Public Safety Committee on June 9th, 2022

[Paul Chiang, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

I will defer the remainder of my time to MP Noormohamed.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chiang; thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the witnesses and to the minister for being with us today.

I would like to introduce a motion, if I might, at this time, and I want to preface this by saying the following.

This committee has worked extremely well in finding ways to collaborate. When I bring this motion forward, I'm seeking unanimous consent to move the motion. It is in relation to the fact that we have seen a substantial run on the purchase of firearms. This motion is not intended to usurp or replace any of the important debate we need to have on Bill C-21, but I wish to introduce the following motion and will seek unanimous consent from the committee to move it.

The motion reads as follows:

That the committee report the following to the House: That pursuant to section 118(4)(b)(ii) of the Firearms Act (1998), the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security has decided not to conduct inquiries or public hearings into the proposed regulations tabled and referred to the committee on May 30, 2022.

The translation and the original motion itself have been circulated to the clerk.

I put this before the committee simply because I believe it's important for us to give unanimous consent to move forward, recognizing how well this committee is working. It really is in response to the alarming run on the purchase of firearms.

I know that a number of members of all parties have raised this issue. I've had discussions with members of the opposition, as well as others, who have expressed their deep and grave concern about this. I put this forward to the committee and seek everyone's collaboration in getting unanimous consent.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Okay, colleagues, we have a motion that's been brought forward. It would require unanimous consent to proceed.

Does the honourable member have unanimous consent to proceed with his motion?

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Okay, then I gather we take the notice of motion as an advance on the next meeting of this committee, and that we'll then debate the motion.

Clerk, is that right? It is.

There's no unanimous consent and time had run out on the previous speaker, so I will move to Ms. Michaud, who has a six-minute block.

The floor is yours.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the witnesses for joining us.

It is nice to see you in person, Minister.

I would like to ask you a question about the secret orders in council your government has adopted since 2015. We are talking about 72 secret orders in council. That is a marked increase compared with the number of secret orders in council adopted by Stephen Harper's Conservative government. Normally, to justify the adoption of a secret order in council, national or military security must be invoked, or it must be argued that the order in council is related to national security reviews of foreign investments in Canadian companies. More than half of those orders in council have been adopted since early April—

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Excuse me, Mr. Chair. I have a point of order. I apologize to Madame Michaud, but the bells are going. I'm wondering if we can get unanimous consent to continue through to the end of the first round before we break for the vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Do we have unanimous consent to continue?

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Wassim Bouanani]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

We do, so let's do just that.

Madame Michaud, you have the floor.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

One of those orders in council was adopted between January 28 and February 1, 2022, and another one was adopted in mid-February, which is around the beginning of the trucker protest.

Another order in council was adopted when the international community was starting to worry about Russia preparing to invade Ukraine, around February 24. Other orders in council have been adopted since Russia invaded Ukraine.

In response to this, your government said it was acting openly. If it wanted to act openly, why did it use secret orders in council?

Since your government has adopted more of those than previous governments, is there reason to believe that real threats to national security exist and that you wish to keep that information confidential?

Can you tell us more about the application of those orders in council?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Thank you for the question, Ms. Michaud. This gives me an opportunity to reaffirm the importance of protecting the principle of an open and transparent government. That principle applies to all of our files. However, as you said, we must also apply other principles to protect our interests related to national security issues.

This decision was made to protect not only the principles, but also all Canadians.

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

Are we to understand that some information is kept secret because Canada fears repercussions in relation to what is happening in Ukraine? Russia is carrying out disinformation campaigns and cyber-attacks. Are we to understand that the decision to keep those kinds of orders in council secret is related to this situation?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

The government considers various factors before deciding to apply national security principles. That said, we try to always provide the public with as much information as possible when we decide to use orders in council, so as to respect the important value of having an open and transparent government.

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

In late May, a University of Ottawa task force—with contributions from four former national security advisors, two former directors of the Canada Security Information Service, former ambassadors, retired former deputy ministers, as well as academics—carried out a study that concluded that Canada was not ready to address the threats, including the ones from Russia. Those experts said that we were not prepared to face that new world and that we should urgently rethink our national security. One of the conclusions was that the Russian invasion in Ukraine shows direct threats that are affecting Canada's interests. According to them, China could also be a challenge over the long term.

What is your response to those criticisms from former government experts who are saying that our national security is currently inadequate?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I know some of the authors of that study, and I want to thank them for their work and their contribution. I had a chance to look at a number of their recommendations. It is worthwhile to consider other studies and to look for solutions the government can integrate into its strategy. That study is timely because the government is modernizing its cybersecurity strategy. The fact that this study was carried out is a very positive thing. That said, our agencies are also doing a lot of good work.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jim Carr]

Thank you, Minister.

I would now like to invite Mr. MacGregor, who will have a six-minute block of questioning.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Welcome again, Minister. It's good to see you back.

We have heard from a number of witnesses across the spectrum, and from many different experts. We've been very lucky to have their testimony before this committee, regarding the threat posed by cybercrime in the Canadian context. With respect to what's going on in Canada, we have a cybercrime coordination centre with the RCMP, as well as the Communications Security Establishment, which runs the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security.

Minister, as you know, when dealing with the federal government, it is a massive organization, and we can sometimes fall into siloed thinking. CSE reports to the Minister of Defence. The RCMP's unit reports to Public Safety. As a committee member, I want to know how these two ministries ensure there's harmonization in the work being done between those two agencies, and no duplication of work. Sometimes, things can get missed when you have two different ministries involved.

Can you give us an update on how those ministries and their respective agencies are working together on this very real problem?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

That's a great question, Mr. MacGregor. To begin, I would emphasize that the national cybersecurity strategy and national cybersecurity action plan are two policy instruments we use to coordinate these efforts. Among other things, my deputy minister, Rob Stewart, is playing a chairing role that brings together different officials across the government, including at DND. That forum, among others, is a way for us to share information, coordinate efforts, identify threats and determine how best to introduce mitigating strategies.

You're quite right. It's important that these efforts continue, in order to avoid a kind of stovepiping, which can lead to the fracturing of a coordinated response.

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

Thank you for that.

We know the Russian government has close allyship and coordination with several criminal organizations. It has partnered with these criminal organizations to do its dirty work. Often, this has very real consequences around the world, including here in Canada.

We have heard from witnesses that the federal government and businesses under federal jurisdiction have some pretty top-level security—our national banks, and so on. The concern is for subnational organizations and governments: our provincial health care systems, the cybersecurity of our big cities, and even major businesses.

First, how are you tackling that problem?

Second, we've had some witnesses call for mandatory incident reporting. Sometimes, businesses are loath to report they were held hostage by ransomware. They find it's just easier to pay off the person and not report it. There can also be a threat of further damage if they do, in fact, report it to the authorities.

What steps are you taking with regard to those two questions?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Again, I cannot emphasize enough how important it is in the current geopolitical environment within which we find ourselves that we are very much on high alert for potential attacks from hostile state actors, like Russia, which could manifest through cyber-attacks or through ransomware, which looks to identify potentially valuable targets to Canadian interests, like critical infrastructure, but equally subnational targets, different orders of government and other sectors of the economy. A lot of this work is being led by the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, which falls under the purview of the CSE, where we work with the industry and with leaders within the economy to provide them with practical, common-sense advice on how they can best protect their businesses.

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

On the mandatory incident reporting, there is the old adage, “We don't know what we don't know,” and we know, from other studies, that Statistics Canada has gaps in our knowledge of violent crimes that might be committed with firearms. There's definitely some room for improvement there.

If we don't really know the full scope of the problem, and if some businesses are keeping this in-house, what steps is your government taking to maybe bring in a mandatory reporting requirement when they've been hit by cybercrime?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I appreciate the follow-up. I was just coming to that as I was talking about how we partner with leaders within the economy and industry to encourage reporting and to encourage it in such a way that they're not concerned about either stereotypes or stigmas.

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

“Encourage” is different from “mandatory”.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

That is a true distinction that you're making, and certainly it's something we are reflecting on within government. I would also point out that the CCCS, the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, also publishes a national cyber-threat assessment, which is another tool that can be used by industry leaders within the economy and other orders of government. Through that particular agency within government, we try to offer support.