Procedure and House Affairs Committee on April 14th, 2023

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

No, I'm not referring to you, but through you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

I was hoping so. I did not hear those two important words, “through you”.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Yes. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

I did appreciate the exchange for the most part. It was nice that we were able to pause so the interpreters could do their work, but if we're going to be in a spot where we are perhaps putting words in other people's mouths, then I need us to go through the chair.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Madam Chair, will you allow the witness to answer the question?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

It will be coming out of possible later time, but yes, I would love to do that.

Ms. Telford.

[Katie Telford]

I want to clarify. The member was asserting a number of things about what I do, and I want to go back to what I said in my opening statement about my role.

The Privy Council Office does not report to me. I manage the Prime Minister's Office. I do, however, work very closely with the Privy Council Office. There are some extraordinary public servants in there, including one who reports directly to the Prime Minister—the national security intelligence adviser.

I want to remind the room about what she said, which was that the connection that was being made between the 11 candidates and, essentially, much of what you're asserting there was inaccurate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

I appreciate your keeping that brief, because I try to make sure the time for the question and for the answer is the same.

I will now proceed to Ms. Sahota.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Telford, for coming here today.

I still hold the belief that staff should not be the ones who are held accountable, but I want to thank you for taking the time to come today, to make Parliament functional. It's important to see that you've done that many times during your time as chief of staff, and not many others have ever done that. I think that goes to show that you are a leader.

However, I think some of the things that have been implied.... You've clarified that it is untrue that a chief of staff controls PCO. In your opening remarks you made it quite clear that many times, as the consumer of intelligence, you do your due diligence in terms of finding out what has been done, what can be done and whether, even within the Office of the Prime Minister, anyone has the authority to do so.

I think that is really important. Maybe we can get to some of what Mr. Brock is trying to get at. Perhaps what we need is a better understanding of how you get briefed on intelligence. Specifically, what type of intelligence is brought to your attention and by whom, and what happens exactly in specific circumstances when you receive that?

[Katie Telford]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Intelligence comes to us in many different forms from many different parts of the government, though it all ultimately funnels through the Privy Council Office and the NSIA in terms of what comes directly to us.

They bring together so many different parts of government where intelligence can get collected, from the Global Affairs department to DND and CSE. There's a glorious number of acronyms that can sometimes, but not always, roll off the tongue easily. They produce all that information and then it comes into the PCO intelligence analysis unit, which will pull it together and determine what needs to make its way to the Prime Minister.

The NSIA, as I mentioned earlier, will flag some information that she will want read. Sometimes I will walk into the office and the CRO will be sitting there, and I know I need to clear my schedule to read something. Other times it will get scheduled. Sometimes it's formal briefings. Sometimes we just see something, sometimes in reporting, and we will need to just catch up quickly in a sort of “pull-aside”, as they say in government, whenever we can find the time.

Also, of course, ahead of any international meetings, whether they're happening here in Canada or happening when we're travelling around the world, it's particularly important, because we work very closely with our allies on all matters to do with intelligence as well, particularly with our Five Eyes partners. There are a lot of different opportunities for us to talk about these things, which is is why it gets complicated to try to pin down some of these briefings in the way I was being asked about.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Part of your role is making sure that the Prime Minister gets the best information. Through these briefings, I'm assuming that at times it seems, from your description, that it's just you getting briefed on some of the matters.

Given that you're not an intelligence official yourself but a consumer, you rely on the work of these officials that is given to you. How do you then determine on what, when and why the Prime Minister gets briefed? How do you make those decisions?

[Katie Telford]

As I mentioned in my opening statement, I am usually with the Prime Minister when he's briefed on these matters. It's actually pretty rare for me to have formal briefings alone. It doesn't never happen, but it's pretty rare. It's usually a question of scheduling when that happens, more than anything, because it's really based on the NSIA's advice.

Sometimes other staff who are in the office, other senior staff, will meet with officials or they'll read something in reporting and they'll say this is something that we should make sure the PM sees sooner rather than later. Ultimately, though, even those thoughts will go to the NSIA who will make the ultimate recommendation on what needs to be scheduled, who should be there and in what format he should get briefed.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Talking particularly about foreign election interference, I'm sure often these briefings that you're discussing are not particularly about election interference. They're about travel that you do and interactions, foreign relations with many countries. I imagine the scale and scope of intelligence that you receive on any given day is quite vast, given the international issues going on around the world, with Ukraine, the Chinese spy balloons and the many things that we're seeing even in the news down south in the last few days.

Given that it is so vast, can you help us understand a little bit better the volume of intelligence that is provided to your office?

[Katie Telford]

It varies, as you say, depending on events. Obviously a lot more started coming in around the time of the balloons, for example. Certainly, as has been publicly spoken about before, in the lead-up to and of course following the invasion of Ukraine, all kinds of intelligence came in much more increasing volumes.

It really does depend on the events, but there have been many events, as you said, in the last number of years. This is a significant part of the job.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

We go over now to Ms. Gaudreau.

Let me just say that we have two official languages and that you may speak in the language of your choice.

Ms. Telford, I know that you understand French perfectly and that you speak it, but our time is limited. You may speak in the language of your choice.

Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Telford.

I don't have much time and my questions will be quick.

We have already gleaned some information. What we would like to know, actually, is how the protocol works within government. We want to understand how information is conveyed to the relevant ministers.

Can you tell us more about the protocol?

[Katie Telford]

This is why there's a question around whether I'm the right person to be appearing here. As I said, I'm going to do my best. I apologize for answering in English, but I just want to make sure that I'm getting it right and I can speak faster.

It's largely run through the NSIA. That is who governs all of the gathering of intelligence. It's actually why the Prime Minister changed the title. It was the NSA when we came into government and the Prime Minister inserted the word “intelligence” into it because that is such a huge part of that function. They will gather, working with all of the public servants who work for her and working with other security agencies across government, all the information on whatever the given issues are in any given week. There are weekly briefs, daily briefs, informal briefs and formal briefings. It really depends on what's going on in the world.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you very much.

My next question will be even more targeted.

We know that Ms. Thomas, who is the senior national security advisor to the Prime Minister, is there to guide you and tell you what is important and urgent.

What are the criteria that you use to follow up on Ms. Thomas' recommendations? What are the factors that lead you to believe that something should be red flagged, as you said, and is worthy of concern?

[Katie Telford]

It's a question best asked to her. I can't remember now, having read her testimony here, whether she answered a question like that. It's usually, at least in terms of what makes its way to me.... There may be things that don't make their way to me that should make their way to me or to the Prime Minister, but I can't speak to what I don't see. What I do see is usually pretty self-evident in terms of what is of importance or of relevance. It's an interesting question, but it really is just pretty self-evident.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

That leads me to my next question.

By asking you what the criteria are, I am seeking to know who is held accountable, when a process will be validated when it perhaps didn't work well in the past, and what circumstances call for urgent action.

When Ms. Thomas testified, she did indicate that information had been passed on. We would like to know who had that information and what happened. Why is it that at a certain point in time, the minister and the Prime Minister said that there was no foreign interference or that they weren't made aware of any, but now they are saying that there was indeed foreign interference?

What are the criteria? We want to be sure that the electoral process is as tight as a drum and be able to reassure Canadians on that score. Please reassure us.

Who is the guardian of this information? How does it work within cabinet between the Prime Minister and the ministers?

[Katie Telford]

I will try to do it efficiently and give two parts to the answer. First, it is the national security and intelligence adviser who pulls all of that information together.

Second, there are legitimate questions. We had them when we were in opposition as a party and they continue to exist today. Even in government, you have questions about whether everything is working right, and it's actually why this government put in place NSIRA. NSIRA is there to oversee the security agencies and to make sure all of those parts are working and, specifically, working on this now.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I just want to state that today was the last possible day that you could testify, Ms. Telford. Thank you for being here.

We are holding this meeting today to try and understand what went on. This is an excellent opportunity for us to try to see if information was omitted. If information was omitted, perhaps corrective measures were taken and we would be able to reassure voters that our electoral system is sound. Right now, I can't claim to be convinced.

I will give you my last 30 seconds so that you can tell us more. Otherwise, there's no reason for our being here today, Ms. Telford.

[Katie Telford]

What I would say to reassure Canadians is that I know the incredible work that senior officials do day in and day out on this. I spend a lot of time with them, and they are constantly working to refine and improve processes, especially as new and different types of information come forward. I know that any time action can be taken, they take it, and I know that any time the Prime Minister can take action, he takes it. He certainly encourages that kind of action as well.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I think I have enough time remaining to ask another question.

Madam Chair, can the witness tell the committee if there is any information on foreign interference that is subject to cabinet confidentiality and is not disclosed to ministers or the Prime Minister?

[Katie Telford]

No. If I'm understanding you correctly, nothing is ever kept from the Prime Minister, certainly not by me.