SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Mr. Michael Cooper (St. Albert—Edmonton, CPC)

Mar/20/23 12:10:27 p.m.
Watch

moved: That, given the many reports of foreign interference in Canada’s democratic processes by, or on behalf of, the communist regime in Beijing, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics be empowered and instructed to study all aspects of foreign interference in relation to the 2019 and 2021 general elections, including preparations for those elections, and, to assist the committee with this study, (a) Katie Telford, Chief of Staff to the Prime Minister, be ordered to appear before the committee as a witness, for three hours on her own, under oath or solemn affirmation, at a date and time, no later than Friday, April 14, 2023, to be fixed by the Chair of the Committee; (b) the following individuals be invited to appear as witnesses before the committee on dates and times to be fixed by the Chair of the Committee, but no later than Friday, May 19, 2023, (i) the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, to appear on her own for two hours, (ii) the President of the King’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Emergency Preparedness, to appear on his own for two hours, (iii) the Minister of Public Safety, to appear on his own for two hours, (iv) Morris Rosenberg, author of the assessment of the Critical Election Incident Public Protocol for the 2021 general election, to appear on his own for two hours, (v) Janice Charette, Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the Cabinet, to appear on her own for two hours, (vi) a panel consisting of the 2019 and 2021 national campaign directors for each recognized party in the House, (vii) a panel consisting of the security-cleared party representatives to the Security and Intelligence Threats to Elections during the 2019 and 2021 general elections, (viii) a panel consisting of the Hon. Ian Shugart, Greta Bossenmaier, Nathalie Drouin, Gina Wilson and Marta Morgan, members of the Critical Election Incident Public Protocol Panel during the 2019 general election, (ix) James Judd, author of the assessment of the Critical Election Incident Public Protocol for the 2019 general election, to appear on his own, (x) a panel consisting of David Morrison, François Daigle, Rob Stewart and Marta Morgan, members of the Critical Election Incident Public Protocol Panel during the 2021 general election, (xi) David Vigneault, Director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, to appear on his own for two hours, (xii) John McCall MacBain former Chair of the Board of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, (xiii) Élise Comtois, former Executive Director of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, (xiv) the Hon. John McCallum, former Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China, to appear on his own for one hour, (xv) Jennifer May, Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China, to appear on her own for one hour; (c) for the purposes of this study, it be an instruction to the committee that, (i) it hold at least one additional meeting, for a duration of three hours, during each House sitting week concerning this study, (ii) it hold at least one meeting during the adjournment period beginning Friday, March 31, 2023, if necessary, for the purposes of paragraph (a), (iii) any proceedings before the committee in relation to any motion concerning non-compliance with paragraph (a) of this order shall, if not previously disposed of, be interrupted upon the earlier of the completion of four hours of consideration or one sitting week after the motion was first moved and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the motion shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment; (d) for the purposes of this study, the committee shall, notwithstanding paragraph (p) of the special order adopted on Thursday, June 23, 2022, have the first priority for the use of House resources for committee meetings; and (e) the evidence and documentation adduced by the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs during the current session in relation to its study of foreign election interference shall be deemed to have been laid upon the table and referred to the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

698 words

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Mr. Michael Cooper

Mar/20/23 12:10:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I rise to speak to our Conservative motion that, among other things, calls on the Prime Minister's chief of staff, Katie Telford, to testify about Beijing's election interference in 2019 and 2021. After all, Katie Telford, as the Prime Minister's chief of staff, is a critical witness for getting to the heart of this scandal. What does the Prime Minister know, when did he learn about it and what did he do or fail to do about Beijing's election interference? While this motion is a test for the government, it is also a test for the NDP, because on three occasions at the procedure and House affairs committee, the NDP blocked Katie Telford from appearing before the committee. NDP members have a choice. They can continue to do the bidding of this corrupt Liberal government, propping up this corrupt Prime Minister, or they can work with us to protect the sanctity of the ballot box and the integrity of our elections by working to get the answers that Canadians deserve about Beijing's election interference in not one but two federal elections. We will soon find out what choice they make. The key question that must be asked is this: What does the Prime Minister have to hide? Since November, when reports of Beijing's interference in the 2019 and 2021 elections came to light, the Prime Minister has refused to come clean about what he knows. For two weeks, the Prime Minister was silent. Then the Prime Minister broke his silence in an effort to sow confusion and avoid accountability. The Prime Minister used carefully chosen words to say that he was not briefed about candidates receiving money from China. How convenient that is, because no one was ever saying that candidates received money from China. It is not as if Beijing writes cheques and hands them out to candidates. It is an absurdity. What is at issue is a campaign of interference by Beijing in two federal elections, and on that issue, the Prime Minister has refused to answer the most basic of questions. He has refused to say how many times he was briefed. He has even refused to acknowledge that he had been briefed, even though it is now well established that the Prime Minister has been frequently briefed about Beijing's election interference. Indeed, the Prime Minister's own national security adviser, when she testified at the procedure and House affairs committee, acknowledged that the Prime Minister had been briefed frequently. In a desperate attempt to change the channel, the Prime Minister has engaged in pathetic attacks, even going so far as to outrageously claim that those who want to get to the bottom of Beijing's interference, those who dare to hold the Prime Minister to account for Beijing's attack on our democracy, are undermining democracy. It is Beijing interfering in two federal elections that is undermining democracy, and it is a Prime Minister who has turned a blind eye to interference who is undermining democracy. The Prime Minister has shut down calls for an independent public inquiry. He has ordered Liberal MPs at the procedure and House affairs committee to use every trick in the book to impede the work of the committee to get to the bottom of Beijing's interference. That includes blocking the production of relevant documents and shielding key PMO officials and former and current ministers. This is now culminating in a shameful filibuster that has gone on for four days and nearly 24 hours to shield the Prime Minister's chief of staff from having to come to committee. Taken together, the actions of the Prime Minister are not the actions of a transparent prime minister. They are not the actions of a prime minister who is concerned about Beijing's election interference. They are the actions of a prime minister who has something to hide. They are the actions of a prime minister who has engaged in a cover-up. Beijing's interference in the 2019 and 2021 elections is not speculative; it is well documented. Even in the limited disclosure given to the procedure and House affairs committee, that interference is evident. For example, a February 21, 2020, daily intelligence brief prepared by the PCO observed that Beijing orchestrated “subtle but effective interference networks” in the 2019 election. It said, “subtle but effective interference networks”, and the Prime Minister received that PCO briefing according to his national security adviser. During the 2021 election, a September 13, 2021, open data analysis of the rapid response mechanism of Global Affairs Canada observed an online disinformation campaign on the online social media sites of those affiliated with the Beijing regime. It targeted the Conservative Party generally and targeted individual Conservative candidates, including the now defeated Conservative member of Parliament Kenny Chiu. That open data analysis further observed that this disinformation campaign had “grown in considerable scale”. Then there are the reports from The Globe and Mail and Global News based upon their review of CSIS documents and other security and intelligence documents that reveal a campaign of interference by Beijing. It begs the question: In the face of that interference, what did the Prime Minister do about it? It appears that he did nothing. After all, no arrests have been made, no diplomats have been expelled and the Prime Minister kept Canadians in the dark. Canadians would still be kept in the dark but for whistle-blowers and the work of Global News and The Globe and Mail. CSIS advised the Prime Minister that, in response to foreign interference, the policy of the government should be one of transparency and sunlight and that such interference should be made known to the public. However, the Prime Minister has done the opposite of this. He kept Canadians in the dark, and now he is trying to bury the truth with a smokescreen, including a so-called special rapporteur, whom he appoints and who reports to him. He turns out to be a family friend and is a member of the Beijing-funded Trudeau Foundation, someone who is hardly independent. It is a secret committee with secret evidence and secret conclusions redacted by the PMO. It is hardly transparency and sunlight. We put forward this motion because Canadians deserve transparency and sunlight. It is time to end Liberal obstruction. It is time to end the Liberal cover-up. It is time to get answers, and that starts with hearing from the Prime Minister's chief of staff. If the Prime Minister really has nothing to hide, he would support transparency and sunlight. He would support this motion.

1118 words

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Hon. Andrew Scheer (Regina—Qu'Appelle, CPC)

Mar/20/23 12:25:49 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to follow my esteemed colleague from St. Albert—Edmonton, who has really been leading the charge along with several colleagues trying to shine a light on what the Liberals are trying to hide. One thing we know by now is that it must be really bad because the Prime Minister has gone to such great lengths to keep the truth from coming out. One does not go to such great lengths if it is just some kind of a minor technicality or if it is a small point of difference between two political parties. They send in their members of Parliament to embarrass themselves at committee and carry on a filibuster, insulting the intelligence of Canadians and other parliamentarians and denigrating the institution of Parliament, which is meant for the one fundamental purpose of holding the government to account. When they do that and the government throws up all kinds of contrived barriers to that investigation, it tells us something, and that is that the Prime Minister must be hiding something really big. We need to know who knew what and when about allegations of the Communist regime in Beijing interfering in Canadian elections. Canada is a wonderful country with a proud heritage and history, and Canadians are well served by strong democratic institutions that, over the course of years, we have refined and improved. Because it is run by individual human beings, it will never be perfect, but Canadians can have great confidence in those institutions if the politicians who hold those public offices treat those positions with respect because there is nothing magical in the air, the water or the trees of our wonderful country that will keep those institutions strong if politicians who undermine them get away with it. That is why every generation of Canadians, both voters and elected officials, have to treat those positions with respect and hold individuals accountable when they do not. We did not come to the House today to debate this motion based on rumours, and we did not come here to debate this motion based on what we overheard in committee proceedings. We are basing this motion on the fact that high-level national security officials have taken the unprecedented step of blowing the whistle on the government. For someone who works at CSIS, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, to go to journalists with sensitive information puts themself, their family and their career in grave jeopardy. There are serious consequences in law, and well there should be, for people who divulge sensitive information, but as we learned over the weekend from the official who took the extraordinary measure of explaining his actions to the Globe and Mail, this individual was so compelled to blow the whistle because of the inaction of the government. For multiple years, our intelligence security officials, who often put themselves in real imminent danger when they carry out their duties, have been warning the Prime Minister. We have multiple reports. I am reading here from a Global News story of March 8 highlighting a special report prepared by the Privy Council Office for the Prime Minister's government that was date-stamped January 2022, well after the 2021 and the 2019 elections. The memo was also finalized, suggesting it was intended to be read by the Prime Minister and his senior aides. Global News also learned of an earlier high-level warning about clandestine funding of China's “preferred candidates” that came from a bipartisan panel of parliamentarians two months before the 2019 election. The information came from Canada's National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians, which reviews national security matters and promotes government-wide accountability. Who does that committee report to? Who reads those reports? That committee reports to one person: the Prime Minister. It is inconceivable that the Prime Minister did not receive that report, yet on multiple occasions the Prime Minister has stood in this place and claimed he had no knowledge about funding coming from the Communist regime in Beijing flowing to candidates here in Canada, despite at least two reports that highlighted exactly that, which went to him personally. That is why we need this motion. That is why we need to break the logjam the Liberals have imposed upon members of Parliament at committee by filibustering, delaying and pulling out every trick in the book, including reading the phone book into the record, just to prevent important key officials from testifying. Some people might ask what would be the cause of this. We know that the Prime Minister admires the Communist dictatorship in China. He was asked once, other than Canada, which country he admires the most. He did not say he admired China because of its natural beauty. He did not talk about the history of China. He talked about admiring the basic dictatorship of China. Those were his words. Let us look at the policies of the Prime Minister upon coming to office. The Chinese government has invested heavily in something called the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. This is a development bank that pays for large-scale infrastructure projects throughout Asia. Many security experts and foreign affairs experts call this Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank the development arm of the foreign affairs policy of the Communist Party in Beijing. The Prime Minister decided to take $250 million of Canadian taxpayers' money and give it to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank to help promote the national interests of the Communist Party in Beijing. We know the Prime Minister took years to make a decision on Huawei. When all our major trading partners and security partners were banning Huawei from the next generation of telecommunications, the Prime Minister dragged his feet. The Liberals have not kicked out a single diplomat. We have heard about illegal police stations operating on behalf of the government of Beijing, and reports of intimidation and harassment of people from China, the coercion and pressure upon them to vote the right way to support a certain nomination candidate. These are serious reports that do not come from other political parties, they come from our national security experts. The Prime Minister has known about this for months. The Liberals have not closed down a single one, and they have not expelled a single official of the Communist regime. What did the Prime Minister do last week in the face of mounting pressure, backlash, and more and more Canadians asking the tough questions about what the Prime Minister knew and why he has done nothing about it? He appointed a special rapporteur. I can just imagine the marketing department of the Liberal Party. Maybe the Liberals whiteboarded “interlocutor”, and then thought that nobody would go for that. Maybe they thought about calling that person an “inspector general”. They landed on rapporteur, and they picked a close family friend of the Prime Minister himself. The Prime Minister who has proven to be allergic to preventing conflicts of interest has appointed a family friend, someone who brags about their growing up together, as families, in the ski chalets of the Laurentian Hills. Could there be anything more emblematic of the Laurentian elite here in Canada than the Prime Minister appointing a family friend from his background in the Laurentian Mountains, at his ski chalet, to investigate whether or not there should be a public inquiry into his handling of the foreign interference? It is unbelievable. Not only is he a close family friend, but he is also someone who sits on the board of the Trudeau foundation, the very foundation that accepted money that flowed from the Communist regime in Beijing and has only paid it back seven years later. Today is about something else. This motion would shine a light. It would ensure that the ethics committee could shine a light on what the Prime Minister knew. This is a very important decision for the New Democrats. The NDP used to believe in things. I come from Saskatchewan. Many people consider Saskatchewan to be the birthplace of the NDP. We can look back at the history of leaders of the NDP, whether it was Jack Layton, who I served with, Ed Broadbent, or someone before that. We may have disagreed on principles, but we at least recognized that the NDP had principles. We would disagree over policy, but we could respect that they believed in something. One of the things the NDP used to believe in was openness and transparency. For some reason, over the past few weeks, the New Democrats have decided to put their own partisan interests ahead of the national interests. I challenge the NDP members today, if they are serious, and if they want to look Canadians in the eye to say that they believe in ethics, openness and transparency, then they must vote for this motion. If they do not, they will be signalling that they are okay with Liberal corruption.

1500 words

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Hon. Andrew Scheer

Mar/20/23 12:37:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is the Prime Minister who has done such a disservice to the former governor general. That is who should be apologizing to Canadians for dragging David Johnston into this. The fact of the matter is that David Johnston sits on the board of the Trudeau foundation. This is the very foundation that is at the hub of allegations of money flowing from the Communist regime into Canada. Do not take my word for it. The foundation itself admitted that when it repaid part of the money it received. David Johnston himself talks about being a close family friend of the Prime Minister. Just because he may have been qualified to serve in one role years ago, as governor general, which is a non-partisan role and one that rises above the back-and-forth, does not mean he is suitable for this role. It is that point the Conservatives are highlighting when we talk about the conflict of interest.

162 words

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Mr. Alain Therrien

Mar/20/23 1:10:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we could discuss it, but I think that the guardian of democracy in Canada is the Prime Minister of Canada. No one needs to be a math whiz or have a PhD to know that. We expect the Prime Minister to take to the trenches to defend democracy. Defending democracy means defending everyone here. It justifies our presence here and allows me to say that I was duly elected by the citizens of La Prairie. Earlier, the Minister of Public Safety said that we should set partisanship aside. I totally agree. I would say that that has been the Bloc Québecois’s modus operandi from the outset. We have to be honest, though. It is all well and good to say that we should set partisanship aside, but at some point we have to address the elephant in the room. Last November, Global News reported that there was interference in 11 ridings in the 2019 election. They figured that was normal. First, they were unfamiliar with the ridings. They do not know whether the candidates promoted by the Chinese government were elected or not. They do not know how they did it. Our first reaction is that there should be an investigation. We asked the Prime Minister to do something, but he refused and said nothing happened, the election was entirely above board, and we should not challenge the results. Then, the man who told us that we should set partisanship aside accused us of being anti-Chinese racists. Then, he told us that we were like Donald Trump and would be challenging the election. Speaking of partisanship, let us just say that the Prime Minister is pretty good at it. He says he has no idea what we are talking about. He went to the G20 summit, where he followed the Chinese president around like he desperately needed a friend. He absolutely wanted to speak with him. When asked what he wanted to talk about, he said that he wanted to talk about Chinese interference, yet here he says that there was no interference. He told us we should not say that because it is not true, but the first chance he got to talk to the Chinese president, that is what he talked about. We were a bit confused, but let us move on. That was just the tip of the iceberg. On February 17, we learned that the Chinese government also interfered in the 2021 election because it wanted us to elect a minority Liberal government, since it believes that a minority Liberal government is more sympathetic to its cause. That is what we learned from the media. We figured it was getting serious. It was no longer speculation. It was getting very serious. On February 28, we learned that Chinese millionaire Zhang Bin, under pressure from the Chinese government, had given $1 million to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation and McGill University. We figured there were ties with the government and perhaps the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation. I know that we are not supposed to say the Prime Minister’s name in the House, but it is sounds a bit like that. We figured there was a problem. Madam Speaker, I am looking at you carefully, because I am going to talk about your riding and, no surprise here, Chinese police stations. We knew that there were five of them in Canada, but on March 9 we learned that there were two more in Quebec, including one in the riding of Brossard—Saint-Lambert. This is worrisome, because we hear that Chinese police stations may have influenced the election results. I am not talking about you, Madam Speaker. I know that you fully earned your presence here, but since I am in the neighbouring riding, I see what is happening and it looks funny to me. Let me continue. On March 16, we learned that Vancouver City Hall may have also been targeted by Chinese interference. An open letter from an unnamed CSIS agent caused an absolute uproar. In this anonymous letter, the agent said that what is happening in Canada is so serious that it represents the “gravest threat” to national security. He said that he was leaking this information because he loves his country, that he has voted for the Liberals in the past and that he has nothing against them, but that there are things going on and the government needs to take action. He said that CSIS keeps sounding the alarm, but that the government is not doing anything. According to him, the government did nothing when it was told that there was interference in 2019; it did nothing between 2019 and 2021 when it was told what was happening; and it did nothing in 2021 when it was told that there was interference and attempted influence. I have only two minutes left and I want to talk about David Johnston. The way people have been talking about him, one would think he is Spider-Man. People are saying that he is going to fix everything because he is a great guy, when in fact, David Johnston once said that he feels at home when he goes to China. He is also a friend of the Prime Minister and his family, so we are not off to a very good start. David Johnston was a member of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, which is also not good. He was also the commissioner of the Leaders' Debates Commission in 2021. During the debate, the moderator suggested that Quebeckers are racist. He was the commissioner for the organization. Clearly, he is no Spider-Man. In committee, I asked him if he realized that Quebeckers were called racist during a debate he was running. I told him that an apology was called for, but he was never willing to apologize. We are calling for an independent public inquiry because that is the right thing to do. The government needs to revoke the appointment of David Johnston as special rapporteur. He is not the right person for the job. This was a bad casting call. The Conservative motion has its flaws, and my colleague will talk about them in more detail later. It is not perfect. We would have liked for the Conservatives to call for an independent public inquiry. Time is of the essence. Given that we have a minority government, an election could be called tomorrow morning, before we have dealt with the issue of Chinese interference and developed the tools we need to hold a proper election where the dice are not loaded.

1112 words

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Mr. Gérard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC)

Mar/20/23 1:32:52 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I very much appreciate the comments by my colleague from Trois-Rivières. His professional experience is very useful to us in this debate. Earlier he mentioned the rapporteur. I would like to come back to that. I think that all Canadians recognize that the person the Prime Minister appointed as rapporteur is a great Canadian who has had an admirable career and is well known for his charity work. Indeed, people are entitled to have friends and to be a friend of the Prime Minister. However, when someone is called to take a close look at the Prime Minister's work and the impact it had, that is where things change. The current rapporteur appointed by the Prime Minister is on the board of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation. We have nothing against the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, but let us not forget that the foundation received $200,000 from people who are very close the Communist government in Beijing. This is my question for my colleague from Trois-Rivières whose job it is to analyze matters of ethics and conflict of interest: Why does he think that the Prime Minister's appointment does nothing at all to reassure Canadians?

206 words

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Mr. Alain Therrien (La Prairie, BQ)

Mar/20/23 2:31:33 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, using “Johnston” and “independent” in the same sentence does not work. We are not blaming Mr. Johnston for being a member of the Trudeau foundation. We are not blaming him for having a cottage next door to the Prime Minister's. We are not blaming him for being a close friend of the family. We are not even blaming him for saying that he felt at home when he went on a trip to China. We are not blaming Mr. Johnston for anything. However, for the Prime Minister to select Mr. Johnston out of the 38 million people he had to choose from, he must be doing it on purpose. He must enjoy being his own worst enemy. Can the Prime Minister help his friend out of this mess and do as everyone is asking and immediately set up an independent public commission of inquiry?

155 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Mr. Michael Barrett (Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC)

Mar/20/23 2:39:42 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, what we have received is horrific partisanship from the government House leader and the Liberals. They appointed a family friend of the Prime Minister, a board member on the Beijing-funded Trudeau Foundation, to advise the Prime Minister on whether he maybe should, probably, might, could have a public inquiry. We are looking for a public inquiry for Canadians, and we are looking for the Prime Minister's chief of staff to testify at committee. Why will the Liberals and their NDP coalition partners not allow the Prime Minister's chief of staff, Katie Telford, to testify?

99 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Mr. Larry Brock (Brantford—Brant, CPC)

Mar/20/23 3:42:46 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Thornhill. It is a privilege to speak in the House on behalf of the good residents of Brantford—Brant on our Conservative motion, which would essentially compel the Prime Minister’s chief of staff to appear as a witness. Canadians have heard numerous media reports on foreign interference in our democratic processes, particularly by the Communist regime in Beijing. We, as a society, cannot allow foreign governments to manipulate our elections and influence the will of our people. Any interference tries to undermine the very foundation of our democracy and threatens our sovereignty, especially when it is plotted by authoritarian regimes. The CSIS whistle-blower who leaked the story did so at great professional and legal risk. He or she put country over career and country over everything, which is the Canadian way. That is how our society should work. This is a serious matter that requires our full attention and immediate action. Canadians deserve the truth and nothing less. From day one, our leader called on the government and all parties in the House to launch an open public inquiry that would answer all the questions and concerns that people have. In this case, only two people can provide us with answers: the Prime Minister and his chief of staff, Katie Telford. As always, the Liberals decided to use their tactics of denial and deflection. Rather than explain what he knows, the Prime Minister is suggesting there should be an investigation into what he already knows. After all these years and numerous scandals, particularly those of SNC-Lavalin and WE Charity, accountability was never the goal of the Liberal government. Its goal is to prolong the scandal as much as possible until no one can remember why it matters. For the past several weeks, the Liberals have been unnecessarily fighting attempts to have Telford appear before committee to testify. They have delayed votes, given long speeches to run out the clock and even refused to show up for meetings, all in an attempt to block Telford from appearing. Almost 24 hours of committee work has been wasted for this single cause. Hearing from Katie is vital to any investigation into the Global News story because she would have been the top advisor who CSIS would have advised in 2019 in providing a brief on concerns about the Liberal candidate and his ties to the Chinese foreign interference network. She has been chief of staff since 2015, and she has the top secret clearance needed to be briefed. The Prime Minister rightly said that voters, not intelligence services, get to pick who represents them, but if those intelligence services believe a candidate is compromised by a foreign government, voters should know that before casting their ballots. Having Telford come before the committee to tell MPs what the government did with the intelligence, if anything, is a necessary step in restoring confidence in our democracy. The fact that the Liberals refuse to allow this to happen may tell us a lot. Probably what she has to say would shake what is left over of that confidence even more. It is time to end the Katie cover-up. The New Democrats have a choice to make: Will they vote for transparency and answers on Beijing’s interference in our elections, or will they again prop up the Prime Minister? We insist that Canadians must hear from Katie Telford and learn what the Prime Minister knew, when he first knew about it and what he did or failed to do. Katie is the highest ranking political staffer in the Prime Minister’s Office. She supports not only the Prime Minister but also his entire cabinet. It is a powerful, yet largely behind-the-scenes role. Unlike other public servants, her job is a political one. She works not only for the PMO, but also for the Liberal Party during elections. Calling political staff, current or former, to testify is not something extraordinary. She testified before the finance committee on the WE scandal and on the sexual misconduct in the military in 2021. Last year, she testified before the Rouleau commission. Any international attempts to interfere in our elections should be a non-partisan issue. The fact that the Liberals are making it one and trying to stop investigations should make everyone question their motives, and today we call on all parties in the House to support our motion and stop the endless filibustering by Liberal members, who are deliberately blocking the Prime Minister’s chief of staff from testifying While the Prime Minister claims that his approach to the issue is “grounded in facts and independent decision making,” he is the one who is playing the partisan games in the hope of delaying any serious investigation or discussion about interference. As revelation after revelation reveals, the Liberal government knew about China’s election interference. It had four years. It did not inform the public. It did not recall any diplomatic staff. It did not pursue any legal remedies. Poll after poll shows that the majority of Canadians are concerned about China's attempts to meddle in our elections. A recent Abacus Data poll showed that 67% of Canadians support a public inquiry into that issue, and in fact, 70% of Liberals support it. It is irresponsible to silence a matter of a foreign government attempting to corrupt our election by pressuring members of the Chinese diaspora. If that does not qualify for the fullest and most public examination, then one must ask oneself this question: What will? There are lots of questions the Prime Minister does not want to answer. Number one, were the Liberals briefed by national security officials that at least one Liberal candidate in 2019 was allegedly part of the interference network from Beijing? Two, did they wilfully ignore that warning because it was to their advantage? Three, did they know that 11 candidates in that election, nine of whom were Liberals, were favoured by Beijing? Four, were Trudeau and his advisors also briefed about China working to defeat Conservative candidates in 2021—

1035 words

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Ms. Melissa Lantsman (Thornhill, CPC)

Mar/20/23 4:00:54 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, time is up. The public confidence in our democratic system is rightly in question. Explosive allegations of foreign interference from senior security officials ignored by the highest levels of government, including the PM himself, splashed all over the front pages of our newspapers have Canadians asking a couple of simple questions: What did the Prime Minister know and when did he know it? The NDP members have a choice to make. Will they vote for transparency and answers on Beijing’s interference in our elections, or will they vote for the Prime Minister’s cover-up? Will they vote to cover up what the Prime Minister knew, when he knew it and what he did or did not do about it? For those watching at home, here is what we do know. It starts with sums of money of up to $1 million that were given to causes near and dear to the Prime Minister, including a donation of nearly $200,000 to the Trudeau Foundation and a gift of $50,000 to put a statue of Pierre Trudeau up. These transfers were arranged by a billionaire who was described in The Globe and Mail as “a senior official in...[a] network of state promoters around the world.” He appeared at Liberal Party fundraisers in the intimate presence of the Prime Minister and, according to sources, was reimbursed for his activities by the Communist Party in Beijing. This should raise concern. Again, two questions remain. What did the Prime Minister know and when did he know about it? NDP members have a choice to make today, a simple choice: Do they want to know, or will vote for the Prime Minister’s continued cover-up? To get back to what we know, the goal of these endeavours, everything I just talked about, was to curry favour with a government that was perceived to be friendlier to Communist interests. As one official was quoted as saying, “red is good and blue is bad.” They sought cash for access. They sought positive trade terms. They sought international co-operation. By most accounts, the relationship was going swimmingly well, and many in Beijing were “extremely pleased”. Again, what did the Prime Minister know and when did he know it? Will NDP members show some courage tomorrow when they vote? Will they vote to cover for the Prime Minister? Will they vote with the Liberals or will they vote with Canadians? Let us fast-forward to 2018. Here is more of what we know. The association between Canada and China began to sour. However, senior Communist officials saw another opportunity to destabilize and discredit elections here in Canada to gain greater influence in our country. They had the goal of electing a Liberal minority government, one that would be friendlier to the Communist Party than the alternatives, and one that would be unstable and marked by backroom deals and infighting. One senior diplomat said it best when they said Beijing likes it “when the parties in Parliament are fighting with each other, whereas if there is a majority, the party in power can easily implement policies that do not favour [the PRC].” We know they waged an unprecedented campaign to make that ideal a reality. They meddled in nomination processes to get their preferred candidates chosen. They funnelled money to 11 candidates in the GTA alone. They organized volunteers. They coerced and intimidated voters. That was all in the newspapers. CSIS uncovered evidence of this interference, but according to sources, the warnings of our intelligence agencies were ignored. This was in the papers. Again, what did the Prime Minister know and when did he know it? That is why we are here today. We are also here to see whether NDP members agree. Will they cover for the Prime Minister? Will they cover up the interference? Will they cover up what he knew and when he knew about it? The National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians gave a specific warning that meddling from Beijing was “eroding the foundations of our fundamental institutions, including our system of democracy itself”. It does not get much more serious than that. With all of that out in the open, the Liberal Party failed to overturn the nominations of compromised candidates that were brought directly to their attention, according to what was written. They failed to seriously grasp the message offered by our security agencies, according to what was written. In fact, they failed to take any action at all. Therefore, I will ask this again. What did the Prime Minister know and when did he know it? That is the question today. The Communist strategy worked so well that it was repeated in 2021, possibly even on a wider scale. Misinformation and disinformation were rampantly and blatantly spread to voters. Preferred candidates were promoted and opposed candidates were targeted. One senior diplomat from Beijing even boasted about having defeated two Conservative MPs in the last election. This is known. It is in the public domain, and no one on the other side is able to give Canadians a single rebuttal saying it is not true. We have asked. Again I ask: What did the Prime Minister know, and when did he know it? That is why we are here. There is evidence that the answer is “a substantial amount”. The Prime Minister's own national security advisor confirmed that she briefed the Prime Minister multiple times on foreign interference. CSIS intelligence was shared, but again, warnings were ignored, and no substantial action was taken. There is evidence that Beijing's strategy is working. They have opened police stations in our own country to harass and survey free people living here. It is crickets from the Liberals. A scientist fired from the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg was named on several documents in China related to discoveries from her time working in the federal government. Several of our universities have collaborated with scholars associated with the Communist regime. The government has vacillated on important issues relating to national security, such as the Huawei issue. We are seeing a pattern here in our own country. Why would anyone conclude that in the absence of doing anything at all, this would not get worse? Canadians need to know that their government is at least taking an interest in how to stop this or answering the basic questions that Canadians have. This is cloaked in secrecy by a Prime Minister who is ranting from a podium daily about how everybody should learn a lesson or take this seriously or is saying that everybody is racist. That is what we are hearing from the Prime Minister, but there is never a single answer about this. What did the Prime Minister know, and when did he know it? Empty platitudes are not going to cut it, nor is having a secret committee with secret evidence that provides secret conclusions to the Prime Minister, who could redact those documents, or telling everyone that it is important but continuing to do nothing about it. Our efforts have been met with never-ending spin and the ever-so-familiar playbook that we have seen time and time again to deny, deflect, divide and distract. It is like a recipe, and the Liberals always use the same one. It is time for unfettered access to officials, including the Prime Minister's chief of staff, Katie Telford, and documents and briefings, all at committee and out in the open. It is time to shine a light on foreign interference, just like our intelligence agency says is the way to root it out. It is time to get answers and to end the charade. The Prime Minister has run out of excuses and other people to blame. It seems that he will run out of people who are his friends to appoint to important positions. The NDP should not be giving the Prime Minister cover today. The Liberals have been filibustering a motion for hours on end at committee, and that is the reason we are here. What are they hiding? It must be bad. Why else would the Liberals go through this whole process, hide at every turn and continue to spin, attack and divide? That is not really behaviour of people who are innocent. This is about our election integrity and the integrity of our democracy. It is about every member in this House. Any time there are even questions about those processes, we owe every Canadian nothing less than the most detailed explanations and answers. We do that through this motion and not by listening to members of the government carry water for the Prime Minister or take orders about filibustering. I have a question, and I know that Canadians are wondering the same thing. Does anybody over there have any courage? Does anybody over there wonder what the Prime Minister knew and when he knew it? Did anyone over there bother to ask? What did we all know about this? If the Liberal members want to talk out the clock at a committee process they control, then it is time we put it in the hands of parliamentarians interested in the actual truth. It is time for the NDP to show some courage when it matters instead of the bluster we hear at the podium, when we are only disappointed by the unwavering support they constantly give to the Liberal government. Anything less than a complete disclosure is not good enough for Canadians. Anything less than full answers will not be accepted by the opposition. What did the Prime Minister know, and when did he know it? We need to find out.

1634 words

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Ms. Andréanne Larouche (Shefford, BQ)

Mar/20/23 4:28:28 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Kingston and the Islands for his presentation. He spoke about what his government did, but I would prefer to know what his government failed to do. When he spoke about the report, was he referring to the report by Morris Rosenberg, a friend of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation? Was he speaking about the special rapporteur, Mr. Johnston, who is a friend of the Prime Minister? Is that how they are trying to rebuild public trust? Is that how they are trying to avoid conflicts of interest? The answer is rather obvious. Aside from the Prime Minister's troubling admiration for a Chinese government that suppresses human rights and freedom of expression, what concerns me the most is that the Liberal Party is trying to buy time. Why is it doing that? What is it hiding? I really do wonder. The Liberals are more interested in protecting their chief of staff than actually getting to the bottom of this matter. The Conservatives are putting on a show. All we want have an independent inquiry give us the truth.

185 words

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Ms. Monique Pauzé (Repentigny, BQ)

Mar/20/23 4:43:57 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my colleague said at one point in his speech that a non-partisan individual had been selected. He was of course referring to Mr. Johnston. Mr. Johnston is a member of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation. He has a cottage next to the Prime Minister's. He is a family friend. He is a close personal friend of the Prime Minister, a friend since childhood. Can anyone seriously try to tell us that Mr. Johnston is truly a non-partisan person?

84 words

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Ms. Raquel Dancho (Kildonan—St. Paul, CPC)

Mar/20/23 5:03:56 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow, the House of Commons will see a very important vote. It is one that will show Canadians whether the New Democratic Party of Canada is an opposition party that believes in its role to hold the government, the Liberal Party, accountable for its actions, or if the NDP is just a sidekick to the Liberal government that will do whatever it can to uphold the government and support it in its cover-up of getting to the truth on the Beijing interference in our elections. That is what at stake with the vote tomorrow. The stakes are so high, in fact, that just breaking on the news, there are whispers that the Liberals may make tomorrow a confidence vote. That is how desperate the government is to cover up the truth. That is the latest on the news. That may be happening tomorrow to force the NDP's hand. If the Liberals lose that vote, we will have an election in this country. That is how desperate the Liberals are to make sure we do not get to the truth. I implore the NDP to fulfill its duty as an opposition party and hold the Liberal government accountable, no matter what the consequences are tomorrow. That is what its duty to Canadians is. That is what its members were elected to do. What are we debating today? In essence, it is a motion to compel a number of key government witnesses from the Liberals to come to committee, face accountability and be transparent on what they knew, what the Prime Minister knew, when he knew it and what he did or did not do about about this political interference campaign from Beijing. The number one person on that list is the Prime Minister's long-time chief of staff, who is arguably one of the most powerful women in this country. Her name is Katie Telford. Katie Telford has been the right-hand person to the Prime Minister since he started his political career. All through his election as a Liberal leader in 2013, and through his winning election campaigns in 2015, 2019 and 2021. She has been his ultimate gatekeeper, which is what a chief of staff is, for all of that time. She has been front and centre, a key operator, in every one of his election victories. As chief of staff, she would have had access to every top-level, classified briefing. She is the one who decides the political filter of messaging that goes out and the information that gets to the Prime Minister. I cannot stress enough how important a chief of staff is to the Prime Minister. In fact, I think she has been the longest reigning chief of staff to a prime minister in Canadian history. It shows how influential she is and has been, both in the Liberal wins and within all the ongoings of the Liberal government in the last eight years. She has come to committee before on two occasions. It makes sense. She is such a powerful figure who is wielding so much power in our democracy. Sometimes she will have to come to committee, be held accountable and answer the questions of elected officials. For some reason, the Liberals are so desperate to stop her from coming to committee that they may be threatening a confidence vote tomorrow. For weeks, they have blocked at the committee a motion to bring her forward. That is why we are here debating it because we were able to bring it to the House for official debate today and a vote tomorrow. It really begs the question why they are so desperate to keep her from coming to committee. What does she know? What does she know that the Liberals do not want Canadians to know? If she is not hiding anything, there would be no problem. She has come to committee twice and frankly, left relatively unscathed. She is a smooth, intelligent operator. If she has got nothing to hide, she can easily come, fulfill her democratic duty to be held accountable as a powerful woman in this administration and answer our questions as the elected officials. It is not a lot to ask given what is at stake. I would like to go over what we are talking about and why it is so important. Conservatives had been asking questions, particularly of the Prime Minister, for a number of months regarding election interference from Beijing. However, it was only about a month ago that The Globe and Mail and some of the most prominent journalists in the country, Robert Fife and Steven Chase, broke a groundbreaking story about leaked CSIS documents, which is our spy and intelligence service. It is basically Canada's equivalent of the CIA. There were leaked documents from it. Someone blew the whistle and gave this to Robert Fife and Steven Chase. In those documents, they found that “China employed a sophisticated strategy to disrupt Canada's democracy in the 2021 federal election campaign as Chinese diplomats and their proxies backed the re-election of [the] Liberals”. The article goes on to say, “Drawn from a series of CSIS intelligence-gather operations, the documents illustrate how an orchestrated machine was operating in Canada with two primary aims: to ensure that a minority Liberal government was returned in 2021, and that certain Conservative candidates identified by China were defeated.” This is what our head spy and intelligence service has written. It is fairly significant. We would think that the government would move heaven and earth to open the box and tell Canadians what it knows and what it has done about it, which amounts to really nothing at this point. It goes on to say, “The classified reports viewed by The Globe reveal that China’s former consul-general in Vancouver, Tong Xiaoling, boasted in 2021 about how she helped defeat two Conservative MPs.” We have a diplomat from Beijing bragging about how she helped defeat two of my colleagues, but the Liberal government says there will be no public inquiry. It says that we do not need that, and we do not need the powerful woman who was likely briefed about this to come forward and answer our questions. No, there is nothing to see here. The article in The Globe and Mail also said: Most important, the intelligence reports show that Beijing was determined that the Conservatives did not win. China employed disinformation campaigns and proxies connected to Chinese-Canadian organizations in Vancouver and the GTA...to voice opposition to the Conservatives and favour the [Prime Minister's] Liberals. It went on to say: CSIS also explained how Chinese diplomats conduct foreign interference operations in support of political candidates and elected officials. Tactics include undeclared cash donations [which are very illegal in Canada]...or having business owners hire international Chinese students and “assign them to volunteer in electoral campaigns on a full-time basis.” That is also very illegal, and these are clear violations of the democratic rules we have set for our elections. Lastly, The Globe and Mail also reported: China appears to have targeted [the Liberal Prime Minister] in a foreign influence operation after he became Liberal Leader in 2013, according to a national security source who said Beijing’s plan involved donating a significant sum of money to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation. Notably, that was $200,000. More than that, the Trudeau Foundation has since returned the money. It has been a couple of years that it has had it, but now that we know all this information, the foundation has returned it. Still, there is nothing to see here and no need for a public inquiry or to engage in the committee process and have the chief of staff of the Prime Minister come to testify. It is important that we acknowledge something in this debate: Why would Beijing want to go through all this effort to interfere in a civic election, as recently seen in reports on this impacting Vancouver, as well as provincially and federally? Why would China be doing all this work? It wants the Canadian government to be sympathetic and supportive of its various agendas, and some of them are extremely serious and counter to everything we believe as Canadians. For example, China wants Canada to accept its claim on Taiwan to annex it by force. It also wants us to accept its draconian 2020 national security law on Hong Kong. It wants us to look the other way with what it is doing in Tibet and its militarization of the South China Sea and sweeping maritime claims in the region. China wants us to do nothing about the fact that it actively threatened Chinese Canadians on Canadian soil, using covert so-called police stations that are operating completely illegally and in violation of our sovereignty. If one does not pay any attention to that, it will help one get elected. At least, that is what is being reported; we could find out more about this if there were a public inquiry and we heard from the most powerful Liberal woman in the country, Katie Telford. I want to conclude with something I found quite moving. Recently, the person who blew the lid off this, who is the whistle-blower from CSIS, wrote in The Globe and Mail. I will conclude with a quote from him about why he would do this. Why would he risk his reputation and going to prison? It would be very severe, if it were ever revealed who he is, what would happen to him. He said: When I first became aware of the significance of the threat posed by outside interference to our democratic institutions, I worked—as have many unnamed and tireless colleagues—to equip our leaders with the knowledge and the tools needed to take action against it. Months passed, and then years. The threat grew in urgency; serious action remained unforthcoming. I endeavoured, alone and with others, to raise concerns about this threat directly to those in a position to hold our top officials to account. Regrettably, those individuals were unable to do so. In conclusion, he said: In the time that passed, another federal election had come and gone, the threat of interference had grown, and it had become increasingly clear that no serious action was being considered. Worse still, evidence of senior public officials ignoring interference was beginning to mount. Those are the words of a very patriotic Canadian. I applaud that individual for coming forward when nothing was being done, despite repeated alarms being sounded, by the Liberal government and by the hard-working CSIS individuals to inform them. I support this member, and I ask the NDP to do its duty and vote for our motion tomorrow.

1819 words

Context: House Hansard - 169 - Mar/20/23

Ms. Raquel Dancho

Mar/20/23 5:14:57 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate very much the member and her style. I know it is quite different from that of some of the other members of the House, and I can respect that. At committee, I too act as someone who brings people together. I do understand that. In fact, the opposition parties in many regards have worked together. However, when it comes down to the most important witness in Canada coming forward to tell us what she knows, one opposition party is not acting like an opposition party. It is acting like a sidekick to prop up a government that is trying to cover up what it knows, when it knew it and what it did or did not do about it. On Mr. Johnston, I will say that certainly during his time as Governor General he was very well respected. He is an eminent Canadian in many ways. However, because part of this public inquiry would have to investigate what the Liberal leader knew, I do not believe this individual is the right choice if we look at his record. He is a member of the Trudeau Foundation, for example. He aids in appointing board members and crafting its bylaws. He was also the commissioner of the leaders' debates in 2019, which appointed the WE co-founder Craig Kielburger to the advisory board of that commission. Also, under his leadership, CBC's Rosemary Barton was selected, and then she later sued the Conservative Party in that election. I can go on and on, but I am certainly not taking anything away from his time as Governor General. By all accounts, he did an amazing job. Is he the right person to put the Prime Minister under immense scrutiny when he called him a lifelong friend? I would say no.

301 words