Public Safety Committee on May 9th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Garrison. We're out of time.

We'll now move back to Mr. Leef, please.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all our witnesses.

Since we did really come today to talk about rail security, I'll direct some of my questions to the folks at VIA Rail.

We've heard about partnerships and integrated work and education. I'm just wondering, when we get down to the client level for identifying threats, what kind of work is VIA Rail doing to ensure the passengers and clients of rail services receive the information and education they need to be vigilant?

We heard the RCMP talk about detachment-level work. We heard CSIS talk about how difficult it is to identify lone operators, and if we have threats around the rail sector, obviously we rely heavily on the general public to be aware of these threats.

How well versed do you think Canadians are right now on the actual threat of terrorism? What kind of work does VIA Rail do to encourage vigilance and encourage reporting from the client level?

[Marc Beaulieu]

We certainly have some programs that are very effective at increasing employee vigilance. Our locomotive engineers are extremely familiar with their territory, and our front-line employees who deal with our customers, either on our trains or in our stations, are very well trained and experienced at observing and identifying any dangerous situations or suspicious behaviours.

We have technology in place in our stations and facilities with many features, such as cameras, access control, remote locking systems. We have security personnel from VIA Rail and station owners to provide security guards in many locations, and we use contracted security inspectors who are former police officers who travel under cover on some of our trains.

There is no doubt in our minds that our customers are a big part of our solution. Anything that is brought forth to our attention is acted upon very rigorously and very effectively. To answer your question, I'm very confident that people who travel in our mode of transport feel safe, are safe, and we do everything possible to continuously improve our mitigations that are in place.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Thank you.

When you're using any form of public transportation or when you're in any public space generally, you just want to be able to operate, to feel safe, let your guard down, and not be constantly on the lookout. But obviously we've reached a different day. As we heard from CSIS, there are people in groups here and now that are seeking to do us harm.

I was just in Boston a few weeks ago when the attacks occurred there. I'd be the first to admit that in a venue like that, you certainly let your guard down. I'm not sure we ever want to see the day when we're inundated with warning signs. Obviously sometimes the best security is the security you don't see. But we as everyday citizens and people utilizing public transportation for this topic have a role to play.

How do you strike a balance between letting people know where and how to report or educating with signage or with security things, and at the same time, allowing people to exist in an environment where they're not on that proverbial edge of their seat all the time? How do you strike that balance appropriately with VIA Rail?

[Marc Beaulieu]

It's through constant training and awareness. We use every opportunity available to us to make sure that the message is clear. Our “keep an eye open" approach and training for our employees is very clear. The first skill that they use is diffusing. Suspicious issues are to be reported immediately. Our operations control centre is directly linked to whatever police forces or support that we require in any event. We test those measures regularly. We use the feedback from our front-line employees and our managers to consistently review any of our processes and procedures to ensure that a balance is reached. When in doubt, always err on the side of safety.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Chief Superintendent Tremblay, the NDP suggested the tool box is full. Would you say that today the tool box for law enforcement is full and that we are on par with terrorism organizations? Are we behind them slightly? Are there things we need to do to make sure that we continually add to that tool box? How are we keeping pace right now?

[C/Supt Larry Tremblay]

What I can comment on is that the complexity of the threat continues to evolve. It's critical that we reposition to deal with that evolving threat. Again, without being in a position to comment on the proposed legislation, we will make use of all tools available. If tools become available, we will put them to good use.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

One minute.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

One minute? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

You described work at the detachment levels. How important do you think the work at the detachment level is in terms of community education and engagement, in contrast to the work at the more discreet levels of enforcement?

[C/Supt Larry Tremblay]

It's absolutely critical. I think the recent arrests, and the more public recent arrests, show the level of collaboration among the various agencies and collaboration with the private sector. But prevention of terrorist-related activity is very much a shared responsibility. It can't be left to the police alone or to the agency alone. The engagement of community leaders and the engagement of the public is absolutely critical in the detect, deny, and prevent phase.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much.

We'll move to Mr. Scarpaleggia, please, for seven minutes.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Thank you very much, Chair, and thank you to all the witnesses for being here. Thank you to the committee for agreeing to our Liberal motion to have this hearing. We also would have liked to have had some outside experts, not because we don't have faith in the work that you're all doing, but just to test the resilience of your responses perhaps.

I'd like to get down to a little bit of a more specific level. We've heard about strategies, coordination, and memoranda of understanding. But I was wondering, Mr. Beaulieu, if you could tell me or the committee how many incidents there have been on the VIA Rail train service in the last year. You say there are people trained to respond to incidents. Obviously we're not talking about terrorist attacks here. We're just talking about incidents on trains where the porters or someone else—one of your plainclothes marshals—would have to intervene in some way. From something very simple to something like, for example, a passenger needing to be taken off the train.

[Marc Beaulieu]

To the exact number of incidents, I would not be able to answer that, but I could certainly recover it from our database as required and get you that information later. I can tell you that our employees are extremely vigilant, and they apply the processes extremely well.

Police forces across the country, when required, respond extremely effectively. To my knowledge, never have we contacted any police force for support that didn't respond swiftly and effectively to our needs. Yes, we have detrained customers on occasion, unfortunately, because it was our only option at that time.

We also are extremely well skilled at identifying any suspicious baggage, and again, the police forces respond extremely effectively to all those needs. I can say that, to my knowledge, it has happened at least eight to 10 times this year, without being too specific, because I don't have the database in front of me, but numerous times. Each was responded to extremely effectively by all involved on every occasion.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

You're telling me there have been incidents and people have been taken off the train and baggage has been taken off the train. So, yes, we would appreciate getting information on the number of times this has occurred, and perhaps on an annual basis for the last three to five years. That would be helpful.

You say you have security cameras in the stations. What do these security cameras tell you? As you know, there's a debate in the United States as to whether security cameras are an effective deterrent. We know they obviously help in apprehending those who've committed offences, but there's a big debate as to whether they are a deterrent.

So I'm just wondering, have your security cameras been helpful in terms of perhaps preventing someone from boarding a train who, based on a security camera, was exhibiting maybe odd behaviour or something like that?

[Marc Beaulieu]

I can't answer that specific question of somebody having odd behaviour. I know that we have used our security cameras to recover stolen items and identify a perpetrator of a crime, but I don't have a specific example of having detected somebody with suspicious behaviour with our camera systems per se.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

I would also like to, at this point, follow up on something that came out of the Auditor General's report and that Mr. Garrison raised, which is that nobody seems to be able to tell us how much is being spent on anti-terrorism or cyber-security in this country.

I remember when the minister appeared. I think it was either last month or two months ago. We asked him if he could give us a number for how much the Government of Canada spends on the fight for cyber-security, and the only answer we got from the minister was, well, consult the estimates in all the different departments that are involved. I think this is something that is concerning, not only to the Auditor General but to members of Parliament and to the public.

Mr. McDonald, in your department, in your unit, will there be any diminution of resources in the coming years, maybe next year or the year after, as a result of budget cutting, for example? Would you be considered front line or back room? If you're front line, we've been told by the government that there will be no reductions in expenditures or manpower, but we've been told that back office services could see some cuts.

I'd like to know if you're being squeezed, or if your budget is being squeezed, to the extent that you may not be able to do the fine work that you do as well in the future. Are you being asked to come up with efficiencies that maybe, quite frankly, are not there to be had?

[Gerard McDonald]

In response to your question of whether we're front line or back room, in fact we're both. We exercise the functional responsibility for our safety and security programs. Then we also deliver those programs on the front line through our inspectors and what have you in the regions and at headquarters.

Our programs have been subject to the same reductions that have been absorbed by other departments around the country. But that being said, we made a specific effort not to cut any front-line resources, not to reduce any of our inspectors out in the field, but to look more at administrative, organization, and overhead-type expenses in order to meet the budget reductions that have been imposed on us.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Beaulieu, if somebody comes to buy a ticket at the local train station and they want to pay cash, do you just take the cash and give them a ticket, or does that raise a red flag?

[Marc Beaulieu]

All purchases paid with cash raise a red flag. There are other indicators, such as one-way trips, nervousness, other behaviours that are communicated through training and awareness to our employees. Any such incidents can be easily reported and followed up on.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Mr. Scarpaleggia.

We'll now move to Madame Michaud for five minutes. The second round is a five-minute round.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

I would like to thank you for being here today.

I would like to build on the questions asked by my colleague, Mr. Garrison.

You mentioned that many departments and agencies, including yours, experienced budget cuts. This began with budget 2012, when the Canada Border Services Agency absorbed cuts of $143 million, which resulted in the elimination of 325 jobs at border crossings across the country. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service will have its budget cut by almost $24.5 million in 2015. This is going to happen. The RCMP has been subjected to reductions of $195.2 million and more cuts are expected in budget 2013. It is expected that spending will be slashed by 29.8% in 2013-14 compared to 2012-13.

Cuts are being made in different departments and the work is being done in silos. However, is there a global assessment of how every cut and every new measure implemented affects the capacity of various departments and agencies to counter terrorism and protect Canada's national security?

[John Davies]

Thank you for your question.

Is it an overall analysis, from a national security point of view, of what the totality of cuts has meant to the community across the board that you're asking for?

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Yes, exactly. I want to know if the cumulative effect of all the cuts has been assessed. Different human resources are being eliminated. What are the effects on the ground of all these initiatives?

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

I have a point of order.