Evidence of meeting #61 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was subamendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON
Thank you for that clarification, Ms. Keeling.
Could you further clarify whether there is any resource allocation required for this to be implemented, and clarify the impact of the broad scope of the information that's being disclosed?
Acting Executive Director, Human Rights and Indigenous Affairs, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Without seeing the exact wording of the text, I would say, based on listening to what has been presented on the table, that this would likely increase the financial and human resources needed to prepare such a report and a list.
Liberal
Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON
Thank you.
I would like just one further clarification.
I know that, from a government perspective, human rights reporting currently is undertaken by Canadian Heritage, if I'm not mistaken . For example, the UN and all the treaty reporting is undertaken by Canadian Heritage. I think when we change it from “Minister” to “government”, the assumption is that it's whatever organ of the government is charged with this. Would this be Canadian Heritage, or would this be Global Affairs?
Acting Executive Director, Human Rights and Indigenous Affairs, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
You're correct that Canadian Heritage would lead on the reporting that would go to the UN about our domestic implementation of human rights. That's a job undertaken between the Department of Canadian Heritage, the Department of Justice and Global Affairs Canada. It would be hard to say for certain. In those cases where we're reporting to treaty bodies and where we're reporting to the UN on Canada's own domestic implementation of the treaties we have signed onto, and with regard to other issues we may need to report to the UN, that is done by a domestic body. In this case, I think it would take more than just Global Affairs Canada's pulling together such a list and making sure we have the proper names and all of the circumstances. It would be bit broader than only Global Affairs Canada—as a tentative understanding of how things are drafted currently.
Liberal
Liberal
Rachel Bendayan Liberal Outremont, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I also have one more question for Ms. Keeling.
Ms. Keeling, based on the evidence that I have heard so far in the context of this study, I remain deeply concerned about the publication of a list. It would seem to me that the government, as you said, has an obligation to do no harm, and that we could be doing harm by publishing a list. It would also seem to me, notwithstanding the fact that my colleagues have attempted to address that question through the subamendment, that the government does not always have perfect information, and it would be difficult for the government to know whether there are risks to the individual in detention through the publication of their information.
I would like to understand from you—I understand that you may not have a completely definitive answer for me today—if it is possible for the Government of Canada to be liable for any aggravating circumstances, injury to or the death of somebody in detention through the publication of their name.
Is it possible that the government may be held responsible legally for that?
Acting Executive Director, Human Rights and Indigenous Affairs, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
I'm not a lawyer, so I can't comment on the legality piece. I'll restate that the onus falls on the government to ensure that no harm is done by any actions it takes.
I can't comment on the legality. I'm sorry.
Conservative
The Clerk of the Committee Ms. Ariane Gagné-Frégeau
All right. We're voting on the subamendment—
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
I'm sorry. We agreed to adopt the subamendment on division. It's not unanimous, but it's adopted.
Liberal
Rachel Bendayan Liberal Outremont, QC
It's either a recorded vote or on division, Mr. Chair. I propose it be on division.
Conservative
Conservative
Liberal
Liberal
Liberal
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
We've adopted the subamendment on division, so now we're back to debate on the main amendment.
It may be that Mr. Anandasangaree has another subamendment to propose to the main amendment.
Liberal
Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON
That's correct. I believe that's been circulated by—
