Public Safety Committee on June 2nd, 2023

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

No, I do not.

The point here, I think, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, is that you have to keep the responsibility for doing these investigations on the agency. CBSA has to be responsible for pursuing the complaints it receives and reporting to the commission whether it has resolved them or not. The commission then makes its independent judgment.

If the responsibility rests only on the shoulders of the commissioner, it relieves CBSA management from treating its complaints seriously. I think you want to keep the burden of responsibility on the agency. Therefore, it's going to need the resources to do those investigations.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

That's interesting.

One reason I feel this could be very helpful—after speaking with frontline police officers—is that people make the complaint that there are too many resources going towards upper management and not enough going to frontline police officers. We know there's a massive shortage in frontline police officer recruitment and retention. I was hoping this legislation could potentially mean some of the middle-management officers, or officers being pulled off the front line to do these administrative duties, could be reallocated to the front line.

However, what you're saying is this wouldn't be the case when this is implemented—these police officers being reallocated to the front line.

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

Like Mr. Weber, I want the agency to be responsible for its own efficiency and effectiveness in delivering service, so I'd keep those resources in the agency.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

I wouldn't be supporting any cuts to our front line at all, but I want to make sure the resources are being used in the best manner. We are seeing an issue on the front lines, with frontline police officers not getting the resources they need to deal with an upswing in crime and—as a mental health advocate put it to me—a tsunami of mental health issues coming in our country, especially in the post-COVID environment.

Do you think—

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

Mr. Lloyd, can I provide a quick comment on that?

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Yes. Go ahead.

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

To put this in context, you have to look at the fact that this is 2015 data, so it's more or less now. There are over 100 million contacts a year between the public and the CBSA. Those generate 2,400 complaints—or they did in 2015. Even if that were four times 2,400, that's 0.001% of contacts leading to a complaint. This isn't going to require massive resources.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Do you think the creation of this committee will lead to better outcomes in terms of police interactions—potentially negative interactions? Do you think that even just the presence of this accountability mechanism will improve those outcomes, or do you think that the creation of this accountability mechanism could also lead to an increase in vexatious and litigious complaints?

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

I think the answer is yes to both. Frankly, I think that you're on to something.

Look, if this system works well, there are no complaints, because the agency takes it seriously and looks at the commission as a problem that it wants to avoid. Therefore, it improves its performance dramatically. That's success.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

Thank you, Professor Cappe. I've really enjoyed this conversation.

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

Thank you, Mr. Lloyd.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Lloyd.

We go now to Ms. Damoff, for six minutes, please.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you so much to our witnesses for being here today.

Mr. Cappe, I have a question for you about these systemic reviews. When the chairperson of the CRCC appeared here in the past, I noticed that she too would like the ability to do more systemic reviews.

Could you maybe expand a little on how you think we should be changing the legislation to accommodate what you mentioned in your remarks?

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

Sure.

Again, Mr. Chiang, in the last session, pointed out that clause 28 allows for the commission to initiate, but it's on a very focused set of issues, the policies and guidelines.

Imagine if there's a pattern of complaints, that you get a lot of complaints coming from the office in Prince Rupert. The commission may look at that and say, “Well, you know, CBSA, you're missing something. You need to look at that office. Maybe there's a management problem. Do an investigation of that.” You want the commission to be able to initiate those kinds of systemic reviews.

In the previous session, Ms. Campbell from Calgary pointed out systemic racism. It's something that may not occur in one office, but it might be systemically across the agency. You want somebody to be able to draw those inferences.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Okay. Thank you for that.

My other question has to do with national security.

As you were doing your report, NSIRA and NSICOP were just going through the legislative process. They didn't actually exist at the time.

We've heard testimony and received briefs about the necessity of having this new commission take note of national security complaints and also how many times they're referred to NSIRA.

I wonder if you could talk a bit about how you see the PCRC interacting within NSIRA and whether there should be reporting on the referrals between the agencies.

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

I made the point in my opening remarks that the RCMP and the CBSA are not the only law enforcement agencies in the government. Intelligence and security go hand in hand. Therefore, NSIRA becomes an important review commission for CSIS and other agencies, like CSE.

I talked about turning intelligence into evidence. You want to be able to see that work. There's nothing that I see in Bill C-20 that prohibits the PCRC from connecting with NSIRA, but neither does it create a gateway.

Out of precision, it would be interesting to think about specifying that those two commissions or agencies would be able to exchange information and that it would be legitimate. I don't think it's necessary. Administratively, it could be worked out. However, it's something worth thinking about.

The other thing is that there are a whole range of other law enforcement agencies. When I was deputy minister of the environment, I had the Canadian wildlife service under me. Those are armed officers who enforce endangered species legislation and such.

Conceivably, you could encompass all of them. I don't think that's a good place to start.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Okay. Thank you for that.

We've heard a lot of concerns about police investing police. I'm assuming that with CBSA it would be a similar situation, in that CBSA would be looking at CBSA to start with.

Do you think this is something that is operational? Is there a legislative change that needs to be made, or is that the way these systems should work?

I'm wondering what your opinion is, given your experience on this.

[Prof. Mel Cappe]

I think it's desirable that you have the agency investigating itself to improve itself in the first instance, and that means police investigating police. If you then have the commission as the fallback to carry out the complaints that are not adequately reviewed, I think that is going beyond.

There's then the question of whether you want the commission to hire current or former police officers. That's an administrative decision. I would leave it to the commission to decide.

It obviously then raises the question of whether this commission is independent enough. I think the answer is it will be, but it will have to pay attention to whom it hires.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you. I have only a minute left. I'm sorry. I wish I had more time for the refugee lawyers.

Quickly, on third party complaints, I know you're supportive of that aspect. It was a change that was put forward by a number of organizations.

I'm wondering if you could talk about your role in initiating those kinds of complaints, and if you have any suggestions to improve the bill before us.

[Perla Abou-Jaoudé]

By permitting third party complaints, it will answer article 28 and permit the commission to do its own reviews. When we, who have experience in the field, have complaints from many claimants, at that point, we could also raise that issue to the agency or to the commission. We already try to do it in the field.

Different organizations, including our organization and legal aid.... When we have access to detainees, it's way easier for us to raise a general issue that's systemic and that we see every time, instead of having every claimant do it with the commission. It would also alleviate the work of the commission and help to improve the situation without putting one claimant, who is, generally, scared and vulnerable, in the position of making a complaint about what just happened.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you.

Ms. Michaud, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here. I'm going to continue along the same line as Ms. Damoff.

First of all, thank you for your comments, Mr. Desbiens. I imagine you've done a lot of work in the past, and again recently, with migrants at the Canada Border Services Agency's immigration holding centres. On many occasions, you probably would have liked, as an organization, to support a complainant through the complaint process or make a complaint on his or her behalf, as allowed under section 38, which you said you supported.

Mr. Desbiens or Ms. Abou-Jaoudé, can you tell us how this could have helped people who find themselves in such situations?

[Perla Abou-Jaoudé]

This would have helped in certain situations where it's blatantly obvious that the person doesn't understand exactly what's going on or how to follow the process. By allowing agencies to help, it would make things easier for the new commission and allow for quicker responses. The agency has extremely wide discretionary powers. Normally the system works, but there are still unfair situations that should be highlighted.

In detention centers, prisoners have very limited access to the outside world. They communicate mainly with their lawyer. When they arrive, access to their families is also limited. Allowing a third party, whether an organization or association like ours, to raise problematic situations would make the commission's job easier.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Thank you.

Your colleague referred to a couple of sections. I don't know if it would be possible to get a list of the changes you're proposing, but perhaps we could talk more about them.

If there were anything to amend in this bill at this time, what recommendations would you make to the committee?