No Inquiry Needed into Election Interference, Says Former Governor-General

Photo Credit: Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press via City News

Former Governor General and Special Rapporteur David Johnston recommended against calling an independent public inquiry into China’s alleged election interference on May 23, weeks before announcing his resignation and in turn leading the government to reconsider calling an inquiry.

In March, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tasked Johnston with examining alleged interference by Beijing in the 2019 and 2021 federal elections. The matter surfaced in February, following reporting from The Globe and Mail that Beijing orchestrated a campaign to influence the 2021 election. Using its diplomats and their allies in Canada, the Chinese government sought to re-elect a minority Liberal government and force out candidates who spoke out against China, according to classified documents viewed by reporters.

Johnston submitted his first report May 23, outlining why a public inquiry would be unnecessary, and was due to submit another report advising the government on how to counter foreign interference in October, following public hearings he planned to hold over the summer.

Johnston announced his resignation June 9, saying it would take effect by the end of the month, after he completed a shortened final report, but urged the government to appoint a new special rapporteur to continue with the public hearings.

Trudeau had committed to following Johnston’s recommendations and not calling a public inquiry, but a cabinet minister has indicated the government is re-considering the move.

“[Johnston] explained and justified his thought process by it and we will be following his recommendations,” said Trudeau, speaking to reporters.

The House of Commons has passed three separate non-binding motions calling for a public inquiry, including a motion calling for Johnston to resign. This motion, adopted May 31, had the support of all opposition parties and some Liberal MPs. A public inquiry would be led by a judge with full subpoena powers and the ability to examine witnesses.

Johnston’s report claims a public inquiry “could not be held in public,” due to the classified nature of the evidence being shared, meaning “the public inquiry would necessarily be held in camera.” Opposition parties and legal and national security experts told The Globe some testimony has been held in camera at past public inquiries and similar arrangements could be made again.

However, Johnston labelled such a move as unprecedented. “While some public inquiries have an in-camera component, it would be highly unusual to order a Public Inquiry that would be conducted almost entirely in camera.” As well, he says such a process would be unnecessary, since he had access to all pertinent information as special rapporteur.

“A person leading a Public Inquiry would be unlikely to learn more about who knew what, when, and what was done with [intelligence] than has been made available to me.”

According to the report, he interviewed the Prime Minister, Cabinet Ministers, senior officials, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, and Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre declined a meeting. He also had access to intelligence reports and Cabinet documents.

Johnston says a public inquiry would be “unable to provide any greater transparency than what I am able to provide to Canadians in this report.” Many of the issues he had already begun investigating would coincide with the mandate of a public inquiry.

“...while we could launch a Public Inquiry on the issues, I am required to address for my October report under my [Terms of Reference], there would be a clear overlap with the work I have already started doing, and there is no reason to think the additional powers available to a Commissioner (e. g., to subpoena witnesses or take evidence under oath) are required for that work. It is more timely and effective to complete the work already underway...”

He adds the problems identified were not caused by elected officials choosing inaction but rather by a lack of intelligence sharing within the government and intelligence agencies. This weakens the case for an inquiry led by a judge distinct from the government.

Photo Credit: Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press via The Star

Despite these assurances, opposition parties believe the House of Commons should dictate what happens next.

“Parliament is the heart of Canada’s democracy. And elected members of the Parliament have voted twice for a full, independent public inquiry,” Conservative MP and foreign affairs critic Michael Chong told The Globe. The MP, who has family in Hong Kong, is the target of intimidation from Beijing due to his criticism of the regime, according to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), Canada’s national intelligence agency.

“It would be difficult to restore public confidence and trust in our democratic institutions and in the electoral process without a full public inquiry.”

Singh is calling for a public inquiry as well. “The problem from the start was that Mr. Johnston answered to the Prime Minister and that is why we are still asking for a process that is independent from this government and will put Canadians first.”

The NDP has agreed to prop up the minority parliament on the condition of the Liberals advancing some of their policy, but Singh says he won’t force an election on this issue. If an election were held now, he says, it could fall “under the cloud of suspicion of foreign interference.”

Blanchet echoed those comments. “What is Justin Trudeau trying to hide here? We are not going to abandon this until the government abides by the fundamental rules of democracy and provides Canadians with all the facts in a credible process,” he told a news conference. Trudeau says information is readily available to opposition leaders if they sign confidentiality agreements necessary to view the classified annex to Johnston’s report.

“I certainly hope that all party leaders will avail themselves of the opportunity to understand the facts of the situation as we continue important debates on how to best keep Canadians, our businesses, our research institution and especially our democracy safe,” he said in a statement.

Poilievre and Blanchet both say they won’t seek security clearance as they fear it would limit their ability to speak publicly, while Singh says he’s interested in viewing the documents but wants assurance from the government he can still address the matter publicly.

Opposition leaders have also called into question Johnston’s favourable ties with the Trudeau family. Trudeau admits he saw Johnston “a few times as a kid.” Johnston says he went on five ski trips with the Trudeau family decades ago and sometimes drove the children home afterwards. He has not had any unofficial encounters with Trudeau since he became an MP in 2008.

Johnston was also a member of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, donating a few times and attending four meetings. The Foundation reached out after he left the role of governor general and he joined due to an interest, given his long post-secondary career, in the scholarships awarded by the Foundation. The Foundation has faced controversy over a 2016 donation from two Chinese businessmen with alleged links to the regime.

“[Trudeau’s] ski buddy, cottage neighbour, family friend and member of the Beijing-financed Trudeau Foundation came out and did exactly what I predicted – helped Trudeau cover up the influence by Beijing in our democracy,” Poilievre told reporters.

He went on to call the report a “whitewash attempt,” saying Johnston is in “a conflict of interest,” and renewed his calls for a public inquiry. “That’s what I will deliver when I am prime minister. There will be a full public inquiry into this mess.”

“Holding a public and independent inquiry into Chinese interference is even more essential today,” said a statement from Alain Therrien, the Bloc’s critic for democratic institutions.

“The special rapporteur jumps to conclusions that we cannot accept that Chinese interference would not have had an effect on the 2019 and 2021 elections, on the basis that he will keep it secret, despite media revelations.”

But Johnston insists his method is rigorous and transparent.

“...I have insisted...that I be granted scope to say as much as possible about the intelligence collected...As a result, the level of disclosure in this report is unprecedented.”

A confidential annex is included in the full report, which gives references to the specific pieces of evidence found in intelligence reports that led Johnston to his conclusions.

However, he admitted on June 6 that his conclusion that China did not take actions against Conservative candidates may have been based on incomplete intelligence, frustrating MPs.

Former Conservative Leader O’Toole, who led the party through the 2021 election, said May 30 that CSIS told him “my party, several members of my caucus and me were targets of misinformation and voter suppression that was orchestrated by China before and during the 2021 election.”

Johnston attributed the discrepancy to O’Toole receiving intelligence after he obtained the intelligence for the report.

Johnston advised the Prime Minister to instruct the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliament and the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency to review the findings in his report and report publicly on whether they reach different conclusions.

“In recommending review by both Parliamentarians and expert officials through NSICOP and NSIRA, I am seeking to provide maximum transparency and accountability to what I have found and thereby contribute to public trust,” the report reads.

Photo Credit: Canadian Club Toronto via Flickr

However, these comments come as a stark contrast to his letter of resignation issued to the Prime Minister June 9.

“My objective was to build trust in our democratic institutions. I have concluded, given the highly partisan atmosphere around my appointment and work, my leadership has had the opposite effect.” Johnston stands by his opinion that a public inquiry would be unnecessary and calls on the Prime Minister to appoint someone to continue his role.

“I encourage you to appoint a respected person, with national security experience, to complete the work that I recommended in my first report. Ideally, you would consult with opposition leaders to identify suitable candidates to lead this effort.”

In a statement, Poilievre accused Trudeau of harming the “reputation of a former Governor General all to cover up his own refusal to defend Canada from foreign interests and threats.

“He must end this cover-up, stop hiding and call a full public inquiry into Beijing’s interference.”

Singh and Blanchet agree.

Before stepping down Johnston fired his crisis management firm, Navigator, according to reporting from The Globe. Liberal MP Han Dong, whose actions Johnston investigated in his report, has also hired Navigator.

As well, Johnston’s lead counsel, Sheila Block, a Torys LLP lawyer, was a Liberal donor, and attended a private party event in 2021 where Trudeau was present.

The Globe asked Johnston’s office whether Navigator had access to the report before it was published and if Torys LLP lawyers and executives not working with Johnston had access to the report, but received no response.

Following his resignation, the government shifted its tone. Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs Dominic LeBlanc, who is responsible for democratic institutions, said the government was now considering creating a public inquiry.

“A public inquiry has never been off the table. All options remain on the table,” he told a news conference. “The Prime Minister said so when he announced the appointment of Mr. Johnston.”

Following Johnston’s report, Trudeau told reporters, “I committed to listening very carefully and abiding by the recommendations the former governor general made.”

LeBlanc will meet with legal and national security experts and opposition parties to decide whether to appoint a new special rapporteur or call a public inquiry. If opposition parties can’t agree on a specific mandate for the inquiry, the government may appoint another special rapporteur.

LeBlanc encourages “opposition leaders to take this matter seriously,” and, “not just simply say there has to be a public inquiry.” Poilievre’s office released a statement following the announcement demanding a public inquiry be called before the party enters talks with the Liberals.

“Liberals must end the cover up and announce a public inquiry now. Only once they finally follow the will of Canadians and Parliament to call an open and independent public inquiry will Conservatives discuss further details.”

CSIS recognizes foreign interference in democratic institutions as the greatest threat to Canada’s national security.