SECU Committee Meeting

Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.

For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.

If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.

Previous day publication Next day publication

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

Meeting No. 65

Monday, December 10, 2012

The Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security met at 3:30 p.m. this day, in Room 253-D, Centre Block, the Chair, Kevin Sorenson, presiding.

Members of the Committee present: Candice Bergen, Rosane Doré Lefebvre, Randall Garrison, Russ Hiebert, Rick Norlock, LaVar Payne, Jean Rousseau, Francis Scarpaleggia and Kevin Sorenson.

Acting Members present: Kerry-Lynne D. Findlay for Ryan Leef, Hon. Rob Moore for Hon. Laurie Hawn and Craig Scott for John Rafferty.

In attendance: Library of Parliament: Tanya Dupuis, Analyst ; Christine Morris, Analyst.

Witnesses: Department of Justice: Glenn Gilmour, Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section; Donald K. Piragoff, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy Sector.

Pursuant to the Order of Reference of Tuesday, October 23, 2012, and the motion adopted by the Committee on Monday, November 5, 2012, the Committee resumed consideration of Bill S-7, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Canada Evidence Act and the Security of Information Act.

The witnesses answered questions.

The Committee commenced its clause-by-clause study of the Bill.

Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), consideration of Clause 1 was postponed.

The Chair called Clause 2.

Clause 2 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 4.

Clause 3 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 4.

Clause 4 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 4.

Clause 5 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 4.

Clause 6 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 4.

On New Clause 6.1,

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7 be amended by adding after line 36 on page 2 the following new clause:

“6.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 83.18:

83.182 (1) The Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the Canada Border Services Agency and the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority shall enter into an agreement on their respective responsibilities for the enforcement of section 83.181.

(2) The agreement shall be submitted to the Security Intelligence Review Committee, which shall assess the combined operational effectiveness of the parties to the agreement and the measures established for the protection of rights.

(3) The agreement shall be approved by that Committee before the coming into force of section 83.181.

(4) Section 83.181 shall cease to apply if an amendment to the agreement is not approved by that Committee within three months.”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 766 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition.

The Chair ruled that the following amendment was consequential to the previous amendment and therefore it was also inadmissible:

That Bill S-7, in Clause 30, be amended by replacing line 9 on page 19 with the following: “30. (1) Sections 1 to 6, 7 to 9 and 14 to 29 come”

Clause 7 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 4.

Clause 8 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 4.

On Clause 9,

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 9, be amended by replacing line 8 on page 4 with the following:

“person who intends to carry out a terrorist”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 6.

Clause 9 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 5.

On Clause 10,

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 22 on page 6 with the following:

“under section 132 or 136, or in any extradition or deportation hearings; and”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 766 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 10, be amended by adding after line 29 on page 6 the following:

“(11.1) The judge may, at any time on the request of a person named in an order, assign counsel to act on behalf of the person if, in the opinion of the judge, it appears desirable in the interests of justice that the person should have legal assistance.

(11.2) If counsel is assigned pursuant to subsection (11.1) and legal aid is not granted to the person pursuant to a provincial legal aid program, the fees and disbursements of counsel shall be paid by the Attorney General.”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on pages 767-768 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 10, be amended by adding after line 29 on page 6 the following:

“(11.1) The presiding judge may, at any time on the request of a person named in an order, assign counsel to act on behalf of the person if, in the opinion of the judge, it appears desirable in the interests of justice that the person should have legal assistance and if it appears that the person does not have sufficient means to obtain that assistance.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 32 on page 7 with the following:

“terrorist activity by that person.”

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

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 10, be amended by adding after line 39 on page 10 the following:

“(13.1) The judge may, at any time on the request of a person described in paragraph (2)(b), assign counsel to act on behalf of the person if, in the opinion of the judge, it appears desirable in the interests of justice that the person should have legal assistance.

(13.2) If counsel is assigned pursuant to subsection (13.1) and legal aid is not granted to the person pursuant to a provincial legal aid program, the fees and disbursements of counsel shall be paid by the Attorney General.”

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 10, be amended by adding after line 39 on page 10 the following:

“(13.1) The judge may, at any time on the request of a person named in an order, assign counsel to act on behalf of the person if, in the opinion of the judge, it appears desirable in the interests of justice that the person should have legal assistance and if it appears that the person does not have sufficient means to obtain that assistance.

Clause 10 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 4.

On Clause 11,

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 11, be amended by replacing line 8 on page 11 with the following:

“83.29 should be extended and detailed information on any changes to law, policy or practice relating to exit information systems or exit control systems.”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 766 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 11, be amended by replacing line 15 on page 11 with the following:

“tively, detailed information on any changes to law, policy or practice relating to exit information systems or exit control systems and their opinion, supported by reasons, on”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 766 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition.

Clause 11 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 4.

On Clause 12,

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 12, be amended by replacing lines 30 to 36 on page 11 with the following:

“83.181, 83.191, 83.201, 83.202, 83.28, 83.29 and 83.3 and their operation shall be undertaken by any committee of the House of Commons or of both Houses of Parliament that may be designated by the House of Commons, for that purpose. The review shall include a study of the interaction between the operation of sections 83.181, 83.191, 83.201 and 83.202 and the operation of sections 83.28, 83.29 and 83.3.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 6.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 12, be amended by replacing lines 31 to 36 on page 11 with the following:

“be undertaken by any committee of the House of Commons or of both Houses of Parliament that may be designated by the House of Commons for that purpose.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 6.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 12, be amended by adding after line 36 on page 11 the following:

“(1.11) Prior to starting the comprehensive review under subsection (1.1), the committee shall review the recommendations in respect of accountability and oversight mechanisms made by the Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar and submit a report on the review to Parliament that includes a list of the recommendations that were implemented as well as a list of those that were not and a recommendation as to whether the extension referred to in subsection (1) should be conditional on implementation of the latter.”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 766 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 12, be amended by adding after line 36 on page 11 the following:

“(1.01) In performing the review referred to in subsection (1.1), the committee is to consult with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, which must report to the committee on whether it appears that discrimination on racial, ethnic, religious or other grounds is a problem in respect of the operation of any of the provisions of this Act.

(1.02) The Commission may hold public hearings on the matters referred to in subsection (1.01) before reporting to the committee under that subsection.”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 766 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 12, be amended by adding after line 45 on page 11 the following:

“(1.3) The report referred to in subsection (1.2) must include comprehensive statistics on the frequency and nature of the application of sections 83.181, 83.191, 83.201, 83.202. 83.28, 83.29 and 83.3 and, for sections 83.181, 83.191, 83.20 and 83.202 in particular, must include statistics on arrests, charges, prosecutions, convictions, acquittals and dismissals. The report must also include an assessment of the anticipated effectiveness of all of these sections, any concerns regarding their future application and statistics on the frequency with which

(a) preventive detention or recognizance with conditions was imposed in respect of offences under these sections; and

(b) evidence was uncovered at an investigative hearing which was later used in the prosecution of an offence under one of these sections.

(1.4) The report referred to in subsection (1.2) must be made available to the public, with the exception of any information contained in it that is protected by parliamentary privilege.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 6.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 12, be amended by adding after line 8 on page 12 the following:

“(3) The Governor in Council may make an order for extension referred to in subsection (2) provided at least 90 days have elapsed since the report referred to in subsection (1.2) was submitted to Parliament, of which at least 28 days were sitting days.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 6.

By unanimous consent, Clauses 12 to 28 inclusive carried severally.

On Clause 29,

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill S-7, in Clause 29, be amended by replacing lines 4 and 5 on page 19 with the following:

“whom he or she knows to be a person who intends to carry out an offence under this Act, is”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 6.

Clause 29 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 4.

Clause 30 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 7; NAYS: 4.

The Short Title carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 4.

The Title carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 4.

The Bill carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Candice Bergen, Kerry-Lynne D. Findlay, Russ Hiebert, Rob Moore, Rick Norlock, LaVar Payne, Francis Scarpaleggia — 7; NAYS: Rosane Doré Lefebvre, Randall Garrison, Jean Rousseau, Craig Scott — 4.

ORDERED, — That the Chair report the Bill to the House.

At 4:07 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 4:10 p.m., the sitting resumed in camera.

The Committee proceeded to the consideration of matters related to Committee business.

It was agreed, — That the Committee meet informally with the delegation from the Committee on Justice of the Swedish Parliament and that the meeting take place during one of the Committee's regular meeting time slots.

ORDERED, — That no meeting of the Committee be convened on Wednesday, December 12, 2012.

At 4:17 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.

Andrew Bartholomew Chaplin
Clerk of the Committee

2013/01/21 11:54 a.m.