Proceedings of the Special Senate Committee on
Anti-terrorism
Issue 1 - Evidence - Meeting of May 13, 2010
OTTAWA, Thursday, May 13, 2010
The Special Senate Committee on Anti-terrorism met this day at 11:02 a.m., pursuant to rule 88 of the Rules of the Senate, to organize the activities of the committee.
[English]
Barbara Reynolds, Clerk of the Committee: Honourable senators, there is a quorum. As the clerk of your committee, it is my duty to preside over the election of the chair. I am ready to receive a motion to that effect. Are there nominations?
Senator Furey: It is with great pleasure that I nominate Senator Segal as chair of the committee.
Senator Joyal: I move that the nominations be closed.
Ms. Reynolds: It is moved by the Honourable Senator Furey that the Honourable Senator Segal do take the chair of this committee. Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Ms. Reynolds: I declare the motion carried. I invite the Honourable Senator Segal to take the chair.
Senator Hugh Segal (Chair) in the chair.
The Chair: Thank you. I am delighted and honoured to be of service to the committee and the work that we will do for the country collectively and in the national interest. If I may, I will proceed with motion 2 on the agenda for the election of a deputy chair. I move that the Honourable Senator Joyal be deputy chair of this committee. I move that we close nominations. All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Opposed? Mr. Deputy Chair, congratulations.
Senator Joyal: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The Chair: I hope it is not to be too heavy a burden to carry.
Senator Joyal: With you in the chair, it will be light.
Senator Wallin: Who will keep you in line?
The Chair: Motion 3 is that the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be composed of the chair, the deputy chair and one other member of the committee, to be designated after the usual consultation; and that the subcommittee be empowered to make decisions on behalf of the committee with respect to its agenda, to invite witnesses, and to schedule hearings. Do I have a mover of the motion?
Senator Wallin: I so move.
The Chair: It is moved by Senator Wallin. All in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Contrary minded? Hearing none, I indicate as a courtesy to members that, after discussion on both sides, the designated member on the subcommittee, except for those times when he is unable to appear for whatever reason, will be Senator David Tkachuk. In the event that he is unable to be present for a meeting, we will discuss collectively who might take his place, if that is acceptable.
Motion 4 is a motion that the committee publish its proceedings; and that the chair be authorized to set the number of printed copies to meet demand.
Senator Marshall: I so move.
The Chair: It is moved by Senator Marshall. Thank you.
Motion 5 is that pursuant to rule 89, the chair be authorized to hold meetings to receive and authorize the publication of the evidence when a quorum is not present, provided that a member of the committee from both the government and the opposition be present. Do I have a mover?
Senator Tkachuk: I so move.
The Chair: It is moved by Senator Tkachuk. Thank you.
The next motion is that the committee ask the Library of Parliament to assign analysts to the committee; that the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be authorized to retain the services of such experts as may be required by the work of the committee; and that the chair, on behalf of the committee, direct the research staff in the preparation of studies, analyses, summaries and draft reports.
Senator Wallin: I so move.
The Chair: It is moved by Senator Wallin. Thank you.
Motion 7 is that, pursuant to section 7, chapter 3:06 of the Senate Administrative Rules, authority to commit funds be conferred individually on the chair, the deputy chair and the clerk of the committee; and that, pursuant to section 8, chapter 3:06 of the Senate Administrative Rules, authority for certifying accounts payable by the committee be conferred individually on the chair, the deputy chair and the clerk of the committee; and that, notwithstanding the foregoing, in cases related to consultants and personnel services, the authority to commit funds and certify accounts be conferred jointly on the chair and deputy chair.
Senator Joyal: I so move.
The Chair: It is moved by Senator Joyal. Thank you.
While I do not anticipate travel to be on the agenda, motion 8 is pro forma in that the committee empower the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure to designate, as required, one or more members of the committee and/or such staff as may be necessary to travel on assignment on behalf of the committee.
A prophylactic motion will be helpful.
Senator Wallin: I so move.
The Chair: It is moved by Senator Wallin. Thank you.
[Translation]
Motion 9: That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be authorized to: 1) determine whether any member of the committee is on ``official business'' for the purpose of paragraph 8(3)(a) of the Senators Attendance Policy, published in the Journals of the Senate on Wednesday, June 3, 1998; and 2) consider any member of the committee to be on ``official business'' if that member is: (a) attending an event or meeting related to the work of the committee; or (b) making a presentation related to the work of the committee; and that the subcommittee report at the earliest opportunity any decisions taken with respect to the designation of members of the committee travelling on committee business.
[English]
Do I have a mover?
Senator Furey: I so move.
The Chair: It is moved by Senator Furey. Thank you.
Motion 10 is that, pursuant to the Senate guidelines for witness expenses, the committee may reimburse reasonable travelling and living expenses for one witness from any one organization and payment will take place upon application, but that the chair be authorized to approve expenses for a second witness should there be exceptional circumstances.
Senator Marshall: I so move.
The Chair: It is moved by Senator Marshall. Thank you.
Motion 11 is that the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be empowered to direct communications officers assigned to the committee in the development of a communications plans where appropriate and to request the services of the Senate Communications Directorate for the purposes of their development and implementation; and
[Translation]
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be empowered to allow coverage by electronic media of the committee's public proceedings with the least possible disruption of its proceedings, at its discretion.
[English]
Senator Wallin: I so move.
The Chair: Thank you. We may in fact on occasion have to go in camera, but I think it would be good that we designate individual staff members who we may wish to be present for those in camera and other meetings. I would like to put before colleagues a motion that I understand to be quite traditional, that each committee member be allowed to have one staff person present at in camera meetings, unless there is a decision for a particular meeting to exclude all staff.
Senator Joyal: So moved.
The Chair: Thank you, Senator Joyal.
I would like to have a brief discussion, colleagues, on motion 12, which is the time slot for regular meetings. There was some discussion back and forth between both sides about trying to do something on Tuesday mornings, and I think the conflicts that members around the table have with other committees on Tuesday mornings may make that problematic. The suggestion that appears to emerge in a consensual way is that we go to the schedule that was so well shepherded by our distinguished former chair, Senator Smith, which had us meeting on Mondays at 1 o'clock. That would allow those who serve on the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence to have a day that began at one o'clock and continued until four o'clock, on some matters not necessarily unrelated one from the other. That would give us an opportunity for a solid, three-hour hearing for testimony and whatever else might be necessary.
Senator Wallin: It is quite complicated because our meetings in the Defence Committee do start at four o'clock. However, there is preparation work with my own team, the Library of Parliament and the clerk.
The Chair: Would colleagues be happier with a twelve o'clock meeting? Senator Tkachuk would not.
Senator Tkachuk: My plane arrives around twelve o'clock, so I could just get here for one o'clock. If we go from one o'clock to three o'clock, that is a two-hour slot.
The Chair: Are we comfortable with Monday from one o'clock to three o'clock?
Senator Smith: Were any other options explored?
The Chair: We tried Thursday mornings. Because of caucus, Wednesday mornings was off the list. We could not find any circumstance where less than 40 per cent of the committee on both sides had a direct conflict because of committee overlaps.
Senator Wallin: Are both 8:30 and 10:30 on Thursday conflicted?
The Chair: Yes, because people here are on the National Finance Committee, which start at ten o'clock.
Senator Joyal: The Legal Committee is at 10:30 on Thursday.
Senator Wallin: Who has 8:30 on Thursdays?
Senator Furey: The Internal Committee.
Senator Wallin: Therefore, midnight Tuesday, is it, then?
The Chair: That would either improve, or not, our hearings.
Senator Joyal: It would shorten them.
The Chair: It would shorten them, and you might get more frankness.
Senator Smith: What time do you wrap up in the Defence Committee?
Senator Wallin: We always do steering committee afterwards. It is probably seven o'clock on a good day, 7:30 if there are issues.
The Chair: Do you mean Monday evenings?
Senator Furey: I think one o'clock to three o'clock is fine.
Senator Tkachuk: I am good with that. If we have to meet longer by 15 minutes or 20 minutes for a special occasion, we can sort it out. If we have a one o'clock to three o'clock time slot, I think everyone here can organize their time for that.
The Chair: If we are comfortable with that, then let us record that, clerk, in that respect.
Let me raise just some general comments. I assume we will try to arrange a meeting of the steering committee, perhaps by telephone, between now and when the Senate returns, to talk about proposals for agenda and witnesses, which we would then bring to the whole committee for discussion. We do not have, as we speak, legislation to consider. There is a bill in the Senate, and it has been adjourned by the other side until whatever time they decide to let it advance.
Ms. Reynolds: Do you want this in camera?
The Chair: No, that is all right. There are two bills in the House of Commons that have yet to clear the House of Commons, and therefore they have yet to clear second reading in the Senate, so we do not have those to consider.
I defer here to Senator Smith, Senator Joyal and Senator Nolin, who served previously on this committee, as well as Senator Jaffer. My own instinct is that there is a context around anti-terrorism requirements in Canada that, by definition, is changing. We have seen interesting analysis of the phenomenon now in the United States and how their approach is changing, and the same with our friends in the United Kingdom and France. I assume that our authorities are having the same consideration of issues here in Canada.
Would the committee be adverse to your steering committee reflecting on one or two hearings that we might have about the context for anti-terrorism? I would have to take a motion to this effect to the Senate to get authority to do that, so I do not assume the outcome of that. However, I would not do that unless the committee thought it was worthwhile. I have had some discussions with our leadership, and they are quite supportive on our side of the proposition. We do not know when we will get the legislation, but we could have at least one or two hearings in June to set a context, from which all could benefit. I hope they will not have to be in camera, but they may have to be. That would allow us to then go forward and consider legislation, whenever it comes, on a well-informed basis. I would not want to do that unless the committee as a whole thought it was a worthwhile use of time, quite frankly.
Senator Smith: Backgrounders are always useful, so I would certainly be supportive of that. We have the context of what happened last time and where it ended. In a Supreme Court of Canada decision, a deadline was given. We met that deadline. I might say that everything that we decided and recommended was by consensus. We had to do some massaging here and there, but it was not partisan. We avoided that. I hope we will be able to do that again.
I know Senator Tkachuk is not thinking about trips much these days.
Senator Tkachuk: I was just about to say that I am on the wrong committee, I think.
Senator Nolin: You will get used to it. We will educate you.
Senator Smith: We did have a trip to Washington, and it was very useful. We spoke to the previous administration. I think speaking to the current administration might be even more enlightening, but time will tell.
Senator Joyal: As Senator Nolin will also remember, as well as Senator Jaffer, we were the first members on the committee who studied the anti-terrorist legislation in its first incarnation. Since then, the context has changed, and there is no question about that. To start our meeting with a background on where anti-terrorism expresses itself these days, or terrorism, because we are looking after terrorism more than anti-terrorism, would be helpful for the members of the committee. In the past, we have had that type of background from Canadian Security Intelligence Service, CSIS, and from other agencies, and it was helpful. I remember one meeting we had in camera that was most helpful and very frank. It would help us understand better the legislation and the context in which the legislation takes place and is expressed. I think it is a worthwhile exercise.
The Chair: Are there other comments? If not, then we can leave it at that, and I and Senator Joyal and Senator Tkachuk will take that as direction from the committee when we consider the agenda items going forward.
Is there any other business that anyone would like to raise at this time? Seeing none, I would entertain a motion for adjournment.
Senator Joyal: So moved.
The Chair: Thank you all, colleagues. I am looking forward to working with you.
(The committee adjourned.)