Finance Committee on May 2nd, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Maybe you will this evening.

I have MP Perkins, then MP Lawrence and then MP Blaikie.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, committee members, for the warm welcome for joining the finance committee for the first time during this Parliament and for the first time as a first-term member of Parliament, who was elected for the fine riding of South Shore—St. Margarets in Nova Scotia in 2021.

You may recall, if you ever visited Nova Scotia, that it includes the beautiful towns of the UNESCO town of Lunenburg, Chester, Mahone Bay, and Peggy's Cove. We can't forget Peggy's Cove, which is the most visited tourism spot in Nova Scotia.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Yes, Mr. Beech.

[Terry Beech, Liberal, Burnaby North—Seymour, BC]

Welcome to the member.

As some advice, we are currently debating a very specific and novel subamendment. If the member opposite would like to speak more generically to the general motion, perhaps we could vote on the subamendment, vote on the amendment and get back to the main motion. Then we'd love to hear all about his worldly experience back home.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

I appreciate Mr. Beech's intervention. I would welcome you to the riding anytime, by the way, to visit those places. We'd love to see you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

MP Perkins, could we hear from you on the subamendment, please?

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

On the subamendment to the main motion, which is a question about finding Freeland and whether or not the minister will appear, or the Minister of Public Safety, frankly there are a few other ministers I'd like to see appear on this important omnibus bill.

Remember, omnibus bills were something that were promised would never happen under this government but are not a part of every budget. The effort to get the Minister of Public Safety—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

On a point of order, MP Blaikie.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Before Mr. Genuis leaves the room, I want to thank him for demonstrating some of the hazards of subbing in a committee. I hope to be able to say more soon, but I fear that he may be gone. I didn't want him to leave without my having the opportunity to offer that thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

MP Blaikie, yes, he is exiting the room. He said he will read the blues about what you had to say.

MP Perkins, on the subamendment, please, which is to add the Minister of Public Safety, that's what was being spoken to.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

I appreciate Mr. Blaikie's intervention, and I must say that I appreciate the work he does in the House. I knew his father. I was a young staffer in the Mulroney government when his father served in Parliament very effectively. He was a large, imposing man in the House, as Mr. Blaikie is as well, and he represents his father well.

On the amendment and the Minister of Public Safety, there are a lot of questions to ask the Minister of Public Safety. He is part of the cabinet that oversees a number of important things, including the expenditure of our police forces and the parliamentary appropriations to the budget for that.

Of course, there are a lot of questions around the issue of the effectiveness of the expenditures from my province to the RCMP in terms of community policing. I think the minister would have some insight, in particular, on the recent Mass Casualty Commission report on the Portapique mass murders in my community in Nova Scotia, where 22 Nova Scotians and an unborn child were murdered, and the fact that it took the RCMP 45 minutes to get to the site after the phone calls that were made within minutes of the first murder being reported.

I would also like to understand why the RCMP took so long to set up a security corridor. It was so long that the mass murderer was actually out of the community before they set that up.

I would also like to know from the Minister of Public Safety how a person with a 72-page rap sheet who was known to the RCMP and to the Halifax police for a variety of crimes—like assault, being convicted of assaulting a 15-year-old and putting him in hospital, and threatening to kill police officers, and who had been reported to have illegal firearms many times and to have committed spousal abuse many times—managed to get a NEXUS card.

As we know—if you have read the report or attended any of the Mass Casualty Commission hearings, as I did—that individual got the NEXUS card from the Canada Border Services Agency, which the Minister of Public Safety is responsible for. This was after he had committed all of these assaults, had all of these complaints, assaulted his father and threatened to kill police officers, yet he still got a NEXUS card.

Why is a NEXUS card important in this discussion? The NEXUS card is important because four of the five firearms that were found in his vehicle after the RCMP located and killed the mass murderer were brought in illegally from the United States. They were bought at gun shows in the United States by an individual friend—not him directly, but he was there—who then resold them to him, and he brought them across the border. He brought them across the border in his truck, with his partner occasionally in the vehicle, using his fast pass NEXUS card to get through the border and not have his truck inspected. He brought these firearms in that way.

I think the Minister of Public Safety has to be available to answer questions around how the agency he's responsible for expends its dollars in this budget in order to ensure that we are kept safe at our borders. It's probable that a fairly fundamental element of the sovereignty of a nation is its ability to police the border. Our inability to police the border is evident with how a NEXUS card was given to the mass murderer.

I think the Minister of Public Safety needs to answer for those questions. In fact, I think he needs to answer for the questions, as my colleague Mr. Genuis said, around the issues of foreign interference, which we heard in the House today, and when they were notified about personal threats against a member of Parliament. That, again, goes to the expenditures of RCMP, Canadian border security, CSIS and our intelligence expenditures, which that minister is responsible for.

I think it's vitally important that he appear and answer those questions.

In fact, some may even remember that, during the public inquiry into the blockade, the trucker convoy, it was discovered, of course, that no police service had actually asked the Minister of Public Safety to invoke the Emergencies Act. He has never answered properly in the House for his claims in the House of Commons that he was recommending that to cabinet because police forces had actually asked for that.

I think there is a lot to account for in the expenditure of the responsibilities of the Minister of Public Safety. I know that it's a difficult situation for him, as it would be for any public safety minister, to actually go the fine line, being careful about what the minister can and cannot say publicly about national security issues. However, we're asking some fairly simple questions, and he is being briefed by his police services and his security agency services. He's, presumably, publicly representing the advice that he's gotten from them or that he, in some cases, has overturned.

If he's getting advice that says that it's okay to give a NEXUS card to somebody with a 72-page rap sheet, we'd like to know how the Canada Border Services Agency budget is being monitored in terms of its effectiveness, its performance. Did the Canada Border Services Agency executives get bonuses in those years when the mass killer received his pass and then was able to come across the border quite easily, without any inspection whatsoever of the illegal firearms he had? We could also speak to the fact that he was able to obtain a firearm from an individual who passed away, and for whom he was the executor of the estate in New Brunswick. He then took the firearm himself. There's also the question about how the minister reacted or found the advice he got on how to deal with the fact that others, who had licences, had actually purchased the ammunition for this individual.

There is a lot we can still talk about. I represent a fishing riding; I know I mentioned that earlier. I have 7,000 commercial fishermen in my riding. I have a number of other questions for other ministers as well, which I would like to ask. On the issue of ministerial accountability before committees, in my first meeting of Fisheries and Oceans in this Parliament, the minister came to speak—it was her first appearance in the new Parliament—about estimates. We had requested in that committee, and the Liberals had agreed—in fact it was unanimous—that the minister appear for two hours. We had all prepared for a two-hour hearing with the minister. While we were in the committee room, 15 minutes beforehand, the clerk texted all of us and said the minister had decided to cut her appearance to an hour.

A minister is invited as a guest. Obviously, we can't compel the ministers to come, but when a minister agrees to come for two hours, and we plan for two hours, I think it's incumbent upon the minister to stay for the two hours. I think it's disrespectful to Parliament when a minister does not stay for two hours. In fact, I think it's disrespectful for a minister, given that we have a number of parties around the table, to think that one can adequately question the minister on an omnibus bill and all the elements of an omnibus bill in simply one hour. I think the committee is actually being generous by requiring her to be here for only a two-hour session. I think it would be totally within the committee's rights to ask her to appear for much more than that, given the number of programs in this bill.

We've talked about the Minister of Public Safety. Perhaps we could talk about the Minister of Industry. I was the fisheries critic. Regarding the fisheries department, in case you're not aware of the expenditures of the government....We've often talked about the growth of this government. It has grown by almost 80,000 public servants in the time of this government, which is a massive growth.

I'll give you a small example. In my part of the world, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has grown from 10,000 to 15,000 employees in three years. If you were to think those are employees being put out into the field to ensure we have better fisheries science, that we have better fisheries management, that we have better fisheries enforcement, well, you would be mistaken, because the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, in that 5,000, hired over 1,200 people at the head office. It hired another 400 people in HR.

You may think 400 people is not a lot for a department of 15,000 people, but that's on top of the more than 400 people the Department of Fisheries and Oceans already had in HR. This department of 15,000 people now apparently needs 832 employees in Ottawa to manage payroll. Yes, it would have been great if they were all in the south shore of Nova Scotia, or other particular parts of the country, but apparently Ottawa was the focus of where they had to be.

Not to be outdone, because of course the people in the finance part of the fisheries department actually control where everyone goes, so the finance department in Fisheries and Oceans is now over 1,000 people of the 15,000 people in the department. Some 200 were hired in the last three years just for corporate strategy.

I know that's being effective—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

There's a point of order by Mr. Beech.

[Terry Beech, Liberal, Burnaby North—Seymour, BC]

I'm sorry. I just stepped out for a second. Can I assume the subamendment has been resolved, since we're talking about fisheries? I just want to check and make sure we're still dealing with the subamendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

We're still on the subamendment of MP Perkins, and it's about public safety.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

You didn't miss the boat. We would have called you in. We would have given Mr. Beech that courtesy. We would have waited, but this is in the context of ministerial accountability. We're discussing—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Public safety, yes.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

—public safety and the finding Freeland main motion. If we can find a way to make sure that we're not only finding Freeland, but we're finding the Minister of Public Safety unless, I would venture that....I will probably move a subamendment in a little while to say that the finding Freeland effort should be complemented by the finding Champagne amendment. That would move forward, because the department of industry, as well, has a huge amount in this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

We're suspending for 10 minutes.

We have a change over going on here with the interpreters.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

We're back, everybody.

MP Perkins, you were on, and then I have MP Lawrence, MP Blaikie and then MP Kurek after.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

MP Kurek will take my spot.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Okay. After MP Perkins, we'll have MP Kurek and then MP Blaikie.

Mr. Perkins, you have the floor.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As I was saying, part of the accountability of the Minister of Public Safety, obviously, is on the spending in the budget or the plans for our security agencies that he oversees.

It might be of some interest. I was referring to the RCMP and the experience of the inadequate community policing they give, at least in my part of the world in Nova Scotia. Regarding the community where the mass killings were, it took 45 minutes for the RCMP to get there because they're not stationed in that county.

Most of the residents there know that, at certain times of the day and certain days of the week, it's easy to speed because the RCMP aren't there, even though they have a contract with the Nova Scotia government to provide adequate policing services. I know that the RCMP has, since 2004, received about $1.5 billion in taxpayer money, so I think the Minister of Public Safety needs to be accountable for that fact.

In fact, there is a wide discussion going on in some provinces. Newfoundland has its own police force to deal with community policing. Ontario has its own police force. Quebec has its own police force. Alberta is having discussions about having its own police force.

Recently, a colleague of mine on our side of the House did an OPQ on 911 services and found that, for example, Nova Scotia has the highest vacancy rate of permanent positions for RCMP 911 offices in the country. Thirty-three per cent of the permanent positions of the 911 RCMP facility in Nova Scotia are vacant, which compounds our issues around crime.

In fact, we're dealing right now with the issue of the enforcement of the Fisheries Act around elvers. I've raised it a number of times in the House and a number of times with the Minister of Fisheries. Some of you may have heard me raise it. If you're in a city, you probably don't know what an elver is. It's a little baby eel. They're not as cute as seals, especially baby seals, but they're a lot more valuable. They sell for about $5,000 a kilogram. For five years, we've been warning the government of increasing poaching. There are only eight commercial licences for those and another three for first nations.

There are two aspects to the enforcement of the law. One is DFO's enforcement, which falls to their police force called Conservation and Protection—C and P as it's more colloquially known—and the RCMP, because the RCMP will back them up when we have disputes like we had with the lobster dispute a few years ago in the previous Parliament around 2020, but we also have the issue of this situation.

I've met with a lot of my constituents. A lot of these licences are in my riding. They phone the RCMP. When they can get through.... They phone two lines, actually. They phone the crime line that is listed in the phone book for DFO when they see illegal activity happening, and they phone the RCMP line. In fact, 911 gets called when there are crimes being committed.

Ten minutes from my house.... You may have read a couple of weeks ago that with this illegal elver fishery, an individual was beaten with a pipe. The RCMP got a tip through that line, pursued that individual and arrested them the next morning.

There have been reports to the RCMP of elver poaching in a community called Hubbards—some of you may know it. It's on St. Margarets Bay. In Hubbards, there were calls to the RCMP, constantly, from the neighbours who live by the property, not only about the trespassing happening on their property but also about what was going on, even before the elver season started. Though not quite as cute as baby seals, glass eels are fished only from March 28 to the beginning of June in the rivers of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. They are then sold as live fish that get transported to Asia to be grown to full-size eels, then used for seafood consumption.

We have been constantly complaining to the RCMP over the last five years about this going on. Two minutes from my home on the Ingram River.... The RCMP were called because the poachers park on the private land of this homeowner. They park themselves in the evening, in the dark, on the river, and they catch elvers with illegal nets. Unlicensed elvers at $5,000 a kilogram are being sold on the black market. The homeowner has called me and the RCMP many times and complained. I have visited her a number of times, both while the legal elver season was on and 17 days ago, on the last two weekends. The minister closed the entire elver fishery 17 days ago. Do you know what happened when the minister closed the legal elver fishery?

[A voice]

What happened?

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

All the licence-holders—the legal harvesters—left the rivers. Guess who stayed? All the poachers were given free rein. In fact, they moved into all the prime spots where the legal licence-holders were. I visited those sites in the evenings, on the weekends I've been home, and stood beside these poachers.

This is not the first year. Last year, a number of them were charged with trespassing by the RCMP. Good for the RCMP. When they went to court, the court fined them $7 for trespassing.

[A voice]

Are there zeros missing?