Public Safety Committee on June 14th, 2017

[The Chair (Mr. Robert Oliphant (Don Valley West, Lib.)), Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

I will call us back to order and first give my apologies to the officials and our many guests out there who have been waiting for us during the other piece of business that we had to accomplish today.

Thank you to the officials for attending. Obviously you don't have statements, but you're here to address any questions the committee members might have as we consider the over 30 amendments to Bill C-23.

We've been through clause-by-clause a few times now, members, and I'm getting better at it. You're already good at it.

We'll begin. As usual, I'm going to be suggesting that we start with clause 2 of the bill and end our consideration by going back to clause 1, which is the short title of the bill.

(On clause 2)

With respect to clause 2, there are two amendments being suggested: LIB-1 and LIB-2. However, I want to draw to the attention of the committee that LIB-3, which is on page 3, and LIB-5, which is an amendment to page 5, are consequential to LIB-1 being adopted. Therefore, the vote on LIB-1 will apply to amendments LIB-3 and LIB-5 as being necessary consequentially from the adoption of LIB-1.

Would someone like to move the first amendment?

Ms. Damoff.

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

I'll move it. Do you want me to speak to it or all three briefly?

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Sure.

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

Basically, it has to do with training. It's something that we heard about, and it's a concern that I know all of us shared. We just wanted to make sure that the pre-clearance officers working in Canada understood our Canadian laws and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This will put that into the legislation, rather than it just being done as a matter of course. It would actually be in the legislation that this training would be required.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

So the true substance of the three motions really comes in LIB-5—

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

That's correct.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

—which is regarding education and training with respect to Canadian law, but it is pre-pumping in LIB-1 and LIB-3.

Are there any questions about LIB-1?

Monsieur Arseneault.

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

If I understand correctly, if amendment LIB-5 carries, then amendments LIB-1 and LIB-3 will automatically be carried as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Yes. We are voting on LIB-1. LIB-3 and LIB-5 will automatically be assumed to be carried.

Mr. Clement.

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

I was just thinking out loud. I apologize.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Seeing no other discussion, shall LIB-1 carry?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

There's a second amendment to the same clause, amendment LIB-2, which is an addition. Who would like to speak to that?

Monsieur Arseneault.

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

I will speak to this motion since I introduced it.

The amendment could not be any clearer. Its purpose is to clarify the French term "loi fédérale". In the context of intra-Canadian relations, we know what an act of Parliament is. However, in the context of an act such as this one, under which an American officer may enter Canada and exercise a right, the term "Act of Parliament" stated in English may also mean "federal legislation". In the United States, all legislation is federal.

So the idea here is that the term "loi fédérale" refers to an act of the Parliament of Canada. That is all.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

It's the Canadian Parliament, obviously.

Are there any questions on that amendment?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 2 as amended agreed to)

(On clause 3)

I'll introduce clause 3. There are no amendments to it. There could be discussion on it, I guess, as it's binding on Her Majesty.

(Clause 3 agreed to)

Amendment LIB-3 has carried because it was consequential to LIB-1. Now we come to the amended clause 4.

(Clause 4 as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(On clause 5)

With respect to clause 5, we have amendment LIB-4. Again, we have consequential amendments. Amendments LIB-8 and LIB-9 on page 27 and page 30 respectively are consequential, and therefore the vote on LIB-4 would apply to LIB-8 and LIB-9.

Monsieur Picard.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

The purpose of this amendment is to clarify what a "border services officer" is and to ensure that this single definition appears in the legislation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Are there any questions about amendment LIB-4 amending clause 5?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

I have a question about whether it brings this out of line with other enabling legislation for the CBSA.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Perhaps we'll turn to an official. The question is whether this is out of line or, I would assume, in line with other legislation respecting officers of the CBSA.

Ms. Radi.

[Madona Radi, Director, Program and Policy Management Division, Canada Border Services Agency]

I'm sorry. Could you repeat that? I didn't hear it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Would you repeat that, Mr. Clement?

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

My question was whether this amendment, by changing significantly the definition of “border services officer”, will bring it out of line with other enabling legislation respecting the CBSA.

[Madona Radi]

No. Right now, our CBSA officers gain most of their authority under subsection 2(1) of the Customs Act, so when this bill was written, it was written in a way such that their authority needs to be designated. However, right now we do not designate our officers, so once you become a BSO, a border services officer, automatically you have full responsibilities to conduct the immigration examination and the customs examination. We do not need to administratively designate each one of them. This amendment just makes sure that the definition is the same as the one under subsection 2(1) of the Customs Act.

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Is it consistent with subsection 2(1)? Is that what you're saying?

[Madona Radi]

Yes, it is consistent.

[Tony Clement, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

It is consistent. Okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Very good.

Are there any other questions with respect to amendment LIB-4? Seeing none, we'll vote on the amendment.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Consequentially, amendments LIB-8 and LIB-9 will be deemed to have been adopted.

Is there any other discussion about clause 5?

(Clause 5 as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clauses 6 to 10 inclusive agreed to)

(On clause 11)

We move now to clause 11, which does have an amendment. However, it's already been approved because it's consequential to amendment LIB-1.