Yes. The minister said it would be coming by the end of the year, in his most recent statement to a parliamentary committee. The Public Safety people have been briefing us that it will be coming next spring. There's a suggestion that there are long delays in appointing the commissioner, with the need for top secret security clearance and so on. When the government needed a fentanyl czar, they seemed able to do an order in council and get that person in place pretty quickly, so I'm puzzled as to why it takes so long for a commissioner.
I see the commissioner as key. If we get a strong commissioner, they can interpret the legislation—things like Senator Woo's concern about “in association with” and being clear on what it means.
What about people anticipating future benefits in the Chinese regime if they go along with a Chinese agenda, when they're in a position of public trust in the civil service or in Parliament? What about secondary influence? In other words, what if a Canadian company has extensive dealings with Chinese Communist business networks and then sponsors a research institution?
There are a lot of questions, and they really need a strong commissioner, in my view, on site and fully qualified to be able to sort them out. What seems to be happening now is that Public Safety is trying to come up with regulations and interpretations, which I believe will inhibit the potential independence of the commissioner in making the registry effective and getting names on the registry.
With that being said, in talking to John Garnaut, who was an adviser to a former Australian prime minister when they put together their act, the simple existence of a registry seems to have a dampening effect on politicians who might be induced to get into situations in which they become beholden to China or another foreign power, so we need this to exist.
We had an election after we heard from a security committee that a significant number of MPs, and a slightly larger number of staffers, appeared to be under the influence of a foreign power. It is outrageous to me that the election happened when we didn't have any means to go into it in a fair way. There was no way to ensure that Canadians were aware of people who may not have been entirely uninfluenced, who were unable to avoid the temptation of benefits from a foreign power or who were subject to very sophisticated engagement by Chinese entities.