National Defence Committee on Nov. 3rd, 2022

[BGen Denis Boucher]

That's a fairly broad question. I will not try to delve into the details of the legal aspect of the legislation that governs our protection of this information.

What I can tell you is that as we have members recruited into the Canadian Forces, we go through a reliability screening as the first element of their recruiting, and that does the background check. We do things like credit checks, criminal record checks and the like. As we move through, depending on the type of employment they will have and the requirements for security clearances, we also do a security clearance verification, which delves further into their background and will start looking into elements such as loyalty.

That's how we screen our members. That's how we end up giving them security clearances over time, and those security clearances evolve throughout the duration of their career, based on the needs of their employment. That falls within my purview as the director general of defence security. We look at all personnel security issues. The application of those acts and the obligations of members are understood by members, as they have to sign that disclosure agreement, as was mentioned earlier.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

Again, what obligations carry over after a member of CAF is released? How is compliance monitored following release? Is compliance monitored following release?

[BGen Denis Boucher]

The obligations under the Security of Information Act carry over after release. You are not allowed to disclose classified information to anyone who has not been authorized to be in possession of that information. This being said, they are no longer within the jurisdiction of the Canadian Armed Forces, so we, the Canadian Forces, cannot follow up with or investigate those members.

As allegations come to light, obviously, we are concerned. We look into these things, but with our federal partners.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

You mentioned in your opening remarks that the defence security program includes elements of security governance, planning, management of security risks and integration with other government departments.

Can you elaborate on how the Canadian Armed Forces—DND, specifically—work with those other government departments to manage security risk, particularly with respect to the security of information?

[BGen Denis Boucher]

Certainly.

As the director general of defence security and the chief security officer, I am in regular contact with chief security officers of other government departments. Every government department has a CSO who is designated, and we're all largely responsible for similar types of responsibilities internal to our own government departments. Some departments, such as defence, are much larger than others.

We share information with regard to personnel security screening, because members of the public service can transfer between departments, and members of the Canadian Armed Forces can leave the forces and be hired as public servants elsewhere. We'll exchange information there. We're integrated with the RCMP, for example, from a criminal records check perspective, and we exchange information as required there.

Those kinds of things would be areas. I don't know if that answers your question.

[Bryan May, Liberal, Cambridge, ON]

It does.

You talked a bit about the federal partners you would work with in this scenario. I think you mentioned justice. For the record, the Department of National Defence would not be the agency conducting any of these investigations. Is that fair to say?

[BGen Denis Boucher]

Yes. That is correct.

Members of the Canadian Forces are under the jurisdiction of the Canadian Forces and the Department of National Defence only until such time as they retire. Once they retire, they're Canadian citizens. They're civilians, as much as any other Canadian citizen would be, and they are no longer under the jurisdiction of the Canadian Armed Forces.

The only exception that could potentially happen is if somebody had caused an offence or had been investigated for and charged with an offence for a time when they were in uniform. You're responsible for as long as you are in uniform. Post-retirement, you could potentially be investigated for any activity that would have taken place before you retired, and there would be room there.

In this case, I would suggest, based on these allegations, that these are members who had retired and who were sought for employment after the fact. That would not have been something internal to defence, and we would not have jurisdiction.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. May.

Madame Normandin, you have six minutes.

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

Thank you very much for coming to this committee meeting, Brigadier-General Boucher.

I'd like to expand on my colleague Mr. May's questions.

You mentioned that when pilots retired from the army, you no longer had any authority over them. But they still had all the information obtained when they were soldiers. I have several questions for you.

As responsibility for the investigation lies more with CSIS and the RCMP, isn't it more difficult, in a way, to spot a real risk that these pilots might, for example, have given military information to the Chinese authorities?

Would it have been appropriate to include defence in the investigation to have a better understanding of how a similar situation could become a threat, rather than simply try to find culprits?

[BGen Denis Boucher]

Thank you for your question.

It's true that the agencies conducting the investigation will benefit from what we know. That's why we're working with them. We are not conducting the investigation as such. If our partners need information from us, then of course we'll be co‑operative.

At the Department of National Defence, and within the Canadian Armed Forces, we take security very seriously. We naturally see to security for our members, and we take our responsibilities for the defence of Canada very seriously. We are prepared to collaborate with our partners in other federal departments to assess the risk to our information, our members and our defence.

That said, a pilot receives all kinds of information, some more sensitive than others. I would say that knowledge about flying an aircraft is not necessarily sensitive information. What might become sensitive would be things like tactics that a pilot could use.

I'm not a pilot, so I'm only speculating, but there are lots of possibilities.

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

In connection with these tactics, is there a risk, or at least, do you assess potential risks that military strategies other than Canada's, such as NATO's, might have been disclosed to Chinese pilots?

[BGen Denis Boucher]

There are always risks of that kind. Our pilots often co‑operate with our NATO allies, whether within a Canadian unit, on an exchange, or with other allies. We share our allies' concerns about these allegations. There is always the possibility that information can be disclosed. Some of the tactics and measures we use with our allies, however, are published on the Internet and anyone can access them.

In any event, once again, before leaving the forces, all members of the Canadian Forces must make a solemn declaration concerning their obligations under the Security of Information Act.

Former members are aware of these obligations and know they may be investigated and sanctioned if they do not comply.

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

Thank you.

You mentioned that pilots had information about how to fly an aircraft, but also information that in some instances might be more important. For example, they are aware of standard operating procedures. Some newspaper articles mentioned that this could be a gold mine for Chinese pilots. Could you talk to us about that?

Is there information that could be extremely useful to Chinese pilots?

[BGen Denis Boucher]

All I can do is speculate, because I'm obviously not an expert in this field. My expertise right now is in administering the National Defence security program.

However, we place our trust in our members, including those who have retired, and believe they will continue to comply with their obligations under the Security of Information Act. We are hoping that the former pilots in question protected the information. Once the investigation being carried out by our federal partners has been completed, we'll know what they may have disclosed.

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

Thank you very much.

You mentioned that there was already some information available online. However, there are also manuals handed out to military personnel, such as B‑GL documents.

To your knowledge, has strategic military information of this kind ever been acquired by the Russians and the Chinese other than from pilots?

[BGen Denis Boucher]

I can only speculate.

Many of the documents you mentioned, such as B‑GL manuals on tactics and military doctrine, are freely available online.

However, when members leave the Canadian Armed Forces and have made a solemn declaration concerning their obligations under the Security of Information Act, they also return any documents that may contain sensitive or secret information. They are required to confirm on the form that all information of this kind in their possession has been returned. Of course,we're not allowed to keep secret documents at home, and are only allowed to have access to such published documents in our working environment.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Normandin.

Ms. Mathyssen, you have six minutes.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you so much, Brigadier-General, for appearing today.

I'm hoping you can provide a bit more context. You already spoke about the variety of Canadian acts and laws that are supposed to provide for the protection of military information sharing by retired forces members.

Can you compare those with what the U.K. has in place?

[BGen Denis Boucher]

I'm not aware of all the policies the U.K. or the U.S. would have in place. We are in regular contact, and we compare policies and procedures with our allied partners, because it is best practice to do so and to constantly revise our practices.

We have a number of policies in place. The U.K. has a number of policies in place for protection of information that I am aware of. I am not aware of the details there. I'm sorry.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Is there a comparison to be made, because it has been verified that there are U.K. pilots involved with this company? Is there any way to make comparisons in terms of that legal obligation after military service?

[BGen Denis Boucher]

I would say there are ways the obligations could be compared, but I think that becomes a question that is a bit outside of my area of expertise. When we're starting to talk about the actual detail, the legal detail of the Security of Information Act, which is a legislative document, I would tend to want to refer that to legal authorities. I certainly am far from a legal authority myself.

I suspect those countries' policies and laws governing the secrecy or security of their information would be very similar to ours. We tend to protect information along the same lines, and that's why we're in such close partnerships with those countries in particular.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you so much.

If I could just shift, there's been a suggestion, of course, that a lot of this is about money and the seeking of very advantageous contracts. I guess this falls more under Veterans Affairs and maybe is less directly relevant to DND and the CAF, but do you ultimately believe that if we were to try to provide far more programming, far more opportunities for veterans to exit out into the private sector or after service employment...? Are we doing a good enough job in that as the Government of Canada? Should we be focusing more on veterans' pensions?

What are your thoughts on that?

[BGen Denis Boucher]

This is, I think, a bit of a speculative question. I will speak as an individual who is at 34 years of service, and thus clearly much closer to retirement than to my recruitment, thus it's obviously something that's near and dear to my heart. I think it's really important, from our perspective, to be able to offer employment opportunities to former Canadian Forces members.

I'm not going to speak to services that Veterans Affairs offers, because at present I'm thankfully not in receipt of those services, but our country is one that I believe respects greatly the service of its members. We are certainly in a better position today in terms of services offered to our members by Veterans Affairs. I would suggest that we could always benefit from increased services, but everybody will always ask for more. I think there are lots of opportunities for employment, and any assistance we can get in terms of offering employment to our veterans is certainly well received from both those in uniform and those who previously wore the uniform.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

As for how we move forward from what potential military information or skills information has been leaked or divulged, is there consideration in our future procurement and the contracts—I think of the F-35, for example, as it relates to the pilots that we need to be in consideration of—as we negotiate that final contract?

[BGen Denis Boucher]

We're constantly looking at the policies we have in place and updating those policies to ensure that we have best practices, in concert with other federal departments and also with our allies, and to ensure that we protect that information.

With regard to the F-35, we are obviously interested in finding out whether or not we will acquire that aircraft for the Canadian Forces. We have a number of allied partners who are already operators of those aircraft, and there are specific security considerations around those aircraft that will speak to and contribute to the strengthening of certain policies, or to examining our policies to see if there are gaps anywhere that need to be filled to ensure that we can protect that information as well as possible.