Evidence of meeting #91 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 o'toole.
A video is available from Parliament.
Noon
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I would like to know more about what that means for an individual, a human being. You said earlier that it was hard to learn that you were a target. How did you experience it personally? How do you feel when you're a target?
Noon
President, ADIT North America, As an Individual
I was surprised by this situation in the last few months of my life as a member of Parliament, but, basically, it was a parting gift in terms of my life after politics—
Noon
President, ADIT North America, As an Individual
—because I'm going to remain a target. That was a little joke.
Noon
President, ADIT North America, As an Individual
Yes.
As I said, as a veteran, I think it's important to put the interests of our country ahead of my personal concerns. As a father, I am concerned, and it is difficult.
That said, this is an important issue for millions of Canadians. That is why each member must receive a briefing when there is a risk of foreign interference. There also needs to be a process to review the issues related to the information before anything is published in the newspapers. As I said to Mr. Duguid, it is very important to take a multi-partisan approach before a scandal breaks out.
Noon
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
If I understand correctly, because the necessary measures may not have been taken to prevent that from happening, your family is still suffering from the fallout.
Are you still wary today?
Noon
President, ADIT North America, As an Individual
No.
My family is paramount to me. We're proud of my time in politics. I hope that, if there are other more serious risks for me or my family, the RCMP or CSIS will notify me.
It is important that every member has the right to freedom of expression, i.e., to be able to talk about issues that are important to their riding, to their country or to their province, and also to be able to use their skills and experiences in the House, without limits. That is why MPs must be briefed.
October 26th, 2023 / 12:05 p.m.
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
It's good to get to ask you another round of questions.
Mr. O'Toole, I called you Erin first. I apologize if I was too informal.
You talked about hoping that Justice Hogue will hear the three questions you asked. Of those three questions, what I found particularly interesting was the concern that there was no interview done after the election with you and your campaign manager.
Looking back, as a person who's led a party through an election in which there were aspects of foreign interference that we're still trying to quantify, what do you think would have made that process a lot more helpful to you in the work that you are doing?
12:05 p.m.
President, ADIT North America, As an Individual
As I said, I try to take all of the issues related to foreign interference very seriously because of my work as foreign affairs shadow minister and because of my time in the Canadian Armed Forces. I've sworn several oaths to the country and I take them very seriously, which is why I and my campaign chair and my designate for the election protocol panel—a very accomplished lawyer who underwent security screening so that they could participate—took that process very seriously. We shared with the committee our concerns about things we were hearing in the middle of the campaign.
The panel of five and the security agencies were able to keep briefing us up until the government appointed a new cabinet. Even after we lost the election—narrowly, I might add—we still brought in evidence that we had. I've brought the materials that I provided to Mr. Johnston and I'm happy to table them with the committee here today, because we've always tried to be forthright with all the information we had. CSIS and the panel cut off communications once the new government and cabinet were sworn in and we had no ability...the caretaker period was over.
Why was that person, who was my designate, not talked to by Mr. Rosenberg—or me? The fact that those two people, who were the subject or source of concerns about interference, weren't talked to in the examination of the 2021 election is a colossal failure, in my view.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Thank you.
You have five minutes, Mr. Duncan, followed by Madam Koutrakis.
Mr. Duncan.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. O'Toole, it's good to see you.
You alluded to the documents that you're willing to table with the committee. We'll make that formal: Are willing to do that?
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Thank you. I appreciate that.
I want to build on your comments.
You had a chance to talk about Mr. Rosenberg's report. You said earlier it was almost professional negligence when it came to not interviewing you or officials from the Conservative Party of Canada.
In your willingness to try to address this issue in a serious manner, I want you to elaborate a bit more on the rapporteur, Mr. Johnston, who was doing his report. You had some frustrations, so I want you to elaborate on those frustrations.
Am I correct in stating that whenever you met with him, he advised you that the report was already written and had been sent to translation? When you talked about the negligence, you weren't interviewed by Mr. Rosenberg at all, and then when you were interviewed by Mr. Johnston, it was just as bad. It was already shipped off.
Can you elaborate on that and what happened in that circumstance, and whether that was inappropriate or not?
12:05 p.m.
President, ADIT North America, As an Individual
Thank you, Mr. Duncan.
I did feel like it was window dressing. The very fact that the first investigation of the election didn't talk to the people who raised issues about the election, I would give that a grade of F, if I were a professor. That type of approach wouldn't survive in the private sector.
Leave aside that Mr. Rosenberg had the Trudeau Foundation connections. I haven't focused on that, but I raised that in the House in 2018, 2019. It was a very inappropriate choice.
The Right Honourable David Johnston, a Canadian I have profound respect for, really disappointed me. I have great respect for Ms. Block, who is one of the countries finest litigators. The very fact that the draft of the report was at translation—and late in the meeting they acknowledged that to me—was profoundly disappointing. It was like I was a check box on a list.
I provided them with and knew more information than they did. In intelligence, not every fact is right. It is about assessing grey. But you can also give a curated view of intelligence to drive to an outcome. Who provided that curation to Mr. Johnston?
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
Can I elaborate a bit further on that?
You mentioned that you provided a bunch of new evidence and information. Mr. Johnston didn't then go and change any aspect of his report. He did not come back to you afterwards and say thank you, that it had helped change the conclusions, or anything that was included in his final report.?
12:10 p.m.
President, ADIT North America, As an Individual
He told me that my contributions were appreciated.
As I said, I do think he felt he was doing what was best for the country in his view. But when you're also receiving a very curated view.... When I read his report that all opposition leaders urged an inquiry, why no inquiry? What is there to fear from sunshine and bright lights?
Having spoken to him and seeing how, in legal terms, you would say they had a closed mind by the time they were talking to me, it was very disappointing. I now know I was targeted and that our intelligence agencies knew about that targeting of me, because I got my CSIS briefing after my time with Mr. Johnston.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
I would say that the fact he resigned afterwards and what the outcome was speaks volumes to the integrity or the conclusion of the report and the quality of the report.
If I could, Mr. O'Toole, I want to ask you to build on something that was said earlier.
You and your family were targeted, or threats were made against you. It was only after the leak and the reports came out that you were provided with the appropriate briefings and backgrounder on it. You said that you hoped in the future, if a threat were made against you and your family, you would be made aware of it.
I'd like to ask, whenever you got the briefing, after the fact, after it became public—and we talked about the massive breakdown and communications failure and protocol failure here—were you given any assurances from the intelligence officials that in the event in the future a threat did come to you, they would come to you directly and tell you? You said that you hoped that would be the case, so I'm concerned that they didn't really give you that assurance that the same mistake wouldn't happen again.
12:10 p.m.
President, ADIT North America, As an Individual
I asked the CSIS officials.... When I was briefed, they knew I was leaving. I knew I was leaving. My motion was my second-last speech in the House of Commons, so they knew this. I asked if I could seek support from them in the future if I had any concerns, and they were open to that. I did not get the sense that they would be required to brief me if an issue arose.
I will remind you about the use of the word “threat”. If someone is being surveilled, that's not really a physical threat, but you're a target and so the intelligence threat has been identified. I never feared for my life or my family. I want to make that very clear.
I do think that if any individual parliamentarian is targeted they need to be made aware of it, and we should provide resources to help secure their communications and to secure their home and their livelihood, if that needs to happen.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Annie Koutrakis Liberal Vimy, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
That's actually a great segue into my question.
Welcome, Mr. O'Toole. It's really nice to see you. I hope you and your family are doing well.
Just following up on my colleague Mr. Duncan's question, are you aware of any further targeting of you? If so, are you able to elaborate? I'm just curious to see how you otherwise would have envisioned your life post-Parliament and if it's what you thought it would be. Could you maybe elaborate a bit on that?
12:15 p.m.
President, ADIT North America, As an Individual
Thank you.
There is a life after politics. I can assure you of that. I miss elements of working with you, colleagues, but I'm very happy, and the family is well. Thank you.
The issue for me came up when my briefing at CSIS kept using the present tense. I said to them, “You know I'm leaving.” Targeted interest, targeted...they kept using the present tense. I had to ask, to say: “You're using the present tense, and I'm not the Conservative leader anymore, and I'm not going to be an MP in a few months when the session comes to an end. Does this mean that I'm an ongoing target?” That's when they clarified: Yes, in part because of my long concerns about certain conduct of the Communist Party in China.
As I've said, I worked in the private sector. I know how important it is for our economy and how difficult the balance is. I've said that, but it was surprising to me that they do consider this to be into the future of an undetermined time.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Annie Koutrakis Liberal Vimy, QC
But are you specifically...are you aware if that is still going on? Has CSIS come back to you and said, you know...?