Public Safety Committee on Dec. 2nd, 2025

[The Clerk]

The motion is to resume debate on Ms. Kirkland's motion.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 9; nays 0)

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Before we get back to the debate on the motion, I would like to thank you, Mr. Desmarais, Mr. McCrorie and Ms. O'Gorman, for spending this time with us and sharing your important and useful comments. We wish you a wonderful day. Maybe we'll see you next time.

I will now give the floor to Ms. Kirkland.

[Rhonda Kirkland, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will not be long, I promise you. I will just quickly remind you that the reason for my motion was to raise urgent concerns regarding systematic discrimination, procedural misconduct and the lack of accountability at Canada Border Services Agency. The findings come at a time when CBSA is seeking to hire thousands of new officers. The agency's credibility and the ability to provide a psychologically safe workplace need to be addressed before expansion can legitimately proceed.

Multiple former CBSA employees have come forward with serious allegations of systematic discrimination, procedural corruption and retaliation within the agency's internal human resources and integrity processes.

We would just seek to cover three things: systematic discrimination against pregnant employees who go on maternity leave, as well as those with serious illness; manipulation and misuse of internal HR systems to justify discrimination; and the national integrity centre of expertise, NICE, including internal investigation processes and the breach of confidentiality in investigations.

With that, I'll just say that this should not be a partisan issue in any way. We want to make sure that the workplace is safe for all of our officers. If we want a safe border, we need a safe psychological place for our officers to work.

With that, I hope that we can potentially just move to a vote to adopt this study, but of course I will cede the floor if any of my colleagues wish to debate or if they have anything they wish to say.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Thank you, Ms. Kirkland.

Mrs. DeBellefeuille, you have the floor.

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

I think the vote earlier said it all, Mr. Chair.

For my part, I agree that we should do this study. I suggest that you put it to a vote right away. Ms. Kirkland explained at length the importance of this study last time, at the meeting during which she tabled her motion.

I would therefore be in favour of us now moving to a vote on this motion.

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

Mr. Chair, I would like clarification on something.

How many meetings?

[An hon. member]

It's a minimum of five.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Ms. Kirkland.

[Rhonda Kirkland, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

The reason there's a minimum of five meetings is simply because of the number of people who need to come before the committee. I don't know that we would be able to accommodate them with with fewer than five meetings.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Thank you, Ms. Kirkland.

Is there any further discussion?

In that case, we will proceed to a vote on this motion.

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Mrs. DeBellefeuille, you have the floor.

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

Mr. Chair, it's my turn to move a motion that I hope will receive the support of committee members. I prepared it in both official languages. I believe everyone has received a copy. If not, I'll give it to the clerk so that it can be distributed to committee members.

The motion is as follows:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study of at least two meetings to examine the material requirements set out under the agreements concluded between Canada and the United States to allow for the clearance of containers at Canadian ports; that the committee invite representatives from the Canada Border Services Agency, Transport Canada, Sectus Technologies (in Laval) and other relevant stakeholders to appear during this study; and that the committee report its findings and recommendations to the House.

I'm trying to do everything I can to study the whole issue of customs clearance for small ports along the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River. In this motion, I'm proposing this particular study because we can't get accurate information about the agency's requirements for container clearance services. I think that, in these two meetings, if we invite the right witnesses, all the port organizations that can't get that information will finally be able to get it.

If my motion were to receive the committee's support, it would also be a pleasure for all members of the transpartisan marine caucus, which was recently created and which also calls for further exploration of the CBSA's container clearance requirements.

I hope my colleagues will support the adoption of this motion. It will be a short study, but it will be a game changer for communities all along the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River where there are small ports.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Thank you for that notice of motion, Mrs. DeBellefeuille.

Mr. Caputo, you had your hand up to speak.

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

I believe I was out of order. I was going to seek to intervene, but the clerk mentioned to me that it's simply a notice of motion and we're not debating the motion, which is correct.

I will give the floor to Ms. Konanz, please.

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you.

I would like to make a motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

I want to make sure we all understand what's happening.

Mrs. DeBellefeuille just—

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

Actually, I didn't say it was a notice of motion. It's a motion that I would like to see adopted. I think it's a motion that isn't complicated and that everyone agrees on, so I didn't just give a notice of motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

The procedural rules we adopted last June require that a notice of motion be tabled at least 48 hours before the committee can hold debate on this motion.

Mrs. DeBellefeuille, you have just tabled a notice of motion. The rules of procedure therefore require us to consider this motion at a future meeting.

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

Excuse me, Mr. Chair, but when we're discussing committee business, this 48-hour requirement no longer applies. I'm quite familiar with the rules of procedure.

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of clarification.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Mr. Ramsay, the floor is yours.

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

We agree that the motion should be moved. We're not opposed to that at all.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Okay.

Mrs. DeBellefeuille, you are indeed right, according to the clerk. I apologize for the confusion, but what was a bit confusing was that, during the meeting, we went from our study on foreign nationals to considering a motion that had already been tabled and presented previously. We haven't returned to the study on foreign nationals. We're therefore discussing committee business, which allows motions of any kind—

[Helena Konanz, Conservative, Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Chair, I have a notice.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Yes, it won't take long.

This therefore allows motions of any kind, even those that haven't been put on notice, to be discussed and debated if the committee agrees, of course.

Sometimes I find myself confusing people more than I wish. We are now going to discuss the motion being tabled and proposed in the committee business section of our meeting today.

Are there any remarks on the content of Madame DeBellefeuille's motion?

Monsieur Powlowski, go ahead.