Evidence of meeting #64 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was inadmissible.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Brett Bush  Executive Director, Immigration and Asylum Policy Innovation, Canada Border Services Agency
Stephen Burridge  Director, Sanctions Policy and Operations Coordination, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Kelly Acton  Vice-President, Strategic Policy Branch, Canada Border Services Agency
Saman Fradette  Director, Migration Control and Horizontal Policy Division, Department of Citizenship and Immigration

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

Marco Mendicino Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

We are endeavouring to make sure there are legal aid services—

11:55 a.m.

NDP

Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

It hasn't been increased to accommodate the need, then.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

Marco Mendicino Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

IRCC is working hard to ensure we address those challenges.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi

Thank you.

We'll now go to Mr. Genuis for four minutes.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Thank you, Chair.

I want to underline that the use of intelligence assessments from CSIS is very important for our discussion of sanctions. I assume it's one of the key evidentiary inputs, as the minister said at the beginning.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

Can I just clarify the rounds, and how this is happening? I thought the minister was here for one hour.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi

Yes. We still have two four-minute slots remaining.

Mr. Genuis, please go ahead.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Thank you, Chair.

In that vein, for information used by the immigration department that will be involved in determinations about inadmissibility, I assume that when intelligence assessments are done by CSIS, they go to some point person in the immigration department. Is that correct?

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

Marco Mendicino Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

If there are inadmissibility concerns, yes, those intelligence reports will be shared with the appropriate departments.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Okay, and then it's up to the point person in immigration to share them with those within the department who need to see it.

When you were immigration minister, who in your office would have received this kind of intelligence information? Would it have been you directly, your chief of staff, your deputy minister, or somebody else?

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

Marco Mendicino Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

As a matter of general procedure, Mr. Genuis, it would depend very much on the significance of the case. Obviously, there are many cases that are dealt with and addressed by our delegated authorities, so not all of them would come directly to my attention. It would depend very much on the individual particulars of each case.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Okay, but someone must have been responsible for receiving the intelligence assessment and deciding who needed to see it and who didn't need to see it, so at what level would that person have been?

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

Marco Mendicino Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

It will depend, again, on the particulars of the case, but this is where we get back to questions around internal governance. Ultimately, a minister will depend on his or chief of staff and his or her deputy minister to help prioritize that information flow.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Okay. In your current role at Public Safety, aside from chief of staff, which other positions held by political-exempt staff in your office receive access to intelligence assessments?

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

Sameer Zuberi Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC

I have a point of order. I'm trying to again understand how this relates to Bill S-8 and the new legislation.

11:55 a.m.

Voices

Be patient. You'll see.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

Sameer Zuberi Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC

What is the difference between these words and not defining [Inaudible—Editor]?

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi

I don't see any relevance whatsoever, so I'll just remind you once again to remain within the ambit of Bill S-8.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON

Further to that point of order, Mr. Chair, it's not only relevance; it's also a parliamentary tradition in that a minister has responsibility when they are the minister, and it is not normal, by any stretch of the imagination, under parliamentary tradition, to be asking ministers about their previous job, because there is a Minister of Immigration now who has that responsibility.

Thank you.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Mr. Chair, on the same point, I've actually moved past that point, for better or worse.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi

The point is made. Let's just try to keep this relevant.

Mr. Genuis.

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I asked a question, so out of respect for the minister, is he interested in answering the question, given the question is [Inaudible—Editor]?

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

Sameer Zuberi Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair. I thought he already spoke about this question and this line of questioning, and—

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Yes. I'm trying to extend the courtesy to the minister.

11:55 a.m.

Liberal

Sameer Zuberi Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC

I believe we're still getting the exact same question being reformatted, when you already expressed yourself, as chair, on the matter.