Evidence of meeting #35 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was information.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:30 a.m.
Bloc
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Des Rosiers, I'm a lawyer by training, like you. With regard to the disclosure of personal information to the Americans, I have no confidence that the American department to which we will be providing it won't pass it on or use it for other purposes. I put the question to Minister Toews, and he told me that the Americans were going to destroy it, that they would not disclose it to others. When I asked him what basis he had for saying that, he responded that the Americans had told him so.
In response to questions from my colleague Mr. McCallum, you said that this issue was being challenged in the United States. What is the case and exactly how big is it?
11:30 a.m.
General Counsel, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
It's a case before a district court in Oregon.
Do you want to answer this...? Okay.
It concerns the no-fly list, particularly people who have appeared on the no-fly list.
One of the problems with this case is that it's the third time the ACLU, the American Civil Liberties Union, has appeared in court to raise the issue of the constitutionality of the process. The first two times, the names of the applicants were suddenly removed from the list.
This is now the third case, and there are 17 applicants. To date, the issue has not been resolved in court because, each time, the U.S. authorities have decided to remove the individuals' names from the list.
This time, we hope the case will reach a judicial resolution.
11:30 a.m.
Bloc
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
However, you've heard the representatives of the airlines and the tourism industry. What response is given to an air carrier that does charter flights between Winnipeg and Mazatlan, Mexico? What is it told?
As you know, the Americans... I haven't yet adopted a final position on this bill or on the amendments either. I'm a bit torn between the imperatives... What do you tell that carrier? Do you tell it to fly over the Pacific Ocean? With regard to Montreal, Quebec City, Ottawa and Halifax, it's very easy, and it's even easier for Vancouver; it's close to the ocean.
What's your response to that carrier?
11:30 a.m.
General Counsel, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
It was in this context that we submitted proposed amendments to restrict the scope of the bill with regard to time, oversight of the bill, to take the pulse, in order to determine somewhat where this is headed. If the U.S. provisions are perhaps ruled unconstitutional, the system in the United States is changed and there are better restrictions, our apprehensions may disappear.
We insisted on written commitments from the U.S. in this context, and an approach that is very calm and that ensures constant monitoring of the question. A process of exemption by route, for example, may be renewed if the situation continues to require it. Your trip may be exempted from PIPEDA if it is necessary or there are no alternatives.
However, we don't want to guarantee holus-bolus that, in future, the private information of Canadian passengers cannot ever be disclosed to any country, particularly in a context in which the bill gives this discretion to the airline rather than to another entity that might be in a better position to assess the dangers of possible disclosure.
11:35 a.m.
Bloc
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Have you sent your proposed amendments? You don't have the written text of your presentation?
11:35 a.m.
General Counsel, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
We just submitted it today. I'm going to make sure it is sent to you in French.
11:35 a.m.
Bloc
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
The clerk probably hasn't distributed it because you submitted it in English only.
11:35 a.m.
General Counsel, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
Yes, that's it.
11:35 a.m.
Bloc
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Canada's beautiful; it seems there are two languages.
11:35 a.m.
General Counsel, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
It'll be a great pleasure for me to write it in French; my French is even better.
11:35 a.m.
Bloc
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Yes, yes.
I have a final question for Mr. Goldstein, Mr. Chairman.
Rightly or wrongly, you're trying to resolve the information disclosure issue through scare tactics, by saying that travellers might decide to cross the border if they want to go south. To avoid this, people would cross the border. As Quebeckers, we see that Plattsburgh airport has become our second airport—we don't have Mirabel anymore—or a subsidiary of Dorval.
I say "scare tactics" because it depends where people live. If they live in Churchill, Manitoba, they won't cross the Dakota border to... Although that depends on their place of residence. If they live in Montreal, one hour from Plattsburgh, yes, they'll do it.
11:35 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Tourism Industry Association of Canada
Perhaps that should be the subject of another study by this committee to determine the current structure of our air costs for Montrealers who go to use the airport in Plattsburgh.
However, we're conducting a different study today. For us, this isn't just about Manitobans who want to go to Mexico. It's also the reverse. We see that two or three major markets for Canada's tourism industry are Mexico, Brazil and...
11:35 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Tourism Industry Association of Canada
... Argentina is another one. This concerns all that traffic. That's our concern.
Thank you, Mr. Guimond.
11:35 a.m.
Bloc
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
As for Mexico, in view of the Conservatives' decision to require a visa—
11:35 a.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to everyone here.
The U.S., of course, has many flights over Canada. I'm curious; if Canada were to institute a demand of U.S. citizens similar to what the U.S. is proposing for Canada, would that stand up under their law?
11:35 a.m.
General Counsel, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
Actually, I think one of the issues as well is that....
I don't know the answer to this, but I'll check. My sense is that it's not.
11:35 a.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
And it's certainly in front of the Supreme Court in the United States right now, this particular type of information sharing?
11:40 a.m.
General Counsel, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
What is in front of the district court is the way in which the no-fly list has too many false positives and no due process rights for people. That's the challenge.
One of the issues is that there is a potential for Canada to exercise a position of leadership here, I think, because there may be a time when this model will be distributed elsewhere in the world. Really, it's dangerous in terms of models for privacy protection. I think there's an opportunity to reflect and take into account the fact that, yes, there are some economic imperatives, but be a little more creative in choosing different models to respond well to the privacy impact.
November 23rd, 2010 / 11:40 a.m.
Sukanya Pillay Director, National Security Program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
I agree with everything that Nathalie has just said.
I just want to add that there are many practical reasons, of course, to ensure--obviously we want to ensure as well--that we continue to have access to U.S. airspace. But it's not something we need to be strong-armed into doing. We don't need to be told that we have to hand things over or we won't have the access.
What we need to do is find a way to have a real partnership between the two governments to ensure that any exchange of personal information is properly protected within the greater context. There are so many issues with listing, and the listing process in the U.S., as Nathalie has said, is before the courts right now. We want to make sure that the Canadian information doesn't get on those lists. If it gets on those lists, we need to know how it's going to be...and what the redress possibilities are, etc.
Going back to the comment of the other gentleman, that the U.S. told them that it wouldn't be used in such and such a way, this is exactly our point. We need to have some sort of written agreement as to use, retention, destruction of the information, that it won't be shared, and if it is improperly used or if it results in a false positive for a Canadian, what the redress would be.
11:40 a.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Okay.
I could go a little more in that direction, but I want to ask a question of the airline.
When it comes to what happens going into the United States now, say with law enforcement--they have a zero-tolerance policy--how many of your passengers fall into that, where you have to deny them access to your plane? Or is that taken care of at American customs before they enter your plane, or at the final destination?
Do you have a problem now with people being taken off planes to the United States for other than security reasons?
11:40 a.m.
Joseph Galimberti Board of Directors Member, National Airlines Council of Canada
For other than security reasons? No.
