Justice Committee on April 24th, 2023

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

I feel that it just makes sense. It's what the humanitarian organizations we heard from at committee asked for. They work on the ground and they need information. I think it's quite clear and simple. I even think it's almost the same thing as amendment NDP‑4, except we're adding an item b). Ours is just a little more fleshed out.

I think that everyone should vote in favour of it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

If you're referring to the right amendment, it should be 12349530.

Is that the one you're referring to?

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

I'm talking about amendment BQ‑1.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

It's BQ-0.1.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Are you talking about the one I sent right before the meeting?

I'm sorry, we're not talking about the same amendment. That one I'm going to withdraw. We've consulted with each other and we'll withdraw it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

He's withdrawing it.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

It was the same thing we just voted on.

I thought we were talking about amendment BQ‑1. I apologize.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

Now we will speak about NDP-3.1.

This amendment is not in the package. It was circulated in a separate document, along with version 2 of the package, by email before our meeting. I want to make sure that everyone has it.

The reference number is 12356028.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Chair, just on a point of order, I didn't see any of these in a new package.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

I'll just give a quick minute for everyone to read it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

Go ahead, Ms. McPherson.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you.

Basically, this is something that's been asked for by the Aid for Afghanistan coalition. What we've done here is added in “substantially controlled”. I do have to say that, from the way that this has all gone, I have to subamend this amendment because listed entities are of course.... That amendment didn't pass earlier.

The only thing we're really adding in there is the “substantially controlled”, and we would change the cases of “listed entity” back to “terrorist group”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

Ms. McPherson, you can't amend your own amendment, so somebody else will have to amend that.

I'll go to Mr. Genuis and also see if he's the one who's going to be doing that.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

It's simply because it's impossible to write an amendment based on....

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I do think a member is able to move an amendment that's different from the one they submitted. For simplicity, I have submitted a draft subamendment to this amendment just now to the clerk, depending on how fast the Internet is working today. It proposes to replace “listed entity” with “terrorist group” in all three places.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

We're going to go through this a few more times.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

The effect of that would be to align with the proposal of the Aid for Afghanistan coalition by clarifying that we're talking about substantial control, which is, from our perspective, reasonable, but preserving the reference to a “terrorist group” not just a “listed entity”.

With that subamendment, we would be supportive of the amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Randeep Sarai]

Maybe, as chair, I can ask if one of the officials can speak on this or share some comments on what they think of this amendment—not the subamendment but the amendment—as it is.

[Robert Brookfield]

Mr. Chair, I may, if you would like, clarify that proposed subsection 83.032(1) is the power to issue an authorization. Therefore, the provision on obligations, the potential criminal liability, remains for providing support to a terrorist group whether it is listed or it meets the requirements.

This amendment would limit the ability to ask for an authorization to situations where there is substantial control. In principle at least, a terrorist group that has less than substantial control, which an entity has to deal with unavoidably, would not be able to apply for an authorization.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

I need some clarity on what you just said. By adding the words “substantially controlled” they would not be able to apply, or they would be...? What is changing for an aid organization?

[Robert Brookfield]

The obligations, as in the existing law as we formulated in BillC-41, are in proposed subsections 83.03(1) and 83.03(2), for knowingly supporting terrorist purposes and knowingly supporting terrorist organizations. Proposed subsection 83.032(1) is the power given to the Minister of Public Safety to issue an authorization.

This amendment limits the power to issue that authorization. The existing law would remain and a potential liability, but the ability to apply under a situation that does not meet the requirement of substantial control would be removed.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

You're saying that if you're an aid organization working in a country, it would still be at risk of criminal liability, but the minister is unable to grant the authorization because of the wording of this. Is that what you're saying?

[Robert Brookfield]

In principle, at least, yes. It's possible that, factually, if there's no substantial control there would be no liability. I can't speak to the application of law in specific facts, but in principle, at least from a legal scope perspective, this would be reducing the scope of the minister to provide authorizations for those who wish to apply for them.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

It's not actually giving them more ability. I'm looking at it from the aid organization's perspective, because my colleague is correct that this is something that was asked for by the coalition of aid agencies. From what you're saying, though, it would put them more at risk rather than less at risk.

[Robert Brookfield]

I'd defer to them to assess their risk, particularly in light of the new amendment that carves out humanitarian assistance, but yes, it does reduce the scope of the ability of the Minister of Public Safety to issue authorizations.