Public Safety Committee on March 31st, 2015

Evidence of meeting #62 for Public Safety and National Security in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site.) The winning word was chair.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

Bill C-51, An Act to enact the Security of Canada Information Sharing Act and the Secure Air Travel Act, to amend the Criminal Code, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts

MPs speaking

Also speaking

John Davies Director General, National Security Policy, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Sophie Beecher Counsel, Public Safety Canada, Legal Services, Department of Justice

Élise Renaud Policy Specialist, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Ritu Banerjee Director, Operational Policy and Review, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Ari Slatkoff Senior Counsel, Public Safety Canada, Department of Justice

Douglas Breithaupt Director and General Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice

Glenn Gilmour Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice

Michael Duffy Senior General Counsel, National Security Law, Department of Justice

Nancie Couture Counsel, National Security Litigation and Advisory Group, Department of Justice

March 31st, 2015 / 7:40 p.m.

Senior General Counsel, National Security Law, Department of Justice

Michael Duffy

Mr. Chair, I would just indicate that I haven't had an opportunity to consider in any detail the wording that the member refers to. But just the reference to “rendition” or “removal to another state” is not necessarily a law enforcement power. So to the extent that the amendment refers to “law enforcement”, it may not be a like thing.

7:40 p.m.

NDP

Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC

It says “or”.

7:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp

Thank you.

Is there further discussion?

Seeing none, we will now decide on the subamendment.

7:40 p.m.

NDP

Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC

I would ask for a recorded vote, please.

7:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp

Yes, Mr. Easter.

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

I had a question on that previously, Mr. Chair, before we got into the subamendment.

7:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp

We actually voted on the subamendment. Now we're on the amendment.

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

Before we got into the subamendment I had a question on the original.

7:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp

I've got you now.

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

Has this section been found necessary by any of our Five Eyes partners, or not? Does anybody know? It's just of interest. If you can't answer it, it's not a problem.

7:45 p.m.

Conservative

Roxanne James Conservative Scarborough Centre, ON

None of our witnesses could give an opinion as to whether something is necessary or not.

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

It's not an opinion. I was just asking if they have it.

7:45 p.m.

Conservative

Roxanne James Conservative Scarborough Centre, ON

You said that it's necessary, so I don't think they can answer whether it's necessary or not.

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

No, I didn't.

7:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp

No, he asked if they possessed that power.

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

Anyway, if they don't have the information, that's fine. It was just of interest.

7:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp

Good.

7:45 p.m.

Senior General Counsel, National Security Law, Department of Justice

Michael Duffy

Mr. Chair, I would indicate that it's in the bill, or being proposed to be put into the bill, not because it appears in legislation in some other jurisdiction, it was to address concerns raised in this particular jurisdiction.

7:45 p.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE

Okay, thank you.

7:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp

Thank you.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

We will now go to Green Party amendment 42.

7:45 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In relation to those specific activities that are forbidden to CSIS agents of causing bodily harm and death, or wilfully attempting to obstruct justice, or violating the sexual integrity of a person, my amendment seeks to ensure that the interpretation of “bodily harm” is compliant with the covenant against torture so that the language is clear that “death or bodily harm to an individual”, then continuing on with new language:

including as a result of using torture within the meaning of subsection 269.1(2) of the Criminal Code or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment within the meaning of the Convention Against Torture as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act;

I was surprised that we thought we had to tell CSIS agents they shouldn't kill anyone, or violate their sexual integrity, or pervert the course of justice knowingly, but I think that while we're at it we might as well also ask them not to torture anyone.

7:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp

Ms. May, that's not called for.

7:45 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Why not?

7:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp

That is not called for. I asked you to introduce your amendment and not to be judgmental on that.

There is no more discussion. Thank you very much.

7:45 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Chair, the words speak for themselves.