Transport Committee on March 5th, 2009

[Dick Spencer]

TSA does all the accepting or rejecting, and we provide the data to them only. They do not share with us every way they reject transport workers from hauling hazardous materials, but our understanding is that could be a part of the security threat assessment judgment that TSA vets in their decision-making.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

What percentage of crimes in the U.S. are drug-related? Possession of--

[Dick Spencer]

I don't know.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

That might be a way to determine the percentage you're dealing with. The process you're describing is one that's singularly.... If you don't have a criminal record, then you're not a security hazard. If you don't show up with your fingers on a card, you're not going to be given much analysis in terms of security risk.

[Dick Spencer]

However, what you just said about them going further with their vetting process other than just.... Just because there's a clean criminal history doesn't mean they'll be allowed to transport hazardous materials. They have other vetting processes. That's only one piece of the puzzle.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

What happens to the materials and the information on those people who are rejected? Is it still held by the FBI, by the agencies that...?

[Dick Spencer]

If there's a criminal history, the FBI keeps that data. If there is no criminal history, the fingerprints are purged. They never appear again. They're not kept on file.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

You mean the fact that the person was rejected is not kept on file?

[Dick Spencer]

No, if they were rejected, it's kept on file.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Okay. So if you're rejected for a security clearance, for a transport clearance, you may find that will come back to you later on because that's on your file. If you're looking for any other kind of reference later on as a person, as an individual that may play against you.

[Dick Spencer]

I don't know if TSA is allowed to share that with other agencies.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Our understanding is it's been shared with other countries. Is that the case?

[Alan Brousseau]

From our understanding, we're not involved in the vetting process or the approval process the TSA operates. The TSA has stated publicly as part of its program objectives that the information is not--

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Admissions received in the course of proceedings in CSIS that personal information collected from employees and provided to CSIS during the background check process, which goes on to the United States, could be disclosed to foreign governments in certain circumstances.

[Dick Spencer]

I think that means they're a threat, if they're considered a threat.

[Alan Brousseau]

I don't think we're here to provide testimony or evidence in terms of what happens at the TSA. That's not the key area of expertise for us. If you have a criminal record, it's on file permanently in Canada as well as the United States. The FBI holds criminal history information. That's its job, the same with the RCMP. It's responsible for holding that criminal information.

Whether the TSA keeps information of rejection or non-rejection is not within our purview of the program. We don't have access to that type of information. Our understanding is that it is not. Once the endorsement decision has been made by the TSA, it's sent to the state, which decides. The state licensing department that issues driver's licences makes the decision on issuing the visa credential or not. So it's not really within our area of expertise as to what happens with that information.

I can tell you our systems are flexible enough to do anything this government or this committee would want to do. So if there is a complete purging of all information, it's a very simple chore to do. I know that when we take fingerprints in Canada for criminal history background checks, we do not keep the information any longer or use the information in any way other than sending it to the RCMP, and we only keep it as long as the RCMP tells us to keep it. We are more than happy to purge that information as soon as possible.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Watson.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our witnesses for appearing here today.

Of course, we are discussing Bill C-9, proposed amendments to the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992. I think we've entertained a lot of discussion about things that are not in the bill. You'll have to forgive me if I'm a little wary that some of the recommendations for strengthening the bill might have some benefit to your own private interests.

I want to draw attention back to the actual bill itself for some of your comments on the bill if I could. First, let me ask about your familiarity with The Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992. Do you have strong familiarity with it, some familiarity with it?

[Alan Brousseau]

I have some familiarity with it, and I've obviously reviewed the amendments to the bill.

[Stephanie Mitchell]

I have reviewed it as well.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

So you're familiar, in the original bill, with emergency response assistance plans, for example, and how those are deployed in the transport of dangerous goods.

[Alan Brousseau]

I focus my studies more on the area in which we are experts, which is really security clearances. We don't do emergency planning, nor do we offer those services or any kind of assistance in that area.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Okay. It makes it somewhat difficult to ask for your commentary about the amendments to the bill.

[Stephanie Mitchell]

In my review I saw portions that spoke of keeping track of vehicles. As one suggestion, we believe that needs to be more strongly worded or research needs to be done to be able to make the tracking available and mandated by the government. And, as well, the U.S. is going to mandate that.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Concerning the provisions around security clearances for the bill, do you support those provisions in Bill C-9?