Foreign Affairs Committee on Oct. 17th, 2017

[Wendy Gilmour]

The export control list, which is a regulation further to the Export and Import Permits Act, has seven groups. We can provide a full list to the committee should you wish, because I certainly can't remember it all.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Could you just highlight one or two of them for us?

[Wendy Gilmour]

This is the export control list.

Certainly.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

I'm running out of time.

[Wendy Gilmour]

Groups one and two are items that are listed further to the multilateral Wassenaar regime, which are dual-use goods. Goods that are of use for military purposes, but aren't necessarily only for military purposes. Group two are items specifically designed or modified for military use. Group three and four cover nuclear items. Group five are items listed unilaterally by Canada, like strategic items. It also includes other items further to trade agreements, like peanut butter. Group six is the missile technology control regime. Group seven is the Australia group, which is chemical and biological weapons.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Is it fair to say that we already regulate and control trade far beyond the items listed in Bill C-47?

[Wendy Gilmour]

There are no specific items listed in Bill C-47. The Arms Trade Treaty lists specific whole system conventional arms. Again, the purpose of the treaty is to bring other countries up to the standard that most of the western countries already have as members of the existing multilateral arms control regime.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

I think the term you used was universalized best practices.

[Wendy Gilmour]

Indeed.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

I think you said that we already have 26 of the 28 elements of the treaty in place in Canada. One area would be changing from policy to specific law. It really appears that the definition of broker is the one area that Canada is lacking to the standard of the treaty.

[Wendy Gilmour]

We have previously not regulated arms brokering activities conducted by Canadians, either inside or outside of Canada. The treaty requires all states parties to regulate arms brokering. We are required in order to be consistent with the treaty obligations to introduce brokering controls.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Have we experienced problems with brokering issues in the past in Canada?

[Wendy Gilmour]

It is safe to say that we haven't been looking for them because it hasn't been an area of regulation. It is important for.... As you pointed out, we mentioned universalization of these norms. In order to encourage all countries to have the same standard, Canada too must meet those standards.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

When it comes to “broker”, you had said the change is to add “organization” to the definition, rather than just “person”. The act actually uses “resident of Canada” as the term, not person.

Is that essentially the expansion, including organizations to capture brokers?

[Wendy Gilmour]

I would ask my colleague Robert, who is instrumental in this particular piece of the law.

[Robert Brookfield, Director General, Trade Law, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development]

The organizational change is actually a very minor technical point to cover not just companies but also unions, other societies—it's a broader term—and to harmonize with the Criminal Code for the criminal provisions.

The actual brokering provisions are new. The brokering provisions require that you need a brokering permit in order to broker, and then it applies to anyone in Canada, to Canadian citizens, current residents, or Canadian entities or organizations.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Once broker is defined, it would be regulated under the normal course for export permits, which are already in place.

[Wendy Gilmour]

The act would also allow the minister to establish brokering regulations.

As a result of the act, we will have what defines a broker, who is a broker, and what is brokering activity. The regulations would add further specificity, much like the existing regulations for export permits. We can't just insert the word “broker”, so effectively we will be creating new ones.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Would it be fair for me to say—because I see the aspirational elements that you've outlined to this—that Canada has been a leader in this area and that the fundamental change brought with Bill C-47 amounts to an extension of the definition of broker?

Is that really the only substantive change? I know there is our being a leader in a group of nations, those sorts of things. Is that the substantive legal change we're talking about?

[Wendy Gilmour]

From the perspective of the Export and Import Permits Act, the addition of brokering regulations is the most significant element in terms of the changes to our export permits program at the moment. There are other elements in the bill that serve to reinforce and formalize practices that we are already engaged in.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

How many consultations were done with industry with respect to the brokering definition change? Are you aware of any?

[Wendy Gilmour]

Absolutely, and I think all of my staff participated in others.

We did consultations with the principal industry associations that are covered by export controls, so that's the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries, the Aerospace Industries Association of Canada, and the Canadian Association of Importers and Exporters. We also engaged specifically with certain companies. CANSEC, which I'm sure you're all familiar with, is the great gathering spot for the defence and security industry across Canada.

We conducted targeted engagements over the last couple of years, both with groups of companies and with individual companies.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Mr. O'Toole, thank you very much.

Now we'll go to Mr. Sidhu please.

[Jati Sidhu, Liberal, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for appearing in front of the committee this morning.

Coming from a rural riding, when we talk about guns, my people start raising their backs. It's “What now?” The opposition parties always have concern.

This is strictly with Bill C-47. What kind of effect is it going to have on the domestic gun owners? Is there any implication with Bill C-47 to private gun owners at all?

[Richard Arbeiter]

I can understand how references to an arms trade treaty might illicit some concerns among constituents across the country, and particularly those who have a long tradition and history of gun ownership for recreational and other purposes.

As I said in my opening statement, there is nothing in the ATT that prevents the lawful use of sporting firearms for legitimate purposes such as sport shooting and hunting, nor does it hinder the legitimate trade in conventional arms. The ATT does not affect how states parties manage their domestic firearms policy, nor does it create an international gun registry.

When Canada participated in the negotiations of the ATT in 2012 and 2013, one of the primary goals of the Canadian delegation was to ensure that the legitimate rights of sport shooters, gun collectors, and hunters were protected. We feel that this was achieved through the inclusion of very specific language addressing this issue in the preamble of the ATT, which reads:

Mindful of the legitimate trade and lawful ownership, and use of certain conventional arms for recreational, cultural, historical, and sporting activities, where such trade, ownership and use are permitted or protected by law....

That is indeed the case in Canada. This language and its placement in the preamble sets the context for the ATT, and makes it clear that it is not intended to challenge or prevent legitimate trade and ownership of conventional arms where permitted by domestic law.