Public Safety Committee on Feb. 1st, 2007

[Alain Jolicoeur]

That's my understanding, but it can be renewed.

[Sue Barnes, Liberal, London West, ON]

Yes. There is a lot of turnover right now, but I would imagine some customs officers may not want to be part of the customs employment situation if they have to arm themselves. You must have done some studies on a human resource situation of having a higher exodus than normal during training.

I want to also talk about the student aspect of this, or the part-time people. As I recall from being a student customs officer on a very busy port many years ago, you have to go through the line. So it's not just one person; you still have the rotation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

You have to allow a little time for a brief response, a very brief response.

[Barbara Hébert]

Yes, we have done some analysis about the people who may not wish to carry a firearm. No doubt there are some people who joined our organization and had a long and very productive career, but perhaps they joined the organization with other interests in mind. It's impossible to know exactly how many people would not want to carry a firearm. Our analysis right now leads us to estimate that it will be between 25% and 30%.

Of course, the benefits of a long phase-in time is that it will allow the agency and the employees to work towards a situation where we can minimize the accommodations.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Ms. Mourani, do you have any questions?

[Sue Barnes, Liberal, London West, ON]

Mr. Chair, there's a second part on students.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Well, you've gone way over your time. I'm sorry. We can come back to that.

[Sue Barnes, Liberal, London West, ON]

Okay. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Ms. Mourani.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank all of the witnesses for coming. My question is for Mr. Jolicoeur. Up until now, why have we never thought about arming our customs officers?

[Alain Jolicoeur]

It is not that we have never thought of arming them, the topic was raised by the customs union well before I took up my position. The agency has existed for three years, but I think that the union has been raising the topic for 10 or 15 years.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Perhaps I was not clear. Why did we never decide to do it, or why has it not yet been done? Why are customs officers still not armed? What are the underlying reasons?

[Alain Jolicoeur]

You are leading me into the area of the policies of different governments.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Fine. So what you're saying is that the decision to arm or not to arm customs officers is a political decision. So taking that decision was a matter of politics and did not reflect the situation on the ground. Is that correct?

[Alain Jolicoeur]

That's not what I said. I said that it is a major policy decision for a government to bring about this type of change. However, if you ask our employees on the ground, the vast majority of them are convinced that they need to carry a weapon.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

I have a few questions for Mr. Fracassi. In your presentation, you said you counted 44 incidents where customs officers invoked their right to refuse to work. Of that number, 38 were collective refusals to work. Over what period of time was this evaluation conducted? Was it over a one-year period?

[Fulvio Fracassi]

Mr. Chair, that was in the timeline I had indicated, starting from May of 2005 to the last refusal that we dealt with, which I think was around December of 2006.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

So it was over approximately a one-year period. When you said that most of the refusals were based on situations potentially involving armed and dangerous persons, does that mean that the refusals were based on potential or real threats?

[Fulvio Fracassi]

Mr. Chair, in terms of the refusals that we dealt with, basically employees who feel that they have a reasonable cause to believe they're in danger can exercise their right to refuse. There's a process, as I mentioned in my presentation, that's followed, to be dealt with internally. But if there is a continual refusal, where the matter isn't addressed between the workplace parties, then it's the health and safety officer who's basically notified, and he comes in to conduct an investigation to see whether indeed, based on the facts that are before him or her at the time, there is a situation of danger or not.

As I mentioned, in the vast majority of the cases that we did investigate, based on the facts and the situations as they existed at the time, there was a finding of no danger.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

I have another question. Since you took up your position, how many officers have died, or were injured, hospitalized, attacked, or were assaulted, in the exercise of their duties? Have you counted?

[Fulvio Fracassi]

Mr. Chair, I don't have that particular information. I don't know if my colleague from the CBSA would have those numbers.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Jolicoeur or Ms. Hébert, would you like to respond?

[Barbara Hébert]

Mr. Chair, if I understood the question correctly, it was generally across the entire public service perhaps. If you'd like to know about the Canada Border Services Agency, I personally am not aware, in the last 15 years, of any fatality, as the question was phrased, or serious injuries such as that.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Are you saying that there has not been a single incident, or that you do not know the answer?

[Barbara Hébert]

Mr. Chairman, I don't think that there have been any.