Special Joint Committee on the Declaration of Emergency (DEDC) - April 26, 2022

Freedom Convoy – CSIS’ Role – Director Talking Points
2022-04-25

• CSIS’ mandate is to identify and advise the Government of threats to our national security, which are clearly defined in section 2 of the CSIS Act and include espionage and sabotage, foreign influenced-activities, terrorism and violent extremism, and subversion.
• While the CSIS Act definition of threats to the security of Canada is how the Emergencies Act defines the threshold for invocation, it is not only CSIS intelligence that is used to determine that the threshold has been met.
• CSIS assessments are one aspect of the larger security and intelligence community, whose collective advice ultimately informed the decision to invoke the Emergencies Act.  
• CSIS is specifically prohibited from investigating lawful protest and dissent. CSIS may investigate only once a threat rises to our investigative threshold; namely it must be ideologically driven, attempt to affect societal change, and be characterized by a willingness to commit or inspire serious acts of violence.
• The beginning of 2022 saw significant manifestations of pandemic-related grievances in the form of the Freedom Convoy protests.

• As demonstrated by the Breach of the US Capitol Building on January 6, 2021, Ideologically Motivated Violent Extremist (IMVE) actors may exploit lawful protests, rallies, demonstrations and other gatherings to carry out IMVE-related violence or to network/recruit like-minded individuals.
• Given this trend, CSIS closely monitored the opportunities the protests could have presented to IMVE actors to promote or engage in serious acts of violence in Canada.
• CSIS was also aware that the protests could have offered opportunities to lone actors.
• CSIS remained engaged with the RCMP, as appropriate, through the One Vision Process to ensure timely sharing, as well as other appropriate law enforcement partners.
• Other streams of intelligence reporting were carefully monitored for threat information linked to the event, particularly threats of serious violence.
• CSIS was also guarding against other threats to Canada’s national security in relation to the protests, such as foreign interference.
• With respect to foreign sources of funding, CSIS’ mandate is engaged when funds are provided at the direction of a foreign state with the goal of engaging in foreign interference activities in Canada, or when those donating the money are doing so to support an act of serious violence or terrorism.
• While the IMVE threats directly implicate CSIS’ mandate, there are broader strategic considerations at play. In particular, the manifestation of IMVE activities affect policy considerations related to online harms, the resilience of our democratic institutions, the security of parliamentarians, dialogue with racialized communities, and engagements on national security issues at all levels of government.

Background

The Ideologically Motivated Violent Extremist (IMVE) threat is diverse and multifaceted. The continually evolving IMVE threat presents a number of unique challenges and operational dynamics, and like the Religiously Motivated Violent Extremist threat, continues to evolve. The IMVE threat spans Xenophobic Violence (racially motivated violence, ethno-nationalist violence); Anti-Authority Violence (anti-government, anti-law enforcement, anarchist violence); Gender Driven Violence (violent misogyny including Incel and anti-LGTBQ violence) as well as other Grievance-driven and Ideologically-motivated Violence. 

Across this spectrum of investigative interests, CSIS’ investigative case work and coverage building efforts are focused on the identification of individuals and groups facilitating, advocating or taking actions towards serious violence (grievous bodily harm or destruction of property) in support of an ideological, political or religious objective with the intent of affecting societal change, as per section 2(c) of the CSIS Act.

In late 2018, the Service began to look into the deeper parts of the online extremist space to see a festering community of frustration, rage and individuals potentially mobilizing towards violence as defined by section 2(c) of the CSIS Act.  The Service has been a leader in the Security and Intelligence community on understanding the IMVE threat, having led three GC-IMVE initiatives: IMVE terminology, IMVE 2C Thresholds, and IMVE-Fabric of Society.  CSIS worked with analysts from across the GC and law enforcement to develop common language and terminology that has been adopted by international partners. 

CSIS has also clearly defined its threshold when investigating the IMVE threat and shared with GC partners briefings and products to help others understand the analytical process used by CSIS in its decision-making process when ascertaining whether an identified IMVE threat actor meets our investigative threshold and what action, if any, should be undertaken and by whom, all while keeping strategic considerations in mind. 

CSIS has also spoken publically about the IMVE threat before Parliament, as well as to external stakeholders and through Public Reports and speeches. In May 2019, CSIS Director appeared before the House of Commons’ Standing Committee National Security and Public Safety (SECU) stating that CSIS was focusing more of its resources on misogynist, white nationalist and neo-nationalist groups, given their use of terrorist methods to achieve their goals. The Service’s Assistant Director, Requirements (ADR), also appeared before SECU in May 2021 further to the committee’s study of IMVE. The ADR noted that grievances can be fluid within the IMVE space, citing COVID as an example for increased anti-authority grievances. The ADR also spoke about CSIS’ regular collaboration and joint efforts with RCMP and other partners to ensure threats are being assessed and mitigated when possible by the appropriate agency. 

Released in 2021, the Service’s 2020 Public Report assessed the IMVE space had evolved with unprecedented multiplicity and fluidity. The report noted the exacerbation of the IMVE threat due to the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically within the xenophobic and anti-authority narratives. This increased threat was in part amplified by false information spread by extremists over the internet.  The report further spoke about the increasingly violent calls for the arrest and execution of public figures including politicians as an area of increasing concern.

Freedom Convoy 22

CSIS mandate; s.2(c) and 2(d) definitions

• As this Committee is well aware, CSIS has the mandate to investigate threats to the security of Canada, to advise the Government on these threats, and to take measures to reduce them.
• The threats to Canada’s national security are clearly defined in section 2 of the CSIS Act and include espionage and sabotage, foreign influenced-activities, terrorism and violent extremism, and subversion.
• More specifically, section 2(c) defines them as: activities within or relating to Canada directed toward or in support of the threat or use of acts of serious violence against persons or property for the purpose of achieving a political, religious or ideological objective within Canada or a foreign state.
• And section 2(d) also defines them as: activities directed toward undermining by covert unlawful acts, or directed toward or intended ultimately to lead to the destruction or overthrow by violence of, the constitutionally established system of government in Canada.
• As such, CSIS does not investigate lawful advocacy, protest or dissent. While the internet is filled with racist, bigoted and misogynistic language and narratives, much of it falls under the category of ‘awful but lawful’.
• As you can understand, I cannot comment on specific details regarding our operations.
• What I can say is that CSIS closely monitored the opportunities the protests could have presented to IMVE actors to promote or engage in serious acts of violence in Canada.

Anti-authority movements and conspiracy theories

• The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated xenophobic and anti-authority narratives, many of which may directly or indirectly impact national security considerations. Violent extremists continue to exploit the pandemic by amplifying false information about government measures and the virus itself on the internet.
• Some violent extremists view COVID-19 as a real but welcome crisis that could hasten the collapse of Western society. Other violent extremist entities have adopted conspiracy theories about the pandemic in an attempt to rationalize and justify violence.
• These narratives have contributed to efforts to undermine trust in the integrity of government and confidence in scientific expertise.
• While aspects of conspiracy theory rhetoric are a legitimate exercise in free expression, online rhetoric that is increasingly violent and calls for the arrest and execution of specific individuals is of concern.
• IMVE conspiracy theories are often influenced by decentralized online trends and communities of extremist influencers who interpret local, national and international events through a radical lens.
• These broader narratives are often individualized by extremists and are impacted by perceived concerns regarding economic well-being, safety and security, the COVID-19 pandemic or other special events.

Protests and funding

• During the protests in Ottawa and across Canada earlier this year, CSIS remained committed to continue assessing threats to Canada's national security during the important operational activities underway by law enforcement partners.
• While the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly is an important part of our democracy, individuals are not justified in breaking the law or engaging in violence. CSIS supported the City of Ottawa and the enforcement actions being taken by the Ottawa Police Service, and their law enforcement partners.
• On financial reporting, CSIS continued to work within the parameters of the CSIS Act to support the Government of Canada in implementing measures that were in effect under the Emergencies Act.
• The Emergencies Act did not expand CSIS’ powers to investigate or take threat reduction measures. CSIS continued to work within the existing authorities of the CSIS Act.
• Under the Emergencies Act, other designated entities had expanded requirements to report to CSIS certain activities linked to designated persons. CSIS engaged with its financial partners to ensure that disclosures specifically related to its national security mandate.
• With respect to foreign sources of funding, CSIS’ mandate is engaged when funds are provided at the direction of or with the support of a foreign state or when those donating the money are doing so to support an act of serious violence or terrorism.

FC22 and way forward

• The bringing together of individuals with differing ideological motivations around a common cause is typical of the IMVE space. However, each radicalization pathway or mobilization to violence is highly individual, and discerning common features or triggers in order to predict action is a core challenge for CSIS and law enforcement partners.
• While CSIS’s work is often undertaken outside of the public eye, we are steadfast in our commitment to work in partnership with communities and individuals, alongside law enforcement, to keep them safe from threats to the security of Canada.
• CSIS works pro-actively with the RCMP, the Department of Justice and the Public Prosecution Service of Canada to align operational efforts, and seek solutions in the interest of public safety. Indeed, we have a duty to share threat-related information within the Government of Canada in order to mitigate risks to public safety.
• In addition, CSIS works closely with its domestic and international partners on understanding the evolution of the threat environment so that it is positioned to provide assessments and advice to support actions, including by law enforcement where appropriate.
• While the IMVE threats directly implicate CSIS’ mandate, there are broader strategic considerations at play. In particular, the manifestation of IMVE activities affect policy considerations related to online harms, the resilience of our democratic institutions, the security of parliamentarians, dialogue with racialized communities, and engagements on national security issues at all levels of government.

Ideologically Motivated Violent Extremism (IMVE) / Extrémisme violent à caractère idéologique (EVCI)

Issue: What is ideologically motivated violent extremism? What is CSIS’ role and assessment of this threat?

Key Messages

• CSIS takes the long standing threats of religiously, politically and ideologically motivated violent extremism very seriously.
• The uncertain environment caused by the global COVID-19 pandemic is ripe for exploitation by violent extremists.
• It is important to understand that extremism can stem from a range of motivations and personal grievances and is driven by hatred and fear and includes a complex range of threat actors.
•  IMVE can stem from a range of ideologies and is driven by hatred and fear. These ideologies can be:
  • xenophobic and linked to white supremacy or neo-Nazism, and ethno-nationalism;
  • anti-authority and targeted at governments and law enforcement;
  • gender-driven, which can lead to violent misogyny; and
  • based on other grievances without clear affiliation to an organized group or external guidance.
• Extremists draw inspiration from a variety of sources including, books music, and of course, online discussions, videos and propaganda. Those holding extremist views often attempt to create a culture of fear, hatred and mistrust by leveraging an online audience in an attempt to legitimize their beliefs and move from the fringes of society to the mainstream.
• As freedom of speech is constitutionally protected, CSIS can only investigate threat actors who meet its investigative threshold – those who are mobilizing to violence or are providing support to an act of violence, as defined in the CSIS Act.
• As such, CSIS does not investigate lawful advocacy, protest or dissent. While the internet is filled with racist, bigoted and misogynistic language and narratives, much of it falls under the category of ‘awful but lawful’.

Threat Landscape

• Ideologically motivated violent extremism (IMVE) is a complex and constantly evolving threat. It has the potential to grow, lead to more acts of serious violence, and cause further erosion of trust in our institutions of government.
• IMVE is often driven by a range of grievances and ideas from across the ideological spectrum. The resulting worldview consists of a personalized narrative that centre on an extremist’s willingness to incite, enable and / or mobilize to violence.
• These last few months and years have shown the threat that IMVE represents in Canada The combination of major disruptive global events like the pandemic, the ever-increasing influence of social media and its global reach, and the spread of conspiracy theories has created an uncertain environment ripe for exploitation by violent extremists.
• Canada is not immune to acts of violent extremism; Individuals in Canada are exploiting this environment by spreading violent rhetoric online and some have engaged in violence.
• Since 2014, IMVE related attacks have resulted in 26 individuals who have been killed and 40 injured on Canadian soil. As you all remember, last year on June 6^th in London, Ontario, we saw the threat itself in a tragic attack where four members of the same family were run down and killed because of their faith. Quite simply, this act was despicable and has no place in our society.

Rise of IMVE threat in Canada

• As reported by the Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC) in January 2016, CSIS concluded that the extent and nature of the Right Wing Extremist (RWE) threat no longer met the CSIS threshold for investigation. As such, CSIS ended its investigation into RWE in March 2016.
• In January 2017, following the attack at the Grande Mosquée in Québec City, CSIS reopened its investigation into RWE.
• At that time, CSIS observed that the motivations behind this type of violent extremism had become more complex. Individuals were no longer influenced by a singular and definable belief system, but a range of very personal and diverse grievances.
• For that reason, CSIS took a leading role in developing an understanding and terminology that more accurately depicts the broad range of motivations behind this particular extremist threat facing Canada.
• Based on its findings, CSIS decided to stop using the terms “right-wing” and “left-wing” to define the threat. Instead, it uses ideologically motivated violent extremism – which has now been adopted by both Australia and New-Zealand.
• It is clear from the 2017 Mosque attack, the 2018 van attack, the 2020 spa attack in Toronto, and the 2021 van attack in London, that Canada is not immune to acts committed in whole or in part by IMVE.

Online threat environment

• Violent extremism online continues to represent a deeply concerning threat to public safety and a significant area of focus for CSIS, as it evolves in complexity.
• Online threats represent a modern challenge and demonstrate the clear need for CSIS to be equipped with the tools and authorities it requires in order to protect Canada and Canadians in the digital age.
• As technology and applications proliferate, extremist online collectives can replicate disinformation and interference campaigns that were once the reserve of state actors or large non-state organizations.
• Threat actors have access to a wealth of information online and CSIS has seen a surge in violent extremist content proliferating in that environment. Propaganda is easily disseminated using both mainstream and alternative media and social media platforms.
• We have seen a combination of misinformation and disinformation pollute the global information environment. This manipulation and propagation of information can erode confidence in our democratic values, institutions, and polarize societies while undermining trust in our democratically elected governments.
• Many of these platforms can be used anonymously or leverage encryption technologies to enable threat actors to conceal their identity and evade detection by law enforcement and security agencies, while spreading their message, inciting violence and recruiting link-minded individuals.
• If violent extremists are spreading propaganda online to recruit and fundraise for their cause, inspiring acts of violence or conducting a live terrorist act for an online audience, CSIS and law enforcement need to be informed of the threat and equipped to investigate and prevent further threat activity.

Gender-Driven IMVE

• Incel (involuntary celibate) ideology bears many of the hallmarks of more traditionally recognized ideologies, and from the Canadian perspective, conforms to our definition of terrorism and is considered within the general terrorism offence framework.
• Incels belong to a misogynistic community of males, who associate primarily through online platforms. Though they use a unified terminology, they are not an organized group and have no centralized structure or planning.
• Incels believe their genetics determine the quality of their life and relationships, meaning they blame their unattractive physical features for their inability to attract women. They attribute their perceived failings in life to women and society in general.
• The ideology/beliefs within the “Manosphere” (a network of online misogynistic and male supremacy communities) stretch from lawful discussion of men’s rights issues to glorification of violence and violent misogyny. Forums also fluidly combine their resentment of women with racist narratives involving immigrants and people of colour.
• Since 2014, individuals motivated, fully or in part, by Incel ideology have, through numerous attacks, killed and wounded more than 110 individuals in Canada and the United States.
• In Canada, Alek Minassian’s perception and beliefs were motivated in whole or in part by Incel ideology when he deliberately ran down pedestrians with his van, killing 11 and injuring 15. In May 2020, Toronto Police arrested a 17 year male and charged him with terrorist activity after he stabbed a woman to death and injured 2 more at a massage parlor, stating evidence showed the attack was inspired by Incel ideology.

Terrorist listings

• Listings are an important tool for the Government of Canada and send a signal that extremist activities are not tolerated in Canada.
• CSIS is a partner in the Public Safety-led terrorist listings regime. The Service is one of several departments and agencies charged with informing the Minister of Public Safety as to the threat that violent extremist entities may pose to Canada, from a national security perspective.In
• telligence and evidence guide the terrorist listing process and are primary determinants for which entities are considered for listing under the Criminal Code.
• CSIS also works closely with its international partners on understanding the evolution of the global extremist landscape and emerging threat environment so that it is positioned to provide assessments and advice to support actions, including by law enforcement as appropriate.

On specific groups being investigated

• CSIS does not investigate Canadians participating in lawful demonstrations or protests in Canada or elsewhere, absent other indications of threat-related activity.
• As freedom of speech is constitutionally protected, CSIS can only investigate threat actors who meet its investigative threshold – those who are mobilizing to violence or are providing support to an act of violence, as defined in section 2(c) of the CSIS Act.
• As you know, the Service is limited in what it can say in an unclassified setting, and we cannot publicly comment further on operational matters and requirements.

Foreign Interference in Canada - General

Issue: What is CSIS’ understanding of this threat?

Key Messages

• Foreign Interference is one of the greatest strategic threats to Canada’s national security because it undermines Canadian sovereignty, national interests and values.
• Foreign interference is a complex modern threat. States employ foreign interference activities against a range of Canadian interests, including the integrity of our political system and democratic institutions, economy and long-term prosperity, foreign policy and military, social harmony, and fundamental rights and freedoms.
• It is also a national threat. It targets all levels of government as well as communities across Canada.
• Foreign interference activities encompass a range of techniques, including human intelligence operations, the use of state-sponsored or foreign-influenced media, and sophisticated cyber tools.
• This threat activity has long been present in Canada, but its scale, speed, range, and impact have grown as a result of globalization and technology.

Foreign Interference Manifestations

Democratic institutions

• Democratic institutions and processes, including elections, are vulnerable and valuable targets for hostile activities by state actors. Canada is not immune to these threat activities. This is not new.
• Hostile activities by certain state actors, such as the People’s Republic of China, seek to manipulate and abuse Canada’s democratic system to further their own national interests, or to discredit Canada’s democratic institutions and erode public confidence.
• Threat actors have sought to clandestinely target politicians, political parties, electoral nomination processes, and media outlets in order to influence the Canadian public and democratic processes.
• For instance, state-sponsored cyber threat actors use computer network operations to interfere with elections.

Communities

• Foreign states or their proxies have also threatened and intimidated persons in Canada, including members of Canadian communities, to attempt to influence their opinions and behaviours.

Media

• Both traditional media outlets, such as publications, radio and television programs, and non-traditional media, such as online sources and social media, can be targeted to advance a foreign state’s intent.
• Mainstream news outlets, as well as community sources, may also be targeted by foreign states who attempt to shape public opinion, debate, and covertly influence participation in the democratic process.

Hotlines

• As is common in large, multicultural countries, Canadian communities are subject to clandestine and deceptive manipulation by foreign states. This is foreign interference. CSIS and the RCMP actively investigate this threat to our national security.
• Both the RCMP and CSIS have phone numbers and online reporting mechanisms that are monitored 24/7 for anyone who would like to report a threat to national security, including foreign interference.
• Should individuals ever be concerned for their personal safety and security, it is essential that they contact their local police for immediate action.
• CSIS’ tip line is 613-993-9620, toll-free at 1-800-267-7685. The TTY/TDD number is 613-991-9228. The online reporting mechanism is on CSIS’ web page under “Reporting National Security Information.”

FI in Canada – Democratic Institutions

Issue: What is CSIS’ role in protecting Canada’s democracy?

On CSIS’ role in protecting Canada’s democratic institutions

• CSIS is responsible for investigating foreign interference threats to national security and advising the Government of Canada on those.
• CSIS distinguishes between overt – and sometimes aggressive – lobbying and clandestine or deceptive interference activities. Clandestine foreign interference activities can pose significant harm to our democratic institutions and processes.
• CSIS has longstanding investigations into specific threat actors who are believed to be targeting Canada and Canadians through clandestine, deceptive or threatening means.
• CSIS also routinely engages with a variety of stakeholders including government and public officials, the private sector and other organizations to discuss potential threats to the security and interests of Canada and to provide briefings regarding specific threats. This can include elected officials.
• CSIS delivers these briefings in order to promote awareness of foreign interference and the actions of other hostile actors and to strengthen individual security practices and protect Canadians and their interests.
• As a member of the SITE Task Force, CSIS worked closely with partners in efforts to raise awareness and assess foreign interference threats against the 2019 and 2021 Federal Elections.
• CSIS actively investigated a number of threats across Canada in relation to the election, and provided classified briefings on these threats to the Critical Election Incident Public Protocol Panel.
• While I cannot provide more detail on specific cases, CSIS takes all allegations of interference in Canada’s democratic institutions or processes by a foreign state very seriously.

General Election 44

• As we did in 2019, in 2021 CSIS continued to work with its partners to advise the Government of Canada on foreign interference threats to our democratic institutions, including through the Security and Intelligence Threats to Elections (SITE) Task Force.
• The Critical Election Incident Public Protocol lays out a simple, clear and impartial process by which Canadians would be notified of a threat to the integrity of a federal election. Under the Protocol, a public announcement would only occur if the Panel determined that an incident or an accumulation of incidents has occurred that threatens Canada’s ability to have a free and fair election.
• As was the case in 2019 and 2021, no public announcement was made.
• CSIS continues to prioritize outreach and engagement to raise awareness of the foreign interference threat across key sectors and civil society.
• That is why, ahead of the most recent federal election, we released a public report on Foreign Interference Threats to Canada’s Democratic Process.

Threat reduction measures

• The Canadian Security Intelligence Service’s threat reduction mandate provides an important tool for the Government of Canada to respond to threats.
• While I can’t get into specifics, CSIS may take threat reduction measures when there are reasonable grounds to believe that a particular activity constitutes a threat to the security of Canada or Canadians.
• As previously indicated, CSIS monitors threat-related activity closely, advises the Government on these threats, and uses its full mandate in order to reduce threats to national security if necessary.
• As has been publicly reported, the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA) did not find that CSIS violated the Charter in its conduct of threat reduction measures.
• I welcome increased discussion on national security issues, which includes the important work of NSIRA and will carefully consider its recommendations.
• I am committed to ensuring CSIS can act effectively protect national security while meeting its legal obligations and respecting Canadians’ rights.

Foreign Agents Registry

• Foreign states use a range of methods to influence policy-making in Canada and promote their national interests.
• CSIS participates in discussions within the security and intelligence community as to what tools are needed to protect Canada’s national security and sovereignty.
• We also engage with our close partners to discuss their experiences in dealing with similar issues of foreign interference and espionage.

Outreach and Stakeholder Engagement

Issue: How is CSIS engaging with external stakeholders, including on cyber threats?

Key Messages

• CSIS employees continue to engage with those in industry, academia, civil society, and other levels of government.
• These efforts are building bridges between CSIS and Canadians and supporting common understanding of the national security threats we face.
• In order to better understand and combat the complex and evolving security threats we face today, in ways that maintain the trust and confidence of Canadians, we must engage directly with those whose interests it serves.
• This engagement leverages decades of ongoing work at CSIS to engage with academic stakeholders in an effort to inform operations, support research, and facilitate discourse on national security issues.
• CSIS engages with community leaders and members to offer support and solidarity and to reinforce the position that there is no place in Canada for racial prejudice, discrimination and hate. 
• These discussions provide an opportunity to affirm CSIS’ commitment to ensure the safety and security of all Canadians – and to seek input on how CSIS can build greater trust with racialized communities.
• CSIS has also engaged with a number of community groups to seek their perspectives on how the organization can better-support Canadians experiencing racism, discrimination, and harassment. CSIS has offered briefings to community groups on related topics, including Ideologically Motivated Violent Extremism and foreign interference.
• These ongoing exchanges also provide an opportunity to affirm CSIS’ commitment to ensuring the safety and security of all Canadians and to building trust including through increased transparency.
• This foundational trust is imperative, and helps CSIS to foster the relationships needed to better protect the communities that are directly targeted by threats including violent extremism, foreign interference and espionage.

Modernizing CSIS Authorities

Issue: What changes are necessary to CSIS’ authorities, and why?

Key messages

• As you may know, the CSIS Act benefited from some much needed updating through the passage of the National Security Act, 2017 (Bill C-59). I thank Parliament for its support in achieving this much needed revision to our legislation.
• CSIS’ authorities need to continue to remain current so that we are able to address the challenges of the significantly more complex legal, operational and technological environment in which we operate.
• For example, our Act sets technological limitations on intelligence collection that were not foreseen by the drafters of the legislation in 1984 and limit our investigations in a modern era.
• We need laws that enable data-driven investigations, carefully constructed to reflect the values we share in our democracy, including robust privacy protections.
• At the same time, what the COVID-19 pandemic has shown us is that threat actors will continue to exploit vulnerabilities – whether it’s stealing life-saving Canadian research or indoctrinating Canadians into conspiracy theories about the virus, public health measures and the vaccine.
• CSIS’ work throughout the COVID-19 pandemic has made it even clearer that the private sector's partnership in safeguarding national security is more important than ever.
• However, section 19 of the CSIS Act only allows us to provide unclassified threat overviews to external stakeholders.
• This is another example of the way in which the CSIS Act has not kept pace with the threats of today or our operational reality.
• Keeping pace on an ongoing basis with changes in the threat, technological and legal environment will ensure that we can continue to fulfill our mandate of keeping Canada and Canadians safe – and do so in a way that is consistent with Canada’s values and the trust that Canadians place in us.

On specific amendments

• These decisions are made at the political level and with support from our other Government of Canada partners both within the Public Safety Portfolio and with the Department of Justice.
• To be clear, the purpose of amending the Act would not be to lower safeguards, but rather to ensure CSIS has the authorities to provide timely, relevant advice in line with Government and Canadians’ expectations of their intelligence service.

CSIS Screening

Issue: What is CSIS’ security screening mandate? What are the different screening authorities under the CSIS Act? What is CSIS’ role in advising Government on security assessments?

Key Messages

• CSIS’ security screening program is Canada’s first line of defence against terrorism, extremism, espionage, and proliferation.
• Upon request from other departments, CSIS’ security screening mandate supports government clearance processes and immigration-related security screening.
• High standards are applied across the board to support the integrity of these processes and to prevent national security threats from materializing.
• Though it supports an important element of the decision-making process, I must emphasize that CSIS provides advice to requesting departments; it does not make the decision on whether to grant, deny or revoke a security clearance, nor does it determine an individual’s eligibility or admissibility to Canada.

On Government security screening

• Under its mandate for Government Security Screening, CSIS provides security assessments on individuals who seek employment with the Government of Canada. This advice may also be provided to some provincial governments and other organizations, when employment requires individuals to have access to classified information or sensitive sites.
• Under reciprocal screening agreements, CSIS also provides security assessments to foreign governments, agencies and international organizations on Canadians seeking to reside and work in another country.
• On request, CSIS, in conjunction with other federal partners, conducts security checks of elected officials who are being considered for appointment as ministers, parliamentary secretaries and all Order in Council appointments.

On recourse when a clearance is denied or revoked

• Individuals who have been denied a clearance or have had their clearance revoked can make a complaint to the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency.
• CSIS fully participates in the complaints process.

If pressed on specific complaints:

• I cannot comment on specific complaints, due to privacy concerns and to the nature of the proceedings.