PROC#80 Special Rapporteur David Johnston

“In the report, Mr. Johnston, you concluded that it was reasonable for the Prime Minister to take no action, even though in your own report you cited that there were irregularities and that there was well-founded suspicion.

From my perspective, I don't know how you can square that circle and how you can come to that conclusion when there was well-founded suspicion, and yet no action was taken. The common refrain from the report seems to be that no recommendations were made, so none were taken and none were ignored. Somehow, the notion is to say “I see no evil, I know no evil, so therefore there is no evil”, but in reality, there is much more and it's much deeper than what is going on.

My question, then, is this: Can Mr. Johnston explain if CSIS looked into nomination processes?“

Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 6th, 2023
Evidence of meeting #80 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 44th Parliament
 

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Global News reported on February 8, 2023, “National security officials [warned] Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his office more than a year before the 2019 federal election...that Chinese agents were 'assisting Canadian candidates running for political offices'”. In Mr. Johnston's report, an early draft of the memo containing “similar but not identical language” was noted. The draft was “significantly revised”, according to the report, before the memo went to the Prime Minister.

Did Mr. Johnston inquire as to who changed the memo, and why it was changed?


The Right Hon. David Johnston
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual


Madam Chair, thank you very much for this question.

I want to go directly to our report. There are two parts of my brain functioning here. One is the part that deals with classified information, and the other is the part that deals with open information. It's important that I not cross that boundary.

To deal specifically with the question that has just been raised, Madam Chair, page 23 of our report, dealing with these statements and conclusions in the press, states:

The PRC Interfered with the Nomination of Han Dong as the Liberal Party Candidate in Don Valley North (Global News, February 24, 2023)

Then it says:

Irregularities were observed with Mr. Dong’s nomination in 2019, and there is well-grounded suspicion that the irregularities were tied to the PRC Consulate in Toronto, with whom Mr. Dong maintains relationships. In reviewing the intelligence, I did not find evidence that Mr. Dong was aware of the irregularities or the PRC Consulate’s potential involvement in his nomination.

The Prime Minister was briefed about these irregularities, although no specific recommendation was provided. He concluded there was no basis to displace Mr. Dong as the candidate for Don Valley North. This was not an unreasonable conclusion based on the intelligence available to the Prime Minister at the time.


The Chair Bardish Chagger
Liberal

Mr. Johnston, if you just reference where you would like us to note that, we'll take it, because time is limited.

I'm going to go back to Ms. Kwan


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I read the report several times over. Quoting it again to me is not going to answer that question.

My question was, did Mr. Johnston look into who changed that memo and why it was changed?


The Right Hon. David Johnston
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual


Madam Chair, again, I must be conscious of the classified information. The memo that appeared in the Global News—


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Sorry, I'm going to interrupt for a second. It's a yes-or-no question.

Did Mr. Johnston look into who changed it, yes or no?


The Right Hon. David Johnston
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual


The answer to that question is that the memo that was referred to in the Global News report was an early draft that had certain statements. That draft was not circulated further. There was a final draft that came to quite a different conclusion about what transpired.


The Chair Bardish Chagger
Liberal

Thank you.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Madam Chair, if I can finish my thought, I take that to mean that Mr. Johnston did not ask who changed it and why it was changed.


The Right Hon. David Johnston
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual


Madam Chair, again—


The Chair Bardish Chagger
Liberal

I'm not going to comment, but I think, Mr. Johnston, your comment does stand as to what your response is. How people received information is not the debate today, but the focus is on foreign election interference.

We're going to continue.

We're going to go to Mr. Chong for five minutes, followed by Mr. Fergus.

Then we will suspend.

Go ahead, Mr. Chong.



Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Mr. Johnston, your report noted that:

Irregularities were observed with Mr. Dong's nomination in 2019, and there is well-grounded suspicion that the irregularities were tied to the PRC Consulate in Toronto, with whom Mr. Dong maintains relationships.

Did you look into what those irregularities were? If yes, what were they?



The Right Hon. David Johnston
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual


Madam Chair, again, I'm trying to keep the two parts of my brain functioning—the open part and the classified part. We speak about that issue on page 26:

Han Dong Advised the PRC Consulate to Extend the Detention of the “Two Michaels” (Global News, March 22, 2023)

There has been considerable media attention about an alleged transcript of this conversation. I have reviewed the same intelligence report that was provided to the Prime Minister relating to this allegation, which I am advised is the only intelligence that speaks to this issue. I can report the following.

The allegation is false. Mr. Dong discussed the “two Michaels” with a PRC official, but did not suggest to the official that the PRC extend their detention. The allegation that he did make that suggestion has had a very adverse effect on Mr. Dong. He continued to maintain close relationships with PRC consular officials at least through the 2021 Election.

Ministers and the Prime Minister went out of their way to defend Mr. Dong, whom they believe has been badly harmed by the reporting. They did not believe the media reports when they came out—


The Chair Bardish Chagger
Liberal

I'm just going to pause.

Ms. Kwan is visiting committee today and we are excited to have her. I think if we can just keep a glimpse on each other, then you can see...because I think it's just an exchange that she's trying to get to. Quoting from the report is appreciated, but she has noted that she has read the report, so she is looking for the answer as to however you feel best....

Ms. Kwan, the floor is yours.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I've read the report several times over, so I don't really need Mr. Johnston to quote the report back to me. What I really need is for him to answer the question, which he didn't.

My next question, then, is this: Did he ask if the Prime Minister knew what those irregularities were?


The Right Hon. David Johnston
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual


Madam Chair, can we be a little more specific about the irregularities?


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

The irregularities, Mr. Johnston, are what you cited in the report. You say, “Irregularities were observed with Mr. Dong’s nomination in 2019, and there is well-grounded suspicion that the irregularities were tied to the PRC Consulate in Toronto”.


The Right Hon. David Johnston
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual


The irregularities had to do with nomination meetings and the busing in of people and students and so on, and some questions about whether Mr. Dong had been substituted for another candidate in the nominated process. I think they were that kind.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

My question was, Mr. Johnston, whether you asked the Prime Minister if he knew what the irregularities were.


The Right Hon. David Johnston
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual


We did ask the Prime Minister about the nomination of Mr. Dong and the allegations that a previous member had been pushed out. He indicated that he was aware of that and that there were reasons that the previous member stepped out and Mr. Dong received the nomination.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

I'm sorry, but my question was whether the Prime Minister knew what those irregularities were.


The Right Hon. David Johnston
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual


I believe the Prime Minister was aware that there was some question about the actual nomination and the busing in of people, etc.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Okay.

In the report, Mr. Johnston, you concluded that it was reasonable for the Prime Minister to take no action, even though in your own report you cited that there were irregularities and that there was well-founded suspicion.

From my perspective, I don't know how you can square that circle and how you can come to that conclusion when there was well-founded suspicion, and yet no action was taken. The common refrain from the report seems to be that no recommendations were made, so none were taken and none were ignored. Somehow, the notion is to say “I see no evil, I know no evil, so therefore there is no evil”, but in reality, there is much more and it's much deeper than what is going on.

My question, then, is this: Can Mr. Johnston explain if CSIS looked into nomination processes?


The Right Hon. David Johnston
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual


Madam Chair, with respect to the nomination processes, that is a very difficult area, because they're governed by the rules of the party. It's been a very difficult area to regulate, to oversee, and I think one looks to the parties to develop appropriate rules.

I think CSIS has been conscious of the fact that nomination events have followed procedures that would not be the most attractive, but to date, I don't think CSIS has cast its attention into that area in great depth.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

I think that explains why CSIS makes no recommendation to the Prime Minister on this, because they don't look into it in great depth, but it doesn't mean to say there are no issues. Even in your own report, Mr. Johnston, you noted that there were irregularities and well-founded suspicion. How could it be that you would come to the conclusion for the Prime Minister to take no action, that it is actually okay? I really have deep troubles with that.

I'd like to ask Mr. Johnston this question: Can you advise the committee on what your concept is of the appearance of conflict of interest? What does that mean to you?


The Right Hon. David Johnston
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual


The appearance of a conflict of interest would be a reasonable person in possession of all the true facts concluding that a person would not be able to provide unbiased judgment on a particular matter. The key issues would be, one, a reasonable person, and two, all the true facts being in front of that person.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Did you check to see if Ms. Block has donated to the Liberal Party or attended a Liberal Party fundraiser event with the Prime Minister before you asked her to join your team on this important work?


The Right Hon. David Johnston
Independent Special Rapporteur on Foreign Interference, As an Individual


Madam Chair, I've worked with Ms. Block on an earlier occasion and have complete confidence in her and her colleagues to make any appropriate judgments on conflicts of interest. With respect to her contributions to the Liberal Party, she has made contributions to other parties, and she has served the country with great eminence.

No, I don't believe Ms. Block is a conflict of interest.


The Chair Bardish Chagger
Liberal

Thank you.

We will now enter into our usual rounds. There are five minutes to Mr. Cooper, followed by Ms. Sahota.

Mr. Cooper, go ahead.
https://openparliament.ca/committees/house-affairs/44-1/80/jenny-kwan-1/

Latest posts

CIMM#115: Pension Transferability and Access to Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF), and Delays in Permanent Residence and Visas for Hong Kongers Recent Reforms to the International Student Program

James McNamee, Director General, Family and Social Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
I would say that's generally the case. If the work permit they obtained was originally connected to the public policy, that's correct. I don't know if that's the situation in all cases. In some cases, applicants may have had an LMIA-based work permit to begin with.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC, NDP
That's right. However, under the special immigration measure, the LMIA is not required.  I have a list of applicants in those circumstances. Their work permit renewal application was rejected. They were asked to submit an LMIA, which makes no sense. I want to flag that as a deep concern now emerging for people whose open work permits are being rejected as they wait for their permanent resident status. At this rate, given the immigration levels plan numbers and the processing delays happening, and with the number of applicants in place, you can imagine that it's going to take something like eight years to get through the backlog of people getting their PR status. This means that if they are trying to get their pension, they will not be able to do so for eight years, because they are required to provide proof of permanent residence.
I want to flag this as a major concern. I hope the department will take action to fix the error being applied to applicants whose open work permits are being rejected under this stream.  Can I get a confirmation from officials that this will be undertaken?

James McNamee, Director General, Family and Social Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Yes, that issue has been raised with the department already, and we're looking into it to see what exactly happened in those situations.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC, NDP
Okay. Officials are aware of it, and yet it's still happening.  I have cases coming to me that are happening. I'm about to prepare a giant pile of this stuff for the minister, so I hope the officials will fix that.  The other thing related to the pension, of course, is lengthy delays for people to get their permanent status.  Based on the immigration levels plan and the number of applicants in place, is it the officials' anticipation that it will take about eight years to get those applications processed?

James McNamee, Director General, Family and Social Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
We have looked at that possibility. Certainly, it will take longer than we had previously indicated to the committee. I would note that the first year of the levels plan is the fixed year. The years that follow, in this case, 2026 and 2027, are flexible. There are opportunities to adjust those numbers in the future, and that could affect that timeline. It's hard to say whether eight years will be the timeline, but it will be longer than had been originally predicted because the numbers have gone down.

CIMM#114: Recent Reforms to the International Student Program

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
Aside from looking at patterns of potential violators—the groups and organizations taking advantage of students with these fraudulent letters of acceptance—will you be including in the analysis what types of institutions are being utilized for these fraudulent letters? In other words, is it private institutions versus public institutions, colleges versus universities and so on? Will that be part of the analysis?

Bronwyn MayDirector General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
It's not always the case that a letter originates from an institution. We would need to look at various possible sources.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
Maybe I can reframe that.
Obviously, as these are fraudulent letters of acceptance, they wouldn't be issued by the institutions. However, regarding the list of institutions being used for the purpose of these fraudulent letters, I would be interested in obtaining information to determine what percentage are private institutions and public institutions, how many of them are colleges, how many of them are universities and so on. That will tell us very specific information that I think is important when trying to tackle fraudulent activities.

Bronwyn May, Director General, International Students Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
I completely agree. That's a very important line of analysis.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
I will make the further request to make sure you share this information with the committee. I'll argue that this information should not be kept secret. It should be public and transparent—shared with all Canadians—so that we're aware of what the landscape is and of how international students are being taken advantage of. With respect to that analysis, will there be information and data on what countries are being targeted?

Click to read the full discussion from the Committee meeting

CIMM#113: Pension Transferability and Access to Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF), and Delays in Permanent Residence and Visas for Hong Kongers

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
All right. Thank you.
Hence, we have this problem. You have the Canadian government, which created this lifeboat scheme for Hong Kongers who are fleeing persecution in Hong Kong as a result of the national security law. The government, in its wisdom or lack thereof, created this lifeboat scheme that only provides for temporary residence by way of a work permit or a study permit. Then these people have to go to the queue to make an application for permanent residence, and we know that there is a huge backlog and delay in processing.
In the beginning, there was swift action, but as time has passed, it's been lengthened by way of the delay, to the point where the former minister even made an announcement to further extend people's work permits and study permits for another three years. That is to say, a person could be here for six years—as long as six years—under this current scheme without getting permanent residence. This is because the minister anticipated that people would not be able to swiftly get their permanent resident status. That is the reality.
As a result of that, people are not able to provide proof of permanent residence, because the application is in process. To make it even worse, the government—the minister—just made an announcement about the levels plan, cutting levels to the tune of 105,000 permanent resident status applications.
You can imagine how long the wait-list is for Hong Kongers as they continue to wait. Now, these Hong Kongers have zero intention of returning to Hong Kong, because they know that they would be persecuted if they did. People know that. I think the Canadian government knows that.
This is my question, then, to you as the manager of their pension, which, because of this rule, they're unable to access: Would your organization be willing to write to the regulator to ask for consideration for these applicants who are in a prolonged period of waiting for permanent resident status, to ask that their declaration indicating that they do not intend to return to Hong Kong be accepted as proof that they intend to leave Hong Kong permanently so that they can access their pensions? Is that something that your organization would consider doing?

Maryscott GreenwoodGlobal Head, Government Relations, The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company
I think I understand the question.
The basic premise of your question has to do with the period of time it takes for the Government of Canada to determine and provide permanent residency or citizenship. It seems to me that this is a function of the Government of Canada, as opposed to a regulated entity. That's how I would answer that.

Laura HewittSenior Vice-President and Head, Global Government Affairs and Public Policy, Sun Life Financial Services of Canada Inc.
Yes. I would say that it's not within our authority to change the criteria.
However, our numbers show that once that permanent residency does come through, we're able to process the applications and approve Canadian permanent residents.

Are you ready to take action?

Constituent Resources
Mobile Offices
Contact Jenny

Sign up for updates