Thank you, Chair.
As you can imagine, it's difficult not to be able to participate in the debates on other amendments. I certainly would have liked to support marine workers, who are concerned about U.S. officials having negative comments on their work.
I'm now making an amendment specifically to clause 25. It would change subclause 25(2) as it starts on page 11 and goes over to page 12. This is within the context of a traveller having a right to see a senior officer before being subjected to a search. As it's currently drafted, it says:
Senior officer’s agreement
(2) If the traveller is brought before a senior officer, the search is permitted only if that officer agrees that the preclearance officer or border services officer, as the case may be, is authorized under the applicable section to conduct the search.
My amendment would create another condition:
and that the search is necessary for the purpose of conducting preclearance.
Again, on the advice of the brief from the Canadian Bar Association, this is to create for the senior officer a discretion that the strip search doesn't have to and should not be conducted where the senior officer determines that there are insufficient circumstances to warrant an invasive act such as a strip search. It makes it clear that it's not just a question of whether the junior officers are authorized, but whether in fact a search is necessary for the purpose of conducting pre-clearance.
It stands as an intermediate position between my earlier amendment, which was defeated as identical to the NDP amendment, of eliminating strip searches, but creates another condition. It is a discretion for a senior officer.
Thank you.