Right.
It's about prioritization. The Liberals and the New Democrats seem to prioritize themselves. The Conservatives want to prioritize both protecting our democracy from Beijing's interference and seeing that Canadians get the answers they deserve about some of the very, very troubling findings contained in Madam Justice Hogue's first report.
I'll go back to the Prime Minister's involvement and how he responded to the information that CSIS passed on to his top officials and that in turn was passed on to him about Beijing's interference in the Don Valley North nomination. I know that's something the Liberals no longer like to talk about, of course because of the Prime Minister's culpability. They were very interested in talking about that member a year ago, but not so much anymore. We saw an effort just moments ago by Mr. Gerretsen to try to shut me down from talking about the Prime Minister's actions in the Don Valley North Liberal nomination.
Madam Justice Hogue found not only that the Prime Minister made his decision to ignore the CSIS report and intelligence about the member, but also that it had an impact on the overall election in Don Valley North. In fact, as Madam Justice Hogue said, the Prime Minister's decision “affected who was elected to Parliament” in Don Valley North. The Prime Minister turned a blind eye to Beijing's efforts to assist someone win the Liberal nomination, and his decision to allow that individual to continue to stand as a Liberal candidate resulted in someone who happened to be Beijing's preferred candidate, someone who Beijing thought would advance their interests in Ottawa, getting elected to the House of Commons. That's on Justin Trudeau.
As bad as all of that is, speaking to the need for why we need to prioritize our study on foreign interference, it was also recently reported in The Globe and Mail, based upon a senior national security source, that the same Liberal candidate, the current member for Don Valley North, was tipped off that he was being monitored by CSIS.
In short, the contents of the classified CSIS briefing that was provided to three top Liberals, all within the Prime Minister's inner circle.... Jeremy Broadhurst and the Prime Minister were informed of the contents of that briefing. Someone, one of those five Liberals, likely leaked that classified information that resulted in the member for Don Valley North being tipped off that he was being monitored by CSIS.
This is a very, very serious matter. The report in The Globe and Mail contains very serious allegations that the member was notified and tipped off. If that is true, and there's every reason to believe it is true, then one of those top Liberals would have leaked that classified information. In doing so, the leaker broke the law. They violated multiple sections of the Security of Information Act. They could face up to 14 years behind bars for a contravention of multiple sections of the Security of Information Act. That's about as serious as it gets.
They not only violated the Security of Information Act, but also betrayed their oath of secrecy, undermined an active intelligence operation looking into Beijing's interference and, perhaps most concerning, compromised CSIS's sources and methods, which could have potentially put a person's safety at risk. That is the consequence. That is the gravity of the crime that someone in the Prime Minister's inner circle committed, if the report in The Globe and Mail is accepted.
If the Prime Minister or his inner circle wants to say the story is false, then they can come out and say so. They can testify before this committee. When there's a credible report in The Globe and Mail from a top national security source that someone in the Prime Minister's inner circle leaked classified information, potentially the Prime Minister himself, that compromised an ongoing intelligence operation and compromised CSIS's sources and methods, and they committed an offence that is punishable by up to 14 years behind bars, this committee, which is studying foreign interference, ought to have some hearings to get to the bottom of exactly what happened with respect to that alleged leak.
On and on it goes. Madam Justice Hogue's report and some of the damning findings in it are not limited to what happened in Don Valley North. We know that when reports of Beijing's interference came to light, the Prime Minister repeatedly downplayed the extent of Beijing's interference. He falsely stated that in “every single constituency election...election integrity held, and it was free and fair.” Those were the words of the Prime Minister.
Madam Justice Hogue concluded otherwise. She found that there were “strong indicators”—those are her words—that Beijing interfered in the Steveston—Richmond East riding to work against the then sitting member of Parliament, Mr. Kenny Chiu, and to help elect the Liberal candidate, who is now the current member for Steveston—Richmond East. She concluded not only that there were strong indicators that Beijing interfered in Steveston—Richmond East to work against Kenny Chiu and help the Liberals, but also that there was a “reasonable possibility” that this interference resulted in the defeat of Mr. Chiu and in the election of the Liberal candidate, the now member for Steveston—Richmond East.
So much for the Prime Minister's claim that for every single constituency election, election integrity held and that it was free and fair. That's simply not the case. Election integrity held in terms of the overall result, yes, but election integrity did not necessarily hold in every single constituency election. It is evidence that there was serious interference that could have tipped the scales in certain ridings, and that is consistent with the reports that the Liberals spent so much time last spring and last fall dismissing.
When there were reports that Beijing had targeted several ridings for the purpose of defeating Conservative candidates and electing Liberals, the Liberal response was that it was no big deal, it really didn't happen and there was nothing significant, because, as the Prime Minister said, election integrity in every single riding held. Well, that's not true. Again, I emphasize that Beijing's interference did not impact the overall election result, but I think most Canadians would be concerned. I'm certainly concerned.
If the result in even one riding was impacted by Beijing's interference or the interference of any foreign state, it would be unacceptable. That undermines the integrity of our elections and it needs to be addressed. Steps must be taken to ensure that such interference doesn't take place and that those who were involved and complicit in such interference are held accountable.
The scope of Beijing interference in Steveston—Richmond East consisted of a disinformation campaign that very much targeted Kenny Chiu. Not surprisingly, given that it was interference from Beijing, it targeted Chinese Canadian voters. The Chinese Canadian diaspora in Steveston—Richmond East comprises a significant component of the population of the electors in that suburban Vancouver riding.
As concerning as it is that there was interference in Steveston—Richmond East, where there was a reasonable possibility that such interference resulted in the defeat of Mr. Chiu and the election of the current Liberal member, it's not as though the Prime Minister, the Liberal Party and the Liberal candidate were bystanders in this interference. They, in fact, were participants in Beijing's interference.
Last week, I sat in on an ethics committee meeting when it heard evidence from Mr. Chiu that the Liberal Party and the Liberal candidate amplified Beijing's disinformation. The Liberal Party created various disinformation products that were then disseminated throughout the Steveston—Richmond East riding. They had the effect, as intended, of amplifying Beijing's disinformation. What was Beijing's disinformation? One aspect of the disinformation was to claim that a private member's bill that Kenny Chiu introduced to establish a foreign influence registry would somehow target Chinese Canadians. That was a complete falsehood.
We have a bill now—what a surprise, just after the report of Madam Justice Hogue—from the Liberals, who have introduced legislation to finally establish a foreign influence registry. I think it's been well recognized by experts on matters of national security that a foreign influence registry is the bare minimum of what should be done to counter foreign interference. Other countries, like the United Kingdom, have passed foreign influence registries. Australia passed a foreign influence registry in 2018. The United States has had a foreign influence registry since the 1930s, I believe, since 1936 or 1938.
In the 2021 election, Justin Trudeau and the Liberals not only opposed a foreign influence registry but were amplifying Beijing's disinformation to target a Chinese Canadian member of Parliament, someone who came from Hong Kong, Kenny Chiu. He came to Canada to build a better life for himself and his country and rose to serve in the House of Commons. Liberals amplified disinformation to target him, to sow confusion within the Chinese diaspora community and to create fear, all very calculated to cause Kenny Chiu maximum political damage and to win on the basis of what amounts to lies—