Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, everyone. I'd like to thank the members for their invitation to appear before the committee today.

I must admit this is my first time appearing before a parliamentary committee. Please forgive me if my level of decorum is not up to scratch. I'm very happy to be here today.

My greetings also go to Mr. Fergusson, who is also appearing before the committee.

Allow me to introduce myself. My name is Dominique Babin, and I'm a lawyer and partner in business law with the Montreal firm BCF. I have practised business law for more than 20 years. For five of these years, I was the director of legal affairs for an American defence sector company. In this capacity, I administered export permits on a daily basis for this defence company.

Now that I'm in private practice, defence sector companies, and companies from other sectors as well, consult me to ensure that their transactions and exports are in compliance. I'd like to point out at the very outset that as a lawyer, my role is really to advise companies to ensure that they are in compliance with legislation enacted by Parliament.

I would like to point out very humbly that I'm not here to give advice on what foreign policies Canada should be adopting with respect to Turkey. However, as Dr. Fry mentioned, I am in a good position to make practical suggestions for improvements that could mitigate some of the negative impacts that might result from enforcement of export controls, which are indeed barriers to trade.

Before coming, I consulted some of the companies and partners with whom I do business on a regular basis. However, I am here as an individual and not to do any lobbying or to send any messages that I may have been asked to transmit. I am truly here in my own capacity and as a professional.

I had prepared a very long speech before I knew that our time would be limited. I asked myself about the two main messages I wanted to get across in my opening statement. As it happens, they are practical issues.

The main challenge that is often faced by the companies I work with is being able to identify which goods are subject to controls.

Once goods have been identified as subject to controls and known to be dangerous, then the proper thing to do is go through the whole approval process to obtain a permit. What I've noticed is that companies often make the effort to follow the process when it's not even necessary to do so. I'll give you some examples of this.

In Group 2 of the Export Control List, a number of concepts cover goods specifically designed for military purposes or for military equipment. It's sometimes difficult for companies to know whether their goods meet the criterion of having been specifically designed or modified for military use.

Some technologies are also combined. Commercial technology can be combined with the military technology, for example. Sometimes, whether out of ignorance or for practical reasons, a commercial portion is listed as controlled, even when it is exported separately. In some cases, this is simply to avoid delays at the border. An export permit is therefore requested, which is a more straightforward process than having to explain why there is none.

My first practical recommendation would be to encourage access to advisory opinions, which would be binding or have probative value for clearing customs.

You've thoroughly discussed the second issue, which is to make the issuing of permits predictable. I have often heard it said that rather than deny a permit to export companies that submit a permit application, they are asked to withdraw their application to avoid having to deny the permit.

I believe that it would be better for a country to be a little more transparent and to have clearer measures that more accurately identify certain aspects of the Export Control List. That brings me back to the importance of properly identifying controlled goods.

Thank you.

Transcript

Discussions (0)