Public Safety Committee on Oct. 27th, 2010

[Wissam Mansour]

We don't need to justify. You're right on that.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Madame Des Rosiers, in terms of the question that was put by my friend, Mr. McColeman, on politicians and directing, I ask you and Mr. Small.... We live in Canada. At the end of the day...currently the Conservatives are the government. They made the decision to bring the G-20 summit to Toronto and to split it and have the G-8 summit in Huntsville.

My friend Mr. Norlock says he speaks to the people at home, so let's speak to the people at home. Obviously, by definition, the Conservative government decides whether to have the summit at all, how to split it, how much money to spend on it, and how to organize the security at an international summit. At the end of the day it's their decision in terms of how to direct this and who to delegate responsibility to. So when we see mayhem on the streets of Toronto in terms of the black bloc creating a ruckus and damage, and when we see more than a thousand people arrested and then released without charges, we must assume.... I'm going to ask Madame Des Rosiers. There was a failure of leadership at the top of the Conservative government to lead to this.

[Nathalie Des Rosiers]

We think there should be a full public inquiry to disclose what happened and what went wrong here. In our view, it's not sufficient for the federal government not to be part of this public inquiry, because all the current reviews that are going on now are partial.

A key element that I did not get a chance to speak on is the role of CSIS and information that was...and the role of the RCMP in this. In our view, the leadership, once a conference is held, must be proactive in setting up in order that people who deserve to be heard, be heard; that answers be given; and that compensation be offered to the people who require it.

Our suggestion is that it will be better than waiting for class actions that can take eight to ten years and will cost more money. So we are inviting the government to continue their leadership--they decided to hold the party--and handle the aftermath.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

On the summit and how it actually played out, obviously it was not successful. The minister said he followed the recommendations of bureaucrats, couldn't state what they were, really couldn't analyze them, and gave no reasons. Then we heard from our colleagues across the way, “It was the police and everybody else down there. Don't talk to us. It has nothing to do with the Conservative government. We take no responsibility. It's not our fault.”

What do you have to say about that?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

It'll have to be fairly quick.

[Nathalie Des Rosiers]

Our report does say that we need to look at this more broadly. If we don't want another G-20 we need to take action to change the legal framework surrounding these decisions. That is a legitimate thing to ask of the government. The Criminal Code certainly did not help in those circumstances. I think it was abused. We have provisions for breach of the peace that were applied in a context where there was no breach of the peace.

So what do we do? How do we move forward? We can do better, and that's our invitation. We should look at the future and how to create a legal infrastructure so it doesn't happen again.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much.

We'll now move back to the government side.

Mr. Norlock is next, and then Mr. Lobb.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Thank you very much. I have just one question.

I understand you're with your legal counsel, so if you need his intervention, please feel free to do that.

I'd like to carry on with Mr. Kania because he knows this very well. In the end, the government does decide to host, because being part of the G-8 and the G-20, each country has a responsibility. Mr. Kania also knows that the G-8 is.... In my personal view, if you take a look at the last meeting of the G-8 when the G-20 came, the G-8 is going to morph into the G-20, so there will probably be only a G-20 down the road.

I think the people at home understand--and I know you do--that politicians don't get into who you arrest and who you don't arrest. The evidence of the chief superintendent who was here last simply said that the government told them, “We're holding this meeting. We need security. The police and public safety agencies need to tell us what they need from us to allow them to do their jobs.” So if the rights of someone have been interfered with, pursuant to our Constitution or any law of the country, it isn't.... For example, if one of those police officers had done something criminal, does that mean the Government of Canada did something criminal? The answer is quite obvious that it did not.

For the edification of folks at home and you, in the province of Ontario there is a civilian complaints process called the Ontario Civilian Police Commission. Any person can go to any police officer at any time and make a complaint and it will be thoroughly investigated. I know that because I was part of the system.

So in all fairness, taking the politics out of it and trying not to slam anybody, whether it's a Liberal or NDP government, provincially or otherwise, if something goes wrong there are processes in place already to cure that. Your job is not to protect innocent victims, like the store owners and public property. In this particular instance, I think your job is to make sure that individuals are protected from the intrusion of the state. The government's job is to make sure we have the correct people in place to do it, like the police and other folks.

I'll pass on to Mr. Lobb now.

[Nathalie Des Rosiers]

I want to make a correction. In our report we ask for compensation for both the store owners and the people who were affected. I want that to be quite clear.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

All right. Thank you very much.

Mr. Lobb, I'm sorry, I hate to do this to you, but Mr. Norlock took up some extra time.

We now want to thank our witnesses for appearing here today and telling their stories. Thank you for the extra information. If any of you want to make application or supply us with any other answers--perhaps you answered a question and want to add something to it--please send it to our committee.

When the bells start we will have to adjourn, so I encourage everyone to say their goodbyes very quickly.

We have a number of motions that we will receive notice on. Mr. Kania submitted one in a previous meeting and we have circulated it, so it has been given notice of motion.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Yes. To be clear, it's the motion that is dated October 26, 2010, that reads, “That the Minister of Public Safety provide all documentation submitted to him”, etc.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

That's good. That motion has been received.

Ms. Murray here would like to also place a notice of motion.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to give notice of a motion regarding an injustice to certain Canadians who experienced being placed under a cloud of suspicion, and with the will of the committee, I would like to read the motion into the record--

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Actually, Ms. Murray, as soon as you start explaining what the motion is--plus you're going to read it into the record--you're moving it into debate, and I can't take it into debate.

If you want to give notice of motion, and just notice of motion, that's fine.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Okay.

May I ask the will of the committee to read the motion into the record?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

You can ask the will of the chairman and I will grant it.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Okay. Thank you very much.

The motion, then, is as follows:

That, in the opinion of the Standing Parliamentary Committee on Public Safety (the Committee), the government has failed to either substantiate or refute public allegations made by Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) Director Mr. Richard Fadden with prior approval from a member of the Executive Council, in which he denounced municipal politicians and provincial ministers in B.C. and Ontario for being under the influence of foreign governments, therefore the government is complicit in and responsible for these unsubstantiated assertions;

and further given (a) the discriminatory nature of Mr. Fadden's remarks regarding foreign governments' influence over cultural community members including those with an interest in politics through university and college clubs, and specifying first and second generation Chinese Canadians, and (b) the consequential implications of untrustworthiness and disloyalty of newer Chinese immigrants compared with third generation Chinese community members, and (c) the negative and harmful impacts on Canadians of Chinese origin and other cultural backgrounds, and their elected representatives, resulting from these unfounded claims and innuendos, and (d) the erosion of confidence and respect by the international community towards a country whose government fails to take action to remedy inappropriate, inflammatory and hurtful allegations made by a senior officer responsible for the security apparatus of that country, and (e) the absence of means for the citizens, who feel they have unjustly been placed under a cloud of suspicion, to rectify this injustice, and (f) the responsibility of parliamentarians to be a voice for those they represent;

Therefore the Committee calls on the government to (a) unreservedly apologize for approving and allowing Mr. Fadden to make these unsupported assertions, and (b) such apology to be made in the House of Commons, (c) and to the Chinese Canadian community and other cultural communities implicated in and offended by Mr. Fadden's allegations concerning growing foreign interference in domestic politics and (d) require Mr. Fadden to tender his resignation as CSIS Director.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Ms. Murray.

You're a very good reader--not a speed reader, but a very good reader.

Thank you. The meeting is adjourned.