Evidence of meeting #83 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 information.
A video is available from Parliament.
6:55 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
We have started. We've had one such instance of a briefing. We have a couple of others that are being prepared as we speak. There will likely be more in the future.
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
You mentioned that in 2022, 49 briefings were provided. Were any briefings provided in 2021? If so, how many?
6:55 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Madam Chair, with your indulgence, I will take this question under advisement and bring back to the committee the specific number. I believe it is listed in our annual report, but I will provide the committee with the specific answer.
Perhaps I can add that I think what's important here is that since about 2018, we started speaking publicly and very clearly to Canadians about foreign interference by providing some of our analysis and some of our advice on how people and organizations could protect themselves. I think we are now at this evolution, given the nature of the threat environment, where we need to have further and more specific discussions with members of Parliament. We very much welcome the opportunity to do so.
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
There has been some criticism regarding the approach that CSIS has taken to educating the public or providing these briefings and a better understanding to the consumer of intelligence. In addition to that, we know that we have public hearings coming up. I'm hopeful that CSIS will be involved in those public hearings and learn from diaspora groups.
We are learning from CSIS, and the national security adviser as well, that there are other countries that previously were not mentioned as state actors that are a threat to Canada when it comes to foreign interference. What are your comments on that? Why have new countries been added to the list?
6:55 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
With regard to the first part of your question, Ms. Sahota, I think that working with diaspora communities is not only important but also the only way that we, Canada, will be able to have increased resilience against foreign interference. This is why, about three or four years ago, CSIS reallocated internal resources to create a stakeholder engagement group, which has been dedicated to engaging with these partners.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
6:55 p.m.
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I have a lot of questions, but I've consolidated them.
First of all, we've heard from a phenomenal number of witnesses on the interference issue. Since we began in November, that's four months, and they've been very intense. What I gather is that the warning threshold is too high and that CSIS prepares a massive quantity of briefing notes, thousands, that are intended for MPs.
We've been told that there's no intelligence culture within the Canadian government's national security apparatus, that funding for personnel and resources isn't necessarily there and that our intelligence services haven't adapted to the geopolitical situation since 2015. We've heard several examples of that.
What happened from 2001 to 2015? We know what has happened since 2015, but we're often told that the situation has existed for some 20 years.
7 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Thank you for your question.
You raise several points. I'll address them in order.
As regards intelligence culture, Canada is a fortunate country because it belongs to a number of collective defence organizations, such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, because it has a unique partnership with the Americans and it's protected by three oceans. Unlike many other countries, we haven't had to concern ourselves greatly with defence or national security issues. That's an element of the culture. It isn't a bad thing not to have to combat as many threats as other communities, but it's a reality.
What happened in 2001 were the terrorist attacks conducted by Al Qaeda. We were forced to completely rethink how we viewed national security. Terrorist groups monopolized the attention of the United States. Enormous investments were made, not only in personnel and financial resources, but also in partnerships with foreign countries and communities within Canada. The emphasis was placed on the protection of Canadians against terrorist attacks.
Since 2015, if you read CSIS's annual reports, you'll see not only the quite significant way in which the emphasis that's put on terrorism and on a detailed way of viewing it has evolved. We discuss not only religious terrorism, such as that associated with Al Qaeda, but also ideological terrorism, which is associated with neo-Nazi groups, xenophobic groups and groups that direct their violence against women, for example.
We at the service have redistributed resources in such a way as to take these dynamics into account. That's also true with regard to the foreign interference issue. We have redistributed resources so we can face that threat. I believe that's an evolution that certain partners and commentators have noticed. I think it's reflected in the government's directives on intelligence requests, that is to say, on what intelligence it wants us to prepare, and in the resources that are allocated to CSIS.
The scales continue to tilt toward state threats, and new state threats have unfortunately been weighing on Canada since China emerged as both a major economic state and a geostrategically destabilizing one, and since the unjustified invasion of Ukraine by Russia. In a speech that I gave in 2018, my first speech as director, I mentioned that the threat that hostile states represent, which includes foreign interference, was the most significant threat to Canada's security and sovereignty.
7 p.m.
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Thank you for your explanations. They help me put all this into perspective.
Who would you say determines CSIS's general policies and directions? Does CSIS advise the government on resource allocation? Or does the government asks you to examine certain issues? I'd like to get a clear understanding of the process.
7:05 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
That's quite a serious question. I think it could be a topic for further study.
Intelligence priorities are very clearly established by cabinet. Cabinet makes a decision and sends its intelligence directives to us. In the case of CSIS, the Minister of Public Safety receives those directives and, considering CSIS's mandate, sends us ministerial directives. CSIS's mandate is clear, and the data collection mandates of other intelligence agencies are as well. Each minister therefore gives us ministerial directives. Apart from that, we discuss resource allocation. That discussion is carried on internally and not among departments.
7:05 p.m.
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
Chair, before I start, I just want to let you know that I got bumped off. We have a bit of a wind storm here. If you could watch the interpreters to make sure that my sound is good, I would really appreciate that.
7:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
I'm going to take that, before I go into your time, and make sure we do a sound check to make sure we're all okay.
I have a thumbs-up. Thank you for that courtesy.
The floor is yours.
7:05 p.m.
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
Thank you so much. The interpreters work hard for us, so I want to make sure we do right by them.
I want to thank the witnesses so much for being here today. I have a question.
Mr. Morrison was here earlier today and spoke about Mr. Chong's receiving a defensive briefing. When Mr. Chong came to our committee, he was very clear that it was very, very helpful. The problem, of course, was that he didn't know, while he was receiving that briefing, that he was a target and that his family, both in the country and outside of the country, were potentially a target. There are some really big concerns there.
Why was the choice made to give him this information but to not inform him of the concerns that it was indirectly addressing? The second part of that question is: How many members of Parliament got a defensive briefing?
7:05 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I can say from the outset, going back to my opening remarks, that I believe that members of Parliament should be receiving more information. I think the world that we're in now requires that we adapt our approaches, and that includes CSIS.
I think the ministerial directive is going to be helpful there, but that will still have to be done within the context of the limits of the CSIS Act. I hope that this committee will have some perspective here.
The approach that was taken to brief Mr. Chong is the one that was available to the service at that point, which is having defensive briefings. I think it's important to note two specific elements of that. The first one is that a defensive briefing is carried out by a professional intelligence officer of CSIS who has access to all of that information. It is not just a generic briefing that is given. It's given by a trained, professional intelligence officer with knowledge of the classified information. It is tailored to the individual and is very much in that context.
That said, I think it's also important to know the limits that we have to brief classified information. I think that has been clearly highlighted in the case of Mr. Chong, and I believe that this is the kind of evolution that we will see, not just from a CSIS authorities point of view, but in terms of the culture we have related to national security, which is that we need to engage more. You have my commitment, Madam Chair, that CSIS is fully engaged in that.
June 13th, 2023 / 7:05 p.m.
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
I still didn't get an answer as to how many MPs. I'm going to ask that again, but I also want to point out that I think what you said is interesting, that it was really targeted. Although Mr. Chong didn't know the whole story, the information was targeted.
How many MPs have been briefed? I don't need to know names; I just want a general, ballpark figure.
The other thing is that Mr. Chong said very clearly in this committee that it was extremely helpful. The briefing helped him have awareness, and he started to see things differently in terms of activities that were happening.
I'm just wondering if there is a plan to have defensive briefings for more MPs or, in fact, all MPs. Is there a general way that MPs can learn how to notice what's happening, so that we can also be part of the solution by letting the appropriate officials know?
7:10 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
I would not be in a position to share the specific number of MPs. However, I think what is clear is that the commitment from CSIS and the specificity of the ministerial directive are to make sure that all MPs will be briefed, and that's a direction that we have and will carry out.
The member is raising a very important point as well. Those defensive briefings to all members of Parliament and I would say all parliamentarians, including in the Senate, are absolutely essential. The plans have been developed, and they have such plans that are almost ready to be put in place. CSIS will be an active participant in briefing all members of Parliament.
If I could add as well, Madam Chair, over and above the elected officials of the federal Parliament, as I mentioned, we have been engaging directly with elected officials at all levels of government, provincial, territorial and municipal, and I believe that we need to continue to do that, because what we have learned over the years is that the opportunity to engage in foreign interference is not limited to the federal level. There are very specific actions that are being taken at all levels of government, and I should have included municipalities on that list.
I believe the member is right to say that we need to increase the number of briefings by CSIS and by other organizations to help build resilience in Canada.
7:10 p.m.
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
Thank you for that. I have just a few seconds left. One of the things that have come up again is that misinformation attempts are particularly problematic in rural, indigenous and ethnic communities. The vulnerability is higher there because of the lack of information, and maybe a lack of reliable media sources. I'm just wondering if there is any work being done on addressing that huge gap.
7:10 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
It is a very relevant point, because we have seen over the years the ability of media in languages other than French and English to be used and abused by different countries to accomplish their goals. This is why our foreign interference material that we produced last year has been published in seven languages—to be able to have information in the language of a number of diaspora communities that are directly targeted.
We are also working with first nations organizations to accomplish similar goals.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
7:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Thank you, Mr. Vigneault.
We will go, for five minutes, to Mr. Berthold, followed by Mr. Turnbull.
Mr. Berthold.
7:10 p.m.
Conservative
Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
Thank you very much.
Good evening, Mr. Vigneault and Ms. Henderson.
Mr. Vigneault, I absolutely have to clarify some things that have previously been said. On June 1 of this year, Minister Bill Blair made a statement that I'm going to read to ensure that we understand each other:
Allow me to clarify that the information was not shared with me. It was authorized by CSIS to be shown to me, but they determined.... I would leave that question as one that perhaps you might want to put to the director. The director determined that this was not information the minister needed to know, so I was never notified of the existence of that intelligence, nor was it ever shared with me.
Did you make that decision?
7:10 p.m.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
As I mentioned a little earlier, CSIS and I conveyed the information to the Department of Public Safety along with the very specific directive to forward it to the minister. I don't doubt that the minister didn't receive it. His comment was very clear. However, it's important for the committee to understand that we shared the intelligence and the briefing note.
7:10 p.m.
Conservative
Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
If I understand you correctly, you never advised anyone that this note should not be shared with the minister.