Evidence of meeting #14 for Public Safety and National Security in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was c-12.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
I call the meeting back to order.
We're debating the motion that was just moved by Mrs. DeBellefeuille.
Mr. Ramsay, the floor is yours.
Liberal
Jacques Ramsay Liberal La Prairie—Atateken, QC
After discussions with the chair and the clerk, who were able to confirm that the work would not be delayed, we think this is an excellent motion. We're therefore in favour of it.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
Okay.
Is there any further debate? It doesn't look like it.
The clerk has informed me that it is theoretically possible to proceed as planned with the clause‑by‑clause consideration of the bill on Tuesday, except that it will place an additional burden on the clerk, parliamentary analysts and the other people who have to speak to the amendments. It will also place an additional burden on members, who will have a little less time to study the amendments and prepare for Tuesday's meeting. However, if this additional burden doesn't bother the members, it is up to them to decide.
Is everyone in favour of Mrs. DeBellefeuille's motion?
(Motion agreed to)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
We will now return to the question and answer period. You had the floor, Mrs. DeBellefeuille.
Just before that, though, I see that Ms. Dandurand would like to say something to me.
Liberal
Marianne Dandurand Liberal Compton—Stanstead, QC
In fact, I would just like to ask you if it's possible to extend the presence of the witnesses. What they have to say is really interesting, but our time with them has just been shortened a bit. Could we spend a little more time with them, to give them a chance to say what they have to say?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
Yes, we're going to give a few more minutes to the witnesses who were supposed to spend the first hour of the meeting with us. We'll still have a little less time than we expected. We'll also extend the meeting so that we can hear the witnesses scheduled for the second hour.
Thank you for that suggestion, Ms. Dandurand.
Mrs. DeBellefeuille, you have the floor.
Bloc
Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My question is for you, Mr. Dufresne. At the end of the day, you're not suggesting a lot of recommendations or changes to Bill C‑12.
Can you provide more details about the amendments you would like to see in order to reflect the points you raised in your opening remarks? For example, you'd like to be consulted when certain regulations are being drafted. You also believe that we need to clarify that a warrant is required for customs officers to enter a dwelling. Five minutes for a presentation is not a lot, so you didn't have time to elaborate on those points, even though you spoke at lightning speed, I must say. Can you clarify those points in a short time?
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
The first point I mentioned concerns information-sharing agreements when documents containing personal information are disclosed outside the department. That's one example I cited as a positive aspect. According to the bill, the agreements will have to include details on the content of those exchanges. That said, the government also has the regulatory power to add other pieces of information or other criteria, among other things. The message I'm sending here is that I expect my office to be consulted on these kinds of regulations. Consultation doesn't need to be included in the bill through an amendment, but I expect it. When the government drafts regulations that will have an impact on privacy, I expect that we will be consulted. That's the first point.
The second point concerns the additional powers that would be given to border services officers so that they can enter premises or warehouses housing goods for export. I support that. However, I would suggest making an exception that they can't enter a dwelling, therefore someone's residence, unless they have consent or a warrant. This practice can already be found in a number of statutes, including the one that applies to me, the Privacy Act. I have the power to conduct investigations and enter workplaces, but I can't enter residences without a warrant. I propose to clarify that the same thing goes in this case.
Bloc
Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC
Therefore, you're suggesting that it be specified in the act in question.
Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners of Canada
Yes. In addition, there's already an existing model: Sections 42 and 43 of the Customs Act already contain the exact wording. It just needs to be inserted there.
Bloc
Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC
That's perfect. Thank you very much, Mr. Dufresne.
Mr. Huebert, my next question is for you.
When we heard from the commissioner of the Canadian Coast Guard, whose name escapes me, he explained to us that Coast Guard practices were going to change now that the act would allow them to share, exchange and collect information.
However, Bill C‑12 and the recent budget offer no guarantees that the Canadian Coast Guard can improve its technological capabilities, and acquire better technological tools or more vessels, for example. Bill C‑12 and the budget do not provide anything specifically for the Canadian Coast Guard, and that worries me.
Are you concerned about the lack of commitment to equipping the Coast Guard with better tools to do its job?
Professor, Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies, University of Calgary, As an Individual
It gets to the funding issue again. I completely agree with you, because this follows a pattern of behaviour. The Coast Guard is given greater responsibility, but because it is a special operating agency, what often happens is that the funds that are then provided to allocate for the new tasks that it is given go by the wayside.
I'm not saying that this is happening in this particular context as we see it given a greater security focus, but I am suggesting that, if past performances are to be held, your concerns that in fact they will be given greater responsibilities, they will be told that they have to do this, and then the issue will be if you have the money to get the necessary pieces of kit that you need to engage upon that type of information. They are already integrated with some of the security sharing of information. This, of course, is going to take them one step further in terms of that whole-of-government approach.
The other part, too, of course, that we haven't talked about is the issue of law enforcement that follows from that. That is something that is also going to have to be addressed if we see this continuation of the direction that the government seems to be taking with the Coast Guard.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
Thank you, Mr. Huebert.
I now give the floor to Mr. Lloyd for five minutes.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Parkland, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to the witnesses for being here today.
I will also be putting a motion on notice today.
This past summer, I had the opportunity to attend a town hall hosted by the Penticton Shooting Sports Association. This facility has been in operation for 42 years and is essential, not only for recreational sport shooters but also for the RCMP and the B.C. sheriffs and cadets who depend on it for training.
Sadly, the Department of Agriculture has announced that the range's lease will be terminated at the end of this year. This divestment plan has been widely condemned by the community and the local RCMP. The local RCMP has been quoted as saying, “The closing of the PSSA would negatively impact our training in a myriad of ways; not only would [it] add significant expense for the RCMP members to travel to an alternative, distant facility, but many other facilities do not offer the same seclusion that allows for enhanced RCMP tactical training.”
I would like to table this notice of motion:
That, given that the Department of Agriculture has advised the Penticton Shooting Sports Association, or PSSA, that their lease is to be terminated at the end of 2025; the range has operated for 42 years and is essential not only for recreational shooters but also for the RCMP, the BC Sheriff Service and cadets who depend on it for training; the planned closure of the range would deprive the community of a safe area where residents can legally and responsibly use their firearms; and the proposed divestment of this land has been met with widespread condemnation from the community and the South Okanagan RCMP; the committee call on the government to rescind the divestment plan and this be reported to the House.
Getting into my questions, I'll start with Professor Huebert.
It has been widely reported that the government is reconsidering its position on the F-35 purchase. We're here today talking about our border and our sovereignty. I fear that abandoning the F-35 would undermine Canada's reputation with our allies.
Can you give us your thoughts on this?
Professor, Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies, University of Calgary, As an Individual
Absolutely.
Look at it from the perspective of the decision-making process we've seen—the discussions about reopening and moving away from a decision that seemingly has been made. Remember that we did go through a competition and the decision was followed up that we were going for the F-35 and not for the Gripen. We seem to be reversing it. That seems to be based on the current situation we face with a very unsettling administration from the United States. There seem to be some economics brought in, but it does not deal with the strategic ramifications.
What we see from all of the reviews from the Royal Canadian Air Force is that the F-35 best meets the need for meeting the strategic threat. That is, of course—to be blunt—coming from the Russians and probably from the Chinese, and the F-35 represents a system of systems. That's what people mean about fifth generation. The days of old-fashioned dog fighting and tactical warfare are still there, and that is where the Gripen probably is a very good aircraft. However, in terms of meeting the type of threat that Canada faces to the North American continent, by the observations of everyone—this includes the former chief of the Royal Canadian Air Force and Billie Flynn, one of the leading experts on this subject matter—the F-35 is the answer to the strategic threat. To move away from an F-35 to go to a technology that is not going to secure our borders is very problematic and troubling, in my estimation.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Parkland, AB
Professor Huebert, the government is moving the Coast Guard into National Defence. We know that these vessels are not armed with kinetic force. What would be the consequences of sending unarmed Coast Guard vessels north without air support if there were to be a delay in the purchase of F-35s or other fighters?
Professor, Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies, University of Calgary, As an Individual
Well, the question becomes how well we outfit them to be able to facilitate our helicopters, because, remember, that gives the Coast Guard the ability to have a much greater reach in that context. Now, you put it in the context of whether it's a risk to send the Coast Guard vessels north when we don't have a proper fighter envelope protecting it. Remember that NORAD, despite the types of difficulties we face with the Americans, is still functioning at a very high level of performance.
If we were to enter into a kinetic situation, where in fact we are dealing with an actual attack over the North American continent, then the American protection would once again come into play in this context.
What does that mean for the Coast Guard? The Coast Guard would be there in its ability, with its increased security orientation and, of course, in terms of observations and data flows—everything that Bill C-12 is offering and everything that the DND transfer is offering. They will be part of that system, but your point is—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
I'm sorry, Mr. Huebert, but the time is over. We might be able to come back to that a bit later.
Mr. Ramsay, you have the floor for five minutes.
Liberal
Jacques Ramsay Liberal La Prairie—Atateken, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Huebert, Bill C‑12 seems to concern you in the sense that the necessary means may not be there to ensure what's provided for in it. However, let's be honest: Bills don't contain any financial provisions. They are two completely different things.
Am I correct or not?
Professor, Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies, University of Calgary, As an Individual
You are right that the ultimate decision is within the budget to fund these aspects. My concern is from holistic observation. Often we come up with very good legislation that provides us with the means or the frameworks to act, and then it is the follow-through in terms of how well we fund the agencies that are then given the responsibility to deal with them. This is ongoing, and there's nothing specific that you can put in the act to really remedy it. It becomes an issue of whether we have the proper integration. Because you are tightening up the borders, do you then make sure that the RCMP have enough capabilities? We go back to Dr. Lackenbauer's point about the thinness of the RCMP and other elements up in the north. Will we have that ability to implement? That's always one of the confounding issues when we're looking for improvement in border security.
Liberal
Jacques Ramsay Liberal La Prairie—Atateken, QC
I'm a bit surprised by your comment, since the Canadian Coast Guard will now depend on the Department of National Defence, which has just been allocated a budget of $9 billion for its procurement strategy. I think that bodes well enough. In that context, I find it hard to understand your concern. I think the government has it right, so there's nothing to worry about at this point.
Professor, Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies, University of Calgary, As an Individual
The problem is, do we follow through? Again, we go back to 2017 with the Canadian defence policy that came forward, “Strong, Secure, Engaged”. Remember that one of the major elements that were brought forward with that particular policy, above what it did with security, was that it said it was fully costed and fully funded. We know that wasn't the case, partly because of the COVID crisis that developed immediately after it, but we do have this difficulty that we come up with good plans and do not fund them.
In other words, yes, we're promising the $9 billion. We're promising in the next five years the $83.1 billion in addition. The question is, do we have the follow-through? That's always been my concern, from long-term observation.
Liberal
Jacques Ramsay Liberal La Prairie—Atateken, QC
You were also concerned that the Canadian Coast Guard may not have the means to carry out its mission. I would remind you that the Canadian Coast Guard often works with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Parks Canada and Transport Canada. It can also rely on officials from Public Safety Canada, Natural Resources Canada and the Canada Border Services Agency. It's important to understand that the Canadian Coast Guard works in collaboration with other agencies and that, as a result, it will have the means to enforce the law.
Do you have any concerns in that respect?
Professor, Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies, University of Calgary, As an Individual
Absolutely. Your point to a certain degree answers itself, because we have the facilities. In other words, in the past, that's exactly how the Coast Guard had to function. It has to ensure that the agencies that then have the responsibility for law enforcement for the elements that it has to do.... You have to get those people. You have to have enough boots on the ground that, when the Coast Guard is going, say, up into a northern region, the RCMP and the border support individuals are, in fact, brought on board. It always comes down to the issues of having the people there and the ability to fund that capability.
Your point is very important, and I'm concerned that in the past that hasn't always happened.
Liberal
Jacques Ramsay Liberal La Prairie—Atateken, QC
There's already a commitment to hire 1,000 new officers at the Canada Border Services Agency and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
Professor Lackenbauer, you talked about—