Public Safety Committee on Dec. 3rd, 2013

[Commr Bob Paulson]

We do have support services. Like everyone, we are experiencing a demand on our mental health care for our members. As many of you know, policing is a particularly demanding and stressful profession, as are most of the professions that are represented here. Members from time to time encounter difficulty and need our support.

Not only do we have a very robust support mechanism for them, but we're building, recognizing that this is growing a lot on us.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Fine. Thank you, Mr. Paulson.

Ms. Sims, please, for five minutes.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you very much.

It's a pleasure to be at this committee. This is my first time appearing here, so I have a couple of questions, and bear with me, please.

We hear a lot about the security of our borders and how we need to be doing more, and yet the very government that talks about border security all the time announced major cuts, I would say, in its 2012 budget—$143 million by 2015 to CBSA and $195.2 million by 2015 to the RCMP.

We know from the Customs and Immigration Union that 325 jobs on the front line of border crossings across the country will be cut. The intelligence branch of the CBSA has been hard hit, losing 100 positions, and 19 sniffer dog units—considering we've just been talking about marijuana—are being slashed due to the budget reductions.

What kind of an impact is this actually going to have on our border security? We're not talking just theoretical. We're talking about actual bodies who are needed at the borders who are not going to be there.

[Luc Portelance, President, Canada Border Services Agency]

First, I welcome the opportunity to clarify the record in terms of the impact on the border.

In general terms, the numbers you've quoted are accurate. The CBSA, like all other departments, contributed to the effort in fighting the government deficit, so we contributed $143 million. That number is certainly accurate.

The efforts the CBSA made were to protect the integrity of managing the border. I can assure you, and I am highly confident, that we've achieved that in terms of the manner in which we undertook those cuts. For instance, about half of those cuts—close to $70 million—were achieved by the streamlining of internal services. This is mostly headquarters support functions and the associated responsibilities.

We also streamlined a lot of the programs. We found efficiencies in programs.

Where we didn't cut was what we call the front line, so for the services we provide in the airports and at the land border, for instance, we did not conduct any reductions in staff.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you.

Were the 100 intelligence branch job losses just administrative? Even if they were administrative, it's my understanding that they would still have been supporting front-line intelligence officers in order to do their job.

As well, 19 sniffer dogs seems to be a very high number.

But I want to move on to a different question now, if I may. I heard earlier some very grandiose comments about how generous our immigration system is, and it took everything in me to sit here and not scream. I have to put it on record that we've become a country that actually turns down mothers, fathers, wives, sons, brothers, and sisters from even coming to funerals, never mind being generous with our immigration policies.

But the question I have—

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

A point of order, Ms. James.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Actually, I sat with Ms. Sims on a prior immigration committee.

Canada allows 250,000 immigrants into Canada every year. We have the most fair immigration system in the world.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

This is debate, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Okay, we are getting into debate, but the point of order—

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Ms. Sims is talking about specific cases.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you.

The chair recognizes the point of order, but the chair also recognizes the fact that we should keep the question germane to the topic of public safety here, and the chair would most certainly appreciate that.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

The only reason I was forced to respond—and I won't continue—is that a comment was made and I couldn't allow it to just sit there.

The question I have now actually goes right into the makeup of our population. We've seen a 25% growth in our prison population, and yet our Canadian population has not grown at that same rate.

But specifically I want to talk about our aboriginal population. The aboriginal population in prisons is ten times more than the national average; 33.6% of all women prisoners right across the board are aboriginal women. And among black males we've seen an increase of 80% in prisons.

What is your response to that? And please be quick.

[Anne Kelly]

Yes, there has been an increase, and that's why, certainly, it's a priority for us to manage aboriginal offenders and to reduce the overrepresentation.

In Correctional Service of Canada we do quite a bit, actually. We do have some healing lodges where aboriginal offenders can be incarcerated. As I said before, we have actually increased the number of Pathways initiatives for aboriginal offenders to 25. Actually, those who participate in those pathways have a greater chance of moving down to lower security levels.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you. We're over the time right now, but thank you very kindly.

Now, Mr. Norlock, go ahead, please.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

The question is for Mr. Portelance.

Because we're dealing with supplementary estimates and the cost of running government, I'm given to understand that after review of some access to information documents that are highly troubling, they appear to indicate that on January 7, 2013, the director of headquarters accommodation was doing translation services for the Ottawa—Vanier riding association of the Liberal Party.

Is it policy and acceptable for public servants and CBSA to do partisan activity at work, and can you tell us what steps have been taken to discipline this individual?

[Luc Portelance]

I'm intimately aware of the case the member is referring to. There are two components to that particular issue. One of them actually falls under the responsibility of the Public Service Commission, and that has to do with the partisan activities of public servants.

From the CBSA perspective, the responsibility we had was to determine whether or not the employee was using our facilities and our tools for purposes that were inconsistent with their responsibilities. We launched an internal investigation and have concluded that investigation. Discipline has already been attributed with respect to that individual.

As for the other matter, Mr. Chair, again, that is under the responsibility of the Public Service Commission. They are seized with the matter. It would be up to them to comment on their current investigation.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Thank you very much, sir.

Could you explain the importance of moving forward with the collection and sharing of exit and entry information between Canada and the United States, particularly through the Beyond the Border initiative?

[Luc Portelance]

I really do appreciate the opportunity to speak to this rather important issue.

The whole concept of managing exit information in Canada is really the cornerstone of the modernization of managing Canada's border. Historically, Canada has not collected information on individuals leaving the country, whether they be Canadians or non-Canadians. As such, it has been impossible to reconcile the entries into and the exits out of Canada.

Canada and the United States are two of the few remaining countries that don't do this. Anyone who has travelled in Europe recently will know that upon leaving Europe you will be encountering an individual who will ask you for your passport information and so on.

This is a fairly significant portion of the Beyond the Border action plan. Last June—on June 30, to be precise—we undertook to work with the U.S. We began the project of exchanging information on non-Canadians and non-U.S. citizens at the land border. We are currently working on the next steps. They are articulated clearly in the Beyond the Border action plan, which targets full implementation by June 30, 2014.

Again, this is a fairly significant area in terms of allowing us to reconcile entry and exit and to effectively manage Canada's border.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Thank you.

I have one more question in that same realm. Can you explain the importance of the interactive advance passenger information initiative and how it will help prevent criminals from entering Canada by providing board/no board direction to incoming international flights?

[Luc Portelance]

This is another rather important element of the Beyond the Border action plan. If I may, I will just illustrate what happens today to compare to what we will have in the future. Today, when you board an aircraft from Europe, let's say, the CBSA gets the information on passenger manifests after the aircraft has left Europe. That provides us time and an opportunity, certainly, to determine whether there are any high-risk travellers on that flight and to take action when individuals arrive on Canadian soil.

The key words here are that it occurs “when individuals arrive on Canadian soil”. The benefit of interactive passenger information going forward will be that we will acquire that information from airlines 72 hours before the aircraft leaves their port of departure. We will actually have a few opportunities to vet that information to determine whether there are any high-risk individuals on those flights. Most importantly, it will provide the CBSA, with partner agencies, the opportunity to direct airlines to not board an individual, and—

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

That's fine. Thank you very much. I'm sorry. We're out of time.

[Luc Portelance]

No problem.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you, Mr. Portelance.

We will now go back to Mr. Garrison, please.

You have five minutes.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I wish we had more time to talk about the issue of racism, which was raised in the Correctional Investigator's report, but I want to make it clear that no one, not the Correctional Investigator or anyone on this side, is accusing our correction officers of being racist. What we're talking about is a failure of the system to respond to the correctional needs of aboriginal people and visible minorities within the system so they can return to society as contributing members.

I want to return to another matter that the Correctional Investigator calls “a dramatic reversal in terms of principles and standards”. He's talking about double bunking here, as it interferes with relocation and also creates unsafe work environments for corrections officers.

The new policy in corrections removes two principles. Our policy used to say that “single occupancy accommodation is the most desirable and correctionally appropriate method of housing offenders.” The second quote is that “double bunking is inappropriate as a permanent accommodation measure within the context of corrections.”

What I'm asking about is that now that we're at the highest levels of double bunking we've ever seen—26% on the Prairies—what is the correctional justification for double bunking? Not “what's the need to accommodate”; we know there's growth in population and there's a need to accommodate people. But what is the correctional justification for this? Why have these principles, which were long-standing principles of our corrections system, been removed?

[Anne Kelly]

In terms of double bunking, obviously we still strive for single occupancy. That's not always possible. Again, I'll go back to what I said before, that we have an approach to this. The first thing we do... Again, it's through national population management committees and regional population management committees that we make use of every single cell across the country, where we can. We've extended shared accommodation, which is a cell built for two. We also make use of double bunking. It's true, our current levels are at 20%. I should mention that before inmates can be double bunked, there is an assessment tool that needs to be completed.

The other thing is, with the new cells coming online, the majority of which will be by the end of March 2014, we expect to have our double-bunking levels return to approximately 8%.

Definitely, in terms of double bunking, we also have our correctional officers do what I would say is a great job. We certainly monitor the movement in our institutions to ensure that violent incidents do not take place.