Evidence of meeting #8 for Public Safety and National Security in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was police.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
I'm looking at a briefing note about your comprehensive strategy for government. It identifies short and long-term risks, and it says:
...assess the adequacy of existing legislation that deals with foreign interference, such as the Security of Information Act or the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, and make proposals for changes if required.
You did identify some inadequacies. Could you elaborate on what they are?
Chair, National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians
I can't right now, off the top of my head. I'd have to find the operative passages in the report for you, which I'd be very pleased to do through the Chair, and send you a written response in terms of those details, because I'm sure they're there.
That particular part of the recommendation was formulated by the committee, when I reflect back on the deliberations. It was about trying to make sure that a full examination, including the legislative and regulatory underpinnings of what was going on, was actually carried out. Were all these pieces properly connecting? Were the powers exercised by one organization aligned with powers organized elsewhere? Was there a chance to, for example, up the understanding of what foreign interference is or is not?
The idea was that part and parcel of a government-wide response to foreign interference would include a necessary examination of the legislative underpinnings.
Liberal
Conservative
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
In paragraph 290 of the report, it says:
The government's public engagement on foreign interference has been limited. There are no strategies or threat assessments to inform Canadians of foreign interference analogous to the yearly reports on terrorism.
The report goes on to mention Operation Fox Hunt, which has been in the media as of late, in which the Communist Party of China threatens Chinese Canadians on Canadian soil.
Has the committee reviewed whether or not the government has any measures to encourage Chinese Canadians to come forward to authorities and report any threats of intimidation they may be experiencing?
Chair, National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians
That's an excellent question, Mr. Kurek.
I don't recall, and I'll have to get back to you on whether we examined that in detail. I want to be very careful about what I do or don't say about that, given sources and methods. I'm glad you raised paragraph 290 around the very limited public engagement. Our understanding is that only the CSIS director has given a very powerful statement, first in a foundational speech and then just several weeks ago, talking about the threat of foreign interference.
Because she has greater institutional memory, perhaps Ms. Marcoux can offer something for you.
Executive Director, Secretariat of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians
You're right, Mr. Kurek, in the sense that we did not come across or find an overall threat assessment produced by the government on foreign interference. In fact, one of our major findings, one of our major recommendations, is that this be included as part of any government threat assessment. It's also why the 2018 report from the first committee presented foreign interference as part of a review of threats to Canada.
Minister McGuinty's right that the CSIS director has been among the most vocal in talking about the threat of foreign interference, along with a few speeches from ministers of public safety.
Conservative
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
Thank you very much for that.
There is a fentanyl epidemic in this country, as we're all aware, and it's not limited specifically to fentanyl, but it's those types of narcotics. We're learning that a lot of this fentanyl is coming from China, flooding the country. It destroys families and society and certainly appears to be of strategic benefit to foreign state actors, specifically the Chinese Communist Party. Is this an aspect of foreign interference that your committee has heard about?
Chair, National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians
No. We may have heard about it, but it's not something we examined in detail.
Conservative
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
I appreciate that.
The report talks about the Chinese Communist Party using a strategy of pushing their political messaging through mainstream international media. Are you aware of whether or not that has been the case in Canada? Are there are any examples of that possibly being the case on Canadian networks such as CBC, CTV or other television networks or print media based in Canada?
November 23rd, 2020 / 4:55 p.m.
Chair, National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians
Any and all comments I can make around media and foreign interference in that sector are in the report. We've highlighted and illustrated as best as we can, Mr. Kurek, what we came across.
Of course, once again, this report is the redacted version of a much longer report, backstopped by—as I mentioned in my opening remarks—almost 30,000 pages of material.
Conservative
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
I have one final question. I hope I have enough time for a quick question, Mr. Chair.
Conservative
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
Have you received a response from the Prime Minister or the public safety minister on these reports that you've sent to them?
Chair, National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians
We've had a general acknowledgement, and we'll likely have more to say about this as we produce our 2020 annual report for the Prime Minister, something the committee is seized with. We were pleased to see that at least in two mandate letters, there was a reference to an NSICOP recommendation and action called on from the ministers of national defence and public safety to revisit the overall legal framework for the conducting of intelligence activities at the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Thank you, Mr. Kurek. We're going to have to leave it there.
Madam Damoff, you have the final five minutes, please.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Thank you, Chair.
Mr. McGuinty, I was part of the public safety committee that reviewed the bill to create your committee. You've been its first and only chair, and I want to thank you for your leadership in doing something the government hadn't done before.
Your report talks about the benefits of diversity and how it's not being done particularly well. Could you elaborate a little on why diversity is a good thing to do, not from an inclusion point of view but from a public safety point of view? Also, do you think that systemic racism plays a role in the challenges you've highlighted in your report?
Chair, National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians
Thank you very much, Ms. Damoff, first of all, for your gracious remarks. It's been quite a journey for all of us on the committee, and we're really proud of the fact that we've managed to produce a series of non-partisan reports adopted by members of all parties in both Houses. We hope that this might serve as a precedent, actually, in a difficult time when perhaps we need more non-partisanship and when we need more co-operation on the floor of the House to be able to move the country forward. We certainly think that that's an important approach to bring to national security.
We did not look at the question of systemic racism per se inside our institutions or within the public service in particular. It's clear—members, I think, would agree—that it's time to recognize the long-standing barriers that racialized minorities face in Canada and the need to dismantle those barriers everywhere.
We did include, however, and we made sure to indicate it in this diversity and inclusion review, international comparative evidence and studies that were undertaken by a couple of other organizations—Ms. Marcoux can chime in here—such as the FBI and the CIA, and we included some other comparative information and analysis that indicates that those organizations in the security and intelligence community that are more diverse and more inclusive are higher-performing organizations. The membership of NSICOP feels that not only is it foolish in and of itself to leave people behind and not be able to reach out and engage as many as we can in productive roles, but it's also affecting the overall performance of the security and intelligence community.
Executive Director, Secretariat of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians
Yes. To add to what Mr. McGuinty said, the committee looked at its counterpart, the ISC, as well, but it felt very strongly, based on the studies, that the more language skills an organization has, the more community contacts—the more cultural competencies, for example—the better it is and the more flexible and open-minded it is to look at threats and to conduct its investigations. As we've seen, it is less prone, for example, to what is called groupthink than an organization that is not diverse.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I think I'm good with that if you want to end it there.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
That's fine. We do have a minute and a half left, but I thank you for helping out with running the clock.
One of the reasons we have these meetings is that you can put flesh on what can be a dry and confusing report. Both Mr. McGuinty and Madame Marcoux have done exactly that, to the point where, as Mr. Harris says, we have dozens of questions. I noted the exchange with Mr. Iacono about how other countries make their colleagues aware of the content of these studies and also raise general awareness.
I think, Mr. McGuinty, that you and I are going to have an off-line conversation about how we can make sure that your reports and your works get a larger audience than possibly an hour before the public safety committee.
Again, thank you for your absolutely outstanding work. Please, on behalf of the committee, thank your colleagues on the committee for us. As you can see, you've really stimulated the interest of members.
Thank you, colleagues. With that, we'll suspend for two minutes while we re-empanel.
Again, thank you, Madame Marcoux and Mr. McGuinty.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
To continue our study on systemic racism in policing, we have author Robyn Maynard and Mr. Bourbonniere, community activist.
I'll call on you for seven minutes each according to the order you are in on the order paper.
With that, Madame Maynard, you have seven minutes, please.
Liberal
Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON
If I may just ask for your indulgence, Mr. Chair, Ms. Michaud is not in the room right now. Maybe we can wait a minute until she comes back.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
We do have a quorum and we don't have a hard stop at six o'clock, although we do have a tentative stop at six o'clock. Do we know where Kristina is?
Liberal
Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON
I think she'll be back in a minute or two, Mr. Chair.
I think it's kind of hard with the distance. You may not have seen her step out, but she's out.