Public Safety Committee on Oct. 5th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Go ahead, Madame DeBellefeuille.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

Mr. Chair, excuse me, but the interpretation is not working at all.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

All right. We will pause briefly.

I'll speak English to see whether the interpretation comes back. It seems to have been missing for a little while.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

Interpretation is working again.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Very good. Thank you, Madame DeBellefeuille.

I would like to thank the interpreters for their patience and perseverance.

We'll go back to you, Minister Anandasangaree.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Let me just wrap up here. The RCMP does a secondary review if required. Then it will be going to CSIS—

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

I'm sorry to interrupt again. It seems there's been a break in interpretation. We'll take the time it takes to ensure that everyone has the appropriate services.

We'll suspend for a couple of seconds.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

We will now resume.

Thank you for your patience.

MP Acan, you have another three minutes and 45 seconds.

[Sima Acan, Liberal, Oakville West, ON]

Thank you.

Minister, the current policy on the security screening framework builds off the standard on security screening, which places the ultimate responsibility for security clearance decisions on deputy heads, as you mentioned in your opening speech. Is that correct, yes or no?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

Yes, it is correct.

[Sima Acan, Liberal, Oakville West, ON]

As security threats continue to evolve, are there opportunities to modernize or improve the support provided to deputy heads responsible for security clearance decisions?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

I believe there are. We're looking at those options. I will say that the Treasury Board implemented a new security screening directive as of January 2025. That is, in fact, quite a modernized version. It is in the process of being implemented across the board.

With your permission, I'd like to ask both the RCMP and CSIS to maybe weigh in on the work they are doing.

[Assistant Commissioner Don Halina, Assistant Commissioner, Forensic Science and Identification Services, Royal Canadian Mounted Police]

We conduct two roles in support of the Treasury Board Secretariat's directive on security screening. From our perspective, we conduct biometric fingerprint-based checks of the national repository of criminal records and provide those results back to the requesting agency to assist in their decision-making process.

[Assistant Commissioner Josianne Phénix, Chief Security Officer, Royal Canadian Mounted Police]

We also conduct law enforcement record checks for employees or prospective employees who require enhanced security screening.

[Sima Acan, Liberal, Oakville West, ON]

Thank you so much.

My second question is around whether greater involvement from security and intelligence agencies such as the RCMP and CSIS would improve those processes and decisions. Is there more room to grow?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

I always believe there's room to improve. The Treasury Board Secretariat is looking at how to make those changes from a directive perspective. Departmentally, I think each department, including Public Safety, has undertaken a comprehensive review. In fact, our processes go beyond the Treasury Board Secretariat advisory.

[Sima Acan, Liberal, Oakville West, ON]

Thank you so much.

My next question is for the officials. Considering today's threat environment, do you believe the current security screening standards place too much emphasis on making clearances transferable between departments and not enough emphasis on department-specific security?

[Adam Hatfield, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Data and Digital Policy, Treasury Board Secretariat]

Thank you for the question. The current security screening policy in the Government of Canada does state that deputy heads ultimately are accountable. Every government department has the authority to make security screening decisions for itself. The current policy does encourage—for the purposes of efficiency, saving time and just consistency—that government departments accept other government departments' clearing or security screening decisions where it is appropriate.

What the policy actually states is that if an employee is being transferred, the receiving department receives the security screening file and reviews the file. If for any reason they might feel there's a reason to revisit some or all of the work that was done, they absolutely have the discretion to do so. Ultimately, the receiving department who grants the clearance to the incoming individual is responsible for that decision. There's a lot of emphasis on transferability, but the authority rests with the receiving department.

[Sima Acan, Liberal, Oakville West, ON]

Okay—

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

I'm sorry to interrupt, MP Acan. The time is up.

Let's move to Madame DeBellefeuille for six minutes, please.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

Mr. Chair, before I begin my speaking time, I would like to seek unanimous consent, as well as the minister's agreement. Given the time we lost because of the interpretation issues, I want to ensure that I do not lose my two and a half minutes at the end of the first round.

Could you ask the minister whether he would be willing to stay a little longer so that I may have my second round of questions?

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

That seems to me to be a reasonable request. We will see whether the minister and his team are able to respond a little later, after your intervention.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

Great, thank you.

Minister, the case before us today is not an isolated one. There have been others. In the case of Mr. Delisle, the Royal Canadian Navy officer who sold intelligence to Russia for several years and was sentenced to 20 years in prison, it was discovered during the analysis that national defence had failed to review his security clearance. They hadn't updated their data. We know that because the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency conducted an investigation and found that national defence had been negligent.

I understand that Treasury Board makes policies and directives and that it is up to each department to follow and apply them. However, you are the boss in charge of national security. How do you ensure that national defence and all departments are doing their job and conducting their reviews, particularly for people with secret or top secret security clearance?

I get the feeling that everyone is doing their own thing in every department, but there is no proper oversight. In any event, there is a very specific case, that of Mr. Delisle, where national defence failed to conduct security clearance reviews.

Would it be a good idea for you to be the big boss in your process and use dashboards to ensure that all departments are doing their job?

Do you, as minister, have the information, or do you trust the departments to do their jobs?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

It's a very important question, and I think you frame some of the challenges in the right way.

Let me just say that with respect to national defence, again, the actual review and investigation is left up to each of the respective departments, particularly with national defence given the nature—

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

I don't want to interrupt you, but I've already told you that. Each department is responsible. That's a fact. You said it, I read it in the notes and I got it. What I want to know is who ensures that everything is in order and that all departments do their review work within the allotted time frame.

Are you, as Minister of National Security, given a report saying that everyone with a high security clearance, whether secret or top secret, has been reviewed?

Do you have that assurance since Mr. Delisle's case came to light and it was revealed that there had been review errors in the most sensitive department?

Did you require that, or do you already have it?