Evidence of meeting #49 for Public Safety and National Security in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was decision.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Superintendent Fraser Macaulay  Assistant Commissioner, Correctional Operations and Programs, Correctional Service of Canada
Caroline Xavier  Vice-President, Operations Branch, Canada Border Services Agency
Michel Coulombe  Director, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Robert Frater  Chief General Counsel, Department of Justice
John Cousineau  Assistant Director, Operations Enablement, Canadian Security Intelligence Service

4 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC

Minister, if I may, I'll interrupt, because my time is limited and it's the only crack at this that I'll get.

You're not closing the door, then, to the possibility of this happening again. To me, it seems that if the Federal Court has deemed this to be illegal, then the answer should be clear. If you do want to update the legislation, wouldn't an appropriate proposal be to make sure that CSIS has the statutory obligation not to retain data on people who are not considered threats to national security?

4 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

I'm receiving advice from a lot of Canadians about all of these issues. When we put that all together in the national security framework, we will report to Canadians on what the result is, but bear in mind that there are two objectives for this consultation: number one, keep Canadians safe; number two, and equally important, simultaneously safeguard the rights and freedoms of Canadians in an open, inclusive, and democratic society, and that includes their privacy rights.

We have had some very important advice offered just in the last number of days from Commissioner Therrien, the federal Privacy Commissioner, and a number of his provincial counterparts. I take the advice coming from the Privacy Commissioner very, very seriously.

4:05 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC

To the extent that retaining data is a breach of the right to privacy, if we want to both ensure security and protect rights, it seems to me that it is easy to say that we will not retain data on persons who are not a threat to national security, since there will be no consequences for national security. I will leave that for the moment, but this is certainly not the last time I talk about it.

I would like to put my question to your colleague the Minister of Justice, but since you are here, I will put it to you.

Some Department of Justice lawyers went to court to defend what CSIS had done. Were you or your colleague the Minister of Justice aware of the arguments put forward by the Department of Justice?

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

Which defence are you referring to, Mr. Dubé?

4:05 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC

I'm referring to the Department of Justice lawyers' going into court, omitting certain information, and defending this scheme by CSIS. Were you or the Minister of Justice aware of this?

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

In addressing this question, the director of CSIS and the deputy minister of justice have both said clearly and unequivocally that until the Federal Court made its ruling, they were of the view, based upon their own legal advice, that the procedures being followed by CSIS were, in fact, authorized by the statute.

4:05 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC

So you were not aware?

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

No. The first time this issue came to my attention was in the SIRC report for 2014-15, which was filed in Parliament in January of this year. It should have been filed last year, but it was delayed because of the election.

4:05 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC

There were several months between January and the court ruling and then the media coverage that followed. What happened in the meantime? You were aware in January, and then the decision came out later. Did you have a discussion with CSIS? How did this play out?

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

The SIRC report flagged the issue. It was after the issue had been raised by SIRC that the Federal Court began its further examination of the issues that were involved. The service and the Department of Justice were dealing in an ongoing way with the Federal Court, responding to its questions and providing it with information. That was an ongoing process over a period of several months.

4:05 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC

Was data retention still ongoing, or was there a moratorium while these court proceedings took place? What exactly happened? I'm still unclear on that.

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

When the issue was fully elaborated on by the court, Mr. Justice Noël provided us with a copy of his judgment. When I had the opportunity to read his judgment, I immediately called upon SIRC, since it was the body that had raised the issue in the first place, to reinject itself in the situation to make sure that the judgment of the court was fully and properly enforced. Mr. Coulombe advised me that that, in fact, was the case.

4:05 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC

Do you not find it worrisome that when you arrived in your position as Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, you were not made aware of this activity by an agency that is under your supervision, and were not informed before a few months had gone by, at least before January, according to what you said?

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

The agency, the service, and the deputy minister of justice were dealing with an outstanding legal issue. They informed me that they were responding to the questions of the court. They were providing information. They were collaborating with the court in every way to provide the information that was required. This was an ongoing procedure.

When the court finally issued its opinion on the subject, which was in about the middle of October, I believe, that's the point in time when I had the opportunity to read the court's judgment. The court said, as you have reported, that it found this particular retention of associated data to be without legal authorization in the statute. It's at that point the director of CSIS took the immediate step to stop the practice. I invited SIRC to re-involve itself in the situation to supervise and to make sure that the data was properly taken care of in accordance with the judgment of the court.

4:10 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC

Perfect.

In the wake of the comments by your colleague the Minister of Natural Resources, can you assure us that aboriginal activists are not under supervision at this time, with regard to the demonstrations that will certainly be held after the announcement about the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain project? We learned that this had taken place in the past. Can you assure us that this is not a practice that is used currently, for prevention?

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

I can give you the absolute assurance, which we made reference to in our election campaign, that peaceful protest, demonstrations, and advocacy are fundamental rights in Canada. They're protected by the charter, and if necessary, we will change the law to reinforce those rights, to make it absolutely clear that Canadians can exercise those democratic rights without fear in this country.

4:10 p.m.

NDP

Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC

We'll follow up on that.

Thanks, Minister.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant

Mr. Mendicino, you are next.

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Marco Mendicino Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, thank you very much for your remarks this afternoon on the supplementary estimates, and for taking a moment to expand on a number of priorities that relate to your portfolio. It's quite clear to me, as I would think it would be to all members of this committee, that there is a tremendous amount of work that is being done on the portfolio, and for that we are very grateful.

You made a recent announcement with regard to the security infrastructure program. For those who are unaware, this is a program that is designed to help communities that are at risk of hate-motivated crimes to improve their security infrastructure.

Could you take a moment to tell us how you've enhanced the criteria and the eligibility of this program in ways that improve on the old model?

4:10 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

Thank you, Mr. Mendicino.

This is not an expensive program. It costs about $1 million a year, so it's not a program that involves a huge amount of public funds, but it is a very useful program for groups and organizations that feel themselves to be vulnerable to hate crimes. Sadly, we have seen in recent weeks and months some very painful examples of that.

We've had some pretty brutal graffiti, vulgar in nature and quite crude in its dissemination of white supremacist symbols, in my own city of Regina. Here in Ottawa, four places of worship were subjected to this kind of attack. We've seen it in Toronto. We've seen it in Peterborough, and in other places across the country.

Groups and organizations that feel themselves to be vulnerable have, over the last number of weeks and months, made the point that the security infrastructure program, while useful, could be made more useful without costing a lot more money by changing the terms and conditions of the program, so we have broadened the eligibility requirements.

One of the previous rules was that you had to have suffered an attack in the past in order to qualify for the funding. The funding is available for gates, fences, security film on windows, closed-circuit television, cameras, lights, those sorts of things that contribute to public security. As I said, in order to be eligible for it in the past, you had to have had an attack which is kind of like prevention after the fact.

We've changed that. Obviously, if you have had an attack, you're still eligible. Now, however, if you can demonstrate your vulnerability in advance by objective evidence that shows you may be vulnerable to this kind of danger, you can submit that argument to the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, and the officials will make an assessment. You can actually, as a part of your application, get an external opinion about the vulnerability. That's one important change.

Another change is to make the security infrastructure expenses applicable to the inside of a building, and not just the outside of a building. Previously, it was just the outside perimeter. Now it can include infrastructure changes within the building.

Another thing we're doing is making sure that communities that may feel vulnerable are well informed about the program. We're involved in a communications effort to reach out to groups and organizations, to let them know that the program is available and that they're eligible to apply if they think it would be appropriate and necessary.

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

Marco Mendicino Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

I will certainly do my level best to help educate the members of my community on this program. This is an issue that has come up in my riding of Eglinton—Lawrence as well, so we are grateful for these enhancements.

In my remaining few minutes, I would like to ask you to expand for a few moments on the Fort McMurray fire that you characterize as being one of the worst natural fire disasters in the history of the country. You mentioned that we have matched, in these supplemental estimates, the $154.5 million in contributions made to the Canadian Red Cross, and before that there was $307 million set aside in the annual disaster relief fund.

Can you tell us how those funds will be used to help the community in Fort McMurray recover from this terrible disaster?

4:15 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

The two separate programs, the matching funds and the DFAA, are designed in a way not to overlap with each other or conflict with each other. The funding through the Red Cross is aimed at those sorts of things that DFAA would not cover.

There are three sources of assistance here. One is the official disaster financial assistance arrangement where, according to a preset formula depending on the magnitude of the loss, a portion of the loss is paid for by the Province of Alberta, and a portion of the loss is paid for by the Government of Canada. The bigger the loss, the larger percentage the federal government pays.

So far, federal and provincial officials have identified $307 million that the Government of Canada will need to contribute to the Province of Alberta. That is not the final calculation; that is an advance payment. So far, it's $307 million. As the work goes on to rebuild the community and the losses are identified in more precise terms, losses that aren't otherwise covered by insurance, the tally will no doubt continue. It does take usually some years for these things to be totally tallied up, but we were able to put into the hands of the Province of Alberta, within one month of the fire, $307 million to begin the process of supporting Alberta in dealing with the situation.

The Red Cross money is aimed at things that would not be covered under the DFAA. The Red Cross has done an amazing job. The total funds that were donated, which they were able to collect from generous Canadians across the country, was $185 million. The federal matching was $104 million, and there was matching on top of that by the Province of Alberta for another $30 million. The total in the Red Cross fund is $319 million to assist those impacted by the fires, including $227 million to support individuals and families, $50 million to support community groups that are involved in the rebuilding and the rehabilitation, and $30 million to support eligible small businesses.

4:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant

Thank you, Minister.

Mr. Miller.

December 8th, 2016 / 4:20 p.m.

Conservative

Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON

Minister, it's always great to have you here.

Lady and gentlemen, thank you to all of you for being here.

Last week, Minister, we had the corrections investigator at committee. We questioned him about the review that was being undertaken. One of the recommendations was to increase inmates' pay. I think there would be many Canadians who would be dismayed that any kind of allowance or pay would go to prisoners. He seemed to be under the impression that this increase is necessary, and he's quite content that inmates never use their pay “to purchase illegal drugs”.

Do you agree with that?

4:20 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Liberal Regina—Wascana, SK

I think Mr. Sapers is very well positioned to examine the facts. His advice is that that very small amount of funding is not, in fact, used for any illicit processes.