Evidence of meeting #60 for Public Safety and National Security in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was terrorism.
A video is available from Parliament.
Chair, Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs
Yes, and our proposal was that there should be improvements of oversight.
Liberal
Adam Vaughan Liberal Trinity—Spadina, ON
What would it say about Parliament if it failed to listen to your advice?
Chair, Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs
I think you guys are going to make the right decisions for Canadians and come up with the best set of structures that are going to protect us, hopefully while moving the ball forward and down the field in the oversight of the anti-terror authorities.
Liberal
Adam Vaughan Liberal Trinity—Spadina, ON
Mr. Mia, are you aware of any testimony or any submission—I know you've been watching this closely—that has recommended reducing oversight or recommended the status quo as a preferred option?
Member, Legal Advocacy Committee, Canadian Muslim Lawyers Association
I can't recall anyone recommending reduced oversight, but I think a lot of witnesses I've seen have certainly said that we need oversight of the security services.
Liberal
Adam Vaughan Liberal Trinity—Spadina, ON
The other common denominator in testimony, from both government witnesses and opposition witnesses, is the need for prevention strategies. You didn't comment on that. I'm curious what prevention strategies you think would be most effective in preventing the problem, which is far more effective than dealing with it in its aftermath.
Member, Legal Advocacy Committee, Canadian Muslim Lawyers Association
I think it's a package, obviously, that you need. You need interdiction. You need intelligence and law enforcement interdiction to prevent or prosecute if something's happened. Certainly, however, what you do not want to do is to get there. You do not want to get to the need to interdict nor prosecute. You want to prevent. Prevention really requires intelligence, as we've heard from Mr. Boisvert.
Mr. Bucci is from the U.S. military, and he can tell you that intelligence can go bad. You were involved with Secretary Rumsfeld and the Iraq war, and that was an intelligence failure. Intelligence can be bad, but what we need to do is to focus on good intelligence.
A big piece of the puzzle, if we're talking about how wide the threat is, as Mr. Boisvert said.... Jihadi terrorism, as it's being called, the label on it, is a legitimate and real threat, but if that's the case, we need to engage with those communities where those risks are going to come up. Just like how, for gangs, you need to work with troubled youth in those communities, the mainstream Muslim community needs to be a real partner in this. I don't think some of that is happening.
I know that the RCMP has done some work. CSIS has done some work. We need to be really encouraging that. In all honesty, I don't think anyone's trying to play a game here. We're just trying to say that with the mainstream community, we may have disagreements, but we really want to have productive and cooperative engagement, really. I don't think anyone has a secret agenda. There may be some rotten apples in every community. Yes, there are probably some youth, the psychopathic one or two, and then there are some who, in a gang, are going there for belonging or whatever misguided.... You need to get the psychopaths into the system and prosecute them. You need to get those other youth realigned and moved into society as productive members of society.
We're missing that piece. This is not an anti-terrorism bill per se; this is a national security bill. It's built on interdiction and surveillance. What we need is not a bill. As a lawyer, I'll tell you that law is not the solution to everything. What we need are operational issues, to improve national security and oversight, making that better; and we need effective community engagement so that everybody is part of the solution and we're not dividing the country.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp
Thank you very much.
I'm sorry, Mr. Vaughan, but the time is now up.
On behalf of the committee, I would certainly like to thank Mr. Peerbhoy, Mr. Mia, Mr. Bucci, Mr. Inserra, Mr. Cape, and Mr. Fogel. Thank you so much for your contributions today. I can assure you that they are most helpful in shaping the direction and the decisions of this committee. Thank you very kindly for coming today.
The meeting is adjourned.