Evidence of meeting #56 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 interference.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Okay. We will take a moment to pause and look at the technical issues.
For people on the screen, do you hear us in the room? You are able to hear us, so it's in the room.
Conservative
John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON
The other thing that's happening is there's a lot of feedback on Peter's microphone that's coming through online.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Commentary aside, do other people who are on the screen also hear feedback when Mr. Julian speaks?
Liberal
Sherry Romanado Liberal Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC
Madam Chair, the problem, as we were hearing in the last panel, is that if someone in the room has their microphone open and one of us is speaking, we get the feedback.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Okay, but otherwise you do not get feedback.
Mr. Brassard, when Mrs. Romanado was speaking, could you hear her without feedback?
Conservative
John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON
There was no feedback when Mrs. Romanado was speaking.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Thank you.
Mrs. Romanado might have a point that sometimes our mikes are left on and that might cause it, so we'll just be mindful to make sure there are no microphones on in the room.
I think everything is now functioning. I'm just confirming that you can hear the sound of my voice.
I think we're all good.
Mr. Julian.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'm going to read into the record the notice of motion that I provided yesterday morning. It was distributed Tuesday afternoon to committee, and of course I also gave notice this morning that it would be moved immediately following our witnesses. Therefore, there's been ample notice for all parties to know what is coming forward, when it is coming forward, and how I'm moving it.
I will now read the motion into the record. Then I will have some comments afterward, Madam Chair.
That the committee report to the House that it calls on the Government of Canada to launch a national public inquiry into allegations of foreign interference in Canada's democratic system, including but not limited to allegations of interference in general elections by foreign governments;
That this inquiry be granted all necessary powers to call witnesses from the government and from political parties, including but not limited to Ministers, former Ministers, chiefs of staff to the Prime Minister and to the Leader of the Official Opposition during the 2019 and 2021 federal election campaigns and national campaign directors for the 2019 and 2021 federal election campaigns of the Liberal Party of Canada and the Conservative Party of Canada;
And that this inquiry have to power to order and review all documents it deems necessary for this work, including documents which are related to national security.
I'm glad to have finally been able to move this after two days and after an hour of procedural circus.
Madam Chair, I'd like to start off by saying I think Mr. Cooper has made the case for this national public inquiry through his own actions, because this was a circus both last night and today. It clearly indicates that what we need is a non-partisan national public inquiry to get answers for Canadians. What answers do we need? Well, certainly, I think there have been disturbing allegations that have come out of news reports published by Robert Fife and Steven Chase in The Globe and Mail and by Sam Cooper for Global News. Those allegations, as I mentioned earlier today, could possibly involve violations of the Canada Elections Act. They are very serious allegations.
I would have to profoundly disagree with the Prime Minister's statement that he doesn't believe a national public inquiry is warranted. The member for Burnaby South, Jagmeet Singh, raised this on Sunday, as you know. We've had other political parties subsequently weigh in. It should be a matter of consensus that this committee direct the House that a national public inquiry is the best method to ensure that Canadians get answers.
Some might say, “Well, let's just limit it to the influence that Beijing has had in elections.” I'd like to remind committee members about the testimony we have heard—and I'll quote from November 3, 2022—in which a witness said the following:
Russian information and influence operations are persistent and they are growing. They do not turn on and off with election cycles and have intensified during the course of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
He went on:
Russia's primary and full-time focus is to undermine and destabilize our democracy by exploiting the most polarizing issues of the day.
Further:
These attacks affect our political environment and choices every day, not just during election periods.
There are allegations that interference by Beijing may have touched up to 11 candidates. Those allegations need to be investigated through a national public inquiry.
Ongoing concerns have been raised about Russia, not just in the articles published by the National Observer but also, as I mentioned yesterday, by the University of Calgary School of Public Policy, which very clearly indicated in its research that Russian state agents were involved in disinformation, and, of course, by witnesses who have come to our committee.
Does that exclude other foreign governments or state actors? Obviously it does not. That's why I believe we should include the allegations of foreign interference in Canada's democratic system as part of this national public inquiry and not limit it to any one of the foreign powers that are potentially interfering in our democracy and potentially interfering in our general elections.
Who should be called? We're providing some direction in that regard, but clearly the allegations so far have indicated connection to both the Liberal Party campaign and the Conservative Party campaign, and we believe that direction is something that should be provided as part of the national public inquiry.
Do we believe people should be taken off the street and other names should be mentioned? Clearly we do not, although the national public inquiry does have the ability to look where it needs to in terms of witness testimony, so this is not a restrictive list at all. However, it is also important that the national public inquiry have the power to order and review all documents, and that includes documents related to national security.
This is an issue that Canadians are concerned about. This is an issue we need to take a position on. That is why I'm putting forward this motion, and hopefully we'll have the consensus to move it through to the House and to say to the government that this is something that needs to be acted on within the framework of a non-partisan and independent national public inquiry.
In light of the many serious allegations of interference by China and Russia, which could also include violations of the Canada Elections Act, it seems important, as Mr. Jagmeet Singh stated so well last Sunday, that we have a national public and non-partisan inquiry. We saw a little earlier how partisanship can lead to a circus atmosphere rather than to a valid and important inquiry.
We are therefore simply requesting that our committee present a report to the House and that it then call on the government to launch a national public inquiry. The Prime Minister has said that we don't need one, but I personally believe that it is very important to have one so Canadians can get all answers they need.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Thank you.
So that everyone knows what is happening, my speaking list currently has Mr. Cooper, Monsieur Berthold, Mr. Fergus and Ms. Romanado.
Go ahead, Mr. Cooper.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I will be moving an amendment to Mr. Julian's motion, and I'll read that into the record. We will distribute a copy of that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Why don't we get it distributed, and then I'll give you back the floor. Is that okay?
For me to maintain order and sanity, can I proceed with the meeting as I usually would? I will offer you the list I have and then return to it when we come back to the main amendment. Or would you like me to start a new list for the subamendment? Can I maintain the way I usually run the meeting so that we can give a turn to everybody who wants one? Can I see some nodding of heads?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
The way I read it yesterday is okay, is it? That's perfect.
Mr. Cooper, you will have the floor once we get it distributed. Has it been sent to the clerk in both official languages?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Stay tuned. It is coming, and we will proceed then.
Colleagues, I believe you should have it in your inboxes. Some people in the room don't have it yet.
For colleagues who are online, can you give me a nod of the head to say you've received the amendment?
I see thumbs-up and some heads nodding. That's perfect. We'll be starting in a couple of seconds.
We'll go back to Mr. Cooper.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I will read my amendment into the record.
I move that the amendment be amended in the first paragraph by replacing all of the words after the words “foreign interference” with the following: “by Beijing in the 2019 and 2021 federal elections”; in the second paragraph by replacing all of the words after the words “the government” with the following: “and from all political parties”; by adding the following after the second paragraph: “that the inquiry investigate abuse of diaspora groups by hostile foreign governments”; and by adding the following after the last paragraph: “that the individual heading this inquiry be selected by unanimous agreement by the House leaders of the officially recognized parties in the House of Commons and that this inquiry does not impede or stop the committee's study on foreign election interference, including the production of documents and calling of witnesses”.
Now, Madam Chair, I will speak to my motion.
This is—
Liberal
Sherry Romanado Liberal Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC
Madam Chair, on a point of order, is this admissible? This is completely changing the original motion. It's been completely rewritten.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
If you would provide me a moment to consult with the clerk, that would be great.
Mrs. Romanado, the clerk and I have spoken. It does narrow the scope of the intention of Mr. Julian, so the clerk does feel, and thereby I feel, that it is in order and that the committee members will get to choose if they want to narrow the scope or broaden the scope.
With that, I'm going to proceed by returning the floor to Mr. Cooper.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
The amendment I have put forward is fair, reasonable and measured. It reflects the position taken by the leader of the official opposition, who is in support and spoke yesterday about the need for a national inquiry. With respect to the overriding purpose of Mr. Julian's motion, we support it and welcome it, but at the same time, we would submit that while there are other instances of foreign interference and other bad actors, Beijing—
Pardon; I see there is no camera, as I'm being told.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Can someone please put the camera on Mr. Cooper?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
The camera should always be on the person who's speaking and the camera definitely should not be on me when I'm not speaking.
Mr. Cooper, could you speak again, and we'll see if the camera goes to you?
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
It's on me now. Okay.
Madam Chair, as I was saying, there's no question that there are other foreign state bad actors—including Russia, which Mr. Julian has cited—and that we need to take those threats seriously, but at the same time, the biggest threat posed to Canada by any state is that of the Beijing Communist regime. That has been made clear by our security and intelligence agencies. It's what we heard this morning from CSIS.
Moreover, there have been alarming reports of a sophisticated and vast campaign of interference in our elections in 2019 and 2021, based upon a review of CSIS documents by reputable journalists. Although that interference in no way impacted the overall result of either the 2019 or 2021 election, it did have, or may have had, an impact in certain ridings.
If even one riding is impacted, that's something that should be of grave concern for all Canadians who care about protecting our democracy and our democratic institutions. It should be Canadians and Canadians alone who decide elections, both overall election outcomes and outcomes in ridings, and not hostile foreign state actors.
In the face of that, what I believe is appropriate to get to the bottom of this interference by way of an inquiry is an inquiry that is targeted and focused and that can produce a report in the near future. I would hope that this would be before the next election, which could happen at any time. It would not be desirable to have an inquiry that was expansive and that did not provide a report until perhaps a year or two years down the road. We need answers and we need answers now. That is why a targeted, narrow inquiry makes sense and deals with these very specific allegations and revelations that have been brought forward.
The other aspect of this amendment is to ensure that Justin Trudeau, the Prime Minister, doesn't get to decide unilaterally who the commissioner is. We all really—