No agreement among parties on releasing names of ‘witting’ foreign interference participants

The federal parties are still at an impasse over whether the government should release the names of the parliamentarians who have reportedly “wittingly” participated in foreign interference.

In a panel discussion on CTV’s Question Period airing Sunday, MPs from the three major parties argued why they believe the names should or should not be made public.

According to a scathing report on foreign interference in Canada — released last week by the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) — there is “troubling intelligence that some Parliamentarians are, in the words of the intelligence services, ‘semi-witting or witting’ participants in the efforts of foreign states to interfere in our politics.”

Reaction to the report was pronounced, with the Conservatives calling on the governing Liberals to release the names of those officials who may have aided foreign governments meddle in Canadian affairs.

But the Liberals say they’re leaving it up to law enforcement.

In an email statement to CTV News, the RCMP confirmed “there are investigations into a broad range of foreign interference in Canada, including matters which intersect with democratic institutions.”

“The RCMP will not provide comment whether there is an active criminal investigation into any parliamentarian,” the statement also reads.

Jennifer O’Connell, a Liberal MP and parliamentary secretary to the public safety minister, told CTV’s Question Period host Vassy Kapelos as part of the panel that party leaders should receive the necessary security clearance so they can read the full un-redacted report, which will “provide them with additional insight.”

“If there was to somehow be a list of names released without context, and ensuring that any sort of intelligence is also corroborated, we think that the rule of law in this country and democracy relies on the fact that there needs to be that evidence, there needs to be that independent investigation,” she said, adding “this information is in the hands of law enforcement.”

But when pressed on why there is an evidentiary bar in this instance — especially considering the RCMP has asked for legislative mechanisms to be able to turn intelligence into evidence — O’Connell insisted there are tools in place for party leaders to act on “serious allegations.”

When pressed further on whether it could be inferred that the Liberal party has pursued those mechanisms to clear members of its caucus when it comes to foreign interference, O’Connell said “no.”

“I don’t think that’s an accurate assumption to make,” she said.

“What’s accurate is that those who have the security clearance can review the information, can determine if there is another process or more work needs to be done,” she added. “But making these hypothetical accusations of who is or isn’t involved without context and corroboration of intelligence to evidence, I think becomes very problematic in that becoming the party process in this country.”

Conservative foreign affairs critic Michael Chong — who has himself been the target of foreign interference — argued there are rules in place that would prevent party leaders from acting on any allegations in the un-redacted report, even if they received the security clearance.

“What the prime minister is asking (Conservative Leader Pierre) Poilievre to do is to essentially tie his hands behind his back,” Chong said.

When challenged on whether one should believe Chong over law enforcement officials, who have said party leaders would have recourse to act on the contents of the report, Chong said “yes.”

“Because I think the director of CSIS and the RCMP may not be as knowledgeable about the processes under the Reform Act that govern party caucuses in the House of Commons and the other processes internal to parties that govern the conduct of their members,” he said.

In a heated back-and-forth over the issue, Chong said the Conservatives have “been anything but political or partisan on this issue,” and once again called on the prime minister to release the list of names.

Meanwhile, NDP public safety critic Alistair MacGregor, said he would also like the government to release the names, so that Canadians can “go through the next federal election with the confidence that when they are choosing a name on the ballot, that that politician has not been compromised by a foreign principle.”

“I would like to find a way where we one day know their identities, but I, again, have to respect the fact that our intelligence community may have issues with how that’s done,” he said, when asked whether the names should be made public, or simply divulged to party leaders.

You can watch the full exchange in the video player at the top of this article

With files from CTV’s Question Period Senior Producer Stephanie Ha