Foreign Affairs Committee on March 23rd, 2023

[Heidi Hulan]

No. Mr. Chair, let me just clarify that. With respect to the Canadian Forces, the Department of National Defence has implemented directives that surpass the obligations of the legislation and the convention. Those directives prohibit the direct use of cluster munitions by the CAF, even when on secondment or exchange with other militaries. They impose further restrictions prohibiting transport of cluster munitions on CAF vehicles. They prohibit CAF training by, or instruction of, others on the use of cluster munitions.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Then we should be able to get rid of that section 11, if we have things that supersede it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

I'm afraid you're out of time.

We will now move to the second round. We will first go to Mr. Hoback.

Mr. Hoback, you have five minutes.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Chair, I just want to inform you I'll be sharing some of my time with Mr. Chong.

Ms. Awad, you were going to finish your question with Mr. Genuis. He requests that you finish your answer in writing, if that's okay.

I'm going to go back to the time frame around sanctions. I know in the bureaucracy there's a process that's consistent, that's comfortable and that everybody likes. However, in times of sanctions, is there not a way that we could actually shortchange the system? I'm not sure what the right word is, but could we supercharge it so that it could actually turn around quicker? Could we look at the processes that are involved and deal specifically with what would be required for this type of sanction versus something that's more general?

[Heidi Hulan]

Thank you very much for the question.

With respect to the discussion on timelines for how we impose sanctions and the cases that we have to build around each individual person or entity that we include on a list, I can assure you that the process is onerous within the government. I would not characterize it as comfortable in any way.

As you know, we have imposed many rounds of sanctions on Russian individuals and entities over the last year, since the large-scale invasion of Ukraine. In every case that I'm aware of, the sanctions have taken longer than 40 days to impose.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

I'm going to share my time with Mr. Chong, so this will be very quick.

What is the problem with putting the sanctions on and then putting the onus on them to have those sanctions removed? What is the harm in saying, “We're going to implement the sanctions, still do our due diligence and then it's up to you, who's being sanctioned, to come back to us and explain to us why you shouldn't be on that list”?

[Heidi Hulan]

Under Canadian law and regulation, the onus is on the government.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

We'd have to change the law to reflect that.

[Heidi Hulan]

It is incumbent upon the government to demonstrate that someone has committed the offence that would justify their inclusion on a sanctions list as a means of avoiding frivolous use of this very powerful tool.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Exactly, you'd want to prevent that somehow, for sure. I understand that.

Maybe I'll stop there, Mr. Chair. I'll turn the floor over to Mr. Chong, if that's okay.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Hoback and Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Madam Hulan, for coming here today.

I have two questions about sanctions enforcement. They're very simple ones. First, the government in the last budget announced a Canada financial crimes agency. The U.K. has announced a similar initiative. The U.K. has indicated that a unit within this new agency in the United Kingdom will be for sanctions enforcement. Can you tell us if the Government of Canada has similar plans for this new Canadian agency?

[Heidi Hulan]

I can say that sanctions enforcement is increasingly the area, particularly in relation to Russia-Ukraine, where our attention and that of our allies are focused. It occupies the bulk of those energies on the specifics of the recent provision.

I'll turn to Marie-Josée Langlois.

[Marie-Josée Langlois]

The Canada financial crime agency that you mentioned was flagged in the last budget. It is under the leadership of Public Safety Canada.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Do you know if a sanctions unit is part of this initiative?

[Marie-Josée Langlois]

At the moment, Public Safety is leading the way on that issue.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Okay, so that hasn't been yet determined.

Do you know whether they are going to do this or not?

[Heidi Hulan]

I can consult with our colleagues in Public Safety and get back to you.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

If you wouldn't mind sending the clerk that in writing, it would be appreciated.

This is my second very quick question. Yesterday Minister Champagne announced a federal beneficial ownership registry, which is obviously an important tool that law enforcement can use to enforce sanctions laws in Canada. However, this only applies to corporations incorporated under the Canada Business Corporations Act, which is only about a tenth of all corporations in Canada. The vast majority are incorporated under 10 provincial statutes.

I have a two-part question. Is this going to be extended to include corporations incorporated under provincial law, and will it also include real estate? The Cullen Commission in British Columbia identified significant money laundering, particularly international money laundering, going through B.C. real estate. Will this registry be extended to provincially incorporated entities and to real estate?

[Heidi Hulan]

Mr. Chair, I'm afraid that the witnesses here are not competent to answer this question, but we'd be happy to look into it. Thank you.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Okay. Thank you. Those are all the questions I have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you very much.

We now go to Mr. Bergeron.

You have two and a half minutes.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Chair, I think we go—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

I'm sorry.

Ms. Bendayan, you have five minutes.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses who are here.

Assistant Deputy Hulan, I'm going to pick up on the theme of sanctions but from a slightly different angle. I agree that the enforcement of sanctions is, of course, very important, but I am extremely concerned by something that I believe this bill would do. Perhaps you could correct me if I'm wrong. My understanding is that the Minister of Foreign Affairs would have to publicly indicate that sanctions will be imposed against an individual before the sanctions enter into force. It would strike me as quite reckless to do that, because the individual who would be targeted by those sanctions would have an opportunity to move their assets.

Is that an accurate understanding?

[Heidi Hulan]

As I've testified before this committee, ambiguity is always desirable in advance of imposing sanctions, for exactly the reason cited, namely, that you do not wish to give the opportunity to move assets out of the country and, therefore, out of our jurisdiction.