Transport Committee on Feb. 7th, 2008

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Okay, I'm going to suggest that I'm not a lawyer, so please correct my understanding of what I heard you say, which is that the Minister of Transport's dependants—in this case it would be those who report to him—aren't in a position where legally they can supervise the discharge of responsibilities of the minister of another department when they want to do things in their own department.

[Ekaterina Ohandjanian]

In a way, yes. And besides, the Marine Transportation Security Act and the regulations already address this. This matter is already addressed through the Marine Transportation Security Act. There are annual audits pursuant to regulations.

So I'm not sure how we would duplicate this and the implications it has, both policy and legal. If both ministers are responsible, how do you separate the responsibility and accountability?

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I appreciate that and I want to make sure we always do the right thing. I'm wondering whether the message I get when I read this is the correct one.

The message I get is that a port authority, for example the new Port of Vancouver, would have the responsibility to ensure that the minister for national security conduct an annual security check on its port before it could do anything else. And if the minister for national security, through his officials, were delinquent in that exercise, what penalties would there be for the port authority for not having ensured that the minister for national security refrain from his delinquency?

[Emile Di Sanza]

I will ask Laureen Kinney, director general of marine security at Transport Canada, to respond.

[Laureen Kinney, Director, Marine Security, Department of Transport]

Thank you. I'll address part of the question, and then perhaps the legal representative may have something further to add.

There might be some distinction of interest in the terminology. The Minister of Transport, as well as requiring that the port authorities carry out annual audits triggered by a number of different things or on an annual basis, has the authority to carry out security assessments. So the minister, through the delegated authorities and inspectors who are in my group, carries out those assessments to look at the overall quality.

When a security audit is carried out by the port authority, the results of that audit may amend their security certificate. It is reviewed by the Minister of Transport's delegated employees, and at that point there may be a change to the security certificate.

To conclude on that area, as mentioned earlier by the parliamentary secretary, the triggering of the audit and the carrying out of annual audits by the port authority are monitored and supervised, and the results are assessed by the Minister of Transport. One of the triggering items for an audit is a change of ownership, which requires a full security assessment by the Minister of Transport.

So those functions are carried out. I believe that your point about obligating the port to ensure that the Minister of Public Safety carries out a function is challenging.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Before I recognize Mr. Laframboise, I want the record to show that Ms. Valerie Devlin is at the table as well as Ms. Kinney, who just answered that last question.

Monsieur Laframboise.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

If I am not mistaken, the purpose of my colleague's amendment is to have this audit conducted by the department of National Safety, rather than by TC as is presently the case. Am I right?

[Ekaterina Ohandjanian]

Not necessarily, because this provision does not go beyond the scope or the strength of the Marine Transportation Security Act. It does not alter the scope of the Act but rather adds to it.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

So, it would be a different audit.

[Ekaterina Ohandjanian]

Yes, and we wonder how it would work because the Marine Transportation Security Act already provides for the same thing.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Except that it would not be inconsistent with the Act. It would simply add another layer of audit. Is that it?

[Ekaterina Ohandjanian]

It is not that clear. My colleague might answer you.

[Laureen Kinney]

Port authorities must apply policies and here they are required to ask the Health minister to do what is described. Frankly, I think that it might be difficult to do this within the confines of the Act and, furthermore, authorities could have difficulties in discharging two responsibilities.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Bell.

[Don Bell, Liberal, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you.

It's just a minor thing. I notice in the English version of the first proposed amendment it says, “including having an annual security audit performed the Minister of Public Safety”. I presume the word “by” is supposed to be in there. It is correct in the French version.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you for pointing that out. I understand that “by” should be in there, just for the correct terminology.

Mr. Masse.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you.

Quite simply, this provides a third party--the Minister of Public Safety--to be a participant to oversee and provide some type of analysis and review of the actual port authority's security. That's the clear intent of it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

To put it simply, as Mr. Masse would say, what you're asking for is really a duplication of what's already there.

Now let's go on to the next stage and talk about the conflict of laws, interpretation, and litigation, because that's what it's going to create. You have two parallel procedures that are asking almost identical things, and you want to talk about litigation? Who's going to decide this? It will have to be interpreted by courts—

[An hon. member]

Especially on security.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Yes. If you want to deal with security, let's deal with the Marine Transportation Security Act and deal with security. If you want to deal with economic policy, it's inappropriate in this particular case, which I hope is why the chair almost ruled this out of order.

I would like to call the question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Carrier.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Much was said lot about the first part of the amendment dealing with security but has anyone checked whether or not the second part, the one regarding foreign investments, is in conflict with other existing legislations.

[Laureen Kinney]

If I read this well, dealing with this issue will be a rather complex and difficult proposition. It has to do with many ports and assessments.