Parliamentarians helped foreign interference in Canadian elections
June 15, 2024 12:20 PM Subscribe
On March 8, 2024, the Canadian National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) provided Prime Minister Justin Trudeau with the Special Report on Foreign Interference in Canada’s Democratic Processes and Institutions (redacted pdf). On June 3, NSICOP tabled the report in Parliament. The document alleges that while "parliamentarians were unaware they were the target of foreign interference", others have been "wittingly assisting foreign state actors," though maybe not anybody currently in Parliament.
NSICOP is a cross-party group of MPs and Senators with the highest level of security clearance, chaired by Liberal MP David J. McGuinty and with members: 3 Senators (the Honourables Patricia Duncan, Marty Klyne, and Frances Lankin) and Bloc Québécois MP Stéphane Bergeron, NDP MP Don Davies, Liberal MP Patricia Lattanzio, Conservative MPs Rob Morrison and Alex Ruff, and two Liberal MPs who ceased membership on Sept 17, 2023, Iqra Khalid and James Maloney.
Some background:
In 2021 and 2022, the Conservative Party blamed Chinese influence campaigns for the defeat in the 2021 federal election of as many as 9 Conservative candidates, with another 4 also targeted who weren't in competitive ridings. Media reported on a vast, orchestrated disinformation campaign by the People’s Republic of China which included funding some federal candidates. At the time, CSIS said they "saw attempts at foreign interference, but not enough to have met the threshold of impacting electoral integrity".
In March 2023, the Prime Minister asked the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA) to conduct a review. NSIRA submitted its Review of the dissemination of intelligence on People's Republic of China political foreign interference, 2018-2023 to the Prime Minister a year later on March 5, 2024 and released a declassified version April 26 (pdf).
Also in March 2023, Trudeau appointed an independent special rapporteur, former governor general David Johnston, to investigate. In June 2023, opposition MPs teamed up to pass an NDP motion to remove Johnston because he recommended against holding a public inquiry.
In September 2023, the Government of Canada announced a public inquiry centering on "China, Russia and other foreign states or nonstate actors" interfering in the 43rd and 44th general elections. Public hearings began in January 2024.
In April 2024, media reported that the People’s Republic of China allegedly clandestinely paid "threat actors" in late 2018 or early 2019, who targeted 7 Liberal Party candidates and 4 Conservative Party candidates, with some apparently willing to co-operate in foreign interference and others apparently unaware of it. Additionally, international students may have been coerced by the PRC to vote for Independent (formerly Liberal) MP Han Dong, possibly without Dong's knowledge. P. 31 of the NSICOP redacted report talks about "a CSIS assessment on the degree to which an individual was implicated in these activities" but is silent on Dong's knowledge of them.
India allegedly interfered in one race for the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada, and the People's Republic of China allegedly interfered in two. Details were redacted from the NSICOP report. Former Conservative leader Erin O'Toole believes interference played a role in his 2022 ouster as party leader.
Trudeau told the inquiry that allegations that China would prefer a Liberal minority government is "very improbable," as Canada-China relations have soured due to the Huawei and Two Michaels incidents.
Canada doesn't have a foreign influence registry, a tool used by the US to remove PRC "police stations" like the ones in Toronto and Vancouver. Trudeau wants to ensure such a registry not target diaspora groups. Bill C-70, dubbed the "Countering Foreign Interference Act," was introduced in early May, though universties say it could chill research partnerships.
Back to the NSICOP report:
The declassified, redacted version of the NSICOP Special Report mentions:
The classified version has now been read by the Prime Minister, Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, and NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, who all have top security clearances.
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is refusing to go through the security clearance process to view the unredacted report, apparently so he won't be bound by the Security of Information Act. Bloc Québécois MP Jean-Denis Garon Mirabel said in debate that, "Agreeing to this security briefing means getting the information and the names. However, those who obtain the names are not allowed to disclose them, not allowed to talk about it and not allowed to act on this information. We are effectively being shut down."
May said she was "vastly relieved" not to see disloyalty from current MPs, while Singh called those involved "traitors to the country," though he wouldn't confirm if he was referring to serving MPs, and slammed Trudeau for being "slow to act" and Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre for ignoring claims of foreign interference within his party. Singh said the report named him as a target of interference, and that no NDP MPs are participants.
Conservatives are calling for the names to be released but Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc says that, in some cases, allegations are based on "uncorroborated or unverified" intelligence information. NSICOP chair McGuinty says the committee has revealed as much as they can without breaching the Security of Information Act, and it's the RCMP's responsibility to investigate the allegations.
The Foreign Interference Commission public hearings will resume this autumn.
NSICOP is a cross-party group of MPs and Senators with the highest level of security clearance, chaired by Liberal MP David J. McGuinty and with members: 3 Senators (the Honourables Patricia Duncan, Marty Klyne, and Frances Lankin) and Bloc Québécois MP Stéphane Bergeron, NDP MP Don Davies, Liberal MP Patricia Lattanzio, Conservative MPs Rob Morrison and Alex Ruff, and two Liberal MPs who ceased membership on Sept 17, 2023, Iqra Khalid and James Maloney.
Some background:
In 2021 and 2022, the Conservative Party blamed Chinese influence campaigns for the defeat in the 2021 federal election of as many as 9 Conservative candidates, with another 4 also targeted who weren't in competitive ridings. Media reported on a vast, orchestrated disinformation campaign by the People’s Republic of China which included funding some federal candidates. At the time, CSIS said they "saw attempts at foreign interference, but not enough to have met the threshold of impacting electoral integrity".
In March 2023, the Prime Minister asked the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA) to conduct a review. NSIRA submitted its Review of the dissemination of intelligence on People's Republic of China political foreign interference, 2018-2023 to the Prime Minister a year later on March 5, 2024 and released a declassified version April 26 (pdf).
Also in March 2023, Trudeau appointed an independent special rapporteur, former governor general David Johnston, to investigate. In June 2023, opposition MPs teamed up to pass an NDP motion to remove Johnston because he recommended against holding a public inquiry.
In September 2023, the Government of Canada announced a public inquiry centering on "China, Russia and other foreign states or nonstate actors" interfering in the 43rd and 44th general elections. Public hearings began in January 2024.
In April 2024, media reported that the People’s Republic of China allegedly clandestinely paid "threat actors" in late 2018 or early 2019, who targeted 7 Liberal Party candidates and 4 Conservative Party candidates, with some apparently willing to co-operate in foreign interference and others apparently unaware of it. Additionally, international students may have been coerced by the PRC to vote for Independent (formerly Liberal) MP Han Dong, possibly without Dong's knowledge. P. 31 of the NSICOP redacted report talks about "a CSIS assessment on the degree to which an individual was implicated in these activities" but is silent on Dong's knowledge of them.
India allegedly interfered in one race for the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada, and the People's Republic of China allegedly interfered in two. Details were redacted from the NSICOP report. Former Conservative leader Erin O'Toole believes interference played a role in his 2022 ouster as party leader.
Trudeau told the inquiry that allegations that China would prefer a Liberal minority government is "very improbable," as Canada-China relations have soured due to the Huawei and Two Michaels incidents.
Canada doesn't have a foreign influence registry, a tool used by the US to remove PRC "police stations" like the ones in Toronto and Vancouver. Trudeau wants to ensure such a registry not target diaspora groups. Bill C-70, dubbed the "Countering Foreign Interference Act," was introduced in early May, though universties say it could chill research partnerships.
Back to the NSICOP report:
The declassified, redacted version of the NSICOP Special Report mentions:
- "members of Parliament who worked to influence their colleagues on India’s behalf and proactively provided confidential information to Indian officials." (p.24)
- a PRC "network had some contact with at least 11 candidates and 13 campaign staffers, some of whom appeared to be wittingly working for the PRC" (p. 26)
- "Member of Parliament wittingly provided information *** to a foreign state . . . a particularly concerning case of a then-member of Parliament maintaining a relationship with a foreign intelligence officer" (p.26)
- "an example of the PRC using intermediaries to provide funds likely to support candidates in the 2019 federal election, including two transfers of funds approximating $250,000 through a prominent community leader, a political staffer and then an Ontario member of Provincial Parliament. CSIS could not confirm that the funds reached any candidate." (pp.28-29).
The classified version has now been read by the Prime Minister, Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, and NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, who all have top security clearances.
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is refusing to go through the security clearance process to view the unredacted report, apparently so he won't be bound by the Security of Information Act. Bloc Québécois MP Jean-Denis Garon Mirabel said in debate that, "Agreeing to this security briefing means getting the information and the names. However, those who obtain the names are not allowed to disclose them, not allowed to talk about it and not allowed to act on this information. We are effectively being shut down."
May said she was "vastly relieved" not to see disloyalty from current MPs, while Singh called those involved "traitors to the country," though he wouldn't confirm if he was referring to serving MPs, and slammed Trudeau for being "slow to act" and Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre for ignoring claims of foreign interference within his party. Singh said the report named him as a target of interference, and that no NDP MPs are participants.
Conservatives are calling for the names to be released but Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc says that, in some cases, allegations are based on "uncorroborated or unverified" intelligence information. NSICOP chair McGuinty says the committee has revealed as much as they can without breaching the Security of Information Act, and it's the RCMP's responsibility to investigate the allegations.
The Foreign Interference Commission public hearings will resume this autumn.
Hmm, do you think this will come back to bite Trudeau in the butt come our next election? Admittedly, it doesn't take much for PP to rag on Trudeau these days, but this is concerning.
posted by Kitteh at 1:12 PM on June 15 [1 favorite]
posted by Kitteh at 1:12 PM on June 15 [1 favorite]
On June 3, NSICOP tabled the report in Parliament
A reminder for US English speakers that tabling something in Canadian/British/Australian English means putting it on the table for official presentation or consideration (as opposed to the US sense of setting it aside to deal with later, or never).
posted by trig at 1:26 PM on June 15 [20 favorites]
A reminder for US English speakers that tabling something in Canadian/British/Australian English means putting it on the table for official presentation or consideration (as opposed to the US sense of setting it aside to deal with later, or never).
posted by trig at 1:26 PM on June 15 [20 favorites]
But Chinese and Indian inputs into our politics are at least as legitimate as the Koch brothers' support for the conservative Neanderthals in Parliament.
That's not an accurate comparison - the real explosive information is that the MPs are working directly with foreign governments and intelligence services, not just private citizens or corporations.
posted by fortitude25 at 1:33 PM on June 15 [14 favorites]
That's not an accurate comparison - the real explosive information is that the MPs are working directly with foreign governments and intelligence services, not just private citizens or corporations.
posted by fortitude25 at 1:33 PM on June 15 [14 favorites]
do you think this will come back to bite Trudeau in the butt come our next election?
Trudeau is toast in the next election regardless, unless the Conservatives really screw up. To be clear, I hope they do, or that the NDP gains.
posted by warriorqueen at 1:59 PM on June 15 [6 favorites]
Trudeau is toast in the next election regardless, unless the Conservatives really screw up. To be clear, I hope they do, or that the NDP gains.
posted by warriorqueen at 1:59 PM on June 15 [6 favorites]
Yeah, I hate that it feels very definite that PP is our next PM.
posted by Kitteh at 2:12 PM on June 15 [7 favorites]
posted by Kitteh at 2:12 PM on June 15 [7 favorites]
My question is whether there is a functional difference between a foreign private citizen's or foreign corporation's underhanded attempts to corrupt a democracy and a foreign government's or intelligence agency's underhanded attempts to corrupt a democracy. Once you decide that underhanded attempts to corrupt democracies are abominable, on what basis do you issue tax exemptions to one group and vaguely prejudicial reports about the others? Governments shouldn't be in the business of picking winners and losers amongst the groups that seek to overturn them.
posted by SnowRottie at 3:53 PM on June 15 [2 favorites]
posted by SnowRottie at 3:53 PM on June 15 [2 favorites]
Very few Canadians object American money funding hard right lobbyists like the Fraser Institute.
Is this true? My impression from what is probably a bubble here in Nova Scotia is we don't like American money in our politics no matter who it's funding, and especially when it's funding those wastes of hair.
posted by joannemerriam at 5:30 PM on June 15 [10 favorites]
Is this true? My impression from what is probably a bubble here in Nova Scotia is we don't like American money in our politics no matter who it's funding, and especially when it's funding those wastes of hair.
posted by joannemerriam at 5:30 PM on June 15 [10 favorites]
There's a pretty significant difference between what think tanks do and attempting to directly fund a candidate's campaign. We might not like either of them, but there's a pretty clear legal and ethical difference between the two.
posted by ssg at 6:35 PM on June 15 [5 favorites]
posted by ssg at 6:35 PM on June 15 [5 favorites]
The Fraser Institute has absolutely taken US money in the past, according to Desmog, who tracks these sorts of things. The Kochs, Searle, the Scaifes and ExxonMobil are among the documented donors.
posted by bonehead at 6:40 PM on June 15 [7 favorites]
posted by bonehead at 6:40 PM on June 15 [7 favorites]
I don't know about Nova Scotia but in the Haldiman/Norfolk region of Ontario, here's a huge number of people who'll be cheering as the black Ford-150s pour in from the US to save them from Liberal tyranny.
posted by brachiopod at 7:24 PM on June 15 [6 favorites]
posted by brachiopod at 7:24 PM on June 15 [6 favorites]
Governments shouldn't be in the business of picking winners and losers amongst the groups that seek to overturn them.
Why not? It's the only thing a government can do. They may be able to ignore threats equally; they cannot fight each threat with the same energy.
Some billionaires have lobbyist groups and think tanks....others control armies, secret police stations, spy agencies, assassination squads, and so on.
posted by UN at 11:55 PM on June 15 [1 favorite]
Why not? It's the only thing a government can do. They may be able to ignore threats equally; they cannot fight each threat with the same energy.
Some billionaires have lobbyist groups and think tanks....others control armies, secret police stations, spy agencies, assassination squads, and so on.
posted by UN at 11:55 PM on June 15 [1 favorite]
MPs take an oath of allegiance, which, although it’s not frequently tested, “Persons who are elected or appointed to public office are expected to be loyal and faithful. They are assuming positions of public trust, and the oath of allegiance is a pledge that they will conduct themselves "patriotically," and in the best interests of the country.”
As a member of the electorate, I certainly would vote and campaign against anyone who was proven to have worked on behalf of a foreign government while in office in Canada. (Intelligence being a good lead, but not the same as fact.)
This isn’t some political what-if game for me. I expect that Canadian parliamentarians will work for Canada. I realize they accept trips — a practice I have mixed feelings about and think should be banned or limited — but at the end of the day, they work for us. If they haven’t been, turf them.
posted by warriorqueen at 5:41 AM on June 16 [7 favorites]
As a member of the electorate, I certainly would vote and campaign against anyone who was proven to have worked on behalf of a foreign government while in office in Canada. (Intelligence being a good lead, but not the same as fact.)
This isn’t some political what-if game for me. I expect that Canadian parliamentarians will work for Canada. I realize they accept trips — a practice I have mixed feelings about and think should be banned or limited — but at the end of the day, they work for us. If they haven’t been, turf them.
posted by warriorqueen at 5:41 AM on June 16 [7 favorites]
Yeah, I hate that it feels very definite that PP is our next PM
Same. I honestly don’t know if the liberals or a coalition have a candidate they could be fielding who would do better than Trudeau in an election, but they need to get rid of him. I’ll happily vote tactically for him if that looks like the best defence against Polievre, but it won’t be with any real enthusiasm. I find myself just annoyed when listening to him now, so I imagine those who are against what he claims to be trying to achieve are going to turn out in large numbers.
The “what he’s trying to achieve/what the actions are” dissonance is just unworkable for me at this point, the liberals have been trotting out the worst sort of milquetoast weaksauce for a good while.
posted by Jon Mitchell at 5:50 PM on June 16 [5 favorites]
Same. I honestly don’t know if the liberals or a coalition have a candidate they could be fielding who would do better than Trudeau in an election, but they need to get rid of him. I’ll happily vote tactically for him if that looks like the best defence against Polievre, but it won’t be with any real enthusiasm. I find myself just annoyed when listening to him now, so I imagine those who are against what he claims to be trying to achieve are going to turn out in large numbers.
The “what he’s trying to achieve/what the actions are” dissonance is just unworkable for me at this point, the liberals have been trotting out the worst sort of milquetoast weaksauce for a good while.
posted by Jon Mitchell at 5:50 PM on June 16 [5 favorites]
I’ll happily vote tactically for him if that looks like the best defence against Polievre, but it won’t be with any real enthusiasm.
I don't like Trudeau very much but will be enthusiastic about voting for my own MP, who helped me get the right to vote back when I was disenfranchised and just this past week (along with a local volunteer group) has gotten Transport Canada to rescind approval for the Dartmouth Cove infill project which would have ruined a beautiful area that means a lot to me. I've always been more of a vote-for-the-local-person kind of voter, though also as an ABC voter sometimes I have to compromise on the local candidate.
posted by joannemerriam at 1:18 PM on June 23 [1 favorite]
I don't like Trudeau very much but will be enthusiastic about voting for my own MP, who helped me get the right to vote back when I was disenfranchised and just this past week (along with a local volunteer group) has gotten Transport Canada to rescind approval for the Dartmouth Cove infill project which would have ruined a beautiful area that means a lot to me. I've always been more of a vote-for-the-local-person kind of voter, though also as an ABC voter sometimes I have to compromise on the local candidate.
posted by joannemerriam at 1:18 PM on June 23 [1 favorite]
« Older All Shook Up | Q: Is this site comprehensive and complete? A:... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by SnowRottie at 1:00 PM on June 15 [6 favorites]