Special Rapporteur David Johnston says the Liberal government didn’t negligently fail to act on intelligence regarding the threat of foreign interference, but he highlighted problems surrounding the dissemination of intelligence within the state machinery.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau appointed the former governor general as special rapporteur in March amid calls for a public inquiry into Chinese interference on Canadian soil, giving him the mandate to determine whether an inquiry was needed.
Although Johnston found that the government had not been negligent in tackling the threat of foreign interference, he says it could have acted more quickly to counter it. One of his main points of criticism was about the way crucial classified information is passed from security agencies to government departments and ministers.
He notes that reports produced by the country’s two main intelligence collection agencies, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) and the Communications Security Establishment (CSE), are sent to departments at large with no clear recipient.
“It is rare for specific names to be mentioned, so specifically who at these departments received these memos cannot be determined from the documentary sources,” the report says.
Johnston says that even after conducting numerous interviews with stakeholders, the “picture remains cloudy” as to the dissemination process, with no accountability on who specifically received or consumed the intelligence product.
He also looked at the consumption of intelligence at the political level and found serious problems that could presumably lead to policy-makers not being informed of key developments, whether locally or internationally.
He says staffers in the Prime Minister’s Office are provided a larger binder full of intelligence products in a secure room with only a short time to review it and no context or prioritization of the material provided.
Public Scandal
The lack of accountability in the dissemination of potentially high-impact classified information turned into a public scandal in early May when The Globe and Mail reported on a leaked CSIS assessment from 2021 noting that the Chinese regime sought to retaliate against MPs who had taken critical stances against Beijing.A source told the Globe one of the MPs was Conservative Michael Chong.
This was incorrect on both counts, and it was only part of the failure of the system to bring the intelligence to the political level.
But the NSIA role was in flux at the time due to a changeover from one adviser to the next, and none of the individuals who held the position during the relevant time frame said they recalled seeing the CSIS assessment.
Johnston’s report also notes that along with the CSIS assessment having been shared with relevant stakeholders, the agency had sent an “issues management note” in May 2021 to then-minister of public safety Bill Blair, his chief of staff, and his deputy minister.
The note said there was “intelligence that the PRC [People’s Republic of China] intended to target Mr. Chong, another MP, and their family in China (if any),” according to the report, and added that CSIS would provide a “defensive briefing” (without specific details on the threat) to Chong and the other MP.
The note never made it to the minister or his chief of staff, who both told Johnston they didn’t have access to the Top Secret Network email through which it was sent.
“It is certainly the most prominent, but not the only, example of poor information flow and processing between agencies, the public service and Ministers,” Johnston wrote in relation to the Chong case.
Blair reportedly told Johnston that normally when CSIS wanted to transmit sensitive information, the agency would request a briefing and provide the information in a secure facility, and not by email.
‘Looking for Information’
Johnston addressed the details of Chong’s case as first reported by the Globe, after having reviewed the intelligence files.“There are indications that PRC officials contemplated action directed at both Chinese-Canadian MPs and their family members in China, and sought to build profiles on others,” he wrote.
“This includes Mr. Chong in both cases. There is no intelligence indicating that the PRC took steps to threaten his family. There is intelligence indicating they were looking for information.”
Johnston’s report also notes that other measures are being taken to improve communication between CSIS and Public Safety, with the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency reviewing the process.