Evidence of meeting #80 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 johnston.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Thank you, Mr. Johnston, for coming to committee today. Thank you for your report as independent special rapporteur, as well as for your lifetime of service to our country in many roles.
Mr. Johnston, you noted in your report a series of structural issues in the way information is shared by our security agencies. Can you please expand on that? What could be the initial view of possible solutions?
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual
Madam Chair, in the last pages of the report, we refer to issues for review in the public stage of the work. In particular, we speak about:
The role and structure of NSICOP and whether it can be strengthened.
Amendments to the CSIS Act that might assist in fighting foreign interference.
Machinery of government issues, including:
Processes for funneling intelligence to top officials, including greater accountability for ensuring that the right people see the right intelligence, including at the most senior public service and political levels.
Tracking protocols so it is possible to reconstruct who saw what, and when.
Clearer lines of responsibility for recommendations as to how to react to intelligence.
A government-led process (rather than an agency-led process) for declassification of information to enhance transparency.
We also speak of the case for a national security committee of cabinet, to put foreign interference in a context where it should be dealt with at the highest level and with a sense of urgency and importance.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
I get you on that. I'm looking for, perhaps, a little preview or a further sense as to where you think we should be going, because as you just quoted from your report, you talked about the problem of information sharing that seems to be happening.
We had testimony before this committee from the national security and intelligence adviser to the Prime Minister, Jody Thomas, who also identified that there were gaps in the process. We understand that she has already implemented a process to address those gaps. Is that also your understanding, and how do you think this would be helpful?
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual
It is my understanding, Madam Chair, that this process has been initiated by the national security and intelligence adviser. It's a very welcome one.
I think there are very important reform initiatives using the experience of other allies, like the Five Eyes, dealing with precisely these problems that we can take and put into effect.
I think what we need is more encouragement with respect to our agencies to be proactive in suggesting those changes, and then ensuring that Parliament and committees like this understand that and say, “We can do better, and we are going to do everything possible to be sure that we do better quickly.”
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
On the parliamentary aspect of it, we have the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians. You wrote about them in your report. Do you feel this is a good forum where documents can be reviewed by parliamentarians while ensuring that we maintain their classification system? More importantly, does NSICOP, speaking comparatively with our Five Eyes partners, have the right level of access?
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual
It's interesting. Another one of the issues that are in this list of things to be reviewed in the next four or five months is “Whether NSICOP is properly constituted as a committee of the executive, rather than a committee of Parliament.” NSICOP has a very fundamental role, as does NSIRA.
We've now had six years of experience with NSICOP. It's made some recommendations. I think there is much more that can be done with that to improve our system. NSICOP, NSIRA and this oversight committee have very fundamental roles to play.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Are there ways that you are able to share with us, before this committee, questions that we should be looking at in making NSICOP and NSIRA more functional?
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual
In preparing for these public hearings, we'll try to list a series of questions and then invite experts from outside the government, and some from within the government, to provide their advice on just that.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Great.
Mr. Johnston, very quickly, you made some recommendations in terms of changes that should be made to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act. This is something that we've also heard from other witnesses. Can you expand on what types of changes you would like to see?
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual
Madam Chair, the first observation to make is that the act was passed in 2003, I believe, and has not been substantially amended since that time. It does call for a significant review.
In fact, the director of CSIS has called for that, with some recommendations, on a number of occasions, so it's another area where I think attention is urgent and should be done. The—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
I'm going to let you just hold that thought, because there was a nice pause there and I think that was a great exchange.
With that, bells are ringing. We do have another vote. I'm going to ask committee members to take a 10-minute break. When we return, we will re-enter into six-minute rounds. I believe we can get through two rounds, and then we can vote.
Do we have agreement to do what we did for the first vote so that we can vote by the app? I'll pause to make sure all votes have been registered, and then we'll continue, to maximize our time together. Excellent.
We'll see you back in 10 minutes. Thank you so much.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
I call the meeting back to order.
We are going to go through six-minute rounds. I'm watching the clock as well. I believe we can get through two or maybe three six-minute rounds, depending on timing.
We will be starting with Mr. Cooper.
He will be followed by Ms. Romanado, then Mr. Therrien, if we have the time. We will vote very quickly and continue the meeting, as we did with the first vote.
Go ahead, Mr. Cooper.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Thank you very much, Mr. Johnston.
Mr. Johnston, when you were asked earlier to reconcile the briefing that Erin O'Toole had from CSIS, in which he was informed that he and the Conservative Party were targeted by Beijing and that, among other things, the Beijing regime and Beijing actors, including the United Front Work Department, had amplified and spread disinformation, with your conclusion that you could not trace that disinformation to a state-sponsored source, you said, “The evidence we had before us that permitted us to come to the conclusion you suggested was what was available to us at that time.”
Are you saying you didn't have all of the material evidence and intelligence when you drafted your report?
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual
Madam Chair, when we drafted our report, we had the intelligence then available from CSIS and other sources, and that was the basis of our conclusion.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
You had intelligence, but you said it was based on what was available to you at the time and that there had been “a much greater step in terms of what should have been done”. That's what you said in answer to the question about your effort to try to reconcile what you said with what Mr. O'Toole said based on the information he had received from a CSIS briefing.
Again, I put it to you, how do you explain that?
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual
Madam Chair, we reported on what was available to us. What transpired in the discussion between the director of CSIS and Mr. O'Toole I don't know. But the issue of—
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Who selected the CSIS information you relied upon in your report?
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual
We had significant information, Madam Chair, from CSIS and we had information, of course, from other agencies, such as the national security adviser and so on, and direct testimony from the heads of the different agencies.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
I would submit that the only way to reconcile what Mr. O'Toole says with what is in your report is to conclude one of three things: either you omitted material information or you misinterpreted that information or this government withheld that information from you.
I will put it to you more specifically that, at page 25 of your report, in reference to the September 8 Global Times article that contained disinformation—the Global Times being a Beijing-controlled entity—you state, with respect to that disinformation from the Global Times, that “the re-circulation could not be attributed to any state actor.”
How did you come to such a conclusion?
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual
Madam Chair, we came to the conclusion set out there based on the information that was available to us at the time—
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Okay. Thank you for that, because the information that was available to you at that time surely would have included a rapid response mechanism report dated October 18, 2021, which stated, “Chinese Communist Party media accounts on Douyin (the Chinese version of TikTok) have published videos that repeat a Global Times headline published on September 8 that suggest the CPC's platform would lead China to break off relations with Canada”. That's from a Communist Party media account, including one Douyin account that had 26 million followers.
You had that information. In the face of that, why did you say there was no evidence the Beijing regime was involved in the recirculation of that disinformation?
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual
Madam Chair, the answer to the question is that our conclusion was that we could not find direct attribution to any state actor. There was no question that there were activities, but that they could be traced to a state actor directly was not the conclusion we came to.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
The rapid response mechanism attributed it to a state actor. It was a Communist Party media account. What part of “state actor” doesn't equal a Communist Party media account?
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual
Madam Chair, if I understand the reference, I'm looking at our report, which spoke about WeChat in an article from The Hill Times.
Is that the reference?
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
No, it's the rapid response mechanism report of October 18, 2021, which is one of the very few documents that have been produced for this committee. Surely you had seen it.