Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 151-165 of 176
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe

Public Safety committee  Earlier, with Mr. Dubé, we touched on paragraph 8b). This paragraph is a restriction; how often will it be applied? We have to consider this. Based on what a minister said recently, this prerogative will be used very rarely. I have a note in English that explains my thinking. I will read it out, if I may.

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe

Public Safety committee  We have to understand—and I believe you understand this too—that there is a difference between review, which is part of the mandate, and access to the information referred to in clause 13 and in the following clauses. I would say it is not exactly the same thing.

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe

Public Safety committee  Are you referring to committees of experts?

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe

Public Safety committee  I don't see it that way. I do not think it is a question of taking precedence. I see what you are getting at, but each committee or body has its own mandate. I don't think it is a question of precedence. I do not see it that way at all. The expert review mandate that we have, as regards the Communications Security Establishment, is one thing.

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe

Public Safety committee  That might be useful. I do not see a problem in calling witnesses to appear if you wish. For example, if you are conducting a review of a specific department and want access to documents and witnesses, but are being refused, it could be problematic if you do not have a power of coercion.

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe

Public Safety committee  It that clause 14 or clause 15?

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe

Public Safety committee  I don't see why they would do that unless they are in bad faith, and I assume that everybody is acting in good faith unless the contrary is proven to me.

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe

Public Safety committee  Are you talking about a quorum?

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe

Public Safety committee  Clause 17, is it? I notice there is no provision in the bill about a quorum in this committee. It says there are nine members, and clauses 18 and 19, for example, talk about voting, but they don't talk about a quorum. I think there should be a provision saying that the quorum for the committee, let's say, is five members or whatever.

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe

Public Safety committee  Part of my mandate is to ensure that CSE activities comply with the law. It goes without saying therefore that if they do not comply, I have to inform the Minister of National Defence, who is responsible for the CSE, as well as the Attorney General of Canada, in accordance with the National Defence Act.

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe

Public Safety committee  It is the Security Intelligence Review Committee, or SIRC.

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe

Public Safety committee  First of all, you have to understand the nature of the committee that the bill would create. It is a committee of parliamentarians, but not a committee of Parliament, it is a creature of the executive. I don't think this is the first time you have heard this. This is why the prime minister and the other ministers have a role to play.

November 15th, 2016Committee meeting

Jean-Pierre Plouffe