.
.
some MPS and Senators have worked with
foreign governments opposition parties
are hunting for names the conservatives
sent a letter to the government wanting
this report sent to the public inquiry
into foreign interference to review and
confirm its findings now the NDP have
also written a letter saying the inquiry
shouldn't stop there jug meet Singh
wants an investigation into past
conservative leadership races where
India and China are said to have played
a role and the block Quebec wall
introduced a motion to expand the
Mandate of the public inquiry to
investigate those suspected
parliamentarians the Liberals say that
may be the best way forward we agree
with members of this house that the
appropriate Forum to look at these
matters is the commission already set up
they won't release the names of the MPS
in this house doing dirty work for
foreign hostile regimes he's known for
11 months and done nothing I asked the
Deputy Commissioner of the RCMP Mark
Flynn this morning what would happen if
I stood up and announced a list of names
like my colleagues are asking me to do
and he said I would be subject to
criminal prosecution so get what Mr
Speaker I'm not going to do that for
more on this developing story I'm joined
here in the studio by Mark gson the
liberal Deputy government house leader
Christina misho is the public safety
spokesperson for the black cubec W and
Heather mcferson the NDP Foreign Affairs
critic now we did extend the invitation
for a conservative MP to join the panel
but no one was made available uh M Mish
show i' I'd like to start with you
because of the the motion that was
tabled by your leader in the house it
seems as if this will pass and this will
go to Justice ug but I don't see how
Justice ug can name names any more than
anyone else can because of the secrecy
laws what is your expectation on that
well I think she'll know the best way to
proceed but I think like Minister Leblon
was saying it is the most reasonable way
to proceed uh we introduced that motion
hoping the House of Commons would speak
with only one voice that we would be
unanimous all parties together uh
wanting to know the truth or wanting to
to go further on this issue that is uh
really important and we have to um give
the possibility to people to regain
confidence in our democracy and
institutions uh so can they do that
without the names though you you know
what I mean because the allegations in
the report it's Senators MPS political
staff can they have confidence without
knowing who did what I I'm not sure I
don't know for to be uh to be H honest
but uh I think Justice hul will know the
best way to proceed and we have full
confidence in her uh the Mandate at
first was decided with all four parties
together so I think the idea to expand
the scope of it uh it is uh Poss it's
possible to do it this way and I think
Justice hul will uh agree with that and
she'll want to to proceed in the way
that seems the most responsible for her
so so Amica eron on that point I mean we
heard the clip there from Dominic Lon
say and I was told by you know the RCMP
if I stand up and name names I'm going
to go to jail now I don't know if that
applies inside the House of Commons
we're privilege enforces but certainly
outside what is your expectation in
terms of being able to identify people
that intelligence agencies and nsic cop
say are potentially Bad actors here
let's not forget it's not just Minister
LeBlanc that knows the names it's also
nsic cop and nsic cop is set up by a Me
by members from each political party
that sit in the House of Commons too so
just like the minister uh they're
restricted in anything that they could
offer as well um and whether or not a
parliamentary privilege to your point is
at play here um we have to remember that
there's a special legisl there's special
legislation set up for this committee
and the members are expected to follow
the rules of that committee whether it
be inside Parliament or outside
Parliament for the obvious reasons but
Dominic Leblon wouldn't be a member of
this committee so that legislation
wouldn't apply to him any more than if
jug meet Singh gets right in or
Elizabeth May or the Prime Minister uh I
think Mr LeBlanc will take the advice
that he received this morning with with
regard to that um but at the end of the
day and and you know what has been said
is absolutely correct um um the hog
commission was set up by all members of
parliament Andrew Shear uh the
conservative house leader who isn't here
today and really should be um you know
he made a point of saying uh in a letter
to minister LeBlanc over the weekend
that the ho commission is the best place
for this to occur So Not only was the Ho
commission set up unanimously by um all
parliamentarians but now the idea that
this uh should be that the whole
commission should be charged with um
looking into this matter further is also
um you know something that appears to
have unanimous support Heather mcferson
I don't know where you are on naming
names but I watched your leader today
jug me Singh and he said he's going to
try to get red in if there's a new
democrat on that list they're out of
caucus no questions asked but you also
want the committee to investigate the
past conservative leadership races where
China and India are said in this report
to have played a role what's your goal
there honestly I mean we we need to do
everything we can to give Canadians
faith that their that their democracy is
not still being attacked by foreign
influence uh we have people in the House
of Commons right now who who are traders
to this country I mean this is
extraordinarily serious and and I think
there has to be a way whether it is
through the block motion which we will
be supporting on on you know um having
the the ho commission be part of that
solution there has to be some way to do
that but it's not just the cting MPS
that I'm concerned about I'm I'm very
concerned that we have leadership right
in this country you know the
conservative leadership race was named
as being um being influenced by the
government of India and by the PRC uh
this is serious this is our democracy
and Canadians need to know that that
that all parliamentarians from all
parties are taking this extremely
seriously and that and our democracy
doesn't just happen with the MPS it is
the processes by which we get elected to
to even run for our parties that we have
to also consider so as you say there are
allegedly traitors in the House of
Commons right now which is an extraord
orary thing to to to have to say with
the based on the intelligence but as
we've heard intelligence is not evidence
right throughout this whole thing so say
Your Leader gets right in say there is a
new democrat on this particular list but
it's based on intelligence we don't know
the weight of it we don't know the
severity of it and we don't know the
Integrity of it how does he then act
credibly without potentially punishing
someone based on one fragment of
intelligence or something that isn't
absolute proof so this is why I think we
need to have a system in place that that
brings in um a third party or whatever
that looks like to make sure that all
MPS would be treated you know treated
equally and that we would be able to
recognize which MPS have because
remember in the report it is witting and
unwitting those are very different
things um somebody who doesn't
necessarily know that they've that
they've you know taken money from the
wrong person or whatever that's that's a
problem and we need to fix that and we
need to tighten up their just the the
the support so that that doesn't happen
but wittingly working with the foreign
government in Our House of Commons
that's a very different a very different
situation um you know members of of the
NDP have been victims of foreign
interference you know the leader of our
party jmet Singh has been a victim of
for Jenny as well Jenny Quan has been a
victim um I would be very concerned
about um members from you know they they
said two parties I think we can all
agree that it is most likely to be the
liberal and the conservative parties of
Canada well I mean those are the parties
that have competed for government you
know and have been the front- runner
parties politically so if you were
trying to influence them that seems like
the the best targets right so Christina
Mish on this Mr Blanchett has not yet
decided if he will read the unredacted
report which comes with conditions that
he can't say certain things uh what do
you expect your Your Leader might do
there and and what how how does this
sending it to Justice a how do you see
that as a remedy to the lack of
confidence people have right now like
what do you hope it leads to well I
cannot speak for Mr BL but I know he is
considering having that security
clearance to look at those doc doents
and having more information on the
matter um he cannot obviously say what
he's reading but he can take action to
make sure that people in our caucus are
uh all clear if I can say it this way uh
I would be very surprised if uh members
of the block were involved in this but
it could happen and we need to to take
Serious actions if that were the case um
but I think uh just like Heather said uh
we need to as parliamentarians has part
political parties uh do whatever it
takes uh to make sure people have
confidence in democracy and in the
government as well so so Mr garrson on
that right I I mean Merson The Logical
deduction is that it would probably be
the Liberals and the conservatives who
are the most likely targeted would you
agree with with that assumption that
you're probably the most vulnerable
parties I would say that probably
because we're government in opposition
we would be amongst and people I think
naturally assume that one of us will be
in in in in government um but I I you
know I think what's really important
here is that um you know it doesn't
matter what political party you belong
to I don't care you know if you know if
this comes down to liberals or
conservatives are under pure block uh
proper actions need to be taken and I
think that everybody agrees on that I
think David what the where the the the
the struggle is right now is in the
manner in which it's dealt with and I
actually think that what the block is
proposing in their opposition day motion
today is very reasonable and actually
you know sets up a process for helping
to deal with that information I think
it's also critically important for every
leader to have this information the fact
that they can't repeat it should not be
a reason to not get the information so
you're talking about pi po here because
he he won't read the Mr Blan to a little
Mr Blan does not aspire to be prime
minister Mr PV could be prime minister
but he could still he could still he
could still benefit from the information
but I'm certainly referring to Mr PV who
unlike Mr blett is considering it has
full out said I'm not doing it and as a
matter of fact he's been the leader for
over a year now and still hasn't got
that clearance that he could have got
it's very easy to get the clearance if
he had that clearance he could sit down
and the Prime Minister and him could
have conversations about exactly what's
going on but the reality is is Mr PF has
no interest in having those
conversations he has no interest in
knowing this information what his end
goal here is to not be informed so that
he can continue um to you know uh entice
rage and and and throw out uh you know
throw darts at absolutely everything he
possibly can because he he doesn't have
to be accountable for having knowledge
okay I want to get your reaction to that
but first you you said we have to do the
right thing or words to that effect the
conservative leadership races have been
mentioned in this report so have liberal
nominations these are things completely
controlled by the party outside of
election candidate scope and they are a
problem according to the intelligence
service does your party need to clean up
the way those nominations I think that
we all need to look at this take
recommendations that come back from hog
after these are after they look into
this and then make a decision on what to
do I think it's really important David
to remember that um and you've said this
on your program many times and I think
you even said it earlier today is that
intelligence is not evidence it can be
everything from a rumor to substantiated
claims but the vulnerabilities in the
processes are independent of what the
facts are the processes have weaknesses
right so I think that what we need to do
is let the let a a a third party the
whole Commission in this uh case give
recommendations as to what we can do
better to strengthen those so that you
know we don't even have the perception
that you can be influenced um because
even the perception alone uh is is
damaging to our democracy and I really
hope and I really believe that it's
something that all political parties can
unite around without partisanship uh
attached to it and I genuinely believe
that the NDP and the block and liberals
come from that perspective unfortunately
the one party that's not sitting at this
table seems to be really politicizing
this for political opportunity well the
conservatives were invited they de climb
but M first just on that point that Mr
PF who has also been invited to read the
NSI cop report and up until now is
declined why do you think that is there
have been arguments from conservatives
that they've adopted the Reform Act so
he can't throw people out of caucus
without support of caucus he can't share
information that he's bound not to
reveal due to secrecy you can do things
with nominations you can tell them you
you will not be the candidate for this
party even though you can run but why do
you think the conservative lead
is refusing to read in on this I have no
idea honestly you know jug meet wanted
to get that information because the more
information you have the better but I
but you know I'll say one thing that the
fact that the leader of the conservative
party refuses to take to get this
information when his own party is named
as having challenges with the leadership
race that he was in is is a problem but
but also let's not forget I don't want
to let the Liberals off the hook they've
had this information for 11 weeks
they've had this information for a very
long time and have done nothing and what
how do we know that there's been no
public action but we don't know what's
happened behind the scenes hasn't been
any public anything done publicly but
but also I think importantly to keep in
mind too is that you know what we need
to be doing is making sure that people
feel that that that that they can trust
in their democracy 11 weeks with not a
peep from the government is also not
something that makes me feel
particularly confident as a Canadian
that my democracy is being protected so
Christina Michelle going to give the
last word to you uh your thoughts on on
whether you think the government has
acted since receiving this information
because I know the report needed to be
released publicly and why you think Mr
PV is not getting read in well it is
quite ironic that it's the block that is
introducing this motion today I mean the
government has obviously had more
information than us uh over the last
couple of weeks or months and hasn't
done anything or spoke to the other
parties to say hey let's talk to Justice
hog and try to expend SCH of the the
inquiry but uh it is coming from the
blog but as we said we hope it is a
nonpartisanship uh thing to do uh which
seems okay with my colleagues here there
you go yes but I think it is really
important we're doing politics in Canada
uh yes but in Quebec as well and we need
people to trust us and uh yes Mr POV
should well there should be a cons
conservative member here talking about
this with us and uh the conservatives
should be more proactive on that issue
as well okay uh we're out of time uh
we'd love to have you back there's
further developments on this Mark
Garrison Christina Mich and Heather MC
first thanks so much for being here
today thank you for more on all of this
Philip lag is an associate professor at
Carlton School of International Affairs
he's here in the studio Professor lag is
good to see you thanks for thanks uh
let's start with the the question that's
out there people want names named
setting aside whether this should happen
if the government or Member of
Parliament or a cabinet minister wanted
to name a name how would they go about
doing it uh well it would be difficult
for them number one they would be warned
by the intelligence Community by those
that know how sensitive this information
is and what implications it might have
for the collection of sources for our
allies that have shared it with us they
would be told in in very Stark terms
that they shouldn't share this
information uh unless they have some
confidence that the sources and uh the
information could be protected as
importantly uh they are all privy
counselors in cabinet they've sworn an
oath to secrecy around on this as well
so they they even if they have the
ability to in the proceedings of
parliament which they do uh they would
have a number of reasons why they would
not want to disclose this information
okay so just talk about that the ability
to do so in the proceedings of
parliament this is where parliamentary
privilege comes into it now all the
members on on nsop the National Security
and intelligence Committee of
parliamentarians they have signed on
through legislation to something that
forbids them from using parliamentary
privilege if they do this but if the
Prime Minister wanted to not saying he
should but if he want to do he could
stand in Parliament and name the names
right and be protected from prosecution
is it that simple it is that simple as a
parliamentarian let's leave aside his
role within the executive let's re leave
aside his the fact that he's a privy
counselor and all all the so jug me
Singh if he was right could do that's
right all the considerations but
parliamentary privilege exists in our
system precisely to ensure that the
legislature can hold the government to
account and in some cases provide
information that's in the public
interest for our Democratic institutions
to function properly and so this might
be a case where you could argue that a
parliamentarian that was privy to this
information could disclose it being
shielded from the the legal consequences
of doing so okay so there is a way to do
it without legal consequences but as you
spelled out there are a lot of like
KnockOn consequences if someone is under
investigation that would be declared to
the world and that could compromise the
police it could jeopardize intelligence
sources I I mean how do you weigh those
risks versus what we heard from people
like Heather first and saying there are
traitors in the Canadian Parliament
right now well there's many different
ways that you could do it um above all
you try and get the all Party leaders to
agree to be briefed on the information
they can learn the scope and extent of
what's alleged who it applies to uh as
the nsic cop report implies some of this
is unwitting some of this may not be
something that somebody was fully aware
of what was happening in other cases you
might have a very clear case of somebody
who probably shouldn't be in a party
caucus may be excluded from that and and
we've had many cases where people are
excluded from party caucuses because
there's allegations of praud fraud
sexual misconduct whatever it is you're
not owed a seat in caucus and if your
party leader having been briefed on this
information believes that you probably
should not be sitting in that caucus
even if it doesn't rise to the level of
a criminal charge then that may be a
possibility so we know the Prime
Minister has read it and has briefed in
obviously jug meet sing says he's
working with the security officials to
get read in this week Mr Blanchett is
considering it Elizabeth may as I
understand it is being read in today um
Pier PV is refusing to do it what do you
make of that move that right now if you
believe the polls he'll be prime
minister after the next election and
he's not getting right in on this I
think from a purely political point of
view he doesn't have an incentive to M
it makes a lot more sense from again a
purely partisan point of view to be able
to critique and LOB accusations at the
government and demand answers as opposed
to have to say I've learned this and I
can't say anything however let's set
aside the partisan aspect of it and to
your point I think we need in this
country to achieve a different nature of
National Security maturity and that
would involve having all parties
understand that matters of National
Security are something that all Party
leaders need to be briefed about when
they rise to this level particularly
when it affects them their parties and
the legislature and so I'm hoping that
even though uh the conservatives have a
partisan interest not to be read in so
that they can continue to critique more
openly I hope that they understand and
appreciate that political maturity and
National Security in this country
requires that they do does not having
the opposition leader right in in any
way affect parliament's ability to
respond to this I mean how do you you
you can see a scenario where the leaders
would get together and come up with a
joint path forward and you can't really
do that when the second most important
leader in the house isn't isn't part of
that well well as we've seen today in
transferring this over to the Hogue uh
inquiry we already have something of an
all-party consensus on some ways of
dealing with this what if the Hogan
inquiry comes back and says yes uh what
nsic cop found is is is correct as far
as we can tell based on the intelligence
however we also as the the inquir we we
can't name the names what's the next
step The Next Step still again falls on
the party leaders all the party leaders
to come up with some mechanism by which
they can all agree on how to proceed can
look at the evidence and uh come up with
some set of criteria that they will
apply to their own parties so that
Canadians can have confidence in how the
House of Commons is managing this this
is the key thing because they can send
it to Justice o but it kind of
boomerangs back to them ultimately for
responsibility because she's Bound by
even more Bound by the National Security
laws than than a A Member of Parliament
would be because she has no privilege
she's a judge she can't rise and break
the law so so what is the value of this
process in your view I I I understand
that perhaps it adds a bit of a pause
here it cools things down and it allows
the inquiry to have a second set of eyes
on the work of nsop that being said I I
do find it a bit strange that we do have
a committee of parliamentarians who has
looked at this who has reported on it as
an allp party uh committee and who has
laid down these findings uh and then we
have their peers in Parliament saying
okay well that's all well and good but
we want another inquiry have a second
look at it to check your work okay fair
enough but what happens when the inquiry
then says yes some of these allegations
are correct what is the next step now I
hope that in the interim period between
now and October which is when they would
like the inquiry to report back that
they develop some idea of what they're
going to do with this information if
Justice hog chooses or is unable to air
the names what are just as a final Point
what are your thoughts on on whether we
should know the names because it's it's
intelligence it's not evidence uh these
are assumptions or bits of information
not a verdict not a conclusion what are
your thoughts on how much Canadians
should know at this point I think it
comes down to a matter of political
judgment that has to be exercised by
political leaders after they've been
briefed on this there may be several
different cases there may be several
different gradations of what's been done
in some cases the nsop has already told
us that some of this is unwitting some
is semi witting and some of it's witting
so it has to be done on a case-by casee
basis exercising political judgment
which is what we should expect from
political leaders in this country when
it comes to National Security Philipe
leg uh with Carlton University I want to
thank you for your time today appreciate
