Michael Cooper calls for public safety minister to testify as low registration numbers, privacy breaches and technical issues raise concerns
Conservative MP Michael Cooper is demanding that Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree appear before a parliamentary committee to address concerns surrounding Canada’s newly established foreign influence registry, citing low registration numbers, privacy breaches and operational difficulties.
Cooper’s criticism follows testimony from Foreign Influence Commissioner Anton Boegman, who appeared before MPs earlier this week and disclosed several challenges affecting the registry’s implementation.
The Conservative MP argued that the federal government has had approximately two-and-a-half years to prepare the system since Parliament passed legislation establishing the registry in 2024. Despite that preparation period, he said the office continues to face significant problems.
Cooper described the registry as being “in shambles” and called on Anandasangaree to explain the government’s handling of its implementation and outline measures to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Although the minister had been invited to testify before the committee on October 6, his office indicated that he was unavailable. A replacement date has not yet been confirmed.
The foreign influence registry officially began operating on August 4, 2026, as part of federal efforts to strengthen transparency and address concerns about foreign interference in Canadian political and governmental affairs.
Under the legislation, individuals and organizations receiving benefits to influence Canadian political or governmental processes on behalf of foreign governments or foreign government entities must register their activities.
The law was introduced following revelations and allegations concerning attempts by foreign interests to influence Canadian elections and political institutions.
During his committee appearance, Boegman revealed that Public Safety Canada had initially estimated approximately 2,422 individuals or organizations would be required to register. However, only two entries had appeared in the public registry, while another 30 registrants submitted documentation shortly before the October 4 deadline for declaring existing arrangements.
The commissioner also confirmed that his office had experienced two privacy breaches since opening in August, alongside several technical difficulties.
Boegman attributed some of these problems to the registry’s information technology infrastructure, explaining that the system was launched as a basic operational version to meet the August implementation deadline.
Cooper criticized the discrepancies between anticipated and actual registrations, arguing that the figures and technical problems raised questions about the government’s preparation and oversight.
Anandasangaree defended the commissioner’s office during question period, maintaining that the registry had been established and that officials were working to register individuals and organizations covered by the legislation.
The minister also warned that those who failed to meet their legal obligations would face enforcement measures.
The controversy has intensified amid renewed scrutiny of alleged foreign involvement in Alberta’s separatist movement.
Following his committee testimony, Boegman confirmed that his office had contacted approximately 60 individuals and organizations associated with Alberta’s referendum campaign to remind them of their registration obligations if their activities met the legislation’s requirements.
Recent reports have indicated that some Alberta independence advocates held meetings with American entities on both sides of the Canada-U.S. border. According to previous reporting, certain discussions took place at U.S. State Department offices in Washington, D.C.
However, Boegman explained that meetings held before the registry became operational on August 4 fall outside the scope of the registration requirements.
The commissioner’s position has drawn criticism from former NDP MP Charlie Angus, who previously raised concerns about potential American involvement in Alberta’s sovereignty movement.
In June, Angus publicly called for an investigation into reports of meetings and alleged financial offers involving U.S. officials and individuals supporting Alberta separatism.
He also encouraged Canadians concerned about potential foreign interference to contact the commissioner’s office.
According to Angus, he subsequently received an email from an unnamed Public Safety Canada official explaining that although Boegman’s appointment had received parliamentary approval, the commissioner could not legally assume office until the necessary regulations were finalized.
The department directed Angus and other concerned individuals to submit future inquiries through an electronic correspondence system.
Angus criticized the response, arguing that concerns about potential foreign interference should have received greater attention from federal authorities.
He also challenged Boegman’s explanation regarding the limits of his mandate, suggesting that the establishment of a new office should not prevent officials from recognizing previously reported threats to Canadian sovereignty.
Angus, who supported the legislation creating the registry in 2024, questioned whether the institution was adequately fulfilling its intended purpose.
The Office of the Foreign Influence Commissioner had not responded to CBC News’ additional questions at the time of the original report.
The dispute highlights continuing disagreements over the implementation and scope of Canada’s foreign influence transparency framework, particularly as federal officials work to improve registration compliance and address operational challenges.
With opposition MPs seeking further parliamentary scrutiny, attention is now turning to whether Anandasangaree will appear before the committee and provide additional details about the government’s plans to strengthen the registry’s operations and enforcement.
