Finance Committee on Feb. 24th, 2022

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to come back to The Canadian Press's article in Les Affaires in which Mr. Manchester was interviewed.

The government asked financial institutions to check whether their clients appeared to support the protests. Mr. Manchester is concerned that this will set a precedent and that, in the future, financial institutions may continue these monitoring efforts.

What are your thoughts on this?

[Barry MacKillop]

Thank you for the question.

I don't know the internal processes of financial institutions. That said, usually, when information is provided in this way, it's for a very specific reason. If the information is used for any other purpose, usually that's unacceptable and not something that financial institutions would do.

I don't work in a financial institution, so I don't know the internal processes. However, I can tell you that the plan was to use the information for a very specific purpose and for a very limited time.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Okay. Thank you.

Mr. Manchester raised another concern. He wondered whether, in the few days where the Emergencies Act was in effect, the government was asking your organization to devote many resources to work related to the Emergencies Act and the siege in Ottawa. His concern is that your resources are very limited. In addition, at the start of the meeting, you reminded us that you were dealing with a heavy volume of reports, among other things. Mr. Manchester is concerned that the steps required under the Emergencies Act haven't given you the chance to carry out the rest of your work properly.

I don't know whether my comments were clear. If so, I'd like your input on this.

[Donna Achimov]

I'll start my response. I'd like to invite my colleague to comment afterwards if he wants to do so.

As I explained earlier, since we're a small agency, we're agile. This was a national crisis and we responded with substantial resources. That's part of our daily work. When needs arose, we focused our resources on them. We did so quickly. We've been working 24 hours a day, seven days a week. We've done a great deal of work. However, it's part of our reality to respond and redistribute our resources as needed.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Thank you and congratulations on all your work.

The redirection of your resources in response to the Emergencies Act won't interfere with your regular activities on an annual basis.

[Barry MacKillop]

No, absolutely not. We certainly assigned people specifically to this initiative. However, that didn't stop us from carrying out our usual work. We worked overtime, but that's typical in a crisis. This isn't our first crisis and, unfortunately, it won't be our last. We have the necessary resources. In addition, everyone at FINTRAC is willing to get involved. It's easy to find people who want to work as long as it takes to get through a crisis.

[Gabriel Ste-Marie, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you, MP Ste-Marie.

Our last questioner will be NDP MP Blaikie.

You have up to four minutes.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you very much.

I think it might help to just step back at the end of our meeting today and take a little bit of a bird's-eye view. I think part of our role here on the committee is to address concerns that Canadians may have that some of the extraordinary powers granted under the emergency orders were improperly used or abused.

I'm wondering if you have any advice for the committee on who else we should be talking to, or what questions we should be asking, to discover, to the best of our abilities, if that's the case; and if that's not the case, to be able to reassure Canadians that things unfolded as they should have under the orders, and how to follow up if they're concerned about lasting consequences with, say, their financial institution or anything else; or, if there are to be no lasting consequences for them, how they might be able to feel reassured that this is the case, who to pursue those questions with, and what would count as kind of getting to a point where they should feel satisfied that those questions have been answered.

I'm wondering if you have any recommendations for the committee on how we can undertake those two tasks—satisfy ourselves that there haven't been abuses, or to find them if they're there; and then, in the event that there haven't been, how to provide reassuring advice to Canadians to that effect and some advice on how they can pursue those questions further in their individual cases to satisfy themselves.

[Barry MacKillop]

Far be it from me to suggest whom you should invite to your committees. If there are people I know, and they don't want to come, I may make enemies, so.... Certainly, there were a number of agencies involved.

For individuals who are constituents, who are Canadian citizens, I think they can follow up with their financial institutions. If they were caught up in this, I think immediate and direct follow-up with their financial institutions will allow them to achieve a measure of comfort with regard to their bank accounts, as Ms. Jacques said the other day, being unfrozen now that the act has been revoked. I think they can follow up with their institutions and have a discussion about what impact, if any, they would see. If their banks or financial institutions have questions for them, I'm sure they can answer those questions and get that level of comfort.

As for the bird's-eye view, I understand that an inquiry will take place. I think many, many parties will be invited to that inquiry, which I'm sure will provide a very nice overview of everything that was done, how it was done and why it was done. From my perspective, I'm satisfied that it came to a peaceful end. Being in Ottawa every day and living through that, I was quite happy and proud of my law enforcement partners in the way they resolved this.

I think I would leave it at that rather than suggest specific names of people you should invite.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you very much.

I'll leave it at that as well, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you so much, MP Blaikie.

Members, I think I speak for all of us when I say that Barry MacKillop and Donna Achimov have been excellent witnesses. We want to thank FINTRAC for being with us and for the many answers they gave to our many questions. They provided great insight into what FINTRAC does and how it does it.

On behalf of the committee, the clerk, the analysts, the interpreters and everybody who makes this operation work, the staff and members, I want to say to all of you that I've never been prouder just to listen to you. You spoke, as I said, from the heart. You spoke strongly. We spoke united on Ukraine. I'm sure all of our colleagues, parties, party leaders, the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister would be very proud. I thank you all for what you have done.

I believe this is the first committee since the conflict began where members have been able to make these types of comments for the public, for them to hear what we have to say.

Thank you.

With that, we'll—

MP McLean has his hand up.

MP McLean.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to echo your comments. This has been a very productive committee, including with all the comments that were received around the table today.

I want to say goodbye to everybody; I didn't know whether I would otherwise have had the chance. This has been a very good committee to be part of. I think all of you probably know that I'm moving to a different committee next week. I will enjoy visiting whenever you invite me, but I will have different responsibilities next week.

I'll miss all my colleagues from every party.

Thank you and until next time, friends.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

MP McLean, we will miss you. I'm sure we'll see you around, and, yes, please join us as a substitute member any day.

Members, with that, I will adjourn.