Evidence of meeting #126 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was information.
A video is available from Parliament.
Director General and Chief Security Officer, Privy Council Office
I'm sorry. That is a mistake on my part. That is true. You need a secret.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Next, the driver who's employed in the Minister of Health's office requires a need to know and has the right to apply. Is that correct?
Director General and Chief Security Officer, Privy Council Office
A security clearance doesn't give you a right to know—
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
It gives them the right to apply, because they need to know. It's deemed that they must have it in order to be employed.
Director General and Chief Security Officer, Privy Council Office
Yes, sir. We need to make sure, though, that the person who is employed in that position can be trusted with the information that they may overhear.
October 3rd, 2024 / 12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
I'm not disagreeing with that.
The intern who participates in the Liberal party's internship program for two and a half months during the summer, in the office of the Minister of Democratic Institutions, requires a security clearance to work in that office. Is that correct?
Director General and Chief Security Officer, Privy Council Office
I'll take your word for that.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
They have to. I read that.
My point is that you come here today and say that there are some resource and capacity issues, that you've issued a quarter of a million security clearances in the last decade, and that...the fact that 338 MPs might apply is a bit of a challenge. I find that a bit difficult. I'm looking here, as a member of Parliament, Mr. Jorgensen...and I'll ask you about a high level again. In the budget for the office that you work in, who approves and votes on your budget each year?
Director General and Chief Security Officer, Privy Council Office
You do, sir.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Yes. The intern at the Liberal Party of Canada's summer internship program is automatically deemed to have the right to apply, because they need or might need to know at some point in the course of their work.... We're having this push-back here today that for a member of Parliament to have the right to apply for that same status is suddenly an issue for some reason. I go back to when we talked about capacity and challenges. I'm saying that there is a frustrating point when it's required to have this, and “capacity” and questions are used as push-back. The point is that members of Parliament should have the same right to apply. What comes afterwards, in many conversations today—and it's frustrating—is, “We have this challenge.”
Maybe you won't be able to provide this in writing, but I just want to give the context and hammer it home. Could you provide in writing to us how many intern applications were applied for and approved since 2021? My point is that, when there are 338 MPs who might apply and be given the right to apply, I go back to how, at the end of the day, it is very reasonable to do that for members of Parliament, who vote on the budgets that you work under and on legislation that you enact and enforce. I don't think it's unreasonable, and there shouldn't be any challenges to meeting this, so I think that's.... Could we have that number provided in writing, just to provide us with context?
Hopefully, what I've been able to outline is that we can get to yes on this. This is reasonable: It's very fair for members of Parliament to have the right to apply and, considering who is already deemed to have the right to apply on the need-to-know status, Mr. Ruff's bill on that is wholly appropriate and doable. I wonder whether you have any comments on that.
Director General and Chief Security Officer, Privy Council Office
I apologize if I left any misunderstanding. I did not say, at any point, that my team cannot do this. We absolutely can do this. It will take some time, but that's true across the government. I want to leave the fact that I have not said we have an issue with responding to this type of demand.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
It's not so much that capacity is a challenge; other ones have been raised about the volume. My point is that there's an opportunity and a way to get to yes on this. The volume of what's being asked here.... Again, I think a lot of the conversation, over the course of a couple of meetings, was about the other stage of having access to it. The right to apply and the capacity to do this is very reasonable, so to suggest, as you outlined, that capacity could be something...but other questions have been raised about this in the last few days.
I leave it at that and just provide that context, again, that if a Liberal party intern, as an example, has the right to apply for need-to-know status because they work in a minister's office, I make the argument that Mr. Ruff's bill is very reasonable, and that members of Parliament and senators should have the very same right to apply.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ben Carr
Thank you very much, Mr. Duncan.
Mr. Duguid, the floor is yours for five minutes.
Liberal
Terry Duguid Liberal Winnipeg South, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all of our witnesses for their testimony today.
I listened with interest to Mr. Wark's presentation, and I'm sure you listened to it as well. He has strong opinions. He referred to the Five Eyes and our international partners. He said they would not view this legislation very favourably; they do not have this kind of provision as proposed in Mr. Ruff's bill in their systems, and they are looking at NSICOP and other innovations we have introduced very favourably.
I wonder if you might comment on his testimony and whether you agree with it, and summarize the risks you see of passing this legislation. I haven't heard a crisp opinion from you on whether you support or don't support Bill C-377.
I'll then cede my time to Mr. Turnbull.
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy and Strategic Partnerships, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Mr. Chair, I can take a crack at that. It's an excellent question.
What I can speak to, perhaps, is how our closest intelligence partners manage similar situations. The way they do that is also by facing independent scrutiny by designated parliamentarians, similar to how we do it in Canada. For example, the U.S.'s FBI is overseen by specialized congressional intelligence committees. The U.K.'s security service is overseen by the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament. The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation is overseen by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. It's similar for New Zealand, but with a different acronym.
What you'll see is the consistency in how allied partners manage this. There are designated parliamentarians who are cleared to the appropriate levels to receive—based on the reviews, specific files and issues they're looking at—the information they need to be able to carry out that function. It's very much about entrusting a designated group of individuals to carry out that function, similar to what NSICOP does for us.
We would be in a bit of a difficult position if we tried to speak to the views of all of our international colleagues. However, I think it would be fair to say that there would be concern, and there always is, when there's a possibility that they or we, as a designated intelligence service within Canada, would lose control over who gets access to specific pieces of information. That's where it circles back to being very clear about the vocabulary around “need to know” and that having a right to apply does not equal having a need to know.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
I want to follow up on a previous line of questioning with the law clerk, who was here before this panel. I asked about the immunities and privileges of members of Parliament and said how I'm worried about the risks associated with certain cases—as we've seen in the United States and, I think, Australia—of members of Parliament or senators, so parliamentarians, using their immunity to reveal sensitive information in parliamentary proceedings that one could say might undermine our national security. I have that concern.
Do you share concerns that this bill might increase disclosure risk related to sensitive information? I'll ask Ms. Giles and then Mr. Jorgensen, please.
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy and Strategic Partnerships, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
From the CSIS perspective, whenever there are not frameworks in place to prevent the onward disclosure of intelligence, we're concerned about our own information and the protection of our own technical and human sources and our analysis, for the reasons I explained. There are also the concerns that our allies, who give us specific pieces of intelligence for very specific purposes, would have.
We are always concerned about the onward distribution of information. We spend a lot of time thinking about it and making sure that we have frameworks in place to prevent it.
Our current understanding of the bill as constructed is that there are not currently those frameworks built in. That might be something that Parliament and this committee want to consider.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Ms. Giles, can I just be really clear on whether this bill increases onward disclosure risk?
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy and Strategic Partnerships, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Whenever the frameworks are not in place to prevent onward disclosure, the risks are increased.
Liberal
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy and Strategic Partnerships, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
As the bill is currently written, there's an opportunity to put frameworks in place that would help mitigate risks. I think Mr. Jorgensen spoke very eloquently about the measures in place for parliamentarians and NSICOP, and how that onward distribution is prevented.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ben Carr
Thank you very much.
Ms. Gaudreau, the floor is yours for two and a half minutes.
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Let's imagine that I am taking part in a study in a committee. There is a document classified as secret, and the permanent members of the committee would like to get access to certain information contained in it. So I have to make a request, but I also have to go through the security screening based on need to know, in order to get access to that information in the document.
Have I understood correctly?
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy and Strategic Partnerships, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Are you talking about a document classified as secret?