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

Results 1-7 of 7
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Public Safety committee  The provision, Mr. Chair, is in fact the same wording that appears in Bill C-44, and so it's tracked in this particular piece of legislation. As the member indicated, if the threat diminishment power is to be of use when it is done outside Canada, it would really negate the pow

March 31st, 2015Committee meeting

Michael Duffy

Public Safety committee  Mr. Chair, I would indicate that it's in the bill, or being proposed to be put into the bill, not because it appears in legislation in some other jurisdiction, it was to address concerns raised in this particular jurisdiction.

March 31st, 2015Committee meeting

Michael Duffy

Public Safety committee  The concept of detention means different things in different contexts. In some cases it may give rise to treatment that would amount to bodily harm, but not necessarily. People are detained at the border for inspection purposes, but they don't necessarily find themselves subjecte

March 31st, 2015Committee meeting

Michael Duffy

Public Safety committee  Mr. Chair, I would just indicate that I haven't had an opportunity to consider in any detail the wording that the member refers to. But just the reference to “rendition” or “removal to another state” is not necessarily a law enforcement power. So to the extent that the amendment

March 31st, 2015Committee meeting

Michael Duffy

Public Safety committee  Mr. Chair, I understand the concern that's been voiced. What it turns on is section 1 of the charter, which provides that the rights referred to in the charter are guaranteed only to the extent that they are not restricted by reasonable limits prescribed by law in a free and dem

March 31st, 2015Committee meeting

Michael Duffy

Public Safety committee  Mr. Chair, that's precisely what I'm not suggesting but indicating. The bill, properly read, doesn't do what the witnesses have indicated it does. The judge is being put in precisely the position of looking at the facts of a particular case and determining whether or not the rig

March 31st, 2015Committee meeting

Michael Duffy

Public Safety committee  Mr. Chair, perhaps I can respond to that for the Department of Justice. The member's characterization made by an earlier witness that there would be a constitutional breach is precisely why the section does not do what it is alleged to do. If in fact it did create or give rise t

March 31st, 2015Committee meeting

Michael Duffy