Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Oct. 26th, 2023

[Erin O'Toole]

On that, the—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

There's a second question.

[Erin O'Toole]

Sure.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. O'Toole, and thank you for your patience.

You mentioned that knowledge is a kind of power and that MPs should be made aware if they are targets and the importance of that and the importance of having that information in real time.

I have to ask the question. In June 2017, the People's Republic of China passed the legislation for the National Intelligence Law, which you referred to in 2017, that difference in posture in China. We started NSICOP. NSICOP was named at the end of 2017, but at one point you removed the members of the Conservative Party from NSICOP for another study and another reason.

Lessons learned.... Now that we know, would you say that was maybe an error and that we should really enhance NSICOP and their capabilities now that we know a little more? I'm hoping you'll be able to provide us with some feedback.

[Erin O'Toole]

Sure. I'm happy to provide detailed feedback.

In my Substack, I wrote at length about the NSICOP and why I did not function it. The Prime Minister was starting to use NSICOP as a way to avoid scrutiny on matters. I was the public safety committee critic that supported—bipartisan, with my friend, the honourable Murray Rankin—Mr. Goodale's efforts to create NSICOP. I was calling for it.

It was never meant to shelve ongoing investigations or issues that were in the House of Commons by sending it to a secret committee. It was meant to be long-term robust oversight of our intelligence agencies by parliamentarians. I think we need to have a system whereby we're able to debate—with secrecy and with intelligence being respected—the events of the day as they arise.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

Madam Gaudreau is next.

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

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

This is an opportunity for me to ask questions of a witness who has a lot of experience. I've been here for four years, but there are still a lot of things that are new to me.

I have received a number of answers to my questions, but I still have a few left. We have work to do. I am referring to our democracy and to what is happening.

Obviously, we have the privilege of having the media present. We've heard from 35 witnesses on this question of privilege. There were also 70 other witnesses, and a public inquiry has been underway since September 18.

Given that the public inquiry is ongoing, that we, the Bloc Québécois, will be introducing a bill to ensure that we have a foreign agents registry, and that the government has told us that it has put measures in place—we are waiting for a list of those measures—since last spring, do you think that what you saw and heard earlier will really allow us to dig down and shed light on foreign interference in our elections and our democracy?

[Erin O'Toole]

The country must take action, and you mentioned a few important policies, including the creation of the foreign agents registry. There are cases where the presence of these agents is appropriate, such as international trade and the representation of a company or a state. There are also other instances where this can be problematic.

We need to invest more money in our intelligence services and provide more information to members of Parliament and senators, because this subject is complicated and the news changes every day. It is therefore very important that MPs have all the necessary information about their safety, their ridings and the businesses that are important to the country.

That is why this committee's study is very important.

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

This is a very important study. We would also like to draft a report with recommendations that would enable us to act.

I understand the need to get to the bottom of this. You agree with me that the public inquiry has a job to do right now and that we, as parliamentarians, have to focus on what we know is relevant. Many hours have been invested. You've lived through it.

I have one last question for you.

When we heard from Mr. Soliman, he told us that there had been signals during the 2021 election campaign.

Did you feel like you were a target at that time?

[Erin O'Toole]

Yes.

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

You noticed something.

[Erin O'Toole]

During the election campaign, we saw concrete examples of Chinese foreign interference on social networks, on the WeChat platform and in stores. Comments were made by certain officials, including the ambassador, who said a few words against the opposition during the debates on the Uighur genocide.

That is why we issued a warning to the Chinese Canadian community, particularly in the suburbs of Vancouver and Toronto. The threat threshold for a warning, which Ms. Blaney spoke of, is a very important element. We need to look at the approach that was used during the 2019 and 2021 elections.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to our witness for spending all this time with us.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

Ms. Blaney, you have the floor.

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

Thank you for your card, Mr. O'Toole, but it looks like we are going to get our last round together, which I'm really excited about.

I appreciate your understanding how important it is that intelligence, CSIS, and whatnot meet a threshold. Identifying with that threshold seems to be part of the problem here because I think we all can agree that the process that has happened with regard to you, to MP Kwan and to MP Chong, is just not a threshold that we want to see.

We have heard testimony in this committee about the fact that the people who are assessing the intelligence don't always understand the process of how politics is implemented in the different parties and what intelligence may mean.

Could you give any thoughts to how we could bring more intelligence into the political realm to understand how elections flow and the impact that things may have so that there's a better understanding of threshold as we move forward?

[Erin O'Toole]

That's a great question.

I didn't perfectly know the word for “threshold” en français in my response to Ms. Gaudreau. That's what I was talking about in terms of level. We have to make sure the level is not ridiculously high and totally disconnected from an election campaign.

I think the protocol's panel of five had no clue how elections are run and the importance of foreign-language social media channels. The voters in a dozen or so ridings in Canada who were subject to intense misinformation and pressure don't watch The National, CTV or Global. They are drawing their news from channels controlled by a foreign entity. Without the ability to even alert them.... Some of the messages I saw, Ms. Blaney, about me...I probably wouldn't have voted for me. The panel knew this, but I don't think they had a comprehension of swing-type ridings. If you suppress a few thousand or 5,000 votes, it's a completely different election. That's what I believe happened. It wasn't just on WeChat, for example.

The questions I've left the committee.... I certainly believe what I've read in the papers, not what the SITE panel and others told me. What I've read in the papers certainly met the threshold of at least warning all the parties. At least warn the people who were security-checked about what happened in the previous election and what the Prime Minister was briefed on—certainly in the case of Mr. Chong, which was just a month or so before the election.

I'll go back to Mr. Duguid's questions. Remember that Parliament dissolved when the Speaker was taking the government to court over the Winnipeg lab. We had the Uyghur genocide motion. We had a number of issues that, even publicly, the ambassador of China was commenting on. Knowing now that there were a lot of briefings at a level I certainly think met the threshold, there needs to be a discussion about who established the threshold, willful blindness, potentially, and the political education of the panel, in order to let them know that, in these swing ridings, it's crucial there's no social media manipulation by many countries.

I alluded to that in my remarks. The panel said they were aware of interference operations by several countries at the beginning, but none that were of serious concern. That's how they started the tone with the parties. I think that was inappropriate.

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

Thank you for that.

I know you are a very busy man and that you need to get on, so I will finish my questions there. Thank you again for coming in, and for answering that question. I feel as if it helps us move forward.

I look forward to the next committee meeting and to discussing the member's motion. I hope, of course, that my friends from the Conservatives remember that we've had testimony in this place. Giving the papers to the law clerk is not the safest route, moving forward. It's never been done, and we have partners in other countries who have never done anything like that. This has been testified to here, and it could be of great concern for our relationships with the other Five Eyes partners.

I am done. Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

Mr. O'Toole...a minute back.

The meeting is adjourned.