House of Commons Hansard #143 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was csis.

Topics

House of CommonsRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

I have the honour to lay upon the table the House of Commons Report to Canadians for 2014.

Public Safety and National SecurityCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

Daryl Kramp Conservative Prince Edward—Hastings, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour today to present, in both official languages, the sixth report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security in relation to Bill C-2, an act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House without amendment.

Sex SelectionPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

Leon Benoit Conservative Vegreville—Wainwright, AB

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour today to present a petition on behalf of constituents.

The petitioners note that 92% of Canadians believe sex selective pregnancy termination should be illegal. They call on the House of Commons to condemn discrimination against unborn girls occurring through sex selective pregnancy termination.

CBC/Radio-CanadaPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Independent

Massimo Pacetti Independent Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC

Mr. Speaker, I have a few petitions here to present.

I would like to begin by thanking Donald Haney, Pierrette Desrosiers and Monique Desrochers for sending me these petitions regarding the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

The petitioners are saying that our national broadcaster is a key player that fulfills an important role in showcasing the reality of Canada's regions. They are also saying that our public broadcaster reflects our diverse realities and can benefit from a shared national spirit.

The petitioners are therefore calling on the Government of Canada to maintain stable and predictable long-term core funding for the public broadcaster, including English and French radio, in support of its unique and crucial role.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre Saskatchewan

Conservative

Tom Lukiwski ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

Is that agreed?

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

York—Simcoe Ontario

Conservative

Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I move:

That, in relation to Bill—

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

The hon. member for London—Fanshawe is rising on a point of order.

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

NDP

Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON

Mr. Speaker, my apologies, but I have a report from the interparliamentary delegation that I would like to present to the House.

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

We have already gone through that rubric, so the hon. member will require unanimous consent to revert. Is there unanimous consent to revert to presenting reports from interparliamentary delegations?

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Interparliamentary DelegationsRoutine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

NDP

Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON

Mr. Speaker, my thanks to the House for being so gracious.

Pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian group of the Interparliamentary Union respecting its participation at the steering committee of the Twelve Plus Group held in Berlin, Germany, on September 22, 2014, and the seminar on ending violence against women and girls, held in Dhaka, Bangladesh, on September 23 to 26, 2014.

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

York—Simcoe Ontario

Conservative

Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I move:

That, in relation to Bill C-44, An Act to amend the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act and other Acts, not more than one further sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the Bill; and

That, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders on the day allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and, in tum, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

There will now be a 30-minute question period. I would ask members to keep their questions to around a minute and government responses to a similar length of time.

The hon. member for Burnaby—New Westminister.

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, this is another sad day in the House of Commons. The government is using the guillotine for the 81st time since coming to power. Eighty-one times. Never in the history of Canada has any government shown such disrespect for the work of parliamentarians and the need to review the bills that are introduced in the House of Commons.

We are talking about a bill that the government itself has said is an important one, a complex one that requires proper scrutiny; yet after only a few hours of debate and after only a handful of members of Parliament have had the opportunity to speak, the government is imposing closure for the 81st time. Perhaps this time more egregiously than any time before, the government is simply refusing to have the proper scrutiny that needs to take place in the House of Commons. Given the impacts on Canadian society, the bill needs to be properly scrutinized.

My question is very simple. Eighty-one times now, the government has imposed closure. It does it at the drop of a hat, after only a few hours of debate. Why is it trying to do it this time when it is well aware that it has the sad record of having more pieces of legislation rejected by the courts than any other government in our history? Given the fact that the government has had shoddy legislation that needed improvement and has been rejected by the courts, why is it imposing closure yet again?

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:10 a.m.

Lévis—Bellechasse Québec

Conservative

Steven Blaney ConservativeMinister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking the member for Burnaby—New Westminster for his question. I used to work with him on the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. I am glad to have the opportunity today to rise in the House to answer his questions and make some progress on a bill that is, frankly, very straightforward.

I have the bill here, and it is just four pages long. It is really very simple. We have already spent more than six hours debating it in the House, and basically, its purpose is to clarify the scope of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service's mandate so that it can protect Canadians.

Of course I will be happy to answer my colleagues' questions for the next few minutes, but the best place for that is at the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, which can study the bill and bring in witnesses.

At the outset, I would like to express my gratitude to my colleagues from the official opposition and the other opposition party for supporting this bill in principle. I hope that we will be able to move it forward quickly because the service needs this clarification right now so that it can protect Canadians.

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:10 a.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, what has become very clear over the last few years is that, ever since the Conservatives obtained majority government, the current government House leader seems to have one mode in passing legislation here in the House of Commons, and that is to use the tool of time allocation. To list few of them, there was the Canadian Wheat Board pool registration, copyright legislation, back-to-work legislation, free trade agreements, first nations legislation, and massive budget bills, which are an abuse in themselves.

As has been pointed out, no government in the history of Canada has used time allocation as much as this government has. It is almost like a normal part of the process. It is wrong. It is disrespectful to democracy and the functionality of the chamber.

My question for the government House leader is this. Why does he believe his government needs to use time allocation on its legislation as opposed to allowing members of Parliament—through the normal, traditional practices that the House used prior to the majority Conservative government—to adequately debate the bills before they go to committee or even pass at third reading?

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:10 a.m.

Conservative

Steven Blaney Conservative Lévis—Bellechasse, QC

Mr. Speaker, the bill is seven pages long, which, as I said before, makes it a very simple bill.

We want to send it to committee for debate because we need to pass it in order to protect Canadians. Furthermore, both opposition parties expressed support in principle for this bill, which would clarify the powers of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.

The service has been around for 30 years, but it was never explicit that the people in charge of keeping us safe could operate here in the country as well as abroad. This is all the more important considering a growing phenomenon related to terrorist threats: high-risk travellers and foreign fighters.

That is what makes this bill so important: it will enable judicial authorities to clearly define the scope within which authorities and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service can exercise their powers while remaining in compliance with Canadian law.

As we have seen, this bill already contains provisions for court oversight of the process.

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:15 a.m.

NDP

Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC

Mr. Speaker, once again I am disappointed in the government's attitude. As I have said before in this House, it seems that the government regards debate as something it has to suffer through until it gets its way, instead of an exchange of ideas that are important not only to improve legislation but also to let Canadians know what issues are at stake here in the House of Commons.

My question for the minister has to do with the fact that he has referred to the committee as the right place to examine this bill. What I would like to hear from him now is a commitment that the government will not impose time allocation and severely limit the number of witnesses at committee, because although it is a short bill, it is quite an important bill in terms of national security. Will the minister give a commitment today that the government will not impose time allocation in committee or try to limit the number of witnesses who appear?

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

Steven Blaney Conservative Lévis—Bellechasse, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question.

As he knows, committees are masters of their own destiny. It will be up to the committee to make decisions. However, there is consensus on this bill.

As legislators, we have the responsibility to provide the tools required by both the police and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service to protect us in compliance with Canadian laws.

Freedom requires a safe and secure environment. This bill very clearly seeks to provide that. It will define the powers of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service at home and abroad, and provide a clear definition of “witness”, the very basis for the information on which CSIS files are based.

It is also important to have reliable information, because the information collected by CSIS is precisely what enables us to build cases and collect evidence leading to the indictment and incarceration of convicted terrorists, so that they are brought to justice.

Unfortunately, the NDP did not support our bill to combat terrorism. However, this time, it is interesting to note that they are more receptive to the bill. They have indicated that they will support it. It is therefore very important to closely examine it now. The parliamentary committee is the best forum in which to do so, and we will have the opportunity to comment on it and debate the final version of the bill once it returns to the House.

Given that this bill is important to the safety and security of Canadians, that parliamentarians support it and that there are no significant objections, I invite the opposition parties to support it so that we can go to committee and move forward with this bill, which is important for the security of Canadians.

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:15 a.m.

NDP

Rosane Doré Lefebvre NDP Alfred-Pellan, QC

Mr. Speaker, this is the 81st time the government has imposed time allocation on the study of a bill. I take issue with this, particularly in the case of Bill C-44, because ever since the events of October 20 and 22, Canadians have been asking themselves a lot of questions about the way Parliament works and especially about the laws it wants to pass to deal with radicalization and give more tools to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and about what is happening with regard to the RCMP and border services.

Many people across Canada are asking themselves many questions and would like their MP to be able to take part in this debate to share their questions or thoughts on such an important bill. Of course, Bill C-44 is just a few pages long, but those pages are extremely important and will change the way CSIS operates. The question I have for the minister is the following: why muzzle the opposition MPs, and government MPs for that matter, and prevent them from properly representing their constituents, especially when Canadians are concerned and want us to make better laws following the events of this past October?

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Steven Blaney Conservative Lévis—Bellechasse, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my opposition colleague for the question.

Why act? We must act because we all witnessed the tragic events that occurred near here and an attack that ended in this Parliament on October 22. We also know that on October 20, a Quebecker, Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent, lost his life because he was wearing a Canadian Forces uniform in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu.

These events remind us that the terrorist threat in Canada is real. An act of terrorism is an act committed by a person who attacks a symbol of Canada, a symbol of power, or a symbol of our democracy. It is an act committed for political, ideological or religious purposes. That is what happened here, in Parliament. President François Hollande talked about that not far from here, and he condemned these acts of violence. He said that together, we must take action. That is why we are working with the French minister of the interior, Bernard Cazeneuve, and with our U.S. counterpart, Jeh Johnson.

As legislators, it is our job to put the necessary tools in place. It is important to take action. Let us be clear: we indicated that we would not over-react, nor would we stand by and leave Canadians defenceless against evolving terrorists threats. That is why we introduced Bill C-44, and that is why we plan on implementing other measures to protect Canadians and democracy. That is why, and in particular with this bill, we always do so in compliance with our country's fundamental laws. That is why, in this bill, clause 7 provides that anyone facing charges based on information from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service has the right to an amicus curiae, a friend of the court, and access to legal provisions and also provides that everything is overseen by a court. This is a balanced bill, and my colleague will have the opportunity to ask questions in committee as soon as the House decides to send this bill to committee.

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:20 a.m.

NDP

Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness made some interesting comments, but in my opinion they were way off base, simply because Bill C-44 was not introduced in response to the events of October 22. This needs to be clear to anyone watching us.

I am still trying to understand, from the lengthy remarks he has made since the debate on the time allocation motion began, why the motion was moved. Was it because the official opposition and the second opposition party are dragging their feet and getting carried away? No. To date, there has been six hours of debate at second reading. If anything, it is the government that is dragging its feet, and I would like to hear the minister's comments on the fact that since 2007, since the Supreme Court's decision in R. v. Hape, the government has known that it had to change certain laws and some of CSIS's powers. Why did the government take so long to do that and now, all of a sudden, it is introducing this legislation in order to give us the impression that it introduced the bill as a result of the events of October 22? Why use a time allocation motion to suggest that the only way to examine this major bill, which grants very significant powers to some of Canada's law enforcement agencies, is to bypass the entire parliamentary process, which is different from the process in committee? I have not heard any convincing arguments, besides the fact that the government is the one that has been dragging its feet for all these years. The Conservatives have had a majority since 2011, and if they really cared about the country's security, they would have taken measures long before now.

Bill C-44—Time Allocation MotionProtection of Canada from Terrorists ActGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Steven Blaney Conservative Lévis—Bellechasse, QC

Mr. Speaker, the answer to the question posed by the member opposite is quite simple. She agrees with the bill. The Liberals agree with the bill. We have already debated it for six hours here in the House. Committee is the best forum in which to amend bills.

Today, the debate is not about passing the bill. It is simply about moving it on to the next step so that it can be thoroughly debated. Why? Because, whether we are members of the government or an opposition party, Canadians elected us to pass bills once they have been debated. That is what we have done in the House and that is what we are going to do in committee.

I understand that the two opposition parties support this bill. For that reason, which seems very clear to me, we should immediately adjourn this debate and send the bill to committee so that we can take action to protect Canadians. That is why we were elected to Parliament.