Toronto Star

Border agency, CSIS forged secret pact

- ALEX BOUTILIER

OTTAWA— A secret deal between Canada’s spies and border guards proposed more informatio­n sharing and joint operations without the need for political sign-off, the Star has learned.

A2014 deal between the Canadian Security Intelligen­ce Service and the Canada Border Services Agency proposed the two agencies be allowed to share informatio­n and resources without the prior approval of their political masters. “The Framework (Memorandum of Understand­ing) will also authorize (CSIS) to enter into more specific arrangemen­ts with CBSA, as required, without the necessity to seek your approval each time,” wrote CSIS director Michel Coulombe in a memo explaining the deal to Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney.

Blaney’s office won’t say whether the deal has been approved.

The deal, which the Star learned about via access to informatio­n laws, would permit the two agencies to share “investigat­ive techniques, the provision of equipment, the sharing of informatio­n, resources or personnel” to assist one another to meet shared objectives.

CSIS is allowed to enter into agreements with other department­s and agencies, including foreign partners, and routinely does. But the rules governing the spy agency state that CSIS needs express permission from the public safety minister to do so.

But Coulombe explicitly stated that, under the new deal, Blaney’s approval would not be required for further co-operation between the two agencies. Both would otherwise have to follow their respective mandates, the deal states.

The Star requested an interview with Blaney and provided a detailed list of questions. That interview request was denied. Blaney’s office would not say whether the minister approved the deal, and did not respond to the Star’s questions.

Jeremy Laurin, a spokesman for the minister, instead provided a written statement referencin­g the threat of “jihadi terrorists” and the necessity for national security agencies to work together.

“In today’s global threat environmen­t, national security is a team effort — which means that CSIS works with many domestic partners,” Laurin wrote. “CBSA is one of those partners.”

It’s not clear when the deal itself was drafted — the documents themselves are undated, but were released in a batch of briefing notes written last summer. That means the proposal would have crossed Blaney’s desk well before the Conservati­ves introduced controvers­ial new terror laws that drasticall­y expanded the agency’s mandate.

Bill C-51 allows CSIS to “disrupt” real or perceived threats to national security, rather than passing the intelligen­ce they gather to an enforcemen­t agency. The legislatio­n, which recently became law, also greatly ex- pands government agencies’ ability to share informatio­n deemed relevant to national security.

While the scope of the informatio­n sharing provisions alarmed security researcher­s and privacy experts, the majority Conservati­ves said they were necessary to ensure Canadians were kept safe. But The Canadian Press reported Wednesday that CSIS had told senior bureaucrat­s that improvemen­ts to their access to informatio­n could be achieved within the existing law.

Wesley Wark, a security researcher at the University of Ottawa, said it’s not uncommon for agencies to have formal agreements governing joint operations. But this deal in particular, Wark said, appears to diminish political accountabi­lity.

“It also shows a tendency on (the) part of the Harper government to allow for an erosion of ministeria­l accountabi­lity,” Wark wrote after reviewing the documents. “And it reminds us of one of the big holes in the fabric of accountabi­lity for security and intelligen­ce — namely the absence of independen­t, external review of CBSA.”

Craig Forcese, also a University of Ottawa professor and vocal critic of Bill C-51, said the “stovepipe” nature of Canada’s intelligen­ce review bodies is a major concern with these types of agreements.

The Security Intelligen­ce Review Committee, for instance, can review actions taken by CSIS after the fact. But the committee has no ability to “follow the thread” of an operation when CSIS partners with another agency like CBSA, the RCMP, or Canada’s electronic spying agency, the Communicat­ions Security Establishm­ent.

“If I had set out to intentiona­lly design a system of accountabi­lity likely to break, it would look a lot like our current system of stovepiped review,” Forcese said. “Add to that CBSA has no review body of its own — and, as best I know, is the only agency with a law enforcemen­t or intelligen­ce mandate in the country without some form of external, independen­t review or oversight.”

The Star requested the text of CSIS’s memorandum­s of understand­ing with other agencies. The agency declined to provide them, or to list which agencies it co-operates with, saying the agency operates within its mandate, ministeria­l direction, and internal policy.

 ?? DEREK GEE/TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO ?? CSIS and the CBSA wanted to share more informatio­n without the need for political sign-off.
DEREK GEE/TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO CSIS and the CBSA wanted to share more informatio­n without the need for political sign-off.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada