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#93: Closed Work Permits and Temporary Foreign Workers and Briefing on Recent Changes to International Student Policy and Plans for Future Measures

On the question around student housing, I absolutely think that it is essential for institutions and provinces do their part and I think that the federal government should show leadership and perhaps initiate a program wherein the federal government contributes a third of the funding, institutions provide a third of the funding, and the provinces and territories provide a third of the funding towards the creation of student housing, both for international students and domestic students. That way you can have a robust plan to address the housing needs of the students.

I'm going to park that for a minute and quickly get into the students who were subject to fraud. We have a situation in which students have now been cleared and found to be genuine by the task force, but they have not gotten their passports back yet. I don't know what the holdup is, and I wonder if the minister can comment on that.

Second, there are students who are still waiting to be evaluated by the task force, and the task force work can't proceed because they might be waiting for a date for the IRB to assess the question on their permit on whether or not it was genuine or whether or not there was misrepresentation. They are consequently in a situation in which people are just chasing their tails and they can't get to the task force.

On that question, will the minister agree that instead of making people go through that process with the IRB, the task force evaluation can move forward first so that they can be found to be either a genuine student or not a genuine student?

 

CIMM#92: Closed Work Permits, Temporary Foreign Workers and Committee Business

I want to thank the special rapporteur for joining us today at committee. I also very much appreciate your coming to Canada and looking into this issue.

As many of the witnesses have said to us, the issue around the immigration system as it's set up, with the closed work permit approach, is that it actually sets these workers up for exploitation. From that perspective.... It's not to say, as the Conservatives would suggest, that you were alleging that all employers abuse workers. I don't believe you said that at any point in time; rather, I think the issue is about the immigration system that Canada has.

Instead of having this closed work permit situation, what would you say is the remedy to address the exploitation that many of the migrant workers you spoke with directly experienced?

 

Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Slavery, United Nations, As an Individual
Tomoya Obokata

My recommendation is, certainly, to modify the closed nature of the program. If the workers are able to choose their employers at their own will, that reduces the instances of abuse and exploitation.

More importantly, whether it's closed or not, employers have to comply with the relevant legal obligations. I accept that a large number of employers already do. It's those others who do not who require further attention from the provincial and federal governments to see whether they can take appropriate law enforcement actions against those who breach labour standards legislation.

 

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

With respect to exploitation, one of the issues that migrant workers are faced with is that they don't have full status here in Canada; they have only temporary status. One issue that has been identified is the closed work permit. The other issue is in terms of having rights. Being able to have their rights protected also means that they have to have status here in Canada.

How would you suggest the policy side of things should be amended to ensure that these migrant workers have their rights protected?

CIMM#91: Government's Response to the Final Report of the Special Committee on Afghanistan and Committee Business

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I thank the committee members for supporting the last motion.

I have another motion that I'd like to move at this point. Notice has been given for it. It reads as follows:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee invite the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship and the Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities and relevant officials together for two hours, or invite the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship with relevant officials for two hours, and the Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities to appear separately with relevant officials for one hour to update the committee on:

(a) the work of the task force addressing the exploitation scheme targeting international students as many students are still reporting that they are in limbo and have not heard back from officials about their status;

(b) the measures taken by IRCC and institutions to help prevent and protect international students from fraud schemes;

(c) the justification to increase the financial requirements for international students by more than 100% to $20,635;

(d) the justification for putting a cap on international study permits; and

(e) the plans to address the housing crisis for international students and efforts made to collaborate with provinces, territories and post-secondary institutions.

I think the motion is self-explanatory on all elements, and I think we would benefit from having the two ministers appear before our committee. We've also deliberated this issue at length at another meeting, so in the interest of time, I won't revisit all of those points.

I hope committee members will support this motion.

 

Are you ready to take action?

Constituent Resources
Mobile Offices
Contact Jenny

Sign up for updates