Evidence of meeting #76 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was need.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
The definition of security of Canada in the information sharing act that's contained in Bill C-51 is unprecedented.
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
It's unprecedented because the language is about undermining the security of Canada rather than threatening the security of Canada. We now have legal experts in a conundrum as to what this could possibly mean and the scope of it, to the extent that activities that are captured in undermining the security of Canada could be seen to encompass a vast scale of activities that are completely lawful, as has been demonstrated by the witnesses on Bill C-51.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Given some comments about returning to the acts of terrorism, preventing terrorism, and terrorism financing, my concern is that one consideration in Bill C-51 is economic interests of the state. We've had government questions on this, and that's why I'm feeling this is okay territory, but I'll allow the chair to rule if I'm stepping beyond.
We've seen through Air India, and we've seen through Arar that we were incapable of being precise enough about who we were going after, and people were able to finance these activities. Sometimes, as Mr. McGuire said, it takes a very small amount of money, so precision is incredibly important.
Is it fair to say, Mr. Clement, as we go forward, that we need that oversight, that reporting back to Parliament, which you said is no longer done, and that we should be very precise about what we're trying to understand?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Clement Advisory Group
I can only speak from my perspective. I do not see an issue with having some accountability on this. I speak from having lived through two inquiries. I had absolutely no problem having to justify what was done and explaining it to an appropriate body. I think that is appropriate.
I believe Bill C-51 has been enacted because of what we're facing today. Do I think it's essential? I'd love to sit here, as I'm sure every one of you would, and say we're not living in the current environment we're in. I firmly believe that what we saw on Parliament Hill isn't over. Let's not do something that means we're all going to have to explain to the public why we took shortcuts in our legislation.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Mr. McGuire, very quickly, you made a comment about how banks need to maintain a hostile environment. Can you elaborate a bit more? I just didn't understand what the comment was.
Conservative
National Leader, AML Practice Investigative and Forensic Services, MNP LLP
The point was about keeping a hostile environment towards money laundering and those who would finance terrorism by making sure you know exactly who they are, because they like to hide in the shadows. Also, for the same reason, banks need to maintain a lot of scrutiny on transactions. Those laundering money like anonymity; they don't like there being a money trail for investigators to follow.
Conservative
Conservative
Mark Adler Conservative York Centre, ON
I just want to preface my comments by saying I have a lot of territory to cover, so I'd really appreciate if everybody could be precise in their answers.
First of all, Ms. Vonn, do I have a right to radicalize myself?
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
I honestly don't know what you mean by the question. In Canada you have freedom of speech and conscience, as has been defined by the Supreme Court of Canada. Those are your rights.
Conservative
Mark Adler Conservative York Centre, ON
You know what radicalization is. Do I have a right to radicalize myself?
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
You have a right to freedom of speech and conscience—
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
—as has been defined by the Supreme Court.
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
No, I'm not going to answer that question—
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
—because I don't understand it.
I'm trying to explain how I understand your question.
Conservative
Mark Adler Conservative York Centre, ON
No, I'll explain the question. I just need you to give me an answer.
Conservative
Mark Adler Conservative York Centre, ON
Do I have a right to take on beliefs that are contrary to the security of our nation?
Michael Vonn
You have a right to whatever beliefs you choose. If your beliefs contradict the law, then you will be breaching the law.
Conservative
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
Again, I'm sorry; your question doesn't make any sense to me.
