Evidence of meeting #32 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was countries.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Representative, Professor, Faculty of Law and School for Public Policy and Governance, University of Toronto, David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights - University of Toronto
I have one alternative suggestion that I put on a slide. Would you like me to elaborate on that now?
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
No, if you have it and it's on a slide, then I'd appreciate getting it and we'll have a chance to look at it.
This is more of a general question, Audrey, just based on your comments about not having seen a legal brief that would show that all of this met the charter and any constitutional challenges that it might face. You said you hadn't seen any. Do you actually believe that the Department of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism would bring forward a piece of legislation they hadn't tested with respect to charter compliance and constitutional alignment?
Representative, Professor, Faculty of Law and School for Public Policy and Governance, University of Toronto, David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights - University of Toronto
The department doesn't bring it forward; the minister brings it forward.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
I see. So you think that all legislation that is written and forwarded into the House of Commons by government is only written by politicians and it isn't actually vetted, reviewed, written, and approved by those who work within....
Representative, Professor, Faculty of Law and School for Public Policy and Governance, University of Toronto, David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights - University of Toronto
The minister actually said in Parliament, I wrote this bill. But be that as it may, my point is simply to go—
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
That's not what he said. He didn't say that he wrote the bill. If you don't—
Representative, Professor, Faculty of Law and School for Public Policy and Governance, University of Toronto, David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights - University of Toronto
Can I answer your question?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
Order.
I'm sorry, stop the clock for a minute.
We're starting to get rather confrontational here and I would prefer that you make statements. You can ask questions and you can answer questions, but if we get into this, you're going to have to address all this through the chair.
Please proceed.
Start the clock again.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
I just took issue with the fact that you said that. You think every single piece of government legislation is actually written by politicians, which you know is factually incorrect. And the second is that the minister did not say that he wrote the bill. He said he had influence and he certainly approved the bill coming forward to be approved at a cabinet committee and then at cabinet.
There is a process that is followed here, but I will give you a chance to respond.
Representative, Professor, Faculty of Law and School for Public Policy and Governance, University of Toronto, David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights - University of Toronto
I have yet to hear any defence of the legality of the legislation, apart from saying we had it checked. I would be delighted to hear a substantive engagement about the content of the bill, and look forward to that.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
Okay, that's a fair point.
Barbara, I have one more question for you on the whole issue of detaining those who arrive. You're clear that this only applies to those who arrive en masse, whether it be by ship or by plane. It doesn't apply to the other 98% or 99% of those who apply for refugee status in this country.
Lawyer, As an Individual
As I understand it, if a husband, wife and two kids come, or just the husband and wife, they can be designated. It requires more than two and—
Conservative
Lawyer, As an Individual
—some involvement of smuggling or whatever. In any event, I don't care if it applies to one person or 3,000 people. It's wrong to detain someone arbitrarily for a year without having a detention review. The Supreme Court said that in Charkaoui .
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
I appreciate your perspective on this. Don't get me wrong.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
Congratulations.
The point we're trying to get at here is that we do have a responsibility not only to the refugees in terms of their rights, but we also have a responsibility to Canadians and their rights. The point we're trying to get across here is would we allow someone who has not been identified, who we do not know who they are, the right or the opportunity to be set free without having to prove who they are and what they may be? The concern obviously is what if that individual who is released on his or her own recognizance is actually someone who shouldn't have been?
Lawyer, As an Individual
That's already in the legislation.
I think you should look at the history of the MV Sun Sea cases. Those people were detained for months while there were investigations as to who they were, while there were background checks done to determine if they were security threats. The immigration division is your best front-line defence against people getting out if they are a risk to anybody. It doesn't let them out.
Lawyer, As an Individual
They stay in detention for a long time. The government was very aggressive through that process. If anyone was ordered released, they went to court and challenged it.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
I want to clarify. Maybe I'm misinterpreting this, but it sounds like your perspective is that those from the MV Sun Sea, for example, who came in would be detained 12 months regardless, that they wouldn't be freed once identification was proven, once they'd been determined to be refugees, for example, or once their ID had been determined they're not refugees and therefore they didn't qualify.
Are you assuming that all people under this legislation would be detained for 12 months regardless of the process that followed?
Lawyer, As an Individual
My understanding is that there's a 12-month bar on release unless they're recognized as refugees within that time period. The thing about it is that we live in a country where we respect liberty. You don't detain people if there's not a need to detain. If you know who they are, you know they're not a risk, they're making a refugee claim, and there are bond signers, why on earth would you detain them except to punish? That's not the purpose of it.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
The opposite then is also true, that if someone is unknown, or someone is a potential threat, they should be detained.
Lawyer, As an Individual
Those people are already being detained by the immigration division members. You don't need this legislation to do that.