Public Safety Committee on May 13th, 2019

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

We certainly see that, basically, colleagues from all parties who work with you on the NSICOP have done so seriously since it was created. That is also clear as we read your report. There is a desire to take the work very seriously.

However, we still have doubts about what will come of your reports. Right from when you submit a report in which you identified serious matters, the Prime Minister basically always has the last word.

The concern we have had since the beginning, when Bill C-22 was introduced, is about the way information is transmitted. Of course, we understand that highly secret information cannot be made public.

However, when the Prime Minister himself is the subject of a study, we don’t expect a response.

As chair of the committee, do you expect at the very least a reply to your studies from the government and the Prime Minister?

[David McGuinty]

Yes, Mr. Paul-Hus.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Your notes mention Bill C-59. You make recommendations involving the Department of National Defence, DND. I know that the bill is being studied in the Senate at the moment, but I no longer recall which stage it has reached. Do you think that amendments will be proposed by the Senate or the government? Have you heard anything about that?

[David McGuinty]

Our role is to submit reports to the government, and we have done that. All we can do is hope that the government will take them seriously

The national security and intelligence review agency, NSIRA, once it's created under Bill C-59, will have the power to review the Department of National Defence but will not be obligated to do so on an annual basis like it will for CSIS and CSE. The committee was unanimous in calling for NSIRA to have that annual responsibility built into Bill C-59 so that the extensive activities of the Department of National Defence in intelligence were reviewed on an ongoing basis.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

You explained that NSICOP has had a number of working sessions and that they are several hours long. What is the main subject that concerns you?

[David McGuinty]

What do you mean?

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

For example, when you have an investigation to conduct and you need information, do you have easy access to it?

[David McGuinty]

Yes, Mr. Paul-Hus.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

The doors of all departments are open?

[David McGuinty]

Sometimes, we ask for so much documentation that the members of NSICOP find it quite difficult to manage the amount. But we have an exceptional secretariat and very experienced analysts. However, from time to time, we have to put a little pressure on some departments or some agencies. But you have to remember that our committee has only been in existence for 17 or 18 months.

Do you want to add anything, Ms. Marcoux?

[Rennie Marcoux]

Yes.

What we notice most is the difference between agencies that are already subject to examination and that are used to providing classified information—such as the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, CSIS, the Communications Security Establishment, CSE, and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the RCMP—and other departments that are not used to it.

Those other organizations, such as the Department of National Defence or other departments, first of all have to establish a triage process for the documents and make sure that their directorates or divisions accept that a committee like ours has an almost absolute right of access to classified information, including information protected by solicitor-client privilege. It really is a learning process.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Marcoux.

Mr. Paul-Hus and Mr. Dubé, you have the floor for seven minutes.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My thanks to the witnesses for joining us today.

First of all, I want to thank you and all the members of the NSICOP for the work that you have done up to now. Given that this is the first experience for us all, please know that, if we are asking more technical questions on the procedure, it is in order to reach certain conclusions, it is not that we are criticizing your work, quite the contrary.

I would like to know more about the follow-up to your recommendations. As an example, when the Auditor General submits a report, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts generally makes it a point to hear from representatives of the various departments.

In your case, it is a little more complicated for two reasons. First of all, the information needed for the follow-up may well be classified. Then, you are not completely able to engage in the political jousting that is sometimes necessary to achieve good accountability.

Would it be appropriate for a committee, like ours, for example, to be given the responsibility of conducting the follow-up with some of the organizations mentioned in your recommendations?

[David McGuinty]

That is a question that the members of the committee have discussed at length: how can we push a little harder and require the recommendations to be implemented?

We are considering several possibilities. We have learned, for example, that the CSE carries over recommendations that have not yet been implemented from one report to the next. That is a possibility we are looking at, but we are in contact with the people involved every day.

To go back to Mr. Paul-Hus’ question, the Department of National Defence has never yet been examined by an external committee of parliamentarians like the NSICOP, which has the authority to require all that information.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Yes.

[David McGuinty]

Since we have had DND in our sights, they, for the first time in their history, have established a group of employees with the sole responsibility of processing all the information requested. That alone is progress.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Thank you.

Please forgive me if I move things along. I have a limited amount of time.

[David McGuinty]

I understand.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

I would like to focus on one other point. I am going back to the question that was asked about foreign interference.

Your study was supposed to be submitted, or at least completed, before May 3, if I am not mistaken. Did I understand correctly that it is possible that the report will not be tabled in the House before Parliament adjourns for the summer?

[David McGuinty]

We are working as fast as we can and spending a lot of time on that task in order to try to finish the report. However, it deals with four topics.

The problem is that the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act stipulates that the government must table its reports, once the process of redaction, or revision, is complete, within 30 days.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

I do not want to add to your workload and I understand that you are making every possible effort.

Is the committee satisfied with the length of time between your report arriving at the Prime Minister’s Office and it being laid before the House?

[David McGuinty]

That is an excellent question. In fact, we are thinking of studying those timeframes as part of the review of the act, which has to be done five years after its coming into force. You have put your finger on a good question.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

I am not doubting your good faith, but it is important for us to ask these kinds of questions in order to do our work, especially as the elections draw nearer.

In paragraph 49 of your report, you talk about the national intelligence expenditure report. You quote statistics from Australia, but the figures for Canada are redacted. Why did the Australians decide that it was appropriate to make those figures public to the extent that even we in our country are aware of them, but Canada did not? Are you able to answer that?

[Rennie Marcoux]

We asked the government the same question when we learned that this information was going to be redacted.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Have you received a response that you're able to send us?