Evidence of meeting #132 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was interference.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Director General, National Security and Chief Superintendent, Federal Policing, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
I can't comment on that today, Mr. Trudel.
Bloc
Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
Earlier, in your opening remarks, you said that interference wasn't always criminal conduct.
Can you explain to me exactly what you meant by that?
From what I understood, there could be legal and criminal interference. However, I imagine that you intervene only when it is criminal. So we have to make a distinction between the two.
Director General, National Security and Chief Superintendent, Federal Policing, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
We were invited to appear before you to talk about misinformation and disinformation. That is why I will speak only on this subject.
If someone's opinion differs from that of other people, that's not necessarily criminal. According to the legislation that came into force in August, a criminal act is committed when the purpose of the disinformation is to influence an electoral or government process. So we have to prove that certain elements are present in order to investigate a criminal offence.
Bloc
Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
Earlier, you said that the new threats were more violent than before.
What were you referring to?
Director General, National Security and Chief Superintendent, Federal Policing, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
I was referring to the ideologically motivated threat—the threat of ideologically motivated violent extremism, or IMVE.
Bloc
Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
You're not talking about physical violence.
Is that correct?
Director General, National Security and Chief Superintendent, Federal Policing, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
No, it's ideologically motivated violent extremism. This type of threat has also increased. We need to redirect some of the existing resources within national security based on the type of threat and the intelligence that is shared with us.
Bloc
Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
All right.
I saw an article in The Globe and Mail this morning. It says that the RCMP is struggling to address the threat of foreign interference from countries such as China, India, Iran and Russia, because it operates under a muddled mandate.
Do you think your mandate is muddled?
What mandate would you need to effectively address threats from those countries?
What is the current legislation missing, and what tools do you need to deal with the issue?
Director General, National Security and Chief Superintendent, Federal Policing, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
We got some new tools about six weeks ago. We're eager to study how they work and put them to use. Certainly, we will always need more resources.
As for having a muddled mandate, I don't think that's true. As threats evolve, we definitely have to adapt. Our investigators have to examine any new threat. Accordingly, we have to provide training. Since the situation is constantly changing, it's also important to educate the public on an ongoing basis.
Bloc
Denis Trudel Bloc Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
An election may be called soon.
Are you doing anything specific to prepare should that happen?
Greg O'Hayon Director General, Federal Policing Security Intelligence, Intelligence and International Policing, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
I'm the RCMP representative on the Security and Intelligence Threats to Election Task Force. We've been preparing for the next election for at least eight months precisely because we anticipate interference.
When it comes to threats—
Director General, Federal Policing Security Intelligence, Intelligence and International Policing, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
At the time, it was thought that—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Unfortunately, the member's time is up.
You'll get a turn for two and a half minutes next time, Mr. Trudel.
Mr. Green, go ahead, please, for six minutes, and then maybe a little bit more after that.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you.
As part of the committee study on the use of social media platforms for data harvesting and unethical or illicit sharing of personal information for foreign entities, Brigitte Gauvin, the acting assistant commissioner of federal policing for national security in the RCMP, noted that the RCMP's national security program investigates criminal activities, and if the activities pertain to foreign interference, an investigation takes place. However, she emphasized that the RCMP does not investigate social media for misinformation, disinformation or attempts to influence the platform. It investigates only if there is criminal activity.
Why is the RCMP not investigating misinformation, disinformation or attempts to influence on social media platforms?
Director General, National Security and Chief Superintendent, Federal Policing, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Like I said earlier, some instances of misinformation and disinformation may not be illegal in themselves, so the RCMP needs to look at whether a criminal offence has taken place. When we establish this, of course we will investigate, and it falls under the national security mandate. When it involves cybercrime, then my colleague, Mr. Baylin, would investigate.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you.
For the purpose of this committee, given the study that's before us, in what context, if any, could the spread of disinformation online be the subject of an RCMP criminal investigation?
Director General, National Security and Chief Superintendent, Federal Policing, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Like I mentioned earlier, it would be in relation to the goal of influencing government processes. That would make it illegal.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
When was the last time an investigation like that occurred? You don't have to give specifics, but give us a sense of how often this might be the case.
Director General, National Security and Chief Superintendent, Federal Policing, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
It was when one of the new sections was just enacted a few weeks ago.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Since this new section has been enacted, there's already been an investigation under the new parameters. Is that correct?
Director General, National Security and Chief Superintendent, Federal Policing, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
No, the only thing I'm saying is that it's a very new law, so right now, I'm not aware of it being used, but again, there are many investigations across the country.
NDP
Director General, National Security and Chief Superintendent, Federal Policing, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
On disinformation, it doesn't mean that disinformation could come with threats, for example, and then we could use the Criminal Code. We need to look at all the facts and not just at the term “disinformation”. There's a wide range of the Criminal Code that we could use.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I'm sorry. I need clarity because I'm not understanding the response, somewhat. I understood you to say that the criminal threshold is if there was evidence of an influence campaign or of foreign interference that would change the government's policy. Is that not correct?