Evidence of meeting #36 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.
12:25 p.m.
National Coordinator, International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group
You would have to ask people from the industry for precise numbers and percentages. All we've been told is that 80% of flights between Europe and Canada in both directions do overfly the U.S., and we know that for all Latin American and Caribbean--
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Bonnie Crombie Liberal Mississauga—Streetsville, ON
That's the case for all flights to Latin America, of course--
12:25 p.m.
National Coordinator, International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group
Of course.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Bonnie Crombie Liberal Mississauga—Streetsville, ON
--and Central America as well, and God knows where else.
That's terrific. Why hasn't the U.S. requested this type of agreement from the European nations?
12:25 p.m.
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
Of course, passenger information for Europeans who are coming to the United States is required.
Our understanding—and again I'm not prepared to say that we have any particular inside knowledge, but this is according to media reports, and so on—is that the U.S. will be looking to branch out and of course to make its secure flight program applicable to many other countries, including members from Europe, but their Parliament is kicking back on this. This is the subject of media reports in the United States, which say the European Parliament is objecting mightily on the basis of the privacy concerns and the mobility concerns that have been raised here.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Bonnie Crombie Liberal Mississauga—Streetsville, ON
Certainly the European carriers would cross over American airspace to come to Canada, or could.
My final question--and my colleague will probably jump in as well--is this: what is the appropriate body to have this kind of discussion for this type of legislation? Should it be at the UN?
12:25 p.m.
President, Ligue des droits et libertés
The International Civil Aviation Organization is the UN agency that deals with civil aviation.
The International Civil Aviation Organization is the organization that deals with civil aviation for the United Nations and would be an appropriate forum for the discussion.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Gerry Byrne Liberal Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
There was some reference to tabling some documents. Also, there was some discussion earlier in the committee from Ms. Vonn about appropriate international instruments and international law.
For the benefit of our researchers and our reporting, would you be able to provide to the committee any applicable international legal references over and above what you've volunteered already, Ms. Vonn? Can any of the other witnesses help guide us, as parliamentarians, to better understand international obligations that Canada has signed on to that are applicable to this particular environment?
12:30 p.m.
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
We would be most pleased to consult with our staff counsel, Carmen Cheung, who wrote this particular report. I'll ask if she has materials that she believes would be relevant that she would be happy to forward through the association. I don't have my colleague here to make that reference now, but I'm happy to look.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
Gerry Byrne Liberal Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
I'd ask, through you, Mr. Chair, if you would accept those materials and forward them to the researchers so that we can get a compendium of international references.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I would ask that you submit the materials to me through the clerk. We will provide translation services and move it out to our committee members.
Go ahead, Mr. Watson.
November 25th, 2010 / 12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank our witnesses for appearing today.
I'll state right off the bat that I'm not a lawyer. I don't think I know the first thing about law. I went the route of being an assembly line worker at Chrysler for six and a half years. I want to try to understand the argument that you're putting forward and ask a couple of questions.
If I understand correctly, the nub of your concern is that there is no mechanism for redress in the U.S. law for Canadians or other internationals who might be subject to the no-fly list. Do I understand that correctly, or have I missed it?
12:30 p.m.
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
No. The nub of the issue here is that you are subject to a denial of permission to travel on the basis of nothing that you can know about and nothing that you can challenge before an arbitrator that doesn't exist.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
So there's no domestic legislative solution to your concern. Is that also correct?
12:30 p.m.
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
To that concern there isn't a domestic one.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
Right, and no court in Canada could address that concern as well.
12:30 p.m.
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
Not relative to that concern, but as I say, why the issue here would come before a Canadian court is because you need legislation in Canada that will fit with this. That's the conduit through which a Canadian court becomes seized of this.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
Correct. I understand that.
The U.S. has been clear that the international overflight provisions will be enacted at the end of this year. If there is no complementary legislation that connects to their process--and you would also love to see some sort of redress mechanism in their own internal law--I'm presuming that the net result would be that flights will be denied permission to go over the United States' airspace. Is that a reasonable conclusion to come to?
12:30 p.m.
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
I'm sorry; I have no insight into what the United States might choose to do in those circumstances.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
Well, I presume they will deny overflight of their airspace if there's no compliance with respect to the law.
That being the case--and again, I don't know an awful lot about the law--is that a restriction of our charter mobility right to leave our country? Is that a fair argument to make, or not? If they deny access to us, that in effect acts as a restriction on my right to leave the country. It doesn't eliminate my right to leave the country, but it does restrict it. Is that a fair argument to make as well, or not?
12:30 p.m.
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
It's an interesting argument. I'm not sure if it actually holds.
12:35 p.m.
Policy Director, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association
Yes. The idea that Canadians would be denied the ability to transit that space because Canada, if it decided that it was unable to do so because it could not simply--
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
If we decided not to pass Bill C-42, for example, which is what you're recommending, the United States could conceivably deny us the right to travel over their airspace. I presume I have a mobility right to leave my country. It would be a restriction.
I was hoping to get some insight from you on that. Again, I'm not a lawyer.
If I have any time left, Mr. Jean might be able to take this.
Thank you very much. I appreciate this.