Public Safety Committee on Dec. 1st, 2014

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

Just to add on the other side of that argument from Mr. Garrison, the amendment would increase the proceedings where the innocence at stake exception could be raised, and yes it would apply to immigration proceedings, security certificates, etc., and other instances where an individual could be deprived of his liberty or in prison. The amendment would reduce the scope of the protection of CSIS human sources. The point of Bill C-44 is to deal with situations where innocence and freedom are at stake, and not every administrative tribunal available should be considered for this. So on those points alone I would disagree with Mr. Garrison on this.

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Mr. Garrison, on amendment NDP-6.

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

Mr. Chair, this is one that was similar in intent to LIB-2 so I'm not expecting any better reception from the government side.

What we're saying is that in any proceedings under this section the judge must allow for special counsel of the defence who holds a security clearance. So we're not saying again, as I believe Mr. Easter is saying, that any counsel for the defence must, but in this case we're somewhat narrower. We're saying any counsel who is already security cleared could be allowed to participate. I do think that's a reasonable requirement and it draws on the parallel special advocate process in immigration, which we already have well established.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Ms. Ablonczy.

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

I shouldn't keep doing this. I would just say only if you could clone the director.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Mr. Easter.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

I would just say that Randall articulated the argument so much better that I think the government members would certainly come in on this one and support this amendment. It makes a whole lot of sense.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you, Mr. Easter.

Mr. Falk.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

I think that this amendment would actually limit the discretion of a judge, and as such, I don't think that's a direction we would want to go in. A judge can always appoint an amicus curiae to address important decisions that are questions of law and to help ensure the fairness—

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

[Inaudible—Editor] Are we on NDP-7?

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

We're on NDP-6, so hold that comment about “only the director“ for the next one.

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 7 agreed to)

(On clause 8)

Mr. Garrison, I believe we're going to amendment NDP-7 on clause 8.

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

What we're saying here is that by limiting the requests for these warrants to the director, it would help prevent them from becoming routine, and it also provides a clear person to be accountable for those warrants. What this does in effect, for those who are trying to read through these, is it deletes other designated officials and keeps the responsibility squarely on the director. Ms. Ablonczy says that means cloning the director. It does not mean that the director has to do all of that work as an individual, but he or she has to put their signature on it and remain accountable for those warrants. That's the import of this amendment, to keep this from sliding down the chain of command, if you like, and making sure the director is aware and that these are exceptional use of warrants.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Ms. Ablonczy, followed by Ms. James.

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

If you have to get the director's signature on every single warrant application, do you know how many there might be?

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

Violating the [Inaudible—Editor].

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

I just don't think that's at all reasonable. He could be a very busy person.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Ms. James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

It's okay, my colleague has said it perfectly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Mr. Easter.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Can you read that into the clause, Randall? I'm lost. Where does that “if the director” come in?

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

What it takes out is wording about others designated for that purpose. We are deleting words by this amendment rather than adding words.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

All right.

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

That's my point. It allows delegation of this authority down the chain where the director might not be aware of these warrants being requested.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you very much.