Evidence of meeting #27 for Canada-China Relations in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was students.
A video is available from Parliament.
9:20 p.m.
Bloc
Christine Normandin Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Thank you very much.
Members of the opposition parties sometimes joke that governments are better at building shelves to store reports than they are at following the recommendations in the reports.
Considering that the NSICOP produced a report in 2019 that included recommendations on foreign interference, are you able to tell us what efforts the government has made since then to actually follow those recommendations?
9:25 p.m.
Chair, National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians
Thank you, Ms. Normandin.
Minister Blair has partially responded to our report and to the opposition motion in the House of Commons. He produced a document of some 20 pages, which has been distributed to all members of the House. It shows what the government is doing, what it is trying to do and what it will be doing. The important question is: how will the government respond to our recommendations? The NSICOP believes that there is a lot of work to be done and that progress can be made.
We have already completed seven reviews and three annual reports, and have made 22 recommendations. We spend a lot of time on these reports and recommendations. Because the recommendations are unanimous and non-partisan and based on the bicameral principle, we believe they are easier to follow.
We expect the government to make a greater effort to respond to our recommendations.
9:25 p.m.
Bloc
Christine Normandin Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
In this context, would it be appropriate to find a new way of doing things?
When you start a study, would it be appropriate to automatically review previous recommendations that are similar to the ones you are thinking about presenting, and to look at how the government has responded to them?
9:25 p.m.
Chair, National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians
That is exactly NSICOP's approach.
We have discussed this issue at length and we believe that the recommendations that have been made, including the one about mandatory briefings for members of Parliament and senators, as I mentioned earlier, should be carried forward from one report to the next.
9:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Thank you very much, Ms. Normandin.
Now we'll go to Mr. Harris for the last two and a half minutes.
Mr. Harris, please.
9:25 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Thank you very much.
If I may, I'll follow up on what Ms. Normandin was speaking about just now. You just outlined that you made 22 recommendations that were fully unanimous, fully non-partisan to the government. Do you have any plans to review those recommendations and do a report on to what extent you see the government has followed them? If they're that unanimous and that clear, then they deserve respect.
I think you're being very diplomatic, shall we say, when you say there's more work to be done to fulfill the recommendations. That's a nice way of saying that they haven't been followed. I wonder if you can tell us if your committee is likely to do a special report to say, “This is where we are with the three sets of recommendations that we've made; here's what we see happening, and here's what we see missing as a priority for government.”
9:25 p.m.
Chair, National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians
Mr. Harris, that's an excellent question and it's something the committee is really seized with.
I don't want to be diplomatic. I want to be forthright. It's a huge amount of work to come to ground in a non-partisan way with these recommendations. We deliberate long and hard. We're looking for recommendations that will improve the situation in the security and intelligence field, and when it comes to protecting our rights and freedoms. I have spoken to the Prime Minister about this, and I've spoken to his national security and intelligence adviser about this. We believe that regular and substantive responses to our recommendations would really strengthen accountability and increase transparency in the security and intelligence community.
In the U.K., our equivalent organization, the ISC, receives regular government responses because they have a MOU with the government. That's something that might be considered here in Canada, but we are certainly now raising with the Prime Minister and the government how to better get feedback and information about those recommendations and what's happening with them, even though one or two of them have found their way directly into mandate letters for cabinet ministers.
9:25 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
I see the chair, but I do want to take a brief moment to second your suggestion that a lot of work is done by your committee. I know from representatives from our party who have been part of that committee there's a tremendous amount of work that takes place. I want to commend you for it and thank you and all of your committee for the work that you're doing.
9:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Thank you, Mr. Harris. That's a good way to conclude, I think.
Thank you very much, Mr. McGuinty.
Thank you, colleagues.
The meeting is adjourned.