Public Safety Committee on March 31st, 2015

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Got that. Is there further discussion?

Ms. James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

I will not be supporting this amendment. For one thing, we're talking about special advocates who are currently only found in proceedings under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

There are a number of other issues here, but to keep it short, I will be opposing this amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you.

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Now the vote on clause 49. Shall clause 49 carry?

(Clause 49 agreed to)

Now we will go to NDP-16 for a new subclause 49.1.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My colleagues will probably be extremely surprised to hear that the NDP's amendment No. 16 proposes a sunset clause, with a review of the law after three years. I won't go into the details. I think that we've already covered this a number of times with other clauses in this bill.

I think it is very important for parliamentarians and the government to conduct a review to determine whether different clauses of a bill as important as Bill C-51 will have an impact and whether they are working. That is our duty. I think it's important to add this sunset clause to clause 2 of Bill C-51.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you, Madam Doré Lefebvre.

Mr. Norlock.

Oh, I'm sorry, Ms. Doré Lefebvre.

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

We are talking a lot about sunset clauses with revision, but this really has to do with the new powers being granted to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. It is doubly important to adopt a sunset clause in that regard. The recent Bill C-44 gives CSIS a lot of powers. Bill C-51 gives CSIS additional new powers. It is important that we do our job here and review the legislation to see whether everything is working.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you.

Mr. Norlock.

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

I don't believe that the proposed amendment is necessary. It's duplicative. I think I mispronounced that word before, and that's why Mr. Garrison got his dander up. I didn't mean anything, and I realize that the mispronunciation carried with it a very different meaning.

The Security Intelligence Review Committee provides an annual report to Parliament on the performance by CSIS of its duties and functions. This will include the new threat reduction mandate. As such, a parliamentary study of the key provisions of CSIS' threat reduction mandate would overlap with the work undertaken by SIRC. Should Parliament deem it appropriate to conduct an additional review of any portion of the bill, including the threat reduction mandate, it will always have the discretion to undertake one.

The sunset provisions of the amendment are inconsistent with the intent of the legislation. The bill intends to strengthen Canada's national security by authorizing CSIS to take measures to reduce threats to the security of Canada. CSIS will take many such measures as part of ongoing, long-term investigations. An end date to the threat reduction mandate with a possibility, but not certainty, of periodic parliamentary extensions would create uncertainty, and will undermine CSIS' ability to effectively plan its operations with the goal of protecting national security.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you.

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

We will then go to NDP-17 as well. Once moved, of course, I will just forewarn Mr. Garrison that it is—

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

Mr. Chair, I will be very brief.

I would like to move the second of my amendments, which attempts to put back the office of inspector general as an oversight mechanism.

I fully expect you to rule it outside the scope of the bill, as you did the previous one.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

First of all, let's deal with your amendment NDP-17

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

That's the amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

I am sorry. It's getting late. The chair was concentrating on the draft ruling of inadmissibilty in the current act—

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

I am anticipating with bated breath.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

—and did not focus on your amendment. Please, would you just repeat it?

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

I am very pleased to move our second amendment, which attempts to restore the office of inspector general of CSIS as an oversight measure. I fully expect you to rule it outside the scope of the bill, as you did the previous amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Mr. Garrison, you are 100% correct.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you.

Now we have a Bloc Québécois amendment 9, which is deemed to have been moved.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

It is another sunset clause, Mr. Chair. I would speak in favour of it. We do need sunset clauses, but I expect the government will likely continue to vote against sunset clauses. It is needed, so I will speak in its favour.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Madame Doré Lefebvre.

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

You know how much I like sunset clauses, Mr. Chair. However, unfortunately for this amendment, I cannot support it because it means involving the Senate, which is made up of people who do not represent Canadians, because it is an unelected body. That is why I will be voting against this amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Fine, thank you very much.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Chair, may I?

I think Madame Doré Lefebvre would like the Senate to go into the sunset.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!