Former GG Johnston Says No Public Inquiry on Foreign Interference Needed

David Johnston, Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, presents his first report in Ottawa on May 23, 2023. Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press

Special rapporteur on foreign interference David Johnston says a public inquiry can’t be held since the classified information informing the matter cannot be revealed publicly.

The former governor general filed his first report on foreign interference on May 23.

“A public inquiry examining the leaked materials could not be undertaken in public given the sensitivity of the intelligence,” he said in a press conference in Ottawa.

Johnston was appointed special rapporteur on March 15 by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who was under pressure to announce an inquiry in light of multiple national security leaks in the media suggesting widespread interference by the Chinese regime.

Trudeau said that Johnston would decide whether a public inquiry was needed and that he would heed his recommendation.

Johnston said that before starting his review, and amid calls for a public inquiry, he had been favourable to the idea of holding an inquiry. But that would have been the “easy choice” and not necessarily the “correct one,” he added.

The former governor general said he came to this conclusion after reviewing the intelligence files and interviewing senior security and elected officials.

Johnston also cast doubts on the validity of some of the leaks in the media that led to the creation of his position.

He said that while foreign governments are “undoubtedly” trying to interfere in Canada, the information leaked in recent months about the issue is incomplete and has led to situations being misrepresented.

“When viewed in full context with all of the relevant intelligence, several leaked materials that raised legitimate questions turned out to have been misconstrued in some media reporting, presumably because of the lack of this context,” he said.

Trudeau has previously commented there have been “inaccuracies” in the leaks but did not provide further details.

Johnston said he did find “serious shortcomings” with how intelligence is communicated and processed inside the government.

This issue came to light earlier this month when the prime minister said he had never been briefed in 2021 about the Chinese regime’s attempts to target MPs like Conservative Michael Chong.

But Johnston says he didn’t find any evidence that the Trudeau government had “any conscious desire to suppress and to diminish” the threat of Chinese interference.

“I have found no examples of ministers, the prime minister, or their offices, knowingly or negligently failing to act on intelligence advice or recommendations on the issues I have investigated related to the 2019 and 2021 elections,” he said.

Interference Allegations

One of the significant leaks in the media alleged the prime minister had been informed that Liberal Party candidate for nomination Han Dong in 2019 was being supported by Beijing and let him run nevertheless.

Johnston’s report says he reviewed intelligence on the matter and found there are “well-grounded suspicion that the irregularities were tied to the PRC Consulate in Toronto, with whom Mr. Dong maintains relationships.” The report adds there was no evidence that MP Dong knew about Beijing’s potential involvement.

Johnston said that Trudeau was briefed on the matter at the time and found “no basis” to remove Dong as Liberal candidate in the Don Valley North riding of Toronto. “This was not an unreasonable conclusion based on the intelligence available to the Prime Minister at the time,” says the report.

Global News had reported that Dong, who has since left the party caucus over the allegations, was a “witting affiliate” of Beijing’s foreign interference. Dong has since filed a defamation suit against Global, calling the outlet “false accusers.”

While Johnston said he found no evidence there’s been a conscious decision made to ignore the threat of Chinese interference, he said it’s “clear that we have not acted as quickly and as thoroughly as the threat that has been growing.”

“The responsibility lies with the government of the day to look at how we’re dealing with this threat and whether we’re meeting it effectively and I think, as we say in terms of the machinery of government, we have a lot to improve.”