Public Safety Committee on June 2nd, 2022

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

When it comes to security and cyber security, do you have any concerns?

In Quebec, for example, critical infrastructure has been targeted for several months now. This happened to Hydro-Québec and certain aluminum smelters, which were attacked by Russian hackers.

You said you are working with provinces, municipalities and the private sector. How are you working with them to ensure that our critical infrastructure is protected?

How can you prevent these kinds of attacks? They’ve happened before, and it’s likely that they’ll get worse over time.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

First of all, our strategy, as I've already mentioned, involved the creation of a number of federal agencies and bodies, including the national cybercrime coordination unit under the RCMP, responsible for conducting criminal investigations. Very importantly, we know that cybercrime events can impact our provincial and territorial partners and our critical infrastructure. We're delivering programs that are focused on industrial control systems for critical infrastructure.

We've been working very closely with stakeholders in providing training, testing response and recovery capabilities and promoting security awareness. Just a few weeks ago, a multisector network meeting was held with critical infrastructure stakeholders, including our provincial and territorial partners, to discuss threats and mitigation measures. In our budget 2022, funding of nearly $700 million is provided over five years to support how we fight cybercrime and defend critical government and private sector systems, including for our provincial and territorial partners, in order to improve and increase our collective resilience in these types of attacks.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Thank you, minister.

In our study, experts told us that Canada wouldn’t have the tools to fight hackers effectively until 2023. That would be because we didn’t start addressing this problem 15 years earlier, as the Americans and Europeans did. We may not get it done. We won’t have the system needed to deal with the situation properly.

What government strategy have you established to make sure you have the tools you need to fight computer attacks, such as ransomware? There are many tactics and many terms to describe them.

In your opinion, is Canada falling behind other countries?

How will the country be able to catch up, if at all?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

First of all, let me provide you with some assurance that we work very closely, particularly with our Five Eyes partners, and it's not just a government-to-government relationship. In fact, among our senior officials, and particularly among the members of the national security intelligence community within Canada and among our Five Eyes partners, there's a great deal of collaboration and working together on the sharing of tools and responses to improve our resiliency.

Some of the questions you ask, I believe, would be more appropriately answered by the Communications Security Establishment and perhaps the Minister of Defence. However, I work very closely with them—both I and the deputy minister do—and I can provide you with assurances that I believe the CSE and our officials have been incredibly vigilant and vigorous in their response to cyber-attacks. There is a high degree of expertise. When we have had cyber-attacks among our provincial and territorial partners that have affected critical infrastructure systems there, we've been able to respond very quickly to send the expertise there, help them in their recovery and provide them with a great deal of support and advice.

Although there's always work to do, I would acknowledge that they're doing a pretty good job.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

That's a lot of thank yous.

Now, for the last person in the first round of questions, I invite Mr. MacGregor to begin his six-minute slot.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister Blair, for coming before our committee.

Canada and Russia of course have the longest coastlines in the Arctic Ocean, and we know about climate change and its effect on the Arctic and the retreating sea ice. That retreating sea ice creates a vicious circle, because the more ice we lose in that ocean, the worse the climate change effects will be.

I guess one of the worrisome consequences of the war in Ukraine is that we see incredibly antagonistic attitudes from our Russian counterparts in a vitally important ocean. I'm wondering about this from your perspective, Minister. In spite of the war that's going on and the antagonistic relations between our governments, there is still a great need for co-operation between our two countries with respect to climate change, given the fact that we share coastlines in the Arctic Ocean and we both stand to lose a lot with the melting of the permafrost.

Could you update the committee on what the status of co-operation is between our respective scientific communities with respect to research and science in climate change? Is there still the possibility of any kind of co-operation in addressing this very real and most dire threat in the 21st century?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

It is a very important question, Mr. MacGregor.

Let me acknowledge that the illegal invasion of Ukraine by Russia has impacted a number of diplomatic discussions and efforts. I was most recently at a UN platform on disaster risk reduction, and I can tell you from experience that the Russians' illegal invasion of Ukraine directly impacted some of those discussions.

However, and I think it's an important however, you highlight some very significant issues with respect to climate change, Arctic sovereignty, and our shared responsibility with all of those who have an interest in the Arctic, to take collective and coordinated action in response to some of the risks that exist, particularly as they relate to climate change in the Arctic.

I believe, notwithstanding the obvious and understandable impact on some of our diplomatic discussions, the important work of ensuring that the right thing is done in the Arctic will continue. We'll assess the impact of Russia's illegal actions as it impacts on those discussions. That work is ongoing. That is not directly by me, by the way, but by Global Affairs and the Canadian military and others, in addition to our other international partners. There are important forums where those discussions will continue.

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

In the context of emergency preparedness, we know that in an increasingly globalized world, and with climate change, we as a human population are being exposed to more and more novel diseases. They, of course, are mutating. I think the next pandemic is something that we have to keep top of mind.

In our response to COVID-19, as a country, we were having to fight a rearguard action against disinformation and misinformation on vaccines. To some extent, I think that hampered how successful we could have been.

We know that foreign state actors have played a role in advocating some of those disinformation campaigns. We've heard that evidence here at this committee. Looking forward to the next pandemic, when it comes, what lessons have you learned as the Minister of Emergency Preparedness?

In your opening remarks, you said that your mandate is all about taking that proactive approach to managing risks. What lessons have you learned about trying to prevent foreign state actors from interfering and causing those misinformation campaigns, which may very greatly hamper our public health efforts in Canada?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thank you for a very important question.

I've just come from a meeting of the COVID committee, where we had a presentation on this very subject with the chief medical officer of health. There is a robust discussion going on in Canada about how we counter misinformation and provide Canadians with accurate, data-based evidence on the nature of disease and pandemics and risk, and how we put better data surveillance systems in place and have greater collaboration internationally. It's also important that information be trusted, and I think that's the point.

I agree with you that what we have seen, not just in Canada but around the world, is the importance of providing, for Canadians in particular, information they can trust and will trust with respect to the steps they should take in order to keep themselves safe. There has been a real challenge, with misinformation primarily, and disinformation, which is slightly different, obviously, and has perhaps a more nefarious intent. Certainly misinformation has resulted in some significant challenges in how we move forward.

The obligation of government is to make sure that we have robust data collection systems that are transparent, so that Canadians can see the basis of the scientific advice and evidence that we're acting upon and that is being shared with them. They can then make informed decisions in their best interests and in the collective interest of everyone's health.

We've learned a lot of lessons from COVID, and one thing we learned is that our strategic stockpiles were not adequate to the task. With a lot of our data collection and information that we were relying on with respect to the nature of COVID as a disease, but also generally to disease and pandemic threats, we're seeing the emergence of a number of variants and illnesses coming forward. It's very important that we get good information to enable Canadians to make good decisions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Thank you very much.

Colleagues, I look at the clock and we have exactly enough time for a full second round of questions.

Ms. Dancho, we will lead with you. You have a five-minute slot.

The floor is yours, whenever you grab it.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Minister, for being with us today.

I'd like to carry on with the theme of cybersecurity.

I recently received a briefing from the public safety department concerning cybersecurity. When I asked, very bluntly, what the Pearl Harbor moment would be in terms of a cybersecurity attack, they mentioned pipelines in the middle of winter—presumably, gas pipelines. As you know, these provide significant heat to our homes, hospitals, grocery stores, government buildings and schools.

Would you agree this would constitute a major emergency—a cyber-attack on a pipeline in the middle of winter in Canada?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Yes, of course I would, Ms. Dancho. Supply lines are a very important part of critical infrastructure—all of our supply chains. I would consider any interference with those supply chains to be a significant emergency, rising to the level of a national emergency.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

What would your first call be? You get a call about this happening: A pipeline has gone down in the middle of winter and millions of people are without heat. What would your first step be?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

A couple of things would have to happen very quickly. If it was related to a cyber-attack, my first call would be to CSE. I'd call the director at CSE and get her working on it right away. They have the expertise within our government. Many of those pipelines, by the way, are administered by the private sector, but we've already built those relationships. We've already made those connections. We're meeting regularly with those people.

We would build upon that in order to get them back online as quickly as possible, but there would be other considerations, because, very quickly, the absence of those pipelines would have an impact further downstream on refineries. It also wouldn't take long for it to begin to impact heating and other energy requirements for Canadians. We would look for alternative ways to deliver those products, as quickly as possible. There would be a number of responses triggered immediately.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

I'm sure you're very familiar with the Colonial pipeline ransomware attack a year ago last month, which shut down a significant source of energy for the United States. There were 17 states of emergency, including in Washington, D.C., and it took several hours to get them back online. That was less than a day, but if it had been longer, in the middle of winter in Canada, you can imagine, as you've mentioned, it would be very serious.

What sort of elements would you pull in? Would you be calling the military or the RCMP? What would that look like on the ground, and what sorts of conversations have you had with your cabinet colleagues in preparation for a worst-case scenario?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

As far as resources go, we would call anything that was required—everything that was required. As we've demonstrated over the past two years, we understand the importance of moving quickly in order to respond to requests for assistance from the provinces, territories or private sector, or even to respond to something we would consider a national emergency...so the resources that are appropriate.

If it was, for example, a cyber-attack—perhaps a ransomware attack, as it was with the Colonial pipeline—certainly, the police would have to become involved immediately.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

What if it were a physical attack? As you know, we recently saw the Coastal GasLink attack: 20 armed assailants with axes. They caused millions of dollars' worth of damage on the Coastal GasLink. I'm sure you're very familiar with this. We are seeing a rise in violence against our pipeline infrastructure.

Are you concerned there could be a physical attack or, God forbid, a bombing of our infrastructure? How would you handle that?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

The police of jurisdiction have responsibility for that. They respond in the first instance and, when the situation exceeds the capacity of the police of jurisdiction, there are mechanisms to elevate that request to bring in resources from wherever they are required. Those are reciprocal arrangements in place with the police and managed very ably by the RCMP.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Since the event in, I believe, February, have you had discussions about emergency preparedness should there be a physical attack from these extremists on our pipeline infrastructure?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

We have not, specifically, because it did not rise to the level of exceeding the capacity of the police of jurisdiction to respond.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

You've had no conversations in terms of how you would handle it, should this increase in severity.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

We have processes in place should it rise to a threshold that exceeds the capacity of the local police of jurisdiction to manage. Those processes are well established and well understood right across the country, but we have not had an event that required it, up to this point.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Are you concerned that Canada could be subjected to more attack events on our pipeline infrastructure?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I'm always concerned about the security and integrity of all our critical infrastructure, and we work hard to be prepared.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Are you concerned that none of the assailants from the Coastal GasLink pipeline attack have been caught?