Public Safety Committee on Nov. 30th, 2017

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

The real difference there is that, without this authority, you have to sit back and wait to be attacked, even though you know it's going to happen. You're not in a position to be proactive. With the new authorities, CSE would be able to identify a very likely attack and be more proactive in preventing it from happening, rather than to try to clean up the mess after it has happened.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

If I've understood you correctly, Minister, on the definition of “terrorist propaganda”, in Bill C-51 it was so particular that it made it restrictive. Is it fair to say that it was ineffective and relatively unusable? Is that a fair criticism?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Regina—Wascana, SK]

It wasn't used in the two or three years between then and now. Our view was that it was written in such broad language, it was largely unusable.

We've tried to use language that is more familiar. In the history of our criminal law, the offence of counselling is very well understood. Using that language covers the problem, and does so in a way that's enforceable.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Fragiskatos.

On behalf of the committee, Minister, I want to thank you. You know that you're always welcome to come to this committee.

With that, I will suspend. I ask just, in the interest of time and efficiency, for those who might wish to ask the minister a question or two, that they ask it outside the room so that we can continue on with officials.

With that, we'll suspend for two minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We have now resumed for the second hour of these hearings.

Since there's no presentation, I think we'll go directly to questions.

Mr. Spengemann is leading off for seven minutes, please.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Chair, thank you very much. Thank you, officials, for remaining with us for the second hour.

My first set of questions is about the Secure Air Travel Act. Many colleagues, me included, will have heard, from constituents, concerns about this, not the legislation but the current circumstances under which particularly young people and children find themselves not being on but flagged by a no-fly list. It's difficult to get around it because we don't have a redress system.

In light of the minister's comments that this bill was introduced before second reading, I wanted to ask you for your views on the legislation as it stands in developing a redress system. Are there particular areas that we can pay attention to as a committee?

We are being pushed hard also on the question of timeliness, of having this part of the legislation completed. Some constituents feel that there is room for an interim quick fix. I'd like to have your views on whether that's possible and feasible.

Once we have the legislation in place and the budget appropriation that's required to fix this problem, what would have to be done operationally to actually build this system? I think there are still some misperceptions of the magnitude, the complexity that's involved in building an effective redress system.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Just as a matter of procedure, can I ask colleagues to—we have quite an array of witnesses—direct their questions to specific individuals.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Perhaps Mr. Rigby, can lead off, but if there are other colleagues who want to comment, I would welcome that as well.

[Vincent Rigby, Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Thank you very much for the question.

I'll pass it on to Monik, who has actually been working on this file to provide some of the details.

But absolutely, I think the minister has made it clear that establishing a redress system is a priority for the government. I think that within the legislation we've already started down that track. In terms of a quick fix, I don't think that there's necessarily one that is readily available. As you say, over time we are going to look at a more comprehensive solution.

In terms of redress, I think it's starting off with a centralized screening system so that the government actually does the screening. Right now that is the responsibility of the airline. We'll bring it back to the government so that we can actually provide more rigorous and consistent screening across the board. In the legislation itself there are also references to the notion of an identification number that will allow those who request the identification number to be screened ahead of time. If there's any misunderstanding with respect to being on the list, that can be addressed before they actually show up at the airport.

We've also made it clear that in cases where a child, for example, is not on the list, the government will inform the parents of that. We feel that is an important provision in that there's a great deal of apprehension when there is a false positive match from parents who ask if their child is on the list. Whether it's through accident or through some other provision, I think it removes a lot of that apprehension if we can actually say to a parent that the child is not on the list.

Over time, yes, this is going to be a very comprehensive approach. By having the centralized screening process, we are actually going to have to build the system up from the ground. It will require a big information technology fix that will require significant funding over time to make that happen.

We feel that the legislation is definitely moving us in the right direction.

Monik, did you want to add anything?

[Monik Beauregard, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, National and Cyber Security Branch, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

The only thing I'd add is that instituting a redress program is quite complex. It requires legislative amendments, regulatory work, consultations with airlines, and some fairly significant IT fixes. I think in Bill C-59 you have the essential first steps to lead us down the path of a centralized program.

We have the proposed amendments here that will enable public safety to gather the information into establishing a program. These are really the first steps that we need down the path to a redress program.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Okay.

Is it your testimony then that you would not recommend any additional areas of examination within the bill, that the bill really captures what's needed to build the system?

[Monik Beauregard]

I would say we're always open to creative suggestions. I think we always believe that we've thought of everything, but we welcome new suggestions on that, especially in terms of working airlines and IT fixes.

[Vincent Rigby]

I would absolutely concur with that. We're open to any suggestions, of course. We feel that this is moving in the right direction, but we would welcome any suggestions from the committee.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Are you able to comment on how we ended up here? We have a lot of constituents who travel to the U.S. who are saying that, as stigmatizing as it may be to have a redress number, that system seems to be working. Why are we in the current situation?

[Monik Beauregard]

I can't really say why we're in the current situation. We are working with the U.S. We have established a Canada–U.S. redress working group to also facilitate the troubles that some air passengers may experience. We are looking to the American experience in establishing their redress program and learning lessons from the way they have done it.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

I may ask you to venture outside the box here, but would you have a rough estimate of how long it would take to build the IT parameters you've described, once we have budgetary approval and Bill C-59 is enacted?

[Vincent Rigby]

We are in very extensive consultations interdepartmentally within government on exactly this issue right now. As to the actual dollar figure or how long it's going to take, I wouldn't be in a position right now to give you a firm estimate on either count.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Would even a loose estimate be premature?

[Vincent Rigby]

It would be premature at this time.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Very briefly in the remaining 20 seconds, how many departments and agencies would be involved in constructing this redress system?

[Vincent Rigby]

There are a number of other departments that we're working very closely with. Obviously CBSA would be one of them, one of the agencies within our portfolio. Then there's Transport Canada, Shared Services.... Those are only three or four, but there are others as well. We would be consulting Treasury Board, etc.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you both very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Motz.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to the panel for being here today.

In keeping to the theme of costs, I'm wondering whether an approximate budget to implement this bill has been costed.

I guess the answer would be from the Public Safety officials.