Foreign Affairs Committee on May 9th, 2023

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Canada has been a steadfast ally with Ukraine, as have been many other countries. You touched upon how this legislation, in terms of the sanctions regime, has actually helped our efforts when it comes to Ukraine.

Do you want to elaborate a bit upon that, in the 45 seconds that remain, about how Bill S-8 will further our solidarity with Ukraine and check Russia's aggression?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

It will ensure that individuals who have been listed under SEMA, who are in some way supporting Russia's illegal war in Ukraine, are deemed inadmissible. That is just the latest measure we can take to support Ukraine.

I would point out that we have been with the people of Ukraine since February and March of 2022, through a variety of initiatives: militarily, diplomatically, by creating immigration pathways to help those who have been displaced, and, equally, through the work we are doing in my portfolio by, among other things, sending the RCMP to ensure that those who are committing war crimes and other transgressions against human rights are held to account.

We will continue to be there for the people of Ukraine, and Ukraine, to ensure its sovereignty.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

We will next go to Mr. Bergeron.

You have six minutes, sir.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Minister, thank you so much for being here. Thanks as well to all your team for being with us today.

I would like to begin with a technical question. Why did you decide to introduce this bill in the Senate?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

It is really for a technical reason, because of the optional process the government used.

Members of the House of Commons are very busy and the House has on some occasions used the Senate to make progress on its priorities and obtain the results that everyone expects.

In the matter before us, our goal is to close the gaps by harmonizing the Special Economic Measures Act with the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

In clauses 5 and 6 of the bill, inadmissibility to Canada is defined and additional details are provided under “Sanctions”.

I find the word “sanctions” quite vague. What is the meaning of sanctions?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Once again, I will call upon my officials for an exact and technical analysis. In practical terms, though, the analysis under the Special Economic Measures Act provides for a review of matters related to corruption or other illicit activities pursuant to international conventions. If there is evidence that meets the test criteria, the provisions of the Special Economic Measures Act apply to that person.

The goal of Bill S‑8 is to coordinate obligations under the Special Economic Measures Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act in order to make that individual inadmissible.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

I know you may not be aware of this, but our committee intends to launch a study on the sanction regimes Canada has imposed. It is as though the cart is being put before the horse, as the saying goes. Since the legislative process requires us to consider the bill, however, let us do that.

You are probably aware of the fear expressed by the Refugee Centre that an asylum seeker fleeing persecution in their country of origin could be refused entry to Canada because of a sanction imposed on their country, even if that person has not done anything wrong.

What can you say to the Refugee Centre regarding that legitimate concern?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

That's a good question.

We will work with organizations that represent refugees and asylum seekers. Our government has a very positive track record on that priority. We have one of the best asylum systems in the world, if not the best.

To answer your question, I would say we will rely on Global Affairs Canada officials for a facts-based analysis. Once this bill comes into force, the person will be deemed inadmissible if they do not pass the test.

On the other hand, it is possible that the provisions of the bill might not be invoked even if certain individuals do not pass the test.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

To be clear, Mr. Minister, are you saying that, regardless of what the bill says, a refugee claimant from a sanctioned country could still have their application analyzed?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

What I mean is that each case has to be analyzed individually.

Before someone is sanctioned under the Special Economic Measures Act and, by extension, pursuant to this bill, all the facts and circumstances related to the individuals identified by the department have to be examined.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

The Canadian Bar Association has proposed that amendments be made to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act in Bill S‑8, to establish “a distinct ground of inadmissibility based on sanctions, namely sanctions imposed on an 'entity, person or country'”. It also recommends removing the references to “country” since the term is too broad. This is probably related to the Refugee Centre's concern.

What are your thoughts on this recommendation from the Canadian Bar Association?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Bill S‑8 must protect the rights of refugees. It must protect the most vulnerable individuals. This bill has a specific purpose; it is in line with the Special Economic Measures Act, or SEMA. I hope you have confidence in the officials who analyze an individual's case before they are listed under the SEMA.

In short, I think there are checks and balances in place, parameters to examine all the circumstances—including any issues relating to human rights and refugee rights—in the analysis before the SEMA process is concluded.

That is one of the ways we can protect human rights and ensure that this bill is in line with the SEMA.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Mr. Bergeron.

We now go to Madam McPherson.

You have six minutes.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you all for being here today and answering our questions on Bill S-8. I'm very grateful to you for taking on sanctions. I think it's very important for us to strengthen our sanctions regime.

As Mr. Bergeron mentioned, we are going to be undertaking a study that I brought forward for us to look at. One of my big concerns with our sanctions regime, of course, is the enforcement of the sanctions regime, because it's very easy to put people's names on a list, but it's not always very easy to make sure that those sanctions are being enforced.

With regard to Bill S-8, though, I have a few questions.

Minister, you heard me being a bit critical before, when the sector or experts were not consulted. We might get to Bill C-41 later on today.

I have something that I'd like to ask for, for my birthday, Mr. Minister.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I would like to be able to give you a present. We'll see.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

With regard to Bill S-8, the legal experts and the refugee sector have said that there need to be amendments to this bill. They have called for that.

Mr. Bergeron referred to the use of the word “sanctions”. We have heard from the Bellissimo Law Group and The Refugee Centre, and they've both raised concerns about the lack of clarity with regard to language on sanctions in this bill. Of course, we have a study that will be looking at this.

Why is it so vague? How do we make sure it's better? Would you be willing to accept amendments to that?

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I'll say a few words off the top, and then I would encourage you to hear what Mr. Bush has to say, because I want to be responsive.

As I was saying to your colleague Mr. Bergeron, prior to the operation of this statute, there would be a rigorous examination of all the facts under SEMA—all of the facts and circumstances—before a conclusion is rendered on whether or not that individual is listed.

If I understand your question correctly, Ms. McPherson, it's that we want to make sure that this statute is not vague or overly broad. I think those are laudable objectives. I would encourage you to—

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

There are the current concerns that the Canadian Bar Association has brought forward with regard to this legislation as well.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

We want to make sure they are sufficiently focused and constrained, but perhaps Mr. Bush might be able to say something specifically.

[Brett Bush, Executive Director, Immigration and Asylum Policy Innovation, Canada Border Services Agency]

Thank you.

We, in fact, met with the Canadian Bar Association about these concerns and had several discussions. The short answer would be that the sanctions regime is managed by our colleagues at Global Affairs. We did not agree with the suggestion that we should be importing language from the sanctions into IRPA, because it is not the place to assess the sanctions. The place to assess the sanctions is with our colleagues at Global Affairs.

We also don't agree with the Canadian Bar Association on the context of the various mechanisms for seeking redress to the sanctions. My colleague at Global Affairs could speak about this. There are measures for seeking redress to the sanctions. The measures in IRPA that the minister has been speaking about are simply to ensure that the people who have been sanctioned by the government are now inadmissible, as you mentioned a few moments ago.

The last point that I would mention.... I lost my train of thought. I'm sorry.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Two out of three is not bad.

I want to make this clear—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Did you want to acknowledge our official from GAC as well?

Did you want to add anything to that?

[Stephen Burridge, Director, Sanctions Policy and Operations Coordination, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development]

Sure. Just on the point around redress for sanctions, there is the ability for a listed individual or entity to apply to the Minister of Foreign Affairs to be delisted from sanctions. That decision, on whether or not an individual is delisted from our sanctions regime, rests with the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Further to that, they also have recourse to have the decision on the delisting application brought before a court and judicially reviewed.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

One of my concerns, of course, is that there will be unintended consequences, that folks who shouldn't be suffering punitive actions will suffer.

Again, that is what we saw in Bill C-41, when we weaponized international development instead of preventing terrorism from being funded.

What we're looking at right now is a situation in which, if somebody wants to appeal—they don't agree with the decision; they feel they shouldn't be on this list and shouldn't be added—they have to come to you, and then they go to Minister Joly.

My concern is that they get all these things clarified...and is that mechanism actually going to work? You will know that the business of government is not a quick fix in a situation—no insult intended directly to you.