Bill S-16 (Historical)

Tackling Contraband Tobacco Act

An Act to amend the Criminal Code (trafficking in contraband tobacco)

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to create a new offence of trafficking in contraband tobacco and to provide for minimum penalties of imprisonment for repeat offenders.

Tackling Contraband Tobacco Act

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

moved that Bill S-16, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (trafficking in contraband tobacco), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to participate in the second reading debate on Bill S-16, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (trafficking in contraband tobacco). The bill proposes amendments to the Criminal Code to create a new offence of trafficking in contraband tobacco and to provide minimum penalties for imprisonment for persons who are convicted for a second or subsequent time of this offence.

To help reduce the problem of trafficking in contraband tobacco, the government committed to establish mandatory jail time for repeat offenders of trafficking in contraband tobacco in its 2011 election platform. The bill would fulfill that commitment.

There are no offences in the Criminal Code dealing with contraband tobacco at the present time. While there exists an offence of selling contraband tobacco in the Excise Act, 2001, that offence exists in support of our fiscal policy in the area of tobacco. This government believes that something more is required to deal with the problem that has become trafficking in contraband tobacco.

The proposed bill prohibits the sale, offer for sale, transportation, delivery, distribution or possession for the purpose of sale of tobacco product or raw leaf tobacco that is not packaged, unless it is stamped. The terms “tobacco product”, “raw leaf product”, “packaged” and “stamped” have the same meaning as in section 2 of the Excise Act, 2001.

The penalty for a first offence is up to six months imprisonment on summary conviction and up to five years imprisonment if prosecuted on indictment. Repeat offenders convicted of this new offence and where 10,000 cigarettes or more, or 10 kilograms or more of any tobacco product, or 10 kilograms or more of raw leaf tobacco is involved would be sentenced to a minimum of 90 days on a second conviction, a minimum of 180 days on a third conviction and a minimum of two years less a day on subsequent convictions.

In order to place this bill in context, it is important to describe the serious problem that has become the trafficking in contraband tobacco.

As members will recall, the contraband tobacco market first became a significant issue in Canada in the late 1980s and early 1990s. During that period, more and more legally manufactured Canadian cigarettes destined for the duty-free market began making their way back into the Canadian underground economy. The high retail price of legitimate cigarettes made smuggling them back across the border a lucrative illicit business.

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police and Canada Customs seized record quantities of contraband tobacco. The RCMP was also engaged in investigating this illegal activity at its source. These investigations eventually led to negotiated settlements involving several tobacco companies paying more than $1.5 billion in criminal fines and civil restitution.

However, the illicit tobacco market in Canada has rebounded in recent years and once again has become an acute problem.

Tobacco is not just a Canadian problem. The illicit trafficking of tobacco is a multi-billion dollar business worldwide today, fuelling organized crime and corruption and spurring addiction to a deadly product.

Last year smuggling experts, customs officials and diplomats of nearly 160 countries, including Canada, gathered in Geneva, Switzerland to finalize the development of what had eluded governments for decades, and that was an international instrument allowing for a global crackdown on the black market in tobacco.

Under the auspices of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, a global treaty to curb tobacco use, delegates worked to complete protocol to stop cigarette smuggling.

Illicit tobacco feeds an underground economy that supports many of the most violent actors on the world stage. Organized crime syndicates and terrorist groups facilitate global distribution and use the profits to finance their activities.

Perhaps even more troubling is the impact that smuggling has on the public health crisis caused by tobacco. Worldwide, one out of 10 adults dies prematurely from tobacco-related diseases such as lung cancer, emphysema, cardiovascular disease and stroke. If the trend continues to hold, tobacco will kill about 500 million people.

By 2030, that figure will reach eight million deaths a year and with cigarettes being heavily marketed in poor countries, 80% of those deaths will be in the developing world. Over the 21st century, an estimated one billion people could die from tobacco use.

In Canada today, illegal tobacco activity is primarily connected to illegal manufacture and not to the diversion of legally manufactured products as it was in the past. I should point out also that it includes, to a lesser degree, the illegal importation of counterfeit cigarettes and other forms of illicit tobacco from overseas.

Organized crime plays a central role in the contraband tobacco trade in Canada and that means this illegal activity is linked with other kinds of crime. Most of the organized crime groups across the country involved in the illicit tobacco market are also active in other forms of criminality.

The problem is further complicated by the international aspect of the illicit tobacco trade. Transnational crime of the type found in contraband tobacco smuggling is considered a threat to public safety and national security and has a direct impact on individual Canadians, small businesses and the economy. It also has implications for relationships with our international partners, especially the United States.

On this issue, I would like to point out that Canada and the United States share a long history of law enforcement co-operation across the border. Recent and ongoing threat assessments have identified that organized crime is the most prevalent threat encountered at the shared border. This includes significant levels of contraband trafficking, ranging from illicit drugs and tobacco to firearms, notably handguns, and human smuggling. In this regard, Canada and the United States have explored the concept of integrated cross-border maritime law enforcement operations. Joint maritime law enforcement vessels, manned by specially trained and designated Canadian and U.S. law enforcement officers, have been authorized to enforce the law on both sides of the international boundary line in the course of integrated cross-border operations.

The contraband tobacco market is driven largely by illegal operations in both Canada and the United States. The provinces of Ontario and Quebec have the highest concentration of contraband tobacco manufacturing operations, the majority of the high-volume smuggling points and the largest number of consumers of contraband tobacco.

The 2012 Criminal Intelligence Service Canada National Threat Assessment on Organized and Serious Crime in Canada identified 58 organized crime groups that were involved in the contraband tobacco trade throughout Canada, 35 of which were currently operating in central Canada. These criminals networks reinvest profits from the manufacture and distribution of contraband tobacco into other forms of criminality, including trafficking of illicit drugs, firearms and human smuggling.

Furthermore, the RCMP reports that violence and intimidation tactics continue to be associated with the contraband tobacco trade. Since 2008 and up to May 2012, the RCMP has laid approximately 4,925 charges under the Excise Act, 2001, and disrupted approximately 66 organized crime groups involved in the contraband tobacco trade throughout Canada. During that time period, approximately 3.5 million cartons, unmarked bags of cigarettes, were seized nationally by the RCMP, along with numerous vehicles, vessels and properties.

It is clear that the illicit tobacco trade is dominated by criminal organizations motivated by the lure of significant profits and relatively low risks. Enforcement actions are therefore directed at increasing the risks associated with contraband tobacco activities: dismantling illegal manufacturing facilities; disrupting distribution supply lines; apprehending key figures; confiscating conveyances such as trucks and boats; and seizing the proceeds of crime. These actions have the dual goal of disrupting the illicit flow of tobacco and weakening the organized crime groups involved in the production, distribution, smuggling and trafficking of contraband tobacco.

Contraband tobacco remains a serious threat to our communities and if left unchecked, organized crime will continue to profit at the expense of the health and safety of Canadians. Overall, the proposals in Bill S-16 represent a tailored approach to the imposition of mandatory minimum penalties for serious contraband tobacco activities. The bill proposes minimum penalties only in cases where there are certain aggravating factors present, such as a conviction for a second or subsequent time.

The Government of Canada recognizes that contraband tobacco smuggling is a serious problem. Canadians want to be protected from offenders involved in these contraband tobacco smuggling operations, which threaten their safety and that of their families. They also want to be protected from the violence that is associated with contraband tobacco activities.

Protecting society from criminals is a responsibility the government takes seriously. Accordingly, this bill is part of the government's continued commitment to take steps to protect Canadians and make our streets and communities safer. Canadians want a justice system that has clear and strong law that denounces and punishes serious crimes, including illicit activities involving contraband tobacco. They want laws that impose penalties that adequately reflect the serious nature of these crimes. This bill would do that.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the parliamentary secretary for his speech. He mentioned that it was an election promise the Conservatives had made a long time ago. We know that tobacco smuggling is a terrible problem in terms of public safety, health and lost revenue for the government. It was said that tobacco smuggling could benefit organize crime.

Knowing this and the problems it raises, what consultations has the government carried out on this bill, which will have a major impact on organized crime and the provinces? A number of provinces, including Quebec, have studied this issue. Before introducing the bill, did the government hold consultations not only with the provinces but also with the other levels of government and the first nations?

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government always consults with the provinces, primarily at federal-provincial-territorial conferences. Clearly, crimes relating to cigarette smuggling are of concern to both the provinces and the federal government. The provinces are responsible for the administration of justice. Therefore, they must use their own resources to resolve this issue. Consultations are continuing, as always.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, this is a particularly important bill in my region.

My local health services, my county health unit and so forth, have come out in support of it. In Peterborough this week, for example, one of the local newspaper has taken this on as an issue. We are trying to prevent cheap cigarettes from getting to our school kids.

One of the deterrents that we have put in place to prevent people from becoming addicted to tobacco and then suffering the tobacco-related illnesses later in life is to make them cost prohibitive. Often these contraband cigarettes are exceptionally cheap. They undermine the tax system as well.

Setting that aside, we want to ensure we are preventing children from having access to tobacco. Could the member speak about the importance of doing that and why the government has brought in this bill in at this time?

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Mr. Speaker, obviously the issue of contraband tobacco attacks Canada's initiatives on many fronts.

It attacks it on the health issue. It attacks it on the issue of gaining access to a dangerous product for many youth. The Department of Health has taken many steps to bring forward warnings of what the dangers of tobacco are, as well as hiding them behind screens when it comes to purchasing them or putting the grotesque warning signs on the packages. Those are the cigarettes that are distributed legally.

What can we do about cheap tobacco finding its way onto schoolyards at a very affordable price? It is a matter of breaking up this activity because it is bad for health. It also finances organized crime, which we know uses the funds, which it does not pay taxes on, to fuel its many activities, one of them being the trafficking in human beings.

It is a vicious circle when it comes to breaking up illegal activities. They are all very integrally tied. One of the them that seems to be harder to discern is tobacco. Tobacco is legal when it is sold under the rules and regulations of the Government of Canada. Therefore, how does one really tell, without looking carefully, whether a cigarette being smoked has been legally produced and sold versus one that has not?

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

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that all Canadians should share the concern about contraband tobacco and keeping tobacco out of the hands of kids.

However, when we look at the record of both the Liberals and the Conservatives on this, probably the most effective thing that can be done is effective ports policing. When I talked to tobacco companies about this recently, they estimated that more than half of the contraband tobacco in our country came through the port of Vancouver from China and the fake was so good they even included excise stamps that looked legitimate.

In the 1990s, the Liberals eliminated the ports police in Vancouver and now the Conservatives have cut so far back on border services that my understanding is we do not check any containers coming into Vancouver unless we have a specific tip about a specific illegal substance being in that container.

Not providing resources has provided a much bigger loophole to drive contraband tobacco through than would have been the case before.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I would add that in conjunction with the bill, there would be a special enforcement force of 50 specially trained RCMP officers who would be dedicated specifically to breaking up the contraband trafficking of illegal tobacco.

The hon. member heard me in my speech, I trust, talk about a specially trained joint marine force for the United States and Canada. It will have a customs mandate and will do cross-border verification within the marine context.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I agree that contraband cigarettes are a real problem. They are a threat in Canada, and they fuel organized crime.

I am wondering if the hon. member has any thoughts on the cuts to Canada Border Services Agency and whether we should not rethink those cuts. In terms of not just contraband tobacco but, obviously, contraband drugs, should we not bring back the canine crews that used to go through imports to Canada at the border to spot contraband tobacco, just as they can spot other illicit drugs?

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada has invested significantly in this area. In my speech, I noted that we are strengthening the perimeter not only in Canada but in North America. We are working jointly with the United States in enforcing our common security interests.

Of course, contraband is as present in the United States as it is in Canada, so we will continue to work with the United States, our very close partners, in strengthening security for both our countries. We will continue to invest significantly to break up trafficking in illicit cigarettes.

[Jean Rousseau, NDP, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will once again ask the same question that I have repeated several times.

Cutbacks at the Canada Border Services Agency, at the RCMP and in the special units have been detrimental to the fight against trafficking in weapons, cigarettes and even drugs. If the government keeps cutting these agencies' budgets, it will be impossible to fight crime, even by increasing prison sentences and so on, measures that have absolutely no impact in the field.

People need real resources. I have spoken to police officers on the front lines and that is what they have told me. The RCMP boats on Lake Champlain and Lac Memphrémagog have not been maintained and have been out of service for two years now. RCMP officers cannot even put their boats in the water to chase the boats that are crossing the lake with huge quantities of cigarettes.

It is impossible to fight crime without putting resources in the right places.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Mr. Speaker, we are continuing to invest in public safety.

As I said earlier, a new unit of 50 RCMP officers will be set up specifically to fight drug trafficking and cigarette smuggling.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Mr. Speaker, a little while ago, my colleague from Brossard—La Prairie asked a question to which he did not receive a very precise reply.

When he asked whether there had been any consultations, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice replied that consultations were continuing.

Does that mean that no consultations were held before the bill was drafted? This happened, for instance, with Bill C-49, when the minister made the decision first and then consulted people about what should be done after the fact.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the verb “to consult” can be conjugated in the past, present or future tenses and the noun “consultation” covers the past, present and future.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill S-16, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, to tackle contraband tobacco.

As the parliamentary secretary said, contraband tobacco is a serious threat. The NDP takes this very seriously. We know that contraband tobacco has just as many repercussions for public health and safety as it does for lost tax revenues.

I will focus more on public health and safety a little later. To begin with, we have long been calling on the government to do something about this and to work with the communities that are affected by this the most. Unfortunately, when I asked the parliamentary secretary about this I did not get a very good answer.

My riding, Brossard—La Prairie, is close to the border. When I was campaigning in 2008, I was asked questions about contraband tobacco.

We want to study the bill further. We want it to be referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, of which I am a member, so that we can ask questions and see where this bill is coming from and where we can take it.

Let us be clear. We are not giving the Conservatives a blank cheque. We want to support the bill in order to truly get into the details, consult experts, witnesses and the public, and see what we can bring to it.

These are things that could be interesting to look at in the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, on which I sit with our justice critic, the hon. member for Gatineau. We are already doing very worthwhile work there. I am talking about the committee in general. I am truly proud to be part of it.

My question to the parliamentary secretary was on consultation. This is a very important bill. We know that this is a major problem. However, far too often we have seen this government introduce a bill without having done any consultation. It is very important that the communities be consulted.

The bill must be examined in committee. When the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights receives a bill, we talk about some of the important aspects. We must ensure that the rule of law prevails and that the Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms are respected. In this case, we are talking about minimum sentencing. It is something that would be well worth looking into. It is also important that we listen to what the experts have to say.

As the hon. member for Compton—Stanstead clearly stated, there is a problem with regard to resources. The government is introducing a bill, but it is not providing more resources. On the contrary, in the most recent budget, the government made cuts to both police and border resources. That is a major problem. We also still have doubts about the consultation process.

The Conservatives have introduced a bill that will affect everyone—the provinces, the territories and aboriginal reserves—but they are not providing the resources needed to enforce it. That is something we are wondering about. We will have to look at this issue in more detail and examine it more closely.

Our public safety critic mentioned how important this issue is and the impact it could have. When we talk about smuggling, we sometimes think only about what is happening here. However, more and more contraband tobacco is coming from other countries. We need to look into that and take it into account.

Why should we work to combat smuggling? As I mentioned, the NDP supports the fight against contraband tobacco. It is a public safety issue.

I have here a report published by the RCMP in 2008, entitled the “Contraband Tobacco Enforcement Strategy”, in which the RCMP states that it is very concerned about:

...the increased involvement of organized crime implicated in illegal tobacco activities...[Profits] from illegal tobacco products are also funding other criminal activities, such as drug and gun trafficking.

Knowing that tobacco smuggling is a gateway for organized crime, we must do something to address the problem. We spoke about the impact that this could have in terms of global security. We must combat smuggling, but as I mentioned earlier, we must also ensure that the committees have the resources they need.

I would like to take my hat off to the government, just the same, for one little thing that it has done. It announced the addition of 50 officers to the RCMP task force on tobacco smuggling. This is a step in the right direction. However, we have to take a broader look at the issue and consider the fact that contraband tobacco comes in through the port of Vancouver and across our border with the United States. An additional 50 officers is a good thing, but still we know budgets are being slashed and positions are being cut. We cannot be sure that the people are actually in the field. It is clear with these cuts that the government is not moving in the right direction.

The parliamentary secretary mentioned that smuggling is a public health issue, and we too are very aware of this. As we know, contraband or illegal tobacco costs less. We also know who is involved: it is young people, primarily, who cannot necessarily afford to buy the legal products that are more expensive. They will therefore try to buy contraband cigarettes. However, studies have shown that this increases smoking among young people. It is true that this is a major problem, a huge problem, and we have to do something about it.

One thing the parliamentary secretary did not talk about was the quality of the product. Contraband or illegal products may come in from other countries. As my colleague, our public safety critic, mentioned, some products have labels that look almost exactly like the labels on totally legal products. However, there is no quality control of contraband products. This is another aspect that must be considered when we look at the whole issue of illegal or contraband products. This is why the NDP wants to take action on this issue.

I also mentioned lost revenue. According to the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, since 2008, it is estimated that tax revenue loss resulting from sales of illegal tobacco products has fluctuated between $1.5 billion and $2.4 billion. This is a huge amount of money that could be used for other purposes. Once again, contraband products are linked to organized crime. The money goes into the criminals’ pockets rather than being invested in social services or in programs that could be better managed. This is another reason why the problem must be tackled.

With regard to the bill itself, when RCMP officers talk about contraband, they are talking about any tobacco product that does not comply with the provisions of all applicable federal and provincial statutes. This includes importation, stamping, marking, manufacturing, distribution and payment of duties and taxes. They talk about a legislative framework for contraband tobacco that is not necessarily limited to what is proposed in Bill S-16.

Let us take a look at what currently exists, even before passage of Bill S-16. I am not sure that I agree with what the parliamentary secretary said. He said there is no instrument and that police forces cannot use certain laws. The opposite is true. First of all, offences are linked to contraband tobacco and offenders can be prosecuted under the Excise Act, 2001, or a number of general provisions in the Criminal Code. Under the provisions of the Excise Act, 2001, certain offences are already punishable by fines and prison terms of up to five years, so there already are some instruments. At the present time, the Criminal Code has no offence specifically related to contraband tobacco. However, all police forces can enforce the provisions of the Criminal Code. Consequently, by adding offences relating to contraband tobacco, Bill S-16 enables all police forces to take action on contraband tobacco.

What, specifically, does Bill S-16 do? It creates a maximum sentence of imprisonment for six months, in the case of a first offence, on summary conviction. It is imprisonment for five years in the case of an indictable offence. More specifically, it creates mandatory minimum prison sentences for repeat offenders—it is important to point this out—where a large volume of tobacco products is involved. This means 10,000 cigarettes or 10 kg of other tobacco products. To be precise, the mandatory minimum sentence for an indictable offence is imprisonment for 90 days for a second conviction, imprisonment for 180 days for a third conviction and imprisonment for two years less a day for subsequent convictions.

Contraband tobacco is a serious and grave problem that we have to tackle. The people watching us must understand the extent of the problem. According to a summary prepared by the Library of Parliament, a recent study found that national estimates range from 15% to 33% of the tobacco market being contraband, with greater percentages in Quebec and Ontario. This problem has been raised numerous times in my riding, not just by people I meet when I go door to door, but also by stakeholders.

Recently, in 2012, the Committee on Public Finance of the National Assembly of Quebec conducted a study on measures to counter the consumption of contraband tobacco, which found that in 2007, more than one-third of the cigarettes smoked in Quebec and Ontario were contraband and over 90% of these illegal cigarettes came from aboriginal reserves and lands.

The study report also discusses the issue of consultation, which I raised in my first question to the parliamentary secretary. There do not seem to have been any consultations done before the bill was introduced, and we have some questions about that. The lack of consultation is not surprising. I have seen this often since 2011, when I was elected, particularly in the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. The Conservatives are not in the habit of consulting the provinces or aboriginal people, particularly when it comes to bills that directly affect them.

What we want to verify in committee, however, is that this government has done its homework in this regard. In Quebec and Ontario, for example, contraband tobacco is a major issue. Those provinces have been working on the problem for years. We want to make sure that legislation at the federal level will not run counter to what the provinces are doing already.

Consultations are therefore important, because there are provinces already working on this issue. In fact, the first recommendation in the 2012 report of the National Assembly of Quebec says just that. I am going to read it, because I think it is very important:

That the Government of Quebec create a joint commission involving five parties, namely the governments of Quebec, Ontario, Canada and the United States as well as the Mohawk nation, to fight contraband tobacco and to develop an action plan dealing, among other things, with:

A “win-win” agreement among the governments and aboriginal people to stop the large-scale tax-exempt sale of tobacco to non-aboriginal people.

In its pre-budget consultation brief to the Standing Committee on Finance, the National Coalition Against Contraband Tobacco also made the same recommendation and called for more co-operation on that front.

A 2009 report from the Government Task Force on Illicit Tobacco Products raised another point: first nations communities in particular need to participate and collaborate in all initiatives to combat the problem of contraband tobacco in Canada.

We must certainly ensure that any measures aimed at addressing the problem also include consultations with first nations, as well as the necessary resources. Fighting contraband takes resources. Reserves need police resources to manage the problem.

There is also a problem with border resources. My colleague from Compton—Stanstead gave a real-life example that proved that people in these communities do not have the funding or the tools they need to address this problem. When introducing a bill that is designed to tackle this issue, the government also needs to ensure that the resources will follow. That is true for contraband that originates in the United States and contraband from foreign countries.

My colleague, our critic for public safety, the MP for Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, has mentioned to me that cuts to CBSA would not help. There are issues with contraband coming into the Port of Vancouver and not having resources to actually look into containers, not having the manpower to tackle that issue. That is a huge problem.

We did not see anything in this budget or the previous budget to ensure that we have the necessary resources to tackle that issue.

The NDP does not always oppose mandatory minimum sentences, which this bill provides for. We have supported this notion in the past, but we always have some reservations about it. We always need to ask ourselves whether this tool is really necessary. This issue really needs to be examined in committee, because it is important to look at the impact this can have on provincial prison populations and determine the additional costs, not only at the federal level, but also at the provincial and municipal levels. We also need to make sure the charter is being respected.

As I already mentioned, given that this bill came from the Senate rather than the government, once again, it bypasses the mechanisms that ensure that the charter is being respected. Unfortunately, that is a problem.

Coming back to some of the concerns raised regarding what the bill proposes, a report released by the Barreau du Québec states:

Nothing in the report [the RCMP's 2011 to 2012 progress report on contraband tobacco] challenges the effectiveness or adequacy of the measures currently set out in the Excise Act, 2001, the Criminal Code or other provincial criminal laws for the purpose of prosecuting offences related to contraband tobacco.

It goes on to say:

In fact, the RCMP did not make any recommendations regarding amending the legislation, and particularly the Criminal Code, which in its current form is already an effective tool that police officers can use to prosecute offences related to contraband tobacco.

These are some of the questions we are asking ourselves, and they need to be examined more thoroughly. That is why we want to send this bill to committee. We understand that it is very important to address contraband tobacco for public health and safety reasons, as I mentioned. All of these questions are crucial. Many people, including some of my constituents, have told me that we need to tackle this problem. However, we also need to look at the tools that are being used and the tools in this bill and go forward from there.

On an issue as important as this, one that involves amending the Criminal Code, it is really unfortunate that Bill S-16 had to come from the Senate, the other place, which is unelected. We have to wonder whether that is the ideal place to introduce such a bill.

As everyone in the House knows, the Senate is mired in scandal. We wonder how appropriate it is to introduce Senate bills in the House. Why go through the Senate? It is a good question that is hard to answer.

As far as civil society is concerned, I have met with people in my riding and I have also met with a number of groups, because this is a major problem. There is the National Coalition Against Contraband Tobacco and the Canadian Convenience Stores Association, which has been running a campaign on the ground for years.

These groups represent convenience stores and chambers of commerce. There is public support for tackling contraband. In my opinion it is essential.

They said:

It is also important that all levels of government—including federal, provincial, municipal and first nations—meet this challenge...It is important that governments collaborate with aboriginal communities to find innovative solutions.

They are quite pleased that 50 RCMP officers are being assigned to this problem because that was one of their recommendations. This is a step in the right direction.

Resources and consultation are the problems. One thing is for sure: when the NDP forms the government in 2015, it will consult the public, including aboriginal communities, before introducing such an important bill.