Pre-clearance bill is sensible legislation

One of the frustrations I experienced in the last Parliament as a member on the government side of the House was how certain government bills and related legislation were at times intentionally mispresented by interest groups and others solely to incite opposition.

As an example of this, it was often implied that Bill C-51, the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2015, would allow for peaceful law-abiding protesters to be arrested without cause at a protest or demonstration. These claims were erroneously made despite the fact the bill contained language that clearly stated Bill C-51 specifically excluded “lawful advocacy or protest” from its application.

When I became a member of the Official Opposition, one of the commitments I made was to not use similar tactics that in my view only serve to mislead Canadians.

I offer these comments as recently I have noted a bill introduced by the Liberal government, Bill C-23, the Preclearance Act, is being targeted with many similar misleading and inaccurate claims .

If you are unfamiliar with Bill C-23, in the words of the Liberal government, it will expand the number of current U.S. Customs pre-clearance locations in Canada.

Some are claiming that Bill C-23 allows U.S. Customs agents to engage in activities that are against Canadian law while on Canadian soil.

While these allegations have been successful in stirring up concern and opposition, the actual legislative summary is clear on this point. It says “the exercise of any power and performance of any duty or function by a United States preclearance officer is subject to Canadian law, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Canadian Human Rights Act.”

From another perspective, it has been suggested that entering the United States may be more difficult for some Canadian citizens as a result of the new administration.

While I have not yet personally heard from any constituents to verify these claims, I will observe that if a Canadian citizen is going to be refused entry into the United States for whatever reason, it is far more convenient for that refusal to occur in Canada at a pre-clearance location rather than in the United States where a deportation and related unplanned air travel costs can present a far more serious inconvenience.

For that reason alone, I believe the Liberal government is taking a prudent course of action in expanding the pre-clearance program that by most accounts has proven to be a simpler, more accessible way to travel across the border for those citizens who decide to visit to the United States.

I welcome your views on this subject. Do you support expanding pre-clearance as described above in Canada? I can be reached at Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca or toll free at 1-800-665-8711.

Dan Albas is the Conservative member of Parliament for Central Okanagan-Similkameen-Nicola.