Public Safety Committee on May 30th, 2024

[A voice]

Keep going.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Okay. We go now to Mr. Shipley for five minutes.

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

Thank you, Chair. I'm going to build on of what a couple of my colleagues, Mr. Cooper and Mr. Caputo, were speaking about.

Time is of the essence with this bill. We are aware that in the last few elections or more, there have been foreign interference situations in different electoral districts across Canada. We know that there's a looming election. We heard the date this morning—October 2025. That's not that far away.

We've also heard that it's going to take approximately a year to implement this registry and get it set up. In my pre-political life, I was in the private business world, and in a much shorter time than a year, you could incorporate a company, find a facility, bring in inventory, hire employees, get customers, ship products and start making profits. Could maybe someone from each department please enlighten me about how this implementing could possibly take close to a year or more?

[Richard Bilodeau]

Thank you, Chair, for—

[Sébastien Aubertin-Giguère]

Just for context, the amendments to SOIA will be in force 60 days after royal assent and CSIS, so that doesn't require the timeline. If we're creating a new regime, which is the commissioner, then there's some delay. I just want to have a broader perspective on the bill.

[Richard Bilodeau]

Thank you for that, Sébastien.

The estimate of a year is based on the number of regulations that need to be brought forward and promulgated by the Governor in Council. It also requires actually setting up an office. While the proposal in the bill is to establish it within a department, it does require staffing up an office, for example, and hiring a commissioner.

We are going to be dealing with Canadians' private data in establishing the registry. That requires a privacy impact assessment to make sure we're dealing with that data in a way that is appropriate and consistent with privacy laws. It also requires establishing an IT platform to receive information for the registry and then publishing that information back out to the Canadian public so that they can consult the database.

It will require developing guidance for Canadians in terms of expectations. For example, if we look over at our friends in the U.K., the law received royal assent last summer, in 2023. They issued guidance in February of this year that is intended to educate people on their obligations with regard to the registry.

The goal of the registry is to increase transparency. One of the key ways of doing that is by clearly communicating to Canadians who might be in arrangements with foreign states. Because it is country-agnostic, that encompasses every foreign state.

What are their obligations in terms of registering? There's a significant part of this that is educating the Canadian public on their obligations. Building in guidance will make sure people know what their obligations are.

Those are some of the steps that need to be put in place so that we have a proper functioning registry when it gets launched.

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

Thank you for that.

Is there anything specific this committee could do here today or in our meetings coming up to help you or anybody in speeding this up at all? Is there anything specific we could do?

[Richard Bilodeau]

I think we're at your disposal. We will be here to support the work of the committee and answer your questions. We will stand ready at any point in time to support that work.

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

Thank you for that. Hopefully, it goes as quickly as possible.

Speaking of the registry, there's been some concern that some foreign governments may be able to exploit diaspora communities by enlisting volunteers rather than paid agents, which may bypass the need to register in the foreign agent registry.

Has that been thought of at all? Is that factual?

[Richard Bilodeau]

The registry does not require the payment. The bill does not require the payment of monies for an arrangement to be captured by a registration obligation. It can be an understanding of doing a favour or anything like that. It does not require payment.

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

Thank you.

Has a charter statement been completed on this legislation?

[Heather Watts]

As is the normal practice, the Minister of Justice will be tabling a charter statement that will outline the potential implications on rights and freedoms protection under the charter from Bill C-70. I don't believe it's been tabled yet, but as per the practice, that would be our expectation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Shipley.

We go now to Mr. Gaheer. Go ahead for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the officials for appearing before the committee.

My question is for all the witnesses and whoever thinks they can best answer this question.

We know that under the proposed framework, individuals or entities who enter into an arrangement with a foreign principal and undertake activities to influence a government or political process in Canada would be required to publicly register.

Could the witnesses talk about the penalties or the consequences that could be imposed if that entity or individual does not register?

[Richard Bilodeau]

The legislation proposes a compliance regime or some number of compliance regimes, but I'd like to start the answer by giving an example. It might be the best way of appreciating how the bill proposes this to work.

Somebody may, for example, forget to register their activity. It's a good faith error. The commissioner would have an ability to, if they so desire, issue a notice and tell the individual or company that they should have registered under the foreign influence transparency registry. Then, that person brings themself into compliance by registering.

I'm sure there will be instances when somebody will deliberately not register or obfuscate. The commissioner at that point will have a decision to make following an investigation as to whether or not to deal with that breach or that contravention either from a civil perspective or a criminal perspective. If the commissioner decides that the best course of action is to issue a notice of violation, in addition to issuing that notice of violation, they could impose administrative monetary penalties, the amount of which will be determined by regulation. The commissioner would then also be obligated to publish that notice of violation so that Canadians are made aware that an individual or a company failed in their obligations to register.

Of course, at that point, there's also the ability of an individual found to be in violation to refer to the Federal Court for judicial review. That part is proposed in the bill. Finally, there are criminal sanctions that could be imposed. If the commissioner believes that the breach is so severe that it warrants criminal investigation, the commissioner could then refer the matter to a police force of jurisdiction—the RCMP, for example—and the law enforcement agencies would investigate and then work with prosecutors; however, that would be done independently by the police at that point.

That gives you a bit of an idea of the scope. Obviously, one big part of that is education up front. We're hoping to make sure that people comply as much as possible.

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

That's great. Thank you for that comprehensive answer.

I'll posit my own hypothetical. Let's say that there is an individual who is a foreign agent and that there is a potential conviction that could arise that could lead to jail time. What level of arrangement is required between that person, that individual in Canada, and that foreign principal that is overseas? Knowing that there are probably layers of separation between them, what level of arrangement is required? Is it implicit? Does it have to be explicit? What is that bar?

[Richard Bilodeau]

That's a very good question.

Chair, I'll leave issues of beyond a reasonable doubt and things like that aside. Establishing whether an arrangement exists between an individual and a foreign state will be a matter of the facts of the situation. The commissioner will have investigative tools and the ability to compel information to try to determine the relationship between an individual and a foreign state. It is not always easy. I think you are correct in making that statement, but there will be tools. There will be the ability to work with intelligence services and law enforcement to get information to try to make that determination.

At the end of the day, it will be a collection of facts to determine whether or not there is an arrangement. As I said earlier, it does not need to specifically be a written contract, although, obviously, that makes it a lot easier. It can be a totality of factual circumstances that can lead to a conclusion that there was an arrangement. Ultimately, it would be up to a court to decide whether or not that burden has been met.

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

That's great.

Chair, how much time do I have left?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

You have 35 seconds.

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

I just want to end with a statement saying that it does worry me that foreign agents could operate through a chain of command, and it's very hard to trace that chain of command back to the individuals who are overseas and acting as a foreign principal. There should be emphasis placed on the actual conviction, because if you can't get a criminal conviction for an individual who is engaging in these acts, then what's the deterrence? The deterrence is basically just the legal expenses and dealing with the embarrassment and inconvenience of a trial. They're not going to get convicted if that chain of command can't be traced back.

Thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

If anyone wishes to respond, they may.

[Richard Bilodeau]

We take note of the concern, and I would say that the element of all of this that is key to the foreign influence transparency registry is bringing transparency. Even bringing sunlight to associations is a key valuable tool, and I know that the service agrees with that as well.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

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

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Bilodeau, my questions will be for you again. I only have two and a half minutes. That's not a lot of time.

Earlier, during the briefing, you were asked why the position of foreign influence transparency commissioner would fall under Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness. You replied that there was a lot of work to be done and that the department already had the necessary resources in place.

That worries me. Earlier, I mentioned dual registration and I was told that it was too much work. I understand that the commissioner, whether completely independent or not, will have a lot of work to do. That's clear. However, to me, being independent means not being dependent on anyone. I do not presume that the minister will interfere, given that I hold that office in the highest regard. I am simply saying that I would be more reassured, and so would the public, if the commissioner were completely independent. That would require the House to be not only consulted when the person is appointed, but also involved in their selection, as is the case for other positions.

I wonder if you could comment on that.