Public Safety Committee on Oct. 31st, 2006

Evidence of meeting #17 for Public Safety and National Security in the 39th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was information.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

Study of the report of the Commission of Inquiry on the events relating to Maher Arar

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Jim Judd Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service

Ward Elcock Former Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS)

9:45 a.m.

Liberal

Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga—Erindale, ON

I was just referring to the collective intelligence community in Canada. I wasn't directing it at CSIS; I was just characterizing the whole situation.

9:45 a.m.

Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service

Jim Judd

I was just trying to be more specific, because I'm here speaking only on behalf of CSIS.

To get to the point of your question, though, I said in my opening comments, in part in response to other reviews that have been done, including the SIRC review of Mr. Arar's case, that CSIS has already changed its policies in respect of information sharing and assessments with foreign governments. We are looking now, in light of Mr. Justice O'Connor's report, at other steps that may be taken to further provide security in respect of information exchanges with foreign governments. We have, I think it's fair to say, modified our policies and practices in that regard over the past several years in light of reviews that have been done.

9:45 a.m.

Liberal

Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga—Erindale, ON

Can you be more specific, if you don't mind, about what policies have changed, from what, and what is the outcome of the new policy?

October 31st, 2006 / 9:45 a.m.

Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service

Jim Judd

Any information that we now provide to a foreign government with respect to an individual is heavily caveated in terms of how it may be used. As I said in my opening comments, we're much more rigorous in terms of doing assessments on a foreign country's records and practices, which in turn has a bearing on whether or not, in the first instance, we would share any information with them.

I think we've made some advances in training and preparation of our staff to deal with these issues. The broader point, too, is that CSIS, as an intelligence agency, is without a doubt the most reviewed intelligence service in the world. We have two external review bodies that throughout the year conduct reviews and assessments on our operations and practices and policies, and we're constantly changing them in response.

9:45 a.m.

Liberal

Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga—Erindale, ON

Sorry, I'm running out of time.

My other question is whether you could give us your assessment right now on the involvement of the RCMP in intelligence and information collection, especially after 9/11. It was perceived prior to 9/11 that CSIS was doing the intelligence collection and the RCMP was more of a law enforcement agency, and now there seems to be some dual role or some duplicity in that role.

Can you give us your assessment of that, please?

9:45 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz

Just a brief response.

9:45 a.m.

Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service

Jim Judd

I think I would agree with Mr. Justice O'Connor's conclusions in that regard, which is to say that both agencies have a role to play in national security areas. Our role tends to be very much more on the intelligence front and the RCMP's tends to be much more in the realm of processes related to criminal prosecutions.

They have, I think it's fair to say, bolstered their efforts on the intelligence side, but in the past several years we've taken a number of steps with the RCMP bilaterally to ensure that there's greater coherence in terms of what each of us does and how we do it in the national security domain.

The minister, when he appeared before this committee, talked about a number of those things, including the renewed memorandum of understanding and a series of other steps that we've taken, including cooperation on targeting investigations, decisions, training, and so on. At the end of the day, I think both organizations do have a role to play in national security, but ours is more--still and only--intelligence-related; theirs is more on the criminal prosecution end.