44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 10, 2024 11:00AM
- Jun/10/24 12:26:37 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate that the member indicated in one of his answers that it is important for us to recognize that democracies all over the world, many of Canada's allied countries, are having to deal with the issue of international interference. It is indeed a very serious issue. I am glad to see that Canada has a House of Commons, and in particular a government, that is doing what it can in order to protect democracies.
The question I have for the member is related to NSICOP, which is a relatively new standing committee. Canada is now a part of the Five Eyes countries that actually have a committee like this. The Conservatives have dissed the committee on several occasions. I am interested in knowing what the member from the Bloc has to say about the important role that NSICOP plays. We would not have the report today if it were not for that committee.
157 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/24 12:45:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, even prior to the Prime Minister becoming the Prime Minister, in third party, we had advocated for a standing committee, NSICOP. If it were not for NSICOP, we would not have the report that we are talking about today.
It is interesting that, even in third party, when we were raising the issue, the Conservative Party opposed bringing in a NSICOP committee. It is important for us to recognize that, today, because of the persistence of this government, the committee exists, and there are representatives from all political entities in the chamber and in the Senate.
I am wondering if my colleague could just enhance his comments in regard to why all of us need to come together, as NSICOP has done, to follow through in listening to what is being said.
134 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/24 1:19:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I remember well the foreign interference threat activities that were revealed by Dick Fadden in the public realm in 2013. They were directed at provincial governments and municipal politicians. I would note that the then Liberal government at Queen's Park in Toronto discounted that intelligence advice, dismissed it and said that it was not sufficient to take action. Here we are some 11 years later, faced with the foreign interference threats now at the federal level.
With respect to NSICOP, the very structure and flaws of the committee have been proven. It is a committee of the government. Under subsection 21(5), the Prime Minister ordered the redaction of the names of members of the House who were involved in the activities. That is why that committee should be a committee of Parliament and not an extraparliamentary committee that lies beyond the House and its authority.
149 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/24 1:22:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member has done a lot of very good work on the issue and at the public inquiry, and she rightfully points out something, which is that it has been reported that up to 10% or so of the documents the government has submitted for the second phase of the inquiry have been redacted and that other documents have been withheld from the public inquiry.
After reading the NSICOP report of a week ago, I wonder whether, of the 4,000 documents and some 33,000 pages that NSICOP received unredacted, Justice Hogue had access to all those documents to come to conclusions in her initial report. My skepticism suggests she did not, which is why the government should hand over all of the 4,000 documents, unredacted, that NSICOP received, to the public inquiry.
137 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/24 3:43:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is a shame that the Conservatives want to heckle and the irony is in the fact that they want to misrepresent what happened at committee.
While Conservatives play partisan games, we are steadfast and focused on countering foreign interference and putting in place the measures that will strengthen our democratic institutions. It is ironic that the Conservatives bring up NSICOP, a committee they voted against and in fact also pulled members off at one point.
We are going to do everything to ensure that our democratic institutions are protected from foreign interference.
95 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/24 4:57:43 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would tend to disagree with the member's conclusion that the government did not take any steps. For the first time, we actually have a government that has recognized international interference is taking place, and there were modifications made in regard to elections. There have been changes in that different individuals have been called forward to look at ways we can deal with interference on the international scene.
Canada has been raising the issue among the G7 countries, and we have been very open and transparent. At the end of the day, NSICOP is the reason we have the report we have today. It is a creation by the government, in full co-operation with a majority of the members.
Would the member opposite not agree that NSICOP is why we have the report today and that this is something the House passed, with all members, except for the Conservatives, voting in favour of it?
158 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/24 5:14:22 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the NSICOP report noted that the foreign interference actors, particularly those from China and India, are most pervasive. The implications are significant to Canadians, to our democratic institutions and to our processes. While the government has known about this for a long time, our system is deficient in addressing the issue.
Paramount to the motion today and to ongoing efforts to counter foreign interference activities is ensuring that the commission has access to all unredacted documents, most certainly the ones that NSICOP received and, as well, the information from cabinet. Would the member support the call for the government to release all unredacted documents to the commission?
109 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/24 5:30:00 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I can assure the member across the way that there are two Conservative members of Parliament who sit on NSICOP. Those two members would be just as entitled to know the names as anyone else. The Conservatives say, “Well, we do not want them them to speak about it, but we want the minister to speak about it.”
The minister said earlier today that he cannot share the names. All the member has to do is listen to what the deputy commissioner said, because he too would be eligible for prosecution. Therefore the NSICOP members are being responsible. The government minister is being responsible. The only one who is not being responsible is the Conservative-Reform party leader in the House of Commons.
127 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/24 5:31:32 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the government and the Prime Minister have not been pushed on the issue. I would ultimately argue that, in a certain way, it is the government that has been pushing the issue. All that members have to ask about is why we have the report that we have today. The Prime Minister, when he was the leader of the third party, insisted that we should have a committee like NSICOP. In 2015, when we took over the reins of power, we actually started to take action to put NSICOP into place. We would not have NSICOP today except for the current Prime Minister and government. That is the report we are actually talking about today.
NSICOP has representatives of all political entities of the chamber. To say that we have not taken action is not true. There are more actions that I could talk about, but I am out of time.
153 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/24 5:59:33 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member made reference to the issue of providing names. He seems to acknowledge that it would not be appropriate for us to be providing names, whether of government or opposition members or of those who sit on NSICOP. I appreciate that comment—
An hon. member: Oh, oh!
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux: Is there no interpretation?
58 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/10/24 6:44:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, in the NSICOP report, the committee noted that NSICOP tabled its first report indicating concerns around foreign interference activities back in 2018. Since then, there have been two other reports with this latest one. The government said that it would take action, but there was a huge gap when no action was taken. As a result, we saw that leaks surfaced in the media, which propelled the government to action. The NSICOP report actually noted that, because of the gap, we are sending all the wrong messages; we are basically saying that there is no deterrent for foreign interference actors and that they can carry on with business as usual. Therefore, in light of this and the severity of foreign interference into Canada's democratic institutions and processes, would the member agree that Commissioner Hogue should be given unfettered access to all unredacted documents, both within cabinet and what was provided to NSICOP, so that we can get to the bottom of the situation?
166 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
