THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Thursday, March 12, 2026
The Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade met with videoconference this day at 10:30 a.m. [ET] to examine and report on such issues as may arise from time to time relating to foreign relations and international trade generally.
Senator Peter M. Boehm Chair in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Good morning. My name is Peter Boehm. I am a senator from Ontario and the chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade.
I now invite the committee members participating in today’s meeting to introduce themselves.
[English]
Senator Adler: Good morning. Charles Adler, Manitoba.
Senator Ravalia: Good morning. Mohamed-Iqbal Ravalia, Newfoundland and Labrador.
Senator MacDonald: Michael MacDonald, Nova Scotia.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: Amina Gerba from Quebec.
[English]
Senator Busson: Welcome. I’m Bev Busson from British Columbia.
[Translation]
Senator Youance: Suze Youance from Quebec.
[English]
Senator Harder: Peter Harder, Ontario.
Senator Wilson: Duncan Wilson, British Columbia.
Senator Coyle: Mary Coyle, Antigonish, Nova Scotia.
Senator Al Zaibak: Mohammad Al Zaibak, Ontario.
The Chair: Good morning, senators, and welcome. I would like to welcome those who may be watching us across the country today on ParlVU.
Colleagues, we are meeting under our general order of reference to discuss consular and emergency assistance in the context of the situation in the Middle East. Today we have the pleasure of welcoming, from Global Affairs Canada, Sébastien Beaulieu, Director General, International Emergency and Travel Advice Bureau; and Yannick Lamonde, Director, Emergency Operations Division. I want to, on behalf of the committee, thank you very much for being here today. We know the work that you are doing is very valuable for Canadians who are in harm’s way in the Middle East and that you and your teams are working 24-7 on this situation.
Before we hear your opening statement and proceed to questions and answers, I would ask everyone present, please, to mute the notifications on your devices. This is an unnecessary distraction. I would also ask you to check the best practices card in terms of using the earpiece and microphone, just to protect our talented interpreters and technical staff.
We are now ready to hear opening remarks. Colleagues, this meeting will go for an hour and a half. We have a fair amount of latitude in terms of questions and answers, but I will, as usual, be relatively strict. Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor.
[Translation]
Sébastien Beaulieu, Director General, International Emergency and Travel Advice Bureau, Global Affairs Canada: Good morning, and thank you to the committee members.
[English]
Thank you for the opportunity to provide an update on Canada’s consular and emergency response to the situation in the Middle East and in the Gulf region. I know this is an important issue for you as senators and as parliamentarians, and it is an important issue for so many Canadians as well. Last week, my colleague Yannick Lamonde, Director of the Emergency Operations Division, offered parliamentarians a technical briefing and provided background on our operations, and today I am here to provide an update on those operations.
The security environment remains volatile and fast moving, and I want to begin by reaffirming that the safety of Canadians in the region and of our own personnel remains our highest priority. We have demonstrated this repeatedly over the past weeks through our efforts in the Middle East as well as in our responses to the recent crises in Mexico and Cuba.
Global Affairs Canada, or GAC, entered this crisis with significant preparedness and experience in the region. Our missions operate in a complex and volatile environment across the Middle East, maintaining high readiness to scale our preparedness as required. From the outset of this crisis, we initiated our well-established processes to coordinate across our network abroad with our whole-of-government partners and with partner countries throughout the region and the world.
This includes surging additional capacity into our Emergency Watch and Response Centre, which this committee visited a few years ago, and at the peak of our operations, in terms of numbers of calls being received, we had over three shifts of 50 people per day answering calls of Canadians from the region.
In terms of government coordination, we are having daily calls with representatives from each of our missions in the region, all government departments concerned and representatives from across Global Affairs Canada. That enables us to share information quickly and inform decision making to respond to the changing realities on the ground.
In terms of deployments abroad and surge capacity to reinforce our network, we deployed 30 members from the Standing Rapid Deployment Team, or SRDT, across Türkiye, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Armenia, Jordan, Israel, Egypt and the Gulf to surge that consular support and assist Canadians. The Standing Rapid Deployment Team is a group of highly trained employees ready to deploy on short notice to provide emergency response coordination and consular assistance.
Our staff’s presence at border crossings and transit points out of Iran and the region has enabled safe crossings out of Iran through Türkiye, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Turkmenistan. SRDTs are also reinforcing missions in the region to meet clients at border crossings and airports as they make their way out of the region.
Over the past two weeks, we have emphasized clear, consistent public communications throughout our response. I’m pleased to report that, as of today, there are no consular cases of Canadians injured or any casualties in the region, and we hope that remains so.
Our travel advice and advisories, referred to as TAA, and registration of Canadians abroad — you may have heard the acronym ROCA — messaging has been frequent and timely. Through the system, we are able to reach out to over 100,000 Canadians who are registered to receive updated information and messaging.
Since February 27, we have issued nearly 100 updates to our travel advice across the region and pushed over 100 messages, either across the region to the 100,000 registrants or more tailored messaging to specific destinations for information on that territory or with very practical and operational information on departure options and, in the case of travel that we were facilitating, specific muster points.
These communications have been amplified through direct emails and social media to provide Canadians with timely information on airspace, border openings and available departure options.
Our preparedness also includes our long-standing network of international partnerships, and we are in daily contact with our Five Eyes partners, the European Union and governments across the region. Importantly, last week we concluded a memorandum of cooperation with Japan on mutual assistance in emergency responses. That was very timely and had been in the works prior to the situation evolving, but we have seen it play out very favourably over the past two weeks, with that concrete cooperation on the ground that we like to see.
[Translation]
I would now like to give you a clear picture of how we helped Canadians, permanent residents and their families to leave the region.
Where commercial airspace was closed or insufficient, we used the full breadth of our consular tool box, including block bookings on commercial flights. We operated one charter flight, organized bus journeys and ground transport, provided direct border support, and in some cases, facilitated the issuance of visas for Canadians seeking to leave Iran and transit through neighbouring countries.
Our efforts focused in particular on securing seats on Middle East Airlines flights between Beirut and Istanbul, block bookings on commercial flights, and a charter flight, as I mentioned, from the United Arab Emirates to Istanbul. We also organized significant ground transport. From Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Israel and Palestine, we facilitated bus movements to a safe third location where commercial options were available.
Our efforts and support for our nationals also enabled us to work in concert with our partners, such as Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States. We also called on our partnerships with Singapore and Japan.
Travellers were also supported at crossings from Israel into Egypt. We had staff deployed in Taba to meet them on the Egyptian side.
As regards what we have observed and the support we have been able to offer in Canada, over the past two weeks we have responded to more than 11,000 calls and emails from Canadians. The peak daily volume of enquiries during the crisis was 1,400 calls per day, and we are now at around 400. We have directly assisted more than 1,000 Canadians in leaving the region through our consular services.
The Canada Border Services Agency has noted that more than 8,000 Canadians have returned home over the past two weeks, which is also encouraging, as our call for caution has been heeded and Canadians who wish to and are able to return home are doing so in large numbers.
At the same time, we are well aware that this crisis is not yet over. Global Affairs Canada continues to support Canadians 24 hours a day, seven days a week, throughout the region. We will continue to adapt our response based on operational realities, security conditions and the needs of Canadians.
Throughout this period, our message to Canadians has remained consistent: monitor our travel advice, register in the ROCA system — Registration of Canadians Abroad — and contact us if needed.
We remain fully committed to supporting Canadians abroad as the situation evolves, and we are pleased to keep you informed of developments. Thank you. We will be pleased to answer your questions.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu.
[English]
I would like to note that Senator Hébert of Quebec has joined us. I would like to remind you that we are looking at three‑minute rounds, so you will each have three minutes for questions and answers. Please keep your preamble short and your questions precise. I think we will have enough time for a second round, perhaps even a third.
Senator Al Zaibak: Good morning. Thank you both for being with us today on such an important topic. My first question is to Mr. Beaulieu. Much of the evacuation efforts so far appear to rely on commercial flights and charter arrangements. If the situation deteriorates further and commercial air travel becomes unavailable, what contingency plans does Canada have to evacuate Canadians from the region?
Mr. Beaulieu: Thank you. In most crises, the first order or advice that we give Canadians is to shelter in place at the beginning of hostilities, and as the situation becomes clearer and safer and as Canadians can move and depart, we first and foremost rely on commercial means when and where they are available. It is what is most convenient for Canadians, and it is what also makes sense from the point of view of stewardship of public funds.
In this instance, in some cases, we have had to bus people to give them access to these commercial options, and in other instances, we have supplemented or made sure that, on those commercial flights, there were enough seats for the Canadians. With our embassies, we reserved or block-booked some seats and then invited interested Canadians to make arrangements directly with the airlines and make their payments with the airlines.
At the very beginning of the crisis, we did resort to a charter flight to ease those pressures. As we have done in the past, those charters are part of our tool kit.
In a situation where neither charters nor commercial options would be available, there are other means at our disposal through partnerships with other federal partners. I’m thinking in particular of the Canadian Armed Forces, but we are not there in the Middle East at this stage. Thank you.
Senator Al Zaibak: Thank you.
Senator Ravalia: Thank you to our witnesses for being here. At the present time, given the very shifting reality of the crisis, what surge capacity does Global Affairs Canada maintain with respect to large-scale consular emergencies? How are you deploying this currently?
In addition to GAC, what other government departments are supporting Canada’s emergency response? Perhaps you could further highlight the collaborative efforts that are taking place between Canada and our closest allies, because our allies, in some instances, have taken a rather different approach, including military flights out of these areas.
Mr. Beaulieu: I’m pleased to take the two parts of this question. First, on our surge capacity across our department, we have two main tools, or two main pressure points in terms of emergency management response. The first one is responding to questions, calls and inquiries from Canadians. In our 24-7 centre at Global Affairs, we have the capacity to surge physically with phone lines and desks. We call on our regular staff across the department to come in and contribute shifts either in lieu of or in addition to their regular day jobs to come and answer the calls of Canadians. Unfortunately, we have a lot of practice with that, so we have highly trained and skilled partners and surge responders across the department who, as soon as there is a crisis, know we are going to call them. Many of them volunteer without us even calling on them and come and work for us.
The other element we have in terms of surging is the Standing Rapid Deployment Team. It is a team of skilled staff who are able to be deployed on short notice. We have some who are, indeed, on short notice to depart. As crises evolve, we have that roster and we activate that roster, and currently we have 30 Canadians in the region, supplementing the efforts of our missions abroad.
In terms of cooperation with other government departments, there is a range. I mentioned National Defence, or DND, and the Canadian Armed Forces. There is Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, or IRCC, and the Canada Border Services Agency, or CBSA. I was alluding to the numbers from CBSA in terms of returns. The role of IRCC is also key in terms of working to support permanent residents and their immediate families who may not be Canadian. That’s an important part as well in the process.
In crises, many Canadians are without valid travel documents. Again, we work closely with IRCC to issue emergency travel documents or expedite the renewal and delivery of their passports so that they can make it home. Thank you.
Senator Ravalia: Thank you.
Senator Busson: Thank you both for being here in these terrible times. It is very interesting to hear about your ability to respond to these kinds of urgencies and the numbers you give — 11,000 people requesting help — and your ability to respond to that is certainly laudable. The nightmares of urgency and complexity at the same time create special challenges.
In that regard, in February, the government announced that, as part of their workforce adjustment, 483 positions are set to be eliminated at GAC. I am curious whether or not, given this new and pressing urgency of what is happening in the region, there has been any signal that this decision might be revisited, given that you are actually using volunteers, in some cases, to respond to these urgent issues.
Mr. Beaulieu: The fiscal pressures are felt across the department as well as the Government of Canada more broadly. We are able and have put forward plans to continue to respond by updating and upgrading our processes, our ways of working, the use of technology. I mentioned reaching out to 100,000 people many times over the past two weeks. We have improved and relied on technology.
On our reporting, we have come up with new ways of integrating reports from across 12 missions into a single daily report that is then shared across the federal family. So, through such efficiencies and improving our ways of working and, frankly, with the habit of doing this as well and developing our culture of crisis across the department, we will continue to be able to respond to Canadians despite the fiscal pressures.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: Welcome once again, Mr. Beaulieu and Mr. Lamonde. According to Minister Anand, the Government of Canada could do little to help Canadians leave Iran, as we do not have an embassy there. In this context, what is the Government of Canada doing to compensate for the absence of an embassy?
Mr. Beaulieu: I am pleased to answer this question, as it must be emphasized that Canada, despite the absence of an embassy, is fully capable of communicating with Canadians in Iran. We have been doing so for months, and particularly intensively in June last year, and we continue to do so through our travel advisories and messages via the ROCA system urging them to leave the country.
We were doing this before February 28. When Canadians in Iran decide to leave, we will be at the border crossing and transit point to welcome them. Around fifty have left the country in recent weeks. I must say that this figure is lower than the number of Canadians who left Iran in June during the previous conflict. We are at the border crossing to support them, welcome them and enable them to catch a flight to Canada afterwards.
Senator Gerba: I see. You also mentioned that there are already 110,000 Canadians registered with the ROCA service. Have these 110,000 Canadians indicated that they want to leave Iran? You mentioned that 1,000 or 8,000 have already returned, but of the 110,000, do you have any idea how many actually want to leave the country and how many simply want to be relocated somewhere in the meantime?
Mr. Beaulieu: The most significant figure regarding Canadians seeking to leave the region is the number of calls we receive each day. Today — or in the last 24 hours — we’re talking about around 400 calls from Canadians. Most of these calls were from Canadians in countries whose airspace is open. I’m thinking of the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. To support them, we’re directing them towards available commercial flights.
Of course, there are people who, for all sorts of reasons, cannot leave the country via commercial channels at the moment. The figure is certainly not 110,000, given that we have received 10,000 calls over the last two weeks. People are registering for all sorts of reasons, mainly to stay informed about what is happening and abreast of the options and advice we are giving them. It is through this that we find information about 110,000 people by pressing a button.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[English]
Senator Wilson: I would be interested in hearing more, to the extent that you can share, about the agreement with Japan. I’m also interested to know if we have similar agreements with other countries and, in particular, if any of those countries have maintained a diplomatic presence in Iran and whether or not that might provide a channel to help with evacuations.
Mr. Beaulieu: We have a number of formal memoranda of understanding with a number of countries. We have one, as a whole, with the Five Eyes partners — the U.S., the U.K., Australia and New Zealand. We have one with France. We have one with the European Union and now with Japan.
This, in many ways, formalizes existing cooperation between capitals but also on the ground. For us, it is also an important tool so that our missions across the region receive a clear political message that they can cooperate. While they would be tempted sometimes, they will say, “We need to check back with HQ.”
In this instance, they know there is an MOU. They know there is this agreement to cooperate to provide mutual assistance, and that gives them a licence to cooperate. Whether it’s things like us notifying the British government when U.K. nationals come to our attention at a border point — we can rechannel and redirect them to the proper services — whether it’s sharing buses and charter flights, whether it’s offering logistical assistance or sharing insights as well, those are important elements of what’s happening at the border and on the ground. Our teams have, through these MOUs, the licence and a clear message to cooperate, and it is a very effective tool.
Senator Wilson: In terms of presence, I’m assuming that some of those partners probably still do maintain a presence in Iran.
Mr. Beaulieu: Some of those countries do still have a presence in Iran. It provides us useful ground truth.
That said, the ability of those present in Tehran to do anything at this juncture is extremely limited for their own nationals and for anyone else. What we’re hearing from the Iranians who have taken the decision and made their way to the border is that it is a very difficult decision for them to take. There is a risk to their security for moving to the border. Once they are at the border, they are very happy to be there.
We have had one Canadian be greeted by one of our SRDTs. He was an elderly gentleman. He sat down and started singing “O Canada” when he arrived in Azerbaijan. Those are the types of reactions we get on a daily basis. You hear other stories in the media as well, but the situation in Iran for now is very difficult, and there are very limited elements that we can do in terms of physically supporting Canadians, other than giving them the information so that they can make an informed choice.
The Chair: Thank you. I want to ask a quick follow-up to Senator Wilson’s question before we move on, and that is, is Italy still our protecting power in Iran in terms of the relationship in a more formal sense?
Mr. Beaulieu: Yes, Italy remains our protective power. That is a responsibility that Italy has accepted to take on our behalf, to represent us with the host government, in this case in Iran. Obviously, what any protective power, including Italy, can do with the host country at this stage is very limited.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Senator Coyle: Thank you for taking the time. I’m sure it’s not easy to have the time to be with us today. I am imagining that visit we had to the Emergency Watch and Response Centre when we were doing our Foreign Service study, and I can now imagine it populated in the way that you are describing.
I was actually going to ask a very similar question to what my colleague Senator Wilson asked, but I have a couple of others. I’m curious about the teams that are rapidly deployed to the region. Could you tell us where they are deployed and how they are actually functioning? I would be curious what they are doing and where they are.
Mr. Beaulieu: Thank you. First and foremost, on being here, it is important for us to be here as well because you are parliamentarians, and it is an opportunity to get our message out. You have constituents who are worried, and then you are able to explain what the Government of Canada is doing.
On SRDT deployments abroad, they have a go-bag. They are often told, as crises develop, that they can be asked to leave within 12 or 24 hours. We give them a little heads-up. Then they are deployed in a particular function and territory under the authority of the ambassador, working with the rest of the team that’s either in the country or accredited to that country.
We have some in Türkiye. They are at a transit point near Van, which is a major gateway from Iran. They are in Astara, Azerbaijan, at the border again. In this instance, that post has accepted to represent our other partners we were talking about in the MOU. Our SRDTs there are working on behalf of a coalition of partners to greet the Canadians and other nationals making their way across. We have some in Turkmenistan, in Armenia, as well as in Egypt, at Taba, and in Israel, down in Eilat. They are also in Cairo, in Dubai, in Ramallah, in Beirut, in Oman and in Riyadh to supplement that existing capacity, and they are there usually on two- or three-week rotations because they need a break, too, and they have a regular day job within the Government of Canada at Global Affairs. We like to rotate them as the needs evolve and either supplement or scale down, knowing that we remain responsive and are able to scale up again very rapidly.
Senator Coyle: What would be a typical shift? How many days?
Mr. Beaulieu: It is usually three weeks.
Senator Coyle: Thank you.
Senator Harder: Thank you, and through you, I thank your staff both here and around the world.
I want to follow up on the duty to protect with respect to our staff. Can you update us on where dependants have been evacuated and whether there has been any enhanced protection of our missions abroad? In that context, I would like you to speak to both Mexico and Cuba as well as the Middle East.
Mr. Beaulieu: Thank you. Our duty of care is a key pillar. I said in my opening remarks that the safety of Canadians and also our personnel is paramount in everything we do.
We have reduced our posture both in terms of non-essential staff and in terms of dependants in Tel Aviv, in Beirut and in Baghdad currently. We have also done the same in Ramallah. That’s a temporary arrangement as the situation evolves, and we’re able to revisit.
We have a range of security protocols for those remaining that are now heightened as the situation warrants. It fluctuates on a day-by-day basis, whether it relates to protocol movements, moving in armoured vehicles, go and no-go zones within the territory of accreditation. Those are all elements that are taken into consideration as the heads of mission ensure and deliver on that duty of care towards our staff and towards dependants.
There are also pre-existing policies before this crisis. For example, in Lebanon, it’s an unaccompanied post, so only adult dependants, spouses are allowed. That also gives us a bit more freedom of action and a higher risk tolerance to situations as they evolve. That’s also why sometimes you see in the media that a country is adjusting their posture, and then, perhaps, you get questions as to why Canada isn’t doing that. As a case in point, Australia at one point adjusted their posture, and we got the question, “Well, why isn’t Canada doing that?” We’re already in that mode of no accompanying children, and that’s the move that one of our partners had taken.
There is a flux in our approach, and we have a whole security team and mission security team keeping close watch.
Senator Harder: Could you comment on Mexico and Cuba as well?
Mr. Beaulieu: The situation in Mexico, currently — I mean, there was the situation two weeks ago related to the cartels. We did not have to reduce our mission footprint, although we had clear guidelines to shelter in place. It was the same information that we shared with Canadians dutifully through our travel advice and our ROCA messaging to the 80,000 Canadians registered on ROCA.
On Cuba, we currently maintain our posture there. A number of steps have been taken to ensure the sustainability of our operations, given the numerous shortages. We have, for example, solar panels to save on fuel and the use of generators. We have reduced the days that the missions are open, as well, in line with the Government of Cuba’s decisions to also limit the services that it offers and its own operations and its request to ensure that sustainability of operations.
Security and sustainability of operations are key to us.
Senator Harder: Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[Translation]
Senator Youance: Our thanks to the witnesses.
I have a follow-up question regarding your various answers. For Canadians and permanent residents who choose to remain in the affected areas in the Middle East, how far can the government reasonably go to ensure their safety and maintain consular support? You mentioned support from Italy, but given the operational limitations — since there is no embassy in Iran — and the potential risks on the ground, what should be done for those who decide to stay?
Mr. Beaulieu: Thank you. I appreciate the question, because it is an important one and one we ask ourselves every day. Although we have issued advisories and encouraged Canadians to leave the area if they can, many are in fact choosing to stay for various reasons.
That said, we continue to be there for them and offer advice. If they decide to stay, we advise them to be prepared to shelter in place for extended periods, which means they must have access to medication, food, water, fuel and generators.
As the situation evolves, it is also becoming increasingly difficult for us to support them. Our commitment is to support them as well as we can, while remaining fully aware of the issues of responsibility and safety of our own staff; we take into account what is known in the jargon as the permissiveness of the context, namely whether it is safe to travel to a particular country or region that is in the midst of active conflict.
Senator Youance: Given the current geopolitical situation, can you reassure us regarding Canada’s ability to respond simultaneously to multiple international crises, including armed or civil conflicts? We have mentioned Cuba and Mexico, and, if we take into account the other countries affected by the war in Iran, I would add Haiti.
Mr. Beaulieu: Thank you. We have that capacity. Although we are generally talking about the Middle East today, this reflects a whole range of very different situations across 15 destinations, 15 different countries, with a dozen embassies. I think we are demonstrating, with this situation in the Middle East and with over 100,000 Canadians registered, that we are capable of managing several crises at once or a very complex crisis.
We are only just emerging from the situation in Mexico, which followed on from the situations in Cuba and Jamaica last autumn, and in Iran and Israel in June of last year. I can assure you that we are capable of responding to multiple crises. In our jargon, we are preparing precisely for a world of multiple crises or a state of perpetual crisis.
Senator Youance: Thank you.
[English]
Senator Adler: I have no experience in diplomacy, either professional or amateur. I want to stipulate that. Here is where my curiosity always goes in times like this: Does the government have some sort of — are the political brakes on when it comes to doing what just regular people think would be wise: preventive medicine?
Concretely, when you have got an American and an Israeli leader clearly beating the war drums weeks before the stuff of war hits the fan, is there a political reason why the Canadian government wouldn’t tell Canadians abroad, especially in Israel and Iran, that we would like to do whatever we can to encourage you and even to help you get the heck out of town now, before the war begins, or whatever the diplomatic language is?
I just wonder if there is a political reason why there can’t be some preventive medicine?
Mr. Beaulieu: Thank you for that question. I think as part of our tool box, one of the main elements — and I was alluding to it earlier — is our travel advice. We have travel advice for 230 destinations. In the case of Iran, for many years, it has been “avoid all travel.” So we’re managing expectations in that sense.
You mentioned Israel. Israel, Lebanon and Palestine have been up and down between what we call level 3 and level 4. That is to avoid non-essential travel or avoid all travel. It has varied. We have been using all the tools we have, including cautions from ministers of foreign affairs over the past crises, to amplify that message to Canadians in terms of avoiding a particular country or heeding our advice.
Senator Adler: I appreciate that very much, but once things get hotter, it’s just not the norm. I understand that you have the advisory because those countries are normally tender, shall we say. Once we have, like I say, specifically, the leaders of Israel and of the United States and, obviously, the leadership in Iran getting closer and closer to the precipice, I would think, just as a Canadian who has friends in different parts of the world, it wouldn’t hurt to strongly encourage those. I mentioned Lebanon because, obviously, southern Lebanon is a battleground.
I’m just asking: Is there no diplomatic way of jacking up the advisory to the point of “We’re approaching what looks like an emergency. We would like to help you prepare now”?
Mr. Beaulieu: Thank you for the question. I would argue that this is exactly what we’re doing. I was alluding to the travel advice but, on top of that, there is the messaging to Canadians who are registered in a particular territory. We issued direct and clear messaging on February 20, more than a week before the hostilities started, then again on February 27 and ever since as well, with very clear messaging: “Leave if it is safe to do so.” Obviously, in some instances, it’s up to Canadians to make that decision, that determination, but we have been very insistent.
We also have our social media channels that amplify this. I keep referring to our travel advice because it is an important tool. Perhaps the proof of how important it is — there are 30 million hits a year on travel.gc.ca for advice on the Middle East but also across the region. More than half a million Canadians are registered to our ROCA system across the world and across destinations.
We are always keen to do more, but I feel that we’re flooding the airwaves in terms of messages to Canadians, and that has been consistent for the past months.
Senator Adler: Is that the standard with our allies as well? Do they all generally comport this way?
Mr. Beaulieu: All our allies have similar travel advice and travel alerts. They will come up in the media, even in Canada sometimes. As we develop this advice, we also develop it in concert with our partners who have either a particular presence in a country or particular insights into a country or a situation, and we are usually quite aligned because of that cooperation.
Senator Adler: Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much. We’re coming to the end of round 1. That’s usually when I ask a question, so here it comes. This is not the first crisis we have had in terms of evacuating Canadians. I look over at my colleague Senator Harder. He and I were quite involved 20 years ago in the evacuation of some 15,000 Canadians from Lebanon. At that time, we did not have an operation centre the way you have now. That was one of the lessons that we took out of it, that we needed one.
But there was also some confusion because in the past, if you wished to have consular assistance or repatriation, you had to fill out an undertaking to repay, or UTR, form. Because the demand was so great at that time — and the Harper government was also new — and we had to do some unusual things, like charter boats out of northern Cyprus, it was decided it was just too complicated, so we would waive that requirement.
I note that in public messaging, certainly by Minister Anand and others, there has always been reference to evacuation on a cost-recovery basis. I’m wondering whether you could tell us just how that cost-recovery basis works if you’re dealing with buses and charter flights and the like.
Mr. Beaulieu: Thank you for that question, Mr. Chair. Our first line of response is to work with commercial airlines, so for Canadians to either get the information or for us to reserve seats for Canadians for them to make their arrangements and pay the airlines for the commercial service they are receiving. That’s the ideal situation, not only from a taxpayers’ perspective but also from a flyer’s perspective — these airlines have onward connections.
Charters are a bit trickier, but when we do have to put them on, we go out to air carriers, to the private sector, and ask for proposals and submissions. And then, in that case, we organize a flight.
In the case of the flight from the United Arab Emirates to Istanbul, the single charter that we put on in that instance, we established what the cost of a flight was on Expedia in normal circumstances, and that’s what we decided to charge Canadians.
You were referring to an undertaking to repay, a UTR. We have since evolved and are now using an online platform whereby a client who says, “Yes, I would like to be on that charter,” when we share information with that client, we send them an email with a direct link so that they can make the payment for that charter flight at that commercial equivalent cost. So it’s great for the client. It’s much more efficient.
We were alluding to working smarter, and using technology is certainly a part of it. The recovery rate is great with that system. If the client is not in a position to pay, they can also forward that email to their family back in Canada so that the payment gets made.
So that’s an important part of cost recovery, and that’s how we have been doing it for past crises, since Haiti, in fact.
The Chair: Thank you very much. I’m glad there has been that positive evolution. We could have used that 20 years ago.
Senator Busson: Thank you, chair. It begs the question, following up on your question: What if somebody does not have any relatives in Canada with a Visa card? Do they get turned down for the flight?
Mr. Beaulieu: Ultimately, nobody gets turned down from our services. We do have, ultimately, un undertaking to repay where that is signed off by the client, and we do the recovery later.
Senator Busson: That’s reassuring. I have another question. I was really interested in how you were talking about the Standing Rapid Deployment Team and how it was utilized. In my mind, I envision a very dangerous environment where these folks operate and offer to meet and escort or help people evacuate in very difficult situations. I don’t imagine these folks are just picked willy-nilly from offices in different consulates, et cetera. Could you tell me a little bit about how they’re selected and trained to deal with some of these situations?
My mind goes back to my own life. I used to do that kind of work in a very small way. It’s very dangerous. I’m just wondering what you could offer in reassurance that these folks are well trained.
Mr. Beaulieu: Perfect. Before turning to my colleague Yannick Lamonde, who oversees those deployments and that rapid deployment team, I would also add that for Canadians in distress abroad who don’t have the financial means, we also issue loans in addition to whatever charter flights that need to be repaid. We do offer that support.
In terms of the SRDTs, they’re highly trained. Many of them have operated abroad in a range of countries; they have skill sets; they go through training with us, including training in a hostile environment. I’ll let my colleague complement. Thank you.
Yannick Lamonde, Director, Emergency Operations Division, Global Affairs Canada: Thank you for your question. Our SRDT members are diplomats; they are not special forces. We are not deploying into very dangerous situations, but there are risks where we operate, of course.
We do select people who have experience being posted abroad, having worked on various crises. We send them to a hostile environment training course. We give them specific training and sessions with experienced SRDT members. They are also working within the framework of the embassies where they are being deployed, so they have security teams that provide them with some advice and some guidance.
Ultimately, we’re not, for instance, sending SRDTs inside Iran, because it’s too dangerous. They are in the countries bordering Iran, for example.
Sometimes, if we organize transportation, such as a bus, and we want to have our personnel there, if the security situation is not good enough, we will have to cancel the transportation because it’s dangerous for our personnel as well as for our clients. It’s often better to remain inside than be on the road, so we do take precautions for them to be well prepared.
We have in-person training with actors and we try to test their abilities to work under stress and see how they respond. Some people have not been deployed because they were not the best fit to work in a stressful, difficult environment, and they can help us at headquarters instead of being in the field.
Senator Busson: Thanks very much.
The Chair: If I could ask a quick follow-on, can you deploy people who also have linguistic ability? I’m thinking particularly of Arabic and Farsi in this instance?
Mr. Lamonde: We will do that when we have those needs abroad. Of course, we have staff in our embassies that are pre‑trained and have language skills, but we do have Arabic and Farsi speakers right now who are being deployed or who are working at the emergency contact centre, responding to people who have inquiries from the region.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Ravalia: Given the dramatic acceleration of the crisis in southern Lebanon, with expedited relocation, are you able to update us on the number of Canadians who may have been impacted by this surge in people moving and on any emergency plans that may be in place to assist them?
Mr. Beaulieu: We have not received specific requests for assistance from that situation in terms of injuries, but, obviously, if you look at the numbers — 800,000 is being reported today — there are, inevitably, some impacted Canadians. Indeed, in Lebanon, whether you’re displaced or not, it is a very difficult time to be in Beirut or elsewhere across the country.
So yes, there are impacted Canadians, but there are no major consular individual cases per se of injuries or people in dire distress.
Senator Ravalia: Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: I would like to pick up on Senator Harder’s question regarding the duty of care. In the current context, where the crisis is dragging on, how does your department ensure that, in order to fulfill its duty of care, the Government of Canada evacuates its employees, including locally recruited staff, who, as we know, make up a large proportion of the personnel in missions abroad? How do you ensure that the duty of care is fully respected, particularly with regard to evacuation protocols, risk management and the protection of families?
Mr. Beaulieu: This issue lies at the heart of our operations and the decisions we make on a daily basis. This responsibility, this duty of care, effectively extends to employees, their families — if they have family accompanying them in this country — and to local employees.
To give you an example of the importance we attach to this, there have been several missions which, at one time or another over the last two weeks, have operated remotely. We were there for Canadians, but in-person services at the embassy were not open to the public, because we wanted people to be able to work from home and not have to make the daily commute to the office, as it was not safe enough to do so.
So, we are adopting measures such as these. We are adjusting our procedures. Sometimes this happens on a daily basis; sometimes, during the course of the day, we make adjustments and decide to close our offices because we feel the situation is escalating or that there may be protests. We want to ensure that our staff, including local staff — who often have a much longer commute to the suburbs — are protected and are not put at risk whilst carrying out operations and providing services to Canadians.
Next, there are all sorts of protocols. Movement protocols apply equally to Canadian staff and locally recruited staff. The availability of armoured cars for important travel is the same for Canadian staff and locally recruited staff, in the course of their official duties as well.
So, this is a whole range of measures that we take on a daily basis from headquarters, but which are also managed locally, under the direction and responsibility of the head of mission. You are quite right to add that our local staff are at the heart of our responses and operations abroad. The chair of this committee will be able to confirm this, given his extensive experience abroad.
Thank you.
Senator Gerba: Thank you.
[English]
Senator Coyle: I have two questions; I’m going to put them both out there. They are quite different.
The first one is about our relationships with our Five Eyes partners, in particular. In this case — which may not have happened before; I’m not sure — one of our Five Eyes partners is a belligerent in the conflict. Does that have any impact on how we work together in this particular situation?
My second question is this: We have a map showing us the Canadian missions in the region. If we were ever to need military support, what does the mapping of those locations look like at this point?
Mr. Beaulieu: I’ll start with the first question on cooperation with Five Eyes — the U.S., the U.K., Australia and New Zealand. We have a coordination call every day on the situation. People from my team speak to their counterparts in those four other governments where we exchange information not only on what is happening and the evolution of the conflict but also in terms of the pressures on the ground and what each of us is doing. That’s one of the important fora where we’re able to share information, for example, “We are organizing a bus transfer tomorrow from country X to Y. If you have any pressures, let us know, and we’ll include your nationals in our effort.”
So that’s the type of coordination that has happened. It continues to happen throughout this conflict, as it does and as it has over past crises, and we’re very pleased that the cooperation continued across the Five Eyes.
Senator Coyle: So business as usual.
Mr. Beaulieu: Cooperation is great, yes.
Senator Coyle: And then the military.
Mr. Beaulieu: Yes. In terms of the military response or our footprint, that’s outside my remit today in front of this committee, but you are aware that Canada has missions across the regions and troops around the world, and CAF does the planning and the deployments they do and the managing of the resources they have. We, as always — and it is not particular to this situation; it is the same across the board — as soon as a situation emerges anywhere in the world, we are in close contact with the Canadian Armed Forces, the Strategic Joint Staff, and ensure that we are on the same page and that we’re connected in terms of our own planning for an immediate response and our own planning for an outward response to a range of scenarios that remain hypothetical. Thank you.
The Chair: So what you are saying, then, is that you have a number of contingency plans, depending on the situation, and if I can discern, there is a task force that would also include representatives from the Canadian Armed Forces and DND, in addition to the Canadian Forces attachés whom we may have in missions abroad; is that reasonable?
Mr. Beaulieu: That’s correct. Plans and tools from A to Z with DND and the CAF on our regular daily coordination call that Yannick Lamonde chairs every morning with a range of federal partners, including DND and the CAF, so that all are watching and seeing the same information from the ground, the same development and the same trajectory, while making prudent planning for other trajectories as well. Thank you.
Senator Coyle: You’re always dealing with hypotheticals.
Mr. Beaulieu: And very real situations as well, and that’s the challenge.
Senator Coyle: Yes.
Mr. Beaulieu: There is immediate planning, and there is outward planning.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: You mentioned earlier that there are teams of officers stationed at Iran’s borders. I assume these are the standing rapid deployment teams. How long does Global Affairs Canada plan to keep these teams in the region?
Mr. Beaulieu: Our teams will remain as long as necessary, precisely to be ready for any eventuality or any lull in Iran. It is conceivable that such a lull would result in a greater number of people than we have seen so far seeking to leave the country. Our staff also remain on standby for any other situation that could lead to increased pressure or increased flows of people seeking to leave Iran, in Turkey, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Turkmenistan, both at the border and near the border towards transit points. The arrangements for leaving Iran are such that Canadians contact us; we facilitate this border crossing, not to leave Iran, but to enter the neighbouring country, through our local partnerships. We are then able to direct our nationals to transport options heading to Canada or elsewhere in the region.
Senator Gerba: I imagine the budgets are unlimited in such cases?
Mr. Beaulieu: We do what needs to be done.
Senator Gerba: Thank you.
[English]
Senator Busson: You are doing a very good job of explaining how the international community works together and the MOUs that take place, et cetera. Domestically, are there departments other than the Department of National Defence and your department that are involved in not just the quick-response teams but, generally, the atmosphere and the environment of crisis in these situations?
Mr. Beaulieu: Yes. We have a wide-ranging list of partners, but in addition to DND and the CAF, I would clearly also mention, first and foremost, the Privy Council Office, which supports the Prime Minister, who is kept apprised of our operations and what’s happening on the ground; IRCC for the issuance of travel documents, of visas in the case of non‑Canadian family members and the issuance of permanent resident cards and management of that; CBSA for the vetting of passengers coming to Canada and keeping track of numbers. I was alluding to 8,000 having made their way from the Middle East in the past two weeks. Those are key partners for us in our response. Again, that list is much broader as well. We have all those partners lined up daily, every morning, seven days a week in close cooperation with them.
As the situation evolves, we were alluding to our Emergency Watch and Response Centre, and those partners become co‑located with us to ensure a more efficient flow of information, atmospherics and quick decision making, again, to bolster our response and ensure that we have all the tools we need.
Senator Busson: The fact that you have had no Canadian casualties to date certainly is evidence of the effectiveness and the nimbleness of how you respond. I want to congratulate and make a note and recognize that on our part or on my part, certainly. Thank you.
Mr. Beaulieu: I won’t take credit for that, but I will be grateful that we have no Canadians injured or casualties.
Senator Harder: Just as a bit of a follow-up, the diaspora community in Canada can be a partner, but it can also seek unrealistic expectations. Are you engaging with the diaspora community from the affected countries that we’re talking about? If so, what’s the state of that relationship?
Mr. Beaulieu: We don’t have a formal mechanism whereby we engage communities, but through our public communications and through the communications from our missions that are also tracked or followed from Canada, those are important channels to get our message out to manage expectations.
I was alluding to over 10,000 calls into the 24-7 Emergency Watch and Response Centre. It is not all Canadians in the region asking for information or assistance. In many cases, it is worried families in Canada asking about flights: “Will there be charters?” “How do I get a passport renewal for my son or my nephew or friend who is in the region?” In some cases, we also have inquiries about whereabouts: “I haven’t heard from my travelling son for the past two days, three days, one week. Can you help me locate them?” That’s the type of questions and engagement we have from within Canada, and that’s part of our consular service.
[Translation]
Senator Youance: I have a somewhat sensitive question that ties in with all the discussions and meetings we have had with officials from the Department of Immigration regarding the issue of a registry. Canadians move around; they travel. What is your position on the existence of a registry when people go abroad, in terms of notifying the Canadian government — for example, in more difficult countries? What is your position on a requirement to ask people to register with consular services in the event of an evacuation?
Mr. Beaulieu: Thank you for the question. We have a service. We offer it, and we ask and encourage Canadians to sign up. It is in their own best interests and that is what we are trying to convey to them, but we have never taken it so far as to make it compulsory. I do not think we would have the means or the will to force anyone to declare their departure to a particular country as part of a personal and private trip.
Senator Youance: I was referring more to notifying the consular services that they are present when they arrive in the country. That would be the idea.
Mr. Beaulieu: Once again, when abroad, we encourage Canadians to register. Communications from embassies are along the same lines, using their social media channels, as well as the platform and attention they have abroad regarding the Canadian community in a particular country; we rely heavily on this, but it remains and will remain voluntary.
The Chair: Thank you.
[English]
Thank you very much. On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank Sébastien Beaulieu and Yannick Lamonde for joining us today. I have told anyone who has asked — and it has been the media — that we have world-class consular and emergency services in our country. For that, I think all Canadians can be grateful. We are grateful to you for your service, and please take — as Senator Harder said earlier — that message back to your teams as well because we know how hard you work on behalf of Canadians.
With that, thank you very much, and we are adjourned.
(The committee adjourned.)