‘Not a partisan issue’: Minister calls on other parties help pass foreign interference inquiry recommendations ahead of next election

Public Safety Minister David McGuinty speaks about the recommendations in Commissioner Marie-Josée Hogue's final report on foreign interference.

Public Safety Minister David McGuinty says he hopes MPs across the aisle can come together when Parliament resumes in late March to quickly tackle some of the recommendations from the foreign interference inquiry report, some of which would require legislation.

In an interview on CTV Power Play with Vassy Kapelos on Tuesday McGuinty said “foreign interference is not a partisan issue.”

“I really believe that parliamentarians of good faith and good will, if we can come back to Parliament in… late March and address some of these pressing issues, we should do so,” he said.

The final report by Public Inquiry into Foreign Interference Commissioner Marie-Josée Hogue was released Tuesday after she was granted a month-long extension.

It includes seven volumes, and lays out 51 recommendations for the federal government, nearly half of which she says should be considered before the next election.

In a statement with Democratic Institutions Minister Ruby Sahota on Tuesday, McGuinty said the government is reviewing the dozens of recommendations laid out in the report.

He told Kapelos he believes Hogue “hit the right note” in her recommendations, but that “so much of this is already being handled.”

“I think right now, there are ways for us to move forward, to fine tune and improve the situation, and to build on the things that our government’s already done,” McGuinty said.

Parliament is currently prorogued until the end of March. Should it resume as scheduled on March 24, following the Speech from the Throne, a series of confidence votes are expected in short order. With the current “supply” cycle ending on March 26, it’s likely that the House of Commons will have to deal with a series of confidence votes within days.

Those will determine whether Canadians head to the polls sooner than the currently slated October election date, and how much parliamentarians are able to accomplish in the interim.

When pressed on whether MPs will have enough time to pass legislation to address Hogue’s recommendations before the next election, McGuinty pointed to Bill C-70 — the Countering Foreign Interference Act, first tabled last May and receiving royal assent in June — as proof parliamentarians can come together to pass legislation quickly when needed.

“I’m sure we could do something similar. In fact, we may. We’ll have to wait and see how this tariff relationship continues,” he said, referencing U.S. President Donald Trump’s looming threat to impose significant tariffs on Canadian imports.

McGuinty said at this point, he’s more focused on addressing Trump’s concerns around border security, and which potential new measures to address those concerns might also require passing legislation.

Several Hogue recommendations would need legislation

Of the 24 recommendations Hogue would like to see implemented before the next election, at least six would require first passing legislation, largely involving amendments to the Canada Elections Act.

Some are specifically focused on preventing meddling by foreign entities in Canadian affairs, while others aim to tackle misinformation and disinformation, which Hogue in her report called “an existential crisis” to democracy.

They include:

• Amending the Act to prohibit undue influence by foreigners at all times, not just during an election period;

• Expanding prohibitions laid out in the Act related to bribery, intimidation, pretence or contrivance to also apply to nomination and leadership races;

• Expanding certain portions of the Act prohibiting efforts to lie or commit fraud during an election, to also apply to nomination and leadership races, as well as outside of election periods, within and outside Canada;

• Expanding definitions in the Act related to impersonations of certain individuals, namely election candidates, to include “the manipulation, by any means, of a voice or image,” except in cases of parody or satire;

• Amending portions of the Act around political financing as it relates to third parties and foreign entities;

• Amending the Act to “prohibit false information being spread to undermine the legitimacy of an election or its results;”

• And increasing “maximum administrative monetary penalties as well as fines for violations of Canada Elections Act prohibitions applicable to foreign interference.”

Hogue disagrees with NSICOP, says no ‘traitors’ in Parliament

McGuinty is also the former chair of by the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP), a position he held for seven years, until he stepped down to take over the public safety portfolio in December.

A late-in-the-game addition to Hogue’s study stemmed from a bombshell report by NSICOP last June, stating some parliamentarians were “semi-witting or witting” participants in the efforts of foreign states to interfere in Canadian affairs.

But Hogue’s conclusions differed from NSICOP’s.

The commissioner stated in her report that she reviewed both the classified version of the NSICOP report, as well as additional information the committee did not have, including “the raw intelligence and operational reporting underlying the allegations.”

Based on that, Hogue concluded: “While some conduct may be concerning, I did not see evidence of ‘traitors’ in Parliament.”

When asked by Kapelos about the opposing interpretations, McGuinty said the inquiry’s legal approach to foreign interference, “taken together” with NSICOP’s political approach to the issue, “complement each other.”

“NSICOP did three foreign interference reviews, not one, and in two separate occasions, made similar comments,” McGuinty said. “But what (Hogue has) revealed is, she said she had much more access to more difficult obtained intelligence.”

“So, she had more time, more lawyers, her mandate was different than the work that the review committee at NSICOP does,” he added.

When pressed on whether it could then be inferred that the conclusion reached by NSICOP was political in nature, McGuinty said “no.”

“I think that there’s just simply an experience that comes to bear when you’re a group of parliamentarians deliberating about different facts, scenarios and intelligence that’s given to you,” he said. “She’s had the benefit of perhaps additional information, as she says in her own review, information that was not brought to our attention at the time.”

“But I don’t think there’s much daylight here at all between the two reviews,” he added. “I think if you look at the bulk of the text, 90 per cent of it is very similar, and the recommendations tend to be very overlapping.”

McGuinty said he “absolutely” stands by the NSICOP report, and that he’s focused on looking ahead and implementing Hogue’s recommendations.

With files from CTV News’ Rachel Aiello