Achi news desk-
New intelligence documents released by the federal Foreign Interference Inquiry raise questions about the conclusions of former Governor General David Johnston’s investigation into the matter.
Johnston, who was appointed by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as a special reporter on foreign interference, denied calling for a public inquiry last May.
If Johnston’s recommendation had been accepted, a host of national security documents published this week by the Committee on Foreign Intervention would not have seen the light of day.
The new information, submitted by CSIS, highlights allegations of “highly capable and motivated” activities by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) against Canada’s democratic process and institutions.
Some of this information appears to directly challenge Johnston’s interpretation of top-secret intelligence and the extent of foreign interference — mainly by Beijing — in Canada.
A spokesman for Johnston said Friday that he was “not responding to any further media inquiries regarding his role as an independent special correspondent.”
A secret fund of $250,00 designated for the pro-Beijing network
Late Thursday afternoon, David Vigneault, director of the Canadian Central Intelligence Service (CSIS), revealed that they have intelligence that claims Beijing tried to transfer about $250,000 to interfere with the 2019 general election.
While CSIS offered no evidence that money changed hands, the summary it presented suggests the money was intended to be distributed through an alleged meddling network that includes an influential community member, a staff member of a 2019 federal candidate and an unnamed Ontario MPP. The intelligence suggests that the money was intended to benefit 11 campaigns, including seven liberal and four conservative candidates.
Global News first reported the existence of the alleged quarter million dollar fund in 2022, citing unnamed national security sources.
But in his report released last May, Johnston called the report “inflammatory.”
“It appears from limited intelligence that the PRC intended to channel funds to seven Liberal and four Conservative federal candidates through a community organization, political staff and (perhaps unwittingly) a Progressive Conservative MPP of Ontario,” Johnston’s report said.
“The prime minister stated that he is not briefed on issues that are not supported by reliable intelligence. No recommendations were given to the minister or the prime minister on this claim, and therefore no recommendations were ignored.”
During Thursday’s hearing, Vigneault did give the caveat that intelligence is not evidence, and that the alleged $250,000 in funding may require further investigation.
Good news from Canada and around the world is sent to your email, as it happens.
But the spy chief still said his words were “carefully chosen to make sure (CSIS) provides (the commissioner) and Canada the most accurate account possible of what we know while protecting classified information.”
The spy agency’s assessment was that the funds may have been “for purposes related to foreign intervention, though apparently not an attempt to covertly fund the 11 candidates.”
Both Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and national security and intelligence adviser Jody Thomas have repeatedly said there is no evidence the money allegedly changed hands — but have not acknowledged the government knew about the money.
The candidacy of Han Dong and a lot of students
On Tuesday, the inquiry heard that CSIS had intelligence that Chinese international students who went to a private high school were bused in to vote in former Liberal MP Han Dong’s 2019 candidacy contest in the Toronto riding of Don Valley North, as first reported by Global News.
Dong did not mention the buses in his initial interview with the commission six weeks before the hearing. Instead, Dong told the committee the day before his testimony
“I was recalled by my wife,” Dong said on Tuesday.
However, in his May report, Johnston called the voter bus standard procedure.
“Reports of buses of people being brought to candidate meetings may surprise the less initiated, but many people with campaigning experience told us that there are always buses, and wondered if they get more attention when they contain racialized Canadians,” his report said.
But a CSIS intelligence summary presented to the inquiry this week suggested the students may not have lived in Dong’s riding, were provided with fake identification and forced to vote.
“Some intelligence reports also indicated that students were given forged documents to allow them to vote, despite not being residents of DVN (Don Valley North). The documents were provided by people associated with a known proxy agent,” the summary said.
“Intelligence reported after the election indicated that veiled threats had been issued by the PRC consulate to the Chinese international students, implying that their visas would be in jeopardy and that there could be consequences for their families back in the PRC if they did not support Han Dong.”
Dong said he was told about the bus and assumed it was organized by the school itself.
“I didn’t notice the transportation of international students because… I didn’t understand it as an irregularity,” he said.
Johnston’s report noted that while “irregularities were observed with Mr. Dong’s candidacy” in 2019 and that there were “well-founded” suspicions that these irregularities were related to the PRC consulate in Toronto, Johnston “found no evidence that Mr. Dong was aware of this. about irregularities or about the potential involvement of the PRC consulate in his appointment.”
Dong denied any knowledge of the students using forged documents to vote in the nomination.
“I will be the first to condemn it. I think it is an insult to our democratic system,” he said.
When asked if he accepted that the PRC was trying to interfere in Canadian politics, Dong said he had “seen reports of that” but he had not personally seen any evidence of it.
Dong’s talk about “the two Michaels”
On Tuesday, the inquiry heard that Canada’s spy agency recorded a phone call between Dong and China’s consul general in Toronto discussing the arrest of the “two Michaels” in early 2021, while the Canadians were still in custody.
The document, created primarily by CSIS, is described as “incomplete” intelligence and its claims have not been proven, although it does have a recording of the phone call.
Global News first reported in March 2023, citing unnamed national security sources, that Dong spoke with a Chinese diplomat at the Toronto consulate about the arrest of the “two Michaels” and recommended against their immediate release. Dong disputes these claims and is suing Corus Entertainment, Global’s parent company.
In the CSIS summary of the conversation, Dong allegedly suggested to the diplomat that if the Chinese government released the Canadians immediately, it would reinforce the “tough” approach to Canada-China relations, while greater “transparency” around their detention would calm public opinion and give the Liberal government “talking points “.
“Mr. Dong expressed the view that even if China released the ‘two Michaels’ at that moment, opposition parties would see China’s action as confirmation of the effectiveness of a tough Canadian approach to the PRC,” the CSIS intelligence summary said.
The redacted document also claims Dong “stressed that any transparency provided by the PRC regarding the ‘Two Michaels,’ such as a court hearing or a court date, would help appease Canadian public opinion and provide some important talking points for his politics. Party vs. Opposition.”
Dong testified that he did not remember these statements, but added the information in the summary “did not make sense.”
The MP also claimed that he had always supported the release of “the two Michaels”.
Back in May, Johnston dismissed any idea that Dong had suggested China extend the detention of the “two Michaels.”
“The allegation is false. Mr. Dong discussed the ‘two Michaels’ with an official in China, but did not suggest to the official that the PRC extend their detention,” Johnston wrote..
“The ministers and the prime minister went out of their way to protect Mr. Dong, who they believe was seriously hurt by the report,” the special reporter continued..
“They didn’t believe the media reports when they came out, because they found Mr. Dong to be a loyal and helpful member of staff. They didn’t get recommendations about that claim, because it’s false.”
After the publication of his report, Johnston admitted that he had not interviewed Dong.
