Public Safety Committee on May 30th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Mr. Gaheer, you have one minute left, if you wish.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Another question I want to ask is this: Who are the entities that the government believes are most likely to register under this new act? Is there a preconception of who is likely to register?

[Richard Bilodeau]

Chair, we would expect anybody who has an arrangement to register. Obviously, there are people who, by the nature of their business, work with foreign governments legitimately and would want to register or will be required to register. If you are in the business of advocating on behalf of clients and you're doing that on behalf of a foreign state, you will have to register, if the bill is passed, with the foreign influence transparency office. We expect, obviously, that the group of people who are well versed in registering for the Lobbying Act to also be required to register when they're in an arrangement with a foreign principal.

That would be one example.

[Iqwinder Gaheer, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

If they have registered, what's the bar for those individuals and their activities being monitored to see if they are now abiding by the laws that this country has, or if they are skirting the law even though they have registered?

[Richard Bilodeau]

I think it's a good question, Chair. The legislation does have provisions requiring the updating of information to the commissioner on their activities. That will be detailed in regulation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Gaheer.

Mr. Villemure, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a few more questions for the officials from the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness.

When I read part I of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, I realize that CSIS will be able to share information with universities that receive Canadian funding. However, I am not sure that these universities are included in the entities that are required to register with respect to foreign principals.

Is that the case?

[Richard Bilodeau]

I thank the member for his question.

I'll use your example. If a university has an arrangement with a foreign government to carry out one of the three activities listed in the bill—communicating with a public office holder, communicating information about a political or governmental process or disbursing money for the purpose of influencing—the university will have to register, because it has an arrangement with a foreign state. It all depends on the relationship, the activities the university conducts and the context. Whatever the example, it is a matter of determining whether one of these three conditions has been met. Whether it's a university or a private company doesn't make a difference.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

That's for the registration of the university itself, but the foreign principal would also have to register in that case.

[Richard Bilodeau]

No, not necessarily, because the person who conducts the influence activities is the one who has to register. If the university is doing it on behalf of a foreign government, yes, the university will have to register. Obviously, the commissioner will publish that information, and there will be some transparency about the fact that the university has an arrangement with the foreign state in question to conduct foreign influence activities.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

If a foreign principal influenced a university in order to change a public policy effort, for example, would they be required to register?

[Richard Bilodeau]

They probably wouldn't be. It always depends on the facts and how that influence is exercised. For example, if someone is hired to exert that influence, they might be. However, as we said, other provisions of different acts could apply in this context, beyond the registry.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Do you see that this might require clarification? Even I'm not sure what I'm reading when I look at this.

[Richard Bilodeau]

The bill is quite clear as to what triggers the registration requirement and who needs to register. I think it's section 3 or 4 of the proposed act, if I'm not mistaken, that clarifies that. I would add that the commissioner will be able to clarify that in briefing documents. That is how the commissioner will be able to educate and inform people about what is expected of them, and how the commissioner interprets the act and their obligations under it. This is common practice in the regulatory environment.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Villemure.

We will go now to Mr. MacGregor for two and a half minutes.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This question will probably be for the Department of Justice.

I'm just flipping through the different sections of this bill, and the theme of my question is on legislative harmony and consistency. I want to draw your attention to the amendments to the SOIA specifically on page 32, where it's talking about the application of the act. There it makes specific mention of “municipal political or governmental processes”, but in part 4, that is excluded.

Likewise, if you look on page 31 of the bill, the definition of “public office holder” is quite thorough and very defined, whereas in part 4, the definition of “public office holder” is not as thorough.

From the Department of Justice's point of view, if we're looking at possible amendments to this act, what is the preference in terms of making sure these two acts are in harmony? Would you like us to be as specific as what's included in the SOIA when we amend part 4? I'd just like to have some guidance on that, please.

[Mark Scrivens]

Thank you for that question.

The definitions that are used in SOIA are with the context of SOIA and the offence itself in mind and were clearly inspired, as you note, by other provisions and other categories of public office holders, so the offence of interference with political processes or governance involves a category of public office holder that I agree is quite extensive. In fact, as it's defined, it is open-ended to a certain extent. That works well within the context of SOIA and within the context of that particular provision.

The other categories of public office holder are designed to work well with the other regime. That's what I would say. Yes, there are similarities and yes, there are differences, but those are intentional.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. MacGregor.

That brings our questioning to a close. I'd like to thank our witnesses for being so enormously helpful and for showing up on such short notice. It's really appreciated.

Mr. Villemure would like a few words with the committee, but before that I want to make sure to remind everyone that we need witness lists. Each party should submit its witness list to the clerk in a prioritized manner. In order to schedule for Monday, he'll need those witnesses by noon.

Mr. MacGregor, do you have a question?

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Yes, Chair.

Given how heavy our workload is going to be next week, and given the timelines we're dealing with on Bill S-210, I'm just wondering if we have unanimous consent from this committee to ask for a formal extension so that we can give Bill S-210 proper study, because Bill C-70 is obviously going to take priority in this committee.

Can I get unanimous consent for that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

There's no unanimous consent, but thank you.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Mr. Villemure, please go ahead for a few minutes.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Given the pace at which the committee will be working, I would like to get the unanimous consent of the members on the possibility of resetting the speaking times after the first hour in the case of a single two-hour panel.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Do we have unanimous consent to do that?