Conservative Leader Pierre Poirierbre said Canadians have a right to know the names of members of parliament who are accused of “knowingly” working for a foreign state agent in a shocking new intelligence report.
The Parliamentary National Security and Intelligence Committee (NSICOP), a bipartisan committee of MPs and senators with the highest levels of security authority, on Monday released heavily redacted documents alleging that some MPs actively supported foreign governments, such as China and India, in interfering in Canadian politics.
“The national security committee has identified members of this House who knowingly worked for a hostile foreign government. Canadians have a right to know who that is and what their information is,” Poirierbre said during a question-and-answer session on Wednesday. “Who are they?”
Public Safety Minister Dominic Leblanc, who has oversight over both the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, said it would be inappropriate to publicly name the alleged lawmakers.
In the House of Commons, Conservative Leader Pierre Poiriervre said the names of lawmakers accused of colluding with foreign governments in recent intelligence reports should be made public “so Canadians can judge.”
“The Leader of the Opposition knows every government very well, including the government. [of] “The committee he was a member of will be publicly discussing the specifics of intelligence information, so he’s well aware of that,” he said.
He suggested that Poirievre go through the process of obtaining a security clearance so that he could review the classified information cited in the report.
“He’s going to have much more information than he has now, and we will urge him to do so, so he’s not going to stand up on the House floor and make aspersions without any information,” LeBlanc said.
LeBlanc has already cast doubt on some of the report’s findings, suggesting it leaves out important context.
“The government’s concerns centre on interpretations of intelligence reports that lack the necessary caution inherent in intelligence activities and insufficient recognition of the broader awareness campaign to inform members of parliament about the threat of foreign interference,” he said the day the report was released.
NSICOP chair says investigating the allegations is the RCMP’s responsibility
The NSICOP report sparked fierce debate over its reliability and whether voters have a right to know whether their parliamentarians are being accused of working for other countries.
Bombarded with questions on Wednesday morning before the Liberal caucus meeting, NSICOP chair David McGuinty repeatedly told reporters that he and other members of the committee had been sworn to secrecy and could not reveal the names or materials behind the compilation of the report.
“The committee’s hands are tied. We can only release what we can release,” he said.
“Our members have always preferred greater transparency, not less. In this investigation, we did everything we could to make the information public without violating the Information Security Act.”
David McGuinty, chairman of the Parliamentary National Security and Intelligence Committee, said that publishing the names of MPs accused of colluding with foreign governments could expose the committee’s report members and others to prosecution.
McGuinty said it’s up to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to decide what happens next.
“The question of whether this matter will continue to be investigated is a question that should legitimately be asked of the RCMP,” he said.
“It is up to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to determine whether or not to take action based on the information and evidence in their possession.”
Prosecuting based on information is difficult: McGuinty
Monday’s report said NSICOP members had come across information indicating that lawmakers had tried to influence their colleagues on India’s behalf and actively provided classified information to Indian authorities.
In another case cited in the report, a then-MP maintained a relationship with a foreign intelligence officer, whose country of origin was not listed in the public report, based on Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) information shared with NSICOP.
NSICOP said some of the foreign interference cases it investigated may have involved illegal activity but were unlikely to result in criminal charges “due to Canada’s failure to address long-standing issues of protecting sensitive information and methods in judicial proceedings.”
Mr McGuinty acknowledged police were struggling to secure prosecutions based on intelligence.
“It’s difficult to get information in broad daylight like a courtroom because it involves protecting sources and methods,” he said.
“This is a big problem for people in intelligence and law enforcement who have been calling for improvements in this area.”
The use of intelligence information as evidence has been a long-running bone of contention between Canada’s security agencies, police and courts.
The “information-to-evidence” dilemma involves balancing the need to protect sensitive information and the use of that information by law enforcement while protecting the accused’s right to a fair trial.
Diminishing RCMP resources
A 2021 report by Canada’s civilian intelligence watchdog, the National Security Intelligence Review Authority (NSIRA), said flaws in how Canada’s intelligence agencies and national police share information have stalled the investigation.
CSIS is under pressure to protect its operational intelligence – its tactics, methods and the locations of its spies – and the RCMP is reluctant to use CSIS intelligence for fear that CSIS involvement could jeopardize the chances of a successful prosecution, according to the report.
As a result, the RCMP investigation is progressing slowly, while CSIS is left with a “mountain of information”, NSIRA said.
NSICOP has access to large amounts of classified information and can interview senior officials, but cannot see information directly related to ongoing law enforcement investigations.
Canada’s Public Security Minister Dominic Leblanc responded to a question about whether he would be comfortable caucusing with lawmakers who are accused of colluding with foreign governments.
“As a result, the committee was unable to obtain a clear picture of any investigations that may have been taking place during the period under review,” the committee’s report said.
Commissioners heard that the RCMP established a foreign interference team to coordinate and oversee foreign interference investigations in 2020. But the report said the RCMP was unable to tell NSICOP exactly how many foreign interference investigations it conducted during the review period.
“The unit was established using resources from other national security priorities, but the RCMP advised the committee that it could not be sustained without new resources,” the NSICOP report states.
“No charges have been brought regarding foreign interference in democratic processes or institutions.”
Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland was asked Tuesday whether Canadians have a right to know the names of members of parliament mentioned in a new report on foreign interference by the Parliamentary National Security and Intelligence Committee.
NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, who received security clearance last year to review documents on foreign interference prepared by former governor general David Johnston, said he asked for the security clearance to ensure no NDP members were involved.
He also said it was alarming on Wednesday that the premier had received the unedited NSICOP report from March but had not taken any action.
“Why aren’t additional steps being taken when we have members of Congress, perhaps some sitting in this chamber right now, who have knowingly worked with a foreign government to undermine our democracy? This is wrong,” he said.
“I’m worried about our democracy. I’m worried about Canadians. I’m worried about all of our diaspora communities who have long said they’re worried about being threatened by foreign governments.”
On Tuesday, Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland said the Liberal party would conduct an “internal investigation.” She did not explain what that meant or whether the accused Liberal lawmakers would be allowed to remain in caucus.
The government pointed to recently introduced legislation aimed at curbing foreign interference in Canada’s internal affairs, from school committee elections to the House of Commons and Senate.
Bill C-70, introduced in the House of Commons early last month, contains a series of measures to deter and punish foreign interference, including new Criminal Code offences.