Government Operations Committee on May 2nd, 2017

[Prof. Sébastien Grammond]

I would say that the internal process will inevitably do most of the work.

The issue of trust is crucial, you are absolutely right. In order for the public and the bidding companies to trust the process, I think the public must have the assurance that there is no political interference and that the process does not give undue discretion to the public service employees involved in the process.

You talked about putting the finger on the problem. I would say that the problem is when public service employees are granted too much power. According to the evidence you have heard, I think that's where we are at in terms of the national security exception. It is enough for an assistant deputy minister to sign a letter for the process to take an entirely different direction. There is no internal or external control over that decision. Therein lies the problem, I think.

So the idea is to find a way of having internal control over it and maintaining the external control that the Canadian International Trade Tribunal has put in place in its latest decisions, or to find an alternative. The Auditor General might have a role to play. However, I think the solution would be a combination of those various—

[Ramez Ayoub, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

We want to avoid all sorts of allegations, criticisms and suspicions. You follow the news, I'm sure. In today's world, a few social media posts are enough to eventually cause suspicion and loss of confidence. In my view, the process is important, because, once you trust the process, which has various levels of security and barriers to making a reasoned, logical and, of course, well-defined decision, the trust should be maintained.

That's why I think there's work to be done in terms of the process to avoid political interference as much as possible. However, sometimes, there are emergencies, national security cases, exceptional circumstances where there's a place for politics. Politics should be allowed in those cases, but it remains to be defined. Just now, we were talking about a restricted group of people with top security clearance, so that would probably be allowed. I think you are really suggesting that the process be examined, and I'm all for that.

How much time do I have left, Ms. Ratansi?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

You have 30 seconds.

[Ramez Ayoub, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you, gentlemen.

I think that covers everything. We have some work to do

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

We still have time. The bells will not ring for another 10 minutes. If anybody has any burning questions, I'm willing to entertain them.

Go ahead, Mr. Weir.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

To follow up on something I was asking about earlier, I'm wondering if you could address the relative merits of having the CITT, rather than the Canadian courts, reviewing the use of the national security exception.

[Christopher McLeod]

The courts take a much longer time to get to a result. If there is a challenge to the invocation of a national security exception and the government is trying to procure goods, and if they decide to hold off until that issue is resolved, they'll be holding off a lot longer with the courts than with the CITT. Timing is a big issue. The other issue is expertise. Frankly, the confidentiality regime with CITT is arguably easier to access, so it's easier to keep the process confidential. They do it every day with the majority of cases that come before them.

[Prof. Sébastien Grammond]

I agree. I would just add that it is essential that the courts retain their ability to rule on cases that are not covered by the Canadian International Trade Tribunal, because there are some cases like that. The tribunal does not have universal jurisdiction. There may be cases where court intervention will be required and, at that point, they will decide whether or not the exception has been properly invoked.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Are there any more questions?

Thank you very much. I thank the witnesses for being here and giving their time.

I'll suspend the meeting for a few minutes, so we can excuse the witnesses and then we'll go in camera.

[Proceedings continue in camera]