Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 6th, 2023

[Jagmeet Singh, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

I appreciate that. Thank you, Mr. Johnston.

Finally, through the chair to you, Mr. Johnston, I want to point out something particularly concerning: a different conclusion that you arrived at in comparison to Mr. O'Toole. I want to highlight that Mr. O'Toole raised a question of privilege, and I just want to quote a portion of what he said:

The briefing from CSIS confirmed to me what I had suspected for quite some time, which is that my parliamentary caucus and I were the target of a sophisticated misinformation and voter suppression campaign orchestrated by the People's Republic of China before and during the 2021 general election.

So, members of the Conservative caucus and he, himself, were targeted.

In your report, you find, in reference to Mr. Chiu—who was of course a member of the Conservative Party and a candidate in the 2021 election—that misinformation could not be traced to a state-sponsored source. We have two very different conclusions: one is from the CSIS briefing that Mr. O'Toole is referring to, and then you're stating in your report that there was no clear evidence that it was state-sponsored. How could you have such different conclusions from what Mr. O'Toole received?

[The Right Hon. David Johnston]

Again, Madam Chair, I appreciate that particular question. I've been asked to be brief.

We did have an opportunity to meet with Mr. O'Toole shortly before our report was completed and did take into consideration what he had to say to us. I must say that he has been a very knowledgeable, thoughtful person about this and has much more to contribute.

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. Since that time, with the conversations that Mr. O'Toole has had with the director of CSIS, I think there's been a much greater step in terms of what should have been done and what must be done in the future.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

I give the floor to Mr. Berthold for five minutes.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thanks to Mr. Johnston as well.

Mr. Johnston, I was somewhat shocked when you said in your opening statement that the comments made about your integrity were false and that repeating them doesn't make them true. To my mind, that statement alone puts you in a conflict of interest, particularly with regard to the opposition party leaders.

Mr. Johnston, you are a former Governor General of Canada, a position in which you did not play a political role.

However, you are still receiving compensation as a former governor general. Is that correct?

[The Right Hon. David Johnston]

Madam Chair, could I have the question repeated?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Are you still receiving compensation as a former Governor General?

[The Right Hon. David Johnston]

No, Madam Chair, I don't receive any payment as former governor general. I have a pension as a public servant, and that is the pay.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you.

For how many years have you been a member of the Trudeau Foundation, Mr. Johnston?

[The Right Hon. David Johnston]

Madam Chair, thank you for that question.

I joined the association of the Trudeau Foundation. That's like a shareholder in a general meeting, not a member of the board of directors, not involved in any decision-making—

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

That's not the question, Mr. Johnston.

[The Right Hon. David Johnston]

[Inaudible—Editor] an annual general meeting to vote in the board, to approve the financial statements—no involvement in fundraising of any kind. That was 2018, and I resigned in March of this year, when I was appointed to this role.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

During an interview in 2016, you said, with respect to your relationship with thePrime Minister's family, that you had gotten to know the children and that your friendship and relationship was really built on exchanges between the children.

Do you acknowledge making those comments, Mr. Johnston?

[The Right Hon. David Johnston]

Madam Chair, I do recall referring to the fact that my own children and Mr. Trudeau, as a young boy, did have opportunities to ski together four or five times. Between that time and when he became Prime Minister, I had no meetings with Mr. Trudeau, and our children, to my knowledge, did not.

When they became neighbours to us at Rideau Hall, I think I referred to the fact that it would be very nice for our grandchildren to have the chance to play with his children. That didn't occur, I don't think, on any occasion, but it still would have been a pleasant experience for us.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Johnston, I would ask you please to answer more briefly. I want to address a number of points, and I want to be respectful and allow you the time to respond, but I have some very specific questions for you.

In 2017, you visited the University of Chongqing in your capacity as president of the University of Waterloo. You met the President Xi Jinping, and you later said that it was wonderful to be back in China and that you felt as though you had come home.

Is that correct?

[The Right Hon. David Johnston]

Madam Chair, if I understand the question correctly—that it was wonderful to be back home—I think that was Mr. Trudeau going back to 24 Sussex Drive, and that was not available. The secretary to the office of the Governor General very gallantly said that he would be happy to vacate Rideau Cottage, and that's why Mr. Trudeau's family moved in there.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Chair, I think we're having interpretation problems because the questions I've asked and the answers I've received haven't really matched up from the start.

So I ask for a little indulgence on your part. I'll try to speak more slowly, but we really are having interpretation issues because Mr. Johnston isn't answering my questions.

Mr. Johnston, you asked Mr. Iacobucci, a former mentor from the Trudeau Foundation, for his opinion as to whether there was a potential conflict of interest in your mandate as the Prime Minister's special rapporteur.

Is that true?

[The Right Hon. David Johnston]

Yes.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

You hired Sheila Block, a major Liberal donor, as senior counsel in drafting your report.

Is that true?

[The Right Hon. David Johnston]

Madam Chair, it is true that Ms. Block was my senior counsel with respect to the Mulroney-Schreiber inquiry. I reached out to her to be the senior counsel for this review as well.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

I have many other statements like these that you've claimed are false, Mr. Johnston, but I'm unfortunately out of time as a result of the interpretation problems.

You have written a book entitled Trust, which I have here. There is no French version. You say in this book that the worst leaders engage in manipulation and fail to disclose vital information or disclose only the information that supports their opinions, decisions and actions.

Do you remember writing that?

[The Right Hon. David Johnston]

I do remember writing that chapter of this book, yes.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Johnston, with all due respect, and having regard to your years of experience, I find it hard to believe that, in your opinion, not a single one of the facts I've just stated suggests an appearance of conflict of interest for someone who is called upon to present an independent report on interference in our democracy by the Beijing regime, interference that apparently favoured the Liberal Party.

Do you sincerely believe that none of those facts can give the impression that there is a conflict of interest and that Canadians should take you at your word?

[The Right Hon. David Johnston]

Madam Chair, to answer the question, I don't believe I have a conflict of interest, and I would not have undertaken this responsibility had I had a conflict of interest.

What I would say is that, for 55 years, I've chaired or served on advisory committees, perhaps two or three dozen times, because of my non-partisanship and my integrity. This is the first time that it's ever been called into question or that it's been suggested that I have a conflict of interest.

My suggestion, Madam Chair, is that one looks at a record of service and comes to one's conclusion on conflict of interest. I would, again, plead that you focus the attention on foreign interference, this report, which will be reviewed, and others, where we must do a much better job of getting on with an important matter.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

Ms. O'Connell, you have five minutes.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Johnston, for being here today. Actually, where you just left off is part of where I want to go with some of my questions.

Before I get to that question, though, Madam Chair, I want to point out that the Conservatives just had a total of 15 minutes' worth of questions and they didn't ask a single question about foreign interference, not a single question. Madam Chair, it was nothing more than a character assassination or conspiracy theories around children playing together.

Mr. Johnston, given your opening comments about how serious and pervasive this issue is, I find it incredibly frustrating and disappointing that 15 minutes' worth of questioning time from the official opposition consisted of zero questions on foreign interference. However, what has already happened—and, Mr. Johnston, you wouldn't know this—is that Conservative member Mr. Barrett has already posted clips—I'm sure to help fundraise or stoke fears and conspiracy theories around your non-partisanship.

Some of the questions earlier by Mr. Brock brought up things about, again, children playing together—your grandchildren playing with the current Prime Minister's children. That's what they think is the smoking gun here: children playing together. I point out that, Mr. Johnston, in some of the responses that you were providing.... Even though the Conservatives wanted you here and the opposition wanted you here for three hours, they didn't want you to answer a single question. I find that very telling, and again, they got their clips. That's what this is really about. This isn't about foreign interference and protecting our democracy, because if it were, they'd ask serious questions instead of playing partisan games.

Mr. Brock mentioned a time period when, as you mentioned, the current Prime Minister was 11 years old. However, my colleague Mr. Turnbull pointed out that, since the time you spent with the current Prime Minister when he was 11 years old, the leader of the opposition, Mr. Poilievre, actually defended your reputation. We can't find anything that has changed in your conduct or behaviour, so all I can conclude is that opposition members are not serious about foreign interference. They're not serious about preserving democracy. They're just looking for partisan attacks. Mr. Johnston, you pointed out that some of the people you used for the Mulroney-Schreiber inquiry are the same individuals you used to help you or assist you in this writing, yet Conservatives are conveniently neglecting that point.

Let's get to the actual issues around foreign interference, because I think we owe it to Canadians to be serious about this. We can leave the partisan games to the Conservatives, because Canadians will judge them on that. I'm going to follow up on some of Mr. Singh's questions about Mr. O'Toole. We heard testimony in this committee from Mr. Chiu. I actually asked him, at the time, if he could table any of the evidence he had or the examples that he had been concerned about. He said that he never saved any of that information.

Was there anything...? Did the Conservative Party provide any information? Mr. O'Toole talked about a dossier. The Conservative Party also, in 2022, did an internal review into the 2021 election results. Was any of this information provided in the package that you would have received and reviewed?