Public Safety Committee on Dec. 1st, 2014

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Chair, we've moved this amendment because of the most recent report from SIRC. In that report, SIRC says very clearly that CSIS did not provide complete and accurate information to the review committee, and they did not always provide it in a timely manner. When I read through the act, I didn't find any such express obligation placed on CSIS. This simply takes a problem that SIRC has encountered and puts it into the legislation so that it's very clear to CSIS that they do have the responsibility, upon request, to provide complete and accurate information in a timely manner. It's not a change in powers, but it's as it says in the legislation “for greater certainty” that CSIS is obligated to take this action.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Is there further discussion on this amendment?

Ms. James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Garrison, for bringing that forward. I'm not sure whether it's within the total scope of the actual bill that's before us, because we're not dealing with anything necessarily associated with SIRC, but I think, according to the information I have, that the whole issue of SIRC oversight is contained in section 39 of the CSIS Act. It's already in there. It achieves the same objectives. Of course SIRC is the oversight body. It oversees the actions of CSIS. It's just provided a report, as you know. That's its job and it's already doing it. So I'm not going to support this amendment. Whether it's within the scope or not—I think it might possibly be outside of the scope of what's being dealt with in Bill C-44—for obvious reasons, I'm not supporting it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Mr. Garrison.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Not to belabour the point, but this amendment is not about SIRC. It's about CSIS and it's about the responsibilities of CSIS to the review body. So with respect, I do believe it is within the scope of the bill. I guess I'd have to say I'm disappointed, given the annual report we had from SIRC in which it expressed that this is a problem, that the committee would not see its way clear to assist SIRC by making this requirement for CSIS.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Mr. Easter.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

I would just add something to that, Mr. Chair. In its report, SIRC did talk considerably about problems within CSIS—regions not speaking to regions adequately enough or not speaking to the central office—and in my view, having it in the bill would put some pressure on CSIS to be absolutely aware that they must report this information to SIRC as they go along. I think it puts pressure on CSIS to be aware and to be absolutely certain that they provide the information. I do not see how what we're trying to do in any fashion complicates or jeopardizes the bill.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Madam Doré Lefebvre.

[Rosane Doré Lefebvre, NDP, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

On this amendment, I agree with Mr. Garrison and Mr. Easter.

When we debated this bill in the House, we had the opportunity to put questions to the Minister of Public Safety. It was said several times that not only does public safety need to be taken into account, but that civil oversight is important as well. The Minister of Public Safety was entirely in agreement with that, as were all of the parties in the House.

Given the last published report, I am having some trouble understanding why the Conservatives would want to vote against this amendment, which is precisely in keeping with what all of the parliamentarians subscribed to. Moreover, this would put some positive pressure on the Canadian Security Intelligence Service to ensure that its activities are clear and precise.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Mr. Carmichael, please.

[John Carmichael, Conservative, Don Valley West, ON]

Mr. Chair, perhaps I can weigh in on this. I think it's already part of the CSIS Act, in section 39, that, when requested, CSIS is required to report in a timely and effective manner to SIRC. CSIS activities are subject to robust oversight right now by the Minister of Public Safety, and reviewed by SIRC and the Federal Court.

Effectively what we're doing is creating redundancy. SIRC is also responsible for reviewing the activities of CSIS.

So I feel that in this case it's already implied in the act and well stated.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Are there any further comments?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

We will now go to Parti vert amendments 2 and 2a.

Mr. Hyer.

[Bruce Hyer, Green, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Chair, PV-2 and PV-3 are very similar except that PV-2 refers to duties and functions and PV-3 refers to investigations.

These two proposed subclauses in the bill widen the possibility for cooperation with other intelligence services by adding “within or outside Canada”. Our amendment seeks to ensure that this information was obtained without torture, since Canada has signed and ratified the UN Convention against Torture.

It's not only our opinion, but Privacy Commissioner Daniel Therrien, who asked to appear before this committee and was not invited, wrote in his letter, “My Office is concerned with the adequacy of existing safeguards to ensure against the risk of such violations, including the risk of torture.” We agree with the Privacy Commissioner.

We think this clarification, with an underscoring of the importance to be consistent with what we have already agreed to, should be in here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you, Mr. Hyer.

Ms. Ablonczy.

[Diane Ablonczy, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Chair, Mr. Norlock asked me if I would pass on some concerns that were discussed before the meeting, because he has lost his voice.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Diane Ablonczy, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

I know; we're all very sad and sympathetic—

[An hon. member]

We're not.

[Diane Ablonczy, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

—and we're doing this with a smile on our face, for some reason.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

I'm sure you feel his pain.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Diane Ablonczy, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

We discussed the fact that there is a ministerial direction on information sharing with foreign entities. It was issued to CSIS in, I believe, July 2011. That set out an approach about information sharing where there may be a risk of mistreatment, because it certainly is a concern.

We believe, Rick and I—I don't know about everybody else—that this ministerial direction covers the intent of this amendment, and we think it's the best way to handle it.

You can nod if I'm correct.

The authority is actually broader in this case, because if you subject it to international law rather than to the information sharing ministerial direction, you limit the scope of our operations by what might be written outside of Canada. This is basically a made-in-Canada protocol. We think it's adequate and the one that should be followed.

Is there anything you want to croak...to add?

There are no croaks from Mr. Norlock, so I think I have stated his concerns adequately.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Given that there is no croak, is there any further discussion?

Mr. Garrison.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

I thank the Green Party for these two amendments. I think they do raise an important question.

I guess what we're dealing with in this bill...which the minister has repeatedly described as “short”. The point is that the credibility of CSIS, both externally and internally, depends on meeting the highest standards. While I agree with what Ms. Ablonczy has said about the ministerial directive, it's not legislated. By putting those guarantees into the law, we achieve a higher standard of certainty, and one that can be relied upon even with a change of government, a change of ministers, or a change of opinion by the current minister.

Therefore, I think the Green Party amendments do add something important to the bill.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Is there further discussion on amendments PV-2 and PV-2a?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 3 agreed to)

(On clause 4)

We have other amendments here by the Green Party, PV-3 and of course PV-3a.

Mr. Hyer, you have the floor.