Justice Committee on April 17th, 2023

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

So you did not consult Doctors Without Borders.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

Thank you, Monsieur Brunelle-Duceppe.

We'll next go to Ms. McPherson.

Welcome.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. It's nice to be in your committee today.

Thank you for being here, Minister.

Thank you, all of you, for being here and providing your testimony.

I have to say that I worked for about 20 years in the non-profit international development and humanitarian sector before I became a politician, so after 18 months of waiting for this legislation, I was expecting something good. Unfortunately, that's not what I see with Bill C-41, so forgive me, but I will speak with my international development hat on today.

You spoke about the balance needed between preventing funding going to terrorists versus helping humanitarian.... With all due respect, Minister, you got the balance wrong on this one. I say this for a number of different reasons.

First of all, we're creating barriers to humanitarian aid. I wrote to you immediately when this legislation came forward, and I didn't get much of a response. I outlined exactly why this legislation doesn't do what you think this legislation should do. I have lots of concerns about how it will be implemented and how we are going to get an overstretched and under-resourced Global Affairs Canada to do this work.

Ultimately, what this does is interfere with international humanitarian law. You talked about the balance. You talked about how this was the best thing you thought could happen.

Why do you think the Canadian government felt that this was the best thing to happen, when we look at governments like Australia, the EU, New Zealand, Switzerland, the U.K. and the United States, and they all listened to the experts in their field? They listened to the experts who do this work, who asked for a humanitarian carve-out.

Why did Canada choose to not go with a humanitarian carve-out when, very clearly, other countries did? I think we all know that other countries know exactly what they are doing on the ground. They have respect for humanitarian assistance. They have respect for anti-terrorism legislation.

However, Canada is the only one that put barriers up for humanitarian organizations, instead of making it easier for them to be on the ground, doing the work and helping Afghans.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

First, Mr. Chair, and through you to Ms. McPherson, I want to thank you for your leadership in this space. I know you've been an advocate for many years, and I respect very much the opinions you bring to this debate.

I would say to you that in this bill we have put forward a Canadian tailored approach that achieves the twin pillar objectives of both promoting flexible pathways to offer assistance—and I have enumerated them.... I think—and I say this respectfully—that a number of organizations that work in the same space that you have advocated in are broadly supportive of this regime—

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

You've put them in a situation, Minister, where they have no option but to be supportive. They waited 18 months for legislation. They're willing to take the crumbs you've put on the table, because you did not come with the right legislation. They're willing to take the crumbs you've put forward, because that's all you brought forward.

This is bad legislation. Will you be open to amending this legislation to make it stronger?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

First, I would not characterize the approximately $4 billion we have put into Afghanistan since 2001 as “crumbs”. I think that does a disservice not only to the organization that serves in this space—

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Minister, you know very well that's not what I'm speaking about.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

What I'm getting at is that we are talking about a program that has been set up with the input of and in consultation with organizations that work in the same space you do. I think I take a more optimistic view of the consultation and the input they have provided to us. I am not as skeptical as you are that they view this program as being crumbs. I say that respectfully.

However, I also want to point out some other things. It is precisely because you and many others want to see that help get to the ground that we have to be sure that Canadian funds are not misappropriated.

What you are characterizing right now as barriers—and I want to hear you out on how we can work through those in this process—I see as potential risks to our national security and to the security of the Afghan people. These are not barriers, in my submission.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Why do you think the U.S., the EU, the U.K., Australia and Switzerland do not see that balance the same way you did? Why do you think Canada is the only country that saw it that way?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Again, I say this with respect, but I am not here to defend the position of the United States or any other country. I am here to articulate the rationale for Bill C-41, and I think the government has put forward a reasonable and compelling case.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

A fundamental principle of humanitarian assistance is neutrality and impartiality. It's a fundamental part of human rights law. Of course, you would know that.

By getting approval from the Canadian government through the process you've put forward, do you not worry that this will actually impact organizations' ability to claim impartiality and neutrality? Do you not worry that you are going to be putting organizations in danger because you're making them go through this process?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

You're right to articulate the concern, but I also think, looking at the language of this bill, that we are promoting an approach and a regime that get that balance right.

I say that, first, because we take advice from the public service. The public service is not partisan; it is not political.

Second, I would add one last point. Certainly, for this bill, I will endeavour to exercise the discretion that is afforded to this office in the best possible way, but in the event that there were any concerns about the way in which that discretion was exercised by me or any successor, there are judicial review mechanisms specifically contemplated by this bill, which afford transparency and accountability.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Yes, but it starts as a politicized process, and anyone can take that politicized process and take it to the next step. The next government may not be as benevolent as you are towards humanitarian organizations.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Well, I appreciate having the benefit of the doubt.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

Thank you, Ms. McPherson.

We'll next go to a round of five minutes, beginning with Mr. Brock.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you for your attendance, Minister and department officials.

I want to continue the discussion or the Q and A that Ms. McPherson finished off with. One of the questions I was going to ask is how this particular piece of legislation was framed in terms of how other democratic nations across the world have dealt with this humanitarian crisis. I get the impression, when I listen to how her question is framed and, Minister, to your responses, that Bill C-41 appears to be an outlier in the sense that other nations are currently providing humanitarian exceptions and getting humanitarian aid to Afghanistan a hell of a lot quicker than Canada is. Is that a fair assessment?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I certainly believe that this bill presents a Canadian tailored approach, but we also take a very tailored approach when it comes to defending human rights through our refugee program. Therefore, it's true that we may be exceptional in that regard, but I think it puts Canada in a very strong light when it comes to protecting vulnerable individuals who have been oppressed or tortured or killed as a result of the fact that they are women or young girls or religious minorities. This bill allows us to try to save as many lives as possible.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

You mentioned that this particular bill is charter-compliant. Is there a charter statement?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Minister Lametti would be responsible for that analysis, and I am happy to defer to our Justice officials who are here on that, if you would like to hear from them.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

I'm concerned about the privacy aspect in terms of releasing confidential private records from the CRA as part of the risk assessment and intelligence-gathering. How does that impact section 1 of the charter?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I'm happy to say a few words about it and then, Mr. Brock, if you'd like to hear a more expanded....

First, though, I want to assure you.... I thank you for raising the question of privacy. This law will comply with Canada's privacy laws, which is to say around retention and storage, and—I would say most importantly for the purposes of the administration of this bill—the funds and the sharing of information that will be authorized that will enable those funds to get through and that will be done for that purpose and that purpose only.

As to your question around section 1, as you know, the interplay between sections 8 and 1 of the charter is somewhat unique. There are some who would say that in a lot of ways section 1 is built into the reasonableness analysis under section 8. I assure you that the impact analysis is being done by Justice, and I will turn to my colleagues to say more if they wish to add something.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you for that, Minister.

I'm going to cede my time to my colleague, Mr. Genuis.

Thank you.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Mr. Brock.

I want to press you on this issue of what constitutes a terrorist organization for the purposes of this legislation, because I think this is really important. The Criminal Code defines a terrorist group as either a listed entity or an entity that has as one of its purposes or activities facilitating or carrying out any terrorist activity. A terrorist group, then, doesn't necessarily mean a listed terrorist group. There could be terrorist groups that are not listed, according to the Criminal Code.

Now, the definition of terrorist activity is long and detailed—

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I'm somewhat familiar with it.