Public Safety Committee on Nov. 1st, 2010

[Garry Douglas]

One minute.

There are tough decisions to be made on budgeting on both sides. There's no question about that. We fought those fights in northern New York, serving Canada extremely well.

It is profoundly sad, I suggest, that we make our connection points at the U.S.-Canadian border a subject only to be decided by the bean counters. There is something historically and profoundly sad to close a 200-year connection between any of these communities, and it ought not be a decision by a treasury board adding up dollars and cents.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Mr. Douglas.

Mr. Orr.

[Barry Orr, Border Customs Compliance Manager, Leahy Orchards Inc.]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for inviting me.

I'm the border customs compliance manager for Leahy Orchards in Franklin Centre. On or about July 16, 2010, the president of Leahy Orchards, Mr. Leahy, received a copy of a letter that was sent to Suzanne Yelle Blair, the mayor of Franklin, advising that the border crossing in Franklin would be closed in April 2011. Shortly afterward, Mr. Leahy sent a communiqué to Claire Jacques, the district manager of the CBSA, Montérégie, and we got a response back that the decision on the closure of the border at Franklin Centre had been made due to budget considerations and that it was more or less a fait accompli. It was done without any consultation, negotiations, or anything.

We are the largest employer, with approximately 230 to 250 employees, in the Haut St.-Laurent. We're the largest employer, and 50% of our production of apple sauce, apple products, and baby food goes to the United States. We process about 175 million pounds of apples and fruit a year. We also are the largest importer of fresh fruit and packaging supplies from the United States in the Haut St.-Laurent region. Taking these facts into consideration, Leahy Orchards would be the largest federal taxpayer in the Haut St.-Laurent region.

Our production facility is approximately three kilometres from the Franklin port crossing. Rerouting truck deliveries and fresh apples from the United States would cost upwards of $100,000 a year for extra fuel and wages.

I personally cross the border once or twice on a daily basis for my daily functions. This represents, for me alone, $6,000 a year. Mr. Rigby said it is 16 kilometres, but it's 16 kilometres to get to the port and to come back to the office. So that 16 kilometres is not 16 kilometres; it's 32 kilometres every day. In the past four weeks I have personally delivered over 200 B-3s, which are customs clearances, for 200 loads of apples in the port of Franklin Centre. Those are commercial, of course.

From speaking on a daily basis to the officers on duty on the U.S. and Canadian sides, I don't know where he got his figures. I really don't know, because there are at least 60 commercial vehicles alone that cross the border. I personally know of C.K. Blair, Havelock, Tannahill, Kingsway, Morrison, Faubert Feeds, and Jean Vincent. These are all commercial loads on a daily and weekly basis that cross at the Franklin Centre border. The number of these commercial vehicles averages at least 60 a week.

Local residents from Franklin, Saint-Antoine-Abbé, Ormstown, Valleyfield, Vaudreuil, Pincourt, and Montreal West Island all use this port going back. A lot of the residents on the west island and the officers have talked to me personally, and they feel that there are more and more on a weekly basis, because there is a set of residents who come in from camping grounds in the United States at Ellensburg, Plattsburgh, Malone, and whatever. This is the closest port for people to get back to Canada, back to Quebec. It is closer than going through the large port with the big waits at Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle and then going to Montreal and crossing the bridge. I was talking to one fellow and he saves approximately 26 miles every trip.

There's also, in the immediate area, another commercial business called Lac des Pins, which is one of the biggest camping resorts in Canada, and a lot of their campers use the local port of Franklin Centre.

Of course, there is the Franklin Centre fire department and the mutual aid services. Mr. Rigby mentioned this. Due to the lack of water and equipment in the rural areas, there is this program. I myself was a fireman for 15 years, and I know that this mutual aid service between the United States and Canada works. It's one of the best programs I've ever been involved with in my life.

I also have information that there is a petition with over 5,000 signatures from the area, which I guess you're going to be getting at a later time, that is going to be presented to this committee.

I personally have been crossing the border for over 50 years in an area of 75 to 100 kilometres along this border in Quebec on a daily or weekly basis. I've seen with my own eyes how the Churubusco, New York, counterpart, on the U.S. side from Franklin, operates, and I've talked to the officers on the site at customs, and they have said that it's impossible for their customs port to operate without the Canadian one working side by side. For rejections, such as, for example, issues of security and refusals, if you refuse a car, truck, or commercial vehicles, which happens—vehicles do arrive at this port, and it's not a commercial port—it would be almost impossible for them to turn the vehicle around back to Canada, unless it's escorted by the state troopers or the border patrol. And they would have to escort them to another port.

I'll hurry up as much as possible; I'm getting to the end.

In conclusion, Leahy Orchards is also a member, and Mr. Douglas knows this, of the Quebec-New York Corridor Coalition. Canada is to maintain and administer their stringent security programs.

The success of Leahy Orchards in the past 25 years has been built on the cooperation of both governments and local ports being open in order to facilitate the facilities in Franklin Centre. I must say that Leahy was quite upset to hear about the closure of the port, especially because of the increased cost impact it is going to have on our business. I'm sure they haven't looked at the other businesses in the area: apples, maple syrup, and all the other businesses. Tourism especially is going to be affected. I travel these roads every day and I see U.S. plates on the cars, in these yards. If they have to go 25 or 30 kilometres out of their way to get to the local merchants, they're not going to be going there.

We believe in budget guidelines, especially in these economic hard times, and in budgets needing to be maintained, but not at a cost to the taxpayers and local businesses. We are sure that CBSA should re-verify its statistics.

Also, in conclusion, we would like to stress that the Franklin Centre port of entry is a vital service to the success of Leahy Orchards. We ask CBSA to reconsider its decision on the closure of this port.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Mr. Orr. It's just been suggested to me that you're very good at presenting. It would have been great if you had brought one of those apple pies....

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Anyway, Mr. Moran, welcome.

[Ron Moran, National President, Customs and Immigration Union]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Members of the committee, thank you for having us.

As has been highlighted already, the Canada Border Services Agency has announced that as part of its strategic review in Quebec, it intends to close two land border ports of entry, reduce the hours at three others, and further to close four inland points of service in that particular province. The CBSA further intends to close a land border point of entry in Saskatchewan, as well as an inland point of entry—that's the port of Kenora that we were discussing earlier—as well as five inland points of service in the province of Ontario, the express purpose being strictly cost-cutting, having now described these closures as being the agency's lowest priorities.

There's a further element to the agency's reductions, which is highlighted in our brief. There are primarily four things that stick out: reducing local intelligence-gathering capacity by centralizing targeting activities; ending the Canadian involvement in the international container security initiative, meaning abandoning Canada's only pre-arrival examination capacity; abandoning CBSA's role in the federal tobacco control strategy by redirecting the funds earmarked for assessing the effectiveness of reducing tobacco smuggling; and fourth, ending funding for joint Canada-U.S. flights—those are joint charters—that would usually unfold for individuals determined to be a threat to national security, or high-risk criminals, or uncooperative deportees. This in fact would be redirecting money initially earmarked as part of the public safety and anti-terrorism initiative.

The CBSA has, at least to this point, provided no non-operational alternatives to these direct reductions in service, so our brief endeavours to do just that.

I would just like to point out that the French version of our brief has not yet been proofread or corrected to ensure that the English and French correspond. I would just ask you to take that into account. A revised version will be published on our website by the middle of the week. We only received the French version this morning, but out of respect for Francophone Committee members, we did want to provide the translation.

In our brief, we have listed the offices affected by closures and estimated what these closures represent in terms of savings. For Franklin Centre, Quebec, the maximum savings are estimated to be $500,000. For Jamieson's Line, the savings would amount to $350,000, and for Big Beaver, Saskatchewan, $450,000. We also explained how we did our calculations and arrived at these results. For those offices where reduced hours of operation are being proposed, we are talking about maximum savings of $300,000 for Morse's Line, $300,000 as well for East Pinnacle, and $600,000 for Glen Sutton.

With respect to inland points of service in Quebec—I referred to this earlier—we will only mention those with respect to which we have information. There is one in Drummondville, where maximum potential savings would amount to $230,000. The same applies to the Granby office which, it should be pointed out, serves the Bromont airport. Therefore, the entire CANPASS Air Program would be compromised as a result of the Granby office being shut down. Furthermore, there would be considerable additional expense if it were decided that this airport should be served by other land border offices.

With respect to the Kenora office, in Ontario, the information we have collected, primarily from the Agency's website, shows that, even though it is a seasonal office, according to the website, it is open throughout the year. In actual fact, it seems it is only open from May 1 to October 31. According to our calculations, the maximum savings would be considerably less than what is indicated.

There is also a list of other affected offices on page 6 of our brief, except that the Agency has thus far providing no details. We are therefore unable to estimate the potential savings.

Based on what we know, the maximum savings would be approximately $3.4 million, and it is important to bear in mind that savings in Kenora would be less than the current calculation.

Canada's unilateral intention to close ports of entry and to reduce its presence at other such locations is in complete contrast with the long-standing Canada-U.S. collaborative border security approach, which until now, and particularly since 2006, has been just that: collaborative. The approach used also seems to undermine the joint border security approach reflected in such joint initiatives as “shiprider”, as well as particularly the joint border security study just recently announced by the public safety minister—that was in June of this year.

Understandably, U.S. officials have reacted to this unilateral CBSA action in blunt terms, including suggesting that it violates the 2002 U.S.-Canada Smart Border Accord.

CBSA's proposal to withdraw from the international container security initiative is a disturbing abandonment of the accepted joint strategy of pushing our borders out to proactively identify items of risk before they arrive in North America. We therefore urge the committee to probe, certainly in that area and the other areas that we've listed in our brief.

There is no doubt that reducing an already very thin customs and immigration presence at the border will clearly promote what is known as port-running—in other words, people who do not report at a border crossing—as well as other illegal entries.

It is extremely important to note that the RCMP's recent Canada-U.S. integrated border enforcement team threat assessment—that's the IBET threat assessment for 2009 on border security issues—reportedly identified an alarming increase in northbound illegal smuggling activities between land border points of entry since 2007. The report specifically identifies a dramatic increase in northbound people-smuggling into Canada, which for the first time since 2007 is greater than such activities running southbound into the United States. We have material supporting that as an appendix to this brief.

So, Quebec has been identified as an area that is particularly affected, because of the number of unguarded roads in Quebec, which is already very high. That is what the IBET report says. However, what the government is proposing today will in fact increase the number of unguarded roads.

I would like to quickly summarize the remaining points. We have prepared a summary of alternative solutions. By changing its implementation of the arming initiative, the Agency could save at least $2 million. Our brief sets out our proposals in that regard.

There is also the fact that, as a result of arming and ending work-alone initiatives, there has been a phenomenal increase in the number of frontline supervisors. As my colleague was telling me this morning, they literally don't know where to hide them anymore. There are superintendents working in offices where, previously, a single officer at a time was assigned. There are now two officers, as a result of work-alone being eliminated, as well as two superintendents, because of shift rotation.

Therefore, in Quebec alone, we estimate that savings could amount to $1 million by bringing frontline supervision back down to a level that reflects reality. We also have details in that regard.

Under unspecified contract expenses incurred by CBSA, a review of the “Management Consulting”, “Unspecified”, “Information Technology Consulting”, “Other Business and Professional Services”, and “Welfare” contracts issued by CBSA for just the last fiscal year show spending of over $30 million. Similar CBSA contract spending in these vague areas for the first quarter of fiscal year 2010-11 is approximately $12 million.

We urge the committee to look into whether there would not be areas where the agency would be able to make cuts without having a direct impact on the service that is being delivered.

We will now entertain questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Moran.

We have others making presentations.

That was part of that; you were together? Okay.

Mr. Dupont, you have statements as well?

[Martin Dupont, Chief Administrative Officer, Drummondville Economic Development Society]

Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished Committee members, good afternoon.

Allow me to introduce myself. My name is Martin Dupont, and I am Executive Director and Industrial Commissioner with the Drummondville Economic Development Authority. The Canada Border Service Agency's announcement that a number of regional offices, including one in Drummondville, would shut down starting on April 1, 2011 has met with strong opposition in our community. Today I am tabling with the Committee a document that deals with the need to preserve this tool for economic development in the Centre-du-Québec region.

Like several other socio-economic players in the region, we were surprised to hear this news. In my presentation today, I would like to begin by explaining the Agency services provided by the Drummondville office in our area and in the Centre-du-Québec region as a whole, discussing how important that Agency presence has been for several years now, and finally presenting arguments in support of maintaining such services in the Drummondville area.

Founded in 1984, the Drummondville Economic Development Authority aims to promote economic development in the RCM of Drummond. It is our responsibility to manage and develop the industrial parks, where more than 700 manufacturing businesses are located, as well as the Drummondville regional airport.

The Drummondville CBSA office serves three sufferance warehouses. One of them is located in Drummondville and is managed by carriers. It is a private warehouse. A second one, located in Victoriaville, is managed by the Cascades company. There is a third one in Richmond which is managed by Richmond Courtiers En Douanes Ltée. The idea behind a sufferance warehouse is to store merchandise that is still under bond. Because customs service is available in Drummondville, the response time is quite quick. As soon as a request is sent to the office, a customs official can immediately go on site so that goods can be delivered without any additional delays. Furthermore, a number of carriers in the Drummondville region—there are 72 of them—take advantage of local customs clearance, given that they are nearby and goods can then be delivered to a variety of different destinations elsewhere in Quebec and Canada. Closure of the customs office will therefore have a direct impact on these transportation companies that have located in the region precisely because of access to a regional sufferance warehouse.

There are also six bonded warehouses: Bourret Transport - Bourret Entreposage, B.R. Logistique International, VC999, CDM PapiersDécors, Aliments Trans Gras Inc., and SMTCL Canada Inc. These private warehouses are used mainly to store raw materials in large quantities at today's prices, for four years. As the merchandise leaves the warehouse, it is cleared by customs. Having customs service close by provides many benefits to the region. There is no bonded warehouse in either Victoriaville or Richmond. The Drummond office therefore serves the Greater Centre-du-Québec Region, with its six bonded warehouses in various industrial parks.

A company by the name of VC999, which is a Swiss company, specifically decided to locate in our industrial area because there was a customs office nearby. It covers all of North America, developing its markets there. Finally, we have an S.O. type sufferance warehouse which is under the control of the customs office but is managed by Primewood Lumber. This type of warehouse is used to store low-risk goods. In this case, the material is lumber.

Customs services are also available at the Drummondville regional airport, as well as the one in Victoriaville. Indeed, our organization is also intending to complete a major development project there at a cost of $9 million. Foreign companies located in our region naturally use the Drummondville airport; they use chartered planes. Passengers travelling on these chartered planes are cleared through customs in Drummondville. The airport also provides seaplane service. Seaplanes are chartered and are then able to land on the river. This is the only seaplane base between the United States and Northern Quebec. Naturally, many U.S. pilots land on the river, resupply and then go through customs.

In actual fact, the Drummondville office is far from being simply a point of service like the other local offices. In addition to contributing directly to the economic dynamism of the entire region, it provides the Centre-du-Québec area with an essential means of attracting large import and export businesses. Starting from the port of entry at the border, the Lacolle office, which is considered to be the largest border crossing, many carriers stop at the bonded warehouses in Drummondville before continuing on to Thetford Mines or other municipalities across Quebec. Most of them have their goods cleared through customs in Drummondville.

As well as the various reasons demonstrating the importance of maintaining customs services for businesses in the region, there are other factors that bear mentioning and which clearly show the need to keep the Drummondville customs office open.

First of all, this particular customs office was first established in the early 1900s, which marked the beginning of the industrial era in our city. This is proof of the long-term importance that has been placed on customs services there. If the Drummondville office were to close, in order to keep the same level of service, the operations previously carried out at the local office would now have to be provided elsewhere. There is therefore considerable risk that such a solution would not adequately respond to the needs expressed by businesses in the region. Finally, this would mean longer waiting periods and slower customer service for users. For the time being, customs officers can easily go on-site and carry out inspections at no cost. That way, shipment deliveries are not delayed. However, if the office is moved to another location, there will be far more delays for users.

Before closing, I would just like to say that we believe that it is important to relate the facts and statistics we have collected regarding the Canada Border Services Agency office in Drummondville.

According to our information, the local Drummondville office handles a high level of customer traffic which is continuing to grow. In 2009-10, customs declarations were filed for 5,600 transactions a year for sufferance warehouses, and 5,500 transactions per year for bonded warehouses. According to our estimates, Canada Border Services Agency revenues for the Drummondville office alone are between $500,000 and $700,000 per month, in the form of GST and customs duties.

Furthermore, due to globalization, there is an ever-growing number of SMEs and large companies that use customs services. As a result, a whole range of services would be affected by such a change, and many businesses in the area—and throughout the Centre-du-Québec and Montérégie region, given that many companies there use the same customs office—would see their business impacted.

In addition, as a general rule, when an office handles over 5,000 customs declarations per year, that volume is deemed sufficient to justify assigning a customs officer. For purposes of comparison, in 2009-10, the Drummondville customs office handled a total of 11,000 customs declarations.

According to the announcement made by the Canada Border Services Agency, the goal of this restructuring is to transfer the commercial operations of nine inland customs offices with low throughput, including the one in Drummondville, to another service location nearby. In our case, it is inconceivable that the Drummondville office could be considered an inland customs office with low throughput, given its high level of use.

Finally, one question remains, which is that when the volumes handled by other nearby customs offices are compared to the situation in Drummondville, it is clear that the Drummondville office has the highest level of traffic compared to those in Granby and Sherbrooke.

In closing, the Drummondville Economic Development Authority, and the entire region are calling on the Canada Border Services Agency and the government of Canada to keep the Drummondville customs office open for the following reasons: first of all, offering customs services is an integral part of our economic development strategy; customs services are part of the tool kit of all the regional and local development organizations; the announcement of this closure has elicited a deep sense of dissatisfaction among business people in the region and profound concerns for our exporters and importers; finally, despite the availability of new technology, a human presence will always be required, especially for on-site verifications.

Therefore, considering that the Canada Border Services Agency has had an office in Drummondville since the early 1900s; considering that this decision will compromise the economic development of the Centre-du-Québec region and our ability to attract foreign subsidiaries; considering that we are one of the regions in Quebec experiencing the greatest economic growth; considering that many of our SMEs are importers and exporters; considering that the RCM of Drummond and the Centre-du-Québec region require customs services in order to support and grow the local economy in the region; considering that this customs office has a high level of traffic and that demand is continually on the rise; considering that government services should be provided where economic activity is occurring, and not the reverse, on behalf of businesses in the Centre-du-Québec region, we are calling on the Canada Border Services Agency to reconsider its decision to close the customs office in Drummondville, and asking the government of Canada to intervene and take action on this critical issue.

In closing, ladies and gentlemen members of the Committee, I would like to thank you for your attention during my presentation. I hope that my comments here have helped you to understand the importance of maintaining a Canada Border Services Agency office in the Drummondville area.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Mr. Dupont.

You have two seconds left, so obviously when we said 10 minutes, you kept it to 10, and we appreciate that.

Monsieur Pelletier.

[Réal Pelletier, Mayor, City of Saint-Armand, As an Individual]

Thank you very much for inviting me to appear today.

My colleagues and other stakeholders have provided quite a few figures, but there is an additional factor that should be considered: the human and social consequences. My presentation will focus less on numbers and be more comprehensive.

To begin with, I would like to talk about the social impact. In our case, quite a few families are living on both sides of the border. In Franklin, on the other side, there are just as many families with names like Bouchard, Pelletier and Rainville as there are on our side. They speak French on both sides of the border. And the same applies to English. There are relationships, and people have as many friends on one side as on the other.

There will also be an economic impact, particularly on jobs. Canadians cross the border to work in the United States, just as Americans come and work in Canada. We all agree that reduced hours will affect these jobs. A small border crossing facilitates local travel. People often talk about large ports of entry. As I see it, they operate more at the provincial level, whereas small border crossings basically provide local services, which stimulates our local economy and jobs.

On our side of the border, there is farming activity. A number of growers on the other side of the border buy a lot of feed from us. Here I'm referring to hay, grain, silage, and so on. The traffic going through our small border crossing is not identified as commercial traffic, but it occurs on a daily basis and it is very significant. There are also short stays. Cycling is something that is growing in popularity. We are even in the process of widening the bicycle path so that it will run through Franklin, around Lac Champlain and come back.

There is also a snowmobile track. At the same time, snowmobilers can only use it between 8:00 a.m. and noon, as opposed to 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. There are people going back and forth across the border. There is an arena in Highgate Springs and another one in Bedford. Young people on both sides are involved in sports. There are also restaurants on both sides of the border.

The Municipality of Saint-Armand includes Highway 235, which actually belongs to us. We are currently completing the third phase of a project involving that highway in which local residents will have invested some $500,000 in taxes by the time it's finished. In other words, we believe in the importance of that road for our local economy.

One very important point is mutual support. With Franklin County—and, based on what I've seen, that is the case all along the border—we have an agreement whereby, in order to have an adequate number of firefighters for major calls, we help out the Americans and they help us out. What does this have to do with our small border crossing? Well, on our side, volunteer firefighters are more available during the daytime, whereas on the other side, they are more available in the evening. We were saying earlier that a solution might have been found to ensure that volunteer firefighters could cross the border, but I still wonder how they will be able to do that. Often people use their own vehicle in order to go and assist the firefighters who are already on site. If they all used the truck, this could work, but the fact is that some always arrive on site later than the others. I don't see how we can possibly manage if there is no longer going to be anyone there.

On our side, there is a little less water availability close to the border. We have just completed the installation of a dry hydrant which will provide a water supply on both sides of the border. It is located on the border at Morse's Line.

Furthermore, gasoline and dangerous materials are shipped between Montreal and the United States exclusively via Highway 133 and U.S. 89. That border crossing would therefore be of strategic importance if there were to be an incident at the customs office or if the main office were closed. It is the only alternative route in the area.

I have been hearing people talk about distances of 15, 20, 25 or 30 kilometers, but no one has said anything about time. The fact is that we should not be calculating on the basis of the number of kilometers, but rather on the basis of the time needed. The additional distance may be 20 kilometers, but if you have to go through a main port of entry and wait for three hours, we are no longer talking about an extra 20 kilometers; we're talking about three hours of waiting time, which is not exactly the same thing. That also will affect our local economy, which depends on tourism, as well as the more vulnerable industries. If people are forced to wait that long, they simply won't come to our region.

Also, in our case, consideration should be given to new Highway 35, the Boston-Montreal connection which will be completed in 2015. As everyone knows, the Morse's Line port of entry serves to reduce some of the overflow, if you will. That crossing is used as a safety valve to speed up traffic flows, particularly in the local community.

There was some discussion of traffic flows earlier. I did a quick calculation to illustrate the current situation and put those numbers in perspective. At the main port of entry, there are a little more than one million cars coming through on a yearly basis, compared to a population of 6,000 in Quebec. At the small border crossing, some 26,000 travellers come through, compared to a population of 45,000 in the RCM of Brome-Missisquoi. Therefore, that small border crossing is serving 60% of the population, whereas the main port of entry is serving 18% of Quebeckers. I don't know how you calculate something like that.

There are 1,000 residents in Saint-Armand which, according to the figures, could mean that all of them go to the United States every two weeks. And yet, I am being told that this border crossing is unimportant. That raises questions in my mind.

As I was saying earlier, there are families and friends, English and French traditions, and a bilingual population on both sides of the border. On May 17, I attended a summit at the Montreal Stock Exchange Tower, where officials from the States of New York, and Vermont and the Province of Quebec underscored the linguistic tradition of using both French and English, which has taken root over time and constitutes an important legacy. That was one of the highlights of the meeting.

Furthermore, it is well known that Vermont and Quebec try to support each other in terms of tourism, given that we are somewhat far from either Montreal or Sherbrooke. We are in between the two, in a way. Therefore, we really have to retain anything that is likely to support our local economy.

In closing, I would just like to say that we can always talk about numbers, but I consider the small border crossings to be local points of service, as opposed to the main border crossings which I see as provincial points of service. So, we have to avoid confusing the two by bringing forward disproportionate numbers.

I can present a petition that has been signed by 3,000 people living on both sides of the border, who are anxious to stress the importance of this border crossing. A meeting was held which was attended by officials from both Quebec and Vermont to discuss all the economic and social factors associated with that little border. I have also sent a letter to the U.S. Congress, which has been signed by Senators Leahy and Sanders, as well as Congressman Welch, regarding the importance of this border crossing.

I am here for one reason: to tell you that, for a small municipality like Saint-Armand, it is critical for our survival and our future that this border crossing remain open.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Mr. Pelletier.

Just before we go to the opposition side, as we have a little bit of time now, I want to encourage each party to submit their witnesses for Bill C-23B, which we'll be hearing on November 22 and 24, and December 8, and also witnesses for Bill C-17, which will be later on in December. We'd appreciate it if you could submit those witnesses as soon as possible. I think Bill C-39 has also been reported to the committee. But that'll be after Christmas, I would imagine.

Mr. Kania.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Pelletier, has your petition been certified yet and presented in Parliament?

[Réal Pelletier]

I just brought them to the attention of the clerk. I just presented them, and he told me I could deposit them down here so you could have them later.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

All I am going to say is I'm more than happy to seek to have it certified for you and present it in Parliament, which would require the government to respond to it within 45 days, so that everybody knows.

I'd like to start by welcoming our American guest, Mr. Douglas.

Mr. Douglas, you indicated that you were underwhelmed by the Conservative government's commitment to the border. I'd like to state, on behalf of the Liberal opposition, that we agree with you.

There are two quotes here that I'd like to ask you about. The first one is your quote dated August 22, 2010, in the Press-Republican, and it indicates:

“The failure of the Canadian government to coordinate with the U.S. government is absolutely mind boggling,” he said. “You can't run a border that way. It's unacceptable. We hope our Canadian friends will rethink this decision.”

Then there's a quote from U.S. Representative Bill Owens, on the same date: “Obviously, we hope Canada will reconsider that decision.”

You're obviously working with Mr. Owens. Since you put these quotes in, have there been any consultations or contacts from the Conservative government in any way to try to work with you on these issues?

[Garry Douglas]

Not with me. I'm not certain what communications there may have been with Congressman Owens' office. A couple of days ago he indicated letters had been sent to the government, and he shared them with me, but no responses. So I'm not aware that there has been any response to date to his communications.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Since you have spoken with Mr. Owens, was he in any way consulted or was the American government consulted before this announcement was made with respect to these closings?

[Garry Douglas]

He was not. Obviously I can't verify whether or not there was some communication at some level with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. If so, it certainly wasn't of a nature that triggered what would have been expected, to have some communication with a member of Congress, particularly a member of Congress who is a member of the oversight committee, to alert him to that fact.

I'm not aware that any of the parties on the ground--state, federal, or otherwise--were at all aware of this.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

So according to what you currently know, this would be a unilateral decision on the part of the Canadian government to do this, as opposed to having some kind of coordination with our American friends?

[Garry Douglas]

Absolutely. That's confirmed by the fact that the U.S. government was apparently, during the same period of time that this decision was being made by CBSA and the Treasury Board, actually proceeding with contracting for major new facilities at the other side of the Franklin Centre crossing, which shows a totally different view of that particular border crossing and a totally divergent approach to the future of that crossing.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Did you say they were investing something like $6.8 million into that?

[Garry Douglas]

Yes, $6.8 million U.S. has been contracted to construct an entirely new U.S. facility at that crossing.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

And at the same time the Canadian government is closing the corresponding crossing.

[Garry Douglas]

That's why the term “mind-boggling” came to mind.

[Andrew Kania, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Right. I find this confusing. I don't understand it, because there is a 2002 U.S.-Canada smart borders accord. In your view, would this not be a violation of that accord to simply unilaterally close this?