Evidence of meeting #74 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 csis.
A video is available from Parliament.
7:35 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Thank you.
You are correct in saying that CSIS identified foreign interference as a threat during the time Prime Minister Harper was in power.
If I recall correctly, the primary foreign interference threat activity taking place at the time was directed at the provincial governments. The Harper government authorized CSIS to brief the governments of Premier Dalton McGuinty and Premier Kathleen Wynne on these foreign interference threat activities.
7:35 p.m.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Thank you.
I note that in the summer of 2010, the public safety and national security committee held a high-profile meeting to hear testimony from the CSIS director at the time, Richard Fadden.
In that meeting, Mr. Fadden testified that he had information that provincial—just as you said—and municipal politicians in various provinces had come under the influence of foreign interference. He also confirmed that he had briefed Prime Minister Harper's national security adviser and had sought advice from the Privy Council Office on how to deal with foreign interference. Mr. Harper, though, claimed that he had no knowledge of these matters.
Do you think that reflects a failure of former PM Harper and the machinery of government at the time?
7:35 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Well, if one were to take the prime minister at his word, then clearly that information should have been relayed to the prime minister, but I do know that action was taken on that foreign interference because it was a bit of a controversy at the time.
7:35 p.m.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Today you've said that these are symptoms of a system that is not working and that these things should have been put in place a while ago.
Given what you've said today about your particular case, would you have the same criticism for PM Harper and the era in terms of the breakdown of the machinery of government?
7:35 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Well, that's a good question. No, I wouldn't, and here's why.
I think the nature of the PRC changed significantly in and around the time of the expiry of the first term of President Xi, around 2017, when President Xi assumed his second term in power. The form and the nature of President Xi became much clearer, and it became clearer that this was a much more authoritarian state that was using foreign interference threat activities as a way to promulgate its authoritarian model of governance around the world and to defend its interests.
I think the era up until 2017 was a different era, because I followed this situation closely and I wasn't at all concerned about things like Hong Kong prior to 2017-18. I wasn't concerned about Canadian journalists in the PRC prior to that point in time. I don't think the foreign interference threat activities here on Canadian soil were nearly as intense as they have become in the last five years.
7:35 p.m.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Madam Chair, is my time up? Am I not afforded the same generosity? Do I get another 10 seconds?
7:35 p.m.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
I just want to ask if.... I feel like we could spend some more time with MP Chong and hopefully get some more testimony. I wonder if we could invite him back, perhaps in camera, to get into a bit more detail.
7:35 p.m.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
I feel like I have additional questions. I have quite a few other questions.
7:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
I will.... I'm still 10 seconds shy, but it was a little bit of a different story, and Mr. Chong was also providing us insights when he was responding to that.
Mr. Chong, would you be inclined to come back if members were to ask you to come in back camera?
7:35 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
I'm happy to appear in front of the committee in public.
7:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
But you would not want to come in camera. You don't feel that you can add anything in camera that you can't do in public.
7:35 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Yes. I think I can add.... All the useful information I can provide to the committee I can provide in public.
7:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
But the details you don't want to provide to us.
I think what you have undergone has been a little bit disturbing. I think this has actually raised an understanding as to what MPs do deal with. I think you have been courageous in actually sharing that. I know you have a young family, something that I personally don't have. I think it's just a matter of trying to get into the details of it, but is that something you prefer not to do?
7:35 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Yes. I prefer to not speak about the specific details of the threats directed at me or my family. I'm happy to mention that there have been threats, but I don't think the details of the threats are useful for the committee in its work.
7:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Okay. We'll just let members figure out whether we're inviting you back again, but I do appreciate your sharing with us where you stand.
Go ahead, Ms. Sahota.
7:40 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Madam Chair, if the committee would allow.... I'd just like a quick point of clarification, because I don't know when the scheduling would happen again.
Mr. Chong, you said at the beginning of your recommendations that you would recommend having a public inquiry to into the interference by the PRC, and then later on in your testimony you broadened the scope a little bit. I'm wondering if you could clarify whether you think a public inquiry should just be—
7:40 p.m.
Conservative
Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
I have a point of order, Madam Chair. The meeting has ended.
7:40 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
—on the PRC or whether it should include all countries and threats to other members of Parliament as well.
7:40 p.m.
Conservative
Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
She's intervening with the witness. The meeting is over. The time is up for the Liberals.
7:40 p.m.
Conservative
7:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Mr. Berthold, I think she's asking because a comment was made in regard to members—
7:40 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
I'm happy to answer the question.
My experience with public inquiries is that if they are focused, they can achieve results that benefit Canadian institutions, and if they are unfocused, they don't. My view is that any public inquiry should focus exclusively on PRC foreign interference threat activities and not those of other states in order to keep the inquiry focused.
7:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Okay. Perfect.
Mr. Chong, we want to thank you for your time and attention today. We wish you the best.
If there's anything else you want to add, please send it to the clerk and we'll have it translated in both official languages and shared with all committee members.
With that, we wish you the best. Thank you so much for your time today.
Members, we will suspend very quickly before we switch to the in camera portion of our meeting.
[Proceedings continue in camera]