Public Safety Committee on May 15th, 2007

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

I will just say that I don't think the process has changed significantly over the years. Perhaps, although Mr. Cullen has an issue, it's something that has been a long time in the making. We're still here and we're still dealing with it in the same manner.

From that perspective, I would just like to say from this side that we are confident that the people who are here and the organizations they represent do a tremendous job for Canada and Canadians. This is an important exercise for people to understand. These people are here, justifying budgets, and at the same time they can know and take some comfort in the fact that they do have the financial resources to do their job.

Mr. Chair, I'd just like to thank them for their time here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Thank you.

We now have completed the first four rounds. We'll begin from the beginning again.

Mr. Chan will begin.

[Raymond Chan, Liberal, Richmond, BC]

How much time do I have?

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

You have five minutes.

[Raymond Chan, Liberal, Richmond, BC]

My question, Mr. Chair, is to the Commissioner of the RCMP. I have a lot of trouble with the government extending the amnesty for the long-gun registry. I also read in the newspaper that both the police association and the police chiefs association are against scrapping the long-gun registry.

With the report from the Auditor General complaining about the integrity of the gun registries, does the department voice a strong opposition to the political decision of extending the amnesty? Obviously, it's going to hurt the integrity of the database.

[Commr Beverley A. Busson]

That's a difficult question to answer, generally.

We too are concerned about the integrity of the database and the responsibility to make sure that both Canadians and our own police officers are safe as they go about their business in dealing with those kinds of issues. The integrity of the firearms database is a very important issue for us and one that we want to be able to rely on. We're investing internally to make sure the database is reliable and is one that can serve Canadians.

[Raymond Chan, Liberal, Richmond, BC]

When the amnesty for registering has been extended for two years, doesn't it mean that you wouldn't have accurate information on those gun owners for two years? How badly will that impact the integrity of the database?

[Commr Beverley A. Busson]

The decision around the amnesty issue was certainly not our issue. Our issue, and our continued issue, is to make sure that the laws in place are enforced and moved forward. What I feel about the amnesty is secondary to the fact that at the end of the day, the amnesty was designed so that we would have some take-up time to put the firearms registry in proper order and move forward with the decision of Parliament.

[Raymond Chan, Liberal, Richmond, BC]

On the cost of eliminating the long-gun registry, I understand that the long-gun registry and the handgun registry have one system, infrastructure-wise, computer system-wise, and so on. Is that correct?

[Commr Beverley A. Busson]

I understand that as well, but I will get back to you if I am wrong.

[Raymond Chan, Liberal, Richmond, BC]

It's so important for us when we enter into debate on the cost and so on. We need the facts before we can have a good debate on this issue.

Over the last few meetings when we had a discussion on the savings by scrapping the long-gun registry, it appeared that it would only save about $2 million or $3 million. Is that correct?

[Commr Beverley A. Busson]

I'm afraid I don't have that information at my fingertips, but I will supply it to the committee.

[Raymond Chan, Liberal, Richmond, BC]

Okay, thank you. That's all.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Monsieur Ménard, do you have another question?

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Well, I am also concerned about the reliability about the fire arms registry. I know that some people have registered their long guns and others have not yet done so because of the amnesty.

Will the names of those who have registered their long guns remain in the electronic file? Do you keep the registrations?

[Commr Beverley A. Busson]

Yes, we do.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

We thought that you had received enough funding to reopen the border units that you had closed in Quebec. Do you intend to reopen them with the money that was provided?

[Commr Beverley A. Busson]

To answer your question, the closing of the units in Quebec were not purely a funding issue. They were an issue around how to get a critical mass of investigators together to do the type of priority work that is done between issues around border integrity and drug enforcement in the province of Quebec and elsewhere. This issue is always around the efficiency and effectiveness of the units.

Those decisions were made in a different time and place. With the new funding we are revisiting the placement and reallocation of all of our federal positions, not only in Quebec but certainly across the country. To say that we will be reopening those detachments I think is something that would lead you in a different direction. We are looking at redeploying and placing units and re-establishing units that address issues that weren't present four years ago. But to say that we would go back and reopen those same detachments, I can't promise you that is what's going to happen.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

I imagine that you agree with what Mr. Zaccardelli told us at the time, when he said that, because investigations were so difficult, he preferred to concentrate on investigating organized groups rather than have police officers walking the beat, more or less, along the borders.

I understand his arguments, but in that case, would you be open to once again having a border police operation, which would be less costly then the RCMP but which could patrol the border, something that, it will now appear, you have abandoned?

[Commr Beverley A. Busson]

We certainly haven't abandoned any measure of the issue around border security. My suggestion is that over the years, with the new focus on integrations, new partnerships, and new ways of doing business with our provincial and municipal partners, we have opportunities to do things in a new way, to achieve the same kinds of efficiencies, if not better than we have in the past, and to give people a level of confidence that we are doing business as far as both organized crime and border integrity is concerned.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

I will move to another topic. My question is for Mr. Judd as well as for you, Ms. Busson.

Are you now clear on what is the responsibility of the CISC and the role of the RCMP, particularly with respect to terrorist activity, because that is what is most important, and what is of greatest concern?

[Jim Judd]

In my mind, I think there are. The RCMP's role clearly falls in the domain of criminal investigation leading to prosecution. Ours tends to be much more further behind that, if you will, in terms of an intelligence or security intelligence investigation.

In the case of the conspiracy in Toronto in which a number of people were arrested last year, we had been looking at that for over a year before it was turned over to the RCMP and other police forces as a criminal investigation, which took, I think, the last six months of the process prior to the arrests. So I think in terms of what we've done over the last several years--joint collaboration, the changed memorandum of understanding, and so on--there are a number of improvements that have been made to ensure greater clarity.

I would say, though, that there is still an issue that we are looking at with the RCMP and the Department of Justice that relates principally to the question as to how intelligence information can be used in the criminal prosecution, because the standards by which we collect intelligence information sometimes differ from those used by police forces. In order for our information to be used, we may have to look at changing some of our practices to facilitate that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Did somebody else have a comment?

Ms. Busson.

[Commr Beverley A. Busson]

I can confirm what Mr. Judd is saying with regard to our intention being turned into the reality of working very closely together, and the issue of whether something is a national security issue for an intelligence purpose or when it becomes criminal is something that we work very closely together on to make sure that gap does not exist. I also agree with him from a legislative perspective. We are still struggling with the issue of intelligence versus evidence and the admissibility of that in a court of prosecution.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Mr. Comartin, did you have a question as well?