NSICOP report more than a Pandora’s box of bad news for Canadian democracy

HALIFAX—The more secretive a society gets, the less democratic it becomes. As The Washington Post’s motto puts it, “Democracy dies in darkness.” Canadian democracy has been weakened this past week by a signal failure of transparency, a dire error of priorities. On an issue of monumental importance, the public was informationally dealt out. What makes that harder to take is that the Trudeau government never misses an opportunity to take a bow for its openness in governance. The PM talks the talk, but sometimes doesn’t walk the walk. Thanks to the work of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP), Canadians have learned that some Members of Parliament have been helping foreign actors to interfere in this country’s politics and elections. The NSICOP report released on June 3 said that certain elected officials “began wittingly assisting foreign state actors soon after their election.” The key word is “wittingly.” The committee members said that they had seen intelligence suggesting that some MPs worked to influence colleagues on behalf of India, and that they had provided confidential information to officials with the Indian government. In one case cited in the report, that relied on information from CSIS, a then-sitting MP had a relationship with a foreign intelligence officer. According to the report, the MP even tried to arrange a meeting with a senior foreign intelligence officer in a foreign country. Other disturbing activities by certain MPs included soliciting support from foreign missions during election campaigns to get the support of community groups; accepting funds or benefits from foreign missions that were disguised to conceal their source; advancing the interest of foreign countries by either influencing their Canadian parliamentary colleagues, or by their actual work in the House; and handing over privileged information on the work or opinions of fellow MPs, allowing foreign actors to pressure them into changing their views. The NSICOP report also laid out another explosive finding, that China and India interfered in Conservative Party of Canada leadership races. According to the report, there were "two specific instances where officials allegedly interfered in the leadership races of the Conservative Party of Canada.” The report also includes an allegation that India interfered in a single Conservative Party leadership contest. Interestingly, India was recently dropped from the International Democracy Union, an organization dedicated to getting right-wing governments elected around the globe. The IDU is run by former Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper. (For the record, it should be noted that the CPC stated that the party never received any communication from CSIS regarding foreign interference in its leadership races.) All of the above is not a Pandora’s box of bad news for Canadian democracy. It is a Pandora’s moving van. If it is true that foreign countries are playing an active role in selecting and directing not only Members of Parliament, but leaders of political parties, this is an all-hands-on-deck moment for the nation. It is not merely “concerning” as Deputy PM and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland put it. It is a five-alarm blaze. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh had it right when he said that no MP who is doing such things should continue to sit in Parliament. The problem with the report is that it went to the laundry before it was tabled in the House of Commons. All of the crucial detail was redacted. So Canadians don’t know which MPs may have been compromised by foreign actors. They don’t know which Conservative leadership races that China and India are alleged to have interfered. They don’t know how much money, or what benefits might have been involved. They don’t know the foreign country where one MP is alleged to have tried to meet a senior foreign intelligence officer. They don’t know the party affiliation of the MPs alleged to have aided foreign actors in meddling in Canadian democracy. The rationale for redacting the details? It was to prevent the spread of “injurious or privileged information.” There is some merit in that argument. If CSIS doesn’t have it right, naming names could ruin innocent individuals. And if there are ongoing police investigations into the allegations contained in the NSICOP report, those investigations could be compromised by revealing further details. And then there is the question of protecting classified information, and the sources and methods of the intelligence community. But here is the counter-argument. The purpose of a report commissioned by the prime minister on the critical issue of foreign interference in Canada’s politics and elections should be to inform, not to titillate and then leave people in the dark. That is especially true since the government, as the NSICOP report states, has been so slow to respond to what is a crisis of national security in Canada. This is the third time such a committee has been asked to look into this burning issue. Justin Trudeau didn’t want a public inquiry into this matter, and he had some valid reasons for that view. But in substituting yet another all-party committee investigation, that committee should at least have had the right to share with Canadians the details of what it actually found. That didn’t happen. Instead, the report was fitted with a silencer. It was adapted to protect possibly underhanded MPs and the intelligence service, not Canadians, who don’t have the information to confirm that their MPs are not selling them down the river to foreign actors. Canadians—not the government of the day—own the democracy. They are entitled to the data gathered by the NSICOP committee. They are entitled to know if foreign corruption has tainted our public life. Freeland says leave it to the police, and it will all be Hakuna Matata. But she misses the point—or at least, severely minimizes it. The police can, indeed, take care of the criminal issues that may be at play here. But what about the stuff that stinks, but isn’t criminal? Last word to the committee: “Regardless, all the behaviours are deeply unethical, and, the committee would submit, contrary to the oaths and affirmations parliamentarians make to conduct themselves in the best interest of Canada.” Let the cops deal with the crooks. But dish the facts to Canadians so that they can deal with the unscrupulous. Michael Harris is an award-winning author and journalist. The Hill Times

NSICOP report more than a Pandora’s box of bad news for Canadian democracy

Let the cops deal with the crooks. But dish the facts to Canadians so that they can deal with the unscrupulous.

Canada’s aging crisis and a call for reform in eldercare

As COP29 wraps up, will Canada finally stop funding fossils this fall?

Addressing the threat of antimicrobial resistance

The wisdom of Homer Simpson and Aaron Sorkin

Climate finance should target resilient food systems

Trump’s ‘America First’ plans may undermine global trade

On foreign interference, we need to regain perspective

‘So damn offensive’: NSICOP and Hogue findings on media raise serious concern about covert targeting of Canadian journalists

‘We’re in the dark’: CSG pushes for security clearance for Senate leaders to parse NSICOP report

MPs should be eyeing a bigger chopping block for interference issues

The buck stops where? Experts urge party leaders to be accountable for NSICOP report findings

News

Get free news updates

Opinion

Submit a guest opinion article

resources

Advertise

subscribe

get help

Get free news updates

Submit a guest opinion article

NSICOP report more than a Pandora’s box of bad news for Canadian democracy

Let the cops deal with the crooks. But dish the facts to Canadians so that they can deal with the unscrupulous.

Get The Foreign Policy Newsletter