Public Safety Committee on Nov. 29th, 2007

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Thank you.

It's really not a question—maybe it is.

I was struck by Mr. Norlock's question or commentary and I was struck by some of the eloquent responses from Ms. Wilson and others.

I think the trouble that we have sometimes on this issue is the kind of trouble Mr. Norlock was talking about, and that trouble arises because some Canadians believe that if you are a non-citizen or a permanent resident or an alien, you should be treated less fairly if you're to be thrown out of the country or restrictions are to be imposed upon you. That's unarticulated; it's below the surface when we do that. It could be my relative; it could be your distant cousin from 200 years ago, Mr. Norlock; it could be anyone.

I think the best we can do is place ourselves in the shoes of that person and ask ourselves what we would like to have afforded to us by way of protection if we were accused wrongly, because you always have to presume that the person is innocent until we are able to establish some guilt—not guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, obviously, in this case, but some guilt.

In that sense, I just want to say that as an immigrant I am perhaps more conscious of these issues than my sons would be, because they were born and raised here.

I just wanted to put the great difficulty of this issue on the table, and I want to thank the panellists for making a great contribution.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

I would like to thank you as well.

We have no more speakers on the list. Before we dispense, I want to tell the members of the committee that we agreed we'd have our key witnesses here this week so you can draft your amendments. If you have any amendments, try to have those in as soon as possible to the clerk so we can go to clause-by-clause next Thursday.

Ms. Priddy.

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We will be ready to go to clause-by-clause by next Thursday.

I see the list that you provided to Ms. Barnes of the people who applied to come and were unable to be--

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Didn't you get a list? The lists are here. They're available to you.

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

I've borrowed Ms. Barnes', so it's okay. I've seen it now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

You can get your own list.

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

I wasn't aware of that.

Some of the people on it, I have no idea who they are, but I certainly know who some of the organizations are. I would be interested to know from other people on the committee--I've had a couple of conversations with folks--whether people are prepared to spend any more time hearing additional witnesses from this list, people who have been involved in this issue for a very long time.

I may be the only one.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Ms. Priddy, I realize you're new to the committee—

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

I understand that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

—but many of the people on this list have already been witnesses.

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

Yes, I understand that as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

This is not the first round, so that's why you may not hear anybody else anxious to have extra meetings. I offer this as a point of information.

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

I am aware of that. I am aware of the fact that people testified before.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

And the record is available for you to read.

[Penny Priddy, NDP, Surrey North, BC]

No, no. I have the record, thank you very much. But because they had applied a second time to be heard on this Bill C-3, because this is different from what came forward.... You know, this is another set of hearings, if you will, or committee meetings.

Since I don't see anybody from the Liberals or the Bloc or the Conservatives who has the same interest I do, I will take that as no interest on anybody's part but mine.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Thank you again to the witnesses. I appreciate very much your coming here. I think you have had quite a good opportunity to explain your positions, and I appreciate your presence.

This meeting stands—

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

I would like to ask the researchers to do something for us.

We've had five legal groups here today, groups that are very familiar with the details of all this, and four of them have suggested to us that they do not feel that the bill as written would meet a charter challenge. As a matter of fact, probably the most experienced person in this field has suggested that he knows of at least three groups that will take the government to court, all the way to the Supreme Court, in a charter challenge if this bill goes through as written.

I've been here 13 years and I have never heard that said at a committee meeting before, that the bill is so bad or has so many flaws—not all bad, but it has certain flaws—that if corrected, could spare the state a charter challenge case.

I want to ask our researchers to see if they can find out the last time a government—it doesn't have to be this government, any government of Canada—had to defend against a charter challenge through all the courts, from the lower courts to the upper courts, and how much it cost. We should be able to find that out from the finance department.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Ms. Brown, with all due respect, that's research that you'd have to do. That's really not the job of our research staff.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

This is the public safety committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Yes, and you are a member of it.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

It's tied to the elements of justice and the courts. I don't see why our researchers couldn't find that out for us.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Do you have a comment on this, Mr. MacKenzie?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

One of the reasons we're doing this is because people have challenged the legislation and it has gone to the Supreme Court. That was legislation that developed over, I think I heard, 1979 to last week, that kind of thing.

I think your question would cover almost any case that ever got to the Supreme Court on a challenge of the charter, would fit the criteria. I think that would be a pretty onerous task.

[Bonnie Brown, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

I don't want 25 cases, but couldn't we just find out what it cost the government to defend against the last charter challenge on this particular piece of legislation, because the reason we're doing this is because it failed to pass at the Supreme Court?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

That's why we have a Supreme Court.