Bill C-3 (Historical)

An Act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts

This enactment amends the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act to, among other things, rename the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police as the Public Complaints and Review Commission. It also amends the Canada Border Services Agency Act to, among other things, grant to that Commission powers, duties and functions in relation to the Canada Border Services Agency, including the power to conduct a review of the activities of that Agency and to investigate complaints concerning the conduct of any of that Agency’s officers or employees. It also makes consequential amendments to other Acts.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss to not comment back and ask a question about the parliamentary secretary's parting shot over the bow on military-style assault rifles, a term that has no definition in this country. If she is referring to military-grade firearms that are already prohibited in this country, and have been for decades, I do not understand the use of that term, other than to confuse the public on the issue. They may not otherwise understand the laws we currently have in this country.

Can the parliamentary secretary describe what a military-style assault rifle is? In addition, can she tell us what legislation is being proposed to target gangs and gun violence perpetrated by criminals in this country, rather than targeting law-abiding gun owners?

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will leave it to the Minister of Public Safety to bring forward any legislation. I am not going to presuppose what he will bring forward. I would echo what my colleague from Parkdale—High Park said about moving the ability to classify rifles away from politicians and to the RCMP.

I would challenge the member for Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner that guns and gangs are taken very seriously by government. We are investing in law enforcement and youth, preventing youth from joining gangs and giving law enforcement the funding and tools they need to carry out and enforce laws, and we are investing in border services.

We have also ensured that when a criminal is convicted, firearms are forfeited to the Crown. That was in Bill C-71, and that measure was opposed by the Conservative Party. Rather than those guns going to a friend or relative, they are now forfeited to the Crown.

That said, the question has nothing to do with Bill C-3. I would call on my colleague from Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner and other members in this House to support Bill C-3.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I stand today in this chamber and am pleased to speak for the first time as a re-elected member of Parliament for Yorkton—Melville. I and my fellow Saskatchewan caucus colleagues thank all our constituents for painting the province of Saskatchewan completely blue.

Bill C-3 actually mirrors Bill C-98, an act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts. As we all know, the bill took so long to introduce that it was not passed prior to the 2019 federal election.

This legislation proposes to repurpose and rename the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to the “public complaints and review commission”. Under its new name, the commission will also be responsible for reviewing civilian complaints against the Canadian Border Services Agency. The bill would ensure that all Canadians law enforcement agencies would have an oversight body.

Canadians expect effective oversight of federal law enforcement agencies. The Liberals made a promise to do this in 2015.

During its previous mandate, the Liberal government took so long to act on this issue that Bill C-98 failed to be passed prior to the 2019 election.

The former Privy Council Office chief, Mel Cappe, had been hired to conduct an independent report and provide his recommendations in June 2017, which he did. However, it was only because of an access to information request by CBC News that Parliament even became aware of this report. For two years, the government and the then, and now no longer, public safety minister from Saskatchewan sat on that report.

We, who served in the previous Parliament, were counting down the days and nights until the session came to a close. Then, at the last possible moment, this rather straightforward and simple but essential legislation was finally introduced. Why did it take the previous majority Liberal government three and a half years to draft and introduce Bill C-98 to the House? In the eleventh hour, it was too late to deal with such a critical promise that impacted public safety.

The Liberals' poor management and bad decision-making impacted RCMP officers, who had to be deployed and dedicated to dealing with illegal border crossings. They were pulled from other details, from monitoring returned ISIS fighters, tackling organized crime. They were pulled from rural detachments, where the RCMP is already short staffed and dealing with an increase in rural crime. The claim that there are more police available in rural Canada is not true, a statement made and not followed through on.

When the Liberal majority government was ineptly unable to keep an election promise at the eleventh hour, so as to not appear to have broken even more promises, it meant an even longer wait, through the whole election process, through the weeks of delay before the House was finally called back by the Prime Minister to sit just before Christmas for a short time only to go into the winter break. Here we finally are today in a second attempt to get the job done of Bill C-3.

The government has been plagued by inefficiency and lack of foresight since the beginning of its first mandate, further hamstringed by one ethical breach after another, through brazen attitudes of entitlement, to the foolish boldness of demanding and coercing our independent justice system and principled people to bow to executive power.

Just this past week we have seen the frightening fallout of the government putting their friends ahead of good governance: A violent man sentenced to life in prison in 2006 for viciously murdering his wife was granted day parole in the fall of 2019. His case manager indicated a moderate risk of reoffending and he was to avoid relationships but could have encounters with women, as long as it was strictly sexual. As a result, a young woman lost her life.

Who in their right mind would create the environment for any woman to be put in harm's way like this? Ex-parole board commissioner Dave Blackburn stated that “such a condition is 'unbelievable'”.

The Liberal government has to take responsibility for a foolish decision it made in 2015 to not renew any parole board appointees, purely a political decision that removed all historical experience from the board and replaced them all, through the Privy Council, with Liberal appointees.

I believe the desk will be pleased, Mr. Speaker, to hear I will be splitting my time with the member for Kootenay—Columbia.

Since then, there has been a more than 25% increase in the awarding of day parole in Canada. This is ridiculous. Canadians have no faith that an internal inquiry will get to the bottom of the incompetence that falls on the Liberal government. An external inquiry of the national Parole Board must take place. The government does not have credibility when it comes to dealing with its own self-serving, intentional mistakes.

As well, we know the delay in bringing forward this legislation was not due in any way to so many consultations. As a matter of fact, again and again, we have heard from stakeholders that they were not consulted. From what I have heard today on the floor, that has not changed.

This legislation proposes changes to the Canada Border Services Agency, yet the Customs and Immigration Union was never contacted. This is another blatant inconsistency by the government. On one end, there was no consultation. On the other, there was the virtue signalling of setting up advisory councils for our veterans but doing nothing other than giving a platform for photo ops and the appearance of consultation before the reveal.

The fact that the Liberal government could not be bothered to consult the biggest stakeholders, the union representatives of the CBSA front-line workers, says it is not about the workers. It appears the Liberals feel they can pick and choose which unions they are going to give special treatment to while others are totally ignored.

Conservative members will work with the government in the interests of the principles of the bill, but rest assured we want to make sure that the people impacted are part of the committee review process. We want to ensure that proper committee time is taken to look at the changes to the RCMP Act and the CBSA Act, and make sure we are doing a service to the people who will be impacted by them, whether it is on a public complaints process or other elements.

As good as this policy is, it needs good government to implement it, not a government consistently mired in scandal that loses track of its responsibilities and then, concerned about its re-election, attempts to rush this legislation through irresponsibly. It does not need a government that is so out of touch that it fails to consult with the Canadians who would be impacted.

The government's approach demonstrates a complete lack of accountability, care and respect for Canadians. There is unrest across western Canada that must not be ignored. I would warn that we must no longer be fuelled by intentional actions that encourage that unrest instead of building consensus and recognizing and celebrating healthy interdependence across our amazing country.

Our nation, and all people of Canada, deserve a government that legislates responsibly, respectfully and with the best interests of all Canadians in mind. I look forward to the day we form that government.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I remember, and I am sure the member will recall, that when we came back in 2015, legislation had been carried over from when Stephen Harper was the prime minister. He had his legislative agenda, but toward the end of that Parliament he was not able to get a number of bills through because of when they were introduced. Liberal ministers reviewed that legislation and on occasion brought some of it forward.

Would the member not agree that, when a parliamentary session comes to an end, there is some benefit in terms of having legislation be debated all the way to the end of that session. That provides the opportunity, whether it is the same party in government or a new party in government, to continue on with that legislation.

That is how I see this particular piece of legislation. I suspect, given the comments from all members of the House, that it is a good piece of legislation, it is a good starting point, and we owe today's starting point to when it was brought in during the last Parliament.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Mr. Speaker, we have agreed around this table that this is good legislation and it needs to come forward. The Liberals made a promise in 2015 that this would happen, but it did not even hit the floor of this place until we were going out the door. Studies were being done that were hidden. We would not have found out about what was going on unless the CBC made a request for information to know what was happening.

If we are working on this as a House and suddenly legislation is brought forward at the end of a session, I question the motives behind why that was done. I agree that there are times when a government gets legislation out so at least it is in the eyes of the House. However, we know no consultation was done and that came through loud and clear from the people who would be impacted by this legislation.

Unfortunately that still has not happened, and here we are discussing it again in the House. It is unfortunate that the people this legislation would impact did not have the opportunity to speak to it.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I beg your forgiveness, but as a new member of Parliament, and I am very proud to be a member of Parliament for the NDP in Alberta, what I do not understand is why it has taken so long for this legislation to come forward. As everyone knows, the NDP has been asking for this legislation for many years, certainly back to when Stephen Harper was prime minister. I am wondering how the member can talk about the delays when the delays began under a Conservative government.

I will read a quote, which states, “It is a basic principle of good human rights practice that agencies that have detention and police powers should be subject to independent oversight and the CBSA has both. It is time that the CBSA is held accountable through an independent and impartial process.”

In addition to why it took so long and knowing that this is important and that Canadians want this legislation, will the Conservative Party support this legislation?

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the member to the House. I ran in a nomination in her riding many years ago.

I agree that we should come to a consensus on this. I am very much sensing in the House that it is something we need to move forward on. Canadians expect it and it needs to be done. I look forward to the bill going to committee and getting the proper oversight there going forward.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, this is the first time I rise in the House this session and I want to thank the good constituents of my riding of Provencher for re-electing me and showing their confidence in me for the third time.

I want to recognize the world-class officers we have in both the CBSA and the RCMP. I am confused as to why the Liberal government would increase their workload by allowing the illegal migrants to come across the border in my riding, but also in Quebec at Roxham Road and in British Columbia. Does the member have any idea why the Liberals would want to do that and tax our good officers any more than they have been?

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Mr. Speaker, this is definitely an issue that was raised right across our country as the illegal immigrants were coming into Canada. The very fact that it was allowed in the first place is questionable. I will be very polite there.

The second thing is that, yes, it caused a great deal of dissension within the ranks of border services individuals, as well as the RCMP. The expectation is that they take this on when they are already pretty limited in their ability to succeed in the jobs they have. It creates more stress, quite honestly, for them in the workplace. For me, as a person who goes across that border and deals with people, we want people who are prepared and ready to do their jobs and not stretched to the nth degree.

[Rob Morrison, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Speaker, as this is my first speech, I want to take the opportunity to thank the great people in the Kootenay—Columbia riding for putting their trust and faith in me to represent them in Ottawa. The support from my family and friends was incredible and from my wife, Heather and our five children, Ryan, Rob, Kassidy, Chelsea and Kendall.

With 80,000 square kilometres, it was very challenging to travel and meet residents from all corners of the riding. The campaign team and volunteers did an outstanding job, working long hours every day.

I listened to the concerns, the priorities for softwood lumber and priorities with the firearms legislation. I also want to talk about supporting the mining industry, tourism, the energy sector, Alberta, as it is neighbouring our riding, and health.

I am pleased to speak to Bill C-3, an act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act. I do so today on behalf of many border officials in ports of Kingsgate, Nelway, Porthill, Roosville and Rykerts, all within the riding of Kootenay—Columbia.

I thank them for their service and I thank the CBSA Kootenay area chief of operations for leadership and dedication in ensuring the safety and security of our area. I also support the RCMP, which provides municipal, rural, provincial and federal policing throughout the Kootenay—Columbia riding.

I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the hard work and dedication of all the men and women who serve to protect this great nation from coast to coast.

One issue I heard when travelling throughout the riding was the word “accountability”, which is really interesting because that is exactly what we are talking about today.

I support internal investigations. In fact, I have been involved in many internal investigations in the RCMP in a 35-year career. I support independence. I believe we need independent investigations. It would be great to hear how this is going to work. I have not heard yet, with the delays in investigations. I know right now with the RCMP, which has an independent review, it is two, three or four years at least. We have some members on the old RCMP act and some members on the new act, and now we are going to change it again to have a new accountability process with this review committee.

I have heard some concerns about the consultation of CBSA with its union. I am also wondering about the consultation with the RCMP, as they are now working toward a union as well. Have we looked at the consultation there and have people come in? I look forward to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security having people come in so we can talk to them and see how they feel about what is happening.

One of the most important things that has not been brought up is training and service standards. What are the service standards of CBSA? What are the service standards of the RCMP? What exactly is the role of an RCMP member? The review committee can then understand what that person is going to do, what they should be doing and what they should not be doing, so they do not, because they have no experience in law enforcement, for example, think that behaviour is inappropriate when maybe it is or vice versa.

Developing service standards is a requirement before we can move forward with the bill, so that the review committee has a clear understanding of the role for CBSA and the role for the RCMP.

One thing that came up at one of the last meetings of the public safety committee was administrative issues that were not expected. I would be interested to hear from the government what those administrative issues were. Was it the hiring of new people? Was it the service standards or was it a union? I do not understand what administrative issues would have popped up in December.

The RCMP and CBSA are very reputable organizations. I want to be up front. They would welcome a well-thought-out, well-trained independent review, but not something where someone is appointed and we would run into the same issues we are having right now with the Parole Board.

I request that the government and the public safety minister answer some of these questions so that we can move forward in supporting this bill and the changes proposed in it.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in the last Parliament, as a rookie MP, I made the mistake of asking a question from someone else's seat. Thankfully the Chair was not aware of that, but I learned my lesson.

I thank the member for his speech and for the wisdom he brings to the position of deputy shadow critic for public safety, as well as for being on the public safety committee.

He mentioned service standards. I wonder if the member could provide an explanation or a better understanding of the type of service standards the public could expect in the role of a CBSA or RCMP officer and what that would actually look like. What would the member's recommendation be to the committee to consider as a parameter to be put into an amendment?

[Rob Morrison, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Speaker, on the service standards, law enforcement officers are trained in Regina. They have six months of training and go through a whole process of what they can do legally when they are arresting someone and how much force they can use. This is really sensitive in that in most cases, they do not need to use force and they would not. They would arrest someone, and it would be very calm. The person would go to jail and there would be no other issues. However, if there was violence involved, how much violence could the RCMP officer use to protect themselves and others?

It is really important that the people selected for this independent review committee specifically understand the powers of members of the RCMP and the CBSA, for example, in searching vehicles at the border and asking to look at what is in the trunk of a car. What are the powers? If they overextend those powers, what did they do to overextend them?

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the new member on his election to Parliament and on his first speech in the House. I am encouraged by his support for oversight of this law enforcement agency.

However, I wonder if the member shares the concerns expressed here today about the exclusion of consideration of complaints about the detention of people. Border agents have the power to arrest and detain people, with or without warrants. That seems to be excluded from the oversight.

Does the member have any concerns about that, since the border agents could arrest and hold children as well as adults without the possibility of complaints being dealt with?

[Rob Morrison, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Speaker, at this time, no, I do not have any concerns. I would like to see a review of the entire bill, which will happen when we sit in our committee meetings.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciated listening to my colleague, the member for Kootenay—Columbia, in the sense of his long record in the RCMP.

I would believe that probably from his experience and understanding of input when policy that will affect a new agency that does similar types of work is being developed, he might understand the value of input as the new policy and procedures are developed.

Could that member respond and tell us how he feels the value of the input from speaking to those people may have been missed and why it is so important?