Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Oct. 24th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

Ms. Blaney, you have six minutes, through the chair.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I appreciate the minister's being here today and I congratulate him on his new role.

As the representative of 19 Wing, I will also remind him that I have a lot of things to talk to him about, through the chair, and I really look forward to having those discussions to support some truly amazing people who serve our country.

I appreciate, through your testimony, that the first you heard of this incident was when you read about it in the The Globe and Mail. I think probably what is even more shocking and horrifying for me is that Mr. Chong read about it for the first time in The Globe and Mail. I can't imagine finding out that my family and I were under some sort of reality that was not clear at all, and reading about it in the news is not the best way moving forward.

You said as well they had a secret to tell you and that you had no idea. Then you also talked about some of the things that are being done to remedy that.

I know you have talked about it before, but could you talk about what you feel was done to start to remedy that and let us know what you left to the new minister and what you left behind to be completed so that this doesn't happen again.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

We didn't leave it completely behind, Ms. Blaney. Let me assure you first of all that each successive minister, I think, has taken important steps, and we will continue to take important steps to make sure that our national security establishment is robust and properly governed and subject to oversight, and that it is effective in providing for and protecting Canada's national interests.

First of all, when I was first made aware, you may recall that I sent a letter out in 2021 to all parliamentarians bringing to their attention issues that, frankly, CSIS had brought to my attention about foreign interference and particularly about the role of China. There was a 12-page letter that I tabled in Parliament and sent directly to all parliamentarians making sure that this issue was brought to their attention.

I was also advised by CSIS that there were a number of unnamed members of Parliament who could potentially be targeted. I asked CSIS at that time about the importance of providing those members of Parliament with enough information so they could be protected from the risk of being interfered with or being subject to interference.

They advised me that they were undertaking a number of defensive briefings. They did not tell me who they were briefing or what they were briefing them on. I did not receive that information.

I subsequently learned after the information appeared in The Global and Mail about Mr. Chong that CSIS had conducted a deep defensive briefing, but I understand that some of the information that was made public in The Globe and Mail was not shared with Mr. Chong, and that was wrong.

I also think it was very important that if there were threats against any members or their families that action had to be taken to make sure they were safe and protected.

In response to that, the then public safety minister, Mr. Mendicino, issued a ministerial directive to CSIS that all such information had to be shared.

Additionally, there were steps taken—

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

Thank you, Minister. I really appreciate that, and I understand that Mr. Chong did get a defensive review. It did not give him the information about his family. I think it's important that we don't confuse the two.

He's also been very clear that he feels this is something that all MPs should receive, because having that information about how to be perceptive of how you might be targeted really allowed him to have some tools in his tool kit to notice things, but it did not give him the information that he so desperately needed which was poignant to him and his family actually being targeted.

I know that foreign interference in our elections is an ever-expanding reality. Figuring out how to secure sharing processes, how to make sure the information is getting where it needs to get and when it should get to that place is all changing rapidly. I respect that, but I am also very concerned that MPs could be targeted in a very personal way and not know that. That means there's no capacity—when you don't know, you don't know—to actually deal with the issues.

You talked about how, in your new role as Minister of Defence, you receive information a lot more frequently now, because of the work that you do. You talked about having information coming and doing a “date received” and a “date read”, so that is calculated, and there's some way of tracking information, which I think is lacking in the study that we're doing right now on the question of privilege motion.

Is it important for us to look, with this new reality, at having a more secure location for the Minister of Public Safety in order to get this information in a more secure way, but more rapidly, and have that accountability of a “date received” and a “date read”?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

First of all, the actual facility.... There are a number of what we call SCIFs around the city and across the country. These are secure locations where classified and even top secret material can be shared. There's a difference, by the way, between those levels. Even within a top secret realm, there are a number of levels, and who has authority to see them. However, there are secure facilities that can be done. There is a secure facility, by the way, at 269 Laurier. It's a SCIF on the public service's side of that building. It's located on the 16th floor.

Fairly routinely, I would be asked to go to that room to be briefed, usually by the director, or almost always by the director of CSIS and a senior staff. So the facility is an issue, but I think more importantly, it's appropriate vigour, making sure—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you, Minister.

I'm going to go to the next round.

I would remind everyone to try to keep the questions and answers about the same length of time. It would minimize your needing to hear my interactions. I have no problem interacting should that be the case. With that, I would appreciate our keeping on time, so we can get through the whole second round.

Mr. Berthold, you have five minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Mr. Blair, when Canadians watch a committee meeting, they see a ping pong match between you, the director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), and your then deputy minister. No one wants to take responsibility for what has happened.

I have here a memo dated May 31, 2021. It clearly states that its intended recipient was the then Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness. It concerns namely Michael Chong and another MP, Kenny Chiu. I'm going to table it so that everyone will recall that it was already provided to all members of this committee.

You say that you only learned two years later, in May 2023, that MP Chong and MP Chiu had been targeted by the Communist regime in Beijing. Do you have confidence in the director of CSIS, Mr. David Vigneault?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Yes.

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

Do you have any information that would cause you to question his credibility?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I have a great deal of respect for Director Vigneault.

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

On June 1, you told this committee, “It was authorized by CSIS to be shown to me but they determined…that it was not necessary to inform me...”. Do you remember saying that?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I assumed that if the director did not share information with me, then he didn't require that I see it.

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

Yet, you were very specific in saying on June 1, 2023, that CSIS “determined…that it was not necessary to inform me.” Now, you're saying that you assume it said that.

On June 13, 2023, Mr. David Vigneault, director of CSIS told this committee:

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.

Are you calling into question Mr. Vigneault's testimony?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

All I can say with absolute certainty is that it was never shared with the minister—me—at the time.

Again, I don't question what Director Vigneault's intention was, but the execution was unsuccessful because the information was never shared with me.

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

Once again, no one is responsible for anything, Mr. Blair. However, Mr. Vigneault was extremely clear in his statement and you were very clear in saying that he had determined that it wasn't necessary to provide it.

Your then deputy minister, Mr. Rob Stewart, testified recently before the committee. He said that the minister was always briefed by the director, that the minister and the director were the ones who determined the subjects and concerns at that time, that he was present, but that he was not responsible for that task.

I asked him to confirm if I had correctly understood what he had just said, and that it was up to the minister to determine which briefings he wished to get or not. He gave me a one-word answer, “Exactly”.

Mr. Blair, why did you refuse? Why didn't you agree to the briefing by CSIS director Mr. David Vigneault? If you aren't calling his credibility into question right now, why are you denying your responsibility in this whole affair?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Monsieur Berthold, again you're mis-characterizing what happened. I was never offered a briefing from the director on this matter. That information was never shared with me. Unfortunately, I learned about it when it was reported in The Globe and Mail.

Although I don't question at all the credibility of the director of CSIS, I can tell you absolutely and uncategorically that the information was never shared with me. I was never aware it even existed.

Finally and most importantly, it was not a question of.... If the director had secret information that he felt I needed to see, frankly, it was his responsibility to alert me to that. He could have called me. He could have sent me an email. He could have come over to see me as he had done in every other case, but that did not happen in this case. That information was never shared with me.

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

So, you are criticizing his work and his judgment by saying that he didn't provide you with the information and didn't ask to give you a special briefing at that time. You're blaming the director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service for not keeping you informed. That's exactly what you said.

Madam Chair, since I got the floor, all I've been doing is quote the witnesses who have appeared before this committee. I'm quoting the minister, the director of CSIS and the deputy minister of Public Safety.

Minister, all these quotes show us that one individual is responsible for not getting the briefing: you, or someone very close to you in Cabinet. Why did you fail so dismally at getting this information, which was harmful to our colleague Mr. Chong?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Minister, you have 30 seconds to respond, without interruptions.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Mr. Berthold, just about everything you said was incorrect.

The bottom line is that I had no idea this information existed. The director of CSIS did not tell me he had information he wanted to share with me. I did not have an opportunity to make a decision whether I would be briefed on it because I did not know it existed until it was reported in the paper.

CSIS has a lot of secrets in its possession. It decides what the minister needs to see. In this case, it may have intended it, but it did not take the steps necessary to bring it to my attention.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

Mr. Lauzon, you have five minutes.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

It's nice to see you here, Minister.

I used to speak to you in English, but today I will ask my questions in French. I will speak slowly.

Mr. Blair, we're familiar with the Conservative's questions, which seek to undermine your credibility. We know full well that it's impossible to request a briefing before finding out that information even exists.

I'd like to ask some questions about your experience serving Canadians. For 39 years, you served the public as the chief of police of Toronto. You started as a constable and then became the chief of police. You have held other positions since then. I met you in 2010. You have always been a leader in maintaining public confidence. That's our experience of the honourable Bill Blair.

In light of the allegations relating to this intimidation campaign, could you explain to members how your commitment to transparency and public service have guided your actions since you learned this information on May 1, 2023? Could you tell us about your experience and transparency?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lauzon.

First of all, just as a point of clarification, I was not the chief in Toronto for 39 years; it was only for 10. I actually began as a constable, and I held every rank in the Toronto Police Service before becoming its chief in 2005.

I appreciate your remarks, and I thank you for that.

I have spent most of my life trying to keep Canadians safe. I did that in various jobs I have held not only as the chief of police or as a minister of this government but also in a number of other fairly significant roles that dealt with national security issues and organized crime matters. I've had to deal with very confidential, secret information.

I've also been one of the people involved in collecting such information, so I know some of the risks that people who do that work face every day.

It has always given me an appreciation of the importance of intelligence work, but I think it's important to recognize what intelligence is.

First of all, there's just an enormous amount of information that people can have access to. Some of it is open source, and some of it is online. Some of it is from human intelligence sources, and some of it is maybe signals intelligence. There's just a cacophony of information.

The role of an intelligence officer is discernment. It's to look at that information and to analyze it to assess the credibility of its source—how it was collected, or what the motive of the person providing that information might be—and then to determine through analysis what they believe is happening.

The purpose of intelligence is to inform action. It really is to help decision-makers determine whether a criminal investigation should be done, or whether there should be action taken, for example, to address a security concern or a public interest concern.

That's the work I've been involved in for most of my life. I think it's important to acknowledge not only the importance of that intelligence function but also the limitations of it. It's not evidence. It's not proof of what's happening. It's just a really strong indication that governments, police services and the public need to be able to act on.

I've also always believed that, though I've lived in, and worked on the edge of, a secret world for a very long time, we should always err on the side of being as transparent with the public as possible, and our first priority has to be the safety of Canadians.

All of that is to say with respect to this information that I thought it very regrettable that the information about a threat to a parliamentarian was not shared with me when it was first collected. I would have, quite frankly, insisted that very assertive action be taken in order to provide that individual with all the information and the support they needed to be safe and to protect their family from that concern. We've subsequently taken steps to make sure that action will be taken.

I think there are real opportunities for Canada to improve its response to foreign interference and to the threat of hostile activities of state actors and non-state actors, and to better utilize national intelligence security information. We have extraordinary people, really credible and great people, working for us, but it is our responsibility to make sure that we create the best public value for that huge investment in the collection of that intelligence, and that we use that intelligence in an appropriate way to take the actions that are necessary to look after Canada's interest and to protect Canadians.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

Ms. Gaudreau, you have two and a half minutes.

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

Earlier, we were talking about the culture of information and measures recently taken. However, our media are the ones keeping us informed on the issue.

Again yesterday, they told us that the Canada's rapid response mechanism had intercepted deepfake videos to manipulate Canadians on social media with false statements by the Prime Minister or the Leader of the Opposition, among others. Are we equipped to deal with this?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Just to be clear, I'm sure you read it in the media and so did I, but the information actually came from Global Affairs Canada and from the minister of global affairs. That was the source of that information. It was the result of a release that came out of GAC in order to inform Canadians.