Foreign Affairs Committee on Nov. 5th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

The motion just has to be for this debate to be held during committee business.

Now, because of the timelines, I again refer to the table. You still have the choice of bringing forward Bill C-300 and then including time for committee business where we would return to this debate.

We have a motion to suspend debate today. All in favour—

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

You have not clarified this. Are you going back to the committee? It is my understanding that Madame Lalonde's committee motion will not come forward.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

That's correct.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

This will go to 11 and then we're done?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

That's right.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

So how are you going to ask them questions? Are we going back into rotation, or what is going to happen?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Yes, we're back on the second round. The questions will be short.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

But then how long can you carry on with this questioning?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

For five minutes.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Then who has the next question and answer?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Ms. Brown.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

For five minutes. All right, here we go.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

That's correct.

All in favour of suspending debate for the last five minutes on the motion of Mr. Dewar? Are we in favour of suspending? Madame Lalonde's motion was to suspend?

(Motion agreed to)

Debate is adjourned, and we'll go into our second round. Hopefully we'll have a few more questions for our panel.

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Chair, what about the members' right to speak? Many people have already spoken.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

I made an error there. Our clerk now tells me that Mr. Dewar has a couple more minutes of his time left.

So, Mr. Dewar, I'll give you the privilege of concluding, and maybe even thanking our guests.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I'd like to thank our guests.

I just want to ask our guests for clarification on whether this motion, in any way, shape, or form, is actually not in keeping with what the Federal Court has already said are the obligations of the government vis-à-vis the Constitution.

I'll go to you first, Mr. Boulakia.

[Raoul Boulakia]

In the Abdelrazik case, Justice Zinn decided very clearly that there was a charter responsibility. In Suaad Mohamud, I relied on Abdelrazik and the Government of Canada—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

That is covered in a ruling already. We're trying not to do specific cases, but to be very general.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

On a point of order, Chair, I agreed with that, but we didn't say in our motion that we couldn't refer to cases. We said that we wanted to focus on some—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

All right.

Continue, Mr. Boulakia.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Let's not get caught up with—

[Raoul Boulakia]

Just to point out, the court already ruled in the Abdelrazik case, so it's too late to say there's no court ruling.

Secondly, in the Mohamud case, we relied on the charter to get the government to agree to make consular representations, and one of the things the consulate did was to go before the court in Kenya to ask for an adjournment of the prosecution of Ms. Mohamud while Canada investigated and did the DNA testing. That's also the nuance between ordering some foreign government or court to do X or Y and what consulates can do, which is to make representations to them. That's what we reach through our legal representation.

So sometimes there's a question of nuance rather than absolute, categorical thinking. Part of the obfuscation of the charter is that it applies to Canadian officials and how Canadian officials interact with Canadians, and that impacts on the representation Canada has to make to foreign governments with respect to due process.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

In other words, Chair, I would say it's not about another government having to abide by the Canadian Constitution; it's about our officials having to recognize the rights of Canadians. That's already been argued in the Federal Court and has been accepted, and I think that point is important to make.

Finally, Mr. Chair, I hope this committee will come back to this issue and pass it. I simply note that this is a recommendation made that it go to the House. It says, “report the following recommendations to the House”. We can't force the government to do it; it's a matter of recommending to government.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much.

I want to thank the witnesses for coming today. You actually were able to witness procedures—

[A voice]

Democracy.