Evidence of meeting #28 for Public Safety and National Security in the 40th Parliament, 3rd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was fadden.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Yes, Mr. Chairman, and I've said I regret it.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Don Davies
We saw in the United States the recent example of General McChrystal having to resign because as a member of the security establishment he made comments in the political realm that called into question the integrity or competence or fitness to hold office of certain elected officials.
As a member of Canada's security establishment, Mr. Fadden, do you see a parallel there?
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
No, I do not, Mr. Chairman.
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Because national security is not at issue here.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Don Davies
No, but smearing politicians, whether they are local government officials or cabinet ministers...you don't think that's calling into question the competence or fitness for office of a certain class of people?
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Mr. Chairman, General McChrystal, as I understand it, smeared his commander-in-chief. I don't think there's an analogy here at all.
The Vice-Chair NDP Don Davies
Well, that's true. He had the courage to name who he was talking about. And it wasn't just the commander-in-chief, it was Vice-President Biden--
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Don Davies
--and other people.
So you're hiding, sir, behind just a general class of people, and you think that gets you off the hook?
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
I don't think it's a question, Mr. Chairman, of getting me off the hook. If Parliament inserted foreign interference in the act, clearly there was the recognition that the foreign interference had to be exerted against someone. I can't think of very many other categories, other than those who are engaged in public life. That's not a revelation.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Don Davies
Sir, if you had said “left-handed cabinet ministers of Romanian decent”, would you still take the position that you didn't specify precisely who it was?
Okay, let me ask you this, Mr. Fadden. I put to you that you are in violation of the act because the act authorizes that the primary purpose is the gathering and collecting of information. That's what this is. This is information gathered under the act, I take it. Would you agree?
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
--or it's a conclusion drawn from the information garnered.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Don Davies
And it says “information obtained shall not be disclosed except in accordance with section 19”. And it says there are four specific people to whom you may disclose information: to a peace officer having jurisdiction; to the Minister of National Defence; to the Minister of Foreign Affairs; or, in the opinion of the minister, disclosure to someone the minister designates. Now, you didn't disclose that to those people. You disclosed it to the general public. Correct?
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
I made a general statement about concerns about foreign interference. I do not believe section 19 applies.
NDP
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Don Davies
Now, Mr. Fadden, it also says that you may disclose, for the purpose of performance of your duties and functions under this act.... My last question will be, which duty and function under this act were you performing when you disclosed to the Canadian public that there were cabinet ministers and municipal politicians in British Columbia who were under the influence of foreign governments?
Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
As I answered a few moments ago to one of your colleagues, Mr. Chairman, no agency act specifies that it is the duty of officers to talk to the public. It is implied.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Don Davies
Thank you.
Now, five minutes for Mr. MacKenzie, and sharing with Mr. Payne.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
Thank you, Chair.
I'd just like to clarify something you said, Mr. Fadden. I wouldn't be on holidays; I'd be serving my constituents in my riding. And I think most of my colleagues would say the same thing.
Mr. Fadden, you must understand that Canadians will read about this tomorrow morning, sitting around their kitchen tables, and will be left scratching their heads over your testimony. Why did you feel that the black-tie audience of people you did not even know had a greater right to the information than the federal minister or affected provinces, that the federal minister and affected provinces did not have that right to know?