House of Commons, a Member of Parliament

National Defence will not say whether one record exists on what defends Canada against nuclear attack

Hello,

Danilo Dzyuban, Ottawa. This goes to you as Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs, with a copy to the Associate Shadow Minister.

Between 29 and 31 August 2026 I filed 3 requests under the Access to Information Act with the Department of National Defence. They carry 14 numbered items. One asks for any assessment of the reliability of the assurances allied states have given to defend Canada against nuclear attack. One asks for the record that names the instrument in which an obligation of any state to defend Canada against nuclear attack is written down, or that states that no such instrument exists. One asks for any note on Canada's options if extended deterrence were withdrawn or conditioned. One asks for the emergency management plan for nuclear attack that subsection 6(1) of the Emergency Management Act requires the Minister to prepare. One asks for the nuclear certification status of the aircraft Canada is buying. On 17 September 2026 the Department answered all 3 requests with the same 2 sentences: "We regret to advise you that this Department neither confirms nor denies records exist pursuant to section 10(2) of the Access to Information Act. If the documentation did exist, it would be exempted in its entirety pursuant to section 15(1) of the Access to Information Act." No item was answered on its own. The Department did not say that the records do not exist. It refused to say whether they exist.

WHAT THEY SAID AGAINST WHAT THEY DID.

The Minister of National Defence told reporters on 3 February 2026: "Canada has absolutely no intention of pursuing nuclear weapons." That position stands on the assurance of allies. His Department refused on 17 September 2026 to say whether it holds 1 assessment of that assurance. The statement rests on a guarantee the Department will not say it has ever examined.

Paragraph 6(2)(d) of the Emergency Management Act names the case of war in its own words and orders a plan. The Department will not say whether the plan exists. Either the plan exists and is hidden from the public that pays for it, or it does not exist and the duty in subsection 6(1) has not been performed. Subsection 10(2) of the Access to Information Act is being used to hide which of the 2 is true.

Public Safety Canada's National Risk Profile runs to 55,574 words. The word war appears 0 times. Armed conflict, 0 times. Armed attack, 0 times. The statute names the case. The published profile of the country's risks omits it.

The United States announced on 8 March 2024 that the F-35A is certified to carry the B61-12. Canada is buying 88 of them. The Department claims that confirming it holds a record on that certification could injure the defence of Canada or of an ally. The ally published the fact itself.

Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty and Article IV of the NORAD Agreement are published texts. The Department will not say whether it holds a record about published treaties.

The NORAD and USNORTHCOM FOIA office wrote to me on 23 September 2026, in coordination with the Department's own access directorate, that HQ NORAD records are not subject to Canada's Access to Information Act and are not physically under the Department's control. The same directorate holds that all records under the control of the Department are subject to the Act. Both statements come from the same building. Either 1 of them is false, or the records of the command that warns of an attack on Canada belong to nobody under the law of either country.

The former Chief of the Defence Staff said on 2 February 2026 that Canada will never have true strategic independence absent its own nuclear deterrent. The institute that hosted him wrote to me on 20 September 2026 that nuclear policy is not a core area of its advocacy. The general raised it. The institute that gave him the room will not carry it.

The finding, the 14 items, the Department's 3 letters in full, the statutes and every source as captured are published under my name at https://dzyuban.com/legal/findings/nuclear-guarantee-no-record/

WHAT YOU ARE TO DO.

Put 1 question to the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the House: name the instrument in which an obligation of any state to defend Canada against nuclear attack is recorded, or state that no such instrument exists. Confirm in writing by 8 October 2026 that you will put it, and on what date. Name the route the Official Opposition supports if the answer is that no instrument exists. Do not refer me to an access office. Sign the answer with a name and a title.

Complaints on the 3 files are before the Information Commissioner of Canada. The Federal Court follows under section 41 of the Act. The same 3 questions are with the Minister of National Defence, with 4 October 2026 as the date. Your answer, or its absence, goes into the public record with the date, next to the Department's letters.

Respectfully,
Danilo Dzyuban

National Defence will not say whether one record exists on what defends Canada against nuclear attack

Hello,

Danilo Dzyuban, Ottawa. This goes to you as Shadow Minister for Emergency Preparedness and Community Resilience, because the plan in question is one the Emergency Management Act requires.

Between 29 and 31 August 2026 I filed 3 requests under the Access to Information Act with the Department of National Defence. They carry 14 numbered items. One asks for any assessment of the reliability of the assurances allied states have given to defend Canada against nuclear attack. One asks for the record that names the instrument in which an obligation of any state to defend Canada against nuclear attack is written down, or that states that no such instrument exists. One asks for any note on Canada's options if extended deterrence were withdrawn or conditioned. One asks for the emergency management plan for nuclear attack that subsection 6(1) of the Emergency Management Act requires the Minister to prepare. One asks for the nuclear certification status of the aircraft Canada is buying. On 17 September 2026 the Department answered all 3 requests with the same 2 sentences: "We regret to advise you that this Department neither confirms nor denies records exist pursuant to section 10(2) of the Access to Information Act. If the documentation did exist, it would be exempted in its entirety pursuant to section 15(1) of the Access to Information Act." No item was answered on its own. The Department did not say that the records do not exist. It refused to say whether they exist.

WHAT THEY SAID AGAINST WHAT THEY DID.

The Minister of National Defence told reporters on 3 February 2026: "Canada has absolutely no intention of pursuing nuclear weapons." That position stands on the assurance of allies. His Department refused on 17 September 2026 to say whether it holds 1 assessment of that assurance. The statement rests on a guarantee the Department will not say it has ever examined.

Paragraph 6(2)(d) of the Emergency Management Act names the case of war in its own words and orders a plan. The Department will not say whether the plan exists. Either the plan exists and is hidden from the public that pays for it, or it does not exist and the duty in subsection 6(1) has not been performed. Subsection 10(2) of the Access to Information Act is being used to hide which of the 2 is true.

Public Safety Canada's National Risk Profile runs to 55,574 words. The word war appears 0 times. Armed conflict, 0 times. Armed attack, 0 times. The statute names the case. The published profile of the country's risks omits it.

The United States announced on 8 March 2024 that the F-35A is certified to carry the B61-12. Canada is buying 88 of them. The Department claims that confirming it holds a record on that certification could injure the defence of Canada or of an ally. The ally published the fact itself.

Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty and Article IV of the NORAD Agreement are published texts. The Department will not say whether it holds a record about published treaties.

The NORAD and USNORTHCOM FOIA office wrote to me on 23 September 2026, in coordination with the Department's own access directorate, that HQ NORAD records are not subject to Canada's Access to Information Act and are not physically under the Department's control. The same directorate holds that all records under the control of the Department are subject to the Act. Both statements come from the same building. Either 1 of them is false, or the records of the command that warns of an attack on Canada belong to nobody under the law of either country.

The former Chief of the Defence Staff said on 2 February 2026 that Canada will never have true strategic independence absent its own nuclear deterrent. The institute that hosted him wrote to me on 20 September 2026 that nuclear policy is not a core area of its advocacy. The general raised it. The institute that gave him the room will not carry it.

The finding, the 14 items, the Department's 3 letters in full, the statutes and every source as captured are published under my name at https://dzyuban.com/legal/findings/nuclear-guarantee-no-record/

WHAT YOU ARE TO DO.

Put 2 questions to the Minister of Public Safety, who is the Minister under the Emergency Management Act, in the House or at the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security. First: does an emergency management plan under paragraph 6(1)(a) of the Act in respect of nuclear attack on Canada exist. Second: is nuclear attack on Canada on any register of risks identified under subsection 6(1). Confirm in writing by 8 October 2026 that you will put them, and on what date. Do not refer me to an access office. Sign the answer with a name and a title.

Complaints on the 3 files are before the Information Commissioner of Canada. The Federal Court follows under section 41 of the Act. The same 3 questions are with the Minister of National Defence, with 4 October 2026 as the date. Your answer, or its absence, goes into the public record with the date, next to the Department's letters.

Respectfully,
Danilo Dzyuban