Information & Ethics Committee on May 2nd, 2023

[Morris Rosenberg]

One of the big differences is the influence that we might call the power of persuasion. A lot of countries, including ours, use that.

I have to say, and I want to stress this, that the mindset really was different during the 2010s.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

What is the difference between influence and interference?

[Morris Rosenberg]

Interference is more of a secret intervention.

I'm going to say this in English, just to be clear.

With the Chinese, one thing that's really difficult is.... If you take what happened in B.C.—it was Kenny Chiu's riding—there was stuff that started in China in newspapers and was picked up on WeChat. There were people in the community who said, gee, this guy Kenny Chiu is a bad guy because he'll bring in this foreign influence registry that's going to require all Chinese to register and the Conservative Party is going to break relations or whatever. The question is, how much of this was being orchestrated by Beijing and how much of this was a genuine view of Chinese Canadians or other Canadians?

There are people in Canada who have business relations with China and who have very strong interests in maintaining them. If a party takes a view that's counter to China's, they may, completely in good faith, be expressing their views. On the other hand, there are other people who may have family in China who have been threatened, and they need to speak the party line. How you tell the difference between the two is very hard.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

That is ambiguous, actually.

I have read your report. I assume that you had the competencies of a former deputy minister of Foreign Affairs.

Were there other considerations? I'm not talking about partisan considerations. On what basis were you chosen?

[Morris Rosenberg]

I was chosen for three of my experiences that were perhaps relevant: one at the Department of Foreign Affairs and another at the Department of Justice. The deputy minister of Justice is a member of the deputy ministers' committee. I also spent five years at the Privy Council Office.

They wanted someone who understood how the machine works. I had that knowledge. My predecessor, Jim Judd, who is a former deputy minister of National Defence and a former director of the security service, had training similar to mine.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

You said earlier that your report wasn't about foreign interference, it was about the use of the protocol. In fact, the report documents what the protocol is, how it was used, and what can be improved. That is clear.

In your report, 23 words out of 23,000 talk about interference. So it is not a report about interference. However, the Prime Minister has been telling us for months that your report concluded that there was no interference. In the House, we are told that your report concluded that there was no interference, although very little is said about it.

[Morris Rosenberg]

The only thing I can say is that I think my report speaks for itself. I did not do any interpretation.

My report deals with the operation of the protocol. At the beginning, I gave a kind of introduction to inform people of what interference is. As well, I quoted what the people I interviewed said, including what the people responsible for the security services said. I also quoted what was said by deputy directors of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and by senior officials at the Communications Security Establishment, or CSE—

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Rosenberg, the instruction given in your report is remarkable. I have nothing to say about that.

However, what intrigues me are the four lines on page 46 that say we cannot conclude that there was interference. That is what is said in those four lines. However, our Prime Minister says the report concludes that there was no interference.

That seems to me to be a greatly exaggerated interpretation of your report. Regarding the protocol, the application and the evaluation, your report is exceptional. But it was not a report about interference.

[Morris Rosenberg]

It is not a report about interference, and I did not make that recommendation.

I'll say this in English.

The United States Director of National Intelligence does a report on foreign interference, a secure version and a public version, within a couple of months of the election. We should consider doing the same thing.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

It is a very interesting recommendation.

Would you agree with me that the interpretation given by the Prime Minister in public is greatly exaggerated?

[Morris Rosenberg]

Given that I did not hear what the Prime Minister said, I can't comment on that.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Okay, thank you.

Rightly or wrongly, your independence has been widely questioned. When someone has a direct connection with the Pierre Elliot Trudeau Foundation and is retained to assess interference, but is not certain whether there was interference in the past, that seems to me to be everything but “independent”.

[Morris Rosenberg]

Can you repeat that?

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

That isn't “independent”.

[Morris Rosenberg]

With all due respect, I think I did the job I was asked to do. Is having been the president of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation going to mean I am denied access to all sorts of positions?

As I said, I didn't think that what happened in 2016 was connected with interference.

I'm going to read the comments by Professor Wark that I read, again. Just a moment. I'm looking for the passage in question.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

That's fine, I remember what you said.

[Morris Rosenberg]

Okay.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Good. Having worked at the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation doesn't disqualify you. I am simply asking you for your interpretation of that.

Do you think it is reasonable for people to doubt your independence?

[Morris Rosenberg]

I think that is the perception some people have, but, in my opinion, it is not accurate.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Okay, thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Villemure and Mr. Rosenberg.

Mr. Green, you have six minutes. Go ahead.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Rosenberg, I can imagine that being before this committee, considering some of the allegations, insinuations and outright attacks on your character and reputation, is probably not easy for you to sit through.

You've stated that you thought a public inquiry might have helped. Do you agree that perhaps this could have been avoided if the relationship between the former governor general, Mr. David Johnston, the foundation and the investigation into this.... Could that have helped your position as the former president of the organization?

[Morris Rosenberg]

I think there are a whole lot of balls up in the air on this.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

There sure are.

[Morris Rosenberg]

I said at the end of my remarks, with respect to all this stuff about the Trudeau Foundation and the 2016 donation, that there should be an independent investigation. It think that's different from the broader issue of an investigation into the issue of election interference.