Proceedings of the Special Senate Committee on the
Anti-terrorism Act
Issue 1 - Evidence - Meeting of May 8, 2006
OTTAWA, Monday, May 8, 2006
The Special Senate Committee on the Anti-terrorism Act met this day at 6:03 p.m., pursuant to rule 88 of the Rules of the Senate, to organize the activities of the committee.
[English]
Adam Thompson, Clerk of the Committee: Honourable senators, as Clerk of the Special Senate Committee on Anti- terrorism, it is my duty to preside over the election of the chair of the committee.
Senator Stratton: I nominate Senator Smith as chair of the committee.
Mr. Thompson: Are there any other nominations? Seeing none, it is moved by the Honourable Senator Stratton that the Honourable Senator Smith do take the chair of this committee. Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Mr. Thompson: Carried.
I invite Senator Smith to take the chair.
Senator David P. Smith (Chairman) in the chair.
The Chairman: Thank you. I will proceed to the next item on the agenda, which is the election of the deputy chair.
Senator Day: I nominate Senator Nolin as deputy chair of the committee.
The Chairman: Are there other nominations? Seeing none, it was moved by the Honourable Senator Day that the Honourable Senator Nolin be deputy chair of this committee. All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried unanimously.
We will move to item number 3, dealing with the subcommittee on agenda and procedure. Note the phrase ``to be designated after the usual consultation...'' It might be appropriate for that to occur between now and the next meeting. Are there further thoughts on that? Is it agreed?
Senator Joyal: I so move.
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: We have not had an opportunity to have the usual consultation. All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
We are now at item number 4, a motion to print the committee's proceedings.
Senator Joyal: I so move.
The Chairman: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Item number 5 is standard wording for authorization to hold meetings.
Senator Stratton: I so move.
The Chairman: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Item number 6 concerns the financial report. There is a draft motion before us.
Senator Jaffer: I so move.
The Chairman: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Item number 7 has to do with research staff. Again, the standard wording is before you.
Senator Joyal: I so move.
The Chairman: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Senator Day: Do we know if the same research staff will be with us as during the previous session?
The Chairman: I will ask the clerk to speak to that.
Mr. Thompson: There will be 50 per cent the same staff.
The Chairman: I see that.
Mr. Thompson: Jennifer Wispinski is returning and Benjamin Dolan has taken a position at the Department of Justice. Joining us is Wade Riordan Raaflaub, from the Library of Parliament, who will assist Ms. Wispinski.
Senator Day: Perhaps, Mr. Chairman, you could send a note to our departing researcher to thank him for his efforts.
The Chairman: We will take that as agreed upon.
We move now to item number 8, on funds and accounts, with standard wording.
Senator Joyal: I so move.
The Chairman: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Item number 9 concerns travel.
Senator Munson: I so move.
The Chairman: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
The Chairman: Item number 10 is, again, a standard motion on designation of members travelling.
Senator Zimmer: I so move.
The Chairman: All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Item number 11 deals with witness expenses.
Senator Stratton: I so move.
The Chairman: All in favour? Carried.
Item number 12 is electronic media coverage. Agreed, Senator Munson? Okay. Carried.
Time slot for regular meetings. We might have a little discussion on this, because I know that in the past, when we have had a lot of witnesses — of course, it is not clear whether we will get into witnesses — it is pretty difficult to hold meetings in the morning, particularly for those coming from the West. I think the standard time is 2 p.m.
Senator Stratton, what are your thoughts on this?
Senator Stratton: We have one member, Senator Andreychuk, who will be coming from Regina.
The Chairman: As I understand it, we have to be out of this room by 3:30 p.m.
Senator Stratton: I would suggest 4 p.m. for that reason, unless we have a long list. I know she will come in the night before if we do.
Mr. Thompson: If I could just point out that at 4 p.m. on Mondays the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights meets, so Senator Andreychuk will have that conflict.
Senator Stratton: Two o'clock it is.
The Chairman: At six o'clock you have Defence, do you not?
Mr. Thompson: They meet in the evenings.
Senator Jaffer: If it is two o'clock, it means people from the West have to come the night before. We have been doing that for a year. It is possible to do it later.
Senator Stratton: We could do it at 6 p.m.
Senator Jaffer: If that is possible, I would appreciate it. Then when we have witnesses, we can change it.
The Chairman: I think we should have the steering committee look into this. I do not think we need to decide until we have some consensus on whether or not we will have more witnesses. We had a fairly full parade of witnesses.
Senator Stratton, we might have some discussion as to whether the two new ministers would like to come and whether members of the committee would like to hear them. I think it would be only fair to give them a reasonable period of time. I do not think we will be in a position to meet with witnesses next week, but in the meantime, the steering committee could be meeting. I think it would be helpful, Senator Stratton, if some thought was given to this and we got a response on that.
Senator Jaffer: I am a little confused, because we brought it up here and now we are saying the steering committee will look at it. I think that this is something we should look at, because the steering committee is looking at rules and procedures.
The Chairman: We are still on what the regular time slot will be at the moment.
Senator Jaffer: Yes. I am saying if we are intending to meet with witnesses, then that is fine. I will come the night before, because it mostly just affects me. If we are not meeting with witnesses, then I would like to have a meeting at 6 o'clock.
The Chairman: The other thing we will have to look into is what meeting rooms are available. As I understand it, we have to be out of this room at 3:30 p.m. if we plan to meet here. Perhaps the clerk could clarify that for us.
Mr. Thompson: The Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights normally meets in this room at 4 p.m. They are normally done by six o'clock, so we could meet following them. Scheduling will be dependent on whether or not we are having witnesses. If we are not having witnesses and are just having an in-camera discussion, we do not need to meet in this room because we do not require the video facilities that are available here. Therefore, we could then use one of the other rooms that might be available.
Senator Joyal: Is room 257 not where Human Rights usually met? When I attended the meetings of Human Rights, it was in 257 East Block.
Mr. Thompson: I believe that is their standard room assignment, but when they meet with witnesses they usually televise the proceedings, which puts them in this room.
Senator Joyal: Room 257 could offer television. We had TV there certainly at meetings on various bills and with witnesses. I remember very well when we had witnesses from Britain, we had —
Mr. Thompson: My understanding is that room 257, while it is still available for video conferencing, is no longer available for televising. The infrastructure has not been upgraded. The only rooms that can handle televising are 160S, and rooms 2 and 9 in the Victoria Building. I will look into that.
The Chairman: We can have the clerk canvas that so that when the steering committee meets, we can discuss the options.
Senator Joyal: That room was the summit room at that time, as I understood. There was TV there, so I do not know what broke down since then.
The Chairman: We are not under quite the pressure we were, in that when this motion was first on the Order Paper, it was for a date before we rose in the summer. I spoke with Senator Comeau and said I thought that should carry over until we come back so we will have the summer to write whatever it is we plan to write, and that was agreed to. We will need to have some discussion as to whether or not we want to reopen certain areas and have more witnesses or whether we have pretty well heard from the logical ones.
There is the other issue, on which we will get some feedback from Senator Stratton, with regard to the ministers, which would be Vic Toews and Stockwell Day. They would be the two relevant ones.
Senator Joyal: I have another item to raise.
The Chairman: First, regarding the time slot, at the next meeting, which will be at the call of the chair after the steering committee has met, I think we can take it as a given it will not be next week because we will not know any of these things.
Senator Day: The point was made earlier by Senator Stratton that Senator Andreychuk is on this committee, but she is not listed in this group. Was that an oversight?
Senator Stratton: I am substituting for her today.
Senator Day: This list is partially one of substitutes; is that right? Senator Munson is not on here.
Mr. Thompson: I received Senator Munson's membership change just prior to the meeting.
Senator Day: Senator Andreychuk, who was on this committee previously, continues as a member.
Mr. Thompson: Yes.
The Chairman: We are agreed that the steering committee will review this, try to identify the options, and when we next meet, we will try to finalize the regular meeting slot at that point.
Senator Joyal, under other business.
Senator Joyal: When you were suggesting the possibility that we could have the two new ministers testify, I wanted to add that since we last met, I have been trying to remember what of substance has happened in terms of security involving Canada that we might want to revisit. The last memory I have, which is short, is that I believe two or three weeks ago the U.S. State Department released its annual review of security initiatives and they specifically mentioned Canada.
I wonder if our research staff could go through the documentation that was released by the State Department at that time and give us an update. There was a specific reference to Canada and some criticism. I think there was another document released two or three days later, if my memory serves me well, with the American point of view in terms of security in Canada.
If we could get that, I would like to review it — and maybe the steering committee will review whether we need to hear more views on that specific point. That ties into my point that we should perhaps revisit what has happened in terms of security where Canada might be involved. We might want to either consider hearing other witnesses, other views, or canvas those issues, because we cannot ignore what has happened in the four months since we had our last meeting.
The Chairman: I think that is a good suggestion. Could we have a motion that the analysts look at that and prepare a report for members of the committee? It could be circulated to the members when it is available. We do not have to wait until the next meeting.
Senator Day: Just to confirm your point, Mr. Chairman, since this report will be going to a new government, I think it is critical that we meet with the ministers responsible. We will have to do that.
The Chairman: Well, it seems fairly logical. I think it is reasonable that Senator Stratton just explore that a little.
Senator Joyal: On that very point, Mr. Chairman, could you remind us again of the target date for the conclusion of our work?
The Chairman: I think it is October 5. We got an extension. We are to table the report by October 5, so that is a couple of weeks after the Senate resumes. We may very well have to have one in the summer, but hopefully not.
Senator Joyal: Very good. Thank you.
Senator Jaffer: I also have a request. From what I read, the Air India inquiries are looking at the terrorist trials and the idea of having three judges. I would like to know exactly what the terms of reference are. I do not think we necessarily need witnesses, but it would be good to know because that is something we have been looking at. Once we have seen the terms of reference, we can decide whether we need to do more work on that side.
The Chairman: I think we are agreed that we will ask the analyst to obtain that and again circulate a précis of it to us as committee members. That will be part of their mandate, yes.
Agreed?
Any other items of business that members wish to raise?
Senator Day: Do you know where the House of Commons is with respect to their parallel work?
The Chairman: I was discussing this with the clerk today; what is your latest update?
Mr. Thompson: I think Ms. Wispinski might be in a better position to answer. I understand that the House has essentially taken the same steps as the Senate. They have re-designated a committee to continue the examination. I am not sure what their deadline is.
Jennifer Wispinski, Researcher, Library of Parliament: My understanding is that their deadline to report is June 23. That was the original motion passed in the House. I have not heard that there has been an extension.
I do not believe that they have done any work on that or that the subcommittee that was looking at it has met, but that is my understanding.
Senator Joyal: Is the committee composed of the same members or has it changed?
Ms Wispinski: My understanding is there are some new members, but I am not sure how many versus continuing members.
The Chairman: We would ask you to get the list of both the previous membership and the current membership and then we could circulate that to our committee members just for background information.
Agreed?
Senator Joyal: If I remember well, the terms of reference that we have received from the Senate reinstate all the testimony and the documentation that was processed through the former committee in the previous Parliament.
That is right? Good.
The Chairman: We do not need a motion for that.
Senator Joyal: I just want to be sure that that established the basis of reference of this committee.
The Chairman: Yes. It is good to clarify that.
Senator Joyal: Thank you.
The Chairman: Does any senator have any other items under ``other business''?
Senator Day: We have the first report.
The Chairman: Yes, that was adopted under motion 6.
Senator Stratton: One question I would like to ask: What is the $90,000 for?
Mr. Thompson: That was our trips to London and Washington.
Senator Stratton: Thank you. I thought you were planning to go to Timbuktu or something.
The Chairman: That is the past. We will stand adjourned until the call of the chair. I think you can take it as a given that we will not be in a position to meet —
Senator Joyal: I asked that question of Senator Fairbairn two or three weeks ago. When we met last time we had a draft report, if I remember, that was circulated among the members. Did we give that back to the clerk or did we keep it in our personal files?
Mr. Thompson: They were not collected by my office.
Senator Joyal: They were not collected. In other words, we have a copy of the draft report that was circulated at that time in our files.
Mr. Thompson: Yes.
The Chairman: If members cannot locate their copies, they can contact the clerk.
Senator Joyal: I think it would be helpful for us to read it again and try to re-familiarize ourselves with the major outlines.
The committee adjourned.