Public Safety Committee on April 23rd, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Do I see any appetite to amend?

Ms. Damoff.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

No, not to amend at this point, but to the officials, can you speak to the impact of what Mr. Dubé is suggesting?

[Scott Millar]

In terms of ministerial directives, there are some that have been made publicly available and we're always looking.... In fact, the legislation reflects some of the things that used to be in ministerial directives and now will be transparent and enshrined in legislation, but there are some ministerial directives that do include classified information and would reveal capabilities of Canada to our adversaries.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

To Mr. Dubé's point about changing it to say that it's excluding any that would impact national security...?

[Scott Millar]

Do you want to speak to it, John?

[John Davies]

I'm not sure if the Canada Gazette is the right vehicle to do that. The Gazette is usually used for advertising regulatory change and consulting Canadians in that way on change about to come.

Earlier on, there were amendments to ensure that NSIRA would be looking at and reviewing all ministerial directions. In the annual report of NSIRA, you would already see changes and any new ministerial directions that way. From that point of view, I'm not sure if the amendment is required.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Motz.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

That answered my question. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Dubé.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Just as a follow-up, for any changes that were made to NSIRA, would they be mandated with reporting back to the public or is that just something that could potentially happen?

[John Davies]

I would have to pull out the amendment, but I believe that there would be a requirement that in their annual report there would be some commentary on that finding.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Is that a commentary on the directives themselves or...?

[John Davies]

They would be asked to review all new ministerial directions and any changes to existing ministerial directions.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

But the report could.... It's at their discretion at the end of the day as to whether they...?

[John Davies]

I'd have to pull out the amendment. I thought there was a requirement. There certainly would be an expectation that they would comment on that work in their annual report.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

If I may ask, Chair—and I should know this, but I don't off the top of my head—I believe the minister has published some ministerial directives: in what forum is that usually done?

[John Davies]

More recently, it would be just normally through a web release of a media relations product. Certainly, in the past it has been through access to information requests, but, obviously, there's certainly a new interest in being more proactive in explaining to Canadians ministerial directions.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

So to clarify, just may I make—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

May, may, may.... Yes.

[Matthew Dubé, NDP, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

—some points on part of the answers I just received?

There doesn't really seem to be a clear precedent for where it would be published. I think that, given that the Gazette does deal with.... It's not regulatory change, but in some ways it could be seen as similar. In the absence of that, I think it's difficult to legislate what's going to appear on a minister's website or something like that. Again, I can't amend my own amendment. I'm somewhat disappointed that there's no appetite to try to make it more palatable, to at least codify what the minister says he wants to do.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Dubé.

Is there any other debate?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Now we have LIB-28.

Mr. Spengemann.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

This goes back to the question of the Public Service Employment Act and the mobility of federal civil servants. LIB-28 and LIB-29, in fact, go together. They are both technical amendments that require strictly the removal of certain provisions that would leave residual or duplicative provisions under the proposed CSE act. It's a technical amendment that simply removes those and, again, renders the Public Service Employment Act applicable to the federal civil servants who previously would have been governed by the proposed CSE act.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Spengemann.

Is there any debate?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Next is LIB-29.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Chair, the very same explanation applies to LIB-29.