Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 4th, 2024

[Stéphan Aubé]

I mean outside of the House of Commons mandate.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you, Mrs. Romanado.

Ms. Gaudreau, the floor is yours for six minutes.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to start with a brief introduction because a lot of incidents have occurred in the past few hours. I've written them down in concise form.

In this past month, we've learned that a number of MPs were targeted and that their personal emails were subject to foreign state schemes to extract sensitive information. The objective, one imagines, was to blackmail those members or to use that information for malicious purposes. We know that.

Yesterday we learned that the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians had sounded the alarm. It's quite clear that the government hasn't done enough. So something has to be done about that. It's very important.

My impression—and we can all see this—is that the Prime Minister isn't taking these issues seriously enough. Some MPs are actually benefiting as a result, given that it's even possible to cause foreign interference. I'm shocked to be discovering that today.

In the meantime, we've learned that false documents are now circulating. Documentaries that you're no doubt aware of are circulating, probably in Russian, particularly on the Internet, about the Olympic Games that will soon be held in Europe. European media have online copies. We're talking about fake news and falsehoods, and they're incredibly realistic. One series is even designed to keep people confused. We're a few days away from the European elections, which will involve more than 700 million people. Imagine the impact that will have on those people.

One year later, I'm trying to understand why the members of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs are here again today to address this interference and are required to take a giant step forward. I don't think we're properly equipped to do that. That's what I notice when I talk to people.

I understand now that parliamentary privilege really embraces everything that's related to our work, in our ridings, in committee and elsewhere.

Now we're talking about personal information being gathered via a Gmail account. We agree that this is a big deal. People are coming to look at our invoices and who we are. They can find out everything. This is an enormous source for gathering personal information. The potential for blackmail could also be enormous.

How is this different from what's happening to the member for Wellington—Halton Hills?

[Michel Bédard, Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons]

Thank you for your question.

I'm going to cover the parliamentary privilege aspect. Then my colleagues can provide you with more details on the mandate of the House of Commons Administration as it pertains to our IT infrastructure.

With respect to parliamentary privilege, the Speaker of the House of Commons acknowledged the situation in that decision. We're talking about acts of interference and threats made against a member of Parliament related to his parliamentary duties. The Speaker ruled that this constituted a prima facia question of privilege, even though the attack involved the personal email of the member in question.

As you said, there's a potential risk of threats and all kinds of acts of interference, even if the member's personal tools are used. However, in the context of parliamentary duties, the mandate and capacity of the House of Commons administration are limited as to the instruments that may be deployed.

Mr. Aubé, do you have any comments that you would like to add?

[Stéphan Aubé]

Thank you, Mr. Bédard.

Considering our capacity to act in this matter, what we can do is protect the institution and ensure that Parliament continues to operate.

The technology infrastructure was established within this framework in order to protect Parliament and to ensure its proper operation.

We do this to support the duties performed by members when they're in their riding offices, travelling or on Parliament Hill and when they interact with their fellow citizens.

As for people's private lives and international relations, however, we can't respond to that type of situation. Other agencies within government are better equipped to do so.

Our mandate is to protect Parliament—

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I apologize for interrupting, but I don't have much time left. I want to say that I'm absolutely reassured about my role as a parliamentarian. I've experienced it.

Who can help us?

You say that there are other possibilities, that other agencies can help you do your work. You have to do it everywhere. We can't say that your work solely concerns my role as a parliamentarian when I'm here. It continues when I'm at home.

Who helps us? Who helps you?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

You have roughly 20 seconds left to answer that question, Mr. Janse.

[Eric Janse]

All right.

I'd say it's teamwork. There's the House of Commons administration, our partner on Parliament Hill, and then there are our partners in the security field, such as our partners in cybersecurity and police services. It's really thanks to our partnerships with all those groups that we can meet all these challenges.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you, Ms. Gaudreau.

Ms. Mathyssen, you're online with us today. We'll turn to you for six minutes. The floor is yours.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you. I appreciate joining you virtually, as difficult as that sometimes is.

I want to continue with Madame Gaudreau's line of....

I'm concerned, of course. She referenced the news that came out of the report relating to members of Parliament being influenced, and the line between our personal and parliamentary existence and work. I guess you could say that we are very political, partisan actors. I certainly want to ensure that my parliamentary work doesn't interact with my partisan, political work. I keep those separate. Of course, I don't run that partisan work or NDP fundraising activity—whatever you may call it—through my parliamentary email, yet that is being highly impacted by foreign interference. We're seeing this in conversations that have just been released in the media about the Conservative leadership race.

Can you talk about the personal attacks we're receiving and how we're supposed to continue to separate them and ensure we are not bad actors as we try to do both sides of our work in this role?

[Eric Janse]

Maybe I'll start. It's a very good question, Ms. Mathyssen, and obviously something the committee will want to reflect on.

As to what's bringing us here today and Mr. Genuis's case, traditionally questions of privilege on parliamentary proceedings are related to the chamber or committee. In this case, it was work Mr. Genuis did with an outside organization but that very much—how can I say this?—influences or assists his work in the chamber or in committee. As a result, in part, that's why the Speaker decided this is a prima facie case and deserves more study.

I don't know if my colleagues want to speak to this.

Pat.

[Patrick McDonell, Sergeant-at-Arms and Corporate Security Officer, House of Commons]

If I understand the question correctly, it's that you may be receiving a harassing email on your personal accounts or in your personal life and not on the parliamentary side of things. Is that right, Madame Mathyssen?

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

It's more about the separation we have. We are political; we are partisan, and that work has to happen outside of the parliamentary precinct and the controls you have. How do we assist you with that separation, but also in the protection of both sides of our lives?

[Patrick McDonell]

My area is responsible for both sides. On the personal side, if you have a security concern, you can come to my office and we will analyze it and reach out to the appropriate security agency, whether it be CSIS, the RCMP or the police force of local jurisdiction. However, we don't have a separation in the Sergeant-at-Arms's office between what's parliamentary and what's personal. Our only concern is the safety and security of members of Parliament.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

The NSICOP report that was just released made reference to members of Parliament who are wittingly or semi-wittingly providing intelligence to foreign governments. If we don't know what's happening on the personal side, how are we supposed to know to communicate with the Sergeant-at-Arms, for example, on those issues and those threats? If we don't perceive them in that way, it gets fairly complicated.

[Patrick McDonell]

Yes, and I take your question as being that the communication on your personal side is overt in nature and not covert in nature. Of course when it's covert, it's much more difficult to detect.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

I'm trying to get at the NSICOP report that's been released. How are we supposed to ensure that we are not providing intelligence in the personal space as well? Are you working with institutions like CSIS? Further to that question, have you seen barriers that this committee could deal with to help with the complicated cases that the NSICOP report revealed just this week?

[Patrick McDonell]

We have orientation sessions coming up. Public Safety is coordinating with us, and we're bringing in CSIS, CSE and the RCMP to give briefings to the caucuses.

Also, we've stepped up our security awareness area. At the last Board of Internal Economy meeting, we were given more resources so we can do a better job at briefing members of Parliament on current threats and can keep them up to speed on what the current threat environment is.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

A lot of this is entirely on the individual. This is on the MPs themselves to know.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Ms. Mathyssen, I'll afford Mr. McDonell a very quick response, but you're out of time.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

I'm sorry. I forgot to push my timer, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

That's not a problem.

Mr. McDonell, do you want to respond very quickly?

[Patrick McDonell]

I always think that security is a shared responsibility, and the more we know to serve you with, the better job we can do providing security for members.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you very much.

We are now in our second round, so we're down to different periods of time.

Mr. Genuis, the floor is yours for five minutes.