Evidence of meeting #20 for Declaration of Emergency in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was funds.
A video is available from Parliament.
8:25 p.m.
Senator, Quebec (Mille Isles), C
How can you explain the fact that you were advising the Prime Minister of Canada on national security but didn't contact police services to find out what was happening on the ground and to ask them what plan they were preparing?
8:25 p.m.
National Security and Intelligence Advisor, Privy Council Office
You misrepresented what I said.
I reported what the RCMP told me, and what the other agencies in the national security environment—in this federal infrastructure—reported to me. If there was a plan and I wasn't told, that's one thing. If there was a plan that could have been executed, then it was somebody else's responsibility. I'm not the chief of police for the federal government.
8:25 p.m.
Senator, Quebec (Mille Isles), C
No, but you advise the Prime Minister on security.
8:25 p.m.
National Security and Intelligence Advisor, Privy Council Office
That's right.
8:25 p.m.
Senator, Quebec (Mille Isles), C
All right.
Did you speak to Ms. Lucki from the RCMP and tell her that there was a plan signed by her organization and that she hadn't told you about it in advance?
Did you reprimand her?
8:25 p.m.
National Security and Intelligence Advisor, Privy Council Office
Any conversation I had with Commissioner Lucki is private.
8:25 p.m.
Senator, Quebec (Mille Isles), C
I see.
So when you discuss national security with the commissioner of the RCMP, those conversations are private and not of public interest.
8:25 p.m.
National Security and Intelligence Advisor, Privy Council Office
I'm not going to discuss a private conversation I had with her here. The conversations and discussions we had regarding the national situation across the country are on the record. We have minutes of them all.
8:25 p.m.
Senator, Quebec (Mille Isles), C
My sense is that you advised the Prime Minister…
8:25 p.m.
Senator, Quebec (Mille Isles), C
…in your office tower without consulting the people on the ground.
8:25 p.m.
National Security and Intelligence Advisor, Privy Council Office
That's not true.
8:25 p.m.
Senator, Ontario, PSG
Thank you, Chair.
I was going to ask about lessons learned, but I think, given the interaction we've just had, it would be very helpful for you to review for this committee the relationship between intelligence and security and policing, and why they are separate in their mandates but they do have touchpoints.
Could you describe that for us again?
8:25 p.m.
National Security and Intelligence Advisor, Privy Council Office
The principle of police independence is fundamental in this country. I don't direct the RCMP, the OPP or any provincial or municipal police force. We receive intelligence and information to form a threat picture. There is intelligence that is retained by the policing agencies, the RCMP being one of them, in order to execute operations such as the one in Coutts.
I had no expectation that I would see the tactical plan. I have no ability to assess the tactical plan. We are not policing experts. That's not what we do.
We relied on the commissioner of the RCMP to ensure there was a tactical plan that could be executed, and she did that. In fact, the plan that was put into play on or about February 17, and then through the end of the clearing of Ottawa and the convoys across the country, was aptly executed, led by the RCMP and the OPP.
8:25 p.m.
Senator, Ontario, PSG
Could you also assure this committee that it would be inappropriate for the Prime Minister or any minister of the Crown to direct policing directly or through you?
8:25 p.m.
National Security and Intelligence Advisor, Privy Council Office
Absolutely, and there was never a request to direct police.
When Commissioner Lucki was aware of the situation in Coutts, she spoke to her minister about it, as is appropriate, to tell him that there was a police action under way.
8:25 p.m.
The Joint Chair Hon. Gwen Boniface
Are you finished, Senator Harder?
We'll move to Senator Patterson.
8:25 p.m.
Senator, Nunavut, CSG
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Thomas, you talked about the definition of a national security threat, and you said that the definition is assigned a meaning but that it “requires a broad interpretation”. As I understood it, you were saying that it requires a broad interpretation beyond the definition in the act in paragraph 2(c).
Can you elaborate on that, please?
8:30 p.m.
National Security and Intelligence Advisor, Privy Council Office
Paragraph 2(c) describes a situation where CSIS has an identifiable group or individual who is going to take action and they can then collect intelligence on that individual or that group. It doesn't then allow the RCMP to take action. It means that they can, within their mandate, now act, which is generally collecting intelligence on that individual.
That definition does not enable the kind of authorities that were required to end a situation such as the convoys and the blockades and the occupations that we were faced with across this country in February 2022.
December 1st, 2022 / 8:30 p.m.
Senator, Nunavut, CSG
Thank you.
We've just been talking about policing, so I'd like to ask you about a remark you made in your opening comments: that, as I understood it, you “determined” the police in Ottawa could not respond. I think this was around the third weekend that you were saying that. After three weeks, the police could not respond.
I'd just like to ask you, do you have an opinion as to whether the root cause of this situation—which, as you have explained, got out of control—was a failure of policing in the city of Ottawa?
8:30 p.m.
National Security and Intelligence Advisor, Privy Council Office
As I said, I'm not a policing expert. I think there was an underestimation of the intention of the people who came to Ottawa. It was seen more as a traditional protest, which Ottawa Police Service manages constantly. The situation rapidly—Chief Sloly said from the Saturday of the first weekend—became beyond the capacity of the Ottawa Police Service. Immediately, we saw impacts on the city of Ottawa. The Rideau Centre closed that Saturday, so it was, from the first weekend, different from anything that had been experienced.
It took some time to understand how large it was—how embedded it was, how entrenched it was, what the logistics supply chains were and how much money was fuelling it, which allowed people to stay—and that we were not able to use existing authorities, or the existing authorities were not used, in order to resolve the problem.
While Ottawa was the biggest, I do repeat that this was a national crisis. There were instances across the country.
8:30 p.m.
Senator, Nunavut, CSG
In your testimony, you said that better relations have been developed between your office and others as a result of this experience with the convoy.
Could you tell us if there are any other lessons learned or new practices that have resulted from this experience?