The West Block – Episode 24, Season 12

THE WEST BLOCK

Episode 24, Season 12

Sunday, March 5, 2023

Host: Mercedes Stephenson

Visitors:

Artur Wilczynski, Former Assistant Deputy Minister,

Communications Safety Institution

Politics Panel:

Stephanie Levitz, The Toronto Star; and Robert Fife, The Globe and Mail

 

Location:

Ottawa, ON

 

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Is Ottawa doing sufficient to inform you what overseas international locations like China are doing to intervene in our democracy?

 

The opposition says completely not. Prime Minister Trudeau says his authorities is on high of it. So what’s the reality?

 

I’m Mercedes Stephenson. Welcome to The West Block.

 

With allegations flying about China’s medaling, we reduce by way of the political noise. Two high officers, who served underneath Justin Trudeau within the Privy Council Workplace and with Canada’s Indicators Intelligence Company, reply questions on the specter of overseas interference and what might be executed.

 

And our inside politics panel weighs in on the prime minister’s response to questions.

 

Stephanie Levitz, The Toronto Star: “Justin Trudeau has ducked extra questions than there have been spy balloons shot down by NORAD over this one, actually.”

 

Mercedes Stephenson: And, requires a public inquiry.

 

Robert Fife, The Globe and Mail: He’s resisting efforts for a nationwide—a public inquiry, which there must be.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Questions on China interfering in Canada’s democracy and medaling within the 2019 and 2021 federal elections have been swirling round Parliament Hill for months now, however the challenge has actually been heating up over the previous week.

 

The a lot anticipated Rosenberg Report got here out, noting senior civil servants discovered there was overseas interference within the 2021 election however that it was not important sufficient to have an effect on the legitimacy of the outcomes. And parliamentarians grilled senior nationwide safety officers about who knew what, when, on China’s interference in Canada’s democracy.

 

There weren’t plenty of solutions, however the committee did cross a suggestion for a public inquiry.

For those who’re questioning what all of this implies, you’re not alone. So we’ve introduced in two former senior public servants to speak about this.

 

Becoming a member of me now’s former Privy Council clerk, Michael Wernick and former Communications and Safety Institution assistant deputy minister, Artur Wilczynski. Thanks each for becoming a member of us.

 

Artur Wilczynski, Former Assistant Deputy Minister, Communications Safety Institution: Thanks.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: You might be each consultants on how authorities works and intelligence, so we needed to place a few of these inquiries to you. The primary large one is belief, I feel. Canadians are questioning. What’s the reality in all of this? We heard the prime minister say on Friday, principally the whole lot is okay once more. Positive there are considerations, however the whole lot is okay.

 

Let’s begin with Michael. Is the whole lot positive with regards to overseas interference?

 

Michael Wernick, Former Clerk of the Privy Council: Effectively I feel one of many driving points right here is retaining the boldness of Canadians, belief of Canadians in not simply elections however their political establishments, their democracy, in politicians. So the problem is way broader than the place it began a couple of weeks in the past about China’s function in a particular election. I feel we do now have a difficulty about retaining Canadians belief of their democratic course of.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: And the way do you suppose that must be addressed?

 

Artur Wilczynski, Former Assistant Deputy Minister, Communications Safety Institution: So I feel transparency is crucial and I feel transparency is one thing that we are able to do extra of inside the safety intelligence group. However I feel as Michael stated, you understand, restoring Canadians belief in all establishments of our democracy are vital. So there are two parts of that. One, now we have to have an applicable retrospective take a look at what occurred and I feel now we have some actually vital establishments in Canada that may assist us do this. Issues just like the nationwide safety and intelligence committee of parliamentarians that particularly was created to handle these sorts of issues, and the Nationwide Safety and Intelligence Evaluate Company. Each of those organizations have been not too long ago created by Parliament. They’ve a task to take a look at this. They’ve the skillset, the tools and the classification wanted to take a look at intelligence. However then we have to look ahead. What can authorities establishments and leaders do to revive Canadians’ confidence in our democratic establishments and to be prepared for the evolving risk of overseas interference in Canada.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: And the truth is there may very well be an election any time. We’re in a minority state of affairs and it will not be the NDP who pulls the rug. It may very well be Justin Trudeau deciding this file’s getting too scorching, and it looks as if there’s nonetheless not plenty of solutions. And to your level, Artur about transparency, why do you suppose it’s that now we have all these senior authorities officers and we maintain listening to that’s labeled. That’s labeled. Clearly a few of it’s labeled, however you will have intelligence companies leaking info to journalists as a result of they’re so involved, is what these sources are telling us, about what’s happening. What ought to we all know that you understand out of your time in authorities about what this interference seems like and the way intently intelligence companies are taking note of it?

 

Artur Wilczynski, Former Assistant Deputy Minister, Communications Safety Institution: Effectively to start with, there’s not a black and white definition of what’s interference or inappropriate interference. We’re an open nation and there are many embassies on this city, and overseas corporations, and journalists and advocates, attempting to affect the insurance policies of the Authorities of Canada and there are many Canadians who’ve robust views about worldwide affairs. There’s nothing unsuitable with that. What the concern is, is tampering within the precise processes of elections in order that that you just aren’t getting the free and honest consequence, which is, you understand, expresses the desire of Canadians. However as I maintain saying, it’s extra than simply elections. There may be the whole interval in between, the conduct of political events, authorities establishments and so forth. It’s a broad set of points. And the entrance line of it, as of late, is disinformation and misinformation campaigns. They usually come from all corners of the world. So there’s extra to it than only one nation and there’s extra to it than simply, you understand, brokers of overseas governments which are brazenly working for them. So it’s not that straightforward to detect and, you understand, the instruments for coping with it, you understand, would usually land in legislation enforcement. I don’t suppose everyone understands that our safety intelligence companies accumulate info, and essential info, however the choices about whether or not to press expenses or arrest someone, arrest with an unbiased police and an unbiased crown lawyer’s, they set a really, very excessive threshold for that.

 

Michael Wernick, Former Clerk of the Privy Council: And that’s why there’s plenty of, I feel, concern about unlawful disclosures, is as a result of these disclosures have the potential impact of impeding the power of legislation enforcement, impeding intelligence companies to really entry the data that’s required to be able to assist mitigate the chance posed by overseas interference. Sources may very well be compromised. People who’re—who work within the area might be compromised, and the investigations themselves might be compromised by this type of leak. And on the finish of the day, what nationwide safety intelligence companies are there for, is to supply info to coverage makers in order that they then in flip could make choices which are within the nationwide curiosity. If these are hindered, if that capability is hindered by disclosures, the—you understand, the power to see what’s taking place, the power to then mitigate the dangers to Canadian communities, to Canadian establishments is hampered and that’s not in our curiosity.

 

Artur Wilczynski, Former Assistant Deputy Minister, Communications Safety Institution: I’ll simply use an analogy that any journalist would acknowledge. You already know the significance of confidential sources to a journalist and you understand how straightforward it might be typically to triangulate and work out oh, that should be the supply. And so the identical in safety and intelligence, there’s a balancing act that you just want sufficient transparency to retain that belief and confidence. However when you go too far, then you definitely reveal assortment strategies and sources, and you’d compromise your future capability to maintain gathering that info.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: And it seems like a few of the frustration from the intelligence sources we’re working with, is that they don’t really feel they’re being heard or that these investigations are being taken, and that’s clearly their notion. However I do need to ask you, Artur, while you have been at CSE, which a few of viewers may not know what that’s. It’s our alerts intelligence company.

 

Artur Wilczynski, Former Assistant Deputy Minister, Communications Safety Institution: It’s our alerts intel company.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: So you possibly can intercept not from Canadians however from overseas actors.  

 

Artur Wilczynski, Former Assistant Deputy Minister, Communications Safety Institution: Right.  

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Emails, cellphone calls, web visitors. You’re monitoring all that, so you’d see plenty of dialogue about this. Once you have been in your place there, how critical was overseas interference?

 

Artur Wilczynski, Former Assistant Deputy Minister, Communications Safety Institution: International interference is a completely key intelligence precedence for the Authorities of Canada. I feel that the integrity of our democratic establishments is a core nationwide curiosity, and intelligence priorities are set by what our nationwide pursuits are. So, you understand, our function inside the Communication Safety Institution is that overseas intelligence element, to look exterior of Canada, to take a look at what the intents and capabilities are of hostile actors. And it’s one of many the explanation why the Communication Safety Institution each in 2019 and in ’21, issued a risk evaluation. What are the threats to Canadian elections, as a result of it was vital to have that form of transparency with Canadians to inform them to be conscious? To inform political events that they should defend their know-how and their knowledge and their cyber techniques, as a result of it’s persistent, it’s rising and it’s changing into extra refined. And I feel that because of this wanting ahead when it comes to not simply understanding what occurred in 2019 and 2021, that’s vital. However how will we proceed to have this dialog in a clear approach in order that Canadians know what are the safety companies doing to guard the electoral techniques? What are officers of Parliament like? You already know the elections commissioner and the top of Elections Canada, what are they doing? What are political events doing to make sure that now we have the best calibrated method to mitigate dangers to our democracy? It’s foundational and it’s ongoing.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: The Australian spy chief got here out and gave a extremely clear speech about a few of what they’ve been doing. The Individuals are typically extra clear. There definitely appears to be a push or a hope for that. I don’t know if it’ll work in Canada. However wanting ahead into what wants to vary, you talked about, Michael, concerning the nomination course of and the in between in elections. I feel plenty of viewers hear election interference and what they’re imagining is direct makes an attempt to affect voters, or to vary a vote versus to put individuals earlier than an election occurs, or to place individuals in rooms that may overhear issues or affect issues. It’s a tricky factor to root out, however there are some issues the federal government might do from the general public inquiry to attempt to unravel a few of this, to overseas affect legal guidelines or overseas brokers registry, having been ready the place you can see this type of intelligence and the way authorities works. What do you suppose must occur?

 

Michael Wernick, Former Clerk of the Privy Council: Effectively we’re having a debate about whether or not to have an inquiry or retrospective train. I’d not have it solely about China and I wouldn’t have it solely about elections. If we’re going to do it, let’s do it correctly and canopy the entire spectrum of potential interference. My level on the inquiry is we don’t have to attend a yr and a half for its findings. I can inform you the findings already. It’ll advocate that we take the Australian and UK fashions of overseas interference laws and registration and produce them to Canada. So there’s nothing stopping our legislators from engaged on that laws in parallel. The federal government might decide to desk a invoice like that earlier than the summer season break and our legislators might debate it, amend it and make it higher, and cross it by the tip of the yr.

 

Artur Wilczynski, Former Assistant Deputy Minister, Communications Safety Institution: I additionally suppose that transparency by way of that form of course of is vital to make it a systemic method for our safety intelligence companies as nicely. I feel having a dialog concerning the function of intelligence in the midst of a disaster is just not a productive or knowledgeable dialog. I feel that the form of train that may very well be a little bit bit extra deliberative, that makes concrete suggestions and that on the finish of the day, safety intelligence companies in Canada are extra clear with what they do, how they do it, why they do it. I feel will present Canadians with the boldness they want, that our organizations are there to guard them and to guard Canadian democracies so that individuals know that after they do go into the poll sales space that the—that their vote is free and honest, and that they’ll trust that the techniques of our democracy are there of their pursuits.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Michael and Artur, thanks each very a lot for becoming a member of us at this time. A extremely attention-grabbing dialog and we sit up for talking to you each once more quickly.

 

Michael Wernick, Former Clerk of the Privy Council: Thanks for asking us.

 

Artur Wilczynski, Former Assistant Deputy Minister, Communications Safety Institution: Thanks.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Up subsequent, the Opposition is looking for a public inquiry. How will allegations of China’s medaling play out when the Home resumes?

 

[Break]

 

Mercedes Stephenson: MPs are again in Ottawa tomorrow after a two week break and you’ll anticipate the prime minister will probably be dealing with opposition questions on how his authorities has responded to overseas interference allegations within the final two federal elections.

 

Opposition chief Pierre Poilievre says Justin Trudeau ought to name a public inquiry.

 

Pierre Poilievre, Opposition Chief: “We are able to’t merely bury it behind closed doorways and have it in secret, whereas Canadians are left at nighttime, doubtlessly with one other election interfered in earlier than the outcomes of the fee come out. The outcomes of the fee and the common testimony should be public.”

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Justin Trudeau has resisted requires an inquiry saying his authorities is taking the problem significantly.

 

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau: “We’ve—the method that we put in place that’s skilled, unbiased individuals, working with the general public service, to ensure thresholds are met.”

 

Mercedes Stephenson: To speak about all of this, I’m joined by our inside politics panel. Bob Fife is the Ottawa bureau chief with The Globe and Mail; and Stephanie Levitz is with The Toronto Star.

 

An enormous week on the overseas interference and China file. Steph, how do you suppose the Liberals have dealt with this?

 

Stephanie Levitz, The Toronto Star: You already know Justin Trudeau has ducked extra questions than there have been spy balloons shot down by NORAD over this one, actually. And…

 

Mercedes Stephenson: That’s saying one thing.

 

Stephanie Levitz, The Toronto Star: And that’s saying one thing, as a result of he’s been requested quite a few occasions, over quite a few days, to clarify himself. To speak about how a lot info he had, to defend particular MPs which have been accused of being instantly influenced, by title, by the Chinese language state and he geese each time, which leads us to surprise why can’t Canadians have extra info from the prime minister. And I be aware that it’s attention-grabbing as a result of he doesn’t even trot out the nationwide safety line, like I can’t remark as a result of it’s a matter of nationwide safety. He simply geese and weaves and bobs round it. And that’s including—growing gasoline, I feel, to the political hearth round this as a result of maybe with some measure of extra transparency, we might get some solutions and that might see a few of the strain fall off.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Bob, why do you suppose they received’t present these primary solutions? We’ve requested a number of occasions about what he knew what allegations in opposition to a Liberal MP? That Liberal MP denies these allegations, however the prime minister received’t affirm or deny whether or not or not he knew about these allegations and if he didn’t, you understand, it might be useful for him perhaps to say he didn’t. However perhaps that throws employees underneath the bus. I imply, what’s the calculation right here?

 

Robert Fife, The Globe and Mail: And he’s been all around the map. When these tales began to come back out, primarily based on CSIS paperwork by the way in which, he stated his very first thing was CSIS seek out these individuals. Not that I—not saying I must be—we must always actually be involved about it. Search out these people who find themselves leaking this form of stuff. After which he stated nicely there’s nothing to see right here as a result of we’ve all the time talked about earlier than that there was interference in election campaigns. After which he stated oh, the political events are being partisan and so they’re undermining democracy. After which while you did—World did the story about Liberal MP Han Dan, he resorted to racism that that is racism by doing this. And now—and now he’s saying that there’s—there’s completely no—he’s resisting efforts for a nationwide—a public inquiry, which there must be as a result of in case you have a decide who holds public inquiry, he can see the key paperwork behind closed doorways. He can have subpoena powers to name CSIS officers, or any nationwide safety particular person, or the cupboard ministers. And the perfect half about it—a few of it is going to be in public, some received’t be—the perfect half about it’s we’ll get suggestions to ensure this doesn’t occur earlier than the following election marketing campaign as a result of it’s a very critical challenge.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Stephanie, do you suppose they’re going to bow to the strain for a public inquiry on this?

 

Stephanie Levitz, The Toronto Star: It depends upon how a lot strain the Opposition is prepared to put, actually. I imply, it is a minority Parliament. The Opposition, sure they moved a movement and voted a movement at committee that there should be a public inquiry. That isn’t a binding movement on the federal government. Honest sufficient. Nevertheless, they’re the Opposition of Parliament. If they want—I imply the opposition, you understand, events. In the event that they want to hijack the federal government’s agenda, in the event that they want to maintain the federal government’s toes to the fireplace, I don’t know, refuse to vote on issues, filibuster at committee. They’ve obtained numerous little instruments at their disposal. They might needle away on the prime minister on this one till he bows and does one thing about it. And I feel that there most likely are indicators inside, you understand, the PMO and elsewhere which are beginning to emerge that they’re delicate to the notion that the belief in authorities, which was already fragile to start with—allow us to not neglect, proper—is being undermined by this. Not essentially there may be the problem, in fact, of overseas states undermining confidence, however there may be the general public belief in authorities. And the general public belief in authorities is sacrosanct right here. That is about elections. That is about democracy.  And if Trudeau is critical in saying all of the issues that he stated, they must be pondering a little bit bit about is there another layer they’ll placed on right here that restores public belief to have individuals imagine in what they’re saying, which is the don’t fear, we’re on high of it. We all know that is taking place and we’re engaged on it.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Bob, the place do you see it going?

 

Robert Fife, The Globe and Mail: Effectively, look, proper now it’s—their—the wagon’s round—they’ve put the wagons round their prime minister. They don’t know—actually understand how to reply to this, however there are some easy issues that they’ll do. One, maintain a nationwide—a public inquiry. Get a revered decide, someone that each one the opposition events will comply with. Herald a overseas agent registry, which is the Australians and the USA have, which signifies that lobbyists and former politicians and legal professionals who—or individuals who work within the media who could also be being paid by the Chinese language state or Chinese language state enterprises, you’ll know who they’re. Then it’s important to change the CSIS Act in order that CSIS might be way more out—outgoing about warning the general public about points like overseas interference. And thirdly, change the felony code to make overseas interference a felony violation. These are options that numerous people who find themselves safety consultants as you understand, have advocated for this and they don’t need to do it. And the opposition retains saying you understand they don’t need to do it? As a result of these doc present that China favoured a Liberal minority authorities and so they needed to defeat Conservative MPs.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Steph, one of many issues that I maintain listening to is, and we all know from Bob’s reporting concerning the allegations that the, you understand, Chinese language diplomatic was bragging about attempting to affect so there could be a Liberal minority authorities. I’ve heard from some Conservatives as nicely that they’re getting strain to cease speaking about China. They have been late to the general public inquiry cal. It was the NDP who put it on the market first. And what a few of these political insiders say is look, there may be overseas interference from extra than simply China. There’s from different international locations as nicely. And so there’s resistance kind the 2 important political events to make modifications as a result of proper now they’re principally run as personal golf equipment. I don’t imply that as an insult. They’re actually run as personal golf equipment, and the nomination course of and plenty of the stuff that goes on the place you will get concerned and manipulate behind the scenes, they don’t need anyone taking a look at it. Do you suppose there’s political will to create not simply transparency from the intelligence companies which we completely appear to wish extra of but in addition accountability for the events on this?

 

Stephanie Levitz, The Toronto Star: No. I imply, I feel political events, such as you say, they’re a closed store. I imply, simply take into consideration on the floor of it. They’re not topic to entry to info regulation. They maintain a bunch of information about individuals and so they don’t have to inform anyone what it’s. Their financials, you understand, are clear to some extent, however typically fairly opaque. I imply, I feel with the Conservatives, what they’re delicate to, and this dates again some years now, is that the stance that they’ve taken on China, has alienated voters. They usually comprehend it. They’ve heard it. They’ve been informed it. It’s past form of the second, you understand, the piece of Chinese language interference maybe costing them votes. They themselves are costing themselves votes and so they don’t know sq. that circle. How do they undertake a overseas coverage line that is perhaps according to Conservative ideology because it pertains to China however not alienating voters within the course of? And that’s the factor they’re fighting. However the attention-grabbing factor about nomination contest, you understand, I feel everyone knows, proper? These are actually laborious fought, usually. Proper? That is the place the grassroots, the grind of politics actually occurs and you’d suppose to some extent that people could be actually on guard there for interference. And so it’s an attention-grabbing query about how political events internally may select to beef up their very own, as a result of that’s a lacking bit in all this. You hear a few of the questions popping out, proper? The place I’m ready for the political events to say okay, nicely listed here are the issues we’ve been doing as political events, to vary our course of, to make issues simpler, to make it extra clear. They’re not doing it. They don’t appear to outwardly be taking this significantly themselves at the same time as they stand within the Home of Commons and yell and scream a couple of public inquiry. I imply, you understand, studies not too long ago, a few of the political events even turned down safety briefings through the election. So both they’re taking it significantly as a matter of nationwide safety, or they’re simply utilizing it to be a political soccer and I don’t suppose that’s the best method both.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Bob, given what Stephanie simply stated, the prime minister means that this could go earlier than parliamentary committees. Lots of of us would say that’s the best place for it.

 

Robert Fife, The Globe and Mail: Effectively that’s not the best place…

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Why not?

 

Robert Fife, The Globe and Mail: To start with, as a result of we’ve seen the committee. It—it will get into partisanship, ridiculous questions, the Liberals attempting to not present solutions, filibustering. The Conservatives all for scoring partisan factors, not attempting to get on the reality. And once we’ve—the CSIS offers doc to the committee that they’ve requested are all clean. They don’t discuss what we all know are in these paperwork, which is social—disinformation campaigns that make—that say false issues about candidates, money transfers to candidates, hiring of scholars—learning right here, worldwide college students—learning right here to assist most well-liked candidates. Tax—individuals contributing cash to events after which they get repaid again minus the tax receipt that they get from the federal government. These are actually, actually critical points. You’re not going to get that in a parliamentary inquiry. You’ll get it in a public inquiry.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Actually critical points and we’ll see if these requires a public inquiry end in one within the coming weeks. Steph and Bob, thanks for becoming a member of us.

 

Robert Fife, The Globe and Mail: Thanks.

 

Stephanie Levitz, The Toronto Star: Thanks.

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Up subsequent, when will Canadians begin to see a drop in rising meals costs?

 

[Break]

 

Mercedes Stephenson: Now for one final thing, the price of residing is placing strain on many Canadians who must make actually robust decisions about their funds. Rates of interest and skyrocketing meals costs are two of the largest elements in Canadians’ budgets proper now.

 

On Wednesday, we’ll discover out whether or not the Financial institution of Canada will maintain its 4.5 per cent rate of interest. And that exact same day, the presidents and CEOs of the largest grocery chains in Canada like Loblaws and Metro, are going to be within the scorching seat at parliamentary committee, answering questions over whether or not their inflating grocery costs. It’s a uncommon week when politics and your pocketbook will line up.

 

That’s our present for at this time. We’ll see you subsequent Sunday on The West Block. Thanks for hanging out with us.