Canada-China Relations Committee on March 11th, 2021

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you, Chair.

Let me follow up briefly on Mr. Bergeron's questions.

We did have questions about this when the minister was before us. We talked about who in the security service had approved the use of this particular subcontractor for the visa services in Beijing, and the minister advised us that this was all done before this government's time, back in 2012. But I understand that these contracts have been renewed since then, particularly in 2018, and I believe in 2015 as well, and would have required some due diligence to be undertaken at that time.

Were any of the agencies present involved in any way in carrying out these due diligence efforts to ensure that the contracts being renewed were in compliance with security concerns?

I'm taking the silence to mean that nobody present can answer that question.

[David Vigneault]

Mr. Harris, this is David Vigneault from CSIS.

We are not in the position to provide specific details of exactly how and on what we provide advice, but I can assure you and Canadians that CSIS and other security partners are involved in the process of providing security and threat advice to government agencies on an ongoing basis. We do that to make sure the proper authorities can then determine what would be appropriate mitigation measures to take place. We try to do this work on an ongoing basis because the threat continues to evolve.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

I understand that and I understand that the answer given the last time was, “We do it when asked.”

My question, then, would be: Were any of the agencies asked to participate in any security check with respect to the visa contract in Beijing since 2015, shall we say, or in 2018, or at any other time since 2012?

[David Vigneault]

Mr. Harris, from a CSIS point of view, I cannot, unfortunately, provide you with the specific details of how and when we have provided this advice. I can tell you, however, that we are engaged with our partners at Immigration, PSPC and others across the government to provide advice on security threats to allow our partners to develop appropriate mitigation measures.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

That's a very general comment. The question was whether or not your agency had provided any security information or security advice with respect to the visa application centre in Beijing. Can you answer yes or no to that, please?

I know you respond when asked, but the question that was before the committee the last time was about whether or not something happened. We got a very passive answer, which was not of much comfort, as I pointed out. I don't think you're giving me much more comfort now.

Can you answer the question, yes or no?

[David Vigneault]

Unfortunately, Mr. Harris, I cannot provide specific details of the type of advice and on what subject we are providing to our partners.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

You seem to be hiding behind the fact that you can't tell us whether or not you gave advice about this. Was your agency in the position to do that? Was there any opportunity for you to do that?

[David Vigneault]

Mr. Harris, I have mentioned that we have been working with IRCC and PSPC in the context of many different ventures. We have been providing advice to agencies, but unfortunately, I cannot provide you with the specifics in this open context.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

That's a very obtuse answer, sir. I thought the minister was much more forthcoming the last time to suggest that nothing had been done. We were told it was only done when asked and nobody had asked. I don't know why that can't be repeated here tonight, if it is indeed true.

Let me turn to another question. We're talking about foreign interference. We talk about foreign influence. We talk about espionage. Perhaps you're the best person to answer this question, Mr. Vigneault, because of the nature of your agency's work.

Can you distinguish between foreign influence, foreign interference and espionage? They seem to be talked about in a different way. Is there a hierarchy here of what might be legal, what makes it illegal and what makes it subject to prosecution?

Could you try that one, or is there someone else who is better able to answer that?

[David Vigneault]

From a CSIS point of view, The CSIS Act speaks to foreign influence as a threat, but colloquially, this is what most people consider foreign interference. That is using covert and coercive means when trying to accomplish an objective.

When we have those characteristics, of a coercive and covert approach, CSIS can intervene and investigate the threat to national security. As you probably know, Mr. Harris, CSIS does not lay charges or take enforcement actions.

You're absolutely right to say that foreign influence and espionage are parts of a continuum. Interference is when you have those elements of coercion and—

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Thank you.

Excuse me. Sorry about that, but Mr. Harris's time is up.

We will go now to the second round.

We will hear from Mr. Williamson for five minutes.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, all, for returning.

Commissioner, I think you were about to give us some interesting indications of the tip line, but you were not able to complete your thought. This was about the 120 tips a day. You were just saying, “As calls have increased, the percentage of” and we didn't hear the rest of your statement. Could you finish that for us, please?

[Commr Brenda Lucki]

Yes, basically what I was going to say that was noteworthy was that, as the volume of the tips increases, the threat percentage significantly declines. What I mean by that is that significantly fewer tips are deemed relevant to national security or to law enforcement matters.

We examine them all. We tend to get a lot of tips that aren't relative to national security or law enforcement. Those are not followed up on by our agency. If they are applicable to any other agency, we would pass them on.

Some of it is just information. People might feel, for example, a threat, and if it doesn't meet the threshold of a criminal offence, then we normally can't deal with it in that sense.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Okay, I might come back to that, but let me ask you first, when you look into these cases that are investigated further, are threats coming from members of the diplomatic corps, from visitors without any official standing here from a mission or from other Canadians?

[Commr Brenda Lucki]

Unfortunately, I don't have the statistics on where they are generated from. I simply have the number of tips that we have received on those lines.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Could you speak to them more broadly? Is the tendency more likely to be someone from a diplomatic mission, a visitor or a citizen?

[Commr Brenda Lucki]

If we did have that information, I couldn't share that with you. Sorry.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Okay. You mentioned that, if the calls aren't related to national security or law enforcement.... We'll put aside national security for a second. What are the parameters of a kind of threat? I think you said law enforcement or maybe you just said the law. What would those kinds of infractions look like when an investigation would continue?

[Commr Brenda Lucki]

Sometimes, if they don't reach the realm of national security, we might pass that information on to the police of jurisdiction if it was a Criminal Code type of uttering threats or something like that, but if it isn't in the national security realm on that tip line, it would be referred to the police of jurisdiction.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Okay, thank you.

I have a question for Mr. Vigneault from CSIS.

I'm just going to make a comment about something that my colleague Mr. Harris said when he was suggesting the other day that, if what the minister had said was true, why can't it be repeated? I would suggest that perhaps it was not true. He was busy finger-pointing to a previous government and not dealing with the problem in front of him.

What department would we speak to if we wanted to have answers around this immigration office in Beijing that is being operated by the police authorities of a foreign country? Is it Immigration? Who would we talk to about the operation of that facility?

[David Vigneault]

I'm looking at my colleague, Mr. Stewart, if he wants to take the question.

[Rob Stewart]

The contract is overseen by and under the auspices of the Public Services and Procurement department, but they work hand in glove with the department that is the beneficiary of the contract, and that is by IRCC, so the two of them together would provide a response to any questions concerning the contract.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Okay, Mr. Chair, do I have 30 seconds?

[The Chair, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

You have 20 seconds.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Is anyone able to say that they believe Huawei should be permitted to operate in Canada? I don't need a long explanation as to why they shouldn't, but who has confidence that Huawei should be allowed to operate in this country?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I had a great answer.