C-17 Committee Meeting

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

Meeting No. 18

Tuesday, April 29, 2003

The Legislative Committee on Bill C-17 met at 3:35 p.m. this day, in Room 371, West Block, the Chair, Bob Kilger, presiding.

Member of the Committee present:  Rex Barnes, Bev Desjarlais, Mac Harb, Bob Kilger, Mario Laframboise, Gary Lunn, John Maloney, James Moore, John O'Reilly, Beth Phinney, Marcel Proulx, Andy Savoy, Paddy Tornsey.

In attendance: From the Library of Parliament:  Margaret Young, Analyst.  From the Committees Directorate:  Susan Baldwin, Legislative Clerk.

Witnesses: From the Department of Transport: John A. Read, Director General, Safety and Security Group; Sherill Besser, Senior Counsel. From the Department of the Solicitor General: Marian Harymann, Acting Director, Policing Policy Division; Christian Roy, Legal Counsel.

The Committee resumed clause-by-clause consideration of the Bill.

On Clause 5,

Mario Laframboise moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing lines 11 and 12 on page 11 with the following:

“destroyed within twenty-four hours after the landing of the aircraft in respect of which the information is provided or disclosed.”

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 2; NAYS 7.

The Chair ruled that the following amendment was consequential to the previous amendment and therefore it is also negatived.

-- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended

(a) by replacing lines 15 and 16 on page 11 with the following:

“(3)(a) to (c) must be destroyed within twenty-four hours after the landing of the aircraft in respect of which the information is provided or disclosed. ”

(b) by replacing lines 20 to 22 on page 11 with the following:

“subsection (4) must be destroyed within twenty-four hours after the landing of the aircraft in respect of which the information is provided or disclosed.”

Bev Desjarlais moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by adding after line 27 on page 11 the following:

“4.811 (1) Before March 1 in each year, the Minister shall provide a written report to the Privacy Commissioner detailing all transactions in the previous calendar year that consist of providing, disclosing or destroying information in accordance with section 4.81. In particular, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, the report shall specify the nature and quantity of information provided under that section, the persons or organizations to whom this information was disclosed, how it was used and, if destroyed, how long it was retained before being destroyed. The Minister shall also provide the Privacy Commissioner with any additional particulars requested by the Privacy Commissioner in respect of any of these transactions.

(2) The Privacy Commissioner shall review all material received in respect of the transactions described in subsection (1) to ensure that section 4.81 has been complied with.

(3) The Privacy Commissioner shall receive and investigate, in accordance with sections 31 to 35 of the Privacy Act, any complaint from an individual that alleges that section 4.81 has not been complied with. The Privacy Commissioner may also initiate an investigation into any of the transactions referred to in subsection (1) if he or she considers it necessary.

(4) The Privacy Commissioner shall include in the annual report to Parliament under section 38 of the Privacy Act a report on his or her findings under subsections (2) and (3) and may make a special report in respect of those findings in accordance with section 39 of that Act if he or she considers it necessary.

(5) The Privacy Commissioner may include recommendations to Parliament in the annual report or the special report referred to in subsection (4), including recommendations that compensation be paid to any individual or organization that has been aggrieved as a result of a failure to comply with section 4.81.”

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 3; NAYS 6.

Bev Desjarlais moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing line 29 on page 11 with the following:

“this section and in section 4.82.1.”

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 3; NAYS 6.

The Chair ruled that the following amendment was consequential to the previous amendment and therefore it is also negatived.

-- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by adding after line 22 on page 16 the following:

“4.821 (1) The following definitions apply in this section.

“applicable transaction” means

(a) in relation to the Commissioner, any transaction that consists of the provision of information under subsection 4.82(4), the disclosure of information under subsection 4.82(6), (7), (8), (9), (10) or (11) by a person designated under subsection 4.82(2) or the destruction of information under subsection 4.82(14) by a person acting under the authority of the Commissioner; and

(b) in relation to the Director, any transaction that consists of the provision of information under subsection 4.82(5), the disclosure of information under subsection 4.82(6), (7), (8), (9), (10) or (12) by a person designated under subsection 4.82(3) or the destruction of information under subsection 4.82(14) by a person acting under the authority of the Director.

“transaction” means any transaction that consists of providing, disclosing or destroying information under section 4.82.

(2) Before March 1 in each year, the Commissioner and the Director shall each provide a written report to the Privacy Commissioner detailing all applicable transactions in the previous calendar year. In particular, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, the report shall specify the nature and quantity of information acquired under section 4.82, to whom this information was disclosed, how it was used and, if destroyed, how long it was retained before being destroyed. The report shall also describe any information retained under subsection 4.82(14) by the Commissioner or the Director, as the case may be, and the reasons for its retention.

(3) The Commissioner and the Director shall provide the Privacy Commissioner with any additional particulars requested by the Privacy Commissioner in respect of any applicable transaction.

(4) The Privacy Commissioner shall review all material received in respect of each transaction to ensure that section 4.82 has been complied with.

(5) The Privacy Commissioner shall receive and investigate, in accordance with sections 31 to 35 of the Privacy Act, any complaint from an individual that alleges that section 4.82 has not been complied with. The Privacy Commissioner may also initiate an investigation into any transaction if he or she considers it necessary.

(6) The Privacy Commissioner shall include in the annual report to Parliament under section 38 of the Privacy Act a report on his or her findings under subsections (4) and (5), and may make a special report in respect of those findings in accordance with section 39 of that Act if he or she considers it necessary.

(7) The Privacy Commissioner may include recommendations to Parliament in the annual report or special report referred to in subsection (6), including recommendations that compensation be paid to any individual or organization that has been aggrieved as a result of a failure to comply with section 4.82.”

Gary Lunn moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by adding after line 33 on page 11 the following:

““flight” means a non-stop commercial air service between two identified points on a specific date.”

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 1; NAYS 7.

Mario Laframboise moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by deleting lines 8 to 23 on page 12.

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 3; NAYS 6.

Garry Lunn moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing lines 8 to 19 on page 12 with the following:

““warrant” means a warrant or other document issued”

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 1; NAYS 8.

Gary Lunn moved, --That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing, in the English version, line 12 on page 13 with the following:

“expected to be on board an aircraft for any particular”

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 1; NAYS 6.

Gary Lunn moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing lines 15 to 21 on page 14 with the following:

“dance with subsections (8) to (12).”

After debate, by unanimous consent, the motion was withdrawn.

Marcel Proulx moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing lines 44 to 47 on page 14 and lines 1 and 2 on page 15 with the following:

(10) A person designated under subsection (2) or (3) may disclose information referred to in subsection (7) if he or she has reason to believe that there is an immediate threat to transportation security or the life, health or safety of a person and that the person to whom the disclosure is to be made is in a position to take measures to respond to the threat and needs the information to respond. In making the disclosure the designated person may disclose information only to the extent that he or she believes the information is necessary to respond to the threat.

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was adopted.

Mario Laframboise moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by deleting lines 3 to 8 on page 15.

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 2; NAYS 6.

Gary Lunn moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by adding after line 8 on page 15 the following:

“(11.1) Any information disclosed under subsection (11) shall be used solely for the purpose of executing a warrant, and any information that has not been so used within seven days after it is disclosed shall be destroyed immediately.”

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 4; NAYS 6.

Mario Laframboise moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing lines 32 and 33 on page 15 with the following:

“within twenty-four hours after the landing of the aircraft in respect of which the information is provided or disclosed, unless it is reasonably required for”

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 3; NAYS 6.

Mario Laframboise moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing line 41 on page 15 with the following:

“being retained, and a copy of the record must be provided within seven days to the Privacy Commissioner, unless the Privacy Commissioner waives this requirement by giving written notice to the Commissioner or the Director.”

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 3; NAYS 6.

Mario Laframboise moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing line 4 on page 16 with the following:

“that its continued retention is no longer required for the purposes of transportation security or the investigation of “threats to the security of Canada” referred to in paragraph (c) of the definition of that expression on section 2 of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act. The”

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 3; NAYS 6.

Marcel Proulx moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing lines 4 to 6 on page 16 with the following:

that its continued retention is not reasonably required for the purposes of transportation security or the investigation of "threats to the security of Canada" referred to in paragraph (c) of the definition of that expression in section 2 of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act. The Commissioner and the Director must each keep a record of their review.

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was adopted by a show of hands: YEAS 6; NAYS 1.

Clause 5, as amended, carried by a show of hands:  YEAS 7; NAYS 4.

Clause 6 carried.

On Clause 7,

Marcel Proulx moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 7, be amended by replacing lines 18 and 19 on page 17 with the following:

4.84 The Minister may designate, in writing, persons to conduct screenings, subject to any restrictions or conditions that the Minister may specify.

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was adopted.

Clause 7, as amended, carried by a show of hand: YEAS 6; NAYS 4.

Clause 8 carried.

Clause 9 carried.

On Clause 10,

Mario Laframboise moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 12 on page 20 with the following:

“application of sections 5 and 11 of the”

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 4; NAYS 5.

Mario Laframboise moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 10, be amended by deleting lines 37 to 45 on page 20.

After debate, by unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

Marcel Proulx moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing lines 40 to 45 on page 20 with the following:

containing the regulation, notice referred to in paragraph (1)(a), security measure, emergency direction or interim order was given to persons likely to be affected by it is, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, proof that notice was given to those persons.

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was adopted by a show of hands: YEAS 6; NAYS 1.

Clause 10, as amended, carried.

On Clause 11,

Mario Laframboise moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 11, be amended by deleting lines 16 to 22 on page 21.

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 1; NAYS 6.

Marcel Proulx moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 11, be amended by replacing lines 18 to 26 on page 21 with the following:

may specify, his or her deputy to make, for any reason referred to in any of paragraphs (1)(a) to (c), an interim order that contains any provision that may be contained in a regulation made under this Part.

(1.2) Before making an interim order, the Minister or deputy, as the case may be, must consult with any person or organization that the Minister or deputy considers appropriate

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was adopted.

Bev Desjarlais moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 11, be amended by replacing lines 1 to 6 on page 22 with the following:

“(5) A copy of each interim order made under this section shall be tabled in each House of Parliament within two sitting days after it is made.

(6) Where a motion for the consideration of the Senate or the House of Commons, that is signed by not less than ten members of the Senate or twenty members of the House of Commons, as the case may be, to the effect that an interim order tabled under subsection (5) be revoked or amended, is filed with the appropriate Speaker, that House of Parliament shall take up and consider the motion within three sitting days after it is filed.

(7) A motion taken up and considered in accordance with subsection (6) shall be debated without interruption and, at such time as the House is ready for the question, the Speaker shall immediately, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary for the disposition of the motion.

(8) If a motion debated in accordance with subsection (7) is adopted by the House, a message shall immediately be sent from that House informing the other House that the motion has been so adopted and requesting that the motion be concurred in by that other House.

(9) Where a request for concurrence in a motion is made pursuant to subsection (8), the House to which the request is made shall take up and consider the motion within three sitting days after the request is made.

(10) A motion taken up and considered in accordance with subsection (9) shall be debated without interruption and, at such time as the House is ready for the question, the Speaker shall immediately, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary for the disposition of the motion.”

After debate, the question being put on the amendment, it was negatived by a show of hands: YEAS 1; NAYS 6.

Mario Laframboise moved, -- That Bill C-17, in Clause 11, be amended by replacing line 2 on page 22 with the following:

“tabled in each House of Parliament within 5”

At 5:34 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.

Jean-Michel Roy

Clerk of the Committee