PMO staffers admit critical memos did not ascend to PM, deny involvement in 54-day delay

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s chief-of-staff Katie Telford and other top-level staffers told the China Inquiry at least four critical memos didn’t make it to Trudeau. Telford, Patrick Travers, senior global affairs advisor in the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) and Brian Clow, deputy chief of staff, also alleged Tuesday at the Commission on Foreign Interference they had no involvement in the 54-day delay in obtaining a Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) warrant. A June 3 National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) report disclosed at least 11 unnamed parliamentarians were operating on behalf foreign embassies. Suspected traitors on Parliament Hill include lawmakers in pay of foreign governments, spied on colleagues, acted at the “direction of foreign officials” and leaked to a foreign agent “information learned in confidence from the government.” .China inquiry hears former parliamentarian operated on behalf of foreign state.On Tuesday, the commission heard the memos in question, written in 2019, 2020 and 2021, warned that then-opposition leader Erin O'Toole and the Conservative party were “vulnerable” to foreign interference.The 2021 memo, which allegedly never reached Trudeau, warned that MP Michael Chong and his family were targeted by Chinese Communist Party (CCP) secret police."My recollection is that the information contained in the intelligence report was not a physical threat to Mr. Chong or his family," said Clow, explaining the reason the other memos never made it to the prime minister due to COVID-19-related factors and the 2021 snap election called by Trudeau."We all agreed this briefing should happen," Clow said about a December 2020 note for Trudeau — that allegedly never reached him — which prompted CSIS to to pursue a surveillance warrant in March 2021."I'm sure some will say members of parliament got no information because these two notes were interrupted, but it's just not the case.""There's often a healthy tension in government on these issues," added Telford, highlighting differences in approach between CSIS and Global Affairs Canada. .Defence minister Blair caught misleading China Inquiry while under oath.Records show the CSIS warrant request involving then-Ontario MPP Michael Chan sat untouched on then-Public Safety Minister Bill Blair’s desk for 54 days, even though he testified during the commission these types of warrants are signed within a matter of mere hours.Commission lawyers grilled the top staffers on the warrant and whether they had any knowledge — or follow-up discussions amongst themselves — once the news of the delay was made public, and whether the delay was politically motivated.The name of Zita Astravas, former chief of staff to Blair, hired by Telford, who she confirmed on Tuesday is a close personal friend, was brought up in questioning. Telford, Astravas and Chan worked together at the Ontario legislature.CSIS in seeking its warrant targetted Chan as potentially being complicit in CCP interference in the 2019 federal election. The intelligence service suspected Chan had tried to influence the PMO into replacing a Liberal MP with another candidate for the election.Chan denied the allegations while testifying at the China Inquiry last week.Telford argued the best way to fight foreign interference would be for all party leaders to get security clearance, which Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre has resisted because if he did, he would be prevented from talking about the issue publicly. "It can only help a leader to have that information," Telford told the commission, adding the intelligence would aide party leaders in decision-making processes."Which is why we encourage all leaders to get their clearance." .China Inquiry Commissioner Hogue cannot unmask Parliament Hill spies. Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc in addressing the 54-day delay testified Tuesday “all pieces of intelligence information are not equal” and explained some can be urgent and others ongoing analyses or renewals that aren’t as pressing.“Some is an interesting analysis done overtime, some are more pressing in the sense that there are decisions to be made, that has a higher level of urgency,” said LeBlanc.“I have always insisted the CSIS director and deputy ministers reach out to me personally and the chief-of-staff is copied, but I don't want to have filters between me and those senior officials, and I’d much rather them wake me up on a Friday night with some urgent matter than find out two days later that we missed a window.”“I’m quite comfortable that I have access to the information I need to do my job, and I have a lot of confidence in the women and men that work in our department and at CSIS and the RCMP, knowing when and what I should see, and I have every confidence that they get it to me with the consistency that is required.”LeBlanc told the commission he is “satisfied” with protocols surrounding the handling of warrants. He said the warrants are like the “crown jewels for CSIS because of the sensitivity of the information” and “the ability of them to do the work Canadians expect them to do.”“Typically we know a warrant is coming, the deputy minister notifies me of the warrants and recommends that I approve it,” he said, explaining that the process can take six to seven days. Once it comes to the public safety minister’s office, the chief of staff reads the warrant before it gets to the minister, he said.“I try and turn them around the same day.”When lawyers pressed him on his chief-of-staff's failure to bring the warrant to his attention, LeBlanc replied, "these don't come as surprises.”“My experience is my chief-of-staff would know that there's a warrant application working, he would mention to me there's a warrant on its way,” he said.“In dealing with these applications can you think of any instance where it's taken 54 days from that time (of a warrant request being issued) to the time you signed off?” the lawyer asked.“No,” LeBlanc said. .China Inquiry Commissioner Hogue cannot unmask Parliament Hill spies.The China Inquiry heard a memo from August 2023 required LeBlanc to release an unclassified version of his Counter-Foreign Interference Strategy — yet, LeBlanc alleged he received no such memo.The memo said making the strategy public would protect Canadians and the country’s democratic institutions from hostile interference from foreign entities, or, as the CSIS memo puts it, “hybrid warfare.”"I don't have a recollection of seeing that particular document,” said LeBlanc of the memo asking for the release of a strategy that has supposedly been in the works since 2018. The safety minister said the memo must have been lost in the bureaucracy.Commission lawyers pointed out the strategy, which the memo requested be translated into languages beyond English and French, would have been a layer of protection against foreign interference because it would alert vulnerable diaspora communities, including those targetted by “Chinese police stations.”“Do you agree that expelling a Chinese diplomat would send the message to the Chinese Communist Party that Canada won’t tolerate another state treading on our territorial sovereignty?” asked the lawyer.That decision is the responsibility Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly, replied LeBlanc.Lawyers asked LeBlanc why the parliamentarians named in the report for colluding with foreign governments shouldn't be unmasked. LeBlanc , who earlier said the spies could not be named, replied, “I'll repeat it to you again — I think it is inappropriate, if not illegal, to release names that the members of NSICOP decided to write the report about and use the words they chose."“I don't think it's particularly helpful to use witting, unwitting, semi-witting. I think those words understandably cast an understandable concern on these parliamentarians," he said.

PMO staffers admit critical memos did not ascend to PM, deny involvement in 54-day delay

Related Stories