Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 1st, 2023

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

Minister, with the greatest respect, Mr. Johnston in his report stated that CSIS had sent this to you and your chief of staff, presumably because they wanted you and your chief of staff to see it, and you didn't see it, because you didn't have access to it.

That's what Mr. Johnston said. Is he wrong?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Allow me to clarify that the information was not shared with me. It was authorized by CSIS to be shown to me, but they determined.... I would leave that question as one that perhaps you might want to put to the director. The director determined that this was not information the minister needed to know, so I was never notified of the existence of that intelligence, nor was it ever shared with me.

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

Mr. Johnston said you didn't have “access”. You didn't have “access”. Those were Mr. Johnston's words.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Yes. In fact, that is factually correct. There's no terminal where such information would ever be made available in a political office, and certainly not in the minister's office. It was in a secure location. I did not have access to that terminal. The only way in which the top secret intelligence provided on that terminal would ever be brought to my attention would be if a positive decision were made by CSIS to bring it to my attention, and then I would attend either at a SCIF, a secure location, or at their offices, where that information would be briefed to me.

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

Mr. Johnston characterized this as the “most prominent” example in terms of a breakdown in information flow. You were the Minister of Public Safety. It was under your purview. It was under your watch as minister.

What does ministerial responsibility mean to you?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

My responsibility is to deal with information that our national security and intelligence agencies bring to my attention. In this case, the national security and intelligence agency made a determination that this was not information that needed to be shared with the minister, and they did not share it with me. It is a concern, and I think that concern has been well addressed by a recent ministerial directive issued by my successor in that role, Minister Mendicino, in which he has directed, by—

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

With the greatest respect, Minister, I take it from your answer that ministerial responsibility means to you that you just don't take responsibility.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I would submit that that is completely incorrect. I take a great deal of responsibility for every matter under my mandate and my responsibilities.

This is a situation where it's an operational decision of CSIS as to what information needs to be passed along to government. In this case, they made an operational decision that this was not required. Two years later, when it was leaked to the press, that information was subsequently shared with me.

At the time, I had no knowledge that it existed. I had no knowledge that it was not being shared with me, because I wasn't aware that the information was available. CSIS, quite appropriately, made a determination that they didn't believe it was necessary to pass that information along.

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

Minister, I would submit to you that the buck stops with you, as Minister of Public Safety. It is quite an indictment of this government that you, as Minister of Public Safety, the Prime Minister and the current national security adviser found out about this in The Global and Mail. It's quite an indictment.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

That wasn't in the form of a question, Madam Chair. Did you want me to respond?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

The way committee works is I try to provide some opportunity for people whom we have invited to provide some responses. Sometimes what happens is...we are individuals in political fields and it's tough. I need the information you are providing.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Then if I may respond—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Quickly.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

—I disagree, Mr. Cooper.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

Mr. Turnbull, go ahead, through the chair.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Blair, through the chair to you, I think what we've just heard is another fallacious argument coming from the Conservative benches, which we hear quite regularly. It's unfortunate.

I want to go through a few of those, but before I do I'll ask you a quick question: Can you act on what you don't know about?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I think, rather obviously, Mr. Turnbull, I cannot.

However, I think the collection of intelligence is important, but it's all.... The RCMP, for example, which also reports to me as the Minister of Public Safety, don't brief on operational investigations. They come with the results of that. It's very similar with the national security intelligence agencies. They make a determination based on their own assessment of the intelligence.

Intelligence can take many forms. It can have many sources, and CSIS has a responsibility to determine its validity, its credibility and whether in fact it needs to get action from the government in response to the intelligence it has gathered. CSIS makes that determination.

Quite clearly, if they determine that information is not required to be shared with us and I have no knowledge of that, I would not have the opportunity to act on it if it's not being shared.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

That's very clear.

I guess what is implied here is that they did not think that information needed to reach you. For what reason would you be able to cite that this was the case?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Again, I'm a bit reluctant to speculate. I think that's a question more appropriately put to the director of CSIS with respect to the decision he made not to share that with government, with the minister responsible or with anyone else. I would not want to speculate as to how they came to that determination.

I am aware, having worked, frankly, in the intelligence field for a number of years myself, that various assessments are made about the validity of intelligence, its importance and the urgency of taking other actions with respect to that.

One can only conclude by the decision not to share this information that CSIS did not believe that was in fact necessary, but I think that's a question better put to the director.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

That's very fair.

There's been another allegation in relation to surveillance of an elected official, namely, Michael Chan. The allegation is that it took too long to sign off on that surveillance. There have been allegations on this that have circulated in the media. Basically, the implication the Conservative Party has made is you dragged your heels on this and you should have signed off sooner.

I believe there's a whole process of due diligence you've spoken to. This would be a very serious matter that you wouldn't take lightly when making a decision about choosing to surveil an elected official at the provincial level.

Could you speak to the process without getting into specifics? I know you can't speak about that, but what is the due diligence that would be necessary?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thank you for acknowledging that, Mr. Turnbull. I have, in fact, taken an oath not to discuss the particulars of any investigation or any warrant that may or may not have been issued. I'm not going to break that oath. There's a good reason those matters are kept confidential.

However, I can state categorically, first of all, that the information reported in The Globe and Mail was false. It contained factually incorrect information. I can also advise you that, quite appropriately, in all warrant applications—not any one in particular or specifically—there is an appropriate process of due diligence and also, always, an acknowledgement that this work must take place expeditiously.

I would like to assure Canadians that, notwithstanding the false suggestion put in the newspapers, there was never any unnecessary delay. In no case were the timelines described in the paper even close to what actually may or may not have transpired in this case—and I have taken an oath not to discuss its particulars.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thank you.

Something else we've heard quite regularly from the opposition party is the false claim that our government has done nothing when it comes to combatting foreign election interference. I note that you spoke about this briefly in your opening remarks—your response to the December 18, 2020 motion on foreign interference. I've read that, and it's quite detailed.

By way of dispelling, again, this myth the opposition parties seem to be trying to perpetuate out there in the public that our government has done nothing, could you speak to some of the particulars of the very real things and the steps we have taken to demonstrate the seriousness with which we take this matter?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Turnbull.

I would like to assure this committee, my colleagues in Parliament and all Canadians that we took this issue very seriously right from the outset of our forming government in 2015. Some very positive steps were taken with the establishment of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians and additional authorities for NSIRA. Some very positive steps were taken in order to deal with this. There have been a number of legislative remedies brought forward that, I think, also strengthen Canada's resiliency.

In response to the motion that was passed in Parliament, I thought it was very important to fulsomely respond and specifically name the issue of foreign interference and some of the countries, particularly China, involved in that. I had a number of discussions with the director of CSIS on how to respond appropriately.

I also thought it was so important for me to not just table the report but also mail a copy to every parliamentarian. I thought that information was critically important to them in doing their jobs. I wanted to make sure they were all well informed, and subsequently—

Oh, we're done.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Yes, thank you.

Go ahead, Madame Gaudreau.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Would it be possible, Madam Chair, to ask the minister to slow down? That would help the interpreters, who are doing a great job, but they have been at it for nearly two and a half hours. It would also help me, so I don't miss anything.

I want to follow up on a comment that was made earlier. I may have misunderstood what was said about how long it took to get authorization and the much talked-about four-month time frame.

The committee heard from Richard Fadden, a former national security adviser and former CSIS director, and he said he found the time frame to be quite long. What do you say to Mr. Fadden about that very long time frame?