At the very least, a report this week from the Parliamentary National Security and Intelligence Committee offers a firm rebuttal to opposition politicians who have dismissed the relatively new agency’s ability to carry out worthwhile work.
Critics were unimpressed last year when the Liberal government suggested NSICOP should investigate allegations of foreign interference contained in a series of media leaks. But a committee of MPs and senators has now delivered a highly critical report scrutinising the government’s response to foreign interference and also raising new allegations against MPs.
One might legitimately ask whether the NSICOP report went too far. In any event, the task force has referred the issue back to Congress, and now questions are emerging about whether the federal government, law enforcement agencies, and lawmakers themselves will take action on the allegations that NSICOP put on the record.
The National Security Commission’s 94-page report describes the threat posed by an intrusive foreign power, identifies flaws in the government’s response, and recommends several legislative and governance changes to enable Canadian institutions to better respond.
But the report also makes a series of allegations about unnamed lawmakers.
Paragraph 164 states that the committee “has seen disturbing information that some members of parliament are, in the words of the intelligence agencies, ‘semi-intentionally or knowingly’ engaging in misconduct.” participant We oppose foreign attempts to interfere in our national politics” (emphasis theirs).
These engagements allegedly include a member of Congress engaging in frequent contact with a foreign mission to obtain support from a community group or business before or during a political campaign; knowingly or knowingly accepting funds or benefits from a foreign mission or its agents; providing classified information about a fellow member of Congress to a foreign diplomat; complying with requests or instructions from a foreign official to improperly influence a fellow member of Congress or the work of the member of Congress; and providing information tip-off from the government to a known foreign agent.
The report also cited “members of parliament who have influenced colleagues on India’s behalf and actively provided classified information to Indian authorities.” The committee also noted “particularly worrying cases of then-members of parliament maintaining relationships with foreign intelligence agents.”
However, the NSICOP report stops short of naming the lawmakers at the center of these allegations.
Raising the alarm vs. sowing doubt
Liberal MP David McGuinty, who chairs NSICOP, told reporters on Wednesday that the committee has disclosed as much information as it can and it is up to law enforcement to determine whether further action can or should be taken.
The committee’s allegations against anonymous individuals are reminiscent of similar allegations made by former civil servant Richard Fadden in 2010 when he was director of CSIS. CBC News interview In June 2010, Faden said CSIS believed there were several city and provincial politicians in Canada who were “at least subject to the overall influence of a foreign government.”
Politicians across the country Criticized Faden’s remarks and subsequent House committee meeting Requested Faden resigned, citing “call into question the honesty and integrity of many elected officials and creating an atmosphere of suspicion and paranoia.”
Canada needs to tackle foreign interference as a priority and ensure it takes steps to protect its citizens from it, said former CSIS director Richard Fadden.
Faden is entitled to enjoy the irony now, but it’s hard to imagine that the same criticism the Public Safety Commission made in 2011 won’t be directed at NSICOP in 2024.
By not naming any names, NSICOP is casting doubt on all 430 sitting members of the National Assembly and Senators. If they cannot name any members of the National Assembly, would it not have been better not to raise these allegations?
Based solely on the NSICOP report, it is unclear whether there is evidence to support the claims. Responses to the reportThe Liberal government specifically said it was “concerned” that NSICOP’s “interpretation of the intelligence report lacked the necessary caution inherent in intelligence activities.”
NSICOP members may have calculated that the need to sound the alarm outweighed the risk of widespread doubt. But now that the alarm had been sounded, what should happen next?
Can MPs investigate themselves?
The NSICOP report acknowledges that while some of the alleged conduct may be illegal, criminal prosecutions may be difficult.
The government recently submitted Foreign Interference Act Pursuing other changes recommended by NSICOP may provide protection against future misconduct, but will it necessarily ensure clarity and accountability for the allegations outlined this week?
Will the major political parties now proceed with investigating their own members?
in C.B.C. Power and politics this weekFaden argued that Congress should investigate the allegations itself, because the House and Senate are ultimately responsible for their own affairs and, as NSICOP noted, some members may have violated their oath of office.
Fadden certainly has a point: it remains to be seen whether lawmakers are interested or able to seriously investigate themselves.
While Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet and New Democratic Party Leader Jagmeet Singh pursued the NSICOP allegations during Tuesday’s Q&A, the Conservatives were entirely focused on other matters. On Wednesday, Conservative Leader Pierre Poirierbre used only one of his five questions to ask about foreign interference. He demanded the government identify any lawmakers who “knowingly worked for a hostile foreign government.”
In response, Public Security Minister Dominique Leblanc said Poirievre should obtain the necessary security clearance to review the unedited version of the NSICOP report. Resisted in the pastLeblanc also accused Poirievre of “making slanderous allegations on the floor of the Chamber of Deputies without any information.”
But, of course, such aspersions have already been debated in the House of Commons.
Conservative foreign affairs critic Michael Chong later rose to the occasion and called NSICOP’s allegations “shocking.” But the Conservatives soon abandoned the issue, refusing to back down on what they claim is “a shambles of a …Carbon Tax Hiding”
Just over a year ago, the respected former Governor-General and notorious Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, David Johnston, The report was released About media leaks about Chinese government interference in Canadian politics. This is the first of what is now four official reports on the issue.
Johnston was vocally concerned that the public had no faith or confidence in our democratic institutions, arguing that the reason for not recommending a public inquiry was that Parliament and MPs should be able to confront and address the issues.
He may have been wrong about the investigation, proved to be very usefulBut a year later, with the challenge of foreign interference landing brutally on lawmakers’ hands, how will they respond?
