Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 13th, 2023

[David Vigneault]

That question has been raised many times in recent decades.

One thing that people don't necessarily know about CSIS is that it has a significant international component. Even though it's a single agency that has been given a very specific mandate, it isn't limited by geographical constraints when gathering intelligence on threats against Canada. CSIS agents are thus posted temporarily or permanently around the world to do the work that's asked of them.

Many countries have developed their procedures by establishing two agencies. Could there be a reason to review CSIS for that purpose? As I told you, the review currently under way should be quite open.

However, to be very honest with the member, I'd say this isn't necessarily the first solution I would consider for correcting potential deficiencies and better protecting Canadians.

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

Madam Chair, since I have a little time left, I'd like to ask Ms. Henderson a question.

Ms. Henderson, you said at another committee meeting that there was a lot of information on the Internet that can help people understand more clearly, do prevention and so on.

Based on everything we've seen, I've come to understand that I never would have taken the time in my life to read this kind of information or that I might have to know more about the strategies associated with any particular threats that might concern me.

What action plan could CSIS recommend to me so I could be sure I was equipped and informed? How can you be transparent enough to avoid potential threats?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

We'll provide some time for a response.

[Cherie Henderson]

Thank you very much for that question.

I think the first part is actually the awareness piece. I think that's what we're starting to have, that conversation in Canada. The first part is making sure that you understand that one. Because of who you are and the position that you have within the government, you are somebody who they would be interested in. I think Canadians on the whole don't really think that people are going to be interested in us and trying to get access to us, but they are. We are a very strong nation. We have a lot of good work going on. We are considered a moderate power that can engage. People want to, or hostile states want to, have access to you and be able to know what we're thinking and see how they can influence us.

I think that's the very first point. It's just to be able to be aware. It's not to be fearmongers, but it's to be aware and to understand what's going on around you.

Then you move from there into understanding, making sure you have the proper protection of your systems and making sure that if you see anything you report it and have those conversations and discussions.

It's an ongoing evolutionary process. The more we all learn, the better we can prepare and protect ourselves. That's including you and including the members in your offices. It's not just you; it's making sure the people in your offices are all aware and can protect themselves as well. That's where we start from.

As we gather more information, we can get to a point at which we can bring in the police. We can get to that point. It starts, really, with each of us as individuals recognizing that people are interested in us and will try to get access to us.

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

Madam Chair, thank you for allowing me more time. There have been a lot of distractions around the table, and it's hard to focus at this time of day.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

So next time I'll take back the two minutes that I gave you this evening.

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

No, the distractions came from the group as a whole.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

All right. Thank you.

Go ahead, Ms. Blaney.

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

Thank you so much, Chair.

I have just one question.

There has been discussion and testimony from both of you today about the intersection between consumers of intelligence and receivers and preparers of intelligence. One of the things we've heard is that one of the challenges is around political awareness. If you're preparing information for a political world, how do you make sure the information makes sense, and what are you looking for that's meaningful?

We have heard testimony from some of the national campaign managers, who said that during the election, the interactions they had to learn about foreign interference and be briefed really felt like ticking a box. It didn't really give them what they needed to assess the issues more fulsomely. I'm just wondering what work is being done to prepare for the next election, to understand how politics works on the ground and how to have appropriate information to guide people to do things correctly and to be able to identify when there is a threat.

[David Vigneault]

When we talk about threats to our democratic processes, political parties are absolutely critical elements. It is very recent, through the work of the security and intelligence task force, the threats to elections task force, that this process has been put in place where there will be people with the clearance to receive classified information.

I listened with interest to the commentary of the political party members who testified, and I think they shared very important points when they asked how they can make use and sense of and be able to do something with the intelligence. I think it's something that not only CSIS but the other members of the security and intelligence community and the Privy Council Office, who are responsible for that level of interaction.... I think it's something that will be a priority to review, to make sure that we all get better at giving the information and the ability to use that information.

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

You're saying it's a priority, but you didn't say if there are any concrete actions that are happening right now to address that. It seems to me that we should always be preparing for the next election.

[David Vigneault]

I can mention the fact that it has been announced by the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs that the SITE task force has been stood up for the by-elections that are currently under way.

I would say that one of the very needed actions will be to get the report from SITE and then to make those adjustments as required. I think it's fair to say that it's more work that will be carried out after the by-election.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

We have gone past the time, but as Mr. Cooper has signalled to me that we need just a bit more time, we will go to the Conservatives and Liberals to finish up this round. Will two—max three—minutes be enough, Mr. Cooper?

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

That would be good. Thank you for that, Madam Chair.

I want to put on notice—and I emphasize “notice”—a motion, and I'd ask that it be taken up next week so that we can have a debate around it.

Let me say very briefly, Madam Chair, that until it does what Parliament has called on it to do three times—and that is to call an independent public inquiry into Beijing's attack on our democracy in two federal elections, the targeting of sitting members of Parliament and the intimidation of Chinese-Canadians, the failure of this Prime Minister to take meaningful action to combat it and indeed evidence that the Prime Minister turned a blind eye to it—this government has a lot to answer for. This is the only committee, the only forum, in which questions are being asked and witnesses are being called to get to the bottom of Beijing's interference.

With that, Madam Chair, the motion that I will be putting on notice is as follows:

That, in relation to its order of reference of Wednesday, May 10, 2023, concerning the intimidation campaign orchestrated by Wei Zhao against the member for Wellington—Halton Hills and other members, the committee hold at least eight meetings, of at least two hours' length, between Tuesday, July 4, 2023, and Friday, September 8, 2023, on dates to be determined by the subcommittee on agenda and procedure, for the purposes of hearing witnesses and considering related committee business.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you, Mr. Cooper.

We will take notice of that motion and make sure it's circulated.

With all of the witness names that have been shared and so forth, we have witnesses for this Thursday. We believe that we will be able to have a meeting on Tuesday morning with witnesses.

This Thursday, we will be notified by the House of Commons on whether we have resources on Tuesday evening. Should we have those resources, this is when I would take up this notice of motion.

I would also welcome other thoughts. I think it was kind of you to provide notice and to allow us to come to the conclusion of this meeting by finding time next week for suitable resources.

Is everyone good? That's excellent.

To end us off, Mrs. Romanado, there are three minutes for you.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I understand we will be discussing this notice of motion next week. I understand also that Mr. Chong stood up in the House yesterday and said he was hoping that PROC would deal with this before the House rises.

However, Mr. Vigneault, I want to get clarity, because we've been receiving conflicting information with respect to some of these briefings.

The motion with respect to the opposition motion in February 2021 ended up flagging the subcommittee members on human rights. An IMU was prepared in May 2021, which you mentioned did not reference the name or identify Mr. Chong. However, that prompted a briefing from CSIS with Mr. Chong on June 24, 2021—a defensive briefing. Subsequent to that, Mr. Chong initiated three meetings with CSIS: August 5, 2021, February 25, 2022 and July 18, 2022.

Madam Henderson, you mentioned that part of bringing defensive briefings to members of Parliament is to educate them and their staff on some of the tactics used by state actors.

Would you say that it could be accurate that CSIS was trying to solicit information from Mr. Chong to augment the intelligence you were gathering?

[Cherie Henderson]

The purpose of the personal security briefings is so that individuals are aware of what's happening around them. We hope that if they are aware, then, yes, they will discuss with us. The original intent is not to try to get information from them at all. It is to create that awareness among the individuals, so that they can protect themselves if they see anything. Then, if they so choose, they can come back and talk to us about it.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

In that regard, we heard this morning that the then NSIA, Mr. Morrison, stated that no MPs were named. However, in the Johnston report, on page 27, it clearly indicates that the current NSIA has acknowledged to Mr. Chong that her predecessor at the time received the memorandum that described the potential action against Mr. Chong. That also references the May 2021 IMU. I'm not quite sure...because there's a conflict of information here.

We're being told that the IMU and the assessment did not reference any specific MPs, yet the report says that it did. We have some people saying it does, and we have other people saying it's not. I'm not quite sure. This is public information, so I'm trying to get.... Again, I'm not asking what was in it, but there's some conflicting information here.

[David Vigneault]

I will try to, hopefully, provide a little clarity.

The IMU did in fact contain specific names. The July report that I think you referred to was an assessment. The specific names were not included in that. As I mentioned, those names are available if there is a need for someone to know, understand, decide or determine, “Okay, I need to do something with this.” Those names are then made available. On a question of accountability and making sure we respect people's privacy, we would not put people's names in those reports all the time.

Madam Chair, hopefully that helps the member with so many different reports and so many different references.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

With that, Mr. Vigneault and Ms. Henderson, it was really nice of you to take the time to be here with us. Thank you for being generous with your time. You provided us with more than we anticipated. On behalf of all PROC committee members, I want to thank you for your service and your time.

If there's anything else you would like to add, please just share it with the clerk, and we will have it provided, in both official languages, to all members.

With that, we wish you the best, and thank you for your service.

Members, we will see you on Thursday.

The meeting is adjourned.