Public Safety Committee on May 29th, 2017

[Robert Ashton]

The biggest thing for our members currently is our port passes, and those are part of the security clearance background checks. When I started on the waterfront about 20 years ago, I could get registered and go to work. Believe it or not, back then there were no fences around some of the terminals. Since then, with the marine transport security program, our people have to get background checks. And those are the biggest.... We have people who have been refused their background checks because they were in line at a nightclub behind somebody the police had been watching out for, and through a bar check—because their licences were scanned right behind theirs—they were refused a security pass.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

So it's fair to say that the process you implemented is of such quality that it withstands any type of other process, namely the one in the U.S.?

[Robert Ashton]

I would say that the process we currently have is very good. That's why I don't believe we need to be a part of that.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Mr. Miller, go ahead for five minutes.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Ashton, I've listened with interest to your concerns regarding your union members and your workers, and I agree with you to a point. But I have one question, which I am going to verify and ask to the department. My assumption, based on logic, is that this will be a reciprocal agreement. So in the event that the same situation happens in the United States, the Canadian government has the right to basically disapprove somebody who they feel isn't appropriate to do the job, the same way the U.S. could. I think that we as a country first of all have to make sure that it's reciprocal, and we should be able to reserve that right at any time in order to protect, as you call it, sovereignty. I don't call it sovereignty; I call it security. As long as that agreement is reciprocal, I presume that would satisfy your concerns with it.

[Robert Ashton]

The short answer is no, the reason being that, again, Canada shouldn't be allowing American workers to go to work in America. It's not our business and not our right—

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Well, that's not—

[Robert Ashton]

As you say, it is currently reciprocal. The documents I've read have said that it's a reciprocal agreement. I'll tell you that right now.

For my membership to get their Transport security clearance, we're waiting anywhere from six months to a year. If you add in the reciprocity part of this agreement whereby Transport Canada now has to go and investigate 70,000 longshore personnel plus, or 10,000 or however many they have to do, that's going to slow down our process.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Okay, but once you have that approval, it's good. It's not that you're doing this every time a cruise ship comes in.

[Robert Ashton]

We do it every four years—

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Okay. Then it's a non-issue. At least to me, it is.

[Robert Ashton]

For my security clearance right now, I do it every four years. Under this new agreement, the names get sent down every day.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Fair enough.

Ms. Reigate and Mr. Gooch, are there any major outstanding concerns in relation to what Mr. Ashton is talking about? Is there anything along the same lines when it comes to workers at your airport that either one of you has concerns with to the same degree or in the same manner?

[Janik Reigate]

My understanding is that through the restricted area identity card, the RAIC, that is issued for workers at Toronto Pearson, that process is what will govern whether or not an employee gets clearance to that area. The information gets sent down to the United States and gets vetted. A comment could come back, but the decision is still made by Canadians as to whether or not a RAIC gets issued so that an employee can work in those spaces. That's my understanding of how it will get operationalized.

[Daniel-Robert Gooch]

I'll just add that, coincidentally, a couple of weeks ago, a colleague of mine, Jennifer Sullivan, from Greater Toronto Airports Authority, and I presented at the transport committee on a series of questions about the screening of airport workers, where we were into a fair bit of the back-and-forth. Certainly, we share Mr. Ashton's concern about the delays, for example, for the transportation security clearances. We're seeing three to six months as well, so there is that level of concern.

We certainly could come back with regard to any specific questions on that follow-up.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

I think I would agree with you that three to six months is longer than necessary, and I would certainly be willing to support any recommendation to try to speed up that process. I think that only makes sense. I don't know what the delay is, but it does seem excessive. That still doesn't take away from the fact of the reciprocity in the agreement and the fact that we have a right to protect our security here.

Could you give me an example of something where either Canada would not allow a certain U.S. worker down there to work on one of these cruise ships, say, or the same kind of airport, or the U.S. is doing the same thing to Canada? What would be something that one of those workers may have done or is alleged to have done that would put them on that “we don't want them” list?

[Daniel-Robert Gooch]

I think that gets out of our area of expertise, but I would say that there is no Canada pre-clearance in the U.S. right now, so it's a bit of a one-sided arrangement in terms of how there is pre-clearance in Canada. We do not have it in the U.S., although that is something that is contemplated in the legislation of the treaty.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

I'm afraid I need you to end there.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

Okay. There's never enough time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

I have three things.

Thank you to all the witnesses for your testimony today. It's been helpful.

Second, I want to thank the clerk for getting the clock fixed, which has been helpful for me.

Third, if it's the will of the committee, I think I would like to have the testimony Mr. Ashton has brought to us today sent to the two departments, Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness and Transport Canada, for comment not exclusively but particularly with respect to clauses 17, 43, and 45. They can comment on it in other ways.

I think he has raised some important questions for us. I will ask them to review the testimony, so that we don't have to come up with direct questions, and respond to it for us. I'm going to try to give them a fairly tight timeline on that. If you will give me permission, if I don't think it's an appropriate response, I'll invite them to come to the committee, if that's okay with you. All right?

[Some hon. members]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

We're going to take a brief pause as we get our next witnesses in.

Again, thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

We will come back to order. We have two guests with us. Mr. Chan is doing a repeat performance. Thank you for the encore.

He has told me he won't give their opening statement again—we've heard it once—but he's available for questions. Ms. Greenwood is here from the Canadian American Business Council.

We'll start with your statement.

[Maryscott Greenwood, Chief Executive Officer, Canadian American Business Council]

Thank you.

Hello, everyone. I'm pleased to be here before you today, in Ottawa.

You can tell that this is a very important gathering, because if it weren't I would be at my pool in Northern Virginia with my kids, because it's Memorial Day and it's sunny in Washington, D.C., so that's how important you are.