Procedure and House Affairs Committee on May 7th, 2026

[Dr. Lori Turnbull]

I think it's important, for example, to take some of the pieces around undue influence by foreign entities, and things like that, and apply them specifically to leadership and nomination contests. We know it happens. We know that foreign actors see these contests as part of the electoral process and also a space that might be easier to penetrate than elections at the ballot box, where people are showing up and casting their ballots in person. We don't really hear that the issues are in ballot box intimidation in Canada. That's not what we hear about. We hear about other issues that are making it possible for foreign influence to potentially happen. It's not like political parties are saying, “Yeah, we'd love to have someone come and influence.” It's not that. Parties have rules about who can participate in these. You have to be a member of the party, obviously. You all know this better than me.

Giving Elections Canada the ability to go after someone who has violated this law is important. To make it—

[The Chair, Liberal, Chris Bittle]

I'll have to cut you off there, my apologies.

I will go to Mr. Cooper next.

I will warn you in advance that I will cut you off at five minutes.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

Okay, thank you very much.

Professor Turnbull, we heard from the Chief Electoral Officer in the previous hour, who acknowledged that there are no real safeguards to prevent foreign actors from exploiting the exception with respect to third party financing, where third parties could use their own funds in terms of purchasing goods or services or funnelling money into those entities, which could then be used for regulated activities by third parties. It's a loophole. You called it a loophole. I agree that it's certainly a loophole.

In answer to Mr. Jackson, you said that a solution would be some sort of separation of funds or separate accounting. Could you elaborate on what fix could be made to close that loophole as well as possible?

[Dr. Lori Turnbull]

The only thing I can think of is for third parties.... If you are registered as a third party, you have to make representation to Elections Canada already; you're part of the system. As acknowledged, as a third party you have requirements under that. If you kept foreign funds completely separate from domestic funds—for whatever reason they're coming, whether it's for a service or whatever—when you get to the point of spending for regulated activities, you know that the money is only coming from money that you received domestically.

They're also subject to audit. If the punishment is bad enough, it would discourage them from doing it.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

Why not simply require third parties to set up a separate bank account and use funds from that bank account, from donations from individual Canadians, for regulated activities? Why not simply do that? This bill seeks to do that, but there's this big loophole that makes it very easy to get around.

[Dr. Lori Turnbull]

I agree with you.

In my view, I don't think that would create an onerous responsibility on the part of third parties, even small ones.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

Thank you for that.

Mr. Burton, what are your thoughts on this?

[Dr. Charles Burton]

I'm with you on this. I think it's an issue that should be addressed by amendments made by this committee.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

I have to think that this is the type of loophole that the United Front Work Department at the PRC would exploit.

[Dr. Charles Burton]

Definitely. They look for any loophole and opportunity to exploit our free and open system to further Chinese interests in Canada. They have such a big operation and so much coordination and capacity that there's no loophole that they're not going to go through, frankly, based on my 50 years of experience dealing with that regime.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

Mr. Burton, I want to follow up on your opening statement regarding the foreign influence registry. You noted that it's been two years since the legislation was passed. Two years later, we don't have the registry up and running. Are you concerned that the government is dragging its feet?

Second, are you concerned about the independence of the commissioner and the impact that this will have on the effectiveness of the registry once it is fully up and running?

[Dr. Charles Burton]

Yes, I am concerned about the role of Sébastien Aubertin-Giguère, the civil servant who has been designated as the foreign interference coordinator, and whether he would in effect be preventing Anton Boegman, who has been appointed as the commissioner, from acting independently.

Mr. Boegman's office has not been very well funded, so I am concerned about whether the government genuinely wants a robust and effective foreign influence registry that's independent from the ministry and the Prime Minister's Office.

[The Chair, Liberal, Chris Bittle]

Thank you so much.

Mrs. Brière, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to go back to the question that was put to Ms. Turnbull in the first hour. It was about a 10% threshold for contributions. We heard the response from the Chief Electoral Officer and the discussion between Mr. Cooper and Ms. Turnbull.

Ms. Lawlor, what's your point of view on this?

[Dr. Andrea Lawlor]

There is no perfect political finance regime that absolutely prevents the interference of foreign monies in the Canadian political process.

As I believe the CEO said this morning, we are always looking for a balance between not encouraging political chill in the environment of political communications on behalf of political actors and, on the other hand—and Canadians feel very strongly about that—ensuring that foreign money doesn't enter our elections in any meaningful way that could impact outcomes or even impact individual vote calculus.

Creating this balance is a very difficult legislative task. The 10% in owned funds may still invite mechanisms or ways in which foreign money could, in a very indirect way, enter into it. It doesn't completely exclude that possibility, but we see the ways in which government legislation—in tandem with other pieces of elections legislation, such as regulated spending limits—has ensured that this sort of influence could only go so far.

The 10% provision needs to be read with the other elements of election law to determine the extent to which it can prevent foreign interference. It may be imperfect, but it may create some of that balance in allowing political expression for actors such as unions and corporations, which have otherwise—and I think quite rightly—been prevented from making monetary contributions in other ways.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

Thank you very much.

We know that our system is very robust and that this is important for ensuring the transparency of the electoral process.

Do you think that what's being proposed in Bill C‑25will still ensure this transparency and preserve the strength of our fundraising system in the electoral process?

[Dr. Andrea Lawlor]

I do believe the transparency provisions that exist within the bill to ensure that third parties identify the source of the funds are a step forward.

Once again, I do not want to say that there is no way in which money could still be shuttled through—as I think my colleagues Dr. Turnbull and Mr. Burton pointed out—but I also struggle to think of political finance regimes where there is not some back door. I don't want to suggest that by simply removing the 10% owned funds contribution we have a fait accompli and we have solved political finance.

I do think there is value in having political expression from different actors in the political environment. I would suggest that the previous legislative changes, under successive Liberal and Conservative governments, that have restricted campaign spending and put limits on fundraising also go a good part of the way to preventing foreign influence.

What I would say is that this is very much an iterative process. If this provision does go through as it is currently written, we will see, in the next election cycle or two, just how effective it is and how it affects the number and type of third parties that will participate in Canadian federal elections.

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

Do you agree with extending the measure to leadership races?

[Dr. Andrea Lawlor]

Yes, I believe this has been a neglected area of Canadian political finance law. Bringing in nomination contests and leadership contests is a very important next step in making sure that Canadians can trust the different stages of the electoral process. While we have had some transparency, in auditing that takes place by Elections Canada, I think this bill pushes that in the right direction by bringing in those two types of competitions. Even though they are competitions that happen at the level of the private organization of the political party, I think it will enhance public confidence in our election processes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Chris Bittle]

Thank you so much.

I'd like to thank all of our witnesses today.

The meeting is adjourned.