There is sufficient evidence to conclude foreign interference impacted the last two elections, the Conservative Party told the public inquiry in its submission.
The party also said the standard applied by elections integrity mechanisms, which didn’t raise flags about interference, is “flawed.”
The public hearings of the foreign interference commission concluded on April 10 and parties with intervenor status have provided their respective assessments of what has been unveiled so far.
In this context, the CPC says the commission should conclude the standard applied by the Security and Intelligence Threats to Elections (SITE) Task Force and the Critical Election Incident Public Protocol (referred to as the Panel of 5) is defective.
During electoral campaigns, the SITE task force receives and assesses interference-related information from security agencies, whereas the Panel of 5 can warn the public if an event threatens elections integrity.
“If action is only taken where the Panel of 5 can decisively conclude, by consensus, that foreign interference is occurring, that standard will never be met in light of the reality of how intelligence is gathered,” says the CPC.
The CPC also suggests the commission conclude that while foreign interference did not decide which party formed government, “foreign interference impacted the 2019 and 2021 general elections.”
‘We Know’
Evidence presented at the inquiry indicates the federal government was aware of potential foreign interference in the two elections as it occurred, mostly coming from the People’s Republic of China (PRC).The public was not informed in 2019 and 2021 of such interference, and only found out through intelligence leaks in the media starting in November 2022.
The CPC criticized the panel in its submission, saying the thresholds was not only “universally regarded as being ’very high,‘ but it would seem that it was effectively treated as ’impossible to meet.'”
The CPC argues the panel had the responsibility to warn about events which could pose a threat, and not about activities which had actually impaired the ability to hold a free and fair election.
“Despite being aware of the corrosive threat posed by foreign interference, the evidence in the present Inquiry demonstrates that the Trudeau Government has failed in its response to foreign interference,” says the CPC.
‘Orchestrated’ by Beijing
The Liberal government has pushed back since criticism started building around foreign interference, saying it’s responsible for putting in place elections defence mechanisms such as SITE and the Panel of 5.The CPC notes how in “many instances,” politicians who were the target of interference from the Chinese regime were only warned about it much later.
Such politicians, like former Tory Leader Erin O'Toole, former Tory MP Kenny Chiu, Tory MP Michael Chong, and NDP MP Jenny Kwan, all testified at the inquiry.
“It wasn’t explained to me, no,” said Mr. Chiu.
‘Cost Him a Seat’
A key focus of the public inquiry has been around MP Han Dong, including his 2019 Liberal nomination contest in the Don Valley North riding. The CPC cited this event to argue the prime minister turned a “blind eye” on foreign interference.The intelligence on the matter had been transmitted to Mr. Trudeau, but he chose to keep Mr. Dong as a candidate. Mr. Dong, who has since left the Liberal Party to sit as an Independent, has not returned multiple requests for comment.
Based on the testimony from Liberal Party officials at the inquiry, the CPC says it appears there was no appetite to find out who ultimately paid for the bus in the 2019 Don Valley North contest.
CPC counsel Nando de Luca had asked Mr. Trudeau’s senior adviser Jeremy Broadhurst whether he had tried to ascertain who hired the bus after receiving the information CSIS delivered to Liberal Party officials.
“I did not have a bus that I can point to to say, ‘who paid for that bus?’” said Mr. Broadhust on April 9.
The CPC says the commission should “conclude that Trudeau was willing to turn a blind eye to the PRC’s activities in Don Valley North, asking no follow-up questions and doing nothing with the information, because it would have cost him a seat in that election.”
“A well-grounded suspicion is certainly warranting more reflection and followups, but also might not hit the necessarily very high threshold for overturning the result of a democratic event,” he said.
The foreign interference inquiry, which has access to unredacted intelligence, is currently preparing an interim report due by May 3. A full report must be submitted by the year’s end, according to the inquiry’s terms of reference agreed upon by all major political parties in the House of Commons.
