That's right. I was their chief counsel.
Evidence of meeting #64 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was csis.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #64 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was csis.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
And you spent four years as chair of the commission for public complaints against the RCMP.
As an Individual
Yes, I was also, for about four or five years, the senior general counsel of Justice who coordinated all the legal advice between the intelligence agencies.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
So you speak to us as an informed expert in these areas, and we appreciate your advice. You've indicated that from this $1 million savings from a $7 billion Public Safety department budget, we could ultimately end up paying a lot more in the future as accountability is eroded by this. No system is foolproof, and there will always be times when something falls through the cracks.
Do you believe we will see more outstanding claims, more suits against the government, and, ultimately, further erosion of public trust in the service?
As an Individual
It's the nature of the beast.
I've briefed three ministers who act in the role either of Solicitor General or Minister of Public Safety. The first thing I told them was that they are presiding over the ministry of bad news. You have corrections officers who deal with inmates. You have the border, with people going back and forth smuggling. You have police officers with guns on their hips. You have spies.
They're not bad people. It's just that in the nature of the work. With the challenges they have confront, people are going to make mistakes. That's inevitable. It's even higher with intelligence people, because you don't then have the same comfort level that it's going to go to court and a judge will handle it. It's a more complex environment they're working in, with terrorism, both here and abroad.
On early detection, there will be problems. The issue is, will you detect it earlier?
The last big inquiry we did, the Arar inquiry, was about a $30-million venture if you throw in the $10 million the government paid in compensation. Yes, it is very expensive.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
You played a very important role in overseeing the investigation into the taser issue at the Vancouver airport. At that time, you helped to shine light on mistakes that were made, oversights in the process—and culpabilities, ultimately.
Do you see any relationship between the government's decision in 2009 relative to your role and this decision in terms of a general approach to accountability and a desire to shine light on inconvenient truths, perhaps?
As an Individual
I don't know. Let's put it in the following context. We've had recommendations for improvements of oversight flowing out of the O'Connor report. We've had them flowing out of Justice Major's report in terms of Air India. I looked at the most recent reports from SIRC, where they were calling for increased powers.
The government put in place Bill C-38—a different Bill C-38—to give additional powers to the public complaints commission vis-à-vis the RCMP for national security matters. It hasn't gone anywhere. Parliament itself was significantly engaged in what used to be Bill C-10 back in 2005. The Liberals introduced it to give Parliament increased oversight.
What we see is all of these people recommending increased oversight. I see nothing happening, except the diminution of oversight. To that extent, it really seems odd.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
At this table none of us is an expert in national security; we're on the finance committee.
Given the potential gravity of these changes, should this part of the bill be referred to the public safety committee?
As an Individual
It would be a wise course of action. Then you could ask questions as to what CSIS is doing now, what the appropriate model is, or if we're going to give it to SIRC
I'm not saying to keep this without something else. I'm just saying that you should conceive of what you think is appropriate today.
All I see is a reduction. To call it a consolidation when I don't see files going over, I don't see personnel going over, I don't see money over, and I suspect—and it's only a suspicion—that SIRC is being asked to do the same thing as other government institutions, which is to take a cut.... How one fashions out of that improved efficiency of oversight for the intelligence community is beyond me.
Conservative
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I don't have a lot of questions.
Mr. Kennedy, I followed your proposal with interest. I liked the debate in relation to what you brought forward. Certainly I would suggest that you seem to be well versed on the issues. I would also agree with your concept relating to the necessity of democracy and whether or not some things are necessary.
You advised three prime ministers. Did you advise Michael Ignatieff?
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
While the previous leader of the Liberal Party was visiting, did you advise him?
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Did you ever advise Michael Ignatieff or talk to him in relation to his position on the same issues?
I was just curious. I had an opportunity to review some of his books. Some of the things he spoke about in relation to torture and calling the “dogs of war” as necessary seem very similar to your own proposal in terms of your thoughts as far as democracy goes and whether or not you can have a pure democratic society without the necessity of torture and other things.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
That was what I took from what he suggested, and I'm curious if I was—
As an Individual
No, I don't have any discussions with Michael Ignatieff. My comments to you are based upon my own 20 years of experience in the business and the fact that if you are in it, you realize.... Actually, I'll give you an example. If you simply go back and look at the submission made by CSIS to Justice O'Connor in the Arar inquiry, you will see that they talk about the advantages to them of having credible oversight because they cannot speak for themselves. That is just the reality.
Former RCMP commissioner Zaccardelli, who resisted for years any expansion of any powers of review of their activities by the complaints body, came out in a speech to the International Police Association and said, I see the light. We need it. We cannot speak for ourselves. We're perceived to be self-serving.
I'm saying this as someone who spent years in the business. I'm saying I want that institution to be protected; I want that institution to have credibility. We need it, but it needs credible oversight. When you do this, you're harming the ability of CSIS to have credibility with the public when there's a problem.
In terms of democracy, Mr. Osbaldeston was called in, about 1986, when a mistake happened at CSIS and the first director, Ted Finn, had to resign, although they were calling for the resignation of the minister, Mr. Kelleher, at the time. He said that you have to realize that in a democracy your intelligence service will only be 85% successful. They asked him if it would be as good as BOSS, which was a South African intelligence service, or Mossad, and he said no, in a democracy it will be 85% effective, because if it's 100% effective you don't have a democracy.
It's important that it be there, but it has to be controlled. It's a sword: it protects us, but it's a dangerous sword. We need them, but we need them in a controlled fashion.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Do you know where these recommendations came from in relation to these changes that you speak against? Are you familiar with any public safety studies that recommended this particular action?
As an Individual
I know, going back a good 20 years at least, that directors have always said that we're the most over-watched body in the world. Those have been traditional complaints.
Conservative
As an Individual
Yes, a consistent complaint and I was there as their counsel. I attach no weight to it, and I don't attach any weight to it now, because if you are in the intelligence business, you should feel uncomfortable because you have tremendous powers.
When police officers do a wiretap, they get an order for 60 days. When we're at the service, we get them for a year and renew them for a year, and they're quite vast.
