Declaration of Emergency Committee on Nov. 3rd, 2022

[Jane Cordy]

Thank you.

[The Joint Chair, Hon. Gwen Boniface]

Thank you.

Colleagues, we have time to do another five-minute round. That is for everyone.

I'll start with Mr. Motz.

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

Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you, Commissioner and Deputy, for being here.

Commissioner, you've probably heard over the last significant period of time about the distrust that the Canadian public has in Minister Blair, and his perceived interference in the Nova Scotia mass shooting.

On the heels of that, if you will, we find a text from Commissioner Lucki to you around February 22, just before the Emergencies Act was about to be revoked. She asked you, “Has minister Blair hit you up for a letter to support the EA?” You said, “No, he has not. Should I expect to hear from him?”

I find it odd—don't you?—that after the fact, we have a minister of the Crown seeking support from the police, who had been saying all along that they were supportive of this.

[Commr Thomas Carrique]

I did not receive any inquiries from Minister Blair for any letter to support the invocation of the Emergencies Act.

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

You made it clear earlier in your testimony and at the commission that you didn't ask for the invocation.

[Commr Thomas Carrique]

I did not.

Post-invocation, I did not receive any requests from any ministers or anyone from the federal government to provide any sort of endorsement or letter.

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

I'm going to take you back to some questioning from my colleague Mr. Green with regard to intelligence. You used the words “strategic intelligence”.

You know that the threshold for the government's invocation of this—that's not your responsibility—is threats to national security. You came out on February 6 or February 7 and indicated that you believed it was a national security threat. I don't know what happened on those days that would have caused you to believe that. Hopefully, you will tell us that, if you can.

It flies in the face of what Superintendent Morris has told the inquiry. He said that there was no credible intelligence to support a national security threat. When you look at how the act is written, “threats to the security of Canada” has a meaning assigned under section 2 of the CSIS Act.

Did you see, or were you aware of any intelligence that supported espionage or sabotage against Canada, or that was detrimental to the interests of Canada?

[Commr Thomas Carrique]

I need to correct you on one statement, sir.

It was not I who, on or about February 6, made any sort of declaration or statement about a threat to national security. It was on February 7, contained in a Hendon report, that there was a possible threat to national security.

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

You referred to that.

[Commr Thomas Carrique]

I referred to that.

That report was completed and approved by Superintendent Pat Morris. He would have had the same information.

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

Since then, he has said that there was no credible threat to national security. He said that at the commission.

[Commr Thomas Carrique]

He did.

Again, I have a point of clarification. That doesn't dismiss what was contained in the Hendon report on the 7th. As time went on, there was no credible threat determined. There was no threat that became realized.

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

To answer my question, you saw no evidence in the Hendon report or any other intelligence reports to suggest that there was any sabotage or espionage against the Government of Canada, or against Canada, period.

[Commr Thomas Carrique]

I did not assess that information in relation to the CSIS Act.

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

You didn't see any threats that would meet those criteria in any of the reports. Did you?

[Commr Thomas Carrique]

I didn't weigh it against any criteria. I viewed that information, as I've indicated, as strategic intelligence. It was a possible threat to national security.

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

Now, you have hindsight, sir. You have hindsight. At the time, you still had to consider....

My question is.... I'm just going through what the CSIS Act says are the security requirements to be a national threat.

[Commr Thomas Carrique]

Yes.

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

Did you see in those strategic assessments that there was a threat of espionage or sabotage to Canada?

[Commr Thomas Carrique]

You're asking me to look back at all the Hendon reports and—

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

No, I'm asking if you were aware of any. Obviously either you were or you weren't.

[Commr Thomas Carrique]

I didn't see anything specific to sabotage or espionage—

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

Were you aware of any foreign-influenced activities within or related to Canada that would be detrimental to the interests of Canada?

[Commr Thomas Carrique]

There was reference to such things that needed further investigation, yes.

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

But nothing was confirmed. It was intel at the time.