with a foreign principal. Individuals and entities would be required to show more transparency about their connections to foreign states and support Canada's national security objectives.

However, we recognize that the foreign influence transparency and accountability act is by no means a single solution to foreign interference. That's why Bill C-70 also introduces measures and tools to help our law enforcement and intelligence agencies detect, deter, decrease and disrupt threats of foreign interference at their early stages, while of course being mindful of the rights and privacy of Canadians. The foreign influence transparency and accountability act would build on the government's ongoing and long-standing efforts to protect Canada against the threats of foreign interference.

I can assure the committee that the government will continue to work with all our partners, including those in other jurisdictions in Canada, affected communities, academia and civil society, to address foreign interference together.

Mr. Chair, I want to thank you and your colleagues on this committee for the work you've been doing so exhaustively over recent days with respect to this legislation. We look forward to your deliberations on amendments that might improve and strengthen this legislation.

I want to acknowledge what I think is an important, non-partisan, collective effort from all parties in the House of Commons to work together on something important to Canadians. I thank all of you for your efforts in this regard.