Procedure and House Affairs Committee on April 14th, 2023

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I'm wondering then why the individual testifying would not have informed Ms. Ng about the troubling information that CSIS provided.

[Katie Telford]

Madam Chair, I would take you and the members back to what I said in my opening statement. Even what we share between other cleared individuals within government is something that we have to be incredibly sensitive and careful about. Threat reduction measures, if they are deemed to be something that is necessary, are something that security officials do—not political staff.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

In June 2017, at Ms. Telford's request, the national security adviser prepared a document entitled “Memorandum for the Prime Minister”. A draft of this memo was viewed by Global News, and it states that Beijing agents were “assisting Canadian candidates running for political offices”.

I'm wondering what prompted Ms. Telford to request this memo.

[Katie Telford]

As I said in my opening statement, I ask a lot of questions in a lot of meetings. Sometimes my name also gets attached to things even when they're not coming directly from me. I have learned that over time.

While I can't speak to the specifics of this memo for the reasons I've said previously, my understanding through the reporting is that this was an unsigned memo. It's particularly strange and not my experience to receive unsigned memos in the PMO.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Through you, Chair, did the Prime Minister receive the memo? It was requested.

[Katie Telford]

Madam Chair, my previous answer stands for that question as well.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

The previous answer was that the Prime Minister receives—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

I don't even know what's happening. We were doing so well.

We set a timer. The timer beeps at the end of the round. I've shown leniency so that we can get you an answer beyond that time, and then we continue. I can ask to see if the timer needs to be louder, but it's been working so far, so I feel like we're in a good spot.

Mr. Turnbull, the floor is yours.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thanks to Ms. Telford for being here today.

We've had lots of good testimony at our committee, including yours today, Ms. Telford. One thing in particular that I would like to quote is from CSIS director David Vigneault, who stated:

What I can say, and what we have said publicly many times over the last number of years, is that the actors who are engaged in foreign interference against Canadians do so at all levels of government—at the federal, provincial and municipal levels—and they are doing it across party lines.

I believe you made a similar comment in your opening remarks that foreign interference affects all levels of government and all political parties. Unfortunately, I think in our proceedings and throughout many months now, we've seen a highly politicized environment. It is unfortunate. We've seen some members of this committee try to use this issue to score cheap political points at the expense of our democracy, I feel.

Ms. Telford, do you think that Canadians are well served by those trying to make this into a partisan issue?

[Katie Telford]

No, I don't. I think there's a lot of.... I've seen this, obviously, at times, but not as much as I think we would all like, which is to bring this into a non-partisan arena or even a multipartisan arena.

That's the interesting thing in terms of some of the mechanisms that are in place that this government created because there was nothing before this government, certainly nothing anywhere close to the things that this government has put into place. One of the mechanisms, NSICOP, is multipartisan, so I almost think of it as non-partisan, because the work that comes out of it and the way in which they operate feels that way, in contrast to sometimes what we see in other places. It is actually a multipartisan place, which is all parliamentarians with full access. They are cleared and get full access on the subjects they are studying.

Meanwhile, there are a whole number of other organizations, as I've already gone through. Then, as I said, there are a number of other things. If you were to talk to the minister of heritage, if you were to talk to Minister LeBlanc, there are a number of other ministers.... Much of government has to consider the possibilities of foreign interference these days, so that's why there's a whole-of-government approach on this as well.

As you said, it's beyond government—it's far beyond government—so there have been organizations set up, coordination bodies set up between provincial and federal bodies. There have been new communication channels set up between security services, financial sectors and businesses, and all kinds of things that have been going on in the last number of years that would be really worthwhile—for everybody who hasn't already—learning even more about. I think these are things that could give comfort to Canadians—to know that all these steps are being taken and that it is being taken this seriously, not just by this government but by the whole country, because holding our institutions strong and being comfortable that our democracy is working, there's nothing more important than that, I don't think, for Canadians.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

I concur wholeheartedly with that statement and that very strong sentiment that you've just sent.

One of the things that struck me in our proceedings time and time again as slightly unjust is the constant accusations we've heard that this government hasn't taken action to combat foreign interference, but the facts really simply do not back that up.

As you mentioned in your opening remarks, David Morrison said before this committee that the tools to address foreign interference are increasing. NSICOP, NSIRA and the panel did not exist before this government took office. We set up the critical election incident public protocol, which is the panel, or the panel is part of. We took the lead on setting up with the G7 countries the rapid response mechanism. The protocol, the panel and the RRM were all part of our four-pillar plan to protect Canadian democracy.

We've continued, in my view, based on all the evidence that's out there, to adapt and evolve our response. The protocol was independently reviewed after both of the last two elections and updates were made to really strengthen it.

These are just a few examples. You've cited some of them, and I think we could all list many others.

There's always more to do. I think we've acknowledged that and you've acknowledged that in your remarks, but would you agree that this government has taken strong action on this, that we take it seriously and that in fact we've taken more action, really, than any previous government?

[Katie Telford]

Yes, I believe that to be factually correct. As well, this government has also committed to taking even more actions—and very soon—and is in the midst of doing that.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Great.

We've heard—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

No, I'm sorry, Mr. Turnbull. I know that possibly you couldn't hear it, but you wrapped up right as a beep happened.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

I couldn't hear it. I'm sorry, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Ms. Telford has provided you an answer, so thank you for that.

We will enter into our fourth round. We're going to start with Mr. Cooper, who will be followed by Mr. Zuberi, Madam Normandin and Ms. Blaney. Then I'll give you two more names and that will bring us to an end.

Mr. Cooper will start.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Ms. Telford, through you, Madam Chair, 10 weeks before the 2021 election, Bob Saroya, the then member of Parliament for Markham—Unionville, received a cryptic and threatening text message from Beijing's consul general in Toronto suggesting that he would no longer be a member of Parliament after the 2021 election.

Were you, the Prime Minister or anyone in the PMO briefed or do you otherwise have knowledge about that text message?

[Katie Telford]

I can't speak to this information. I'm sorry.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

You can't speak to the information. Is it because you don't know? Why can't you speak to this information?

[Katie Telford]

No. It's because, as I said before, as frustrating as it is for all of us, I can't get into confirming, let alone denying, information and going beyond the bounds of the security heads who were here before me.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

I find it very interesting that you will not confirm whether you have knowledge of that text message.

I'll ask an even broader question. Do you have any knowledge of interference by Beijing in the 2021 election in the riding of Markham—Unionville?

[Katie Telford]

I can't speak to specific pieces of information. As you know, I was not the cleared representative during the campaign. I'm sorry—that's through the chair. The member knows I was not the cleared representative during the campaign, but in terms of what I have been briefed on subsequent to the campaign, you will have seen a lot of this come out of the review of the panel's work during the 2021 campaign. Broadly speaking, yes, I have been briefed on attempted interference and influence during the last elections.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Did that occur in the riding of Markham—Unionville—yes or no?

[Katie Telford]

I can't speak to that in terms of the specifics.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

That's another convenient non-answer.

Ms. Telford, through you, Madam Chair, when I asked you in my previous round about when the Prime Minister first learned about Beijing's interference in the 2019 election, you didn't answer. You said it's part of an “ongoing conversation”. You conveniently refused to even acknowledge your knowledge of or familiarity with one of the very few documents that have been produced by the Prime Minister's own department, the PCO. It is dated February 21, 2020. It spoke about a subtle but effective interference network in the 2019 election.

In the interests of transparency, Canadians deserve to know: When did those conversations begin?