Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has every partisan political reason to resist calls to read the classified version of the watchdog report into foreign meddling and alleged collaboration from Canadian parliamentarians. His party’s support in the polls is sky-high. The Liberals’ support is the worst it’s been since 2015. He has a clear, solid line of attack in demanding Prime Minister Justin Trudeau “release the names” implicated in the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) report, the redacted version of which was released earlier this month.
And most importantly, by remaining deliberately ignorant, Mr. Poilievre doesn’t have to actually do anything about foreign meddling in his own party. Indeed, if he learned the specifics of, for example, the alleged interference by India and China in Conservative Party of Canada leadership races, which is mentioned but not detailed in the redacted version of the NSICOP report, he might be expected to clean house, or tweak his party’s policies, or test his parliamentary privilege.
Doing something risks doing something controversial. And why would Mr. Poilievre do that?
A spokesperson for the Official Opposition Leader’s office noted last week that he would happily receive a briefing from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) if the agency believes there are things he needs to know about his party. That is both a convenient way for Mr. Poilievre to foist responsibility onto someone else, and a bit rich considering he criticized Mr. Trudeau all of two months ago for not reading briefing notes made available to him about foreign meddling. (Yes, Mr. Poilievre is not the Prime Minister, but surely the man who aspires to become one should want to know about the threats facing his country as they occur, not after.) The Conservative Leader’s passivity and apparent incuriousness about what is happening in this country is not shared by any of the other party leaders, who have all sought the necessary clearance to inform themselves about the threats facing our democracy.
On a CTV News panel earlier this month, Conservative MP Michael Chong, who is also the party’s Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs, defended Mr. Poilievre’s decision not to read the unredacted report. He argued that the information would effectively “tie his hands behind his back,” since Mr. Poilievre would be sworn to secrecy, and in order to remove a member from caucus under the Reform Act, he would need to put the name to a secret-ballot vote at caucus. “They’re certainly not going to vote without information,” Mr. Chong said.
Surely Mr. Poilievre could find a way to get his caucus the information they need if the allegations in the classified NSICOP report were compelling enough to necessitate an MP’s removal (by, perhaps, disclosing the name under parliamentary privilege). But doing so would be personally and politically risky, as it would technically contravene the Security of Information Act, even if he wouldn’t be punished because of parliamentary privilege. It would also take the steam out of the party’s claim of “holding the government to account,” since the Opposition Leader would be sitting on the same information he’d be demanding the Prime Minister release. It’s much easier and safer for Mr. Poilievre to put a blindfold on himself and stagger about the House, wailing about Mr. Trudeau’s lack of disclosure.
Right now, we have two seemingly contradictory interpretations from party leaders about the contents of the NSICOP report: one, from Green Leader Elizabeth May, who said she was “vastly relieved” after reading the unredacted version; and another, from NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, who said he is “more concerned.” We also have a Prime Minister seemingly casting aspersions on the conclusions drawn by members of the committee, and a public that ostensibly is more confused than ever about the integrity of our democracy and the trust that should be placed in sitting parliamentarians.
Conservatives might claim that Mr. Poilievre can more effectively oppose this government if he is unburdened by the details contained in the classified NSICOP report, but so far his tactic of repeatedly yelling “Release the names,” and then reverting back to the carbon tax, has yet to bear fruit.
Where he might actually prove useful is in reading the report and providing some clarity. Indeed, Mr. Poilievre has the opportunity to prove himself as the adult in the room – to demonstrate that where this government is failing Canadians on foreign meddling and public disclosure, he will step up, potentially sacrifice a little political capital, and at the very least offer another interpretation. It’s a chance for Mr. Poilievre to show that he is more than a pugnacious attack dog, and to inform himself as any serious opposition leader would. But then again, with where he is in the polls, why would he?
Robyn Urback