Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 15th, 2023

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

First, Madam Chair, I was very pleased to be able to lead the public consultations on the foreign agent registry. That was an extremely valuable exercise. It allowed us to engage with thousands of Canadians both online and directly in person.

As my colleague said, we intend to publish a “what we heard” report in the very, very near future, certainly by this summer, and as a result inform the creation of this important tool.

I would reiterate that this tool has to be seen against the backdrop of all the other concrete actions the government has taken to date when it comes to foreign interference, including by giving new authorities to CSIS and by raising the bar on transparency through NSICOP and NSIRA.

When we talk about the next steps, including legislation, what you have is a very comprehensive plan to deal with foreign interference.

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

My next question is on the diaspora.

We know there are long-term communities who have come forward to talk about the challenges they're facing on a personal level with foreign interference and who have largely gone ignored.

In the consultation process, how did you include these communities? In the rollout process of the foreign agent registry, I'm wondering how you're working with those communities to make sure the rollout is done in a way that is friendly and doesn't target the very people we are trying to get to share with us.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Madam Chair, Ms. Blaney makes a very important point. One lesson from the public consultation on the registry was that there is fear of retaliation from within diaspora communities if they engage in any public discussion.

As we think through the next steps on consultation once we table the legislation involving the registry—and indeed once we continue to engage Canadians more broadly on the suite of other legislative reforms, which we may want to visit again—we do need to turn our minds to creating atmospheres that are safe and secure so that Canadians feel they can step forward, give their best advice and give their best feedback into this without being worried about being targeted, marginalized or stereotyped, which is the whole point of foreign interference.

It is critically important that we do create those conditions that will allow them to engage, so that we can bring them along in this discussion and build their trust and confidence.

The stakes are very high, Madam Chair. What's at risk here is our capacity to fight against foreign interference. To do that, we do need to bring along Canadians. That's our commitment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

We'll now go to Mr. Calkins for five minutes, followed by Mr. Noormohamed.

Mr. Calkins.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Red Deer—Lacombe, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Through you to the minister, do you know what an issues management note is?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Yes.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Red Deer—Lacombe, AB]

That's your final answer? I'm jesting.

Already you're ahead of your predecessor, who is now verbally sparring with CSIS over the information exchange that should have happened in relation to MP Chong.

Prior to issuing your ministerial directive, can you tell this committee how many of your issues management notes you've personally read?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Madam Chair, I want to thank my colleague for the question.

I am obviously briefed routinely—weekly and often daily—on issues. The point of the ministerial directive was to ensure that there is a stronger intelligence flow from our officials to the elected branch of government. We feel as though we have strengthened internal governance on that point.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Red Deer—Lacombe, AB]

You have indicated that you know what an issues management note is. They've been around, according to CSIS, since 2015. My specific question is: Do you see each issues management note that is issued to you by CSIS, yes or no?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I will see issues management notes. They take different forms. Some come directly from the department, some come directly from elite agencies and some come directly from my staff.

What's important is that there is a dialogue and a flow of information so that in my capacity as Minister of Public Safety, I can appropriately be up front with Canadians about any issue that touches on national security or public safety, and so that, where appropriate, I exercise certain ministerial authorities to protect Canadians from issues like foreign interference.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Red Deer—Lacombe, AB]

In the context of being up front with Canadians and establishing the credibility of what's being said here so that we can formulate a report and have proper recommendations going forward, Minister, in January 2022, you talked about getting advice from law enforcement asking for the triggering of the Emergencies Act, which we found out not to be true.

In October 2022, you had an issue where you misled a federal judge by backdating documents.

In January 2023, you had an issue about the Safe Third Country Agreement working effectively and miscommunicated that to Canadians.

In April of this year, you had to scrap your amendments to Bill C-21 after saying that you weren't targeting law-abiding hunters.

In May of this year, you indicated that CSIS never shared intelligence that the Communist regime had targeted Mr. Chong and his family, which we now know is not true.

In May of this year, you talked about police stations still being open, which we know now categorically wasn't true.

Now we know that not only did the Correctional Service of Canada tell your department and your ministry in May of this year, but you were also cc'd on that same memo from your own boss, who forwarded it on to your department or your ministry.

Last night, reading through Twitter, your boss, through the Prime Minister's Office, has said that they sent you that same note and there was no indication, according to the reporter, that you responded to the Prime Minister's Office. The Prime Minister's Office found out on the 29th, the day before you said you found out on the 30th, that Paul Bernardo was being transferred from a maximum security prison to a medium security prison.

It is—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

There is a point of order.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Red Deer—Lacombe, AB]

I'm trying to establish the credibility of the witness, Madam Chair.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

This isn't a courtroom, but okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Do you have a point of order, Mr. Turnbull?

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Madam Chair, it's the same point of order as last time. I just want to ask for relevance.

I don't know how Mr. Calkins thinks this is relevant to foreign interference, which is what we're here to study. I'd really like to know how this is relevant to our current study.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

I was just waiting to see where the question was landing, because Mr. Calkins has been around a long time, and he knows how this works.

I was hoping that we were coming back into it. Perhaps that was the case, Mr. Calkins?

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Red Deer—Lacombe, AB]

The issue is the information that's being shared. Not only you but also other ministers of the Crown are being blamed for our not getting the information. There is no doubt in my mind, Madam Chair, that the minister had the information about this transfer and had the information about all of the other things pertaining to Mr. Chong and every other issue I mentioned.

Given that, Madam Chair, I'm going to ask the minister if he can do the one thing that I think he knows he should do. He has a microphone in front of him right now. With all of the issues that have been caused under his watch and the issues specifically pertaining to my colleague Mr. Chong, will he do the honourable thing and resign right here, right now?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Madam Chair, I'm focused on one thing and one thing only. That is to do my job to protect the safety and security of Canadians.

That question is so riddled with inaccuracies and falsehoods that it doesn't even begin to warrant an answer.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

I love watching the House, because I'm cool and hip like that. I do believe that a motion was moved in the House on a similar topic, which means that the chamber is seized with that issue.

Here, I would ask that we try to get to a response to the question of privilege from our colleague and to the question on foreign interference in elections. I can only try.

Mr. Noormohamed go ahead.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister and officials, for being here today.

I came here today because I'm keenly interested in the issue of foreign interference. I am surprised that we haven't really had much of a focus from opposition colleagues on foreign interference. Perhaps we can come back to the issue of the day.

During my time as a public servant at Public Safety and PCO, under three different prime ministers of different political stripes, I recall there was a substantial level of concern dating back to the time of the McDonald commission around the notion of how we share intelligence. This has plagued Liberal and Conservative governments. No doubt we are here having a similar discussion today.

I think one of the most important things we can establish is how we make sure, in the context of the question of privilege, that we build a safer environment for Canadians.

Minister, when you think about the path forward, what, in your view, are some of the things that need to happen or that are already happening to ensure that we are right in how we address and deal with intelligence and to ensure that we don't conflate the notion of intelligence with actual evidence?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

This is an issue, Madam Chair, that I'm extremely concerned about. It takes me back to my days as a former federal prosecutor, when I dealt with cases involving national security. Indeed, one of the biggest challenges, which continues to confound not only Canada but many democracies, is understanding how it is that we transition from actionable, credible intelligence to admissible evidence that can be used in a court of law to prosecute and hold responsible those who commit acts that pose a threat to public safety and national security.

One of the things the government is very much focused on doing is revisiting that particular question. That can be done through legislation. There are currently Canada Evidence Act provisions that do allow for proceedings, in which judges get access to classified information and make determinations based on privileges that can be asserted by the government to protect national security and the people who work within those institutions, with the relevance and the probity of that evidence so that it can then be used in open proceedings.

I will say that it is a very challenging exercise. We have to strike the balance correctly. As you and the government pose the question—and I'm talking not just about the question—we do have to really think through the evolutions in the threats to our national security landscape. You talked about coming back to foreign interference in this discussion today.

Madam Chair, through you to Mr. Noormohamed, I could not agree more. The stakes have never been higher. We have to set aside the partisanship. We have to set aside the distractions. We have to be focused on the issues at hand. What's at stake is our democracy, our economy and, most importantly, the Canadian people and their safety and security.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Thank you, Minister.

My next question is for Ms. Geddes.

I have had the privilege of working for people who have sat in your seat and who are incredible public servants. It is always a privilege to ask our most senior public servants questions around some of these issues that you live every day.

We live in a world right now where we hear all the time that if everybody had access to this information, we wouldn't have the problems that we do.

Can you bring us back to why it's so important to distill intelligence in a way that allows people to make informed decisions, and the material risks of putting everything that might be collected in the realm of intelligence into the public domain?

[Tricia Geddes, Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Thank you very much for the question.

I have worked in the national security community for some time, and I can tell you that one of the most important drivers is for us to make sure that the people who are providing us with that intelligence—and people are sometimes putting their lives at great risk to provide that intelligence.... We are paying very careful attention to how we can take that very sensitive information we have received and find a way to be able to convert it into advice, so that the government can act on some things and turn it into evidence, as the minister described, or so that we can use it for action.

Those are really important pieces of intelligence that we want to be able to use, but in so doing, we have to be incredibly conscientious about how we're able to protect those people who have, in many cases, put their lives on the line to be able to give us that information.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

If you were to take what you have just said, and you consider some of what is being discussed in the public domain.... This is not a partisan question. I'd like your answer as a public servant....

Do I not have another minute, Madam Chair?

I guess not.