Evidence of meeting #33 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 cbsa.
A video is available from Parliament.
Director, Marine Analysis, Department of Transport
—or a specific issue with regard to clearance.
Conservative
Chak Au Conservative Richmond Centre—Marpole, BC
Can I ask that you come back to us with more information in that respect?
Director General, Marine Policy, Department of Transport
Certainly, we can provide more information with regard to the dwell times and the process.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
Thank you, MP Au.
To finish, we'll go to MP Powlowski for five minutes, please.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
I'm one of the two MPs from Thunder Bay. If you look at a map and see how far inland ocean-going boats can go, you'll see that we're really lucky with our geography. Thunder Bay is right in the middle of the continent, as is Duluth. However, we basically take no containers at the Thunder Bay port, even though—from my understanding from shipping people—increasingly, over the years, shipping has gone from bulk cargo to container cargo. If the Thunder Bay port wants to bring in something in containers.... Sometimes it has to. For example, it brought in a windmill. It brought in the big windmill turbines, but the individual parts come in containers. They had to go to Duluth instead of Thunder Bay.
To my understanding, there are very few containers on the Great Lakes, which leads to me to.... Are you familiar with the report by the Chamber of Marine Commerce, “Unlocking the potential of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway System: Economic analysis of container reception services in six Eastern Canadian ports”? Are you familiar with that?
Liberal
Director General, Marine Policy, Department of Transport
We have met with the Chamber of Marine Commerce and Aviseo regarding their report. We feel it's an important contribution to the discussion around enhancing the competitiveness of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence region, including on the topic of increasing CBSA services. As I noted, the expansion of services requires an assessment of multiple variables. We understand from Aviseo that, for some of their conclusions, they didn't necessarily have all of the data that would be able to support final determinations.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
Thank you.
Their numbers overall look pretty good in the summary of the net economic impacts of container reception services at various points. Ports such as Quebec, Valleyfield, Picton, Hamilton, Windsor and Goderich added $131 million in value—I guess that is per year. The impact on business income was $132 million, and on household disposable income—I guess because of the more efficient movement of goods—it was $365 million. Then they go port by port—Picton, Goderich, Hamilton—and for all they give pretty good numbers about the economic benefits.
I would point out Quebec City. They said that, “The federal government can recover all costs [of putting in a CBSA port] in just over two months”, so I'm a little mystified as to why we're not doing this.
On top of that, if you look at.... They give some other examples of how this improves efficiency. It decreases greenhouse gas emissions, because you're going by water. There's supply chain efficiency.
We've talked about delays in the port of Montreal. According to them, the numbers are that, “Canada consistently posted the highest median port time for container ships, averaging around 1.6 to 1.8 days”. In Montreal it's three days. Canada certainly has longer delays than the United States, Germany, Italy or France.
The cost for CBSA, isn't it fairly minimal? I'm just wondering why we don't get out of second gear here. It's not a big investment. There are potentially significant economic benefits from opening CBSA posts. If we're not doing it, when can we hope that we're going to get some answers to this? If we're not, why not, and when are we going to start this?
Director General, Marine Policy, Department of Transport
My understanding is that there were some data limitations in the report regarding the CBSA, the cost of CBSA requirements for infrastructure and labour to implement proposed services. As a result, those weren't necessarily reflected in the analysis. Because of that, Transport Canada isn't in a position to validate the revenue projections presented in the report or the financial sustainability of implementing individual proposed projects.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
If you're not in a position to verify the numbers and say whether this is a good financial idea, who is? I mean, isn't that the role of the government? If we're going to look at it, and you're being asked to provide a service to help industry, shouldn't we be doing that? I mean, who else do we...? If you're not going to trust their numbers anyhow, why bother asking them?
Director General, Marine Policy, Department of Transport
I'm sorry, but I just want to be clear. Are you asking me why we asked Aviseo for their numbers?
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
No. I think you said you were in no position to verify the numbers or whether this was, financially, a wise move. Well, isn't that the role of the government? If we're looking to provide government services, and if part of what we're trying to do is to contribute to trade diversification and improve our economy, shouldn't we be doing that?
Director General, Marine Policy, Department of Transport
We would do that based on a comprehensive business case if it were presented to Transport Canada. As I noted, we have discussed, with Aviseo and the Chamber of Marine Commerce, the work that they did through this study, so that we could better understand their numbers. We understand that there were some data limitations. As a result of that, we can't necessarily validate their revenue projections in terms of the economic benefits.
However, if those individual cases come forward in the context of a business case, we would be able to validate the process through that. We wouldn't necessarily base it on the Aviseo study, although it is a very valuable indicator.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
Thank you for that.
Thank you again, Monsieur Grenier, Madam Read and Madam Moriarty, for this presentation and all the work that led to it. We wish you a good end to the day. We'll suspend for a few seconds, for the time it takes you to leave and for the other witnesses to come in.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
Thank you everyone for coming back.
We'll start the second hour, for which we have four guests from three different organizations. First, from Aviseo Consulting, we have Mathieu Paquet, partner, and Guillaume Chartrand, senior consultant. We also have James Hamilton, executive director of the Used Car Dealers Association of Ontario and John Tod, vice-president, operations, eastern Canada, from VIN Verification Services Inc.
Gentlemen, thank you for making the trip and for the work you put into preparing for this important meeting.
We'll start with opening remarks for five minutes from each of the three organizations.
Mr. Paquet, you have the floor.
Mathieu Paquet Partner, Aviseo Consulting
Mr. Chair and members of the committee, thank you for welcoming us today.
My name is Mathieu Paquet, partner at Aviseo Conseil and economist. I am joined by my colleague Guillaume Chartrand, senior consultant and economist at Aviseo Conseil.
Over the past months and years, we have had the privilege of supporting several ports in conducting economic studies. More recently, in partnership with the Chamber of Marine Commerce, we published a study analyzing the economic impacts of container reception services in six ports in eastern Canada.
This study has been conducted in a very particular context. Canada is facing a major investment and productivity challenge. In fact, since the pandemic, Canada's productivity growth has lagged behind that of the United States. At the same time, the country is seeking to strengthen its economic resilience, improve the flow of its supply chains and further diversify its trading partners, notably through maritime corridors.
Some responses to these challenges involve long-term transformations—artificial intelligence, for example. Others can deliver gains more quickly. Improving trade logistics is one of those concrete levers: It requires relatively limited investment, yet it can have a rapid impact on productivity in the business sector.
Our role, as economists, is to examine the economic impact of these services. We do not assess these projects from an operational implementation standpoint, and the study was not intended to be a market study. The central point of the study is straightforward: container gate services are, first and foremost, a lever for economic efficiency. They enable goods that have already been traded to move more directly, more quickly and more reliably—and, in many cases, at lower cost.
For importers, this can mean more affordable inputs and/or better-controlled lead times. For exporters, it can mean improved access to containers, smoother logistics and enhanced competitiveness in international markets. For the economy as a whole, this translates into productivity gains that ripple through the economy, benefiting businesses, households and governments.
There is already a substantial body of economic literature on the relationship between port infrastructure, trade fluidity and economic performance. We could have drawn on research that links a stock of public infrastructure—such as ports—to productivity gains. However, we sought to be more direct and more precise in our approach.
The main impact mechanisms take the form of reduced transport times, lower logistics costs, improved allocation of empty containers, greater system flexibility, or more efficient use of existing maritime capacity. More conceptually, these mechanisms affect the productivity of the firms and sectors that would use container services at the ports studied.
To measure these effects, we used computable general equilibrium models of Quebec, Ontario and Canada. This is a type of model that most major public administrations maintain. Our results can therefore be readily replicated.
One of the key findings of our study is that these projects have the potential to generate recurring economic benefits through relatively targeted interventions. They also contribute to broader effects that are particularly relevant to the work of this committee: stronger supply-chain resilience, better diversification of points of entry, reduced pressure on the road network and enhanced economic security for the country.
In addition, beyond the economic impacts presented in our study, many stakeholders emphasized to us the importance of ensuring redundancy in access to containerized goods along the St. Lawrence–Great Lakes corridor.
We also paid close attention to the issue of costs related to the Canada Border Services Agency. As detailed information was not available for each project, we adopted a prudent approach based on the Halifax case. Even under a conservative scenario in which CBSA costs would be of the same order of magnitude as those associated with the expansion carried out at the Port of Halifax, the analysis shows that the economic and fiscal benefits remain significant.
Finally, it is worth recalling that our study builds on work initiated upstream. Port congestion has been identified, at the national level, as a strategic priority for improving the performance of Canada's supply chain.
Thank you for your attention. We will be pleased to answer your questions.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
Thank you very much, Mr. Paquet.
You have the floor for five minutes, Mr. Hamilton.
James Hamilton Executive Director, Used Car Dealers Association of Ontario
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and honourable members of the committee.
My name is James Hamilton. I'm the executive director of the Used Car Dealers Association of Ontario. We represent and advocate for nearly 5,000 motor vehicle dealers, new and used, lessors, recyclers, rental companies and associate members across the province of Ontario, with some members outside of Ontario as well, across Canada.
As this committee studies the Canada Border Services Agency's role in maritime trade and port practices, we want to address a critical security gap, speaking to a data piece. That's vehicle identification number cloning and revinning. Some of you have likely read about or heard about this in the media as a growing phenomenon. It's likely the result, frankly, of organized crime pivoting away from the ports, where we've seen some success in stolen vehicle intervention. They're simply shifting to other means. This is a scam in which thieves will use legitimate vehicle identities to disguise a stolen or salvaged car, making it appear legal to sell. Essentially, criminals create fake VIN, plate and ownership documents to match a similar vehicle in another jurisdiction, or at least with a VIN that decodes as a real VIN. They can then sell that stolen vehicle with a cloned VIN to an unsuspecting buyer here in Canada. Oftentimes, those buyers are our members, the dealers, who are often on the front line of the transaction. Ultimately, the consumer is the one who's going to be harmed, however. It can lead to innocent buyers being denied insurance in the event of an accident or when they have to make a claim, or the vehicle being confiscated by law enforcement because it is, in fact, stolen and eventually the law enforcement folks track it down.
CBSA maintains a database of the VINs of every vehicle exported from Canada. In order to help law enforcement identify stolen vehicles and reduce the flow of revenue to organized crime groups, our association is presently seeking a data-sharing arrangement with CBSA to make use of that data. This would enable our members, for example, to search whether a VIN on a vehicle they're thinking of buying has already been exported, which would be a red flag to them that it's likely a clone or a revinned stolen vehicle. They wouldn't, of course, buy it. Instead, what they would do is alert law enforcement officials to a potential problem car.
VINs from exported vehicles are particularly useful. The reason is that they're real VINs on a vehicle that really existed and is no longer here in Canada, so it's ripe for use on a stolen car. It's not unlike using a deceased person's identity to create identity theft or fraud, because it's an identity that's real. The VIN was real; it's just not here anymore, so they're ideal. We have seen instances where these VINs are appearing on vehicles that are being purchased by dealers. We think this is yet another way for dealers to have a data source to protect against that. It's not going to solve all the problems. As was mentioned earlier in this session, auto theft is a complicated and complex issue, and there's no one single solution. Whenever somebody suggests that there is, that's probably misleading, but this is another piece, and it's easy to do because the data is there.
Currently, the CBSA is sharing that data, the very data I speak of, with private foreign-owned entities and insurers, but they deny it to Canada's own registered dealers through our association, the very people who could flag these ghost vehicles at the point of trade-in and before resale.
The UCDA attended the federal auto theft summit held in Ottawa in February 2024. This was at the height of the auto theft crisis, which was particularly virulent in Ontario and Quebec at the time. The port of Montreal featured prominently as a focal point of concern at that time as well. Much has been accomplished, as I mentioned, since then, and auto theft numbers have been going down, thanks in large part to efforts to make illegal export more difficult for criminals at the ports. Équité, who some of you may know are very active in the auto theft file and have a lot of good data, have suggested that auto theft in Ontario is down 20%, but we need to be cautious about celebrating too much, because auto theft in Canada still represents approaching a $1-billion loss to insurers in 2025.
Criminals are nothing if not flexible. Revenues derived from stolen vehicle activity account for the third-largest source of revenue for organized crime after drugs and guns, and they use that money to fund drugs and guns anyway. They are not going to forgo that revenue just because one avenue is closing to them. They'll simply pivot. They're doing this by focusing more intently on the domestic market for stolen cars.
It is still the case today that a VIN on a stolen car could be registered in Ontario with an exported VIN. That's because the MTO in Ontario doesn't know that VIN was exported, as it's not getting that data from the CBSA either. At the summit in 2024, the CBSA agreed that data is a major tool in the fight against auto theft. We agree, and we would like to be a partner with the CBSA in protecting consumers in Ontario.
Thank you.
Liberal
John Tod Vice-President, Operations, Eastern Canada, VIN Verification Services Inc.
Mr. Chair and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the role of CBSA in the H2O highway corridor.
To save time, I've provided a bio of my experience.
I appear before you today to offer a clear and candid assessment of where the current system is failing and where meaningful improvement is both possible and necessary.
The reality is straightforward. The system is not working, and the data is unequivocal. In 2024, CBSA intercepted approximately 2,200 stolen vehicles, which is roughly 4% of the more than 57,000 vehicles that were stolen nationally that year. In 2025, that interception rate fell below 3%. This decline persists, despite prior testimony before this committee indicating that 60% of the stolen vehicles are destined for export primarily through the port of Montreal .
Organized crime exploits predictable weaknesses in the export control system. Vehicles are falsely declared as household goods or electronics. Containers are loaded inland and blended in with legitimate cargo. Export documentation can be altered after vessels depart.
Most critically, many stolen vehicles are revinned with VINs that are cloned or altered. They cannot be detected by X-ray scanners. Only physical inspections and document verification can identify them, yet such inspections occur far too infrequently.
CBSA relies upon a risk-based inspection model. However, physical examinations are conducted on fewer than 4% of the outbound containers—often less. Past audits have indicated that many high-risk electronic lookouts are not referred to secondary inspection. These are systemic vulnerabilities that organized crime and criminal networks have learned to exploit.
As a result, Canada's ports are increasingly being used as criminal gateways. The port of Montreal, for example, processes roughly 70% of Canada's legitimate vehicle exports but remains the epicentre for stolen vehicle activity. However, the problem is no longer confined to a single port. Halifax has experienced a sharp rise in vehicle-related financial fraud. Container traffic through Saint John has more than doubled. Vancouver, which is Canada's largest container port, physically inspects a small fraction of the outbound shipments.
The pattern is unmistakable. Where enforcement presence is limited or inconsistent, criminal exploitation exists and thrives. The absence of a visible deterrent becomes the invitation. These risks are accelerating as Canada's port network expands and global trade patterns are shifting.
To be clear, CBSA faces genuine operational and legal constraints. It cannot inspect every container. Current scanning technology cannot verify VIN integrity. Export data sharing remains limited. Training standards and investigative tools have not kept pace with the sophistication of modern criminal networks.
This is not a failure of CBSA officers by any means, but it is a failure of the system design. The private sector can play a constructive role, but only if it's done correctly.
Let me be unequivocal. Under current laws, private companies cannot and should not exercise enforcement authority in the ports. The outsourcing of enforcement functions risks legal challenges, charter violations and compromised prosecutions. These are real concerns that have been raised with CBSA.
However, there is a viable alternative option. Qualified private sector partners can augment CBSA capacity through expertise and technology scale, provided that the enforcement authority remains firmly with CBSA and governance is clearly defined. Elements of this approach already do exist. That model, however, carries legal risk, lacks scalability and transparency, and has resulted in limited and inequitable access to government-derived data.
With proper oversight, the model can be modernized. Trusted private sector partners can support CBSA through advanced analytics, AI-driven targeting of pre-screening, standardized national training support, and most critically, scalable vehicle examinations across all ports—not just at the port of Montreal.
This is not privatization. It is force multiplication. When criminals believe detection is likely at any port, their behaviour will change. It is possible to reduce random inspections and trade delays and increase capacity without major new infrastructure. VIN fraud is detected more efficiently. Public confidence improves with transparency and measurable outcomes.
In closing, I respectfully offer to the committee five recommendations for your consideration.
First, mandate a national standardized training model for CBSA officers that is focused on consistent, defensible, risk-based targeting.
Second, fully implement the mandatory 72-hour advance export filing to finally close off the post-departure documentation loophole.
Third, expand VIN data sharing, under strict governance, to additional trusted private sector partners for anti-fraud purposes.
Fourth, establish fair and transparent service-level agreements for inspection facilities—including qualified vehicle examinations—to standardize timelines, costs and accountability.
Finally, create the conditions to pilot a private sector augmentation model focused on VIN examinations to significantly increase capacity without transferring authority.
Stolen vehicles continue to leave Canada, not because the CBSA lacks commitment, but because the system lacks scale, transparency, modern tools and consistency. To be clear, the process urgently needs to adapt.
With those comments, I'll close. Thank you. I welcome your questions.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
Thank you, gentlemen.
We'll turn to MP Lloyd for six minutes, please.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Parkland, AB
Thank you.
Thank you to the witnesses for being here.
I'm going to start with Mr. Tod and Mr. Hamilton.
To clarify, it's not necessarily stolen exported vehicle VINs that are being used. Legally exported vehicle VINs are being used to clone VINs from stolen vehicles in Canada. Is that correct?
Executive Director, Used Car Dealers Association of Ontario
Those would be the desirable VINs to use, because they don't have, by virtue of the fact that they're legitimate, any kind of stain on them. They can create a title chain that looks legitimate, at least at first blush.