Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 1st, 2023

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I will try to speak more slowly, and I apologize to the translators. It is a very important point. Thank you for the reminder.

First of all, I don't disagree with Mr. Fadden. The timeline described in The Globe and Mail was a very long one. I want to assure you that it's not true. It just didn't happen. That timeline is absurd. There is, however, important work of due diligence undertaken by CSIS, the Department of Justice, Public Safety Canada and even officials in my office to ensure.... The signing of any section 12 warrant is a very significant intelligence effort, but it's also a significant intrusion upon people's privacy and therefore requires due diligence.

There were also issues the Federal Court raised with respect to the duty of candour, for example, that CSIS has a responsibility for. There is always an appropriate level of scrutiny and diligence that must be applied. I can't speak specifically to any case—you will forgive me—but when these matters were brought before me for my approval, it was always done in a secure location. Frankly, it took hours, not days, weeks or months, to form that approval.

I recognize the importance of being diligent and of acting expeditiously. I want to assure you that this took place in every case.

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

Thank you.

Minister, you have extensive experience, so I'd like to hear your thoughts on the expert opinions the committee heard. The experts said that documents from the intelligence community were over-classified. Ms. Thomas said earlier that up to 3,000 or 4,000 pieces of intelligence came in a month.

Is the culture of intelligence sharing deficient in cabinet? Tell us about that. We'd like to know.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I wouldn't necessarily characterize it as deficient. However, let me make some acknowledgements, if I may.

I think transparency is very important. Canadians want to see evidence of the actions that their government takes, so I think we should always attempt to be as open and transparent as possible. I also know, having worked in that area for a number of years prior to becoming a politician, about the importance of maintaining secrecy around the collection of information, the people who may be involved in that collection, investigative techniques and how that information is collected. Some of that information is of a very sensitive nature and could impact the reputation of our government or our country or private Canadian citizens.

There are some things, quite frankly, that must be kept secret and should always be kept secret. However, I think we should also reflect on things that can.... We don't, in my opinion, have a good system of declassifying secret material, and not everything is as sensitive as some things are. I think that's work that we need to reflect upon and work that we need to do.

As this committee has heard from many witnesses, transparency and trust are at the heart of everything we do. I think it's important for us to explain to Canadians why some things must be kept secret and why other things should be more publicly available.

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

I want to use the little time I have to talk about transparency and confidence.

The statistics say it all. I mentioned this earlier: two out of three Canadians think the Chinese government is trying to interfere in our elections. Nearly half of people feel the next election will be less free and fair. I find that troubling, Minister.

From the previous discussion, we learned about a host of new measures I didn't even know existed.

The public clearly isn't aware of them either, so how do you plan to make them aware? Are you humble enough to say you're fixing the situation and announce what's coming?

People need reassurance because, right now, they can't keep track of it all. What would you tell people about what you're doing?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

It's a very important question. I think public trust is the currency of the work that we all do as politicians and the work here in Parliament. Without the trust and consent of the public, we don't have the ability to do our job.

There are a couple of points that I would clarify.

You said that the Chinese are intent on doing this. It's the People's Republic of China. It's the government of a foreign nation, a hostile nation, that is actually targeting...and they are targeting to interfere not only in our democratic institutions and our elections, but in many other aspects of our society as well. We have an absolute responsibility to protect those Canadian institutions and to protect Canadians.

I think to earn that trust—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

Mrs. Blaney.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you so much to the chair. As always, everything that I say goes through the chair.

Minister, thank you so much for being with us today.

I think public trust is the very essence of what we're discussing. That is why the NDP put forward a motion that said every party has to agree on the person who's leading this process that we would like to be a public inquiry.

I think it's become fraught with political rhetoric. The key issue for me is that I want to have Canadians trust their institutions. If they don't trust their institutions, that becomes a very scary place to be.

We're here today, specifically to talk about the question of privilege, but also to try to unpack what happened and where the gaps are.

My first question is around how you received information from CSIS in that role. What is the process, and is there a problem with this process that needs to be addressed?

We heard testimony, which was shared from experts who said that intelligence is going...but there's not necessarily appropriate advice. When intelligence is going over to someone, there doesn't seem to be a very good process of making sure that this intelligence was consumed, how it was consumed and what came out of that.

I'm wondering if you could talk about the process part, from the history you've lived through, where we might want to see that improved and whether you felt at any time that this was a concern for you.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Let me explain perhaps how intelligence was shared with me while I was the Minister of Public Safety. I would receive information, usually from the director of CSIS or one of his staff, that they had information they needed to share with me. There is a secure room for those types of briefings here in Ottawa—actually, there are a couple of them—and there's one in Toronto. I would very frequently, depending on where I was at the time, go to that secure location. At that location, I would then be brought into a room, and in hard copy—never by email—that information would be shared with me. I would have the opportunity to read it and ask questions about it.

The question you raise, I think, is the most important one. It's just consuming intelligence and information—what people think is happening or might have happened, or what someone suggested is happening to them. This really raises questions. Then what? What's next? What do we do about this?

For example, Mr. Johnston asked me, if I had become aware of any threat to any parliamentarian or their family, what my response would be. I said, “Call the police.” How could you not? Our first responsibility is to protect people, and we cannot leave people in jeopardy. That question arises with every intelligence briefing.

I think there are ways to improve how that information is shared with various people in government, particularly the Minister of Public Safety and others.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

This leads me to a second question.

Of course, I heard what you said about wanting to call the police and hoping that it would be addressed. The concern, of course, is that we now know MPs were being targeted, and they didn't know for an extensive amount of time. It's hard to respond in any way if you don't know that you're being targeted.

The other issue, which Ms. Kwan and Mr. Chong have both brought up, is that there are ethnic communities being targeted, and people have come forward to the RCMP—to the police, as you noted. When they come forward with this information, what they're finding is that actually there isn't a lot of awareness of how to respond to that. People get a file number, and then they never hear back. They feel under threat. They may have more experiences, but they stop going to get help, because that help doesn't seem to be there.

I wonder if, in your previous role, there was any discussion about what we need to do in terms of building our infrastructure within Canada, so that when we call the police or the RCMP when things like this are happening, there's actually the capacity and the understanding of foreign interference in a meaningful way to respond to it. That's where I'm concerned. I appreciate what you're saying, but it seems to me that what we're hearing is that the police and the RCMP actually don't have the skills necessary to respond to that. Why would we be hearing from so many communities saying they've gone for...they have a file number, but nobody ever called them back?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Madam, there are a couple of things.

First, when CSIS advised me that there were activities of a hostile state, the People's Republic of China, in particular, directed towards Canadians, and it could include parliamentarians—although they didn't name any individual or...any specific interference on any individual in most of those cases—I asked that, in fairness to those parliamentarians and in fairness to those Canadians, we conduct awareness briefings. You had to tell people that this is what interference looks like; here's how to recognize it; here's action you can take to protect yourself from it. You can't just leave people vulnerable to such attacks, because they can be quite insidious and quite serious. I asked that intelligence briefings take place. I think that was important.

Secondly, I think you've identified a significant challenge, and it's this issue of intelligence to evidence. It's where the national security intelligence agencies collect intelligence, and the ability to then take that intelligence and use it for a criminal investigation or prosecution can be quite challenging—it's ongoing work. I think there are some legislative and judicial responses and considerations we need to concern ourselves with.

Let me also acknowledge that I also work very closely with that diaspora right across the country. There have been situations in which they have been intimidated or threatened, and those are very serious matters. We have a responsibility to protect all Canadians, and our national institutions, like the RCMP and CSIS, have a responsibility. We have to make sure they're adequately resourced.

As you said, and as I mentioned in my opening remarks, we are putting significant additional resources into the RCMP, for example, to enable them to do those investigations and to protect those Canadians, but I would also acknowledge to you that there's more work to do.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you for that.

We have Mr. Cooper, followed by Monsieur Fergus.

Mr. Cooper, you have five minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

To the minister—through you, Madam Chair; always through the chair—are you familiar with the 1988 Supreme Court Vanweenan decision, otherwise indexed as R v. Chesson?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

No, I'm not.

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

Okay. The Vanweenan decision stipulates that CSIS must identify the individuals it believes will be intercepted talking in the surveillance process while applying for the warrant.

Does that ring a bell?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I know what you're talking about now, yes.

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

Thank you.

Are you aware that CSIS has to provide a list of third parties who may be intercepted talking to a target of surveillance during the application process for a warrant?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Yes.

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

In the warrant application for Mr. Chan, which you approved, did CSIS identify any individuals who may be intercepted in the course of surveillance who are members of cabinet, any sitting members of Parliament or senior officials in government?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Mr. Cooper, I took an oath not to discuss or disclose any information—

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

I understand, Minister—

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

—relating to any of those matters, and I intend to uphold my oath.

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

—so I'm going to put this to you in general terms.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

There's nothing general about your question, Mr. Cooper, and I'm not going to answer it.

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

I will ask you a question—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

I'm going to pause the clock really quickly. I feel that sometimes that helps.

As we know, one person speaks at a time.

Minister Blair, I know you don't frequent this committee, but we appreciate your taking the time to come, and you responded really quickly. That's something I said to Ms. Thomas as well.

Because of the culture of this place, members who sit on the committee tend to, I guess, have the time. Whenever I see that you're not getting time, I will make sure that some is provided to you to answer, but sometimes, just with the importance of this topic, we know where it's headed.

I'm just going to let us get through this together. Okay. That's all of us. That's great.

Mr. Cooper, the floor is back to you.