Dear Readers,
I posed a series of questions to NSICOP (National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians) drawn from my reading of its recently tabled 2022 annual report.
I am grateful to the NSICOP Secretariat and media office for being willing to respond to all my questions and for giving permission to publish the exchange in this newsletter.
I hope readers who follow NSICOP reporting or are interested in the system of review of our national security and intelligence agencies will find this exchange of interest. It can be read in conjunction with my earlier substack column, “NSICOP Reports,” from July 24, posted below.
The Q and A exchange follows verbatim:
1. NSICIOP review of the RCMP’s federal policing mandate was announced on Feb. 23, 2021 and was initially meant to be concluded in 2022. Can you say anything about the reasons for delay in concluding this study?
The delay was caused in part by the Federal election, which was called on August 15, 2021. The new Committee was not appointed until the end of January 2022, and time was required to brief the Committee on the review, particularly a number of new members, and to hold further appearances with RCMP officials.
2. The NSICOP Act came into force on October 7, 2017. The Act states at s34 that a comprehensive review is to be undertaken by Parliament “five years after the day on which the Act comes into force.” This means that a review should have been launched in the Fall of 2022. Can you explain the delay and any consequences of concern?
We have no information on why the review has not started. You may wish to pose this question to the government.
3. Does the NSICOP secretariat need more resources?
Over the past five years, the Secretariat has supported the Committee, including conducting eleven reviews and drafting five annual reports, within its financial authorities
4. Would NSICOP benefit from a robust communications strategy around its tabled reports? Are there plans for enhanced public engagement?
The Committee responds to requests for information through its Secretariat. When reviews are tabled in Parliament, the Chair of the Committee makes himself available to the media. Overall, the Committee only speaks through its reports and at events organized by academic organizations. That said, the Committee will consider expanding its public engagement in the future.
5. How does NSICOP engage currently with relevant Parliamentary committees? Is that engagement pro-active?
NSICOP regularly appears before Parliamentary committees, when asked to do so.
6. Does NSICOP brief party caucuses?
To date, NSICOP has not briefed party caucuses.
7. It is not clear what role NSICOP intends to play with regard to review of departmental and agency annual “mistreatment” reports.
As noted in the Annual Report, the Committee receives the reports and reviews them. The Committee would make any comments that it deemed necessary in the context of its annual reports.
8. Why hold off on advancing ideas in public for legislative change to the NSICOP statute?
NSICOP will provide input to the appropriate Parliamentary committee if asked to do so.
9. Why such a short annual report?
As it noted in its 2021 Annual Report, the Committee decided to decouple its reviews from its annual reporting cycle to permit the Committee to conduct complex reviews over varying timeframes and to provide its reports to the Prime Minister as soon as they are ready. The annual reports are now used mainly to fulfill the Committee’s statutory obligations under section 21 of the NSICOP Act, and to raise issues to the Prime Minister outside of a specific review.