The Long-Awaited Public Inquiry

Why the silence?

Oct 17, 2023

The long-awaited Public Inquiry has finally come. A Commissioner has been appointed. The terms of reference are publicly available on the government web site.

On September 7, the Hon. Marie-Josée Hogue began her work as Commissioner of the Public Inquiry into Foreign Interference in Federal Electoral Processes and Democratic Institutions.

Now the question remains, where is the Public Inquiry going?

Why the silence?

With next to nothing in the media on the Public Inquiry these days, it is difficult to speculate what the outcome will be. However, based on the flow of events that have brought us to this point, we can still identify some key factors that will determine the effectiveness of the Public Inquiry.

Throughout Parliament's discourse on the CCP’s interference in Canada’s elections, one of the barriers to revealing the whole truth about the Liberal government’s handling of the matter has been the excuse of protecting classified information. For this reason, how classified information is handled and what is allowed to be seen by the Commissioner and the public is critical to the Public Inquiry.

The Commissioner absolutely needs to access unredacted Cabinet Confidence files because that is a black box of the government’s communication. These files will be revealing of the Liberals’ handling of the issues and the gaps between ministerial offices and intelligence personnel.

But the most sensitive and perhaps some of the more important documents to the Inquiry may be examined strictly in camera. If so, the public will likely remain in the dark about some crucial information. Therefore, the integrity of the Public inquiry will also depend on the professional objectivity and integrity of the Commissioner, advisors, witnesses and all who will have a role in the process.

In Canada’s current atmosphere of skepticism toward the government’s handling of national security issues, silence creates more cynicism than assurance that things will change for the better. Keeping the Public Inquiry out of the spotlight denotes for many observers that it is not a transparent process and that Trudeau’s Liberals are controlling it from behind.

The Public Inquiry comes at a time when the underbelly of national security in Canada is raising many eyebrows. On the heels of insufficient government response to foreign interference, we now come face to face with charges against William Machjer and Cameron Ortis.

William Machjer is a former RCMP officer charged under the Security of Information Act for allegedly exploiting his contacts to help the Chinese government track an individual living in Canada.

This is re-traumatizing for immigrant Canadians who have fled oppressive regimes and already struggle with fear of government. This is detrimental to any efforts made to this point to build bridges and help heal their trust in authorities. Machjer's case would create more hesitation among regime targeted diaspora to report threats to police and seek help.

Cameron Ortis is a former RCMP intelligence director facing charges for allegedly selling sensitive intelligence or attempting to sell such tips to criminals and terrorists.

In the larger picture, the number of good RCMP and intelligence officers, current and retired, probably overwhelmingly outweigh the number of crooked ones.

But who can you trust when top RCMP spies are working for dictators and terrorists?

Then there is the issue of foreign interference from India, and the Liberal Government’s inaction that led to a possible assassination.

Coming back to the topic of foreign interference in Canada’s elections, the chronology of events leading to the Public Inquiry speaks for itself on the government’s abdication of responsibility.

Earlier this year, after a series of leaks of CSIS reporting on CCP interference in Canada’s elections hit the news, opposition parties demanded answers from the Government.

The Liberals attempted to deflect accountability by accusing Conservatives of stoking racism, gas lighting dissenting witnesses in Committee, and purporting they did more for national security than any previous government. But none of their tactics convinced opposition MPs to back down.

So opposition MPs demanded a public inquiry, which would grant the commissioner access to classified files.

The government resisted.

The opposition pushed back.

The Prime Minister, therefore, gave Canadians David Johnston. The Special Rapporteur turned out to be an old Trudeau family friend. His report reinforced Liberal talking points. He dismissed the veracity of the leaked CSIS reporting. The opposition harshly criticized the former Governor General for his ties to the Trudeau Foundation until he resigned.

Then just before MPs rose for the summer, the Liberals agreed to hold a public inquiry but threw the ball into the opposition parties’ court for names and terms of reference. The process dragged out.

Up to that point, the media had been inundated for months with headlines about CCP foreign interference in our elections.

But now, radio silence even after a Public Inquiry was called.

Long stretches of silence cause most people to lose interest in an issue. Is that the goal?

Tragically, on matters of national security, it’s not all right to deflect, delay, defer and forget because threats don’t go away unless they’re dealt with. The longer the delay, the threat actors gain more momentum and confidence. This is the sobering reality.

Moreover, when public interest diminishes on an issue, one might assume that public accountability on that matter can be dodged. Perhaps for some. But those who have an interest in our national security don't stop watching. This includes not only patriots, but also our allies and hostile foreign actors.

Fortunately, those who work behind the scenes in national security don’t stop working on a file just because the media stops reporting and the hashtags stop. As long as threats exist, it’s their job to keep collecting intelligence and provide briefings to the appropriate authorities, which includes the Prime Minister and his Cabinet, whether or not they care to act.

The political game of "deflect, delay, and defer" keeps weakening public trust and seems to be prevalent on issues that particularly demand account. The ethics breaches and scandals that have been deflected by Justin Trudeau over the last eight years are unprecedented. Foreign interference in Canada’s last two federal elections just happens to be one of those.

The vicious cycle of brushing problems under the rug repeatedly teaches people to accept this as the norm and to expect no better. People who are too busy putting food on the table get turned off and stop engaging. In their eyes, accountability doesn’t exist and voting is a waste of time. When politicians intentionally try to train the public to lower their expectations and standards—this is plain manipulation.

Is this the mark of a healthy democracy?

How can you trust a government that’s training the public to lower accountability standards so they can keep dodging responsibility?

The preamble in the terms of reference addresses “the need for transparency in order to enhance Canadians’ trust and confidence in their democracy.” Acknowledging the need for transparency to restore the people’s trust and confidence in our democracy sounds very patriotic.

But our democracy is not the problem.

The absence of accountability and the compromised integrity of the people who run our democracy is the problem. Democracy is only as good as the people who run it. Transparency is a mechanism of honesty and submission to a larger good. Only humans can practice transparency and it is a basic requirement for the politicians and public servants who hold up our democracy.

Silence doesn’t help with building trust. It’s been over a month since the Commissioner was appointed. The public needs to hear where the Commissioner is at in the process—is she reviewing files, calling witnesses?

Otherwise, the public will fill in the blanks with skepticism.

There are two very practical objectives that need to drive the Public Inquiry—to strengthen the confidence of Canadians with a process conducted above board on all counts of integrity and to address policy needs that will improve our national security legislation and practices. Without these outcomes, our democracy will continue to face vulnerabilities and threats.

The opposite of “deflect, delay, defer and forget” is to take responsibility with decisive, timely action that will yield correction, change, and set a new standard for a stronger future.

I hope this is the path that the Public Inquiry will take.

The greatest strength that Justice Hogue can bring to the table are the skills she’s already had many years to cultivate as a judge—discernment to analyze and weigh matters with clarity and objectivity, and the courage to take risks when needed in order to make just and right decisions.

Like the long-awaited Public Inquiry, Commissioner Marie-Josée Hogue can be a long-awaited standard bearer of accountability that our country needs today. It is ultimately up to Justice Hogue to determine the legacy she wants to leave for our country.

Nelly Shin
Former Member of Parliament

TURNING POINTS

Discussion about this post