Evidence of meeting #44 for National Defence in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was interference.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, we've been very patient with the relevance of the questions from the opposition. This is a study on the Arctic and—
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
Bryan May Liberal Cambridge, ON
Excuse me. I just ask, respectfully, that we get back to the study of the Arctic.
Thank you.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative James Bezan
I'll just say this. Because this has been discussed at this meeting, it is relevant to the meeting, because it has been.... Ms. Thomas has been answering the questions, so I'll allow the questioning to continue, especially in light of the fact that we do see China as a threat to our Arctic security.
Go ahead, Mrs. Kramp-Neuman.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative James Bezan
I've ruled that this is in order, and we'll continue on.
You have a minute and a half left, Mrs. Kramp-Neuman.
11:35 a.m.
National Security and Intelligence Adviser, Privy Council Office
I would like to answer that question.
11:35 a.m.
National Security and Intelligence Adviser, Privy Council Office
I'm not sure that my personal integrity needs to be attacked in this committee. I am not shielding the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister is briefed regularly. He's very interested in this subject and has directed work for agencies to do, but it's not a.... To imply that bureaucrats and officials, deputy ministers or agency heads are shielding the Prime Minister I find to be a bit offensive. We are briefing regularly, and those briefings are received and acted upon.
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
Shelby Kramp-Neuman Conservative Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
That's fair enough.
With regard to that, I was speaking to this because, due to the proximity, any line of questioning with respect to the People's Republic of China I feel is relevant. Could you speak further to any security briefings you have been in contact with our Prime Minister about in the last two weeks?
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative James Bezan
You're out of time, so I'd say a 30-second response if you can, Ms. Thomas.
11:40 a.m.
National Security and Intelligence Adviser, Privy Council Office
In the last two weeks, I actually can't tell you what we briefed the Prime Minister on. I don't think that's appropriate, but there are constant briefings to the Prime Minister. He is briefed almost daily on the situation in Ukraine—that's an intelligence brief. He's briefed on the situation in Haiti—that's an intelligence brief. He's briefed on foreign interference when we have issues to raise to his attention. He has a daily foreign intelligence brief, and he has a weekly Prime Minister's intelligence brief.
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative James Bezan
Thank you.
Ms. O'Connell, you have the floor for five minutes.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you all for being here. I'm sorry for the inappropriateness.
Let's follow up on some of the questions from the Conservatives.
I was a member of NSICOP. In 2019, NSICOP tabled their annual report on foreign interference in the House of Commons. Conservatives should take note, if they want the title of a report. It spoke about potential election interference.
This is more of a rhetorical question.
It is funny to me, as somebody who sat on the committee and knows exactly the quality of documents provided under very strict national security protection guidelines. Conservative members and senators sat on that committee. They would have reviewed that information, yet they waited until 2022 to talk about foreign interference in elections, when a report was tabled in the House of Commons—it was in a redacted form, of course—that spoke about that.
Maybe I'm biased, because I was a member of NSICOP and I think they do incredible work, but it's funny to me that Conservatives are only waking up to foreign interference now, when they were provided information tabled in the House about foreign interference on an ongoing basis, including misinformation, disinformation and attempts on our elections. As a reaction to that, the Prime Minister is required to respond to those reports, which I'm assuming you all did as well in your teams—maybe not at that specific time as you wouldn't have been in this role, but eventually.
One thing that came from that was the NSICOP committee and the non-partisan panel of national security experts at the deputy director level, if I'm not mistaken. They came together to determine, during elections, whether or not the threshold was met on the constant foreign interference that happens all the time. It doesn't mean it's successful, but it happens. Number one, if it ever reaches that threshold, does the public need to be aware of it? Number two, how is communication then made to Canadians, so that it's not in some partisan form that will influence the election, one way or the other?
Part of the NSICOP role and response.... One thing that came from ongoing foreign interference was the fact that major parties are now briefed on foreign interference and what to look for and how to protect themselves, advise their candidates and protect their data.
This is for anyone on the panel. Ms. Thomas, you could start.
Can you talk about the briefings that political parties now receive on foreign intelligence, which they never received in the past? Do you have any specifics on the dates when parties—whether in 2019 or for the 2021 election—were briefed on foreign interference and how they could best protect themselves?
11:40 a.m.
National Security and Intelligence Adviser, Privy Council Office
I think Mr. MacDonald should answer.
11:40 a.m.
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Security and Intelligence, Privy Council Office
Thank you for the question.
You described it extremely well, actually. It's called the election security architecture and the various players who contribute to the governance of that space.
It is correct that a call goes out to political parties, via a letter, to have candidates who can be security-cleared and who will then engage with officials during the election period.
I was around for the 2021 general election and was part of organizing those briefings with officials from the parties. Generally, the conversations were very educative, making sure that, if individuals saw issues that caused concern, they knew where to go and how to identify issues. Topics covered were foreign interference and what to look out for. Briefings were also given on what ideologically motivated violent extremism is, and on security. What is a security clearance? What does it mean? How does it operate?
The last thing those meetings were very instrumental for is this: They allowed the representatives from the parties a chance to ask any questions they wanted to ask. There was a range of questions asked. It was very much a free-flowing exchange. They had security clearances, so we were able to share information.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Thank you.
Did the Conservative Party send a representative to be briefed on foreign interference during the 2021 election?
11:45 a.m.
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Security and Intelligence, Privy Council Office
Yes, they did.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative James Bezan
Thank you.
We'll move on to two and a half minutes with Mr. Desilets, please.
11:45 a.m.
Bloc
Luc Desilets Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Thomas, my question is for you again.
Don't you think that the West not being at the table on the Arctic Council is somewhat dangerous?
11:45 a.m.
National Security and Intelligence Adviser, Privy Council Office
That's a very important question to ponder.
In 2015, when Crimea was invaded, we had a similar situation where Russia was removed temporarily from the Arctic Council. The other nations managed very well in co-operation and continued dialogue on very important Arctic issues, such as economic issues, social issues and development issues. It's unfortunate. I think it's of their own making. Again, you can't just decide when you're going to participate in a rules-based endeavour.
11:45 a.m.
Bloc