Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning, members of the committee. My reason for speaking today, and the message I'd like to get across, is that I do not agree with the decision to not have a public inquiry on the foreign interference allegations. I will address the rationale used to support that decision.

Information & Ethics committee  Here's the thing. The Security of Information Act is where we're going to get that enforcement. There's an actual legislative and regulated way you could use. I know there are a lot of people who want the registry. I think it has merits, but I don't think that it should necessarily be the priority over the legislation.

Information & Ethics committee  No. I've been retired from the service for a few years, but no. It goes back to how CSIS doesn't look at the elections. It doesn't look at processes. In the course of investigating an individual target, no, I'm not aware of that coming across the radar. Any issues that the service would get involved in are around who's voting at a nomination, or who's donating and what status they have.

Information & Ethics committee  That's the year I left. It was October 17, 2017.

Information & Ethics committee  I was working in the field office. I really don't know; I have no idea.

Information & Ethics committee  Do we have enough time? I really have no idea. I don't know. I just really have no respect for this at all. I think there's an awful lot of damage that's being done. I could carry on from some things that Artur has mentioned, but I have no respect for it. I think, to profile the leaker—I can provide that—it's someone who's seeing a small piece.

Information & Ethics committee  Yes, right, that's enough.

Information & Ethics committee  Who are you asking?

Information & Ethics committee  I don't have an answer from my experience of particular vehicles of briefing or personnel. I know CSIS provides a whole range of intelligence products, from assessment to law. You'd be looking at the Privy Council Office and at various departments. As to how that would make its way to the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's national security adviser, I really have no insight.

Information & Ethics committee  I don't necessarily.... Here's what I believe, based on the media reports. I've been following it. The service provided advice in terms of clearance. Whether it's clearance renewal or whether it was clearance, it goes to the deputy head of the department. It's their decision what to do; it's not a decision for CSIS.

Information & Ethics committee  From what I've read in the media, it looks like no one is around. I think the fact that no charges have been laid might reflect that. I look at this, and I see that there was an issue there. Perhaps proprietary information was sent back to China. Who knows? It probably doesn't meet the threshold of espionage.

Information & Ethics committee  Here's my answer.

Information & Ethics committee  I will be really quick. In those cases of allied releases, it was probably based on very convincing intelligence, probably corroborated intelligence, so they did the release. All we're getting through the media, with all due respect, are allegations. Why would the Canadian government not make these warnings and send emails to everybody?

Information & Ethics committee  Not really.

Information & Ethics committee  In terms of foreign interference as it's defined in section 2 of the CSIS Act, no, there aren't a lot of others. We have to also bear in mind that foreign states do want to influence what goes on in Canada. That is part of normal diplomacy and engagement. It's no surprise that a certain state would probably, with a particular diaspora community, want to have some engagement there.