Public Safety Committee on June 14th, 2007

[Allan Kagedan]

Again, thank you.

I guess, again, there are issues related to privacy, and so on. We're looking at a preventive measure. We're certainly not looking at catching anyone, we're looking at protecting everyone.

So the question is, are there instances where some individuals who did have bad intent tried to get on a plane with their own identity? And there are. That's true in the case of 9/11, and it's true in the case of Richard Reid.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Were there people involved in the events of September 11 who would have been on a no-fly list?

[Allan Kagedan]

At the time, there was no significant no-fly list.

There are many responsibilities of government. One basic one is to protect the citizens, to protect people, and one basic human right is security of the person. So what you do is work very hard, using the lawful investigative powers of your law enforcement, to try to prevent certain things from happening. And you do that with all your systems. And in the course of that, you have to design them carefully, you have to protect privacy, and you have to have a system that is efficient so people can travel, which is what they really want to do. But you get all the information you can in a lawful manner to try to stop exactly these sorts of individuals from getting on the planes in the first place.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

I believe you have not answered my question at all. I do not even believe that you made an effort to answer it. But you know, not answering is an answer. I understand your answer quite well: it is that you have never investigated. If the existing measures had been applied in the past, you do not know whether an incident that occurred would have been avoided.

I am going to ask my third question. We are very concerned about the operation of an American no-fly list and the mistakes that have been made. Have you studied the reason why those mistakes were made, so they can be avoided in Canada? For example, could you explain for us why Bill Graham, the Canadian Minister of Defence and External Affairs, was on the American no-fly list? Why John Williams, one of our colleagues in the House of Commons, was also on the American no-fly list, as was Senator Edward Kennedy? Why the singer Cat Stevens -- I do not know his Islamic name; I liked his music a lot when I was young...

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

And I still listen to his music.

How is it that these people ended up on the American no-fly list? What are you going to do to avoid these kinds of gross errors?

[Allan Kagedan]

Thank you. That is a very important question.

What I'd like to do, and I appreciate it, is clarify something. And I'm going on media reports. In the cases of Bill Graham and Ted Kennedy, they were not on any no-fly list. There was a situation of name match, which was clarified. What you had were situations of name match, which were clarified. Name match typically leads to a delay; it does not lead to a denial of boarding. This is a critical distinction, and one of the challenges of this is the failure to grasp that critical distinction.

So if a person is not on any no-fly list, there's delay, having to match your ID, showing your date of birth, and so on. It's an inconvenience, but it's against the issue of a much bigger problem if one of these people we're talking about were to get on the plane. I think you would agree with that.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

John Williams!

[Allan Kagedan]

So what have we done to reduce the inconvenience? That's very important and very helpful. What we have done is create guidelines, which I have mentioned to you. They are very specific. We have a very narrow, specific focus. What that immediately does, if you just look at the mathematics, is reduce the numbers, and therefore it reduces the chance even of a name match, let alone a mistake. So you reduce that.

We have created a 7/24 operation, on the spot, where you can show some ID, and there's a chance, an opportunity, to exchange not only name, gender, and date of birth but other information--if you happen to have a passport or if you happen to have a home address on a driver's licence--to clarify the matter and settle it right there. So what we have done is focus ourselves; that's one thing, to limit and focus who we're concerned about. Second, we've created an interaction at the time of boarding to clarify matters if your name happens to match.

Going back to my first point, we have to be very careful to distinguish between the issue of name match and delay--which is an inconvenience matter--and denial of boarding. Denial of boarding is much more serious. Denial of boarding, in the case of the Canadian program, would be a decision of the Minister of Transport. It would be taken at that time. There would be an assessment of those reasons at that time based on information received and with regard to the security of everyone on that flight and, more broadly, in the airport and surrounding areas.

So let's keep that distinction very clear in terms of a name match--which is inconvenient, and you work to reduce it and resolve it very quickly--and the actual decision to put someone on the list, which in our case would be along these guidelines. There has to be information behind that to reach that conclusion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Thank you.

We're a little over time here in this round, but I think Monsieur Ménard has a very good question. I'm just wondering how this list is developed. Can you actually share with us how this list is developed? You indicated in your opening remarks that if someone has a criminal record, or a record of some criminal activity in their background, they'll be put on the list. But surely there must be other ways...? Can you share this with us?

[Allan Kagedan]

Certainly it's much beyond a criminal record. What we're talking about here is an individual who has been convicted of one or more serious and life-threatening crimes against aviation safety. This is not a common criminal record; this is a very special record. We're talking about these sorts of individuals.

Essentially, what you do is try to obtain information that is necessary to support this extremely sensitive decision to place anyone on the list. The information is received through various means; you have the United Nations, which lists over 200 people on a terrorist basis. So they have obtained information and gone forward with that. So you obtain information from various sources. Law enforcement has connections with other law enforcement organizations; security has connection with other security organizations.

You then have to check the reliability of the information. That is nothing strange or unusual. When you receive information, you look at it and say, how valid is it? That function is part and parcel of the analysis of the information. If you determine it is relevant and valid information, then you bring it to a larger group—law enforcement, intelligence, and Transport Canada—and make that assessment and reach a conclusion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

So you do consult intelligence agencies as well?

[Allan Kagedan]

Well, the RCMP and CSIS, who have contacts with other agencies. And that's normal, because in the prevention of terrorism, information sharing is important. And it has to be very carefully controlled and monitored. That's how we function.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Mr. Comartin, please.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Are you aware if there's any discussion going on right now to postpone the implementation of the no-fly list in Canada?

[Allan Kagedan]

I'm not aware of any discussion to postpone it.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Last week there was discussion on this, and I have to say that as much as you've extolled the virtues of the program in promoting it to the country, it's not clear to me how youth are going to be treated.

Madame Savoie, when you were here last week, you said some things, and then I heard some different reports in the media. I don't know what's accurate. So can you tell us now, if I show up, of whatever age—under 16 or under 12—how am I going to be handled if I don't have a passport?

[Linda Savoie, Director, Access to Information, Privacy and Reconsideration, Executive Services, Department of Transport]

In fact, I'm not the best person to respond to this, because my slice of responsibility in this process is very specific and limited; I'll deal with people who are actually going to be denied boarding. When the 24/7 centre refuses boarding to someone, they will inform me of the denial and they will also inform the passenger of the denial.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Okay.

Mr. Kagedan, can you respond?

[Allan Kagedan]

Thank you very much.

I guess there was discussion on the question of the age of 12, and so on, and the challenges this poses. If you're travelling internationally or to the U.S., you need a passport; it doesn't matter how old you are.

But within Canada it can pose a challenge. In trying to relate to families who may be travelling this summer, last week the Minister of Transport announced that an exemption from the full ID requirement would be granted to people between the ages of 12 and 17, that is, an exemption from having two forms of ID—they don't have to be photo ID—down to one form of ID, for the summer months from June 18 to September 18.

That decision was taken in order to help families. At the same time, it was taken in the knowledge that in Canada we have a pretty robust aviation security system with other layers, which I mentioned before, and that it is okay to do this for this limited time to allow people to get their documents together.

But I'd like to take this opportunity to shed a little bit of light on the question of why age 12? How did we arrive at that age?

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

No, we don't have enough time.

Let's go to how this is going to be handled when a 12-year-old or 16-year-old or 18-year-old shows up at the airport. Who determines what is an acceptable single piece of identification?

[Allan Kagedan]

On the website, www.passengerprotect.gc.ca, there is a list of acceptable ID, government-issued ID. The reason for that is that we want it to be a responsible authority issuing that ID. You're looking at federal ID. You're looking at provincial ID—kids' health care cards, which a lot of kids need, because they need those to get injections. So that they can stay in school, they need that inoculation. Everyone across the country has access to a birth certificate. So we're asking for one document of government-issued ID from people of those ages.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

So when they show up with this document, is there a list there for the staff person to look at and say, yes, this meets the list?

Then my secondary question is, are there any exceptions? If there is a list of documents that are acceptable so that person can make the decision rapidly, are there any exceptions to the list?

[Allan Kagedan]

Yes, the air carriers are fully aware of the documents on the list. We're working with them very closely. That is the regulation, and people are expected to comply.

The challenge is, for travel within Canada—it's not really a challenge if you're going to the U.S. or internationally, because you need a passport anyway—getting the word out that you need ID. To fly, you need one piece of ID.

Then again, it has been a common practice for decades in aviation to require ID. In fact, some people approach us and say, “This is new? You're kidding. We thought it was always there. We were just sure it was always there.”

So there may be adaptation for some. That's why we're getting the word out, and that's why the minister decided to issue this exemption over the summer months to reduce the ID requirement.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

I want to go back.

There is a printed list somewhere that the staff person at the airport will consult.