Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 1st, 2023

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thank you for that clarification.

You have said that the minister should have had whatever intelligence was related to this printed out, and you would have viewed it in a secure location.

Is that correct? It would not have been through the top secret email?

[Jody Thomas]

That's correct.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thank you.

From your testimony today, I have become interested in statements about credibility ratings on intelligence.

Is a credibility rating always included in intelligence documents?

[Jody Thomas]

Yes. When we receive raw intelligence from any of the agencies, they normally tell us a range of things about the credibility or the soundness of the report.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

How important is the credibility rating?

[Jody Thomas]

It allows us to draw conclusions about whether something is actionable, whether we need to wait for more information, and how we should assess what we are reading. If it's a single source or it's not a credible source or there's no further intelligence about a particular element or any allegation or any action that could be taken, we gauge ourselves accordingly.

One piece of intelligence, as we said, is generally not a smoking gun, for lack of a better term. There is a totality. As a member said, it's a puzzle piece.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Yes, you have said that. Thank you for that.

How useful, then, is intelligence that doesn't come with a credibility rating?

[Jody Thomas]

It could be, at the end of the day, enormously important and significant in a total picture. In and of itself, it gives you an indication of something that might happen or that maybe is happening or maybe is not. As I said, it's an art, not a science.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

It could be as irrelevant as it is important, so it's a bit of a coin toss in terms of how relevant it will end up being, given the fact that it doesn't have a credibility rating.

Is that right?

[Jody Thomas]

That's right in that you have to see the totality of anything that came before it and what continues to be collected. That credibility is part of how the agencies determine, with limited resources, whether they are going to continue down this particular thread of investigation and collection.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

I think it's notable that the leaks in the media haven't included a credibility rating, as far as I know. I think Mr. Johnston said something about drafts having been made. Does that point to the source of the various leaks that have come through the media, how credible that information is, and maybe where it originated from within the security and intelligence environment?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Mr. Turnbull, I would usually give the floor back to Ms. Thomas, but our time has come to an end.

Ms. Thomas, if there is anything else you would like to share with committee members, please just send it to the clerk and we will—

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Madam Chair, could I have a quick answer to that last question? It's a pretty important one.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Yes, if it's really quick.

[Jody Thomas]

I'm not sure I actually understood the question. I apologize.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

I can't have you repeat the question, Mr. Turnbull, because we just don't have the time. I apologize.

I apologize, Ms. Thomas, but we have Minister Blair joining us for the next hour, and our resources are very limited. I will have to deal with that, and I don't want to.

With that, on behalf of PROC committee members, we thank you for your time and attention. Again, if there is something else you would like to share, please send it to the clerk and we will have it put out in both official languages.

We're suspending really quickly. We will be back at noon.

Thank you and have a good day.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Good afternoon. I call the meeting back to order.

In our next panel, we have the Honourable Bill Blair, Minister of Emergency Preparedness and, from the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Tricia Geddes, associate deputy minister.

Minister, you have up to five minutes for your opening comments. The floor is yours. Welcome to PROC.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Minister of Emergency Preparedness]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you, colleagues, for the kind invitation to appear before you today.

I will try to be brief in my opening remarks, to give us all sorts of opportunities to ask lots of questions and have a conversation.

There is a single, core issue at the heart of this study. Let us be clear: no parliamentarian or their family should ever be threatened for advocating their beliefs, for representing their constituents or for acting on behalf of their constituents.

Colleagues, Canadians elect us to speak on their behalf about the future of this country. We can and do disagree often, but it is utterly unacceptable that any member of Parliament be made the target of possible violence, and I want to assure all of you that I stand behind anyone who is the victim of such malicious behaviour.

I first learned about the possible threats against the member for Wellington—Halton Hills when they were published in The Globe and Mail last month, on May 1. They were serious claims and particularly disturbing, as they named both the member and his family.

While security considerations restrict the information I am able to share, I can tell you that at no point was I ever briefed on a threat of violence by a foreign actor against any parliamentarian. I want to assure all of you in this committee that if I had ever received such intelligence, I would have asked that it be swiftly referred to law enforcement and that action be taken to protect that member and his family. If there is ever evidence of a threat of violence against a Canadian, it is critical that the matter be referred to the police immediately for further and appropriate action.

Foreign interference has been a significant threat to Canadian interests since before this government was elected, and it has become even more serious in recent years. In our very first mandate, we took our first steps towards addressing this problem, including investing in cybersecurity capacities and passing legislation to strengthen the security of our elections.

Shortly after I became the Minister of Public Safety, COVID-19 drastically changed all of our lives. The national security landscape evolved rapidly, and new threats emerged at a near unprecedented rate. There was an observable increase in activity from hostile foreign actors attempting to interfere with Canada's national interests.

In response, in 2020 I sent a letter to each member of Parliament to advise them on the severity of this threat and to explain our government's efforts to combat it. As I wrote at the time:

This Government values above all the wellbeing and safety of Canadians. Whenever malign foreign states seek to harm our communities, undermine our values or jeopardize the very institutions on which our country is built, we will take action.

This remains true today.

We were—and still are—seeing interest from malicious foreign actors to attempt to intervene in Canadian politics, behaviour that went well beyond normal diplomatic activity. That's why I explicitly instructed CSIS to provide awareness briefings to those they believed could be a target, so that they understood those risks and knew how to defend themselves against these attempts.

Let me be clear again, though: I was never informed of any attempt by a foreign actor to harm a parliamentarian or their loved ones. While CSIS made the determination of who should have a briefing, I understood that several MPs received one in advance of the 2021 election.

Our government's work on this issue is far from done. We have continued to make important progress since the last election.

Budget 2023 included $13.5 million to establish a national counter-foreign interference office at Public Safety Canada. The RCMP has also received $48.9 million to strengthen its capacity to protect Canadians from hostile foreign actors.

Also, my colleague, Minister Mendicino, has been holding consultations on a foreign interference transparency registry, and I am pleased to report that these consultations were wrapped up earlier this month. We have received positive support to proceed.

Colleagues, as the Right Honourable David Johnston said in his report last week, there are questions that are “too important for partisanship”. In his words: “What hangs in the balance for all of us is confidence and trust in our democratic institutions. The very confidence and trust that foreign interference seeks to undermine.”

We must continue to review these matters in a way that respects all of our national security obligations, including for those who put their lives at risk collecting intelligence in the field. While I will caution that I am limited by what I can speak to in a public setting, I very much appreciate and respect this committee's work to raise awareness of the serious threat to all Canadians and to Canadian institutions.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll happily respond to any questions my colleagues may have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you, Minister Blair, for keeping your comments so concise.

We're now entering six-minute rounds, starting with Mr. Cooper, followed by Mr. Turnbull.

Then we will go to Ms. Gaudreau and Ms. Blaney.

Mr. Cooper, the floor is yours through the chair.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Minister.

Through the chair, Minister, you very specifically stated that you had not been briefed about any MPs who were the subject of threats of violence. However, were you briefed about intimidation or interference concerning MPs? “Violence” is a very specific word.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Yes indeed. Thank you very much for the question. I appreciate the opportunity to provide clarification.

I had a number of discussions with the director of CSIS with respect to the issue of foreign interference and particularly the activities of the Chinese government, but I did not receive any specific information about interference targeting any individual MP. I was aware that there was concern within CSIS that interference could be directed towards unnamed MPs. That's why I asked CSIS to conduct awareness briefings for those individuals.

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

Thank you, Minister.

You indicated moments ago that you first learned that member of Parliament Michael Chong had been targeted by Beijing through The Globe and Mail, but we know that CSIS had attempted to inform you that MPs were being targeted, including specifically MP Michael Chong, in an issues management note that was sent to you and to your chief of staff via a top secret email, and that you didn't see that note because you didn't have the log-in information, and neither did your chief of staff.

How is that possible?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

First of all, what you have just described is not correct. You have your facts wrong, but I'm happy to have the opportunity to explain how that actually works, if you'd like me to.

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

Please explain.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Yes, of course. First of all, there is no email account in which top secret information is shared with ministers. There is a secure terminal that is located in certain offices, but not in any political office, and certainly not in the minister's office. I had no access to a terminal in which this information was shared.

The way in which the information was brought to the attention of the minister was that it was determined by the director of CSIS what intelligence information the minister needed to know. They would then print out a copy of that and have me attend at a secure location, and the director of CSIS would brief me—