Evidence of meeting #80 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 debate.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
Mr. Chair, it's been raised but I'll raise it again, with respect to the argument about leaving and being radicalized elsewhere, if they're leaving and if your concern is that they're coming back, we still have the entry information on file.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Is there any other debate?
The question is on the subamendment. It's pretty clear it's 40 years.
(Subamendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Now we're voting on the main amendment, NDP-6.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
You're on a roll, Mr. Dubé.
We're moving on to amendment CPC-2.
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The amendment is designed to require the Privacy Commissioner, every five years, to review the use of the data collected. Protecting privacy is important to us.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
I will be supporting the amendment, but I will also be moving my own because again I feel five years is too long. I would prefer to see annual reporting, as Professor Wark recommended.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Is there any other debate?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
I would have liked to know why the member thinks that.
Liberal
Michel Picard Liberal Montarville, QC
That review is already one of the Commissioner's responsibilities.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Gentlemen, please address the chair while you're debating among yourselves. Thank you.
We're moving on to amendment NDP-7.
Mr. Dubé.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Once again, this amendment is in line with one of Professor Wark's recommendations, namely, that an annual report on the data collected be tabled in Parliament. I consider this entirely appropriate. This will provide accountability and also protect the privacy of Canadians.
Liberal
Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
Mr. Chair, thank you very much.
Liberal members are opposed to the amendment because it's essentially creating an obligation to report very specifically on sections 92 to 94. This is redundant in the context of the minister's broader practice to table an annual departmental report but cover the activities of the entire agency and that would include those impacted by Bill C-21.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Is there any other debate?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We now have amendment NDP-8.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
Chair, this is a concern that was raised by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association with regard to solicitor-client privilege. The amendment seeks to protect that and also specifies the specificity of the Quebec situation in that sense.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Is there any debate?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Shall clause 2 carry as amended?
NDP
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
There are no amendments to clauses 3 through 8. Shall clauses 3 through 8 carry?
NDP
Conservative
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Our amendment seeks to require that, before the end of the 270th day after the day on which this act receives royal assent, a committee of the Senate or of the House of Commons conduct a study to verify the proper application and smooth operation of the act, and to evaluate its financial impact.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Is there any debate?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Shall clause 9 carry?