FAIT 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

37th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION

Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Tuesday, October 7, 2003

1105

The Chair (Mr. Bernard Patry (Pierrefonds—Dollard, Lib.))

Mr. Hau Sing Tse (Vice-President, Asia Branch, Canadian International Development Agency)

The Chair

Mr. Paul Hunt (Acting Vice-President, Africa and Middle East Branch, Canadian International Development Agency)

1110

1115

The Chair

Mr. Stockwell Day (Okanagan—Coquihalla, Canadian Alliance)

The Chair

Mr. Paul Hunt

Mr. Stockwell Day

Mr. Paul Hunt

Mr. Stockwell Day

Mr. Paul Hunt

1120

Mr. Stockwell Day

The Chair

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron (Verchères—Les-Patriotes, BQ)

Mr. Paul Hunt

The Chair

Mr. Paul Hunt

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron

The Chair

Mrs. Karen Redman (Kitchener Centre, Lib.)

1150

Mr. Hau Sing Tse

The Chair

Mr. Paul Hunt

1155

The Chair

Hon. Wayne Easter (Solicitor General of Canada)

1205

The Chair

Mr. Stockwell Day

1210

The Chair

Hon. Wayne Easter

1215

Deputy Commissioner Garry Loeppky (Operations, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Department of the Solicitor General)

The Chair

Ms. Francine Lalonde (Mercier, BQ)

1220

The Chair

Hon. Wayne Easter

D/Commr Garry Loeppky

The Chair

Hon. Diane Marleau (Sudbury, Lib.)

Hon. Wayne Easter

1225

The Chair

Right Hon. Joe Clark (Calgary Centre, PC)

Hon. Wayne Easter

Right Hon. Joe Clark

Hon. Wayne Easter

Right Hon. Joe Clark

The Chair

Hon. Wayne Easter

Right Hon. Joe Clark

Hon. Wayne Easter

The Chair

Right Hon. Joe Clark

The Chair

Hon. Wayne Easter

The Chair

D/Commr Garry Loeppky

1230

The Chair

Hon. Art Eggleton

The Chair

Hon. Wayne Easter

The Chair

D/Commr Garry Loeppky

The Chair

Hon. Art Eggleton

Hon. Wayne Easter

1235

Hon. Art Eggleton

Hon. Wayne Easter

The Chair

Mr. Svend Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP)

The Chair

Hon. Wayne Easter

Mr. Svend Robinson

Hon. Wayne Easter

Mr. Svend Robinson

Hon. Wayne Easter

Mr. Svend Robinson

The Chair

Mr. Svend Robinson

The Chair

Mr. Svend Robinson

The Chair

1240

Mr. Svend Robinson

Hon. Wayne Easter

Mr. Svend Robinson

The Chair

Mr. Svend Robinson

The Chair

Mr. Svend Robinson

The Chair

Mr. Stockwell Day

The Chair

Mr. John Harvard (Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia, Lib.)

The Chair

Hon. Wayne Easter

Mr. John Harvard

1245

Hon. Wayne Easter

The Chair

Mr. Deepak Obhrai (Calgary East, Canadian Alliance)

The Chair

Hon. Wayne Easter

Mr. Deepak Obhrai

Hon. Wayne Easter

Right Hon. Joe Clark

Hon. Wayne Easter

Mr. Deepak Obhrai

The Chair

Ms. Aileen Carroll (Barrie—Simcoe—Bradford, Lib.)

The Chair

Mr. Irwin Cotler (Mount Royal, Lib.)

1250

The Chair

Hon. Wayne Easter

The Chair

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron

The Chair

Hon. Wayne Easter

1255

The Chair

D/Commr Garry Loeppky

The Chair

Mrs. Karen Redman

The Chair

Mr. Keith Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, Canadian Alliance)

The Chair

Hon. Wayne Easter

The Chair

D/Commr Garry Loeppky

1300

The Chair

Hon. Wayne Easter

Mr. Keith Martin

Hon. Wayne Easter

Mr. Keith Martin

Hon. Wayne Easter

The Chair

Mr. Svend Robinson

The Chair

Ms. Aileen Carroll

The Chair

Ms. Aileen Carroll

The Chair

Right Hon. Joe Clark

The Chair

CANADA

Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade

NUMBER 050

2nd SESSION

37th PARLIAMENT

EVIDENCE

Tuesday, October 7, 2003

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Á (1105)

[English]

The Chair (Mr. Bernard Patry (Pierrefonds—Dollard, Lib.)): Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), consideration of relations with Muslim countries, we have the pleasure of having with us this morning as our witnesses, from CIDA, the Canadian International Development Agency, Mr. Hau Sing Tse, the vice-president for the Asia branch, and also Mr. Paul Hunt, qui est le vice-président de la Direction générale de l'Afrique et du Moyen Orient. Bienvenue. Welcome.

I want to tell members that there will be a vote. It's a 30-minute bell and we will hear it in about 20 minutes from now.

Mr. Tse, please, perhaps you would start.

Mr. Hau Sing Tse (Vice-President, Asia Branch, Canadian International Development Agency): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[Translation]

Mr. Chairman, thank you for your invitation to appear before this committee to discuss with you our development assistance programs in Malaysia, Indonesia, Pakistan and India. With the exception of Malaysia, CIDA is involved in many activities through multiple channels in Indonesia, Pakistan and India where a large number of poor reside.

Let me start with Malaysia. While it is not a tiger like Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan, Malaysia has done well on the economic and social development front. It has recovered relatively quickly from the 1997 financial crisis. In more ways than one, it is a success story. In recent years, CIDA has assisted Malaysia in making the transition from aid recipient to Canada's number one trade partner in Southeast Asia. A total of $2.5 billion in trade was transacted in 2002, with programs that emphasized economic policy and cooperation between Canadian and Malaysian institutions and enterprises, including entrepreneurial and managerial training for Malaysian women.

In light of Malaysia's impressive development achievements, our development assistance activities in this country are fairly limited in scope.

[English]

It's quite a different story when one shifts to take a look at the development situation in Indonesia. It is the largest Islamic state and its practice of Islam is moderate. It had obtained very good growth based on its natural endowments and succeeded in significantly reducing its poverty. However, it became the poster child of the 1997 financial crisis, primarily due to years of bad governance both at the government and corporate levels. The effects of the crisis are still evident, as Indonesia now has a large group of vulnerable poor. More than 60% of the 216 million people live under $2 a day.

One silver lining from the crisis was that it precipitated political changes that led to the establishment of a democratic form of government where power is being decentralized to local levels. The first direct presidential elections are to be held in 2004.

The political freedom has also resulted in an explosive growth of civil society organizations that were suppressed in the past. CIDA's program in Indonesia has evolved in line with the needs of the country. Since 1997, CIDA has been focusing on promoting good governance, human rights, and democratic development at the central and local levels, stimulating the growth of small and medium enterprises that create jobs for the poor, and improving the well-being of communities through more sustainable management of natural resources and their environment.

The two South Asian countries you will be visiting are Pakistan and India. Let me start with Pakistan. I understand your committee had an opportunity to have a dialogue with its President when he visited Canada a couple of weeks ago. While he has made attempts to carry out some reforms and has mounted a major initiative in decentralizing power to the local levels, Pakistan possesses very depressing social indicators. It exhibits the characteristics of a very fragile state.

We, along with the other donors, have taken some risks to provide assistance to the decentralization initiative. We're currently focusing on working with the decentralization to the local government and helping the local capacity exercise their authority and decision-making. We are focusing on assisting delivery of education and health services at the local level. Finally, given the dire straits of affairs related to women, we're working at bettering the lives of women, particularly among the rural poor.

As for India, its shifting of gears since 1991 from a socialist democracy that was inward looking to becoming a more outward-looking socio-economy, embracing economic liberalization and decentralization of power from the centre to local governments, has produced 6% annual economic growth over the past few years. While it has the largest number of poor, it is indeed an emerging economic force that could certainly have regional, if not global, significance. Its population size will overtake China in 2030 as the most populous country in the world.

HIV/AIDS is a real threat in the medium-term development of India. Our current program supports economic reform, social development, and environmental management.

The Indian government has recently announced its external aid policy, which directs smaller bilateral donors, like Canada and many others, to work with civil society only and not directly with the government. We are in the midst of thinking through an appropriate response to this policy with our minister, Minister Whelan.

Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

Mr. Hunt, s'il vous plaît.

[Translation]

Mr. Paul Hunt (Acting Vice-President, Africa and Middle East Branch, Canadian International Development Agency): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'm delighted to be here and I want to thank you for the invitation to discuss with the committee, in anticipation of our upcoming visit to this region, Canadian government assistance to Egypt, the Palestinian territories and Jordan.

CIDA does not have an aid program for Iran, Saudi Arabia and Israel. Per capita incomes in these nations are higher than those in developing countries.

Á (1110)

[English]

CIDA has a very modest aid presence in Turkey. Most of CIDA's cooperation in Turkey is managed by the agency's industrial cooperation program, which supports long-term business alliances between the Canadian and Turkish private sectors. Currently, our bilateral involvement in Turkey has been centred on a very small but well-targeted support to the Turkish national police, involving the RCMP as a Canadian partner.

[Translation]

For some years now, the focus of the international community has been on the Middle East and North Africa, not only because of the region's vast oil reserves or the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but also because of ongoing instability in the area. This instability has had global repercussions, and in particular, has deprived the region's inhabitants of the opportunity to improve their living conditions.

Arab experts who drafted the outstanding Arab Human Development Report 2002 were extremely critical of this situation and committee members may wish to take a closer look at the report summary.

[English]

This UNDP report on Arab human development is actually quite a landmark document, given that it was prepared by Arabs and analyses the situation in the region.

Canada's overall poverty reduction goals remain at the centre of our aid activities in Egypt and the Middle East. They're also in accord with Canada's policy for strengthening aid effectiveness and the government's desire to emphasize the 3D approach: diplomacy, defence, and development. For example, we support Egypt in its efforts to reduce the poverty of the country's marginalized groups, particularly women, children, and youth, by investing approximately 40% of our current budget to allocations in human resource development, principally to basic education. A further 45% of our overall allocations are targeted toward fostering better employment opportunities through support to small and medium-sized enterprise development. The program in Egypt also focuses attention on gender equality, child protection, the environment, and institutional capacity issues.

CIDA's long-term development aid in the Palestinian territories focuses on creating an environment where peace and sustainable development can thrive. The link between peace and security and sustainable development is particularly pertinent in the present political context. Canada continues to explore opportunities to become more engaged in the peace process and in support of the Palestinian reform agenda. Canada is viewed as a credible and trusted partner in the region, with a capacity to do more.

With respect to Jordan, Canada has made a strategic contribution to supporting Jordan's development efforts in the education sector and in support of a knowledge-based economy.

Before you travel to the region, I would simply like to draw your attention to the supporting text we've provided to members of the committee. It is basically an overview and contains an annex and more detailed information on the initiatives Canada supports through CIDA's cooperation program. It describes as well the information available on CIDA's website with respect to assistance to the West Bank and Gaza and to Jordan.

There's absolutely no question that the Middle East is an area of global strategic importance and of considerable economic and political interest to Canada. It's a region to which a significant number of Canadians have a personal tie, and it is an area in which all Canadians hope to foster peace and socio-economic development.

I think it's important, Mr. Chairman, to underline for you that CIDA works very closely with a diverse range of Canadian partners who help create an environment that's conducive to peace and where long-term development can flourish. These efforts are continuing despite increased tension in the region.

To illustrate this, I'd just like to mention the remarkable contribution of just four Canadian partners in assisting civil society and actors in the region. The International Development Research Centre, for example, has provided research and capacity development support on the difficult Palestinian refugee issue. The Canadian Federation of Municipalities, the FCM, has provided support for the establishment of partnerships between Canadian and Palestinian municipalities and for helping to strengthen local governance, which affects citizens at the local and community levels. Oxfam and Oxfam-Québec have made a strong and ongoing commitment to assist vulnerable Palestinian communities. And the Department of Education of the Government of New Brunswick has done innovative work on e-learning and education, in both official languages, in collaboration with the Government of Jordan.

Á (1115)

[Translation]

These are just a few examples of initiatives undertaken by Canadian partners within the framework of a very interesting cooperation program between Canada and countries in this region.

I would now be happy to answer your questions, Mr. Chairman.

[English]

The Chair: Merci beaucoup. Thank you very much.

Before we start with questions and answers, I just want to pinpoint that we have in the audience with us this morning, Professor Alan Dershowitz, professor of law at Harvard Law School and a distinguished human rights lawyer, who is here in Ottawa today to address a conference on national security and civil liberties, organized by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. We welcome him this morning.

We'll start for about ten minutes, with five minutes for questions and answers, before we suspend for the vote.

Mr. Day.

Mr. Stockwell Day (Okanagan—Coquihalla, Canadian Alliance): In the five-minute timeframe, thank you to both gentlemen for your presentations and for the work you do. We recognize on this committee that political questions are not things on which you have great sway, so it's the operational elements we're interested in. We do appreciate the good work you do.

Mr. Hunt mentioned a couple of times the association on the education front, especially within the Palestinian territory and with the Palestinian Authority. It has now been verified by a number of sources beyond any debate, given that the publications themselves are available, that there's much material under the auspices of the Palestinian Authority that is filled with hateful invective toward Israel and Jews. As recently as this summer, we've seen videos of what has been available in the market under the Palestinian Authority, on television channels, and everything from commercials to newspaper accounts, to youth events glorifying the suicide bombers. And most disturbing, just 10 days ago, some 30 non-government organizations or Palestinian NGOs refused to sign a commitment saying that aid to the country—primarily U.S. aid—would not be used for terrorist purposes. They refused to sign that agreement.

Given that, have you been given any direction in terms of your relationship with these types of agencies and in terms of their refusal to guarantee that the funds will not be used for terrorist activity? What implications do you see for Canada?

I understand your political restraints, Mr. Hunt, but can you tell me what involvement there is now in the Palestinian area, given these facts?

The Chair: Mr. Hunt.

Mr. Paul Hunt: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I may not be able to pick up on all of the points you raised in your question. I would say, first, that Canada is not working specifically in the area of education in the Palestinian territories through the cooperation program. The examples I referred to speak most specifically to Jordan, and other examples touch on the Maghrib region, including Morocco.

Mr. Stockwell Day: Sorry, I thought you had said you are working with groups in the Palestinian territories.

Mr. Paul Hunt: Yes, but not in the area of education. Your original question started with references to textbooks and to educational materials and the like, so I just wanted to clarify for the committee that we are not working in the area of education in the Palestinian territories.

Mr. Stockwell Day: What about with any of those 30 NGOs who refused to sign this document? Do you know?

Mr. Paul Hunt: I'm afraid I'm not in a position to reply to you. I haven't seen the list of the 30, and I don't know if they would be partners or actors with whom Canada or other partners collaborate.

I would say, though, that one of the important international organizations through which Canada contributes to work in the Palestinian territories is the UNRWA, United Nations Relief and Works Agency. It is a UN organization that has a very specific mandate to address issues of the socio-economic well-being of refugees in the region. For quite a number of years, Canada has made an important annual contribution to the work of that organization. Issues of children, local communities, schools, water, and sanitation are part of the work that organization does. But Canada, along with the international community more generally, contributes to that.

I can undertake to follow up on the member's question with respect to the organizations you've referred to and see if there's anything we can provide to you in terms of additional information.

Á (1120)

Mr. Stockwell Day: I would appreciate that.

Thank you.

The Chair: Sorry, but we need to suspend. We will be back after the vote.

Thank you very much.

We'll suspend for the moment, and we will be back with the witnesses from CIDA, and after that, by noon, with the Solicitor General.

Á (1120)

Á (1145)

The Chair: Order.

We're now going to keep doing questions and answers till noon.

[Translation]

You have five minutes, Mr. Bergeron.

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron (Verchères—Les-Patriotes, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Following up on Mr. Day's questions, I would like to clarify a few things, for the sake of balancing out the viewpoints expressed.

I trust that Mr. Day's next visit to Israel and Palestine will provide us with a much broader and more balanced perspective on the prevailing situation in this region of the globe.

I had the pleasure and privilege of visiting Palestine, specifically Jenine, as well as Israel on three occasions, along with my colleague, the Member for Mercier, after the Israeli raids that made the headlines. I was especially struck by the fact that Israeli repression in the occupied territories played out mainly in the form of brutal assaults on Palestinian Authority infrastructures. A kind of paradox was evident between Israeli rhetoric to the effect that the Palestinian Authority needed to control terrorists and the attacks by the Israeli army on communications or police services in the Palestinian settlements. I was also struck by the fact that all of the infrastructures, that is water and hydroelectric services and traffic lights, had been systematically destroyed by Israeli authorities.

Yet, it's no secret that much of this infrastructure was financed with help from the international community, including Canada. Therefore, I have to wonder if it serves any real purpose for donor countries, including Canada, to invest substantial sums of money in the development of Palestinian infrastructures that are destined to be systematically destroyed by Israeli authorities?

Mr. Paul Hunt: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I'm not sure how to answer this question which has very political overtones.

The Chair: I'd appreciate an answer that is non-political.

Mr. Paul Hunt: It's important for us to remember that humanitarian aid is a critical component of the Canadian cooperation framework. This aid is provided by respected agencies and partners who work locally to meet the needs expressed by the communities. For example, the UNRA, the United Nations agency that I spoke of earlier, is genuinely respected, particularly in this region. It works to meet the needs directly expressed by local residents.

It should also be remembered that countries belonging to the international community have a responsibility to ensure that communities, individuals and families are treated with respect and given support. Canada is in a position to assume such a responsibility.

Admittedly, in view of the prevailing unrest, we are occasionally faced with problems affecting investments that flow either through the UNRA or other sources. Nevertheless, what matters is to sustain a political dialogue, to encourage those involved in the conflict to work together to resolve their differences, trying all the while, even though it may not be easy, to have the day-to-day needs of families and individuals in the communities attended to.

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron: Very briefly, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to...

The Chair: Thank you.

I'm sorry, Mr. Bergeron, but we have to move on to Ms. Redman.

Madame Redman, je vous en prie.

[English]

Mrs. Karen Redman (Kitchener Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank both of you for your interventions today.

From time to time Canada is criticized for its actual level of foreign aid, and one of the remedies to that is looking at concentrating our aid so that it's more effective. I'm wondering if you can comment on whether there's a critical mass or the effectiveness of that way of operating.

We've also heard from international as well as national commentators that one of our strengths in flowing aid has actually been our relationship with the non-government agencies. It's interesting to note, I believe, that Mr. Sing Tse talked about the fact that India has actually suggested that we continue to flow aid in partnership with non-government agencies.

Perhaps you can comment on how effective that is in these areas.

And, Mr. Hunt, I listened with great interest when you both talked about flowing money to women and entrepreneurs specifically, because it's a committee that I've just finished working on, a task force on women entrepreneurs in Canada. Can you talk a little about what mechanisms are in place to measure the success we have with those kinds of programs? How do we measure that it has been a good expenditure of development dollars?

Á (1150)

Mr. Hau Sing Tse: Perhaps I can share with you my view on the civil society as a key contributor to development. If you look at the case of India, where you have a time-tested democracy and you have a vibrant civil society, the capacity to work with the civil society to carry out their work as well as to influence government or to be engaged in the public dialogue on policies of different kinds is the kind of area that has great potential for us.

If you relate that to the country concentration, if you look at Asia, fundamentally, the countries are very large, the developmental needs are very huge, and they are not particularly aid-dependent in terms of their percentage of the development assistance of their GDP. Therefore, in many ways, for Canada, it's really a question of our ideas, our experience, our knowledge of looking at areas where we can have a little more strategic impact than the money otherwise could bring us.

Right now, if you look within the context of the Indian external aid policy, we are looking at different aspects of what can be a civil society. In many ways, the Indians are exercising their local ownership, their own development plan in looking at the large donors with the IFIs. And some are politically driven, like Russia, to work with them at a government level. By and large, most of them would like the other donors to work with the civil society. So I think there's a recognition of the importance of that.

Along the vein of women entrepreneurs, of results measurement, if I look at the situation in Indonesia, at the different initiatives, I think at the end of the day you don't measure it by the number of women working in that area, but you look at the kinds of systems in place where they would continue to encourage the participation of women as entrepreneurs. In this case here, we're looking at it a lot more into Asia, compared to Indonesia...and a little in India.

Paul, I don't know if you have other comments.

The Chair: Mr. Hunt, do you have any comments?

[Translation]

Mr. Paul Hunt: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

[English]

Perhaps I could pick up on the elements of aid effectiveness and concentration. I tried to refer to this in my remarks, but clearly there's absolutely no question that the way we're trying to manage Canada's cooperation program in the region I'm responsible for is very much focused around the key principles underlying aid effectiveness: demand-driven, country-led, local ownership, partnership as a way of addressing and tackling the priorities that are being expressed by our partners in the region. With respect to concentration, you can see this most dramatically in the way the Government of Canada and CIDA have begun to invest new additional resources in Africa and its countries of focus, as well as in Latin America and in Asia.

In this particular region we have a fairly stable funding envelope for the time being and therefore we are not able to entertain a wide variety of additional new requests. So we are having to be equally focused and concentrated in the way we try to target and deliver our programs.

For example, recently, with the authorities and civil society groups in Morocco, we have refocused Canada's contribution program to focus on basic education. Why? It's the key to a series of positive development changes that take place in a society. And the Moroccan authorities were very keen to have Canada's capacity in this area in both languages and in a way that was to accompany their efforts to put in place a reform strategy for basic education.

On the point of the importance of non-governmental organizations, I purposefully tried to stress that in my remarks to you this morning. The non-governmental community...Canada's pan-Canadian institutions are very important actors with partners in the region, particularly in the region you'll be visiting.

With respect to the participation of women, the issues of gender, and to build on Hau Sing's comments, I would simply say that the question of access is one of the fundamental findings of the Arab development report, along with equity. The questions of access and equity are most particularly directed to the participation of women and girls in the development process and in their societies. So inside Canada's cooperation program there is a particular emphasis on ensuring that girls are not just getting into school, but also being targeted to help them complete school. In the formal and non-formal learning structures and in the e-learning initiatives, particularly in Jordan...that girls are part of that, and then in the small, micro, and medium-sized enterprise initiatives, that women entrepreneurs are active participants in that.

One point that Hau Sing didn't mention is that with respect to microcredit and microfinancement, the most dramatic and encouraging statistics are that when this type of credit is made available to women, the rates in terms of the success of their individual enterprises as well as their repayment rates as responsible business owners are extremely encouraging. Therefore, it's something we try to support in the way we structure, target, and partner.

Á (1155)

[Translation]

The Chair: Thank you very much.

[English]

Thank you very much, Mr. Sing.

[Translation]

Thank you very much, Mr. Hunt, for coming here this morning. Your visit was greatly appreciated. I'd also like to thank all of the CIDA officials who accompanied you.

[English]

Before we suspend for a few minutes for the minister, I want to tell all the members that we're going to have a visit on October 27 and 28 of the President of the National Assembly of the Republic of Portugal. He will be here on an official visit with four members of Parliament of the Portuguese government. I want to know if you will authorize the chair to organize a meeting or a lunch or a working meal with the speaker and his delegation.

Some hon. members: Agreed.

The Chair: Thank you.

We'll suspend for two minutes.

Á (1158)

Â (1201)

The Chair: Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we're still on the consideration of relations with Muslim countries. We now have the privilege to have with us the Honourable Wayne Easter, the Solicitor General of Canada, and also Mr. Garry Loeppky, who is the deputy commissioner of operations of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

[Translation]

Welcome, Minister. You have the floor.

[English]

Hon. Wayne Easter (Solicitor General of Canada): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have a few opening remarks, Mr. Chair, and then I will go to questions.

First of all, thank you, Mr. Chair. I am indeed pleased to be here today to have the opportunity to discuss with you the matter of Canadians in foreign custody. As a former committee chair myself, I appreciate the vital role and valuable work of the committees from both houses of Parliament.

The issue being considered today is very important, and I want to assure the committee of my portfolio's full cooperation and support. That being said, I want to say at the beginning, and I know you will understand, that there are some restrictions placed on me when it comes to commenting on operational police matters.

As Solicitor General, the safety and security of Canadians is my top priority. I want to assure you that in this country security does not come at the expense of democratic rights and fundamental freedoms. We recognize that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms embodies the very fabric of our society. I believe this government has done an excellent job of ensuring safe and secure Canadian communities while continuing to respect and promote the values reflected in and the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the charter. As I've said on many occasions, this government is committed to balancing the rights of Canadians with the security of Canada as a nation. We are extremely vigilant when it comes to both fighting terrorism and protecting the rights of our citizens.

The hallmark of our approach to national security is close collaboration among security and law enforcement agencies, federal departments, other governments, and the international community. As the minister responsible, I can assure you that in cooperating with foreign agencies, CSIS and the RCMP conduct themselves in a professional and appropriate manner, one that is consistent with Canadian law and mindful of the rights of Canadians. After all, the protection of Canadians both at home and abroad is our goal.

Regarding the case of Mr. Maher Arar, I am pleased to see that the government's efforts from numerous sources and the efforts of Mr. Arar's wife have led to his safe return to this country, to Canada. The campaign to secure Mr. Arar's release included intervention on a number of fronts. The Government of Canada's position was clearly articulated by the Prime Minister in a letter to the Syrian President in July, in which the Prime Minister stated there was no Canadian government impediment to Mr. Arar's return to Canada. The Prime Minister also requested that consideration be given on humanitarian and compassionate grounds to the release of Mr. Arar and his return to Canada.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs and his department have also worked diligently to obtain Mr. Arar's release. This included continued efforts to ensure consular access for Mr. Arar through appeals to the Syrian ambassador in Canada and by Canadian officials in Damascus. As a result, we were able to secure a number of visits with Mr. Arar, and throughout Mr. Arar's detainment Foreign Affairs officials met with his wife on a number of occasions to keep her informed of our efforts.

I would now like to turn to the broader issue of the government's responsibilities with respect to disclosure of information, in particular as it relates to national security issues. Successive Canadian governments have consistently maintained that they have an obligation to protect certain fundamental freedom principles, including rights to privacy, the confidentiality of officials' advice to ministers, cabinet confidences, and sensitive national security law enforcement and international relations information. In this context, officials have a general duty as well as a specific legal responsibility to hold in confidence certain information that may come into their possession in the course of their duties. Likewise, the RCMP does not reveal information about investigations because to do so could jeopardize the integrity of ongoing investigations.

Â (1205)

In addition, public disclosure of information may violate an individual's privacy, may compromise investigations being carried out by other law enforcement and intelligence agencies, domestic and foreign, and may contravene domestic laws such as the Privacy Act, the Canada Evidence Act, and the Security of Information Act. In carrying out its mandate, the RCMP routinely shares information with its domestic and its international partners in an effort to ensure that it can effectively protect the safety and security of Canadians. Confirming that the RCMP has provided specific information to another agency in a specific investigation could compromise the integrity of that investigation and perhaps others, not to mention the privacy of the individuals involved.

Moreover, as a police force working with international law enforcement and intelligence agencies, the RCMP must be able to maintain its reputation for protecting not only ongoing investigations but also sensitive information received from other nations. The inability to remain above reproach in this respect could result in other nations withholding important information from Canada. This would seriously undermine our ability to ensure the safety and security of Canadians.

It is for these reasons that, as I have previously stated, I will not speak to specific operational police matters. To do so would be inappropriate and would not serve either the public interest or the interest of the individual in question. This is and always has been the nature of successful operational police work.

What I can confirm is that the RCMP was not involved in the decision by American authorities to arrest and deport Mr. Arar. The United States authorities acted independently and in accordance with their domestic laws. Furthermore, the RCMP did not at any time suggest to the United States authorities that Mr. Arar should be deported to Syria. Those are the facts.

Mr. Chair, that concludes my opening remarks. I'd like to thank the committee for the opportunity to appear, and I look forward to your questions.

[Translation]

The Chair: Thank you very much, Minister. We'll now continue

[English]

with a question and answer session. We'll start with Mr. Day.

Mr. Stockwell Day: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

On the question of alleged information sharing between the RCMP and U.S. intelligence, the minister has said a number of things. He said there will not be an inquiry. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest the inquiry has already begun. There may or may not be some multi-million dollar inquiry, but the inquiry has already started. Canadians want to know, and we have some questions on this.

On the question of information sharing, if there was...and let's be clear about this. The act from which I will quote, says that CSIS and the RCMP are able to share information with foreign governments and also foreign agencies. They are permitted to and have the right to do that. We need to know that if there were real security concerns shared.... We don't have to know what those were. Mr. Chairman, the minister, in saying he won't share anything about an investigation, has already shared some things. He said very specifically that there was no direct request to deport, so he has already talked about this particular investigation.

The minister chooses his words very carefully, as did the deputy commissioner. They keep using this phrase that the RCMP were not involved in the decision to deport. That's clear, but that's not the question we're asking. Was there information sharing that went on, involving the RCMP and related to concerns with Mr. Arar? There are a number of reasons that's important, not the least of which is the fact that if information was shared, there being security concerns, and the Prime Minister intervened, however softly and ineffectively with his “Dear Jean” letter, then there was a disconnect between the Prime Minister and the security services. We want to know if information was shared related to these concerns. That's why it's important.

Then we need to know, if information sharing took place or did not, why does the minister allow this perception to exist out there that there are rogue elements within the RCMP? Either he or his office is allowing that to exist. That is a taint on the RCMP and their good work, and it's a taint on the minister's office. If there are rogue elements within the RCMP, what steps is the Solicitor General taking to clean that up? If they are not, then will he make it clear to the Canadian public that there are no rogue elements within the RCMP?

Â (1210)

[Translation]

Thirdly, whether or nor Mr. Arar is guilty of any crime, one thing is clear: his basic rights have been violated. Why hasn't the federal government demanded an apology from the Syrian government?

[English]

My final question is on information sharing.

With this disconnect between the government and the security services, five countries, five of our allies, have banned the group, the Tamil Tigers. As recently as yesterday, the United States redesignated them as a banned group. This is a group that has taken responsibility for, among other things, the suicide bombing death of a prime minister of a friendly nation--India--and we still refuse to ban that group. Has CSIS or the RCMP recommended to the government that this group be banned?

The Chair: You have a few questions. You can pick out the one you want to answer first. It's your choice.

Hon. Wayne Easter: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

With respect to the last question first--and I've said this a number of times to Mr. Day in the House--the listing process is very deliberate and clear. It is ongoing, and when we list entities under the Anti-terrorism Act, it is done on the basis of criminal intelligence and security information and that only.

All I can say in that regard is that it is an ongoing process, and I have never said or confirmed or denied any of the groups we are looking at, nor will I today.

Let me be very clear: there are no rogue elements within the RCMP. I'll repeat that: there are no rogue elements within the RCMP.

With respect to your first question, in the broad sense--and I'll ask Garry to come in on this question as well--the very nature of law enforcement and security matters, especially since 9/11, is the business of gathering and exchanging information between countries, between law enforcement agencies. That's the very nature of the business in which we protect the national security of Canadians and of North Americans, and indeed of our allies around the world.

I've been very forthcoming about the progress we have been making in terms of information exchange with our neighbours to the south. We've established 12 integrated border enforcement teams where, on the ground, police forces of local jurisdiction, of the RCMP, of local jurisdiction within the United States, of the FBI, are working well together in terms of doing a better effort, and I think a greater job, of ensuring the security of North Americans.

I cannot, and it would be absolutely inappropriate for me, as Solicitor General, to get into the operational details of the RCMP.

I'll turn to Mr. Loeppky.

Â (1215)

Deputy Commissioner Garry Loeppky (Operations, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Department of the Solicitor General): Thank you very much, Minister.

Even before 9/11, during all of our investigations, whether those pertained to organized crime or to national security, the fact of the matter is that information and intelligence is really the lifeblood of the work we do. The objective, obviously, is the safety and security of Canada and for Canadians.

We share information under the appropriate protocols and legislation that exist, and we expect that reciprocal exchange or sharing will take place. We require the support of other countries to conduct our investigations, as we expect that they will do effective investigations.

It's important that the committee understand that revealing details of any ongoing investigations, whether those pertain to organized crime or national security, can compromise ongoing investigations, can compromise the privacy rights of individuals who are identified, and can really lead to a loss of credibility in terms of the foreign nations that share information with us. So we need to be aware of what's at stake here in terms of Canada's credibility, but also the credibility of our ability to undertake effective investigations in terms of national security issues.

[Translation]

The Chair: Go ahead, Ms. Lalonde.

Ms. Francine Lalonde (Mercier, BQ): Thank you.

Thank you, Minister. The critical question at this juncture—and there will be other questions later—is this: what role did the RCMP play in the deportation of Maher Arar from the United States to Syria? In the file report released by the committee supporting Maher Arar, it's clear that before leaving for and returning from Tunisia this summer, Mr. Arar was under RCMP surveillance. Even though he had worked in the United States and had had no problem obtaining the proper work visa, and even though he had travelled extensively, Mr. Arar had been detained on more than one occasion after September 11. For instance, here in Ottawa, his computer was seized when it was mistakenly believed he had purchased it in the United States.

I'll dispense with some of the details because we don't have a great deal of time, but one thing is certain. When he attempted, through a lawyer, to contact a person who had visited him at one point, he never received any response. According to the facts as presented here, he never met with the RCMP either.

Minister, you stated that the RCMP

[English]

“did not at any time suggest”.

[Translation]

You maintain that the RCMP did not at any time suggest that Mr. Maher Arar be deported. Therefore, you're not saying that the information you passed along may have led to the deportation. Moreover, your insistence that you cooperated with the United States leads one to believe that intelligence was indeed exchanged, unbeknownst to Mr. Arar. This is extremely disturbing to citizens of other origins and to those who might have in their files information of some kind that could be passed along to the United States. Therefore, some serious explanations are warranted.

First of all, let me say again that the RCMP passed along some information and when you say “it did not at any time suggest”, this confirms that information was relayed, but that no decision was reached. That's in effect what you're saying.

Â (1220)

[English]

The Chair: Mr. Minister.

Hon. Wayne Easter: No, that is not what I'm saying. As I said in my statement, and I believe Mr. Proulx said this before the committee as well, the RCMP was not involved in the decision made by the United States authorities--I want to be very clear on that--to arrest and deport Mr. Arar and did not at any time suggest to the United States authorities that Mr. Arar should be deported to Syria. That's what I said.

In response to an earlier question, I talked about sharing of information in the broad sense in terms of our ability to do our job and law enforcement in national security. I think one of the things that committee members have to be careful of as well is that we operate in Canada on a system of presumption of innocence. That's how our system operates. I cannot speak for what another country does.

As I outlined in the points earlier, I have been assured that the RCMP was not involved in the decision made by the United States authorities in this matter.

Did you want to add anything here?

D/Commr Garry Loeppky: Just to pick up on the comment with respect to contacting of individuals, I want to give a response without being case-specific.

The RCMP, in its mandate of public service, comes into contact with a wide range of people, whether those are complainants who require service, witnesses, or victims of crime. So it's important to recognize that we deal with people in a very broad range of issues, and we certainly need to be very careful when we look at the public interest of, in any case, disclosing details of any type of investigation before it reaches the process of criminal prosecution.

We investigate many things across Canada, and it's an accepted fact that we do not disclose anything that deals with the identity of anyone in that investigation until there is a public disclosure in a court process.

[Translation]

The Chair: Thank you.

Go ahead, Ms. Marleau.

[English]

Hon. Diane Marleau (Sudbury, Lib.): Gentleman, normally when something looks bad and smells bad, it is bad, and this case smells bad. One of our citizens basically had his rights denied. He was kept almost incommunicado in the U.S. for at least two weeks, then shipped to Jordan, again incommunicado—we don't know exactly what happened to him in these places—and then shipped to Syria. We want to know, if you can get to the bottom of this, whether you can reassure us that the sharing of information did not allow a flagrant abuse of one of our citizens' democratic rights. We want to know that.

I also want to know whether you feel confident enough in your department to think they will tell you the truth. I've been a minister before, and there are times when they tell you what they think you should know and not what's real. Can you be sure you will get to the bottom of this?

I know you don't want a public inquiry. We may have to have one if we want to get to the bottom of this.

Hon. Wayne Easter: As I indicated earlier, I've been assured by the Commissioner of the RCMP—and I've outlined these facts—that they were not involved in the decision made by the U.S. authorities. As the Solicitor General, I believe the RCMP has operated within its mandate appropriately and within the laws of Canada. That's basically the bottom line. I feel assured the RCMP has operated within its mandate and within the laws of Canada.

We talked earlier about the sharing of information in the broader sense, which is in the interests of national security and law enforcement, within Canada and North America and within the world. I think we've made great strides in the last number of years in improving the sharing of information.

I guess I'm a little—I wouldn't want to say miffed—shocked by your statement, in some respects, in that I really believe we're fortunate in this country to have the democratic rights and values we have as a nation. The RCMP have played a major role in Canada's becoming the kind of respected nation it has become, in terms of their values and the responsibility of the way they operate within Canada and with their connections around the world.

Â (1225)

The Chair: Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. Clark, s'il vous plait.

Right Hon. Joe Clark (Calgary Centre, PC): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Minister, I have some fairly precise questions that do not interfere in operational matters and that allow a brief response.

First, after the detention of Mr. Arar on September 26, 2002, was there ever a conversation in which any member of the RCMP was asked by any official of the United States government whether Mr. Arar was likely to be charged if he were returned to Canada and where the member of the RCMP answered that he was not likely to be charged?

Hon. Wayne Easter: That is an operational matter of which I cannot speak.

Right Hon. Joe Clark: After you have said in the House of Commons that there was absolutely no involvement—no information provided by Canada and used by the United States—what authority are you using to deny to this parliamentary committee an answer to a very simple question, the very simple question I just put?

Hon. Wayne Easter: I'm not denying information to this committee, Mr. Clark, in any shape or any form. As I said in my opening remarks, I believe for me to publicly confirm or deny what information the government holds and who we share that information with puts at risk the ability of Canadian agencies to fulfill their mandate. I am sure—

Right Hon. Joe Clark: Mr. Chair, let me ask the minister if he is denying that a conversation like that occurred.

[Translation]

The Chair: One moment please, Mr. Clark. There's no need to get excited. We'll let the minister respond and then you can put your question.

Mr. Minister.

[English]

Hon. Wayne Easter: I just want to make it clear as well, Mr. Chair, that I really don't accept the premise of the first part of Mr. Clark's question. What I said and said very clearly—and Mr. Proulx said it when he was before the committee, and I've said it in the House a number of times—is that I've been assured by the RCMP that they were not involved in the decision made by the United States authorities who arrested and deported Mr. Arar. That's the bottom line.

Right Hon. Joe Clark: I note, Mr. Chair, that—

Hon. Wayne Easter: That is the fact, Mr. Chair. Mr. Clark may not like those facts, but those are the facts.

The Chair: Mr. Clark.

Right Hon. Joe Clark: I note, Mr. Chair, that the minister is now saying he has “been assured” by the RCMP—which is a change in his mantra—and is passing the responsibility off to his officials. The mantra he has used is “the RCMP was not involved”. A simple question: is he saying that no information provided by Canada was involved in the United States' decision?

The Chair: Mr. Easter.

Hon. Wayne Easter: Mr. Chair, I indicated earlier that I will not get into operational details and the operational exchange of information.

If Mr. Loeppky wants to follow up on that question he can do so.

The Chair: Mr. Loeppky.

D/Commr Garry Loeppky: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to just reinforce—without being case-specific—the nature of the international cooperation that has to exist in any type of investigation that takes place.

Canada's reputation and ability to be effective depends on good partnerships and good relationships. On many cases we share information. I'm not being case-specific, but it's important that those types of relationships exist. We respect the parameters under which information is shared and we certainly respect other countries' parameters concerning disclosure when they share information with us. I think it's important to recognize that when you talk about any type of investigation and get into particulars, you jeopardize perhaps ongoing investigations, you jeopardize sources—those types of issues that really strike at the heart of our ability to be effective in national security and against organized crime.

Â (1230)

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Loeppky.

We'll pass now to Mr. Eggleton, please.

Hon. Art Eggleton: Well, gentlemen, we've certainly established, and you've said several times, Minister, that the RCMP was not involved in the decision-making with respect to Mr. Arar that led to his deportation by the Americans to Syria. But something was said, obviously, and I suspect you're not going to tell us specifically what was said, although I'd like to hear it. But do either or both of you know precisely or approximately what was said to the American officials?

Secondly, is Mr. Arar under investigation at this point? If something was said that led the Americans to make the decision, there must be some concern you have about Mr. Arar. So is he under investigation? I think we should at least know that.

Finally, what do you know about why the subsequent deportation led to Mr. Arar's going to Syria? You've talked about the cooperation that exists between Canada and the United States on these matters, so I assume that in some dialogue you must have been given some information. What can you tell us about those things?

The Chair: Mr. Easter.

Hon. Wayne Easter: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll turn to Garry in a moment, but I think we have to come back a little bit, Mr. Eggleton, to the efforts the Government of Canada made, that the Department of Foreign Affairs, that the Minister of Foreign Affairs, that Mr. Arar's wife, that the Prime Minister made in getting Mr. Arar back to Canada. I think we have to acknowledge those facts. There was a great effort made by Canada as a nation, from many sources, to get Mr. Arar back to Canada.

With regard to the specifics, let me put it this way. If I confirmed in this instance or any other that information was passed, it would be a de facto admission that there is a police investigation. That's what it would be; it would be a de facto admission that there is a police investigation.

An hon. member: No.

Hon. Wayne Easter: I think you would agree that it would be highly inappropriate for any Solicitor General to publicly confirm any RCMP investigations. I do not get into operations of the RCMP.

I don't know if you want to add further, Mr. Loeppky.

The Chair: Do you have any comments?

D/Commr Garry Loeppky: I would only reinforce the minister's comment that the minister is not provided with the specific operational details for a wide variety of reasons that I'm sure the committee understands. However, it is important that we reinforce that disclosing whether anyone is under investigation or not compromises that individual's privacy rights and, more importantly, the public interest of Canadians. If we were to start disclosing who might or who might not be under investigation in any type of investigation, that would be a significant issue in terms of the public's confidence in an independent criminal investigation.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

Hon. Art Eggleton: I asked about what they know from the dialogue they have with the Americans about the process of the Americans and why they deported. That doesn't infringe upon whether this guy is under investigation or not. What do you know from the Americans, who you have a lot of dialogue with, about why he was sent to Syria?

Hon. Wayne Easter: I really can't answer that question, Mr. Eggleton.

Â (1235)

Hon. Art Eggleton: Why?

Hon. Wayne Easter: Because I come back to my earlier response that the United States made their decision within their own law, within their own country, and that decision having been made, we as the Government of Canada worked strenuously to get Mr. Arar back to Canada. If you were before a U.S. Senate or Congressional committee, that question might be better placed there.

The Chair: Thank you.

We're going to pass to Mr. Robinson, but before that I will remind members that a vote is being called in the House of Commons ten minutes from now. If members agree, we'll stay here as long as the opposition stays here, and then we'll ask two of the Liberal members to quit the room, to be sure we'll be fair in the House of Commons.

Mr. Robinson, please.

Mr. Svend Robinson (Burnaby—Douglas, NDP): Thanks, Mr. Chairman.

I find it incredible that the minister and Mr. Loeppky are talking about the importance of ensuring respect for the relationship between Canada and the United States when the United States authorities have treated Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen, with total contempt. United States authorities have ignored international law, they've ignored the requests of Canadians for information, and yet we say we've got to be concerned about how the United States would respond in this area.

Mr. Minister--and I say this directly to the Solicitor General--Canadians are looking for a minister, a Solicitor General, who is going to be a watchdog for the rights of Canadian citizens like Maher Arar. Instead, what we're witnessing today is a minister who is a lapdog for the RCMP and CSIS, and that's appalling. That's appalling.

The fact of the matter is that earlier this year, in July of this year, the minister said, and I quote, “You could have a number of individuals claiming to speak on behalf of an agency and that is certainly not what we want....” Well, we know now that the recently retired head of consular affairs and foreign affairs, Gar Pardy, the top consular official, said, and I quote:

Every time we talked to the Americans, the Americans would turn around and say 'Your problem is back in Ottawa. We only acted on information that came from there.'

We know that Paul Cellucci, the American ambassador has said:

Mr. Arar is well-known to Canadian law enforcement. They understand our handling of the case. They wouldn't be happy to see him come back to Canada.

We know that the American ambassador, Paul Cellucci, said “I think you may want to check with your local people on that”, when it came to the question of whether or not the RCMP were involved.

So I want to ask this minister directly: has the minister followed up on the earlier suggestion that he himself made that there may have been rogue elements within the RCMP who furnished information to United States authorities? Has the minister followed up on that, and is he satisfied that this didn't happen?

The Chair: Mr. Minister, it's up to you, because the question is borderline, the fact that Mr. Cellucci--

Hon. Wayne Easter: Mr. Chair, I reject categorically Mr. Robinson's point with respect to this Solicitor General or probably any other.

I take my job very seriously, as does the whole of the executive council, in terms of protecting the interests of Canadians. I think we have shown that by the fact that Mr. Arar is indeed back in Canada.

I've talked earlier about our strenuous efforts to enhance public safety and national security in Canada, and we've made great efforts in that regard. I might turn to a comment that was made by a United States embassy official, Beth Poisson, who said that Mr. Arar was in the United States when he was arrested and United States officials made that decision on their own.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I asked about rogue elements. Have you determined whether there were any members of the RCMP who communicated information to the United States?

Hon. Wayne Easter: In response to an earlier question from, I believe, Mr. Day, I made it very clear, and I'll make it very clear again, Mr. Chair, that there are no rogue elements within the RCMP.

The RCMP is one of the most respected law enforcement agencies around the world--

Mr. Svend Robinson: Has there been--

Hon. Wayne Easter: --and the RCMP is indeed a credit to the nation.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Mr. Chair, let me ask this: has the minister very briefly--

The Chair: No. You asked him three times and three times you got the same answer. Four times will get you the same answer.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I have another question, Mr. Chair.

The Chair: If it's another question.

Mr. Svend Robinson: I'm trying to get an answer.

The Chair: Straight to the question, no preamble.

Â (1240)

Mr. Svend Robinson: Mr. Chair, my question is with respect to the American ambassador, Paul Cellucci. The American ambassador has said that in fact the United States got information from Canada. Has the minister questioned the American ambassador as to the basis for that statement?

I would say, Mr. Chair, and I'll be bringing a motion before the committee at the appropriate time, in view of the minister's stonewalling of this committee and his refusal to answer questions, I will suggest that we call Ambassador Paul Cellucci to ask him exactly what information was received.

I'm asking the minister, has he asked those questions of the American ambassador?

Hon. Wayne Easter: Mr. Chair, I am not stonewalling the committee. I've made it very, very clear that I do not get involved in operational matters of the RCMP. The deputy commissioner, who is with me, has made it very, very clear, as have I, the reasons why it would not be appropriate for me to get into operational matters of the RCMP, based on privacy and many other reasons.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Have you met with the ambassador?

The Chair: We'll go to Mr. Harvard.

Mr. Svend Robinson: On a point of order, Mr. Chair.

The Chair: No, it's not a point of order. Your time is over. You asked the minister and he gave you the answer. That's not a point of order, I'm very sorry.

Mr. Svend Robinson: He refused to answer the question.

The Chair: No, no, he didn't refuse. He gave you an answer that is not nice for you. You don't think it's an answer, but it's up to you.

Now we'll go to Mr. Harvard.

Mr. Stockwell Day: On a point of order, Mr. Chair. We have a vote right now...[Inaudible—Editor]. It's a fairly important vote.

The Chair: No, Mr. Day. I'm very sorry. If you want to go and vote, you can go and vote. It's up to you. But you have your question; you can leave when you have your question. If Mr. Obhrai doesn't want to ask a question, it's up to him. But you can leave. You asked a question, and I think it will be fair for the other members of the opposition as well as the Liberals to have questions also.

Mr. Harvard.

Mr. John Harvard (Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Wayne, the last time I was able to put a question to you, you were the President of the National Farmers Union. A lot of manure has gone through the spreader since then.

Now, Wayne, you say you're not going to get into operational police matters, so I will accommodate you; we won't go there. But you are not only a minister of the Crown, you're also a human being, so let me ask you this--three questions actually. Aren't you as mad as a wet hen over the behaviour of the Americans? They took a Canadian citizen, Wayne, and they sent him to a Syrian gulag. They didn't send him to a democratic neighbour. They didn't send him to Canada, where there is a reputable justice system. They sent him to a Syrian gulag. Aren't you mad at the Americans?

Number two, the man, as far as we know, is innocent. He hasn't been proven guilty of anything. He was stuck in that Syrian gulag for one year. As a human being, Wayne Easter, does that not depress you? Can you look me in the eye and say the system works? He was in the jail for a year. Yes, he's innocent. He hasn't been found guilty of anything. But the system works. Can you really say that?

Number three, I simply want to know how curious you are, as a human being.... This is a case that screams out with demands for answers. I am only wondering, when you come to this, how curious are you? Have you asked all the necessary questions? Are you satisfied in your heart and in your mind that every question has been answered and that you can say to the Canadian public, yes, I've asked all the questions and I am satisfied there has been no wrongdoing here whatsoever?

The Chair: Mr. Minister--

Hon. Wayne Easter: I think I was very clear in the beginning, John, as well as Mr. Proulx when he was before the committee. I have been assured by the Commissioner of the RCMP that the RCMP was not involved in the decision made by the United States authorities. You have heard that remark. You may have heard those remarks before.

Yes, my sympathies certainly go out to Mr. Arar and his family for what has happened to him as an individual. But as the representative of the United States indicated, it happened on United States soil and it was their decision. Following their decision, the Government of Canada took extensive measures through the Department of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, right up to the Prime Minister, to get Mr. Arar back to Canada so that he was on Canadian soil. He is now.

Mr. John Harvard: Have you said to the Americans, Wayne, that it is no way to treat a Canadian citizen? We are partners in North America. We share intelligence information. This is no way to treat a Canadian citizen.

In my opinion, we should be launching a protest with Washington, saying “don't ever do that again or those good RCMP guys, upon whom you depend, are not going to cooperate with you any more”.

Â (1245)

Hon. Wayne Easter: Maybe it's one of the recommendations that your committee can make, Mr. Chair.

The Chair: Thank you.

Now we'll go to Mr. Obhrai.

Mr. Deepak Obhrai (Calgary East, Canadian Alliance): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to go back to many of the questions.

There are two issues here. There's an issue that asks why it happened to Mr. Arar in the first place. Whatever happened? This is the question everybody is asking.

You are saying that due to personal reasons you won't.... I can tell you, without any question, that our opinion is that there was some involvement by the RCMP. From your answer, there's no doubt in anybody's mind about that.

The second question is on your handling of the case when Mr. Arar was in Syria. It has left an impression with those who hold dual nationalities, most of whom are minorities, that you have let them down. You treat people who have dual nationality, especially Canadian citizen nationality, as second-class citizens.

On your actions later on...it took one year to get Mr. Arar out of jail. You keep saying your government has done this and that, but everybody knows it was Mr. Arar's wife who took the leading role in fighting for him and in bringing this issue and the public reaction out. It was only then that the government became involved in a bigger way to get Mr. Arar out.

What assurance are you going to give that those who hold dual nationality are not treated as second-class citizens?

The Chair: Mr. Minister.

Hon. Wayne Easter: I believe, Mr. Chair, that others who were before the committee made it very clear.

Mr. Deepak Obhrai: I made it very clear too.

Hon. Wayne Easter: People who hold dual citizenship are not treated as second-class citizens within Canada. I know the committee does not like me to repeat the facts, so this time I will not, Mr. Chair, but the facts are the facts.

Right Hon. Joe Clark: They're not the facts. They're not the whole truth.

Hon. Wayne Easter: They are the facts, Mr. Clark.

When a representative from Foreign Affairs, Mr. Sigurdson, was before the committee, he said

I can tell you we have 3,000 prisoners out there in the world. In the U.S., I've mentioned before, we have the most--2,244.

I think the government makes every effort—we have the Transfer of Offenders Act in some cases—to ensure that Canadian citizens' interests are in fact protected. We make the greatest effort to ensure that those individuals do come back home. That's what happened in this case.

I can't help it if you don't agree with the facts I've stated to you.

Mr. Deepak Obhrai: I don't.

The Chair: We will go to Ms. Carroll.

Ms. Aileen Carroll (Barrie—Simcoe—Bradford, Lib.): Actually, Mr. Chair, the questions I would have directed to the minister and the deputy commissioner, on the sharing of information on an everyday basis, have both been pretty much addressed.

I will leave it go to Mr. Cotler.

The Chair: Mr. Cotler.

Mr. Irwin Cotler (Mount Royal, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

My question to the minister is as follows. Now that Maher Arar has happily been returned to Canada, there are two fundamental questions that remain unanswered. They have been the two core questions that have underpinned the rather Kafkaesque nature of this case. The first has been on the role of the U.S. authorities in the deportation of Mr. Arar to Syria. The second is on the accountability of Canadian security agencies in a democracy.

As to the first point, it's clear that the United States breached its international obligations both to Canada and to Maher Arar under the Vienna Convention: one, by not advising Canada that they were holding a Canadian citizen; and two, by not advising that Canadian citizens have consular rights under the treaty. Equally, the United States breached its own domestic law and policy in two respects: one, by deporting him to a country that the United States says is a state sponsor of terrorism; and two, deporting him to a country where the United States states one cannot get a fair trial.

A question arises. The U.S. has appeared to justify Maher Arar's deportation to Syria, in breach, as I said, of its international obligations and domestic policy, on the basis of information that has been received from the Canadian authorities. Specifically, the U.S. Secretary of State, Colin Powell, so advised our foreign affairs minister, Bill Graham. Why would the U.S. Secretary of State make such an allegation if it were not true? What justification, if any, have the American authorities given, other than the fact that they received information from Canadian security forces for breaching their own domestic law, as well as breaching their international law? Are you aware of any other reason that they have given as to why they engaged in this conduct?

Â (1250)

The Chair: Mr. Minister.

Hon. Wayne Easter: Thank you, Mr. Chair and Mr. Cotler.

There have been several statements by several people from the United States, some of them along the lines that Canadian law enforcement authorities were not involved in the decision to remove Mr. Arar from Canada. I believe Ambassador Cellucci at some point said that as well.

I'm not aware of the reasons why the United States made the decision. They made their decision through their own laws. I don't agree with their decision, and we have made that clear through other ministers in the Government of Canada.

The Chair: Thank you.

Monsieur Bergeron.

[Translation]

Mr. Stéphane Bergeron: Mr. Chairman, the disturbing aspect of this whole story is that more and more, we're getting the impression that information is only flowing in one direction. We're conveying information to the US, but when it's time for them to share information with Canada, it's not as simple.

Like my colleague, the Member for Mercier, and like others seated at this table, it troubles me to hear the Solicitor General and the Commissioner tell the committee that not only can they not disclose the nature of the information they shared with the US, they cannot even tell us if any information was exchanged in the first place.

And why is that? What possible reason could there be? They claim that any future investigation might be jeopardized by such a disclosure. Mr. Loeppky even went so far as to say that such an admission could damage the RCMP's credibility. Has anyone ever expressed any concern about Mr. Arar's credibility? Has anyone ever bothered to ask him how he feels?

Mr. Loeppky even strained our credulity when he argued that authorities were only trying to protect Mr. Arar's constitutional rights. Perhaps Mr. Arar would like to know first and foremost if he is being accused of anything. Right now, the fact that Canadian authorities are remaining tight-lipped suggests that this individual may have been linked, either directly or indirectly, with a terrorist organization. If that's the case, then the government must reveal if it shared any information, because everything points to that having happened and the silence of Canadian authorities tends to confirm this. As recently as September 11 last, a delegation met with US embassy officials who confirmed that they accepted full responsibility for the arrest and deportation of Maher Arar. However, they admitted in their own defence that they had acted on information conveyed to them by Canada.

Why do you persist then in saying that no information was shared? Why the reluctance to admit that Maher Arar was under investigation? By refusing to make such an admission, you're acknowledging that this individual was indeed under investigation and you're confirming every suspicion that people might harbour against him. Is anyone in your department concerned about the credibility of Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen?

The Chair: Mr. Minister.

[English]

Hon. Wayne Easter: I think, Mr. Chair, I've made it clear that it would be absolutely inappropriate for any Solicitor General to publicly confirm any RCMP investigation. I've spoken on it and the statements I made earlier are on the record. If I confirmed in this instance or any other instance that information was passed, that would be a de facto admission that there is a police investigation, and it would be inappropriate for me to do so.

I think Mr. Loeppky had some remarks he wanted to make on this point and on one previous question as well.

Â (1255)

The Chair: Mr. Loeppky, please.

D/Commr Garry Loeppky: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have just a couple of points. Following 9/11...I just wanted to clarify that when we talk generally about information exchange and working together with international organizations, it is certainly not a one-way street. We receive a tremendous amount of information, and there's an expectation we will respect the confidentiality of it, but that we will also react to that and do our due diligence in terms of responding to the broader community's needs, focusing on public safety.

When I spoke a few minutes ago about constitutional rights, what I was saying was that we need to respect the rights of an individual to be presumed innocent. If we were to start talking publicly about anyone in our communities who is a suspect, that would really be an infringement of their rights and it would be inappropriate.

I wanted to pick up on the comment from just a couple of minutes ago about essentially a two-tier approach to citizens of our country. I want to assure this committee that nothing is more important to the organization, to the RCMP, than that whole issue, the perception of those communities that we're not sensitive to various ethnic communities.

At the most recent chiefs of police conference the whole theme was “changing faces facing change”, and it focused on the need for the law enforcement community to be very vigilant about the aspects of racial profiling and about the concerns within communities in Canada that the police, the law enforcement community, are not sensitive. I want to assure the community that this is a priority for us and that we address it through a variety of mechanisms, including our recruiting processes and our approaches in dealings with communities.

Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you.

Now we'll finish with one brief question each from Madam Redman and Mr. Martin.

Madam Redman.

Mrs. Karen Redman: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I really appreciate you both coming. Clearly, this is very timely because of the case of Mr. Arar, but you were actually scheduled to come because we were looking at several cases.

Mr. Loeppky, you've actually touched on the point I wanted to make, which is that in the post-9/11 world these incidents will happen time and time again. I'm wondering if you can comment with a broader sort of brush on what we're doing to ensure the rights and freedoms Canadians enjoy in that milieu of international law, because clearly there's a new reality as we work toward anti-terrorism.

Also, is there anything from Minister Easter's point of view that would be proactive and constructive that this committee could do in addition to studying countries of the Muslim world, anything that would help further the security of Canadians in the international forum?

The Chair: Thank you, Mrs. Redman.

We'll go to Mr. Martin for his question. Please, Mr. Martin.

Mr. Keith Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, Canadian Alliance): Thank you both for being here.

We understand completely, Minister, the balance you have to strike, but the case of Mr. Arar is one that has obviously gone terribly and horribly wrong. Therefore, my question is very simple. Mr. Arar's rights were violated in the United States; that's a fact. My question is, why wasn't Mr. Arar deported to Canada instead of to Syria?

The Chair: Could you answer Mrs. Redman's question first?

Hon. Wayne Easter: I'll turn Mrs. Redman's question over to Mr. Loeppky and then I'll deal with Keith's.

The Chair: Mr. Loeppky, please.

D/Commr Garry Loeppky: Immediately following 9/11 we knew that there would be concern in the community, especially with additional legislation that was passed in the form of Bill C-36. Although there are various types of mechanisms in there for accounting for and reporting on how we use that legislation, we realize there's a broader education required.

We have met with a number of those communities, with the Muslim community in Ontario and in a variety of other places where we've been proactive in terms of meeting with the communities and trying to address their concerns. I know, for example, the commissioner met with a community of about 500 people in Toronto and heard their concerns; there was a perception that they were being targeted. We recognize it's an ongoing challenge for us to be out there and talking to those communities.

Second, we also recognize that to provide effective policing services, whether it's in the Muslim community or in the oriental community in Richmond, British Columbia, our organization needs to reflect the faces of the communities we're providing service for. So we've taken some steps to be more proactive in ensuring that our organization reflects the faces of those we actually provide service to.

· (1300)

The Chair: Mr. Minister, there's Mr. Martin's question.

Hon. Wayne Easter: We have indeed, Mr. Martin, tried to find the balance, and I believe we have. There is no question, as Garry has indicated, that the world has in fact changed since September 11.

But we have, I think, made great strides forward in working cooperatively with others around the world by, as I mentioned earlier, establishing 12 IBETs. There will be two more coming as a result of our relationship with the United States in terms of sharing intelligence and security information and trying to ensure public safety and national security within Canada.

I seriously believe there's been an unjustifiable attack on the RCMP on this issue.

Mr. Keith Martin: The question was, why was Mr. Arar not deported to Canada instead of Syria?

Hon. Wayne Easter: I think specifically on that question, that's what the committee should be dealing with, but that's not due to actions by Canadian authorities. The decision was made, as has been stated several times by others--

Mr. Keith Martin: I was just trying to find out why he was deported.

Hon. Wayne Easter: --by Americans on American soil.

We as the Government of Canada did everything within our power to get Mr. Arar back to Canada. He is now back in Canada, and we're very pleased that he is in fact back with us now.

The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Minister. Merci beaucoup.

Mr. Robinson.

Mr. Svend Robinson: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, I do want to give notice of the following motion. I understand it can't be moved at this meeting, but I do want to give notice. Since we can't get answers from the Solicitor General, maybe we can try to get answers from the United States ambassador.

I would move that this committee call as a witness the United States ambassador to Canada, Paul Cellucci, with respect to the treatment of Canadian citizen Maher Arar by United States authorities and with respect to information that may have been communicated to United States authorities by members of the RCMP or CSIS concerning Maher Arar. I'm giving notice of that motion, Mr. Chair.

The Chair: You're giving notice, and Ms. McDonough will bring this motion forward at another meeting. That's fine.

Ms. Aileen Carroll: I was just going to ask, has there been a change? Is Ms. McDonough no longer a member of our committee?

The Chair: No. Ms. McDonough is a full member. Mr. Robinson is replacing Ms. McDonough this morning.

Ms. Aileen Carroll: It's a shame. She's done a lot of work on this case.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Clark.

Right Hon. Joe Clark: Mr. Chair, the Solicitor General has gone, but I wonder if we could ask him to provide the committee with a very clear statement of the legislative authority by which he withholds from Parliament information as to whether a representation by a Canadian official led to the false imprisonment and possibly the torture of a Canadian citizen.

The Chair: Mr. Clark, the clerk took down part of your question and we'll request an answer from the department.

Merci beaucoup. The meeting is adjourned.