Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Foreign Affairs
Issue 21 - Evidence - November 23 meeting
OTTAWA, Wednesday, November 23, 2005
The Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs, to which was referred Bill C-25, governing the operation of remote sensing space systems, met this day at 4:26 p.m. to give consideration to the bill.
Senator Peter A. Stollery (Chairman) in the chair.
[English]
The Chairman: Honourable senators, I call the meeting to order.
Yesterday, as everyone will recall, after hearing from the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the committee agreed to move into clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-25, governing the operation of remote sensing space systems. It was then agreed that the title and clause 1 be postponed, after which a point of order on committee business was raised.
We are here to today to pursue the clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-25. With the consent of the members of this committee, we could do so in an orderly fashion, considering each clause individually in the appropriate order.
I shall ask the questions: Shall clause 2 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 3 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 4 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 5 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 6 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 7 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 8 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 9 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 10 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 11 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 12 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 13 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 14 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 15 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 16 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 17 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 18 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 19 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 20 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 21 carry?
Senator Carney: I wish to move the amendment that we discussed yesterday, which I believe is being seconded by Senator Downe.
The purpose of the amendment is to restrict the delegation of statutory powers to three ministers or to any privy councillor provided for under the proposed legislation. It is to restrict it to ministers, not to bureaucrats.
We have been informed by legal counsel that we could do this by amending Bill C-25 at clause 21(1)(a), on page 17, by replacing lines 29 to 41 with the following — ``The Minister of National Defence and the Solicitor General of Canada may not delegate the exercise of any of their powers under this act'' — and by deleting lines 1 to 20 on page 18 of the bill.
The Chairman: Copies are being made right now.
Senator Carney: My understanding was that the clerk had a copy of the amendment in French and English and that, therefore, he would make copies of the amendment; however, as it turned out, apparently he had not received the copies before the committee meeting.
The Chairman: I suspect we are better to wait until the copies are here. It will only be a few minutes. Do you want to proceed?
Senator Carney: I do not mind if you want to proceed.
Senator Corbin: You said we would proceed in order, so what is the order?
The Chairman: I did say that.
Senator Di Nino: After we deal with clause 21, you can bundle the remaining clauses; there will not be any opposition.
Is there any other business before the committee today?
The Chairman: No, Senator Di Nino. I believe I have consulted with most members of the committee about our Africa report. We have all seen the five-pager. The collective decision, as I have been able to determine it, is that we will put the report off until the next Parliament, at which time the committee will, I hope, re-form. That would be the most sensible way to proceed, it seems to me. Since we have a strong report, we do not want it lost in the snowstorm of papers over the next little while.
We now have copies of the amendment.
Senator De Bané: Given that the parliamentary secretary is here, can he give us his arguments for or against?
The Chairman: We went through all of that yesterday with the parliamentary secretary and the witnesses; we do not want to interrupt clause by clause, where I think the committee has agreed we are at.
Senator Corbin: I hate to disagree with you, but we asked the officials to remain in the event we needed them in the clause-by-clause study.
Perhaps we could reinterpret Senator De Bané's question in the following terms: Do the officials have anything new to add to what was said yesterday?
The Chairman: I could ask the parliamentary secretary to come to the table and tell us if he has anything new to add.
Senator Downe: Did anything happen overnight?
Hon. Dan McTeague, P.C., M.P., Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: I thanked the committee yesterday for this. Some of the material and questions were very good ones, and allowed some time.
Senator, I did discuss, and I alluded to several senators here, the rule regarding delegation of all statutes, or in most statutes, that this is normal practice and is found under section 24 of the Interpretation Act. I raised this with you personally, but I also raised it more referentially yesterday.
In Bill C-25, the normal rules of delegation of authority have been tightened up with respect to two extraordinary powers. A minister's power to issue a shutter control order cannot be delegated to anyone. A minister's power to issue a priority access order can only be delegated to the deputy ministers and agency heads, as set out in section 21.
Thus, Bill C-25 was crafted to limit the delegation of these powers that could have generated an adverse impact on the licensee's operations. Shutter control means the interruption of the satellite's operation over a limited geographical region for a limited period of time. Shutter control can be seen to be rather a drastic measure. For this reason, the bill confined these powers to the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and National Defence alone.
The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. McTeague.
Honourable senators, each of you now has the amendment; hence, it would be appropriate if we proceeded.
All those in favour of the amendment, please raise their hands?
All those opposed to the amendment, please raise their hands?
I declare the amendment lost.
Shall clause 21 carry without the amendment?
Senator Andreychuk: I did not interrupt before the vote, but normal practise and our rules provide that we can bring officials back if we wish to ask them questions. It is not that they wish to make presentations to us. The way this was worded is a little difficult, and I hope it is not a precedent for the future.
The Chairman: I do not think in the committee's proceedings of yesterday that any precedent has been established.
Senator Andreychuk: You have put that on the record. Thank you.
The Chairman: It was a decision of the committee yesterday to ask the people to attend here and sit at the back of the room in case there were questions.
Senator Andreychuk: That is the normal practice, but not to bring them to the table for their input. They answer our questions in clause by clause. That was the point. We did not have a question to them, so we did not need them. It is just for precedence, and you have said it is not a precedent. That is on the record.
The Chairman: Thank you, Senator Andreychuk.
I think clause 21 has carried. Am I correct?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
An Hon. Senator: On division.
Senator Di Nino: On division.
The Chairman: Shall clauses 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Carney: Mr. Chair, you said yesterday that you would not bunch the clauses, that your preference was to do clause by clause.
The Chairman: That is my preference.
Senator Carney: Why did you change your preference?
The Chairman: Someone asked me to.
Senator Di Nino: I suggested that the chairman bunch them.
The Chairman: Shall clause 31 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 32 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 33 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 34 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 35 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 36 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 37 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 38 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 39 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 40 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 41 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 42 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 43 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 44 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 45 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 45.1 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 46 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 47 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clause 1 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall the title carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall the bill, as not amended, carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Andreychuk: On division.
The Chairman: Shall I report the bill to the Senate?
I know yesterday that we agreed on observations, and I do not think any of us have a difficulty with that. Senator Carney, that is accepted.
Shall I report the bill, with observations?
Senator Di Nino: Agreed.
The Chairman: What are the observations, Senator Carney?
Senator Carney: One of the observations was dealing with the statutory powers, that it was to be restricted to ministers.
The Chairman: They are suggestions.
Senator Carney: Now it is being given to the Commissioner of the RCMP. There is one person here — that senator has left — may wish to deal with that.
I wanted to deal with the observation that it is not the purpose of the proposed act to expropriate private property through the utilization of the measures that state that no compensation will be paid for use of the satellite. I am in the hands of the clerk on this, since I did not know until you opened it up that you would be doing observations.
My point is that this is a private-sector satellite. If the Government of Canada — it is draconian to my mind — should second the use of the satellite it should do so with compensation.
The Chairman: Senator Carney, as I said yesterday, I have no difficulty with that.
The difficulty, though, is that we do not have anything in front of us. We need something that all the members of the committee can see because it is a committee recommendation. It is not that we disagree; it is that we do not have anything to agree with.
Senator Di Nino: I was under the impression that notes were being taken yesterday for the purpose of having something in front of us. If they were not taken, I am surprised. If they were taken, then they should be referred to and something can be drafted for our review this evening or tomorrow morning, for the steering committee.
The Chairman: Would you like to put it to the steering committee?
Senator Corbin: On the basis of the contents of yesterday's transcript.
The Chairman: Would that be satisfactory?
Senator Robichaud: I understood that, when the question was put to witnesses, the answer was that there could be payments made. The provision is there, and I cannot see any minister wanting to do otherwise.
Senator Carney: If no minister wished to do otherwise, then the proposed legislation should not be worded the way it is.
We gave this clause-by-clause consideration on the understanding that it is not the purpose of the proposed act to second the use of the satellite from private-sector owners without appropriate compensation. I do not think you need anything more than that.
We were told that it was not the purpose of Bill C-25 to second the use of this private-sector satellite without appropriate compensation. When I raised this question, the witnesses said that there were all these other measures, but their could, and their might be and they are subject to, et cetera. I am saying that the observation should be that, if this is a private-sector satellite — RADARSAT-2 and others — the government cannot walk in, second it and say we are not paying you. Bill C-25 specifically uses the phrase ``financial losses.''
The Chairman: The difficulty here is that we do not have anything in front of us.
Senator Carney: I just stated the words to you.
What I have suggested is that, with regard to clause 22, where it states, in part, that ``no person is entitled to financial compensation from Her Majesty in Right of Canada for any financial losses resulting from any of the following actions taken in good faith'' — and then it lists the actions — our observation should be that it is not the purpose of this proposed legislation to second or expropriate the use of this private-sector satellite without appropriate compensation. I do not think we need more wording than that.
Has the clerk written down what I have said? I can say it a third time, if you wish. Can we ensure that this is actually recorded? Yesterday, we thought it was being recorded.
I would like to say, again, that the observation, which regards clause 22, is that we have been advised by officials that it is not the purpose of this proposed legislation to second or expropriate — whichever term you prefer — the use of this satellite without appropriate compensation.
Senator Corbin: I do not think it is the job of the researcher of the committee to act as a recording clerk.
Senator Carney, surely you should present us with a worded text.
The Chairman: Senator Carney, you are looking at a committee that is prepared to accept an observation, perhaps with some exceptions. I might say that this discussion took place before we had the vote on clause 21.
Senator Carney: We expected it would carry.
The Chairman: You have put me on the spot, Senator Carney, because I do not have anything to present to my colleagues — and I include my Conservative colleagues. I do not have anything here.
I would be delighted if someone would like to give me a way out of this.
Senator Andreychuk: Other committees do not ask for written submissions on observations. It is usually the clerk or the researcher who drafts it.
It seems to me that it would be fair if we were to say that the committee had some unease with respect to clause 22 and that we expressed concern that it could be utilized as a way of circumventing compensation.
Senator Carney: With respect, that is not my observation. My observation is that officials advised us that it is not the purpose of the proposed legislation to second or expropriate the satellite without appropriate compensation. It is not circumventing — that is a separate issue.
I am grateful for your point, however, Senator Andreychuk, that it is not necessarily the case that we have to have a written text when it comes out of dialogue involved in committee. I have written it down. If you wish, we can adjourn the committee until it is written down, translated and produced.
The Chairman: Maybe the answer is to suspend our meeting for 10 minutes, until five o'clock, and give you a chance, Senator Carney, to sort this out and give it to us. I do not have anything to work from.
Senator Corbin: That would be a wise move; it is reasonable and logical. If the committee is making an observation, I would like to see it before I give it approval.
The Chairman: Let us suspend until five o'clock, to give our scribes and Senator Carney time to put something together, thereby providing us all with a copy.
The committee suspended.
The committee resumed.
The Chairman: Honourable senators, I am calling the committee back to order. We now have the observations in both official languages. You should all have a copy.
I think there is a word missing here; we will put it in right now. It should read that it ``was'' — not ``is'' — ``that it was not the purpose.''
Someone should give a copy of this to the officials, so they know what we said. Let us be sure that a copy of this is given to the parliamentary secretary?
I will read it in English:
The committee was advised by officials that it was not the purpose of clause 22 of the act to second the use of a private-sector satellite such as RADARSAT-2 without appropriate compensation.
Is that right?
Senator Di Nino: One of the officials said that it was not the intent of the —
The Chairman: Would an official like to come to the table?
Bruce Mann, Senior Counsel, Justice Legal Services Division, Foreign Affairs and International Trade: I am looking at the statement that has been circulated. I do not think this is exactly what any of us said yesterday, but I for one would agree with it — that it is not the purpose of clause 22 to second the use of a private-sector satellite without appropriate compensation. I think that is a fair statement.
The Chairman: Is that agreeable to the members of the committee? I shall repeat the wording.
The committee was advised by officials that it was not the purpose of clause 22 of the act to second the use of a private-sector satellite such as RADARSAT-2 without appropriate compensation.
Mr. Mann, you have said that, although it is not what any of you said yesterday, you would have no difficulty with that. Is that right, Mr. Mann?
Mr. Mann: That is correct.
Senator Robichaud: It was said by the officials that they did not say that, but they do not have problems with that.
Senator Di Nino: We were just advised by the officials now. If not before, we were just advised 12 seconds ago by Mr. Mann, who said this is correct. He is an official.
Senator Robichaud: He did not say it was correct; he said he had no problems with it. That is different.
The Chairman: Shall I report the bill to the Senate with the observation?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
An Hon. Senator: On division.
The Chairman: On division.
[Translation]
Senator De Bané: I would like to follow up on a comment made by the clerk, Mr. François Michaud. He expressed some dissatisfaction with the French translation. I would like the text to be reviewed by a translator.
The Chairman: Thank you very much, Senator De Bané.
[English]
I shall now adjourn the committee, but it will not be to the call of the chair, because there are events that will take place before we see each other again, I believe.
The committee adjourned.