CSIS Frustrated by Delay in Minister’s Approval of Wiretap on Ontario Politician: Former Official

Representatives from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, including interim director Vanessa Lloyd and former director David Vigneault, appear at the Foreign Interference Commission in Ottawa, on Sept. 27, 2024. From left: Bo Basler, Nicole Giles, Vanessa Lloyd, David Vigneault, Michelle Tessier and Cherie Henderson. Justin Tang/The Canadian Press

It took six weeks for then-Public Safety Minister Bill Blair to approve a Canadian Security Intelligence Service request for electronic surveillance of an Ontario politician, leading to frustration within CSIS, the Foreign Interference Commission has learned.

Officials from CSIS testified on the matter before the Foreign Interference Commission on Sept. 27, saying the delay was unusual.

“We wondered what was going on, there was frustration with the delay,” said former CSIS deputy director Michelle Tessier.

Tessier said judicial authorizations are normally approved within 10 days by the minister. Blair, now defence minister, told the inquiry in April he had approved the warrant three hours after it was placed on his desk.

CSIS submits affidavits to the federal court when it seeks to obtain intrusive surveillance powers. The process goes through various consultation and approval stages.

The subject of the warrant application discussed was not explicitly mentioned by CSIS officials during the hearing. But past intelligence leaks and related comments by Blair to the inquiry make it clear that the subject of the warrant was the current Markham deputy mayor and former Ontario Liberal cabinet minister Michael Chan.

As part of the release of multiple intelligence leaks last year, The Globe and Mail reported that Blair took four months to approve an electronic and entry warrant against Chan before the 2021 elections.

The Globe had also previously reported on Chan’s close interactions with the Chinese consulate and CSIS’s warnings about him to the Ontario provincial government. Chan has not responded to inquiries from The Epoch Times. He told the Globe at the time that “CSIS has never discussed their concerns with me but continues to unjustifiably harass, intimidate, threaten, and frighten my friends and acquaintances.”

Blair had reacted to the Globe article by saying the reporting was “factually incorrect.” He said all warrants during his time had been “signed expeditiously. No warrant ever took as long as four months for approval.”

Blair was asked about the Globe reporting and the warrant on Chan when he testified at the inquiry in April.

“Can you comment on why it took so long for you to sign off on the warrant?” asked Nando de Luca, counsel for the Conservative Party.

“This paragraph is false,” said Blair. “There was no delay of several months ... The document in question was put in front of me on May the 11th. I signed it off the same day, about three hours later.”

‘I Can’t Explain That’

The question of how or why Blair said he had signed the document the same day it was presented to him, while CSIS had sent it to his office six weeks prior, was explored in depth at the inquiry.

Tessier said she had briefed Blair’s chief of staff, Zita Astravas, about the warrant application and its subject before sending the document to Blair for signature in March 2021. Tessier, who retired from CSIS in 2023, said she couldn’t recall when the meeting had taken place.

Gib van Ert, counsel for Tory MP Michael Chong, asked Tessier how the warrant application sat in Blair’s office with Astravas knowing about it for 54 days and more.

“Do you know? Do you have any explanation? Has Ms. Astravas told you? Do you have any sense of why Ms. Astravas would have kept that information from the minister?” asked the counsel.

“I can’t explain that,” said Tessier, while specifying “absolutely” nothing gave her the impression that the delay was intentional.

Information about the warrant issue is also discussed in more detail in the commission’s in-camera (private) examination summary of CSIS officials.

It says that a briefing had been held with Astravas and others approximately two weeks after the warrant application had been sent to Blair’s office. Tessier’s interpretation was that the warrant was moving ahead, says the summary.

“There was never any indication that Ms. Astravas would not put the warrant application to the Minister until CSIS had answered her questions,” it adds.

Former CSIS director David Vigneault told the commission during the in camera examination that another meeting with Blair’s office took place approximately five weeks afterward to discuss the warrant.

“Minister Blair did not demonstrate or express any hesitation in signing the warrant when it was presented to him approximately one week later,” says the summary.

Vigneault also told the commission in camera that Astravas was forthcoming and transparent in all discussions relating to the warrant.

Aside from the delay issue, van Ert tried to ascertain whether CSIS had informed the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) about the subject of the warrant application.

Tessier said she couldn’t recall, whereas Vigneault said he had not. The former director added that normally communications with the prime minister would go through him.

Tessier also couldn’t say whether Astravas had herself informed the PMO.

Other Intel Products

Around the same time that CSIS was seeking a warrant against Chan in early 2021, the organization was distributing intelligence products to high officials and relevant departments about Beijing’s efforts to target parliamentarians.

The House of Commons voted to recognize the treatment of Uyghurs by Beijing as genocide in February 2021. A summary of Canadian government intelligence entered as evidence at the inquiry said the Chinese regime “took initial steps to try to influence MPs to vote against” the motion.

After the motion was adopted, Beijing “sought to build profiles on a number of MPs,” some of whom, like Chong, it targeted with sanctions. Beijing also targeted Chong’s family in Hong Kong.

Events that have happened since and that have been discussed at the inquiry have shown that CSIS had disseminated the information but it stalled somewhere in the process, not reaching top decision-makers. Blair said he never saw CSIS information on the targeting of Chong and other MPs.

Counsel van Ert honed in on the issue, noting that the evidence Astravas or then-deputy minister of public safety Rob Stewart have submitted to the commission was not yet available to the parties.

“Knowing what I know right now, it appears that at the same time that minister Blair is not informed of the warrant, he is also not informed of these three intelligence products concerning Michael Chong,” said van Ert. “Do you have any reason to believe that Ms. Astravas was keeping information from the minister?

“I do not,” Vigneault told the inquiry.

The Epoch Times contacted Blair’s and the minister of public safety’s offices for comment but didn’t hear back. Blair is slated to appear before the inquiry on Oct. 11 and Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc will appear on Oct. 15.