Public Safety Committee on Nov. 25th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

We are back to further input, if that is so desired.

I have Mr. Caputo's name here.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

I'm prepared to provide further input at this point, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

No one can block you.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

I'm sure some would love to.

I have a very short question to start out, for whoever would like to answer.

Is there a reasonable expectation of privacy?

I'm just trying to connect the dots between a reasonable expectation of privacy at a border crossing and personal ownership. How does one actually own a dwelling at a border crossing, essentially? It couldn't be one that's government owned. Is that possible? How does that all work?

[Graeme Hamilton]

Can I just get quick clarification? Are you talking about a privately owned house that's on the border or a privately owned port that's on the border operating as a port of entry?

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

I'm talking about at a port of entry, whether it be privately owned or government owned. I'm just having trouble wrapping my head around how you would have a dwelling-house there. I guess it's conceivable that on a privately owned port, there might be a home there for somebody, perhaps the president of the port or something like that.

Is that accurate?

[Graeme Hamilton]

Potentially, yes.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

I'm talking about expectation of privacy on this. That would attract the same expectation of privacy as a dwelling-house not on that property. Is that right?

[Graeme Hamilton]

I wouldn't want to comment on expectation of privacy outside of the context of the provisions.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

That's where I was actually going to go. I'm kind of a nerd. The expectation of privacy is what triggers the charter right to not be subject to “unreasonable search or seizure”. If there is no expectation of privacy, then section 8 is not generally triggered, but I may be mistaken on that.

Now, within this amendment, it says that “entry into the dwelling-house” must be “necessary for any purpose related to the administration or enforcement of this Act”.

Hypothetically, is a warrant then not issuable for contravention of another act?

[Graeme Hamilton]

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I fully follow the question.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

I'm reading from a spreadsheet here. The spreadsheet I have says that this is under proposed paragraph 3(b).

Are you with me there?

[Graeme Hamilton]

Yes, I'm just looking at it right now.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

This is what I have here.

You have the basic oath or affirmation that's required for a warrant and then it says, “a judge may issue a warrant...subject to the conditions...specified in the warrant, if the judge is satisfied...on oath” or affirmation that “there are reasonable grounds to believe that the dwelling-house is a premises or place referred to in subsection (1);”—

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Mrs. DeBellefeuille, the floor is yours.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

The interpreter is telling us that she's unable to interpret properly. First, she doesn't have the text, so she can't read it. Second, since Mr. Caputo is speaking very quickly, it's impossible for her to interpret what she's saying.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Mr. Caputo, I would ask you to adjust both the speed and the intensity of your remarks. That might help the interpreters.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

Sure. I will attempt to go slower, then. Thank you.

I just read the portion of sub 3.

(3) On ex parte application by the Minister, a judge may issue a warrant authorizing an officer to enter a dwelling-house, subject to the conditions that may be specified in the warrant, if the judge is satisfied by information on

oath or affirmation, which is fairly common boilerplate, that

(a) there are reasonable grounds to believe that the dwelling-house is a premises or place referred to in subsection (1)

It's fairly common in a warrant that you have to prove that there's a place where evidence is going to be found, which I believe is in part (c)—sorry, I may have skipped ahead—and

(b) entry into the dwelling-house is necessary for any purpose related to the administration or enforcement of this Act; and

Where I'm going here is the emphasis on “this act”. When it comes to the act at play, let's say that it is a contravention of another act other than this act, for instance, the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. Does that mean that a warrant could not be issued if that was the case? Do you get what I'm saying there now?

[Graeme Hamilton]

Yes, I do.

The CBSA does enforce over 100 different acts and regulations at the border, and so it is something that we do from a regulatory perspective across the board. It's my read of this act that it would be specific to the enforcement of the Customs Act, not of another particular act that we would be looking for a contravention of. It's written as the enforcement of the Customs Act, so it would be linked to the Customs Act and not the broader suite of responsibilities that the CBSA has.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

Right. I'm curious, does that mean that—sorry I'll let you finish up there, to find whatever you're looking for.

[Graeme Hamilton]

I'm just trying to get confirmation from my experts who are just making sure that I did put that down correctly.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

This is a highly technical question. I get that. Most people think I'm not a very technical person, but there you go. I'm trying to prove them wrong right now. This stuff is genuinely interesting to me. I find that super interesting because that's why ordinarily what we see here.... Sorry, I'll let you finish up there.

[Graeme Hamilton]

It was just a clarifying measure.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

Okay. Ordinarily, what we would see is a reference to an act of Parliament, because that is kind of the catch-all. Is that right?