Public Safety Committee on Nov. 6th, 2023

[Randall Koops]

It very well could, but as it stands now, nothing would stop a parliamentary standing committee from bringing a matter to the attention of the commission. The parliamentary committee does not need a provision in the statute to say to the commission, “Hey, we think this is worth a review.”

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

I don't sense that we have a meeting of minds here on what we're doing with this.

Mr. Julian, do you still require a few minutes for us to suspend to sort things out?

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I think I will start by withdrawing NDP-17.

I think Ms. Michaud asked the right question and we can move on to NDP‑18.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Do we have unanimous consent to withdraw NDP-17?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

(Amendment withdrawn)

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thank you to all my colleagues. The level of collaboration is remarkable today. I really like that.

I now move NDP‑18. Furthermore, if Ms. Michaud would like to propose the changes contained in BQ‑1 concerning the concept of a third party, that would go in the direction I would like to see. NDP‑18 includes the three elements we're interested in: third parties, unions and, of course, parliamentary committees. By amending NDP‑18, I think we'll have all the elements we need.

Whether the committee supports it is another question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

You're not moving NDP-18 at this time?

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I am. I'm moving NDP-18 and opening the door to amendments to NDP-18.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

Is there any discussion on NDP-18?

Ms. Michaud, you have the floor.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

I'm thinking of amending NDP‑18 with a subamendment to include BQ‑1. As mentioned earlier, if NDP‑18 were adopted, BQ‑1 could not be moved. I think it's important to do so.

Everyone agreed to add the concept of third party in all the other parts of the bill. I don't know if it's doable or if it's going to be a problem, depending on what the officials think of NDP‑18 as it stands.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Is there any further discussion on NDP-18?

Madame Michaud, could you please clarify where you want to include “third party” language?

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Actually, I just changed my mind on NDP‑18, and I'm not proposing to amend it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Is there any further discussion on NDP-18?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

With commiseration, it is defeated.

This brings us to BQ-1.

Ms. Michaud, you have the floor.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The purpose of BQ‑1 is to allow a third party to file a complaint. Again, there are two references in this amendment to “non-governmental organization”, which I propose to change to “third party”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Very well. BQ-1 is moved with a change in wording to include “third parties”.

Go ahead, Mr. Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I would like the witnesses to clarify something. Could a “third party” include unions representing employees?

[Lesley McCoy, General Counsel, Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police]

Yes, I think it would include that.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

In that case, I'll vote in favour of BQ‑1, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

Is there any further discussion on BQ-1?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

That brings us to NDP-19.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Chair, I'm not going to move NDP‑19

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

NDP-19 is not being moved. That brings us to NDP-19.1. If NDP-19.1 is adopted, then BQ-2 cannot be moved due to a line conflict.

Mr. Julian, go ahead, if you wish.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

This is a concern that exists, and it has been raised by the Canadian Council for Refugees, the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group, the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the RCMP and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. Concerns were also raised by the Canadian Muslim Public Affairs Council, the National Council of Canadian Muslims and the National Police Federation.

The conditions within subclause 28(3) read as follows:

In order to conduct a review on its own initiative, the Commission must be satisfied that

(a) sufficient resources exist for conducting the review and the handling of complaints under Part 2 will not be compromised; and

(b) no other review or inquiry has been undertaken on essentially or substantially the same issue by a federal or provincial entity.

The concern around “sufficient resources exist” is something that has been a matter of concern for a number of organizations, as I've mentioned. What NDP-19.1 would do is simply take out the “sufficient resources exist”. Resourcing has been an issue, but it is up to the government to provide adequate resources for the commission to do its job. The question of sufficient resources existing or not should not be a reason to not undertake a review of specified activities, particularly concerns about systemic racism.

NDP-19.1 would simply allow the commission to consider, before conducting a review, whether the handling of complaints under part 2 will be compromised or that any other review or inquiry has been undertaken and would take out “the sufficient resources exist” component that has, I think, quite rightly drawn real concerns about whether the commission is able to undertake important systemic reviews that many Canadians want to see it do. It should not be a question of resources, and that's why I'm moving this amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, sir.

We'll go to Mr. Bittle, followed by Mr. Motz.

Go ahead, Mr. Bittle, please.