Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Feb. 26th, 2026

[Anton Boegman]

Maybe I'll touch on the last part of your question first. I think establishing trust or rebuilding trust is an outcome that will occur through successful implementation of the mandate through the carrying out of the activities that are necessary. For me, moving in, obviously it will be a brand new office. Establishing that office is operationalizing the registry and getting the registry in place; working on things like making definitions when they're necessary; establishing interpretation bulletins; establishing guidance; and then communicating that guidance so that it's clear on what the rules are when people do need to register, when they need to inscribe themselves on the registry and those sorts of things.

I think there needs to be lots of outreach. There needs to be outreach particularly among communities that are affected by some of the issues we are facing. I think there needs to be outreach in the academic community. I think there needs to be broad outreach around what the registry means, what the focus of the registry is and what the object of the registry is in terms of greater transparency in these types of activities.

I think these sorts of things would be priorities for me if I were to be appointed into this role. I think the outcome of doing those successfully would be to broaden trust.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

How do you think the establishment of a foreign influence transparency registry will help Canada further contribute to bilateral and multilateral co-operation in efforts to counter foreign interference across the board?

[Anton Boegman]

A foreign influence registry is a tool. It is a very effective tool, in my belief, but it's one tool among many. It's also a tool that has been used by some of our allies. There are registries, as I'm sure you know, in the U.K. and Australia, and the U.S. has had legislation in this area since the late 1930s.

It's bringing us into line with what is currently used by many of our allies in this same area. I think it will help reinforce some of the relationships we have when we know that this tool is in place and there are means to have greater transparency regarding some of these influence activities that are taking place and targeting our processes.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Some people may be a little skeptical and think that the government is trying to overreach. How will you handle not under-enforcing but also not overreaching?

[Anton Boegman]

I have to trust, obviously, that in the development of the legislation, it will meet the requirements of the charter. Obviously, regarding balancing, any time there are regulations that affect people and what people have to do, there has to be a trade-off between the necessity of those and, of course, the rights that are established for all Canadians in the charter.

Again, drawing from my experience back in British Columbia, there are times when you are regulated in terms of what you can say and when you can say it through the election advertising laws and the campaign finance laws. These are deemed necessary to have a greater good, which, in that case, is the preservation of the fair and level playing field in an election campaign.

There's obviously a need for a foreign influence transparency register. The application of that will be key, but the application is really to provide greater transparency, and it is not to be used as a tool to persecute or repress.

[The Chair, Liberal, Chris Bittle]

Thank you so much.

Ms. Normandin, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much for being with us today, Mr. Boegman.

You mentioned that one of the cornerstones of your role was independence. However, I understand that there are duties that do not fall under the commissioner’s authority. For example, the power to conduct intelligence investigations will be handled more by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, or CSIS. The ability to assess geopolitical threats will fall to entities other than you.

I wonder whether there will be times when contradictions arise between the information we obtain from CSIS and the signals being sent by the Prime Minister. I'll give you a concrete example. The Prime Minister left for a trip to India stating that India no longer posed any risks, whereas six months ago, CSIS clearly stated that there were threats, even criminal threats, from India. How will you juggle both, knowing that information comes from one source but can also come from another source, and that you need to remain neutral and bring out the truth of it all?

[Anton Boegman]

Thank you for the question and the opportunity to speak in French. I'm not a French speaker; Canada's second language is not my mother tongue, so forgive me if I use the wrong words or anglicisms in my response.

Your question is a good one. When something is said, there may be clues or evidence that indicate something else. If I'm appointed commissioner, I'll need to develop partnerships with other agencies to be able to gather additional information and reach my own decisions. If I think that a foreign influence activity has occurred, I must contact the individual or entity to ensure that it's in the registry.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much. Your French is impeccable.

With respect to this limited investigative power, how do you plan to conduct additional research? For example, if you need to access a bank account to check for specific transactions, how would that fit into your role? What kind of partners could you work with to carry out that type of investigation?

[Anton Boegman]

I think it will be important to form all kinds of partnerships with other agencies, such as financial, police or intelligence agencies, to see whether things are happening in areas of society.

The commissioner's office will be quite small. It may have 30 people. The goal of the office is simply transparency. If I identify an activity that indicates an agreement between an individual and a foreign principal to communicate with a member of Parliament, engage in public communications or distribute funds, I will need to list the individual in the registry, in accordance with the established criteria. That is why partnerships with all kinds of organizations will be very important.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Do you intend to take an agnostic approach to the various agents that could exert influence? On the contrary, do you already have in your sights certain countries known to make more attempts at interference, countries that will attract more of your attention?

[Anton Boegman]

The system is agnostic. It's a registry listing every occurrence of an individual or entity carrying out certain actions. However, I'm sure there are countries that are flagged as countries that do things here in Canada. India, China, Iran and Russia are countries identified in documents and by services. We need to know what these countries are doing here. Therefore, we'll need to have partnerships with other agencies to understand whether the activities…. Sorry, I can't think of the word.

However, the registry is agnostic, so each time an entity or individual carries out certain actions, it will be recorded in the registry.

[The Chair, Liberal, Chris Bittle]

Next is Mr. Van Popta, please, for five minutes.

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley Township—Fraser Heights, BC]

Thank you.

Mr. Boegman, welcome. It's nice to have a fellow British Columbian in the room.

You're applying for this job, in part, based on your credentials as a successful chief electoral officer for British Columbia. I'm going to ask you a couple of questions about that—I hope you don't mind—and particularly around the most recent provincial election in 2024, which was the 43rd election. I'm going to focus on the riding called Surrey—Guildford, which I'm sure you're very familiar with. That's a riding where the NDP incumbent won by a narrow margin of 22 votes. Obviously, those 22 votes were very important to the people in that riding. This supports our argument and our pep talk with our volunteers that every vote counts.

In this case, it was really particular because it actually had an influence at the provincial level. If that vote had gone the other way, Mr. Eby would have been denied his one-vote majority.

My facts are right. Is that correct?

[Anton Boegman]

Yes, that's correct.

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley Township—Fraser Heights, BC]

You'll also be aware that the unsuccessful Conservative candidate, Mr. Randhawa, commenced legal action to overturn the certification of the vote, arguing that there were some voting irregularities at a seniors' home, which, coincidentally, had 22 mail-in ballots. All of those the requests for those mail-in ballots came from one ISP and a computer that was tied to the administrative office of that facility. It was somebody doing this in a coordinated fashion.

You stated in the court documents, in paragraph 98, “Receiving multiple requests for mail-in packages from a single computer session or location does not, on its own, signal to Elections BC that there has been any wrongdoing or contravention of the Election Act.” I would agree with that assessment.

You went on to say, “The Vote by Mail Team decided to fulfill the request from the Facility...to ensure the voters received their mail-in voting packages in time.” In the next sentence, which I would underline, you said, “However, the Team failed to follow-up with the District Electoral Officer, Ms. Malhi,” for that riding “to confirm that an individual at the Facility...was appointed as an election official.” Somebody dropped the ball.

I take it that being appointed as an election official would require some basic training, like how to help patients under their care vote without influencing their vote. That seems to not have happened.

Can the voters of Surrey—Guildford rest assured that those 22 mail-in ballots did not influence the outcome of the vote in that riding, and that the vote as you certified it is the true expression of the majority of that riding?

[Anton Boegman]

There are some parts to that that I'm very happy to respond to, but others are in the hands of Elections BC. Of course, I'm no longer the chief electoral officer there.

The lawsuit was filed and dropped by the candidate in Surrey—Guildford. That happened after my term ended, so I have no information in relation to why that happened and what was behind that.

I know the plan, when I was the chief electoral officer, was that if the proceedings were going to take place in court, the courts would determine validly what happened and what didn't happen. If it did not, there would be an investigation for Elections BC to do.

I can't speak for Elections BC.

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley Township—Fraser Heights, BC]

I'm going to challenge you a bit on that, because you say in the same document that Mr. Randhawa was just out of time. He missed the limitation period. Elections BC was basically saved by the bell. He had to drop the case, move on and live to fight another day.

My concern is, particularly in such a tight race, whether Elections BC actually exercised the due diligence you would have expected, as a professional, and whether your team lived up to the demands of the day.

[Anton Boegman]

The requirement to appoint an individual as an election official is something that is done, but it's not required under the legislation. It's not absolutely necessary under the legislation.

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley Township—Fraser Heights, BC]

In this case, it might have been appropriate.

I've also read the affidavit of the Green candidate, who said he tried to canvass the home and was told, “No, these people are all sick and they don't vote,” yet 22 people cast a vote. At least there's some suspicion, anyway.

I would have expected some alarm bells to start going off in your office.

[Anton Boegman]

I can say, based on the information I was provided as the chief electoral officer, I believe the election was administered in accordance with the legislation. I do not believe that activities counter to that took place.

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley Township—Fraser Heights, BC]

Fair enough. It will never be tested in court, of course.

I have one follow-up question. How were the elections of—

[The Chair, Liberal, Chris Bittle]

Mr. Van Popta, you don't get to self-rule on your.... Go ahead. We have a little time. You can go ahead with a very brief question.

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley Township—Fraser Heights, BC]

How are the lessons of the 43rd election going to help you be a better foreign influence transparency commissioner for all of Canada?

[Anton Boegman]

There are always lessons to be learned in various roles and from different people with whom I associate.

What was reinforced is that training can always be better. Training of the staff who are performing roles can always be better. Even though you put what you think is decent training in, whenever there are people who are interacting in these roles, human nature and the complexity of legislation can mean that inadvertent errors possibly take place. You can always improve the training. You always have to put checks and balances in everything. I think that making assumptions is never a good thing. You need to follow up to make those assumptions. At the end of the day, you're providing a service. You need to make sure that it's done properly.