'Not a blank cheque': LeBlanc on working with opposition on shaping foreign interference public process

Conversations are getting started on Parliament Hill between the federal government and opposition parties on what form a further public process probing foreign interference in Canada should take, following the resignation of special rapporteur David Johnston.

But, those talks should not be interpreted as "a blank cheque," to the opposition, says Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc, who Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tapped upon Johnston's departure to consult experts, legal scholars and opposition parties on "next steps."

"No responsible government is going to give a blank cheque to opposition parties on something as important as protecting the national security of Canada, the safety of Canadians," said LeBlanc in an interview on CTV News Channel's Power Play with Vassy Kapelos on Monday. 

• Capital Dispatch: Sign up for in-depth political coverage of Parliament Hill

"We're not delegating to them the responsibility of being a responsible government. What we're saying is this whole conversation would benefit from all of us lowering the partisan tone and I'm encouraged just in the last 48 hours… about our ability to try and work out exactly those questions."

In his late-breaking Friday resignation letter, Johnston suggested Trudeau forge ahead with public hearings, but pick some other "respected person, with national security experience" to do them. He advised that the prime minister would consult with opposition parties to identify "suitable candidates to lead this effort."

This work got underway over the weekend—on the sidelines of the Parliamentary Press Gallery Dinner according to LeBlanc—but with more openness that the public process could after all this time, be an inquiry, so long that it respects the need for certain intelligence to remain confidential.

"This is a sincere effort, and it's also one that's not going to be designed in any way to buy time. We're prepared to move very quickly in the next few days, next week, if we can agree amongst ourselves on the right way to proceed. Canadians would benefit very much from this exercise, and I think we can do it constructively," said LeBlanc, whose portfolio includes the democratic institutions file.

The main challenge ahead is who the right person, or persons, could be who would have the consensus of Parliament in picking pick up on this work, and whether they would be willing to enter into the role after witnessing how highly partisan the process became under Johnston.

Since being appointed to the role of special rapporteur in March, Johnston faced heavy scrutiny from opposition parties for his personal connection to the prime minister. That criticism grew louder when he recommended against a public inquiry, instead suggesting public hearings that would be led by him.

Ultimately, Johnston cited the intense politicization of his appointment and work, as the reason for his departure.

In a separate interview on Monday's episode of CTV News Channel's Power Play, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said he's prepared to play a part in the work of outlining the terms of reference for the public process and putting forward names of perceived conflict-less individuals, whether meetings with his opposition party leader counterparts, or through committee.

Singh is optimistic about all parties being able to arrive at a consensus, calling it "absolutely achievable."

"We've seen judges that have worked, the Rouleau commission I point to, is one example of one that worked and the judge was someone that was absolutely above board,” Singh said, referencing the work of commissioner Paul Rouleau in the Emergencies Act inquiry.

In a Sunday letter to Trudeau, Bloc Quebecois Leader Yves-Francois Blanchet outlined his views on what the next steps should be: agreeing to an inquiry and then talking who could lead it.

Blanchet remains of the view that an inquiry is the "only option" to restore Canadians' confidence in political and democratic institutions and ensure that federal electoral processes are secure ahead of the next election. He is calling for the government to strike this independent investigation before the end of the parliamentary sitting on June 23.

The issue was one of, but not the dominating issue that Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre challenged the government on during Monday's question period, which Trudeau did not attend.

"We need a public inquiry. The Conservative Party is ready to work with all parties, including the government in order to launch one. Will the government call a public inquiry so that we can know all of the details about Beijing's interference?" he asked in French, echoing comments he made during a press conference on Sunday.

Poilievre said that he's willing to take part in parties' putting their heads together on identifying names of "independent and unbiased" individuals who could lead a public process, while still insisting that process be an inquiry.

Poilievre's criteria includes the need for neutrality, an absence of any connection to any element of the foreign interference storyline so far, and someone who is "job-ready" so that the probe can have a tight turnaround so that "all the truth" can be placed on the table before the next election.

The former governor general has said he still intends to deliver a brief final report, sometime before the end of June, to conclude his work.